Following the resignation of her governorship, Sarah Palin was pretty much written off by everyone. Her 15 minutes of fame had come and gone and people where happy to put the 2008 elections in the past. Looking to the future and to their new President whose promises of hope and change were warmly welcomed in a country whose economy and American dreams were slowly slipping between their fingers, Sarah Palin slowly faded from everyone’s mind. Then like a bat out of hell Sarah Palin resurfaced in 2010 and stronger than ever. According to the Time article entitled ‘How Sarah is Winning the War With(in) the GOP,’ she is “now more popular nationally, more in demand by conservative groups as a speaker and far richer than she’s ever been.” Additionally, “she’s become the most important independent endorser in a generation” (Time.com Article). Although she has not officially put her hat in the presidential race of 2010, she certainly is packing some serious heat; power and money, oh yeah and her “16-11 win-loss record in the recent GOP primaries” guaranteeing her the support and loyalty that she did not have the last time around (Time.com Article).
But how did a woman once ridiculed in the press for being under qualified and inexperienced for the position of V.P. muster the support of not only an entire movement (Tea Party), but soon perhaps the majority of republicans themselves? (Even though “40 % of Republicans [still] doubt [whether or not] she is qualified for the presidency in 2012”—Time.com Article) Is this really happening? You Betcha! Sarah Palin has taken on the historical image of what Waterman refers to as “The Common [Wo]Man” (Image is Everything Presidency). This image says just as much about the campaign Palin is running (or not running) as it does about the prevailing attitudes of this era—and both are shocking. The image of the ‘common man’ reflects the “image of the President as an ordinary American” (23). Self-described as a “commonsense conservative,” Palin is just that—common, or at least she tries very hard to appear to be with her Palinspeak and ‘I’m just like every other unrepresented middle-class, toddler-toting, hockey mother’ out there. Appealing to the emotions of the middle-class and empathizing with their struggles she’s totally cut out the need to prove herself to Washington. She doesn’t need Washington to like her, she has the support of the people behind her and therefore the support of the Washington whether they are happy about it or not. Even though a good percentage of Republicans doubt that she’s qualified to be President—her charismatic appeal and hot selling, stick a Palin Sticker on it and its sold, Palin brand may have the momentum to carry her into office in 2012.
However, even though the ‘common man’ image historical has succeeded in getting a candidate elected into office, Waterman warns that it is often a “double-edge sword” often “remind[ing] the public that a particular individual was not big enough for the job” (43). Essentially, we end up getting what we deserve and what we knew all along but were too blinded by our own reflections to see, a candidate that talks a lot, but says nothing; and a presidency that promises a lot, but does nothing. The thing is Presidents are not supposed to be ordinary, they are suppose to be extraordinary. As we look to history, so being history repeats itself, we may see Palin run for office in 2012 and we very well may see her win.
Sources:
Newton-Small, Jay. "How Palin Is Challenging the Republican Establishment - TIME." Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. 23 Sept. 2010. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2021154,00.html.
Waterman, Richard W., Robert Wright, and Clair Gilbert K. St. "Historical Images." The Image-is-everything Presidency: Dilemmas in American Leadership. Boulder: Westview, 1999. 23-44. Print.
I agree very much with the statement, "the thing is Presidents are not supposed to be ordinary, they are suppose to be extraordinary." We are in a world now where image really is everything and the candidates' competition is rougher and more intense than ever. If a candidate is running, the candidate needs to make his or herself more applying and seem more qualified than the other candidates. I think a big reason why Sarah Palin's part in the McCain campaign was such a flop was because all she really focused on was making herself the common mom running the state of Alaska. In Waterman's "The Image is Everything," Waterman goes into Ford's mistake of focusing most of his image on being just a normal guy. This can be paralleled to Sarah when Waterman says, "Ford's biggest problem was that he tried to combine two contradictory images: those of 'the guy next door' and 'Mr. President (30)."
ReplyDeleteBut despite all of this, it is undeniable that Sarah Palin is slowly taking over the GOP and gaining a lot of power in middle America. Maybe it is because we live in the Northeast, and are used to influential businessmen in political office, but maybe this is America needs right now- someone to relate to their collective problem. With the midterm elections about 5 weeks away, we are going to have a lot more insight on where Sarah Palin stands.
Many presidents can no longer pull off the common man president image because we as a nation have grown to expect so much from our president. Waterman mentions Truman, Ford, and Carter whose "common man" image as president hurt them. The turning point of the common man president can be pinpointed back to FDR's election.
ReplyDelete"Public expectations of the presidency had changed radically following the election of Franklin Roosevelt. The public now expected the president to lead the nation...FDR had transformed the people's expectations of the presidency. It was now an office that no mere mortal--or common man could be expected to inhabit. An extradorinary man was now required for governing (Waterman, 28)."
So while Palin is taking the image of a "common man" (or woman), and her political motive is to become President, she should be careful since that is an image that has not worked favorably with recent presidents as we have grown to expect more out of our nation's leaders.
It is definitely understandable that, in the past, people have enjoyed the thought of an ordinary American running the country. However, I believe that in times of crisis, the "common man image" can work against them, as well. As Waterman states, both Ford and Truman experienced problems with their "common man image" that had been so successful in the past (Waterman 29). People did not see them as "exceptional enough ... to be an effective president" (Waterman 29).
ReplyDeleteI think that this was Sarah Palin's problem the first time around. She worked extremely hard to pursue the image of an everyday, American "hockey mom," but many people rejected her because it seemed like she was too ordinary to get a job done. In times of economic crisis like this, people cannot afford to put any old Average Joe into office.
But of course, virtually anything any politician does is going to rub someone the wrong way. The fact that Sarah Palin had so many children and constantly talked about the values of family is very important to some people, but at the same time, others would look at that and find it hard to get past wondering how she was going to balance her pregnant daughter and handicapped infant with the Vice Presidency. Since she is a woman, it is hard for people to break away from the expectations that might previously be associated with a first lady, such as homemaker, caretaker, or other traditional female roles (Burns 50). So although she tried to use her family as a tool to work with her, the fact that she constantly referred to her dedication to her family made many people question whether or not she'd have enough time for both.
Waterman talks about the reasoning for why presidents adopt images. “These images relate to the personality of the individual president or presidential candidate, as well as the specific political needs of the a particular administration.” This is exactly what we saw with the McCain campaign’s use of Sarah Palin. It seems undeniable that the campaign’s strategic decision to name her as the running mate was more about winning the election than picking the ideal vice presidential candidate. The McCain camp was trying to appeal to the moderate female demographic that they assumed felt disenfranchised after Hilary Clinton’s primary loss to Obama. Sarah Palin’s campaign image focused on her as a mother and small town politician who was in touch with “real America”. However, the image seemed forced and began to unravel as Palin began to let her campaign inexperience show. While being a Washington outsider could presumably be a beneficial thing in today’s political climate, problems arose such as Palin’s public questioning of the decisions made by McCain’s campaign staff.
ReplyDeleteWith Palin’s more recent publicity as a renegade Tea Party spokeswoman and anti-establishment candidate endorser, her image has become much more authentic. Palin has an ability to captivate audiences whether they agree with her or just want to her what she’ll say next. Maybe its because she’s calling the shots now with how her public image is built (rather than her image being dictated by higher-ups) but Palin has finally been able to embrace the image the McCain camp was trying to create in 2008. Her current image embodies a modern “true womanhood” like Burns used to describe first ladies Ida McKinley and Carow Roosevelt. This is a concept that Hilary Clinton has struggled with in the past two decades. She created an image that portrays her as “one of the boys” and has walked a fine line between showing femininity and authority. Palin, on the other hand, has a image that embraces the idea that she plans to play like a women and beat the man anyway. An example is her tactic of being the de facto Tea Party leader rather than joining the ranks of the establishment GOP leaders. In my opinion, Clinton probably needed to create her image in such as way just to be taken serious in national politics at the time. But perhaps her success in fact paved the way for current female politicians such as Sarah Palin and Christine O’Donnell to have more freedom with their public image.
I immediately thought of Sarah Palin while reading chapter two of Waterman. The chapter explains a lot about the different images presidents have adopted over the years, and I was really trying to place Sarah Palin in one of those. I realized that maybe the reason I don’t like her as a politician is because she doesn’t exactly fit one of those cookie cutter roles, which is what we have come to expect from politicians, especially those running for the presidency and vice presidency. At the time of the 2008 campaign, I thought she was just too inexperienced, and trying too hard to promote an image that I felt that it came off as desperate and fake. On page 44 of Waterman, he talks about the problems with the two prevalent “images” of the moment, the master politician and the Washington outsider. For master politicians, they are very knowledgeable of Washington politics and know what they need to do to get things done in congress, but with politicians comes the idea that they are not trustworthy. For the Washington outsider, they appeal to the more average American and traditional American values, but once in office they might not be as effective as one sensed they would be while on campaign. I feel like Sarah Palin and her team were trying so hard to convey the Washington outsider image that she lost any hint of the image that she was an effective politician. Coupled with the fact that she was only a state governor gave the impression that she really needed more experience, and that her being on McCain’s ticket was merely a tactic to get more voters, to appeal to a larger demographic. Now, she is heading up the Tea Party and in a way she is starting to be taken more seriously as the party is making headway. I think she is trying to project her true image, not the one that the campaign wanted her to project, so we will have to see where it takes her.
ReplyDeleteSarah Palin is not a common woman. As much as Sarah would love to believe the days she spent cheering at the hockey rink, or making family dinners qualifies her under the 'common' terminology Presidents have rightfully used in campaigning methods in the past, I don't feel it is justified for her to manipulate that title.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 2 of First Ladies and the Fourth Estate Burns discusses the evolution of female image. First Lady's would be labeled as the "new woman" or "the woman of action." I would be more accepting and even appreciate of Palin's title terminology had she made it specific to her.
Titles such as:
Ordinary Dancing With the Stars Mom
Governor of Alaska Drop-out
Sexy Sarah
would be a couple avenues I might offer. However, if I were to be unbiased there are simply more unique(like herself)options available.
The hostility I have comes from expectations I have of the United States first female president. I fear that if Palin were elected into any sort of office it would be steps backward rather than the enlightening and productive opportunity that could be possible.
I do agree with Michelle that the Tea Party movement is enabling Palin to showcase her true colors. I still don't know if this is a good or bad thing, based on the fact this is the most I've heard of a political movement yet.
I feel the necessary question to ask Sarah Palin is, "Where do you think you would be if you hadn't been placed on McCain's ticket?"
I don't know if anyone is quite sure.
The correlation between the people’s view of Sarah Palin today and their hopes for what this country becomes is similar to what the people of this country saw in Andrew Jackson as he prepared to take office. Image and Spirit as Waterman describe was the essence of why this president was supported by the American people. Today, we see the same charisma and image being pumped into the political and pop culture icon that Sarah Palin is becoming. She’s gaining momentum with the Tea Party momevment but is she really the best candidate to contribute to the country? Many would say yes, and believe that Palin would be a breath of fresh air since she is just like every other soccer mom in the country. But many would also disagree. I happen to be one of these individuals that are skeptical of Palin and her platform. First of all, she definitely isn’t just like everyone else. After spending so much time in the limelight and using her name on the Republican ticket of the last president election, it’s hard to believe that Palin could revert to being just an every day woman. Even before her national political endeavors, she government an entire state as the governor of Alaska.
ReplyDeleteNow, as the head of a political revolution, she is far from ordinary. In fact, it’s what the public doesn’t see that separates her from every day Americans. She has a team of people planning her every move. The words she speaks, the clothes she wears, trips, and meetings; all cleverly planned an executed by a team of professionals whose mission is to make her relatable, appealing and seemingly normal to the American eye. I think the problem with blending pop culture and politics is that there’s little different between someone qualified for the presidency and someone qualified for a prime time slot on television.
There’s such an area of grey these days that it’s hard to tell what’s real in candidates and what’s been crafted by those who work for them. Additionally, the requirements and qualifications that one individual needs in order to help lift this country off the ground once again can’t be found in a candidate like Palin who is, as she describes, “ordinary.” The Waterman reading discusses FDR’s election and terms in office and notes that it took someone extraordinary to achieve the success that he brought to this country when he was in office. The same events need to occur today. With the economic state of this country, and the effects of the wars we have been fighting over seas, it will take a leader that is meant to sit on a pedestal to pick up out people by the bootstraps and lead them into the future of a better America. I’m not saying this isn’t possible for our current president, because certainly change doesn’t come easy. It’s just necessary to carefully examine every candidate and vote responsibly. That is the most direct avenue to a brighter government.
I agree in the sense that this upcoming election is clearly a time when the image of the common man/woman is one that is being over played. As said in Waterman, “Ford’s initial return to the common man image made perfect political sense. Like Cooldige following the scandals of the Harding presidency, Ford adopted the common man image as a means of presenting a stark contrast to his predecessor, Richard Nixon” We have seen Sarah Palin attempt to do the same thing, however, I can’t say that it’s worked for her. Her attempt at creating a brand of a hockey mom, a lipstick-wearing pit-bull and just a mom, may have worked in her favor at first, until, as said in the original blog, people realized that she was just ordinary, not extraordinary.
ReplyDeleteSarah Palin’s image is one that has been ridiculed in the news over and over, however it is this same image that perhaps cost her running mate his presidency. While a brand and an image is important to run on, when your images are only 2-dimensional and won’t add anything to the actual presidency, the image fails.
In a time of war when being the common man doesn’t work, Sarah Palin’s image of being a hockey-mom didn’t work, especially when it wouldn’t add anything to the administration. In the times of Nixon and Ford, adopting such a persona did have it’s benefits, as that image was seen as adding something to the presidency, not detracting from the extraordinary aspect of it.
I really liked your point that, “presidents are not supposed to be ordinary, they are supposed to be extraordinary”. However, I feel there is a fundamental difference between a candidate appearing ordinary and actually being ordinary. For example, President Bush, despite his fallings and negative media representation, was still attended Yale and Harvard Business School before entering a career in politics. Whatever your political beliefs are, that is definitely an extraordinary feat. To look to a more historical example, Andrew Jackson was also considered a “common man” by his constituents. But, he was a general in the Army as well as a war hero. He was also able to set up “a newspaper network to promote the ‘peoples candidate’ and (went) about establishing one”. (Laracy, 67) Palin, on the other hand, has not exhibited such skill in manipulating the media.
ReplyDelete