Palin Chronicles

[SB Shock]

First the story comes out "Next for GOP Leaders: Stopping Palin"

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44449.html

Top Republicans in Washington and in the national GOP establishment say the 2010 campaign highlighted an urgent task that they will begin in earnest as soon as the elections are over: Stop Sarah Palin.

Palin seems to be hitching herself to the Tea Party movement and warned today to the GOP to "Embrace the Tea Party or lose". Of course this would probably mean embracing her.

I know there are some who love her, but she grates on me. I do think she makes a good spokesperson just because she drive the other side crazy, and has a rock-star following and brings energy, but just don't put her in a position of substance.

[Maggie]

I agree. As of today, I don’t really want Palin to be in the 2012 picture either – she is not ready and her vague answers when asked policy questions still drives me crazy (she could change my mind; but she has a long road ahead in that regard – at least as far as I am concerned).

That said, the premise of the article and the blind quotes are a bit silly. I don’t doubt that many Republican insiders feel this way. But here’s the thing: the way to “stop” Palin, if that is the goal, is to find someone better. If we’ve learned anything this year, we know that the smoke-filled rooms have been replaced by mass rallies and upstart candidates. The Tea Party is genuinely a “grassroots” “movement” – which is pretty unusual. There is no party machine that can prevent a determined candidate - one who can raise millions at the drop of a hat - from running.

So who’ve they got? So far, the most dynamic (Chris Christie) and the sharpest not-really-new face (Paul Ryan) say they aren’t running. Mitt Romney is well financed and experienced but has authenticity and RomneyCare liabilities. Mitch Daniels has stumbled out of the gate, revealing a certain imperviousness to the concerns of the primary voter (e.g., touting a VAT, proposing a truce on social issues, sounding a preference for a penny-pinching national security policy). Tim Pawlenty is good on paper but has yet to excite anyone. John Thune is perfectly acceptable to many conservatives but hard to see catching fire. And Mike Huckabee’s liabilities in 2008 (an anti-free-market strain of populism, problematic pardons while governor, general goofiness) remain.

That is not to say that these candidates cannot overcome their weaknesses and impress the electorate. But someone will have to if Palin is to be “stopped.” It is hard to upend a candidate in a primary on the electability argument. So the question for these insiders is: who ya got?

And that question won’t be answered for a long, long while.

Marco Rubio (experience issue)? Jeb Bush (“Bush” is no longer an epithet. Just saying)?

[ISASO]

I have to make an analogy to sports. Competition during the preseason and during practice will drive the best players to become your starters. If there are a phenomenal group of right-wing candidates to choose from, the cream should rise to the top, providing us with a formidable opponent for President Stalin, err Obama.

[wu_shizzle]

Marco Rubio (experience issue)? Jeb Bush (“Bush” is no longer an epithet. Just saying)?

Rubio - Bush

Bush - Rubio

Either way works for me.

[SubGod22]

I always thought Jeb might make a good president.