TNR BLOGS

November 20, 2008 | 3:55 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:45 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:06 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

November 20, 2008 | 2:15 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:52 PM
November 20, 2008 | 11:06 AM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
03.10.2008
Invisible Woman?

Sarah Palin obviously exceeded trainwreck expectations last night and reassured panicky supporters. The McCain campaign has every reason to be relieved, and perhaps even pleased.

But the fact that Palin dodged a potential bullet doesn't mean they're going to want to put her up in front of any more firing squads. In particular, the campaign will likely keep her away from any interviews that allow followup questions, which were lethal to her in the Couric sitdowns and the absence of which last night enabled her to skate past questions where she clearly had no real answer. Which essentially means that the campaign is going to keep her away from any serious interviews at all.

Sure, she'll have more base-stoking talks with partisan sycophants such as Hugh Hewitt, and she'll continue to do big rallies and raise money. But don't anticipate an appearance on "Meet the Press"--or, for that matter, "The View"--any time soon.

As a result, I suspect from here on out Sarah Palin is going to recede considerably as a campaign issue, and while that's good for McCain in the narrow sense, I'm not sure it is more broadly. Since Palin arrived on the scene, the campaign's fortunes have mirrored hers almost exactly: It peaked shortly after her convention speech had pundits everywhere declaring her a superstar, sagged gradually for a while after that, and crashed right around the time the Couric interviews became America's favorite daily comic entertainment. She was not the sole, or even the primary, reason for all these up and downs, but she clearly played a role.

Sarah Palin is political nitroglycerin, and as she recedes a bit from the political discussion, so too may some of the volatility that's characterized the race. And while that volatility may have increased the odds of McCain losing in a landslide, it was also arguably his best bet to eke out a victory.

--Christopher Orr

Posted: Friday, October 03, 2008 9:58 AM with 10 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

icarusr said:

"base-stroking talks" - what, you think they'll put her on a 1-976 line?  With the voice that makes Fran Drescher sound like Elisabeth Schwartzkopff?

Ohhhh - sorry, "base-STOKING" ... oooh, painful - that reminds me of the legend of Edward II and the poker - POWPOW McCain is certainly stoking that base with the Palin, and how.

No, you missed the whole point of the debate.  She said, à la Mussolini, that she would not take any more questions from the pesly filtering media who censor her bon mots (the most Orwellian statement ever made, because the media - Couric - did precisely the opposite, but who am I to quibble) and that she would go to the people.  And when she is Empres- I mean, VP, she will bypass Congress and have one plebiscite after another, so that there is no pesky legislative filter ...

October 3, 2008 10:26 AM

epicciuto said:

Like Obama, she will never recapture that magic that she once had. Unlike Obama, she has no substantive skills with which she might win people over who were not dazzled by her initially, or who are simply suspicious of dazzle.

I don't think putting her out there now will work, even as a Hail Mary pass. I think she's won over who she's going to win over. And it might hurt to put her out there. The more Katie Couric moments she has, the more her debate rehab will wear off. She is simply no longer a factor Republicans can rely on to move the race.

October 3, 2008 10:42 AM

mpintar2 said:

Let's us all hope she becomes invisible and, more importantly, inaudible to those of us who do not want to listen to another month of Marge Gunderson, VP candidate

October 3, 2008 10:50 AM

mikelazarusb23 said:

I am still not sure what people thing she proved last night.  We already knew that when she has a script she's lethal, when she has to think about something and reason, she can't.  Mildly discerning eyes would have seen that again last night.  She is unqualified for high executive office.  

Watching the media last night, they seem to talk without qualifying what they should try to understand: Is she able to handle the intellectual challenges of the office.  How did her performance increase confidence in  her ability to do that?  No one discussed that.  People just parroted: "She did what she needed to do".   It is unguided meme replication.  No target, no depth, no understanding.  Wait a minute.  Is the national media like Palin.  I think I am onto something.

October 3, 2008 11:08 AM

JEFF FREY said:

Absolutely right, epicciuto.

October 3, 2008 11:33 AM

maybe said:

I truly hope you're right, Orr.

Perhaps it's because she is barely conversant on matters of national interest, but after each Palin outing, I am left thinking that her sneering is actually her most memorable quality. Her divisiveness cuts through any folksy charm she may project -- and divisiveness is a pretty sh*t attribute on which to base a public identity, imho.

To this Casual Country native (thanks, David Brooks!), she lacks the standing or political conviction to substantiate her jabs, which makes her seem self-serving, thin-skinned and ugly. Each subsequent exposure I have to Sarahcudha leaves me with less compassion for her. And, as a woman, I am completely reviled by the persistent thought that, so far, she has used her current visibility to no constructive end -- unless her own personal advancement somehow qualifies as constructive.

However, for her supporters, it seems that her nastiness is equally solidifying. It's a mystery to me: objectivity is virtually impossible with someone who thrives on picking fights.

What's more, I'm still not clear what Gov Palin is fighting against. Big bad media? How horrible that they report on the abuse of power charges against her in the Alaska legislature! How dare they want to ask --gasp!-- questions about --shock!-- *policy*. And all that fact-check stuff she keeps failing? It's soooo obviously biased against the wrong brand of truth.

I really don't feel her pain. I just hope I don't have to absorb any more of her nasty after November 5th.

But her immediate invisibility would be, y'know, awesome.

October 3, 2008 11:38 AM

TLaBorn said:

She performed significantly better than expected.  I fully expected her to flubber around similar to the Couric interviews.  She managed to repeat her keywords over and over without ever answering any real substantial questions with one exception:  She envisions the position of VP in the likeness of Cheney.  This is frightening.

Probably the most telling part of the whole debate was in the last 15 minutes when Biden got tired of her snarkiness and her obvious attempts to pander to the "Little Guy".  Biden opened up talking about his deceased wife and child and how his two boy's were in the hospital with an uncertain recovery.  He choked up and almost started crying.  Took a deep breath and continued.

If you noticed for the last 10 minutes her snide little smile was wiped off her face.

October 3, 2008 11:38 AM

michael said:

After 2-3 weeks of Obama gaining in red states, after several embarrassing interviews by both Palin and McCain and after McCain concedes he can't devote resources to Michigan (one of two states where Obama didn't have an edge because he didn't compete in a primary) we have The Debate.

After the above? No, Palin's initial impact on independent and undecided voters after the debate only allowed Biden to walk away with bigger numbers. She probably did not capture any voters outside the base and the team needs them. McCain doesn't need help with the 35-40% of his base but the Bush-Rove ground army was able to inflate 'value voters' who were not ID'd with the GOP but Obama has already rolled up new registrations & negated the meager McCain machine.

Palin needed to do more than not fail but it was unrealistic to burden her with moving the ticket's appeal into the center.

I argued yesterday that it would be foolish for McCain to think he could hide her for a month because The Debate did not end his campaign and she is not a small part of it. I predicted a good performance would be a curse and she'd have to live up to her improved image. My analogy was a quarterback who was booed for a 1-6 start and won game eight. With eight games to go he couldn't sit on the bench and bask in the glory of two wins. It will be a trick for her to recede when there was a giddy response to her 90 minutes of theatrics. A 'managed month' where she only speaks to the base (rallies and media from the right) will be met by a cry for her to help Johnny out on Sunday morning shows, another shot at legit interviews and a stand up in front of the press. By claiming she did well, the right may have conned their own group into thinking she can't recede. She is once again the game-changer (they still need one) and in that regard they'll regret what they wished for. Yeah, she did not fail. So go for it and take your winner out for the next 30 days and keep on winning. Put her in the arena she has avoided and we'll see how she does. After all, she proved last night she can take it to Obama-Biden...right?

October 3, 2008 12:05 PM

Lundell said:

I tend to agree Chris and I hope both of us are right.

The McCain camp will foist her performance around like a victory banner and then not let her answer anymore questions.

The snarky dvisiveness is really troubling, but having worked around this demographic, it works "within the tent" to re-inforce a sickening self-righteousness that is then used to embrace the Gospel of Wealth (google search:  Reverend Mac Hammond v. IRS) and smite the wicked foes of homosexuality and anything not American.

Last thing we need right now is a sneer anywhere near Pennsylvania Avenue.  At some juncture (although this may be too risky), Obama should ask McCain/Palin "Why are you two so pissed off?"

October 3, 2008 12:16 PM

Sirhc said:

If she had been asked to follow up or explain any position in depth, she might have collapsed.  We'll never know.  

We all knew the same things about her before the debate:  She is telegenic; she is okay when speaking from a script;  she might be bright, but she does not possess a depth of knowledge on national or international issues.

The debate changed none of those things.

In hindsight, betting on whether she performed okay, well or imploded, was really a bet on Ifill.  Ifill did not want to, or was too scared, to follow up.  Hence, Palin did okay.  

Yesterday, someone wrote that an old white guy would have been perfect.  I think Couric proved and the debate confirmed that a white woman is Palin's kryptonite.  It is a cliche, but, like most cliches, it is true:  Her greatest strength is her greatest weakness.  White woman identify with her and they are not wowed or cowed from her or forbidden from calling her out.

I wish the secretary from Ferris Bueller's day off had moderated the debate.  Or the sheriff in Fargo.  Someone who could say, "Ummm, I know and understand people like you and you're an idiot" without risking an "ELITIST!" response.  

October 3, 2008 12:24 PM