The pressure was really on Sarah Palin tonight, given the incredible series of events that have been buzzing around her this week. So how did she do?
Just fine, I think. She may be new to the national scene, but she clearly knows how to give a speech and her command from the podium is at least as good as some of the other more seasoned politicians we've seen on the stump this year. She also flashed a sense of humor and, when necessary, a little well-placed scorn. The small-town hick meme probably won't be operative any more. She is not a refugee from Hee Haw by any means and that should now be clear to everyone, despite the media filter she's been subjected to in the past week.
I did have one concern about the tone of the speech -- while it was good and proper to celebrate her small-town roots and the importance of small towns in American life, the Republicans need to understand that there are a lot of people who live in urban America who might be congenial to their views as well. It is my view that the elites in this country have been driving a lot of the garbage that Sarah Palin had to deal with this week and a lot of what has been said and done has been disgraceful. The elites deserve all the mockery they received tonight but it would have been smarter politics to acknowledge that there are a lot of citizens who live in places like New York, or Philadelphia, or even Chicago who share the same ethos that Palin extolled tonight.
There are many things that bring us together as a nation but there are many cleavages as well. As a Midwesterner who grew up in a medium-sized city, I think I understand Sarah Palin fairly well. But I'm not the person she needs to convince. The McCain/Palin ticket needs to erode the advantages that the Obama/Biden ticket will have in urban centers. Perhaps John McCain will make that sale tomorrow. It would behoove him to.
7 comments:
Mark,
My take on the Palin speech was actually quite similar to yours. I think Palin did a pretty decent job. She met the expectations that were pushed upon her, which was no easy feat given the extraordinary level of scrutiny this speech was being given.
But the actual content of the speech lacked substance, and seemed to revolve around the notion that DC needs to be shaken up, which is strange coming from a leader of the party that is currently in power. I can only guess that this means the McCain camp has decided that the only way they win in November is by appealing to their base rather than an attracting independents. Because that speech was predicated on the notion that people are not going to stop and think about who has been in charge for the last eight years (and where, exactly is McCain different from Bush).
Many people in the crowd last night were comparing Palin to Reagan, and I can only attribute that to the exuberance of the moment. Reagan was so effective because, apart from his excellent personal skills, smooth delivery and wit, he added something to your party's constituency that had not been there before: Reagan Democrats. Given the divisiveness and tone of Palin's speech, I just don't see her attracting many independents or moderates. But Palin didn't seem too interested in bringing anyone new into the fold. That speech played well in the convention hall, but I doubt it will attract people tired of partisanship, which, oddly enough, seems to be one of the strongest complaints about the Washington she claims to want to shake up. I don't see how the open disdain Ms. Palin showed toward Barack Obama, in her speech tonight will forward the Republican agenda.
Mark, one last thing. I know you worked in the legal field for a lot of years, and that you are well grouded in the nomenclature of the field. Did I correctly here Giuliani say "If the facts are against you, change them." Isn't the proper quote "If the facts are against you, cite the law; if the law is against you, cite the facts." Was that a Freudian slip? I just can't tell with that guy.
Regards,
Rich
Help me out on one thing, Rich. What substance did you want? Did you want a laundry list like the speech Obama gave? That wasn't going to happen. And frankly Obama deserved a few of the shots, especially after spending the week calling the town Palin comes from "Wasilly." That was clearly calculated and, to my mind, pretty crappy on his part.
My impression of independents is very different from yours. My view on independents is that a lot of them are either (a) only mildly interested in politics or (b) contrarian. Most just aren't that into politics, certainly not the way you or I are. And so I don't see much value in trying to put forth a focus-group style speech that reaches a group that really isn't a group.
I saw enough of Obama's speech to know that it was plenty divisive, too. Ditto Biden's. It would seem that both sides are trying to get to 50.1%. Whether that is the right approach, I don't know. But it would be disingenuous to suggest that the Republicans are the only ones doing it. I am regularly treated to incredibly nasty ads from Democratic surrogates like the AFL-CIO that use the entire panoply of class warfare animus. I don't like any of it but I harbor no illusions that they will stop because I find it distasteful. Like I said yesterday, game on.
I'm not sure what Rudy said, either. He says a lot of things and it's generally not worth my time to sort it all out. He had one good line in his speech - advising Obama to call John McCain next time there's a crisis. Otherwise, it was pretty much standard fare.
Best,
Mark
Mark, no surprise that we don't see eye to eye on everything here, but I thought that the condescending tone of Palin's rhetoric regarding Obama was considerably higher from Palin than anything the Dems said about McCain. I didn't see Obama or Biden openly mocking McCain. Maybe it's just whose bull is being gored.
What I meant about her speech lacking substance is that, yes, attacking the press and elite liberals works in a year like 2000 when the country is awash in economic prosperity. (But when Mitt Romney attacks "Coastal Elites" the cognitive dissonance is palpable). In the good times, candidates can split hairs on the issues. So culture war pandering can play and play effectively.
This is not 2000 however, and many people are feeling the economic pinch; Some are losing their homes to foreclosure, having their jobs packed up and shipped over seas, and/or are finding themselves deep in the hole due to escalating health care costs.
Are the culture wars going to fly in this atmosphere? I guess we will soon find out.
Palin's speech consisted of mocking her opponents and puffing up her own credentials. Outside of drilling the North Slope, she didn't say anything about addressing the current economic crisis. Maybe that is McCain's job tonight, but I would have expected a little more attention be paid to pocketbook issues. It doesn't have to be a laundry list, but at least acknowledge the current situation and try to allay peoples fears.
Regards,
Rich
the people were expecting her throw some red meat.
instead she slaughtered the whole caribou, and danced in the entrails.
she had a great performance.
Bottom line, Rich - I don't have a lot of confidence that government, especially at the federal level, can do much about any of the things you list as concerns. I prefer McCain because he's less likely to do harm, but an Obama administration won't ruin the Republic. Either way, the trajectory of my life won't change that much.
And yep, your ox got gored good last night. Bush has had his ox gored every darn day for the past 8 years. That's how it goes. Like I said, game on. If Obama wants the job, he'd better get used to it, no?
Gino,
True dat. Palin did exactly what she was supposed to do in re attacking Obama and Biden.
A GRAND SLAM. She was hot.
Post a Comment