TNR BLOGS

December 01, 2008 | 12:30 PM
December 01, 2008 | 11:48 AM
December 01, 2008 | 11:20 AM

December 01, 2008 | 11:22 AM
December 01, 2008 | 11:10 AM
December 01, 2008 | 9:57 AM

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

December 01, 2008 | 12:00 PM
November 29, 2008 | 3:23 PM
November 29, 2008 | 2:18 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
31.08.2008
The Two Conventions' Common Thread: Redemption

The Clintons -- Bill in particular -- stage-managed their redemption at last week's Democratic convention. Their coyness regarding Obama, dramatically magnified by a news-ravenous press, made each of their speeches into nail-biters and turned the final wholeheartedness of their support (wait, hadn't Hillary already endorsed Obama? whatever) into a pleasant surprise, a catharsis, a joyous bit of "closure" instead of another predictable convention routine. The whole thing was brilliant. I think there's another guy out there who's playing the same game.

We've been assuming that McCain's Sarah Palin pick was so out-of-the-blue because it was a last-minute choice, a (perhaps grudging) acceptance on McCain's part that his moderate buddies Tom Ridge and Joe Lieberman just wouldn't fly. But what if McCain was calculatedly setting up his own redemption narrative, too? Lowered expectations followed by a happy shock -- could the Maverick who crapped all over James Dobson and dotes on Lieberman really be coming back home? -- is playing no small part in the wildly enthusiastic evangelical response to McCain's veep pick. Read Jonathan Martin's great Politico story on Palin's "electrification" of the base for evidence. Here's a snippet:

“There is an electricity going through the social conservative crowd right now; it’s unbelievable,” said James Muffett, head of Michigan’s Citizens for Traditional Values, who had met with McCain in the weeks leading up to his selection of a running mate. “Especially given all the set-ups and head fakes — it’s amazing. A lot of people were sure he was going to show his more moderate colors.” 

... “I’ve talked to two prominent social conservative leaders in the past 24 hours who told me they had previously not planned to attend the convention, but were now coming to Minneapolis after the Palin pick,” wrote Ralph Reed, a Christian conservative leader who has tangled with McCain, in an e-mail. "I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a veep pick energize the grass roots like this.”
 
... Muffett, who was talking on his cell phone from a church outing at Ohio’s Cedar Point amusement park, likened McCain’s campaign to the world-record 17 roller coasters that dot the park on the banks of Lake Erie. “Oh my gosh, holy moly,” he said. “He floated the pro-abortion running mate, then there was his performance at the Saddleback debate, and then you had the Lieberman headfake and now this. Up and down, up and down.”

--Eve Fairbanks

Posted: Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:22 PM with 33 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!

AlanSP said:

Eh, a guy like Brownback would have fired up the base too.  Problem is that the effectiveness of pumping up your base depends on the broader dynamics of the race.  Facing a 10-point party ID disadvantage, mobilizing your base just isn't going to cut it because the other guy's base is bigger.  Republicans can only win this election by persuading people that don't already support them.  Not sure if Palin helps there.

August 31, 2008 7:36 PM

Wandreycer1 said:

Perhaps the convention might be a wee bit inconvenient with credible rumors that Palin's three month old is actually her granddaughter.

August 31, 2008 8:09 PM

JEFF FREY said:

Are you serious, Wandreycer? I don't buy that for a moment -- it is about as plausible as the Obama is a secret Muslim nonsense.

August 31, 2008 8:26 PM

ackyri said:

This isn't 2004. The evangelicals won't turn Republican loss into a win - just a bad loss into a close loss. Bring 'em on.

August 31, 2008 8:28 PM

Wandreycer1 said:

Just got off the phone with a family friend who is an elected Republican official, a county commisioner outside of Philadelphia - a staunch Catholic, a lawyer raised in a huge blue collar family, a Republican woman involved in politics for 30 years.  Not a Hillary fan to put it mildly, tolerates Obama at best.  Likes Michelle, loves Biden (another PA Catholic, they are TRIBAL), loves Cheney too.  So.

I had to hold the phone away from my ear, she was screaming so loud.  She is beyond disgusted with this pick.  I just listened.  

The gender divide is becoming more stark on this.  I have no idea if it will translate in to anything meaningful, but it is amazing how many angry women I have heard from this weekend.

August 31, 2008 8:38 PM

Wandreycer1 said:

I thought so too Jeff, and this stuff is not to my taste at all - it gives me  the shivers to mess with baby stuff in any way.

But the facts remains: read Andrewsullivan and especially Kos (who I ONLY read when Andrew links) and tell me there isn't something there.

If I'm proved wrong, strike me down.  

August 31, 2008 8:40 PM

Wandreycer1 said:

I wondered - Hillary has been AWFULLY quiet all weekend.  She always waits for awhile after something weird happens with politicians, she's always cautious, always knows something more is probably going to happen.

August 31, 2008 8:43 PM

nbarry said:

I smell a smear on this baby parentage stuff because a good part of Gov. Palin's appeal is her family life: hunky, blue-collar husband, oldest son in the military, wholesome looking daughters, un-Clinton-like fidelity. In short, a noticeable, and quite appealing to middle America, contrast with strident "sisterhood of the traveling pantsuits" feminism.

August 31, 2008 9:14 PM

ironyroad said:

Either way, Obama himself is handling it well:  wish the nominee good luck, don't get drawn into smoke and mirrors, keep on message, and observe how the basic elements of the election are developing away from the humid media hype.

August 31, 2008 10:08 PM

JEFF FREY said:

Wandrey, it is very distasteful, especially because it is dragging in Palin's daughter. The girl has done nothing to deserve this (think back to nasty remarks about Chelsea Clinton). And I don't buy the justification that her new baby has been made into a campaign prop or something like that, so this is aboveboard. It is not aboveboard. Her kids must be left alone, period. If there was solid proof, then I could see a justification in letting the story out. But neither Sullivan nor DailyKos claims to have any proof, so shame on them.

And I still find myself very skeptical.

August 31, 2008 10:16 PM

cspencef said:

I'm just now getting this story for the first time, having now followed the various links and sources noted above. Frankly, my first reaction it that if the story is false, and in fact Sarah Palin is the mother of Trig Palin, I am inclined to think even more negatively of her judgment than if the whole coverup thing is true.  

August 31, 2008 10:51 PM

ironyroad said:

OTOH, Palin could garner some votes from the extended-family, multi-relationship, polyamory wing of the GOP.  I mean, I know it isn't really a wing, but I'll bet you a piece of home-made jewelry at a Renaissance Faire that there are Republicans who'd have a whole other take on things if you just get them to a bar and stood them a round or two.

A friend of mine keeps getting emails on a fairly upfront "dating" web site from dyed-in-the-wool conservatives who say, I have seven kids by two wives, and I need a third woman to keep track of what's going on.  We're producing kids for the Christian future, they say.

August 31, 2008 11:45 PM

JEFF FREY said:

That's an ugly thing to say, cspencef. She made a decision (to keep the baby) that was consistent with her principles and values. I disagree with many of her principles (and her politics) and may well have made a different choice in the same circumstances, but carrying a baby with Down's syndrome to term is in no way a sign of worse judgement than fabricating a medical condition to avoid family embarrassment would be,

ironyroad: Funny, although Alaska is not Utah. Even our wingnuts tend to be of a different sort (more along the lines of Ron Paulistas and jury nullification supporters).

September 1, 2008 1:28 AM

woland said:

I think you misunderstand cspencef, JEFF.  What cspencef is obviously talking about is Palin's decision to fly back to Alaska from Texas after her water broke.  Apparently, Palin's doctor said it was O.K. for her to fly back after Palin informed the doctor about the breakage, but another doctor quoted in a news article I read stated that standard operating procedure would have required Palin to immediately go to a hospital to get checked out after her water broke and not for her to give a speech and then take a 9 hour flight followed by a 45 minute drive to the hospital in Anchorage.

Something definitely does not smell right here.  Here are the possibilities as I see them:

1)  Palin's doctor is a freakin back country doctor idiot whose medical license should be revoked.  No fault on Palin's part.

2)  Palin recklessly decided that it was so important that her baby not be born in Texas that she ignored her doctor (and perhaps commonsense) and flew back to Alaska and took that 45 minute drive to her doctor's office.  Palin must have know something bad was up because she rushed out after giving her speech so fast that the next speaker jokingly stated, "What?  Is she having the baby right now?"  This is just further proof that Palin does not have the judgment to be VP besides just insulting the great state of Texas.

3)  Palin is covering for her daughter Bristol.

Right now I don't know what to think.  I would tend to agree with JEFF's thoughts that the burden lies on those pushing this story to provide proof, my only worry is that what proof there is may solely be in the hands of the Palins (getting Trig's birth certificate might be possible I suppose).  If the Palins are the only ones in possession of such proof (DNA tests, photos of an obviously pregnant Palin during the months in question before she announced that she was pregnant, Bristol's medical records for treatment for mono during the months she was absent from school during Palin's pregnancy), is it not incumbent on them to come forward with such proof?  Or is Palin going to get away with this if it is true?

P.S. If Bristol had mono during Palin's pregnancy where did Bristol stay?  She obviously could not be around mom, no?

P.S.S.  I can't speak for others, but I'm not suggesting that this rumor is true.  So please spare me at least any comments about protecting Bristol's reputation.  These questions in my opinion need answering one way or the other and merely asking these questions is not damaging anyone's rep.

September 1, 2008 3:05 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

This is a very awkward story I feel awful about.  Jeff is right, it sounds like the Muslim story, only worse.

On balance though, it seems fair - if really uncomfortable - to follow up and find out if this is true.  If not, I'll be the first to say how shameful its been and how wrong I was.

Palin is not the one that made fecundity the main selling point for her VP slot,  gruesome McCain did that.  Her party used her for it and made it an inherent selling point.  She's been put in this position, it was the campaigns job to vet her appropriately in private and they did not. This has been well known rumor in Alaska for a long time.

Its been a disgraceful performance by McCain and says ugly things about his judgement, emotional maturity and values.  

September 1, 2008 3:47 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

I've never linked to Kos before, have only even read it a couple of time through Andrew - way too knee jerk for me.

But I'm linking here because this story seems to be over:

dailykos.com/.../581734

September 1, 2008 4:06 AM

woland said:

Hmmm....  I think I agree with you Wandy.  The pictures of her pregnant don't satisfy me, but the fact that the MSM has not addressed this issue at all by now convinces me that it is not true.  Ah well!  Guess we'll have to do without such a blatant exposure of McCain's lack of judgment in picking her as VP.

September 1, 2008 9:38 AM

Eos said:

The left should really look at themselves for flogging these rumors. The lack of decency and the willingness to be dishonest are breathtaking. To do this, they must be very distrubed/scared by Palin.

September 1, 2008 9:52 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

I feel convinced and utterly relieved, this would have been so awful had it been true - unfair and gross.  I am seriously glad its over.

Imagine if this had been a Democratic nominee - Rush Limbaugh would be broadcasting from the hospital.

September 1, 2008 9:57 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

Hi Eos - What about the center?  Can't we be flogged too?  PLEASE?

The SHOCK shock I tell you of something unfair and horrible happening in a campaign, Republicans, innocent lambs that they are, wouldn't dream of such antics!

September 1, 2008 10:03 AM

Eos said:

Wandrecyer1:

you really should be ashamed of yourself. but i guess your moral enlightenment is so great that you can say and do anything you want, even smearing a child.

it's pretty disgusting.

September 1, 2008 10:35 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

I did no such  thing, Right Wing Plant Man, and you know it.

September 1, 2008 10:44 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

I have made it clear that this is entirely John McCain's fault for his sloppy, unprofessional vetting of this woman.  These rumors were around for months, it was his job to deal with them and he did not.  Again: immature, unprofessional behavior that put her at risk for this.

I bet even your paymasters think so too.

He should have picked Pawlenty.

September 1, 2008 10:47 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

Look, this is all squalid and I should not have taken the bait, period.  I consider Andrew a highly credible source (not so much Kos, like I said, don't read him - too knee jerk and too left) and am suprised that Andrew fell for it so quickly.  No excuses, but he bought it so I did.  Not good.  

Even if it were true, it would make me respect her more and I suspect most mothers would secretly or not so secretely at least understand if not support her.  I have always been uncomfortable with her taking that disabled newborn on this sort of escapade, and I would have felt that way no matter who it was.  I have kids sometimes Moms are ferrel about these things.  But its her choice and I respect that.

Besides, I feel a mixture of awe, disgust and admiration - we Dems are normally hopelessly lilly-livered with this low down dirty stuff that wins elections, Karl Rove probably wishes he thought of it himself.  

September 1, 2008 11:18 AM

The Plank said:

Today On TNR.com (August 28, 2008) The Gustav Effect: How this tragedy could benefit the Republicans

September 1, 2008 11:26 AM

nbarry said:

Is it a "fault" of McCain? Or could he have laid a trap for a party that has prided itself on not wallowing in Karl Rove slime?

September 1, 2008 11:32 AM

JEFF FREY said:

woland, you could be right about what cspensef was criticizing Palin for, and if so, I would owe him/her an apology.

At this point, the people who pushed this baby story look really dumb. Did they try looking at Google Images?

September 1, 2008 12:51 PM

mattmar said:

I was mayor 30 years ago of a city 9x the size of the one in Alaska. My governor is a film star. I have not fathered a child in over 40 years. I am an avid reader of the NR. What are my chances of getting a job with potentially nothing to do, a large salary, a large house, a large staff and the use of a hide-out in an undisclosed location? I am willing to wear a flag lapel pin and ask God to bless America in case He has not heard it enough. Answer: Since I was not born in the USA my chances are nil.

September 1, 2008 1:51 PM

cspencef said:

woland, your reading is correct; JEFF FREY, I will take your remark above as apology and accept it.  

September 1, 2008 2:38 PM

woland said:

Well!!!!  What do you know!  There was something to the pregnancy cover story after all.  The McCain camp has announced that Bristol is currently 5 months pregnant and is going to marry the father.  Not the coverup suspected, but something was up.

September 1, 2008 2:59 PM

tomeg said:

Eos:

"The left should really look at themselves for flogging these rumors. The lack of decency and the willingness to be dishonest are breathtaking. To do this, they must be very distrubed/scared by Palin."

Quick, EOS, who what where when "the left" is "flogging...rumors." You must have a quadruple split-screen computer rig to monitor the left with such certainty, 'cuz I haven't read anything but surprise, and concerns such as everyone is expressing, including Republicans in St. Paul, notably. Sure, there's speculation "what if" no assumptions, they/we are as confused as you evidently are about "the left."

September 1, 2008 6:40 PM

tomeg said:

I don't give a pfennig one way or other about Palin's daughter's pregnancy, in or out of wedlock, other than that I hope the media spotlight won't last long. Like any decent human I hope the child is well cared for and the marriage pans out best for all concerned, *especially the child*.

There are brutish nasty people of all political bents, left right center. Why focus on them, and try to assign partisan blame? It's hard enough having an adult discussion as it is.

September 1, 2008 6:51 PM

GSpinks said:

"The lack of decency and the willingness to be dishonest are breathtaking."

I will happily admit that the Democrats claim among their membership many notable personas from the blogosphere whose SOP is to come up to a line and cross it; having said that, Eos, the abundant hypocracy in your concise statement is breathtakingly sublime.

September 2, 2008 12:54 PM