Monday, September 5, 2011

As Michele Bachmann fades, is there an opportunity for Sarah Palin to jump in?

At the top of Google's News this morning was a story about Michele Bachmann's fade since her Iowa Ames Straw Poll victory. It's said that the "Republican political class" is concerned about Michele Bachmann's electability. Even Bachmann's campaign manager, Ed Rollins, said, “The Perry-Romney race is now the story, with us the third candidate.”

In a recent nationwide Fox News poll, registered voters were asked whether any of the Republicans were "too extreme to be seriously considered." The poll found:
Among all voters, Bachmann tops the list at 18 percent, followed by Perry at 14 percent, Palin at 12 percent and Paul at 10 percent. Four percent think Romney is too extreme. Responses were volunteered by respondents; a list was not read. About a third of voters (35 percent) said none were too extreme and 22 percent were unsure.

Among Republicans, Paul is seen as too extreme by 14 percent, Bachmann by 11 percent, Palin by 9 percent and Newt Gingrich by 6 percent. Five percent of Republicans think Perry is too extreme and 3 percent say the same about Romney. Some 38 percent of Republicans say none of their party’s announced or potential candidates is too extreme, and another 26 percent have no opinion.

For the key voting bloc of independents, Bachmann (19 percent), Perry (17 percent) and Palin (14 percent) are the Republican contenders most frequently mentioned as being too extreme to be seriously considered. Five percent of independents consider Romney too extreme.
With the poll's margin of error at three percentage points, a cluster of candidates "too extreme to be seriously considered" exists. They are Bachmann, Perry and Palin. At some point, the "Republican political class" will have to consider whether Perry can be elected. More than likely, Palin has already been dismissed by them, and Saturday, in Indianola, she joined the quasi-secessionists by citing the Tenth Amendment as an argument against the federal government. That amendment, however, is not the only part of the constitution, and if they weren't ignorant of constitutional history they would know that the federal government has grown, not because the tenth prohibits its growth but because the Commerce Clause exists, and its interpretation has enabled the growth of the federal government.

It's still early and a Republican nominee hasn't yet been chosen, but if any of those "too extreme to be considered" are the nominee, then it's likely that a democrat will be elected, because an even larger percentage of voters will consider that candidate to be too extreme, if the Democratic party can successfully convey that candidate's dangerous extremism. Each of those candidates would attempt to turn-back the clock and destroy the Social Compact that has existed since the Great Depression. We're certain to have a debate about the economy during the campaign, but if a know-nothing is the Republican nominee, that debate's outcome could have far-reaching consequences.

Will Sarah Palin jump in as Michele Bachmann fades? Possibly, but with Rick Perry, a kindred spirit, running why would she? Because the field is incomplete without a woman?

"Searching for Bachmann" was the story at the top of Google's news. Wikipedia has an introduction to the Tenth Amendment, which considers that amendment's interplay with the Commerce Clause.

I take "political class" -- chattering class? classless chatterers? -- to mean, concerning presidential politics, those actively interested in the candidates and races before the nominees are chosen. The definition is in flux, now that a celebritician is running for attention, if not office; many discussing Palin have no interest in politics. Anyway, most people don't pay attention until after the nominees are chosen.

The Commerce Clause was cited when the constitutionality of much of the New Deal's legislation was upheld.


Joie Vouet said...

It's interesting that the Wall Street Journal is carrying a story, Palin’s Attack on ‘Corporate Crony Capitalism’ Spotlights Gap in GOP Field", after Palin advocated the elimination of corporate income taxes, Saturday, in Indianola, and she agreed with Romney, when he first said, "Corporations are people."

The WSJ story begins:

Sarah Palin’s speech Saturday in Iowa against “corporate crony capitalism” left her presidential ambitions uncertain, but it made clear a big gap in the 2012 GOP field: the lack of a strong conservative populist. ...

There must be a difference between a "populist" and a "conservative populist," and a strong one at that. A "populist" wouldn't be advocating policy that would destroy the Social Compact that so many of those she appeals to depend upon, and certainly, rather than pandering to corporate donors, a populist would advocate taxing the rich rather than the poor.

Anonymous said...

She's corporate oriented. How does that fit in with the Tea Party?
She's quite the contradiction.

I really do wish we get do away with our party system and start fresh with an open menu.

I do not believe the vision was this.

Joie Vouet said...

The destruction of the Social Compact would mean things like three generations living under the same roof, the disabled unable to even try to live independently ... .

Unless you're like the Romneys or the Palins, who "got theirs" and can, in the case of the Romneys, expand their house, in La Jolla, to accomodate three generations, or in the case of the Palins build side-by-side monster houses and easily pay for their son's care, your life and your family's lives will change dramatically.

Anonymous said...

I don't think any of these candidate's views will stand up under the intense scrutiny that will come when the field narrows. They are ant-choice, anti-worker, and anti-small government. They want a theocracy, access to our health decisions, and they want to tax the middle and lower classes to benefit themselves and their wealthy donors. They would eliminate public education, public health agencies, the EPA, the FCC, anything at all that looks like 'big' government. We would get unregulated businesses, doing what the unregulated do...hire fewer workers, work the remaining people for less money as they foul our air, land, and water, and as people begin to do, who will the right blame then? The lack of health care for all will mean many more deaths in the young and elderly. Who will they blame? Obama is a handy target now, but the man cares bout this country. Can the right truly say the same? Beneath their prayers and their mantras, there is no substance.

Anonymous said...

I've said this before. I'll say it again. I want one of these people to win. I want Sarah to be the president. I want stuff that we take for granted to just come completely undone and for these stupid ignorant people to get the shock of their lives. I want the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately-'cause-I'm-an-American crowd to totally get what they deserve.
Those of us that worry about REAL things will be just fine.
Then we can pick up the pieces and move on.

Detroit Free Press
Tea partiers in N.H. want a simple answer from Palin: Are you running or not?

Palin's New Hampshire appearance came amid rising frustration among Granite State Republicans and tea party activists over her hazy intentions.

A New Hampshire tea party leader couldn't hold back his frustration Sunday night at another rally hosted by the Tea Party Express.

"Once again it is time to determine -- are you here to sell books or are you here to run for president of the United States?" asked Corey Lewandowski, state director for Americans for Prosperity, a tea party ally.

"The people of New Hampshire deserve to know, are you serious? And if you are serious, then welcome to the race. And if you're not serious, get out of the way because we're going to elect a new president."

Anonymous said...

Sarah, New Hampshire, radio station WIBW:

Her speech did not contain many specifics in terms of policy proposals. She said America needed a "pro-growth" agenda that would cut taxes, promote personal liberties, reign in the power of the federal government, and loosen regulations on oil production.

"You've already withstood the wrath and the disdain and the lies from the media and the permanent political class looking down on us. Mocking us. Making things up about us. telling us to 'go to hell,' you've already withstood that. We're still standing, right?"

Floyd M. Orr said...

Neither Sarah nor Bachmann Turnip Overripe can defeat Perry. Both are just marking time until they can either figure out a new strategy or give up the ghost. I have been saying for a long time that the only reason Perry ran for an unprecedented third term was because Americans had developed such a bad taste after Bush. You will notice that soon after the bad taste began to be forgotten, due to the short memories of most voters, that Perry began to move toward his candidacy.

There is only one reason why we have all learned the name Sarah Palin in the first place. That reason is that the GOP was dumb enough not to groom an upcoming candidate other than a Mormon who likes his flip-flops very flippity and very floppity. There are only three questions that the GOP needed to ask of Perry: (1) Are you a tall, handsome devil? (2) Are you a greedy a-hole? (3) Are you a Baptist or Methodist? Since he could easily answer all three questions in the affirmative, Sarah and Michele are just wasting their time.

- Author of the book Sarah Palin has personally said she does not want you to read. Thank you for your support.