Foresight in hindsight

Since my first post on Sarah Palin this past June, I’ve had a fair bit to say about her and why she was the best person to run alongside John McCain. Now the campaign is in the rearview mirror, I thought it might be a good idea to go back and see how I did.From my first post, “Sarah Palin for VP”:One, she’s young, just 44; she would balance out Sen. McCain’s age.I think that worked out decently well; it did open the McCain campaign up to the argument that her youth took the “inexperience” argument against Barack Obama off the table, but taken all in all, I don’t think it really had that effect. If anything, trying to make that case hurt the Obama campaign a little, because their attacks on her inexperience rebounded on him. As Ramesh Ponnuru said at the time, “Obama has diminished himself . . . by getting into an Obama vs. Palin contest.” Once he gave up, he did better, because “experience” was never going to be an argument that was going to win this election anyway; and unfortunately, while Sen. McCain had a strong argument to make for himself as the real change agent in this election, an argument which Gov. Palin reinforced, he was curiously reluctant to actually make it.Two, she has proven herself as an able executive and administrator, serving as mayor, head of the state’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, and now as governor; she would balance out Sen. McCain’s legislative experience (though he does have command experience in the Navy).This gave the McCain campaign and others the ability to make a strong argument that Gov. Palin is in fact more experienced and better qualified than Sen. Obama. Had they done a better job of that, it could have intensified their experience argument against him. Unfortunately, the dysfunctional character of the McCain campaign and their seeming inability to put out a strong, coherent message undermined this. In the end, what I think this campaign demonstrated is that while Sen. McCain’s experience advantage meant something in national-security issues, it was in other critical respects meaningless. Those of us who pointed out that Gov. Palin was the only one of the four candidates who had ever run anything, and thus that she had a meaningful edge in executive experience, were right; those who noted that as an implicit criticism of Sen. McCain were also right. I can’t imagine Gov. Palin could do a worse job running a national campaign, certainly.Three, she has strong conservative credentials, both socially (she’s strongly pro-life, politically and personally) and fiscally (as her use of the line-item veto has shown); she would assuage concerns about Sen. McCain’s conservatism.Which would be why she fired up the base the way she has. Check.Four, she’s independent, having risen to power against the Alaska GOP machine, not through it; she’s worked hard against the corruption in both her party and her state’s government. She would reinforce Sen. McCain’s maverick image, which is one of his greatest strengths in this election, but in a more conservative direction.This is why, as even many conservative pundits who were initially skeptical have said, she was “the only choice who could have simultaneously excited the base and strengthened the ticket’s appeal to independent voters.” In the end, the media attacks and the badly mismanaged response to them from the McCain campaign succeeded in blunting her appeal to independents, but her connection with the GOP base remained strong; given a few more years to build her resumé, I think she’s in a good position to rebuild that support among swing voters as well.Five, for the reasons listed above, she’s incredibly popular in Alaska. That might seem a minor factor to some, but it’s indicative of her abilities as a politician.A point which has been referenced in some commentary. Of greater importance is the fact that those abilities have clearly made the transition to the national stage.Six, she has a remarkable personal story, of the sort the media would love.And so they did, when they weren’t desperately trying to find some way to use it to destroy her. But then, as I noted, No one now in American politics can match Sen. McCain’s life story (no, not even Barack Obama), but she comes as close as anyone can (including Sen. Obama); she fits his image.That made her a threat—and a bigger one than I realized. An awful lot of folks in the MSM reacted accordingly.Seven, she would give the McCain campaign the “Wow!” factor it can really use in a vice-presidential nominee. As a young, attractive, tough, successful, independent-minded, appealing female politician, though not well known yet, she would make American voters sit up and take notice.Check, and enough said.Eight, choosing Gov. Palin as his running mate, especially if coupled with actions like giving Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal the keynote slot at the GOP convention, would help the party going forward. The GOP needs to rebuild its bench of plausible strong future presidential candidates, and perhaps the best thing Sen. McCain can do for the party is to help with this.I still believe this, but obviously, the proof is yet in the future.In my post “Sarah Palin hits the bullseye,” I wrote,John McCain leads Barack Obama among women over 40—normally a solidly Democratic voting bloc. To take advantage of this, Dick Morris concludes, McCain should take dead aim at this demographic, perhaps by selecting a female running mate who would appeal to them.
To do that, are there any better options than Alaska’s
Sarah Palin? I don’t think so; and as Adam Brickley points out, people are noticing. Gov. Palin for VP.This is hard for me to judge, given the collapse of the campaign as a whole over the last month and a half. Anecdotally, it seems to me that adding Gov. Palin to the ticket did indeed provide the boost the McCain campaign was hoping for, but that the campaign lost at least some of that boost because they couldn’t make a good enough case for Sen. McCain, and he couldn’t make a good enough case for himself.A week later, in a post titled “Sooner or later,” I said this:This is not an election for the conventional approach. That’s one of the reasons why I think Sen. McCain needs to name Gov. Palin as his running mate . . .: if Sen. McCain is going to win, he needs to shake up the conventional wisdom and cross up people’s expectations.The Palin nomination certainly accomplished that. Unfortunately, he couldn’t match that when the economic crisis broke.I called Sen. Obama’s pick of Joe Biden as his running mate “One more argument for Sarah Palin” thusly:Joe Biden on the ticket with Barack Obama is the best argument yet for Sarah Palin on the GOP ticket.accompanied by a list of comparisons and the suggestion, taken from Adam Brickley, that Gov. Palin would be the best person available to debate Sen. Biden. She handled him well, and I do think she did better than anyone else out there would have been likely to do (with the possible exception of Bobby Jindal, who had taken himself out of the running).On the eve of Sen. McCain’s announcement, I wrote this:A great many people across this country—many Republicans, but also more than a few moderate Democrats—are catching the vision of a McCain/Palin ticket, and getting excited about the possibility. This is the reason John McCain needs to name Gov. Palin as his running mate, because you can’t say that about anybody else; the arguments for the other candidates are all purely rational, coldly political parsings of the data. There are equally strong rational arguments, and perhaps stronger, to be made for Gov. Palin, but among them is this: she excites people. None of the other candidates do that, except Mormons for Romney; none of them excite both wings of the Republican base; none of them excite people beyond the Republican base. Only Gov. Palin does that, and I hope Sen. McCain realizes that.He did, and she did. I could wish he and his staff had given her more support, rather than hamstringing her.When the attack on Gov. Palin began, I wrote this:To go one step further, I think the Democrats are making a major mistake here. They’re trying to neutralize her with ridicule as a lightweight, hoping for the quick wipeout right out of the box, instead of treating her seriously; and while that would work if she were a lightweight, she isn’t, and she’s faced worse before. What this means is that, when she comes to the debate with Joe Biden, the expectations for her will be low.and that because of Republican enthusiasm for her, she’s insulated from being Quayled:If she does put her foot in it and give the media the opportunity to label her a lightweight, out of her depth—I’ll be surprised if she does, but even the best of us do it at the worst of times—Republican voters aren’t going to buy the line. Instead, we’ll defend her against it to anyone who will listen, and some people will.On the former, all I can say is that I wasn’t giving her enough credit there; she outperformed my implicit expectations, turning the ridicule back on the Democrats time and time again. For the latter, things played out that way to some extent; every time someone on the left tried to turn something into a “gaffe,” Republicans rose up in all directions to hammer them down. Those efforts still left their mark in the minds of more swing voters than they should have, though, due to the McCain campaign’s efforts to mold Gov. Palin and keep her under control rather than just turning her loose.I also put up a post suggesting that Gov. Palin would be a very difficult target for the Obama campaign, and so she turned out to be; one of Mitt Romney’s strategists went so far as to describe them as “like a lion tiptoeing around a turtle—they don’t know what to do with it.” Unfortunately, the media filled in the gap by beating her up with all sorts of half-truths, invented stories, and interviews edited with malice aforethought, doing everything they could to create a false image to weaken her appeal. The campaign tried to fight this, but they were left playing catch-up; they would, I believe, have done better just to turn Gov. Palin loose to go over the heads of the MSM on every talk radio show and local TV station she could findTaken all in all, though, I think the Palin nomination has to go down as a significant political success; she didn’t put Sen. McCain over the top, but he finished a lot closer than anyone would have expected, and a lot of that is the fact that she energized the base in a way in which he never could have. That freed him up to go after swing voters, and that was working until the economic crisis swung them back into the Obama camp. The appeal she brought to the ticket was fairly easy to see coming, if you could just break out of the conventional wisdom long enough. Credit for that goes to folks like my father-in-law, who got me looking at Gov. Palin to begin with, and Adam Brickley, who kicked the whole thing off nearly 21 months ago. Now that’s foresight.

Posted in Politics, Sarah Palin, Uncategorized.

2 Comments

  1. You prognosticated brilliantly, but who could foresee how abysmally the McCain campaign would squander its edge? The economy and the Bush legacy had an impact, but we can’t overlook the extent to which the McCain camp illuminati snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

  2. As I said, it was no great brilliance on my part–that belonged to others.

    As for the McCain campaign . . . well, a pessimist would have seen that one coming, too, given the previous year and a half.

Leave a Reply