Moderate poison
posted at 2:10 pm on October 15, 2009 by Doctor Zero
Commenting on the idea of General David Petraeus as the only potential presidential candidate who could unite the Republican party, Allahpundit says:
Among the major Republican candidates, the only one who truly excites the base is Palin, yet she’s sufficiently poisonous to moderates at the moment that Bob McDonnell won’t even take her up on her offer to campaign for him in Virginia while sitting on a nine-point lead.
I’m sure Petraeus would receive an eager and respectful hearing from both Republican and independent voters, if he decided to pursue a career in politics. (Democrats would haul those disgraceful “General Betray Us” signs out of storage, and begin inventing imaginary racist quotes they could post online, citing each other as reliable sources.) I find the classification of Palin as “poisonous to moderates” debatable, however.
Allahpundit didn’t pull this description out of thin air – various polls show her doing much better among conservatives than moderates, and of course liberals hate her the way that creepy little kid and long-haired girl in “The Grudge” hated anyone who came into their haunted house. A recent Pew Research poll gives Palin a 62% approval rating among moderate Republicans, which is a little north of poisonous, but far below her 85% rating with conservatives.
Opinions among the broader electorate are harder to judge, especially when we’re less than a year into the current president’s term… and discussing a private citizen, who last expressed her feelings about elective politics by starting a Facebook page, and racking up 925,000 supporters. She has some work to do with independent and moderately liberal voters, but there’s no reason to declare her task impossible in advance. Note that Allahpundit astutely qualifies his toxicology report by saying she’s “poisonous to moderates at the moment.” Things change in the world of politics, sometimes very abruptly.
Why should Palin be such a hard sell for moderate voters? After all, she was tapped as a running mate by the most moderate moderate to ever moderate his way to a crushing electoral defeat, John McCain. She’s clearly much more conservative than he is, but are we supposed to believe the people who adore McCain’s maverick centrism will completely disregard his… shall we say… moderate endorsement of Palin, and treat her like a radioactive wolverine? What did she ever say, or do, to send these enlightened, open-minded moderates stampeding for the hills? Her style isn’t “divisive” or confrontational, unless we are meant to conclude that strong criticism of the radical Barack Obama automatically infuriates middle-of-the-road types… in which case they seem more like a herd of sheep than a wise company of level-headed independents. All of the superficial reasons cited for Palin’s alleged inability to connect with moderate voters are exactly the kind of trivia they’re supposedly able to think beyond.
When we speak of moderates, there are really three distinct groups under discussion: liberal Republicans, conservative Democrats, and true independents. The truly independent voter should, I think, be strongly disposed to reject an incumbent for poor performance. Someone who could vote for Bush in 2004, then Obama in 2008, should be extraordinarily eager to hear new ideas, when the current occupant of the Oval Office clearly isn’t taking care of business. Conservative Democrats should be less than eager to re-elect a leftist radical, especially since he seems keen on turning the Reagan Democrat states into economic disaster areas.
Liberal Republicans would actually be the hardest of the three moderate groups for a serious conservative to win over, given their long-standing distaste for the right wing of their own party, but they might be willing to jump onto a campaign headed for victory. They were certainly quick to bail out of the Straight Talk Express, despite their ostensible love for John McCain. If Sarah Palin ran against Obama and looked like a winner in the last months of the campaign, she shouldn’t be surprised to see some fawning op-eds from people like Peggy Noonan, as they suddenly discover a luminous aura of energy and charisma around her. That’s what courtiers do. “Moderation” can dissolve in the frantic scramble for relevance. Anyone who could swoon over the “superior judgment” of the guy who filled his administration with tax cheats, 9/11 conspiracy morons, and NAMBLA supporters will have no trouble revising their opinion of the “seemingly very nice middle-class girl,” if she’s up six points over Obama in the October 2012 polls.
How does Sarah Palin improve her standing among moderates? By talking to them. A true moderate can hardly define themselves through stubborn closed-mindedness. Palin’s book sales suggest people are interested in hearing what she has to say. Her writing and speeches show that she’s gotten better at saying it. Of course, not having to shamble along with the zombies of the McCain campaign helps with that. Everything I’ve seen of Palin since the end of the 2008 campaign is remarkably consistent with the performance that brought the house down at the Republican National Convention. That speech was intoxicating, not poisonous.
People sincerely interested in hearing both sides of the political argument aren’t going to judge Palin by a comedy skit, or Katie Couric interview, from four years ago. It doesn’t mean they’ll stack copies of Going Rogue into a giant pyramid, like Xerxes’ seat from 300, and carry her into Washington on their backs… but at this point, it’s equally ridiculous to say that she doesn’t have a fighting chance with them, if she wants to take it. There certainly isn’t anything “moderate” about the man she would be running against.
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
No, it can would be re-instatable by executive order.
So Palin gets to be all squishy about gay rights?
And then makes the case for another 10 years in Afghanistan and another 40,000 troops? And maybe a war with Iran?
Because Obama is to the right of the American people on some of these these issues already.
I’m looking for a single “moderate” position.
How about abortion?
How about a single environmental issue on which I would agree with her. Just one?
Bleeds Blue on October 15, 2009 at 4:05 PM
That’s the best criticism you can come up with? Yeesh, indeed.
tom on October 15, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Sarah’s strongest point in my view is she is a fighter. She scored the most effective hits against Bambi during the campaign.
If anyone is going to beat Barry O it will be someone who will call him out on his record without flinching. If she kept taking the inevitable onslaught of totally unfair and unprecedented attacks she will take and keeps focusing on Bambi’s in competence, arrogance, and unending stream of lies, constantly painting him as the Jimmy Carter that he is she can beat him.
It would devastate the current trend toward socialism and soft autocracy if she won, decimating the northeastern establishment in a way similar to Reagan’s revolution.
revolution on October 15, 2009 at 4:07 PM
“Moderates” can kiss my a$$.
pugwriter on October 15, 2009 at 4:10 PM
The Democrats must kiss the butt of minorities, illegals and gays to get elected. Republicans kiss moderates butts. It’s about the same disgusting thing.
Jeff from WI on October 15, 2009 at 4:11 PM
BleedsBlue, you would be surprised. Over half of Americans would be fine with making abortion illegal except in cases of rape, incest, or a danger to the life/physical health of the mother. Less than 20% agree with Obama that abortion ought to be legal even through the 7th month and that there is nothing wrong with the procedure.
Some 85% of Americans with insurance are happy with their plans. They take for granted what is not available in any country with universal insurance: almost instantaneous access to doctors, medical testing, and treatment. Sarah Palin understands that Americans are outraged over having to spend a week waiting to get a MRI and would not tolerate the inevitable rationing of care that will result from Obama’s plan.
Americans don’t like getting attacked. They don’t like the draft (which the Left is trying to institute). They don’t like the Taliban, no matter how much Obama thinks that they should have some control over Afghanistan. They don’t like the idea of fighting a war in 2030 with 2010 technology, but it’s Obama, not Palin, who wants to cut military research spending. Americans like our technology, our power, and the fact that countries don’t mess with us.
So who is out of the mainstream?
Roxeanne de Luca on October 15, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Really? Of course that is a possibility but highly unlikely.
How many military members would have to be immediately discharged? What about their benefits? What about their dependents? What about their current duties?
ladyingray on October 15, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Nobody gives a tin sh*t about DADT right now. I think obama has enough on his plate since he can’t seem to make a damn decision about our troops in Afghanistan. He needs to deal with that FIRST and all the rest of it later.
HornetSting on October 15, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Gay Agenda? Since when do conservatives care about specific agendas like that? Liberals talk about all sorts of minority issues, putting people into little boxes, but conservatives tend to look at what’s best for the country, and go from there, at least in theory.
It was an incredible movie. You’re not really making a point here.
He’s not a troll.
Esthier on October 15, 2009 at 4:16 PM
How can she be squishy on it when she’d have to end the careers of all the open homosexuals serving in the military?
More people agree with her than agree with your or Obama.
Energy independence?
Esthier on October 15, 2009 at 4:23 PM
Hell, Hill-Dawg will be considered a liberal Republican when Obambi is through with us.
In reality, there is no such thing as a liberal Republican, as liberal ideas by their very nature are contrary to our core beliefs of maintaining simple, limited government through the preservation of and adherence to the Republic’s founding philosophy. If you think you’re a liberal Republican, sorry, you’re not. You’re a progressive, a liberal, or something else. But you are definitely no Republican.
BirdEye on October 15, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Surprisingly you didn’t get the point.
The number 1 priority of the President of the United States is the security of the United States.
Nobody but you really cares if you personally agree with or would ever vote for Palin or not. You’re one fringe vote at best. The campaign of 2012 isn’t going to be about convincing BleedsBlue.
DarkCurrent on October 15, 2009 at 4:28 PM
Burn!
ladyingray on October 15, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Sadly, Sarah Palin has a near zero chance of ever being elected to national office, even on the dubious assumption she wants that. Resigning the governorship would be nearly impossible to spin as something positive, even if her choice were considered as completely justified.
I’m sure there are Palin fans who could do so – and I’m not in the least hostile to Palin or her fans – but I can’t imagine the general electorate giving her a pass on that – even as fickle and short-memoried as they are. “It got tough and she quit,” is almost certainly the phrase that would kill any such aspirations.
There’s no need to be gloomy about that, though. Just about any Republican picked at random could take the White House in 2012 – if they would just do what Republican politicians seem to have the most trouble doing: be honest, be consistent, and be firm when they stand up for freedom. They’re invariably swayed by a perceived need to appear squishy about every ‘downtrodden’ group in the country, i.e. to me-too the Democrats.
Any other Republican with the least balls – and there’s no doubt Sarah Palin has more than all of them put together – could win in a landslide if they just stood up unapologetically for self-reliance, private property, and freedom, i.e. Americanism.
JDPerren on October 15, 2009 at 4:37 PM
I actually agree with you, at least for any election in the near future. Maybe, depending on what course her life takes, she’ll be viewed differently in a decade or two.
Esthier on October 15, 2009 at 4:39 PM
As an ex-Marine I can tell you that doing away with DADT will be terrible for the services. How would you like to work for a company where the boss is the top Sgt. and his wife is the next in line? They would never allow that in the services because of the obvious conflicts it would cause. If gays are allowed to be open then you could have the same situation with two gay men. Another senario would be combat. Imagine you are in a real bad situation fighting from fox holes, two to a hole, with your wife in a hole two holes over from you crying that she is wounded. Would you break defensive protocol and go to her or would you stay and maintain the defensive integrity? Once again this would never be allowed between a man and a woman but it could between two gay men. I’m only pointing out areas where known problems between men and women already exist and you would have to assume that two gay men would have the same emotional bonds that heteros have. I have been into female barracks years ago on midnight unannounced inspections and it was like turning on a light in a kitchen at night with the cockroaches running for cover. The scurrying from one bed to another was unbelievable! How would you have liked being one of the straight women in that barracks? I am not a homophobe and my best friend who was openly gay lived with me several years while both of us were bachelors. I offered to make him straight if he would go out with a nice girl and see how great it was. He said sure if I would do the same thing with a nice guy! NOT! This is not a civil right issue in the military and should be looked at as man/woman issue. If a man and a woman are not allowed to do it then two gay men should not be either.
inspectorudy on October 15, 2009 at 4:49 PM
As an independent I could care less about DADT. I served with gays in the army, the ones that hid it were more concern to me than the ones that reveled it( and at great risk to themselves ). Reversing as many of Obama’s mistakes as possible is the next presidents biggest task, starting with the big ones and working from there.
aceinstall on October 15, 2009 at 4:58 PM
From the LA Times:
Anyway, our colleague Margot Roosevelt, over at the Greenspace blog, reports that Palin has just unveiled a statewide green energy plan. It would do even more than California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 33% renewable electricity plan by 2020.
alliebobbitt on October 15, 2009 at 5:00 PM
I’ve heard this mantra over and over, but I’ve yet to get a good argument as to WHY she isn’t electable. Also, I’ve yet to see a serious rebuttal of her policy positions. What I have seen is a lot of third grade name calling and a lot of assumptions.
jimmy2shoes on October 15, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Great post and I hope Allahpundit (he’s so far to the left, that he makes Markos look like a moderate conservative) reads it…
Karmi on October 15, 2009 at 5:05 PM
As Governor of Alaska, Palin used her first veto to block a bill that would have prohibited the state from granting health benefits to same-sex partners of public employees. Ms. Palin said she vetoed the bill because it was unconstitutional, but raised the possibility of amending the state Constitution so the ban could pass muster. She also supported a ban on same-sex marriage, but then so did the citizens of California and our President.
alliebobbitt on October 15, 2009 at 5:05 PM
If there were someone more electable than Sarah Palin, you would have heard all about them and their dirty laundry. The opposition is covering its bets by going after Liz Cheney and Michelle Bachman now, but neither is more electable than Sarah Palin. This person you’re looking for would have revealed themselves.
alliebobbitt on October 15, 2009 at 5:08 PM
No, I do follow politics as a “hobby,” if you will. so I’m curious to hear Sarah’s route to mainstream voters.
Which, after four years of CiC, Obama will have a tin more credibility on. Hell, George Bush was botching two wars and running against a decorated veteran and the public gave him more credibility than Kerry. Palin and the Alaska Air National Guard are going to mean very little. So she’ll have to find another issue.
I didn’t notice a follow-up article about how she got it through the legislature before she quit. Interesting, nonetheless.
Untrue, especially in swing states. Even South Dakota rejected banning abortion in the case of rape.
Bleeds Blue on October 15, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Because the “decorated veteran” faked it, and those who worked with him knew it.
The man never had any consistency and would go with whatever he was told to (liberals loved this about him, but it makes most people nervous while we’re fighting two wars).
And no president has ever lost during a war.
Esthier on October 15, 2009 at 5:17 PM
She hasn’t advocated banning abortion for rape victims.
Esthier on October 15, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Then I guess Ms. Palin is going to have to hope Obama wins it before she gets out to the hustings.
Bleeds Blue on October 15, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Or that he pulls out, but only a true partisan would hope for that and believe what she does.
But then, considering W isn’t in office anymore the, president staying in power during a war doesn’t really apply to Iraq or Afghanistan. Obama would have to start a new war.
Esthier on October 15, 2009 at 5:43 PM
“topic is how to sell Palin to moderates”..
Bullshit..
Let life show moderates how wrong they are. Then they become conservatives.
Partisan on October 15, 2009 at 5:44 PM
What…you would have Hot Air quote dbag trolls, instead? Go away.
Jaibones on October 15, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Sarah Palin was the catalist that lit a special light for me and my family, all of which are free thinkers. No one can accomplish what she has without being bright and competitive. Can she run against a huge machine?
obleo on October 15, 2009 at 6:29 PM
It’s aligning for Sarah for 2012 quite nicely.
We just need to muster everything we have when she climbs to the top of the hill and sounds her call to us.
And when that happens, millions of her supporters are gonna pitch in like no other GOP campaign in history.
Even AP will help out in the end because the other choice is an Alinsky Marxist.
She is the ‘Anti-Obama’ on many many issues.
Sapwolf on October 15, 2009 at 6:45 PM
You still don’t understand.
It is NOT ENOUGH for a GOP candidate to WIN.
It must be somebody who is a libertarian or conservative or like Sarah part of each.
Anybody else at this point would not push for limited government and liberty the way she would.
Mitt? Come on! The coward with the nice hair would buckle under any of the left’s media onslaught.
You must win AND govern with fearlessness.
Sapwolf on October 15, 2009 at 6:48 PM
I don’t believe for second that the majority of the voters really wanted a Marx socialist as POTUS. They were fooled. We were not all fooled but just enough voters. We need a real leader.
obleo on October 15, 2009 at 7:07 PM
Who really cares what moderates think? Moderates have contributed to the mess this country is in NOW. It’s time for moderates to sit down and shut up, their leadership has been a DISASTER. The GOP won’t ever learn this and will probably nominate a RINO-moderate like Romney, AND LOSE.
GWH Bush ——-DISASTER
Bob Dole——–DISASTER
GW Bush ——–DISASTER
John McCain—–DISASTER
Ronald Reagan—-SUCCESS
GET THE POINT?
nelsonknows on October 15, 2009 at 7:10 PM
The right wing crazy of the Repubs have already been punished via the last two elections because of their war happy nonsense. The left wing crazy of the Dems will get their lesson in 2010 and 2012 for trying to turn us into the United States of Europe.
If Repubs also haven’t learned by now that Americans are not interested in banning abortion and having public school teachers make students pray, the cycle will just begin again.
Moesart on October 15, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Actually a majority of Americans now object to abortion.
Mojave Mark on October 15, 2009 at 8:16 PM
Goldwater was the last true conservative to lose. Reagan is the modern model of how to do it.
Mojave Mark on October 15, 2009 at 8:35 PM
Update on AOL Hot Seat #8 poll:
Might Sarah Palin still have a decent shot at the White House?
Absolutely 28%
Maybe 21%
Unlikely 24%
Definitely not 27%
101,422 votes
of the states won by George Bush in 2004 Palin is leading in every state except Virginia, Utah and Alaska.
In states that Kerry won Palin is leading in Wisconsin.
http://news.aol.com/article/palins-going-rogue-coming-soon/692161
(bottom right hand corner of page)
Please vote if you haven’t done so already!
technopeasant on October 15, 2009 at 9:35 PM
I fear that that Sarah Palin is being groomed and clipped like a French Poodle by a couple of GOP insiders Randy Scheunamen and Stephen Beigun. And that she’ll soon lose the bond that she had with Mom/Pop working folks. She’d do well to seek the sage wisdom of Steve Wynn and ditch the GOP hack advisers. Darvin Dowdy
Darvin Dowdy on October 15, 2009 at 10:53 PM
This fellow should get top billing on this site.
Dr. Zero’s Hot Air
With Allahpundit & Ed Morrisey
DrZin on October 15, 2009 at 11:41 PM
Haven’t you figured it out? It Bleeds Blue due to oxygen starvation. That can cause severe disorientation.
Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on October 16, 2009 at 12:30 AM
I wouldn’t want AIDS infected brains blown on me either.I would have done anything for my buddies to save their lives.But with gays you just don’t know what their blood carries.
huckelberry on October 16, 2009 at 12:45 AM
It’s not up to candidates to sell themselves to moderates. It’s up to moderates to look at the candidates and determine which best represents their views. Neither side is going to be a perfect fit for a moderate, but given that polling shows more people lean right than left in this country, it stands to reason that a Republican who runs as a solid conservative will attract more voters than a Democrat who runs like a liberal. Had Obama actually presented himself to the electorate as the socialist we all know him to be, would he have garnered so many moderate and independent votes? Doubtful. OTOH, every time it’s tried, when a Republican runs on a solidly conservative platform as, say, Reagan did — they win.
The narrative that Gov. Palin is some sort of right-wing extremist is a fiction. Her record is clearly one of a libertarian-leaning conservative, and her position on most issues is squarely in the mainstream. Will moderates agree with her on everything? Of course not. Heck, I adore her and she is my candidate in 2012, but we differ on a few agenda items. However, I’m not a one-issue voter . . . and moderates are even less so. If they read her book and take an honest look at her record (instead of relying only on what the SRM has cherry-picked to tell them), they will find a happy, optimistic warrior who passionately loves her country, loves liberty, and wants nothing more than to see her fellow Americans succeed and prosper. I’m not sure what is so polarizing about that. It worked for Reagan and it will work for Sarah.
NoLeftTurn on October 16, 2009 at 12:58 AM
WOW. FROM GREEN ROOM TO MAIN PAGE.
But I kinda like the Green Room columns than the main article.
Green Room, for me, is the most revered place in HA.
The front page is contaminated by AP.
TheAlamos on October 16, 2009 at 2:53 AM
Me and my family are supporting Palin with $$money$$ and volunter work.
Rant and rave all you butt heads but I am putting my money where my mouth is.
jarhead0311 on October 16, 2009 at 8:07 AM
ROFLMAO!
bitsy on October 16, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Ding, ding, ding! And all the rest who thought the One was going to pay their mortgage and buy them free gas will stay home.
bitsy on October 16, 2009 at 10:28 AM
test
Franklyn on October 16, 2009 at 1:15 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2