A word on the non-candidate

American politics

Democracy in America

Sarah Palin

by R.M. | WASHINGTON, DC

WHEN a candidate who has little shot of being president announces she's not running for president, it really shouldn't be treated as big news. Sarah Palin's decision not to run for the White House is sort of like my decision, announced this morning in the shower, not to run for Apple's chairmanship. But as much as I'd like to let this non-story pass without comment, I'm finding the reaction of her detractors to be a little overblown.

Many now expect Mrs Palin to fade away, which is something we've heard before. But is our collective fascination with her really dependent on her potential to run for office? Liberals love to hate Mrs Palin because they believe she's a divisive, know-nothing windbag. And conservatives love to hate the liberals she so effectively pisses off. She will no doubt continue to cater to the needs of both groups. And our TMZ-inspired political media can hardly turn away from her family drama and experiments with the English language. I'll celebrate the death of Mrs Palin's political celebrity if she ever starts making sense or develops the wherewithal to string two coherent sentences together. That is when she will be forgotten, when she is no longer a spectacle.

On a more substantive level, David Frum, who believes Mrs Palin is fading out, says she "will never become a party elder stateswoman." But who are the Republican Party's elder statesmen? For years the party has been defined by Rush, Hannity and Fox News—Mrs Palin fits right in. As long as she keeps floating somewhere between Huckabee dullness and Beck insanity, she's not going anywhere.