Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts

Friday, October 7, 2011

Sarah Palin, the Medium, the Message and the Future

How time can work for Gov. Palin rather than against her.
*
If Sarah Palin had decided to contend for the GOP nomination, could she have secured it and gone on to defeat Barack Obama in the 2012 general election? Although most of her supporters are convinced she would have accomplished both tasks, my opinion is not likely to be a popular one among my brother and sister Palaniste.

Don't get me wrong. I was one of the first to recognize that Gov. Palin is a remarkable woman, and her political instincts are nothing less than exceptional. I've been blogging for her for three years. Now that she's taken herself out of the running, I'll probably write her name in on my ballot come November. But this isn't my first political rodeo. I've been a student of American politics since the 1960 battle for the White House over half a century ago. One of the more illuminating lessons of that historic election was uncovered in analysis of audience reaction to the Kennedy-Nixon debate. Those who watched on television were convinced that JFK was the clear winner, while those who listened on radio were equally sure that Nixon won it hands down.

Four years after Kennedy's eventual victory (which was won by just 0.1 percent of the popular vote, 49.7 percent to 49.6 percent), communication theorist Marshall McLuhan's book, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, was published. In it, he coined the phrase, "The medium is the message," meaning that the form of a medium embeds itself in the message, creating a symbiotic relationship by which the medium influences how the message is perceived. Sarah Palin's message, which should be what matters most, has been overshadowed and greatly distorted by the master media manipulators of our age.

Most Americans, including likely voters, don't know much, if anything at all, about Sarah Palin's record as a city councilwoman, mayor, oil and gas commissioner and governor up in remote Alaska. Indeed, many believe that the entirety of her political experience consists of the partial term she served as governor before she was scooped up and deposited on the national political stage as John McCain's running mate in 2008. Though the media at first dutifully outlined her political resume, before the RNC convention had even wrapped up, it had faded into the background and was soon forgotten. All the talk was about an unmarried daughter who was expecting a child.

And so Sarah Palin hit the campaign trail and went where the geniuses who ran the McCain-Palin effort off a cliff told her to go for media interviews. Never in U.S. electoral history had a vice presidential candidate been grilled on foreign policy issues as Sarah Palin. Despite the fact that Russia and Alaska are in such close proximity, have many cultural ties and are trading partners, the takeaway from the media was that Gov. Palin could "see Russia from her house," something she never said. But that punch line from a weekly television comedy show became the measure that her take on U.S. foreign policy was to be judged by a public that was barely paying attention. Never mind that whenever the Russians test our air defenses with their Tu-95 "Bear" Bombers, as they still do to this day, it is always done in the skies within sight of the 49th state's coastline. But the medium is the message.

And so it went for the rest of the 2008 campaign. That which the left proposed, the media eagerly disposed, and the first woman to be elected governor of Alaska was reduced to a caricature of herself. She who governed mostly as a centrist on social issues was transformed into an evangelical theocrat. She who worked with both political parties in Alaska's best interests became perceived as an extreme right wing ideologue. The media kept hammering away at Sarah Palin in this manner for three full months, shaping the perceptions of most voters -- at least when the media even bothered to report distort her governing philosophy and issue positions. Most of the time, the media focus was on far less substantial matters, including her daughter's stormy relationship with the ne'er do well father of the governor's grandson, a wardrobe she never requested nor shopped for but acquired for her family by the McCain campaign using RNC money, and other trivial pursuits, each one distorted by a media which was not only cheer leading for the Obama-Biden campaign, but also functioning as the referees on the field where the political game was played.

After the election, the media continued to chip away at Sarah Palin's image, and what had been seen for those three months of the campaign was extended over a period of three years. When her political enemies in Alaska discovered how easily they could file bogus and frivolous ethics complaints against her, they did so more than than twenty times, and the media reported each one as front page news. But when each case was summarily dismissed or decided in the governor's favor, the story was buried in the back pages, if it was even reported at all. To their credit, Sarah Palin's supporters pushed back against the lies and media distortion, but we were mostly preaching to the choir.

It was not until the summer of this year that clubs of sufficient size were fashioned that could beat down the media's Palin narrative. The first was ironically the result of the media's determination to gain access to Sarah Palin's private emails from the first two years of her time as governor of Alaska. Though salivating reporters and editors had hoped to find truckloads of dirt on the woman they knew was an existential threat to their precious Obama, what they uncovered turned out to be compelling evidence of a capable administrator who governed competently, thoughtfully and ethically. So the emails were quickly forgotten. The second club came in the form of Stephen Bannon's excellent documentary "The Undefeated." Though unabashedly a pro-Palin film, it nevertheless presents the truth about her record as a reformer who battled and defeated cronyism and corruption in her own political party. Bannon's effort is as persuasive as it is steeped in details no policy wonk can resist devouring. Many who were not favorably disposed toward Sarah Palin have become her supporters after just one viewing of this landmark film.

But there's a problem. It takes time to change widely-held perceptions. It took Richard Nixon eight full years after his 1960 general election defeat to recast himself in the image of a winner. Nixon also had several other key factors working in his favor, not the least of which was a superior political organization. That organization allowed him to defeat his rivals for the GOP nomination, a field which incidentally included Ronald Reagan. Perception and organization are two necessities Sarah Palin needs to have working in her favor to win both her party's presidential nomination and a general election. Both require a lot of time and no end of hard work. Consider that he media has taken three years to fashion its image of Sarah Palin. It will take at least that long to repair the damage that has been done to her reputation by her political enemies, and the most serious work on that front has only just begun.

The Bannon film was only released on DVD this month, which makes the timing for it to have a significant impact this election cycle less than optimal. Yes, it can change thousands of minds before the first primaries are held a few short months from now, but millions -- not thousands -- of minds need to be changed. That takes time which Sarah Palin does not have, at least not to win the present election cycle. The governor's supporters, if they take the long view, can use "The Undefeated" to win over those millions, but it will take more than a few mere months to do so. Taking the long view has the advantage of making time work in the governor's favor and not against her. But that requires no small measure of patience on the part of her troops on the ground.

The same is true of the task of building an effective campaign organization. Time was working against the organizational effort being made on the governor's behalf, but only to the extent that 2012 has been the target. Organize 4 Palin has done work which is no less than heroic, but no matter how unconventional a Palin presidential campaign may be -- if there is still to be one -- it must regardless abide by certain conventions. If O4P takes the long view, it can harness the latent power of the grassroots to take control of the Republican Party's basic electoral building blocks. Precinct captains and county chairmen currently control this structure, one which gives them access to voter lists and the other war materiel of electoral combat. By forging alliances with local TEA Party groups, O4P can rebuild the GOP infrastructure in a manner which will be favorable to a future Palin presidential run. It's amazing how many precinct and country party posts go uncontested, which leaves them ripe for the picking. It is similarly not a daunting task to get oneself made a delegate to the party's local, state and even national conventions. This is the sort of work which has to be done to wrest control of the Republican Party away from the politics-as-usual types who wield its power today. Again, if the goal is, say, 2016 or 2020, it is very doable.

Though I take Gov. Palin at her word that family considerations were primary in her decision not to run for president this time around, I have to believe that image and organization were at least secondary reasons of consequence. If her supporters look ahead, keep their feet on the ground and do the legwork, they can not only change the media-shaped public perception of her to that which is told by her true story, but they can also make the Republican Party a much more Palin-friendly organization. The lessons of this electoral cycle can be valuable learning for Sarah's Army. Like a freshman year at a war college, her troops can come away from their experience fully armed and ready for battle. But it will require them to get the stars out of their eyes and see the nuts and bolts of basic political construction and how they can be used to build a formidable political organization.

Sarah Palin is no Richard Nixon, and that's to her credit in many ways. But if Tricky Dick could make himself into a winner after a humiliating defeat and years later into a elder statesman after the biggest political scandal in American history, it should be no problem for Sarah and her supporters to correct her image in the eyes of the majority of voters. Remember, Nixon managed to change his own image after the media had made him into a political pariah. In four years' time, with her supporters using the media resources available to them to make an electorate much more receptive to her message and remaking the Republican Party into one that fights for her rather than against, I'd be willing to wager that she would have a difficult time saying no to a Draft Palin movement. Consider that the perceptions and concerns of some of the family members can also possibly change over a period of years. In the meantime, she will be doing her part to change hearts and minds. If her supporters can do the same, perhaps it will be history in the making. If the medium is indeed the message, why not use the media, including such powerful resources as "The Undefeated," to make the message her message?

- JP

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Alaska's Sen. Murkowski a Coke Head?

-By Warner Todd Huston
*
Dan Riehl of Riehl World View has a bit of a bombshell to drop on the arrogant, self-reverential "Senator of the people," Alaska's Lisa Murkowski -- she of the second hand Senate seat bequeathed to her by her father who held that seat himself. Riehl says that it is a commonly known, not-so-secret secret in Alaska that Lisa Murkowski is and/or was a major drug addict even as she served as Alaska's Republican Senator.

Murkowski recently lost her primary, as we all know, and suddenly she is now Mz independent because obviously having her in the Senate is far, far more important than anything as silly as the will of the voters! Perhaps her drug use explains her completely incomprehensible decision to continue running despite being turned out by her own voters?

So what did Riehl find?
"It was back during the primary that I first heard reports that Alaska's independent candidate for Senate, Lisa Murkowski, may have routinely ignored the state's drug laws by regularly abusing cocaine. Given a lack of solid sources and Lisa Murkowski's loss to Joe Miller, I moved on, though some reports suggested the abuse may have been habitual, even while her influential politician father, Frank Murkowski, positioned himself as something of a hardliner on drug enforcement."
After calling Murkowski's office and getting no reply, Riehl sent five questions via email that he wanted answered regarding this rumored drug use.
1) Has Senator Murkowski ever used cocaine recreationally prior to her holding elective office at the state, or federal level? Has she ever shared same in the past, without cost, with friends and or associates, including at a then downtown Anchorage restaurant owned by her husband?

2) It's also been alleged that this was something of an open secret within a relatively small circle of friends and associates in Alaska. If true, is that a correct characterization?

3) Has the Senator ever been confronted with said allegations? If so, how did she respond?

4) Has her husband, Verne Martell, ever been involved with a police matter in California? Did Lisa's father Frank ever use his influence to minimize said matter, if not in essence, make it go away? Has she ever been approached by CA or AK media in this regard?

5) Finally, as it will likely be briefly re-visited in a pending item, the Senator recently spoke well of PMBR, see link below, despite its having been hit with an 11.9 million dollar judgment for copyright violation. Would the campaign care to comment as to how her experience with PMBR relates to the copyright issue? Any comment as to any concerns that the acknowledged assistance from PMBR could be construed as her having gained insight to copyrighted questions for which (bar exam) testing candidates should not have had access?
Still no reply.

Riehl looked up one of Murkowski's former opponents and he said he got many reports of Murkowski's drug use when he ran against her in 1998. "I received many calls back then alleging that Ms. Murkowski used cocaine in substantial amounts for a prolonged period of time," said Richard J. Helms.

Riehl has a lot of other anecdotal evidence concerning Murkowski's drug use at his blog post but it all raises an interesting question. Why has Murkowski not addressed this persistent question, one that has been around in Alaska since at least 1998? One would think that Murkowski would have at least denied the allegations and moved on if they are, indeed, deniable. But Riehl could find no statement from Murkowski shooting down the rumors.

These are pretty strong charges, to be sure. Why no reply?

Now, many of you reading this may dismiss this as all just rumormongering, unsubstantiated blather, nothing to get exercised about. Of course there's that whole media propensity to think the "seriousness of the charge" is enough to talk about this accusation until the cows come home (for you city folks that means "for a long time").

Yet, even as the media would normally give this sort of rumor a full court press, the same media has wholly ignored this long-time rumor. One has to wonder why?

On the other hand, let us contrast the media blowing off this Murkowski rumor to its drummed up reports about another Alaska politician: Sarah Palin. Remember the idiotically absurd rumors that Sarah's baby son Trig was actually her own daughter's baby, one born out of wedlock?

This rumor was really one of the most idiotic rumors of the age, one easily disproven, yet the Old Media played this rumor to the hilt and for months used it as a staple of criticism of Palin during the 2008 presidential elections.

So, in light of the halfwit Trig truther rumor that the Old Media went wild to report I have to ask once again: why is the Old Media ignoring this much more substantive Murkowski drug use rumor?

In any case, it's all a pretty good reason to vote for Joe Miller for Senate in Alaska!

-WTH

Warner Todd Huston is editor of Publius' Forum and a contributor to Texas for Sarah Palin as well as Big Government, Right Wing News, and a number of other websites.

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Sarah Palin on Fox Business, Wednesday, June 9, 2010

*
Sarah Palin appeared on Fox Business Wednesday evening, and discussed the success of candidates she has backed in the primaries and other issues with "Scoreboard" anchor David Asman:



- JP

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Sarah Palin: 'This is a center-right country'

*
SArah Palin appeared on "Hannity" Tuesday night to discuss the day's primary and special election results.



- JP

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Ed Morrissey on Principled Palin Pragmatism

*
Hot Air's Ed Morrissey was at the Rosemont Theater last night for Gov. Palin's speech and posted about it this morning. Here are some excerpts which we think are significant, in light of the dust up over Gov. Palin's most recent endorsement:
Palin addressed the issue of her endorsement of Carly Fiorina during her speech. Without mentioning Fiorina by name, Palin defended the California Senate candidate as “pro-life, pro-business,” and underscored Fiorina’s conservative credentials. Activists need to back the “best conservatives we can elect,” Palin said, and said that activists have to have some pragmatism about electability. Palin took a more veiled shot at Tom Campbell by noting that Fiorina was a better conservative choice than some of the alternatives.

She also challenged the notion of RINOs in her speech, which may also have surprised some in the audience. While the name “Mark Kirk!” got yelled repeatedly, Palin warned about purity purges in the Republican Party, especially in this midterm cycle. Palin admitted that RINOs exist but argued that they’re more rare than people think — and to remember that the goal is to produce conservative leadership in Congress and eventually in the White House. That won’t happen, Palin reminded people more than once, while Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi control the agenda.

The crowd was highly receptive to the entire speech, although one could hear a little grumbling about RINOs during Palin’s argument. It was an effective rally speech, but also a practical defense of her efforts and endorsements in this campaign season.
Read the full Morrissey post here.

- JP

Sunday, September 27, 2009

What's that sound?

Pajamas Media's Jennifer Rubin has her ear to the ground and says if you listen carefully, you can already hear the 2012 campaign underway:
Last week, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney appeared at the Foreign Policy Initiative conference to lay out their case against the president’s approach to foreign policy and align themselves with a forward-leaning, free-trading, and American values-based foreign policy vision. Tim Pawlenty has been throwing some shots at Romney over his Massachusetts health care plan (Romney hasn’t bothered to respond) and Mike Huckabee is everywhere — in Israel and on Fox News most visibly. Sarah Palin pushed “death panels” into the public debate, both horrifying her opponents and cementing the attachment of her fans. And in Hong Kong she too talked foreign policy last week, taking issue with the president’s defense cuts and emphasizing the importance of free trade and human rights as part of America’s international agenda.
According to Rubin, there are four themes that the more likely GOP challengers are working from:

1. Obama's lack of executive leadership experience has become all too obvious.
2. Obama is no moderate, but rather the far left radical Sarah Palin told us he was.
3. Obama now owns the economy, complete with its alarming debt and unemployment.
4. Obama's foreign policy, which belittles America, is a failure.

That last point, Rubin says, will be hammered home by the Republicans as they offer an optimistic vision for the nation and its future:
Each in his or her own way will sound Reagan-esque themes as Palin did in her Hong Kong speech: restore America’s defense budget (which Obama is determined to take down to 3% of GDP), go forward with full funding for missile defense, counter Russian aggression, and defend human rights and democracy against despots. Obama thinks American exceptionalism is cringe-inducing chauvinism; Republicans know it to be the foundation of a successful foreign policy.
Rubin doesn't expect any GOP candidate to announce for 2012 until the 2010 congressional races are behind us and and all their implications of their results have been thoroughly analyzed. But the four campaign themes she citied all come under the same general heading -- this is not the “change” most American voters had in mind when they marked their ballots for Obama.

- JP