Sarah Palin’s scheduled political trip to Iowa this month marks a shift from near silence in the leadoff presidential nominating state to the kind of outreach common among White House prospects. Palin’s plan to headline the Iowa Republican Party’s annual fall fundraiser on Sept. 17 is solely to help raise money for the state party’s candidates, the former Alaska governor’s aides said. And one trip to Iowa is a long way from a successful campaign for the state’s 2012 presidential caucuses, still 18 months away, Iowa party insiders said.

But Palin’s recent overtures to Iowa reveal a change in posture that puts her in a position — like other 2012 presidential prospects already laying campaign groundwork in Iowa — to build goodwill and relationships with influential activists, state Republican officials said. -- Des Moines Register

Idea. Palin doesn't campaign for President. She doesn't run for President. She simply appears. Everywhere. Backing winners. Amassing cash. Drawing crowds. Putting Mitt, Newt, Huck, and everyone else with a quirky nickname in deep shade. People start wondering aloud. Aren't these guys yesterday's news? Weren't these guys flawed candidates last time (or times) around? A wave of resignation sweeps over the low, dull buzz of sneaking desperation: Why not Sarah? She's already -- yes -- the de facto nominee. Nominated by acclamation. None of the other guys are this popular. This ubiquitous. This famous. Sarah is Destiny...who are we to dare to defy it?

Well, that's one attitude. But the bigger and badder Palin gets, the sharper and better a contrast is drawn by the would-be candidates who are new to the game -- you know, names like Barbour, or Daniels...

PS. At the largest venue in Anchorage, on September 11th, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are doing...something.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller

I heard Bob Beckel earlier today referring to candidates endorsed by Palin as if they were her puppets... as if their only appeal with voters is Palin's favor. I wondered if Beckel's choice of words were strategic or merely delusional. Palin is the new Bush, apparently.

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

She makes me nervous.

I'm starting to smell narcissism.

Pretty narcissism. Perky narcissism.

But narcissism nevertheless.

We need a workhorse, not a show pony.

Extending the metaphor - Mitch Daniels is a plowhorse.

Chris Chistie is a Clydesdale.

I will now duck for cover....

Edited on Sep 1, 2010 at 12:41pm
etoiledunord
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

I think she might want to be one of Alaska's Senators. Look at how long Ted Stevens was there, and how much power he had. It's almost better than being President. But, it takes a lot of money, and that means storing up lots of GOP fundraising IOUs.

cdor
Joined
Jun '10
cdor

Kenneth...

What, no mule?

Pilgrim
Joined
Jun '10
Pilgrim

I wish I had a better reason for supporting Sarah Palin than imagining my sheer delight in the eye-bulging, red-faced, mouth-foaming apoplexy of the academic, Hollywood, media and political left at President-elect Palin (hopefully by a few hundred votes in a FL recount).

Maybe its better just imagined.

So Rob, there is the opening sequence for the pilot, then the swearing-in Bible in one hand, baby in the other, Washington-insiders misunderestimating the beautiful, but kinda ditzy president, the first crisis when all America comes to respect their new president. West Wing, Commander-in-Chief, and American President but funny this time

Edited on Sep 1, 2010 at 1:46pm
Rob Long

Actually, Pilgrim, that's a pretty good pitch.

But I'm persuaded on the Senate issue: Sarah Palin would be a terrific senator.

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

Rob Long: Actually, Pilgrim, that's a pretty good pitch.

But I'm persuaded on the Senate issue: Sarah Palin would be a terrific senator. · Sep 1 at 6:51pm

I wonder if she could be elected Senator in Alaska these days. I understand they think she's gone uppity.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser

cdor: Kenneth...

What, no mule? · Sep 1 at 1:11pm

Maybe that would be Haley Barbour: "Yuh darn raht ahm uh me-u-u-ule." Love that guy. His best line today over at U.K.:"The problem is not the deficit; the problem is spending. And raising taxes is the enemy of controlling spending." He might be a sleeper, and he sure as heck'll have the loyalty of influencial governors.

If our whole bench gets in the game in 2012, it'll be pure fun.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser

Kenneth

Rob Long: Actually, Pilgrim, that's a pretty good pitch.

But I'm persuaded on the Senate issue: Sarah Palin would be a terrific senator. · Sep 1 at 6:51pm

I wonder if she could be elected Senator in Alaska these days. I understand they think she's gone uppity. · Sep 1 at 7:10pm

...and yet her mere endorsement just got a relative nobody a primary win. She'd win in a landslide.

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

Scott Reusser

Kenneth

Rob Long: Actually, Pilgrim, that's a pretty good pitch.

But I'm persuaded on the Senate issue: Sarah Palin would be a terrific senator. · Sep 1 at 6:51pm

I wonder if she could be elected Senator in Alaska these days. I understand they think she's gone uppity. · Sep 1 at 7:10pm

...and yet her mere endorsement just got a relative nobody a primary win. She'd win in a landslide. · Sep 1 at 7:20pm

There was an interesting article up somewhere this morning saying that she lost because she ran a lousy campaign and failed to counter Miller's untrue assertions that she was against repealing Obamacare.

I also think she lost because of the anti-insider mood. You don't get much more "inside" than having your father appoint you Senator and being Mitch McConnell's poodle.

I've never been a huge believer that endorsements swing elections. And Palin does have a mixed record. If one were to be cynical, one might conclude that Palin has a pattern of betting on the obvious winning horse. She didn't endorse Miller until the last hours, when the die was cast.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser

That's not how Miller portrayed it on Hugh Hewitt tonight, but--who knows--you might be right.

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth
Scott Reusser: That's not how Miller portrayed it on Hugh Hewitt tonight, but--who knows--you might be right. · Sep 1 at 9:33pm

How did he portray it?

Pilgrim
Joined
Jun '10
Pilgrim

Kenneth #10: "There was an interesting article up somewhere this morning saying that she lost because she ran a lousy campaign and failed to counter Miller's untrue assertions that she was against repealing Obamacare."

That article is on a macro key: Just search and replace @loser with "Creigh Deeds", "Jon Corzine", "Martha Coakley", "Jan Murkowski"


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