The Gaggle : Sarah Palin

Does Palinmania Really Help Bloomberg?

Katie Connolly — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:20:54 GMT

Over at The Daily Beast today, political strategist Mark McKinnon makes a compelling argument for why the 2012 election could be tailor-made for NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg. McKinnon is one of the sharpest minds around when it comes to understanding the mood of the electorate. McKinnon knows how to sell winning candidates, which is why I think the case he builds for Bloomberg is a serious one. Bloomberg is a true centrist who has racked up a swag of political achievements in New York—and he has a ton of cash. Dropping $1 billion on a presidential campaign would barely cause a ripple in his ocean of Benjamins. And he appeals to the growing bloc of independent voters. But, after reading McKinnon's analysis, I've got a couple of lingering questions.

First, how will his background in financial services play to an electorate weary of Wall Street misadventures? To be sure, it's been a very long time since Bloomberg was directly involved in trading and banking. Most of his cash piled up when he started offering IT and media services to the financial sector. But Wall Street is already enough of a myth to most voters. They may not have the patience to distinguish between the greedy bankers who broke the economy and the folks that provided the information that helped them carry out the devastating deeds. They may just see a really, really, ridiculously rich guy who made his money on Wall Street.

That may not be as much of a burden in New York, where there are plenty of ridiculously rich people, as well as loads of people who move among the obscenely wealthy hoping one day to be that rich themselves. But outside the city, the electoral map just doesn't work to Bloomberg's advantage. I can't imagine Bloomberg's appeal translating well in the red states he would have to win to wrest the presidency from Obama (and to scuttle the Palin vote): Kentucky, Alabama, Tennessee, you know the list. He'd need to pick up all the purple states and nearly all the red ones to be viable, and for many predominantly Republican voters in those parts of the country, Manhattan might as well be a different country. And then there are the poorer rural areas that have long voted Republican. I just don't think Bloomberg's urban fairy tale will resonate with people who can't get even broadband in their homes, or who can barely afford their electricity bill let alone think about buying a Mac.

Second, I'm unconvinced of Bloomberg's ability to excite and inspire, as evidenced by the paltry turnout in November's mayoral election. Of course turnout was low because his opponent was a pretty ordinary candidate who nobody thought would win, but it still didn't seem like Bloomberg's supporters were particularly passionate about him. People who like Bloomberg often like him in a very levelheaded fashion. In my experience they tend to offer buttoned-up report-card like assessments of his political career. "He's a wonderfully proficient administrator." "He's managed the city very well." "New York feels much safer under Bloomberg. I'll take sugar with my tea." You get the picture.

I don't think that rationally expressed appreciation of management skills wins presidential elections. Just ask Mitt Romney. As our current president definitively illustrates, voters want to be excited and inspired by presidential candidates. Effective turnout operations are critical, and they require passionate, committed field workers to herd voters into polling booths. Maybe I've misread things, but I don't see swathes of voters fired up about Bloomberg, nor can I imagine armies of enthusiastic volunteers. (They certainly didn't in New York, according to The New York Times: "But the turnout appeared to be on track to be among the lowest in modern New York history as the mayor’s vaunted campaign machinery failed to deliver the surge of supporters his aides had predicted.")

Yes, Bloomberg could capture the imagination of many an independent voter (and has in the past), but independents can't be your base. Mostly, they're independent for a reason: they're fickle, picky, and non-committal. And that means they're rarely inclined to spend their Saturdays handing out your literature at Wal-Mart or cheerfully standing on street corners brandishing pro-Bloomberg signs. (I guess Bloomberg could just pay folks to do that.) Independent voters are ripe to be courted, but they're not renowned for reliability.

McKinnon's argument shouldn't be discounted, and my quibbles aren't insurmountable hurdles for someone like Bloomberg. But I'm going to need some more convincing before I believe he's viable in 2012.

NEWSWEEK Explains Thinking Behind Palin Cover

Daniel Stone — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:35:51 GMT

As Sarah Palin’s book tour kicked off this morning, the debate continues to rage about what exactly she means for America and the Republican Party. This week’s NEWSWEEK takes a look at those questions, exploring the unique challenges posed by a would-be candidate both loved and loathed but almost nothing in between.

Our choice of a cover image this week has also stirred the debate. Yesterday, NEWSWEEK Editor Jon Meacham responded to critics of the photo, explaining the magazine’s policy, which is, and has always been, to choose the most interesting image available to us to illustrate the theme of the cover.

This morning, on the Today show, NEWSWEEK Managing Editor Daniel Klaidman further explained the editorial choice. “Since [Sarah Palin] has been on the national stage, there have been these questions about her gravitas and her seriousness. Sarah Palin has cultivated this image of a down-home, folksy, outdoorsy woman. And I'm not suggesting it's not authentic, but there is a sense in which she understands that it resonates politically,” Klaidman told Today host Matt Lauer. “There are a lot of people who would see that image and say 'that’s Sarah Palin, that’s why she connects with people, there’s that authenticity.' I don’t think this is an image that is taken out of context, especially when you consider what the point of the story was: to raise these questions about her seriousness."

Watch the video here.

Official Statement on NEWSWEEK's Sarah Palin Cover

Katie Connolly — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:34:07 GMT

Newsweek, issue dated November 23, 2009

This week, to coincide with the release of Sarah Palin's book Going Rogue, NEWSWEEK's editors decided to print two essays (one by Evan Thomas, the other by Christopher Hitchens) about the former Alaska governor and have her image grace our cover. The photo chosen was from a shoot Palin had participated in for Runner's World magazine.

To note that choosing that particular photograph has ruffled a few feathers is perhaps an understatement. Palin denounced it—and us—to her million-strong Facebook following last night. "The choice of photo for the cover of this week's Newsweek is unfortunate. When it comes to Sarah Palin, this 'news' magazine has relished focusing on the irrelevant rather than the relevant," she wrote on her fan page, adding, "The out-of-context Newsweek approach is sexist and oh-so-expected by now." She also told ABC's Barbara Walters that she found the cover "a wee bit degrading." Others, like CBN's David Brody, said our cover was a new low: "biased and sexist at the same time."

Today, NEWSWEEK's Editor Jon Meacham has responded to critics. "We chose the most interesting image available to us to illustrate the theme of the cover, which is what we always try to do,” Meacham said. "We apply the same test to photographs of any public figure, male or female: does the image convey what we are saying? That is a gender-neutral standard."

Payback Time: Why Right-Wing Men Rush to Palin's Defense

Eleanor Clift — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:47:59 GMT

It’s nothing new when liberal women complain about sexism, but when conservative men take up the banner, calling NEWSWEEK sexist for portraying Sarah Palin on the cover in her jogging clothes, that catches my attention. Why do right-wing men rush to Sarah’s side to defend her? My theory is that this is payback time. They’ve been called sexist and racist, and subjected to media ridicule of their allegedly retro views. Palin is their way to push back against the elites that have marginalized them.

For the record, I loved Palin’s interview with Runner’s World, and the cover image that graces NEWSWEEK. She’s in great shape, and she’s shown herself capable of handling whatever comes her way─and making a tidy profit in the process. She’s turned media criticism into a cash cow. Anybody who can stir up the body politic like Palin is a force to be reckoned with. With such Christian-right leaders as Jerry Falwell gone and the Reverend Dobson retired, Palin is the new kingmaker. She may not run for national office again, but those who do will seek her endorsement as the key to mobilizing the populist energy emerging on the right.

Right-wing men embrace her with the same fervor they did Clarence Thomas when he was first nominated for the Supreme Court. Whatever reservations they may have had about the minorities that gravitate to the Democratic Party, Thomas was their guy─and they believed he was every bit as qualified as contenders who’d gone to fancy colleges, even more so, because he understood ordinary people. And supporting him, and now Palin, they believe should put to rest any notion that they are racist or sexist, or somehow not up to the standard of Washington and New York dinner parties.

Palin embodies the backlash against the intellectual and geographical elites that the folks who live in flyover country blame for wrecking the economy and denigrating their values. She’s a vehicle for their rage. After all, there is something to be said for mediocrity, declared Republican Sen. Roman Hruska in 1970 defending G. Harrold Carswell, an undistinguished Supreme Court nominee who was ultimately rejected by the Senate. In the words that immortalized him more than anything else, he said of Carswell, "Even if he were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they, and a little chance? We can't have all Brandeises, Frankfurters, and Cardozos.” Substitute whatever names you like for those legal giants, and you’ll plumb the whys and wherefores of Palin’s appeal. She’s ordinary folk, and in times like these, when the elites have messed up, the segment of society that feels most marginalized─white, working-class men who more often than not are conservative─have found their heroine.

Click here for a visual retrospective of Sarah Palin's career, from Wasilla to the presidential trail.

Sarah From Alaska: Election Details Uncovered in New Palin book

Katie Connolly — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:32:54 GMT

A new Palin book hits shelves today, with lots of juicy details on the Alaska governor's accelerated ride to the top of the GOP. In Sarah From Alaska, Scott Conroy and Shushannah Walshe, reporters from CBS and Fox, respectively, who covered her campaign, document Palin's roller-coaster rise and uncover more than a few interesting nuggets along the way. Perhaps their best score was getting their hands on a copy of the speech that Palin would have given on election night had McCain's campaign managers not barred her from doing so. Her desire to introduce McCain at the nationally televised event rankled the McCain campaign, who worried that she was trying to steal his moment or, worse, that she would go off script as she had done before and undermine the gracious tone they hoped to set. But the speech that was written for her was actually quite respectful and complaisant. Here are a few of her choice would-be lines:

I wish Barack Obama well as the 44th president of the United States. If he governs with the skill and grace we have often seen in him, and the greatness of which he is capable, we're going to be just fine. And when a black citizen prepares to fill the office of Washington and Lincoln that is a shining moment in our history that can be lost on no one.
It would be a happier night if elections were a test of valor and merit alone, but that is not for us to question now. Enough to say it has been the honor of a lifetime to fight at the side of John S. McCain.
I said to my husband, Todd, that it’s not a step down when he’s no longer Alaska’s "First Dude." He will now be the first guy ever to become the "Second Dude."

Conroy and Walshe also write of Palin's desire to inject her Christianity into speeches, which McCain aides had urged her to tone down:

Palin was the kind of Christian who felt comfortable expressing her face in public, which the speech reflected: I will remember all the people who said they were praying for me. She squeezed another handwritten line in the margin: You prayer warriors have been my strength and my shield.

The authors portray election night as deeply unsatisfying for Palin—not only was she denied the opportunity to speak, but there was also no real postcampaign celebration with the McCains. Instead, Palin and her entourage accidentally ran into McCain in the parking lot as they were making a quiet exit. McCain's wife, Cindy, was already inside the Chevy suburban when Palin halted them by calling out, "John, is that you?" Conroy and Walshe explain:

The now former running mates exchanged final pat-on-the-back hugs and a muffled thank-you or two. There was no discussion about the shared experience they had just completed and no photograph to memorialize the gloomy occasion, as there had been on that buoyant day in Arizona nine weeks earlier when he had asked her to be his running mate. As some of Palin's staffers gazed at the scene, they marveled at its awkwardness. McCain was never one for overwrought sappiness, but this was a strikingly anticlimactic way to end his partnership with Palin.

Later back in their hotel suite, Todd cracked open the champagne, while Palin wondered aloud to the group that had gathered, "What just happened?" Soon she was off on her second renegade mission that evening—gathering her staff and family for an unapproved photo shoot onstage. The move infuriated McCain's senior advisers, who thought that, with all the television cameras still set up, it was Palin's last-ditch attempt to steal the spotlight from the senator. But the authors imply that Palin simply viewed it as closure, a way to mark the end of a memorable experience for her, her family, and her staff.

Sarah Palin Charging $100K for Iowa Speech? Not Exactly.

Holly Bailey — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:27:12 GMT

Palin in Iowa, November 2008. Photo by Mark Hirsch / Getty Images

Politico's Jonathan Martin has a good story today about an Iowa conservative group's efforts to lure Sarah Palin to a fundraising dinner in Des Moines next month. The Iowa Family Policy Center, according to J-Mart, is trying to come up with Palin's reported $100,000 speaker's fee in hopes of getting the former governor to headline its Nov. 21 banquet—which just so happens to be the same night Vice President Joe Biden will be in town to headline the Iowa Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner. But wait a minute: Paying a White House hopeful to come to Iowa? Seriously? Has anyone ever had to do that? Needless to say, the very prospect has other Iowa Republicans up in arms. "If somebody tells me they want me to pay an appearance fee, it tells me they're not very serious about running for president," Ed Failor Jr., president of Iowans for Tax Relief and an influential GOP insider, tells Politico. "I found it really, really odd."

But hang on: did Palin actually ask the group to pay $100K for her appearance? An IFPC spokesman tells Martin he's "not personally aware" of a speaker's fee. "There may or may not be, I don't know," he tells Politico. For their part, the Palin camp tells NEWSWEEK there's no fee. Meg Stapleton, Palin's spokeswoman, tells your Gaggler that Palin "has not requested anything" and that she "does not charge people to campaign for them." According to Stapleton, Palin would instead cover such travel costs through her political-action committee, SarahPAC. Of course, that doesn't mean she's going to Iowa. Palin's book, Going Rogue, is due out Nov. 17, and she's got a major publicity tour planned around that, including a Nov. 16 appearance on Oprah. "We don't believe she will be able to attend with her tightly scheduled book tour, and the group has been told that through formal and informal channels," Stapleton says in an e-mail this morning. "However, it appears that some enthusiastic members are willing to try anything to entice the governor as we look at her schedule."

Palin's Book Advance: $1.25 Million. Plus, She Discloses $43k in Gifts.

Holly Bailey — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:01:23 GMT

Remember those rumors that Sarah Palin was asking for an $11 million book advance for her upcoming autobiography? Well, she didn't get that much. According to a newly-filed financial-disclosure form, the former Alaska governor was given a $1.25 million advance for Going Rogue. The disclosure doesn’t list when Palin officially inked the book deal or when she received the money, but the forms, first reported by the Anchorage Daily News, cover from January 1 to July 26, 2009, when she officially resigned from office. How does that compare with what other political hot shots got for their books? Well, former First Lady Laura Bush reportedly received $1.6 million for her memoirs. George W. Bush was rumored to have gotten a $7 million advance for his upcoming book on the toughest decisions he made as president. Hillary Clinton was paid $8 million upfront for her autobiography. Meanwhile Bill Clinton topped everybody, with a $15 million book advance for My Life. What do Palin and all of these folks have in common? They were all repped by Washington power lawyer Bob Barnett in negotiating their deals.

When Palin left the governor’s office this summer, one reason circulated was that she needed to make money to pay off her legal fees related to various ethics complaints. While the forms do not list Palin’s debts, she does report that she took a loan out on her home “to fight false allegations while governor.” The amount, however, is not disclosed. She was paid $73,000 for her final seven and a half months in office, not including a $6,371 per diem. The First Dude, Todd Palin, earned $34,086 working at BP and $32,260 from his commercial fishing operation during the same period. According to the forms, Palin also founded a marketing business, Pie Spy LLC—though the form lists no income from the venture.

But what’s life without getting something for free? According to the disclosure, Palin and her family reported more than $43,000 in gifts, including free travel, jewelry, art, sporting goods, and clothing. Among the more notable gifts: New York Yankees tickets valued at $4,250 from Rudy Giuliani; $2,666 worth of Nu Skin skincare; a $1,599 revolver honoring Alaskan statehood from Ruger Firearms Company; and a $1,664 plane ticket from evangelist Franklin Graham, who visited a series of remote western Alaskan villages with Palin earlier this year. The First Dude, meanwhile, received $2,000 in travel and lodging from the Candie’s Foundation, a teen abstinence group for whom their daughter, Bristol, served as a spokeswoman.

Sarah Palin's Book Is Already on Clearance

Holly Bailey — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:46:21 GMT

screenshot of Amazon.com, 10/23/09

With just under a month to go before it’s released to the masses, Sarah Palin’s upcoming autobiography, Going Rogue, has already been near the top of Amazon’s bestseller list for weeks. No surprise, considering the enormous amount of interest—both bad and good—the former Alaska governor has generated since John McCain named her as his vice presidential running mate last year. But there may be more to the story: over the past week or so, Amazon has been steadily dropping the price of Palin’s book to compete with other retailers, including Wal-Mart, which offered it for presale at $10. Amazon, which originally listed it at $28.99, is now basically giving the book away for a measly $9. This, as my fellow NEWSWEEKer Sarah Ball notes, is cheaper than buying a copy of Pat the Bunny. Heck, even How to Win Friends and Influence People is priced higher. Of course, it would be absolutely, positively un-American for Wal-Mart to back down from its promise of offering people the absolute lowest price, and now it's reportedly charging $8.98 for the Palin opus. By your Gaggler’s math, that’s a whopping 2 cents a page, or, as we’d describe it, practically free. Will Amazon go even lower? Could there be a buy-one-get-one-free scenario in the offing? Not likely, now that the trade association representing independent bookstores has gotten involved. It has asked the Justice Department to investigate Amazon, Wal-Mart, and Target (a partner with Amazon) for charging below-cost prices for books in order to dominate the bookselling industry. You know what that means: buy your copies now.

The Sarah Palin Show. First Stop: Oprah.

Howard Fineman — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:15:50 GMT

After its modestly successful way-way-out-of-town tryout in Hong Kong, The Sarah Palin Show is getting ready to hit the U.S.A. next month. To coincide with the release of her ghost-assisted book, Going Rogue, Palin and her advisers are planning a careful TV and Web rollout in mid November, to be followed by paid speeches to business, civic, and college groups. Assembled with the advice of her Washington lawyer, Bob Barnett, and her speech agency, Washington Speakers Bureau, Palin's junket will go light on the free-ranging, traditional hard-news venues and heavy on personality: one major stop will be Oprah.

On speeches, a Palin spokesperson declined to offer details, but other sources tell me that she is asking for $75,000 for a college gig—and three first-class tickets, apparently so she can be accompanied by a press aide and another staffer. Fees for business and corporate groups may be higher. She also is asking that speeches be clustered in one city or other single location so she can do more; two or even three in a day's visit.

Time Out of the Spotlight Hasn't Helped Sarah Palin

Holly Bailey — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:02:49 GMT

When Sarah Palin resigned as governor of Alaska last summer, it seemed she was finally taking the advice of many political professionals and retreating from the spotlight to rebuild her brand and find her message. With the exception of a closed-to-the-press speech last month in Hong Kong, she has not been seen in public. Palin has turned down interviews and declined to appear at GOP party events. Aside from the occasional op-ed, like this one published last week by National Review, and messages posted on her Facebook page, Palin has been laying low, no doubt preparing for what will unquestionably be a major publicity push when her autobiography, Going Rogue, is released next month. But has her time away from the cameras actually done Palin any good politically?

Two polls released in the last several days suggest Palin might not be in good shape should she seek the GOP presidential nomination in 2012. A new Gallup poll finds that Palin’s approval ratings have taken a serious hit in recent months. According to Gallup, Palin’s favorability rating is currently at 40 percent—the lowest number she’s had since John McCain named her to be his vice presidential running mate in August 2008. After her nomination speech at the Republican National Convention, Palin had a 53 percent approval rating. By the end of the campaign, after a messy back and forth between Palin allies and McCain staff over Palin’s “rogue” behavior, the then-governor had a 42 percent approval rating, and she still hasn’t recovered. While she continues to do well among Republicans—69 percent like her, according to Gallup—Palin’s biggest problem continues to be her ability to woo independent voters. According to Gallup, only 41 percent of independents have a favorable view of Palin, while 48 percent don’t. Those numbers were opposite when she joined the McCain ticket a year ago.

While Palin’s strength has always been her appeal to the GOP base, a second poll raises questions about whether Republicans will actually vote for her. A Rasmussen Reports survey of likely GOP voters finds only 18 percent think she should be the Republican presidential nominee in 2012. She trails Mike Huckabee, who led the poll with 29 percent, and Mitt Romney, who came in second with 18 percent. In July, Palin finished second to Romney in the same poll. The most troubling number for Palin: asked which candidate they’d “least” like to see get the nomination, Palin finished second with 21 percent. (Gov. Tim Pawlenty finished first in that poll, with 28 percent of voters saying they don’t want to see him receive the nomination.) When matched up one on one with Huckabee and Romney, Palin is a distant second to both. Huckabee leads Palin 55 percent to 35 percent among likely GOP voters, while Romney beats Palin 52 percent to 37 percent.

It’s probably no coincidence that Palin’s decline within her own party has come in the months after she quit the governor’s office. As Rasmussen notes, 40 percent of Republican voters thought her decision to leave office hurt her chances in 2012. Clearly, the party faithful, who desperately want to win in 2012, don’t think it’s quite enough for Palin to weigh in on national matters by offering her thoughts on Facebook. But the unanswered question is what exactly do they want from Palin, and what does she want to be? In 2008, Palin energized her party base by serving as the GOP attack dog on Obama. She’s tried to corner that market again with provocative Facebook essays and op-eds, raising questions about the Democrats’ health-care-reform push. But that hasn’t helped her appeal to swing voters—whom polls show are just as wary about some of the reform proposals as Republicans—and she’s lost ground to Huckabee and Romney within the GOP.

As her book release nears and she presumably reenters the spotlight, the big unknown is whether Palin can change what the public already thinks about her and regain ground. You can't doubt her as a major political force. As Chris Cillizza notes this morning, she's topped 930,000 followers on Facebook—more than any other potential GOP candidate. In the age of Obama, that's not something you can discount. The dilemma for Palin is how she can transform that into something more meaningful than people posting comments to her latest Facebook essay. To have a chance in 2012, Palin needs people to take her seriously. Stepping back from the fray a bit can help, but in the end, it's ultimately about message. Why would she be the best GOP candidate in 2012? How would she be a better alternative to Obama? That's clarity she'll need to offer.

The Secret of Levi Johnston's Success

Katie Connolly — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:26:37 GMT

Levi Johnston, the lad most famous for knocking up his high-school sweetheart—who also happened to be Sarah Palin's daughter—is making the most of his fame. He's been made news twice this week already. On Tuesday, we were chattering about his amusing role in a new commercial for nuts. Today, the blogosphere lit up with news of his nude shoot for Playgirl, titillating girls and gay men alike. Apparently Levi has become a work-out machine, toning the love handles he exposed in GQ in preparation for moment in the female erotica spotlight. If he wasn't a liberal pin-up boy before, he certainly is now. Surely Levi's 15 minutes are almost up. And yet there he is again, trending high on Google, and cluttering up gossip blogs. So why the fixation with this unemployed, hockey-playing, high-school dropout?

Of course, his appeal is partly explained by his looks. The dude is hot. But he also comes across as remarkably normal given his circumstances. His starring turns in GQ and Vanity Fair showed a kid managing to remain relatively down-to-earth amid his swirling fame and personal tumult. Sure he has an agent and talks about landing acting gigs, but one imagines him doing so with the same unaffected nonchalance with which he pops a pistachio, or talks about shooting moose. He seems playful, as though he's not taking this whole caper too seriously. He'll chat about his life as long as people want to listen. And therein lies the secret to his success: Johnston can pan the one of the most criticized women in the world without sounding salacious, nasty, or misogynist. He's not a screeching critic. He's just a guy bitching about the inlaws. It's an entirely unique position in the Palin-sphere. And people love it.

When Johnston drops bombshells about troubles in Palin's marriage or about Sarah's plan to adopt Bristol's baby to cover up her pregnancy, he does so with a straightforward naiveté that can't help but provoke sympathy. It's a tone that's absent from most of the revelations about Palin's personal life. That's why his critiques are so devastating. When Johnston speaks, liberals quiver, because in a universe of hungry anti-Palinites, Johnston offers a rare spot of credibility. He's been in her house. He's part of her world. So when he speaks, there's a kernel of truth, even if he was just a teenage observer.

Palin detractors love Johnston for another reason too—he actually seems to get under the former governor's skin. Since he first appeared in the public eye, almost everything Johnston has done is an affront to Palin's image as a family-values conservative. He got her unwed daughter pregnant, he didn't marry her, he aired the family's dirty laundry, sought fame in licentious Hollywood, and now he's getting his gear off in public. Palin has hit out at Johnston. Clearly irked by his interview on The Tyra Banks Show in April, a Palin family representative issued a statement saying "It is unfortunate that Levi finds it more appealing to exploit his previous relationship with Bristol than to contribute to the well-being of the child."

When Palin trashes the media, it feels like part of her schtick. But when Palin-the-mom knocks Johnston-the-ex, there's palpable,seeping tension. It's compelling. And it's why as long as there is Palin, there'll be Levi Johnston.

McCain Strategist: Palin in 2012 Would Be 'Catastrophic' for GOP

Holly Bailey — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:03:36 GMT

Looks like there’s at least one high-profile Republican who won’t be voting for Sarah Palin should she run in 2012. Steve Schmidt, John McCain’s top political strategist in 2008, told a forum in Washington today that nominating Palin as the party’s next presidential nominee would be “catastrophic” for Republicans. “I think that she has talents, but my honest view is that she would not be a winning candidate,” Schmidt said. “In fact, were she to be the nominee, we would have a catastrophic election result.”

The comments aren’t necessarily surprising—many prominent Republicans privately share Schmidt’s views. And there’s bad blood between Schmidt and Palin. As has been widely reported, the two clashed repeatedly during the campaign. Palin allies have accused Schmidt of leaking unflattering details about her to reporters. Schmidt allies have accused her of being a diva and unmanageable. Schmidt is the only member of McCain’s inner circle to publicly criticize Palin—something that McCain himself has privately discouraged but seems in no real position to stop any longer. Asked today how he thought he might be portrayed in Palin’s upcoming memoir, Going Rogue, Schmidt replied, “I think it may say I was anti-rogue in the running of the campaign.”

But even with all the drama, the fact that these comments are coming from Schmidt, who advised McCain to pick Palin as his vice presidential candidate, can’t be overlooked. It’s not entirely personal. For months, Schmidt, without mentioning Palin’s name, has urged the GOP, for its own survival, to find a way to appeal to moderates and independents as well as the party's base. "In the year since the election has ended, [Palin] has done nothing to expand her appeal beyond the base,” Schmidt said today. “The independent vote is going to be up for grabs in 2012. That middle of the electorate is going to be determinative of the outcome of the elections. I just don't see that if you look at the things she has done over the year . . . that she is going to expand that base in the middle.” It’s not “inconceivable” that she could win the nomination, Schmidt acknowledged. “I do think it's fairly inconceivable that she could be elected president of the United States.”

UPDATE, 1:43 p.m.: Meg Stapleton, Palin's spokeswoman, responds via e-mail: "The Governor will write about all of this in her book. There will be plenty of time to talk about it then."

Tim Pawlenty Joins the 2012 Fray

Katie Connolly — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:40:05 GMT

Looks like Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty has finally bitten the bullet and has submitted papers to register a PAC—usually the first step in any presidential bid—thus ending the most predictable speculation in the 2012 race so far. Pawlenty will call his PAC Freedom First, continuing the GOP trend of corny freedom-themed PAC names. (Mitt Romney's is called Free and Strong America.) Over at Politico, J-Mart reports that Pawlenty has been quietly collecting high-profile campaign staff and supporters, including Vin Weber to co-chair his campaign. Weber, a former Minnesota congressman and a prominent GOP player, threw his weight behind Romney in 2008. Pawlenty has wrapped up a few other big names from the 2008 cycle, including RNC communications director Alex Conant and McCain campaign manager Terry Nelson, who will be big assets to his bid.

While anything could happen between now and the 2012 primaries (remember when Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani were the presumptive 2008 nominees?), there's no harm in speculating, right? Pawlenty has a couple of disadvantages going in. He has lower national name recognition than three of his key rivals—Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee. He hasn't run in a presidential election before, and many Republican strategists will tell you that the experience of having done it once is enormously advantageous. (Democrats, on the other hand, are far less supportive of repeat candidates.) He's also behind in the fundraising stakes, which is a big challenge when facing the likes of Palin and Romney, both of whom are fundraising powerhouses.

Pawlenty will likely to be fighting for Romney's turf. Both men are telegenic former governors (or at least Pawlenty will be—he's not running for a third term in 2010) who will likely focus their campaigns on the economy and their administrative prowess. Both men are socially conservative, but neither is likely to make that the centerpiece of their campaign. And both will fashion themselves Washington outsiders, as will most of the potential field.

On the upside, Pawlenty has significant good will within the GOP. His time at Minnesota's helm has been widely respected within the party, and has been relatively uncontroversial. He's considered a solid player, a reasonable man with good conservative credentials who is reportedly easy to get along with. No diva-ish behavior there. He was high on McCain's VP shortlist last year. In those considerations, his only real vice was that he wasn't showy enough. He was a good choice, but not a flashy, surprising game-changer. But if in 2012 the economy still feels shaky and voters feel uncertain about their future, that vice could prove to be his crowning virtue.

Palin Can't Get Domestic Speaking Gigs? That's Not Unusual.

Holly Bailey — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:59:39 GMT

Is Sarah Palin having trouble landing speaking gigs? Citing an anonymous “industry expert,” the New York Post’s Page Six reports today that Palin isn’t attracting much interest on the lecture circuit. The reason: she’s so polarizing. “The big lecture-buyers in the U.S. are paralyzed with fear about booking her, basically because she’s a blithering idiot,” the unnamed source tells Page Six. “Palin is so uninteresting to so many groups—unless they are interested in moose hunting … What does she have to say? She can’t even describe what she reads.” Ouch.

But in Palin’s defense, is she actually trying to book gigs in the U.S. anyway? It’s worth noting that plenty of current and former polarizing political types on the lecture circuit usually make most of their money speaking in other countries—especially their first year out. Back in 2001, when he was still caught up in all the drama of his final days in the White House, Bill Clinton collected nearly $9.2 million for giving 59 speeches—39 of which were overseas. More recently, George W. Bush hit the speaker’s circuit. With the exception of a speech in Michigan, Bush’s talks have all been abroad, in Canada, Asia, and Europe. (No word on how much he’s earning—though he’s reportedly asking for at least $150,000 a pop.) There are exceptions: former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice hasn’t had trouble landing domestic gigs, giving speeches in Pennsylvania, California, and Michigan. She earned a reported $150,000 to talk to a meeting of the National Football League’s owners' association this past spring.

Palin was signed a month ago by the Washington Speakers Bureau—the same group that reps Bush and Rice. Last week she earned a reported $150,000 for a speech in Hong Kong. No word on what her next move will be—though the fact that her debut speech attracted mixed reviews can’t be reassuring to her bookers. But we’d venture to guess that Palin is still pretty marketable to an overseas audience—after all, no other potential GOP 2012 candidate attracts more attention than she does, and the world never has a lack of curiosity about our political celebrities. The question Palin’s bookers must be wondering about is whether the former governor’s memoirs will add to her marketability or if it will lead to overexposure.

Who Is Advising Sarah Palin?

Holly Bailey — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:44:05 GMT

When it comes to Sarah Palin, there are two big questions that everybody in Washington wants to know. Is she going to run for president in 2012? And who exactly is working for her these days? Since she resigned as governor of Alaska in July, Palin has been uncharacteristically quiet. She’s stayed largely out of the public eye—though she’s been posting messages on her official Facebook page and wrote an op-ed on health care for The Wall Street Journal. Last week she earned her first check as a paid speaker, receiving a reported low six figures for addressing a Hong Kong business group—a speech that was closed to the public. Yesterday, word broke that the publication of Palin’s memoir, Going Rogue, had been pushed up from next spring to this November, just in time for the holidays. According to reports, Palin worked on the book with a ghostwriter, conservative journalist Lynn Vincent. The big mystery, even to those who once worked closely with the former VP candidate: besides Vincent, who is working with Palin to keep her brand alive?

In the nasty aftermath of the McCain-Palin ticket, Palin broke with many of the advisers she had worked with in the final days of the campaign. She went back to Alaska, surrounded by her longtime political team, including chief spokeswoman and top adviser Meg Stapleton and Kristan Cole, who helped Palin launch a legal-defense fund to cover costs related to several ethics investigations in Alaska. In January, Palin launched a new political-action committee, SarahPAC—a move widely interpreted as an effort to help forward her political ambitions. Between January and June, the PAC raised more than $730,000, with almost $270,000 of that going to staff and consulting fees. Palin hired Pam Pryor, a GOP operative who once worked for former representative J. C. Watts, as an adviser. In February she tapped Becki Donatelli, a longtime GOP consultant close to McCain, to run SarahPAC, but the two severed the relationship in April. Donatelli declined to comment and, like Pryor, directed all questions to Stapleton, who did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

One key question: who has been ghostwriting the Facebook messages and op-eds signed in Palin’s name? Since August, after she left the governor’s office, Palin’s messages have been more heavy on policy than her previous post-2008 remarks. But many GOP strategists, including those who worked for McCain last year, claim to have no idea who is manning the Palin ship these days. Last week we got at least a few hints at who she's been talking to. According to Politico’s Ben Smith, former McCain foreign-policy adviser Randy Scheunemann accompanied Palin to Hong Kong and helped write her speech. Scheunemann, as you might recall, was viewed as a Palin sympathizer during the McCain campaign, even as she clashed with other top McCain strategists. Another contributor to the speech: Steve Biegun, a former foreign-policy adviser to President George W. Bush who worked with Palin during the campaign. She also reportedly got assistance from two other longtime GOP policy hands: Dan Blumenthal, a China expert at the American Enterprise Institute, and Kim Daniels, a lawyer for the conservative Thomas More Law Center. Still, it's unlikely that any of these people are the main stewards when it comes to helping Palin guide her political image in the run-up to 2012. Who else ranks in the former gov's inner circle? At this point, we might have to wait for the "acknowledgments" section of her book to find out.