Blogger Poll: Right of Center Bloggers Think Palin is a Plus


I’ve been participating in an interesting daily blogger poll organized by Tom Madigan at National Journal.
Today, he reports that right of center bloggers think Sarah Palin is a big plus for the McCain ticket. Left of Center bloggers are not convinced, but it is ultimately what the right (and the undeclared and independent) thinks of Palin that is going to matter.
For the record, I had TWN listed as right of center for the Democratic Convention — and as left of center for the Republican Convention.
— Steve Clemons


20 comments on “Blogger Poll: Right of Center Bloggers Think Palin is a Plus

  1. Tahoe Editor says:

    McCain & Palin have spent more time on the other side of the aisle than The Barack Obama Show even pretends to.
    Blaming Bristol’s pregnancy on bad mothering is a not a winner.


  2. Kathleen says:

    SATIRE contains seeds of truth…maybe Bristol’s pregnancy is because her Mom’s too busy to pay attention to her…if Chelsea had become pregnant at 17, what do you suppose the rants about it would be?
    “Change’ is never going to come from centrists/conformists…either side of the aisle…they owe too much to the status quo…they all say what we want to hear and then do whatever they want… Bush 1, No new taxes….Bush 2., no nation building…Chump change is what we’ll get.


  3. Tahoe Editor says:

    Hillary was Changeâ„¢ We Can’t Believeâ„¢ In. So we get Joe Biden instead. Sigh.
    The Citizens for a Legitimate Gov’t piece is SATIRE and is clearly labeled so. “Jaw dropper” — not so much.


  4. Paul Norheim says:

    Obama, partly because of his personality, is not able to answer if
    he`s confronted with absurdities like those quoted above. He`s
    not qualified to be a member of the Monty Python, as far as I
    What troubles me more is Palin. Obamas mind is concentrated on
    attacking the establishment, and not a “hockey mom.” And his VP,
    who will be attacking her, represents the establishment. Trouble.
    I also hoped that Obama would chose Hillary as his VP. Then
    probably McCain would have picked some established figure as
    well. And if not, Hillary would`ve had an easy match against Palin.


  5. Kathleen says:

    Paul…No, it’s a piece from Citizens for a Legitimate Gov’t that was posted on… I posted it here because I think reasonable people forget how warped the extreme right can be… it’s a splash of cold water…and a glimpse of how irrational the electorate can be…scarey…maybe we don’t need a reminder, but I was shocked when I read it…it’s a jaw dropper….and thanks for promising not to blame me if BO loses.. more importantly, don’t blame Hillary.


  6. Paul Norheim says:

    Hey Kathleen, are you inventing this, as a parody?
    “If it wasn’t for Hillary’s long time support of loose morals and
    whipping up women to think they can make decisions about
    their own bodies, none of this would have happened,” said
    Grover Norquist…”
    ” James Dobson of the powerful Focus on the Family
    organization said he backs Palin completely. “We all know that
    this teen pregnancy is the result of the Democrat Party’s
    unabashed support of the gay agenda.”
    I guess you`re not. Is it possible to answer this kind of stuff if
    you`re not a member of the Monty Python?


  7. Kathleen says:

    Some twisted thinking from Grover Norquist:
    By R J Shulman
    ST. PAUL, Minnesota – Key leaders of the Republican Party are going on the offensive to head off criticism of their new Vice Presidential candidate Alaska Governor Sarah Palin due to the disclosure that her 17-year old unmarried daughter Bristol is pregnant. “If it wasn’t for Hillary’s long time support of loose morals and whipping up women to think they can make decisions about their own bodies, none of this would have happened,” said Grover Norquist, anti-tax activist and GOP leader. “Staying married to that cheating liar of a husband of hers, gave the message to our daughters that it is acceptable to lose all respect for themselves and to forget our all important teachings of abstinence only. Shame on the Clintons. They should be impeached all over again,” said senior McCain advisor Steve Schmidt.
    “The focus of blame lies clearly with the Clintons and the rest of the Godless Democrats,” said Family Research president Tony Perkins, “and certainly not with the Palin’s. Fortunately, their daughter Bristol believes in pro-life and will keep the child and will marry the child’s father as soon as a suitable father can be located.” More importantly for Palin and the Republicans, the elder statesman of the evangelical movement, James Dobson of the powerful Focus on the Family organization said he backs Palin completely. “We all know that this teen pregnancy is the result of the Democrat Party’s unabashed support of the gay agenda.”
    “This disclosure will not hurt the Republican ticket but actually help it,” said Annette Ratliff a Texas delegate to the GOP convention. “It shows that the Palin’s wrestle with the same problems as ordinary Americans and their handling of it shows strength, determination and that they are just like us. Now if it was Chelsea Clinton or one of the Obama girls who got pregnant when they are teens, it would be nothing less than a message to the American people of a shameful flaunting of immoral behavior encouraged by parents in league with the devil himself.”
    03 September 2008


  8. DonsBlog says:

    Of course the right of center blogs think she’s an asset. Remember the 2000 talking point, cognitive dissonance? The right wing will believe everything that is good about her and ignore everything that’s bad.
    Just curious, are their no exactly center blogs worth polling? Even 3 degrees of separation would be nice to have. It seems to me that in securing his base McCain has given up on the center. Despite his PR he’s actually very conservative and now he’s chosen a running mate even more so.


  9. Robert M says:

    One of the problems w/ bloggers is they are noise. Even without nothing much about a person we all go that was a great gal or guy because they were personable to you(is that person the one you want to have a drink w/ ). That is what is going on w/ Palin. Bush had that same aura in 2000.
    The only way to counter is it is by tying them to the decisions of the Bush Presidency. Bring the vampire Hilliary out of the coffin and let her attack. Since she has reserved a special spot in Hell on the level for traitors she is more than willing to move up. W/ her in the vanguard of other Democratic women especially not from hard 60’s Feminist bastions(Whiney Wasserman Schultz is out as are the two senators from Cali) serious damage can be done to Palin. I’d start w/ Gov Selibus of Kansas and others in any non metropolitan setting. Schriver and Caroline in the metropolitan and their surrounding suburbs


  10. karenk says:

    Oh, and Steve I like ur very middle position. I’m a Conservative Liberal myself!


  11. Tahoe Editor says:

    digdug, a great portion of the GOP base is livid at the Bush administration’s spending patterns. They’re looking for a conservative alternative. They’re looking for Republicans who aren’t like Bush. McCain-Palin is that ticket.

    Geraldine Ferraro has noted that the Senate has a lock on Roe vs. Wade, so Palin’s pro-life stance won’t necessarily be the turn off the Dems would like it to be.


  12. karenk says:

    Seems McCain has “out-minoritied” Obama!
    A pretty good political maneuver as illustrated by Ms Palins own comment that we can now vote for an historic ticket either way. But the trouble is she’s too unknown and perhaps too far right for most Americans. I could like her for elbowing her way to the top of a very manly state(10:1 ratios I hear),but I don’t get her total anti choice for all attitude. Does she think women should go back to coat hangers and flinging themseves down stairs to terminate an unwanted pregnancy? Those are the realistic alternatives to her desired legislation to outlaw all safe medical abortions for any reason. Lady drop it already, we’ll never go back, and 60% of Americans are with us….


  13. digdug says:

    “fiscally responsible… Republicans”
    Uhmmm… and those Republicans would be whom? The ones in power that blew a surplus and ran up the deficit to historical levels?
    This tired old saw that Republicans and conservatives are fiscally responsible has been proven categorically false. By their own behaviour.
    There is no such thing as a fiscal conservative. It’s a myth.


  14. rich says:

    I’m not a fan of Gov. Palin’s politics, nor do I advocate voting for her. I also don’t think she’ll win.
    However, it’s pretty easy to see how having Palin on the ticket could help McCain slip the horns of 2008’s electoral dilemma.
    With his prospects hampered by a distrustful and alienated evangelical base, her pro-life evangelical views add authenticity. If the base gets excited about Palin and votes just because they like her, it evens up the enthusiasm score.
    With McCain’s hopes further dimmed by the disaffection of fiscally responsible, limited-government Republicans, McCain had to find a way to run against Republican malfeasance and Washington corruption. Even though, or especially, because he’s very much a part of that. Despite heroic rhetoric, McCain had not made a dent or a fuss in Bush’s games, not effectively, for eight years. But Gov. Palin may give McCain a convincing pathway out of his Ambiguous Thicket of Washington Insiderdom. Salted with Alaskan authenticity, and with the right image and campaign handlers, at least, Gov. Palin can credibly run as a corruption-slayer and pork-rejector.
    The contradictions, I think, are irrelevant. Everybody’s against pork before they’re agaisnt it. With some media kid gloves, the right message machine, a charming personality and appealing approach, and a whole lotta people will be eager to overlook her flaws and shortcomings.
    Personally, I don’t believe it’ll play out that way. We know too much; she’ll make mistakes and come off not as a Ronald Reagan savant, but as an earnest lightweight. Maybe.
    If Rove’s messaging is as inspired as the selection of Sarah Palin, this’ll come off looking brilliant. Watch McCain actually try to run against Washington.


  15. Zathras says:

    After the last eight years, exciting Republicans who think the 2008 election is about Iraq, the economy, or anything the federal government actually does is a tall order. So Sen. McCain has found a way to excite those Republicans who think the election is all about abortion.
    There’s a winning message, all right. The single largest group of American voters that does not think George Bush’s Republican administration has screwed up foreign policy, pointed the economy toward stagflation, mired the country in debt and acted with contempt toward the law and traditions of American government is composed of people who don’t care, or think, very much about any of these things. They care about abortion, about presenting the appearance of being consistently pro-life. They want a President who will stick up for them, and stand up to liberals and the media.
    These folks love George Bush, and they will love Sarah Palin. They never really thought much of John McCain, who though indisputably pro-life has often showed disquieting signs of caring about other issues as well, and who is clearly suspect for not thinking as highly of George Bush as they do. Sarah Palin is a bouquet thrown as these folks by a campaign that didn’t think it could get their enthusiastic support in any other way.
    Well, other things being equal, it will get that support now. Because of Sarah Palin, many Americans who believe George Bush has been a great and inspiring President will find a reason to fight for John McCain. Unfortunately for McCain, “many” is a relative term. Many more Americans list abortion, and for that matter most other social issues, well down their list of priorities during a time of economic stress. Having moved in a dramatic way to tie himself closely not only to Bush personally but to the most single-minded of Bush’s remaining supporters, McCain is likely to find the price of the knot higher than he thought.


  16. We're Screwed says:

    Palin voted for the Bridge to Nowhere before she voted against it. She said in a very recent interview that her concern was Alaska and not U.S. foreign policy.
    Get a GRIP. Palin is a friggin’ idiot, and so “pro-life” that she endangered her Down’s Syndrome child with about 24 hours of travel/ speeches after her water broke.
    I wish I believed in God, because at this point, with people who actually think that Palin, mayor of a town of between 6500 and 8000 (depending on what statistics you read) and not even a full term governor of a state with about 700,000 people could counter Putin — the mastermind, should go along with our apparent desire to restart the Cold War?
    Seriously, when a $100 bill is about as worthless as a role of Charmin, thank yourself.
    Sarah Palin is a podunk nothing, child endangering liar.
    And dumb-asses like you are willing to risk the lives of billions of people because she can shoot a rifle, pretends to be Christian, and like moose stew.


  17. rich says:

    Gov. Palin gives McCain instant and authentic credibility with the pro-life, family values, Christian base. Without necessarily having to embrace George Bush.
    Generating big turnout in the Republican/right-wing base was supposed to be John McCain’s big shortcoming, and Palin may make that go away. The base has an excuse to vote McCain, regardless of how unhappy they are with him.
    Make no mistake, the Palin pick could implode on any number of counts.
    But don’t underestimate the appeal among Repub women (& men) of a feisty (& attractive) mother of 5 who not only has a career, but wields executive power. There’s a competitive thing here in which having a career doesn’t involve giving up your cultural status or motherhood or your values, but rather maintains social status as well as power.
    Fresh enough to at least wield an independent image, Gov. Palin unexpectedly nixed the Bridge to Nowhere. Palin can run against the old Republican Party, Tom DeLay, Ted Stevens, and Don Young included: with McCain’s maverick brand and the right messaging, Gov. Palin can compete credibly by demonizing Washington deficit spending, and running not just against D.C. pork, but against D.C. corruption.
    Republicans still disaffected by Bush’s deficit spending could be persuaded by a sound McCain/Palin fiscal policy characterized by thift, thrift, and responsibility. Yeah: it’s absurd, and it’ll be run on image and propoganda, but it’ll give plenty of Repubs the excuse to vote Republican—anyway.
    Sarah Palin’s full of contradictions—but that may work in her favor. I don’t agree with her politics, but it’s far easier to like a meat-eating, moose-hunting, frank-talking, self-made mayor-governor who went after Alaskan corruption and nixed the Bridge to Nowhere – – – than it is a lockstep liberal who repeats the political error of fulfilling the stereotypical feminist positions without speaking to a wider common ground or clarifying that she’s not promoting abortion or irresponsible sex, etc.
    Palin is in with Big Oil, and Republicans–but can say she took on corruption.
    Palin is all for bringing home the bacon–but vetoed the Bridge to Nowhere.
    Palin is in with the fundamentalist right-wing—but is perfectly at home with hockey moms and blue collar dads and hunters.
    Palin may be pro-life, but she’s pro-career. She may be a global warming denier, but might pull the outdoorsman vote.
    If Palin is appealing enough, and can speak credibly on the issues at hand, she be tremendously reassuring. Mom? Is that you?
    If she’s likable and can play to her strengths and the media omits her (severe) shortcomings—she may be a difference-maker. The turnout of a resurgent Republican base might overcome negligible Democratic gains in the middle, though I think those gains will be more subsantial than many will now admit.
    EXPERIENCE. I want the most qualified staff and candidates, like anyone. We will need civil servants who can step in instantly and make changes in the right direction. BUT I DO NOT believe we can discount or veto Sarah Palin simply because her resume is shorter than Strom Thurmond’s or she’s unfamiliar to most D.C. villagers and has no social network.
    When Arnold Schwarzenegger can be taken seriously in a run for the California Governorship, and Heath Schuler can be taken seriously as a Senate candidate, now is no time to suddenly pretend we’ve got standards for holding public office. Let’s stick with the Consitution. I’d say that the idea that ‘key institutions might not support Palin’s ascension to POTUS’ sounds remarkably like treason.
    Dick Cheney showed us what experience, insider connections, and a conventional resume can do for the country. We don’t need that.
    When Jesse Ventura makes more sense than George Bush, who worth taking seriously?
    We absolutely need competent governance. But the bedrock of the American nation, and its greatest achievement, is that the character, judgment and capability informing such competence can come from any walk of life and be drawn from any profession.
    If Sarah Palin makes the transition to a national figure, and comes across capably and is able to contribute effectively to the national dialog, more power to her. Literally.
    Ronald Reagan, Mitt Romney, Ross Perot, Jimmy Carter, Huckabee—there’s nothing most of these folks havd on Sarah Palin that a few more months in office wouldn’t fix.
    On the issues I would not vote for her. But if she earns more votes, she’s earned the VP position–by definition. And if ‘a few key institutions’ in Washington, D.C. are uncomfortable with that, or somehow think they’re in a position to take issue with that, or actually believe they’re entitled to step in to prevent the lawful swearing-in of VP to POTUS—then they are the ones who must go. Now.
    Because they’ve clearly forgotten who’s in charge. Think hard: A general had the temerity to say this. Last I heard, generals do not count votes, they take their orders from those who do. Or—was that not the right thing to say? These whisperers need outing.
    I don’t agree with Sarah Palin’s politics. But she sounds like a fresh character who at least got a few things done in the face of Alaskan corruption and monumental pork. That may just be an image. But if she can get rid of that general’s sense of entitlement—just deracinate that false sense of just who is and who is not capable, competent and lawfully entitled to play the game—then, hell, I’LL vote for her.
    Sorry to have to spell it out, but George Washington and friends had it right. There are more than a few dairy farmers and high school English teachers fully capable of outperforming George Bush and Dick Cheney. We have the evidence in hand, fresh from the last 8 years. Now let’s drop the pretense that all these DC functionaries-turned-proconsuls can give a VPOTUS the thumbs-down, or can afford to be unresponsive to course corrections defined by the American people. We’ve got this system in place for a reason. There’s no job description that can legitimately ignore it.
    As for President Palin? That’s why we have smart people like James Steinberg and Eliot Cohen and David Addington. Right? So decision-makers aren’t ill-informed and don’t go astray?
    It’d be interesting to find out where your two whisperers were—and where these ‘key institutions’ were—for the past eight years. Not guarding the treasury. Not capturing Osama bin Laden. Not guiding George and Dick, and assuredly not putting up the checks and balances these men require.


  18. Arun says:

    Given how some evangelicals are finding reasons in the scriptures that women should not lead, the right wing is not uniformly happy.
    For instance right-wing blogger Doug Phillips approvingly quoted this:
    “So then, if we are to be faithful to Christ, we must search the Scriptures to see what the Lord says in regards to the issue of women civil rulers, and whether it is permissible for Christians to support a woman for the office of civil magistrate. Second, we should recognize that the issue here is not the character or ability of the woman seeking the office; nor is it her spiritual condition, her views on the issues, or even if she is the “best” available candidate. The point in question is this: does the Word of God give us the liberty to place a woman into a political office where she will in some sense bear rule over us in the civil sphere? Or, to state it more precisely: is it biblically proper for a woman to hold political office, and thus rule over men? Has God ordained women to be civil leaders, or has He reserved this authority for men only? I believe that the Bible gives a definitive answer to this question: women are not permitted by God to hold political office and rule over men in the political sphere. There are four lines of evidence in the Bible that establish that women are not to hold political office.”


  19. Tahoe Editor says:

    No sh1t they think she’s a plus! She’s CONSERVATIVE!
    An earlier poster who obviously isn’t paying attention said, “such and such a poll says people don’t think Palin is a moderate, so McCain’s attempt to paint her as a moderate won’t work … ”
    That’s a conversation inside someone else’s head. The McCain campaign wants EVERYONE to know she’s a conservative.


  20. Mr.Murder says:

    Left of center bloggers think she could be a plus as well.
    She’s accomplished some reform, after all.
    She didn’t need the DoJ prosecuting a Demcorat in her state to win the Gov’s race either, did she?


Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *