I am, however, interested in her to the extent that she remains a force in American politics and a potential presidential candidate in 2012.  Palin is, in many ways, the nightmare candidate for a partisan Republican who cares only about winning the next election.  She’s wildly popular with the conservative base, but deeply unpopular among moderates and independents.

She therefore also poses a unique problems for her potential Republican opponents.  Primary contests often feature arguments among the candidates over who is most electable.  But one of the characteristics of the rightward lurch of the Republican Party in the past year has been increasingly valuing ideological purity over electoral pragmatism.  Attacking Palin for being unelectable–that is, for being unpopular with those outside the conservative movement–isn’t likely to sit well with Republican Primary votes.  Indeed, there’s a strong case that the main reason for Palin’s appeal to conservatives is the contempt that non-conservatives have for her.

-AR

Even if Giuliani thinks he can do better this time, it’s hard to see how running for statewide office in New York is a better launching pad than his current “Democrats want the terrorists to win” road show.  New York is a fairly liberal state, and winning statewide office would require Giuliani to emphasize his more moderate views on abortion and gay rights.  That won’t sit well with a Republican electorate that seems even more intent than in 2008 to emphasize ideological purity over electability.

If Giuliani does announce a run for the Senate (or governor), whoever his opponent is should make possible presidential aspirations a major issue and demand that Giuliani pledge, without any equivocation or wiggle room, to serve a full term.  Doing so would be more than political grandstanding.  Again, New York is a pretty liberal state, and I doubt its voters want a senator who, immediately upon taking office, will start casting votes to appeal to Republican primary voters in Iowa and New Hampshire (and Florida!)

-AR

What struck me most from the Vanity Fair piece, and is more striking after today’s events, is just how bizarre McCain’s selection of Palin was. At the time the recklessness of the decision was apparent, but it only grows more inexplicable over time. The thought that such an ambitious man–72 years old and in public service his entire adult life, seeking the highest level of achievement possible in what was clearly his last shot–would risk it all on such an unknown quantity, and without doing It betrayed McCain’s self-image as a man who put principle above politics and country above self–there’s not way McCain ever genuinely believed Palin was the most qualified person who could pick to be second in line as commander-in-chief– and, ultimately, it didn’t even pay off politically.

But I’m of course not complaining. Putting aside minor issues like Iran, health care, and climate change, the Supreme Court-related news of the last couple months has driven home how important McCain’s loss was. The thought of John McCain choosing David Souter’s replacement is downright terrifying.

-AR

All that is a rather convoluted way of saying: I’m not too scared of this guy.

Doesn’t exactly look like the face that’s going to enlarge the tent of the GOP. Nothing says kinder and gentler like a tobacco lobbyist from Mississippi.

-AR