Is Sarah Palin Still Relevant?
Sarah Palin jumped onto the scene in late 2008 as the VP nominee. She was a straight talking, brash, take no prisoners type of politican. Palin was targeted relentlessly by the left in an effort to destroy her politically, and possibly even personally - which continued even after the 2008 election.
She continued to influence the GOP via the 2010 midterm elections by raising money for her PAC and being one of the voices of the Tea Party. Of course she caught flak for "targets" on certain districts on her website - especially after the Gabby Giffords shooting. Needless to say, Palin is no stranger to controversy, contrived or otherwise.
But now we sit in 2011. In the course of less than a year, we have seen the Tea Party influence begin to wane, though they are still a force to be reckoned with politically. We also have a GOP primary to concern ourselves with as well. However, the question I want to examine is whether or not Sarah Palin is still relevant to the 2011 election cycle. Will she hurt or help the eventual GOP nominee? What role will she eventually play in 2012?
Palin has spent the last 2 years attempting to establish herself as the conservative kingmaker in GOP politics. In the year leading up to the 2010 elections, at the height of the Tea Party, many candidates for office on the federal level running as conservatives seemed to covet the opportunity to kiss Palin's ring to gain her endorsement.
That was then, this is now. One year is a lifetime in politics. Now, Palin is nearly a nightly event on either Greta or Hannity. She's on TV as much as Karl Rove these days, but like Karl Rove, she has yet to say anything different or groundbreaking other than to add commentary on different GOP candidates or rightfully criticize President Obama. I have to apologize, but when I listen to Sarah or Karl I don't feel like I know more afterwards than before they started opining.
Palin still has a very vocal and strong following among certain corners of the GOP (whom I am sure I'll here from because of this post). I'm not trying to be insulting here towards Palin, but she comes off to me as this generation's version of Ron Paul - only sane. Their followers are similar - passionate, devoted, and willing to defend until the bitter end. Nothing wrong with that per se, loyalty in politics is a rare thing.
Which brings me to relevance. Is Palin's endorsement really all that important going into 2012? Do the GOP candidates have to kiss her ring this time around? I'm not convinced. I believe that Palin has lost some of her punch as a kingmaker or being able to influence the GOP at large. Her unfavorables are fairly high based on the last time I could find polling about her - 32% favorable, 62% unfavorable.
Perhaps Palin's relevance hit a peak this past summer when she led the media around the country as she stopped at different US historical sites. Each speech she gave was half-way covered by the media just in case the announcement to run for President came - but it never did - leaving the MSM to scratch their head wondering what just happened. Her supporters wept and gnashed their teeth and did everything in their power to draft Palin or convince her to reconsider - to no avail.
Has the ship sailed on Palin? She declined to run for President instead deciding to stay on the sidelines to help defeat President Obama. Others have done the same from Mitch Daniels to Chris Christie, but both Daniels and Christie are not perceived must-have endorsements. As time ticks closer to the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire primary, I believe her relevance in 2012 diminishes without her endorsing anyone. After Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada,and Florida, will her endorsing anyone really matter anyway? The GOP field should be whittled down by a few candidates by that point anyway. Besides, isn't that the point of endorsements? To gain enough support to push the other candidates out of the race or create a perception of inevitability of one candidate over another?
What if Palin does endorse - given her high unfavorable rating - does she hurt or help the GOP candidate she endorses? If a candidate - at this time Newt Gingrich - can rise within the polls, maintain the lead, and win at least one of the early primaries, does Palin's endorsement matter, again, leading to whether she is relevant. At the same time, a Palin endorsement could hurt the perceived frontrunner as the MSM would have the ammo to run stories about how the "radical" Palin has endorsed a fellow "radical" so on and so on .
On the other hand, maybe Palin is smarter than the average bear. Palin protected her relevance/influence when didn't endorse Bachmann as Bachmann rose and fell in the polls. Palin didn't endorse Perry as he rose and self-destructed. Palin didn't endorse Cain as he rose fast and fell just as hard. Palin also hasn't endorsed the other candidates - Paul, Santorum, Huntsman, Romney or Gingrich.
Today, as I write this, a Palin endorsement in my opinion is about a 50/50 help/hurt chance. One just never knows how such an endorsement will be perceived by voters - which will be the real test of Palin's relevance and ultimately, her continued influence within the GOP. We know how such an endorsement will be handled by the MSM and the left attack machine (is there really a difference?).
To sum up, I feel Palin has lost some of her influence among the GOP voters. I believe her relevance in the GOP primary race lessens each day as the political world goes on without her blessing one candidate or another. Finally, in a real threat to Palin's relevance, influence, and another test on her base supporters, what if Palin came out and endorsed Romney? Whatever happens, at this point in the ball game a "none of the above" answer is unacceptable.
She continued to influence the GOP via the 2010 midterm elections by raising money for her PAC and being one of the voices of the Tea Party. Of course she caught flak for "targets" on certain districts on her website - especially after the Gabby Giffords shooting. Needless to say, Palin is no stranger to controversy, contrived or otherwise.
But now we sit in 2011. In the course of less than a year, we have seen the Tea Party influence begin to wane, though they are still a force to be reckoned with politically. We also have a GOP primary to concern ourselves with as well. However, the question I want to examine is whether or not Sarah Palin is still relevant to the 2011 election cycle. Will she hurt or help the eventual GOP nominee? What role will she eventually play in 2012?
Palin has spent the last 2 years attempting to establish herself as the conservative kingmaker in GOP politics. In the year leading up to the 2010 elections, at the height of the Tea Party, many candidates for office on the federal level running as conservatives seemed to covet the opportunity to kiss Palin's ring to gain her endorsement.
That was then, this is now. One year is a lifetime in politics. Now, Palin is nearly a nightly event on either Greta or Hannity. She's on TV as much as Karl Rove these days, but like Karl Rove, she has yet to say anything different or groundbreaking other than to add commentary on different GOP candidates or rightfully criticize President Obama. I have to apologize, but when I listen to Sarah or Karl I don't feel like I know more afterwards than before they started opining.
Palin still has a very vocal and strong following among certain corners of the GOP (whom I am sure I'll here from because of this post). I'm not trying to be insulting here towards Palin, but she comes off to me as this generation's version of Ron Paul - only sane. Their followers are similar - passionate, devoted, and willing to defend until the bitter end. Nothing wrong with that per se, loyalty in politics is a rare thing.
Which brings me to relevance. Is Palin's endorsement really all that important going into 2012? Do the GOP candidates have to kiss her ring this time around? I'm not convinced. I believe that Palin has lost some of her punch as a kingmaker or being able to influence the GOP at large. Her unfavorables are fairly high based on the last time I could find polling about her - 32% favorable, 62% unfavorable.
Perhaps Palin's relevance hit a peak this past summer when she led the media around the country as she stopped at different US historical sites. Each speech she gave was half-way covered by the media just in case the announcement to run for President came - but it never did - leaving the MSM to scratch their head wondering what just happened. Her supporters wept and gnashed their teeth and did everything in their power to draft Palin or convince her to reconsider - to no avail.
Has the ship sailed on Palin? She declined to run for President instead deciding to stay on the sidelines to help defeat President Obama. Others have done the same from Mitch Daniels to Chris Christie, but both Daniels and Christie are not perceived must-have endorsements. As time ticks closer to the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire primary, I believe her relevance in 2012 diminishes without her endorsing anyone. After Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada,and Florida, will her endorsing anyone really matter anyway? The GOP field should be whittled down by a few candidates by that point anyway. Besides, isn't that the point of endorsements? To gain enough support to push the other candidates out of the race or create a perception of inevitability of one candidate over another?
What if Palin does endorse - given her high unfavorable rating - does she hurt or help the GOP candidate she endorses? If a candidate - at this time Newt Gingrich - can rise within the polls, maintain the lead, and win at least one of the early primaries, does Palin's endorsement matter, again, leading to whether she is relevant. At the same time, a Palin endorsement could hurt the perceived frontrunner as the MSM would have the ammo to run stories about how the "radical" Palin has endorsed a fellow "radical" so on and so on .
On the other hand, maybe Palin is smarter than the average bear. Palin protected her relevance/influence when didn't endorse Bachmann as Bachmann rose and fell in the polls. Palin didn't endorse Perry as he rose and self-destructed. Palin didn't endorse Cain as he rose fast and fell just as hard. Palin also hasn't endorsed the other candidates - Paul, Santorum, Huntsman, Romney or Gingrich.
Today, as I write this, a Palin endorsement in my opinion is about a 50/50 help/hurt chance. One just never knows how such an endorsement will be perceived by voters - which will be the real test of Palin's relevance and ultimately, her continued influence within the GOP. We know how such an endorsement will be handled by the MSM and the left attack machine (is there really a difference?).
To sum up, I feel Palin has lost some of her influence among the GOP voters. I believe her relevance in the GOP primary race lessens each day as the political world goes on without her blessing one candidate or another. Finally, in a real threat to Palin's relevance, influence, and another test on her base supporters, what if Palin came out and endorsed Romney? Whatever happens, at this point in the ball game a "none of the above" answer is unacceptable.
Posted by downstateiladvocate at 12/2/2011 8:20 PM 
Categories: Politics
Tags: Sarah Palin GOP endorsement Romney Gingrich Cain Huntsmann Bachmann Santorum Perry Paul Primary
Categories: Politics
Tags: Sarah Palin GOP endorsement Romney Gingrich Cain Huntsmann Bachmann Santorum Perry Paul Primary
Comments