Michelle Cottle

Note to Sarah Palin: Screw the reality show. Taking Americans on televisual tours of Alaska’s natural wonders would I’m sure be fun and lucrative, but the gig cannot possibly take maximum advantage of your special talents. (As a general rule, nature shows don’t traffic in high-octane demagoguery.) Instead, allow me to suggest a better, more meaningful way to serve your country: Step up and save the Tea Party from itself.

After an electrifying start and some tantalizing victories (remember when Scott Brown was the new conservative Superman poised to derail Obamacare?), the Tea Partiers have suffered serious p.r. setbacks of late. The ugliness of the health-care protests at the Capitol and the subsequent threats and vandalism against congressional Dems who voted for the bill (whether perpetrated by actual Tea Partiers or simply by their spiritual brethren) spurred some Republican leaders and Tea Party organizers to denounce and distance themselves from the movement’s more noxious antics.

But even before this, the Tea Party had been plagued by infighting—there were internal lamentations about the movement becoming a tool of the GOP, and there was even a lawsuit filed against an ex-leader of the Tea Party Patriots who had dared to take up with the Tea Party Express. More broadly, the movement’s anarchic, bottom-up structure may give its gatherings tons of snap, crackle, and pop, but it is lousy for formulating and delivering a coherent message. This becomes ever trickier as the Tea Party struggles to cope with some of the wackier elements that have glommed onto its energy (e.g., birthers, 9-11 truthers, and white supremacists). Pretty much everyone gets that Tea Partiers are mad as hell, it’s just increasingly hard to tell about what.

With the health care meltdown, the situation threatens to come to a head. Sooner rather than later, Tea Partiers will need to decide whether to continue as a pure protest movement or evolve into a serious political party. And while Option A may seem more exhilarating—I mean, who doesn’t enjoy flouncing around in tricorner hats and brandishing teabags?—I’m rooting for Option B, in the (admittedly faint) hope that the movement could wind up having a constructive rather than destructive impact on our political system.

As the economy recovers, the level of public anger and panic will fall. That’s just the way things work. But even in fat economic times, there remain plenty of angry, scared, even paranoid people around, and these people need a place to come together and be heard. For a while now, the Republican Party has tended to be that place. While the Democratic Party has been shifting to the middle in recent years, the GOP has been drawn steadily toward the angry fringe. If the Tea Party remains just some mouthy, disruptive, vaguely threatening force with no real structure or accountability, this trend is likely to continue, steadily poisoning the GOP.

As an actual third party, however, the Tea Party could play a different role in American politics: providing a haven and platform for the disgruntled and disillusioned, while freeing the GOP to try and regain some broad-based appeal. Yes, in the short term, Republicans would likely suffer even greater losses as TP candidates siphoned off some of the GOP’s far-right supporters. (A new Quinnipiac poll found that 74 percent of Tea Partiers consider themselves Republicans or Republican-leaning Independents.) But, faced with possible extinction, Republicans would have strong incentive to retool into a party that could once again speak to independents and conservative Dems. This development would benefit the entire republic. A vibrant two-party (or multi-party) system is a good thing. What we have right now is scary.

For this to happen, however, a leader will need to rise up—soon—and bring order to the swelling Tea Party chaos. This is no small task considering the inherent quirkiness of this grassroots phenomenon. Despite all the talk of ideological purity, Tea Partiers aren’t defined by their ideology so much as their attitude, meaning that any aspiring leader would not only need to toe a strict (very strict) conservative line but also display a handful of characterological attributes:

1. Anger. The more the better.

2. Paranoia that the other side is out to get you.

3. A self-righteous conviction that the other side is not merely wrong but irretrievably evil. (To be fair, this is pretty much a requisite for leadership in any political party these days.)

4. Sympathy (or, better still, empathy) for the victim mentality, ideally coupled with burning resentment that the other side looks down on you.

5. Major-league charisma and near-blinding star power to overcome the movement’s petty jealousies, feuding factions, and general disorganization.

There are plenty of figures on today’s political stage who display some combination of these traits, but few seem to possess the potent blend that Palin does. Florida’s Tea Party-championed Senate candidate Marco Rubio talks a good conservative game and is quite the charmer, but he doesn’t seem convincingly angry and paranoid enough to actually lead the movement. South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint seems plenty disaffected, self-righteous, and paranoid, but he doesn’t exactly ooze star power. The tough-talking Liz Cheney, fast establishing herself as Dick in a dress, is arguably angry, self-righteous, and paranoid enough, but her star shine is more reflected than inate, and she seems to lack the proper victim mentality (although she is clearly plenty aggrieved at how dear ol’ dad has been mistreated). Glenn Beck is an intriguing possibility. Arguably no one is more outraged, paranoid, self-righteous, famous, and convinced of his enduring victimhood than Fox’s weepy circus clown. That said, guiding Tea Partiers into the land of serious electoral politics calls for a leader who seems less crazy than the fringiest elements now causing the movement such grief. Glenn Beck—like his congressional soulmate Michele Bachmann—may simply be too nuts to qualify.

Palin, on the other hand, may be exactly nuts enough. As Noam Scheiber so deftly detailed in 2008, the former governor is in large part defined and driven by her bitterness toward and resentment of those she suspects are looking down on her. During the White House race we certainly saw ample evidence of Palin’s paranoia, self-righteousness, anger, and penchant for playing the victim. And there is no shinier star in the conservative firmament. Period. With this kind of cred, it’s unsurprising that Quinnipiac found that 72 percent of Tea Partiers view Palin favorably (versus 33 percent of overall voters).

Is Palin a perfect fit? No. She’s still out there stumping for Tea Party-despised John McCain. And, to be fully embraced, she’d likely need to leave the GOP and issue a variety of disparaging remarks about its establishment. But many in this establishment didn’t exactly cheer her addition to the ’08 ticket, so she shouldn’t have much trouble mustering the necessary bile. My guess is that Palin could emerge as a unifying Tea Party leader with very little effort. Actually whipping the movement into shape would require some heavy lifting, but she could always bring in aides and advisers to help with that. Admittedly, the experience wouldn’t be all fun and games. But as far as patriotic pursuits go, it beats the hell out of teaching TLC viewers how to field dress a moose.

Michelle Cottle is a senior editor of The New Republic.

5,664 views 20 replies
Reply #1 Top

You know what?

As much as I dislike Sarah Palin as a politician, and what she stands for, I think it would do a lot of good to the USA to have her there. It would actually shape this public opinion into a clear and constructive political party, rather than leave it as a protest that wish to influence the Republicans.

Reply #2 Top

Most of the "problem" is with the attempt by the left and their willing accomplices in the MSM to demonize the Tea Party. As with any organization, there are going to be some kooks, but for the most part the Tea Party is a well behaved highly motivated group with a common goal.  Stop the usurption of rights.

Most of the hysteria associated with the group is just ginned up to discredit them.  Indeed, while the tangible threats against the rights are well documented and available for anyone to scrutinize, the alleged threats blamed on the tea Party are just that - alleged.  They have to play the victim in order to gain sympathy and divert attention from their real activities, so they say all of this is happening.  And the only proof is their word.  Which we can see is highly questionable in itself.

Palin would do well leading any group, including the USA.  But I do not see why she has to clean up that which cannot be cleaned up - because it is all smoke and mirriors.

Reply #3 Top

Palin would do well leading any group, including the USA. But I do not see why she has to clean up that which cannot be cleaned up - because it is all smoke and mirriors.

So you need to clean up the smoke and the mirrors. She'd be good at that, as she was the target of such herself in the past. She has the experience against slandering that no other politician, save Obama and Bush, faced.

Reply #4 Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 3
So you need to clean up the smoke and the mirrors. She'd be good at that, as she was the target of such herself in the past. She has the experience against slandering that no other politician, save Obama and Bush, faced.

Yes, and I can use a back hoe to dig a post hole.  My point is that her talents would be wasted there.

Reply #5 Top

My point is that her talents would be wasted there.

If the Tea party is a legitimate strong people's movement, why having a talented politician sharing their views as their appointed leader be a waster of her talent?

I know it's not the "safe" bet, but it's the one that has the best potential for the whole USA, no?

Reply #6 Top

If the Tea party is a legitimate strong people's movement, why having a talented politician sharing their views as their appointed leader be a waster of her talent?

Because the tea party movement is grass-roots, and that's the way they want to keep it. The left has complained since the beginning that there was Republican involvement. Your "idea" would only serve to give credence to that perception, especially to people too lazy to do any research. I understand why you think it's a good idea to weaken the movement through association, but the question at hand is do you really believe we (conservatives) think you have the best of intentions for the the movement at heart? Palin joining the tea party would be a Democrats wet dream. All the vitriol and indignation hurled at her from the left would be leveled at the tea party by proxy. But... a valiant attempt Batman.

Reply #7 Top

I understand why you think it's a good idea to weaken the movement through association, but the question at hand is do you really believe we (conservatives) think you have the best of intentions for the the movement at heart?

Well.. the general vibe I got from people around me is that it would be a good thing. These people would be more than just grass roots, they would have an actual political strenght outside of mere manifestations. Also, we believed it might go a long way toward sucking out the poison out of the current toxic environment.

But then, if you just believe I wish harm to whatever conservative movement I comment about, feel free to reject whatever I say.

Reply #8 Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 7
Well.. the general vibe I got from people around me is that it would be a good thing. These people would be more than just grass roots, they would have an actual political strenght outside of mere manifestations. Also, we believed it might go a long way toward sucking out the poison out of the current toxic environment.

And they have already shown their strength (and will do more in a few months).  You just hit on one of my biggest pet peeves.  Every election, blacks complain that no one takes them seriously.  Why?  because everyone knows that they will vote for the democrats (regardless of who is running) so the democrats campaign for swing voters (read: not black).  republicans do the same, so they do not campaign for black votes either.  But guess who is falling all over themselves for the hispanic vote?  Everyone.

The republicans have shown they cannot be trusted.  So the Tea Partiers should not get into bed with them!  They can support them this year (and probably will), but should they be betrayed again, they can switch with no problem.  in other words, they are more powerful outside the parties than inside.

That is why palin should not hook her star to it.  She can use their support, but they should stay the way they are.  A powerful advocacy that will have to be catered to by both parties, not just neglected by one side.

But then, if you just believe I wish harm to whatever conservative movement I comment about, feel free to reject whatever I say.

No, but you believe the pundits too much.  At one time, I bought what they said as well, hook line and sinker.  But no more.  I got tired of buying into someone else's agenda.  I will read what they write, but that does not mean I will buy it because they have an R (or not buy it because they have a D) beside their name.  If nothing else, McCain should have alerted the parties to the fact that a lot of people can no longer be taken for granted by either party.

Reply #9 Top

So the Tea Partiers should not get into bed with them!

Obviously not. I wasn't advocating for the Tea Partiers to get in bed with them through Palin.

But Palin leave the badly-managed GoP to lead this new party. Ya know, an establishment-free organisation that would go a long way toward tilting the scale in some crucial elections?

Reply #10 Top

But then, if you just believe I wish harm to whatever conservative movement I comment about, feel free to reject whatever I say.

I don't claim to know your intent. It could be intentional or unintentional. Either way it would not be good advice for the Tea Party. Maybe they should ask Nancy Pelosi what would work best for them?

Reply #11 Top

But Palin leave the badly-managed GoP to lead this new party. Ya know, an establishment-free organisation that would go a long way toward tilting the scale in some crucial elections?

The left is never going to accept her because they believe what they say about her. Need proof? When she left as governor of Alaska, it was the left that fanned the flames, saying she left her supporters high and dry (anyone doing the research knows she needed to raise money to fend off the vast array of frivolous lawsuits levied by the left). Imagine the field-day they would have if she left the GOP? Why should she give them more ammunition to marginalize her further than they did on their previous attempts? The left is very afraid of her as she is the farthest thing from a Washington insider as a politician can get. People like that. They (the left) have no effective counter for this other than to smear and/or marginalize. Where was the left prior to her selection as VP candidate? Her ticket lost, so why the continuing intense effort against her? (Rhetorical questions) If it wasn't for John Edwards being the "baby daddy" nobody would be talking about him, and rightly so.

Reply #12 Top

Maybe they should ask Nancy Pelosi what would work best for them?

Because Nancy Pelosi isn't at all in synch with the ideological claim the Tea Parties have, while Palin is probably the most charismatic figure sharing both the ideologies and the desire to refurbish the GoP?

Reply #13 Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 12

Maybe they should ask Nancy Pelosi what would work best for them?


Because Nancy Pelosi isn't at all in synch with the ideological claim the Tea Parties have, while Palin is probably the most charismatic figure sharing both the ideologies and the desire to refurbish the GoP?

Sarcasm my good man.;)

Reply #14 Top

Sarcasm my good man

I just don't understand what you see so offensive about the idea. I think Palin could win a lot out of the deal, and the Tea Partiers would win a lot too by having such strong leader. You'd have a clear, defined, and actually properly conservative political movement not tainted by pork barrel.

Reply #15 Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 9
But Palin leave the badly-managed GoP to lead this new party. Ya know, an establishment-free organisation that would go a long way toward tilting the scale in some crucial elections?

That could make her the power broker, but not the power.  I think she stil has eyes on being the power.

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 14
I just don't understand what you see so offensive about the idea. I think Palin could win a lot out of the deal, and the Tea Partiers would win a lot too by having such strong leader. You'd have a clear, defined, and actually properly conservative political movement not tainted by pork barrel.

Not offensive, just limiting (see above).

Reply #16 Top

That could make her the power broker, but not the power.

Power broker can hand you the power. Hitler was the power broker, and he eventually got the leadership.

I KNOW, I probably didn't used the best example. But it's just that I don't have any other example of a democracy where one side was influencial ennough without having actually won the election that he managed to get into power. The moment you give me a better example, I'll edit this post.

Reply #17 Top

I just don't understand what you see so offensive about the idea. I think Palin could win a lot out of the deal, and the Tea Partiers would win a lot too by having such strong leader. You'd have a clear, defined, and actually properly conservative political movement not tainted by pork barrel.

I don't find it offensive, just not smart. I couldn't say it any more plain than that. As for a strong leader, the people are leading, it doesn't appear to me they want to follow one person. They have had enough of politicians not listening to THEM. The y don't want another THEM, they want the people they elected to office to be their voice or get out of the way. The purpose of the tea party is not to drive a wedge between Democrat, Independent, and Republican conservatives. Your idea would do just that. It's not the Republican tea party...it's the get people with conservative values, be it Democrat or Republican, that will reign in spending and stop throwing the US into more debt for future generations.

Reply #18 Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 16

That could make her the power broker, but not the power.
Power broker can hand you the power. Hitler was the power broker, and he eventually got the leadership.

I KNOW, I probably didn't used the best example. But it's just that I don't have any other example of a democracy where one side was influencial ennough without having actually won the election that he managed to get into power. The moment you give me a better example, I'll edit this post.

I had to laugh at that one as I figured someone would rush in and invoke Godwin's Law.  But you are right.  It can be done.  And Hitler was a good example of it being done.  But I do not see it happening here.  Before the mid 19th century, 3rd parties were a real power in America and wielded it too!  But that was a long time ago, and I do not see it happening again.  In the case of Weimar germany, they were in the young stage like the US 150 years ago, so it was possible.  Now, the 2 parties are not only deeply entrenched, but through their own selfish legislation, institutionalized.

Reply #19 Top

But that was a long time ago, and I do not see it happening again

If that is the only thing you ever tell you "It won't happen", "It can't happen" "It's not possible", then no wonder nothings is ever done.

I have some economic idea for a business here in Quebec that could, eventually, benefit the demographics and economics of the whole western world by building up that kind of expertise. But whatever I talk to people about that idea, the only thing they answer me is "Nah.. you'll have to deal with Union X, and Ministry Y. It won't work".

Well, Duh. Off course I expected to have to deal with those. But just because there is difficulty ahead doesn't mean that you cannot take on those difficulty. How many highly succesful business, parties, or the like have achieved great because they have not let themselves be discouraged?

Reply #20 Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 19
If that is the only thing you ever tell you "It won't happen", "It can't happen" "It's not possible", then no wonder nothings is ever done.

No, just it wont.  Anything can happen.  Almost anything is possible.  But it wont is an acknowledgement of the fact that there is no longer the freedom we once had in the US with respect to political parties.  The 2 majors have stacked the deck so that only they get federal money, only they get to debate (rare that a 3rd party is invited to anything other than a dog and pony show), rare that they even get on all the state ballots!

Could it happen?  yes.  Is it possible?  yes. But It wont.  it is a safe bet as far as I am concerned.  That is not to say I will be a slave to the 2 parties (I am not), but that America is too fat, dumb and lazy to care about expending the energy to make it happen.