Here’s a little game we can play, ok?
Let’s say, for instance, that former New York Governor George Pataki, a one-time rumoured presidential candidate, announced the upcoming release in key primary states of an independently-produced two-hour long film documenting his accomplishments governing the Empire State. The day after this announcement, his poliltical action committee makes it known that the governor and his family will make a multi-state bus tour to historical locations across the country under the banner, “One Nation: A Fundamental Restoration of America,” playing off Obama’s infamous “fundamental transformation” speech. Combine these facts with the fact that oh, he had run for vice president in the last cycle and had been traveling around the country criticizing President Obama’s record for nearly two years, recently declaring, “Game On” directly to the president.
What would you conclude from this series of hypothetical moves?
A. He’s seriously considering a run for president.
B. He’s probably just trying to make money or something.
C. He’s definitely not considering running for president.
D. There is no possible conclusion to be drawn … it’s completely baffling.
If any other person not named Sarah Palin were to announce what she has announced in the last 72 hours, it would be taken as a sign of a serious consideration of a presidential run. In fact, all Rick Perry did was say, “I’m thinking about [running for president],” and it was taken as a sign of a serious consideration of a presidential run.
Can you imagine the logistical work that goes into a bus tour? Palin had to consider security for herself and her family, the selection of stops, the permits for the bus, the itinery for those stops. Not to mention the careful consideration of the slogan and promotional efforts for the tour. Quick, can anybody reel off the slogans for the Bachmann/Cain/Romney/Pawlenty presidential explorations?
I guess we’ve come to expect that every Palin move will be grossly mischaracterized, and that she will be underestimated and maligned at every turn.
I’m curious why they can’t just treat her like any other politician, accepting her at her word: she’s seriously considering a run for president, but hasn’t finalized her decision, at which point she would tell her employer, Fox News, that she was terminating her contract, and filing the required paperwork.
But in adddition to presuming to read Governor Palin’s mind and contradict her own stated version of reality, reporters can’t seem to resist making up negative stories about her.
Andrea Mitchell, a supposed foreign affairs correspondent, gleefully reported on NBC yesterday that Palin was not invited to participate in Rolling Thunder this weekend, opining that Palin would be a distraction to the group’s annual riding event in Washington D.C. It turns out the one person Mitchell interviewed with Rolling Thunder wasn’t yet aware that indeed, Palin had been invited and had accepted the invitiation. Mitchell was following her tried and tested formula for reporting Palin news: “If it’s negative, run with it as fast as you can without double-checking its accuracy.”
Meanwhile, the New York Times is comparing Palin to Trump, suggesting she’s using this tour and documentary as a ratings boost, presumably for her non-existent TV show. At least they’re all getting their memes consistent. Anonymous Romney misogynists are once again deriding Palin as a mere “entertainer” who has no intention of running for president. You know, because running for president would spoil her “mystique” and damage her celebrity brand that she’s built up over 20 years in public service.
Let’s give the Palin bashers and Rombots something to chew on, shall we?
Suppose they’re right, Palin’s not seriously considering running for president and she’s just doing this tour to gin up media attention to continue her speaking career.
Do they honestly believe that her actions would improve her brand and standing among supporters, the very people who shell out money to hear her speak and who buy her books?
As Hunting Moose commented last night:
Please please explain to me..
The one thing I just don’t understand is how some get to the conclusion that by running Palin may “destroy” her “brand”.
I am clearly a Palinite hooked on her brand.
And the only way she could destroy “her brand” in my eyes would be by NOT running as a result of me being disappointed in her not doing what she stands for, to fight and give me the best candidate, a candidate the first time in my life I really like, trust and have ‘gut feeling’ she will be the best president we had since a long time. If she runs (as I 100% expect), it would only make me rally around “her brand” even more
So tell me am I the only one who does not fit the mold of the very smart commentators who are assumed to understand her supporters more than these supporters understand themselves?
Exactly. Which would be more likely to destroy Palin’s brand … dramatically and in bad faith building up your supporters’ hopes that you will run for president only to disappoint them? Or, making an honest exploration of a presidential bid to test the waters like any potential presidential candidate?
I think the media is so used to being head-faked by Palin that they’re presuming she’s pulling a head-fake on her own supporters. In the final analysis, the Governor would gain nothing from building up her own brand under the pretenses of launching a presidential bid. She already has all the fame and fortune she can handle. She’s not selling a book right now. Why go to the time, expense and trouble of a campaign-style bus tour 17 months away from the next election if all she plans to do is play kingmaker?
It makes no sense.