Saturday, July 04, 2009

Sarah Palin's Resignation--Game Changer or Game Over?


There's been a lot of chatter already (and rightly so) about the stunning, peculiar aspects of Sarah Palin's announcement to resign as Alaska governor. So, let's pull back from the more sensational and overheated analysis and look at this move from the perspective of political strategy and communication. Let's assume, for this essay, that she's not resigning because of an unknown scandal or a personal health issue, or as a permanent withdrawal from politics (although those remain possibilities) and let's look at this as a move to begin preparations and positioning for a 2012 White House run. The question then becomes, from a communication standpoint, what arguments emerge from this move that will bolster her presidential prospects?

My initial answer to this question is: not many. Palin's governorship was of value to her national political fortunes, because it provided evidence of high-level executive experience. It was an effective counterpoint to her running mate John McCain and Democratic nominee Barack Obama, both of whom had none. However, in 2012, Palin's one term (or two-thirds term, as it turns out) as governor of a sparsely populated state will pale in comparison to Obama's stint as President. From an experience standpoint, there's no getting around that, even if Obama's not doing well. So Palin probably knows that the argument made by her status as governor will be weighted very differently next time around. Maybe she's decided that her time would be better spent building political support without the constraints of a demanding, full-time job. Yet, to defeat Obama in 2012, a candidate will need to argue that she or he could have done a better job managing the country. That argument now becomes very difficult for someone who couldn't even finish the job.

So what will Palin do now? She will probably appear on talk shows, write a book, make public appearances, and engage in fundraising. In other words, she'll become either a pundit, a conventional full-time politician, or both. All of those actions will win her political allies and help her sharpen her political communication skills. However, it has the potential to strongly dilute the most unique and appealing aspects of her unique political brand--the fresh-faced outsider from the frontier. In order to make this time politically useful, she must engage in activities that will render her typical of most politicians. Nothing could be worse for Sarah Palin, to become, after all of the trailblazing maverickosity of 2008, the female version of Mitt Romney. On the other hand, if she vanishes from the public scene altogether to reinvent herself and re-emerge in a couple of years, the political ground beneath her may have shifted so dramatically that the voters very well may have moved on.

The balance of her gubernatorial term also presents rhetorical problems. If her successor does well, then the refrain will be that Palin was not even the most qualified person to lead Alaska, let alone the whole country. If the new governor stumbles badly, many will hold Palin responsible for bailing out in the first place.

The one argument option that remains viable is one that goes something like this: "Look, you said you wanted change in 2008, so you voted for change. But the change agent you elected came from the same old system, and so we didn't get much change. We need someone who has no connection to that old system, so that's why I got out in 2009. I'm the real deal." Now much would depend on the execution of such an approach and Palin would still have to prove her policy competence during the campaign. But, as I see it, that's the only truly powerful rhetorical option generated by her brash resignation. And a bold move that leaves you with only one option is usually a bad move.

Of course, I could be wrong. Pundits like Mary Matalin and this guy from FOXNews.com see this as some sort of brilliant "checkmate" move. But the latter's argument is based on Palin now being liberated from her Alaska responsibilities and building a national political presence here in the "lower 48." All of which make her into something altogether uninspiring--a typical pol who quit on her constituents. Try making a bumper sticker out of that.

Labels:

<> Comments:

At 12:42 PM, Blogger Linda Berdayes said...

I'm hoping for "game over." Of course, I imagine much has to do with how Obama fares in the next couple of years. If the economy is in worse shape, she could play on people's fears who will resonate with her emotion and won't care about her lack of experience or credibility. A big question to me is how many people can be persuaded to follow her in the case of Obama's worse case scenario.

 
At 12:58 AM, Blogger Michael R. Kramer said...

Hi Linda, thanks for reading. I agree, if the economy rebounds strongly, there's not much that Palin or anyone can do to unseat Obama. However, in light of her resignation, if the economy tanks, I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP goes with Romney, a proven and stable manager-type, over Palin.

 
At 2:22 PM, Blogger Calvin Dodge said...

Whether Palin's stint will pale in comparison to Obama's will depend partly on the results of Obama's actions.

For example, when Obama was pushing the so-called "stimulus" bill (economists noted that 10% or less actually qualified as "stimulus", and little of THAT would be spent immediately), many economists and conservatives were saying it won't work", while Obama and company were predicting a major positive change in employment statistics.

What have been the actual results? Unemployment has increased faster than the "if we don't pass the stimulus" prediction.

So if Obama continues his FDR-inspired practice of announcing major new taxes and regulations for every occasion, and employment continues to drop due to investors' rational misgivings about those taxes and regulations (economists generally agree that FDR's similar tactics are what put the "great" in "The Great Depression"), then he'll have a poor record to point to when he runs for a second term.

That is, unless if he's successful at emulating FDR's playbook in 1936 (claiming that the Depression was the fault of the long-gone Hoover).

 
At 2:28 PM, Blogger Calvin Dodge said...

You say "The balance of her gubernatorial term also presents rhetorical problems. If her successor does well, then the refrain will be that Palin was not even the most qualified person to lead Alaska, let alone the whole country. If the new governor stumbles badly, many will hold Palin responsible for bailing out in the first place."

So if the state does poorly after she leaves, it's her fault. And if it does well, then she gets no credit.

On other words, no matter WHAT happens in Alaska, you claim her reputation will be negatively affected. That doesn't make any sense.

It does, however, sound like lefty rhetoric.

 
At 2:34 PM, Blogger Calvin Dodge said...

I'll go out on a limb here to make a public prediction. Feel free to rub my nose in this if I'm proved wrong.

IF Obama continues to follow the FDR pattern of new taxes, new regulations, new government agencies, and other economy-stifling actions, then he will create the same result which FDR did (far greater unemployment).

Since FDR was able to convince a majority that all that unemployment wasn't his fault, I make no prediction about the effect of those lost jobs on Obama's reelection bid.

 
At 8:45 PM, Blogger Michael R. Kramer said...

Hi Calvin, thanks for reading the post and taking time out to comment. The post is not about what Obama's record is or will be by 2012, so let's set aside that speculation. My point was that, on the issue of executive experience, a gubernatorial term pales in comparison to a full presidential term. I, and, honestly, I think most people, would strongly agree with that statement. The U.S. presidency is called the hardest job in the world for good reason. As I state in the piece, even if Obama struggles in his first term, few would claim that he would not have more executive experience than a one-term governor.

Regarding my argument about the remainder of her term, it's fair to disagree with my analysis, but to state that it "doesn't make any sense" is surprising, because the argument is pretty straightforward. Nowhere do I claim that Palin will get "no credit" for her accomplishments as governor. I'm saying that her premature departure could hurt Palin in 2012, yes, even if the new governor does well. My concern in this post is with the potential arguments that her resignation generates, and those are one set of arguments that she may have to confront.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home