Don't Run Sarah!

I spent only a few hours with the former governor, helping to prepare her for the vice presidential debate in October 2008. And during that brief window, I saw Palin at one of her most vulnerable moments, when any result other than a complete train wreck seemed impossible. And yet I also saw a determined woman buckle down, recover her confidence and then storm the national stage where she more than held her own against a seven-term senator.

Did she face some tough slogging to reach her remarkable perch? Sure, you betcha. I admire her tenacity, her verve, her moxie, and her pluck. As she releases what’s sure to be another bestseller, America by Heart, I think it’s phenomenal how Palin has been able to leverage her moment in the spotlight. I marvel at her masterful manipulation of the media, and her ability to redirect the national debate with merely a tweet. Most of all, I like the way she defies conventional wisdom and does things her own way: She doesn’t retreat, she reloads. And without Palin and the Tea Party backing Republican candidates, I doubt the crimson tide would have risen so high Nov. 2.

Palin’s appeal completely befuddles metro-intellectuals. They scoff at her “experience,” holding the one-time city manager, mayor, oil and gas commission chair, governor, and vice presidential nominee to a different standard than candidate Obama. A marathon runner, mother of five, and grandmother to one, she has no qualms about smacking a slimy halibut—or an oil and gas company—upside the head. And don’t be fooled, underneath that “prom hair” is a brilliant populist.

Yet I find myself continually goaded into denigrating her, saying things like “she’s reached her sell-by date,” “her stock is going down,” and “if she’s smart, she won’t run for president.” And I was going to go on TV recently and say, “It’s rare you hear quantitative easing and Sarah Palin in the same sentence,” until I realized that she did a hell of a lot better job explaining the complex concept than I could.

Though she is rightfully suspicious of advice from outside Team Palin, and she certainly doesn't care what I think, it is my strong opinion that she should not run. Not just because I don’t agree with her positions or her politics, but because the coming political fight is about more than the future of Sarah Palin. It’s about the future of the country.

All the fun, the money, the power will only be diminished if she runs. Because I don’t care how you cut it, in the end she will lose.

President Obama’s approval rating is now just 39 percent, and he is statistically tied in a direct matchup with Palin according to a new Zogby poll. And according to Quinnipiac, American voters believe that Obama does not deserve a second term by a margin of 49 to 43 percent. But Palin is viewed unfavorable by 51 percent of voters. And among independents, the key swing voting bloc, her negative is at 54 percent. She is not the right candidate right now.

Framing the presidential contest ahead, Mona Charen put it well: “Voters chose a novice with plenty of star power in 2008 and will be inclined to swing strongly in the other direction in 2012. Americans will be looking for sober competence, managerial skill, and maturity, not sizzle and flash.”

If Palin runs, I think the entire Republican primary process will be hijacked. With ardent fans and a rabid media, it will become Palin-palooza. A celebrity fest will follow with even more amplitude than the adulation and adoration that surrounded Barack Obama, who was so revered he was sometimes referred to in biblical proportions as “The One.” An all-consuming super nova, Palin will suck the oxygen out of every room, everywhere she goes. And one of two things will happen. Discerning conservative voters in early primary states will be offended by the circus-like atmosphere and the presumption that they could so easily fall for a “cult of personality.” And they will vote against her. And she will lose. Or, Republican voters will be completely swept up in the mania and nominate her as the GOP standard bearer to go up against President Obama. And she will lose—perhaps the only Republican nominee who could lose in 2012.

But I also think she shouldn’t run for her sake. How could life get any better? She has more power, money, control, and influence than she could have ever possibly imagined. Two bestselling books, almost 2.5 million Facebook fans, a record-breaking cable TV show, and a daughter who made it to the finals on another TV show—not because of her abilities, but because she’s Sarah Palin’s daughter, and by god, the Palinistas out there defiantly come to her rescue week after week.

Palin is having fun. She decided governing Alaska was, well, just a pain. Too much work. A hassle. Whatever. Next. There I go again, denigrating. See, it’s just a reflex. It’s easy to discount her accomplishments, and to ignore the ludicrous opposition Palin faced in the courts and in the press on her return to office from the campaign trail. But my point is, all the fun, the money, the power will only be diminished if she runs. Because, I don’t care how you cut it, in the end she will lose. She is just too polarizing a figure at this point in her career to win a general election. And if the Republicans lose to a weakened President Obama, she will forever be blamed for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

But I know how these things go. First of all, as James Carville said, running for president is like sex. Once you’ve done it, it’s hard to stop. Second, once the drum beat starts, and all your friends and admirers start telling you, “For the sake of the Republic, it’s your duty to run,” it’s awfully hard not to let your ego get filled with a lot of helium. Next thing you know, you’re shivering at a diner in January in Iowa.

I know there are millions of conservative women and young grizzlettes out there who admire Sarah Palin. She inspires them; she is them. They know that beneath the sequined lapel pin roars the heart of a Mama Grizzly wronged. And they are offended when elites, the media, and smart asses like me dismiss her infectious optimism, her pitch-fork populism, and her love of family, faith and the flag.

In my view, it would have been interesting to see what would have happened to her as a political figure had she not been plucked too soon from obscurity, if she had been allowed to ripen on the vine for a couple of terms as governor of Alaska before emerging on the national scene. Alas, she was thrown onto the rocket sled of celebrity and has ridden to heights never before seen.

And if Palin doesn't run for the top slot, she will very likely be on the short list again for vice president. Or certainly for a cabinet slot if the Republicans win.

Only one thing is for sure. Sarah Palin is going to be around for a very long time. She’s already had a few last laughs, and she’s likely to have a whole lot more before the closing credits roll. ’Cause life as America’s sweetheart—and siren for the left—is “flippin’ fun.”

No matter what happens, whether she runs for president or not, Palin is going to be Pot Stirrer-in-Chief.

I think the only votes I ever wasted were for annointed GOP candidates.

I’ll be voting for the person I prefer from now on, thank you, and if the GOP doesn’t nominate that person, they won’t have my vote.

Hear ya.

Be encouraged that this is the first time in history a populist grass-roots conservative movement has muscled in on the Elitist GOP's turf. They don't like it, but we have spoken in 2010. LOUDLY.

2012: "Ich bin ein Tea Party-er!"

But so does almost any other Republican, including Romney. Many on FR hate Romney so much that they have lost touch as much as Mackinnon has with Palin, namely there are a LOT of people who really, really like him if for no other reason than his perceived business sense. I think Huckabee is probably one of the few Republicans who could not win.

If the election is truly about Obama, then my position is that the only candidate who cannot beat him in a two-way race is Romney. And that's primarily because Romney gives the voters no incentive to choose him over Obama on the two most prominent issues likely to arise in 2012 -- government-controlled health insurance and corporate bailouts. Their positions may not be identical on those subjects, but they are close enough that it diffuses the greatest argument against Obama.

Of course, that's the overwhelming reason for her high unfavorables -- perhaps at a level of 95% causality. But it's as inevitable as is tomorrow's sunrise. All the King's horses and all the King's men aren't going to change this unfortunate reality.

The other way of looking at it is that any GOP candidate, after winning the primaries, will be subject to the same treatment. Palin's already been "vetted", and the media have pretty much shot all of their ammo -- when campaigning begins and the public sees that's she's not the caricature they've been told she is, what then?

saw that Fat Boy, Karl “The Buffet” Rove this morning.

They set the segment up as Sarah and Karl having sharp barbs for each other.

That pudgy bastuhd defended himself saying he was a “Commentator”.

Blam! I changed the channel. FUKR

“And she does have advisers and she does have staff, and part of her “mystique” has been to hide them well. Indeed, every single time there is a gaffe, or a booking to which she doesn’t appear, it’s ALWAYS blamed on the staff.”

In this pre-anouncement stage, the fact that Gov. Palin is presenting the illusion that she doesn’t have a staff, speaks to her being a little bit smarter than the political elites want to give her credit for.

She has positioned hersself to be one of the co front runners for the nomination after getting savaged by the liberal media and the Establishment GOP, including a big hit by Rove.

Seriously LS, what you are saying about Palin not being criticized on FR is just factually incorrect. I used to post on a big variety of issues on FR. Now, I have little time to do that because I am constantly refuting allegations leveled at Gov Palin by Freepers.

The attacks have been constant, intense and redundant for 2 years now.

>> The other way of looking at it is that any GOP candidate, after winning the primaries, will be subject to the same treatment. <<

Interesting theory! Not sure I can agree just yet. It's too far in advance of 2012. But time will tell.

In any case, even if the MSM do try to bash other candidates with the same intensity, I simply can't believe the "treatment" will work so well against an exceptionally smooth and personable rhetorician like that snake, Gov. Huckabee, or against a very successful and likeable two-term governor like Gov. Daniels or Gov. Barbour.

Palin's already been "vetted", and the media have pretty much shot all of their ammo

Your statement would have carried a lot more weight a week ago, before Sarah's "North Korea" slip of the tongue. I might even have been persuaded by you back them. But if Gov. Palin keeps giving the MSM this sort of "ammo," then I don't see how she could ever recover.

when campaigning begins and the public sees that's she's not the caricature they've been told she is, what then?

If she hires a voice coach and learns to soften her screeching oral delivery, and if she seriously bones up on the great world issues of our time -- the way Reagan did for years when writing his hundreds of commentaries -- then she probably will have a chance.

Otherwise, I find it strains credibility to imagine she can break the template already set in stone by the MSM, specifically the media's "narrative" of a petulant two-year governor who left the field of battle, thereafter earning millions as an author and TV celebrity.

I think there was some (correct) criticism of her about her endorsement of McCain.

I guess I'm speaking more to the overall "Palin has a brilliant strategy" argument. It in fact was a strat adopted by Obama, who had no record and ran on being a celebrity. We'll see if that works twice. But the fact that someone has to administer a MASSIVE federal government with so little experience (again, see Obama) and so few connections with people who DO have experience (again, see Obama) is troubling. It can be overcome, but it first needs to be acknowledged as a serious weakness, and I don't see anyone here doing that. Criticism of her McCain endorsement? Yes. But of her other experience and judgment, no.

Totally disagree, especially if it's about the "economy," where rightly or wrongly Mitt is perceived as this brilliant businessman and savior of the Olympics.

If, on the other hand, it is about terrorism, "that vision thing," or illegal immigration, then Romney is extremely weak---but Palin also appears a little weak on immigration, having supported Amnesty Juan. She would win clearly if the debate is framed about "morning in America," that "vision thing," or kind of "home town values."

I don't think she will do well at all if it's about Fed policy and/or debt swaps.

The sissified MSM water-boys on FR, and in the GOP...insist that her voice is now a “problem”.

So let’s look to Romney, Tim, Huck, etc......because anyone who hasn’t actually used their voice (to battle the left) to any extent, in the last two years, certainly will not need a voice coach.

Trashing a good conservative woman’s accent and colloquialisms. Sounds like the bigoted liberals I have heard calling her a snowbilly.

And strange how none of these “problems” arose BEFORE she was chosen in 08. The AK media, AK Dems, oil companies, never complained that she could not be serious and sober.

As a matter of fact, when she was picked there were articles from her local media stating they were surprised because she was the first Gov to sit for editorial board meetings without her aids and lawyers with her.

I don’t recall Charlie Rose complaining about her voice or answers when being interviewed numerous times before 08. Or any Oil companies or other State Gov running out of a meeting with their hair on fire saying she was an incompetent or complaining to the press about her voice. Does anyone think McCain would have picked her (after his staff vetted her for months) if these “problems” were out there in her State in her poll numbers in her local press??

None of these things were a problem before the national MSM/DNC/Hollywood/Academia smear machine got a hold of her.

Propaganda is a powerful thing, and some are more susceptible than others.

And FR is no exception.

It becomes MUCH easier when you put in a specific name. Once the Dems have a target to demonize (O’Donnell, Angle) then they can play up negatives. I agree now he would lose OH instantly, and probably NC and VA and IN. But now isn’t the election, and ANY Republican you put in the campaign is going to be disliked by some on our side. So the trick is to minimize them and maximize the Dem/Indie defectors. I think it can be done, but I’d caution against overconfidence. We don’t want Hoover to turn out to be Harry Truman.

You really are a Romney troll. Palin is more experienced than your man Mitt Romney, his sole governmental experience is a single term as Governor where he proved to be a disaster, and left with 34% approval, and the Democrats have held the office ever since.

Your statement would have carried a lot more weight a week ago, before Sarah's "North Korea" slip of the tongue.

You've got to be kidding me. Anyone who speaks in public for more than a few minutes is going to tip over their words, or misspeak once in a while. It's clear she meant South Korea, from context, and taking a verbal gaffe out of context isn't "ammo", it's deliberate deception, and again, something that would be used against anyone running against "The One".

Now, had the context around the slip not been clear, you may have had a point.

Totally disagree, especially if it's about the "economy," where rightly or wrongly Mitt is perceived as this brilliant businessman and savior of the Olympics.

"The economy" is too broad. It will come down to things more specific that that.

- ObamaCare: Romney offers no alternative to Obama, being saddled with his past and continuing support for pretty much the exact same thing in Massachusetts. The "what's good for Massachusetts might not be for the rest of the country" dodge he tries to use will get him nowhere.

- Corporate Bailouts: Again, Romney's backing of bailouts, even if not identically to Obama, is close enough to offer voters little reason to switch to Romney of they're upset about bailouts.

-Taxes: Here, Romney has an advantage, but then, so does any Republican, if taxes are an issue.

-Employment: If employment is the biggest issue, that may help Romney if he is perceived as an economic mastermind.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.