The two Republicans whose names came up most often on the NR cruise? Sarah Palin and Chris Christie.
In my interactions with only a fraction of the 700+ NR cruisegoers — mostly older, mostly well-off, passionate about politics, and many heavily involved with the tea parties — I found about two-thirds wildly enthusiastic about Sarah Palin; you could hear the gasps when Scott Rasmussen predicted she would not be the 2012 Republican nominee. Most of the remaining one-third said that while they personally liked Palin, they didn’t want to see her run in 2012, or anytime soon. An isolated few didn’t seem to like Palin much at all.
I was struck by how many Palin fans agreed with me that resigning the governorship, while understandable, is a serious misstep for any aspiring president. If you want to govern, it is best to demonstrate that you can govern.
The Palin family has taken over your television, between “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” on TLC and Bristol Palin dancing up a storm on “Dancing With the Stars.” You’re also seeing Palin on the cover of People and other non-political magazines. It’s odd to see a Republican begin to master the domination of pop culture that Obama practiced in 2007 and 2008, and this is certainly a way to keep Palin enthusiasts at a fever pitch. But I’m not sure this approach gets her where she wants to go, or at least whether it wins over the folks who aren’t on board with her already. Are the persuadable Palin doubters — separate from the irretractable Palin foes — turned off because they don’t think Palin is a good wife or mother, or capable of having a great time in the Alaskan outdoors? Is it about qualifications and experience and expertise with a variety of issues? Or am I totally off-base, and they’ll be won over by images of Palin encountering the brown bears and climbing the mountain?
Having said all that, it’s easy to picture a half-dozen GOP candidates quitting the race the day after Palin jumps in. She’ll suck most of the oxygen out of the room, almost all of the media attention, the donations, etc. The 2012 Republican presidential primary could quickly shift from a wide-open free-for-all to a one-on-one match between Palin and the anti-Palin.
On the cruise, Ralph Reed — a strikingly smart guy about the nuts and bolts of campaigning — emphasized the importance of money and the importance of organization, not just in Iowa or New Hampshire but in about 30 states or so. We know money won’t be an issue for Palin; when she asks for donations, she’ll dwarf the record hauls of Rob Portman and Marco Rubio and Sharron Angle. And there seem to be enough Palin volunteers to make an army of organizers in most of the key states.
Regarding Chris Christie, my best line was the observation, “People ask me if I support Chris Christie. He’s direct, his mouth gets him in trouble, he knows what he wants and he’s determined to get it, and he looks like he eats too much. Do I support Chris Christie? I am Chris Christie.”
This was shortly after I ripped off my shirt to reveal a Toomsday T-shirt while introducing Senator-elect Pat Toomey.
I think Sarah will add tons of excitement to the field, but that's it, she'll be the Howard Dean of 2012. It'll either be the next in line, i.e. Huck or Romney, or a Buckley fusionist dark horse. I just don't see Mitch or Pawlenty catching on all the much; they've already been pushed a lot. I do think Mike Pence has a very real chance. He's doing all the right things, out front with the tax cuts and major speeches at the Federalist Society and Detroit Economics Club.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks Jim
I've been a Conservative Republican all my adult life, being attracted to conservatism's emphasis on excellence, achievement, and virtue and its cogent critique of the failure of liberal policies in the 70's and 80's. Conversely I was repelled by liberalism's obsession with identity politics, "authenticity" and whiny grievance mongering.
If Sarah Palin represents what conservatism is today then count me out. She doesn't get my vote in the primary or the general election and I will actively work to make sure that she doesn't win anything. This woman is a conservative cancer being the epitome of what used to characterize the left.
I might be alone in this view among conservative NR readers but I doubt it. It depresses me to see so many NR cruisers even flirting with supporting her.
I'm wondering how long it will take for NR to recognize this woman for who she is at the risk of ticking off her deluded fan base.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm not excited about Palin. I like her, but I don't want to see her running anything. She's a good promoter of many of my values but I just can't take another election season listening to everything Sarah. I want a Chris Christie or a Mitch Daniels type. I don't want anyone who ran for president last time, and I don't want anyone who glommed on to the Tea Party movement. Give me someone real.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePlease not Palin. Not yet. While I'm sure she'd be exponentially more on top of the issues and current events, she still needs to add substance and distance from her resignation. She would indeed suck the air out, killing what stands to be a heated primary season with several great candidates.
One thing for certain: Obama vs Palin would set turnout records.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf not Palin, then who?
Huckabee = Palin with less testosterone and more big government moderism.
Romney = Obamacare under a nice haircut
Pawlenty = McCain
Gingrich = Palin with messy divorces
Daniels = religious right runs a third party alternative
There are three people I would love to see run. But all three have said emphatically NO: Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal and Rick Perry.
Who is left? I like Jan Brewer. Bob McDonnell is also good. And John Kasich, if he can have one good year as Governor, could be a power player. But I like Jan Brewer. She has a long record in government and can tap into the tea party without being enslaved to it. Team up with up and coming super star Marco Rubio, and you have a dream ticket.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm fine with Palin running, we need a big field and an open discussion. There is no question that the MSM will focus completely on her, because they feel, even if Obasma can't beat her, THEY can beat her with ridicule, snide comments and SNL. Palin's not my first choice, but as long as her opponents (and their supporters) discuss issues and don't fall into using that same tactic, all will be well. She might not win the nomination, but everyone should ensure that it is a fair fight.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI just don't understand why there is this continued fascination with Sarah Palin. She lost me forever the day she resigned he post as Governor (not that I was a huge supporter before). Yes, the media have (and continue to) done a hatchet job on her that she doesn't deserve, but that is not even close to being a reason to vote for her as President. Unfortunately, I am not all that excited by any of the alternatives. And no, you cannot have Christie, yet. He's not finished fixing NJ yet.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePalin’s enemies are my enemies. She has been unfairly treated, but as a candidate, she scares me. She would win the nomination easily, then loose the general most probably. Her persona plays into the worst caricatures that the liberals make of us. If she were to establish a record as a governor, or better yet, get herself a Ph.D. in economics, then great. But now, she’s Obama’s best hope for a second term.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou are absolutely right, jsmitty. Sarah Palin is such a cancer to conservatism that only 18 of 20 Palin-endorsed republican congressional candidates were able to flip seats from democrats. I guess this is more proof of Palin being a clueless dolt. LOL.
For the record, I hope Sarah does not run for president because her greatest asset to conservatism looks to be the use of guerilla tactics in both politics and media. Quite frankly, it's about darn time we had someone on our side that knows how to play both games. However, if Palin decides to run she will have both my vote and financial support.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhile I agree with Sara Palin on almost every issue, and I like her personally, I also believe that she would have an extremeley difficult time beating Obama, and so I wish she would stay out of the 2012 race. For now, far too many independents, moderate Republicans, and conservative Democrats view her negatively due to the portrayal of her by the msm. I do think that this could change given time, but not in time for 2012. She's young, and she will have other chances.
I will say that I am very, very worried about the possibility of a Romney or Huckabee candidacy, and I'm not sure Palin would do that much worse than either of them by the time the msm and various liberal groups got through with them (depending on the state of the economy and what happens during the next 2 years). I could not support either of them in the primary; Romney due to the health care plan in MA, and Huckabee due to some of his seemingly liberal, nanny-state views. I'm not sure if either one of them could unite the various parts of the Republican Party behind them and appeal to enough independents and conservative Democrats to win in anything other than an environment that would be basically identical to 2010, and I don't think the environment will be quite that favorable (at the very least, I think the far left will be much more energized in 2012 than in 2010). In particular, how does Romney make the case that he would actually repeal Obamacare instead of compromising with the Democrats on keeping parts of it since he signed a bill that was very similar (including the hated mandate)in Massachusetts? I'm hoping that someone else will come along (I really wish Rubio had been elected 2-6 years ago so he would have some experience to add to his resume) who can combine Palin's popularity with the Tea Party with a reputation for knowledge of the issues and a decent amount of experience in government. Who this is, I don't know yet.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRemember how much people hated Reagan in 1979? Remember how much the GOP establishment hated Reagan in 1979? The same charges that were leveled at Reagan are leveled at Palin. 1. You can't be serious. 2. Intellectual lightweight. 3. Demagogue supported by the "great unwashed" but certainly nobody respectable. 4. Not our kind of people. 5. Makes crazy or radical statements 6. The media will destroy this candidate 7. Looks good, but lacks substance. The thing that the GOP establishment really hated was how much the "grassroots" loved Reagan. He was not part of their "club" - and neither is Sarah. I think she has some "growing to do", but I also think that there is enough time before 2012 for that growth to happen. Strap in and hang on because I think the Palin candidacy will be a juggernaut, and she will attract some of those same Reaganesque swing votes that the "Great Communicator" did.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Lhornbk
"In particular, how does Romney make the case that he would actually repeal Obamacare instead of compromising with the Democrats on keeping parts of it since he signed a bill that was very similar (including the hated mandate)in Massachusetts?"
*****************************
I'm not a Romney supporter, but in defense of him, he has more than once made the federalism argument against Obamacare. It is possible, in other words, to support an Obama-style system at the state level and be against it at the national level and still be philosophically consistent. Of course, his case would be made weaker if had be advocating for such a national system way back before anyone was ever paying attention; I don't know whether he was or wasn't.
As for Christie, I wonder how many people realize he came out in favor of building the ground zero mosque. Seems like a pretty big deal to me -- I wonder why it doesn't get talked about more. He'd have a hard time getting my vote with a position like that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCan we please dispense with the "Palin = Reagan" comparisons? Yes, Reagan was hated by the "establishment" much the same way that Palin is, but just because Palin gets the same line of criticism in no way indicates that she is the same kind of candidate.
Reagan had the benefit of several years as President of SAG, spokesman for GE, and, lest we forget, eight years as governor of California.
To compare Palin's experience to Reagan's is nonsense, and, in my opinion, degrades Reagan. I like Palin quite a bit, but she's no Reagan. And it does a disservice to the conservative cause to pretend that she is.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTo Gullyborg:
Don't believe for 10 seconds that Rick Perry is a definitive "NO" when it comes to running for president. He just put out a book, won what was supposed to be his toughtest reelection race easily, and has been governor of Texas for 10 years now. I would be willing to bet money that he does run, if for no other reason than to position himself as a vp candidate. I guarantee that his ambitions go beyond the Texas governor's mansion.
I totally agree that I would like to see either Jindal or Christie run. Christie probably hasn't been in office long enough yet, but I still hold out hope that Jindal might change his mind.
To peasant: I hope you're right, but I'm afraid that Palin doesn't quite have enough time for the growth she needs for 2012. There are a couple of difference between her and Reagan. Reagan had 8 years of successful time in the governor's mansion in California, compared to Palin quitting. And the media has gone much further in trying to destroy her than it did with Reagan, and they have 2 more years to pile on. Also, Reagan, while considered an intellectual lightweight by liberals and some establishment Republicans, had established himself as very, very competent on the issues with the conservative movement (remember his debate with WFB on the Panama Canal), and I don't think Palin has done that to the same degree, at least not yet. She's really only been around 2 1/2 years now, compared to over a decade for Reagan by 1978-79. I hope you're right and I'm wrong, but I just don't think 2012 will be the right year for Palin.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere are a great many American conservatives who admire Palin fiercely — admire her quite apart from her shameful treatment at the hands of the self-satisfied cultural elite — but also wish fervently that she would not run for president in 2012.
For conservatives, the overriding goal must be to defeat Barack Obama. Decisively.
Given her enormous popularity on the right, Palin could easily sweep to the nomination, and then lose badly to Obama in November. If you think that she was treated scandalously in 2008, wait until you see what the elites will resort to in order to keep her out of the White House.
If not Palin, who? Gullyborg’s list of equations is on target, except for Mitch Daniels (my personal favorite). Daniels’s problem is not that he is unacceptable to the religious right, but that his position on a social-issues “truce” is being distorted — by conservatives who would howl if Palin were treated the same way — to the end that he sure enough seems unacceptable to the religious right. (He is, in truth, deeply religious. Descended from Syrian Christians, he knows in his bones what it is like for Christians to be hated. He is also a full-throated Zionist. Take it from this Orthodox Jew: he would increase the Republican share of the national vote among the Jews.)
But increasingly I am convinced that Daniels will not run. What I have heard — and it is only an unsubstantiated rumor — is that he will not enter the race if his good friend Haley Barbour decides to run.
And given the success of Republican gubernatorial candidates on November 2nd, it is inevitable that Barbour will run. His biggest negative is not his past experience as a lobbyist. Barbour dispenses with objections in one persuasive sentence. His biggest negative, frankly, is the uncomfortable image that will be created when a governor from the Deep South, with a shameless Southern drawl, stands across from “America’s first black president.”
Even so, Barbour may be the best in the field. A great fundraiser, extremely smart and quick on his feet (despite his slow speech), he could hold his own with Obama. And he has a record of accomplishment in office to run on.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFor the life of me I simply do not know what I would do if Sarah Palin secured the nomination in 2012. I'm a college student and I worked hard for campaigns in 2008 and this past year but I would seriously consider staying on the sidelines away from a Sarah Palin presidential run.
We need someone who can articulate conservative principles to the American public, like it or not that person has long ceased to be Sarah Palin. They also need to back this articulation up with a record, this she has none to speak of that I've ever heard. It seems to me Mitch Daniels is the guy to do it?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGullyborg wrote:
"If not Palin, then who?
Huckabee = Palin with less testosterone and more big government moderism.
Romney = Obamacare under a nice haircut
Pawlenty = McCain
Gingrich = Palin with messy divorces
Daniels = religious right runs a third party alternative
There are three people I would love to see run. But all three have said emphatically NO: Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal and Rick Perry."
I agree 100%. Of the national candidates being talked about, only Palin appeals to me.
I would add John Thune to your list, who with his love for ethanol subsidies and vote for Murkowski keeping her committee-chair has made him completely unacceptable to me.
I like Mike Pence, but I doubt he will make a break-through if he runs. My primary comes up relatively early, and I won't waste my vote on someone who can't win the nomination. If Palin, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich Daniels and Pawlenty are still in the running when my state votes, there is no doubt whatsoever: I will vote for Palin.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFirst of all everybody here seems to accept that Obama will run in 2012. That's a big jump to begin with. The more Hillary insists she is not interested (the person who lent her own campaign millions), the more she distances herself from her commander in chief. While Obama and Pelosi insist this election was not about them, the rest of the democrat party is not that deluded. They recognize Obama is very damaged goods at this point and that he is no Bill Clinton! No Republican white man can win against Hillary but a Republican white woman would rip the contest wide open.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm not prepared to write off Romney. He's bright, he's energetic, he's been a chief executive of a state, he's run a private equity firm and an Olympics. There might not be any other GOP candidate with nearly as much substantive executive experience. The big smudges on his record are Romneycare and flip-flopping on abortion. He needs to get out in front of these once and for all and press on. I'm a little nervous about him, but I am more nervous about Palin. Romney/Santorum could potentially be a strong ticket (with Palin as shadow Energy Secretary for the 2012 campaign).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePalin should run for RNC chair -- star power and money power. I'm not seeing any potential 2012'er yet. However, the latest hit on Palin by Mama Bush suggests to me that Jeb is in the wings.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse