The biggest winners in the 2010 American elections may prove to be former Vice Presidential candidate and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, and her husband Todd. She became the darling of the Tea Party movement, which energized the moribund Republican Party and may decide its future—and that of its “establishment.” While there is a long list of other potentially-strong GOP candidates, the often-outspoken Sarah Palin has “caught fire” and connects with her audiences like few politicians can.[2] Barack Obama did this prior to the 2008 elections, but he has lost his luster and credibility, and faded.[3]
Palin has established herself as a force to be feared and reckoned with in Republican politics, and is formidable. As Michael D. Shear noted in the New York Times:
Ms. Palin wasn’t on any ballot. But the self-described “Mama Grizzly” had plenty at stake . . . as she sought to bolster her credentials as the Republican Party’s most powerful kingmaker and the voice of the newly empowered Tea Party movement. Ms. Palin was anything but timid in the midterm elections, endorsing dozens of candidates, including in some of the most high-profile races.[4]
Indeed, most candidates won whom Sarah Palin had endorsed—resulting in “plenty of victories that Ms. Palin and her allies have already begun to point to as evidence of her political prowess and her ability to shape and direct the unwieldy frustration that is fueling American politics.”[5] A political analyst for CBS News, Nicolle Wallace, stated: “My observation of Sarah Palin is that she is one of the shrewdest political figures in our country at this moment. She’s also one of the most electric.”[6]
Germany’s SPIEGEL ONLINE observed:
“If there was one true victor on election night . . . it was the Tea Party movement. . . . What matters now is whether the Tea Party can manage to establish itself as an independent power in Washington, as a voice of dissent next to the Republicans—in order to profit even more from the wave of dissatisfaction that is sweeping the land.”
“Then anything would be possible in two years. Even the prospect of the former governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, as the first female president of the United States.”[7]
If Sarah Palin is a winner, one might ask: why include Todd Palin too? Because he is a man’s man; and for many men such as yours truly, the Palins are running as a team—as they did in Alaska—and Todd adds legitimacy to Sarah Palin’s candidacy and potentially brings in male voters. For far-Left and mainstream Democrats alike, especially women, Hillary Clinton provided legitimacy to Bill Clinton’s runs for the presidency, amidst almost non-stop allegations of peccadillos, adultery and worse.
As the 2012 elections loom, and as Barack Obama’s presidency effectively ends[8], Hillary and Bill Clinton represent a team to which many Democrats may flock once again. For members of the Tea Party movement and Republicans and “disenchanted” Democrats, the Palins represent a breath of fresh air too. Indeed, it is not beyond the pale to believe that two women might face off for the American presidency in 2012, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton, which would be historic!
© 2010, Timothy D. Naegele
[1] Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He practices law in Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles with his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, which specializes in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and http://www.naegele.com/naegele_resume.html). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from UCLA, as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He is a member of the District of Columbia and California bars. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal. Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., http://www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com
[2] Right after the 2010 elections, the Rasmussen polling organization released the following results, looking ahead to the 2012 elections:
On the Republican side, it’s a dead heat between the ex-governors—Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, Mike Huckabee of Arkansas and Sarah Palin of Alaska, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely GOP Primary voters.
Asked who they would vote for if the Republican presidential primary were held today, 20% say Romney, 19% Huckabee and another 19% Palin. . . .
Romney and Palin are tied among male GOP voters, while Huckabee has a slight edge among female voters.
In October 2009 when Likely Republican primary voters were given a choice of five potential presidential nominees, Huckabee led with 29% support, followed by Romney with 24% of the vote and Palin at 18%.
Rounding out the list of seven candidates chosen by Rasmussen Reports for the question, with their levels of support, are former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (13%), Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (6%), Texas Congressman Ron Paul (5%) and Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels (3%). Seven percent (7%) prefer some other candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided.
Thus, Sarah Palin has moved up in the polling results; and the full effects of Tea Party-supporter voting in the GOP primaries may not be reflected in the Rasmussen polling data.
[3] See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/01/20/the-end-of-barack-obama (see postings beneath the article as well)
[4] See http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/palin-proves-that-mama-grizzly-has-bite/
[5] See id; see also http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2010-11-12-1Apalin12_CV_N.htm
[6] See http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/03/earlyshow/main7017707.shtml
Among the winners whom Palin endorsed: John Boozman of Arkansas for the U.S. Senate; Rand Paul of Kentucky for the Senate; Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire (which holds the first presidential primary) for the Senate; Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania for the Senate; Susana Martinez of New Mexico for governor (who may prove helpful with the growing block of Hispanic voters); and Nikki Haley of South Carolina for governor (who may be helpful when Palin’s presidential campaign moves to South Carolina).
As the New York Times’ Michael D. Shear points out, there were losers too:
In Delaware, Ms. Palin all but created the Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell, helping thrust the young woman onto the national political stage over the strenuous objections of the Republican elite in Washington. And in the end, Ms. O’Donnell never had a chance, handing what most likely would have been a Republican Senate seat to Democrats.
And in Nevada, Republican celebration was muted when their top target—Harry Reid, the Senate’s majority leader—handily defeated Ms. Palin’s chosen candidate, Sharron Angle, to return to Washington.
In Ms. Palin’s home state, Alaska, political turmoil still reigns thanks to her support of Joe Miller, the Tea Party favorite who defeated Senator Lisa Murkowski in the state’s Republican primary this year. But with “write-ins” leading Mr. Miller, Ms. Murkowski may retain her seat.
Still, as potential 2012 presidential contenders begin lining up support and cashing in chits, Ms. Palin will have plenty of places to look for support. In addition to the Senate and governors’ races, there are dozens of lesser-known House candidates who had earned her blessing.
See http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/palin-proves-that-mama-grizzly-has-bite/
[7] See http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,727235,00.html
[8] See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/01/20/the-end-of-barack-obama (see postings beneath the article as well)
NaegeleBlog 
Will Hillary (And Bill) Run Against Obama?
Political pundit and former adviser to Bill Clinton, Dick Morris, argues:
See http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/obama-may-face-left-wing-primary/
Obama’s failed policies in Afghanistan are apt to trigger far-Left animus as well, similar to what happened to Lyndon Johnson in 1968, when he was prevented from running for reelection because of Vietnam.
See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2009/12/26/obama-in-afghanistan-doomed-from-the-start/; see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/01/20/the-end-of-barack-obama/ and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/is-barack-obama-a-racist/
LikeLike
I’ve been watching Palin to see what kind of opinions comes out of her quick study preparations for a run at the presidency. I doubt she’s studied foreign policy, military or monetary issues in any depth before she was suddenly pushed onto center stage in 08. She’s clearly gifted on the campaign and in her ability to connect with conservative crowds (and she does have an ability to stir up those on the left too). Here’s a quote from a recent speech that confirms that she’s been successfully absorbing a good monetary/economic background.
See http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/252715/palin-bernanke-cease-and-desist-robert-costa#
LikeLike
Thanks so much for sharing this article, which is excellent and sets forth her policy conclusions and reasoning.
I agree with her, and believe she is getting sound advice. Also, I recommend that readers of the article above take time to read her comments. They represent another step along the path of her political maturation.
LikeLike
Views From The UK
A commenter named “Peter” had the following to say at the UK Daily Mail’s Web site:
See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1329482/Sarah-Palins-Alaska-Intimate-portraits-Mama-Grizzly-cubs.html
It is likely that more comparisons with Thatcher, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, will be made in the future.
LikeLike
Please, look up the definition of socialist and then tell me what about Obama is truly socialist. If anything, he’s just being liberal with capitalism. Even though that’s you quoting someone saying it, it’s as good as you saying it because you acknowledge it as being your position. And Palin? If she’s nominated for Republican presidential candidate I’ll know there’s no hope for America. She’s a laughing-stock for the whole world, she acts as a puppet for big industry and capitalistic megalomaniacs, and has less qualification for president than Obama. Just because she has good moral values doesn’t mean she should be President; so do many priests and good-hearted Americans, but I wouldn’t say they are all President material. Lincoln was KNOWLEDGEABLE. Roosevelt was KNOWLEDGEABLE. It’s what makes a good president: wisdom. And frankly, I’ve never seen true wisdom from this woman other than what has been spoon-fed to her.
LikeLike
Thank you, Patrick, for your comments.
First, I never said that Barack Obama was a socialist, period. Like every person, he is complex, and has views across the political spectrum, as most people do. His core beliefs are set forth in his book, “Dreams from My Father,” which I have written about in another article.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/is-barack-obama-a-racist/
Second, there is always hope for America. Many people thought there was no hope when Obama was elected, and when George W. Bush was elected, and when Clinton was elected, and when Reagan was elected . . . and the list goes on and on, including both Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.
See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/america-a-rich-tapestry-of-life/
Third, Sarah Palin is not the laughingstock of the world. People are intrigued by her, at the very least.
Fourth, she does not have less qualifications for the presidency than Obama. He had been a state senator, and hardly set foot in the U.S. Senate because he spent all of his time running for the White House. Palin has been a city council member, a mayor and governor, which involves actually governing and administrative experience, not merely pontificating.
See, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
Fifth, Palin has true wisdom and “street smarts.” Among other things, she was smart enough to marry Todd Palin, and to never let him go. He is a man’s man.
Sixth, the article above is not a “stump speech” for Palin, nor do I know how I will vote in the 2012 elections. I am an Independent, after having been a Democrat and then a Republican. I do not like either party, and expect to see the day when an Independent is elected president.
LikeLike
Sarah Palin To Obama: Bomb Iran If You Want To Be Reelected In 2012
See http://wejew.com/media/7675/Sarah_Palin_to_Obama:_Bomb_Iran_If_You_Want_Re-Election_in_2012/
Such rhetoric smacks of comments during the Vietnam war attributed to now-deceased vice presidential candidate and former U.S. Air Force General Curtis LeMay; namely, his response to North Vietnam would have been to demand that “they’ve got to draw in their horns and stop their aggression, or we’re going to bomb them back into the Stone Age.”
See, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay#The_.E2.80.9CAirpower_Battle.E2.80.9D
Presumably Palin is shilling for AIPAC and the Netanyahu regime, and trying to garner contributions from Jews, which is understandable. However, her statements are irresponsible to say the least. Former Vice President Dick Cheney criticized Palin for engaging in such war-mongering with respect to Iran, and rightly so—certainly when America is engaged in two wars already, in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Cheney took issue with Palin’s suggestion that President Obama could help himself politically if he declared war on Iran:
See http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=9821035 and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/israels-senseless-killings-and-war-with-iran/
Like Curtis LeMay, Palin’s sentiments on the issue of Iran alone may be enough to disqualify her from ever becoming America’s president or vice president.
LikeLike
Barack Obama Does Not Deserve A Second Term, American Voters Say
According to a Quinnipiac poll:
See http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1538; see also http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AK1VO20101122
Independent voters, such as your truly, are the swing voters who make the difference!
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/31/the-rise-of-independents/
LikeLike
Sarah Palin’s Senseless Killing Of Animals?
I am not a wimp, and I was trained to shoot guns as an Infantry officer during the Vietnam war, even though I ended up serving at the Pentagon in intelligence. I was trained to kill, not because I wanted to, but because it was the training that the Army gave me. I have been a fisherman since I was a kid, because my parents were born in Minneapolis, and my father loved fishing; and we did lots of it in Northern Minnesota when I was a kid. In later years, I did it in Montana, the Chesapeake Bay, South Florida, the Bahamas, Hawaii, Mexico and California.
My father hunted for ducks and other birds too. I did it once in Maine, as the guest of a lawyer in Boston, who invited me to join him for the opening of the season, when we sought Canada geese as they migrated south on the “Atlantic Flyway” into the United States. I flew to Boston from Washington, D.C. where I worked full time. The two of us went to a Ducks Unlimited dinner in the Boston area, and then drove to L.L. Bean’s old flagship store with its wood floors in Freeport, Maine about midnight, before reaching my host’s cold stone house somewhere in Maine in the wee hours of the morning. After a few hours of sleep, we got up and shot some clay pigeons, and then took his large and playful Lab puppy to an old duck blind where we cut reeds to “camouflage” it, and waited for the geese to arrive.
And we waited and we waited and we waited. Finally, one showed up ahead of us in some reeds, and my host went near to it in the hopes of having it fly in our direction so we could shoot it, and instead it flew in the opposite direction. After spending most of the day trying to stay warm, and seeing nary a goose, a perfect “V” formation of them flew over us, seemingly at 30,000 feet, as if to say “screw you.” I was never so happy that our hunting had come to naught; and I never went hunting after that. My father had bird hunting equipment including a fancy shotgun, which I got rid of after his death.
No, I do not begrudge hunters the right to kill game if they abide by the laws. And yes, I believe most of the American laws protect the various species from destruction. However, viscerally I do not like to kill animals. For example, on trips to Ireland, I followed herds of deer in the breathtakingly-beautiful Wicklow Mountains south of Dublin when I was hiking there on four trips, and I “shot” them with my camera. They were majestic, and I could not kill one of them if my life depended on it.
See, e.g., http://www.wicklowmountainsnationalpark.ie/wildlife.html
Thus, when I saw Palin kill an animal, I understood it . . . but it was not my “cup of tea.” To my way of thinking at least, there is no “sport” in sighting a caribou through a rifle’s long-distance lens, pulling the trigger and killing it. And no, I am not a member of any animal rights groups such as People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals (or “PETA”) or the Defense Of Animals. I can understand both sides of the issue; and my gut reactions are my own, and I do not expect anyone to agree with me, nor do I condemn Palin for hunting. It is a way of life in Alaska and other parts of America, and a tradition; and I understand that.
See also http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/12/11/why-have-some-hunters-declared-open-season-on-sarah-palin/ (“Why Have Some Hunters Declared Open Season on Sarah Palin?”) and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1337075/West-Wing-scribe-Aaron-Sorkin-brands-Sarah-Palins-reality-snuff-film-caribou-shooting.html
LikeLike
The Tragic Events in Tucson Are Politicized, Which Compounds The Tragedy
Among other media organizations, the UK’s Daily Mail has reported that Sarah Palin and the Tea Party’s “vitriolic rhetoric” are being blamed for the tragic events in Tucson, which resulted in the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and others.
See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345682/Sarah-Palin-removes-target-list-vitriolic-rhetoric-blamed-Arizona-shooting.html; see also http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2011/01/tragedy_tucson and http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703583404576079823067585318.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion (“Sarah Palin Is Right About ‘Blood Libel'”)
It is totally absurd and politically motivated to assert that Palin or “political vitriol” were behind what happened. Just like the killing of John Lennon in New York City, and Yitzhak Rabin in Tel Aviv, we have witnessed the acts of a deranged killer.
A Wall Street Journal editorial states in part:
See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071943007100666.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion
The Journal’s editorial represents totally-responsible journalism, unlike the hate mongering that has arisen elsewhere in the media and our society, and around the world, in the wake of the tragic events that took place in Tucson. This is what responsible media organizations in the United States and elsewhere should be saying; and as the editorial concludes, it is what President Obama should be saying too.
LikeLike
Reckless, Scurrilous Political Discourse, Unsupported By Evidence
This is the conclusion of the Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer, in a brilliant column of his about the tragic shootings in Tucson entitled, “Massacre, followed by libel.” It is worth reading in its entirety:
See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/11/AR2011011106068.html (emphasis in original)
LikeLike
Sarah Palin Under Attack
The UK’s Daily Mall is reporting:
See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1347418/Arizona-shooting-Spike-death-threats-Sarah-Palin.html
The Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer was correct: the Tucson massacre was not a consequence of the “climate of hate” created by Sarah Palin or anyone else. It was the work of a deranged killer, similar to the men who killed John Lennon in New York City, and Yitzhak Rabin in Tel Aviv.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/sarah-and-todd-palin-the-big-winners/#comment-1279
Also, it is tragic to think that politicians, other public figures, or anyone with whom we might disagree would be targeted by anyone else for death.
In an article of mine entitled, “Washington Is Sick And The American People Know It,” I mentioned the vitriolic climate of hate and personal destruction in Washington today, which is far beyond anything that I dealt with when I worked in the U.S. Senate on Capitol Hill.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/24/washington-is-sick-and-the-american-people-know-it/
I did witness the “politics of personal destruction” though, when senators, congressmen, and their staff members went after political “targets” who were seeking Senate confirmation. There was a conscious effort to find “dirt” on the people and destroy their reputations to prevent the confirmation process from going forward. It was unseemly when I first encountered it; and it is not the American way.
In my article, I referred to Peggy Noonan’s use of the word, “Enraged,” and I described Barack Obama’s detractors and opponents as being “angry, livid, galvanized and motivated.” Also, I wrote:
And I described Washington as “a corrupt, politically-polarized toxic city.”
Charles Krauthammer is correct: many Americans use the metaphors of war to describe sports, politics and daily discourse in this great country; and rereading my words, I realize that I am just as guilty of this as anyone.
I believe Obama is leading America in the wrong direction, for all of the reasons that I have discussed in my articles; however, I do not wish him ill in terms of his physical safety or that of his family. Quite to the contrary, people often become martyrs when they are struck down, which is what happened to John F. Kennedy who has been “deified”—and wrongly so, in my opinion—since he was assassinated in Dallas just before Thanksgiving in 1963. History has been distorted, and continues to be, right up to this day.
See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/john-f-kennedy-the-most-despicable-president-in-american-history/
I was stunned when Kennedy was shot; and I will always remember when I learned about it, walking from my law school class at Berkeley—before it was announced that he had been killed. People worldwide remember the moments when John Lennon and Yitzhak Rabin were killed too.
LikeLike
GOP In Tight Spot If Palin Is Not Nominated?
Sarah Palin is a political force to be reckoned with:
See http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2011/46_of_gop_primary_voters_who_favor_palin_might_back_third_party_option_if_she_isn_t_nominated (emphasis added); see also http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/05/poll-palin-near-top-re-shaped-gop-field (“Poll: Palin near top of re-shaped GOP field“) and http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303654804576347560903745364.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLETopStories (“Palin starts stirring the pot“) and http://www.gallup.com/poll/147806/Romney-Palin-Lead-Reduced-GOP-Field-2012.aspx (Gallup: “Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012“)
The fact that Barack Obama was elected proves that anyone, literally anyone, can be president of the United States!
See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/barack-obama-is-a-lame-duck-president-who-will-not-be-reelected/ (see also the footnotes and comments beneath the article)
LikeLike
Rethinking Sarah Palin
I use to like Sarah Palin; and in fact, I voted for John McCain because she was on the GOP ticket and provided a breath of fresh air in American politics. She and her husband Todd seemed like a great couple; and as a man’s man, he added legitimacy to her candidacy and potentially brought in male voters.
However, I would probably vote against her now, and believe that Mitt Romney will be the GOP’s presidential nominee—and may be America’s President-elect in November. She has lost her luster and credibility, and faded. Indeed, she just revealed that she voted for former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich in the Alaska Republican presidential primary, who is a true “Neanderthal” and the darling of Tea Party wackos.
See http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/06/sarah-palin-i-voted-for-newt-gingrich/ and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/barack-obama-is-a-lame-duck-president-who-will-not-be-reelected/#comment-1965 and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/are-all-tea-partiers-wackos-misfits-and-extremists/
LikeLike