Wrong, wrong, all wrong. That’s been my feeling about recent media coverage of Sarah Palin’s decision to step down as governor of Alaska. Most press accounts have read like quasi-obituaries of Palin, subtly maligning the abruptness of her decision and already implying that Ms. Palin’s 2012 presidential hopes are the pipe dream of an uneducated political novice.

I don’t like Sarah Palin. (Surprise!) But there are dozens of reasons not to count her out in 2012. And the primary reason for this is so obvious that, like most obvious and important observations, noone has made it. Most press accounts have read like this recent excerpt from the New York Times:

“…the dominant reaction of Republicans has been befuddlement. Her move may play well with her strongest supporters, but her political instincts and stability were once again being questioned in other circles of the party, which had already been wary of her after last year’s election. That is hardly a development Ms. Palin could welcome as her party is looking for a candidate who can endure what could be a very tough race in 2012.”

The logic here is quite fuzzy. If it is true that the GOP is falling apart at the seams with no coherent strategy for 2012, then Ms. Palin is in better shape for this internal chaos. Imagine a 2012 scenario where a reasonably-strong third-party candidate, ala Michael Bloomberg, emerges to draw away moderate Republicans from their splintering and incompetent party. Add to that those moderate Republicans who are already defecting towards Obama on economic issues; the ‘Obama Republican’ is the new ‘Reagan Democrat.’ In that case there would be nearly no Republicans left in 2012 besides the true believers — who, in case you haven’t noticed, kinda dig Sarah Palin. Palin is not a stupid person, despite media efforts to portray her as an awkward and babbling quasi-sex-symbol. This logic is not lost on her. And even if the party elites are an obstacle for her nomination, Barack Obama showed that creative grassroots fundraising means as much as having a smorgasbord of elites at your disposal.

Then there’s the matter of how Palin’s early departure from the Alaska governorship will bode with people looking for strong leadership. Here it shouldn’t be necessary to remind anyone that even with her resignation, Palin has more non-presidential executive leadership experience than our current president. Many people scoffed at Palin’s justification for the resignation — that it would be unfair to the people of Alaska for a “lame duck” governor with no reelection plans to represent them any longer. Am I the only one who sees at least a wisp of integrity in that justification? (Maybe she, like, cares about her state.) If a progressive Democratic governor resigned for similar reasons, I don’t think the media would be treating her with similar cynicism. Whether or not that explanation is sincere, it looks good on paper, and we all agree that lame-duck officeholders aren’t good for efficiency. I fail to see the offense in her stated rationale.

But perhaps the final reason for Palin’s departure announcement is a cynical one: this keeps her in the news. Or more specifically, if she does have 2012 hopes, it inserts her into the news much earlier. It ensures that she remains the first major name people identify with the 2012 race (last time I checked, Barack Obama was also thinking about running.) And the extra time gives her the ability to spend the next several years courting Republican elites and influencing the broader policy discussion. It is unclear to me that remaining governor of Alaska would have won Palin any more credibility: first, because Alaskan politics are mostly boring and undramatic — but most importantly, because her 2008 opponents correctly convinced Americans that being governor of Alaska is not a good primer for higher office.

So I am baffled why Palin is being written off. I do not believe that liberal media bias is a major problem, but this treatment of Palin comes way too close to making me doubt myself. It could simply be that casting Palin as an impulsive hack sells more newspapers than the real story: that the Republican nominee in 2012, if not Sarah Palin, will probably at least look damn well like her. Forget the polls and the jeers and the outraged scoffing: the GOP has a frontrunner for 2012. They just don’t know it yet.