op-ed

$100,000 says Palin isn’t elected president in 2012

I also figured that telling the story this way would enhance the credibility of my conclusions, but still much of the focus has been on my motivations. I guess I gave too much credit to what I thought was the obvious reality that I had a huge self-interest in Palin running (because my movie would get another large bite of the apple and because, until the article came out, my last communication from the Palins indicated that I might be working on her campaign) and that therefore the fact that I was coming out so strongly against my own self-interest would kill off any silly suspicions about the “real” reason I chose to tell the whole truth. Obviously, I should have been clearer about this as well, but I am convinced that, when forcing people to face an airtight case that they don’t want to hear, one is always going to be assaulted on this front.

I do find it quite amazing that no one ever seems to care that there hasn’t been a single allegation of an inaccuracy in either my film or the Daily Caller Palin essay.

Does anyone really believe that if I had written anything remotely untrue that the Palin camp wouldn’t have at least leaked that allegation to someone on background? Instead, total silence and of course no one in the media with access to her is going to ask about this on the record.

As frustrating as it is, one of the many things I have learned during these very strange last three years since I bought www.HowObamaGotElected.com is that telling the truth doesn’t really have much, if any, value and, in fact, will likely cause you far more trouble than it is worth. Unfortunately, I am one of those people who appear to be genetically incapable of doing anything but tell the truth.

Now, back to those who take issue with my well-documented conclusion that there is no way Palin can beat Obama in 2012.

I get that her many fervent fans are largely blinded by their understandable love for her and are about as likely to have their minds changed by a rational argument as moderate voters would be about Palin as a presidential candidate. But what I find laughable is that while the majority of conservative commentators have dodged the “no-win” issue, some have actually tried to claim that I am dead wrong about my primary conclusion (kudos to Dennis Miller and Erick Erickson for having the brains and guts to publicly defend what I am saying, and thanks to the half-dozen people significantly connected with Palin who have sent along private good wishes). Interestingly, based on polling, the Republican rank-and-file seems to be with me more than their chattering class’s general public position.

The most outspoken and contrarian analysis I have seen comes from John Nolte, the editor-in-chief of Andrew Breitbart’s Big Hollywood website. In a column titled “Why John Ziegler is Wrong About Sarah Palin’s Electability,” he claims to defeat my argument with “evidence” that Palin’s poll numbers are improving and an assertion that the new documentary on Palin’s Alaskan record will fix the probably fatal perceptions of her resignation from the governor’s office. Assuming he is sincere and not just pandering to the Palinistas, John (for whom I was once happy to write) is simply fooling himself.