Palin 2012

Columnist Walter Shapiro says that the Republican party rules allow winner-take-all primaries, and that could make it possible for Sarah Palin to win the nomination in 2012.

He points out that, in a multi-candidate field (say, Romney, Pawlenty, Huckabee, Gingrich, plus a couple of minor candidates), a well-financed and well-known person with a passionate following could easily lead in the early primaries. A 28% vote, say, and she could walk away with each state's full delegation. And before they knew how to stop her, before any major debates, she could have the necessary votes. She's already got Bill Kristol shilling for her (of course, there's comfort in the fact that Kristol is always wrong about everything he supports or predicts.)

Shapiro also points out: winner-take-all is permitted, not required; and states could change their way of allocating delegates before then.

OK. This makes it possible she could win the nomination. But could she win running against Obama? Imagine them in a one-to-one debate. We shouldn't be too complacent. Remember that we felt the same way about George W. and Al Gore? Folksy and fear-mongering sometimes trump articulate intelligence and knowledge of details. But (I hastened to reassure myself) Obama has articulate intelligence, knowledge of details, AND the best way with a speech in memory, whereas both Gore and Kerry were wooden, prolix, and boring.

Of course, a lot hinges on the economy, jobs, and the war in the coming year. But I'm a little less sanguine about the GOP nominating her -- the prospect of her actually winning is just too scary.

Ralph