Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

The hunted look, the defensive crouch

by Paul Wells on Monday, November 16, 2009 7:11pm - 80 Comments

Sarah Palin does Oprah:

When Ms. Winfrey pressed Ms. Palin about why she would not mention the names of newspapers or magazines she read when Ms. Couric asked her to, Ms. Palin said she found the CBS anchor’s persistence “annoying.” Still looking annoyed, she recalled how she left a rally “pumped up” and aglow, only to pull back the curtain and discover Ms. Couric waiting with camera and crew, or as she put it sourly, “There’s the perky one again.”

Ms. Winfrey, who didn’t hide her surprise at Ms. Palin’s impolitic wording, came to Ms. Couric’s defense, noting, “You’re pretty perky too.”

Oprah and the other members of the left liberal MSM elite sure will be surprised when the perky Palin rolls over the usual Harvard Trotskyites to get elected president in 2012. By a landslide. Mark my words.

Tags: of course I'm joking, Sarah Palin, see if anyone can tell

More by Paul Wells

Dave

Three words: President Howard Dean.
Anonymous

By a landslide. Mark my words.

You mean the media have decided already? Gee, I thought it took y'all a little longer than that.

Just kidding. You all will be but a distant memory by November 2012. Mark my words.
kcm

'By a landslide. Mark my words"

what landslide would that be PW? The one the buries every conceivable possible contender in the US with an IQ of more than 60?
Tim Smyth

Paul,

Sarah Palin is not Danielle Smith or Stephen Harper. Harper and Smith actually want to govern and seem to enjoy the art of politics. Palin is more akin to Kim Campbell and we all know were that led. As an American who lives in the US and who has to follow Canadian politics for my job I am deeply suspicous that the Calgary elite's fascination with Palin has to do with the that Alaskan Independence something Palin as we all know has been tied could lead to Alaska becoming part of Canada and Canada becoming the third largest oil exporter in the world behind Russia and Saudi Arabia.

Orson Bean

" . . . the Calgary elite's fascination with Palin . . ."

Huh?

Tim Smyth

Read about all the political scandals brewing in Alaska about her ties to Trans Canada(based in Calgary) and the fact she attempted to award Trans Canada exclusive rights without bidding to build a gas pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to the Alaska Yukon border. One of the many scandals yet to be well known about in the lower 48. I don't think Calgary ever thought she was a great political leader ala Stephen Harper or Ralph Klein(she would never even get elected as a bankbench MP in Alberta) but a low level functionary to carry out Canada's political interests in Alaska who was too stupid really understand who she was was carrying water for. From her perspective after she turned against all the large American oil companies she needed an alternative source of big money fundraising and thus Trans Canada and Calgary saw her as someone who would promote their interests vis a vis Houston and US big oil.

Mike T.

Palin is nothling like Kim Campbell with the possible exception that they were brought in during very low points in their parties history.

Tim Smyth

While I think Kim Campbell was far more of a serious and legitimate politican and definately from a different side of the political spectrum than Palin I do think even in recent interviews she can seem a bit ditsy. Supposedly from what the history books have told me(I wasn't in to Canadian politics in 1993) exploits of her and her boyfriend on the campaign trail in 1993 were gossiped about frequently. Not dismissing the job of prime minister I also think she has coasted off her 15 minutes of fame as prime minister a little too much though not as much as Joe Clark and definately not as much as Palin for being governor of one of the smallest states in the US.

a Guest

Given that, as you say, you have to follow Canadian politics for your job, perhaps you should pay a little closer attention.

Kaplan

Kim Campbell had substance, if not always the greatest political acumen. Comparing her to Palin is unbelievably…wrong.
tobyornottoby

Tim if you want to understand Canadian politics, you need to know that Kim Campbell had next to nothing to do with losing that election, Russian boyfriend or no.

The election desk "coverage" by This Hour has 22 Minutes put it best when they reported the straight news that Kim Campbell had "lost" the election, then looked at each other and jumped up and danced around the studio shouting excitedly "He's gone! He's gone!"

In other words we rose as one nation and voted against Brian Mulroney, who had annoyed us all the more by retiring instead of letting us throw him out of office.

Orson Bean

Couldn't agree more. The 1993 federal election was like a sublimated public burning, tarring and feathering of Brian Mulroney in absentia.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

"Oprah and the other members of the left liberal MSM elite sure will be surprised when the perky Palin rolls over the usual Harvard Trotskyites to get elected president in 2012. By a landslide. Mark my words."

I wouldn't put anything past a people that would elect GW Bush to office twice.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Bartolomeo Bartolomeo

The same people that elected Obama. What's your point, or do you have one?

Kaplan

Actually, NOT the same people.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Fish_30 Al O'Wishes

Well, once. But that was AFTER they knew what he was like as a president, which kind of makes it worse.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

Paul may be just trying to sir up debate, but he makes several important points.

I followed US politics in Washington DC for 7 years as part of my job and I certainly do not rule out the very real possibility that she can win the Republican Party nomination. She would not be my choice, but I don't have a vote.

Moreover, President Obama is not a slam dunk for re-election. He has made a few new enemies on both the left and right since becoming president over a range of issues including health care and Afghanistan. Depending on what happens between now and 2012, Paul's prediction could very well become true. Would it be a positive for the world? No. But what has that got to do with it?

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

"Paul may be just trying to sir up debate"

I'm not sure if he indeed trying to do that but I do think that Palin has a very good chance of getting re-elected. I, frankly, will be surprised if Obama gets a second term. He has to preside over a country faced with mind-blowing deficits, record-high unemployment and, more importantly, potentially losing its standing as economic superpower.

Obama is great at what he does but can he pull another term despite the above?

Palin might seem like the unlikely candidate but I personally think that many Americans would turn to her come 2012.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Bartolomeo Bartolomeo

Wells was only oking of course. It may fit in with your, "Aren't those Americans stupid" narrative, but Wells's obvious irony evidently eluded you.

Orson Bean

I agree, and I'm old enough to remember the lead-up to Ronald Regan getting elected in 1980 (after an unsuccessful attempt at the nomination in 1976). Many of us swore up & down that there was no chance that that simpleton ex-movie actor could become President. Yet it happened, and we eventually got used to it (and tended to forget our previous denials that such a thing could happen). I can't stand Palin, but people need to separate their visceral dislike of the woman from an objective, cold-blooded assessment of whether she could in fact get elected President. Her appeal amongst the Republican right is undeniable.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Bartolomeo Bartolomeo

Please! Yes Reagan was dismissed and underestimated but that eventually worked in his favour. People learned that he was not as much of a simpleton as he was made out to be (which is not saying much by the way). He was also not the scary warmonger people thought he was. Orson, you must remember the debate with Carter and RR's "There he goes again" refrain.

One of the main reasons why McCain lost was Palin. On one hand people were uncomfortable with such an unqualified VP, especially considering McCain's age. On the other hand, it raised serious doubts about McCain's judgement that he would pick such a dimwit. (I still don't know what he was thinking).

You and PolJunkie are way off. She probably won't run and certainly will not win the GOP nomination, let alone the presidency.

Wells is joking!

Orson Bean

It is now well-established that Reagain was in fact suffering from early Alzheimer's symptoms while in the White House. What saved Reagan — and the United States — was the fact that he did surround himself with a lot of very competent and experienced people (Howard Baker, Michael Deaver, James Baker, Caspar Weinberger, George Schultz), and tended (most of the time) not to appoint ideological nutbars to important positions (unlike George Bush Jr. BTW, who would sometimes do so — witness John Ashcroft). Reagan was a good delegator of authority and he ran things in a true cabinet government manner, it was the antithesis of micromanagement (which is, ironically, what saved his butt in Iran-Contra — he truly did not know the details of what was going on). Reagan was pretty simple, but he was smart enough to know that he should leave a lot of things to the pros — which, to his credit, he tended to do.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Bartolomeo Bartolomeo

I pretty much agree with your assessment of RR and GWB – except the part about RR's early Alzheimers symptoms which became an issue in the second half of his second term. But you're right that he was smart enough to know his limitations and surround himself with competent people. Sarah Palin is too dumb to realize how dumb she is. She will never be president BUT she will sell a lot of books.
LindaL

So Bartolomeo — how "dumb" is she. I think she gets dismissed as dumb by a lot of people who have never taken time to assess what she knows and what she does not. I also suspect that she is seen as a lightweight because she is a woman and does not take on a feminist/male persona. Is she dumber than Biden? Is she dumber than Barry? Really, I don't think we know. She may have her sights on the White House, but I suspect she will will target the Senate or the House in the short term.
Orson Bean

I think it's a bit of a pointless mug's game to try to debate Palin's raw intelligence level. I don't personally think she's dumb in that sense. I think the "unqualified" label is far more accurate. I do think that she's repeatedly demonstrated that she lacks knowledge with respect to policy areas that you'd normally expect a serious presidential candidate to have a grasp of. Foreign policy being a good example. And I think the fact that people attack her for that has less to do with her gender than a lot of her defenders claim — e.g., nobody ever accused Madeleine Albright or Elizabeth Dole of being dumb or unqualified. And people don't tend to say that about Hilary either.

Ted

Whatever you think of Reagan and his policies and his "evil empire bravado", he was a smart man who downplayed his intelligence significantly to get elected governor of the largest state in the nation and then president.

In fact, if you look at his early political speeches, you can see a very well read (conservative ideology and theory, but an abundance of it) firebrand who fired up the base but could not get elected because his edges were too sharp and his ideology too much the focus of his campaigning. Having earned his stripes as a hardcore conservative, he softend his edges in his public persona, developed a less firebrand and more folksy demeanor and dumbed down his rhetoric. From "The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing" to such insightful deep thoughts as "It's morning in America".

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

Check the tags folks.

Jody

Thanks, Gaunilon, I was beginning to worry about Wells. Plus dread of mass migration north.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Even without the tags, it was obvious Wells was looking for a reaction to some goofy statements. Palin cannot win and the sooner she realizes the better. I could see her as a vice president, considering we've had Biden and Gore. But as a president, she is ridiculously unqualified and inexperienced.

tobyornottoby

Tags? We don't need no stinkin tags!
BBB

So Biden and Gore get a mention but no Quayle? Whatever one thinks of Gore today he is a smart man and was well qualified to be VP or even President. Biden and Quayle (and Agnew etc..) not so much.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

I think Biden is turning into a very good vice president. Obviously less important in the structure than Cheney, but even Bush eventually decided Cheney's dominance needed to be resisted. Meanwhile Biden has more experience in Washington than the Obama crowd; vastly greater foreign-policy experience; and a willingness to think for himself, which absolutely includes a willingness to jam his foot in his mouth, but is vital in avoiding groupthink. His influence on the Afghanistan policy process has been huge, and as far as I can tell, seems to have been to the good.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Sure, I'd add Quayle to the list. The fact that Gore was nearly president I find scary now with his senseless crusades. Biden is a gaffe machine, just like Quayle and just like Palin.

Mike T.

You bet'cha.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Spoilsport

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

"Oprah and the other members of the left liberal MSM elite sure will be surprised when the perky Palin rolls over the usual Harvard Trotskyites to get elected president in 2012."

Of course Wells is joking. Generally speaking, I know when Wells writes something that I agree with – Harvard Trotskyites! – he's being facetious. I am big fan of Palin but am not impressed with her since she quit being Governor. Tho I did enjoy the 'death panels – Dems want to kill your nan!" debate she started.

Three years is long time so Obama does not have to worry yet but he's got to align himself with independent voters soonish or he could lose in 2012. If Americans think of Obama as Carter II in a year or two than he's in trouble.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

I actually had to tackle David Frum and chain him to a radiator after he read this. You're welcome, Wells!

http://intensedebate.com/people/JSRobinson JSRobinson

I can honestly see a Palin-type as a more likely winner than someone working from the Gingrich-Frum conservative apologist plan. The important thing for Republicans to do is not change their ideology, but to communicate it more effectively (either through harsher or more intelligent rhetoric, preferably both but more likely the former). Interesting non-white males in their policies would be helpful, but since they have no chance of taking African Americans from Obama, they should focus on women. But there has got to be someone better than Sarah Palin to do this job.

http://intensedebate.com/people/JSRobinson JSRobinson

Oh and Lord Bob, are you someone I know with the initials "MR?" If so, don't use an alias online- being unaccountable for your opinions makes these discussions uninteresting.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

I am not MR, no. My initials have an M in them but it's on the other side.

http://intensedebate.com/people/DZulu Dave Z.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lord_Bob

Yes? No? Try again?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

Enjoy an authentic Why Did I Invite This Challenge? No-Prize, Dave!

MediaBuff

Calm down everyone. Notice the 'of course I'm joking' tag.

The ID and favourable numbers for the Republicans federally and Palin individually are terrible. And getting worse.

Yes, Palin is VERY popular with her base. But it's a small, shrinking base.

The scandals brewing in Alaska might prevent her from entering the campaign. Then, she would have to start addressing policy questions, which seems to tank her support. The GOP establishment, what's left of it, will do almost anything to stop her, while Democrats will help her where they can in the primaries. In all, she's less likely to win her nomination than Barack Obama was in 2007.

Palin is more likely to end up as a 3rd party candidate, which would be real entertainment. However, I think her game is to pretend to want to run, to get as much fame, exposure and money as she can, while she can.
Richard

Palin's election in 2012 was foretold by the Mayans eons ago.
Irritable Canadian

Keep laughing Wells. You, Couric, Obama and all the rest. They laughed – hard – at Reagan too.

But then its the sycophants like you in the media who think that Obama is a rockstar, Carter was a great President and the Iranians are just misunderstood.

Palin will have the last laugh on all of you.

Blues Clair

No tags, not too sure what to make of this.

kcm

Can't be Palin…the wurds is all where there sposed to be and speld proper two.
Maybe it's PW double bluffing us…we wont get fooled again.

Seriously?

Yeah Wells, stop your biased, Liberal rhetoric. We just know your a whore for the political left, you commie you. ;)

TAGS: Replying to dumb comments

Blues Clair

Got fooled kcm? I just thought Steyn hacked into the Inkless account again.
kcm

Well i don't know. IC went at least 4 sentences without once mentioning HR tribunals, jihadists or trudeaupia…seems a bit out of character.

http://intensedebate.com/people/tigerinexil1428 tigerinexile

Well, you know me, BC.

And I won't come straight out and predict that Sarah Palin will have the last laugh in this drama.

But I'd just advise you all to prepare yourselves for the slim possibility that three-and-a-half years hence…

Derek Pearce

Did you star in that commercial where the town hall teabagger is yelling about no difference in the taste of his coffee brews?
Kaplan

I can just imagine Irritable Canadian twirling his moustache while he writes this, with an evil chuckle to boot.

Mulletaur

"Oprah and the other members of the left liberal MSM elite sure will be surprised when the perky Palin rolls over the usual Harvard Trotskyites to get elected president in 2012. By a landslide. Mark my words."

You may well be joking, but there are so many true things about Yankee politics you just couldn't make up …
http://theplaceofbiff.blogspot.com biff

Liz Cheney, dark horse.

Though as the RNC gains in the polls, don't be surprised if someone comes out of the woodwork to blow the pack away.

A safe bet is, whoever the Repub. is, Obama will lose. Those hopey changy twenty somethings who rode the hip new wave of polity in the US became disinterested about four weeks after the election. With regular voting independents, Obama's falling fast.

Orson Bean

I'm reminded of the fact that Trudeaumania didn't exactly repeat itself in 1972 either (though Trudeau had the luxury of running against Bob Stanfield, who could have given Stephane Dion a run for his money in the "least charismatic leader ever" department).

kcm

Trudeau had to take some pretty tough decisions before that election[ october crisis ] It pretty much burst the bubble of those who thought him the first hippy PM. But it also established his creds as a tough customer. We'll have to see if Obama's up to a similiar challenge. If he is, he'll be re elected for similar reasons to Trudeau…if not. all bets are off.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

In a way, I'm enjoying the slo-mo Palin implosion. Her grand coalition includes just about everyone who is an embarrassment to the USA, and she's happily playing Pied Piper. Meanwhile, it's very funny. If only there weren't an outside chance that she will somehow wangle the Republican nomination — and thus an outside, outside chance that she'll nuke Norway — I would be blissfully happy.

kcm

You'd almost think she was a liberal plant. But what does she say about the health of conservative intellectual life in the US? It must be a fearful time to be a thoughtful conservative in America these days?

Orson Bean

Well, William F. Buckley is dead . . . and it shows. I've read recent pieces by, and seen recent interviews with, David Frum, and it's remarkable to me how this guy — author of the Axis of Evil moniker — now comes off like the enlightened voice of reason within the Republican Party. And of course, his reward for that is that the moonbats within the party lambaste him as being a tourncoat and infidel.

Derek Pearce

I agree, it's G.D. entertainment. Only she and her supporters don't seem to get the joke. It's surreal, it's delicious, it's everything cheap about the American Dream coming to a head.
http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

"Her grand coalition includes just about everyone who is an embarrassment to the USA, and she's happily playing Pied Piper"

Ok so we might consider her fringe material but I would suggest to you that Palin's views are quite mainstream among rightwing politicos in the US.

Frankly, I never dreamed that a lightweight like GW could beat a prime candidate like Al Gore but he did, didn't he? And once it was made clear to everyone that Bush had lied about his true intentions behind his invasion of Iraq, I was certain that Americans would toss the man to the side and pick Kerry. That didn't happen either.

Ted

In fact, Reagan has been the model for successful presidents ever since: Clinton and Dubya, the only two termers since, play folksy dumb on the stage. Clinton was a Rhodes scholar policy geek and played down his intelligence. George Jr. didn't have to dumb down anything of course.

If there is anything at all to compare between Reagan and Palin, is that she inherits this dumbing down legacy of Reagan, but with the understanding or education or reading of the ideology or political or economic theory of Reagan. She starts where he ended.
http://theplaceofbiff.blogspot.com biff

"The grand coalition" happening in the U.S. right now is much more than Palin. It's a resurgence of limited government/libertarianism spawned by out of control government and its corresponding debt, created on both sides of the isle – though exponentially more by the Dems in congress and Obama's gargantuan porkbills.

Palin is part of it, but only a small part. "Conservatisim" (not to be confused with the RNC identification) is at an all time high in the U.S., while all recent studies/polls have shown that identification with being a liberal is quickly becoming a dirty word.

The RNC appears to be moving to capture this obvious base (See Virginia, NJ…and in Ohio, the ulitmate bellweather, the polls have turned drastically against the Dems and for the RNC).

Grand coalition yes. Palin as its leader, not so much.

BBB

Conservatism is is basically within 2 or 3 points of where it has been for the last 30 years.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-s…

Obama's contribution to the deficit is small compared to the Bush years but he isn't doing much about it yet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/econom…
kcm

", while all recent studies/polls have shown that identification with being a liberal is quickly becoming a dirty word."

Well we have had 30 years or more now or fear, smear and slander ; i'm surprised it took this long. When exactly will you be happy? When liberals are driven out of their own country? Or when the US becomes a theocratic or fascist state or both?

http://theplaceofbiff.blogspot.com biff

Palin does appear to be serving an important purpose on the left, thought not an entirely healthy one for them – a political soother of sorts, she has been held up by the left as personifying and leading the conservatives and then promptly cut to shreds by her detractors,

as though the personal distruction of this one woman will somehow stop the massive resurgence of conservatism in the U.S.

In sports many successful teams employ a needler to "get under the skin" of their opponents, causing them to overly focus on them, lose their perspective on the bigger game going on.

While the left's obsession with Palin continues, a great conservative leader waits in the wings while the conservative base energizes.

Bart

John McCain !

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

Obama has indeed demonstrated that he is a formidable opponent on the campaign trail and it sounds absolutely ludicrous to suggest that Palin could beat him in a race. The thing is, Obama will have lost a lot of his shine after his first term. While I was glad to see him win, it always felt to me like he came into the presidency at the worse possible time given the economic chaos that he would have to face, not to mention having to deal with two wars. If anyone can convince Americans to give his presidency a second term, it would be Obama.

That being said, I still think that Palin could give him a run for his money if she manages to win the GOP nomination.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I agree, it's always close once one has the nomination, especially the last 10 years. So Palin winning the nomination would certainly make for some anxious nights. This fellow, however, thinks that, if Bush 2000 and McCain 2008 are anything to go by, the Republicans will have an invincible establishment candidate, based on how their delegate voting system works and how they raise money. He thinks Romney is looking good right now (2 years away, of course).

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

Very true. Money and establishment support is the name of the game in the primaries but if that was always true, Hillary would have won the nomination, not Obama.

I'm sorry but I can't seem to be able to join others in their confident belief that Palin couldn't possibly win the primaries and beat Obama. I just don't think that it is as far fetched as it may seem.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Bartolomeo Bartolomeo

CNN Poll: Palin Not Qualified for Presidency

Only 28% think Palin is qualified to be president, the least percentage of any of the five potential presidential candidates included in the survey. Among those polled, 70% think Palin is not qualified to be president.

- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was voted most qualified, with 67% saying she is qualified to be president.

- Public opinion of VP Joe Biden's presidential qualifications was almost evenly split – 50% think Biden is qualified to be president, 48% think he is not.

- 47% think former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is qualified for the Oval Office, while 42% think he is not.

- 43% think former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is qualified to be president, 47% disagree.

Conducted Nov. 13-15, 2009, error margin 3 points.

http://thepage.time.com/cnn-poll-palin-not-qualif…

Dakota

Good grief…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

Not joking this time. I know it can be hard to tell.

BBB

Well, he's not the worst but I think is legislative record is somewhat overrated although I did think his division of Iraq into three wasn't nearly as bad as it has been made out to be. Let's face it, the Kurds want their own country and Iran's growing influence in Iraq doesn't bode well for Shia-Sunni relations. A division along ethnic lines seems to have worked with Yugoslavia.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

Had me fooled. I thought Biden's stupidity and incompetence were obvious to everyone.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

Since his stupidity and incompetence are not obvious to everyone here, perhaps you could be specific.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

It's obvious to me. Not only is he a gaffe machine, his incompetence shines through frequently.

Dan

The best part is going to be the nomination race. GOP party faithful and elites are going to hate her by that time 2011 rolls around for airing so much dirty laundry. Meanwhile GOP grassroots members are going to love her. It's going to get real nasty and real entertaining. If she can survive South Carolina in decent shape, it will be over by Super Tuesday.
Sea Otter

She won't run. She will spend the next 18 months or so dropping tantalizing hints, but when it comes right down to it she will bail. By running and getting slaughtered, she loses any aura she had. She can make more money, and have more influence, by floating above it all as the perpetual populist firebrand, or however she wants to brand herself these days.

Make no mistake, though – if she runs, she will lose badly in the primaries. There is a myth that GOP primary voters are all members of the far right, but if that were true John McCain could not have been nominated. They nominated McCain because he was the anti-Bush, and their best chance to win. (I would submit to you that Romney or Huckabee would have been destroyed by 20 points – at least McCain kept it respectable.) If Palin did show any early strength at all, that would simply serve to speed up the process of the party coalescing around a front runner not named Palin.