I think it’s low down and pathetic that McCain’s operatives are blaming Palin for his loss. If anything, she pumped him up. Surely the proposed Lieberman pick would have been a complete flop. McCain did better in the popular vote than I ever expected considering what an unpleasant mediocrity he was on the stump and considering how much he alienated conservatives with his aggressive attacks on immigration reformers.
Palin is hated because of who she is. Like Mike Huckabee, she represents a populist appeal and rural way of life and value system that is absolutely terrifying for the “K Street Conservatives.” The professional punditariat in Washington DC and New York are indifferent or hostile to everything that matters to their base, including abortion and gay marriage as well as gun control and immigration. I don’t agree with everything from the populist wing, but I do share their concerns and their necessity as a group to a well balanced country, as I argued here earlier.
Our elites are more out of touch than ever with these people. Their diagnosis of Bush Senior as “too conservative” in 1992 is why we ended up with a big government disaster with almost nothing to show for itself under the rubric of Bush’s “compassionate conservatism.” To make Palin’s untutored instincts a symbol of the authentic conservatism of America’s interior ignores the real intellectuals–Tom Fleming, ISI, Vdare, the Von Mises Institute, Thomas Sowell–making intelligent and rigorous contributions to our understanding of culture and policy far away from the most prominent institutions of “conservative” opinion.
Consider Andrew Sullivan. He’s still obsessing over this threatening, fertile and religious woman. And he’s lost all sense of proportion and reason, for example: ”The trouble is that Palin confuses what is settled reality and what is settled reality insider her own head. . . . 46 percent of the country was prepared to have this delusional whack-job as a potential president . . . . Give us the proof of Trig’s maternity now!” It’s telling that a whack-job like this works at the Atlantic.
The soon-to-be-vicious conservative infighting about what to do next will chiefly be between the neoconservative right as represented by the coastal elite institutions that guided the Bush presidency and the anti-intellectual populist-nationalist institutions and people of the interior, the Huckabees, Palins, and Buchanans. Of course, sometimes the elites are right as on Hariett Meirs or Bush’s penchant for cronyism. But on the whole they’ve been a disaster both politically and on policies, whether immigration, Iraq, the economy, or the Bush presidency as a whole.
Subscribe To This Feed
The thing to keep in mind here is the root of these claims. McCain assigned his own staffers to work with Palin. Those staffers worked for McCain and likely did not appreciate their newfound direction and lack of access to McCain. It is my understanding that none of them volunteered to get pulled off the campaign to help Palin prepare. So no doubt these are disgruntled employees to begin with.
The other thing to consider is that the McCain campaign was DEAD before Palin came on board. Part of this can, no doubt, be blamed on McCain for being a lifeless candidate. But blame can also be pinned on these dopey aides he had around him. These people then tried to apply the same principle to Palin once she came on board.
Say what you want about Palin, but she’s a fairly sharp gal. She knew the advise she was getting was poor. Apparently she did not shy away from making that point when she needed to. Surely this rubs people the wrong way.
But to blame Palin for the lost election is silly. McCain was dead in the water before Palin. She energized the base and helped make this unwinable fight almost winable.
No other VP candidate would have done that.
The fact that these staffers are turning weazel now spweaks more about them than Palin. She’ll be around much longer than any of them, to be sure.
For what it’s worth, the number of potential VPs for McCain was pretty limited. All the GOP Governors, US Senators, seniorish US Reps, big-city Mayors, and prominent FORMER cabinet people. To move outside that pool would have seemed Eagleton -> Shriverish. So McCain picked someone exciting, pleasant, and popular in her home state, rather than someone with foreign policy experience (or even savvy) and a simple home life. He rolled the dice, and got a point or two of the popular vote (my guess, no proof) for his troubles.
Palin’s gaffes were quite celebrated of course, as was her lack of experience. Now compare Palin’s “Bush Doctrine” gaffe to Biden’s “IQ” gaffe, to McCain’s “bomb Iran” gaffe, to Obama’s “instrument of God” gaffe. Palin suddenly doesn’t look too bad. (Or objectively evaluate claims that she was inexperience … compared to Obama???)
The way people seem to vote is, Count gaffes and vote for the lowest-gaffe candidate. But the way they really vote is, Vote for the MAJOR PARTY candidate with the fewest/ least egregious gaffes. I didn’t see people piling on the Constitution Party or Party for Socialism and Liberation due to the gaffe-free nature of their coverage by the MSM. The latter simply got no coverage.
People wanted to celebrate the Washington Outsider this year, but the only major player who was a true outsider was Palin. Yet as much as this montra was uttered, the press let Biden slide on every gaffe he made (not a peep about his Quayle-sian 3-letter word flub: J-O-B-S).
The bottom line was that Palin was not a known commodity and the press used that fact to paint her as a dumb, backwards, funny-talking hick. In fact, she is none of those things.
The plus here is that now she is a major national player and can position herself for 2012. Palin/Jindal or Palin/Steele would be a mighty interesting ticket to field on 2012. It’ll be interested to see how the GOP sorts itself out in the next few years.
Palin/Jindal or Palin/Steele would be a mighty interesting ticket to field on 2012.
Why must Palin be paired with a non-white? Whites are still >70% of the electorate, and yet you’re buying into the position that we cannot have an all-white ticket in this country anymore. Why? Have you ever stopped to wonder why Jindal and Steele are being hyped to the degree they are? The “elites” love them for the same reason they hate Palin.
Personally, I hope the Republicans nominate some non-white mediocrity like Jindal. They’ll further alienate their base and lose handily in 2012, unless Obama screws up royally in the meantime. Aracial conservativism is in its death-throes in this country.
Jindal has a pretty stellar conservative record. Steele, perhaps less so but only because he hasn’t had the sort of voting experience Jindal has. Hell, Jindal was elected in LA….and not Los Angeles. The people down there could care less about coastal elites or the MSM. For him to get elected, his record meant everything because he had some fundimental obstacles to overcome.
And last time I checked, Palin was white.
Speaking of Andrew Sullivan, what is the purpose of putting “Mr.” in quotations in front of his name on your blogroll? It reads as a snide reference to his homosexuality, and confirms the stereotype of paleocons as childishly homophobic.
Homophobic? What does that mean? It’s a made up stupid word. Was Jesus or Moses homophobic, incidentally?
You’re deflecting my question. Is the “Mr.” in front of Andrew Sullivan’s name on your blog roll a derogatory reference to his homosexuality?
If so, it strikes me as a bit childish.
I think it’s more just a suggestion that he’s more mouse or wimp or bag of psychopathologies and designer drugs than a man. No real man would freak out the way he does on damn near everything. I don’t find his homosexuality particularly offensive. That’s just part of life. But his preening narcissistic obsession with gay marriage, redefining conservatism to suit his vices, and other related radicalism is.
Damn, Roach. The gloves come OFF. I don’t read Andrew Sullivan that much, so take my impression of him with a grain of salt… but while I agree from what little I’ve read that he can be extremely histrionic, it’s worth remembering that he showed a pair of brass balls as editor of National Review when he published that issue on The Bell Curve. He’s never backed away from his stance on that book, either. In short, for what it’s worth, my impression of him isn’t that he’s a wimp or a mouse, as you said, but that he’s prone to fits of hysteria.
Blaming McCain’s loss on Palin is further proof of his campaign’s dementia.
Presidencies today are won or lost on marketing skills; the trick is to create a favorable, cozy identity for one’s candidate, hope the candidate has promise, enhance the image with a set of homespun, acknowledged first principles, and then run with it. In short, brand and package one’s product until the cows come home.
McCain did nothing of the sort. He was one thing on Monday and something else on Tues. Maverick today, conservative tomorrow. I never knew if he was channeling Reagan or avoiding him.
His campaign’s dementia left him as the shapeshifted man. And that won’t work. It wont sell. Palin came along, much too late, and at least allowed him to join a pack of wolves with which we were familiar-for better or worse. That was the interior, rural proles of whom you spoke. The Base.
Ceteris paribus, Obama would have won this election because he offered the public a figure and message of constancy; that was how he was portrayed, marketed and campaigned.
One might disagree with his ideological act, as I do in large part, but he didn’t need a Palin, as McCain did, to ultimately define who he was.
-resh
“wed a pair of brass balls as editor of National Review when he published that issue on The Bell Curve. ”
It was The New Republic.
Look, Mr. Roach, there’s two things going on here.
1. Andrew Sullivan is indeed a hysterical nitwit. Unlike you, I do find his homosexuality offensive. It’s a dead giveaway that one’s hormones are unbalanced. They have the dumb aggression of males yoked to the needy neuroticism of females. Ugh. Ugh. Ugh.
2. But that doesn’t undercut a basic point: Sarah Palin wasn’t suited to the Vice Presidency. She was simply not informed or intelligent enough.
3. You probably despise pragmatic middle of the roaders like me. Well, sorry, buddy, but I would have considered voting for the old guy if he hadn’t chosen Palin as Veep. Plenty of people who aren’t goggle-eyed believers voted for Obama. I was one of them. I’m hoping that the Republican Party comes back and gives me something to think about in 2012. I don’t have very high hopes for Obama.
4. Back to Sullivan. Don’t you read his blog? He hates Hillary Clinton as much as he hates Sarah Palin. Notice a pattern? Sully is a little gay bitch who is scared of girls and hates them. Nothing political here – totally personal.
I have to say that for me, Sarah Palin was the most exciting thing going in that election. It wasn’t just Andrew Sullivan who lost it at the sight of her. They all did, and it was disgusting. I even saw a short video clip on youtube with John Cleese of all people, obviously stumping for Obama by trashing Palin. In fact, for a couple of weeks, or, at least a week, it looked like it was Obama versus Palin.
But, for me she was, above all else, a lightening rod for the pathologies of the Left. I mean, they were simply oozing with emotional and psychological sickness – pathologies. If they could have physically attacked her and gotten away with it, which they probably would have, they would have done it, without hesitation. But they settled for a more verbal, but none the less posionous violence. It was disgusting.
I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to refer to the Liberal-Left-Neocon Levithan as a sordid collection of Psycho and Sociopaths.
After all, Psychopaths are people who engage in violence, verbal or non-verbal, without remorse.
And sociopaths engage in manipulation without a sting of conscience.
I thought it was funny too that they got so worked up over her. What, was that an act to convince us that they election wasn’t a fake?
In that regard I think it was as real as Professional Wrestling. To steal a line from Dennis Miller and apply it to the “Election” I would say that I have’`t seen choreography that stiff since the Lee Harvey Oswald assassination.
But if I’m wrong and the elections were real, then I hope Palin comes back to run in 2012. But given what’s before us today, that seems so far from now.
“Andrew Sullivan is indeed a hysterical nitwit. Unlike you, I do find his homosexuality offensive. It’s a dead giveaway that one’s hormones are unbalanced. They have the dumb aggression of males yoked to the needy neuroticism of females. Ugh. Ugh. Ugh”
There’s no evidence that homosexuality is linked to hormonal imbalances in the affected individual. Attempts to “straighten out” gay men by injecting them with testosterone had no effect on sexuality except to increase their sex drives. Hormonal imbalances in the womb may be a different story.
We can agree to be mutually offended by each other, so long as you agree to respect our rights under the law. How’s that?