Media commentator and best-selling author Laura Ingraham, whom I admire, respect and ordinarily agree with, spoke with a Sarah Palin supporter on her Thursday radio show. Ingraham cooled the caller's enthusiasm by making the point that a Palin candidacy is what the left hopes for above all else, since Palin would presumably alienate the independents who are abandoning Obama in droves. This reasoning is faulty and self-defeating.
First, no one knows who can or will win any election. Democrats won the presidency last time with the least qualified candidate to seek the office in a century. Judging from the policies and legislation passed under Obama, Democrats seem completely mystified by economics, foreign policy, American culture and character. So what evidence is there that they can predict the behavior of an electorate suffering from massive government debt, debilitating unemployment, and four years of buyer's remorse? Other than those votes conjured from thin air by ACORN, the Democrats have no particular insight into who the electorate will choose. It is impossible to predict the GOP nominee, and how formidable a candidate he or she will be. The only probability is that Barack Obama will spend most of 2013 wondering where he went wrong.
Second, if Palin is such a pushover that liberals everywhere are salivating at a chance to compete against her, why have they been so public about their hopes? Why have they spent years attacking her in the media? If she were actually the candidate they prefer to face, wouldn't they keep their preferences to themselves, and passively support her candidacy? If the Dems are really anxious to see Obama face Palin in presidential debates, on the campaign trail, in the media, why have they done so much to make her candidacy difficult to achieve? Obviously, they don't want to face Palin. They are terrified of her because they know she will expose Barack Obama for the empty vessel he has always been.
Third, whether the opposition fears or dismisses Palin, why would we ever let the enemy’s stated preferences determine our candidate? Even if the Dems do have a crystal ball, how would we know if their views are legitimate or assumed? Will we choose all GOP candidates based on how much they are reviled, feared, or savaged by our enemies? Isn’t the whole point to choose candidates based on their views, track records and experience?
Fourth, does the Democrat claim that they are anxious to run a brutal campaign against Palin guarantee that they will sling any less mud against any other candidate? No matter who the GOP nominates, that person will face a hostile media, unscrupulous tactics, and mendacious advertising. Does anyone believe that the Democrats will meet a non-Palin candidacy with reserve, integrity, and fair dealing?
I believe Sarah Palin would be a strong, inspirational and galvanizing candidate. There may be good reasons not to nominate her, but the professed eagerness of the Democrats to run against her is not one of them. If Republicans believe another candidate will do better, they will make that choice during the primaries. And if Sarah Palin runs, and the GOP nominates her next fall, then we’ll see how eager the Democrats really are for a fight.
