Who does “Joe the Plumber” appeal to?
The same people who write this:
Palin became the embodiment of every dark fantasy the Left had ever held about the views of evangelical Christians and women who do not associate themselves with contemporary feminism, and all concern for clarity and truthfulness was left at the door.
and
Palin never actually boasted of ignorance or explicitly scorned learning or ideas. Rather, the implicit charge was that Palin’s failure to speak the language and to share the common points of reference of the educated upper tier of American society essentially rendered her unfit for high office.
In Levin’s defense, his conclusion was not horrible:
Either way, the Palin moment shed a powerful light on the power, the potential, and the ultimate inadequacy of a conservatism grounded solely in cultural populism. It also exposed the vulnerability of the Left to a challenge to its most cherished claims—as the sole representative of the interests of the working class and the only legitimate path to political power for an ambitious woman.
I agree that their is a need for more diverse political representation of variety of constituents. However, Sara Palin’s Republican party is not it. Palin was gibberish, a joke, a stain on the legacy of John McCain, and confirmation that the Republican party has become all it is accused of being. One cannot govern on populism, appealing to the superficial power of crowds and bandwagons guarantees non-action. It is all reactive.
I defended Palin when she was nominated, the executive of a state seemed qualified for the vice-presidency, more-so than a Senator. Then she talked. Her appeal was not anti-elite, it was pro-ignorance. Hence the drop of my defense.
