« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

A Tale of Two Palins

By: azaeroprof (Diary)  |  November 30th, 2010 at 12:07 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Before I get to the main point of this diary, let me say what it is not.

This is not intended to be a discussion of Sarah Palin’s qualifications for the presidency, experiential or otherwise.  I will leave this to future diarists to discuss.  JSobieski has promised to post to this effect in a comment to JadedByPolitics’ recent Palin missive (now at 350+ comments and 45+ recs).  Frankly, I don’t personally care about that topic at this point.  It is best left to later discussion when we know who the candidates are and can explore their qualifications in a comparative sense.

This diary is also not intended to be an advertisement for a Palin candidacy.  Those who know me here at RS know that I have been a consistent Palin supporter (though last I checked, I didn’t have any drool running down my chin!).  Much of what I discuss below could be applied to any number of potential candidates.

So what is the point?  Here it is, plain and simple.  It is nearly 2 years out from the presidential election of 2012.  At the end of 1974, Nixon had just resigned and virtually no one had heard of a certain Georgia governor by the name of Jimmy Carter.  Two years later, he was President-Elect.  In 1978, most pundits thought Ronald Reagan was a right-wing warmongering extremist dunce that could never win a general election.  Heck, even within a week of his 10-point victory, he was virtually tied in most polls with an incredibly ineffective and unpopular Carter.  In 1990, hardly anyone thought an unknown governor of Arkansas had a shot at being elected.  Two years later, we had the beginning of a 2-term Clinton presidency.  And finally, in late 2006, hardly anyone thought that the Hillary Express could be stopped, especially by a newly-elected senator from Illinois with zero executive experience.  The rest, as they say, is history.

The only thing funnier than watching economists attempt to forecast market trends, is watching political pundits try to forecast political elections.  It is simply absurd to state with any certainty what will happen in 2012, either in the primaries or in the general election.  So if you read or hear someone saying “Palin is unelectable” or “Palin will wipe the floor with Obama”, or even “Daniels is too boring to win” or “Pence is not well-known enough to win a national election” or “Mickey Mouse could beat Obama in 2012″ or any variation thereof, feel free to chuckle out loud at the absurdity of the statement.  Anyone (including me!) who would make such a statement is either separated from reality or, more likely, exposing their personal bias towards or against a particular candidate.

All that said, the ultimate point of this diary (as belied by the title), is to particularly address the first of the absurd statements mentioned above (i.e. “Palin is unelectable”).  We don’t know if she’ll even run, and she very well may fall flat on her face in the primaries.  But the political landscape of Alaska, and to some extent America, is littered with the carcasses of those who have underestimated her.  So here I will make an argument for at least the plausability of a Palin general election victory.

It was the worst of times…

Sarah Palin of November 2010

  1. is a failed GOP vice-presidential candidate
  2. is viewed, rightly or wrongly, as divisive and polarizing by many voters, particularly independents
  3. has an upside-down favorability rating
  4. is viewed by many voters as “stupid” or intellectually “uncurious”
  5. has a personal and family life viewed as a national soap opera by many
  6. is best known for only one interview in which she did not perform well
  7. trails Obama in all head-to-head early polling
  8. has many Republicans (even conservative ones) doubting that she is qualified to be president
  9. is viewed as “unelectable” by many in the GOP
  10. has never participated in a presidential debate
  11. is not actually running for president

It was the best of times…

OK, you have to use your imagination for this one!  As mentioned above, she may not even run.  But if she does, even many of those who view her as “unelectable” in the general election, acknowledge that she would be a formidable candidate for the GOP nomination.  So imagine we have just come out of the 2012 nominating conventions, and Sarah Palin is the GOP nominee. Now consider the

Sarah Palin of September 2012

  1. has been a candidate for president for months
  2. has run a successful campaign for the GOP nomination, defeating several other qualified candidates
  3. has participated in a good number of presidential debates, apparently successfully
  4. has demonstrated the ability to garner support across a broad geographical area necessary to win the nomination
  5. has a unified GOP behind her, motivated to prevent a second Obama term
  6. has given literally dozens of national interviews to a public now forced to consider her as a viable candidate
  7. has a running mate with his/her own political and geographic strengths (as long as we’re imagining, maybe it’s Marco Rubio?)
  8. is now a truly historic figure as the first woman nominee of a major party and one step removed from being the first woman president

Conclusion

As I argued above, it would be foolish of me to say that this would certainly all end well.  If this scenario were to occur, Palin could well go down in flames in the general election.  She may utterly fail at being able to pull independent voters to the GOP.  But keep in mind that the “worst of times” Palin trails Obama in head-to-head polls by anywhere from 4-12 points right now.  It is not at all implausible to view the “best of times” Palin as being able to more than make up this margin.  And this argument is based solely on the characteristics described above.  It does not depend on any magical transformation of her personality or her image.  It simply follows from a successful campaign.

So please, if you want to discuss the pros/cons of a Palin candidacy (or Romney, Huckabee, Pence, Pawlenty, Gingrich or whoever), let’s do it.  But beware of stating unequivocally that any candidate is “unelectable” or “a shoe-in”.  At 700+ days prior to the election, that is equivalent to a meterologist telling you it is going to snow on Super Bowl Sunday 2012.

Tags: , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    But Obama currently may very well be at his nadir of popularity and an even somewhat recovering economy by 2012 would benefit him greatly, thus that current polling gap would grow larger as opposed to smaller. Also, I would not presume that 2-5 have to be true for her to have the GOP nod in 2012. The cast of primary candidates may not be presumed qualified by the primary voters, she does not have to win any debates, she doesn’t have to have broad support (just strong turnout amongst supporters in greater numbers than her opponents), and the GOP does not necessarily have to be unified behind her. Those are problematic assumptions to make.

    • azaeroprof

      I’m assuming we will have a fairly crowded field, making it likely that 2-5 will be more true than not.

      • Death_of_the_Donkey

        She could have huge tea party support, while the rest of the candidates divvy up the remainder. So, she gets out to a huge lead, uses momentum to carry her to the finish line, but never really “wins” a debate or consolidates GOP support. And not to be overly critical, but I cannot see her destroying Obama in a debate to seal the election (ie Reagan v Carter).

        • azaeroprof

          Especially among the so-called independents whose knowledge of Palin largely comes from the MSM and Tina Fey, their expectations of her are so low that she may only need to show up and not have her tongue scrape the ground.

          With his failure to “heal the planet” in 2 years or less, Obama is probably wishing he had created some of those low expectations himself!

          • acat

            her new .. public persona?

            She’s gotten used to the weight her words now have, where every barb thrown at Obama may end up on Drudge.

            I recall her doing well in the debate against Biden – who was supposed to be the “voice of experience” of the Obama/Biden ticket – and I expect she can think on her feet well enough to crush Obama in a debate. (he clearly has trouble thinking on his feet…) I don’t know if we’d get a “there you go again” moment, but .. it’s plausible.

            Mew

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    would draw a strong 3rd party candidate, you can book it.

    The thing that is bothering me about Palin right now, as she pops up on my tv screen every 35 minutes is not only does she not have thick skin, she has no skin at all. She is even firing back at Barbra Bush as a blue blood? Her boy Joe Miller is going down Al Gore style in Alaska and she can not avoid a cat fight. She just cant calmly say “Mrs. Bush is certianly entitled to her oppinion” and just leave it at that?

    • azaeroprof

      She definitely should have handled the Babs comment as you suggest.

      I disagree on the 3rd party likelihood. But frankly, if Repubs and Conservatives are stupid enough to vote for a Bloomberg over *whoever* the GOP nominee is (or to not vote at all), then we deserve another 4 years of Obama.

      • acat

        If the Dem nominee is Obama (and yes, the odds of him not running are small, but a lot can happen in 2 years…) and if Palin cannot achieve a more favorable view among independents (again, a lot can happen in 2 years) then all it needs is an establishment republican who sees it as his (or her) mission to “save the party from that woman”.

        Bloomberg is one possibility. Thune is another – he seems to think he’s the “it’s my turn” candidate for 2012…

        Mew

        • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

          Which I would assume would be Thune.

          There might be a third party on the left, especially if BO caves like house of cards over the next two years.

          Bloomberg may well run just because he can. He can self finance a campaign and I could see him spending $500M of his own money jousting at windmills.

          Then there’s always RonPaul™.

          • acat

            …which is one reason I mentioned Thune – Anderson started from Congress.

            But yeah, I could see Bloomberg running as “the Establishment alternative”. (with, of course, better phrasing…)

            I think Palin could overcome this, by continuing to grow as a ficon, and by naming someone whose ficon credentials are beyond doubt as veep. …

            Mew

          • azaeroprof

            I’d almost forgotten about him. Reagan didn’t have any trouble overcoming his entry into the race. Of course, Anderson wasn’t exactly well-known or charismatic.

            I’d be more worried about Bloomberg if he had even one iota of likability! He might carry NY with all the NYers who would want to get rid of him.

          • gop2010

            NYers think they are so special, it’d be fun to see them all line up behind a candidate who wins only their state.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            How else do you explain electing Hilary Clinton?

          • azaeroprof
          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            The guy has pretty much an unlimited amount of money.

            Given that both Obama and Palin are pretty toxic relative to independents, he’s got a target audience. Moderate Republicans would probably either stay home or vote for my dead white cat, or Obama, if Palin runs. Bloomberg gives them an outlet. Same for “moderate” Democrats.

            I don’t see him making the same mistakes that Perot made, and he’d be one heck of a lot better funded and organized, at least on a national level, than Anderson.

            I think he could make a credible run. I don’t know that he’d come close to winning, but he’d sure mess things up for the planners.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            is going to be a big sell outside of New York, or San Fran.

          • acat

            …but for the RINOs and Dems who would be pushing Candidate X, it would be about splitting the Repubs, and allowing Obama to win.

            Reagan didn’t have any trouble wiping the floor with Anderson.

            If she can break through to the independents and ficons over the next 2 years, neither will Palin. If being the key word.

            Mew

    • edintexas

      As a “Goldwater Conservative”, you should easily be able to recognize a Rockefeller Republican when you hear one. Mrs. Bush is a lovely lady, who is barely (if at all) removed from her Rockefeller Republican roots. She IS a “Country Club Blueblood Republican” and long term residence in Texas apparently hasn’t changed that very much.

      As a citizen, Mrs. Bush is entitled to her opinion. If she were an ordinary citizen you would never hear that opinion on TV. As the spouse of a retired President, she should have known better than make a derogatory comment about an active politician from her chosen party. She seemed to have lost her “manners” in the case of Palin, which is surprising given her reputation (though perhaps unsurprising given the contempt with which many so-called Republicans apparently hold Sarah Palin).

      • azaeroprof

        Seems to me that Mr. Goldwater didn’t suffer the Rockefeller bunch very well. I would not expect a self-proclaimed Goldwater Republican to criticize Sarah for pushing back against that wing of the party.

        We like to think the Rockefeller gang went away after Reagan’s ascendance. Truth of the matter is that they just went underground through his 8 years and have been reclaiming their old power ever since. Now they’re coming full circle promoting the son of one of the chief promos, George Romney, for president. I say watch out, because the apple never falls far from the tree.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    It’s interesting to note that at this point in the ’08 race Hillary was a given to be the Dem candidate and BO was a junior Senator who didn’t show up for work a whole lot.

    In ’04 Howard Dean was the guy who was going to clobber Bush and when push finally came to shove the Dems nominated a “decorated war hero” who was going to win in a landslide.

    We don’t even have a clue what the real issues facing the next Congress are going to be and that’s only two months away. The issues in the next Presidential election are so unknown – aside from the fiscal issues – that it’s anybody’s game.

    • azaeroprof

      I will be sure to write down today’s date as we are actually in agreement on a Palin-related post :)

      • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

        a whole lot more than we disagree on. Even about Palin.

        The key is that important comment at the beginning of your diary, “no drool”. Unfortunately that can’t be said about most of the Palin supporters who contributed to that other tome.

        • azaeroprof

          Since you’re a friend of mine on Facebook, I’m sure you’ve noticed my pro-Palin tone there is much stronger (even linking to, ‘gasp’, C4P!). I see FB as a site better suited for advocacy. RedState’s environment demands a more cerebral, discussion-based approach (and an open mind!)

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
      • acat

        Better to start saying “we don’t know yet” and work from there.

        Seems to me that Candidate Palin needs to break through to the independents in order to win. She’s got 2 years, and she’s established her conservative credentials, and built bridges with many newly elected folk.

        If she performs a pivot and starts reaching out to independents – not modifying her positions an iota, but unpacking and laying out the reasons why for those whose only “news” is what’s on the radio in between songs (and who don’t read Red State) – she’s got plenty of time to break through the fog.

        I’m reading Bristol Palin being on “Dancing With The Stars” as the first step in this pivot.

        Mew

        • azaeroprof

          There is no doubt she knows this is her Achilles heel. And you’re right, she has time. She has proven to have incredible media and political instincts. And don’t forget that appealing to independents (and even Dems) is not new to her. That’s how she won the governorship in the first place, and partly how she got to an 80% approval rating before the Axelrod/Obama Axis of Evil got a hold of her.
          I am looking forward to seeing how she moves in this direction and whether she can ultimately succeed.

        • Scope

          Just last night you asked another commenter to prove that Palin was a conservative. I responded by asking you to prove that she was not. Your reply was that the budget information posted on that diary also, showed that she was not a conservative, with respect to the budget info at least.

          Above you say “she’s established her conservative credentials.” I ask what info you have gained about Palin, since last night, to now be convinced that she in fact is a conservative? I’m glad that you agree that she is a conservative, but am just curious as to your change of mind on the issue.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
          • acat

            Trig Palin’s birth is the best proof ever she values every life, i.e. most clear anti-abortion political statement ever. She is clearly a social-conservative, at least in terms of being anti-abortion.

            She’s obviously pro-USA – and a good jolt of national pride would do us all some good. (Reagan’s “Morning in America” ad for reference) So, she’s a nationalist-conservative. Her visiting the ANG in theater indicates she’s also pro-military.

            She’s also done more to block the Obama agenda than any other Republican, hands down, and funds-wise she’s out-raised just about everyone else. That she’s not gone the “third party” way, and her support for Sen. McCain’s re-election establishes her party loyalty – which will be very important when it’s time to work with the “establishment”.

            However.

            Gov. Palin’s record while in office was not one of fiscal conservatism. (I can go find Becker’s post in the other thread if you’d like)

            “She’s established her conservative credentials” is a true statement. I’m choosing to accept that she’s a conservative but not a ficon.

            I also don’t see where Palin has the required executive skills to take on the challenge that will be a Washington D.C. bureaucracy that will be out to destroy her presidency, starting Nov. 4 2012.

            Mew

          • azaeroprof

            is definitely an open question, though I’m not sure there is anyone truly prepared or even up to that task!

            On the Alaska budget, I do think that’s a bit fuzzy. The connection between oil prices (which were high during her term) and Alaska’s revenue are well-established. There really was little incentive or even need to not use the higher revenues to increase services to Alaskans. As long as it wasn’t institutionalized so as to create a burden during low oil-price times. My understanding (though I may be wrong) is that she at least didn’t raid the rainy-day fund (as Janet Napolitano did here in Arizona!). I think she did show some proclivity to make some cuts and earmark reductions, though maybe not enough to satisfy our stronger ficons!

          • Scope

            because to me it appeared you were making a blanket statement in saying “she’s established her conservative credentials” without specifying which credentials.

          • acat

            There’s no way for her to firm up her dubious ficon credentials without taking an executive gig and actually .. executing…

            But if she takes an executive gig, we lose the one person taking Obama to task who the media are unable to ignore.

            There are three things Candidate Palin could do to slice this knot.

            First, ignore the ficons. Any pandering now would be seen as pandering and rejected.

            Second, as azaeroprof did in his reply above, find a narrative that minimizes the ability of ficons to complain, and *get the Palinistas to repeat it*. “Palin maintained the rainy-day fund while using increased oil prices to increase services” is .. tolerable. Not great, but .. tolerable. I’d rather see evidence she used the increased revenues to pay for updating the states’ vehicle fleet, or making other long-term investments. Putting the state jet on eBay was the right move, that should be brought up again.

            Third, find a way to work on something with Gov. Christie. He’s currently the lion of the ficons so an alliance there would go a long, long way toward allaying their suspicions.

            Gov. Christie is also a potential rival for the nomination (in some eyes) so it would be a good political move on her part to do some outreach.

            If, of course, she’s running.

            Mew

          • JSobieski

            on that lengthy Palin thread as not being negative towards Palin or her record. To the contrary, I was basically asking for Palin supports to point to (with links) specific things in her record that make her look good. I was begging for a fact-laden pro-Palin diary on her Alaskan record.

            The same should and in fact must be asked of the supporters of other candidates. For example, Daniels and Barbour supporters will need to address the relatively low Cato institute ratings. Daniels was graded a B and Barbour a C.

            Characterizing Cato as having Barbour Derangement Syndrom is not a viable response. Daniels does have to answer the question of whether his deficit concerns make him the most likely R to raise taxes.
            Moreover, the whole “truce” comment is very problematic.

            These topics should be debated and discussed, not burried under an emotional undertow.

            Palin was never my last choice for President. I do not have PDS. I have consistently stated that I would vote for Palin over any of the 2008 retreads, including Fred. Yet even with those caveats, it didn’t seem possible to cut through to emotional fog.

            Anyway, this diary and its comments are good signs for the future.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            Part of her wants to run, but a big part of her would rather not, after all she is having a heck of a good time with all the things she is doing right now.

            She seemed to have a real affinity with Rick Perry, who was her ally with all the other governors. My wild thought is that if Perry runs, she will support him. But if he does not run, she will see no one with the kind of views she has and will decide to run.

            This is just speculation.

          • Scope

            I had replied to a comment of your’s yesterday, where you also claimed that Christie was conservative with fiscal issues. You can go back and read that comment if you haven’t, however, I will relink the article I linked in my comment.

            http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/08/gov_chris_christie_signs_offsh.html

            Gov. Christie signed legislation to implement a wind farm off the coast of NJ. The state is providing $100 million in tax credits, and, other financial incentives for those that will bring the project to fruition in NJ. He believes it will bring jobs to the state, but, according to the business interests in the state , it will cause more businesses to leave the state because of the increased electric costs to those businesses. Someone has to pay for the project, and, the maintenance of it thereafter. It will cause electric costs to increase for everyone in an already highly taxed state.

            The way I view Christies fiscal policies is to decrease the union pension liabilities by just a little, by requiring the state workers and retirees to contribute just 2% toward their healthcare costs, and, he proposed freezing teacher wages for a certain time period, they said no. He did in fact cut the budget for education, and the teachers can take a pay freeze, or the cuts will affect other areas in their school budgets. That’s a great start, however, he is using some of the savings from the union activities and is supporting tax credits and incentives to promote his “green” agenda. I don’t know about you, but, for me he is using budget shennanigans to promote something that is far less than conservative. Christie seems to be a one trick pony, going after the unions. He is failing on some other accounts with respect to fiscal conservatism though.

          • acat

            Without spending four paragraphs, Christie has a much harder state to be a ficon in than Palin. (or Daniels or Barbour, for that matter)

            Unions have a level of control in New Jersey that’s hard to understand without living there, or in a similar area. (Chicago works along similar rules…)

            As for wind farms, there are a few spots where the wind is constant enough that they make economic sense. My guess is that, given that Gov. Christie has killed other popular projects (I recall a tunnel and a rail line…) because they’re not economically justified, that the wind farm has numbers to back it up. I admit this is a guess.

            Looks like I’ve reached four paragraphs anyway. Okay, one more point. New Jersey has had more Democrat governors than Republicans, Whigs, and Federalists combined. Remember the RINO EPA director Christine Todd-Whitman? Former Republican governor of New Jersey.

            Mew

          • http://seekingliberty.wordpress.com fmaidment

            New Jersey doesn’t have the wind potential of some states, especially those in the upper-midwest, but it’s better than some other areas.

            The real future of wind-power isn’t massive wind farms in the middle of nowhere. It’s small, inexpensive turbines on top of office buildings that simply reduce the amount of energy consumed, rather than huge, expensive ones that replace coal plants.

          • Scope

            wind energy. Why don’t you install a windmill on your property to reduce your energy costs. If you like it, do it. No one is stopping you. Someone here posted the costs associated with installing the windmills, and the costs that ensue for keeping it running. Those costs would only be passed along to those that have no interest in wind energy, if it went beyond personal properties. I am all for personal windmills, have at it if you choose, but, don’t make everyone else pay for your decision.

          • acat

            cost or efficiency (either would work) of generators needs to come down quite a bit before they make sense for the average office park.

            I’m hoping for a breakthrough that leads to a better battery or massive-scale capacitor to allow storing electricity the way we currently store gasoline. (that is, relatively safely with proper precautions) At that point, life gets much more interesting.

            Until we get that, it makes far more sense to use wind power to create potential mechanical energy – pumping water uphill, spinning up flywheels – that can be used to create electricity on demand instead of electricity when there’s wind….

            Of course, there’s not much of a government subsidy for that…

            Mew

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            there are only two governors who are taking on the public employee unions. Christie and Daniels.

          • Scope

            “As for wind farms, there are a few spots where the wind is constant enough that they make economic sense. My guess is that, given that Gov. Christie has killed other popular projects (I recall a tunnel and a rail line?) because they?re not economically justified, that the wind farm has numbers to back it up. I admit this is a guess.”

            The wind farm has the numbers to back it up? Really. Oh My.

          • acat

            Just what part of it are you disagreeing with?

            That there are spots in this country where the wind is consistent? Because .. there are such spots. And they tend to be offshore.

            That it’s possible to build a wind farm that actually makes money? Because .. if you can run the generators consistently .. they do earn back the cost of investment.

            That the New Jersey one makes sense? Well .. I don’t know if it does or not. I’m not exactly involved in the project, but .. it’s not something I’d laugh at out of hand.

            Mew

          • JSobieski

            nt

          • acat

            is an hour or so away from me.

            Batavia used to be known as “The Windmill City” as a number of windmill manufacturers were located there. This was over a century ago, and the windmills of the time were used on farms across the midwest to pump well water, filling cisterns and troughs, and in general making farms more productive.

            All this with no offshore manufacturing, and no government subsidies.

            Mew

          • Scope

            and it is obvious that this diary is quickly turning into that other diary. Don’t even go there acat because you are wrong totally. You more than contributed to the animosity at that other diary. You need to understand that there really are some that don’t see things your way. You desperately need to allow people to post without having to indulge your numerous “quibbles.” Get over yourself already.

          • acat

            So, when someone laughs at you (a sign of derision) that’s okay with you?

            I accept that you disagree with me. I do not accept the way you went about it.

            Mew

          • Scope

            I do suspect that any guy who closes every one of his posts with “mew” would be very sensitive. Sorry for the offense to your very tender sensibilities.

          • acat

            Which part of the wind farm do you find .. upsetting?

            You never did answer.

            Mew

          • Scope

            but the issue has already been discussed by many in the energy industry as being a useless exercise, that wastes money because of it’s inefficiency and high cost for little value, but, you are pretty darn stubborn once you lock onto any issue. Have a good evening, I’m going to bed, as, I am bored with any arguments you can make in favor of wind. I do appreciate your comments though, it keeps giving a more complete picture of where you are on the issues.

          • acat

            Your post title is contradicted in your post body.

            Yes, I am stubborn. Happens that I know I’m right, and what’s being thrown at me is emotional rubbish instead of actual fact-based arguments.

            You have yet to debunk the wind farm idea, instead you’ve mocked it and appealed to “experts”. Even there, you’re arguing from generalities instead of specifics.

            I’ll keep this in mind in future discussions with you.

            Mew

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            Palin/Christie 2012. Can you imagine the heart attack that would give the left? FIREPOWER!!!

        • brycerow

          Looking at the sucess Bristol Palin had on “Dancing With the Stars” and the upcoming reality show about the Palins I think Sarah Palin has a good chance of turning the current “popular” opinion of her around.

          The only thing I worry about however, is that Palin might be overexposing herself too much in order to acomplish this. With the Dancing with the Stars example I think the indepentants watching Bristol make great personal triumphs week after week did a lot to repair any “damage” made by previous attacks on the Palin family. But will another show ontop of that undo that? Not necessarily by anything the Palins might say or do on the show but just because they are exposed in the media too much?

          • azaeroprof

            But she may be one candidate, maybe the only candidate, who could get away with this. So much of what people see *about* her in the media from comedians, Chris “Tingle” Mathews, Joe “Fair” Scarborough, etc. largely perpetuate caricatures of her that are exaggerated at best, inaccurate at worst. She has a very likable personality, so the more people see of her (and her family) on her own terms, the more they (hopefully) will realize that much of what they “know” about her is just false.

          • brycerow

            I hadn’t really thought about it before, but yes, most of the negatives ideas about Palin seems to have generated from other people (minus the one ‘bad’ interview everyone else in the media latched onto mentioned in the opening post) so perhaps in that light the extra media exposure would be a good thing. I guess we’ll have to see after the new show starts airing.

          • azaeroprof

            Episode #4 (of 8) will be on this Sunday. If you want to see the first 3, they have been replaying earlier episodes prior to the new one each Sunday evening.

          • brycerow

            I guess time got away from me. I remember seeing an ad for the show to start airing two weeks from now. I guess that was a few weeks ago!

            I will check it out, thanks!

          • acat

            The news media didn’t want to give Reagan a break either.. but he knew how to work a camera, and found ways to go around the newsies right into peoples’ living rooms.

            Palin is going to have to do the same thing – most of what we think we know about her just isn’t so – it’s manipulated. (even the “one bad interview” was cut to emphasize the negatives*)

            I think she can pull this off – she’s got 2 years after all. I’m not convinced that she’s the best option available… yet… but she definitely could win.

            Mew

            * not to mention she was still having to stay on McLame’s messaging…

          • azaeroprof

            I had been advocating for her to be McCain’s pick for almost a year before he chose her. I watched every interview I could find and all the Alaska gubernatorial debates on the internet. She impressed me in all of those places. But even I was blown away by her RNC speech, and how effective she was at using the camera in conjunction with the teleprompter (and apparently her memory when the teleprompter malfunctioned?). IMHO, Obama thinks he is a great speechreader using the teleprompter, but I don’t think at his best that he comes close to her performance there.

            Obviously, that is only one venue, but she has that one down pretty pat.

        • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

          If she doesn’t find some way to get independents on board she doesn’t have a chance. I think that given her history in Alaksa she would be able to do this quite easily. She has to get through the primary as well though. At 2 years out, you can throw around as much red meat as you want without needing to moderate your message for another half a year or so.

  • Randy

    That two years is a long time for a nominee to be put in place, however, I will hold my nose and vote for anyone who is not Obama… and I believe that there will be a lot of similar votes.

    With that said, I think it’s time that we broke a second barrier and why not a woman and why not Ms. Palin…… she sure can’t do any worse than the one we have now…. IMHO

    • aesthete

      it is to preside over an expanse and economy the size of Europe’s, to lead the bulk of the forces defending the free world, and now, to reform and cut a tottering, enormous federal government. If a woman happens to be better than a man at doing those things, great — let’s get her in office posthaste! Explicitly voting for someone to break some arbitrary (and largely imaginary) barrier is outright foolishness.

    • Goldwater_Conservative

      a lot of voters will be thinking. We just broke our first barrier and look what we got, I think its time to go back to ole relieable…that is a middle aged white guy. America became the greatest country in the history of the world with 42 middle aged white guys as leaders, why break with what was working?

      • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil_truth

        Your advicemight be correct, but your analysis leaves something to be desired.

        I do agree, though, that the affirmative action stuff needs to stay on the left side of the blogosphere.

        But, looking to possible future conversations, don’t confuse pride with aa -and don’t overcompensate and create “reverse aa” hurdles.

        • Goldwater_Conservative

          a woman, or a black man, or someone else couldn’t do a good job, I’m just saying that I think there are going to be a lot of anti-obma voters thinking what I just said in that we just broke with tradition and we dont like the results, so lets go back to tradition. And as someone who is a bid Jindal fan, I realize that also applies to him.

          • http://www.thejoyofreason.com Greg Garrison

            Some are, of course, and part of Obama’s appeal was his different-ness. That said, I don’t think that voters will, en masse, say something along the lines of, “We need a white male to set things straight.” Most Obama opponents, I imagine, dislike his policies, not the fact that he’s a different race than every past President. There will be plenty of ink spilled about the differences between O and his opponent, whether that individual is an Indian guy, a woman from Alaska, or a portly Caucasian male. Ultimately, though, I think that the biggest difference that will matter to the swing voters who decide the outcome will be grounded in policy.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            After this royal screw up, it might be a whole generation before we can get another black president. And yes, I beleive that most voters are rather shallow.

      • mediaman034

        America became the greatest country in the history of the world in spite of the 42 middle aged white guys who served as it’s leader…

        More reliably, it is the concise wording of, and the principles within, the Constitution that has allowed the United States to be the light of the world.

        That, and the sure blessings of The Almighty…!

  • Tbone

    It is far more important to be discussing what philosophies our Country needs and who most closely exemplifies those and how to get that person elected.

  • azaeroprof

    Couldn’t agree more.

    • azaeroprof
  • aesthete

    Palin has a hurdle to overcome in the general, but that is true of all candidates running. The extent of the hurdle is a dependent variable, but a variable nonetheless, not a constant.

    • azaeroprof

      Funny, I just finished reading the chapter in her latest book where she talks about the value of hard work and overcoming obstacles. Being a runner, I’m guessing she wouldn’t know what to do if it were easy!

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    Palin is a great asset to the conservative movement, in her fundraising and such. But all of her qualifications or non-qualifications are immaterial.

    In order to win a national election you MUST attract the independents. and She has been typecast and will not ever be able to win them.

    If you believe otherwise I think you are indulging in wishful thinking. She has been slimed in the same way that Dan Quayle was. She would NOT be able to defeat Obama, even if his popularity sinks another 20 points.

    If she is the nominee, we will lose, in much the same way that the Christine ODonnel election was a forgone conclusion. I like her, (I liked ODonnel too), but it is a bridge too far.

    • azaeroprof

      O’Donnell had about 3 weeks to turn her image around. Palin has nearly 2 years and less of a deficit than O’Donnell. It’s definitely a hurdle, but I’ll merely refer your certainty back to my last paragraph.

      I spent over 15 years hating Hillary Clinton with a seething passion. The 2008 campaign and the treatment she received at the hands of Lucifer Axelrod changed even my opinion of her. I still don’t want her to be president, and I really don’t like her, but I think I could actually stomach it if she were to run and win (at least to the extent that I could still keep food down). If I can change my view that much, anyone can on any subject!

      • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

        it is possible. But is it happeneing? Not a month goes by that she doesn’t say something either ill concieved, easy to misconstrue, or simply false.

        It just might be that this is the type of person she is, She shoots from the hip, and in our current media age that will not help her fight her type- casting.

        • azaeroprof

          To fight against type, she has to be more “measured” in her comments. It is the boldness of her comments that endears her to so many. Maybe she’s locked in her base enough to make that change without alienating them now. IDK.

        • acat

          What Palin needed to do then was to “win friends”. That is, to pick and back winners. She didn’t “run the table”, but she did a better job of it than the RNC or (IIRC) the RGA, and the people she backed were often underdogs who would have gone down without her so .. she wins. That’s a big box of favors she can call in.

          What Palin did not need to do in the 2010 run-up was to reach out to the independents or change her image. Her “shoot from the hip” “pit bull with lipstick” image worked very well for her for the purpose of backing insurgents.

          Now, she needs to pivot…. and I’m watching to see if she does so successfully.

          Bristol Palin on “Dancing With The Stars”, and the “Palin’s Alaska” shows are two early steps in the pivot – both reach right past the newsies and into the living rooms of Joe and Jill Sixpack, showing the Palin family as relatively normal, and not the blundering dunderhead Tina Fey portrayed.

          We’ll see if she can complete the pivot without falling down. My bet is that she will….

          Mew

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            She has a degree in journalism and experience in sports media. If anyone on the right understands how media works, it’s her. She’s got them wrapped around her little finger. I agree, I think she will pivot (and already is). The closer we get to the election, the more buttoned down and professional she will become. It’s the way people always get elected – first fire up the base and get a following, then pivot to expand your outreach to independents.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
          • JSobieski

            Seriously, you think time spent in Alaska sports media helps her understand the drive buys?

            Palin’s strengths do relate generally the issue of media, but I believe that you misdiagnose the causes.

            The MSM has at two distinct times (2008 election and the ethics crap) shot at her with all of the ammo that they have. In other times, its not like they were even tempted to say something nice about her.

            Unlike other Republicans, she is not going to be tempted to appease the MSM because she knows it won’t do her any good. I totally agree that there is a lot of value in this—nobody things Palin will do something for the purpose of getting good press.

            Translation for JadedByPolitics: I hate her I hate her I hate her. Hatred just seeps through my veins. I would vote for Obama before I ever vote for Palin.

            Sarcasm off. Or is it on?

        • Finrod

          Not a month goes by that she doesn?t say something either ill-conceived [sic], easy to misconstrue, or simply false.

          I’ll call you on that. I’d like to see you break down and give an example for each of the last six months. I don’t think you can come up with such a list and you’re exceeding your hyperbole limit.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil_truth

    You’ve laid out your case in a reasoned manner, which is what we need more of here, regardless of one’s view on Sarah Palin (and her other family members). More light, less heat.

    • Scope

      Your comment is as noble as azaeroprof’s diary. I was worried there for a time that every time Palin’s name came up it would turn into another 300 and something fire and ice comments that unfortunately happened with Jaded’s diary. Absolutely more light, less heat.

      • acat

        Less heat, more light.

        More reading for comprehension,less reactionary key-bashing.

        And, hopefully, nobody goes for the all-uppercase.

        Mew

      • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

        But part of the problem with that diary was the prickly nature of some of the commentators and the fact that they attack everyone who has a slight disagreement with them in a most vituperative way. I think you know who I am talking about.

        • JadedByPolitics

          mbecker, jsobeiski, acat and one other tool whose name eludes me and is unworthy of looking up, that is who you are referencing correct? because that was just a nice little diary bemoaning the fact that Sarah Palin had to interrupt her Thanksgiving dinner to attack the MFM who keep doing polls that say she is unelectable and yet give her more time then the President. It was a very nice conversation with supporters of hers who like her because she says what they are saying when they talk about the future of America, until the aforementioned entered said diary to begin the ignorant proposition of asking for proof she is electable with links and then arguing with those who provided those links. So what should have a been a 10 comment diary exploded into 400 comments that shows exactly where the majority on this site stand and the minority stands and what the 2012 primaries are going to look like.

          BTW excellent diary azaerprof :)

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            …bemoaning the fact that Sarah Palin had to interrupt her Thanksgiving dinner to attack the MFM…

            Ahhh yes. Poor Ste Sarah. Just trying to spend some quality time away from the spotlight forced on her by the media. And her turkey got cold.

            And your still #1 rated diary, …a very nice conversation with supporters of hers who like her because she says…

            This is Redstate not C4P. This is a forum for political discussion not pandering and idol worship. You want to talk about Palin, fine. The problem comes about when you and your little club of idol worshipers turn a political forum into a theological site. You “want to talk about what she says”. OK. But you (as in her worshipers, not necessarily “you”) haul out the big guns “HATER” (including the caps) when anyone has questions about her tenure as Governor of Alaska and her actual “record”. And the apoplexy when someone points out that her polling numbers with Indies lags way behind favorable polling numbers for the TP in the same poll.

            I don’t recall anyone saying that she couldn’t be elected President, but there are serious questions about her ability to actually BE an executive and her “fiscal conservatism” is an open question.

            Palin has done a great job in this election cycle poking sharp sticks at the Administration, raising money and throwing red meat to the base. She’s a good stump speaker. All those same things can be said about our current President. Part of the reason we’re in the mess we’re in is because nobody bothered to pay attention to the fact that the guy had no experience actually running anything. Palin has run some stuff, albeit for a very short time and there are legitimate open questions about her record and her ability.

            You want to talk about Palin fine. You want to have a little idol worship session, do it at C4P or start your own site. You come in here with crap like that and attract a cadre of fools who can’t make a rational argument beyond stomping their little feet and whining and you’ll get more diaries just like that one.

            And my comments have nothing to specifically with Palin. When the Mittbots and the Huckabots and Paulenes show up with their unhinged commentary they’ll be questioned in the same manner. The point – my point and I’m pretty sure the point of the other “tools” you mentioned – was simply to point out that Palin has problems that need to be addressed and she needs to be vetted relative to her professional qualifications. The media blitz she’s been under is not vetting in any sense of the word, it’s just sniping and part of the reason it continues is because she’s either got really thin skin or she sees the opportunity to stay on the front pages with her repartee (which, for the most part is quite good), or both.

            Bottom line, you want to address candidate issues fine. You want to have a tent revival, do it at C4P.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            That’s politics mbecker. It’s how the arguments get hashed out. If you can’t handle debate between supporters of Huckabee, Palin, Paul, Romney, etc., you shouldn’t be posting on redstate.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            You’re more than welcome to show up. I beat the living bejesus out the people who were attending the Huckabee tent meetings and now it looks like those tents have been rented out to Palin’s worshipers.

            Don’t get me wrong. A case can be made for Palin. Just not by any of the fools – you included – who’ve been posting here. There are two people who are rational with respect to their support so far and they will discuss issues. Of which there are a ton of them.

            Every candidate is going to have issues. You just don’t want to deal with them with respect to Ste. Sarah. I’m pretty much going to walk away from this crap – and it’s crap you’re leaving here – until primary time. At that time, you show up here with more of this tent meeting BS and you’ll get drawn and quartered just like the Huckafool supporters did (and by a whole lot more people that just me).

            I’m pleased to engage on facts. You wouldn’t know one if it hit you on the head.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            No wonder you opposed Huckabee. Beating the living bejeesus out of conservatives is not really a good strategy on redstate.

          • DONTREADONME

            commence riot act!!!

          • powertothepeople

            would accuse Huckabee of being a conservative. And you bragging about being a supporter of his, does little to improve your image around here.

            In terms you may understand, the Huckster is only slightly more accepted here than Ron Paul.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            I opposed Huckabee because he is a populist liberal who ran Arkansas just a Democrat would have. He never met a tax he didn’t like or a problem that couldn’t be solved by government interference. He lied consistently about his record even though there are dozens of YouTube videos that prove he was lying about his supposed fiscal policies.

            Oh, and he’s a thief. There was that “wedding present” thing.

            I’m looking forward to primary season. You’re going to be fun. For a while at least.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            given what you’ve been saying about Palin. If I were Erick I would ban you. I have no idea what you’re talking about when you call him a thief or what the “wedding present” thing is. Huckabee is a solid social conservative and did a great job with his state’s budget too.

          • nycenterright

            Dust yourself off, go back in your corner, don’t pick fights with people who have been around 11 times as long as you have. Just a suggestion.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            I’ve been around political blogs a while; excuse me if I was focused on local politics for the last two years.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            A true worshiper AND an ignorant fool. We’ve got everything wrapped up in one.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            Who did you support in 2008? McCain? Romney? Hillary?

          • powertothepeople

            good thing you are not Erik. And since you are making stupid claims that Huckster is a conservative and then trying to defend them, it is obvious if you did own this site it would be an empty site that spew leftist views.

            And you have long lost your credibility.

          • gekster

            Just asking.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            If I recall, Huckabee was the conservative in the presidential race last time. McCain was (is) a RINO and Mitt “Romneycare” wasn’t much better. Huckabee is a fiscal and social conservative.

          • ffc99

            You’re having a laugh. Assuming you aren’t being sarcastic (and just don’t know what you’re talking about), I’d urge you to do a little research into Huck’s record while governor of Arkansas. He had a spending record that your average liberal Democrat would be extremely proud of.

          • powertothepeople

            You do not know what you are talking about, that is obvious. You claim you are his supporter but do not even know about well known things he did that MBecker raised. You keep coming back to defend a position that is not defensible and of you persist, you will try to come in one day and all you will get is the dreaded 404 error. We will all see the G’bye below one of your post, and that will be that.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            I’m going to be banned for having supported Huckabee? If so Redstate is not the blog I thought it was.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            Even I – not a moderator – wouldn’t ban you for that. You will, however, discover just how disconnected your thought processes are if he announces and you support him.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            I said I’m supporting Palin, not Huckabee, and I don’t think he’s the right guy for the job right now.

          • powertothepeople

            is that you will be banned for your mouth. You talk a lot of crap when you should learn to keep quiet. Going after a long term member in good standing is not something that is advised.

            They will already know you are an idiot because you stated Huckster was a conservative, and continuing to go after other members will simply be the justifiable reason.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            discussion of Huckabee here, beyond the initial comment is a threadjack.

            You’ll probably have plenty of time to absorb the impact of fact bouncing off your empty head when the campaign starts. Right now is not the time or place for a Huckabee discussion.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            I know your type. All bluster and nothing to back it up with.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            I’m not redoing 08, it’s pointless. I’m not arguing Huckabee because it’s a threadjack and it’s pointless right now.

            Let Huckabee come out and announce and when his supporters show up, they’ll get flayed just like last time. The guy is a populist and he’s indefensible on a conservative site.

            Now then punk, zip up, quit typing one handed and go see if your mommy has dinner ready. You’re done for the near future.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            You’ve almost got your Olbermann impression down pat. I find it hard to believe you are not a liberal based on your juvenile name calling and lack of cogent argument. Why can’t someone be populist AND conservative? All populist means is that people like the person. Which is kind of the point. You know, government of, by, and for the people?

          • powertothepeople

            are an idiot of the highest caliber. You are not smart enough to tangle with him so I would suggest you back off and move on. When you called Huckster a conservative, you already showed everyone reading this blog you were an idiot, do not make it any worse.

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            What are you, Becker’s sidekick? Not that I’m supporting him, but Huckabee apparently is about to get a lot more attention as a presidential prospect. See today’s Politico headline.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            Liberals, unfortunately for them, were not able to hold back and ignore me on coloradopols, which worked to my advantage. However, here at redstate I am on my home turf (at least I agree with everything Erik says and most of the diaries that are promoted). You’re more than welcome to ignore me; in fact I would prefer it as I could then focus on rational conversation with intelligent adults.

          • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679

            Case in point: I don’t think that anybody will argue that George W. Bush is a deeply Christian man, and he certainly stood behind solid ‘values’ so to speak.

            However, he basically rebranded big government Republicanism as “compassionate conservatism.” In my view, nobody did more harm in this past decade to the conservative brand than George W. Bush. Let me give you a couple of examples.

            • Medicare Part D (2003)GWB pushed and won passage of a massive new medicare entitlement program (which, I might add, was also supported heavily by Newt Gingrich – another not-quite-conservative Republican). This was a massive expansion to the federal welfare state not seen since Lyndon Johnson.
            • Faith Based Initiative. Another expansion of the federal government, Bush created a whole department dedicated to the federal government funding quote-faith based initiatives-endquote, to somehow place these organizations on equal footing with other charities that receive federal grants. A true conservative would have dismantled the corrupt grant-giving bureaucracy since it is this ‘community initiatives’ crap at the federal level that gave us ACORN.
            • No Child Left Behind. Instead of beginning the process of dismantling the Dept of Education and returning school regulation to local school boards and the states, Bush doubled down with Teddy K and Johnny Mac to once again pass a huge expansion of federal power and intrusion into business never envisioned by the founders.

            I am less familiar with the specifics of Huck’s well-documented ‘big government’ ‘compassionate conservative’ record in Arkansas but he is exactly the type of GWB-Republican that we don’t need going forward into the future. About the only thing I support about Huck (and I’ll admit, this is a big one), is his advocacy for the FairTax.

            There is NOTHING about conservatism that prevents a social con from also being a fiscal con, and vice versa. However, the absolute FOUNDATION of conservatism rests on your belief in limited, constitutional government as envisioned by the founders and enacted and enshrined in the constitution. GWB and Huck fail on that, and while they may be good Christians and generally swell fellows, they are NOT conservatives.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            national security cons. Its a subset of fiscal cons that part ways on social and national security issues.

          • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679

            And when you really dig into the meat of the issues, you will find that TRUE social conservatism (which I tend to equate with Christian social ethics) actually requires fiscal conservatism (limited government).

            The Bible speaks in volumes about the role of the king (i.e., government) as having its own specific sphere of influence that it should not overstep. It exists as a co-equal social institution alongside the Church, the Family, the Community, and Labor (workplace, employer, etc.). These are institutions that, from a Christian worldview, are co-equal and separate from one another. This is the framework upon which our U.S. Constitution was founded. See The Truth Project for an eye-opening take on this subject.

            So you are absolutely correct, most true social conservatives will ultimately wind up also being fiscal conservatives . . . but as far as federal politics go, libertarians should be standing shoulder to shoulder with their conservative brethren, and conservatives should absolutely not be pushing the federal government into places it should not be. Despite the overwhelming temptation to harness the power of the federal government for perceived ‘good,’ like the “One Ring” (—ok I am revealing too much here!) it is a tool to be dismantled, not used.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            liberal Christian any day. more later

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            Constitution…not faith, at least not as pertains to government.

            Of course, as pertains to one’s soul, faith is paramount. I would also say that much of what Christians want in many areas is best achieved through participation and influence in the culture and institutions like the media, academia and the arts. Also in government, but again, within the spheres as per Jesus, render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God, the things that are God’s!

            more later if desired

          • acat

            Seriously, I think this is a critical, non-trivial issue. Patrick Henry applies. (We must all hang together or we will surely hang separately) – and Samuel Johnson also (nothing so concentrates the mind as the hangman’s noose) …

            The center-right majority is being hung .. by degrees … because we’d rather quibble with each other than address the real issues.

            Mew

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            What we know from every election cycle since Reagan is that the social cons he brought in always come out to vote GOP. They are equal in loyalty to any supposed “faction”. And we also know that it is the moderate/libertarian/social moderate types that are the fickle ones and that their numbers are rather inconsequential, esp given the tea partier movement.

            I wouldn’t mistake quibblers on Redstate for any major or minor rift.

            We would have won in 2006 and 2008 if the moderates hadn’t forced their policies and McCain on us.

            I think God let us lose in 2008 so that the nation would finally see libs in the raw with ObamaDem super-majorities and thus get re-educated so that we could wake up and have a chance to fix the nation.

            Under a McCain, the moderates choice!, we would have just continued to slouch towards Gomorrah.

            Are there some social cons that care only about a const amendment against abortion and against gay marriage and vote only on those issues? yes

            They are a TINY number.

            Most are like me and would be satisfied with good sup ct judges that would reverse Roe and send to the states and who would gladly fight these issues at state level. And most also are string on defense and want less govt. After all, it was baptists that wanted separation of church and state in the correct sense from the gitgo.

            trust me

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            as I watched the social cons leave the Dem party for the GOP and most all were also fed up with failed lib dem economic policies and weakness on defense as well.

          • acat

            I would say “Preach it!” but .. well …

            I’ve been considering the “One Ring” analogy for months, thank you for referencing it.

            Too many Republicans see the power of government and believe, just like Liberals, that “if only the right people were in charge, they’d do better”. This is a mirage, a siren-song, an illusion. It doesn’t matter who’s in charge – they’re still a central authority, with all the problems that brings.

            The Who got this one right – “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss” – it’s not the morals or beliefs of the person or people in charge, they almost don’t matter. The issue is the nature of the centralized, top-down system – it’s defective.

            What’s needed, and what the Founding Fathers gave us, is a distributed system where problems can be addressed and decisions made at the lowest possible level.

            For example, it should be up to the citizens of Elkhart, IN to decide whether they want a manger scene on the courthouse square… and nobody in New York, NY should believe they have a right to complain about it.

            This is the system our forefathers gave us…. we forget at our childrens’ peril.

            Mew

          • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

            He would have been good in 2008, and probably could have beaten Obama. He had populist appeal, something McCain didn’t. I think in the larger scheme of things you guys are confusing libertarians and conservatives. Huckabee is conservative, not libertarian. Right now, we need someone who is conservative and also has libertarian tendencies in order to cut the massive growth in government.

          • izoneguy

            It’s funny but I watch the Huckabee show a lot.
            He is very personable and would be pleasant enough to talk with.
            But I cannot see him sitting in the Oval office.
            Carter, The other guy from Hope Arkansas, Obama….
            They have been bad enough.
            What America needs now is a real leader.
            A General Patton type. A real kick ass kinda guy.
            Don’t know who that is yet – but I know it ain’t Huck.

          • acat

            I don’t have any dislike for Palin. I have questions and some concerns about her.

            I asked questions in a thread .. about Palin. Now I’m a “tool”.

            This is my current question about Palin – can she successfully reach out to the independents, whose votes she needs to win the election, when her supporters go on the offensive when someone asks questions, especially about her qualifications?

            If Palin is successful in reaching out, there are going to be a lot of independents who seek out their Palin-supporter friends and acquaintances for reassurance as the primary gets closer. I can’t tell you what to do, but I can tell you that if y’all react to them the same way y’all reacted to me, her campaign will be finished before it’s really begun.

            Just think about it.

            Mew

          • JSobieski

            My critique of Palin has always been measured and balanced.

            I never said she was unelectable, although you put those words in my mouth repeatedly. I think she can beat Obama, I am just skeptical that she is the best that we can do.

            I have repeatedly said that I would vote for her for President over ANY 2008 retread, a list that includes Fred and Rudy.

            I actually like Palin, although people like you enjoy throwing around the Palin Derangement Syndrom label on anyone who is the least bit objective on Palin. If you look back to 2008, I was actually on the record as hoping McCain would pick Palin for VP.

            Its unseemly for people on RS to communicate in the baseless innuendo of leftists at the Daily Kos or Pravda. However, even those more enthusiastic about Palin than I have acknowledged that raising questions about someone’s record of accomplishment does not make someone a tool.

            Asking questions does not make someone a tool.

            Points out facts does not make someone a tool.

            Acting like an idiot and attacking without a basis in fact—that just makes someone a fool.

            Point to one comment even remotely tool-like, apologize, or just continue beclowning yourself.

            I know you will continue to pick option 3, but it is the season of Christmas, and hope springs eternal.

          • Scope

            your own way of looking at Palin, and in the past O’Donnell. You said that you have been looking at Palin “objectively.” To me that means that you are concentrating on a specific goal with respect to anyone’s opinion about Palin. You seem to be determined that if you keep posting the same thoughts/beliefs/ideas, which there have been no lack of at all here at RS, that you will convince others that your beliefs must be drilled into everyone else that may support Palin, based on their foolish “subjective” impressions of Palin, or in the past O’Donnell. Sure you did it with O’Donnell before the primaries, and, you did quiet down after she won the primary, and, I give you credit for that.

            There is most definitely a small cadre here at Redstate that are more determined to promote the questionable about Palin, absolutely supported by the facts as you guys see them. What you are missing is that your seeming absolute “objectivity” has not registered with those that are considering her good accomplishments “subjectively.” You can’t change peoples perceptions, by repeating the same things day after day. It’s old. No one is much interested in yesterday’s news.

            You cannot win an argument with what you believe to be indisputable facts, when many others have interpreted those very same facts differently. Her leaving the Governorship before her term was up, the ethics charges, the budget and on and on, There are no absolutes in those arguments from either side. Being objective about the whole argument means that, and I will again credit an unnamed poster here- “Insist that everyone answer your questions you want them to answer in the hope that your bullying will bring them to heel.” “Repeat the same statements over and over again in the hope that repitition will drill a hole from their ear into their brain.” Hattip to the poster of those excellent statements on “How to Behave at Redstate.” Never read anything better.

            JSobieski, how many times did you drill the message that O’Donnell didn’t pay her bills, she left some from a previous campaign high and dry, and, I believe you did bring up that she used campaign money to pay for her personal expenses, among other odt repeated arguments. Maybe they were very valid arguments, however, were those charges more egregious than the record Castle had, or was that worse than the bearded Marxist, who was a known bearded Marxist even before the DE Republican primary. That whole scenario was well played out way before the primary.

            There are just some times that cerebral is not the best way of skinning a cat, so to speak, as many many aren’t as cerebral as you seem to be in your quest.

          • JSobieski

            Argue your point. Namecalling doesn’t make those points more. Why everything is so personal to you, I don’t understand. I argue with lots of people here. Its only with a very select few who result to petty name calling.

            How would you like it by the way if somone owed you a bunch of money, and they spent their time running for office. I hope you get to know that joy sometime. Nothing better than people speaking up for small businesses by refusing to “process the invoices” for at least two years. Yes, that was O’Donnell’s specific phrase.

            I will not apologize for sticking up for small businesses in the US. O’Donnell did stiff several small Delaware businesses in failing to even process her invoices.

            Sorry if pointing out these facts makes me a tool in your eyes. You might however want to get a better dictionary, and maybe some eye glasses.

          • JSobieski

            Definition of “tool”–someone who argues just as persistently for a different point of view

            As I recall, it takes at least two people to keep an ongoing conversation. The rule of Scope/JadedByPolitics is duly noted:

            “Disagree with us, and you should talk sparingly. Violate this rule, and we shall insult you”

            “Agree with us, and you should talk just as much as you want”

            Yup, pretty much what the communists told my parents. Keep up the good work!

          • Scope

            to anyone who has argued against your positions, and, successfully if I may add. Silence to your accusations is pretty much in order, especially when you imply that those that have argued against your positions to be communists. I’m sorry for you that you feel such a great need to win the argument. I’m also sorry for you that you have displayed such a “thin skin.” Some of your statements have been so on target, but, you seem to lose it when it comes to political candidates that you do not support.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            Scope you found your backhoe. Digging new holes I see.

            …foolish ?subjective? impressions of Palin, or in the past O?Donnell.
            There is nothing “subjective” about the Palin commentary on this thread that’s been posted by JS, me, acat or asthete. Or, for that matter by gop2012 or azaeroprof. What we’ve done is to point out that Palin has some serious problems with respect to her short lived performance as Governor. And every point has been based on factual stuff of public record.

            As far as O’D is concerned, she is one of the two worst candidates ever fielded for Senate by the Republicans. All of her own doing and since she was an experienced candidate, having run for Senate in DE in 08, she certainly should have known better.

            There are no absolutes in those arguments from either side.
            The published financial statements from the State of AK are absolutes. Her budgets, presented to the Legislature and approved by same and the audited financial statements of state spending. Those are as absolute as you get.

            The only people running around Redstate spouting BS often enough with absolutely no facts and a complete reliance on current speeches v. historical fact would be you and the Palin cheering section. Frankly, as I noted to some idiot Huckabee and Paul supporters during the last primary cycle, if you want to help your candidate, sit down and shut up.

          • acat

            I mean, eventually they both sat down and shut up, more or less…

            Mew

  • modestee

    I’ve been ‘lurking’ and enjoying reading many of the posts. Snarling at some, laughing at some, learning from many. And found your post on Sarah Palin very thought-provoking. However, as a woman, I wonder if I’m being overly sensitive to the intense swings of passion and vitriol I read when it comes to comments on the female politicians that have been running lately. It seems to me that both parties tend to slam female candidates mercilessly. And much more atrociously than male candidates. But lately, when it comes to Sarah Palin, I am more and more reminded of Elizabeth Blackwell, the first female MD. Admitted to Med school as a joke, had to make grades twice as good as the male students to be considered “equal”, then graduated first in her class. On Jan 23, 1849 (I rather like that date *smile* so close to Inauguration) http://www.winningthevote.org/F-EBlackwell.html

    • azaeroprof

      I enjoyed your reference to Elizabeth Blackwell. That reminded me of something I had read about her years ago when I lived in Cincinnati.

      I think the worst was when Chrissy “Tingle” Mathews asked Michele Bachmann if she was hypnotized when he was interviewing her. Can you imagine him asking that of *any* male candidate?

  • mediaman034

    No No NO!!! I cannot support Palin as a presidential candidate. Have we learned nothing about what happens when a media manufactured, intellectually shallow, thin-skinned, sound-bite delivering, reality show plugging, moderate antagonizing, twittering, fractious, spiteful spouse-yoked, one-dimensional candidate desires the most powerful office in the land?!?

    When such a candidate is a radical socialist liberal, he gets total media cover, complete with fawning praise, and deceives millions.

    When that one is a Republican conservative the likes of Palin, the result will be a massive media diss party and a 2nd Obama term. Let’s face it folks, unlike those here, few put much thought into what they are doing when pulling the lever… that much should be obvious.

    LOVE that Palin makes liberals go berserk. Love that she rallies the Tea Party base and makes establishment Rino’s wince. I would be thrilled to see her replace Michael Steele and push the Republican party back toward Constitutional governance. She’d be an unbeatable fund raiser. She’d also be a horrible choice as a the Republican presidential candidate.

    Consider that there needs to be a hard push back to the conservative position of Constitutional authority. No one would be able to accomplish this better than Ron Paul, ESPECIALLY if teamed with one of the many, true conservative young guns out there like Jindall, Rubio or Ryan.

    Without doubt, Paul is the single, most honest politician alive. His record is absolute. The correct choice of a running mate like those mentioned would serve to attract moderates, legal immigrants and others; educate the masses for the need to reinstate Constitutional principles; and scare the liberals witless!

    One thing is certain – this nation will not survive a 2nd Obama term. We will not be able to stem the tide of New World Order fascism while Reid and Obama, teamed with a diminished, but still powerful Pelosi, remain in place.

    It’s time to ignore the media, including the nay-saying conservative voices. It’s time to ignore the party. Conservatives and libertarians must join together in order to win. It’s time for a reality gut check on what it will take to save this great nation, mount an unbeatable offense, and push back – HARD!

    • Goldwater_Conservative

      the economic landscape is so bad that I think for the first time everyone should give Ron Paul a serious look.

      • acat

        is to make sure the chains are still firmly attached.

        Other than that, he’s bat-{guano} crazy, and my biggest fear is that Rand hasn’t fallen far enough from the tree.

        Mew

    • azaeroprof

      You came to a diary about the dangers of making definitive electability statements 2 years out from an election, and proceed to state how absolutely certain you are that Palin would lose….and then proceed to advocate for Ron Paul?

      Wow.

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      love my dead white cat. He’d get more votes and do less damage.

      • acat

        I want to contribute to a winner…

        Mew

        • aesthete
      • aesthete
    • Joshua Persons

      “When that one is a Republican conservative the likes of Palin, the result will be a massive media diss party and a 2nd Obama term. Let?s face it folks, unlike those here, few put much thought into what they are doing when pulling the lever? that much should be obvious.”

      vs

      “It?s time to ignore the media, including the nay-saying conservative voices.”

      • Joshua Persons
    • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

      ;)

  • Kevin Barbour

    I’m sick to death right now of these idiotic “Palin can’t win”..blah, blah, blah proclamations from so called experts. Idiots like Ed Rollins and Joe Scarborough come to mind and there were guys, just like these two morons, also warning Reagan was not electable either…just like you pointed out

    • azaeroprof

      We got stuck with McCain, partly because he was the media’s “darling” and the supposedly “electable” one. We must realize that the media will hate whoever our nominee is, and that person will be painted as stupid and extreme.

      • Scope

        was considered the media darling should have automatically made him “unelectable.” When that campaign season started out, McCain was just coming off a bruising loss of the McCain/Kennedy/Bush amnesty bill. Right after that I remember seeing him on the news, pulling his carry-on behind him through an airport, on his way to a cheap flight to somewhere. I believe that that amnesty legislation was the first time the majority in the country shut down the DC switchboards with their protest calls, yet he still became our candidate. In McCain’s case, I think the media pushed our weakest candidate, on a very stupid and shallow electorate, that didn’t know they were being deceived. Wasn’t it the media that sold him as a great POW hero, to the point that the amnesty bill was all but forgotten about by some?

        • azaeroprof

          I don’t know why we keep falling for the “electability” canard. Our biggest presidential wins in my lifetime (at least post-Goldwater) have come when either we nominate an unabashed conservative (i.e. Reagan), one who pretends to be conservative (i.e. both Bush’s), or when the Dems nominate wacko liberals (i.e. McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry).

        • acat

          I supported him because of his running mate. You remember her… what’s her name?

          The primaries for the 2008 race were a disgrace – McCain pulled exactly what some candidates including Romney and Huckabee are trying to pull now – get the name out early so when pollsters ask the public remembers the name and it gets mentioned …. inertia and vague memories masquerading as momentum….

          McCain didn’t win because he was the best candidate, he won because he looked like he could win. I see the same approach being taken today by candidates like Romney …

          The thing about the polls Romney has been winning is – he’s not winning by much. This indicates the public is looking for a stronger candidate.

          Palin could be that candidate. She does have to get over a couple hurdles first – she has to reach out to the independents and the group who will eventually be known as the Palin Democrats. (she ought to do very well with rank-and-file labor .. if she can get through to them… )

          She also has to overcome the hostility that her fan club has toward anyone who suggests she can’t walk on room temperature water.

          Mew

  • jimmyg

    http://newsminer.com/bookmark/10538996 In her new book Gov.Palin waxes poetic about how she was against the stimulus funds, yet she blames the legislature for taking the stimulus funds. She had the ability to stop the acceptance of the stimulus funds yet accepted 97% of the funds offered the State of Alaska.
    Gov. Palin’s new show wants to be seen as a documentry on the beauty of Alaska, and definitely a reality show. Yet she has as a guest on the show the Queen of Reality shows Kate Gosslin. She wonders why she is not taken seriously?
    I’m sure this will be rationalized by Gov. Palin’s fans, but it is hard to accept for others. She has a unique ability to rationalize her actions and create a reality which goes unquestioned by her fans.

  • http:crazyconservative.wordpress.com/ jamesalfred

    I agree with much of what you say but would like to speak specifically to the point of Sarah Palin being divisive. She is not devisive at all, Obama himself is much more divisive than she could be if she spent the next year working on it.

    She is the victim of liberal hate and smear because people on the left don’t agree with where she stands on the issues. The left have created division where there isn’t any instead of debating the issues and recognizing the fact that she is indeed a contender.

    The liberal MOA is is teard down an opponent by smearing them rather that face them in an even fight. Part of this is strategy and part of it is based in complete ignornce as much of what is said about her is based on lies and missinformation.

    She may indeed be unelectable but if she gets the nod, we need to support her. If Obama keeps doing what he has been doing for the last two years, he will not have much support outside the kooky left base but this does not mean we can sit back.

    Smart people are waking up to the fraud that is the Obama presidenc and are realizung it is noting more than a lie and a failure.

    Therefore, the choice in 2012 could very well be between unelectable and unacceptable. Palin needs support because she will certainly not be worse than four more years of a socialist agenda.

    tp://crazyconservative.wordpress.com/

  • Wing Zero

    This is the best and most cohesive Palin diary I have seen in a while. Actually, ever. It’s also a good template for other folks to speak about their preferred candidate.

    I remember this conversation I had with an Army Captain turned contractor. He was a republican, but not a conservative. Politics came up, and asked who he liked.

    “McCain.”
    “Why?”
    “Because he can beat Hillary.”
    “Hillary’s not going to be the nominee.”

    I had a gut feeling that someone would come out of nowhere. I was right.

    It’s still 2 years away. Yeah, we have a general idea of who is running. Mitch Daniels, Tim Pawlenty, probably Romney, Huckabee, perhaps Gingrich, most likely Palin. We also have some folks that want to see Chris Christy, or Bobby Jindal, or Marco Rubio run. My personal preference is to see Christy and Rubio season first.

    I do have a fantasy where the next Republican President appoints Christy the Sec of Education. That seems like it would be fun to watch.

    • azaeroprof

      A whoooole lot can happen between now and early 2012.

      I do find it amusing that some folks here insist that Palin supporters need to lay out in detail all of her conservative executive experience to justify our support of her. Funny that I don’t recall seeing anyone really complaining about Fred Thompson’s total lack of executive experience in ’08 (he had been a lawyer, an actor, and a Senator). And I say that having been a Fred-head in ’08. It didn’t really bother me with Fred, and I’m perfectly fine with Palin’s experience level now. To me, there are more important factors than government-based experience.

      BTW, I <3 the idea of Christy as Sec of Ed!

  • warkarma

    I know Sarah Palin is very popular on this website for her pro-life views. However, she is quite possibly the worst candidate that the GOP could put forward. I actually have nightmares about her securing the GOP candidacy and having to suffer a 2nd Barack Obama term.

    I think Sarah Palin has a certain place as a political pundit, but I wouldn’t place her in charge of my lawnmower – I own a Honda, after all :) – let alone our country. Romney, Thompson, Huckabee, Pawlenty, Thune, Rubio (though I think he’ll make a great Veep, not POTUS) – these are all bona-fide leaders with tact, diplomacy, experience that could mount a challenge to Obama.

    Sarah has none of these attributes. She’s brash, rude, polarizing, lacks political depth and diplomacy and is, quite frankly, unintelligent. She is a media darling and has capitalized on her newfound fame. Good for her. But presidential material this does not equal.

    We need to realize the consequences of a 2nd Obama term. Incumbents are historically difficult to defeat, and if the economy continues to recover (albeit slowly), and unemployment drops, Obama will be difficult to beat. A Sarah Palin candidacy assures us defeat. The Democratic base will rally behind Obama and the independents voters will swing left – Obama is already trending more and more towards the center.

    I don’t hide who I support. I want Mitt Romney to win the nomination as he has been an extremely successful governor in a very liberal state. He managed to do what Obama could not – create a surplus in his state, balance the budget and implement a sound healthcare plan. I have no issue whatsoever supporting any of the other candidates I listed. I’m warming up to Rubio as Veep because that possibly gets us Florida. But I won’t vote for Sarah Palin under any circumstances.

  • azaeroprof

    Thanks for dramatically proving the point of the last sentence in my 4th full paragraph.

    RedState is a Conservative AND Republican site. Do I understand you correctly to say that you will not necessarily vote for the Republican candidate against Obama?

    I don’t like Mitt Romney. He may have been a good businessman, but I think he is a phony conservative, whose mentor and father was the man who fought tooth and nail against Barry Goldwater. But if Mitt is the GOP nominee, I will enthusiastically support his election.

  • runner12

    conservative who supports limited government and fiscal responsibility when you support someone like Romney. He is the poster child for a RINO. He is a big government Republican in the form of GW Bush, only worse.
    One of the primary reasons the Dems were defeated was due to the ObamaCare legistaltion. Romney signed into legislation Romneycare, a program similar to ObamaCare. He did nothing to solve his state’s debt crisis, in fact he contributed to its demise. What long lasting good effect did he have on his state?
    He also cannot seem to make up his mind on where he stands on certain issues. He changes his statements based on which way the wind is blowing any given day. He is a career politician. He cannot win a general election, period.
    You decry the possibility of a 2nd Obama term, and yet would not support Palin if she were the nominee. That is hypocrisy. As much as I disdain Romney, if he were the nominee I would support him over Obama.
    As for Obama trending to the center, do not hold your breath. If the lame duck session is any indication, he is digging in.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    Willard has already been exposed has a huckster. He has no momentum, and the only reason he’s topping polls is because he came in 2nd to McCain last time (I know, technically he dropped out) and is the default place holder. Sorry if that’s harsh, but it’s true.

  • Tbone

    However, your willingness to so openly share with us your stupidity is somewhat refreshing.