Sep

4

They don’t get it: More musing on Sarah Palin

Filed Under Ideas, News, Random Thoughts 

The media was doubting whether Sarah Palin would actually appeal to women. They failed to realize how effectively she could appeal to mothers. In the typical modern feminist mindset, women are not mothers, at least not primarily. But Mrs. Palin demonstrated last night that she can be a mother and a vice president — that in fact it would be good for American mothers if she becomes VP.

Sarah Palin with family (TimesOnline UK)

Sarah Palin with family (TimesOnline UK)

I think there were at least a half dozen specific references to “motherly” issues in her speech last night. But they didn’t seem forced or invented the way you’d expect from someone like Hillary Clinton or even Cindy McCain. Her comment about special needs children probably won the Republican ticket a few hundred thousand votes on its own. But to reinforce her comments about motherhood, her family played their parts perfectly. Her youngest daughter is delightfully cute, but did you see how she followed her mom around on stage after the speech? And that her mom actually paid attention to her? I don’t think people should worry about her ability to be a mother and a VP.

Daniel Henniger of the Wall Street Journal had a great piece today that addresses some of these issues. Mrs. Palin is far more convincing as an American mom than nearly any other woman in politics.

An MSNBC show this morning also included some talk about her appeal to mothers. Generally, the “oracles of political wisdom” thought she’d appeal very strongly to moms. Of course, if they had said otherwise, they’ve have lost what shreds of credibility they still have.

Populism

It’s nearly axiomatic in American politics that in order to get elected, you have to play the “average Joe” card frequently. The anti-elitist strain runs through nearly every dimension of the culture (with the exception perhaps of academia and the mainstream media–both of whom are, of course, elitist). However, most candidates aren’t actually drawn out of the unwashed masses of American society. There is a “ruling class” in America and most of our politicians come from it. That’s not a bad thing necessarily, but it doesn’t play well on “Main Street USA.”

I don’t recall that John McCain has really claimed that he’s just an average guy. In fact, his campaign has been largely about being a very non-average guy. I suggest that some of his success is because of this very fact.

It might, then, be interesting to compare Obama’s populism with Sarah Palin’s. Here were see another important distinction. Some of Obama’s story sounds like typical America, whereas Palin’s sounds like normal America.

Let me explain.

American society is hardly a moral paradise. There are lots of bad things that happen. And we all know it. I think most people would agree that single-parent families aren’t a good thing. Serial polygamy (i.e. divorces) is common–again, probably not a good thing. Parents effectively neglect their children for various reasons. Obama comes from a somewhat disadvantaged slice of society. So do a lot of other people. He is in some ways “typical” of his culture, perhaps even of contemporary America. But few people would argue that the culture is a good one.

Mrs. Palin’s family (several generations worth) includes some of the same negative elements, but in a radically different way. She represents “normal” America–the society that we wish we could have and that we expect. Now, many aren’t sure that the conservatives own the path to normal America, but Mrs. Palin’s successes are very persuasive. What woman wouldn’t want the opportunity to “make a better” world for her kids, however limited the opportunity may be? What woman wouldn’t want kids who love her (and each other) and a husband who lovingly labors to provide those opportunities?

Mrs. Palin appeals to the normal American woman. Not the academic feminist or the media darling, but the everyday working mom. And she can tell real stories about it without omitting important details or sounding elitist (”You just wouldn’t believe how expensive it is to have the limo pick up the kids from school each day”).

(Addition Friday morning: I note that I slightly pre-empted Peggy Noonan on this idea of “normal.” I suppose it’s good for my ego to make an observation similar to hers all by myself. :-) )

Public Speaking

The gut reaction from the Democrats (and I’ll include the media) was that her speech wasn’t all that great. After the dust had settled and the pundits had time to review the tapes and move past their knee-jerk feelings, they’ve admitted that her speech was pretty awesome.

It was.

There are a few women in public life (and some that I personally know too) that I really wouldn’t want to debate in public. It’s not necessarily that I think I’d lose every time, but these girls are smart, quick-witted, and won’t hide behind their own skirts if the debate gets tough. I hope Joe Biden has a good debate coach, because the VP debate won’t be anything like the floor of the Senate or even a committee hearing. He’ll have to walk the knife’s edge between appearing misogynistic and getting creamed.

She’s sarcastic, but remarkably gracious about it. I didn’t come away thinking that she was being mean. I thought she was funny. Part of what made it funny was that it was true.

I don’t think the McCain camp will need to shelter her from the press for the next few weeks. I hope they can shelter her kids–though they shouldn’t have to. But I don’t think a serious discussion on relevant issues will be over her head. Besides, how many serious policy questions have they asked Obama anyway? Let her continue to show that the GOP VP candidate is more qualified to lead than the Democratic presidential candidate.

Religion

Mrs. Palin’s speech didn’t include many references to religion, but there were a few. She only mentioned God twice (probably too often for some). Early in the speech she had a line that sounded a lot like the book of Ecclesiastes: “there’s a time for politics and a time for leadership, a time to campaign and a time to put our country first.” Later, she commended governing with a “servant’s heart.” Hmm. Put that into practice in Washington.

I’m not sure the Democrats will be well-served to attack her Christianity. You would think that someone of influence in the campaign would remember that the vast majority of voting Americans go to church. And a lot of them don’t take kindly to all-out assaults on people who appear to sincerely share their beliefs.

Ok. I’ll be done for now. It appears I’m coming up on 1100 words, which I’m sure is taxing your patience. I may continue some of my bedroom punditry tomorrow or as other things develop in the campaign.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Comments

Leave a Reply