I don’t know what to make of the gap between the “serious Republican candidates” and the Palinese Liberation Army. Steve M. describes it well:
The more I watch Republican voters go for one set of candidates and reporters and GOP pros go for another set, the more it seems I’m in the Arts & Leisure section reading another critic’s rave for Meek’s Cutoff while the mass moviegoing audience is flocking to Thor, or learning about the latest blog-buzz band from Brooklyn with an 8.8 rating from Pitchfork that has a tiny fraction of Lady Gaga’s following and will never have anything resembling mass success.
It was also clear that we were dealing with elite rather than mass taste last week when we read that Mitch Daniels was attempting to launch his campaign by schmoozing the likes of Josh Marshall and Hendrik Herzberg at a Bloomberg-connected venue in Manhattan. If you polled the crowd at that soiree and asked about a favorite TV series, surely it would be Mad Men, not Two and a Half Men. Go to dinner with this folks? You’re a lot more likely to be dealing with molecular gastronomy practiced on locally sourced produce by tattooed prep cooks with Top Chef dreams than you are to wind up at the proverbial salad bar at Applebee’s.
I know the search for “acceptable,” “serious” candidates is being conducted in part by big-money types, which ought to mean that they’ll get their way eventually — but I’m not sure how that’s going to happen when Rupert Murdoch is putting his big money into promoting the likes of Donald Trump (particularly last month) and Herman Cain (more recently).
I don’t know this will play out. Republican primary voters usually did as they were told…until 2010. All of the “serious candidates” are flawed, but the Bachmanns and Trumps are even more flawed.
Am I wrong to think that Huck could win it if he was in it?