Palin Dynamite
Despite the continuing efforts of the left and the mainstream media (redundant, I know), Sarah Palin’s political presence appears to be undiminished. She packs some punch.
Fresh off his runoff victory Tuesday night, Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss credited Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin with firing up his base.
“I can’t overstate the impact she had down here,” Chambliss said during an interview Wednesday morning on Fox News.
“When she walks in a room, folks just explode,” he added. “And they really did pack the house everywhere we went. She’s a dynamic lady, a great administrator, and I think she’s got a great future in the Republican Party.”
Republicans would do well to figure out why she has that effect on people. She can fire up supporters by hitting the right notes and showing that she is one of them. She has solid conservative roots but works hard to build nonpartisan coalitions in her state. She is a conservative who chooses battles wisely and can be pragmatic, not an ideologue, when it counts. She has been reviled by the left (and not a few members of her own party) and held up for ridicule by the media. Remind you of anyone?
No, she is not the second coming of Reagan, but she shares a lot of what he did so very, very well. She has charisma, pragmatism and an ability to make a room explode. There is real power here. Can she stay in it for the long haul? I have no idea. But she kept her head up and kept swinging despite a level of vile personal attacks that would have challenged even the Gipper. She is very, very good. Republicans need to see what she is and how she does it. That is the road out of the wilderness.
Via Memeorandum.
By Larry Sheldon, December 3, 2008 @ 6:47 pm
Am I the only one that can read the message?
We don’t need or want a “big tent”. (We don’t want a big anything, but mostly we don’t want a big goobermint!)
We don’t need for the party to move to the left.
We don’t want to be told one thing while the pols do another.
Somebody get the RNC some tickets to tne next Pain rally and make sure they show up with their hearinig aids on.
By MikeM, December 3, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
Actually, she might be “the second coming of Reagan” – or maybe the American Thatcher. It’s too soon to be tell, but I wouldn’t rule it out yet.
By Anthony (Los Angeles), December 3, 2008 @ 8:36 pm
I want a big tent, and I’m a life-long Republican conservative. The party will be forever marginalized unless it can rebuild a long-term coalition ranging from the Center to the Right, with the Center-Right as the bridge between the two.
As for Palin, I like her. A lot. I think she’s just what the Party and the nation need, and she’s my early choice for 2012 or (if that doesn’t look practical) 2016.
By Gaius, December 3, 2008 @ 8:57 pm
No, I think she’s Sarah Palin – with a heck of a lot in common with Reagan. Which may well be enough. We’ll see, soon enough.
And yes, Anthony, we have to be “Big Tent” enough to welcome people with a lot of special interests who have a lot of things in common. That was what Reagan was good at. Not all of our special interests will coincide perfectly – but the core values matter, regardless of the rest.
You can’t get all you want in politics. But you can move forward incrementally. That is where the big tent comes in. When you share the same core values, you can move a lot of things forward. One step at a time.
By Andew X, December 3, 2008 @ 11:20 pm
I think Sarah Palin’s “lightning in a bottle” is best used temperately.
She now has Saxby Chambliss’s notch in her belt. Excellent. Now….. back to Alaska. Do what she does best… right now, and that is govern Alaska. Stay out of the 48, no real need to be here. Every day governing up there is one more day of executive experience that our 44th POTUS never bothered to get. Plan, but do it quietly.
Then, summer of 2010, come storming out of the North and campaign for the GOP coast to coast. If the GOP flounders, well, maybe she hit her ceiling.
BUT…. if they rack up victories (not unlikely), every single one of them could be credited at least partially to her.
Then she’ll be a freaking Viking. The Dems will be terrified, and rightly so. Now she’ll have executive experience, presidential campaign experience, congresional campaign experience, and two years of quiet planning under her belt.
Then she’ll turn the joint upside-down, man, and what a sight that will be.
Now’s the time to turn down the volume, re-charge, and stock the armories. There is a season….
By syn, December 4, 2008 @ 8:29 am
I like big tents and am a 9/11/2001 convert ot Conservatism (I actually used to believe durning my time of self-indulgent narcissism that Reagan was a war-monger who caused AIDS) however I have no idea what the is the Center anymore.
The Center is so confusing and contradictory what is it’s basic foundation? What does it represent?
For example, Obama’s supporters voted AGAINST gay marriage yet 54% of Catholics voted for Obama whose own position on abortion is far more extreme than NARAL.
-Don’t want bailouts BUT want that $600 stimulus check.
- No tax increase BUT give us our cure-all disease and keep us young forever stem-cell stuff.
- Lower price for a tank of gas BUT don’t dare access America’s own resources.
Oh and was not Reagan a pro-life, low tax, national defense hawk who advocated personal responsibility and American exceptionalism? How is he different from Conservative Right as opposed to Center-Right?
Rather, how are Reagan Democrats not Conservative?
Please do tell…what is The Center??????? IT all sounds so ‘can we get along’, however everything about the Center is irrational and contradictory.
SO whatever is the Center, I am like Robert Downey Jr when said ‘one cannot live 20 years of Liberalism and not come out Conservative’
By syn, December 4, 2008 @ 8:38 am
PS: I greatly admire Gov Palin because she’s does not engage in the politics of bs.
What is so hard to understand about low taxation, national defense, accessing America’s own resourses, siding on the side of life?
By syn, December 4, 2008 @ 8:42 am
From my own personal life experiences I now do believe that Liberalism is schizophrenic and is seeping into the minds of otherwise reasonable people.
This is one reason why I no longer consider myself a ‘brain-dead liberal’, it was making my life crazy insane stuck on stupid stuff.
By Anthony (Los Angeles), December 4, 2008 @ 9:14 am
“For example, Obama’s supporters voted AGAINST gay marriage yet 54% of Catholics voted for Obama whose own position on abortion is far more extreme than NARAL.”
You have to bear in mind that the media did a marvelous job of not educating the public about Obama’s record or positions. The abortion issue is just one of many examples.
By syn, December 4, 2008 @ 11:12 am
‘the media did a marvelous job of not educating the public about Obama’s record or positions’
If relying on mainstream media alone to get ‘educated’ is the excuse then this is one more reason to think the Center-whatever has no idea what it is about or what it is doing.
By martian, December 4, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Actually, syn. a true centrist would be a fence sitter who never had any opinions about anything. The vast majority lean either left or right even if it’s only a very slight tilt. Personally I don’t consider myself a hardcore conservative but more a slightly right of center Republican. I don’t agree with the entire Republican platform – there are many areas where I differ from their hardline approach. I’m a Republican because I agree more with the Republican Party on what I believe to be the core issues – national defense, low taxes and smaller government with a healthy dose of fiscal responsiblity. I think there are a large number of people who are in the same category but disagree with many of the more “legislating morality” items of the truly conservative agenda. I think those of us in this category are the people who are being referred to when it comes to the idea of being a “centrist”.
By martian, December 4, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
Also, add adherence to the Constitution to my list of things I agree with the Republicans about.
By Larry Sheldon, December 4, 2008 @ 2:07 pm
First and foremost, Sarah Palin has beliefs. She can describe her beliefs. She lives according to her beliefs.
Those are important attributes. The details of the beliefs are not so important.
I don’t have to try and predict how she will behave after election, she will behave as she said she would.
It really is a simple as that.
That she believes in small, corruption-free government is a strong plus.
The big deal is there is no pig (with or without lipstick) in a poke here.
You can make your flipping tent as big as you like, as long as it is people who walk like the talk, and don’t scam me into another big goobermint debacle.
By Andy, December 4, 2008 @ 2:51 pm
Like most, I truly like Palin.
I think it is too early to call her the next Reagan though. The Democrats belittled Reagan as nothing more than a personality, a genial idiot. However, he had a clear philosophical underpinning. Yes, he compromised for the sake of the Big Tent and to accomplish things, but he never lost his bearings.
Don’t know that about Palin yet, or at least she has not articulated it. Right now, she is a little more Obamaesque in that we are projecting things onto her that may not be right or fair. In fairness to her, she was the VP nominee and had to toe McCain’s line so she did not have the opportunity.
I live here in DC. I know a lot of Dem operatives. The reason the media is still out to crush her is that they are truly afraid of here. The Republicans have not had someone who can rally people the way she does since Reagan. Obama did it; neither Clinton really does.
She needs to find a way to define herself and remain relevant to the discussions. My personal opinion is that she should win re-election as governor, take a leadership role from there. Take a stand on energy policy. She knows it cold, and with the focus on renewables she could be a real force for market economics. My guess is she would have to master some of that, but maybe not. That would also give her the opportunity to show how she approaches problems and her views on limited government, etc.
If Obama is doing well, she should not run in 2012. Too much like a rematch. If he is weak, then by all means.
By feeblemind, December 4, 2008 @ 6:47 pm
Gaius, I think you have a point that the Repubs should study why Palin is such a hit and try to emulate it with other candidates. Only problem is that many repubs don’t want to do that and/or have Sarah Palins included in the GOP. As for the Georgia runoff, it appears that Obama indeed had coat tails. Without Obama on the ballot it appears that many dems did not bother to show up and vote in the runoff.