Palin has already been painted as a buffoon, and with the broader electorate,it has stuck. Politics is about perception, and her perception is that she's intellectually empty.
And... so you'll just concede to the state-run media? Thanks for nothing.
If this were October 2012, I might agree with your implied conclusion that the incorrect public perception of Palin can't be corrected.
But it isn't 10/2012.
We have TWENTY MONTHS until that point. Perspective. You need some, it seems.
And yet, you present a strong affinity for a candidate who is only capable of just that - soundbites.
"If teleprompter-perfect speeches are all you require, I suggest you vote for the Won; he's got that down. "
No sport, I don't want "teleprompter-perfect speeches", at all. I want a presidential candidate that is capable of speaking extemporaneously in a manner that isn't embarrassing. Is that too much to ask?
"And... so you'll just concede to the state-run media?"
No, I'm not "conceding" anything. I am, however, adult enough to recognize a political reality. Palin's political reality is that she's dimwit.
"We have TWENTY MONTHS until that point. Perspective. You need some, it seems."
No, I think I have plenty of perspective. I've been politically aware since Nixon's first successful national election. Nixon in the mid-1960s, is remarkably relevant to Palin's current situation. After the CA governor's loss, Nixon went away - entirely - for almost three full years. That absence allowed him to re-invent himself, and to a degree re-brand himself which allowed for a genuine reintroduction to the American public. Palin, on the other hand, hasn't gone away, not for a moment. It's all Palin, all the time. Every time she's on, she reinforces the fears of middle-America; That she's wholly unprepared for national elected office.
It doesn't matter whether ODH "concedes" to the media or not -- we're not, after all, discussing his opinion, but rather the public's perception of Sarah Palin. He is correct on his point, which is that the broader voting public has perception of Sarah Palin as being intellectually empty.
It really doesn't matter at this point how that perception came about. What does matter, is that the perception really does exist. And from Palin's perspective, if she's serious about running for president she needs to act to change that perception.
If this were October 2012, I might agree with your implied conclusion that the incorrect public perception of Palin can't be corrected. But it isn't 10/2012. We have TWENTY MONTHS until that point. Perspective. You need some, it seems.
The time for Sarah Palin to start working on that (supposedly) "incorrect public perception" was two years ago. And she really hasn't done that. If she somehow scrapes out the nomination and hasn't corrected it by 10/2012, we're all screwed.
You say you don't go by sound bites, but the quote from her interview is, unfortunately, rather typical of her unscripted comments, and her prepared speeches aren't really all that impressive either.
And on that score, ODH's comparison of Palin to Paul Ryan or many other potential candidates is very telling. One expects Paul Ryan to give a cogent and detailed answer to a tough economic question; whereas with Palin, there's no telling what she's going to say in response to the same question; but the expectation (based on empirical evidence) is that her answer would not only lack detail, but ramble on in a manner similar to what we've seen here.
Even if Ms. Palin has a good answer in her head somewhere, her problem is it does not come out of her mouth in good order. And that makes her seem very un-serious. That's going to be a fatal flaw in the upcoming election, in which a perception of "seriousness" is going to be a very valuable asset.