This morning WaPo’s The Fix remarked on John McCain’s statement yesterday that voters were divided on Ronald Regan just as they are on Sarah Palin, bringing up a key difference when it comes to comparing the two politicians.
“There are basically no Palin Democrats. And given the passions she evokes, it’s hard to see how such a group would form,” the bloggers point out.
They make a great point, but I think she does more than EVoke passions, she actively PROVokes them with her continual cheerful sneering at libs. In fact she’s painted herself into a corner. Anything she says to attempt to appeal to Dems will turn off her base because they love love love it—and her—when she gives voice to their resentments about elites, cityfolk and booksmart pencilnecks. It’s kind of a sweet sharing-bonding thing she has with her fans.
And some of her most supportive camps are way, way out there: over on Free Republic they’re saying Karl Rove is a liberal; and some of the Christian groups in 2008 were praying God would smite McCain so their Sarah might achieve her destiny.
If she doesn’t win the nomination she still will want to keep that base (which might be better characterized as a market).
You know how blogs, news sites and entertainment sites put “Sarah Palin” in a headline (which often also puts the words in the URL) to rack up page views? Liberal, conservative, small blogs, big media—it works for everybody for different reasons.
Well, there’s a fair chance I am completely full of shit, but I think the TLC Channel’s new supplemental site for the Sarah Palin’s Alaska show is purposely courting controversy. The site provides four blogs and a podcast to serve as a newer-media add-on to the traditional network show site. One of the blogs, called Not Taking Sides is the place to talk about politics, because, even though the TV series is non-political, politics are going to come into it, the inaugural post sort of explains.
It makes sense for TLC to do this from a marketing perspective. It’s true that the show is going to be political no matter how it’s positioned so why shouldn’t the very entity that’s creating the buzz get in on some of the discussion action? Negative comments about Palin are not scrubbed, and call me cynical, but some of them almost look like seed comments—they’re too well punctuated and use proper capitalization rules.
Head blogger for the politics section will be Matt Gagnon, Deputy Director of Digital Strategy for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. He’s busy working on a recount, they don’t say whose—maybe Joe Miller’s? So he will show up later.
It’s a funny old world out there in new media land, when commercial interests get in the game and the genuine might be genuine, or it might be a hustle, or might be a little of both.
You have to wonder, though, if Sarah is down with stirring the pot. Admitting there is a political angle runs counter to every description she has applied to the show. She might be OK with it, since the environment is somewhat controlled.
I peer into FreeRepublic.com every other week or so to get a feel for right-wing sensibilities for some fiction I’m working on. After seeing the Newsmax clip of Sarah Palin fretting about Iran on Morning Joe this morning, I looked in. A freeper suggested Sarah Palin’s remarks about armageddon would cause liberals to believe she is peddling end-of-days rhetoric. Well, yes. That is the first thing I thought of.
Of course I worry that she may believe Jesus will come sooner if we attack Iran, or if we indicate we wouldn’t mind if Israel did, just as I worry about evangelicals in the Pentagon.
Whether she believes it or not, this kind of talk plays to her base. A Pew poll published this summer said 58% of white evangelicals believe Jesus Christ will return to earth by 2050.
Drill down to her even more devoted base—the undereducated, whether or not they identify as evangelicals:
In addition, those with no college experience (59%) are much more likely than those with some college experience (35%) and college graduates (19%) to expect Jesus Christ’s return. By region, those in the South (52%) are the most likely to predict a Second Coming by 2050.
Palin isn’t just a joke. She’s dangerous because she would put her faith in dominionists while putting her trust in neocons who have a complimentary world agenda. Imagine Randy Scheunemann calling the shots for the world.
President Obama said “Let’s try common sense” in the State of the Union speech Wednesday night.
Here’s the Twitter reaction. Obama fans like the idea. The Right scoffs. (If you see this seven days from now, the search link will lead to an empty results page; Twitter doesn’t keep historical searches.)
Bonus: I found this in my searches this morning—a November 2009 accounting of Governor Palin’s fondness for the phrase by Chris Kelly, a writer for Bill Maher’s show who blogs at Huffington Post.
But… but… but… Governor Palin says too much regulation caused the 2008 financial meltdown. And I think I need to believe her story, because… she’s just like me, and… socialism… and take our guns… and ivy league elitism… and… and… freedom!
“Palin has devoted a dismayingly prominent chunk of her book to scapegoating communications aide Nicolle Wallace for supposedly forcing her to wear designer clothes.” Nov. 17, 2009, Boston Globe editorial.
Salon’s editor, Joan Walsh, put this headline on her opinion piece yesterday: ”I have Palin fatigue already.” Me too. No, not really.
Here’s Walsh’s thought, way down at the end, that prompted me to awaken from blog hibernation.
So while I’m not worried about President Palin, I remain worried about President Obama. I’m particularly concerned that his increasingly triangulating, anti-deficit administration will do the wrong thing, morally and politically, and move to the right, without understanding that some right-wing rage could be rechanneled by acknowledging its roots: That the economic system seems rigged for the have-a-lots v. the have-a-littles, and despite their promises, the Democrats haven’t done enough to change that. Palin can’t change any of that, but Obama can. There’s still time for him to do so, but the clock is ticking.
I agree that populist sentiment on the right could be rechanneled, but I wouldn’t leave it up to the president or the Democrats in Congress to take charge of the effort.
Liberal citizens could do more. We could not only rechannel populist mojo but reclaim it. What if progressives started showing up at the next round of town halls to agree with bits of the anger at the way things are going, but suggest other means to change it? To decry Wall Street dominance of the halls of power right along with our louder neighbors, but point to other ways out?
Cultural and ideological gulfs are so hard to bring oneself to bridge. Reminds me of a Therapy Sisters song. The Austin, TX-based female folk ensemble sings about how easy it is for feminists to claim identification with the suffering of third-world women, but not so easy to throw in with the bow heads (sorority members) across campus.
They make a great point, but I think she does more than EVoke passions, she actively PROVokes them with her continual cheerful sneering at libs. In fact she’s painted herself into a corner. Anything she says to attempt to appeal to Dems will turn off her base because they love love love it—and her—when she gives voice to their resentments about elites, cityfolk and booksmart pencilnecks. It’s kind of a sweet sharing-bonding thing she has with her fans.
