Michael Steele to anonymous Palin critics: Shut up

posted at 4:56 pm on November 1, 2010 by Allahpundit

Skip ahead to 4:30 for the key bit. Most HA commenters have seemed, shall we say, lukewarm thus far to the prospect of him running for reelection as RNC chair, but will that still hold if/when Palin endorses him? Because I’d bet that that’s coming. Remember, she’s already said she thinks he’s done a, er, great job.

As for today’s big Politico piece, I have to ask: Isn’t its worst sin the fact that the 2012 “establishment vs. Palin” dynamic has already been painfully obvious for a long, long time? How many times have I bored you guys with posts about that over the past year or so? If even a dummy like me can see it coming from a mile away, I’m hard-pressed to call this “news.” Here’s a bit from a post written 10 months ago:

Virtually every primary poll taken thus far shows her, Huck, and Mitt bunched up in the low 20s, which means in all likelihood that the threshold for victory will be exceedingly low if the 2012 primaries have as many candidates running as the 2008 primaries did. (That’s how McCain won, after all.) That’s why I think if she jumps in, Beltway Republicans will try to head her off by uniting behind a single anti-Palin candidate: They simply can’t afford to see the vote split three or four ways or else her devoted supporters will carry her to victory, especially with evangelical-heavy states like Iowa and social-con strongholds like South Carolina early in the primary schedule.

Here’s a little more from February about the developing “Palin vs. anti-Palin” contest; here’s something from July about how the establishment’s favorite will have to be very careful in the tone they take with her; and here’s something from just last week about how Karl Rove’s sniping at her may be aimed at building support for an anti-Palin alternative in the primary. As my pal Karol says of Politico’s alleged blockbuster:

What I don’t understand about the outrage is that isn’t this what Palinistas/Tea Partiers/conservatives have been saying all along? That is, that the establishment/elitists/old guard don’t want to tamper with the status quo and find this new movement, with Palin as its unelected leader, unsettling?

The anger at Politico for publishing the story seems odd too. Sure using anonymous sources is cheap, but, again, it’s not like anything in the story is a great surprise.

Quite so. In fact, one of the core arguments among Palin supporters all along has been that the establishment fears her because, if elected, she’ll “shake things up” and purge the Rove-ian fatcats and RINOs, etc. Could be — although as I recall, The One promised he was going to do that too and then instantly stocked his cabinet with Clinton retreads, started granting waivers to lobbyists, and stayed nice and cuddly with all his union cronies like Stern and Trumka. I think the greater establishment fear here, given polls like this, is that nominating her would either produce a replay of LBJ vs. Goldwater if the economy starts to turn around (none other than George Will has used that analogy) or make Obama competitive in an election where he’d otherwise be crushed if the economy doesn’t turn around. Either way, is it any surprise that people who make a living on Republicans being in power want the “safest” nominee possible? If not, then Politico’s piece ain’t much of a scoop.

Both Romney and Tim Pawlenty have denounced the story, which is also perfectly predictable of course: They’ll each need Palin’s base to turn out for them against The One if they’re the nominee, and given the level of devotion to her among her strongest supporters, there’s a risk that that won’t happen if things turn nasty in the primary. So expect plenty of public ass-kissing coupled with lots of anonymous sniping for the bulk of next year, before the race gets going. (In fact, there’s already a bit more of it at WaPo this afternoon.) Says Politico editor Jim VandeHei, “None of these Republicans would speak on the record for obvious reasons: they fear the backlash from Palin and her very passionate supporters around the country.” I’ll bet they do; see this very sharp old post by Erick Erickson for more on that. The question is, how are we going to get through a primary two years from now without either the Palin fans walking away in disgust if she isn’t the nominee and some establishment types walking away if she is?

Exit question: If, as they so often claim, Democrats are hoping to face Palin in 2012, then wins tomorrow by Joe Miller, Sharron Angle, and — especially — Christine O’Donnell should carry a bright silver lining for them, no? If we’re seeing that kind of tea-party wave for “outside the box” candidates, no one could blame Team Sarah for thinking the time is right for a shot at the big prize.


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 2

I don’t think that is what is bothering them. I really don’t. Palin was the VP pick on a national ticket, she is not some outsider, she is a Republican herself. I think they just don’t think she can win, and they don’t want her to get the nomination if she can’t beat Obama. If her favorable numbers were higher with Independents and people who were not conservative Republicans, I think they would be fine with it whether they all liked her or not.

Terrye on November 1, 2010 at 5:57 PM

Winner.

Her unfavorables are extremely high. She’s not likely to pull in any moderate to conservative Democrats; independents may not “hate” her, but they do not view her as a qualified / viable candidate; and moderate Republicans don’t really see her as legitimate.

That spells potential disaster in 2012 if she’s the nominee. Let’s assume that she does manage to win over the moderate GOP, who will unite behind her because they’d unite behind whomever the GOP nominee is, just to beat Obama; unless she can move a significant number of indies, she stands a good chance of losing, even against what will likely be a weakened Obama.

It isn’t about “shaking up the Establishment” or “maintaining the status quo”. The GOP doesn’t think she can win, and I’m sorry, but as of now, the evidence points to that being correct.

And I know I’ll get smeared by the usual suspects here for challenging her electability, so I’ll leave you with this: I’ve already gone on record here as stating that I will vote for her if she’s the nominee. The difference is, I just don’t see any path to victory if she’s the one facing Obama in 2012.

Vyce on November 1, 2010 at 7:07 PM

Are these the people Palin called “corrupt bastards”

PrezHussein on November 1, 2010 at 7:09 PM

I have a dream that one day Michael Steele will burst into a DC cocktail party of Rinos with a pitchfork and a “Palin” t-shirt screaming WHAT UP?

picklesgap on November 1, 2010 at 4:59 PM

Now that was just funny :o0

IowaWoman on November 1, 2010 at 7:15 PM

nominating her would either produce a replay of LBJ vs. Goldwater if the economy starts to turn around (none other than George Will has used that analogy)

Goldwater didn’t have the tools Palin has to fight the MSM and make his case to the American people. Palin not only has these tools, but also is a master at using them.

bw222 on November 1, 2010 at 7:20 PM

Are these the people Palin called “corrupt bastards”

PrezHussein on November 1, 2010 at 7:09 PM

no these are the child molesting, puppy-kicking, chain smokering, porn producers.

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:23 PM

Her unfavorables are extremely high. She’s not likely to pull in any moderate to conservative Democrats; independents may not “hate” her, but they do not view her as a qualified / viable candidate; and moderate Republicans don’t really see her as legitimate.

Vyce on November 1, 2010 at 7:07 PM

She already has pulled in moderate to conservative Democrats, Vyce. I am not alone even on Hot Air in being one of those she brought in. Most people who dislike her right now believe the 2008 narrative. She will set her own 2012 narrative. It will influence all of the groups you list, although her numbers may be stickiest among “moderate” Republicans.

alwaysfiredup on November 1, 2010 at 7:26 PM

chain smokering

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:23 PM

lol.

alwaysfiredup on November 1, 2010 at 7:26 PM

If her favorable numbers were higher with Independents and people who were not conservative Republicans, I think they would be fine with it whether they all liked her or not.

Terrye on November 1, 2010 at 5:57 PM

hmmm how high should her numbers be before she is ok to run?

Whose views are closer to your own? Palin/Obama

Overall: 52/40

Male: 55/37
Female: 48/43
White: 58/35
Black: 5/87
GOP: 84/9
DEM: 14/81
INDY: 59/27
Conservative: 80/12
Moderate: 28/61
Liberal: 14/85

Or these:

“…..76% of Republicans and 52% of unaffiliated voters now hold a favorable opinion of Palin.”

“…Unaffiliated voters by a 41% to 36% margin see Palin as good for the GOP.”

Is 52% of unaffiliated voters good enough? Or maybe you want 60% or 80%?

Here is a thought stop basing your posts on skewed liberal polls. The above poll is Rasmuseen. And Gallup has her at 49/50. Here is another thought. Don’t wait for allah to link those two polls.

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:28 PM

lol.

alwaysfiredup on November 1, 2010 at 7:26 PM

oops chain-smoking

“I suppose I could play their immature, unprofessional, waste-of-time game, too, by claiming these reporters and politicos are homophobe, child molesting, tax evading, anti-dentite, puppy-kicking, chain smoking porn producers…really, they are… I’ve seen it myself…but I’ll only give you the information off-the-record, on deep, deep background; attribute these ‘facts’ to an ‘anonymous source’ and I’ll give you more.

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:31 PM

The difference is, I just don’t see any path to victory if she’s the one facing Obama in 2012.

Vyce on November 1, 2010 at 7:07 PM

hell a blind man could see the path

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:34 PM

And I know I’ll get smeared by the usual suspects here for challenging her electability, so I’ll leave you with this: I’ve already gone on record here as stating that I will vote for her if she’s the nominee. The difference is, I just don’t see any path to victory if she’s the one facing Obama in 2012.

Vyce on November 1, 2010 at 7:07 PM

-
On another note… The Unknown Zero is being exposed more and more as the wrong guy for the job, and the MSM may have already become somewhat ineffective as a Dem toolbox.
-
Of course… it was over for Sarah the day she spoke to Couric, or was it when is when she resigned as Governor so she could stop being a fish in the barrel… and go back to being the ‘Cuda?
-
A lot happened in 2 years, and a lot more will happen by 2012… Sarah is on the hunt. She may not want to be nailed down to the presidency. Either way… I’ll vote for her in the primary if given the chance, unless a better option is available.
-
And then there’s stuff like this… ObaAmericanHater… Keep talkin you pompous pr*ck.

RalphyBoy on November 1, 2010 at 7:34 PM

no these are the child molesting, puppy-kicking, chain smokering, porn producers.

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:23 PM

OMG! LOL

Love Palin!

LurkerDood on November 1, 2010 at 7:35 PM

Palin for President 2012 is bad news…

ninjapirate on November 1, 2010 at 5:06 PM

Not nearly as bad as your hero, the Mittwit. If Romney is nominated you can be assured of a viable third party and Obama’s second terem.

bw222 on November 1, 2010 at 7:37 PM

RalphyBoy on November 1, 2010 at 7:34 PM

Anyone that comes up with the quote “puppy-kicking, chain smoking porn producers” has a shot. In fact that very quote shows what the GOP establishment that hasn’t had an “outside the box thought in the last 30 years” is up against. If Gov Palin goes up against the establishment it will be like Patriots firing on the British form the woods as they march in nice straight lines.

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:39 PM

Palin Mitch Daniels for President 2012 is bad news…

ninjapirate on November 1, 2010 at 5:06 PM

portlandon on November 1, 2010 at 7:41 PM

Is 52% of unaffiliated voters good enough? Or maybe you want 60% or 80%?

Here is a thought stop basing your posts on skewed liberal polls. The above poll is Rasmuseen. And Gallup has her at 49/50. Here is another thought. Don’t wait for allah to link those two polls.

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:28 PM

-
Easily doable by 2012… She’s clean, articulate, not a white man, PRO-American, genuine and fun to be around. And seriously folks… she had more real economics experience than Obozo back when Mac tapped her.
-
Easily capable of becoming the people’s choice. The 80% would be tough… The hard core left, Obama’s base, the media… will never make the correction.

RalphyBoy on November 1, 2010 at 7:45 PM

I would like to suggest that Sara Palin be be nominated and replace M. Steele as “Chair” of the RNC.

bucko36 on November 1, 2010 at 7:46 PM

canopfor on November 1, 2010 at 6:41 PM
===============
I hear you..You are going to be able to stay up late tomorrow night?..I do not want to hear anything about Wife having to get on Facebook!..:)

Dire Straits on November 1, 2010 at 6:45 PM

Dire Straits:FB,hehe!

I`ll be up till at least noon on Wednesday,
been awaiting two years for this!:)

canopfor on November 1, 2010 at 7:47 PM

canopfor on November 1, 2010 at 6:43 PM
==============================
Cuda ‘just’ endorsed Tom Tancredo for Gov in Colorado!! Woo Hoo!!

katy on November 1, 2010 at 6:45 PM

katy:The news keeps get`n better,awsome!:)

canopfor on November 1, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Easily capable of becoming the people’s choice. The 80% would be tough… The hard core left, Obama’s base, the media… will never make the correction.

RalphyBoy on November 1, 2010 at 7:45 PM

Palin does offer something new. If/when people listen to her message she captivates people. Palin is not about party she never was. she is about principles and once/if people get past the roadblocks that the puppy-kicking media has built up she wins them over in droves.

She had 93% approval rating as gov for a reason. She placed principle above party. And she was uncorruptable. She did what she felt was correct as long as it was allowed by the consituion of AK and the USA.

I see Palin and people like her changing for a period politics as we know it. Palin is JFK in drag anew beginning so to speak

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:50 PM

Like Rush says, they always tell us who they are afraid of. If she were not a big problem for them, they wouldn’t hate on her every chance they get. As far as who runs the RNC, who cares anymore?

I would like to suggest that Sara Palin be be nominated and replace M. Steele as “Chair” of the RNC.

bucko36

Then they would make some money..

unlisted on November 1, 2010 at 7:52 PM

He’s been Palinized. Just like Greta Van Susteren.

SouthernGent on November 1, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Allah scoffs at Palin as a reformer even though he knows she actually enacted reforms. Interesting.

SilentWatcher on November 1, 2010 at 7:53 PM

would like to suggest that Sara Palin be be nominated and replace M. Steele as “Chair”leader of the RNCGOP party.

bucko36

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 7:57 PM

I`ll be up till at least noon on Wednesday,
been awaiting two years for this!:)

canopfor on November 1, 2010 at 7:47 PM

I will be right there with you.. :)

Dire Straits on November 1, 2010 at 8:14 PM

Perhaps the smartest thing Mr. Steele has said since assuming the Chairmanship.

I have no respect for anonymous leakers OR for the reporters who write stories based only upon anonymous sources – it’s downright unethical.

Some, like Erickson in particular but he is far from alone, are more interested in leveraging the Tea Party movement to take over the Republican Party than in opposing Obama and the left. Do not aid and abet their efforts; these people are NOT the Tea Party and their efforts have NOT been key to its success – they jumped into the parade, elbowed their way to the front, and pretend to be leaders.

Screw ‘em.

Adjoran on November 1, 2010 at 8:21 PM

So am I to take it AP approves of unnamed sources in hit pieces?

eforhan on November 1, 2010 at 8:24 PM

Eeyore needs to get over this one.

The folks screaming the loudest that Palin cannot win are the ones who cause a McCain to be nominated. Do not drink the media Kool-Aid. Push for the candidate who is most likely to govern as you’d like, and quit thinking of the game. Republicans lose when they think of the game, they win when they think of the Constitution and appropriate governance.

In January 1992, nobody outside of Arkansas or Tennessee had a clue who Billy Jeff was. In March 1992, his negatives were so bad (the “bimbo eruption”) that he dropped out of the primary circuit. In spite of numerous nascent scandals, a multitude of reports of unsavory behavior, The Comeback Kid still won the nomination and the general election.

Don’t tell me who is unelectable. Check the numbers, where Sarah Palin goes these days winners are being produced, and several of her endorsements have turned around likely Donk wins. Nobody else on the landscape is having as large an impact.

Freelancer on November 1, 2010 at 8:24 PM

I disagree with Karol’s point — that there’s “anger at using anonymous sources” (as to Politico’s method).

Politico is NOTORIOUS for using anonymous sources, or, rather, for making political plays and relying on the “don’t look at us” excuse by alleging “anonymous” was the source of this and that. It is the method, the play, by Politico that is the issue, more specifically.

I’ve long wondered just why Politico is said (by some bloggers and some talking heads in media) to be “very influential”. Van de Heigh, particularly, and Mike Allen continue to write content that isn’t worthy of lining a cat litter box as to their Leftwing gossip methods.

Though technically well-written, it’s what they write and write about that is not worthy of influencing anyone nor shouldn’t. I could refer here to story after story after story after story after… in which both deploy their creepy, underhanded gossipy methodology, including their many bits as reported by “anonymous”.

Palin was right on target with her denigration of the site and the authors, specifically.

Lourdes on November 1, 2010 at 8:27 PM

So am I to take it AP approves of unnamed sources in hit pieces?

eforhan on November 1, 2010 at 8:24 PM

Not if the hit is on Mittens.

bw222 on November 1, 2010 at 8:35 PM

Summation of Politico’s method:

(A thing happens in which a Democrat and a Republican offers statements about a controversial issue)…

As to the Democrat and the issue, Politico (would) write:

Senator Miss Heroic-in-Courage courageously lent her support to the human rights issue of Free Food With A New House For All And Someone Else Has To Pay For It by reminding a grateful nation as to how tirelessly the Democrats have labored over this important and immensely popular issue.

As to the Republican and the issue, Politico (would) write:

Amidst the din at the Senate Office Building, a tired Senator from The Bad State appeared and claimed that he and the GOP were running out the back door of their overstuffed, luxurious trailer — which the taxpayers funded despite protests against it — and didn’t want to answer any questions, although this publication remained steadfast against the trailer’s walls all through the long night. Per anonymous sources, the Senator from The Bad State eventually appeared well past noon on the following day and leered when questioned as to why there was harsh criticism for Free Food With A New House For All And Someone Else Has To Pay For It from his disgruntled party.

AND, Politico would “report” that on the eve of the day after the worst natural disaster evah.

Lourdes on November 1, 2010 at 8:38 PM

anyone see the interview with Neil cavuto and Palin. the lady is a class act . Neil wa simpressed. Very impressed. And Neil has never been a Palin fan.

unseen on November 1, 2010 at 8:38 PM

Perhaps the smartest thing Mr. Steele has said since assuming the Chairmanship.

I have no respect for anonymous leakers OR for the reporters who write stories based only upon anonymous sources – it’s downright unethical.

Some, like Erickson in particular but he is far from alone, are more interested in leveraging the Tea Party movement to take over the Republican Party than in opposing Obama and the left. Do not aid and abet their efforts; these people are NOT the Tea Party and their efforts have NOT been key to its success – they jumped into the parade, elbowed their way to the front, and pretend to be leaders.

Screw ‘em.

Adjoran on November 1, 2010 at 8:21 PM

I agree with you, Adjoran, on all those points you’ve made. I could add a few names to your last paragraph, among the so-called or assumed “Right” blogosphere who are anything but that and who make a very big show out of agitating the issue of who’se-who.

Lourdes on November 1, 2010 at 8:42 PM

Related:

Did anyone catch that *moment* on Fox the other day (Saturday, I think it was) when Geraldo with guest, Huckabee, leaned across Geraldo’s table, shook hands with great gusto, grinning big grins, while Huckabee stated and stated again (Geraldo asked him to “repeat that”), that “Obama will win re-election in 2012 by a big margin”. (He said, “big” or “wide” or something like that.)

Lourdes on November 1, 2010 at 8:44 PM

LOL – Palin calls Politico “puppy-kicking porn producers”.

VidOmnia on November 1, 2010 at 5:02 PM

Palin’s right. Love that quote, too. It’s so, so, so smart. Not kidding.

Lourdes on November 1, 2010 at 8:47 PM

while Huckabee stated and stated again (Geraldo asked him to “repeat that”), that “Obama will win re-election in 2012 by a big margin”. (He said, “big” or “wide” or something like that.)

Lourdes on November 1, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Nice to know who’s side he’s on.

I really think we are going to discover that a lot of people who we thought we knew, turn out to be rather different. Some Democrats will move right and some so-called conservatives will reveal their true faces.

sharrukin on November 1, 2010 at 8:48 PM

While the Dwarfs are still trying to decide whether they want the battleship, race car, shoe or thimble, Snow White keeps circling the board, getting $200 for passing go and is building apartments on all her properties.

bw222 on November 1, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Sarah will make them fall her way, one rino at a time. Believe.

Kissmygrits on November 1, 2010 at 9:52 PM

In fact, one of the core arguments among Palin supporters all along has been that the establishment fears her because, if elected, she’ll “shake things up” and purge the Rove-ian fatcats and RINOs, etc. Could be — although as I recall, The One promised he was going to do that too and then instantly stocked his cabinet with Clinton retreads, started granting waivers to lobbyists, and stayed nice and cuddly with all his union cronies like Stern and Trumka.

The difference here is the guy with highest IQ, Clean and Articulate versus a Stupid Bible Thumping, Moose Hunting, white woman.

antisocial on November 1, 2010 at 10:35 PM

LBJ/AuH2O doesn’t wash. LBJ was an open-ended heir to an assasinated President. He was also Southern. And Texan. LBJ had yet to bring forth the abomination of the “Great Society”. He had yet to wage war in Vietnam in earnest (and incompetently). For the most part, he was a stong candidate that could have taken the election half blind and facing indictment for murder.

The comparison is not only wrong but wrong-headed. Obama has and will have little to commend him in 2012 given his inability to lead, or do anything at all of any real merit. Palin might be a poor candidate in 2012, but not for any strength on Obama’s part.

Rather than swinging at phantoms, better to strengthen the bench all around.

Then again, I don’t think the GOP really gives a crap about federalism, conservatism, liberty or anything else their “base” cares about. They are professional politicians that rose to their positions on the wings of rent seekers and incompetent hangers-on. They fed the monster that killed them in 2006 (pun intended), and nothing will change in 2010. If Palin can serve the end of destabilizing them and the Democrats, more power to her.

spmat on November 1, 2010 at 11:40 PM

Uh. Palin actually has a record of turning out the corruptocrats and corruptocans.

MSimon on November 2, 2010 at 12:07 AM

Oh yeah. A little election music:

Get Fired Up

MSimon on November 2, 2010 at 12:08 AM

Sheesh, what a choice. Without Palin, we have Huckleberry Finn and RINO Romney. Can’t get behind either. And don’t tell me about Scozzafava Gingrich…

Where there is no vision, the people perish…

Dandapani on November 2, 2010 at 6:36 AM

Comment pages: 1 2