Palin’s rise to political stardom has precipitated the most thorough media introspection in America since the Iraq War. When Palin was first announced the media thought all its Noëls had come at once. Result: in the words of Peggy Noonan, the media dropped the “A-bomb” on her within the first 72 hours. They, and the Obama campaign, are still suffering from the blowback.
Before anyone had heard so much as squeak from this pleasant looking, hockey-mom-governor-of-five, the media went after her, and her family, in the most savage and disrespectful way possible. You might well say at this point, “of course they did, that’s their job”, but it’s not the mainstream media’s job to kick around a pregnant seventeen-year old, nor is it within their remit to present sordid internet rumours of sexual affairs as national news. In more ways that can be mentioned, Palin is an abominable choice for VP, but the media and Democrats overplayed their hand to such an extent that it gave Palin, and the McCain campaign, a golden opportunity.
An opportunity that she took with both hands, in front of over forty-million Americans who tuned in to watch, the same number that had watched Obama the week before. Palin delivered one of the most well-crafted and pitch-perfect political speeches you could hope to see – the Republican equivalent of Obama’s 2004 Convention speech, but better because it was delivered against a backdrop of unequalled media intensity.
Candidates running for national office usually only get two opportunities to speak directly to the voters of America in the midst of the campaign: the Convention and the debates. America was tuned-in, and they liked what they saw. Most importantly, middle-America concluded that it was the media that couldn’t be trusted; not Sarah Palin.
In short, America has stopped listening to the (overwhelmingly liberal) media; they’ve made up their own mind. Consequently, she is virtually bullet-proof to more attacks from Democrats or the media. The only person who can damage Brand-Palin is Sarah herself, and it will take more than the Bush Doctrine to derail her.
Obama has only one option: ignore her. He can’t go after her, but he can stop talking about her. The campaign will come back to the top of the ticket, either this week or next, and the main issues will be at the centre of this election by the time of the first debate. And it’s on these issues, not character, that Obama can still triumph.
NH@CentreLeft
Filed under: Labour, Leadership | Tags: john reid, leadership challenge, siobhain mcdonagh
Siobhain McDonagh is the latest, and most senior government (now ex) member, to break ranks and call for a leadership election to ‘clear the air’. Forget McDonagh, that’s not the story. Senior Westminster insiders tell me that this ’smells of John Reid’; so we’re left to ask: is this the start of a John Reid comeback?
Siobhain McDonagh is a former PPS to Reid and her sister Margaret McDonagh (now Baroness McDonagh) was responsible for the abortive Reid leadership campaign in 2006. Airdrie and Shotts – Reid’s constituency – have yet to announce a Labour candidate to replace Reid who announced that he was standing down over a year ago. So why the delay?
Is Reid riding to the rescue of the Labour Party? Stranger things have happened.
UPDATE: Where CentreLeft lead others follow. Today both the Telegraph and Political Betting pick up on the Reid speculation. Clive Davis at the Spectator also picks up the thread…
Brown it seems has survived – despite the rumours of further disquiet amongst backbench Labour MPs – and the Prime Minister will stagger on through the Conference season and into the New Year.
James Forstyh, writing over at Coffee House, explains it thus:
It is not as if Brown has faced down his internal enemies. It is just they they have retreated because getting rid of him appears too hard.
Perhaps. But Labour MPs have also retreated out of pure self-interest. The prospect of taking on a demoralised and near bankrupt Party, widely discredited and increasingly fragmented, is not particularly appealing.
The Young Turks in the Cabinet, the Purnells and the Milibands, aren’t willing to risk getting an electoral spanking courtesy of Cameron’s Conservatives. They’d rather leave that to Brown whose capacity for punishment is – it seems – unending. Labour’s so-called future are now longing for the safe cover of opposition, awaiting their chance to lead the renewal, and happy to allow Gordon to march the Party to the gallows.
CentreLeft is delighted to announce that NH has now joined our team of contributors and will be covering the US Election. NH is a former Hillary staffer, worked on the Kerry campaign and is now working in the City.
They said she wasn’t “qualified” to be one 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency. They’re right. But forget about “experience” and “qualifications”. Since the emergence of Palin, the McCain campaign has been more energized than at any other point in this election and the Obama campaign is on the back foot. Why? Buzz.
In the modern “minute-by-minute” media world, the vast majority of Americans digest their news through a hotchpotch of different media snippets: a YouTube video, a few minutes of cable news, a joke on the late night shows, or Drudge. Thus, controlling the media cycle becomes one of, if not, the most important priority for each campaign. If the public’s impressions and assessments of the candidates are made on scant interaction with prolonged news media, the lead story of each cycle matters. The more the media buzz around Palin continues, the less time Obama has to talk about the economy and health care. Obama isn’t used to not being at the centre of the media storm, and he doesn’t like it.
Undoubtedly, the original political “maverick” took a risk in choosing Palin as his VP, but thus far the so-called “gimmick” has resulted in a monumental bounce in the polls, to the point where McCain now enjoys a 2 percent lead – unthinkable before the conventions. Palin’s buzz is enabling the McCain campaign to redefine the electoral dichotomy as one based on character, not issues. As Rick Davis, a top McCain adviser, said recently: “This election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.” At least, that’s exactly what the McCain campaign wants the election to be about.
Palin may yet fall to earth (maybe as soon as today, in her first unscripted interview with ABC’s Charles Gibson, or perhaps later, in the VP debate), but McCain’s gimmick has given his campaign a real shot at winning, a scenario that looked far-fetched when Obama accepted his nomination in front of 84,000 people, and the media went weak at the knees.
What’s the difference between a gimmick and a calculated political risk? Lipstick.
NH@CentreLeft
Jackie Ashley was spot-on in yesterday’s Guardian, describing the majority of career politicians in the Westminster village:
They were pimpled politicians at university and moved quickly to London. They went to drink warm white wine at political lectures, seminars and conferences, wrote speeches for older politicians, then dug up facts for them, then dug up policies, found a seat and rose without bubbles or much kicking.
Anyone reading this who tried and soon gave up on university politics will recognise the picture – the tedious factionalism, the arse-licking meetings with real politicians, the constant churning out of Central Office propaganda in place of any real debate.
But the bigger problem is Westminster’s culture, imported from Washington, of unpaid internships as a path to power. Search www.w4mp.com and the majority of jobs are internships with this politician and that think-tank, kindly offering Zone 1-6 travelcards and a fiver towards lunch because we all live in London.
These think tanks and politicians lecture us all about fairness but what’s fair about its unpaid internships if you (say) live on a council estate in Glasgow, and how are they opening the experience to everyone? These roles are always advertised as “vital” to the organisation but if they’re so vital, why are they not paid? Imagine if a private company was found to be relying on young unpaid workers. In fact they always pay, and provide well for their interns.
So the result is that all the people I know who have taken up these internships, and undoubtedly gained a lot from the experience, are people whose parents can support them, and most likely live in London. Even if, like this writer, you have the time but need to save up money for something in the real world, taking an internship is utterly impractical. Graduate jobs, especially the civil service, are more appealing for all but the most committed to party politics. It would be nice to see some of these organisations, supposedly so committed to fairness and equality for all, opening their doors to more, but I won’t be holding my breath.
