Palin Endorsements: A Megaphone for Candidate or the Kiss of Death?


Just a few months ago, friends of Brian Murphy would roam the halls of the Maryland State House, practically begging reporters stationed there to come outside for news conferences by an unknown Republican candidate for governor.

Last week, a parade of those same scribes lined up to see him.

What changed things was a single unexpected moment: Sarah Palin's endorsement of the like-minded 33-year-old business investor from Montgomery County, who is making his first bid for public office against former Maryland governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. in the GOP primary.

"What this campaign has always needed is a megaphone," Murphy said, "and Sarah's endorsement gave that to us."

In the 72 hours following Wednesday's announcement, Murphy braced for an expected surge in campaign contributions, particularly from out-of-state Palin supporters. The endorsement became the talk of the political blogosphere. Murphy appeared on most every Maryland television and radio station.

And he was summoned to New York for a Friday night appearance on a Fox Business Channel show, on which a panel nodded as Murphy argued that business leaders were best suited to run the state.

Yet as the week ended, the debate in Maryland politics seemed to center not on whether Murphy could win but on how long his newfound attention might last — and what Palin was thinking.

Since she has come to be revered by the political right, the former half-term Alaska governor has offered endorsements in more than two dozen races across the country, bolstering the fortunes of some candidates but siding with losers in several other cases.

Murphy mentioned the Palin endorsement three times during the course of his remarks at the fundraiser, speaking to a crowd of about 150 that included many young and middle-aged professionals sipping cocktails and nibbling on elaborate finger food.

No independent analyst has suggested that Murphy has a chance of beating Ehrlich, who told reporters this week that he thought Palin's endorsement was "not terribly relevant to anything." The Tea Party movement, with which Palin has aligned herself, has not packed the same punch in Maryland as in some states.

Privately, Ehrlich aides have argued that getting shunned by Palin could actually help him in the general election.

While Murphy has welcomed the newfound attention in recent days, not all of it has been positive.

During a radio appearance Friday on WTOP's "The Politics Program," host Mark Plotkin said Palin's endorsement of Murphy reminded him of the way that McCain had picked Palin for his presidential ticket: with very little vetting.

"How could she do due diligence without speaking to you?" Plotkin asked.

Read More

Read and post comments | Send to a friend


10 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Syrin from Wasilla
    Aug 08, 2010 @ 12:03:00

    The problem is that it has become obvious that there is no rhyme or reason for any of the endorsements that Palin makes. They are not based on 'political like mindedness'! Sarah Palin is a political whore, she has NO political core to use as a critieria. The last sentance…Asking how she could do due diligence without taking time to SPEAK and LEARN about the subject or in this case the candidate. That's the crux of it, Palin is a fraud, she has never performed DUE DILIGENCE in anything she has done in her personal or public life. But, Due Diligence is nothing when you've managed to get away with Abuse Power! To be endorsed by Palin is similar to being endorsed by Jessy Jackson!


  2. ken
    Aug 08, 2010 @ 22:23:00

    palin gave brown the same endorsement, and even though he didn't completly embrace it he did thank her,wake up 60% of americans think obama is a socialist president,,are you just part of the herd or are you a american…


  3. Madonna
    Aug 09, 2010 @ 08:57:00

    Palin-The-Asshole strikes again!


  4. Inside_Passage
    Aug 09, 2010 @ 09:47:00

    Tell me something, Ken. Do you like the fact that Scott Brown teamed up with Joe Lieberman to author a bill that would grant Clinton and Obama the right to strip you and any other American of your citizenship when they feel like it?The T.E.A. Bill (Terrorist Expatriation Act). Look it up, and then tell me what a great job Palin is doing of recommending people.


  5. ken
    Aug 09, 2010 @ 18:52:00

    brown is doing some things i don't like but considering what a tightrope he has to walk in overly liberal mass. i won't count him out,he's spearheading a return to normality in that whole area,its going to take time.
    as far as the bill itself its been on the boks for almost as long as we have been a country,if you provide help to a country or group that is commiting a act of war against the u.s.a. you should be shot for treason,you,know,like obama…………


  6. Inside_Passage
    Aug 09, 2010 @ 19:51:00

    Let me point something out to you, Ken. Unlike what that idiot Hilary Clinton says, citizenship in this country IS a right, not a privilege. That is the law our founding fathers laid down in the constitution, the law of this land. We are not cowards – we don't take away the citizenship of our terrorists and throw them off in some other country. We try them before a jury of their peers.Understand that the T.E.A was written by Scott Brown and his buddy Lieberman. It is not a law as old as the constitution, it is a law as old as the previous law that was added allowing citizens to renounce their citizenship. Brown's Amendment allows the State Department i.e. Secretary of State (see: Hilary Clinton) who is appointed by the president (see: Obama) the right to strip any citizen of their citizenship in this country.No due process.No review. They don't have to justify themselves. According to the law Brown wrote, it is entirely the domain of the Sec of State to determine whether someone is deserving of continuing their citizenship in this country.That means if some person they didn't like… say, you were to piss them off, they could simply revoke your citizenship, blame some vague terrorist ties and bam. You are done. And once you no longer have citizenship? You have no rights.That's the power Brown wants to give Obama. That you can sit there and justify writing it as walking some tightrope is absolute malarky. Call it what it is. Betrayal of the people who got Brown elected. Betrayal of this country.


  7. Syrin from Wasilla
    Aug 09, 2010 @ 20:29:00

    It appears that nobody can adhere to sound doctrine even in God's own party. Scott Brown: The likelihood that anyone not fully grounded before taking office will go along to get along. Hilary Clinton: I say…..Off with her head! Symbolically speaking, of course!


  8. ken
    Aug 11, 2010 @ 19:36:00

    you know as well as i do that this law was built to deal with people who have dual citizenship,people who are commiting crimes against the united states then hide behind their ''rights'' does it have the possibilty to be abused,yes ,do most laws also have that possibility ,yes,…alot of people are comparing this to the sedition laws,but there as with this one common sense play its part,if not people like bill ayersrev. wright.or goerge soros would have been deported a long time ago,if you have a better way of protecting america when cowards hide behind their ''rights'' speak up,i'm listening..


  9. Inside_Passage
    Aug 11, 2010 @ 19:48:00

    I understand what it was made to deal with, and I also understand that someone as smart as Scott Brown knows perfectly well that he could have written it to deal ONLY with people who enjoy dual citizenship or are naturalized. Instead, he chose to attempt to give our government the power to strip ANY citizen of their rights. Every last right.You trust Obama with that power? You trust Democrats with this power? You sit there and constantly scream non-stop about the socialists and marxists and all the rest of these people, about how they hate America and are traitors to the country and looking to destroy us.And you think that what Scott Brown did is "protecting" this country.I want to say: I'm not sure who's acting like the greater fool here, you or Scott Brown. Except that Scott Brown's not a fool. He knew exactly what he's doing. He sold you out, and even better for him, people like you will eat every last bit of crap he spews and call it the nectar of the gods, the defense of America.This is why you fail – you talk about how you want change, and you let people like Brown sucker you into the same thing over and over again.


  10. ken
    Aug 12, 2010 @ 17:14:00

    its a law,a tool, and should be used well,much like the sedition laws that are on the books,and how would you go about treating theu.s. born children of terrorists,much like the anchor babys born to mexicans,or the people who plan their vacations at the same time as their babys are born so that they can be u.s. citizens,there is a large gaping hole in the laws,and this bill aims to fix it,do i fear its use for political reasons,not very much,socialist giving america the right to boot the likes of bill ayers and rev. right is just to inviting.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Syrin From Wasilla’s Stats

%d bloggers like this: