Blaming McCain for Palin?
Andrew Sullivan reminds us all how Sarah Palin came to be driving the dialogue today:
[W]hat I didn’t fully come to terms with, until the Palin farce, was the full extent of John McCain’s recklessness and cynicism. This is worth keeping in mind through all this. The only reason we even know about Sarah Palin is John McCain.
Certainly McCain’s VP pick brought some sudden life to his campaign. And yes, it looked extremely cynical to me as well. But when Sullivan goes on to suggest that McCain should resign to atone for his sins, he totally loses me.
He picked her so carelessly, and his thought process was so cynical, that he should stand in the dock of public opinion before Palin does. Her vanity led her to say yes to his crazy offer. But he gave her that chance. And in the end, she is his responsibility. [...]
If he had any sense of responsibility, he would resign. And if the Washington media had any sense of responsibility, it would never invite him on TV again without demanding he take responsibility for what he nearly did to the national security of this country. No one who put this person near the nuclear button should have a future in public life.
Myself, I’d say that McCain already paid a very high price for his Palin pick. I’ve long suspected that he might well have won the presidency with a less polarizing (and more prepared) choice. She was definitely a factor in my decision to vote for Obama, and I know I’m not alone.
However — while it’s fair to attribute Sarah Palin’s meteoric rise in the national consciousness to McCain, it’s really a bit off to go after him for the “almost” that wasn’t.
More interesting (to me), frankly, is the question of where the GOP base would be right now, had she not entered the dialogue. My guess is that they’d still be spinning their wheel in angst, with no centering point (other than, perhaps, some media figures) at all.
Palin has emerged as a leading voice for the disaffected conservative base — a base that includes the stringent classic conservatives as well as the social. But she didn’t invent them.
McCain’s choice was certainly cynical, but it wasn’t necessarily incorrect. And although I’m thoroughly dismayed by the direction they’re going, there was a good chance the Republicans were going down an ideological purity road anyway. There’s no use in blaming McCain.
For that matter, there’s no point in blaming Palin, either. This was a fire waiting for a spark, and it was bound to come from someplace.
The cartoon by Taylor Jones, El Nuevo Dia, Puerto Rico, is copyrighted and licensed to run on TMV. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited. All rights reserved.
51 Responses to “Blaming McCain for Palin?”
I'm fairly certain not many people give a flip what a blog poster writes anyway. Only collectively do they ever get an honorable mention from the MSM, as generic a mention as it may be I doubt McCain or Palin really care.
However an opinion is an opinion and I read the blogs so my opinion on Sullivan’s opinion is that Sullivan’s opinion is moot.
I blame Sarah Palin for making Andrew Sullivan unreadable.
OK, that isn't her fault, but Lord do I get tired of the way he can't stop posting about her.
Yup. Obsessed. A real shame.
“No one who put this person near the nuclear button should have a future in public life.”
And yet, Joe Biden is only a heartbeat (and Nancy Pelosi, only two) from that same nuclear button.
“I wonder what this does?”
~EdT.
Gotta say, EdT, that I find Biden far less disturbing than Palin. Pelosi, otoh…. LOL!!!!
Just because Palin was not on the liberal media's radar screen does not mean that there was nobody who had heard of Palin. There was a national group pushing a Palin candidacy before McCain nominated her, pushed by conservatives including many who were quite disappointed by the McCain nomination. What shocked us was that McCain actually picked her, obviously to shore up his base.
The pick immediately drove McCain up over Obama in the polls and bolstered fund raising for the Republican ticket. Conservatives were electrified during the convention by her speech. While much of the clueless media was scrambling to figure out who she was, there was widespread celebration amongst conservatives who were well aware of her.
McCain lost the election in large part when the fiscal crisis hit, and he handled it poorly. After proclaiming himself to be the candidate of fiscal responsibility, who would fearlessly wield the veto pen to stop the mushrooming of federal spending, he halted his campaign and started running around like a chicken without a head pushing a fabulously expensive Federal bailout. The first vote failed, and the bill became laden with pork and earmarks and finally passed — and McCain spoke of how proud he was of having pushed it. The energy and support he had picked up among conservatives by nominating Palin was blown. That, in addition to muzzling and mishandling Palin cost him the election. The Republican right was split into two camps — those who sat out the vote, and those who made it clear they would vote for Palin, even if they had to vote for McCain to do it.
Exit polls have shown that more people voted Republican because of Palin than voted against the ticket because of her. Combine the animosity of many in the base toward McCain, the extremely good campaign of Obama, and McCain's incompetency in putting Palin to good use and you have the result. The one good thing McCain did was nominating a conservative as VP. But he hardly discovered her. That's nothing more than liberal spin.
You're telling me that Sarah Palin was a household name in conservative circles? Really?
I'd say 'household name' might be overstating it a bit, but among conservatives who were politically engaged, yes. She was always on the lists that I saw and heard tossed around as potentially good running mates that would balance out McCain's centrism (which has always been derided by some conservatives.)
And I think that DaMav is correct about how she helped with the base, and it's not at all a given that McCain could have done better with someone more appealing to centrists. Most centrists already seemed pretty predisposed to voting the GOP out, and many of them were fairly smitten by Obama- so I don't know that McCain had much of a chance to make headway in that direction.
It is what it is. Personally I think McCain's odd performance after the economic meltdown is what killed his chances, and if I'm not mistaken that's what the polls showed (that was when Obama pulled ahead, and McCain never recovered.)
FWIW though, I thought Palin had some good qualifications but wasn't ready. Since I also thought Obama was too inexperienced, the experience level of the number two slot didn't seem as important though.
CStanley, I'm sure you're right about names in political junkie circles. But today, she's become the standard bearer — the driver of the dialogue. This is no small change, imo.
And I certainly agree that she rallied the base.
Every one of the conservatives I know down in these parts (and it's VERY red here) who voted for Obama, did so for two reasons: 1. Palin, and 2. Send a message to the GOP that they'd screwed up royally.
For the record, btw: I don't think Alaska's enough like the continental US to launch a presidential candidate. But had she been running the state for awhile, I'd have been able to judge beyond that. More problematic, though — for me and many folks like me — was/ is her extreme social conservatism.
Among conservatives who were/are politically active, yes she was a household name. She had appeared in a number of blogosphere straw polls and been discussed there regularly. The general view was that she would never actually be nominated by McCain. The shock among many conservatives was not a 'who is she?' shock but that she actually became the nominee. Most of us were looking to 2012. Discussions about Palin appeared fairly regularly on conservative blogs and discussion groups.
Recently someone did a poll on how many people knew who the Vice President of the US is, and while I don't recall the exact results I'm not sure that it even achieved a majority. Those of us involved in politics sometimes lose sight of the fact that few of our leaders on either side of the aisle are 'household names'. Sigh. After all, it's not like they are rock stars or sports stars
I don't see her as a very extreme social conservative- I think she appeals to socially conservative people because of her life story, but her politics have not reflected an agenda that I feel should trouble anyone.
As for the people you know (you realize, of course, that you're making the type of statement that was famously made by journalists who scratched their head over the Nixon victory because 'no one they knew had voted for him), I do think that reflects more on the fact that conservatives you know aren't base conservatives. And unfortunately, although you may know a lot of people like that, there aren't enough of them to win national elections (particularly when, as you also acknowledge, a fair number of them were sufficiently disgusted with the GOP that they weren't disposed toward voting for McCain even before the Palin pick.)
Yes, I realize anecdotal evidence isn't evidence at all. However, it's really important to understand (not necessarily you — I'm sure you get it) that “the base” and “Republicans” are not at all the same. thing. Probably I shouldn't have used the term “conservatives” in my last comment, since I really meant the GOP.
And the GOP people I know were all horrified by Palin.
Horrified? Really? I find that odd- but of course I also find it odd how many Republicans were horrified by McCain getting the nomination.
In each case I can see reasons for people to be dissatisfied, but 'horrified' is such an extreme reaction and I don't see the basis for it.
I have to laugh at anyone who honestly believes McCain made the choice of Palin. Karl Rove and others in the GOP made the choice of Palin. And McCain was no maverick to stand up to them when he really wanted Lieberman as his running mate.
Palin's resurgence is a early Christmas (can you still say that?) gift to the Dems
I know Conservatives who truly were horrified after watching her actually wink (not once, but multiple times) at the camera during the VP debate.
A candidate for U.S. Vice President and she was actually flirting with us. To me it was more disturbing… I think those who wanted to vote for the Republican ticket were “horrified” after realizing there was no way in Hell they could do so.
Ethos
'She's bad news for the GOP—and for everybody else, too'
Newsweek, November 23
By the way, while I do not like her political views, I find her outdoorsy, athletic lifestyle very wholesome, and I believe that her attractive, sporty image in running shorts—and shoes—on the cover of Newsweek (that “Lberal rag”) will certainly motivate young Americans to get with it and do some running. Shame about the American flag, though…
The GOP is unaware as yet, as far as I can tell of one complete dichotomy in their knucklehead base [there's your only clue] as to Palin's electability. Or they're aware and they don't, under any circumstances, want the word to get out about why that is…lol…
I'm not telling for now. Why spoil the fun? Palin for 2012!
Just to add some quant to the anecdotal discussion:
Rasmussen – 59% of Republicans say Palin shares the values of most Republicans; 21% disagree; the rest undecided. 18% say she is a divisive force within the party. And only 18% think the current Repub leadership in Congress represents the base.
http://tinyurl.com/yj76cla
So among Repubs enthusiasts for Palin vs her detractors is basically 3:1 in her favor. She consistently places in the top 3-4 candidates for the nomination, 3 years out from a decision. And she outperforms the GOP Congress among all Republicans.
That should at least dispel the anecdotal notion that most Republicans are 'horrified' by her.
[...] Blaming McCain for Palin? (themoderatevoice.com) [...]
Pretty sad.
Having Andrew Sullivan remind us of anything having to do with Palin is almost like having Orly Taitz or Glenn Beck remind us of the birthers. He's still hell-bent on trying to unearth the so-called mystery of the birth of Palin's youngest.
Maybe its just me, but I find it a bit strange that anytime the Weekly Standard, Newsbusters, or any other right-wing site gets cited, its essentially laughed off the board for being a biased rag. Yet at the same time, credibility is lended to folks such as Sullivan.
Uh…she agrees with McCain politically. They are conservative bed partners. The more damage she does to the ones she loves the more notoriety she gets. Hack and chop your own political party to bits for personal gain. She must be the center of attention or no attention at all….which reminds me…..
Whom booked her media tour? These are the people behind her celebrity. Must be my beloved democrats…..must be. Gut’em Nancy!
Andrew Sullivan — why waste time on somebody like that? He makes stupid Brooks look and sound good.
Note the scummy nature of the attackers as well as the attacks on Palin — including by “righties.”
“Palin's resurgence is a early Christmas (can you still say that?) gift to the Dems”
Many of us realize the real news isn't Palin herself, but that she's being made news by her critics (and due to the nature of their “criticism”), which leads many non-true-fans of her to defend her, naturally. More to the point, it boosts her newsworthiness (as with Carrie Prejean, turning almost nothing into a Big Thing) and her book sales, amounting to a big Christmas present for her. Way to go, Dems and chumpier “conservatives” like Sullivan. (Keep on sniveling, Andy.)
This is redundant, but I'm with Polimom on this one. Leaning srongly to McCain initially, the selection of Palin combined with McCain's age and health history caused me to vote write-in (Obama was never an option for my vote).
CS is correct that Palin's record as Governor is not as socially conservative as her personal views. But, that does not cause me to want her leading the country.
DaMav — yes, the recent polling regarding the majority of Republicans and Palin relates here as well. However, it's worth pointing out that to poll Republicans these days is to poll a much smaller group of people than there were. (Last poll I remember seeing earlier this year had the GOP in the low 20s% of the population.)
So essentially, the Rasmussen poll tells us that just under 60% of under 3/4 of people in the US share Palin's values.
My figures might be outdated, but whether Republicans have come up a point or three since, the percentage of Palin-supporters within the party is probably as good a measure of “the base” these days as any.
Pretty fractional amount of the total population, actually.
jchem — it's true. Sullivan's strange fixation on Trig is very Orly Taitz-ish. I almost wrote a post along those lines instead.
Palin is only #2 to Obama in ability to pull in a crowd of supporters…and ratings….and sell books…ect…
She is a political force in this country and people better get used to her.
I'd never vote her into the White House, but you have to at least respect her following.
It's just absolutely ridiculous that this person is seen as a political force–absolutely ridiculous. She has so little knowledge–and she even doesn't know that she has no knowledge! This is the modern day GOP–promoting this person who so clearly is unsuitable for the national stage, propped up by political consultants, ghost writers, winks and “you betcha's”.
People are f*cking dumb to be taken in by this. But then again, the right has cultivated the f*cking dumb for years. Results=Palin
I was responding to your sincerely offered anecdote that “And the GOP people I know were all horrified by Palin.” Clearly your known GOP people are not very representative of the GOP; just pointing that out, no disrespect intended.
I'm certainly not saying that Palin is in great shape as a candidate in the general election. Clearly she is not. But three years before the last election neither was Obama. Almost everyone was certain that the next President was going to be Hillary Clinton. Obviously things can change dramatically in three years. It's what makes politics so interesting.
I have to agree with shannonlee here. As she put it, “She is a political force in this country and people better get used to her.”
DaMav, you may be right that my GOP friends are not very representative. (It's worth mentioning that quite a few of them have changed their affiliations to independent now, btw). OTOH, they're also not what the base would consider particular representative either, since they all are, at the very least, socially tolerant.
The GOP is, to my eyes, in the midst of changing rather a lot, and while it's hard to say where they'll end up, the current path doesn't look particularly good to me. Very disturbing to me, since I'm of the opinion that we need two (preferable more) healthy, vibrant political parties in this country. I do NOT want to be under single-party control for any length of time, and I want to see the GOP recover.
“As for Sullivan, he just has a bad case of vagina envy.”
*** APPLAUSE ***
LOL, I agree, that was a good line, Shannon.
It looks to me that this is reaching a point where an intervention is needed though. Sullivan appears to be imploring patience from his readers since it's just him and two other guys battling this all powerful vagina that's taking over the universe or something.
I'm totally a dude
LOL!!! I worried over that pronoun forever before posting, too!
“She is a political force in this country”
And look at who is making her that force. Not just the outright sewage-lefties, but the likes of Sullivan.
First there was a Big Bang. Now we're all threatened by universal recession into the Big Black Hole.
DLS — At this point, I'd say it's the Republican “base” that's making her that force.
I believe Palin's base is dwarfed by the size of the Palin-haters on the Left. The relative noise is that way.
Speaking of those obsessed with all-things-Sarah, there was an editor's post yesterday (his 41st) on a Palin favorability poll.
While the editor dutifully cut and pasted the wording off the Memeorandum source blog, both cleverly omitted the piece of the poll pie chart that showed something like 37% of those polled still are reserving judgement on Palin.
Given all the press Palin has received, the “reserving judgement” bunch can't be equated with the “never heard of” bunch.
For any political figure to have that large of a permeable group means they have plenty of room to get rather formidable enough to give Verathegun nightmares……or crash quickly into Ted Kennedy's national electability status.
It seems to be her ball to either score with or kick out of bounds.
I'm going to have to agree with DLS here. Clearly, she has her following, but her name has been on the top of memeorandum since Monday–every news outlet has spent time talking about her. If I didn't know any better, this is almost like what it was with Michael Jackson.
But Nate Silver wrote an interesting post yesterday, outlining why he believes that Palin will indeed run in 2012. Much of it seems to do with her playing and trumpeting up the “little guy / victim” going against the huge behemoth of an establishment. When everyone and their dog attacks her, she seems to gain more sympathy. And as shannonlee and polimon have both pointed out, she isn't going away just because anyone wants her to–she's going to stick around for awhile.
And CStanley, I'm with you in thinking an intervention is in order. Seriously, that link of yours should be given its own separate post for the quote of the day, just so the TMV crowd can see how far off the deep end Sullivan has gone.
jchem — CStanley's link shows it's pretty bad. But I was flummoxed when he did a live-blog of her Oprah appearance… right up until I saw some conservative blogs doing the same thing.
She's got a lot of people obsessing, and it's really not limited to her detractors.
Well, Polimom, you're absolutely right about the Oprah live-blogging bit. But I would still say that much of the reason I think she's been on top of the news cycle all week is simply because people are going after her. It almost seems like a sport. Sarah says a bunch of crazy stuff and then the race is on to see everybody point out how wrong she is. I mean, right now there are two articles at the top of the home page here; one of which discusses a possible Palin/Beck ticket. If we actually need a post to entertain the idea of such a possible ticket, then we have clearly lost our marbles.
Don't get me wrong; she loves the attention and she's very good at getting it. But how hard could it possibly be to laugh her off the stage and let her fade away into oblivion? Doesn't anyone get tired of having to go through the process of fact-checking or debunking every single thing she says? She really doesn't have a large crowd of support on this blog. I mean, it's not as if there isn't anything else going on in the news cycle, right?
But how hard could it possibly be to laugh her off the stage and let her fade away into oblivion?
Well, jchem, that's what I've been saying. I don't think she will fade into oblivion — at least not anytime soon — regardless of who's laughing and how loudly.
It has nothing to do with a slow news cycle. The woman has a massive number of supporters. I don't think you have a grasp on how many people identify with her. These are the people that only show up every 4 years to vote. All you need is a couple months of good campaigning to make them forget the past 3 years.
You think she is big now?…wait until 2011.
It happens all of the time
I really don't get the idea that Palin's hype is somehow primarily a product of the Left. For lack of a better description, the woman has become a media whore. She puts out an opinion on something as often as she possibly can. She may get a (predictable) response from Democrats (or “sewage-lefties” as it were), but that doesn't mean they're the ones putting her out on the public stage.
Now when she takes some time off and we're still hearing about how much of an idiot she is, let me know. At that point I'll probably agree everyone is just hating on her.
Ethos