Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Of Course Sarah Palin Endorsed Donald Trump

I could talk about the superficial comparisons between the two reality television stars as explaining the reason why Palin is throwing in with Donald Trump, but the one comparison that fascinates me is the way they both can stimulate a crowd. They make an interesting pairing. In a way, I don't see the Trump campaign as being possible without the spectacle that the McCain campaign became when she joined the ticket. Saying the right things took precedence over knowing the right things.

Does she want a possible cabinet position? Meh--if she found out what it entailed, she'd say "Thanks, but no thanks." But her endorsement in Iowa helps Trump with evangelicals and gives validation to her relevance as a political player who doesn't have to run to have power. You could call what she does a grift--but it's based on authenticity. (And, as always, there is her family, not always at her side, just, awfully near...who wants to be strongly vetted by the lamestream media all over again?)

It's at least the most interesting endorsement since Senator Graham endorsed Jeb.

2 comments:

mikey said...

Josh has a really good take on the whole deal:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-2016-gop-is-the-party-of-palin

Formerly Amherst said...

Hi Vixen, remarkably enough I found the Palin announcement interesting even though I'm already tired of the political campaigns, and we haven't even gotten through the primaries.

There are a couple of things that could probably use some emphasis and are less understood by the Left.

Basically people on the “right” have discovered that politicians in Washington have more in common with each other than they do with their constituencies. Whether on the right of the left, they all went to the same ivy league schools, they are almost always well-to-do, they frequent the same country clubs, and they vacation in many of the same European playgrounds. They were on the same tennis and lacrosse teams, and they all at one time dated people from Andover, Vanderbilt, etc. In short whether they are Republicans or Democrats they are part of the same culture. They would prefer to hang out with their own kind and mostly they have contempt for their constituents.

They seldom have anything in common with the ordinary person working at regular jobs, and this includes people who have managed to elevate themselves financially and socially to some degree.

We have also discovered that Democrat and Republican politicians enjoy enormous support from what is now discussed as the donor class. It matters little whether they are one or the other – it requires a lot of money to run for national office, and the donor class gives them the money required to engineer this.

As a consequence the donor class has power and influence that override what constituents want most of the time. If they keep the donor class happy those same donors will be there to fund their next campaign.

For the main part these professional politicians are contemptuous of ordinary people. The party is irrelevant, and one of their chief goals is to feign a relationship with the people for whom they have contempt. They want the ordinary person to feel that they have some common accord, but actually having to act like you care about regular concerns is just the price of doing business.

The Right had a similar awakening a while back with corporations. We're capitalists and corporations are capitalists, and so we thought we were on the same page. However, corporations began to vigorously outsource the jobs of productive middle class Americans because they could get it done cheaper in some 3rd world country. At that point the Right began to realize that they shared little with corporations after all.

On the right we are more concerned with this than we are with Democrats. There are the puppet masters, many of whom are psychopaths in the clinical sense, and there are the useful idiots. And what the Sarah Palin and Donald Trump combination is appealing to is the desire to get back to a representative democracy. Naturally it is impossible to know in advance whether this will be successful. However, when you have a system that has been around a couple hundred years, obviously all the opportunists will learn how to game the system and make it work for them while appearing to carry on business as usual.

This is no longer suitable for ordinary people on the right.