David Frum - who remains one of the few rational and reality based conservative pundits - has a column in The Week which asks the question of whether or not the GOP has learned anything from the Sarah Palin debacle. In my view, the selection of Sarah Palin as his VP running mate by John McCain more than anything else cause McCain to lose to Barack Obama. I know many Republicans who could have held their nose and voted for McCain rather than Obama but for Palin. My late mother was one such long time Republican who absolutely detested Palin and because of that voted for Obama. Now, with the utterly unhinged Michele Bachmann and Christian Dominionist boot licker Rick Perry as serious GOP candidates for the GOP nomination, Frum frets that the GOP learned nothing from the 2008 Palin disaster. Someone may be able to energize the looniest elements of the party base, but if they will be radioactive in the general election, they should never be nominated - at least not if the goal is to win the election. Here are highlights from Frum's column:
This week, Sarah Palin stoked a late, brief flurry of speculation that she might enter the 2012 presidential race. I won't try to predict the former Alaska governor's decision. But I will predict this: If Palin does enter the race, she won't be any kind of factor.
Over the past three years, Palin has systematically laid waste to the basis for a presidential campaign. By her own words and actions, she has discredited herself and alienated her one-time supporters. But before Palin vanishes into her hard-earned obscurity, Republicans need an assessment and an accounting. Had John McCain won in 2008, we would have put an incompetent, deceitful, and vengeful person second in line to the presidency.
[T]he people who promoted and celebrated the Palin pick have disavowed — or at least abandoned — their former enthusiasm. They no longer accuse those who objected to the pick of "elitism" or "snobbishness" or "misogyny." . . . But before the episode is consigned to forgetfulness, there are some lessons to be learned of urgent value for 2012 and beyond.
[1.]More respect for brains as a qualification for the presidency.
Within days of the announcement of Palin as GOP running mate, it became obvious to everybody that she could not pronounce two coherent consecutive sentences on any aspect of national policy, foreign or domestic.
[I]t remains true even now that Republicans do not take intelligence or expertise very seriously as qualifications for the presidency. Mitt Romney's smarts do him surprisingly little good; Rick Perry's non-smarts do him disturbingly little harm; and Michele Bachmann's out-beyond-the-Orion-belt substitutions for familiarity with life here on Earth only intensify the admiration of her fan base.
[2.] Quit treating consumption patterns as substitutes for character.
[T]he choice of cowboy boots over loafers, enjoyment of hunting rather than bicycling, a preference for ketchup over mustard — these tell us precisely nothing about a candidate's character. Yet it was precisely these kinds of irrelevant lifestyle choices that persuaded so many conservatives that Sarah Palin would be a fitting leader. She drops her "g"s! Her husband owns a fishing boat!
[3.]Involve more women as party decision-makers.
The Republican party's nomination of its first female vice presidential candidate led to an utterly unexpected effect: a collapse of female support for the Republican Party national ticket. In the single month of October 2008, Sarah Palin's favorabilities among independent women dropped by more than 20 points. Within a year of Palin's appearance on the national scene, a plurality of female Republicans dismissed her as "unqualified" for the presidency.
Had women participated in the selection process, one of them would have issued a warning: "Boys, I gotta tell you — whatever she's doing for you, she's not doing for me." . . . . Here was a woman candidate chosen by men who do not respect women. No surprise what happened next. And unfortunately — it's still happening.
He's right. Why does the name "Michele Bachmann" immediately spring to mind??
No comments:
Post a Comment