Skip to main content
opinion

Canadians still consider Sarah Palin a joke, Globe columnist Margaret Wente wrote Saturday in her cover story in this week's Focus Section.

But this fall's U.S. primaries proved her influence is growing.

Ms. Wente pursued Ms. Palin to Iowa and Alaska to find, not fanatics, but worried, fed-up citizens similar to those fueling current populist surges in Toronto, Calgary and B.C.

"Just 14 months ago, Sarah Palin was washed up," Ms. Wente writes.

"By the time she quit as governor of Alaska, she seemed destined to go down in history as a Tina Fey joke.

"Now, she's the de facto Queen of the Tea Party, a powerful insurgency that has turned out to be bigger than anybody thought. She's probably the most powerful Republican in America at the moment. Thanks to her endorsements, obscure Tea Partiers - including a few total wing nuts - have been thumping the Republican establishment's choices in the primaries. And she's not about to let the party bigwigs forget it."

Ms. Wente was online earlier today for an online discussion about her article on Ms. Palin, the Tea Party, populism and the politics of anger.

Here is the transcript:

Jim Sheppard, Executive Editor, globeandmail.com: Our first question/comment comes from Charlie 4444 who submitted this on the earlier discussion page: The Tea Party will do for the Democrats what the Reform Party did for the Liberals for years . . . help win election after election. She (Palin) has helped elect the first black President and is doing a great job in getting him re-elected as well.

Margaret Wente: Hi Charlie, I'd argue that the collapsing economy had a big hand in electing Obama. People voted for him because he promised to fix the problem, and he ran as an outsider. But he hasn't fixed the problem.

Instead, he launched a spending binge -- including billions in stimulus spending -- that in the eyes of many people have made the problems worse.

Americans believe the elites have screwed it up and that their children will inherit a mountain of debt. In that volatile atmosphere, all incumbents are at risk. Just look at Harry Reid in Nevada, who is being seriously challenged by a very weak Tea Party candidate.

Comment From Guest: No, Ms. Wente is wrong. The economy wasn't the biggest factor in the election of Obama. The economy collapsed only one month before the election. Americans had political and foreign policy changes in mind when they supported Obama.

David Gibson: For those who live in the U.S. and understand the politics there, the Tea Party is rightly understood to be a threat not to Democrats, but to Republicans. The Republicans know that, and the Democrats know that. However, G&M readers may need a little background and analysis.

Margaret Wente: David, you're right. The Republicans are horrified by the Tea Party, which knocked off many of their mainstream candidates in the primaries. But they have no choice but to embrace them. That's why so many of them are holding their noses and embracing Sarah Palin. The Republicans will never be the same.

Roger That: Is the idea that we are supposed to take Palin seriously as an individual because she attracts a sufficient number of supporters? All the objective and anecdotal evidence I have found is that -- notwithstanding any dubious "charisma" -- Palin has the intellect and rationality of a brick of cheese.

Margaret Wente: Roger, it's what she stands for that's so interesting. Fortunately, she will never be a serious candidate for president. But whoever is a serious candidate -- even on the Democratic side -- had better take her followers seriously. They want less government and less spending. And they are furious at the ruling class -- Democrats and Republicans alike. The mainstream media have underestimated how many people feel this way. It's probably two-thirds of the electorate.

Zorn: Hi Ms. Wente. What impact will the Tea Party resurgence have on Canada in terms of the economy and politics? Do you expect that a similar movement might take root here?

Margaret Wente: Our economic situation is nowhere nears as dire as it is in the U.S. We also have a higher tolerance for government and _ believe it or not _ our governments at all levels are vastly less dysfunctional.

But we'll definitely see some populist action here, especially as our stimulus money stops and our bills come due. A populist (Rob Ford) is likely to win the mayoralty race in Toronto. And Dalton McGuinty faces reelection in Ontario at just about the time its deficit will hit $40 million or so. Voters will be cross.

U.S. voters have moved to the right of us, and they are massively skeptical of the ability of government to deliver benefits to the people. The welfare state is being downsized in Europe too. As tax revenues flatten out with a sluggish economy, I think we'll all be adjusting our attitudes about what governments can be expected to do and can afford to do.

Randy: To give the Tea Party folk the benefit of the doubt, everyone on the left and right should rightly be concerned about the U.S. deficit situation.

But where were they when Bush started taking the country into this financial mess?

The anti-Obama tone is a bit disingenuous…. a case of shooting the messenger. Obama has hardly had time to single-handedly destroy the country as his most extreme detractors claim.

And of course, the situation would probably be no different if McCain was in the White House.

As for Sarah Palin, I am cynical and see her prime motivation being to ensure financial security for her family. Most of us would probably do the same.

Guest comment: Wente doesn't seem to realize that the US would have been much worse off if Obama hadn't gotten stimulus measures passed. There would absolutely have been a depression had nothing been done. Unfortunately, because a depression was averted, many people think that there couldn't have been one.

Guest comment: The media created Obama to give the illusion of political change. Then the media created Sarah Palin and the Tea Party to raise an uproar for economic change, covering up for Bush's disastrous presidency, ensuring political gridlock and no change.

Mary Tell: Personally, I like Sarah Palin. I think she could do very well if given the opportunity to be president. Obama was elected without an ounce of experience. He went for his European tour with 300 advisers. Give Sarah Palin the same advantages (and the same positive media coverage) . . . and she would do better than the guy sitting in the Oval Office right now.

Margaret Wente: Mary, you belong to a very small minority of Canadians who don't think Sarah's wacko!

One thing that surprised me researching my story is that even people who love Sarah Palin can't really see her as the president. What they want is someone with her values to be president.

Alex comment: I don't understand the Tea Party. In Konrad Yakubuski's article in today's Globe, he writes that Tea Partiers have an inherent distrust of billionaire bank executives and elites. Yet it's okay to trust a billionaire former governor with the populist cause. Sarah Palin is no more ordinary than the people on Wall Street. I suppose anger at the status quo can blind even the most sensible people.

Jim Sheppard: You can read Mr. Yakabuski's article from today's Globe by clicking on this link

JA Sannuto comment: Regarding all of the stimulus spending, is it not true that the majority of the $$ has already been or will be paid back to the government, with interest? That can hardly translate into a burden on American taxpayers.

Guest comment: No. Obama's large base of democratic supporters want more government. They want another FDR type New Deal.

Guest comment: Canadian media are trying to create a kind of Tea Party movement here to ensure there's no political and economic change.

JA Sannuto comment: The only thing about the stimulus spending that has made matters worse is the level of greed inherent in corporate America and how it is left unchecked to extract wealth from the hands of the middle class. Those things are legacies of George W Bush.

Patrick comment: I agree with Guest - without bank, auto bailouts and stimulus packages, the U.S. economy would have tanked for a generation.

Peter comment: Far more than her effect on U.S. politics, I fear Palin (and her ilk, like Glen Beck) will have a lasting negetive effect on social discourse here in the U.S.

Just like in the campaign, they walk right up to the line with their "dog whistle" racist/xenophobic comments, pitch-perfect to insight the Tea Partiers, and then claim "that's not what we meant"... when they know perfectly well what they meant: fear the other, the ones not like us.

Ian Fleming: Our problem in North America is we have lost our self discipline.. We want everything but we dont want to pay for it. Debt is now a strategy for a better life, and when that doesn't work out we want to

Margaret, why do people have this increasing need to dismiss anyone with expertise, education, experience as an "elite" like as if we had more "regular people" running the show somehow we would do better?

Margaret Wente: Ian, the suspicion of the "elites" is a sign of institutional mistrust. Right now, Americans as a whole don't trust any of their institutions any more, with the exception of the military. (That doesn't mean they like the wars they're fighting.)

This is a long-term trend and it extends to Canada too, in a lesser way. People don't trust the government, the Catholic Church, or the media very much in Canada either.

Jim the Canuck comment: Being a populist does not by definition mean that "no plan is required". It seems to me that Americans have a right to be angry but I have not seen anyone in the opposition provide any kind of concrete plan. Sarah Palin has no plan.

James Corbett comment: Further to CV's comment that "They (Tea Party) are generally ill-informed" and those that make this observation "get tarred as an elitist". I point out that the comment is elitist. It implies that you could only support the Tea Party if you are ill-informed. That is not debate; it is just elitist hubris.

Alex comment: I think the introduction of U.S.-style primary elections would actually be detrimental to Canadian democracy. It makes getting on the ballot even more difficult and I think it would tire people to have election season start even earlier than it already does.

Municipally, the Toronto race has been running for at least a year now, and I for one cannot wait for it to be over so I can vote and get the result.

If less than 65% of voters show up for one election, just imagine how pathetic the turnout would be at a primary election to select candidates for the real election a few months later.

Guest comment: Obviously, by electing Obama, the Americans have moved away from having the "guy next door" as president. Palin strikes me as a move backwards, perhaps even farther the "gal in the next trailer" Can't the people in the Tea Party see that? The other reality is that the "guy/gal" next door is always going to be a figurehead for the real power behind the scenes, no?

Guest comment: "... Canadians still consider Sarah Palin a joke, Globe columnist Margaret Wente wrote Saturday in her cover story in this week's Focus Section. ..."

Why do you think Canadians think this way? Palin has directly influenced the outcomes of several U.S. primaries and the election of a REPUBLICAN as Senator of Massachusetts (replacing the vacant Kennedy seat) _ something that hasn't been that way since the 1950s. Why are Canadians engaged in demonizing a person who has such great influence in the most powerful country in the world?

Guest comment: The world wants Obama's administration to be a strong large activist government, including a large component for single-payer health care, regulating Wall Street, better schools, fixing crumbling infrastructure, better environmental protection. Palin and the Tea Party, along with Republicans are calculated to create gridlock so that government can do little for the people who need change the most. It's a pre-fixed stalemate to ensure status quo elitist dominance, despite Tea Part's decrying " elitists".

Jim Sheppard: Margaret, thanks for joining us today to answer questions from our readers. I'm sure they appreciated your insights. Any last thoughts?

Margaret Wente: I'm thrilled this subject has attracted so much interest, because I obviously believe that the roots of American populist discontent aren't well understood. And because this slump is likely to be prolonged, this discontent isn't likely to go away any time soon.

The political challenge will be to try to channel this discontent in a positive direction in an era where policy fixes probably don't exist.

Good luck to political leaders!

Jim Sheppard: And thanks very much to all of our readers who joined us today for this fascinating discussion. Please feel free to continue the debate in the comments area of this article.

Interact with The Globe