Look Out Mitt and Mike: Palin Can Do This

Before tonight's proceedings in St. Paul, the venerable National Journal released its latest poll of Republican "insiders," in which several dozen party establishment figures were asked -- with a guarantee of anonymity -- to handicap the 2012 G.O.P. presidential field (contingent on a John McCain defeat this fall).

Their consensus: Mitt Romney is the runaway front-runner, favored by 55 percent, with "nobody" finishing a distant second, at 15 percent. For a party that is fond of anointing an heir apparent years in advance of its nominating contests -- and then ratifying that selection through the primary process -- Romney seemed to be in a commanding situation, roughly where Ronald Reagan was in 1976, George H. W. Bush in 1984, Bob Dole in 1992, and John McCain in 2004.

And then Sarah Palin spoke.

The Alaska governor's breathlessly anticipated speech -- the cable news networks provided countdowns to the start of remarks in the corner of their screens -- came shortly after addresses by Romney and Mike Huckabee, the two unsuccessful 2008 G.O.P. candidates who have been in an informal competition for '12 front-runnerhood for the past six months.

Both of them delivered technically sound performances. Romney, completing his opportunistic conversion from Massachusetts moderate to Reagan conservative, resorted to a heavy dose of old-fashioned, Arthur Finkelstein-inspired liberal-baiting, while Huckabee used a little more humor.

But all of that was forgotten moments after Palin, who received a standing ovation that lasted for more than three minutes before even opening her mouth. To the delegates in the hall, she had become a living, breathing and besieged symbol of the national media's (and the Democratic Party's) mockery of and condescension toward them. This sort of kinship with the audience is an enviable way for any speaker to begin any speech, and Palin never squandered it.

She hit the right policy points -- particularly on energy policy, where she brought the crowd to its feet with her embrace of aggressive domestic oil drilling and derision of the Democrats' skepticism -- but what really resonated with the conservative audience was her poise, her confidence, her determination and her humor.

"You know," she ad-libbed (or at least seemed to) upon spotting a sign in the hall from a fellow hockey mother, "they say the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull -- lipstick."

A deafening roar ensued, as it did over and over throughout her speech. She flubbed no lines, stumbled over no words, and delivered every sentence with the ease and command of a natural politician.

"I'm not going to Washington to see their good opinion," she said as she took on her detractors in the press, "I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this great country."

The McCain-Palin ticket may end up winning this fall, in which case Vice President Palin would instantly become a leading candidate -- and probably the leading candidate -- for the next open Republican presidential nomination, whether in 2012 or 2016. And her performance, tonight and on the campaign trail over the next two months, just might end up making the difference for McCain, given how close the outcome figures to be.

But even if the G.O.P. ticket loses, we probably witnessed on Wednesday night the birth of a new future Republican White House contender, a rival for Romney and Huckabee as '12 approaches. Her acceptance speech marked the opening for Palin of a two-month window that ambitious politicians dream about -- an opportunity to show her party's base what she looks like on the national stage, going toe-to-toe with the other party (and the media), and to leave them drooling for more.

She provided strong evidence on Wednesday night that she's up to the challenge -- that she'll more than hold her own in her October debate with Joe Biden (the next highest-profile moment for her) and on the stump between now and November. If she does that, then win or lose, she will finish this campaign as an obvious White House prospect with a large and loyal following on the right.

Not every VP nominee seizes an opportunity like this. Dan Quayle was plucked from similar obscurity (at a similarly young age) in 1988, but he wilted in the media spotlight, from his disastrous first appearance with George H. W. Bush at the August convention (when, resembling a rambunctious 8-year-old on a sugar high, he declared that "we will win because we can't afford to lose!") through his horrific debate performance against Lloyd Bentsen in October, when Quayle blindly walked into one of the most devastating put-downs ("You're not Jack Kennedy") in American political history. Quayle had the same opportunity Palin was handed earlier this week, but he fumbled the ball.

Quayle may be the most spectacularly unsuccessful VP nominee of recent mint, but others have also squandered their chance, most notably Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 (thanks to a scandal about her and her husband's personal finances) and Jack Kemp in 1996 (whose listless performance on the campaign trail turned off his once-loyal supporters on the right).

There are still plenty of land mines for Palin. A gaffe in her debate with Biden or a slip-up in a campaign speech would be very costly. And how long can the McCain campaign shield her from the press -- and the chance that some mischievous reporter will corner her with a pop quiz on foreign policy that, no matter how much the McCain team crams into her head, she just won't be ready for? And whether there will further revelations from Wasilla is a dangerously open question.

Still, Palin proved on Wednesday night that, in many ways, she's a natural in the big leagues. That alone should be enough to warrant an adjustment of the insider's line for the 2012 G.O.P. nomination.