Dean of Washington Conventional Wisdom David Broder has a column today lauding Sarah Palin's homespun populism. He notes that her ability to repeat the phrase "common-sense solutions" puts her in a long line of populist candidates, some of which have won and some of which have lost. And though Palin never liberated Europe, isn't an unashamed aristocrat, and apparently lacks eloquence and brains -- well, "the lady is good." Um, sure, Broder, but check out the latest poll your paper took on Palin: "Fifty-five percent of Americans have unfavorable views of her, while the percentage holding favorable views has dipped to 37, a new low in Post-ABC polling." That is, of course, much worse than President Obama's approval.
Even if Broder feels that Palin's populist appeal transcends the hard fact that most people don't like her, the Dean earned his position by dint of his long history as a reporter. Thus, I would be interested to see him try to suss out what these "common-sense solutions" he lauds actually are. Consulting this interview of Palin by Fox News' Chris Wallace, I looked for any kind of policy position. The best I could come up with is that Palin thinks Obama is being "lackadasaical" on national security issues because he wants to close Guantanmo Bay and try terrorists as civilians. At the same time she's endorsed Rand Paul, the libertarian Senate candidate in Kentucky who wants to ... close Guantanamo. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, so no worries there.
On to the economy. Near as I can tell, Palin thinks that the deficit causes unemployment -- "we have lost millions and millions and millions of jobs as we have incurred greater and greater debt and deficit" -- which isn't so true. Her economic policy consists of empowering small business in a way she doesn't explain -- I'm assuming it means tax cuts. Really, Broder, is this someone you think is a good politician? Despite the Broderian urge to say nice things about everybody on alternating days, one should be able to understand that despite Palin's ability to capture the imagination of a significant minority of the country, it is hard to imagine her acting as a credible candidate for national office.
Update: Commenter weboy has a smart observation after the jump:
The struggle over Palin reflects a problematic rise, on the left, with an unpleasant elitism among the educated classes; dismissing Palin, and with her, much of the working class resentments that drive the Tea Parties and other elements of our discourse, is too often about presenting a superior, dismissive tack. The alternative, I think, is what you see with Broder: a “you should admit she's got… something, because otherwise these yahoos could sneak in and ruin everything.” It's just as condescending, except it tries, at least, to define something in her as a strength, rather than a weakness. But that approach, I think, is just as deadly, because it gives Palin a seriousness and a conventional notion of her political motivations that I think just isn't there – which is why these notions of “policy” she's supposed to espouse gets so muddled.
-- Tim Fernholz
