You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Palin's future causes Republican rift
2008-10-29
(CNN) -- Election Day is still days away, but Republicans are already caught up in a heated debate about Sarah Palin's future role in the party should the GOP ticket fail to win the White House.

In one corner are some conservatives who believe the Alaska governor has been a detriment to John McCain's presidential bid and threatens to lead the party astray for the foreseeable future.

Another faction says Palin's core-conservative beliefs, demonstrated political acumen, and compelling frontier biography position her to reshape the face of a party now viewed by many voters as out of touch.

It's a debate, somewhat ugly at times, that is beginning to play out in public view as Republicans brace themselves for the possibility of losing the White House and a significant number of seats in Congress come Election Day. And that may leave the party in shambles with drastically reduced influence in Washington. iReport.com: Share your thoughts on Palin

Should that happen, political observers say, the party will face its biggest identity crisis in more than a generation, and Palin may well be caught squarely in the middle of it.

"A civil war that is simmering will break out into the open if McCain loses, and the party will have to decide what they want to be in the post-Reagan world," said Gloria Borger, a senior political analyst for CNN. Watch whether Palin is making a power play »

Palin, whose campaign rally crowds have been noticeably larger than McCain's, will certainly have legitimacy to run for president in four years should she want to. Some McCain operatives, claiming Palin repeatedly veers off script and often disregards the campaign's advice, already believe she is more interested in positioning herself for the future than helping the party win this year.

"She is such a compelling figure, and she has helped, without a doubt, with the Republican base," CNN Chief National Correspondent John King said. "But she's also hurting with key constituencies, like suburban women and independents, and there's a big question that, if McCain loses, does she try to emerge as the leader of the party heading into the 2012 cycle?"

Should Palin ultimately decide to launch her own presidential bid, she will face a massive headwind from an influential group of conservatives who believe the Alaska governor represents the very reasons why the Republican Party finds itself in retreat.

"She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for? It's unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn't think aloud. She just ... says things," conservative columnist Peggy Noonan wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal column.

It's an argument that has been echoed by a string of conservatives -- including David Brooks, George Will, Kathleen Parker, and David Frum -- who believe Palin exhibits a poisonous anti-intellectual instinct of the party that threatens to ultimately destroy its foundations.

"Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices," said Brooks, a conservative columnist for the New York Times.

Frum, a former speechwriter for President Bush who has written that Palin is woefully inexperienced to be president, told CNN the Alaska governor's chances might be slim in a general election matchup.

"She will face the classic problem of being a strong candidate for the nomination, but not such an appealing candidate across party lines," he said. "She has a very intense following among core Republicans, but at the same time, non-core Republicans have reached a very negative verdict."

Frum also pointed to recent polling that suggests Palin's unfavorable ratings have sharply risen in the last two months, and predicted it will be extremely difficult for her to combat a perception among many voters that she is a lightweight, ill equipped for the burdens of the presidency.

"This is a moment where people have formed impressions, they have been watching her closely and paying a lot of attention," he said. "Even if she spends the next two and a half years delivering worthy speeches at the Council on Foreign Relations, the cumulative work that she will do will be seen by fewer people than probably watched the Katie Couric interview or the Charlie Gibson interview, or the debate with Joe Biden."

But even as one corner of the party predicts dire consequences if Palin becomes the Republican standard-bearer, another is strongly behind her.

"I hope and expect that she stays involved nationally, and she can play pretty much whatever role she wants to. She's got momentum now, and I'd be surprised if she didn't play a leadership role in the party," Richard Viguerie, a prominent cultural conservative and chairman of conservativehq.com, told CNN.

Viguerie, as well as many other cultural conservatives, point to Palin's core beliefs on key issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage and say she represents a fresh face, from a different region of the country, who has the potential to reshape the conservative movement.

"Palin, as best I can describe it, exudes a kind of middle-class magnetism. It's subdued but nonetheless very powerful," Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes recently wrote. "Whether they know it or not, Republicans have a huge stake in Palin. If, after the election, they let her slip into political obscurity, they'll be making a tragic mistake."

Factors out of Palin's control could ultimately control her fate.

The political landscape in 2012 may look markedly different than it does now, depending on the success of a President Obama should the Illinois senator win. Unforeseen developments in the economy and the war in Iraq will also likely have an effect on whether Palin rises to the forefront of her party in the next election cycle.

But one thing is clear: If Palin wants to mount a serious bid for her party's nomination in 2012, she has a lot of groundwork to do.

She has yet to form relationships with many key conservative groups at the local level, whose support would be instrumental in ultimately capturing the Republican presidential nomination. She knows few party chairman in the key early primary states where the race will likely be decided.

"She needs to get out there and get to know conservative leaders at the national, state, and local level," Viguerie said. "She needs to introduce herself in a way she hasn't had the opportunity to do so far."

And should McCain lose next Tuesday, the Alaska governor will have little time to take a breath.

"She would have to start the day after the election if she wants to run for president -- there is no period where the election isn't going on," Frum said.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#33  Agree with OS on the '12 ticket. The biggest question is whether, if Mc Cain wins, he will step aside voluntarily or be subjected to a humiliating primary defeat.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2008-10-29 21:12  

#32  Palin made it very clear in Minneapolis that she had no use for the Wash/NY media or the political elite, both Dem and Repub. That was a challenge they could not ignore.

The media have spent the campaign trying to destroy her. A degree of survival depends upon it.
Her populist meme depends on going to the people over their heads.

Now that the campaign is winding down, politcos of various persuasions are adding their voices to the take down. Win or lose, she is a threat to business as usual in DC. Her record in Alaska makes it clear that she doesn't play party favorites.

If McCain wins, she carries her populace message to the White House. She might not find a lot of friends in Congress. She has demonstrated that only makes her stronger.

If McCain loses, she is free to start her 2012 campaign immediately. She takes her message to directly the people. Something she has shown that she is very capable of doing, and based on the crowds she pulls, someone whom with they want to connect.


Posted by: Skunky Glins 5***   2008-10-29 20:38  

#31  
3dc Rote,
"This election I am voting for Palin and whomever she is running with."


Me Rote,
"YEP IMA CONCUR WID 3dc."

Posted by: Red Dawg   2008-10-29 20:35  

#30  Fred! is done. He only ran because a lot of us pulled him in against his will. He makes a good speaker and great on commercials, but not a campaigner.

Jeb Bush, if he were named Joe Briggs instead, would be a shoe-in based on abilities to campaign, his fairly solid conservative philosophy, his performance record, and his ability to fund raise.

Its a shame his brother valued loyalty over ability and had no real philosophy of government (liek hsi father), and ruined the family name.
Posted by: OldSpook   2008-10-29 20:32  

#29  Palin and Jindal will be going head to head but in a CONSTRUCTIVE way. One will be the Pres the other the VP, and we will have a great ticket no matter which of those is top of the ticket.
Posted by: OldSpook   2008-10-29 20:26  

#28  Had it been Romney, the original plastic FAKE con and slime merchant, the campaign would have been over long ago and Obama's margins woudl be even bigger, mcCains funds even smaller. No conservative base, etc. Same goes for Pro-Choice Ridge, and grey and vanilla as it gets.

You need to wake up and get out amongst the people the LIVE conservatism instead of talk about it -- that's Palin country.
Posted by: OldSpook   2008-10-29 20:24  

#27  Steve, I think the Bush family ran the wrong son first. Had Jeb ran first, the family might have had 3 presidents.

I think the Bush name can't be overcome for at least 8 years.
Posted by: Mike N.   2008-10-29 20:07  

#26  If McCain loses, I think the 2012 Republican challengers are 1) Palin 2) Jeb Bush 3) Romney and 4) Bobby Jindal. Not sure who'd win that, but I'd place my marker on Palin.


If McCain wins, he's almost certainly not going to go for a second term. If his term goes reasonably well, Palin is a lock. If it doesn't, it won't matter who the Republicans nominate.
Posted by: Steve White   2008-10-29 18:35  

#25  With those guys?
Posted by: anonymous5089   2008-10-29 16:43  

#24  You'll find me down in Ribeauville with the birds if it happens here anonymous.
Posted by: Besoeker   2008-10-29 16:36  

#23  Or here in Fronze!
Posted by: anonymous5089   2008-10-29 16:30  

#22  There are times when I think that we should just let Obama win because he is going to be such a train wreck that it will expose the idiocy of the dem party. But I fear the damage he will do, or the damage he will let happen through his inaction.

The last years of the Weimar Republic were plagued by political deadlock, increasing political street violence, and economic depression. These years were also marked by leaders who, lacking firm commitment to democracy, were willing to invoke emergency legislation as a substitute for parliamentary consent.

But it couldn't happen here, right?


Posted by: Besoeker   2008-10-29 16:08  

#21  As I recall, people used to think Ronald Reagan was some kind of a kooky, right-wing fringe element. But after four years in office Jimmuh Carter had so weakened himself with his own record of incompetence that people couldn't vote for Reagan fast enough.

If McCain loses it will be his own fault, not Palin's. Choosing her as his running mate was one of the smartest decisions he ever made.

And after four years of Obama my bet is people will be chomping at their bits to vote for anybody but him. And who would run in the Republican primaries against Palin? Huckleberry? Giuliani? Thompson? What's his name from Massachusetts? (I got so excited about him that I forgot his name.) I don't think so. Palin doesn't need intellect because she has something better: common sense. She's the breath of fresh air that this country needs.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2008-10-29 15:50  

#20  Well said Remoteman.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2008-10-29 15:43  

#19  I already voted against Obama (absentee). Mitt would've been my choice for VP. Actually I would've loved to see Mitt & Fred or Mitt & Palin in the future on a ticket.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2008-10-29 15:42  

#18  I think the media campaign against Palin has been effective. I believe her "brand" is severely damaged, perhaps beyond repair. She is a dumb hick who depends on voices from the heavens to make her decisions (not what I think, but what the media has created). It will be very, very hard for her to overcome that. She will always be fighting the headwinds of that image.

I am not a McCain fan, other than I absolutely believe in his love of country and his dedication to same. But he is a populist and will do some very stupid economic things unless he listens to smart people around him.

There are times when I think that we should just let Obama win because he is going to be such a train wreck that it will expose the idiocy of the dem party. But I fear the damage he will do, or the damage he will let happen through his inaction.

I will pull for McCain/Palin. Screw the lying, sack-o-shit media.
Posted by: remoteman   2008-10-29 15:41  

#17  Palin has more executive experience than ohbama, unless you count spending a ricockulous amount of money for a such a narrow lead and choosing joe "I'm Joe Biden" biden as encouraging.

Personally I'm more comfortable voting for the BlueDog/Repulican ticket than the 2 shifty lawyers.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2008-10-29 15:28  

#16  It's my belief that they're trying to make Palin the scapegoat for the fallout from McCain's decision to sign the bailout package.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2008-10-29 15:28  

#15  I'm voting for Palin because she is "country", and its time that we are represented somewhere in this government besides the military.
Posted by: bman   2008-10-29 15:13  

#14  I'm not a Palin fan or a Palin skeptic. But the way the media has gone after her has gotten my hackles up. Some pundits may dislike her because she doesn't have an Ivy League degree and hasn't served in the military. Let me point out that Reagan wasn't an Ivy League alumnus either.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-10-29 15:04  

#13  CNN gets to work early for 2012...
Posted by: tu3031   2008-10-29 15:00  

#12  She's the front running trunk in '12. Get used to it.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2008-10-29 14:52  

#11  The only thing that the republicans can blame for McCain losing (which is very, very far from certain), is McCain. He has not inspired me and I was only going to vote for him as a anti-Obama vote.

Now, I am voting for Palin and Mr. Lackluster.
Posted by: DarthVader   2008-10-29 14:51  

#10  Palin is not ready to be President - but nobody is. She does impress me as a 'quick study' though.

I can't remember where I saw this, supposedly from a former Dem speechwriter:
Governor Palin and I don’t agree on a lot of things, mostly social issues. But I have grown to appreciate the Governor. I was one of those initial skeptics and would laugh at the pictures. Not anymore. When someone takes on a corrupt political machine and a sitting governor, that is not done by someone with a low I.Q. or a moral core made of tissue paper. When someone fights her way to get scholarships and work her way through college even in a jagged line, that shows determination and humility you can’t learn from reading Reinhold Niebuhr. When a mother brings her son with special needs onto the national stage with love, honesty, and pride, that gives hope to families like mine as my older brother lives with a mental disability. And when someone can sit on a stage during the Sarah Palin rap on Saturday Night Live, put her hands in the air and watch someone in a moose costume get shot—that’s a sign of both humor and humanity.
Posted by: Glenmore   2008-10-29 14:34  

#9  However it turns out Tuesday, i think the RNC would be terminally stoopid not to include SP in future plans. She has connected with so many folks and shaken up the conventional wisdom that that momentum should be capitalized on.
Posted by: USN, Ret.   2008-10-29 14:17  

#8  Had the VP been Tom Ridge or Mitt, I think McCain would have had a stronger hand. I won't be voting for Palin in 2012, maybe Mitt.

"I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated." Wall Street Journal, 11/26/05

"The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should." Boston Globe Political Intelligence, 12/18/07

"I might have to rely on a vice president that I select" for expertise on economic issues. GOP Debate, 11/28/07
Posted by: Snavins Forkbeard5154   2008-10-29 13:52  

#7  I agree with 3dc.

I'm voting for Palin and against Obama.

If Mac can pull off the upset he'd be well advised to understand that Palin won the election for him.

History shows that "elite conservatives" were dismissive and harshly critical of Mr. Reagan and Mrs. Thatcher long before those two giants came into their own.
Posted by: MarkZ   2008-10-29 13:52  

#6  I agree with 3dc. I'm voting more for Palin than I am for McCain. One thing that so-called Republican "leaders" overlook is that conservatives by and large vote Republican because there is nowhere else for them to go, not because they are in love with the party.
Posted by: Infidel Bob   2008-10-29 13:50  

#5  sounds like a truckload of FUD to me...

(FUD = Fear Uncertainy & Doubt, for those who aren't in the know, which would be very few Rantburgers, but you never know...)
Posted by: Querent   2008-10-29 13:05  

#4  This election I am voting for Palin and whomever she is running with.
Posted by: 3dc   2008-10-29 12:59  

#3  After editing for context, its shoudl read this way:

In one corner are some Manhattan-DC cocktail-party & media conservatives who believe the Alaska governor has been a detriment to John McCain's presidential bid and threatens to lead the party astray back to its conservative/populist Reagan roots thereby denying the elites their influence and access to power for the foreseeable future.

... as if McCain's constant blundering and lackluster campaigning is not enough of a cause of failure in itself.

The only reason Gov Palin may be "hurting" certain demographics is that the mass media has been savaging her and painting a false portrait on behalf of the Obama campaign, instead of telling the truth.
Posted by: Jiggs Slolutch1780   2008-10-29 12:55  

#2  not to mention that the fact that they ass-u-me that McCain lost. Last I looked at the polls, they are tightening like they always do before the Republicans win.
Posted by: Betty   2008-10-29 12:46  

#1  CNN is having wet dreams again. A civil war within the party? That's what we have primaries for.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2008-10-29 12:24  

00:00