The Candidates
Featured Archives
Probably. But it really depends on her performance Thursday night. While I think that the vice presidential debate will have virtually no impact on the race for 2008, it could determine whether or not Palin even makes it out of the gate in the race for 2012.
There’s a reason Republicans never nominated Dan Quayle. Once the public perception stuck that he was simply not intellectually up to the job, there was no point in even considering him absent some sort of Republican death wish. Palin is now dangerously close to Quayle territory. McCain picked her way too soon. It’s obvious that this woman has never had any presidential aspirations, and, as such, has not spent the last few years engrossed in study and wonkery. A great presidential candidate need not be a policy wonk, but even our most famous non-wonkish presidents (Reagan, Bush 43, etc.) have come to the table with distinct, interesting, and well-developed political philosophies, which is what Palin lacks. She is, ultimately, a first-term governor of a small, sleepy state.
By plucking her out of Alaska far too early, and then by filling her head with the tired ideas of the current Republican establishment, McCain has done two things to Palin. First, he’s ensured that Americans will perceive her as that fifth grade student who hasn’t done her homework and who is perpetually winging it. Secondly, she will come into 2012 branded as the product of Bush/McCain, Inc. This could be detrimental if the Republican Party responds to Obama’s presidency by taking sharp turns away from its current trajectory and perhaps embraces a more classically conservative foreign or economic policy.
And then there’s the question of whether Palin even wants to be president. Is she willing to do the hard work necessary to hold her own in a 2012 debate against Newt Gingrich? Because based on the Couric interview, an hour on stage against Newt would be the end of Palin’s political career forever. I don’t care what sort of crowds are currently gathering to see her. We’ve seen this before with Thompson and then with Huckabee; conservatives are so hungry for a new Reagan that they run from candidate to candidate only to be disappointed each time. Ultimately, though, it is Palin herself who will decide whether she can fill this role. She can either go back to Alaska and be a small state governor and mom, or she can make being president her primary goal from November 5th onward.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:21 am
LOL… Newt Gingrich
September 28th, 2008 at 11:25 am
I wasn’t disappointed in Huckabee. I was disappointed in conservatives.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:26 am
#2. Ditto.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:27 am
Pain’s failures are almost singularly McCain’s. She was picked too early, bad handlers and not enough prep before the final sprint to the election when all eyes would be on her.
I am curious Dave what tired idea Palin has been filled with that has hurt her? I don’t think her failure has anything to do with ideology or policy.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:29 am
I still think that it’s Palin’s in 2012 if she wants it, until I am proven otherwise – she owns the base right now. Granted 2012 is five lifetimes away in political terms, but I don’t see her losing Iowa. A Mark Sanford candidacy complicates things for candidates in that he likely takes SC off the table which might help Mitt, if he can look to NH or Michigan as his firewall. But it will be interesting to see if most prospective candidates stand down in 2012 if Palin gets in.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:36 am
FWIW, Palin is the most-loved politician here in these West Virginia hills.
Funny that the WaPo is running another anti-Palin piece, slamming her for supporting a mine in Alaska against the concerns of hyperventilating environmentalists. The urban/academic leftist Conventional Wisdom of the MSM always permeates their reporting. They have such an insular, ivory tower perception of the world and no clue at all about 90 percent of the U.S. countryside.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:39 am
The year 2012 is so far away that you might as well resort to astrology or casting runes to figure out who might run.
Four years ago all the talk was about Bill Frist and George Allen. Anyone remember them?
September 28th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Ruined implies permanence. So no, she is not ruined.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:44 am
God forbid Palin 2012. Haven’t we had enough base-appealing, anti-intellectual, IQ-deficient science illiterates in the White House?
September 28th, 2008 at 11:45 am
I think that the only candidate who has a chance at beating Palin in 2012 (I think Jeb will wait until 2016) is Michael Steele. In a Steele vs. Palin 2012 primary we might see the Republican version of the Obama vs. Hillary dynamic of 2008 – Palin seen as inevitable, but Michael Steele building a renegade, grass roots campaign.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:49 am
JA Pruce, you’ve been off the reservation lately. Steele doesn’t have the resume/storyline to run for the President, until he gets elected Governor or Senator first.
#7: Believe it or not, Pataki was being talked about seriously for 2008, too.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:54 am
2012, if it is a GOP primary it’s Romney’s too loose. Unfortunately Palin has faltered to the point where she is on less than equal footing and Romney is clearly the next in line.
Gotta go to church.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Dave, you are obviously quite ignorant of Palin’s views and haven’t seen her on c-span over the years. Your column comes off as quite insulting. Something I would expect from someone on Obama’s payroll.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:56 am
It is so easy to just repeat inside the beltway (most often quite in error) conventional wisdom.
They also called Reagan a fool.
And btw, Bush-Quayle won in ‘88 and Quayle was not why 41 was not re-elected.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:57 am
#12 Jason, Palin had A bad (ONE) performance. Obama, Biden and McCain have had scores. Cool it.
September 28th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
#6 amen, if Palin were so damaged as the youthful herd here presumes since the elites told them so, why would the left keep attacking her.
pitiful analysis and seems quite against Kavon’s policy
even Kavon seems to have violated his own!
Kavon, say it ain’t so? Have you learned nothing from DeVine…
September 28th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
I agree that this isn’t an ideal time for the McCain/Palin team, and I agree that we to mix reality with optimism.
But, if you’re going to write about the unweighted poll done by CNN, you’ve got to write about Rasmussen’s poll from Saturday: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/winner_of_the_first_debate_jim_lehrer
I assume this one was weighted: 36% thought Obama won, 33% McCain, 31% unsure.
Cheer up, dude.
Two other things:
1. Please do not compare Fred Thompson to Mike Huckabee. One is a conservative, and one is not.
2. I like Newt, but if he runs in 2012, he’s going to need to answer the question: why didn’t you run in 2008?
September 28th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
that’s all
September 28th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Palin/Steele 2012!
September 28th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
The Bradley effect is all that can save us now….
September 28th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Huckabee has found his fame on Fox News, his own show. People will never think of him as a politician again.
September 28th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
I am sooo fed up with the crap about Sarah Palin being stupid. Show me one piece of HARD EVIDENCE to support that claim. Do you have access to her IQ tests? Her school records? For crying out loud, I am ashamed to be called a “conservative” if it means that we have to look down our elitest noses at anyone who didn’t go to school on the East Coast! Sarah Palin is, by the testimony of anyone who has actually spoken with her, an extremely bright, articulate woman. Quit crying over spilled milk about Mitt, Fred, RP or whoever the hell it was you wanted for Pres or VP and suck it up! I find the repeated jabs against one of OUR candidates offensive. I thought this site was for the promotion of the Republican candidates for office this year. I guess I was wrong. It’s obviously for a bunch of spoiled babies to try to see who can pee the farthest. Somebody with some sense let me know if that changes and I’ll be back. Not that anyone cares, because I don’t have a degree from an Ivy League school either.
September 28th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
I think the implication in this article is that Palin’s learning curve was an unnecessary part of this campaign: Pawlenty, who had been campaigning nationally for McCain for almost all of 2008, would not have had these blunders with Couric, etc. But Palin is our VP nominee right now, and we must do best with what we have. They need to allow her to be herself, which means she’ll be less wonkish, but less hesitant.
If she can overcome the negative press by doing a good job against Biden and can avoid further blunders, she’ll be the GOP’s future star.
September 28th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
I just hope if Obama does win nobody on this site will say how it’s the end of conservatism. Keep in mind that Republicans have held the White House for 8 years and Congress for 6 years. It’s a sad fact that you can’t win them all.
September 28th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Here’s some news on The One’s respect for the wishes of a bereaved family.
Bam’s bracelet gaffe (he clearly couldn’t remember the name of the fallen soldier) won’t be counted against him by the MSM, of course. None of that is relevant because Bam just does everything out of love for everyone, think of the children, and daisies and buttercups, Kumbaya, etc…
September 28th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I think the pessimism on the front page of this site by Dave G, should stop. It’s over a month to the election, and that’s a long time in politics. This race is still within the margin of error of a handful of battleground states – so it is easilly within the reach of either canidate. Yeah Obama has a clear lead and a clear advantage, but it’s only the beginning of the fourth quarter, its silly to walk on out on the game right now.
Even if you are right and the game is over, what good does it do to say so? However, if you’re wrong and the game isn’t over, this overly pessimistic attitude can cause a damage. The deterministic pessimism needs to stop. I’m not asking for the level of optimism you see with people like Gamecock, but to tell everybody the war is lost whenever the tides turn is to be defeatist.
September 28th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
mike,
Palin has a lot if positives, but McCain has hurt her gravely. So far both Gibson and courics interviews were subpar the latter far worst. So far she has been denied any opportunity to talk to press and I agree with lowery, in that if she tanks another interview her brand will be ruined.
September 28th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
It’s surprising how many people on here have spent a year and a half fighting it out for their guy (or gal), and now are content to just concede defeat with just about a month until the election. What a bunch of whiny B****es. Unfortunately, a lot of the pessimism comes from the front-pagers. One has to wonder how much of this crap from DaveG and a few others is agenda driven, considering how hard he pushed for a pro-choice nominee and then veep without getting his way on either.
September 28th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
I’m puzzled with the McCain campaign’s strategy for Palin. Why not do a large number of small interviews with sympathetic media first, slowly ramping up to larger interviews with hostile personalities like Gibson and Couric?
My guess is that we will get more of the same with the VP debates – lack of specifics, tenuous grasp of issues, …
September 28th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Jindal 2012! Our only hope for a fresh face, executive/legislative experience, appeal to conservative base, and undeniable intellectual heft. Yes, there is light at the end of the tunnel!!
September 28th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
“Has McCain Ruined Palin?” Yes.
McCain fell for the MSM´s bait and decided that Palin had to become a foreign policy expert in a couple of weeks. Why? Why send her to meet all those world leaders when she should have been rallying the electorate in Ohio, Colorado…?
This is what I don’t like about McCain. In his superficial, shallow thought process Palin now has foreign policy experience and can go toe to toe with Biden on the subject. Biden is an idiot but he’s had a lot more time to memorize his cue cards.
I hope the Curic interview was an aberration and Palin can recover. If not, she’ll go down in flames carrying McCain and the whole republican party with her.
September 28th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
#22 DITTO
September 28th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
# 26 based on when the conventions ended it’s only the beginning of the 3rd quarter. Arizona was down to the Jets 34-0 at the end of the first half. It’s now 34-21 at the end of the 3rd quarter. I don’t think anybody, even the most avid Obama supporter could suggest that McCain is now down to Obama 34-0. Let’s see what kind of half-time adjustments the crafty John McCain comes up with before we write him and Sarah off.
September 28th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
It’s undeniable that the liberal mainstream media has a great influence on many people. It’s not surprising that Obama is doing as well as he is, since much of the mainstream media propaganda is favorable to him.
“Has McCain Ruined Palin? Probably. But it really depends on her performance Thursday night. While I think that the vice presidential debate will have virtually no impact on the race for 2008, it could determine whether or not Palin even makes it out of the gate in the race for 2012.”
I swear I can hear the folks at CNN spewing this gibberish. What is the basis for your assertion? Is it your reaction to a couple of heavily edited interviews? We haven’t seen Sarah Palin in a national debate yet, we haven’t seen her perform and express her positions, and we haven’t seen her interact with the gaffe prone goof Biden. It’s far too early in the game to pronounce Palin’s prospects ruined based on the limited liberal crap that that has been out there.
It should be obvious that the media seeks to depress the GOP vote and enthusiasm. Our party needs people with back bone to stand up for our principles and our values, not to wave the white flag every time SNL pokes fun at or the liberals criticize Sarah Palin.
And on that note, the candidate who truly excites the conservative base is Sarah Palin. I’m sure next week Sarah will have a much bigger audience than tuned in for the first 2008 presidential debate.
There is all this hype about Obama being an exciting figure who draws an enormous audience, but the reality is that the debate was among the least watched in the history of presidential debates. Some of the speculation on this site suggested that the debate would have drawn about 100 million viewers to watch Obama in action. Those who were so optimistic about the Messiah’s magnetism are probably thinking he won the debate and McCain lost.
Excerpt:
“The first debate between John McCain and Barack Obama is on track to pull a surprisingly average viewership number, drawing fewer households in the preliminary ratings than George W. Bush’s face off against John Kerry four years ago.
In the meter-market overnights, Friday night’s 90-minute debate in Mississippi received a preliminary household rating of 33.2, according to Nielsen Media Research.
That’s 16% lower than the national number from the 2004 debate, which aired on a Thursday — generally TV’s most-watched night of the week. Friday’s number is only slightly above George W. Bush and Al Gore’s first debate in 2000 and the Clinton-Dole debate in 1996.
National household ratings for earlier presidential debates (each year’s first debate only):
2004: Kerry-Bush: 39.4
2000: Bush-Gore: 31.7
1996: Clinton-Dole: 31.6
1992: Clinton-Bush-Perot: 38.3
1988: Bush-Dukakis: 36.8
1984: Reagan-Mondale: 45.3
1980: Carter-Reagan: 58.9
1976: Ford-Carter: 53.5
http://www.thrfeed.com/2008/09/debate-ratings.html
September 28th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
I don’t think anyone has claimed Palin is “dumb”. She’s just very new to the national scene and doesn’t have a whole lot of understanding of it. That’s not dumb, just ignorant. Not that ignorant is much acceptable, but…
September 28th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
I actually think that Palin did pretty well in her three nationally televised interviews considering that two of them were heavily biased and full of unfair gotcha questions. Yet, I think to the nation and those folks watching at home she probably came off as reassuring, strong, resolute, articulate and as having a command of the issues that people care about.
The media have pushed her expectations so low that there is no way she can fail in the debate thursday. The only thing she has to do to pass the threshold is to reassure Americans that if something were to happen to McCain that she would be able to step in and preside over the nations domestic and foreign policy. She will likely do that and she will probably win the debate in the process.
September 28th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
It is the mainstream news media. Hope she will do well on the debate with Biden next week in St. Louis.
September 28th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
You’re right mary, the liberal mainstream media is mischaracterizing these interviews to make Sarah look bad. To the average voter, she looked Presidential, informed and ready to lead America through some of the most challenging times ahead.
September 28th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Let’s face it: if Sarah had been a 100% perfect in her presentation and interviews during the past 2 weeks with the devastating economic news front and centre and dealt with in a crisis mode, which it is, would McCain be sitting much better in the polls than he does now? I think not. The story should be that with Palin on the ticket that McCain still is competitive in the battleground states of Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire, that Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota could become competitive and that McCain according to the most recent polls is only 10 points back in California.
September 28th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
I gotta say, Ridge is looking better now than ever.
September 28th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Guys don’t forget about General David Pretraues, he might be the next nominee for the GOP ala Dwight D. Eisenhower.
September 28th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Good point Jimmy. And I will bet you that Petraeus is against the bailout. Interesting.
September 28th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Palin is not the problem. So please do not count me among those who say she is. Palin has energized our base in a way that no other veep choice could have. She is reason #1, #2, & #3 why we are still even in this. Can you imagine the position we would be in through the crisis if our BASE wasn’t even with us?
The problem is that we have a campaign that allows our opponent to say any lie that want about our nominee unchallenged. The financial crises is the Dem’s fault. Obama hired two of the main crooks who are responsible for it to top advisory positions in his campaign. The campaign should be crucifying Obama with this. They aren’t and apparently won’t. That is what is the problem.
Anyone who talks about who’s the favorite for 2012 in September of 2008 is beyond ridiculous.
September 28th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Palin will NEVER EVER be President and thank the lord for that. Face it we acted like giddy teenagers after her one good scripted speech (ie like Democrats). We stuffed up.
September 28th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
It would be interesting if Palin came out against this bailout – that would rally the troops and Americans across the political spectrum. McCain seems to be only reluctantly or mildly in support and could still switch to opposing it in the final moments.
September 28th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
palin is a nice lady, and capable, etc.
but she hasnt been an advocate for mccain. she hasnt been an attack dog on Obama. She has barely been visible. that is the problem. they are keeping her in a bunker, and that is the opposite of what a VP should be doing. DUMB
September 28th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
PS – how is this post any different than what got alex banned? i mean that in a good way.
September 28th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Another take…if mccain loses will palin even want to run in 2012…??? she will only be 48 in 2012 and maybe she doesn’t want to spend her final 2 years as gov of alaska running around the lower 48 campaigning and raising $’s, ie she could serve out her full two terms and enjoy life…than run for senate from Alaska in 2014…than run for president any cycle between 2016-2032 after gaining some creds. The same could also apply to Bobby Jindal + jindal might be lock for veep if he doesn’t run for prez.
September 28th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
I support Palin and she has energized the base in a way no one else could. I am 110% behind her. For those of you who are critics, give her a chance at the debate, don’t write her off yet, that’s foolish. Be prudent.
September 28th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Did you see McCain gush over Palin with his interview with George Stephanopoulos today? Either he’s the best actor this side of Laurence Olivier or he’s genuine!
September 28th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
I am stunned that there are still people talking about Palin having any chance in 2012.
She is already beyond Quayle. Let’s just hope she can provide the performance of her life this week and that McCain can find some other source of mojo over the next month.
I am supporting McCain, and I was initially pleased with the Palin pick (but knowing nothing about her), but her performance has given me significant pause regarding McCain’s decision-making process/capacity.
The Republican Party needs to stop providing case studies of the Peter Principle. Palin is not presidential material. Let’s put our country first!
September 28th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Palin was promoted to early, and the learning curve was too fast.
It is amazing how much difference being a “surrogate” or running a campaign makes to developing a candidate. The discipline & breadth of knowledge.
I remember a story about Mitt, who answered a question about some rare disease that some young kid had (asked by the mother) – he talked about how much the government was spending on that disease, and what needed to be done (he should have ‘felt your pain’, but anyway). I remember thinking, ‘wow, how much do these guys need to know?’
Palin wasn’t in the media spotlight before being picked, and it does show. But there’s still time to pull it around. The debate will be key.
September 28th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Gamecock, #13, saying that someone is on Obama’s payroll is a certain way to suggest you’ve lost the argument. Playing the man not the ball indicates the ball is not on your side. Stick with the arguments against his points (which you also do) Much more useful!
September 28th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Can we re-phrase the question? Is Palin 2012 more or less likely as a result of being nominated VP in 2008? As I see it:
Pros:
- name familiarity nationwide
- contacts in important states
- practice in the spotlight
Cons:
- entrenched negative perceptions (see Clinton, Hillary)
- no longer “new”.
WaPo is negative. But Politico is not exalting flattering either.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Mike, I have said on here before that counting on that is not wise. Plus thats a nice way of saying I hope he gets beats by racisim. Is that a way you want to win? In California where the affect Happned was 25 years ago. Point one the affect is why he is not up by 10-15% 2 in Ca where this took place, does anyone on this site think McCain will win Ca? Does anyone think that there is going to be a Bradley affect in Ca? Thats where it happened so there should be one……….
There are other ways McCain can win, I just hope that is not the way, that just shows racisim is more of a factor than it should be. It probably will affect 1/4 of the elctorate but there is 75% that it wont……….and out of the 1/4 would they have voted for a dem anyway? we will see if McCain can get back on track, I think he will but he needs to be himself not what his campagin says he should be
Leave a Reply
September 28th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
I read another article that reported that McCain is upset about how his staff has handled Palin the past few weeks. Methinks it wasn’t a good idea to turn her over to a group of Bushies, and that McCain needs to quickly conduct a shake-up of the Palin staff.
September 29th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Sorry folks, no matter how attractive Palin’s persona is, she’s not presidential timber – not by a long shot. Has she ever spent one day thinking about the issues? If so, it doesn’t show.
The problem is not how she’s being handled, but that she can’t put 2 words together to form a coherent thought. Her answer to Couric about the bailout was embarrassing. She said it was about health care reform and a bunch of other nonsense. Has anyone ever seen a governor so unable to answer simple questions? I haven’t.
The sooner we stop kidding ourselves about Palin the better. If she does poorly in the debate, McCain is going to have to deal with it. The rift in the party over Palin will grow substantially. I sure has heck don’t want her near the presidency at this point, and if something happens to McCain in office we are in big trouble. And don’t tell me she’ll have great advisors. Like who? That’s a crock!
September 29th, 2008 at 9:58 am
#57 – Amen.
September 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
#44 – if McCain pulls this election off (and there is still a chance), Palin may very well become president.
However, I agree that she will never be elected president.
September 29th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
The problem is that, from what I’ve skimmed of this thread, we’re expecting McCain to be in charge of everything Palin says or does, and if she messes up, it’s clearly his fault. Does anyone think, that if someone like Romney were the candidate, we’d be expecting McCain to dictate everything he does? If McCain is at fault in this, it’s in choosing her in the first place. What she says and does are on her. And, Billy, I understand your point. I hope she succeeds. But the problem is that there isn’t that much room for error. If this debate implodes, I think this campaign is effectively over. I also don’t blame McCain for ruining her future. If someone accepts an opportunity, they accept the risks and rewards associated with it. And if they can’t handle it, they shouldn’t accept in the first place. And, no, Palin will never be President (on her own accord, at least).