That's the thought of Pollster.com's Mark Blumenthal, who writes that Gov. Sarah Palin's base "was big and in many ways comparable to where Obama
started." Thus, as of last week at least, she was the Republican best positioned
to emulate Obama's tactical model for seeking the nomination.
Blumenthal's point is that Palin, though having the highest negatives among adults among all potential 2012 candidates, had by far the best positive ratings among Republican activists, eclipsing by more than 20 points the favorability number attached to the second-place Mitt Romney. Extrapolating a bit, we can posit that Palin starts the race -- or would have started the race -- with a hard corps of true believers, perhaps even larger than Romney's -- and had the most room to grow, at the same time. Blumenthal writes: "The Pew numbers show that Palin's base as of June 2009 was as strong as Obama's
on the eve of the 2008 campaign. Consider two numbers: Palin's "very favorable"
rating last month on the Pew Research survey among all adults was 15%. Obama's
very favorable score among all adults on a Pew Research survey in August 2007
was 14%."
And then, of course, the similarities end. Put aside your views about
their inherent personal charisteristics: Obama's campaign attracted the
Democratic base because of his identity and because of his stand
against the Iraq war, but Obama's message was consistently forward-looking and targeted to independents who were watching the
Democratic primaries. Obama did not have to face the conviction that he
was not qualified -- something more than half of all Americans believe
about Sarah Palin. Indeed, Obama ran for Senate and stayed in the
Senate precisely because he knew he needed more experience; he did not
resign from office at the point when people were questioning his
experience.
"Was Palin Posed To Emulate Obama's Rise?"
No.
Obama did not face criticism for his obvious lack of qualifications because his principal opponent in the primaries was similarly inexperienced.
I'm not sure why you think "Obama ran for the Senate" because he knew he needed more experience; presumably he ran for the Senate to serve in the Senate.
Staying in the Senate while running full time for president seems to be an odd way to get experience as a senator.
The fact that so many Americans think Sarah Palin lacks the qualifications to be president demonstrates in many ways the advantages Democrats have. The cooperation of the mainstream media (the Atlantic included) in offering up Democratic talking points as news, and the Democratic willingness to use sexism to its advantage without criticism are things that Republicans will never be able to do. (The impending death of the MSM is thus largely good news for Republicans.)
In any event, won't the 2012 election be about Obama, a referendum on his policies? And isn't it becoming clear--more clear every day--how that's going to go?
Not that the msm media ever offer up Republican talking points as news. And yes it's becoming fairly clear that absent some mishap which doesn't seem very likely that Obama's a shoo in for 2012. This little comment is actually a very typical example of the alternate reality much of the Republican base inhabit these days. The $64,000 question is when do they come out of it.
Yes their numbers are similar, but they were at completely different times in their level of celebrity. I'm surprised 14% or people even knew who Obama WAS in August 2007. I surely didn't. I vaguely remembered his speech at the 2004 convention, and that's it. This was his base number, and as his national stature rose, so did his numbers. On the other hand, Palin is already super well known, from the election and the constant media storm around her. People already know who she is. It's not a matter of exposing her and her ideas to more people. She actually has to change the minds of 85% (or 36% actually), which is something I don't think she is capable of doing.
Good points. The only similarity between them are the numbers. The fact that some 11 months after hitting the national stage, her numbers aren't better is an indication of the barrier she faced.
And after this latest maneuver, I suspect those numbers will tumble.
Marc's technical assessment of Palin's electoral status is entirely accurate. No one disputes that surely, it's one of the reasons why the media maintains the charade of treating her doings seriously rather than falling out of their chairs laughing. Well they probably do that too. The issue isn't where she starts it's where she finishes. Personally I hope she runs and her base propel her to the nomination which is by no means inconceiveable given she is basically popular with 75% of the party. A Palin candidacy would test to destruction all the phony mythmaking of the right and would produce a big enough bang to propel them in a new direction. The alternative, which is what will probably happen, is that the GOP will limp along wedded to the ragbag of suicidal policies that have become holy writ within the party while its packaging will continue to carry prominent images of Bush, Limbaugh, Gingrich, and it's latest new media celebrity Palin who will cause more damage in political death than in political life.
The comparison doesn't hold -- Obama was not a national figure at the time and had not turned the corner in Iowa. He was, by his own admission, still figuring out what it meant to be a national candidate and getting schooled by Hillary (and others) in the debates.
I sincerely hope Palin runs for the nomination in 2012 and gets it. It will lead to an Obama landslide (including victory in Alaska) and will cause the Repubs to go through the type of reflection that they should have done after 2008 and come back as a viable party.
Actually, Obama did leave office as senate before his term was up, which is why he really didn't have the experience to run for president. I think the only reason why Obama wasn't looked at as somebody who doesn't have experience, and Sarah Palin was is because Sarah is a woman and Barack is not, which demonstrates that there is still some gender inequality in America. The same thing happened to Hilary as well.
-Nikki-
1 dollar ebooks
selling photography 101
Let's see. He left office because he was elected President, and that translates into him not having the "experience to run for president"? He was so inexperienced in running for President that he got elected and then had to resign his Senate seat?
Sarah Palin isn't looked at as not having sufficient experience--that's not the problem. The problem is that she appears to be underinformed about multiple issues and uninterested in correcting that. Add to that the incomprehensible speech patterns and that's why she's not taken seriously. Not the supposed lack of experience.
Anyone who listens to Obama and Palin elucidate their positions and only sees a difference in terms of gender was clearly an unfortunate victim of social promotion in grade school.
It of course had nothing to do with the fact that within five minutes of Obama opening his mouth he's confirmed an impression of intellect, introspection, poise and articulateness while Palin has confirmed an impression of ditziness. It had nothing to do with gender but since this is clearly something of an idee fixe you might want to ponder just how bad an advertisement Palin is for professional women.
Should the headline read "poised"? Not "posed"? Although "posed" does suggest a certain amount of stagecraft, which basically was the foundation for Palin's campaign. . .