Who's afraid of Sarah Palin? Michael Kazin -- who, in a panic-stricken post at The New Republic, calls Madam Grizzly "the most dangerous politician in America today," a "polarizing" and "aggressive" figure possessed of a "menacing brilliance" on par with Joe McCarthy and George Wallace. Even her fundraising numbers are "terrifyingly high."

As I've said, when it comes to 2012 Palin isn't my girl. So I'm actually very interested in Kazin's concern that Palin will not run but instead "veto any Republican who seeks the nomination and be king, or queen-maker, of whomever gets to run against Obama." This prospect Kazin of course finds "frightening," and though I admit I don't like it much, fortunately I'm convinced that it's not gonna happen.

For it to happen, the GOP would have to (1) produce a leading contender for the nomination who is both (2) unacceptable to Palinites and (3) a man Palin doesn't like personally, doesn't owe any favors, and can't promote to her advantage (let's not kid ourselves: Palin wouldn't veto a woman even if she could). I just don't see that narrow, complex scenario playing out in any event. Palin's ability to shape the party from its margins will likely remain significant but marginal. McCarthy made his impact from deep within his party; Wallace made his (and these are not my preferred Palin analogues, not by a longshot) from far outside it. Palin is a woman who endorsed Carly Fiorina and supported John McCain -- and not out of weakness, either. For me, not even Kazin's fear of a kingmaking Mama Bear carries much weight.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

As someone with longstanding misgivings about the woman, I also believe that she is learning and maturing in her current role. Her convictions are the same, but I find that she has fewer and fewer wince-able moments. I don't think the Katie Couric interview would go the same way today for example. Given this, I see less evidence that she would run off the rails and lead her followers off a cliff. After all, you can't be a king-maker if your guy/gal has no realistic hope of actually become king.

etoiledunord
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

Oprah picked the last one. Isn't it Sarah's turn now?


Joined
Jul '10
Devereaux

?Why is everyone so afraid of Sarah. She clearly has serious leadership qualities. She is dedicated. She is principled. She believes in the real Founding Fathers concepts for setting up government.

You want "smart" you already got 0bozo. Look where it's gotten us. Sarah is ONLY a threat to the usual republican hacks who have for years insured that the republican party is the party of the also-rans. OH, and to liberals, or progressives, or whatever their nom de jour is, attempting to escape the people's scrutiny.

Matthew Gilley
Joined
May '10
Matthew Gilley

I think Kazin overestimates her influence, too. She's not my preferred '12 pick either, but I tend to give her more credit than most for her political instincts and skill. She has shown she knows when she will be the wind in someone's sails and when she will be the anchor they're going to have to drag across the seabed. When she can help, she does (e.g., Nikki Haley in SC). When she's going to be a distraction and hurt Republican chances, she remains scarce (e.g., Scott Brown in MA). She does a good job picking her spots and has not involved herself when she won't help. I think you'll see her act much the same way in deciding who she will support in 2012, how, and where.

Joseph Stanko
Joined
Jun '10
Joseph Stanko

I'm more interested in this:

Her stated views are on the wildest fringe of conservative thinking. She opposes even the mildest forms of corporate regulation, thinks the New Deal made the Depression worse, believes the U.S. is and must remain a Christian nation, condemns the idea that “God should be separated from the state,” and, of course, wants to ban all abortions and make it illegal for gay people to marry.

Can he really live in such a bubble? Even Obama claims to oppose gay marriage, though no one really believes him. That the New Deal prolonged the Depression is hardly a fringe view among mainstream academic economists.

etoiledunord
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

Joseph Stanko: I'm more interested in this:

Her stated views are on the wildest fringe of conservative thinking. She opposes even the mildest forms of corporate regulation, thinks the New Deal made the Depression worse, believes the U.S. is and must remain a Christian nation, condemns the idea that “God should be separated from the state,” and, of course, wants to ban all abortions and make it illegal for gay people to marry.

Can he really live in such a bubble? Even Obama claims to oppose gay marriage, though no one really believes him. That the New Deal prolonged the Depression is hardly a fringe view among mainstream academic economists. · Jul 15 at 2:48pm

What you describe is a leftist defending the tenets of their own religion--a religion that can't be separated from secular socialist government, because they're one in the same.


Joined
May '10
Conor Friedersdorf

I agree with everyone's assessment that Sarah Palin in 2012 isn't likely, and I think it's silly to call her the most dangerous politician in America, or to pretend that she's out on some lunatic fringe.

At the same time, I continue to be perplexed that smart people like Devereaux think that she is principled and dedicated. Was her endorsement of John McCain based on shared principles? Or was it a departure from principle for the sake of loyalty? Shouldn't either option lower her esteem among people who think John McCain represents everything that's wrong with the GOP?

And dedication? That seems like a quality that would cause someone to finish her term in office, rather than resigning in favor of earning millions of dollars as an entertainer and media elite.

Also, can someone explain to me what it means to say that Sarah Palin has good political instincts, and why I am supposed to value that quality?

Matthew Gilley
Joined
May '10
Matthew Gilley
Conor Friedersdorf: Also, can someone explain to me what it means to say that Sarah Palin has good political instincts, and why I am supposed to value that quality? · Jul 15 at 5:44pm

Good point. When I refer to her political instincts, I'm talking about her better than average track record picking winners. (Granted, her approval does tend to bring in votes that candidate may not have received otherwise - see again Nikki Haley in SC.) Considering some of the occasional underdogs she has tapped and who have gone on to win, I think we've got to consider a Palin endorsement to be a good indication that a candidate has the horses to win. In some cases, that may be grounds for concern.


Joined
May '10
Conor Friedersdorf

Matthew Gilley

Conor Friedersdorf: Also, can someone explain to me what it means to say that Sarah Palin has good political instincts, and why I am supposed to value that quality? · Jul 15 at 5:44pm

Good point. When I refer to her political instincts, I'm talking about her better than average track record picking winners. (Granted, her approval does tend to bring in votes that candidate may not have received otherwise - see again Nikki Haley in SC.) Considering some of the occasional underdogs she has tapped and who have gone on to win, I think we've got to consider a Palin endorsement to be a good indication that a candidate has the horses to win. In some cases, that may be grounds for concern. · Jul 15 at 6:52pm

Gotcha.

I'd be curious to see how Palin did as a recruiter of candidates.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In