PALIN FOR PRES!!!!

[Gob]

Will Sarah Palin run for president?

Sarah Palin campaigning in 2008 The pundits wonder which way Sarah Palin will go

With Sarah Palin visiting the key state of Iowa on Friday, speculation is mounting that she is preparing the ground to run for president in 2012. Will she?

The Iowa caucuses are the first stop on any Republican or Democrat's road to earning their party's nomination for president.

So the former vice-presidential candidate's attendance at a major Republican fundraising dinner in the state is likely to set tongues wagging.

But what do the pundits think?

Matthew Continetti

Credentials: Author, The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star.

Verdict: She will.
John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008 Some think Mrs Palin, former governor of Alaska, has had presidential ambitions for some time

Pros: I don't think she's made a decision yet, but when you look at some of the moves, the fundraising, endorsements and the political travel it suggests that she is very interested in a presidential [run].

Palin is an impulsive politician. When she looks over the past two years, her interpretation of events suggests this is her moment. Everything up to this point is leading her to run.

She has rejected conventional advice. She did it most recently when she resigned her office [as governor of Alaska] in 2009. Most people declared her political career dead. But she is more influential than ever.

Cons: The main one would be the calculation that she could exert more power over the Republican party as a kingmaker. Also, financial interest would play a part. This is a woman in a family who haven't been wealthy for most of their lives. They came into a great deal of wealth in the last year and they may think they don't want to give it up.


I'm not certain Palin can win. You look at Republican [presidential] primary fights and you tend to have an establishment and an insurgent candidate. The insurgent tends to lose.

One thing Palin has going for her is the grassroots of the party wants new faces. They may desire ideological purity over electoral victory.

If Obama's approval rating continues to fall an elephant would have a chance against him.

David Yepsen

Credentials: Former political editor at Des Moines Register, Iowa. Now director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute.

Verdict: Palin yet to decide.


Pros: I don't know if she is going to run. I don't think she probably knows in her own mind. She is doing things to position herself to run if she wants to. She doesn't have to decide now.

Iowa is where the selection process starts. It sends a signal to the political community that she might be interested, sends a signal to Iowa Republicans that she might be interested.

Her whole travel schedule, her endorsements, she is building up chits all over the country with Republican constituencies.

Cons: She has a lot of financial reasons not to decide now. Once you become a candidate for president, speaking and media gigs go. She has every incentive to keep the buzz going.

She has a steep hill to climb. A lot of people, according to the polls, do not see her as presidential material. She will have to convince a lot of Republican activists.

There is a difference between being a candidate and being a celebrity.

Shushannah Walshe

Credentials: Co-author, Sarah from Alaska: The Sudden Rise and Brutal Education of a New Conservative Superstar

Verdict: She will.


Pros: She is making more overt strides. She is going to Iowa. With her big win in Delaware [Christine O'Donnell's surprise win in the Republican Senate primary]. These are all chips she's going to cash in when it comes to 2012.

It's more about the kind of person she is. She is the kind of person who reacts to what is in front of her, both good and bad. What is in front of her is supporters all over the country who want her to run.

Cons: She is making a lot of money at what she is doing right now and that would be curbed. Now she can charge a lot for speaking, she has sold a lot of books, she has a contract with Fox. Much of that income would stop.

She really does shy away from any sort of interviews or contact with the press, except Fox. That would change if she ran for president.

That is going to be part of the scrutiny. Her leaving the governorship of Alaska is going to be a very hard mountain to climb. People will say running the country is harder than being governor of Alaska.

She could get the nomination. She has a lot of support in the early states [places like South Carolina that have early primaries] but after that I think it would be very difficult.

Larry Sabato

Credentials: Founder of Sabato's Crystal Ball and director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

Verdict: Palin yet to decide.

Pros: Obviously the victory by Christine O'Donnell, even though a disaster for the Republican Party, tells Palin the GOP base will override the overwhelming feeling against Palin in the leadership.

She can win the nomination. She is clearly in the running for the nomination and she might well win it.

Cons: The [Republican] leadership knows Palin will lose the general election.

Norman Ornstein

Credentials: Research scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Verdict: Impossible to tell. More inclined to believe she will run.

Pros:
Karen Handel and Sarah Palin Sarah Palin has had successes and failures in her endorsements

She is clearly preparing the ground work to be able to do it. Just like Newt Gingrich, she's doing it in a way that ensures she gets an enormous amount of attention and makes money.

The one clue out there is the endorsement of Kelly Ayotte, candidate for Senate in New Hampshire [the site of a key early primary]. It is the one place where Palin picked the more moderate candidate over the conservative.

Cons: It is a lot of work to run. The fact that she gave up the governorship of Alaska would suggest she might be averse to a lot of work.

It doesn't appear she has a great aptitude for study.

And what if she runs and loses? It would be a little more damaging to the brand.

I wholeheartedly endorse Sarah Palin for president of the USA.
signed; The Gob.

[Sue U]

I wholeheartedly endorse Sarah Palin for president of the USA.
signed; The Gob.

You really do hate America, don't you.

[Lord Jim]

Steve will be elected President of Optimists International before Palin is the Republican Nominee for President of the US.

[Guinevere]

But it was ok for her to be the VP nominee. Why is that?

[Gob]

You really do hate America, don't you.

I miss old George W Bush. It was like having a constant stream of Monty Python/Blackadder/Fawlty Towers on tap, the funniest comedy the US had ever produced. I used to love getting up in the morning and opening the BBC website and reading what the oaf had been up to the previous day, (they were remarkably restrained in the face of such farce.)

I reckon Palin could knock all that into a cocked hat, she'd be the funniest thing ever.

(Mind you her "war on Iran" wouldn't be much to laugh about. )

[Lord Jim]

But it was ok for her to be the VP nominee. Why is that?

Well there's a pretty obvious answer for that....

To become a Presidential Nominee in the modern era,, one must win it, after a grueling process that lasts more than a year, against other contenders, in an enormously complex contest that is both national and state by state... they have to achieve the prize after having gone through that year plus gauntlet, standing up in a whole series of debates against their opponents and every attack they can throw at them on every level, as well as relentless media exposure, and having to deal day in day and day out through the whole process with the press....

To become a Vice Presidential Nominee, all you have to do is convince one guy (or gal) that you can bring to the ticket strengths that could push them over the finish line and bring victory....

The requirements are very different....

[Lord Jim]

Who a Presidential nominee selects for their running mate, (despite all the high flautin' shine about, "the most qualified person to succeed me") is based on a calculus designed to address where they believe they are in the race, and what they think best helps their chances for victory...

Do you think Dwight Eisenhower believed Richard Nixon was the most qualified person to succeed him? (He chose Nixon to bring a young conservative from the Robert Taft Wing of the party on to the ticket)

Do you think JFK thought Lyndon Johnson was the most qualified person to succeed him? (He picked Johnson, whom he detested, because he felt he could deliver Texas)

LBJ had nothing but contempt for Hubert Humphrey, but he put him on the ticket to sew up the votes of northern liberals who were suspicious of him...

Nixon picked Agnew, because his polling showed that he ran more poorly when paired up with any well known GOP figure, (Nelson Rockefeller, George Romney, etc.) than against Humphrey head to head...So he chose a complete unknown...(Who btw, had a reputation as Governor of Maryland, for being a moderate....)

I could go on....

Presidential nominees pick Vice Presidents they think can help them in some way...

If they feel they're in a strong position, they tend to go with safer picks...

If they have no chance at all, they go with whatever they can get....(See Shriver, Sargent and Miller, William)

And if they're behind, but they think they might win, sometimes they "throw the long ball"....

That's what Walter Mondale did in '84....( ya think he thought that a two term congresswoman from Queens was the most qualified person to succeed him? ) he knew going in to his convention that if things went on a predictable trajectory, he was going to lose for sure....he needed to shake thing up to have any chance....

And for a brief time it worked...

He cut into Mr. Reagan's lead right after the Demo convention, and after The President's poor performance in the first debate, he was in striking distance, just about six points behind...

But then he began to pay the price for picking a Not-Ready-For-Prime Time running mate who hadn't been fully vetted...

All kinds of stuff started coming out about her finances and her husband's business dealings that became a huge distraction, and her abrasive style...(And of course Mr. Reagan regained his footing and turned in a brilliant performance in the second debate...the booming economy didn't hurt either)

The analogy isn't perfect, but I think McCain got hoisted on much the same petard....

After he picked Palin, after some initial WTF? reaction, she turned in a very credible acceptance speech....

Initially, she helped him immensely....by early September, for the first time, despite all the baggage he was carrying as the standard bearer for a party with a hugely unpopular incumbent, he had pulled ahead in the polls....she made a huge dent in gender gap....

But then, the Not Ready For Prime Time thing started to kick in....

She wasn't the main reason he lost, (any more than Ferraro was the main reason Mondale lost) in both cases there were a lot of other factors ( the economy in both cases, their own weak performances versus much more politically effective opponents, and other external factors played more important roles)

But in both cases, they showed the limited value of throwing "the long ball" with a running mate who hadn't been vetted thoroughly and wasn't ready for the big time....

[Gob]

Who a Presidential nominee selects for their running mate, (despite all the high flautin' shine about, "the most qualified person to succeed me") is based on a calculus designed to address where they believe they are in the race, and what they think best helps their chances for victory...

I love American politics...

[Gob]

Bring it on, more of this sort of stuff please, hysterical...

Once Glenn Beck starts speaking the language becomes restrained, moderate, not even a hint of euphemism or innuendo, indeed an insistence that the audience must reach out and persuade their political enemies, not hate them. But the warm up is a different matter.

A local pastor kicks off the proceedings. Beck - and the other speakers - he claims, "will be speaking for God": a claim Beck is not around to hear and will later contradict. Not only this, but Beck and others are the target of unspecified people who would like to kill them, the pastor insists: hence, we the audience must pray for their safety.

Next the compere, who says that America is under siege from more than just al-Qaeda:

"Today we're not only being attacked by terrorists but by those who believe in different principles: our children are being indoctrinated with liberal views on a daily basis."

And consider this, from an Iraq-style deck of "wanted cards" on sale in the sparsely populated exhibition space: a picture of Barack Obama, framed with the legend:

"Trust me. I am not a Kenyan born, lying, arrogant Muslim communist that hates America - really I'm not: Barack Hussein Obama, President USA, Socialist/Communist . The Ultimate Race Card. Done in 2102," complete with the caveat: "This is not a quotation of this person merely a funny anecdotal statement."

http://www.novembersmostwanted.com/

The warm up for Beck is Republican Congressional candidate Jackie Walorsky. She declares ideological war on the "progressives" and warns she will vote for a law to assert "states' sovereignty" against the Federal government, should she beat her Democratic opponent.

This is the Tea Party movement in full swing, three weeks after its march on Washington. It is clearly at a political crossroads: its leaders trying to channel it onto the battlefield of mainstream electoral politics and media spin, its members still minded towards the political equivalent of asymmetric warfare with the establishment.

At his Washington rally Beck had mixed political oratory with lengthy meditations on the greatness of George Washington, the power of religious belief. Afterwards he is said to have been self critical, and vowed to focus much more on the religious message alone.

In Angola, Indiana - in a less than full sports hall at a local university - this is what he did.

Beck spoke for one hour thirty minutes, to an audience of about 2,000 paying up to $125 (£80) a seat. Having been whipped up by the previous speakers, and videos eliding images of D-Day with 9/11 and Fallujah, they were now whipped down by Glenn Beck.

His website, TheBlaze.com had already warned followers to desist from wearing historical costumes and toting self-scrawled banners open to the accusation of bigotry. So the crowd were mainly wearing Beck t-shirts ($15) and, some, beatific smiles.

Here's the summary of Beck's speech: Miracles are coming (he means this literally not metaphorically). We've achieved a lot by putting Tea Party candidates in the front seat for 2 November but now we have to go further and stop haranguing our opponents, also looking crazy on the streets. America's problems started in 1915 (ish) with Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, who attempted to DESTROY (Beck writes in in capitals on a whiteboard) Americans' "faith, history and Constitution". George Washington was the greatest human being ever, after Jesus Christ. A number of anecdotes are recounted from Washington's life, of questionable relevance to the matter under discussion. Whenever Beck discusses Washington he bursts into tears, which he always manages to quickly stem by returning to the theme of bashing the "progressives" and their pernicious doctrine of "social justice".

Beck here is cutting against the instincts of the audience: the only real standing ovation moments come on the two or three occasions when he lets fly the rhetoric of "take our country back from the progressives and communists" variety. For the most part he is not only trying to damp the enthusiasm but also confront the almost totally white, over-45, Christian, small-town audience with the limitations of their current strategy. He also insists, tellingly, that they should "love their enemies not hate them" and that they should not claim to speak on God's behalf but understand that God speaks on theirs.

For this reason the audience is for the most part subdued. Remembering this is America, where a 30 second TV commercial is considered long, this feeling of ennui grows towards the end of the 90 minutes Beck is onstage. There are looks of puzzlement. But the seasoned political operators in the audience are not puzzled.

Coming in the same week Sarah Palin called for "unity" in the Republican Party, the depoliticisation of Glenn Beck's rallies, together with his move against the Tea Party's street image, signals the intent to harness the movement within the confines of mainstream party politics.

The only overt policy passage in Beck's speech was this: "Private is always better than public: I'd rather go to a private hospital than a public one; send my kids to a private school than a public school; use a private toilet (pause for laughter) than a public toilet..."

In urging a return to charity, and sacrifice, Beck is not slow to give this a sharp political edge as well. He warns his followers: "You may have to give up your pension plan, your social security, so that the next generation is not burdened with debt."

Half a mile away in fact, in the "protest area" designated by the police, about 20 local opponents of Glenn Beck held placards saying "Hate is not an American value".

But there was no hate in the speech I heard. And there was very little politics. In the process of becoming the figurehead for the American right, Beck has found new depths within his own personality and "got religion" even more than he had it before. The ideological heavy lifting is being done by the warm-up speakers and by the paraphernalia vendors.

His relationship with George Washington remains in a state of evolution: in the DC march he claimed he "knew there was another George Washington in the crowd" before bursting into tears.

This time he told the story of Washington's attempt to head-off a military coup against Congress: "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray, but almost blind, in the service of my country". Then burst into tears.

If Glenn Beck were on the psychiatrists' couch, not a platform in front of a paying audience, the analyst might ask why his thoughts and emotions seem to come spontaneously round to Washington again and again ("I see him in my mind's eye," says Beck, and looks at a space in front of him as if, indeed, the man in the wig and stockings could soon appear there).

Could it be that Beck believes he himself is destined to play a similar role? He insists not.

Decoded, this is what I think he is trying to communicate. We've come a long way: changed the game; become power-brokers in the Republican Party - but we have to become less extreme, look less unusual, reach out and make alliances with the non-devout right and conservative Democrats. And in the process of doing this we've got to drive hatred and extremism out of our speech. And we need a powerful and selfless leader to enact a second American revolution that breaks free of Wall Street, social justice, "progressives" and go back to the Constitution of 1776.

Beck says repeatedly that the "liberal media" does not understand the Tea Party movement: darkness cannot comprehend light, as he puts it. I think this has been true up to now - the mainstream US media constantly under-estimates the momentum behind the grassroots right.

But in choosing to become an essentially religious moralist on his public speaking tour, rather than letting fly with both barrels at the politicians as he does on TV, Beck becomes easier to categorise - because there are a lot of other TV evangelists with similar views on social morality and economics. Take away the wit and barb, the unashamed populist rhetoric that made him a TV superstar, and he is in a crowded market.

I joined the line to shake his hand, afterwards, as a way to get a question to him on camera (he's not doing any interviews).

Does he want to be the leader of this movement?

No, was the gist of the answer.

"I am a reminder," he insisted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/pa ... glenn.html

[dales]

I'm glad you're so easily amused.