Romney advisor on Palin: “She’s not a serious human being”

posted at 6:34 pm on July 15, 2010 by Allahpundit

Huckabee’s taken potshots at her from time to time, but between this fusillade from unnamed Mitt advisors and the furious counterattack on Romney at Conservatives 4 Palin, I’d say that the 2012 primary is now, at long last, officially on.

In the immortal words of Greg Stillson, “The missiles are flying. Hallelujah.”

Still, few express much regard for Palin’s ultimate chances. One adviser to Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, and, by traditional standards, the putative 2012 frontrunner, says of Palin, “She’s not a serious human being.” Another Romney intimate warns, “If she’s standing up there in a debate and the answers are more than 15 seconds long, she’s in trouble.”

One of the most experienced Republican national political operatives in the country suggests that while Palin might be envied and sleek, she lacks the endurance required for a protracted nomination fight. “She’s like a cheetah. She can run really fast, but not really long.” In the end, this school of thought about Palin goes, she is too polarizing to be seen as likely to beat Barack Obama, and Republicans will be too hungry in 2012 to risk nominating someone who could cost the party the White House — maybe even in a landslide…

Such a disjointed field can only provide more encouragement for Palin.
And nothing would make the White House happier. The President’s political advisers, troubled by the weak economy and Obama’s image as a big spender, are more worried than he is about re-election and more worried than they let on publicly. Obama himself has told people that he believes the Tea Party movement will still be going strong in 2012, leaving the party to go into battle against an incumbent with a candidate too far right to win. In fact, the President’s advisers believe that if Palin is the nominee, New York’s billionaire mayor, Michael Bloomberg, could enter the race as an independent, scrambling all the conventional rules yet again.

Bloomberg as a self-funded stalking horse for his pal Barry intent on taking down the GOP? Why, that sounds … entirely plausible, actually. As for the nastiness about her being unserious, righties as respected as Krauthammer and George Will have made the same point. And I’ve noted before myself that, given the media’s obsession with painting her as a female Quayle, she’d have to be virtually perfectly on the trail for more than a year to avoid that narrative. The tiniest, most innocent flub — think Bush being quizzed on the names of foreign diplomats — will be hyped into the second coming of the Katie Couric interview, with the press breathlessly insisting that no sane person would vote for such a doofus. Can she be that perfect on the trail? Can any human being, including Barack “Bitterly cling to guns and religion” Obama?

Follow the link and read all of that piece, actually, if only for the bit about Bush and Cheney both reportedly pushing their old pal Mitch Daniels to GOP movers and shakers. Given the reviving influence of Team Dubya over the party’s establishment, I wouldn’t underestimate Daniels’s ability to burst out of obscurity quickly via a huge push from prominent Republican donors and groups. And speaking of quick bursts, more on Palin from Mark Halperin:

She would be the only woman against a half-dozen or more Republican men. As long as she leaves the door to a race open, she can freeze the field, prevent other GOP hopefuls from gaining much traction, keep the media in a perpetual will-she-or-won’t-she frenzy and jump into the race whenever she likes. That would be impossible for an ordinary candidate, but Palin could splash in as late as November 2011, just a few months before the voting begins. There is no deadline for signing up for the Iowa caucuses, and when it comes to competing in early-state contests, she will have a far easier time than any previous insurgent. Her candidacy would require almost none of the usual time sinks that force politicians to jump in early: power-broker schmoozing, schedule-intensive fundraising, competitive recruitment of experienced strategists, careful policy development. She would have immediate access to cash, with even small Internet donations likely bringing in millions.

Fred Thompson splashed into the last primary late, but not as late as November. Then again, Fred wasn’t the grassroots phenomenon that Palin is and he suffered from the perception that his late start was due to him not caring quite as much about winning as the rest of the field. That wouldn’t be the case with Palin; her late entry would be seen as calculated for dramatic effect, which would probably give her boost. And the point about small donations is well taken: Romney’s PAC has dwarfed hers in fundraising so far this year, but according to the Globe, most of the money’s come from events and large donors. By contrast, three-quarters of SarahPAC’s haul came from small donors. That’s not good news for her in terms of raw numbers — Mitt can almost certainly use big-money bundlers to crush whatever amount she’d rake in from grassroots contributors — but the media will go bonkers for a storyline about plucky blue-collar conservatives trying to propel Palin to victory against the Romney fortune one five-dollar donation at a time. And of course, that media coverage will be worth millions in itself. Remember: The default press narrative in 2012 will be Palin vs. Anti-Palin, with the task for Romney, Daniels, or whoever emerges as her nemesis to try to embody the good qualities the Anti-Palin is supposed to have — smart, competent, experienced — while avoiding the bad ones (elitist, white-collar, uncharismatic). As such, they’d better be awfully careful with how far they push the condescension towards her, especially given the potential alluded to by Halperin for gender politics to enter this race.

For what it’s worth, former McCain associate Mark McKinnon thinks she’s going to run even though neither she nor the country are ready for it. Note well his point at the end about what a Palin loss in the primary would mean; given the fervor her supporters are known for and the likelihood that the race will turn nasty, he’s totally right about the possibility of devastating party divisions in the general election. Exit question: Some Palin critics are speculating that the Bristol/Levi tabloid wedding announcement was secretly blessed by Sarah. Um, given the fact that her alleged unseriousness is already a major political liability for her, why on earth would she do that?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 4 5 6

Why would you vote for a communist who hates America and is desperate to destroy what the founders built over someone who wishes to restore us to those principles?

Do you support communism? I’m not being glib, it’s a serious question.

darwin on July 16, 2010 at 10:13 AM

I don’t think he’s a Communist and I don’t think he’s a Socialist in any true (i.e., dictionary rather than political bomb-throwing) sense of either of those words.

Jimbo3 on July 16, 2010 at 10:55 AM

Still, few express much regard for Palin’s ultimate chances. One adviser to Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, and, by traditional standards, the putative 2012 frontrunner, says of Palin, “She’s not a serious human being.” Another Romney intimate warns, “If she’s standing up there in a debate and the answers are more than 15 seconds long, she’s in trouble.”

There’s a whole lot of passionate debate here on HotAir as to whether or not Sarah Palin is the Republicans’ best chance to replace Barack Obama in 2012. IMHO the jury is still out, and it SHOULD be out at least past the 2010 midterms, when everyone should be concentrating on retaking the House and as many Senate seats as possible.

But let’s stop quoting these anonymous advisors to Romney or other candidates saying that Palin is not a “serious human being” or couldn’t last 15 seconds in a debate. If they want to criticize Palin, let them have the cojones to at least state their own names, and we can “consider the source”–otherwise these opinions are worth less than those of Joe the Plumber. Sarah Palin’s book is full of references to people at McCain “headquarters” who never identified themselves who undermined her campaign and ordered her around like a puppet. If these behind-the-scenes advisors are so smart–let THEM run for office!!!

If Sarah Palin is not a “serious human being”, why is she tied in the latest PPP poll with the President? If she really couldn’t last 15 seconds in a debate, why did most observers believe that she WON the only debate she ever had against the vastly more experienced Joe Biden? Why are those taking such cheap shots at her afraid to identify themselves?

Sarah Palin can galvanize and enthuse conservative crowds in a way that John McCain could not, and Mitt Romney cannot. In 2008, she was in the difficult position of both running against Obama and Biden and trying to portray herself and McCain as different from George W. Bush, whom the media blamed for the failures against Katrina, in the war in Iraq, and the bank collapse that started about a month before the election, and voters embraced a vague notion of “hope and change and judgment to lead”.

But lots of voters are now angry at Barack Obama, for massive deficits that failed to provide jobs, for wasting ten months forcing through socialized medicine that most voters want repealed, for worrying about life jackets and sand (traps) while oil gushed into the Gulf for three months. Sarah Palin may be the candidate who can galvanize those voters into a White House majority. And, after oil gushed into the Gulf for nearly three months and our President flailed helplessly wondering whose @$$ to kick, a former state regulator of the oil and gas industry, who negotiated a massive international gas pipeline contract just might be a smart choice for President.

Let Palin, Romney, Huckabee, and the others present their cases, and let the voters decide. And let the anonymous advisors either please stand up and identify themselves, or STFU.

Steve Z on July 16, 2010 at 11:07 AM

They don’t love her like you do, so they have no investment in her. They’ll eventually abandon her.

Vyce on July 16, 2010 at 9:47 AM

Not quite accurate. I have no investment in Palin, but if it comes down to picking between her and Obama bin Lyin…

Dark-Star on July 16, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Threads like this should be saved in case anyone wonders WHY the GOP candidate loses to Obama in 2012.

katiejane on July 16, 2010 at 11:53 AM

Not quite accurate. I have no investment in Palin, but if it comes down to picking between her and Obama bin Lyin…

Dark-Star on July 16, 2010 at 11:17 AM

-
I think Sarah is awesome… Even as I accept that there might be another who can unseat Obama with less luck, rangling, and nail biting. Not sure who that would be, but we’ll see how things go in about 2…
-
That all said, for the first time in my life, I would vote for a door knob as opposed to giving Obast*rd a pass.
-
And to these gop a**wipes that are helping the dems by so nastily degrading Palin, or any other non-Marxist for that matter… Piss off.

RalphyBoy on July 16, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Even as I accept that there might be another who can unseat Obama with less luck, rangling, and nail biting. Not sure who that would be…RalphyBoy on July 16, 2010 at 12:20 PM

That would be Billary!

And then, we’ll have to find a woman to beat her…
Gee I wonder who that would be?

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on July 16, 2010 at 12:37 PM

That all said, for the first time in my life, I would vote for a door knob as opposed to giving Obast*rd a pass.

RalphyBoy on July 16, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Put a suit and a tie on a stick or a door knob and you’ve made substantial improvements already.

I agree. Door Knob/Stick 2012!

…..if it is the only thing standing between Obama and another 4 years.

nico on July 16, 2010 at 12:38 PM

This says it all: Time and “anonymous” sources.

What I don’t understand why people believe them any more after all the times they have been proved false using “anonymous” sources.

JeffinSac on July 16, 2010 at 1:07 PM

I don’t think he’s a Communist and I don’t think he’s a Socialist in any true (i.e., dictionary rather than political bomb-throwing) sense of either of those words.

Jimbo3 on July 16, 2010 at 10:55 AM

Of course you don’t. Ignorance must truly be bliss.

darwin on July 16, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Jimbo: Never mind dictionary definitions that are externally applied to individuals based on their outward actions, such as his ranking by National Journal as the most left-wing Senator over #4, self-described socialist Bernie Sanders (I-VT). There is more reason for observers to believe that Obama is a socialist by his OWN definition (whatever that may be) than not.

It is absolutely reasonable to conclude that Obama’s heart is tied up with Marx-borne philosophies when you examine what is known of his personal upbringing, that he admits he associated with Marxist professors in college, his advocacy on behalf of crypto-Marxist union leaders and activists as a community organizer, what he said in 2001 about the Constitution and how it’s a shame that the Supreme Court hasn’t parsed it to somehow endorse government wealth redistribution, the known Marxist/Maoist revolutionaries whom he associated with when he first went into politics, and those whom he has consulted with and/or appointed to help implement his policies as President (including Van Jones, Andy Stern, Anita Dunn, and now Donald Berwick).

Now, if you wish to dismiss all of that history, that’s your prerogative. I would be interested in knowing if you could in short order produce similar exhibits indicating that he’s just as much a free-market capitalist as are most of us.

I won’t hold my breath.

L.N. Smithee on July 16, 2010 at 10:44 PM

Shouldn’t the Rhomboids be attacking Obama and his follies?

profitsbeard on July 17, 2010 at 10:49 AM

I`ll say it again: Palin needs to improve her public speaking. That would help her be taken more seriously by all of these doubters (the ones that really are doubters not those pretending to doubt for their own purposes). In fact, the others are not really that good at speaking (besides Romney). So toning down that awshucks style would be a good thing. I don`t think her detractors mention that awshucks thing publicly because it suits their purposes very nicely.

Just cut the awshucks a bit, Mrs. Palin! And more vocal range!

We all know Obama can`t speak worth a fart anyway. Ta ta ta duh duh duh uh uh . . .. makes up most of his contemporaneous repetoire . . . .

Public speaking has suffered. Time to remind ourselves of a solid Western tradition of good public speaking from Greece on through the centuries that has suffered greatly in these times.

Sherman1864 on July 17, 2010 at 5:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6