So, what’s up with Sarah Palin?
Long-time readers here know I’ve never joined the Palin-bashing. I’ve always thought she was pretty smart, and that most of the negative hype about her was exaggeration and/or outright lying, based not only on political animus but also on class snobbery and a profound cultural gap.
That said, I’ve always acknowledged that articulation and gravitas are not her strong suits. Ever since Palin quit the governorship of Alaska, she’s lost gravitas rather than gained it. I always figured that was her decision to make, and that she had pretty much left electoral office behind in favor of becoming a media personality, a gadfly, and backer of people in the Republican Party who agree with her conservative point of view. And that’s fine.
Lately there’s been a lot of muttering in the press about a recent statement of Palin’s that she’s thinking of running in 2016. There was an ambiguous and teasing quality to it, though; was she baiting the press?:
Palin, the GOP’s 2008 vice-presidential nominee, said she stood by comments she made Thursday in Las Vegas to ABC News, where she first expressed enthusiasm about potentially competing for the Republican presidential nomination.
“I am. As I said yesterday, I’m really interested in the opportunity to serve at some point,” Palin said Friday, as former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum, a potential 2016 rival, looked on…
Palin said, “It is a significant step, of course, for anyone to publicly announce that they’re interested. Who wouldn’t be interested? Who wouldn’t be interested when they have been blessed with opportunities to speak about what is important to this country and for this country?”
Still, Palin said that she is not yet ramping up a national political operation. Instead, Palin said, she is contemplating her political future and does not feel rushed to make a final decision.
Sounds to me like she’s not running. I hope she’s not running, just as I hope Romney’s not running. There are plenty of new, fresh, conservative Republican faces with a proven track record and none of Palin’s baggage (same for Romney’s baggage). Yes, the new ones have their own baggage, and that baggage will be taken full advantage of by the MSM, of that you can be sure. But I’d much rather see someone like Scott Walker—who seems to have given a galvanizing speech at the Freedom Summit in Iowa—run. Walker is that rarity, a conservative Republican with a proven track record in a blue state, who’s been through the fire and shown true political grit.
Speaking of speeches and the Freedom Summit (although as I’ve said many times I don’t like to listen to political speeches and haven’t watched the Freedom Summit ones), apparently even Palin-supporters thought hers was pretty rambling and incoherent.
Did anyone here watch both Walker’s and Palin’s speeches? What did you think?
The video of Walker’s speech is here.
She’s kind sorta like a poor man’s Donald Trump, no? However, unlike Trump she does seem to have talent for picking winners.
Also: She may lack gravitas but she exudes courage. That lady has brass somethings and I love her ability to effortlessly drive the Left crazy.
Video of Palin’s speech is here.
Okay, here’s a question.
Stipulate, for the moment, that Gov. Palin has a lot to give, but that she is NOT ready to be Chief Executive (and may never be). Stipulate that she has courage aplenty, and is not afraid of taking on entrenched interests, including in her own party.
Is there a Cabinet position particularly suited to her strengths, which President Walker might appoint her to? Or would her strength be in the Senate?
Personally, I think she might want to make another run at the governorship of Alaska. She did well there.
Daniel in Brookline:
Interior or Energy?
I agree with Jonah Goldberg that Palin is NOT like Trump, and that is just the media talking.
Yeah, her speech could have been better but so what! The best speech giver I ever saw was the late Mario Cuomo, and look how far that got him.
To me, Palin is the “canary in the coal mine” of our political culture and she shows how far the rot has progressed for both D’s and R’s. It’s one thing to say she shouldn’t be POTUS, but the reactions to her….they say more about the speakers than her.
I remember a Democratic party that would have spoken of a Palin-like figure with pride….but not any more!
I’d love to see her go back to the governor’s office, but Alaska seems to be a funky place, politically, and she seems to have made herself some real enemies (and not just the entire MSM).
I think she plays important roles as kingmaker and morale officer.
I just watched some of Palin’s speech. Very strange. She looks tired, for one thing, and also seems frazzled and confused. Honestly, my first reaction was that she’d been drinking.
The article in the Washington Examiner you linked to, Neo, mentioned that Carly Fiorina did a bang-up job with her speech. I watched the first several minutes of it, and, wow, very impressive.
Palin is an example of Progressive animus toward any member of a natural constituency going against the party line. Any of the women abused by Clinton fall into this category. So do Miguel Estrada and Clarence Thomas.
The profanity directed toward Palin was so vial that if the speaker were conservative and the target Progressive, someone would have been sued or arrested.
Such people are treated as apostate.
But you know that already.
Ann:
I suspect she IS tired, actually. Can you imagine the stress she’s been under since 2008, both personal and professional? She may need to take time off and recharge her batteries.
Agree. I’ve often wondered why she hasn’t taken that time off to recharge, as you say. Would have been good for her personally, and away from the spotlight, I think she may have been able to produce some good writing on political matters.
My guess is she will not run. She has more influence on the outside making the gop establishment squirm. The Des Moines speach was far from her best rebel rousing appearances.
Oh, she was most definitely baiting the press and her haters, and it worked like a charm.
I’ve read that Palin’s teleprompter broke during the middle of her speech, and she was suddenly forced to start ad-libbing. Might explain why she came across as incoherent. Though the info came from the comments section of a blog, and I don’t know where it’s been reported. So take it with a grain of salt until you see it confirmed elsewhere.
Having said that, I don’t think Palin could win the White House. Too much of the country has too dim of a view of her to let her get elected. While it’s not really her fault, imo, 2008 destroyed her public image with much of the country.
I’m a big fan of Palin as I perceive her to have “the right stuff” I think she’s another Margaret Thatcher. But I too do not think she should run for the very reasons junior states.
I agree that we need new blood and of the available candidates, a Walker/Fiorina ticket would combine conservative principles with pragmatic political calculation..
I love Palin and think the country would be in a much better position with her as president than a Democrat or a RINO. Could she win? I dunno, but how many presidents won it their first time running?
I will say she might not seem as well-rounded as the ideal candidate, i.e., she may be very good and knowledgeable in a couple areas but only be guided by courage and common sense on others. Again, this is where we would be much, much better with her than with a Dem or RINO. Perhaps a cabinet post would not be bad – working to her strengths while she learns on other topics? Maybe, but I’m not gonna give up on her as president.
I like Walker very much. He’s demonstrated a spine of steel in combatting the progs in Wisconsin. He has a record of executive achievement under stress.
Now, here’s what’s being said about him by some who don’t think he can win at a national level. He’s not a graduate of an elite university – the MSM will highlight that and imply that he’s a low caliber intellect. He’s not an inspiring speaker. Although his speech in Iowa was well crafted and hit exactly the right points with conservatives, the delivery was not as inspirational as the words and ideas. He is a “Mr. Smith” type (average, wholesome, flyover-country American). As such he doesn’t exude the needed gravitas. He has no foreign policy experience.
I admit that these are weak points for Walker, but in the next few months he may be able to address those issues.
I also love Bobby Jindal, but realize that he may not be able to appeal to a national electorate.
What we need is a man/woman with Walker’s executive experience and impeccable conservative credentials cloned into a man/woman with the orating skills and academic credentials of a Cruz.
I’m hoping Walker can be competitive, but am watching and waiting for someone to rise out of the crowd.
My ticket is Walker/Martinez. Two governors from vastly different areas. A ticket of a proven midwest former in a purple state and a hispanic conservative who has shown she can win in a very leftist state.
Palin at Interior or Energy would drive the Left nuts.
I am 100% behind Ted Cruz. His speech was great. Abolishing the IRS is key.
And he spoke with no notes and without a TelePrompTer. He would destroy Hillary.
I know the Establishment would never consider this, but Palin would be perfect to chair the RNC, as opposed to the dead fish they’ve been choosing.
She energizes people, she’s got a track record of backing winners. She’s got passion. She’s everything the RNC isn’t.
We’re doing it again, just like in the last two cycles.
None of the candidates, actual or potential, is as verminous as the Democrats in or out of office. Christie is sleazy, but he is not yet rotten through-and-through.
Who cares about foreign policy experience?
Are you going to tell me Baraq’s policy is due to his inexperience and not his pro-Shia, anti-American, anti-semitic malignancy? Really?
And the Iron Lady, what foreign policy “experience” did she bring to 10 Downing? She did pretty damn well.
Palin could have done a better job than McCain, once in office. Romney would have dithered as POTUS, as would have Ryan. All of which is a big SoWhat…we have Baraq, and his damage, like Carter’s, will not be undoable. Just much, much worse.
Palin would be great as Energy Secretary — I heard her interviewed by Larry Kudlow just after she made the Alaska-Canada pipeline deal and was very impressed — she really knows that stuff. On the other hand, the Department of “Energy? We don’t got no stinkin’ Energy! We don’t need no stinkin’ Energy!” is one of first agencies I would abolish. Whether she could turn that bureaucractic Titanic around is another story.
I heard three speeches from the Freedom Summit: Trump, Walker, and Newt. I thought Trump’s was the best – confident, genuine and effective. Yes. he is arrogant, but unlike certain people residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, he has a right to be — he actually has accomplished things.
Newt’s was coherent, well-organized, specific (limited to the threat of Islamic jihadism), and quite powerful. Definitely the best oratory, in the classic sense.
The worst, I’m sorry to say, IMHO, was Scott Walker’s. It was rote, cliche-ridden, and right out of the box from Amazon –“Speeches to be given at conservative gatherings to make sure you hit all the hot buttons.” A lot of kiss-up — about half the speech was “Thank you, thank you, thank you, Iowans, for supporting me and praying for me,” over and over again. Didn’t say anything new, different, or displaying original thought. I was unimpressed.
When Palin came on the national scene I seriously considered volunteering for a politician if she decided to make a run for President. Something that I have never done and would never do for any politician. I consider most politicians to be just a step above behind-bars, lying, thugs.
Seriously! I liked/admired her that much; especially when I saw all that she accomplished in Alaska. I wanted to help her win.
Now, however, I do NOT want Palin, Romney, or Christie to even try. I think any one of them would be fine in the oval office (eh, maybe not Christie. I’m in Jersey and don’t like how he lowered the flags for Whitney Houston to half mast, nor, do I like how he gave Obama a tour of the shore after Sandy but didn’t do that for Romney. Christie showed his true politicians colors with those moves – nothing but an opportunist looking for ways to pander for votes which makes him too much “on again” and then “off again” to trust him to make smart decisions)
I don’t want any of those three to even try, not because I don’t think they could do a good job. No, it is because I don’t think any of them are electable. And the Republicans need someone who is electable. period.
There is now a Republican congress and this country needs a Republican oval office if we want to repeal Obamacare (especially the fines – that is really dumb, fine those who are unemployed because they lost their healthcare along with their job; only a Democrat would think of that) and move this country back in the correct direction.
Republicans need someone who can win and work with this Republican congress. I’d even hold my nose and vote for Christie. But, let’s hope the Republicans nominate someone who is electable.
How much time and/or money would it take for Palin to get herself a good speech coach? Or is it that she doesn’t care? I do like her very much and I support most of her positions, but, Lordy, that screeching is putting me off. I think it would present a serious barrier if she decides to make a run for another high political office.
jenna:
I think she considers her voice part of her populist message, and does not want to change it.
Let’s create a new cabinet position: Dept of Repeal. And make Palin the head.
On Facebook, the liberal nutbags are going berserk over Walker already, gearing up to “Palinize” (character-assassinate) him. Some jerkwater band withdrew their permission for him to use one of their songs, screeching that they utterly HATE him (!!!Eleventy!!!), and all the liberal nutbags were posting and reposting this. One of them (a “friend” of mine) added snidely, “He probably didn’t pay the royalties.”
They’re deranged with hatred. Limbaugh is right: he keeps saying the Leftists have driven their followers literally insane with hate.
So anyone we put up, they will try, not to defeat, but to disembowel. It’s gotten that bad.
I think probably the first qualification of a candidate for me is they need to state unequivocally the first thing they will do is repeal Obamacare (yeah, I know, Congress has to actually do it, but the president proposes). Everything else required of a good president follows from that.
Palin would have been better off if she had concentrated on one or two policy areas and given sound more comprehensive ways to move things in a better direction. Instead, she let herself be reduced to crowd-pleasing soundbites that made her seem even more superficial to her non-supporters. It’s a shame because she really is smart.
I did not watch Palin’s speech. It seems like it was one of her worst efforts. But she has made some great speeches with enough content to make the NYT take notice. This was probably her speech in the lead up to the 2014 race. It really is worth reading. I don’t think she is going to run again. I do think she’d make a great energy secretary because she understands energy and the impact it has on our national security. We need to be pumping more oil. as opposed to fracking it, to stop the Saudi’s driving frackers out of the market. They may be allies of convenience but they are not our friends. She gets that.
Peter Schweizer, author of “Architects of Ruin” and “Throw them all out”, was one of her top advisor. He interned at our friend’s conservative think-tank (AFPC) years ago, and is highly respected. His books are devastating critiques of the ruling class – both parties. Worth the read if you have the stomach.
Palin’s problem is the GOP establishment hates her almost as much as the Democrats hate the idea of a Conservative female President (aka Maggy Thatcher).
So, out of the current field. I like Walker for what he has accomplished, despite ferocious attacks from the Left. and maybe Rick Perry for what he has done in Texas, and then, to quote “Who’s on First”, I don’t give a darn.
I am in favor of a Romney candidacy for two reasons:
1) Of the establishment candidates being bruited (Mitt, Bush, Christie) Mitt is the least objectionable. And,
2) Mitt splits the establishment vote, taking money and
support away from Jeb and making it more likely for a fresh conservative to win the nomination. I notice John Podhoretz seems to agree me, but for just this reason I suspect the establishment will drive Mitt from the race.