Huckabee And Palin
Posted on September 3rd, 2008
by Daniel Larison |
|
This quote from Mark DeMoss (via Andrew), who worked (largely unsuccessfully) on Romney’s evangelical outreach during the primaries, got me to thinking why the response to Palin has been as strong as it has been:
Too many evangelicals and religious conservative are too preoccupied with values and faith and pay no attention to competence. We don’t apply this approach to anything else in life, including choosing a pastor.” Imagine, he said, if a church was searching for a pastor and the leadership was brought a candidate with great values but little experience. “They’ve been a pastor for two years at a church with 150 people but he shares our values, so we hired him to be pastor of our 5,000 person church? It wouldn’t happen! We don’t say, ‘He shares our values, so let’s hire him.’ That’s absurd. Yet we apply that to choosing presidents. It blows my mind.
A key part of understanding the enthusiastic conservative response to Palin, particularly among evangelical Christian leaders, is remembering that this was not how the movement and evangelical leaders responded to Huckabee when he was running for President. Many movement activists and evangelical leaders insisted on being “pragmatic” and rallied rather half-heartedly around Romney on the dubious basis that he shared their values, but more important than this was the claim that he, unlike his rivals, was both competent and met all of the criteria for each major conservative bloc. Despite Huckabee’s manifestly greater popularity in many early primary contests, and despite his far better conservative, particularly social conservative, record and his more extensive executive experience, practically every pundit, activist and party official you could find was absolutely certain that Huckabee was beyond the pale and would cause the GOP to implode if nominated. Even though Huckabee was the stronger non-McCain candidate, and stopping McCain had been a top priority for all of these leaders, they opted for the safe and phony Romney.
In the wake of Huckabee’s second-place finish to McCain, whom most of the Romneyite Christians loathed, prominent Romney backers expressed regret for not having seized the opportunity by backing Huckabee–one of their own. The selection of Palin has provided an opportunity to make up to some extent for ignoring and even attacking Huckabee, which is one of the reasons why there has been such a powerful identification with her. Having rejected Huckabee in the strongest terms and declared him to be unacceptable as a VP selection, movement and evangelical leaders are now rallying to someone who is “one of us” after having contorted themselves with their strained rationalizations for supporting Romney. Having helped to sink a representative of one of the largest constituencies of the GOP, they must be relieved that they have a chance to undo what some have come to see as their colossal blunder. Had they responded in this way eight months ago after Huckabee’s victory in Iowa, they would not now need a Palin to offset McCain’s flaws and provide a reason for them to be excited about the ticket. The Palin enthusiasm is an expression of the desperation felt by those who are looking for a second chance.
Filed under: politics
“The Palin enthusiasm is an expression of the desperation felt by those who are looking for a second chance.”
Maybe partially, but I don’t think that really explains the sheer depth and breath of the outpouring of support for this woman. (Not just on the internets, in my own social/religious circle it has been nothing short of astonishing.) She is fulfilling the same role that Obama is for both blacks and upper income-highly educated white voters: they are both viewed as the avatars of their respective cultures, and view the success of the candidate as a resounding endorsement of their lifestyles, just as they would view the defeat of their candidate as a crushing blow.
But that’s just it–Huckabee already was the embodiment of an evangelical, working-class (and Southern) culture. That was half the problem that party and movement elites had with him, and it also didn’t translate into the same degree of enthusiasm. Now Palin comes along with approximately the same kind of background, obviously minus the Southern part, and she becomes the acceptable vessel of this culture. What happened in the last six or eight months that made Palin so much more appealing to both elite and constituent than Huckabee was? Is it simply that Palin is in the No. 2 slot, which makes it easier to rally around such an “avatar” than it would be if we were talking about the presidential nominee? I think there is something else going on.
” Is it simply that Palin is in the No. 2 slot, which makes it easier to rally around such an “avatar†than it would be if we were talking about the presidential nominee? I think there is something else going on.”
Exactly so, because no one thinks that Palin is going to be Dick Cheney mark II, power behind the throne. People are looking for her to be a living affirmation of a life and lifestyle that they idealize. This is, of course, exactly the wrong reason to pick a VP candidate, and not at all a reason to vote for the ticket, especially as it throws into very sharp relief the contempt that McCain feels for the office. But as a political pick, it was sheer genius. I can’t think of McCain without my gorge rising, but, as Ross Douthat said a few days ago, I am rooting for her (Gov. Palin) like crazy. It is stupid and atavistic and crassly identatarian of me, I know, but there it is.
I have been impressed with Gov. Palin on many fronts, but I am inwardly cringing that she has simply been raised too high, too fast, too soon; that she will make a mistake and be ridiculed off the public stage, and one of the (precious few) rising conservative stars left.
Of course, my enthusiasm is somewhat tempered by the realization that right now Gov. Palin is being assimilated by the AEI/AIPAC/Borg collective. Sigh.
Another way to think about it might be this way: the working-class evangelical is fine to have as a mascot and a symbol, but under no circumstances should the GOP trust any of them with the top position. A skeptic might say that this ticket is the perfect illustration of how the GOP uses evangelicals for elections and then spends the next four years ignoring them on most everything that matters. In exchange for the “gift” of Palin, the GOP will then expect complete support for whatever McCain wants to do. The sad thing is that, should McCain somehow win, the party will get that support and more.
I think this is only part of it. Broad swathes of the Republican constituency are not radical ideologues. Additionally, even the most oblivious voter has to recognize that the Republican party is the party of old white men.
For 18 months, the Democrats have laid claim to two historic candidates – a black man and a woman. Forget their actual values / positions / campaigns, the simple fact is that the left of the country has spent nearly two years pointing out how enlightened they are (with the unspoken implication that Republicans are all closet racists / sexists by default).
Now Palin arrives, and suddenly the Right gets a chance to be the party of equality, of opportunity, of multicultural melting-pot veneration. In other words, Palin’s vagina gives them a rebuttal to holier-than-thou liberals. Obviously it’s not the main reason her embrace has been so enthusiastic, but I think it’s a part of it.
I don’t think it’s just the GOP establishment that’s at fault* here. Set aside the working class aspect of this: I’m reasonably convinced that your average swing voter, who may well be broadly sympathetic to the social conservatism of the Republican party, is still not going to vote for an evangelical.
Relatedly, at times I think that the GOP position on social conservative issues – loud support in theory, little action in practice – is not JUST a reflection of the fact that your average GOP politician doesn’t really share socially conservative values, but it a reflection of that same swing voter. They want their politicians to talk a good game with regard to social conservative issues, but don’t REALLY want the relevant platform positions on abortion, etc., to be adopted.
*”fault” from the perspective of a social conservative and/or evangelical. I’m neither, and I don’t want either overlapping group to increase its political power, but I can sympathize with their frustration.
What I don’t understand is why McCain didn’t pick Huckabee for VP. I think Huckabee’s by far the most appealing candidate, the best speaker, and the shrewdest politician of all the possible choices. The only thing Palin has over him is ovaries. I think if McCain had picked Huckabee it would have energized the base even more than Palin without any of the negatives, and given McCain his best chance at actually winning. Thank God he chose Palin instead. What I find odd is that it doesn’t appear that Huckabee was even in the running. I think McCain really blew it here.
There’s another angle here, as Steve Sailer has pointed out. We remain in awe of reproduction, which is ultimately a mystery. A fertile woman with five kids and a pregnant daughter, love her or fear her, has mana (spiritual power) even (perhaps especially) in this age of miracle and wonder.
The second and third angles are class and region, Cambridge vs. Moscow, Idaho, windsurfing vs. snowmobiling, arugula vs. mooseburgers. Outside of what Peggy Noonan calls the Bubble, Moscow, snowmobiles, and moose meat win.
The Presidency is partly a quasi-royal position. Symbolism counts. The gun-toting beauty queen trumps the “articulate” Columbia-Harvard orator. The GQ suit suddenly seems mighty empty.
Should it be about the issues? Sure, but this is the country of TR, the Boy Orator of the Platte, “Give ‘Em Hell” Harry, and the Great Communicator.
[...] And Larison has another good post as to why social cons are going ga-ga for Palin. [...]