McCain’s Campaign Team Disses Sarah Palin In Vanity Fair Piece
Members of Arizona Senator John McCain’s 2008 Presidential campaign team have dissed McCain’s former running mate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in an upcoming issue of Vanity Fair, the New York Daily News reports — and in a big way:
In an expansive story in the August edition of Vanity Fair, a slew of senior members of McCain’s campaign team told reporter Todd S. Purdum that they suffer a kind of survivor’s guilt following the 2008 presidential election.
“They can’t quite believe that for two frantic months last fall, caught in a Bermuda Triangle of a campaign, they worked their tails off to try to elect as vice president of the United States someone who, by mid-October, they believed for certain was nowhere near ready for the job, and might never be,” Vanity Fair reports.
During the campaign, there were reports of anonymous McCain aides describing Palin, the governor of Alaska, as a “diva” and a “whack job.”
The Vanity Fair article recounts how strained Palin’s relationship was with the McCain advisers. She maintained “only the barest level of civil discourse” with Tucker Eskew, the operative assigned to be her chief minder, the magazine reports.
She believed Steve Schmidt, McCain’s top strategist, had lied to her about conducting polling in Alaska – that was a “belief she conveyed to anyone who would listen,” the magazine reported.
As previously reported, Palin was so intent on delivering her own concession speech on Election Night that she wouldn’t accept advisers telling her that McCain had decided he would be the only one to speak. She took the issue up with McCain himself, discussing it on the walk from his hotel suite to the farewell rally.
Palin did not speak on Election Night. Only McCain addressed the crowd and the nation.
The Daily News article ends with part of the Vanity Fair article where a McCain staffer takes a swipe at Palin from the standpoint of early hopes that she was raw talent — and that his worst negative fears about Palin were confirmed after the election. In other words: it blasts her for her campaign and post campaign performance.
This piece will only likely add to Palin’s woes in the political imagery needed to perhaps not get the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination but win a national campaign. She is already the target of a slew of Sarah Palin jokes. Her admirers, on the other hand, see her as the wave of the conservative future and many are members of the talk radio political culture that’s highly influential in the GOP.
But the ongoing tensions between McCain staffers (as well as subtle and perhaps not so subtle hints from McCain himself that he thinks the GOP should shop around before choosing a 2012 Presidential candidate) underscore Palin’s failure to mend political fences on the most fundamental, basic scale: with her own running mate’s staff. Moreover, this split seems to have personal as well as ideological roots: although Palin is painted as a political diva it’s no secret McCain is less predictable politically than Palin and she seemed to be unhappy at some of his less conservative stands.
The bottom line: articles like this continue the flow of mainstream media news stories that don’t cast Palin in the best light — and not become of some media plot controlled from above. You can’t do articles such as the vanity Fair piece without there being sources who are eager to talk. The fact that McCain staffers seem eager to get this off their chests will not be lost on voters (including Republicans) who are not enthusiastic Palin supporters.
The Daily News also has this:
Palin refused to comment for Vanity Fair.
As someone who was in the news media this can be stated with certainty: when the subject of an unflattering story refuses to respond, it can indeed limit the impact of a story. But it also means the allegations hang out there and are taken by many readers to be true.
In this case, it will be instructive to see if the McCain sources — and McCain himself – are now showered with criticism from Palin supporters in the new and old media and talk show hosts. It will keep this story alive and spread its content.
In other words: this is a lose-lose article for Palin. She’s not being painted as a major talent and the wave of the future — but as a political dead-weight anchor and prima donna.
UPDATES:
– From NBC’s Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg via First Read:
Riddle us this: How is Sarah Palin going to be able to run for president when so many other Republicans, especially those who worked on the McCain campaign, are more than willing to criticize her? Todd Purdum has a piece in the latest issue of Vanity Fair, in which former McCain campaign aides unload on her — again. “They can’t quite believe that for two frantic months last fall, caught in a Bermuda Triangle of a campaign, they worked their tails off to try to elect as vice president of the United States someone who, by mid-October, they believed for certain was nowhere near ready for the job, and might never be,” Purdum writes.
–And here’s the link to the full piece.
–Meanwhile, USA Today’s lively On Deadline blog offers some good excerpts from the piece (if you don’t have time to read it all now). Here is one:
On Palin’s CBS interview: “By all accounts, Palin was either unwilling, or simply unable, to prepare. In the run-up to the (Katie) Couric interview, Palin had become preoccupied with a far more parochial concern: answering a humdrum written questionnaire from her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman.”
–Another perspective from RealClearPolitic’s Tom Bevan:
Purdum’s piece is an absolute classic of the genre, complete with a slew of juicy, negative quotes from insiders and a smoothly crafted narrative that demeans and diminishes Palin’s accomplishments and portrays her as an ignorant white trash whack job who stumbled her way into the governorship of Alaska through a combination of raw ambition and blind luck.
Sarah Palin is one of those rare figures who evokes acute emotions in a lot of people. I’m not one of them, so it’s always been hard for me to understand why those who didn’t even know her name before August 28 of last year could either fall so madly in love with her or be driven into such an absolute blind rage over her.
Even more perplexing is the MSM’s continuing fascination with, and seemingly instiatible desire to destroy Sarah Palin. Why are Todd Purdum and Vanity Fair pulling out all the stops for a piece on Palin 10 months after the election? Is it because they fear she’s still viable as a national political figure, or simply that a 9,800 word hit job on Palin is the kind of delicious red meat VF’s readers can’t resist?
Either way, there’s the very real possibility that this kind of piling on Palin by the elitist MSM will actually improve her image outside the New York/DC corridor and make people in flyover country like her more, not less.
–And from Marbury:
Todd Purdum’s much-heralded Sarah Palin piece for Vanity Fair contains little in the way of news or insight. He was clearly hampered by the reluctance of McCain’s loyal staffers to make strong criticisms of Palin, for fear it might reflect badly on their boss. Even more importantly, his lack of sympathy, or just empathy, for his subject means that he hasn’t found anything interesting or new to say about her character. As a result the piece just reads like a string of cuttings.
FOOTNOTE: Due to some very quick editing there were some typos in the original first paragraph of this post. They have been fixed. TMV regrets the errors..
23 Responses to “McCain’s Campaign Team Disses Sarah Palin In Vanity Fair Piece”
HA! Dumb and Dumber on the same ticket.
Palin is never going to be President or Vice President. The only one that don't know this is Palin.
There are millions of Palin supporters under the delusion that she can be elected President. She is far too conservative to ever be elected to the highest office.
It is a bit odd for me to see the same people that helped select the woman, now tear her down. They are basically admitting to doing a terrible job as campaign advisors. Had they done their homework, she would have never been an option in the first place.
Hmm. Staffers for the losing candidate lashing out at the running mate.
THAT HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF AMERICAN POLITICS!!!!!
It is obvious she is the Anti-Christ.
Why the continued focus on Palin? Her supporters still think she is THE rising star in the GOP. In the absence of any clear leadership in the party, she's still seen as a contender. Her supporters angrily denounce her critics and are probably determined to run her for president. Her detractors find her such an easy target, and delight in rubbing GOP noses in the fact that they thought, and still think, she's presidential timber. Some of us on the left would LOVE to see the GOP run her. Again and again.
GD – yes, what a shining light of competence Joe Biden has brought to the office of Vice-President instead.
Actually, when you get down to it, the recent history of VP's, with the exception of Reagan/Bush I and Clinton/Gore, has been dismal.
nice try AR. Biden is not a laughing stock. cmon, you're not a Palin fan are you? Maybe so. Anyway, just proves my point. If you think Biden comes even remotely close to being divisive and lame and polarizing as Palin, well you KNOW you have my support to nominate her for the presidency.
There's an interesting dynamic. Palin is obviously a potential disaster if she were in a position of power, capable of inflicting serious damage. Those who realize this speak out, and her blind followers react by thinking that we're “scared” of her. Well, anyone in their right mind should be scared of the possibility of Sarah Palin as President, but we have enough faith in the American people to hope that this couldn't happen. Her fans send more money to her PAC, and Democrats can legitimately hope that she gets nominated: she would easily be demolished by Obama. Still, it's like having a bullet in the chamber of a revolver, playing Russian roulette. What if something happened and she actually WON? After all, a borderline imbecile like George W. B*sh DID get “elected”, in a manner of speaking, and look where that led us.
With the ongoing purification of the GOP, and the possibility of a Palin candidacy in 2012, that is going to leave the GOP VP nominee pool wittled down to Michelle Bachmann, Eric Cantor, and a 7th round draft pick to be named later if Ben Stein can't be talked into living in government housing.
GD – I thought you paid enough attention to know that I am FAR from a Palin fan, from the word go. That doesn't mean I cannot see the silliness in the continued efforts to tear her down, though. Hell, she gets more attention from the Left than from the Right.
And Biden is too a laughing stock.
Biden is not a laughing stock? You don't get out much, do you?
http://giovanniworld.files.wordpress.com/2008/1…
“It is obvious she is the Anti-Christ.”
“Hell, she gets more attention from the Left than from the Right.”
And as you caricature it so well, it is so routinely _pathological_ from the Left. (Lefty S.O.P.)
As for McCain, as with his recent comments about Obama on Iran (responded to strangely and wrongly on this lefty site, naturally) — McCain is weak, as weak as the statements he makes about Obama, as weak as his campaign was, as weak as he was as a candidate (weak as a “conservative,” after all).
As for Obama and the Demmies in Congress and in Obama's executive-branch menagerie, they should sometime begin to exercise self-control and even some intelligence; they cannot rely on Dim-vote forever acquiescence to continued rushing to gross excess on every issue they can name or identify to shove the nation far too leftward without any attention to fiscal propriety or often without paying financial attention at all. It's not going to continue comfortably forever.
“If you think Biden comes even remotely close to being divisive and lame and polarizing as Palin”
Lame, arguably more so. Biden the buffoon in the limelight has been kept muzzled for everybody's good.
Divisive? Palin's “divisiveness” (as with the GOP) is largely fictitious, created for various reasons or “reasons” mainly by the Left (making divisive remarks that include charges the GOP is divisive)
Good and fine. As I expected, you guys will circle the wagons around Palin, which suits me just fine.
A method that political scientists use for gauging ideology is to compare the annual ratings by the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) with the ratings by the American Conservative Union (ACU). Biden has a lifetime liberal 72 percent score from the ADA through 2004, while the ACU awarded Biden a lifetime conservative rating of 13 percent through 2008. Using another metric, Biden has a lifetime average liberal score of 77.5 percent, according to a National Journal analysis that places him ideologically among the center of Senate Democrats.
works for me…
The day Obama announced Biden as his running mate, I was on the golf course. From that day to this, those in our foursome refer to mis-hits as “Bidens”.
The day McCain announced Palin as his running mate, I took up smoking again, knowing I wouldn't want to live if she ever became president.
After the lapses in judgment by both candidates in their vice presidential picks, all I can say is thank god for write-in ballots.
anyone who knows my blog knows i am no palin fan.
but i tend to agree w/melissa @ shakesville that the article was rife w/sexism and a lot of unnecessary put downs because palin was a woman.
one of melissa's best points is that the ambition that purdum cites as questionable trait in palin would never be mentioned about a male candidate; what's wrong w/a politico having ambition?
also, the imagery purdum uses: it came from wasilla, little shop of horrors (get it? palin's a monster! yeeks!), she needed a “horse whisperer,” things that, i wonder, would purdum write about a male politician?
i disagree w/the overboard polticial correctness @ shakesville often times (i personally thought the bit about palin's relatives making billy carter and roger clinton look good was hilarious), but this time i felt melissa was spot on.
did we really need to contemplate that palin is fertile? is that really something that needs attention? aren't most male politicians of an age where they could father a child? what's that about, some hormonal imbalance we need to take into account when dealing w/palin?
i loathe sarah palin for her smallness, her pettiness, her willingness to destroy perceived enemies, and her unwillingness to acknowledge reality.
but i don't loathe her for being a woman. can't we have a profile, either from the right or left, that doesn't treat palin's sex as some sort of carnival side show to be gawked at?
GD -
A) I have never circled the wagons around Palin
B) I didn't comment on Biden's ideology; I commented on his buffoonery. I believe he is the model for the new clowns at the Ringling Bros' circus.
AR, I know you're not a fanboy, or you'd surely have to relinquish the “unnervingly moderate” crown. Of course you're meandering close to the line on your Biden point, though of course both of us have more illustrious achievements and if people just got a clue about our brilliance, they'd pad our c.v. with stuff like longest serving Senator and VP. Besides, neither of us would ever 'misspeak' or have any foot-in-mouth moments.
Neither longevity as a Senator (Strom Thurmond) nor being VP (Dan Quayle) has any bearing on or is an indicator of intelligence.
If Palin wants a political future, she's going to have to maka an apperarnce on “Meet the Press”.
Biden's been on MTP three times from what I've googled.
What are the odds of Palin's handlers allowing her to do MTP… slim and none?
Palin on MTP would be pure comedy gold.
“A) I have never circled the wagons around Palin”
Nobody here has. This was just another illogical or downright fictitious and spontaneous-emotional charge from the other side.
“If Palin wants a political future, she's going to have to make an appearance on “Meet the Press” sooner or later.”
She shouldn't _have_ to (as no show, especially a Washington “institution,” should ever have such clout), but in today's reality, of course she should. She's either not for real or is being protected (why?) if not.
[...] Joe Gandelman in Moderate Voice: The Daily News article ends with part of the Vanity Fair article where a McCain staffer takes a swipe at Palin from the standpoint of early hopes that she was raw talent — and that his worst negative fears about Palin were confirmed after the election. In other words: it blasts her for her campaign and post campaign performance. [...]
I find it amazing the rip's on Sarah Palin after all this time. It must be true. She really is a threat. McCain is a would be wanta be President. He would not have got the votes He got if he had not brought in Palin. As far as Vice President Biden and the Democratic Leadership we are seeing now in Congress, I would not be boasting on how poor Palin is. The People of America both Democrat's, Republicans, Independents are giving the Majority all F's for a grade. 2010 election should be interesting.