| UPDATED: The trouble with Sarah? |
| by Brian Saint-Paul |
| 9/29/08 |
|
While Governor Sarah Palin's popularity continues among social conservatives and the Religious Right, a growing number of Republicans -- including former supporters -- are concerned. Very concerned. It didn't help. Those exchanges were even more cringeworthy than the spot with Gibson. The problem wasn't simply nerves -- though she was understandably nervous. Rather, to put it bluntly, on a range of issues, she just didn't seem to know what she was talking about. It was as if she'd memorized a dozen campaign soundbites that came tumbling out -- regardless of relevance or coherence -- with the first question. Couric: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess? Sorry, what? As Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria described it, "This is nonsense -- a vapid emptying out of every catchphrase about economics that came into her head." Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League. With Thursday's vice presidential debate fast approaching, word is coming out from the McCain campaign that preparations aren't going well. Populist/progressive radio show host Ed Schultz has been hearing murmers himself (and in case you're inclined to dismiss him as a liberal propogandist, Schultz isn't the only one getting negative reports): Capitol Hill sources are telling me that senior McCain people are more than concerned about Palin. Ultimately, Thursday's debate will reveal much. If Palin performs well, all the negative pre-event publicity will have so lowered expectations that she'll be the clear winner. But if she turns out to be the empty power dress that some now suspect... we might end up seeing the landslide Obama's people are cautiously predicting. UPDATE (12:10pm): Things are not getting better for the McCain campaign. The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz reports "the worst may be yet to come for Palin; sources say CBS has two more responses on tape that will likely prove embarrassing." Politico's Ben Smith has more:
Readers have left 27 comments. First I did not think she did so bad on the Gibson interview. THe problem appears to be with Aides that are advising her and prepping her. We have seen McCain was a similar funk until he shook ups his staff. According to Kristol in the NYT McCain is shaling up the people around her so Palin can be more Palin. I have seen her past interviews and debates so I am very hopeful. Let me say one thing about PUndit and lets take "Former Supporter" Kathleen Parker that you quote. First she was not a supporter in one of those that was fighting to get her on the ticket. Also who in the heck is she anyway. I do find it funny that all these people (including Mrs Parker) who are talking qualifications for VP don't seem to have a clue about the job. For instance they say something like "Palin must step aside so McCain can pick someone else". Do they have a clue how this this works? Have they looked at the Const for instance? Have they looked at the 12th amendment. For the pundits here are some cliff notes THE VP is not a job the President can fire someone. In fact McCain cannot force her off the ticket because she was nominated on another ballot. In fact it is too late to get someone else. Early voting has begun and her name is on the ballot. I can't think many States allow another VP to be put on the ballot within 30 days of an election even if McCain could get the process going to get another VP. He just can't just call up Sec of States Offices and go hey this my new person. Has it every occured to anyone that there is chance that lets say as many Pundits wish Palin steps aside and drops out that if Mccain wins BIDEN is VP?  Written by JH Let's play against type here ... Governor Palin seems to be an honorable person. Her publicity engine didn't have to dig deep to find very admirable personal traits. That she is a political maverick is a plus, imo. The only way I could vote for a Republican would be someone who stood rather outside the party fold. That said, I feel badly for this woman. If she were running for Queen, maybe--just maybe--her executive experience would be adequate. As a queen (or a mayor or a governor or a boss), you don't really need to be articulate or diplomatic. You give orders. People follow them or it's off with their heads ... or paychecks. If the American presidency has evolved into an imperial one, and some evidence might support that, political skills of negotiation, compromise, diplomacy, and all might be less important than it was for Clinton or Reagan or the other recent successes. If Sarah Palin had more experience as a legislator, or even as a community organizer, she would be more experienced in the social world of give-and-take when dealing with equals. Interviews and debates would not be a problem because she would have been prepared by life's experiences. My sense is that McCain has done her, his campaign, and his party a great disservice by nominating her. Other women were better qualified. Other conservatives were better qualified. Governor Palin is about a decade away from having the necessary "schooling" to pull this off. I'll also add that her handlers are obviously desperate and probably incompetent. They're over-coaching her and it shows. If they were doing their job, she would be more confident, not less, as the campaign rolls on. Thanks, Brian, for posting on the governor. Y'all really have been quite silent on her these past seventeen days. Written by Todd Two things: Keep in mind that the voters vote for the man at the top of the ticket. The 1988 election was a perfect example of this. If McCain loses this election, it won’t be because of Palin. He’s falling in the polls right now because he’s trying to pass himself off as a Washington outsider who’s spent the last 25 years in Washington, and it isn’t working. Second, given the current state of the economy, and the role that these ‘well-informed’ politicians in Washington have played in getting us into this mess, the idea that more experienced candidates are the answer isn’t flying with me. While Obama certainly has better command of the facts than Palin does, he ought to, since he’s spent his four years in the Senate running for President. I don’t know where this quote originally came from (maybe William F. Buckley?), but I’m really starting to think that the country would be much better off being governed by the first 536 names my local telephone book than by these bunch of self-righteous egomaniacal ignoramuses in Washington. Is Palin clueless about foreign policy? Maybe, but I don’t remember Bush, Clinton Reagan or Carter having a whole lot of foreign policy experience when they were elected. One thing that is seems apparent about her short political career is that she is more likely to get things done than these bozos in Washington, who sit around and wait for a crisis to occur and then scramble trying to figure out how to place blame on their political opponents. If Palin has a problem, it is likely that McCain’s people are trying too hard to control what she says. If McCain wanted another (and yes I’m holding my gag reflex in as I write this) ‘maverick’ on the ticket, then he needs to let her be a maverick, even on points where the two of them don’t agree. Otherwise, go get Lindsay Graham, who never disagrees with McCain about anything. Written by Francis Wippel Y'all really have been quite silent on her these past seventeen days. — ToddSpeaking for myself, there hasn’t been much to say. Palin has been more or less kept out of the media spotlight (apart from three interviews - the Couric one only recently). The McCain campaign obviously thinks this is the better strategy given her inexperience. But I wonder if it’s a big mistake. My impression of Palin since she delivered her Convention speech is that of a yoked woman harnessed to talking points she’s not comfortable with. Everyone knows she has little foreign policy experience, for example, so why have her stretch so much to pretend? Do we need to keep hearing about Alaska’s proximity to Russia, or her one trip to the Middle East? People like Palin because she’s not an insider. She has not spent years in Washington. She seems real and in touch with regular people. She comes across as tough and smart and fearless. But once on board the McCain train, she became rigidly scripted by the Campaign -- and this seems to be stripping away what’s most appealing about her. I think the McCain campaign would be far better off allowing Palin to be herself and letting the chips fall where they may. Perhaps what we see is what we get. But they should let her play to her strengths -- that's the best chance they've got now. Written by Zoe Brian, most politicians spew empty slogans. Palin just hasn't perfected her delivery of them yet. Her supporters on the right want her to be different, and they're understandably disappointed. But her enemies on the left (see my post above) are hypocrites for pretending that their guys (or opposition pols that they claim to admire -- as they once did for Sen. McCain) are superior any any sense other than having had more time to memorize the tropes. EDIT: And I say this as someone, let me remind all, who reacted cautiously when she was picked, opining that she wasn't ready. Written by Todd M. Aglialoro If Palin is a maverick as she was first touted to be, perhaps that's as big a problem within the McCain campaign as her supposed inexperience is. The media was sure to go after her and, while she hasn't aced each of her public appearances, the fact that her early advocates are bailing on her exacerbates the problem. Choosing to "jump off the horse that brung 'em" this late in the campaign suggests there may be a problem other than her not-ready-for-prime-time interview style. Bush didn't have much more experience than she has and it's hard to think of her doing any worse than he has. The spin is she's in over her head, but reality is usually much different than the spin. She may be inadequately pliable for the handlers. Who knows? At any rate, McCain's poll numbers have taken a hit because of the financial news not because of Palin. Written by RK Everyone knows she has little foreign policy experience, for example, so why have her stretch so much to pretend? Do we need to hear keep hearing about Alaska’s proximity to Russia, or her one trip to the Middle East? — ZoeThis is why the McCain campaign should have taken my advice and kept on the offensive about Obama's lack of experience. Written by Todd M. Aglialoro whoever is doing her prep help is just throwing stuff at her, not explaining principles... i hope? i guess this could be her problem, too. Written by AmericanPapist At any rate, McCain's poll numbers have taken a hit because of the financial news not because of Palin. — RKAgreed. Let's be clear. The recent poll separation -- and if Obama wins, likely his victory -- is due to the financial meltdown and the public's Pavlovian anti-GOP reaction. Roughly the opposite effect of what a terrorist attack would have done. Written by Todd M. Aglialoro I think it is a mistake for her to try to be all things and know all things. She should just say that she would surround herself with knowledgeable people who's opinion she trusts. That's what presidential cabinet is for anyway. She is smart, quick and honorable and that makes her someone that I will vote for. She'll be just fine if everyone will just let her be herself. Of all the politicians that I know, she holds the opinions that are the most like mine. Written by Mariadevotee I hate to say this, but this is what I thought of when I read the Couric response you posted above: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww Written by Cassandra Governor Palin is simply not that bright or educated. It would be interesting to see her various college transcripts. When she speaks extemporaneously, she makes very little sense. Sound bits and talking points, however strung together, will only get you so far. Maybe she has Adult Attention Deficit Disorder or something else that makes learning and focusing unusually challenging for her. Or, maybe she’s just never had to try this hard before or been under real scrutiny. So, how did she get to be a mayor of a town of 5,500 (at that time)? She ran a pro-life, pro-gun campaign. Under that circumstance, no one required her to know anything. The bar was as low as it could go. She was elected governor in a race of continued low expectations. The incumbent was extremely unpopular. Her party defined corruption, and she campaigned as a reformer. Again, no rocket science involved. Alaska is a wealthy state with few problems, except the highest rape rate in the country. (You all know about how Mayor Palin was the only Alaska mayor who charged victims for rape kits until a new state law stopped her.) And then, there’s the matter of how she governs/ed, sort of like the president of a high school social club. She fired her qualified opponents and hired her unqualified friends. Not a lot of executive judgment going on there. Besides her lack of intelligence (or, mental capacity or discipline) and her immature governing style, Palin also lacks useful exposure to the world. She got her first ever passport in 2007. She’s spent almost all of her life isolated in Alaska. She has no national or foreign policy experience or knowledge. She is quoted as saying that man and dinosaurs roamed the earth together 6,000 years ago. (Sorry. Inexcusable for anyone aspiring to national leadership at least while I’m still roaming the earth, too.) Despite her fundamental deficiencies, Palin is extremely self-confident and highly critical of individuals who are far more intelligent, articulate, educated, knowledgeable and worldly (in the good sense) than she is. In other words, she isn’t demonstrating any self-knowledge or self-assessment skills either. When you get right down to it, it’s all really about John McCain’s reckless (no real vetting), selfish (McCain First) and totally political decision to make Palin his running mate. He blew his first presidential decision BIG TIME. God bless America! Written by Patricia Brian, Thanks for posting this. I've been critical of this pick from the get-go, and it hasn't earned me much support from my friends. It appears many of my suspicions are beginning to play out. Written by Steve Skojec Palin's so called inexperience is a fabrication of the media - period. She is John McCain's running mate - second on the ticket. She is more experienced to hold office - Obama has more experience running for office - big difference. The McCain staffers would do well to put her more out in the open which I believe they will after the debate. It is also rumored that Biden is going to step down after the debate. His level of nastiness during the debate will be a sure sign that this is true. He'll be Obama's attack dog on Palin. Written by L.B. Palin's so called inexperience is a fabrication of the media - period. She is John McCain's running mate - second on the ticket. She is more experienced to hold office - Obama has more experience running for office - big difference. — L.B.The McCain staffers would do well to put her more out in the open which I believe they will after the debate. It is also rumored that Biden is going to step down after the debate. His level of nastiness during the debate will be a sure sign that this is true. He'll be Obama's attack dog on Palin. L.B., Biden won't need to attack Palin. Any attack on her by someone else would just be overkill. Written by Patricia Once again, one of Brian's posts has the feeling of deliberately taking sound bites of the enemies and using it on a site to sabotage. Written by Frederica Once again, one of Brian's posts has the feeling of deliberately taking sound bites of the enemies and using it on a site to sabotage. — FredericaFrederica, Brian published legitimate commentary on McCain's choice of running mate. So far, the only individual guilty of sabotage is John McCain. Written by Patricia The Leftists are out in force, aren't they? ![[smiley=laugh]](http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/components/com_jreactions/custom/templates/blog/smileys/smiley_laugh.gif) In all seriousness, though, I don't really have THAT much of aproblem with Palin's perfromances so far. The Gibson interview was fine to me; the Couric gaffes have no excuse, but given the constant refrain of "uhhhhhhhhh. uhhhhhhhhh, uhhhhhhhhhhh" from Obama in various circumstances since his campaign began, to say nothing of gaffe factory Joe Biden, I see no problems. I DO wish they would let her talk on her own, though. There's no doubt she's been "coached" excessively. Here's hoping she kicks some major arse by being herself and not just mimicing McCain's talking points. Written by Andy K. Once again, one of Brian's posts has the feeling of deliberately taking sound bites of the enemies and using it on a site to sabotage. — PatriciaFrederica, Brian published legitimate commentary on McCain's choice of running mate. So far, the only individual guilty of sabotage is John McCain. There's nothing "legitimate" about quoting the hysteria that Palin is imploding. It's untrue. Seeing continued attempts to sabotage the McCain/Palin ticket by the editor here is really beyond belief. Written by Frederica There is indeed a saboteur of the McCain candidacy. His name is John McCain. Written by Patricia I wanted to mention that Margaret had doubts about Palin on day one. Maureen Written by maureen martin Biden won't need to attack Palin. Any attack on her by someone else would just be overkill. You're right - the MSM puppets, abortionists and the "Christians" on this blog are doing a great job of attacking her. The fruits of your labor are evident - 50 million and counting. Written by L.B. The fact that there is an ongoing investigation about probable malfeasanse in office would be an excellent reason by itself not to choose her. She may be exonerated, of course, but then she may not. Until it is resolved there is always the possibility no matter how remote that she might be indicted. Given the "rule of funny" one can even imagine a comedy skit in which she raises the hand to take the oath and her wrist is handcuffed. Sure laugh getter. All McCain had to do was to find a conservative, pro-life woman who was *not* under investigation. I refuse to believe that such women are in such short supply that he had to get one with legal problems. Written by Adriana "Troopergate" is already very empty. No "there," there. The only reason it's still even being mentioned is because, until her scatterbrained responses to questions came out, there wasn't much else to say about Palin. Now that she's managed to sound like an utterly non-linear thinker in response to Couric (Gibson, with his horrifying demeanor, doesn't count and probably upped her popularity), there's something else to say. Which I'll say: She's unprepared, and over-coached, and because of the latter unable to graciously and comfortably admit some of the former. I like her, and would very much like to see her spend a couple of years in the Senate, then join Bobby Jindal on a 2012 ticket. I think she was put into prime time too soon by McCain in search of a game-changer. If she comes off like a hot looking Henry Kissinger in the debate against Biden, she'll recover momentum (and people will wonder whether she was just shamming with Couric). Otherwise, my hope is that she manages to recover her brand well enough by 2012 to be a more successful Veep candidate a second time around. Or designated energy Czar, or some such thing. Written by R.C. RC: The investigation is not over. Until it is finished, she is under a cloud. Sad but true. Until it is resolved, there will always be the possibility of her being indicted - in nothing else, because the idea of it is inherently funny (there is nothing that amuses us so much as the misdeeds of the hight and mighty, and how messily they fall). True, there is little mention of troopergate now, but then when you have financial meltdown on your hands, no one cares about malfeasance in some place near the North Pole. Of course, she is perfectly innocent, or so I am willing to believe. But I have believed other people to be perfectly innocent and been proven wrong - I can be a terrible judge of people I have sympathy for - and since as a rule the Universe loves to drop anvils on us, I will continue saying that it boggles the mind that McCain could choose someone who was under a cloud. Written by Adriana Troopergate is a heroic action of a woman who stood up to be counted against a drunk cop who tazered his own children. If he did it to his dog this crowd would be apoplectic. Children are commodities to tazer and decapitate. Some community leaders y'all must be. What should we expect for those who want terrorists in GITMO freed. It's discouraging coming here, maddening really, between the Obama trolls that have taken over the comments section and posts hijacked from the left to drag a woman who has sacrificed and worked hard towards our agenda dragged through the slime. This post is another low moment on Inside Catholic. Written by Anon I wanted to mention that Margaret had doubts about Palin on day one. — MaureenThanks for the compliment in your title, Maureen, but I'm not going to give myself too much credit here. I certainly liked Palin straight away as a person and hoped, rather than expected, that she would turn out to be as dazzling in real life as she appeared on paper (much like several other bloggers here). And I don't think her latest poor performances are an indication that she is dumb or shallow, or any of the other insults hurled at her lately -- just underprepared. Which, again, isn't all that surprising, given how long her opponents have been training for this, compared with her mere weeks on the trail. The debates could still be a surprise, though: After all, she handled herself well in the Alaskan gubernatorial debates (a different class, I know, but still). She sounds miles more confident and easy there than in any of the recent interviews -- a result of the over-coaching that Todd and Zoe mentioned, maybe, or her relative unfamiliarity with the topics. And, as Brian mentioned last week, modern debates are more about answering the questions you want to answer, not necessarily the questions you are asked -- a little soft shoe that's easier to manage in a two-man debate than in a one-on-one interview. Who knows, she may surprise us again. Written by Margaret Cabaniss |
|
 |
