Saturday, November 20, 2010

Why Sarah Palin Shouldn't Run — Or Why She Should

Mona Charen spoke at the Jewish Policy Forum panel in Los Angeles, along with David Horowitz. Michael Medved began the talk with a discussion of electoral politics, and at some point the panelists got to talkin' about their favorites for the 2012 presidential race. Ms. Charen endorsed Mitchell Daniels (not my favorite, for reasons some might recall). And that's interesting, since we find that Ms. Charen's not hip to a Sarah Palin presidential bid. See, "Why Sarah Palin Shouldn't Run" (at Memeorandum). And this passage is worth consideration:

Photobucket

She is wildly popular with a swath of the Republican electorate, it's true. And, as a conservative woman politician told me, the consultants (who get paid the big bucks win or lose) will doubtless descend upon her with game plans showing how she can win in Iowa and then cruise to the nomination. Maybe. But the general election would be a problem, since 53 percent of independent voters view Palin unfavorably, according to a recent Gallup poll, along with 81 percent of Democrats.
RTWT.

Fair enough. But my sense, beyond this, is that Ms. Charen is looking at presidential politics a bit clinically. Extreme emotionalism devolved to a form of secular worship in 2008 and the election of "The One." Ms Charen's right to note the dangers of it forming on the right heading into 2012. But skimming over this a bit more, Ms. Charen yearns for a conservative politics almost entirely divorced from popular culture. I doubt we're ever going back to a time of Reagan, much less Goldwater. But check the comments
at the post (Townhall has a well organized comments section). If the sentiment there gives any indication, the GOP nomination is Palin's for the taking. And why not? Sarah Palin is a force of nature. She embodies all the best of the American spirit, and her family emobodies all the best of the American citizen. We don't know if she'll be a good president. Leftists had no clue if Barack Obama would be a good president. Democrats picked Obama on faith. There's danger there, sure. My sense is that Palin's attuned to popular sensibilities in a way the Barack Obama has never been. She's anti-elitist. She stands against the elite-arugula entitlement that is the essence of the Democrat-Socialist hegemonic power agenda. And Sarah Palin learns. She's open to ideas and feedback. If President Obama had even an ounce of those qualities he'd have a much better chance of avoiding early retirement in 2012 --- quite possible at the hands of Sarah Palin herself.

RELATED: "
Sarah Palin Rallies GOP at 'Victory 2010' in Anaheim."

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

If Sarah Palin would have finished what she started in Alaska she might be taken seriouly as a potential presidential candidate. Resigning from office half way through her guberatorial term doesn't look good on her political resume. Super Sarah might be alot of things, except being a future President of the United States.

Danny L. McDaniel
Lafayette, Indiana

John said...

Well Danny, the very reason she resigned was part of her ethical outlook. She felt it would serve taxpayers better to quit because of the expense of litigation launched by her opposition.
Most politicians have no ethical values or sense of fiscal responsibility... I feel we need a lot more of this from our elected officials!

Dave said...

I just got finished dealing with that on another blog. I'll repost what i said, cuz it bears repeating: Frankly, when she did that, she showed me that she has the character and guts to be a great leader. Abandoned financially by the very people who had caused her to be targeted, AFTER they promised that she had their financial support, handcuffed in her job, unable to do what Alaskans had elected her to do, the easy thing to do would be to hunker down, ride out the remainder of her term as an ineffective figurehead and then walk away. She had the guts, brains and the integrity to realize that she would be hurting the people of Alaska by remaining in a job that she would be unable to perform because of baseless, partisan, harassing attacks. So, she changed the rules and walked away, allowing Sean Parnell to do the job she couldn't, through no fault of her own, do any longer. Man, that took guts. That took LEADERSHIP. Not only is your criticism outdated, it's 180 degrees wrong.