Smart piece, as usual, by Daniel Larison:

Palin was surrounded and cheered on by almost nothing but yes-men, because once anyone tried to offer any kind of criticism that person seemed to become persona non grata in her circle and in the wider conservative world pretty quickly. That is why a reasonable column offering advice and encouragement to Palin could be met by so much insane fury from so many of her supporters. It will be very difficult to explain to later generations what it was that the Palinites saw in her that made them so fervent and enthusiastic.

Well, I can explain it. She was one of them. This was identity politics, writ large - though of course her supporters would never use that term to describe it.

What came to be so annoying about her was not so much that she performed poorly in interviews, had no policy knowledge outside of issues related to oil, and had an unremarkable record as governor (except when she was jacking up windfall profits taxes to redistribute liberate the money from oil corporations), but it was that her supporters seemed intent on never acknowledging her errors, refused to hold her accountable when she made misleading statements and began making virtues out of her weaknesses. Whether or not Palin could have become a much better candidate, there was no way that things could work out well for her or the country with supporters like this.

Understand the mentality, though. Because she was one of them, she had to be defended from the outsiders. Because she was one of them, things they would have vehemently denounced in other candidates became excusable - even, in the case of her resignation, noble.

To “acknowledge her errors” would have been to cede ground to the opponents, something that can never be done. It’s not that they think she’s infallible - it’s that they resent that anyone would dwell on her fallibility, ultimately their own fallibility.

To criticize Palin was to criticize then. Which makes it ironic, for as Larison points out - that attitude ultimately prompted more criticism, both of the candidate, and those who saw themselves in her.