Replies

Reposted from another thread:

You are correct in your analysis. COD is not going away anytime soon and her fans within the movement will rally behind her making it a litmus test of sorts, as if it is only possible to support fiscal conservatism by supporting this women, and rabidly attack anyone who disagrees.

I think what happened needs to be viewed in the context of the current political landscape. Right now the formula is a new face (or at least new to the movement) challenges a democrat and an establishment GOP person.

Then:
(1)They get alot of hype online and via the usual sources (Rush, FOX, etc.)
(2)They come out with some hard hitting messages about Obama/Pelosi/Reid and the debt and healthcare and such.
(3)Then they are attacked somehow by the media usually on personal matters (Palin’s baby for example) but sometimes gaffes (Angle’s hispanic/asian comment).
(4)Then the conservative base rallies around them and carries them to victory to the horror of Democrats.

So in COD case people, largely from out of state who did not know her, were introduced and simply thought to apply the formula. They saw a pretty lady talking bad about the state of washington so they thought this was the next Palin/Bachmann. No one bothered to check into her background as a professional political campaigner, the lawsuits, living off campaign money, the poor financial situation, odd personal history. They didn’t think they needed to as COD was saying all the pick up lines to get the Tea Party to fall in love. When CODs gaffes came out (ignorance about the constitution and supreme court, weird personal statements) people just chalked it up to step 3 and assumed that step 4 would follow as this was supposed to be a tidal wave election.

When this failed to happen many in the movement who have internalized COD as being one of us want to defend her and will attack anyone for perceived betrayal. Look at this thread for instance. Lots of comments about “COD has conservative principles damnit! Don’t you like conservatives?” with no proof at all for any of that. Palin was mayor then governor in Alaska. She can point to things she has done when asked to prove she is a conservative. Scott Brown could point to things and say he is a conservative (which for someone in Massachusetts he is). Angle could point to things and say she is a conservative. COD? Not really. Sure she is a social conservative but I don’t really see signs for abortion and abstinence only education at the rallies. Everyone is focused on fiscal issues right now and COD’s fiscal reputation is troubling.

The problem we have now is that people have dug in and assume like with Palin that skeptics will come around and her reputation will somehow soar. The difference is Palin is a very smart politician and COD is a walking gaffe machine. The movement has already damaged itself by jumping in to bed with her without really thinking it through.

We should make it very clear that COD is not an accurate representation of our movement which is a perception that Democrats will attempt to solidify amognst moderates (aka the people you can’t win the white house without). The good news is that this should be easy to accomplish as more and more people look into her history without an impending election. Instead of COD vesus Democrat with the “us vs them”/”vote the bastards out” thought process people can look at it with a “what does she bring to the table for us” mentality. Then they will find they do not like what they see and don’t want to have this bizzare* woman as a face of the movement at all.

* = my sincerest apologies to anyone on this site who is unmarried 41 year old woman, who don’t believe in masturbation, lives off campaign money and used to have picnics with witches on satanic altars.