Can Sarah Upstage Barack?

Pajamas Media ^ | 2/16/2011 | David Solway

[Lakeshark]

Let me begin with a paradox. The more Sarah Palin seems unelectable, the more electable she may actually be. The media blitzkrieg launched against Palin may be interpreted not as a sign of her unfitness for office but precisely as a measure of her eligibility. As I’ve written elsewhere, “Palin’s electability can be reckoned as an inverse function of the virulent campaign intent on her delegitimation. … The greater the fury … she is met with, the greater the likelihood that she poses a genuine threat. One does not raise a mallet to crush an ant.” Conversely, the beatification of Obama by the same leftist media is an infallible indication that they are arguing in partibus infidelium. Indeed, the media is almost always inversely reliable, providing an ironic touchstone for the facts of any matter. Just cross out and write in the opposite and we can be confident of a more accurate approximation to the truth.

[Lakeshark]

A good article about the inverse reality of our present day media speculation.

[Lysandru]

Indeed, the media is almost always inversely reliable, providing an ironic touchstone for the facts of any matter. Just cross out and write in the opposite and we can be confident of a more accurate approximation to the truth.

Yep, that's where I am at.

[Lakeshark]

A good article to read, well worth it.

[nhwingut]

I just want someone to punch Obama in the face (rhetorically). Sarah is the only one.

The rest of the top tier (Romney, Daniels, Huck, Barbour) are a bunch of squishy get-a-long types.

[twhitak]

When has Sarah ever NOT upstaged Barack?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

[edpc]

Unfortunately, Obama's election sets the bar very low. If a community organizer, turned present-voting state legislator, turned part-time US senator can win....anyone can. Hell...even the "Rent is too damn high" dude seems qualified in comparison. That's not a knock on Palin or any other candidate, it's just a fact. Well....maybe not a fact....just my opinion.

Anyhow....I believe it's way too early to speculate. Someone will separate themselves late this year or early next once primary debates begin. Economic, domestic, and foreign events will have a lot to do with it. Plenty of time for someone to stumble or rise up between now and then.

[mmercier]

The measure of self is based on those who bother to love or hate such.

I hold in equivalent value those who hate me or love me.

The worst possibility to self is to be neither loved or hated.

[Lakeshark]

The rest of the top tier (Romney, Daniels, Huck, Barbour) are a bunch of squishy get-a-long types.

Unfortunately I think you're right, but if she runs, Sarah Palin will need to demonstrate to the primary voters she has what it takes to be the nominee.

Whoever wins the nomination needs to consolidate the TEA Party and the GOP behind them. Bambi has to be beat, we can't have another four years of him ruining this country.

[ClearCase_guy]

For the 2012 campaign, would the media try to vet Palin -- again? We've heard it all. The stories are old and boring and have no meat. Digging into her past? Discovering "the real Sarah Palin"? What a yawner!!

Now, the Democrat running for president in 2012 -- maybe the media should do some digging into that guy's past ...

[Eska]

Kills me, when I ask myself how can she be portrayed in such a negative light as a presidential candidate when she was such an effective, successful, and highly rated governor up here in Alaska. She really straightened this place out, in just a couple years too; yet they'll claim no executive experience.

No wonder the world is laughing at America, after the people electing big "O". We'll be lucky to even have a country left in another year or two.

[JaguarXKE]

I think Rush describes the left and Palin perfectly along with the "useful idiots" in the GOP!

[SpaceBar]

There seems to be a reoccurring theme amongst opinions regarding Sarah Palin’s “electability”, where people imply that they'd be more than happy to vote for her, but remain unconvinced that others would, thereby suggesting that doing so would constitute a wasted “throwaway” vote. So peoples’ assumptions regarding other peoples’ opinions about her become the litmus test, and not her actual electability or qualifications. Like lemmings unsure of what to do until they figure out what the other lemmings will do.

[SoFloFreeper]

She already upstages B.O.

[Lakeshark]

Now, the Democrat running for president in 2012 -- maybe the media should do some digging into that guy's past ...

LOL. After they did such a geat job in 2008.......

[svcw]

Brilliant point.

[svcw]

You are correct both are emotional responses.
The opposite of love is not hate it is indifference.

[JaguarXKE]

...but if she runs, Sarah Palin will need to demonstrate to the primary voters she has what it takes to be the nominee.

That is not a unique requirement to Sarah Palin; it applies to any candidate. If one examines her actual record and sets aside the media template, she has demonstrated in spades that she has what it takes.

[Lakeshark]

I agree, however it will be more important for her considering the pounding she has taken. If she runs, and if she does destroy the media template of her being unelectable, she will win.

[Bigtigermike]

I always wonder about those say what Sarah can’t do but when I say “do you have more confidence in the other guys”? They go silent. Do they at least fight back like Sarah does? The answer is no!

Being squishy mealy-mouth on issues and conversation will only confused the voters more, we need a bold stark contrast to Obama to expose him for who he is and leave no doubt to voters what choice they have before them. It’s time for a “give them hell, Harry” moment, the media and the unions and even many Establishment Republicans want Obama to win reelection; being cute and muddying the water in the election won’t cut it against the these forces