How Sarah Palin provided the foundation for conservative success

Gordon Wysong:

The Democrats don’t have lousy Presidential nominee candidates merely because the good ones were keeping their powder dry.  A Black Swan candidate of 2008 is appreciably responsible for it, and no one seemed to notice.  When Sarah Palin became the focus of the hopes of committed conservatives, the swamp did everything in its power to destroy her.  Venal Republican operatives were so beset with personal jealousy, they were willing to crash the ship on the rocks to ensure against her ascendancy.

They won their battle, sadly.  But, a single line -- just one -- provided the foundation for conservatives.  Mrs. Palin told America “Do you know the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull?  Lipstick!”

In one succinct line she captured the commitment and determination of conservatives seeking to protect something they love.

Fast forward a year, and those same conservatives saw Obama trying to destroy that which they love and without hesitation, these conservatives jumped into a new political movement.  Bolstered by their belief that Sarah Palin was an everyday somebody like them, and infuriated by her maltreatment, they populated the ranks of the Tea Party.  They were determined to protect America. Within months, they were activists.

Then in 2010, the Tea Party revolt wiped out the budding careers of a huge number of Democrats -- about 1000 existing Democrat officeholders were sent packing, as were a large number of what the Democrats thought were viable challengers.  It was not just a loss; it was the creation of a schism in Democrat Party, one that  has gotten worse in the nine years since.

This one election left them without a pool of sane people at the party’s center. The old guard in ultrasafe districts continued their careers, but had no one to mentor.  The modestly experienced Democrats were gone, and the highest priority for the party was recruiting replacements.  In this, they made the only choice they could; they went for youthful rookies. And over the last four election cycles they continued the strategy, building on its limited success.  They forgot or never recognized the risk -- that the new youth party was opposed to their system.

...

The Democrats' weak bench is really apparent in this year's candidates for President.  Their leading candidate is an elder "statesman" with corruption problems, an old communist wannabe, and former law professor who pretended to be a "native American" in order to advance her career.  All of them should be defeated by President Trump and that is why Democrats are now pushing a bogus impeachment case.