"Her irreverence and disdain for the establishment of her own party and her embrace of the 'isms' — nativism, isolationism, you know — she blew the walls out on the political norms before Donald Trump did. She was obviously onto something. She had crowds five times the size of McCain’s. We think it was all about her political skills, but it was also about her message. She railed against the mainstream media, she attacked all of us, her own advisers. That her audiences were so enthusiastic about that was the early signal that the party had changed."
Says Nicolle Wallace (who worked as a communications strategist for George W. Bush, John McCain, and Sarah Palin, and now has an MSNBC)(interviewed by Ana Marie Cox in the NYT).
Sarah Palin really did start it all, didn't she?
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८० टिप्पण्या:
Ya betcha!
Aye, she did.
I'd say Ron Paul started it. Palin was a better vehicle to bring it more mainstream, and it has grown from there, but the original voice in the wilderness would seem to be Paul.
I like Scott Adams' notion that Trump has opened a crack into reality, but it does look like Palin started the process. I didn't like her much but she had guts and paid the price of suffering public disdain
"that the party had changed."
Not just the Republicans - the whole country had changed. But since the Democrats were making it work for them politically, they weren't concerned about that.
"She had crowds five times the size of McCain’s"
Part of that was hotness.
Sarah could see the future from her house.
Did Palin really run against standard GOP positions during the 2008 campaign? On the main issues (the war and how to respond to the economic crisis) she backed the party platform, as to be expected. Where was it that she veered on any major issues?
This period of Palins and Trumps will be looked back upon as a brief anomaly. Governments only get bigger. The people who support the Palins and Trumps will be dying off soon, clearing the way for the Government to resume its march.
Free Speech will be -- for all purposes -- dead within a Generation. It is not needed. The Government knows what is okay to say, and what is not okay to say. Governments only get bigger.
I am Laslo.
As for "railing against the mainstream media" this was typical GOP playbook going back to the Nixon years. And "railing against her advisers" sounds more like issues within the campaign organization than running against GOP orthodoxy.
To say that this is defined by Party, shows such a massive, willful blindness to how DC and the NYC-DC corridor is perceived by the entirety of the rest of the Nation, absent, media and academia, also cloistered from any sense of the day to day lives of all but the elite,(as they identify themselves, nothing they earned)
I don't think the Republican party has changed. In fact, the GOPe is actively working against attempts to change it.
What has changed is that the establishment no longer has a monopoly on mass communication and people are stepping up to address the concerns of at least 1/2 of the population. Concerns that were deliberately ignored while the discussion of them was suppressed because they conflicted with the agenda of the establishment.
Laslo Spatula said...
This period of Palins...
For a moment there I thought Laslo was channeling Andrew Sullivan.
Is nativism the same as saying that the American government should put American citizens first? Is isolation the same as we shouldn't get involved in foreign civil-religious wars where our national interest is not at stake? This is where a GOPe person like Wallace is out to lunch. Her candidates lost and now she is on MSNBC.
railing against her advisers
@brando
This can be translated as "not agreeing with the advisers." And it would seem that she was correct. Of course, the advisers are going to frame the loss as being Palin's fault because she didn't listen to their brilliant counsel.
Yes but she gave Jared Loughner the map to mass murder. So you have to factor that in when singing her praises.
Palin was an asset McCain never understood or used to his advantage. I've often wondered how he could have made that bold move, choosing an obscure governor who was a rising star with a great personality and ability to reach people, and yet had no plan for using her talents to actually, you know, get elected. That he stood by and let his own people savage her in the media forever earned my enmity. If McCain had any honorable qualities after the Keating Five mess, and I don't think he did, he burned conservative support forever by his despicable treatment of Mrs. Palin. This disgusting episode is what exposed to me the rift between GOPe and the party I thought I was supporting.
Where was it that she veered on any major issues?
She was out of step by actually supporting the platform. She wasn't just "riding the anger" and paying lip service to the ideas so she could be elected and go to Washington to do the elites bidding.
That's why she had to be destroyed. She threatened to rip the mask off the GOPe.
It's funny how so many wrote off Palin. One advantage of that was the few noticed her impact as she worked to help elect people like Cruz. She is a self starter, an energetic woman with an agenda of her own, the opposite of that organization drone, Hillary. Feminists looking for a role model would do well to take a second look at Palin.
@David Begley
You nailed it. But apparently, according to Kevin Williamson of NRO fame, we should all just realize we are losing losers and go off into a field and die.
She ran, and won, against the corruption in both parties in her own state. An outsider who wasn't bought off and didn't have deep pockets. So they kept lodging nuisance complaints against her through the courts to break her. When she went national with her message, she had to be destroyed. Her own runningmate let her be savaged while going out of his way to defend Obama. Had she not been on the ticket, I would not have voted that year.
Harvard and Yale grads have turned government into secular religion and they are keen to keep out the heretics.
I loved Palin, she was brilliant.
It must have been embarrassing for McCain to have his running mate be wildly more popular than himself. Palin's rallies were much larger, after awhile didn't McCain start campaigning with Palin because of enthusiasm gap?
"She was out of step by actually supporting the platform. She wasn't just "riding the anger" and paying lip service to the ideas so she could be elected and go to Washington to do the elites bidding."
But on specific issues, there really was no disagreement--the Iraq War was a success, tax cuts and less regulation would boost the economy, and Obama's agenda (as promised in the campaign) would make both issues worse. Seems to me the main criticism against Palin was from the left that had a problem with those issues generally, and from parts of the right that did not like her style or clashes with the McCain campaign. But it's not like she "went rogue" on any major policies.
That her audiences were so enthusiastic about that was the early signal that the party had changed."
No, the voters changed. The Party did not. That is why Hammond votes Libertarian.
I don't think the GOPe understands just how badly they shot themselves in the foot with their base by their treatment of Palin.
I think it is noteworthy that Trump made sure to get Palin's endorsement. Trump understands the GOP base better than its "leaders."
The media credited Rick Santelli as the catalyst for the Tea Party movement but I can tell you, from personal experience, that the name on most peoples lips was Sarah Palin. Heaven forfend that the Wicked Witch of the North get credit for anything.
Laslo said "The people who support the Palins and Trumps will be dying off soon, clearing the way for the Government to resume its march." For a more nuanced view I suggest a perusal of this chart showing long term trends in US politics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Combined--Control_of_the_U.S._House_of_Representatives_-_Control_of_the_U.S._Senate.png
Perhaps the Great Ship of State is making another course correction.
Nicole Wallace is a faux conservative. She always bashes conservatives and kisses up to liberals. She is Joe Scarborough in drag.
I wonder if any of the other Republican contenders in the primaries even thought about trying to get Palin's endorsement?
"But apparently, according to Kevin Williamson of NRO fame, we should all just realize we are losing losers and go off into a field and die."
You do realize that Williamson never said that don't you?
She scared the shit out of the New World Order minions. She was openly Christian without shame.
Now Trump and Pence are holding Bible study in the Situation Room.
She was Jeb's girl Friday, and the perky kayies understudy. She and Steve Schmidt who I've dubbed Dr. Evil followed the Jones memo campaign which was translated into game change, halperin and heileman trafficked in that.
"For a more nuanced view I suggest a perusal of this chart showing long term trends in US politics:.."
This is applicable only if one believes the Republicans are against a larger Government.
The fact that the Republican Congress is open in their disdain for Trump shows this is not the case.
The fact that the Republican Congress would not repeal Obamacare shows this is not the case.
You get the idea.
I am Laslo.
The problem with Iraq is the Sunni tribesmen who her son encountered in Nineveh, have always run the country even though they have never been the majority, the golden square, baath Islamic state comes from the same soil.
No, the permanent govt elites started this. And so middle America, left out of the enriching 90s by the beginnings of globalism and clobbered in the Aughts by the stock crashes and Sept 11 and mortgage bubbles looked more and more to people outside DC.
They tried W. They tried Palin. They tried the Tea Party. And it got worse, with their towns withering and their kids junkies.
There is no more civil discourse. What happened to Palin was proof of that, even then McCain muzzled her and lost for it. The people preferred the unmuzzleable Trump this time for these reasons.
Nicole Wallace is the one who threw Palin to the wolves without giving her time to get up to speed, she's the one who "set her up" with the Katie Couric interview. Nicole Wallace is basically a dumb liberal however superficially smart she might be.
If the Clinton/Lewinsky affair thrust a dagger into the heart of feminist hypocrisy, then the way they treated Palin twisted it home.
She really did start it all. She was Donald trump before Donald Trump.
She scared the crap out of people for the same reasons President Trump does. She was going to break their collective rice bowls.
I always thought the ticket was upside down. I thought it should have been Palin-McCain in 2008. Or better, Palin-somebody else
I still have my Sarah Palin t-shirt and wear it regularly.
She deserves better than she got.
John Henry
No she was more civil then they deserved this is why I was nonplussed at scaramucci.
Palin wasn't the first conservative to be treated unfairly by the press, but, perhaps because she was such a sympathetic woman, that unfair treatment caused many to rally to her side. It was like watching the hounds tear the flesh off Little Eva.......Trump is treated unfairly by the press, but there's something sporting about it. It's more like bear baiting. Every so often he grabs one of the hounds and bites the head off it. Trump's quarrels are far more entertaining for both conservatives and liberals.
Laslo said "This is applicable only if one believes the Republicans are against a larger Government."
The voting trend is a harbinger. The people are voting for those who profess a belief in a smaller government. It will take some time. The old dogs will die or retire and the puppies will serve a different master. This is all well and good.
"Sudden and slashing reforms are as perilous as sudden and slashing surgery." ~ Russell Kirk.
When they're replacing your heart valve you don't want some guy on the other end fixing your hernia at the same time.
Yes, Palin was the first, and still best, Deplorable. The real thing -- not a billionaire New York reality-TV version
In recent political history, anyway --not counting Wallace, or Jackson for that matter.
She also triggered progs' and GOPe anti-deplorable rage, which told the deplorables they had nothing to lose. With Trump, they went for broke.
Ross Perot is the founder of what we have today. His 19 percent total in 1992 changed the course of both political parties. Many of his issues are those embraced by those who put Trump in the White House.
There was no nativism or isolationism in her speeches in fact the opposite, but she was goldwatered regardless.
All popular female or minority conservatives must be destroyed to keep the Party alive. Halley is next up.
Laslo is right, the odds on systemic reform are very poor.
Palin and Trump are reactions within the process of normal politics against the decadence of the US political-economic system. These within-the-system revolts are unlikely to succeed, because, as noted above, it will require breaking vast numbers of rice bowls. Concentrated interests like that normally trump (yes) the general public interest. Public choice economics is real.
Historically the only way such decadent systems are reformed is in a crisis, when the protection of the structure of formal and informal rules are removed. But here we are talking of civil wars, revolutions, coups-d'etat, foreign conquest.
However, the US is a unique place, and modern technology is a wild card, which may be at a point where historical models have become irrelevant. Who knows.
You do realize that Williamson never said that don't you?
I know he didn't use those exact words, I read the article in question. But the overall message was clear.
I still have my Sarah Palin t-shirt and wear it regularly.
Me too.
The problem with Russell Kirk, and others in that vein, is that, normally, reform is not possible. He was, or tried to be, an optimistic conservative. He lived in an era of increasing prosperity and optimism, his worries were about the future.
But the root and core of conservatism is pessimism. And Russell Kirks future is now.
The ideas of Burke and his student Kirk, are in their own ways tinged by their circumstances and the conditions of their times.
In any event, Williamson's counsel was that Republicans should not attempt to appeal to down scale working people because restricting trade or immigration is apparently immoral. They deserve what they are getting because they either refuse to or incapable of getting on board the globalism train and since globalism is inevitable, well if you want to make an omelette, you gota break a few eggs.
Try reading the article as if it was a defense of communism.
Something I've stated before: maybe ending up like the Soviet Union is the best we can hope for.
I am Laslo.
Nicole Wallace -- another McCain POS. She was sabotaging and giving Palin the Trump-treatment from the first day.
If I remember correctly, Palin was the first one to give Trump any street cred, back when everyone else did not take him seriously as a candidate.
Of course, many people in 2008 will tell you that they did not and would not vote for McCain -- they voted for Palin, and McCain just happened to be along for the ride.
Brando said...
Did Palin really run against standard GOP positions during the 2008 campaign? On the main issues (the war and how to respond to the economic crisis) she backed the party platform, as to be expected. Where was it that she veered on any major issues?
Maybe it is just me; picking and choosing which posts to comment on. But I haven't seen many of your comments lately and I have missed them.
I think you're right about Palin; she "went rogue" only when it was in support of her book title.
And since then, what has she accomplished? What has she done? She's not even reliable or important as a mere media figure. It's unfair, to Pat Buchanan, to call her "Pat Buchanan with lipstick." As the recent White House photos have shown, she's Ted Nugent and Kid Rock, but without the music to back her up.
And if Movement Conservatives seem to be hard on her, it is only because she has been such a dysfunctional bitch toward the Republican Party.
My favorite moment of the last ten years of Sarah Palin, by far, is the Glenn Rice story. I spent hour after hour watching Rice in Crisler Arena as a collegian. An incomparable clutch shooter.
What has she done?
Raised her children and kept her husband drained and happy.
She was death-paneled by the media.
I essentially agree with Brando's 8:10 comment, but with a twist. It was not Palin's message that revealed anything. Rather Palin herself revealed the deep disdain the GOPe has for any populist Republican, and the extreme extent to which the media would close ranks to destroy same. Too much excitement for the GOPe, and too much grassroots popularity for the press. Ironic since Palin was brought in to add a frisson of excitement to the McCain nomination. They got what they wanted and then hung her out to be disemboweled by the media.
Add message and outsider to the mix, and you get the hyper overreaction of both GOPe and media that we've seen over the last year and a half.
"... it is only because she has been such a dysfunctional bitch toward the Republican Party."
Republican women should know their place.
If it takes careless / casual misogyny to keep them in line, so be it.
I am Laslo.
In eight short years we've gone from "I can see Russia from my house" to "I don't remember the Russians I met with in my conference room." But I would say that Ross Perot started it all. It was a really slow burn.
And if Movement Conservatives seem to be hard on her, it is only because she has been such a dysfunctional bitch toward the Republican Party.
Yeah, you gotta go along to get along.
Blogger buwaya said...
The problem with Russell Kirk, and others in that vein, is that, normally, reform is not possible. He was, or tried to be, an optimistic conservative. He lived in an era of increasing prosperity and optimism, his worries were about the future.
I think you misread Kirk. Perhaps a reread might help.
http://www.kirkcenter.org/detail/ten-conservative-principles/
> And since then, what has she accomplished? What has she done?
He wails, as history drags him off to the dust heap.
I read Palin's book and agreed 100% with her views but I voted for Ron Paul that election year because I can't stand McCain.
Fake news from LBC — I'm shocked to see it, shocked I tell you….
Bristol Palin is no Ivanka Trump.
Palin went from a populist within the system to a populist critic outside the system.
As such, you could say she begat Trump AND Milo.
Yeah: I just did that.
I am Laslo.
Ha ha ha ha. Nicole Wallace figures out what was obvious to us 8 years ago and gets credit for being perceptive.
The true clown car today is packed full of pundits. There's not a TV talking head worth a shilling.
TosaGuy said...
Ross Perot is the founder of what we have today. His 19 percent total in 1992 changed the course of both political parties. Many of his issues are those embraced by those who put Trump in the White House.
Ross Perot did two things. 1. Ensured Bush would lose to Clinton. 2. Ensured Clinton would go down in history as the only president to get get elected AND re-elected with less then majority support of American voters.
Perot was nothing more then a spoiler candidate. He wasn't in it to win; he was in it to make sure someone else lost.
The popularity of Sarah Palin and Trump's election can be traced back to when liberals first began to lose control of the media- the success of Rush Limbaugh and local copy-cats. While liberals attempted to resurrect "The Fairness Doctrine" to fight back, the internet was developing, and Matt Drudge happened. And the power of the internet was revealed when Dan Rather used obviously forged documents in an attempt to destroy Bush, and the forgery was uncovered not by the fearless reporters in the mainstream media and their layers of fact checkers, but by bloggers who worked for themselves, or as the MSM pejoratively called them, guys in their basements wearing pajamas.
Those guys in their basements are a check now on the MSM. And for the last two presidential elections you could pretty much predict who someone was going to vote for by asking them where they got their news from. Trump voters get their off the internet.
Trump really is Palin's Revenge. If the media had understood her at all and been minimally professional regarding her, many things would have been different. Actually, she might well be President today after 8 years as VP.
Business guru Peter Drucker, 1969: "Large organizations cannot be versatile. A large organization is effective through its mass rather than through its agility. Fleas can jump many times their own height, but not an elephant."
Fans of Trump and Palin should to encourage the Republican Party to change its symbol from an elephant to a flea.
"I think you misread Kirk. Perhaps a reread might help."
I don't think so. Kirk is a very "American" conservative.
His ten principles have no hint of the inevitability of decay, which was and is a European thing, of the beginning, flourishing and certain death of civilizations. He is all about what must be, which is fair enough, but not what will be.
"I can see Russia from my house"
Ah, the MSM's power over us. How many Americans can come up with a single real Sarah Palin quote, rather than attribute Tina Fey's SNL skit to her?
"He is all about what must be, which is fair enough, but not what will be."
True, he was not Nostradamus. Nor was he buwaya or Laslo. You'se guys should lighten up. Going through life in a funk is kind of a waste.
"True, he was not Nostradamus. "
No, but his real fault was that he was not a serious historian, trying to draw conclusions from history rather than theory, of how things actually tended to go and not on what certain people thought of how things should be.
He wasn't Schumpeter or Spengler.
"The sly-shrewdness of the country and the intelligence of the megalopolis are forms... between which reciprocal understanding is scarcely possible"
- Oswald Spengler
Palin was that rustic sly-shrewdness, that did not register as "intelligence" of the form understood by the megalopolis.
(The word that jumps out at me is "white." What about Asian-Americans? Aren't they the ones losing out?)
In the racial spoils system, it is assumed that Asians are included in the term "White".
It was the memory of what happened to Sarah Palin that motivated me to vote for Trump. I would be happy to vote for any non-politician who ran for office
@buyawa,
"No, but his real fault was that he was not a serious historian, trying to draw conclusions from history rather than theory, of how things actually tended to go and not on what certain people thought of how things should be."
Are we talking about the same guy? Lot's of history right here: http://www.kirkcenter.org/detail/ten-conservative-principles/
"Are we talking about the same guy?"
Yes, same guy.
Go have a look at his mass of writings, starting maybe with "The Conservative Mind"
He writes about writers, about thinkers.
His big thing was to reconcile all the rather inconsistent threads of conservative thought, working with the concepts notable conservative figures. His ten points is a short version of the outcome of this attempt at reconciliation.
This is not, however, historical analysis.
His work is not "this is how things really go", but "this is the overlap set of what conservative thinkers thought".
My favorite moment of the last ten years of Sarah Palin, by far, is the Glenn Rice story.
Lots of LifeLongRepublicans treasure Joe McGinniss-pushed seedy allegations about female Republican politicians' private lives. That's the kind of thing LifeLongRepublicans really dig. The same LifeLongRepublicans who talk about who crappy Hannity and Brietbart.com and other unreliable "fake news" outlets are definitely love Joe McGinniss, yes sir.
Background: LegalInsurrection - NYTimes Review - Yeah Joe McGinniss Is A Sleaze
See, the NYTimes reviewer recognizes what a sleazy inconsistent and untrustworthy author McGinnis is, but a LifeLongRepublican just loooves that one story he pushed about Sarah Palin.
What a joke.
Make a list of sitting GOP senators, then find out which US Senators Sarah Palin was instrumental in helping to get elected or nominated. It's a surprisingly long list. From Orrin Hatch to Ted Cruz, from Tim Scott to (Gov. now UN Ambassador) Nikki Haley. She started working to get selected US Senators and other politicians elected in 2010 and continued for four election cycles.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/palin_tracker/
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा