Wednesday, March 09, 2011


Back in November, when it was announced that NBC and Politico were going to co-sponsor a GOP presidential debate at the Reagan Library, I predicted that Sarah Palin would boycott it. Here's what I wrote:

I've been saying for months that it's silly to think that Sarah Palin's inability to master policy issues will hurt her in the endless series of debates that are going to take place during the 2012 GOP nomination fight -- if she feels she's going to do poorly in debates, she's just going to boycott them, offering some excuse (personal insult, liberal bias) that her rabid fan base will readily accept and embrace....

Well, now Palin gets a golden opportunity to put this into practice if she chooses....

I thought she'd attack the co-sponsors:

NBC? You mean that evil, horrible company that employs the vile Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow and Leg-Tingle Matthews and Larry the Socialist O'Donnell? Can ya get more biased? (Even if none of those people are actually on the NBC broadcast network, and the moderator is certainly not going to be one of them?)

And Politico? Biased? No, that's not a harder sell to the Palinbots. Just last week Palin was calling Politico sexist for running a photo of Michele Bachmann having makeup applied, and a couple of days before that she was denouncing Politico for "yellow journalism" after it ran the story "Next for GOP Leaders: Stopping Sarah Palin." Oh, and we smug lefties think Politico is overly obsessed with getting Matt Drudge links, but Fox Nation has taken to calling it "Left-Wing Politico" in headlines.

So she can blow this debate off and win favor with her crowd if she chooses....

Turns out I was right.

Palin's not going to the debate, and Conservatives4Palin, her semi-official blog, explains why in a post entitled "Governor Palin to Politico: Take Your Liberal Biased Debate And Shove It!"

Yesterday Ian reported that Governor Palin will be fundraising for the troops in Denver on May 2nd at Colorado Christian University and not attend the NBC/Politico debate scheduled that same night.

Some ... took the fact that she will not be attending the first debate as a sign that the Governor will not be running for president....

I beg to differ.

Doing this fundraiser, instead of the debate, is a sign that Governor Palin will be a candidate for president in 2012....

It's not that the Governor wont be attending the debate because she's doing the fundraiser. She's purposely doing the fundraiser to not attend the debate. Governor Palin is sending a message to the far left NBC and Politico: you can't suck up to Obama and trash her, her kids and Republicans in general all the time and expect a credible debate in return....


Even I've been thinking lately that Palin isn't going to run, but this is one of several signals she's sending that, yes, she is so going to run, and you're just saying she isn't because you're a big hater. Over at National Review's Corner, there's this:

...SarahPAC's treasurer made it clear to National Review Online yesterday that Palin's decision to give a talk the same night as the first GOP primary debate should not be interpreted as a sign she wouldn't run in 2012.

Palin has said that if she does run, it will be an unconventional campaign. But when we assume that her decisions on debates and early states hint at her 2012 plans, we're making judgments based on thinking about what a traditional campaigner would do.

And there's this, apparently spoon-fed to Ben Smith (yes, of the hated but still apparently useful Politico):

Palin would base campaign in Scottsdale

The prospect of Sarah Palin running for president is, increasingly, dismissed by a political class that sees her facing weak poll numbers -- especially in key early states -- and doing nothing to correct them or to buil the infrastructure for a run.

But I'm told Palin's camp is, at least, holding preliminary talks about how a campaign would look if she decides to run. One early decision, a source says: It would be based in Scottsdale, Arizona, where Bristol Palin recently bought a house in nearby Maricopa.

... Arizona carries its own significance: Basing a campaign there would be a provocative rejection of any lingering political cost from those who connect her harsh rhetoric and Gabrielle Giffords' shooting -- a traditional refusal to retreat.

... And it would also hark back, perhaps not to McCain, more a Washington figure than an Arizona one, but to what now stands as the iconic campaign for many base Republican voters: Goldwater '64....

Did Palin's people feed the spin as well as the story to Ben Smith? If so, it's quite remarkable: even the siting of the campaign headquarters is an act of aggression on Palin's part ("a traditional refusal to retreat").

But, um, that Goldwater thing? Is her crew actually announcing that she's modeling her campaign on the campaign of the last Republican nominee to lose more than 40 states? That's a good thing?

No comments: