Counter narrative
I've been writing with the unstated assumption that Americans would reject the crazy right positions if there were seriously brought into a campaign, but this morning I had this creeping uneasiness as I remembered that sometimes Americans (especially those who don't pay too close attention) prefer certainty in their candidates above anything else.
However, as a counter argument, a new ABC/WaPo poll says that 60% of Americans would "definitely not vote for Sarah Palin, and 60% also say she's not qualified, while she still carries a whopping 76% approval among Republicans. So, she could win a primary, but get blown out in the general.
She's just one highly elaborated example, but it does return my sense of comfort to see crazy so thoroughly rejected.
Later: Walter Shapiro looks at the GOP 2012 primary calendar and sees Palin very plausibly walking through as nominee. (On the counter side, Palin has historically not been willing to do the work or organization necessary.)
However, as a counter argument, a new ABC/WaPo poll says that 60% of Americans would "definitely not vote for Sarah Palin, and 60% also say she's not qualified, while she still carries a whopping 76% approval among Republicans. So, she could win a primary, but get blown out in the general.
She's just one highly elaborated example, but it does return my sense of comfort to see crazy so thoroughly rejected.
Later: Walter Shapiro looks at the GOP 2012 primary calendar and sees Palin very plausibly walking through as nominee. (On the counter side, Palin has historically not been willing to do the work or organization necessary.)
posted by mikevotes at
7:24 AM
14 Comments:
Sarah Palin 2012. Palin getting the nod is the best-case scenario. She's utterly unelectable.
By
Nonplussed2, at 8:05 AM
Fully agreed. The only way I could see her losing a Repub Pres primary is if a whole bunch of folks appealing to the same "base" split that vote a hundred ways.
The key question to me is whether another person in her mold, who doesn't have the exposure of incompetence, might be able to "certain" their way through.
By
mikevotes, at 8:19 AM
I have no faith in the American electorate. We are, as a body, more influenced by marketing, emotion and media than anything resembling an informed electorate.
And of course I say this based on emotion and perception, not hard data...
By
-epm, at 8:21 AM
It's all about getting people out to vote.
By
Anonymous, at 9:55 AM
I have no faith that the American electorate will be heard from. There have been decades of rigging votes : anything from old jerrymandering of districts to targeting voting groups of poor with fraudulent i.d. requirements or disinformation robocalls to divert opposition support from registered polls...all in a base of proprietary software in voting machines where the results can be undetectably altered.
BradBlog has perhaps the best ongoing exposes...for years now.
Not that 'media' spin is appreciated for the mind-moulding structure of disinformation that it is across the global reach of monopoly media control.
You could try checking in on sites like Media Matters for somewhat of a 'heads up'.
My indexes are at My.opera.com/oldephartte/links/
Check the listing 'Collections Forwarded to Blogger' for the file 'Perception Alteration', which is updated as I find worthwhile new material. That's the one in which I focus on media headbanging...but it's not the only resource file. Plus the Blogger blog carries both RSS results and surfing finds.
By
opit, at 10:03 AM
EPM, I just got to thinking back over the last couple decades of PResidential elections, and it occurred to me that the guy who was perceived to wobble lost every one.
...
Anon, Always. In this closely split country, getting people out to vote changes the base field of voters and an extra 5% on either side tips the deal.
....
Opit, Just as a broadening point, election fraud/tampering has been a part of this country almost since the get go, ebbing and flowing in level at different points. Not to say it's right, but it's not a new thing at all.
By
mikevotes, at 10:13 AM
Certainty and strength. The worst thing a candidate can do is demonstrate deliberative thought and an evolving position based on new information.
American don't want deep thought, or long range strategies, or messy little things like having to solve problems through work and sacrifice... We're wimps. Violently wimpy.
By
-epm, at 10:35 AM
I fully agree with you. That's one of the things that appealed to me about Obama.
Unfortunately, one sentence policies repeated over and over are much more effective for campaigns.
By
mikevotes, at 10:55 AM
"Unfortunately, one sentence policies repeated over and over are much more effective for campaigns."
Agreed. And the Democrats -- as a party and as a "movement" -- absolutely SUCK at this sort of thing.
By
-epm, at 11:12 AM
Slightly off topic but GM posted a $1.6 billion loss. They see it as a sign of progress.
By
Anonymous, at 11:26 AM
Mike
Election fraud/tampering affect an irrelevancy. That's the point : not that different techniques go back centuries. Politics is a 'Heads I win, Tails You Lose' chimera of the rich and powerful.
Look at the latest in Op-Ed news, for instance. Obama names a front for Monsanto to an agricultural post. If you know anything about food security/corporate 'agriculture' and its history that's a red flag hard to beat for importance.
By
opit, at 12:16 PM
EPM, It's probably because they actually try to articulate the policy they'll try to implement, not just use the cover of "less government" to justify stripping of regulation. It's because they still actually believe in gov't.
....
Anon, I saw that. On NPR, they phrased it as "posting better than expected profits." Made me chuckle out loud.
....
Opit, I didn't see the posting you speak of, but, yeah, a Monsanto rep could be big trouble depending upon the position's leeway and responsibilities, if in no other way than legitimizing the Monsanto effort to turn agriculture into intellectual property.
By
mikevotes, at 1:06 PM
Oh, And I'm disappearing for awhile. Back to comments later.
By
mikevotes, at 1:06 PM
"Legitimizing the Monsanto effort to turn agriculture into intellectual property."Wake up and smell the bacon. It's a done deal.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-Nominates-Monsanto-R-by-Gustav-Wynn-091114-137.html
I've got far too much info to relink through a spam filter. Index is at http://my.opera.com/oldephartte/links.
Notice Collections Forwarded to Blogger : that starts off a list of hints for search. The Blogger news site includes just before mid August posts on agricultural madness. Also Corporate Farming and Health & Wellness include more info.
It'll get you started. I recommend the news board at Care2 : a worldwide enviro watch. Samples are right there on my RSS page.
By
opit, at 3:35 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home