Mark Halperin, political reporter and TIME magazine blogger, has a problem with the gray area of political life. This morning I came across an article he wrote entitled "Why Sarah Palin Is Stronger Than You Think" that represents a perfect example of irresponsibly equating popularity with infamy.
Halperin recommends us not to "underestimate Sarah Palin." Fine. Anybody who follows politics closely, especially over the past two years, knows how easily Sarah Palin can control a news cycle. CNN could spend all day covering a massive hurricane wreaking havoc across the gulf coast, but the moment Fmr. Governor Palin tweets or sends out a provocative Facebook status update all other news has to go on the back burner. It's a testament to how far gone our national media has fallen to think that 140 characters or less can change the conversation and coverage of the country.
But, it's one thing to warn political bloggers and reporters about the attention grabbing power of Sarah Palin and it's another thing entirely to equate the fascination with her as real strength. It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that Palin will run for President in 2012 with a message that will be light on debate and heavy on talking points and invitations to a new culture war, but when Mark Halperin writes an article explaining why her natural abilities as a candidate put her in a good position to be taken seriously, I have to speak to my peace.
Halperin states that "the mistake you are making is to assume that Palin needs or wants to play by the standard rules of American politics. Or that it even occurs to her to do so. Trash her all you want (even you Republicans who are doing it all the time behind her back) for being uninformed, demagogic and incoherent, and brandish the poll numbers that show fewer and fewer Americans think she is qualified to be President. Strain to apply political and practical norms to Alaska's former governor. You are missing the point."
Am I, Mark? Am I missing the point? I've never once believed that Sarah Palin had any interest whatsoever in needing or wanting to "play by the standard rules of American politics" because I don't believe she has any clue what the "standard rules" even are; after all, who needs them when you can rely on fiery rhetoric and faux-folk-populism-cheekiness? It's sad that a leading contributor to TIME magazine and a frequent guest of political talk shows can even say "trash her all you want (even you Republicans who are doing it all the time behind her back) for being uninformed, demagogic and incoherent, and brandish the poll numbers that show fewer and fewer Americans think she is qualified to be President. Strain to apply political and practical norms to Alaska's former governor. You are missing the point" and then go on to tell me why she'll be a strong candidate in 2012.
Maybe you're missing the point, Mark. We shouldn't be elevating politicians to a national status and theorizing about when and how they'll become President unless they are worthy of that plateau. This is a woman with an approval rating of 38/58, who is detested by independent voters, and whose idea of a political platform involve catchy slogans and fear-baiting.
We are about three or four months away from when candidates begin declaring the intent to run for President and I've yet to hear one policy detail from the Palin "campaign." Let's spend less time discussing how incredibly potent she is as a candidate when we don't have any idea what she stands for other than "less government, except when we're talking about gays, abortion, and immigrants" and more time talking about how anyone can run for President with an incredibly high negative approval number.
I'm a numbers guy. Sorry, Mark, as much as I appreciate your warning about Sarah Palin's "power and strength" the numbers make your point a little ridiculous and incredibly irresponsible.
Don't believe me? Look for yourself:
9/13 --- Favorable: 38% Unfavorable: 58%
9/7 --- Favorable: 31% Unfavorable: 50%
8/24 --- Favorable: 23% Unfavorable: 40%
Here's a great one from April, the question posed was: Do you think Sarah Palin would have the ability to be an effective President, or not?"
Would: 26% Would not: 63% Unsure: 11%
I don't care how infamous you are... with numbers like these... you are anything but a strong candidate.
-- Joseph Banks
No comments:
Post a Comment