SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Christine O'Donnell '10, A Dry Run For Palin '12

JONATHAN CHAIT SEPTEMBER 15, 2010

Christine O'Donnell '10, A Dry Run For Palin '12

BY JONATHAN CHAIT

The dynamics around the Christine O'Donnell campaign are going to set the stage for Sarah Palin's presidential campaign, if she chooses to wage one. O'Donnell is kind of a more Palin-y Palin, an attractive female committed social conservative who excites the base. Much of the establishment considers her totally unelectable, and some people who have worked with her consider her totally unqualified to hold national office. Yet she has attained an iconic standing that makes opposition very tricky.

One commonality is the issue of "respect." Fred Barnes explains that Mike Castle lost, in part, because he "didn’t respect a Tea Party-backed rival." The context of this claim is not that Castle failed to take O'Donnell seriously as a threat, but that he failed to treat her with appropriate deference. This is exactly the same dynamic that Palin's potential rivals are trying to navigate—run against her without seeming to endorse the calumnies of the dread liberal media.

If and when O'Donnell loses, it's also likely that establishment Republicans will use her loss as an object lesson to the base in the dangers of nominating Palin (again, contingent upon Palin running.) It's an easy, "sticky" example of a similar circumstance. One problem, though, is that conservative activists might blame the establishment for O'Donnell losing—she would have won if the party supported her. Indeed, it might even be worthwhile for the GOP to invest some money in O'Donnell's campaign merely to tamp down thse recriminations.

Meanwhile, Republicans have to be frightened of the precedent. Here you have a slam-dunk case of an obviously unelectable candidate, which the party gangs up against in order to advance its obvious interests. They spend a week bombarding O'Donnell with disqualifying character attacks, and pleading with the base to think strategically. Yet it totally fails.

Now, Palin is not as unelectable as O'Donnell. (You tell me the state of the economy in 2012, and I'll tell you how electable she is.) She also doesn't have the benefit of running against a Mike Castle. (Though Mitt Romney, whose health care plan was a more liberal version of Obama's, will be a ripe target.) But she has a much deeper base of support going into the race. How would Republicans persuade their voters that a vote for Palin is strategically daft? At this point, their best hope is either that the economy performs so badly that anybody can beat Obama, or that Palin chooses not to run.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 22 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

22 comments

Uh, say what you will about their other similarities, but O'Donnell is *not* an attractive woman.

- santoast

September 15, 2010 at 2:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Appropriate difference, or appropriate deference?

- ironyroad

September 15, 2010 at 2:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ditto santo, but what if Carly Fiorina wins in CA?

- NR027810

September 15, 2010 at 2:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

she's pretty good looking for a pol. check out her anti-masturbation campaign on MTV from the 90's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzHcqcXo_NA

- apollo

September 15, 2010 at 3:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

An attractive woman should never be the spokesperson for an anti-masturbation campaign. Talk about self-defeating!

- Fishpeddler

September 15, 2010 at 3:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

- "dry run" "sticky example" "party gangs"? Musta been a slow day on jury duty.

- michaelg

September 15, 2010 at 4:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hilarious, fish. And Sarah Palin will run for president. You heard it here first.

- liberal reformer

September 15, 2010 at 4:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is a weird and stupid new rule in our public discourse. Obviously not qualified and not all that bright, GOP candidates who are female are entilted to deference because their very unqualified nature shows they are "real" and "citizen" candidates. (Of course, they must be at least moderately attractive physcially or this rule does not apply.) Why do people play along? Call her for what she is.

- MikeB.

September 15, 2010 at 4:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

- MikeB: "Why do people play along? Call her for what she is." Anarchy is a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority. What qualifications does a candidate need for those voters? I think I know why people are playing along because what she is may not matter as much as what she is not.

- michaelg

September 15, 2010 at 5:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

why can't big government just stay out of our pants? we don't need bureaucrats and socialist death panels bossing our prostates around.

- apollo

September 15, 2010 at 5:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Republicans have brought back the Confederacy, this time though it is a Confederacy of Dunces.

- blackton

September 15, 2010 at 6:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We should only pray that Palin runs (and wins the nomination) - I don't care how rabid the Republican base is and how deep her support among them is ... you'll see all the intensity you need on the Democratic side. As for independents, a healthy number of them will vote for Obama even if they don't think he's done a stellar job ... the thought of that woman in charge of the red button will scare them enough, no matter how bad the economy is. I don't think it's a realistic scenario, though ... no way the Republicans are dumb enough to nominate her for President. It's one thing to say, no RINOs in Congress, quite another to give up the White House because of ideological purity.

- NR409654

September 15, 2010 at 7:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I second liberal reformer. Palin will run. What's more, she'll probably get the nomination. I mean, what halfway sane, career-minded GOP pol would run against her? The calculation would go like this: 'If I loose to Palin in the nomination campaign, as is entirely possible, I'm toast forevermore, and for what would I be running that risk? For the chance, more than likely, to lose to Obama in the general election, in which event I'm toast.' I'm placing my Intrade bets right now.

- AaronW

September 15, 2010 at 9:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

NR - On the contrary, I think you are painting a realistic scenario. The GOP base is not listening to whatever adult is supposed to be in charge of the party. I think even Rush couldn't sway them to think or vote strategically now. As of today, I bet on Sarah getting the nomination in '12.

- wnalpert

September 15, 2010 at 9:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I dunno, O'Donnell is kinda "it's ten minutes to closing time" cute. I wonder if "Only you can save me from an evening of masturbation" would work on her. Of course now, she's no Michelle Bachmann!

- W_Bombay

September 15, 2010 at 9:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can see how a progressive wants to be involved in running government but I don't understand why a Tea Party conservative wants to be involved in running non government. Maybe that's why they always seem so crazy to me.

- Nusholtz

September 15, 2010 at 9:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Both Palin and O'Donnell are attractive *FOR POLITICIANS* That's a crucial qualifier. In credit to their baseline intelligence, the GOP is working hard to ensure that the economy is as bad as it possibly can be.

- miceelf

September 15, 2010 at 9:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thanks for the whacking material, apollo!

- drheingold

September 16, 2010 at 4:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Palin won't run. She wants to pull the strings. She wants a place in the history books without having to take any direct decisions. She wants to be "influential".

- kras

September 16, 2010 at 4:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Anti-maturbation campaign? Well THERE'S the problem. No wonder these people are so angry all the time.

- WandreyCer

September 16, 2010 at 10:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, the problem that hat line of thought is that there is quite a lot of anger on the left, too.

- liberal reformer

September 16, 2010 at 11:38am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I meant to write "with that."

- liberal reformer

September 16, 2010 at 7:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close