BrainGlutton:
I would call that an intentional effort at a clever pun, but, considering the source, probably not . . .
Probably not. This is the woman who had to call her debate opponent Joe because she kept saying O’Biden.
And somehow Trump will win due to Dems taking him lightly, despite the reality that most general election voters don’t like him .
As Nate Silver points out, Trump’s overall fav/unfav ratings are 33/58. Hillary’s ratings aren’t great, but at 42/50, they’re still way better than Trump’s. He’s -27 with independents and -70 with Dems, way worse than any other Republican candidate. His favorables aren’t even all that great among Republicans - and Silver notes that his gains among Republicans during the primary campaign have been canceled out by increased unfavorability among Dems and independents.
But if you say that how we feel about this election might turn all that around, well, who am I to blow against the wind?
She wanted to call him Joe so she could make the oh so clever retort: “say it ain’t so, Joe”.
She’s not drunk/stupid, she’s an avant-garde poet!
No, Palin is the vanguard of a new way of right-wing speechifying, a surprisingly avant-garde method of political outreach for people who think of themselves as the protectors of tradition. Her methods are the most outrageous, but as with most artistic revolutionaries (in this case, with the art of making political speeches), what seems iconoclastic now will swiftly become the norm for those who follow. Her speech was, for Republican politicians, the “Rite of Spring” or the “Salon des Refusés.” And we can already see the signs that other Republicans are walking the trail that Palin blazed.
<snip>
The thing is, Palin isn’t trying to make an argument. That’s not her strong suit, and that’s not what audiences want from her. Her speech was more impressionistic than argumentative. She was there to push buttons and arouse passions, not get people thinking.
Palin understands, probably better than anyone besides Donald Trump, how thinking is the enemy of the conservative populist mission. What she wants is to make you feel, to have those feelings of bitterness and misplaced entitlement wash over the crowds until they are screaming for more blood. In this, she succeeded.
It’s not a surprise, then, that some folks out there are comparing her speech to poetry, with its rhythms and internal rhymes. One blogger broke down notable parts of her speech into free form poetry.
Who are they to say that?
Tangent
January 25, 2016, 12:56am
125
Cold open from last night’s Saturday Night Live:
