More Hints of Violence

Our book, Divided We Stand, looks at the 2020 election and the January 6 insurrection.  Some Republican leaders -- and a measurable number of rank-and-file voters -- are open to violent rebellion, coups, and secession.

 MMFA shows Palin on Newsmax:

ERIC BOLLING (HOST): When you see the former president being fingerprinted, having to show up, turn himself in, you see the mugshots of the other seven or eight who've turned themselves already, do you have concern for the country as I do?

SARAH PALIN (GUEST): Absolutely, I mean -- I think those who are conducting this travesty and creating this two-tiered system of justice and I want to ask them, "What the heck? Do you want us to be in Civil War?" because that's what's going to happen. We're not going to keep putting up with this. And Eric, I like that that you suggested that we need to get angry. We do need to rise up and take our country back.

Isaac Arnsdodrf at WP:

Former president Donald Trump suggested that the United States could see intensifying political violence, saying in a new interview that tensions in the country were reaching a boiling point.

Asked by former Fox News host Tucker Carlson whether the nation is headed toward open conflict, Trump responded: “I don’t know. I can say this: There’s a level of passion that I’ve never seen. There’s a level of hatred that I’ve never seen. And that’s probably a bad combination.”

 

Democrats Defibrillated

Our most recent book is titled Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics.  Among other things, it discusses state and congressional elections. 

John McCormick at WSJ:

Democrats are entering the homestretch before November’s election in better shape than earlier this year, boosted by gains among independent voters, improved views of President Biden and higher voting enthusiasm among abortion-rights supporters, a Wall Street Journal poll shows.

Republicans have electoral fuel to tap into if they can keep the debate focused on the economy and what has been the highest inflation in four decades. Nearly two-thirds of registered voters say the economy isn’t good or poor—a larger share than in the last Journal survey, in March—and close to two-thirds say the pain of higher costs makes them more likely to cast a ballot.

Democrats hold a slight edge over Republicans, 47% to 44%, when voters are asked which party they would support in their congressional district if the election were held today, a lead that is within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 2.7 percentage points. Republicans had a five-point advantage in March.

The Democratic gains come from increased support among independents, women and younger voters. Black and Hispanic voters, who have traditionally favored Democrats heavily, are also more solidly supportive of the party than they were earlier this year.

Among political independents, typically the key to victory in close elections, more voters now favor a Democratic candidate for Congress than a Republican, 38% to 35%. In March, Republicans led among independents by 12 percentage points.

Before the Supreme Court’s late-June reversal of the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion ruling, the GOP had been more optimistic about its prospects, in part because the party that doesn’t control the White House typically makes midterm-election gains.

“Republicans were cruising, and Democrats were having a hard time,” said Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio, who conducted the survey along with Democrat John Anzalone. “It’s almost like the abortion issue came along and was kind of like a defibrillator to Democrats.“

Final margin: Peltola (D) defeats Palin (R) 51.5%-48.5% in the final round of ranked-choice. This is a huge victory and pickup for Dems, driven more by Palin's unpopularity than national trends. #AKAL

— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) September 1, 2022

 

Republicans and Vaccines

Our new book is titled Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics.  Among other things, it discusses the politics of COVID.

Martha Mercer at The Daily Beast:

An unmasked Sarah Palin has been spotted at two New York City restaurants after her attorney revealed she had tested positive for COVID-19. Her disclosure prompted the delay of her defamation trial against The New York Times on Monday. The unvaccinated former Alaska governor was seen by Mediaite sitting with a group at a table outdoors at Elio’s restaurant on the Upper East Side on Wednesday, the same restaurant she dined at on Saturday night, before her diagnosis. Gothamist also spotted her dining al fresco at Campagnola on Tuesday. On her first visit to Elio’s she sat indoors, in violation of city rules, which require diners to present proof of COVID vaccination to be seated inside. The restaurant apologized for not asking her for a vaccine card Saturday, and on Wednesday, its manager, Luca Guaitolini, told Mediaite that Palin returned to apologize. “In accordance with the vaccine mandate and to protect our staff, we seated her outdoors. We are a restaurant open to the public, and we treat all civilians the same,” he said.

Vera Bergengruen at Time:

Already, opposition to vaccine and mask mandates has become a purity test for Republican officials, as well as a key part of their agenda ahead of this year’s midterm elections. It seems to have turned some of former President Donald Trump’s fervent supporters against him in favor of politicians like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has been coy about acknowledging his vaccination status and is not publicly backing such measures. Just 26% of Republicans say they consider vaccine mandates acceptable, according to a CNN poll last month, compared to 82% of Democrats. This partisan divide is evident in the vaccination data itself: unvaccinated adults are three times more likely to lean Republican than Democrat, according to a November analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Aaron Blake at WP:

For months, we’ve written in this space about how the Republicans’ pushback against coronavirus vaccine mandates could foment — and apparently has been fomenting — opposition to mandates of other vaccines, including for schoolchildren. It’s inherent in their talking points: If vaccines should be a matter of “choice,” why not those more long-standing vaccines, too? High-profile Republicans haven’t generally addressed where they draw the line and why.

Early efforts to wade into allowing more choice on other vaccines had been quickly pulled back. In Tennessee, the state momentarily prevented its health department from communicating with children about any vaccines. In Florida, a prominent state senator suggested that his state might “review” those other vaccine requirements, before walking it back.

But GOP lawmakers in other states are increasingly moving in this direction.

In Georgia, a GOP state senator proposed a bill that would ban the state from requiring “proof of any vaccination of any person as a condition of providing any service or access to any facility.” The bill was endorsed by 17 state senators, about half of the Republican contingent in a chamber where you need less than 30 votes to pass something.

When it was pointed out that this could quite logically extend to vaccine requirements for the state’s public schools, state Sen. Jeff Mullis (R) said he planned to “adjust” the bill.

Efforts by Republicans in Wisconsin also have shown some real momentum. State Senate Health Committee Chairman Patrick Testin (R) held a hearing this month that included Senate Bill 336. The bill would, among other things, prohibit schools and universities from excluding students because of their vaccination status. And, again, it’s not just about coronavirus vaccines.

No Trump

My former student Clifton Yin writes at The Baltimore Sun:

When I was 22 years old and a delegate to the 2008 Republican National Convention, I made the mistake of voting to make Sarah Palin the party's vice-presidential nominee. In hindsight, she was not ready to be president had John McCain won the election and immediately become incapacitated. That unlikely scenario never played out. But in enabling even the possibility of a novice becoming the most powerful person in the world, I let down my party and my country.

Today, delegates to the upcoming convention face a vote of even greater impact: to potentially make Donald Trump the Republican presidential nominee. I urge them to do everything in their power to prevent that catastrophe.

There's probably little I can say to dissuade those who support Mr. Trump because they agree with his style or statements. Some who have rallied to his cause are clearly just jockeying for positions in a potential administration. Why else would Rick Perry bend his knee after describing Mr. Trump's candidacy last summer as "a toxic mix of demagoguery, mean-spiritedness, and nonsense"? Or Chris Christie? The New Jersey governor never stood taller than when he declared that "ignorance is behind the criticism of Sohail Mohammed," a highly-qualified Muslim-American he appointed to the state bench. Only ambition can thus explain his stooping to endorse someone who proposed a national Muslim-ban as a solution to the chimera of radical Islamic terrorism. There's probably no reasoning with "leaders" like Governors Perry or Christie either.

But many Republican voters and leaders are embracing Mr. Trump hesitantly, engaging in incredible feats of intellectual bargaining to justify their support.

Some rationalize that his primary weakness is impulse control; for example, one congressman advised him to "think before you say what's on your mind." To them, I say it's a much greater concern if he actually believes what he says. Speaker Paul Ryan criticized Mr. Trump recently for making "the textbook definition of a racist comment" in regard to a judge he doesn't like. Taken together with his reluctance to repudiate the support of white supremacists, it means the party of Lincoln could have a racist as its standard-bearer in 2016.

Others opine that despite his radical policy pronouncements, Mr. Trump is a conservative at heart. To them, I say the only common thread in what he professes to believe is incoherence. After all, Mr. Trump bemoans offshoring but manufactured his clothing line in China, and he calls for a trade war against that country but insists they'll help us put pressure on North Korea.

Still others harp on the importance of "party unity," but we are not communists or fascists and therefore are under no obligation to support the party in pursuit of a Pyrrhic victory. The GOP should be a vehicle for conservative solutions, not Mr. Trump's ego and self-enrichment.

To all Republicans, supporters and fence-sitters alike: Mr. Trump will let us down. The word of a man who oversaw four bankruptcies, mocked a disabled reporter, compared his sex life to wartime military service, et cetera ad infinitum has little value and cannot be trusted.

I can't tell the delegates whom to vote for, or even how, as the convention rules have yet to be finalized. But it can't be for Mr. Trump — the stakes are too high.

It would have been difficult to vote against Governor Palin's vice-presidential candidacy, as convention leaders made it a vote by acclimation. I could have held up a sign to show my disapproval, or confided in a reporter, but my opposition would likely have been drowned out and overlooked in a sea of supportive delegates. And the truth is any doubts I had were forgotten in that historic moment as the party nominated a woman to its ticket for the first time..

Speaking out isn't easy, especially when you're voicing an unpopular opinion — but principles only mean something when you stand up for them when they're inconvenient. So I pray that when the delegates stand on the convention floor, they think carefully about the consequences of their actions. I pray they will not be swayed by the fanfare or misguided party loyalty, as I was. I pray they make history again by rejecting Mr. Trump's candidacy.

Democratic DEFCON 4

At Slate, David Weigel says that Senate Democrats are currently at DEFCON 4 (increased intelligence and heightened security):

The smart money in Washington is for a hung Senate—maybe the party loses West Virginia, South Dakota, Arkansas, Montana, and Alaska. But Democrats aren’t actually down in the polls in Alaska.

That state, which hadn’t previously elected a Democratic senator since Mike Gravel (yes, him), is a test case of whether Democrats can help a lousy candidate navigate the Republican primary to face the DSCC on the killing field. Begich is four points ahead of Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell, who’s running, but he’d be 12 points ahead of Sarah Palin if she ran, and he’d be doing even better if failed (and Palin-endorsed) 2010 GOP candidate Joe Miller won the primary. Knowing this, Begich has aggressively trolled Palin, and gotten the predictable angry response in the form of Facebook posts.

This is a playbook Democrats haven’t snapped shut yet. In 2012, Guy Cecil helped shape Sen. Claire McCaskill’s strategy of elevating Todd Akin by attacking him as the “most conservative” candidate in TV ads that, obviously, thrilled conservatives. In 2014, they could try that in Georgia, where two of the most right-wing members of the House are trying to make the runoff. “They’ve never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” said Bennet. Would the DSCC help them in that effort? “If we did, I wouldn’t tell you.”

In After Hope and Change, we discuss the McCaskill ad that nominally criticized Akin but effectively won him support in the GOP primary:

Leadership PACs

Open Secrets reports:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa). Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.).

All are current lawmakers with political action committees that gave a third or less -- in some cases far less -- of their proceeds to other candidates in the 2012 campaign cycle.

Leadership PACs are an extension of a politician's brand. Set up as auxiliaries to traditional campaign committees, they're traditionally thought of as ways for politicians to earn goodwill by passing campaign cash on to other party members -- bestowing gifts on up-and-comers in exchange for loyalty down the road, or offering tribute to party higher-ups. But in an analysis of leadership PACs, OpenSecrets.org found that of the 25 leadership PACs that spent more than $1 million in the last election cycle, just five of them gave more than 50 percent of their money to other candidates.

...
SarahPAC, the leadership PAC led by former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin, also ranks among the top spending leadership PACs, but it stands out for how little of that cash it gives to other candidates. The group spent $5.1 million in the 2012 cycle, ranking it third on the list of top spenders even though Palin was not running for any office, but it gave just 4 percent of that, or about $306,000, to candidates, PACs or party groups.

The number one recipient of SarahPAC cash was HSP Direct, a Virginia-based direct mail company.

While Palin's leadership PAC stands out for its high spending and single digit sharing, it's not an unusual pattern for politicans rumored to have presidential ambitions, or at least aspirations to a national profile.

Rubio's Reclaim America PAC spent $1.7 million, far less than SarahPAC, but similarly gave just 4 percent of that cash to other political committees or parties. The leadership PACs for Reps. Michelle Bachman (R-Min.), Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and his son Rand, all known for their national aspirations, all raised more than $1 million but gave 10 percent or less to other candidates.

Debate Fallout

AP reports:

The Nielsen ratings company says an estimated 67.2 million people watched the first debate between President Barack Obama and challenger Mitt Romney, the largest TV audience for a presidential debate since 1992.

Eleven TV networks carried Wednesday night's debate live. Telemundo showed it on tape delay.

Nielsen says you have to go back to the second debate involving Bill Clinton, George Bush and Ross Perot in 1992 for a more popular presidential debate.

Four years ago the vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin attracted 69.9 million viewers.

Nielsen says 11.25 million people watched the debate on ABC, 11.07 million watched on NBC, 10.58 million on CBS, 10.44 million on Fox News Channel, 6.88 million on the Fox broadcast network, 6.05 million on CNN, 4.73 million on MSNBC and 2.58 million on Univision.

Nate Silver writes:

On Friday, Mitt Romney had his best day in state-level polling since at least the party conventions, something that very probably reflects improvement in his standing following the presidential debate in Denver on Wednesday.

Two automated polling firms, Rasmussen Reports and We Ask America, released polls in Ohio, Florida and Virginia on Friday. All of these polls were conducted on Thursday, the day after the Denver debate.

In the Rasmussen Reports polls, Mr. Romney trailed Barack Obama by 1 point in Ohio. But he led him by 1 point in Virginia and by 2 points in Florida.

These are very good numbers for Mr. Romney as compared with the ones we were seeing recently, although part of that is because Rasmussen has shown more favorable numbers for him in these states throughout the year. As compared with Rasmussen Reports’ previous polls of the same states, the margin in Ohio held steady, but Mr. Romney gained 2 points in Virginia and 4 in Florida, for an average gain of 2 points among the three states.

The We Ask America polls suggested that Mr. Romney made much larger gains. He led in all three states in its polls — and gained an average of 7 points from We Ask America’s prior polling of the same states.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

It is too early to tell how much Mr. Romney moved the needle Wednesday night, and the early evidence is more anecdotal than empirical: Volunteers in Nevada lined up before campaign staff could open the doors on Thursday morning, the campaign said, and larger-than-usual groups showed up to work at field offices across the country. The campaign said it added more than 300,000 new Facebook friends.

The $12 million the campaign reports raising in less than 48 hours after the debate tops the amount Mr. Romney raised in the days after announcing Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) as his running mate and the Supreme Court's decision to uphold a major plank of the president's health-care law. Sixty percent of the money came from first-time donors, the campaign said.

Mr. Romney's debate performance triggered additional volunteers for the GOP's next national turnout drive on Saturday. The number of people who signed up to volunteer to make calls, knock on doors and sign up supporters for Mr. Romney has shot up by nearly 63% since Wednesday night, campaign officials said. The Republican National Committee, working in conjunction with the Romney campaign and its various state parties, expects to contact nearly two million voters on Saturday and roughly five million for the week.

The New Yorker weighs in with its cover:

The Maher Issue

From yesterday's White House press briefing:

Q Last thing. The President spoke out in the news conference about how people need to be careful with their language in general, and he spoke about his own daughters and setting an example. I know he's not the language police, you're not the language police from this podium to pick on people on the left or the right. But there is a letter that went to the Chief of Staff today from a conservative group, Concerned Women for America, saying that the President should direct this super PAC, on the Democratic side, that took a million-dollar check from Bill Maher, who has had some pretty coarse things to say about conservative women.

And I understand the President can't -- he's not in charge of the super PAC, it's an outside thing. But he did bless that PAC and say to his supporters, you should give to this PAC if you want to. So can he also say, give a million-dollar check back if it's from somebody who said these things?

MR. CARNEY: I think the points that you made as you were asking your question are the ones that I will make, which is that we are not, and cannot be, the arbitrator of every statement that everybody makes in the policy and political arena.

As a general matter, obviously language that denigrates women is inappropriate. And I think I would point you to what the President said when he was asked about this during his press conference, which is that he chooses to lead by example, or to try to. He chooses to, in the pursuit of a more civil discourse in our public space, he chooses to try to practice that civility himself. And he calls on everybody to do just that.

A new video documents Maher's remarks about women and people with disabilities:

 

Palin Sorta Endorses Gingrich

At USA Today, David Jackson writes:

Newt Gingrich has a semi-endorsement from a prominent Republican: Sarah Palin.

The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee told Fox News host Sean Hannity last night that she would vote for Gingrich, if only to prolong the Republican presidential race.

"If I had to vote in South Carolina -- in order to keep this thing going -- I'd vote for Newt and I would want this to continue," Palin said.

Palin did not mention the the name of front-runner Mitt Romney, who will get a strong push toward the Republican nomination if he wins the South Carolina primary on Saturday.

But the former Alaska governor did say the Republican candidates need more vetting.

Changing Rules of the Game

At National Journal, Reid Wilson notes several ways in which the 2012 contest is changing presidential campaigns:

• "Debates are now the first primary," said Glen Bolger, a Republican pollster sitting out the 2012 race (Bolger's firm, Public Opinion Strategies, is Mitt Romney's lead pollster). 
• "The echo chamber has been exponentially heightened and strengthened by social media," said Rich Killion, a New Hampshire Republican strategist who worked for former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty. "The water cooler is not at work and you don’t have to wait until tomorrow to share your opinions; it's at your fingertips and you can do it in your pajamas in the middle of night or in the back of a cab racing to the airport.
• Meanwhile, the 2012 contest has been marked by the emergence of candidates who have used presidential campaigns as a way to sell books and make a profit. Donald Trump and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin never went beyond flirting with bids in the media, though cable news networks hungry for ratings covered their every move.
•  Other states have long coveted the attention (not to mention the tens of millions of dollars in economic activity) an early slot on the primary calendar guarantees. Florida's refusal to move its primary in compliance with Republican National Committee rules earlier this year forced Iowa and New Hampshire to move up; Michigan, Arizona, Colorado, and other states have put similar pressure on the nominating calendar, despite warnings of RNC-levied penalties.

Perry Surges

Rick Perry on a bit of a roll. The Austin America-Statesman reports on recent surveys:

• Perry was only three points behind Romney, 17 to 14 percent, in support from 323 registered GOP voters in a Fox News poll. Bachmann was third with 10 percent. President Barack Obama topped all Republicans in head-to-head matchups, with Romney behind Obama by six points (47 to 41 percent) and Perry and Pawlenty down 10 points (both 47 to 37 percent), the poll showed.

• A CNN poll of 455 Republicans and independents who lean toward the GOP showed the tightest race, with Perry only two points behind Romney, 16 to 14 percent, with potential candidates Giuliani and Palin close behind at 13 percent.

• Romney had a solid lead with support from 30 percent of GOP primary voters in an NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll. Bachmann followed with 16 percent, and Perry was third with support from 11 percent of those polled.

• Perry came in fourth with support from 8 percent of registered Republican voters surveyed by the Washington Post and ABC News. Romney had 28 percent, followed by Palin with 16 percent and Bachmann with 13 percent.

If he runs, this article in The Texas Monthly will be the starting point for a lot of research. In "Dear Yankee," Paul Burka writes of 8 points to keep in mind while writing about the governor:

1. He is not Bush. He grew up poor, while Bush grew up rich. They hate each other.

2. It is not a big deal that he was once a Democrat, since he was always a conservative. [Besides, Reagan started off as a Democrat -- and a liberal. -- JJP]

3. He is cannier than you think. He knew what he was doing with secession remarks.

4. Texas is not a "weak governor" state. Like LBJ as majority leader, he has expanded the power of his office.

5. He is not a hair model. He is a very tough pol.

6. He is from the middle of nowhere -- Paint Creek.

7. He is an Aggie.

8. He is lucky.

Burka concludes:

So there you have it. In closing, I would like to request that you please do your best to avoid tin-ear clichés about barbecue, cattle, oil, football, and the Alamo. Remember, this is an urban state of 25 million people. We don’t go to sleep at night dreaming of William Barret Travis drawing a line in the sand. We do admire our rural history, as this month’s cover attests, but our vitality is in the cities. Enjoy your visit, best of luck, and please get it right this time.

Palin Emails

Yes, Anthony Weiner's name does show up in the Palin emails, but only as part of a long list of recipients in an email that she forwarded.

As Andy Barr says at Politico, the Palin emails show that she was aware of vice presidential speculation well in advance of McCain's decision to choose her. (Of course, certain pundits had mentioned her as a possibility months before, indeed as early as October 2007).

Molly Ball writes at Politico:

Once, there was a different Sarah Palin.

She was hands-on and averse to partisan politics. She championed openness in government and had normal relations with the media. She was a little starstruck by her interactions with national politicians but unafraid to do battle with the chief executives of the world’s largest oil companies.

Continue Reading

The emails from her governorship, released Friday, brought back the memory of a long-lost Palin: the popular, charismatic, competent woman of the people.

This was the vice presidential candidate John McCain’s team thought they were getting, before her darker tendencies — defensiveness, thin skin, grudge-keeping — hardened into tics. Together with the newly released, pro-Palin documentary “The Undefeated,” which focuses on her rise to the spotlight, the emails are reminders of a sympathetic figure who was not yet the brittle, divisive caricature Palin has become.

The Palin that emerges from the first cut at nearly 25,000 emails released by the state of Alaska Friday is touchingly authentic, responding to the news she’s been tapped for the national ticket with the words, “Can you flippinbelieveit?!”

Palin Poll Data

A CBS poll finds that Republicans do not want Sarah Palin in the race:

Most Republicans do not want to see former Alaska governor Sarah Palin enter the presidential race, a new CBS News poll finds.

Fifty-four percent of Republican registered voters want Palin to stay out of the race, as do 50 percent of Tea Party supporters. Just 34 percent of Republicans and 38 percent of Tea Party supporters want her to seek the Republican nomination. Overall, two-thirds of registered voters want Palin to stay out of the race.

Republicans are split on opinions of Palin overall: Thirty-seven percent have a favorable view, 36 percent have an unfavorable view, and 25 percent have no opinion. Her favorable rating among all voters, meanwhile, is just 21 percent, with 57 percent holding an unfavorable view.

The Republican presidential candidate with the highest net favorability rating among Republican voters is Mitt Romney, who has a 37 percent favorable rating and an 11 percent unfavorable rating. But despite Romney's relatively high profile, half say they don't know enough about him or have no opinion.

A June 2-5 Washington Post poll offers similarly discouraging news:

The balance of public opinion is decidedly against a Sarah Palin run for president. Nearly two-thirds — 64 percent — flatly rule out supporting her in 2012; 28 percent would consider it; and just 7 percent are committed to voting for her.

In the Republican former governor of Alaska decides to join the race, the numbers leave a lot of convincing ahead, even within her base. Across a variety of Republican-aligned groups, there is steep opposition to Sen. John McCain’s 2008 running mate.

Among Republicans overall, 42 percent would definitely not vote for her, and 14 percent say they would definitely support her. Palin was in a better position among Republicans in 2009 and 2010, when fewer than three in 10 flatly rejected her and majorities said they would consider voting for her.

Palin Bus Tour

At "The Note," Sarah Just reports on Sarah Palin's bus tour:

While the “One Nation” tour Is not specifically being called a presidential campaign effort, it sure looks like one. Palin released a “One Nation”video on Friday that was more slick than most campaign ads.

But many in the media – which Palin often calls the “lame stream media” – couldn’t even find the One Nation bus Sunday morning.

Palin aides this weekend indicated that the tour schedule would be posted on Palin's political action committee website, SarahPAC.com, but as of Sunday morning there were no updates.

Andy Barr writes at Politico:

The bus tour is the first major test of what Palin’s organization can do on its own. For every other major public event since Palin resigned as Alaska governor, other people have done the details. Her paid speeches are handled by the people who hire her. The logistics and press for her two book tours were taken care of by her publisher. Her speech on the Mall at Glenn Beck’s rally last summer, the two fundraisers she’s done for the RNC, her appearances at events for tea party groups in Boston and Las Vegas — all that was coordinated by the groups that brought her in.

Palin rehired advance aides Doug McMarlin and Jason Recher to plan the tour. They’re now part of an increasingly small Palin circle, made even smaller since spokeswoman Rebecca Mansour was sidelined from talking to the press after tweets criticizing Palin’s daughter were posted by the Daily Caller earlier this week. SarahPAC Treasurer Tim Crawford, a longtime Washington hand and campaign finance expert with deep ties to the Republican establishment, has been filling Mansour’s role on press. There’s a policy researcher, and she has former Bob Dole aide Michael Glasner serving as her chief of staff.

Along with her husband Todd and Palin herself, that’s the extent of the inner circle. And convinced she’s her own best spokesman and advocate, Palin calls all the shots directly.

At Politico, Molly Ball explains that the Northeast is unfriendly territory:

Palin’s plans, details of which are still hazy, will also take her to New Hampshire for the first time since she was on the GOP ticket with John McCain.

But after all her time away, Granite Staters aren’t feeling particularly warm about her.

A CNN/WMUR poll of New Hampshire Republican voters last week found Palin had the support of just 5 percent, good for fifth place and trailing non-candidate Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who has dipped his toe in the presidential waters of late.

Among the New Hampshire electorate as a whole, Palin is viewed favorably by just 28 percent, according to a recent survey by the Democratic automated pollster Public Policy Polling.

In PPP surveys in 31 states over the last six months, just three states had smaller proportions of Palin fans, and all were in the northeast: New Jersey, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. (Though the firm is partisan, its results generally track with polls by other organizations. PPP’s results were used in this analysis in the interest of consistency across different states.)

Continue Reading

Palin’s highest ratings, in the low 40s, were in states like Montana, Mississippi, Nebraska and Texas, according to PPP.

Daniels Out

Mitch Daniels isn't running. Erin McPike writes at RealClearPolitics:

The Republican received encouragement from all over the country, from tea party activists to elites. But in the end, his family concerns stood in the way.

Saturday night, Daniels said, "The counsel and encouragement I received from important citizens like you caused me to think very deeply about becoming a national candidate. In the end, I was able to resolve every competing consideration but one, but that, the interests and wishes of my family, is the most important consideration of all."

He went on: "If I have disappointed you, I will always be sorry. If you feel that this was a non-courageous or unpatriotic decision, I understand and will not attempt to persuade you otherwise. I only hope that you will accept my sincerity in the judgment I reached."

Daniels' exit is welcome news to the campaigns of Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney, who would have competed directly with him in New Hampshire and for many of the same donors.

Jonathan Martin writes at Politico:

Mitch Daniels’s overnight decision against a presidential bid will immediately raise the volume on the low-hum grumbling among Republican insiders that they’re gearing up to face President Obama with the weakest primary field in recent memory.

The pressure on a handful of Republicans who’ve insisted they won’t consider running but would be potentially strong alternatives to Mitt Romney will now significantly intensify, but the ultimate beneficiaries of Daniels’s absence may be two candidates already on course to run: Tim Pawlenty and Jon Huntsman.

At the moment, though, the Indiana governor’s exit illustrates the degree to which the GOP race is being shaped by who’s not running.

Consider the list of would-be candidates who’ve passed on a campaign in the last four months: Mike Pence, John Thune, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, Donald Trump and now Daniels.

Add Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan and Rick Perry – Republicans with star power who’ve said flatly they won’t run – and it translates into a GOP establishment deeply worried that the flawed options they’re left with won’t be any match for an incumbent president who seemingly won’t face a primary but is likely to shatter campaign fundraising records.

As Gabriel Sherman writes at New York, Roger Ailes is not happy:

And, for all his programming genius, he was more interested in a real narrative than a television narrative—he wanted to elect a president. All he had to do was watch Fox’s May 5 debate in South Carolina to see what a mess the field was—a mess partly created by the loudmouths he’d given airtime to and a tea party he’d nurtured. And, not incidentally, a strong Republican candidate would be good for his business, too. A few months ago, Ailes called Chris Christie and encouraged him to jump into the race. Last summer, he’d invited Christie to dinner at his upstate compound along with Rush Limbaugh, and like much of the GOP Establishment, he fell hard for Christie, who nevertheless politely turned down Ailes’s calls to run. Ailes had also hoped that David Petraeus would run for president, but Petraeus too has decided to sit this election out, choosing to stay on the counterterrorism front lines as the head of Barack Obama’s CIA. The truth is, for all the antics that often appear on his network, there is a seriousness that underlies Ailes’s own politics. He still speaks almost daily with George H. W. Bush, one of the GOP’s last great moderates, and a war hero, which especially impresses Ailes.

All the 2012 candidates know that Ailes is a crucial constituency. “You can’t run for the Republican nomination without talking to Roger,” one GOPer told me. “Every single candidate has consulted with Roger.” But he hasn’t found any of them, including the adults in the room—Jon Huntsman, Mitch Daniels, Mitt Romney—compelling. “He finds flaws in every one,” says a person familiar with his thinking.

“He thinks things are going in a bad direction,” another Republican close to Ailes told me. “Roger is worried about the future of the country. He thinks the election of Obama is a disaster. He thinks Palin is an idiot. He thinks she’s stupid. He helped boost her up. People like Sarah Palin haven’t elevated the conservative movement.”

Social Media's Role in 2012

Michael Scherer writes at Time:

From the moment he arrived in January, Plouffe changed the way the White House unfolds each morning. He demanded far more precision and repetition in the language used by the President and his surrogates. ("Win the future," ad nauseam.) He sought greater outreach to state and local media outlets. (West Wing aides now get news summaries from regional papers and local 6 o'clock news broadcasts, not just national publications.) And he doubled down on efforts by the White House to use social media to spread its message. (Plouffe, who turns 44 this month, also removed the clutter on Axelrod's desk; his desk is spit-shine clean.) (See why Obama is not a lock in 2012.)

Plouffe points to the recent announcement of the Osama bin Laden raid. By the time Obama spoke, shortly after 11:35 p.m. E.T. on a Sunday, 56.5 million Americans had their televisions on to watch the speech — Obama's largest audience as President, according to Nielsen. An additional million-plus people watched the speech stream on WhiteHouse.gov. Word had traveled fast in two hours. "People were texting each other and tweeting and on Facebook and doing some old-fashioned landline calling, I'm sure," Plouffe says. "That's how the world works these days."

With the 2012 campaign approaching, Plouffe is looking for every opportunity to sharpen Obama's edge. He has leaned heavily on the 10-person department that handles digital outreach and launched efforts to interact with the public, including a series called Advise the Adviser, in which citizens are invited to write in policy recommendations. He has also issued calls for Americans to organize roundtables, using online White House tools, to discuss immigration policy. "There is no guarantee that you are going to get any of those people through any other means," he says, noting shrinking audiences for TV news.

Rich Galen writes at Mullings:

In the week or so since he formally announced that he was a candidate for President, his campaign has gone from sputtering to on the rocks.

Newt is not a great orator. He is, as a former college professor, a great lecturer. If I had been involved in the planning, I would have had him deliver one of his 50 minute lectures before a live audience then edited it down to a five to seven minute video which would have had the energy a live audience provides.

As it was, the announcement had all the excitement of a corporate auditor reading the balance sheet at a stockholders' meeting.

There has been no word from the campaign as to how much, if any, money it raised in those first days.

It is hard to believe that they didn't have the millions of people on Newt's vaunted e-mail and twitter lists teed up to hit the "DONATE" key on the website when the video was put up - even if only to donate $5 - so in the ensuing 48 hours they could have announced that X-tens of thousands of people had donated Y-hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Sarah Palin tells Sean Hannity:

Well, I think to start with, we ignore some of these reporters and their requests for us to comment and be interviewed. We know going into what they are going to do to us, to a conservative. So, why participate in their game?

Instead, candidates need to get their message out via the news social media, be a fair and balanced reporters who will just allow the facts to get out there. Don't even participate in that goofy game that has been played now for too many years with the leftist lamestream media trying to twist the candidates' words and intent and content of their statements.

Undeclared Candidates' Debate on SNL

Saturday Night Live was relevant in the 2010 campaign, and remains so:

Some background on Bachmann-looking-at-the-wrong-camera, from CNN in January:

Was Rep. Michele Bachmann looking at the wrong camera during her Tea Party-sponsored rebuttal to President Obama Tuesday night?

Not exactly.

While it may have appeared that way to viewers watching on CNN, Bachmann was actually addressing the camera of the Tea Party Express, the group that had invited the congresswoman to deliver a response to the State of the Union. The feed from that camera

Still it's likely many more saw Bachmann's remarks on CNN, where it appeared the three-term Minnesota Republican was looking slightly off screen. The camera CNN took to air was actually supplied by Fox, who shot the event on behalf of all the news networks as part of the rotating network pool coverage. Fox ran Bachmann's speech at a later point Tuesday night on tape delay.

Bachmann's delivery was subsequently mocked by a number of left leaning commentators and no less than David Axelrod, a top adviser to President Barack Obama, who afterwards in an interview with MSNBC said, "Am I looking at the right camera?"

Flaws

Mitt Romney is not the only GOP candidate who has to grapple with flaws. At USA Today, Susan Page writes:

The most credible contenders to take on President Obama in 2012 must deal first with vulnerabilities that threaten their standing in the GOP — “a deal-killer,” says Trey Grayson, a once-rising star in the Kentucky GOP who is director of Harvard’s Institute of Politics.

“Going into this cycle, every candidate you can envision being the nominee has a real question they have to answer to Republican primary voters,” says former GOP national chairman Ed Gillespie. “There’s really not any one of the most significant candidates who doesn’t have some issue that has to be addressed before they can capture the nomination.”

Having to deal with a big vulnerability isn’t new, of course. Four years ago, Arizona Sen. John McCain had to persuade party regulars that he was a loyal Republican despite a history of forming alliances with Democrats on issues such as campaign finance. He eventually won the nomination.

What’s notable this time is that everyone seems afflicted.

Some of the candidates have been caught in the party’s increasingly conservative tide, having to account for past positions on health care or the environment that weren’t so far out of the party’s mainstream at the time but now are more in line with Democrats’ views. What’s more, the profusion of websites and bloggers means issues are raised, circulated and scrutinized with a velocity that’s unprecedented.

She identifies several tactics for dealing with these shortcomings:

1. Apologize (Pawlenty on cap-and-trade);
2. Explain (Romney on Romneycare; Huckabee on the Clemmons commutation);
3. Fix (Gingrich on faith and family; Barbour on race)
4. Turn it around (Barbour on lobbying; Huntsman on his ambassadorship).

At The Washington Post, Dan Balz and Jon Cohen reports good news/bad news for the field:

Deepening economic pessimism has pushed down President Obama’s approval rating to a near record low, but he holds an early advantage over prospective 2012 rivals in part because of widespread dissatisfaction with Republican candidates, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

In the survey, 47 percent approve of the job Obama is doing, down seven points since January. Half of all Americans disapprove of his job performance, with 37 percent saying they “strongly disapprove,” nearly matching the worst level of his presidency.

Driving the downward movement in Obama’s standing are renewed concerns about the economy and fresh worry about rising prices, particularly for gasoline. Despite signs of economic growth, 44 percent of Americans see the economy as getting worse, the highest percentage to say so in more than two years.

The toll on Obama is direct: 57 percent disapprove of the job the president is doing dealing with the economy, tying his highest negative rating when it comes to the issue. And the president is doing a bit worse among politically important independents.

If Obama is running into headwinds, however, his potential Republican opponents face serious problems, as well. Less than half of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say they are satisfied with the field of GOP candidates.

That field is still taking shape, but the sentiment is a big falloff from four years ago, when nearly two-thirds of Republicans were satisfied with their options.

Lack of enthusiasm for the candidates came in other measures, as well. When Republicans and GOP-leaners were asked who they would vote for in a primary or caucus, only former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney registered in double digits, with 16 percent. More than double that number expressed no opinion and an additional 12 percent volunteered “none” or “no one.”

Businessman Donald Trump (8 percent), former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee (6 percent) and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin (5 percent) were the only other names volunteered by more than 2 percent of respondents.

An Early Look at 2012 Online

Andy Barr writes at Politico:

Sarah Palin rolled out a new website for her PAC on Monday with significantly more content and features, along with a vehicle for Palin to start gathering email addresses and information from her supporters.

The new site, sarahpac.com, is a necessary step if Palin intends to run for president and for the first time gives her organization the ability to interact with her supporters by providing a centralized location to collect data and solicit donations. Though Palin maintains a staff of several seasoned political hands, she had yet to build out some of the basic needs of a political organization — including an email list.

SarahPAC Treasurer Tim Crawford told POLITICO that the new site has been in the work for some time and was designed to engage more directly with Palin supporters.

“We needed a new website, one that was more interactive,” Crawford said. “We’re certainly engaging with Sarah’s supporters.”

Seema Mehta writes at The Los Angeles Times:

Pre-Obama, the political world viewed digital as a box that had to be checked," said Bryan Merica, a GOP new-media consultant. "What Obama did was show this is a tool we can use to not only fundraise but win elections."

Patrick Ruffini, another new-media consultant, described the 2008 Obama campaign as the "gold standard."

"Republicans, after that campaign, we were kind of licking our wounds, wondering how we could do this better," he said.

They have since learned; the "tea party" movement was built in part on social media connections, much as Obama's campaign.

Ruffini cited the Internet's role in the 2010 election of Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown, delivering $12 million in donations in the 18 days before he captured the Senate seat that had been held by the late Democrat Edward M. Kennedy.

"Digital … made a game-changing difference in the race," said Ruffini, whose firm worked on the Brown campaign and is now working for Pawlenty.

Among the most remarkable users is Palin, who routinely posts notes to her nearly 3 million followers on Facebook in order to bypass what she calls the "lamestream" media.

"I can't think of any time in American history where the vice presidential candidate on a losing ticket has been so iconic two, three years after the election," said Paul Levinson, a Fordham University social media expert. "That's because Sarah Palin uses Facebook and all these new media quite effectively."

Ty Fujumura writes at The Huffington Post:

"It wouldn't have been the same election without the design," says Aaron Perry-Zucker, a then-senior at RISD who founded designforobama.org, a web application that collected posters from pro-Obama designers and formatted them for easy downloading and printing. Launched in just a week, the site garnered hundreds of submissions from around the world and was spun off into an art book edited by Perry-Zucker and filmmaker Spike Lee.

Design historian Steven Heller wrote during the campaign that "never, as far as I can tell, in the history of presidential campaigns has such a huge outpouring of independent posters been created for a single candidate. This election's poster child is definitely Barack Obama." Merited or not, the Obama campaign so galvanized designers that it created a full-fledged visual movement more typical of a revolution than than election.

The visual characteristics of the Obama brand became trendy, and remain so. The sweeping gradients and subtle shadows of Obama's 2008 site and the new whitehouse.gov were not new, but atypical, and Obama's look propelled those trends to prominence. The campaign's favored typeface, Gotham by Hoefler and Frere-Jones, was recently acquired by MOMA along with 23 other "New Faces". McCain's oft-used Trajan, typical of movie posters, gravestones and memorials, was not.

"Picking Gotham over Trajan is clearly a hip move, showing that you know something about the design zeitgeist, about the evolution of typography, and going with something that feels modern and clean," Perry-Zucker says. The typefaces, featured prominently in the endless torrent of campaign ads ran by both sides during the race, contributed greatly to the perceived character of each candidate. Trajan versus Gotham encapsulated how the public ultimately judged the election: old versus young, tired versus fresh.

Palin Roundup

Politico's "Morning Score" has a roundup of Palin news:

Former New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg warns in the Hill that the 2012 Republican primaries could drag on all the way to the GOP convention and produce a nominee who can’t win the general election. That’s Palin he’s talking about, arguing that someone “who runs second or third in a great many primaries could go into the convention with a sizable block of delegates. Who would this favor? Does Sarah Palin come to mind? Although she is not viewed by most as strong enough to win, she is viewed by many as a person worth voting for to make a statement … [P]icking a nominee who it seems would be easily defeated by President Obama might not be the best statement.” http://bit.ly/ht7F04

- POLITICO’s Jonathan Martin and John Harris write that a growing number of Republican intellectuals are frustrated with Palin’s “politics of grievance and group identity” and “empty brand of populism.” Martin and Harris: “For decades, it was a standard line of the right that liberals cynically promoted victimhood to achieve their goals, and that they practiced the politics of identity—race, sex and class—over ideas … Matt Labash, a longtime writer for the Weekly Standard, said that because of Palin’s frequent appeals to victimhood and group grievance, ‘She’s becoming Al Sharpton, Alaska edition’ … ‘This is a problem for the movement,” said Will about what Palin represents. “For conservatism, because it is a creedal movement, this is a disease to which it is susceptible.’” http://politi.co/e6nK5i

- Gabriel Sherman reports in New York magazine that Palin may be on “thin ice” with Fox News following her decision to spurn advice from Chairman Roger Ailes on how to handle the Tucson shootings in January. Sherman: “‘Lie low,’ [Ailes] said … The consensus in some corners of Palin's camp was that she faced considerable risks if she spoke out. But, this being Sarah Palin, she did it anyway. Ailes was not pleased with her decision, which turned out to be a political debacle for Palin … Ailes’s displeasure matters, not only because his network is a holding pen for Republican candidates-in-waiting, but because he is paying Palin a hefty $1 million annual salary while she strings out her decision over whether to run … Fox executives have been discussing when they need a definite answer from Palin on her presidential intentions.” http://bit.ly/esZWHY