She Who Shall Not Be Named

On yesterday’s Fox News panel with Brett Baeir, I amusingly watched as the All Star panel (starring Bill Kristol, Charles Kraut, and Mara Liasson) talking about the 2012 nomination. In their discussions, you could see how hard they were trying to avoid mentioning Sarah Palin whatsoever. Kraut once again declared that Mitt Romney and perpetual One-Percenters Mitch Daniels and Tim Pawlenty were obviously the three to beat and the only “serious” contenders. They all seemed to agree that Mike Huckabee wasn’t likely to run. Kristol noted the obvious, that while he agreed with Kraut, none of the three establishment Republicans really meshed well with the Tea Party base. And with Huckabee not running, this obviously left the door open for… Michelle Bachmann and Donald Trump.

Through the whole segment, which was a lengthy discussion, there was no mention of Sarah Palin. Not even the general “she’s not running” brush-off that Huckabee received. When the door was open for a Tea Party type candidate, it was open for either Michelle Bachmann who has never broken single digits in a poll, or Donald Trump, who is definitely not running. (I’m pretty sure the Donald charade is just good old fashioned revenge for his friends, the Clintons. But it is very amusing.) Certainly they can’t say she isn’t likely to run. Her new website, her appearances in India and Wisconsin, her multiple policy speeches, her policy-heavy articles all point to a run. They can’t declare her a “long-shot” for a couple of reasons. First, If Trump and Huckabee do not run, she will likely be the biggest beneficiary. In any given poll she finishes in the top 3 or 4, always out polling “the electables” Daniels and Pawlenty. She finished 4th in a Gallup poll, where the top 4 finished within 6 points of each other and all above 10. (Pawlenty and Daniels finished with 3% each). The latest CNN/Opinion research poll had her in third behind Trump and Huckabee, and ahead of all 3 of the Mainstream frontrunners. In the same poll she was tied for 2nd in 2nd choice candidates behind Mike Huckabee. The Fox News poll had her in a dead heat at 12% behind Huckabee at 15% and Romney at 14%.

And it’s not just yesterday. I’ve seen it on multiple channels and programs. But is it not odd that the most electrifying and, fine, the most “controversial” (even if fabricated by the media) candidate gets not only mentioned but deliberately avoided in discussion of the 2012 nomination?

And as the GOP establishment media ignores a top-tier candidate, they perpetually push fantastical delusional pieces like this one. Titled “Strategists speculate on where Barbour supporters will land” it wonder where all of Barbour’s imaginary/1% support levels will go: Romney, Daniels, or Pawlenty (catching a theme). It speculates that if anything, it could lure Huckabee into the race because, obviously, while Huckabee leads almost every poll with 20%+ he was waiting to see if One-Percenter Barbour was running or not. And where will the One-Percenter’s support go? To One-Percenter Daniels or One-Percenter Pawlenty? It’s all quite riveting who will become the Two-Percenter first.

So, maybe it’s just me. I know the GOP political class does not like Sarah Palin. And I know the GOP grassroots does. I know that the GOP political class is in love with Romney, Pawlenty, and Daniels. And I know that the GOP grassroots is not. Yet as the Media and information-spreaders talk about the race, it’s simply bizarre to ignore a top-tier candidate (I guess moving from calling her non-electable to ignoring her is a fitting step for the elites) while continuing to push candidates that actually have no shot and no one likes. Is ignoring her an attempt to establish the field in the eyes of the Washington power base? If you repeat Romney-Pawlenty-Daniels enough, will it make it so? I guess we will see, but at some point, she who sahll not be named, will have to be.