The Appalling Sarah Palin

The preliminary postmortem of the McCain campaign continues, now focusing on the role of the Palin pick in dooming his candidacy. Adam Nagourney of the New York Times writes:

Mr. McCain may still win the election. Still, anticipating that he will fall short, the pre-postmortems have already begun, both inside and outside his campaign headquarters. And without question, the biggest one is whether he would have been in a better position today had he not chosen Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running-mate.

The answer, in the view of many Republicans and Democrats, is almost certainly yes.

Why? Well:

[P]olls, most recently one conducted by The Washington Post and ABC News, underline the extent to which her standing in the public eye has declined during the campaign — particularly among women and independent voters, the very groups Mr. McCain hoped she would help him with. More than that, there has been a steady increase in the number of people who say she is unqualified to be president, and even some conservative commentators now criticize Mr. McCain’s judgment in choosing her.

Which really goes to show you that American voters, by and large, recognize that putting lipstick on a pig doesn't transform the pig. No matter how big the makeover (to the tune of $150 K), the original substance remains on stage.

For a truly hysterical take on the original substance, watch "The Vet Who Didn't Vet" (also note that Palin = Bush).

And the original substance is staying "true" to its own inclinations. Saturday, Politico.com reported that Palin was "going rogue." CNN took note as well.

Judith Warner wrote that the Palin picked proves women have achieved parity: no longer do successful women have to overachieve; rather they can be as incompetent as the next guy. Now that's finding a silver lining in a dark cloud! Or as Warner says:

In 1977, Bella Abzug, the former congresswoman and outspoken feminist, said, “Our struggle today is not to have a female Einstein get appointed as an assistant professor. It is for a woman schlemiel to get as quickly promoted as a male schlemiel.”

In other words: women will truly have arrived when the most mediocre among us will be able to do just as well as the most mediocre of men.

By this standard, the watershed event for women this year was not Hillary Clinton’s near ascendancy to the top of the Democratic ticket, but Sarah Palin’s nomination as the Republicans’ No. 2.

While not complimentary, it squares with voter perceptions, which are increasingly negative:

A majority of likely voters in a new Washington Post-ABC News national poll now have unfavorable views of the Alaska governor, most still doubt her presidential qualifications and there is an even split on whether she "gets it," a perception that had been a key component of her initial appeal.

Later in the article, we get this:

The declines in Palin's ratings have been even more substantial among the very voters Republicans aimed to woo. The percentage of white women viewing her favorably dropped 21 points since early September; among independent women, it fell 24 points.

More broadly, the intensity of negative feelings about Palin is also notable: Forty percent of voters have "strongly unfavorable" views, more than double the post-convention number. Nearly half of independent women now see her in a very negative light, a nearly threefold increase.

The shift in Palin's ratings come with a pronounced spike in the percentage of voters who see her as lacking the experience it takes to be a good president. Voters were about evenly divided on that question a month and a half ago, but toward the end of September a clear majority said she was not qualified. In the new poll, 58 percent said she is insufficiently experienced.

Despite all the criticism, Palin will retain the spotlight:

Most serious analysis still sees a strong political future for Palin within the Republican party. She still has the backing of the powerful evangelical grassroots. Time will help to erase the memory of her gaffes. She will become a smoother and more experienced politician.

'She has a bright future ahead of her,' said Osborn, who predicted that she might end up in the Senate when an Alaskan seat becomes available. Others see a possible 2012 presidential run. Whatever happens, Palin will not be returning to the political obscurity from which she so suddenly emerged.

She could be formidable, but I still doubt her ability to persuade those who reside in the Reality Based Community since the Palin pick confirms the GOP's "appalling contempt for science and learning."

We shouldn't be surprised: Palin's so-called "Real America" excludes centers of learning and cosmopolitanism.