Nate Silver on a Palin candidacy

I wrote recently about Paul Krugman's seemingly off-hand comment on a Palin presidency. (He repeats that comment here.) Along with speculation on the Democratic side, this subject is worth more than a little thought.

Nate Silver, writing for the New York Times, has an update of his previous (pre-election) analysis of a Palin 2012 candidacy. It's an interesting read, and includes a 10-point analysis of various campaign parameters, such as voter enthusiasm, the 2010 effect, condition of the rest of the Republican field, need for a ground game and field offices, given her base voters' lesser reliance on new media, and so on.

Here's Mr. Silver's conclusion (h/t tedemang at reddit; my emphasis):

In the near term, I would look toward two things. First, what is being said about Ms. Palin on conservative blogs, on conservative talk radio, and on Fox News? These reflect the middle ground between elite and popular opinion and may provide a leading indicator — perhaps more so than polls — about how much the elite’s criticisms of Ms. Palin, and their concerns about her electability, are penetrating into the general public.

Second, I would look toward whom Ms. Palin is hiring as her support staff. A presidential campaign is a huge endeavor, comparable to a medium-sized business. Perhaps, because of her facility in commanding attention, Ms. Palin requires less assistance than a typical candidate might. Perhaps, because she sometimes seems to have an impatience for details and has not run for president before, she requires more. But all presidential candidates need some help: those candidates, like the Republican Fred Thompson, who have become too enamored with the notion of running a “viral”, nontraditional campaign from the confines of their living rooms have usually failed miserably. Is she hiring good pollsters, media strategists, fundraisers, consultants, logisticians, and advertising gurus? If so, she may still be as likely as anyone to prevail from a large, but fairly weak, Republican field. If not, her campaign, if she decides to run one, is liable to be a bust.

These are smart early indicators to be watching. But do look through the whole article. The subject is complicated, and Silver's analysis is one way to slice through it.

GP