To those on the left, Palin seems to be almost a caricature of all they dislike about the right. Her flamboyant religiosity is an obvious example. (left-wing Christians tend to have more respect for Matthew 6:6). The perception is that she, and other religious-right leaders, are laying it on with a trowel to win votes.

(Left-wingers, by contrast, expect their politicians to have the courtesy of only manipulating them subtly…)

Another big component is the perception that Palin is anti-intellect. For example, her derogatory comments about fruit-fly research generated a lot of anger in the scientific community. Fruit-fly studies are actually quite vital to biology, particularly in “basic research”. This is research that isn’t expected to produce a cure for cancer in the near future, but could lead to dramatic revolutions thirty years down the line.

In denying the importance of this research, Palin gave the impression that: a) she had a very limited understanding of the significance of science; and b) she was willing to eviscerate American research in order to save funds. Needless to say, none of this endeared her to the left.

(Left-wingers, by contrast, prefer their leaders to at least pay lip-service to science before they slash its budget…)

The fact that Palin was a cheerleader – and hence a poster-child for beauty over brains – is just the icing on the cake. Basically, what right-wingers see as the down-to-earth, everyman image of Palin, left-wingers see as wilful ignorance and ersatz tribalism.

So yeah, symbols.