« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Much Ado About Palin

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  January 3rd, 2011 at 08:45 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The left and Republican Palin Haters have been in open pants soiling mode late this afternoon over my post on Mike Pence. It is truly a matter of reading what one wants to read.

Here’s what they are reading.

But right now I am not excited by or inspired by any of them save Sarah Palin and, as much as I love Sarah Palin, I am adamantly convinced that she cannot win given the ridiculous smears and hate thrown her way by Democrats and, frankly, by a lot of Republicans. She has been made radioactive.

I would, however, still gladly vote for her and support her. I’d rather go down with her than up with some of the others. Let’s be honest here — Lyndon Johnson won in 1964 largely because of Barry Goldwater as the GOP nominee. The alternative would have been Nelson Rockefeller.

I’d have rather gone down swinging with Barry than sell out with Nelson any day of the week and twice on Sunday. I feel the same way with Palin.

But I don’t think it has to be Palin.

There are a few choice bits that I’d like to point out.

First, I do believe that as it presently stands Sarah Palin can make it through a Republican Primary, but given her present negatives and the additional sh…tuff that will be thrown at her by her Republican opponents and a willing media, she will not be able to spend adequate resources to pick up the independents to beat Obama.

That could change.

Second, I am not going to sit around and wait on someone else to enter the picture if Mike Pence will get in.

Third, and I think this is the key point:

I’d have rather gone down swinging with Barry than sell out with Nelson any day of the week and twice on Sunday. I feel the same way with Palin.

As it stands right now, if the election were held tomorrow and Mike Pence isn’t in, Palin has my vote. Don’t get me wrong, I can be persuaded by any of the other candidates in all seriousness. And the odds are in the favor of several of them. But my heart is with Palin. I just know the fight she’d be in for and think we can get what we like about Palin, minus her looks and the First Dude and well . . . you know what i mean, with Mike Pence.

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Aaron Gardner
  • Wubbies World

    The sad fact of the matter is it would make me vomit to have to walk into a polling booth in 2012 and vote for a lot of the corrupt vermin still lurking in the Republican Party. Even more sadly, a lot of them are still dressed up in the Lame Stream Media as “front runner candidates”. I almost gagged voting for McCain in 2008, but Palin made it palatable.

    A lot more cleansing of the establishment needs to occur. The snooty ruling class Republicans need to be driven out.

    Thanks for your article. It made me smile to know I wasn’t alone.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    “I just know the fight she?d be in for and think we can get what we like about Palin, minus her looks and the First Dude and well . . . you know what i mean, with Mike Pence.”

    Just what the heck is wrong with her looks or the First Dude or whatever you mean? You’re starting to scare me Erick. You’re sounding like an elitist. Just admit that maybe your Pence endorsement was a little bit premature.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    that almost sounds sexist. What else do you mean about her looks?

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    Didn’t mean to imply you are normally sexist.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    Some people are, especially when it comes to the presidency. Maybe some people doubt whether a woman could handle it, especially one with a bunch of kids and a Downs Syndrome baby. However, I think that there are many women who have been excellent heads of state: Margaret Thatcher, Benzair Bhutto, etc. Plus Palin has demonstrated time and again that she has the strength to do it. Case in point: most candidates in her position would have been brought down by the media by now. She’s one tough lady.

  • skey

    My support in the primaries is going to the most electable person who stands for the same things Sarah Palin stands for. If no one else steps up, she’s got my vote.

    Pretty much none of the other presumed candidates are anywhere close to this.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • wxguy

    Sarah Palin has an enormous amount of negative inertia (generated by the left and the Republican ruling class) to overcome to be successful in the general election. I have no doubt she could win the nomination, but I am less certain about her prospects in the general. There is no one in the current Republican lineup of possibilities that I find very viable, but that could change very quickly.

    What Palin does do really well is drive the left up the proverbial wall… which is the one reason I really like her. She does this so well that it causes the left to make strategic mistakes. The fact that the left goes after her to the degree they do is an indication of how much they fear the truth coming out… because I truly believe she has Obama’s and the progressive’s number (so to speak).

    So… we’ll see. She could prove me wrong in terms of the general election. Right now, given the current field of prospects, she couldn’t do any worse than any of them.

    When looking at Palin or any other Republican alternative, the ruling Republican class and those precious independents need to be asking themselves this question… “Will the country survive another four years of Obama and his ruling by executive fiat?” At least she has one thing Obama does not… a little common sense borne out of being brought up to make your own way in a ruggedly independent environment… something there is precious little of in Washington, D.C.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    Do you have some other explanation? ‘Cause she certainly ain’t bad looking.

  • ymchoo

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/229768/nra-convention-2012-cattle-call/jim-geraghty?page=2

    - “Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana…was the next-to-last big-name speaker, and while he joked that his following Sarah Palin was like having R2-D2 follow Luke Skywalker…”

  • edwyrd

    why is is that coaches get stupid at the goal line? we have a chance to gain the hearts and minds of americans with a real “cinderella” story. a cinderella with more reagan in her than any other potential choice. when i say reagan, i mean the great communicator. lets not lose our nerve at the goal line. sarah got us here, lets go for the touchdown, give the ball to the star running back!

  • Superheater

    I’m not willing to concede arguably the most important Presidential election in decades, if not ever to the artistic pillories of the left.

    Assuming she is “radioactive”,it’s because of propaganda masquerading as parody-by SNL and the other comedic Riefenstahls of the left.

    The same techniques will be employed against Mike Pence or any other presumptive nominee.

    I’m tired of having candidates hit by the left’s IED’s and snipers and leaving them behind. We might as well prepare for the attacks and learn to rebuff them NOW.

    Either way, I would crawl over glass to vote for either.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Again, this is a reading comprehension problem.

  • writeblock

    …including Pence and Palin. But I’m not willing to go down swinging or otherwise–not when there are alternatives. Personally, it seems that a lot of social conservatives are politically suicidal–and would rather lose with a loser they like than win with a winner they don’t like. But the result would be disastrous if this kind of thinking prevails–another four years of Obama–and the end of America as we know it. Four more years of Supreme Ct. nominees, of the EPA, etc. Four more years of tightening the grip on our liberties.

    I hope we can at least agree that Obama will be no pushover. He’s now at 50% according to Gallup, and he’s got the big blue states in the bag–unless somebody can break that tight hold. It won’t be easy with the black vote concentrated in key states, comprising 12% of the electorate. We would need a big presence, someone inspiring confidence, someone articulate, yet a happy warrior. Neither Pence nor Palin fit the bill. They are for a lot of conservatives–especially social conservatives–dream candidates–but each would become a nightmare if nominated.

    It’ll all come down to the wire as when Bush ran, no matter who we run–unless we can penetrate blue states and take the purple states. Only one man can do that imo–and that’s Rudy who’s looking better and better as time passes. He’s a known entity to the electorate, a big presence, immensely popular with ethnic easterners–and he can take places like NJ and PA. Think about it–before hauling insults.

    With someone like Rubio at his side, he’d be formidable, even in places like NM and NV.

  • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

    Anything else to add? Do you perhaps want to toss in a “racist” or two while you’re at it?

  • Pirohy

    Palin has weaknesses of her own creation. She needs to be able to take command of interviews and articulate her issues with more focus. She has a year to improve her skills.

  • Jack_Savage

    …but you have touched on the crux of the matter for me.

    As a movement, and as a party, we have let the left do this time and time again to some of the most decent people that have ever walked this earth. We even have a cute little word for it – “Borking”. It is sickening. The left rallies around a President who is nothing more than an impeached, disgraced, disbarred, unconvicted rapist and serial sexual predator, and he is now a rock star. Why do they do it? Because they can. No elected Republican has ever said a word, because the gutless punks don’t want to be next.

    We take random pot shots at a woman who has completely reinvigorated the base of the party, inspired women who had never thought of being in politics before to run for – and win – elective office, transformed the way the GOP looks at grassroots activism and has devoted her life to electing conservative Republicans – not to mention walking a walk that made a man who spent years in a Vietnamese prison camp wither like an orchid under a hair dryer.

    Who in the hell would ever – EVER – stick their neck out or go to bat for people like us? EVER?

  • Tbone

    Ethnic easterners? ROFLMAO.

    Yep, he’s a known entity to the electorate, at least the 3% that voted for him.

    I bet even Rubio can’t spell albkirky, Albequirie, albiecurky, whatever.

  • obamaslow

    So you let the LEFT make your decisions? ARE YOU THAT IGNORANT?

    The left sees a Palin Presidency as inevitable and this is why they keep attacking! WHEN WILL DUMMIES (Erick Erickson) on the right wake-up realize the same thing?!?!?

    Mike Pence!!? Give me a break!

  • acat

    Rudy could do well .. but he’s going to have to start in 2010 to convince the Social Conservative grass roots, not their so-called leadership, that he either shares their values, or at least has the same end goals.

    Did Rudy start doing so? If so, I’ve only heard about it from you…

    Mew

  • acat

    At some point ya gotta start thinking about cutting bait….

    Mew

  • Tbone

    Republican motto.

  • erod

    This is 1980 all over again, if the economy does not approve in 2012 the GOP nominee will probably be POTUS. Sarah Palin may have high negatives but Obama has a hell of a fight in the next election, not to mention his own high negatives and loss of independents. If current conditions hold: a stagnant economy, high unemployment, possible energy crisis, possible inflation, and Obamacare, which will most defintley be a central issue in 2012, he will lose handidly.

    Ronald Reagan won in 1980 because of the debates and because he wasn’t Carter. Speaking of Carter, Carter wanted Reagan to run because of his high unfavorables and kooky demeanor ” a dumb b-movie actor.” We all know how that turned out and if Palin wins the nod I want to see her debate Obama, I bet anyone here that she would win. I like Pence, but I like Palin more and I don’t think her ability to win the Presidency should be underestimated or dismissed.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    Saying that Pence is better than Palin, all other things being equal, because she is a woman and he is a man is definitely sexist.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • Superheater

    Too much personal baggage.. plus lets not forget, when he had a chance on the nitty-gritty of the national stage-he referred a DOA candidate to President Bush..

    I question his judgment.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    If the GOP gets all establishment-y and starts talking about who is “electable” in the eyes of the left this election, it’s over. The TEA Party will never again trust them.

  • Superheater

    We shoot our wounded and let the enemy abuse and display the corpse.

  • gekster

    Never say die.
    He posts like it’s new.

  • jeffreywturner

    Palin, Pence, Romney or even Bugs Bunny will beat Obama if the economy does not improve significantly in the next 12 – 18 months.

    “Electability” will only matter if Obama is sitting between 47% and 52% approval by election time, and that will depend almost entirely on the economy.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I have no idea who I’m supporting for Pres. in 2012, and seriously doubt I’ll even care for another year (there’s still a lot of local work to be done). But seriously, if you’re this emotional already, you’re going to create some serious problems for our new healthcare system before long…

  • writeblock

    with this approach. I want a winner who will put down Obama. If I disagree on some issues, so be it–as long as he’s a winner with at least 80% of what I want.

    How to judge this? Look at the electoral map. Then think about what a president does. He nominates Supreme CT justices; he appoints bureaucrats wielding immense power.

    Given the stakes, I would go for someone more likely to win over someone I find ideal in terms of the issues. I would take, for instance, Daniels over Pence or Palin any day.

  • gekster

    Lets worry about this 12/2011.
    We don’t even know who’s running yet.

  • gekster
  • jeffreywturner

    And by her best trait, I am of course referring to her ability to cause the heads of members of the liberal media to explode on site.

    No one infuriates and gets under the skin of those people more than her. Ann Coulter wishes she could inspire as much derangement as Palin. It is truly a sight to behold.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    If you are confirming this as a reference to her gender, then it is sexist. Most of the time when the media calls us sexists, they’re wrong. Let’s not prove them right.

  • AceInTX

    My support in the primaries is going to the most electable person who stands for the same things Sarah Palin stands for

    If you’re for everything about what Sarah Palin stands for…why look for anyone else…support Sarah…

    Jerry Ford was the “Most Electable” in 1976

    George H W Bush was “Most Electable” in 1980 and again in 1982. Reagan wasn’t “electable” in 1980 but he won and went down in History as one of our greatest Presidents while GHW Bush was a disaster as president.

    Then it was Bob Dole who was “Most Electable” in 1996

    And John McCain in 2000, and 2008…he lost to a two term President Bush and was the greatest disaster as a Republican Candidate for President second only to Bob Dole in 2008.

    Going with who is “Most Electable” is a fool’s errand since it’s the liberal intelligentsia in the press and the liberal elites in the Republican establishment who determine who is “Most Electable”.

    I’m backing Barbour right now…and am proud to proclaim Palin as my number two choice….if you agree with her and are looking for someone like her…why not support her and have done with it…don’t let anyone tell you she’s not electable because the ones saying that are the ones most opposed to her…they said it about Reagan…and they said it about GW Bush

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister
  • AceInTX

    George H W Bush was ?Most Electable? in 1980 and again in 1992. Reagan wasn?t ?electable? in 1980 but he won and went down in History as one of our greatest Presidents while GHW Bush was a disaster as president.

  • writeblock

    to take a high-risk gamble. Could she win? Sure. But it won’t be a slam dunk. It’ll be tough–and much would depend on Obama’s situation and if we’re ready to gamble the life of the nation with such bad odds. I think even if Obama’s down in the polls and the economy is doing poorly, she’d still have a tough time compared with somebody like Romney, let’s say–a guy I feel is not a true conservative, though he certainly would appeal more to independents than Palin imo and would do well in places like MI and PA.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    I like what you say about her driving them up the wall so well that it throws them so entirely off balance that they actually make strategic mistakes. I hope you’re right.

    I think of the Florida District 8 race this past fall. I really feared for Dan Webster when Alan Grayson came out with those horrible “Taliban Dan” ads and all the other crap Grayson pulled. I thought to myself, oh no, there is no way, Dan is going to be able to overcome all this. Grayson was doing his best to make Webster radioactive.

    BUT IT BACKFIRED. Normal, sane, middle-of-the-road people revolted against Grayson’s tactics, and Webster won.

  • littlehouse18
  • LisaDe

    The praises heaped upon Mrs. Palin for being the energizer of Conservatives, the woman who pulled the base together, who single-handedly opened the eyes of hordes of people who were otherwise blind, for being completely responsible for the Republican takeover in the house is over the top for me. It was not an ultra-conservative woman who made this happen in 2010. The credit belongs to an ultra-liberal/socialist man who duped the masses and became President. He’s the one who gets all the kudos for our resurgance.

    I like the woman, but I think some are a bit confused over a person who spreads the conservative message with ease and grace to a person who should be the President of the United States. I promise to change my thinking about her if she indeed becomes Obama’s opponent. I just have a strong feeling we haven’t been properly introduced to the real candidate yet.

  • LisaDe

    The praises heaped upon Mrs. Palin for being the energizer of Conservatives, the woman who pulled the base together, who single-handedly opened the eyes of hordes of people who were otherwise blind, for being completely responsible for the Republican takeover in the house is over the top for me. It was not an ultra-conservative woman who made this happen in 2010. The credit belongs to an ultra-liberal/socialist man who duped the masses and became President. He’s the one who gets all the kudos for our resurgance.

    I like the woman, but I think some are a bit confused over a person who spreads the conservative message with ease and grace to a person who should be the President of the United States. I promise to change my thinking about her if she indeed becomes Obama’s opponent. I just have a strong feeling we haven’t been properly introduced to the real candidate yet.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    But I was fuming at Erick the whole time. First he comes out on the first work day of the year for Pence, really just for the purpose of squashing Palin’s momentum. He did this because he doesn’t think she is “electable” in the eyes of the media and establishment Republicans. I don’t know if anyone put him up to this or he did it himself, but he’s acting like an establishment elitist trying to squash grassroots enthusiasm. THEN, to add insult to injury, he cited Pence as being better than Palin because he doesn’t have her baggage, which included her looks and the First Dude. Just what does he have against either of these and who does he think he is? I though he was supposed to represent the grassroots? Is he implying that a woman isn’t fit to be president? That a presidential candidate shouldn’t have a blue-collar, outdoor husband? The more I think about it, the more offensive and insulting it becomes. This is NOT the treatment we expected from the champion of the grassroots conservatives who live in red states.

  • littlehouse18

    Erick is spot-on IMHO.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister
  • AceInTX

    I’m not on the Palin bandwagon not because I don’t think she’s electable…I just like Barbour better…

    But to run from a Palin candidacy just because the Democrats the press, (I repeat myself)…and country club Republicans will call her and anyone who supports her bad names is foolish in the extreme.

    Would we let Hitler pick out President for us? Would we let Tojo? or Stalin, Bin Ladin or any of our other sworn enemies?

    Then why should we…as Republicans let the Democrats…(our sworn enemies…Barry says so)…pick our nominees for us?

    yet we have…over and over…and over again…and I can hardly recognize the country I was born in as a result!

  • Mary Beth
  • writeblock

    both Brown in MA and Christi in NJ asked Rudy–but no other major GOP pol–to comapaign with them? Italian-Americans comprise 12% of the electorate–higher in places like MA and NJ–and is concentrated in key states like NY, PA, NJ, CT, OH, FL and CA. It’s as big as the black vote, though less monolithic. Time for the GOP to wake up and smell the coffee. Reagan got a lot of those votes–the well-known Reagan Democrats. Time somebody else tapped into that part of the electorate–which loathes Obama, by the way.

    And where do you get this 3% number? Don’t mention the rigged GOP primaries please where a lot of small staters got to the polls before anybody from PA or NJ ever got a shot

  • meg_m

    Sarah Palin’s number one negative for me right now is her base of sycophant supporters. They have pushed me from the camp of having a few reservations about her but willing to keep an open-mind to hoping that someone steps in that will keep her from running and bringing all the unnecessary baggage/divisiveness to the ’12 election. I understand supporting your favorite candidate but honestly this is beginning to reach Obama derangement proportions.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    That last sentence is worded ambiguously. You’re right, he was saying that’s what we like… at least I hope so.

  • smitch61

    to say that whoever the republican nominee is for the general election, is going to need Palin supporters going forward.

  • AceInTX

    that got us Jerry Ford, GHW Bush, Bob Dole and John McCain.

    Republicans just gave the Dems a shellacking running candidates who were unapologetically conservative…and here we are faced with the same losing arguments that were proven so disastrous in 1876, 1992, 1996, and 2008

    Rudy My Rosy Red AXX!!

  • antisocial

    My thought is not to think electability at all. That is what primaries are for. Vote Your Values. Vote as if your life depends on that one single vote. As if your vote is the one deciding vote that will elect a President. Once primary process is done, we get a candidate that most Republican’s want as President. Then we all get behind that candidate.

    I think Erick’s post is premature. I also think he is buying the media spin of electability. For a guy who got behind Rubio and Toomey when no one thought they could win, this is like a big downer.

    I would let the primary process sort that out.

  • writeblock

    the social conservatives have got to stop looking a gift horse in the mouth. He promised strict constructionist judges. That was all any social conservative ever should have needed to know to feel comfortable with him. Every other qualification was superb–broad Justice Dept. experience under Reagan, broad experience fighting corruption on Wall Street, broad executive experience in NYC cutting taxes and fighting crime, right temperament to lead in a crisis, ability to fight the press, ability to articulate issues. He brings NJ and PA to the table. What other candidate can do that? Sarah? Haley? Pence?

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    Pence is Palin, but without her good looks and without a First Dude. At least I hope to hell Pence does not have a first dude.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    ..and I stand by it.

    Leaders LEAD, and persuade others to follow, even those that weren’t initially inclined to follow.

    Like Reagan.

    Most other pols fall prey to the electability nonesense, as if choosing a president is as prosaic as picking out a breakfast cereal, based on the Nielson points. Good Lord…

  • Bill S
  • Aaron Gardner
  • antisocial

    Are you sure it will be a slam dunk with Romney? Or Pence? Or anybody for that matter.

  • lineholder

    It’s cultlike to the point of being very disturbing.

    At one moment it’s “martyr” Sarah who can do no wrong and the next minute it is “poor pitiful Sarah”. I just don’t have much patience for it right now.

  • gekster

    why didn’t he fair betterin the primaries.
    Oh, that’s right, the system is rigged against him,
    Sorry, I forgot.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    Scratch the second part of that comment. However, I still think it was a little bit of a cave to the media, the left, and establishment Republicans that Sarah Palin doesn’t deserve.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    She also has the goods to back up that stardom, unlike Obama.

  • walter_hanson

    Everybody thinks that McCain suffered a landslide loss in part because of Palin. Those so called experts think Palin cost votes. Um she was the reason why conservatives like me voted for McCain let alone gave money towards national republican funds when I should’ve been giving more especially to US senate candidates.

    McCain cost us states like Indiana because he wasn’t a true conservative. We need a true conservative and one who will run on a Republican agenda. I’ll vote for Palin unless a better candidate shows up because she’s willing to fight to overcome those handicaps. McCain, Rommey, Huckebee, etc won’t do that.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • Bill S

    You have some serious personal issues if you read that as “for the purpose of squashing Palin’s momentum”. That has to be one of the top five stupidest things I’ve read on these forums in the almost 4 years I’ve been here, and that’s saying something.

    Get. Over. It.

  • AceInTX

    she positively ate Biden’s lunch…and I could just see Barry boiling over like an over full pot every time she put’s a criticism directly in his lap…he’s so thin skinned she’d have him tripping all over himself in frustration just as Reagan did with Carter….

    Seriously…we need to get over this…”My good friend on the other side of the isle” crap….it’s killing us….

    I want to see some bloody noses this time…no more “respectful” campaigns…no more kinder gentler BS….the Dems play for keeps…and it’s time we did too!

  • Mary Beth

    As soon as they look like they?re a threat to the left?as soon as they?re effective?

    The left brutalizes them, rakes them over the coals and rapes them 24/7 for the world to see.

    And the right abandons them as ?radioactive?.

    It seems as though some folks think it’s smart politics to abandon Palin as “radioactive”… because of all the attacks against her, with the presumption that we can forward another conservative, and they’ll get a fair shake.

    Why is that? Why would anyone believe for a second that any conservative won’t get the same treatment as Palin would? Are people really that deluded into thinking that the left and the media won’t absolutely DESTROY any conservative who challenges Obama?

    So sure. Let’s go ahead… in January of 2011…before any candidates announce…before any campaign launches… to abandon a conservative because the left has recognized them as a threat and has gone after them. Awesome strategery!

    If that?s the case, we get what we deserve? a squishy, unprincipled LOSER who will run an unoffensive campaign, stand for nothing and LOSE.

    And I don’t mean Mike Pence…who I really love (but would be equally brutalized)…but I think he’s running for IN Gov.

  • JSobieski

    However, does that mean that we shouldn’t consider independents/swing voters?

    Forget about Chris Matthews or some other media twits, but the battlefield is independent voters.

    Note that I am not suggesting watering down conservativism in any way. Nor am I suggesting that we cater to uninformed swing voters.

    I am suggesting that the swing independent voters do cast ballots on the basis of factors that are not ideological and that that the ability of a candidate to persuade swing voters is relevant criteria and in fact, smart criteria.

    Electability is not inherently based on what our adversaries say or think. Electability can be assessed in the framework of swing voters.

    To leave the context of Palin for a moment, I would suggest by way of example, that New Gingrich has absolutely basis on which to build support among independent voters. They simply dislike the guy. Given his name recognition which is fairly high, and the negatives which are also fairly high, I can evaluate Newt’s electability without referencing anything a D or MSM person says.

    Just something to consider.

  • tanarg

    And agree with you, Erick, about Palin.

  • writeblock

    You want a pastor, go vote for Huckabee–another sure loser. Or bring back a nicely married guy like Carter or maybe Obama himself, Give me a break. The country is being dragged kicking and screaming into socialism and you want a guy with a nicer personal life? At this point most of the rest of us want somebody who knows how to lead, who understands economics, who will nominate the right people, who is sympathetic to the military–somebody who’s a fighter. Has he killed anybody? Has he robbed a bank? Has he behaved dishonorably in office? Don’t tell me he’s had troubles with his former wife and kids. That’s irrelevant. America doesn’t need a saint, It wants somebody who can fix the fiscal situation and nominate judges who appreciate the Constitution.

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    I live in Manhattan and volunteered for him when he ran for Mayor of NY. I was about as big a fan as you could be. Having Rudy promote regional candidates is something different than Rudy running himself. I followed his most recent campaign, and it’s clear he doesn’t have the drive left that a national campaign would require. He got to Century Village in Florida and no further. His business involvements have also increased, and he did want to make money. If he did want to run, I can see the clodhoppers at the RNC asking him to back off so their pal Romney could run, and Rudy would kindly do so. I don’t believe he has enough left in the tank. By the way, he always favored illegals.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    But please, don’t start letting the media and establishment Republicans pick our candidates. Palin can handle the media.

  • Bill S

    I was just thinking about this today. i would love Palin to stay in the position of “spreading the conservative message with ease” as you say. I’ve been saying for quite some time now that she needs to be the mouthpiece for a GOP White House because she is so adept at creating great quotes and soundbites – which is something the Republicans just completely suck at. Her value is messaging. Let someone else do the POTUS thing.

  • walter_hanson

    McCain was seen as the person who could defeat Hillary let alone Obama. So what if he was amensty. So what if he was for global warming. So what if we couldn’t count on him for judges. He was going to win!

    The Democrats ran a person who will run on their issues and they won big and swept in votes to destroy our health care, nearly passed the dream act, spent trillions we didn’t have.

    give me that issue candidate because that’s the person who has the best chance to win. At this moment it looks like that will be Sarah Palin. The point Erick was trying to make is there a candidate who can run on these issues that wouldn’t have the perceived handicaps that Sarah Palin will have.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • littlehouse18

    Erick suggested that her looks and the First Dude *are* among her positives, but Pence necessarily can’t have those. (Though Pence looks just fine to me). Take another close look at his words: “we can get what we like about Palin, minus her looks and the First Dude and well . . . you know what i mean, with Mike Pence.”.

    I think Erick brought this up because, as stated previously on this site, Pence said he would make a decision this month. If Erick thinks he should run for Prez, there’s not much time left to influence him.

    No offense, but I think you are unfairly railing against EE because of a mis-reading of his words.

  • David123

    I’ll believe that when I have to speak German in Bastogne.

    Just because you might have a tough fight doesn’t mean you should shrink from it. Bring it on!

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    Barack Obama is a feckless, rudderless leader. He still has yet to make a lone command decision that carries significant historical weight. Two years is a long time for him to prove just how feckless and rudderless he is. The issue isn’t Sarah Palin’s ability to smite the might Obama. By 2012, I contend, just about anybody will be able to beat him (-not least of which might be Dame Hillary herself, as a primary challenger)

    Something MAJOR is going to happen in the next 24 months: Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear installation, and then Iran will attack Iraq, and so on… Or, one of Don Rumsfeld’s Unknown Unknowns will pop up, and President Obama, so recently a Community Organizer will find that breakout sessions and in-person dialogs don’t cut the muster when all hell is breaking out.

    He is a disaster, and when he is done proving it to any and all sentient carbon-based life forms on earth, John Wayne Bobbit will be able to beat Barack Obama by then. Sarah Palin will wipe the floor with him. I can just see her smiling during the debates, and saying, “Well, there you go again. And by the way, America, are you better off now than you were four years ago?”

  • writeblock

    in former posts. Tell me: how well would Huckabee or Thompson have done in NJ or NY? I rest my case. Why expect Rudy to have done well in IA or SC when all anybody wanted to talk about was abortion and social issues? NH was Romney and McCain country. His only shot was FL–where Crist stabbed him in the back and backed a fellow moderate. In other words, the Stupid Party behaved as usual. The press focused on abortion of course–and played its part. But times change. Rudy looks better this time around than in 2008–where, even then, he was leading both Hillary and Obama in the polls by double digits in places like my state of PA–and he even led in the polls in PA after he actually dropped out of the race.

  • Tbone

    LOL.

    PS. That boy of yours get properly spoiled this Christmas?

  • Aaron Gardner

    YOU are what people don’t like about Palin. The best thing that you could do to help her win the nomination and the presidency is to never comment on politics again.

    Not even when you are alone.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    Obama’s got Soros’ bottomless pockets, and the unions/SEIU/ACORN machine.

    Gonna be uphill no matter what.

  • writeblock

    tooth and nail in NY. He fought the NYTimes, the race hustlers, the unions. You need to understand people like Rudy and Christi are a special breed–they’re not like Gerry Ford or John McCain or even Romney. They’re tough fiscal conservatives and strict constructionist lawyers. Whatever their personal social views, they tow the line legally and politically. Rudy cut taxes drastically, sold public-owned properties, fired bureaucrats, consolidated agencies–and succeeded where nobody else did.

  • walter_hanson

    Romney! Republicans hate with a passion Obamacare and yet he’s the guy who proposed Obamacare lite. Furthermore if you didn’t notice in 2010 we won big in Michigan, in Ohio, in PA, the senate race in Illnois, the key races in Florida with candidates running on the issues which Palin supports. Get a real argument!

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • gekster

    Give it up.
    He isn’t even going to run.

  • acat

    So. What.

    Being a great candidate in the northeast gets you .. the northeast. Now, bring me someone who can win nationwide.

    Mew

  • Aaron Gardner

    He got a nice load of gifts from Santa, end of the month is his first birthday, so we will have a second load for him then.

    Sorry for my outbursts brotha, but a few on your side of the divide seem to be incapable of comprehending the written word. For your sake and the sake of Palin, I sure wish they would pick up a copy of hooked on phonics.

    ;)

  • AceInTX

    My ante is in for Barbour and I’ll call anyone’s bet at the moment…but I’m not about to go all in for anyone at this point in the game…

    I like Pence too….maybe even more that Barbour and Palin….an I’ll have to admit a little hypocrisy in not jumping on his bandwagon over electability too…mainly because he’s running from Congress… something that is virtually imposable to do…but my concerns along those lines are far more defensible than those who won’t back Sarah because she’s “Not Electable” since her negatives are artificial and manufactured by the press and the Dems

  • lineholder

    There are plenty of us out here still in the uncommitted camp.

    It would be a wiser choice by far on the part of some of her fans to just back off a bit and leave us be until we decide who we can and/or can not support.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    I’m hardly going to leave the battlefield of ideas to the likes of you though. We do need some intelligent commentary.

  • littlehouse18

    as a female or minority conservative, because the white male conservative fits into their distorted worldview. The latter two sorts completely shatter it and threaten the loss of the liberal base. Mustn’t let them see ‘one of their own’ thinking for themselves. Nope, gotta destroy them. Sad commentary.

    Of course, even a white male with an (R) will have the deck stacked against him.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • walter_hanson

    How come he couldn’t compete in Iowa?

    How come he couldn’t compete in New Hampshire?

    How come he couldn’t compete in Michigan?

    How come he couldn’t compete in South Carolina?

    How come since he decided to focus on Florida he couldn’t win Florida? Oh that’s right Charlie Christ went for McCain after promising Rudy his support.

    I would love Rudy as an AG in 2013 or maybe the first Supreme Court Nominee, but he can’t win the Republican base in order to be elected President in 2012.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • gekster

    Take it from me, you are the mouse. ;)

  • JSobieski

    As a side note, aren’t allegations of sexism what liberals use to stereotype conservatives?

    More fundamentally, it suggests that your participation in the battlefield of ideas may be occuring more prominently in the battlefield of emotion.

    Emotion isn’t irrelevant, but when it accentuates errors in reading comprehension, its a good opportunity to take a break, cool off, and revisit.

    You were very sure of yourself in accusing Erick of sexist behavior. Next time you are that sure of yourself, I suggest you become a little less sure.

    Everyone makes arguments based on faulty premises and misconceptions from time to time. However, you unloaded onto a conservative in the way that a liberal would.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    You’re nothing but a troll.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    Yes, Erick most definitely was categorizing her looks and the First Dude as positives!!!

    If someone can misread that by 180 degrees, it makes me suspect them of fanaticism.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • writeblock

    Gallup has Obama at 50% as of today. He’s got TARP and stimulus money to dish out any way he wants. That can buy a lot of votes in a lot of states for a lot of reasons. And he’s got the media, not to mention almost all the black vote in key states like OH and PA. The worst thing we can do is underestimate him.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    That is all. Carry On…

  • AceInTX

    If they are truely independent voters…they are open to persuasion….so our nominee should be an articulate persuader….a good communicator of what we believe and why we believe it…

    where we keep going wrong I think…is in bending our views to the left to appease people who say they are independent….but aren’t and wouldn’t vote for us anyway…while we never work on persuading the persuadable as a result.

    Isn’t it a contradiction to say we have to moderate out views to appeal to people who self profess a lack of belief in anything?

    Your point on Newt is well reasoned…of course electability of someone as high profile as Newt is important and should be considered…especially since his negatives have a basis in actual behavior and things done on office…and Palin shouldn’t be immune to that…why I would distinguish the two would be that Gingrich’s negatives were built up by years in office in a high profile position…where Palin’s negatives are largely manufactured by incessant prattling by the Press and elitist Republicans of Gingrich’s ilk…most of what they are attacking with her are things that can be dispelled in a campaign….IF…she has the skills for it….THAT is yet to be seen…

    I really do think…she’d destroy Barry in a Debate in much the same way Reagan did Carter by directly challenging his statements….Both Carter…and Barry take themselves WAY to seriously…and their thin skins would be their undoing in the jovial way Palin has of slapping her opponents in a one on one

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    That was honestly the way I read it at first. I was wrong; I apologize. This does not mean Erick is off the hook for bending to the media and GOP establishment just a bit. If he really likes Palin best he should support her instead of throwing her under the bus.

  • acat

    I fully expect, should she decide not to run, to see her working furiously – pit bull with lipstick style – for Conservative candidates, just as she did in 2010.

    Mew

  • NHConservative0227

    That Palin has been made too radioactive. Too many people are afraid of the polls that now show Obama beating her. I think it’s way to early to be concerned about that.

    If you must look at any poll, look at the one on Rasmussen that shows that 52% to 40% agree with Palin on policy over Obama.

    I think that once she goes through the debates and lays out her positions for all to hear, that she can and will defeat Obama. We definitely need someone who will stand up to Obama and tell it the way it is instead of sugarcoating it. Palin is the the one who can do that the best. She won’t beat around the bush, she’ll tell it the way it is and lay a clear choice for the American people: socialism or capitalism.

    That being said Erick, I respect that you would go down swinging with Palin instead of any of the others (such as Huckabee, Romney, or Gingrich).

    BTW: Pence would be my top choice as well since I think he’s more conservative than Palin, but we’ll have to see if he decides to run

  • AceInTX

    and it’s failed EVERY TIME it’s been tried…

    besides…I refuse to consider defending RUDY for foolishness like this:

    Presidential no?

  • speciallist

  • skey

    What I’m saying is, in the primary I’m not compromising my vote at all. Right now Palin has it if she’s running, and what it will take for me to change it is someone I think is more electable who stands for the same things.

    As things go right now, I think the odds of that happening are very, very low. So this is more or less a notice to those who shudder in horror at the thought of a Palin candidacy – they need to find someone to get behind who isn’t a compromise on conservatism who folks like me can support. And that eliminates a hundred percent of the also-rans from 2008, I don’t want to hear any of those names. They have been examined, and found wanting. If they hadn’t been wanting we wouldn’t have had to stick bags over our heads and vote for McCain two years ago.

    If that doesn’t happen I’ll happily support Palin, and to quote Erick above, “I?d have rather gone down swinging with Barry than sell out with Nelson any day of the week and twice on Sunday. I feel the same way with Palin.” Goldwater paved the way for Reagan. And while I shudder to think what sixteen years more of Democrat and/or RINO executives will do to the country, perhaps in this Internet Age the cycle can go faster.

  • meg_m

    with the fact that she has so many fans that cannot discuss her objectively. I am so sick of the tirades about the world being out to get Sarah Palin and crying that anyone that does not support her candidacy must be a RINO or caving to the left and the MSM. If you read my whole comment you would see that I already had reservations about Governor Palin including her inability to finish out her term as governor and her tendency to come off as incompetent in interviews with non-sympathetic factions of the press. There are legitimate questions and concerns about her readiness to be leader of the free world. Perhaps she does have more experience than Obama but we should be setting the bar MUCH higher than Obama when it comes time to elect our own candidate.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • writeblock

    You think the South is going to vote for Obama? It’s solidly Republican. We don’t need a candidate who can take the red states since they’re a given! You think the Dakotas or Alaska or Kansas are going to suddenly turn blue? The whole point should be to win the purple states and maybe one or two blue ones. The rest are already committed–or too small to worry about. That’s why somebody from the NE makes sense. That’s why Romney right now, even with his health care baggage, makes more sense than Pence or Huckabee who would do poorly in PA or NJ.

  • AceInTX

    “weighed in the balance and found wanting” is an apt description for all of them…they sucked then…they suck now

  • Tbone

    I thought he was coming up on his first one.

    The best thing about Palin for me is that a post on here in support of her is like giving an ahole bother-in-law’s kid a drum for Christmas.

    It’s almost unfair.

  • diesel53

    Who would the Big O, be more afraid of ? . Palin, or DeMint, or Both… I would love to see the Big O, take a two year vacation.. Just something to think about.

  • Mary Beth
  • AceInTX

    Romney was for Detroit Bailouts before Bush and Barry were….

    No more finger in the wind RINOs who want to be President becuase it was Daddy’s dream he never achieved.

    If we elect Romney…you can kiss repealing Obamacare goodbye…How could Romney of all people argue against it since Obamacare’s individual mandate is an idea from the brain of non other than Mitt Romney?!

  • writeblock

    he didn’t get a chance to compete in urban areas? Why in farm country or small villages or in the deep South? He polled nationally ahead of both Hillary and Obama by double digits. How come we ignored that in favor of losers like McCain or Huckabee? I’m trying to make a point here. There are Republicans in NJ too–and in my state of PA–far more than in Iowa or NH–and far more representative of the rest of the nation–and far more important in terms of electoral votes. Yet by the time the process got to me it was all over.

    The Dems had a longer, but fairer, process–which is why it played out all year and got to some very big states, my own included. But the GOP establishment deliberately chose a truncated process loaded in favor of a particular kind of constituency–which is why we ended up talking about ethanol or abortion instead of anything else. The process stunk–and has thankfully changed from a winner-take-all process to a proportionate one.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • David123

    JFK was more conservative than Palin on a number of issues. This could be a teachable moment for independent voters showing just how far left our country has swung.

    I think reminding voters of all the “spiritual guidance” Barrack Obama received from Reverend Wright would be helpful and educational as well. People need to realize that Barrack Obama is not “your father’s Democrat”.

  • David123

    JFK was more conservative than Palin on a number of issues. This could be a teachable moment for independent voters showing just how far left our country has swung.

    I think reminding voters of all the “spiritual guidance” Barrack Obama received from Reverend Wright would be helpful and educational as well. People need to realize that Barrack Obama is not “your father’s Democrat”.

  • AceInTX

    Don?t tell me he?s had troubles with his former wife and kids. That?s irrelevant.

    seriously?

  • victrola

    It’s a warped way at looking at who we should nominate, and actually puts Liberals in the driver’s seat.

    Liberals and the MSM hated O’Donnell in Delaware with a passion, but I really don’t see what it accomplished for conservatives by nominating her and then losing by 20 points.

    There’s a range of reasons why many people on our side have legitimate issues about a Palin candidacy, from electability to temperament. My goal is to have a conservative Republican President in 2012 that can lead, not to flip the bird to liberals during a campaign.

    We can rub it in their faces after we’ve taken power away from them.
    He who laughs last, laughs best.

  • acat

    Seriously, the primary system hasn’t been significantly changed – although many including myself think it should be – in a long time.

    If Rudy wants to win, he needs to compete *in the existing arena*, not in some hypothetical.

    Iowa and New Hampshire can be won by anyone – they’re more about proof of organizing ability, proof that the candidate can get boots on the ground than about the message. If Rudy didn’t win, it’s because Rudy wasn’t trying hard enough.

    I’ll grant you this, Write. Rudy is the only retread I would seriously consider.

    Mew

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

    no matter who they’re worshiping, is that they are soooooo easy to bait.

  • writeblock

    I’m not a moderate. I’m saying our idea of who’s a conservative and who’s a moderate has to bend a little to accommodate a very special breed of politician–pols like Giuliani and Christi. These guys are fighters, they/re not bland, they’re not go-along types, they’re reformers, they’re tough, they’re fiscally intelligent, they’re socially moderate–but unwilling to dislocate the Constitution to accommodate their own personal views. Rudy had said he would nominate judges like Scalia. I believe him. Why? Because he showed his conservatism as asst attorney general under Reagan. Back then he was a strict constructionist. So there’s reason to trust him.

  • drivlikejehu

    As the VP candidate in ’08, Palin was constrained by the fact that McCain’s people ran the show. Her selection also came abruptly and without much in the way of preparation. As a result, her stature nationally was dealt a crushing blow before she even was able to respond on her own terms.

    Recognizing this is not ‘giving in to the left’ as some here suggest. The lesson should be not to waste a rising star by making him or her the VP nominee. And for her part, Palin has shown no real indication that she is serious about running for President anyway. She resigned as Governor to do book tours and reality shows and maintains no organization to speak of.

    Palin fans need to think about the big picture. Is she more conservative than Pence? No. Her actual record isn’t even to the right of people like Thune, Pawlenty, and Daniels. Is she the strongest nominee against Obama? No. Maybe she’s electable, maybe not, but she certainly would have a difficult path.

  • AceInTX

    this is the same crap we got form the McCainiacs…and look where we are today.

    Unbelievable….

    IF YOU ALWAYS DO WHAT YOU’VE ALWAYS DONE….YOU WILL ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU ALWAYS GOT…

    Tee up everybody…let’s do 2008 all over again….

    I can’t wait!!!!

  • JSobieski

    You go off half cocked and admittedly make defamatory comments about a conservative in the way that a liberal would.

    Its great that you admitted your error. However, does the fact that you made a highly visible and avoidable error give you pause at all? When you start projecting points of view on your allies that are customarily done by your enemies, doesn’t it suggest being a bit out of it?

    Also, did it ever occur to you that Erick may be bending to the independent voter?

  • writeblock

    over Giuliani, they bring out this Saturday Night Live video of him in drag. What is that supposed to prove other than he has a sense of humor? I agree it was poor judgment–but seemed funny at the time. Now the rudy-haters keep showing the clip.

  • septembergurl

    get the Palin treatment. That’s a guarantee. Does not matter who.

    Have you forgotten the treatment meted out to John McCain (previously an MSM favorite) after he became the nominee? Hit pieces on him & his wife in the Slimes, etc?

    There is no Republican who will not get this treatment, therefore the “media will dump all over her” argument is void.

    At least Palin has fought back and has been in the arena for more than 2 years now.

    My thinking now….Palin-Huntsman.

    The 2011 equivalent of Reagan-Bush. Unbeatable!

  • AceInTX

    PotAto…PotAUto

    Two ways of saying the same thing…let’s ignore conservative states…run moderates to appeal to blue and purple states and we’ll be walking in high cotton

    BULL CRAP!!

    BEN THERE….DONE THAT….BOUGHT THE CRAPPY TEE SHIRT

    No thanks

  • gekster

    Get over it.
    mbeckers dead white cat could beat him hands down.
    Just. Get. Over. It

  • spainishirish

    Palin needs to calm down her bots before they deprive her of the leverage she admittedly has.

  • AceInTX

    heh

  • NHConservative0227

    Side with Palin over Obama on policy.

    If Palin runs and wins the nomination, I think she will convince the majority of Americans to choose free markets and liberty over big government tyranny.

    Obama has been an absolute disaster. He rammed Obamacare and the Porkulus down our throats to mention a few things We need someone to never let people forget that and Palin has been the one fighting him on every single issue over the last two years.

  • JSobieski

    Some are non-ideological. They vote based on perceptions of competence and experience. Some will vote based on likeability.

    Independent voters are notorious for not having strong convictions. Palin’s negatives among swing voters are undoubtedly higher than they would be for similarly conservative candidate. For example, DeMint is not as well known, and as such his negatives are lower and less entrenched.

    My point is that pursuit of independent voters is not about changing the message, but it can involve the messenger.

    Two facts about Palin are concerning:
    (1) Her name recognition is very high
    (2) Independents don’t like her very much

    Nothing in immutable, and I would vote for Palin over any 2008 retread. However, it is foolish not to take into consideration the ability to appeal to independent voters.

    Reagan’s appeal to independent voters was based largely on personality. They liked him, and trusted that he wasn’t a nut—at least at the end (1 week prior to the election).

    I believe Palin has higher name recognition than Reagan did at this point in the 1980 cycle, and that her negatives are higher. More importantly, her likeability is lower than Reagan’s was.

    I do like Palin. But concerns about appeals to independent voters are different than abandoning conservative principles to win votes.

    Message wins the conservatives. Messenger wins the independents. The magic of Reagan in many respects was that people voted for him who often didn’t agree with him. Obama had a bit of that in 2008.

  • Bill S

    I’m going to go into your profile and change your ID to “mentalblock”, because you obviously have one. As gekster says: Get. Over It.

  • writeblock

    but he said he’d decide after the November election. I’m hoping he’s going for it.

  • NHConservative0227

    Pence is my top choice because Palin is not conservative enough for me.

    However compared to everyone else, Palin is the one most likely to remind everyone of just how radical Obama is. She started to touch on Ayers during the 08 campaign only to be held back by McCain.

    I don’t think she’ll be afraid to mention these things this time around.

  • http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

    The independent voters agree more with Palin than Obama on policy. This has been shown in the polls. They have been duped by the media; that is what Erick is bending to.

  • speciallist

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

    oh yeah, she’s popular as all get out in Alaska. Just ask Senator Miller.

  • gekster

    Nothing yet?

  • AceInTX

    let alone Conservative….

    Shades of Steele crying racism every time he’s challenged for his penchant for foot in mouth syndrome

  • NHConservative0227

    That’s the main thing that did it for me. I thought he did a great job as NYC mayor even before 9/11 but I did not support him because NYC was a sanctuary city under him.

  • AceInTX

    it’d be a good idea to know who you’re talking to before calling people trolls….because that comment is the equivalent of dropping your pants around your ankles in front of the whole class

  • georgeinla

    Why endorse a guy who has almost no chance of winning, who has an obviously much better next move which is the Governor’s race, who probably won’t be running . . . on the idea that Sarah Palin is too “radioactive” to win in the general election?

    The GOP nominee in 2012 in all likelihood will be Sarah Palin. Even if you have misgivings about her, what’s the point of harping on them at this point? You’re just contributing to the weakening of her candidacy, and those words will come back to haunt you when it really matters.

    Let the people decide. That’s what primaries are for. Don’t say things that you will later regret.

  • gekster

    Haa-haa.

  • writeblock

    even Reagan had trouble with his kids–remember? The idea Rudy can’t be trusted because of his wife and kids is just plain dumb. In fact, his word is solid. We know more about how he’d govern than about practically any other politician. We know he was a huge success. We know he’d fight the left–because he’s done it. He fought the Mafia in NY and sent the heads of the five families to prison. He put corrupt Wall Street billionaires in prison–Boesky and Milikin–and had the intelligence to understand the ins and outs of high finance to do it. He’s had a long and honorable career without any scandal apart from problems with his shrew of a wife–a media personality who tried to embarrass him at every turn. Aside from that his record’s clean. Even the hit piece the NYTimes did on him the last time he ran was a tissue of innuendos that turned out to be false in the end. Finally, he performed bravely and calmly and wisely during 9/11. That said all we need to know about how he’d perform as a leader. Nobody has to protect his honor. He’s been there, he’s done it.

  • lineholder

    I like Ms. Palin a great deal and I respect what she has contributed to the conservative movement in our country.

    A lot of people have presented that she has been attacked by the left because she is a threat to President Obama. This may be true in some cases, but not in all of them.

    In some cases, the left has simply been trying to goad her into a response so that they can take whatever response she makes, put their own spin on it and try to discredit her in the process. Unfortunately, they’ve succeeded to a certain extent.

    There are times when it probably would have been wiser for her to just let them froth at the mouth, go on about her business, let her actions speak for her and leave the lefties hanging in the wind making idiots out of themselves.

    As it is, she’s in something of a hole now as far public perception is concerned. Can she get out of it in time to present a genuine campaign in2012? I don’t know.

    A lot depends on her ability to articulate herself well in presenting her views on how to address the issues our country is facing.

  • JSobieski

    and vote based on perceptions of competence, experience, and likeability. Obama won those voters in 2008 by being the calm post-partison candidate. It was crap, but he was tapping into a section of the electorate that helped him win.

    Message matters, but so does messenger. A candidate is more than a collection of policy positions. A messenger has attributes that are not inherently linked to policy.

    Palin has remarkably high name recognition and remarkably low favorability among independents. Not saying its insurmountable, but it can’t be dismissed as merely catering to Chris Matthews. Only leftist utopians believe that human beings are infinitely maleable. Some people are locked into their assessment of Palin. Its unfair, but its reality. The question is how many? Its worth thinking about.

    P.S. Glad to hear that you asked about rather than simply assuming the worse and proceeding from there. However, when one loses sight of how is a friend and who is an enemy while in battle, its good to take a moment to clear one’s head.

  • AceInTX

    Love it

  • writeblock

    Texas would vote for Obama instead? No wonder we lose–with people like you thinking the way you do. Texas will vote for Rudy. So will South Caroline and Georgia and Tennessee and West Virginia.

    And no, it’s not the same crap as with the McCainiacs. McCain never led Hillary or Obama in national polls throughout the primary season. He was far behind Rudy. In my state–PA–he was ahead of Obama–but not by as much as Rudy was. You need to be better informed.

  • writeblock

    And the system has been changed to a proportionate one. It’s no longer winner-take-all. Anybody up to snuff on this on how it;’ll work?

  • NHConservative0227

    Palin has been taking command in her interviews over that past year. She did a great job on O’Reilly last month who is one of the toughest interviewers in the business.

    Also, I think her Alaska show appeals to independents and those who don’t watch Fox News. She does a good job of adding in nice little tidbits of the need to drill and take advantage of our great natural resources in Alaska too.

  • gekster

    is having a painfull…..
    oh well….:(

  • AceInTX

    His word is solid?

    I think his wife ex wife would beg to differ…

    B ringing Reagan into this shows the depths of your ignorance of the man…Reagan didn’t leave his first wife…she left HIM…and he was devastated by it by all accounts…

    as for their kids…you brought them up…not I…but for all the “trouble” with Reagan’s kids….he was always there for them…they left the reservation…not the other way around.

    Rudy is right for New York…and right for NE…but he’d be poison on a national level…Red States would suffer for lack of GOTV…and Barry would walk back in in a land slide….

    Rudy should have run against Hillary for Senate….he didn’t….he could have run when she left to go to state…he didn’t….his ship has sailed…get over it

  • acat

    I recall that you’ve mentioned proportional before, but the article you linked that time was Dem-specific. Nothing about Repubs changing to proportional.

    As for Pennsylvania, your specific quote was “How come he didn?t get a chance to compete in urban areas?” .. which is a b.s. question. The answer is, Rudy did get a chance to compete in urban areas .. but the Repubs are thin on the ground there, so he naturally lost.

    Mew

  • NHConservative0227

    We need someone to tell it the way it is and I think Palin is more likely to do that than anyone.

    I’d love to see her during a debate to call out Obama to his face for sitting in that church for 20 years and for starting his political career in Ayers living room.

    Call him a liar for saying we could keep our doctor, remind everyone that he told the SEIU that he wants a single player system.

    Be confrontational and strong. The American people need to know the truth, no more sugarcoating out of political correctness.

  • NHConservative0227

    We need someone to tell it the way it is and I think Palin is more likely to do that than anyone.

    I’d love to see her during a debate to call out Obama to his face for sitting in that church for 20 years and for starting his political career in Ayers living room.

    Call him a liar for saying we could keep our doctor, remind everyone that he told the SEIU that he wants a single player system.

    Be confrontational and strong. The American people need to know the truth, no more sugarcoating out of political correctness.

  • writeblock

    The point is to win elections, not to make conservatives feel good. We already have the red states in our pocket–so why keep currying favor with them while we ignore more essential swing states like PA and OH? There are huge blue states behind Obama. CA alone has more electoral votes than GA and SC put together–and they’re pretty well-populated states. So we need to take some swing states especially. We don’t need to worry about the easy pickin’s like AL or TX. We need to worry about PA and OH. That’s where our focus should be–and on FL of course–not SC or tiny NH.

  • acat

    but it didn’t make me into a Notre Dame fan.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108002/

    Mew

  • AceInTX
  • aesthete

    That must be why I post on RS, vote Republican, am pro-life, want smaller government, etc.

    Try again.

  • gekster

    And he just doesn’t want to see them.
    And several posters have been making these points
    in quite a number of diaries.
    Driving with his eyes closed.
    If you look up Rudybot, it shows his picture.

  • AceInTX

    hah

  • gekster

    ntntnt

  • AceInTX

  • AceInTX

    GOTV suffered…Obama won

  • writeblock

    that it’s a mere block. But I saw disaster coming with McCain from the get-go–and was furious we threw away a golden opportunity to nominate somebody leading in all the national polls–and among most Republicans. Except that most Republicans never had a real say.

    Anyway I’m trying to talk strategy here–and all a lot of you want to do is go down the same blind alley you went down in the past with guys like Thompson and Hunter–ideal candidates, if only the rest of America thought about issues exactly like we do. McCain was the compromise–acceptable to Dr. Dobson.

    In the end this gave us Obama.

  • AceInTX

    in 1976…in 1992, in 1996 in 2008

    WE LOST!!!

    WE”LL LOSE AGAIN

    NO THANK YOU!!!

  • NHConservative0227

    I said before that Pence would be my top choice since I think he’s more conservative than Palin, but other than that I don’t see anyone better than her.

  • AceInTX

  • acat

    So far, not much of a shift if any in her negatives… and I’m convinced that’s the number to watch. It represents, more than anything, the number of voters who will say “meh, why vote, don’t like either of ‘em!” in the general.

    She has got to bring down her negatives without offending her supporters by appearing to “go moderate”. It’s possible she can do it. .. and if she does, it will be one of the most impressive political make-overs in history.

    Mew

  • azaeroprof

    She can be beaten in the primaries, but it will require the winner to go negative on her. She has so many rabid fans (and this is not necessarily a bad thing!), the one who goes negative on her risks alienating a huge chunk of the GOP base. This will be especially true if the person is seen as “establishment”, like Romney, Barbour, etc.

  • writeblock

    And Republicans are thin on the ground in PA? Are you kidding? We’re not equal in number to the Dems but we sure as hell outnumber the Republicans in rural Iowa or tiny NH or even in SC. Ours is a big and important state. To ignore it is crazy–no wonder we lose.

  • AceInTX
  • NHConservative0227

    Erick Erickson has always been one my favorite conservatives. However, I expect better of him than to give in at this stage and call Palin radioactive and say she can’t win.

    Any conservative who poses a serious threat will get brutally attacked by the left, the media, and RINO GOP elitists.

    I say let Sarah decide if she wants to run and see how the primary goes before writing her off already.

  • aesthete
  • cwilson

    …way to burn a sleeper account for no reason!

  • writeblock

    and it’s an inane one.

  • acat

    Iowa and New Hampshire are a test of organizing skills. A test Rudy failed.

    We are a republic, not a democracy. The President is elected based on the number of electoral college votes won, not the percentage of the total vote. President Al Gore may disagree, of course.

    I am hardly ignoring Pennsylvania, but .. you cannot be taken seriously when you argue that Pittsburg and Philly are going to come out strong for Rudy in the general. Face the facts, Block. The cities are Dem strongholds, they’re never going to vote R. Running a candidate to appeal to them is handing the election to Obama.

    Mew

  • NHConservative0227

    nt

  • AceInTX

  • AceInTX
  • aesthete

    Not that it excuses an outburst based on an oddly-written section of what seemed to be a quick “oh, by the way” post on Erick’s part.

  • cwilson

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    Rudy promised to appoint strict constructionist judges, then said this:

    GIULIANI: The direct answer is, a strict constructionist judge can come to either conclusion about Roe against Wade. They can look at it and say, wrongly decided 30 years ago, whatever it is, we will overturn it. They can . . .

    BASH: But what is your personal deal on Roe v. Wade?

    GIULIANI: They can look at it and say, it has been the law for this period of time, therefore we are going to respect the precedent. Conservatives can come to that conclusion as well. I would leave it up to them. I would not have a litmus test on that.

    I’m sorry, that’s not “strict constructionist” at all; he’s saying a so-called “strict constructionist” can go along with emanations and penumbras, inventing constitutional rights out of whole cloth…so long as it was done long enough ago that stare decisis applies.

    Again, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • acat

    Barbour and Daniels have more time in as governors than Palin.

    Cain and Pence have more media experience than Palin.

    Cain and Pence have private-sector experience that may be useful in getting government out of the way so businesses can create jobs.

    Barbour, Daniels, and Pence have good contacts inside D.C., and the establishment cannot be counted out. We can’t afford to have them sit out another cycle… have you considered how much larger a tsunami 2010 would have been if they’d been off the sidelines?

    Palin is in a class all by herself as a bomb-thrower, fund-raiser, cheerleader, and lefty-head-exploder. She’s amazing. She’s also extremely polarizing – if someone doesn’t have a positive impression, it’s almost guaranteed they’ve got a negative one…. but she could turn that around by the end of 2011 if she works hard at it.

    I would be very happy to see any of the above win the nomination.

    Mew

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

    But the political picture for President will be totally different in 2012, and I don’t see any constituency for Rudy – we’ve got a whole new set of prospects warming up.

    Apart from the serious issue of personal baggage, where portion of the Republican party do you see Rudy drawing a massive wave of support that he couldn’t attract in 2008. I sure don’t see it.

    You can spin general election scenarios all you want, but unless you can get a majority of the delegates to the RNC to vote for you, it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. Where’s your path to primary victory?

  • aesthete

    You accused him of sexism, then demanded that he prove himself to you. I’m glad to see that you apologized and I have no interest in a fight, but let’s not retcon the above thread.

  • aesthete

    No one has the goods to justify the insane levels of support that Palin gets from some quarters: not even Reagan or Thatcher. The fact that an inexperienced political neophyte with an unspectacular record has a cult-like following is both a liability for the conservative movement, and disturbing on many levels. That is why many are getting turned off to Palin.

  • writeblock

    You mean the one who starred in Vagina Dialogues? That ex-wife? The one who from the beginning refused to act as hostess for official affairs? That ex-wife? My only surprise is that it took him so long to find someone else.

  • meg_m
  • aesthete

    It seems inconsistent with the more conventional like/dislike polls, and rather sketchy, given that we don’t know much about Palin’s positions on issues besides that she has a generally conservative outlook.

  • cwilson

    the likes of Nicole Wallace, Steve Schmidt, and Mark McKinnon. How’s Operation Leper going? Are these three…individuals…still enjoying their deserved unemployment, or have they found a nice cozy sinecure to burrow into?

    Personnel is policy, and I hope WHOEVER the candidate is, is smart enough NOT to hire these three.

  • writeblock

    if they were good points as you say. They’re in fact poor arguments. It’s not a real argument to say Giuliani was unfaithful to his wife and therefore would be a bad president. All the facts of his public life weigh against such an argument. And it’s even weaker to say because he lost in the last primary, he’d make a poor candidate for us. In fact, the primary said nothing about how a candidate would fare in a general election. I’m trying to point out the problem was with the primary system itself–one that was front-loaded to favor a few small atypical small states–rather than more typical and important states in which Rudy might show his real strength with the electorate. He was running 20 points ahead of Hillary and Obama in PA, for instance. It was inconceivable that he would not have won an early primary in PA–had it had one. There are millions of Republicans in PA who never had a chance to get heard. So the arguments I hear are poor ones–they make little political sense.

    As for his being a moderate–yes and no. He’s a unique breed, similar to Christi, a NE type, a fighter, a fiscal conservative, a strict constructionist. True he’s personally pro-choice, etc.–he could never have been elected otherwise in NY. But this is tempered to a great degree by his strict constructionist legal outlook. I just don’t see how my arguments are foolish and those opposed wise. I see it as the other way around since Rudy brings some blue states like NJ and CT–and some purple one–PA to the table–unlike most other candidates except maybe Romney.

  • yea37ey

    Over the past several years,I have sat back and watched the so-called purist in the consevative movement whine and bellyache about how the Republicans just would not give them everything they want all the time and it would be preferable to lose an election than elect a person who agrees with you only 90% of the time.This is stupidity at it’s finest.When in life do you get everything you want all the time?Many so-called pure conservatives have said they either want it all or nothing.Again stupidity at it’s finest.Many so-called pure conservatives say if Palin doesn’t get the nomination,they will either sit out the election or go third party.I’m begining to think many of you like the thought of losing because it’s much easier to sit in front of a key board typing about how rotten everything is and being negative than say something positive.I guess you did learn something from progressives after all.Perhaps the next lesson you will learn is that you don’t move the conservative agenda forward by losing elections.Remember, voting for someone you agree with most of the time IS NOT sacrificing your principles or selling out.If you think that by losing that you will win,you will show yourself to be very short sided.Also,many in the conservative movement will begin to question Your commitment to the conservstive cause.Like myself.

  • gekster

    No matter how much you beat that dead horse, it’s still dead.

  • speciallist

    exactly

  • writeblock

    the social conservative votes were the crucial vote. But it’s the independents that are crucial. Social conservatives are strongest in the very states that would vote Republican no matter who the party nominated. But independents are not keen on socially conservative issues.

  • writeblock

    Instead of Rudy who was leading in all the national polls. Are you really so dense you equate Rudy’s fiscal conservatism with McCain’s lackadaisical economic background? People like you chose McCain–because you chased after losers like Hunter and Huckabee and others who never had a chance on the national level–just as some of you are now chasing after a non-entity like Pence because you are sympatico with his ideas–ignoring his electoral chances. You need to look at the electoral map more closely. It won’t be easy for us to win 270 votes.

  • NHConservative0227

    http://michellemalkin.com/2010/12/02/reminder-big-labor-big-nanny-mrs-os-government-nutrition-bill/

    Honestly, he was intriguing until I read about this. I don’t like the nanny state in any way and that automatically crosses him off my list.

    I stated earlier tonight that Pence was my top choice yet there’s a strong chance he runs for Ind gov. instead.

    I like Daniels, only thing I didn’t like was his proposal to tax those making more than $250,000.

    I like Cain too, having heard good things about him, but who knows if he’ll run.

  • writeblock

    How much organization did it take for a preacher like Huckabee to win the evangelicals over in IA? How much skill did it take for Romney to win over MI where his father was governor and where he had his roots? How much skill did it take for McCain to win over a few townhallers in one of the smallest states in the Union? Your theory is pretty weak–especially in view of the dismal organization our primary winner showed afterwards in the general campaign.

    I grant Rudy did not run a brilliant campaign during the primaries. But he knew he could never get traction in places like Iowa or SC or MI or NH. His only shot was FL–where he was ultimately betrayed. Still, he ran a lousy primary campaign–but that tells us nothing about how he would have fared in a general election since the terrain would have been so vastly different and since the electorate would have been so different.

  • aesthete

    OTOH, it would be nice to get more than the breadcrumbs that, by chance as much as by design, our masters in the Senate and the White House deign to grant us. We don’t need perfection, but we do need a government that trends towards less government and a stronger defense. That has not been the case under previous Republican administrations.

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

    …would you please try to formulate a credible path for Rudy to win the 2012 Republican nomination. Where can he assemble a winning block of delegates.

    Rehashing the 2008 political map isn’t very helpful.

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/01/03/much-ado-about-palin/#comment-96032

  • writeblock

    how Roberts and Alito answered the very same question posed. Rudy’s view is exactly the same. Stare decisis is the legal principle he’s affirming–just as Alito and Roberts did during their Senate confirmation hearings. Nothing at all wrong with such a response.

  • gekster

    A loser is a loser.
    Rudys a loser.
    You just wont see it.

  • gekster

    so many nts

  • writeblock

    His talents are more necessary now. We’re in crisis. We’re well on the path to a socialist state. The bureaucrats are superceding elected government officials. Rudy is a reformer. He knows the federal agencies backwards and forwards. He’s fiscally a Reaganite–like Daniels, only tougher. He’s also skilled in fighting the left–in the media especially. He’s never been just another politician. He’s been in the headlines consistently for decades, ever since he was a young attorney working for Reagan. He’s as well-known as Sarah and more than equal to the task of defeating Obama where he is strongest–in a few blue states and in the purple states.

  • gekster

    Besides losing BIG in the primaries.

  • Kentucky Scott

    I have fantasies of watching the left and RINO”s having strokes on camera as they watch Sarah Palin tear down their failed political beliefs in front of the American people. She does not have to pull her punches and she has the way of speaking to the conservative MAJORITY in a way they can understand … even those who don’t yet know they are conservative. I want a no prisoners taken, bare knuckled debate on the future of our country and right now Sarah Palin seems to be the only leader with the “cojones” to do this.

    If this sounds familiar it is because Ronald Reagan knew the same things Sarah Palin (and Rush Limbaugh) know …. conservative principles never have to be apologized for or watered down and work EVERY time they are tried!

    If every conservative who likes Sarah Palin would just stop saying “but I don’t think she can win” we will be calling her President-Elect Palin in two years and can then watch the Ruling Class in this country have that collective stroke together.

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

    …hope is not a method.

    Rudy is not Rhett Butler, and the Republican delegates are not Scarlett O’Hara.

    So try again as to what is your proposed method for assembling a majority of the delegates to the RNC delegates to select Rudy.

  • http://www.sheetanchor.org Sheet Anchor

    Time Magazine ? March 31, 1980

    ?National opinion polls continue to show Carter leading Reagan by an apparently comfortable margin of about 25%. They also show that more moderate Republicans like Ford would run better against the President. This suggests that Reagan is not the strongest G.O.P. choice for the November election and that he clearly faces an uphill battle.?

    ?Party operatives are plainly unhappy with his selection. In Massachusetts, where both Bush and Anderson defeated Reagan, party leaders are not yet reconciled to the Reagan candidacy. Says one: ?There?s a vacuum of leadership at the national level; and what appears to be the Republican Party?s response? A 69-year-old man who has done virtually nothing for years?

    ?Reagan has a history of committing rhetorical blunders that drive away voters. His quest in 1976 was damaged when he suggested vaguely, without proper research and consideration, that $90 billion in federal programs should be turned back to the states. He then spent months explaining that the affected programs would not be eliminated, only transferred. As Governor, Reagan was outraged by student unrest and once proclaimed: ?The state of California has no business subsidizing intellectual curiosity.?

    ?Worse perhaps than the verbal gaffe is Reagan?s relentlessly simple-minded discussion of complex problems. He is aware that he is charged with this failing, and in his 1967 inaugural address on becoming Governor of California, he asserted: ?We have been told there are no simple answers to complex problems. Well, the truth is there are simple answers, just not easy ones.?

    Time Magazine ? March 31, 1980
    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,921912,00.html

    Obviously things turned around in 8 months.

    So what are we going to do if Governor Palin is the nominee? Sit around and as though all is lost? As though the election is over? Or are we going to raise money and volunteers like no political race in history so that the Governor can fight to correct the lies propagated against her 20 year public service record, and as though our nation’s existence depends on the 2012 general election?

    If Governor Palin is the nominee, I am completely confident that she will do more than her part. She will be more than ready to do battle against Obama. The Governor can win all of the states won by GW Bush on the electoral map. She can win Ohio. Florida will be tough. But with the wind of a bad economy at our back, she can win it.

    So when the time comes, I will be ready, and I hope and expect my fellow conservative countrymen will ready. Erick, I know and expect you will be leading from the front in the political fight of our lives, Our nation will be depending on patriots like you and others here at RedState. This election will be about the future of the United States. Either we will be reduced to a socialist state, generally subordinate to the world community led by people like Putin; or we will renew and restore this nation to its exceptionalism. The future will be in our hands. We will determine whether we win or lose; not Obama; not the Democrats; and not the main stream media. How we act, and what we do, will determine which way for America.

  • audax
  • ithos

    It is critical that the next GOP candidate attracts voters on the margin and she simply can’t seal the deal. Yes, she has been smeared by a despicable press since day one but she has had two years to turn public opinion with massive exposure and she has failed. Her political rhetoric lacks the substance, eloquence and punch that you find in comments by Rubio, Jindal and Christie.

    Of course she would make a great President but she lacks the Teflon qualities that any GOP candidate must have to get elected. It isn’t fair but is a fact that the media is extremely biased and will exploit every weakness that they can find. For the survival of our Republic, we need to find a candidate who passes the conservative litmus tests and is ELECTABLE.

  • audax
  • smit

    Sarah can win AND YOU CAN HELP!

  • The_Gadfly

    Yes, the MSM is going to try to dump all over any nominated candidate the way they have on Palin. The key bit however is that at the most critical time she was under attack she cut and ran. Instead of fighting the smears against her as governor (which incidentally used the law she advocated for over the objections of other Republicans in Alaska), she resigned. The attacks on Presidential Candidate Palin would be both more vicious and more numerous than they were as governor. Some Palinistas claim that as Presidential Candidate Palin she would have more resources to fight back. While this is true on a strictly money scale, it ignores that the Left will likewise have more resources with which to smear. The difference being that the Left will be able to add even more resources relative to what Palin will gain, and thus have and even larger edge than they did when she was Governor of Alaska and not weighted down with the McCain albatross as she was when she battled Katie.

  • ithos

    At least what I’ve seen so far. Reagan came to prominence by giving stirring and compelling speeches that helped bring Conservatism back from the dead. I challenge you to find one Palin speech that could hold a candle to Reagan’s address to the 1964 convention and his many subsequent presentations marketing conservatism to non Republicans. She can sing to the choir but that is about it.

  • AceInTX

    all of whom he screwed around on…so don’t give me the “his word is solid” bull.

    He’s pro abortion, Pro Amnesty, Bro Gun Control…he’s a typical north eastern establishment big city elitist.

    I said he should run to fill the Senate seat Hillary vacated…or he should run to fill the other Senate Seat next time it’s up…but for POTUS?

    Please!

  • AceInTX

    And let me repeat THIS again…We’ve followed the pander to blue and purple states…trying to attract moderates and independents in 1976, 1992, 1996 and 2008….

    and every time we failed to win any of those “crucial blue and purple States…and we failed to win those “Crucial” independents….in the mean time…we pissed off our base….drove our enthusiasm and turnout down…and lost BIG TIME…

    on the flip side…Reagan ran base elections in 1980 and 1984, GHWB ran a base election in 1988GW Bush ran base elections in 2000….and 2004 he went exclusively to turn out the base and won reelection while simultaneously holding on to the House and expanding Republican Control of the Senate…something that had never been done before in modern times.

    you can look at the mid terms the same way…1994 and 2010 were base elections run exclusively at the base…and they were landslide Republican Elections…look at the contrast of 1986, 1998, and 2006…

    We lost…

    HISTORY proves your strategy to be a losing one…yet you people insist on hanging onto this foolishness….

    It’s insanity to keep putting your hand in the fire and getting burned every time you do it.

  • AceInTX

    let’s just ignore History and repeat it again!

    I bow to your superior intellect

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

    Palin was savaged just like every other conservative, but it was she who was unprepared for her first national interviews, and it was she who said some rather silly and not well thought out things.

    And further it is she who has done nothing to try and change her image by all this overexposure and these unserious TV programs.

    You never get a second chance to make a first impression. She blew it. that is what you will have to come to grips with. I think she also blew it when she quit as governor.

    It is all those things that make her radioactive, not the attacks.

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

    Palin was savaged just like every other conservative, but it was she who was unprepared for her first national interviews, and it was she who said some rather silly and not well thought out things.

    And further it is she who has done nothing to try and change her image by all this overexposure and these unserious TV programs.

    You never get a second chance to make a first impression. She blew it. that is what you will have to come to grips with. I think she also blew it when she quit as governor.

    It is all those things that make her radioactive, not the attacks.

  • AceInTX

    We’ve picked up electors and Obama has lost them this go round before a single vote has been cast. Texas adds five to our column all by her lonesome.

    Seriously…this is sad.

  • ruexperienced

    nt

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

    Reagan spent over a decade formulating his policies, doing Radio addresses, debating the issues, and giving speeches to large audiences.

    Saint Sarah has chosen another path. She is more involved in raising money, attacking the left, and picking candidates. Now all of that is great! we need it.

    But it does not make her a better candidate, it makes her a kingmaker within the party and gives little outreach to independents.

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

    Reagan spent over a decade formulating his policies, doing Radio addresses, debating the issues, and giving speeches to large audiences.

    Saint Sarah has chosen another path. She is more involved in raising money, attacking the left, and picking candidates. Now all of that is great! we need it.

    But it does not make her a better candidate, it makes her a kingmaker within the party and gives little outreach to independents.

  • ruexperienced

    If she wanted to let the world that she deserved to be on the world stage, she sure didn’t act like it.

    Plus from a marketing standpoint, I don’t understand the Alaska show.

    How is that show telling Americans anything they don’t already know about her? She’s from Alaska. She likes to hunt. She likes to fish.

    We get it already!

    Tell us something we DON’T know about you.

  • ruexperienced

    just saying

  • AceInTX

    What a load of crap….the primaries are font loaded with blue state open primaries….with the exception of IA and SC…this schedule should favor Rudy….

    Rudy lost because he didn’t compete in the early primaries….and put all his chits on Florida. All they while crowing about what a brilliant strategy he was following…

    HE LOST!!!

    His BRILLIANT STRATEGY was a failure!!!

    If he runs again…HE’LL LOSE AGAIN!!!

  • ruexperienced

    with you.

  • AceInTX
  • AceInTX

    you suck at this…you really do.

    The Dems own Philly and the I 95 corridor….Republican strength in PA is mostly in suburban and rural western PA

    you’re arguing out of both sides of your mouth here…and making a fool of yourself

  • ruexperienced

    … then you need to go back to his Bedtime For Bonzo days in the 1950s for a comparison.

    Let Palin serve two full terms as governor as Reagan did.

    Let her debate people on the level of Bobby Kennedy as Reagan did, instead of hiding behind Twitter and Facebook.

    Let Sarah Palin make some hard nomination choices, as Reagan was forced to do with Nixon and Ford.

    After a few decades of this, let’s see how much stature she has.

  • AceInTX

    he?s saying a so-called ?strict constructionist? can go along with emanations and penumbras, inventing constitutional rights out of whole cloth?so long as it was done long enough ago that stare decisis applies.

  • JadedByPolitics

    …

  • JadedByPolitics

    …

  • AceInTX
  • NHConservative0227

    Palin has done nothing but state her issues on a variety of positions over the last two years.

    We know she’s pro drilling and resource development in Alaska– which is a major strength for Palin.

    She has spoken out strongly on American exceptionalism and even who a great op-ed for the Wall Street Journal on foreign policy.

    She is against quantitave easing.

    She is against bailing out any of the states.

    She was the first to mention the death panels that have now magically reappeared.

    This is just off the top of my head. Her positions have been pretty clear for all to see.

    I think we need to let her decide if she wants to run and see how she does in the primary instead of writing her off now because of some stupid polls and that the left and the establishment is afraid of her.

  • NHConservative0227

    Palin has done nothing but state her issues on a variety of positions over the last two years.

    We know she’s pro drilling and resource development in Alaska– which is a major strength for Palin.

    She has spoken out strongly on American exceptionalism and even who a great op-ed for the Wall Street Journal on foreign policy.

    She is against quantitave easing.

    She is against bailing out any of the states.

    She was the first to mention the death panels that have now magically reappeared.

    This is just off the top of my head. Her positions have been pretty clear for all to see.

    I think we need to let her decide if she wants to run and see how she does in the primary instead of writing her off now because of some stupid polls and that the left and the establishment is afraid of her.

  • AceInTX

    particularly the…”I can see Russia from my back yard” line was a McCain campaign talking point. I heard McCain staffers say the same thing a couple days before she said it.

    I’m not a Palin Bot and am currently backing Barbour…but I think the Sarah who was being coached and molded by the McCain camp needs to be separated from the Palin post 2008 campaign…

    As for unserious TV programs…I think the same thing was said of Ragan about his GE theater days wasn’t it?

  • AceInTX

    and she needs to answer for that better than she has to get me 100% on board with her.

  • AceInTX
  • AceInTX

    no matter how likely her coronation….she should still be vetted like all the mothers….the Dems didn’t vet Barry and look where they are….

    I don’t know about you…but I’m in no hurry to end up in the Dems place in 2014 having just undergone a shellacking wondering why we didn’t pick a horse from sterner stock.

    I’m a Palin Fan…though not yet a Palin for Potus supporter….KI’m a show me kind of guy…I think she has what it takes…but she needs to prove it…

    for me it’s silly to start calling for people to back off her and not ask legitimate questions because she’s destined to be our nominee….

  • AceInTX

    the point is…the same things were said about Reagan…and he was able to turn that around….

    can Sarah…time will tell…if she does it…only then will she be worthy to be compared to the likes of Reagan….the point is…the more things change…the more they stay the same…if she can emulate what Reagan did…she can win the right to be compared with him.

    What bugs me is that there are so many here who sound like the Time Magazine of 1980

  • Scope

    after reading all 410 comments now residing on the Pence diary, the majority of the comments questioning Palin are just that, questions. Most gladly say they would support Palin if she is the candidate. Many of the negative Palin comments have come about because of just a few of the Palin worshipers, who are so blinded by the Palin light, they can’t see why anyone has any questions as to Miss Perfect.

  • AceInTX

    how do you know who’s “ELECTABLE” ahead of time….

    To often “ELECTABLE” is code for Establishment approved…or Media Approved…or Democrat Approved…

    spare me that argument…I’m sick of it….Reagan wasn’t “ELECTABLE” but he won….

    Is Palin “Electable? who knows….only time will tell…but it’s way too early to declare her “Un-ELECTABLE”

  • AceInTX

    and please shove the “purist” trip up you…err…where it belongs…

    we were treated to a solid year of this crap beginning with McCain’s nomination on into 2009 after the old fart lost his “respectful campaign” and I have little tolerance…much less intent of listening to any more of it from the likes of you or anyone else here..

    if you want to criticize something someone here has actually siad…by all means…but don’t set up a straw man and knock it down and then lecture us about how stupid we are…

    we tried things your way…they didn’t work….now it’s your turn to sit down and shut up!!

  • Scope

    knocking those that one deems “purists.” If you had a clue, you would know that most here in fact voted for McCain, and, believe me he wasn’t an 80% conservative, or even Republican. This is your first comment here at Redstate, and, it is obvious you don’t know anything about the community of regulars that post here. As to anyone staying home and not voting because the candidate wasn’t pure enough, perhaps you really meant to post this comment over at the Daily Paul.

    I’m also sick and tired of people, who sit back and watch what’s going on in the political world, and then come out swinging against the movement to get better, more conservative candidates. I would say most here fight for the best conservative in the primaries, but, then go to the ballot box and vote for the Republican, who ever it is.

    Seems you may still be mad about Castle the corrupt crook.

  • Scope

    when someone posts their first comment on Redstate, and calls out the “purists,” and who he deems purists, us, it isn’t a good beginning to a happy relationship here on this site.

  • AceInTX

    with this as a beginning

  • runner12

    the Shakespeare play “Much Ado About Nothing.” This is exactly what this is. I read his initial article and not one thing that was said offended me, and I like Sarah Palin. I also happen to agree with the article.
    Do you really think that he was suggesting that we capitulate to the Left or the MSM? Has anyone who has any pull on this site EVER done so? The answer is a resounding no.
    Has anyone considered that Palin may be in the exact spot to do the most damage to the Left? This may be her arena in which she is the most effective. It is not a question of competence with regards to the Presidency, it is a question of strategic placement.
    Also, while it may be an unpopular view, it is also a question of polarization. I am not talking about “electability”. That word has been misused so much it is a dirty word to me. I am speaking of being pragmatic. The odd thing is that I think Palin herself is more of a pragmatist than some who support her. I am convinced that she will not run if she feels there is a better candidate out there. She is a smart lady and whatever decision she makes, I am convinced it will be well thought out. She is all about taking down the Left, whether it is in the Oval Office or as a conservative activist. We should follow her example and quit jumping all over people who simply have a slightly different viewpoint.

  • Read Chesterton
  • Scope

    it is very easy to speak out against Obama, or what his administration is doing. Anyone of us here are capable of doing the same, and even better. It’s great to say she is against something, however, what would she do about them? It’s great to say she is for something, however, how will she accomplish those goals. She doesn’t need to put out white papers on everything, but, she does need to do more than just use the terminology.

  • Scope

    n/t

  • cwilson

    …that was a *deviation* from the doctrine of strict construction. Rudy was trying to assert that stare decisis is, itself, A PART OF strict construction.

    It isn’t.

    Roberts and Alito were establishing the conditions under which strict construction would NOT apply — not trying to blur the definition of the term as Rudy was.

    And the attempt to do so doesn’t say good things about Rudy’s sincerity on the issue.

  • Scope

    that Obama’s approval ratings will be up in 2012, unless of course he keeps paying for polls that are completely bogus, and, that can be expected.

    Obama will never go to the center, despite his rhetoric. His handlers won’t allow it. He has pushed the socialist agenda much too far to turn back now. He will rule by regulations, czars, and every back room deal he can make. The Center for American Progress will continue to write the agenda, and to rule.

    By 2012, the electorate, minus the small cadre of communists, will vote for Peter Pan for president. He already scares the crap out of too many people, and, no one trusts him any longer with all his well documented lies. His wife doesn’t help with her extravagant spending of the tax payers dollars.

  • jyalai

    Palin hasn’t lost very many elections so far. Until she faces off in an election and loses, we really can’t say she is “not electable”. Up to this point, she is the only one engaging the public on conservative ideals in a way that the public understands. Everyone knows she is conservative. There is no doubt. There is plenty of doubt about many of the other Republican front runners in the minds of the public.

    Neither Palin nor any other conservative will win, unless we conservatives go to our neighbors and make the case for conservatism. If conservatism is not the focal point of the next election, nobody will beat Obama.

    My definition of conservatism is strengthening the individual over the collective, strengthening the family over the community, strengthening the private sector over the public sector, and reducing the federal government back to its constitutional limits.

  • Scope

    and I have been saying much the same since BJ started on her angry tirades against anyone who has the slightest question against Palin. At one time, the Ron Paul fanatics were banned on sight. It seems that at some point the same will be necessary against some of the worst of the Palin fanatics. When it gets down to calling EE every name in the book, it might be time to consider that option. They always have Conservatives4Palin to sprinkle their fairy dust on, or Hillbuzz for that matter.

  • georgeinla

    “crowned”, and as I mentioned, I do think that the primaries are the right place to make this decision. But holding off judgment pending the primaries is different than openly fretting that unless someone else steps forward, we’re doomed in the general election.

  • Scope

    an honest to God real troll calling a front pager a troll. Then again I’m surprised you haven’t called EE a troll in addition to every other name you have called him. You would be well advised to back up on your attacks on those here that have more credibility in their little finger than you will ever earn. I knew you were close to the edge of the cliff, but, you just jumped off of it.

  • powertothepeople

    here is why people state she is unelectable.

    Like her, love her, dislike her, hate her, just do not want to support her, put any word there and it is all irrelevant. Winning a republican nomination is only the first step and the smallest step.

    In order to win the presidency, you have to have the combined vote. Being extremely popular in conservative circles, moderate circles, or liberal circles is not enough. You have to be able to take a vast majority of all the votes from those circles in order to stand a chance. But to win, you have to have the independents. Without these folks, you do not win, period.

    This does not mean you have to change your character or your message, it means you have to convince them you are the best option for the country. During the primaries, independent votes do not hold much sway in most areas or overall. But come the general, they matter tremendously. If the independents do not like our nominee, they will simply vote hardcore republican in all the Congress, state houses, and gov races out there yet stay with the Obama man. They will justify their decision, as they have before, by stating we took most of his power away, but were not ready to give it all to “…..name…,.”

    Palin has a serious problem. Some will claim it is all her fault, some her fault, all the fault of the media, and even some will claim the fault of our party. All that is irrelevant. Palin has major issues with the independents and the moderates of our party. If the general was today, she would, most likely, take enough of the moderate vote to be OK, but not the independents. If she runs and wins, her main focus has to be on the independents or she will lose to B Obama. You can argue the country hates him that bad or anyone could beat him, but that is a fools argument. The very same argument was used by the left in the second election of GWB. Did not work out too well for them did it?

    Palin, if she runs, will most likely win the nomination, but unless she changes the minds and the hearts of the squishes (independents and a large portion of the moderate to liberal side of our party) she will lose the general. And so far she has done little to work on their opinion of her and she is running out of time. Every poll out there shows independents, in a large majority, will not vote for her or most likely will not vote for her.This can not be changed in a few speeches or a few catchy phrases. She is going to have to work hard to get a majority of them behind her or she can not win the general. People’s hearts may lie to them, but numbers do not. Any person who wins our nomination must be able to take a majority of independents or they will lose. Palin is no different except for the fact out of all our possible nominees, she is the most disliked amongst the squishes and would receive the least amount of their votes. And that is a major problem with being electable.

    So to answer your question/statement. You are correct that we need to make sure a proven conservative is the nominee. Another McCain fiasco and we are in trouble. But at the same time, with Palin, it is not conservatism or being a proven conservative that is her problem, it is her ability to garner the very needed independent votes.

    She must work on that or she will remain unelectable. 99.9999% of us on here will support her in the general regardless of who we supported in the primaries. But that is not enough to win….

  • Scope

    good to see that you were suckered into buying one.

  • powertothepeople

    many are confusing electable with whether or not she would do a good job.

    Since she is not president, knowing she would do a good job would require a crystal ball.

    Most, not all, say unelectable because of her standing with independents. No matter who runs, they have to take a majority of the independent vote. Put a reborn Reagan up in 2012, and he would have to win the independent vote to win the election. In fact put up any name, and the same applies.

    She is not doing well at all with independents and that is a major problem for her. And so far she has done little to change their opinion.. The election is a ways off, not so far that she can wait and wait and wait, and she has time to do the work to change their minds but she has to get started. The same would apply to whoever wins, not only her. But she is in the worst position when it comes to the independent votes. Things could change, but it will take a focused effort on her part to make the change.

    People do not like Obama, in fact, many despise him. But that is not enough to get a win. The left learned that in the second GWB election and if we do not learn that now, we will learn the hard way in 2012. Palin could win, but she has a lot of work to do and catchy phrases or speaking to those who love her is not enough. In fact it is no where near enough to win. Should she run, she must focus on the squishes or she will lose and we will be stuck with another 4 of Obama.

  • NHConservative0227

    Palin is required to clearly state her policy positions line by line when she has yet to even declare that she’s running.

    Do we require this of any other other potential candidates? Do we know in depth what their exact positions are anymore than Palin’s?

    I don’t think it’d make alot of sense for Palin to spend alot of time explaining her policy positions in great detail at this point since she hasn’t declared yet. If she did so, it’d be kind of obvious that she is running and would only fuel more hatred and vitriol from the left and GOP elites.

    Yes, I know in general what Palin’s beliefs are and I like what I’ve seen. I think she deserves alot of credit for being pretty much the only one who has continually spoken out against Obama over the last two years. That really goes a long way with me. Most of the rest like Romney, Newt, and Huckabee have been silent.

    In terms of what we do know about policy, I think her position on energy is a major plus. Of course all the GOP candidates are going to talk up drilling unless you’re McCain or the Cap/Tax Huckabee, but Palin knows first-hand how important it is to utilize Alaska’s resources and has been touting this since day one. I believe this would really help her throughout her campaign especially as gas prices continue to skyrocket.

    Also, what Palin has denounced is very important. She has spoken out against Moochelle Obama’s nanny state food police program, while others like Huckabee and Barbour actually support it.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2010/12/02/reminder-big-labor-big-nanny-mrs-os-government-nutrition-bill/

    Honestly, he was intriguing until I read about this. I don?t like the nanny state in any way and that automatically crosses him off my list.

    Finally, here is a good article by Palin on Iran that gives plenty of good insights into what her foreign policy would be like. In fact, this is one of the more in depth and better solutions I’ve seen on how to handle Iran:

    http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/its-time-to-get-tough-with-iran/476148663434

  • acat

    Because that’s what Iowa and New Hampshire are. In the end, they’re not about who’s the *best* candidate, they’re about who’s the best *organized*.

    In Iowa, it’s routine for candidates to bus in their supporters to pack the caucuses. In New Hampshire, it’s a bit more of a popularity contest, with a twist of “what can we get these guys to do?” thrown in. Lamar Alexander flipping flapjacks comes to mind, but that may be before your time.

    In short, Rudy should have done well in New Hampshire if he could leave the NYC bluster behind for a while… and he could have taken Iowa wit the right money and boots on the ground. Not seriously competing in both is .. stupid.

    Yes, Huck had an advantage in Iowa – not because he’s a preacher, but because he’s a populist from a nearby state… he didn’t have to look hard to find supporters. So what?

    All McLame did to win over New Hampshire was to show up and have a sense of humor, the same sense of humor he later displayed on SNL. Did Rudy do either?

    You keep going on about how the primary system is why Rudy lost. You’re wrong. Rudy lost because he either failed to understand the system, or failed to do what’s necessary to win it, not because of the system.

    As you yourself point out – McCain and Huckabee managed to do well enough…

    Mew

  • acat

    Unless you plan to nominate Archangel Gabriel, you’re going to find disturbing stuff. And I haven’t heard he’s interested in the job….

    Palin’s disturbia is pretty well out there. Daniels tripped out of the gate with his “truce”, Cain is an unknown, Barbour is an “insider”, etc. etc. (and that doesn’t even mention the retread clown posse of Newt, Rudy, Romney, Huckabee, etc.)

    The point is, whoever we get is going to be flawed. The best we can do is flawed. So. What to do? Find someone whose flaws you’re willing to live with. As I said, I can live with Barbour, Cain, Daniels, Palin, and Pence.

    Mew

  • outlawcountry

    I have became a huge Mike Pence fan and like to see him run but it not going happen. With LT.Gov Skillman backing out of the run for gov it will give Mike Pence better hopes of winning higher office

  • aesthete

    or in any position of authority where we could see her act on her beliefs, she can’t get away with not elaborating on them in detail, as a governor could due to the fact that he or she is actually vetoing or advancing legislation and doing things that a president would do.

    I doubt that most voters know any of her positions outside of opposition to ObamaCare and support of drilling in ANWR, despite her many public appearances. That is why I am suspicious of the poll.

  • NHConservative0227

    Yes, Palin is no longer governing, but she is also not campaigning for president.

    Again, I ask why is it fair to demand to Palin outline her policy positions while not doing the same of the other potentail candidates?

    There is a time and place for that, it’s during the primary.

    All I ask is that people give her a fair shot at running if she chooses to do so. I don’t think it’s fair at all to simply write her off just because the left and the establishment doesn’t like her.

  • NHConservative0227

    I’m surprised that you can live with Barbour given that he’s on board with Moochelle Obama’s nanny state food program. To me that’s one of the most important things, to have a constitutional limited govt that lets us live our lives.

    As for Palin’s flaws, I think I’ve highlighted the most important ones that are often ignored. I don’t like her support of Kelly Ayotte, Carly Fiorina, and John McCain. I’m not too high on her pseudo support of amnesty back in the 08 campaign either.

    However, I don’t buy that she’s unelectable, unqualified, or too radioactive. These polls don’t mean anything until we have some real debates once the primary starts.

    Palin’s negatives as listed above are not nearly as bad as the other establishment picks. As for amnesty, sadly pretty much all the candidates are soft on this in one way or another. For her part, Palin was a strong and outspoken supporter of Jan Brewer and the Arizona law.

    As for the negatives of the rest of the field:

    1. Huckabee: By far the worst. Supports Cap and Tax. Supports Moochelle’s nanny state food program. Raised taxes as governor. Is Mr. Clemency soft on crime.

    2. Romney: the establishment pick. Romneycare: pretty much says it all.

    3. Newt: Supports the party platform over conservative principles. He supported the RINO/Acorn supporter Dede Scozzafavva in the NY 23rd. Also, I can’t get that image out of my head of him sitting on that couch with Pelosi talking about global warming.

    4. Barbour: Supports Moochelle’s food nanny state as mentioned above.

    5. Pawlenty: Don’t know alot about him, I have heard rumors that he believed in global warming; not sure if this is true.

    6. Daniels: The truce as social issues thing which isn’t a big deal to me, but I did not like his plan to tax those making over $250,000– sounds like an Obama policy to me.

    The reason I would support Pence or Demint as my top picks is because I believe they are the most conservative. Unfortunately DeMint isn’t going to run and it’s looking like Pence is going to run for Ind. gov. instead.

    That leaves Palin as the most conservative with the least amount of significant flaws.

  • acat

    I notice that you ignored Pence and Cain, other than to guess what Pence is going to do…. never mind that Pence may not have made up his mind yet.

    Note that Becker has posted extensively on how Gov. Brewer had nothing to do with the AZ law until it was passed – backing Brewer is right up there with backing McCain…. meaningless. Brewer isn’t a reformer, she’s a poll-minder, kin to Clinton.

    Also, the negatives to look at with Palin have to do with the general, i.e. her negatives among independents, not Red Staters.

    As it has been put, if it’s Palin vs. Obama in the general, it becomes a referendum about Palin. If it’s anybody else vs. Obama, it’s a referendum about Obama…. and we saw how well that worked for the Dems in 2010. I want to credit Kyle8 with that, but I could be misremembering.

    The other point to consider is whether Obama will run again. I predict that he will not, that he will be “too radioactive” for the Dems who have more sitting Senators up in 2012 and cannot afford any more losses in the house or in the state legislatures and governorships. In short, Obama will have anti-coat-tails…. and just about any Dem except Obama would do well against Palin…. her qualifications really are quite thin… they only look good compared to Obama.

    Mew

  • NHConservative0227

    Palin’s qualifications are quite thin? How so? She has valuable executive experience from 2 years as governor, head of oil and gas commission, and mayor of Wasilla.

    Compared to Redstate favorites Pence and Cain, that’s very impressive. Pence has zero executive experience and Cain has never held any public office.

    Many are upset that they don’t know the specifics of what Palin’s policies would be, but the same is true about Daniels and Cain and I don’t hear the same concerns.

    Unlike many others who feel the attacks on Palin have made her “radioactive” I think it’s actually helped her because she’s already withstood the vicious onslaught. Does anyone really think the left and the GOP establishment won’t unleash similar brutal attacks on any other conservative who they feel has a shot at winning?

    Simply put this election is going to be about socialism vs. capitalism. Total gov’t vs. limited gov’t. We need a candidate that can clearly articulate that and has the balls to say it the way it is and call Obama out for his intentionally reckless policies. As proven by her constant criticism over the last 2 years, Palin is the best one to do it. Given the choice, the majority of Americans will choose Palin and freedom over Maobama.

    Finally four more things for ya Acat:

    1. You’re seriously not concerned about Barbour supporting Moochelle and the nanny state food police?

    2. As for Pence, I was reading as night that he actually wrote an amnesty bill in 2006. I haven’t verified this yet, but if true it’s the first major flaw I’ve heard about him.

    3. I didn’t know that about Jan Brewer, but I still give Palin credit for strongly supporting the Az law. As I mentioned earlier, I’m concerned about Palin’s pseudo amnesty support from the 08 campaign and this goes a long way on countering that.

    4. I don’t think there’s any chance that Obama doesn’t get the nomination and I will hold you to that $10 bet to charity. :)

  • kcdude

    effort to get Mike Pence in the national race and his comments regarding Sarah Palin. We want a conservative to run and win. Pence can win, Palin can win but mention her name and folks immediately begin picking a side – not so with Pence. So much of the reaction to her is based on gut feeling- folks not willing to take a look at her postions and beliefs. That said, I like her and she will have my full support if she is our nominee just as Erick stated in the OP.

  • acat

    It’s hard to find a package that has less than 25% of the USDA daily recommended amount…. and there are long term health effects associated with excessive salt.

    I don’t think the “food police” are a good approach to the problem, but I also don’t see them as significantly different from the “booze police”, a.k.a. prohibition… and that little experiment didn’t last long and has produced a lasting anti- bias around alcohol.

    You’re wrong about the Pence “amnesty” smear. He wrote a non-Amnesty response to the McLame/Grahamnesty bill that did contain a path to citizenship – not amnesty. It’s quite telling that some on Red State are repeating the lie. Hat tip to Scope for digging up the truth, by the way.

    As for the AZ law, the only thing I like about it is that it standardized existing police procedures throughout the state. That’s right, the police were *already* checking when they talk to someone in most of AZ.

    The law had no effect on day-to-day operations overall, it instead had the effect of bringing immigration to the forefront when the Left and idiot-Rs weren’t ready, which is good, but it also made AZ a lightning rod, which is less good.

    As for Obama not getting the nomination – what if he withdraws, LBJ style?

    Mew

  • audax
  • Scope

    49%. No lie.

  • NHConservative0227

    To regulate what its citizens eat, period. Either you believe in a free society or you don’t.

    Also, it coincides pretty well with Obamacare. As long as the gov’t is in charge of our health care, it will be able to tell us what to eat.

    I’m glad to hear that about Pence. Like I said, I really like the guy. I don’t even like the pathway to citizenship thing, but that was the same thing Palin in 2008. Pence and DeMint are the only two that I think are truly more conservative than Palin, but I don’t think either is going to run.

    I’m aware that the Az law merely reinforces existing federal laws. I heard Hannity repeat that on a daily basis last summer (he has to be good for something). It did highlight the need to get serious about illegal immigration and the fact that the Feds have not done much to stop it (both Dems and GOP).

    If Obama withdraws, then I’ll pay the $10 to charity and the self-made Sarah will beat Hillary “Coattails” Clinton, but I just don’t see Obama doing anything like that.

  • NHConservative0227

    To regulate what its citizens eat, period. Either you believe in a free society or you don’t.

    Also, it coincides pretty well with Obamacare. As long as the gov’t is in charge of our health care, it will be able to tell us what to eat.

    I’m glad to hear that about Pence. Like I said, I really like the guy. I don’t even like the pathway to citizenship thing, but that was the same thing Palin in 2008. Pence and DeMint are the only two that I think are truly more conservative than Palin, but I don’t think either is going to run.

    I’m aware that the Az law merely reinforces existing federal laws. I heard Hannity repeat that on a daily basis last summer (he has to be good for something). It did highlight the need to get serious about illegal immigration and the fact that the Feds have not done much to stop it (both Dems and GOP).

    If Obama withdraws, then I’ll pay the $10 to charity and the self-made Sarah will beat Hillary “Coattails” Clinton, but I just don’t see Obama doing anything like that.

  • Scope

    You can read it for yourself and see if you think it has anything to do with granting amnesty. Pay particular attention to his Ellis Island ideas in particular, please.

    http://mikepence.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1150&Itemid=66

    The amnesty smear was posted by someone posting by the name of beltwaylvr (belt way lover) who I don’t think has posted here before. Probably a Romney or Huckabee staffer.

  • acat

    In inverse order, I doubt it’ll be Clinton – too much guilt-by-association, both to Obama and to Billy Jeff.

    The AZ law did not change AZ police procedure. They were *already* checking. Unlike Cali, which has a nearly identical law but does not use it. My point isn’t that AZ is enforcing Fed law, rather that AZ LEOs were already doing what the AZ law requires for the most part. In short, it brought the issue up before the Libs and Amnesty-Rs were ready, but at the cost of making the state a lightning rod. I think it was the right move, but it’s not clear cut.

    I was very happy when Scope posted the link to the actual Pence bill as well.

    And as for our food .. that’s where things get a little sticky. In a purely free society, we’d be back to “how do we know this food is what it claims to be?” because the USDA would be toast.

    What I think we need, though, is more Pepsi. Yeah, I know, there should be a punchline… but there isn’t.

    http://www.latimes.com/health/hc-yale-pepsi-1227-20101227,0,6907393.story

    Pepsi’s Frito-Lay unit is seriously trying to make their Fritos and potato chips healthier without changing the taste. This is the right approach…. but to get to this point has taken someone with a stick, eh? Once it’s a little better understood, watch for ramen to drop its’ sodium percentages as well…

    Yes, I don’t want the Food Police. That said, I also want to be able to eat healthy food, and to not pay for long-term health issues caused by poor nutrition. (including rickets in kids who are given soy milk because their parents are idiot liberals…)

    Mew

  • Scope

    some are saying that they want to know what her policy positions are before they jump on her bandwagon. The same would be so for the other candidates as well. It is the Palin fans that are coming out and saying that she has already stated her policies and positions, which is not true of any of the potential candidates. One could think that we already know the positions of Huckabee and Romney, that is unless Romney has changed his mind on the issues yet again.

  • acat
  • NHConservative0227

    I want to be able to eat healthy food as well. The way to do it is by consumers demanding these choices with their pocketbooks, not by the overbearing First Lady forcing companines, schools, and people to eat the way she thinks they should.

    Until she gets Barack to stop smoking, I don’t want her opinion on anything I should be eating.

    The Food safety bill bans soda in schools and eliminates school bake sales which is idiotic.

    Props to Palin for standing up to this nonsense.

    Finally, Acat, if Barbour actually becomes a serious contender, how do you think the media will treat a white southerner with a thick southern accent?

  • rightwingmom52

    and see how far you get. Who do you think was elected in November? Pro life, pro 2nd amendment, pro small government, pro constitution, pro capitalism, etc. conservatives. Of course they ran on a stop the spending and create jobs platform and didn’t necessarily talk about abortion or DOMA, but I guarantee you that every voting social conservative like me checked their positions on their websites before donating or supporting them.

  • SirGladiator

    There are tons of Palin Democrats out there, I have an aunt who is one of them. She had literally never voted for a Republican for any office, before McCain picked Sarah. There isn’t a bigger Democrat than her, and she cast her first ever Republican vote for Sarah (she voted for all the other Democrats in 2008, and straight Democrat ticket again in 2010). Sarah will get her vote, and the votes of many others like her, if she runs in 2012. I agree she’s got to prove herself once again in the Primaries, the same as Reagan did in 1980, and she will no doubt be as impressive as the Gipper was, possibly even moreso (if you recall he actually lost Iowa before really getting things going, I could easily see Palin doing even better than that). She’s got such a huge appeal to Independents and Democrats, I know the Washington folks don’t think so, but that’s actually great because they’ll continue to underestimate her, which makes it even more likely that she will actually score not just a victory in 2012, but a landslide victory!

  • Scope

    BTW- I have “a cat” that has the most beautiful blue blue eyes you ever could imagine.

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

    There was actually a pretty huge Republican vote. But we lost all of the independents, and the Libs motivated their base in a huge way. That is what did it.

  • rightwingmom52
  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    nearly all of those type of people,(except your aunt) have already left the democrat party, they are either Republicans or independents.

    The modern democrat party is the party of Reid, Pelosi, Barney Frank, Obama, and Rahm Emmanuel.

    I don’t see how anyone who is even slightly right of center and of a sound mind can support that party anymore.

  • acat

    … Frito-Lay would have put this change in on their own…. and gorp and granola would outsell cheese puffs.

    I’m not sure how the media will treat a southerner with an accent. In my wanderings, I’ve found that a persons’ accent has very little to do with their intelligence, although those with northeastern or urban accents are more often liberals…

    My guess is the media is going to do to any Repub candidate exactly what they did to McCain and Dole and Bush… that is, ignore as much as they can, focus on minor idiocy, and try to create scandal if they can’t find a real one.

    Barbours’ accent will end up mattering very little in all that.

    Mew

  • azaeroprof

    I clicked through and read the whole thing. It’s amazing how similar it is to what could be written about Palin today. And this was written just 7 months before he was elected in a landslide!

    I strongly encourage you to post this in a diary, using the ‘blockquote’ feature for the article excerpts. If you don’t, I’d be glad to.

  • aesthete

    putting higher value on things besides health? The fact that Frito-Lays, ice cream trucks, et al exist is not evidence of a market failure, it is an example of people having different preferences than yourself. For myself, I have no interest in living an austere, drab existence in order to prolong my waning years*: is that a choice that the government should take away from me in the interest of public health? Because if that’s so, you’re essentially holding personal liberty hostage to the medical profession.

  • jyalai

    Independents are confused right now. They don’t like what Obama is shoveling, but aren’t sure why. Palin, or any other conservative, must make the case to the independents that the uneasy feeling they have about Obama and the Democrats is because they are socialists, and that voting Republican will stop that slide into socialism. If that case is not made through clear conservative answers, the independents will deliver a mixed bag.

    So far, no Republican hopeful has really made a clear conservative case yet. Palin has tied herself to conservative ideals better than any other candidate. The question is whether independents are sold on conservatism yet.

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

    for both Bush’s, a Dole, and a McCain, but he had to hold our nose while we did it, shame on us for being so demanding!

  • acat

    provided, of course, they don’t ask me to pay for their health problems later on.

    Seriously, I’m not saying that the existence of ice cream trucks or salty chips or ramen are a failure. I am saying that the market will seek the cheapest, not necessarily the most healthy… and a lot of the less expensive foods (ramen, for example) are also the least healthy.

    Again, I’m not holding anyone responsible to the health care industry. I am, however, opposed to paying later for their health care … and if it takes a minor and temporary deformation in the free market to get there, I can live with it.

    What, you think the salt nazis are going to do any better in the long run than the alcohol nazis or light bulb nazis? Really?

    Mew

  • aesthete

    do particularly well in the short or long run on any objective metric, particularly when one measures individual liberty. Virtually every human action has an effect on health, and IMO it is better to concentrate on getting government out of the health care market than to get it involved in every other market to “correct” the problems created by government involvement in health.

  • NHConservative0227

    You hit the nail on the head, let’s get the gov’t the heck out of health care and every other business in the interest of public safety!

    Quite frankly, Acat was starting to disturb me with his/her posts that seemed to advocate more gov’t regulation over the food industry.

    It’s the main reason I will not support Barbour and every conservative should be made aware of Barbour’s record on this.

    The same is true for Huckabee.

    Major props to Gov. Palin for standing up to Moochelle Obama on this!

  • aesthete

    of that lot, and that ain’t saying much.

  • NHConservative0227

    I don’t think this was one of Erick’s better posts. I’ve always liked Erick and I know his heart in the right place, but I think he should know bettter than to say that Palin is too “radioactive” to win.

    If Pence or any other real conservative became a serious contender for POTUS what do you think the media, the left, and the elites would do to them?

    We can’t let these guys pick our candidates for us.

    If Sarah wants to turn, how about we let her make her decision and get into the primary to see how it goes before labeling her as too “radioactive”.

  • acat

    .. I also don’t agree with you fully, either.

    There’s nothing magical about the free market – it has just as many flaws and hang-ups as the kleptocracy that’s trying to elbow its’ way into power at the moment, or a monarchy with or without limits, or an oligarchy, or a theocracy.

    They all, in pure form, become corrupt. The best solution I can find is the smallest government because government has the most potential power for abuse.

    This does not mean that I don’t see where free market can also cause abuses – and the FDA and USDA do serve their purposes… when kept in check by the private sector. The inverse is also true – the private sector does its’ job when kept – slightly – in check by government. Neither can do as well alone as it can with the external challenge.

    I’m not expecting the FDA or USDA to “correct” for another area of government, but to act on a larger stage, eh?

    Mew

  • aesthete

    to find out that Barbour was apparently quite active in promoting a sweeping “wellness” initiative in his state before the passage of ObamaCare, and that he supports the current nanny bill. I’m still open to seeing what else he’s done as governor, and I’m not ready to rule him out quite yet, but that is a major turnoff for me (even more so than raising taxes).

  • acat

    I did not advocate for more gov’t regulation.

    I pointed out that the free market does not *by itself* guarantee quality products.

    This is a simple fact – the free market guarantees the lowest cost and most variety of products, but it does not inherently guarantee quality… and where food is concerned, I have a rather large interest in being able to determine quality.

    I also have an interest in not paying for someone elses’ poor choices… and since those who have no money for healthier but more expensive food also have no money for health insurance, that’s exactly where the “let ‘em sell whatever they want” argument ends.

    Mew

  • acat

    It’s a rather open-ended term – does it mean encouraging people to get regular checkups, or does it mean legislating the fat used to cook french fries?

    I’m all for encouraging preventative care as catching cancer and other diseases early saves money and lives in the longer term. I’m opposed to laws about cooking oil unless there is a clear public health threat involved.

    Mew

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

    it does not cost either taxpayers, nor society as a whole any more for people with bad health, in fact just the opposite.

    A guy who lives to be 95 is going to use up a whole lot more medical resources and an even higher level of pensions benefits as a guy who drops dead the day after retirement at 65.

    Those so called socialized costs are just a false argument put forward by the health nazis.

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

    it does not cost either taxpayers, nor society as a whole any more for people with bad health, in fact just the opposite.

    A guy who lives to be 95 is going to use up a whole lot more medical resources and an even higher level of pensions benefits as a guy who drops dead the day after retirement at 65.

    Those so called socialized costs are just a false argument put forward by the health nazis.

  • aesthete

    not because its actors are well-intentioned, but because it maximizes personal liberty and consumer sovereignty. Government involvement in promoting health standards for our food, far from complementing the free market’s natural tendencies to maximize personal satisfaction, lowers it by forcing consumers to purchase a product that would make them less happy than they would otherwise be. If you’re going to be consistent in your desire to regulate behaviors that you might have to pay for in the future, you’re going to have to massively regulate and restrict many actions, from shooting at the range to sitting in your office chair, under those auspices (or at least allow for that possibility). I’d wager that even with ObamaCare in place, the costs of regulating those actions would far outweigh the savings we would get in healthcare costs. The ideal would be a relatively free market in healthcare, but if the choice is between ObamaCare and ObamaCare + food nannying to make ObamaCare cheaper, I’d choose the former. (BTW, this is at least one problem with having government involved as an active participant in the healthcare market: it necessarily entails that government make a large number of choices for adults who are qualified to make them to even be feasible, cost-wise.

  • aesthete

    The inherent advantage of the free market is that it is not restricted by binary choices such as providing only cheap, low-quality products or high-end, expensive products: so long as there is a market for either, suppliers will attempt to meet that demand. Far from simply shoveling cheap crap down America’s collective throat, free market can and does provide high-end products, and has made a pretty penny on them, too (see the success of Apple, Whole Foods, etc).

    There are healthy choices available in the free market — thing is, the price of these choices in a free market reflect the cost of their inputs and what people are willing to pay for them. IOW, quality comes with a price tag, which people may or may not want to (or be able to) afford. What the health nazis want is not “more choices”, it is that government will make their own personal choices artificially cheaper using other people’s money, and artificially mainstream at the expense of other people’s choices. Those desires are indulged by government only at the expense of other people’s desires, and can only be realized through government coercion.

  • aesthete

    Not to be morbid, but smokers cost much less for the government, through early death and increased productivity, than healthy individuals who have the last 1/3 of their lives paid for entirely by Uncle Sam.

  • nonameteapot

    Because if he can’t be as blunt and concise as Gov. Palin, then he’s lacking more than her looks and first dude.

    Could he have said that obummercare had ‘death panels’?
    Because if he can’t say, that he’s missing something else Palin has.

    I like Mike Pense alot, but this nicey nice, acting reasoned and sophisticated bull has got to go. What did Gov. Palin call it? Hautey toautey (sp?)

    I, for one, am tired of the republican who’s more interested in sounding “reasonable” and ” thoughtful, than one who is going to call a socialist a socialist. We don’t need another obama-type. I am ready for bluntness.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • nonameteapot

    Palin supporters like her because she is unlike all the so called established candidates. they don’t care what the LSM or elite say about her. She has qualities that they admire. Trashing Palin supporters is not going to help you win them over to support your candidate. I am open to all the candidates, but when Erick says that Pence is Palin without this and that, it just sounds weak. It sounds like he thinks iits easier to find an alternative to Palin than it is to push back on the ones who trash her. Gov. Palins supporters like her positions and they like her style. Trash her and them all you want. they are not going to listen to anyone whose only interest is finding anyone but her. We need a candidate who is Palin plus this and that. And I say that because, whether you or I like it or now, she seems to be the standard of the tea-party, and they and Rush are the ones who people are paying attention to this go around.

  • nonameteapot

    They get upset because rather than discuss how they disagree with her policies as they would speak about Romney or Pawlenty or any other candidate, when it comes to Palin, they act as though she isn’t qualified and has no business even considering running.
    There are several things I don’t like about Palin, but it’s rare to find a discussion regarding Gov. Pallin’s stance on issues. There ‘s talk about Pence’s stance, and Romeny’s stance and Huckabee’s stance, but never about their negatives or divisiveness or personalities. I think if the Palin haters would show her some respect, the Palin supporters wouldn’t get in your face.

  • nonameteapot

    then he’ll get my vote . And Palin supporters won’t be upset with him, because when he is deemed “unelectable” she won’t run.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • Aaron Gardner
  • Aaron Gardner
  • nonameteapot

    “unelectable” too?

  • nonameteapot

    don’t want to be our candidate. They always do. If I let them pick them for me, I would go for anyone but Palin.

  • nonameteapot

    unelectable?

  • nonameteapot

    The Time article could be said about Gov. Palin today. It appears as though Reagan wasn’t the favorite of the elite or establishment republicans either.

    And Palin could win Florida if she choses Rubio.

  • nonameteapot

    governor, but I bet she never walked out on her own press conference to party…..and let an ex-governor take over.

  • nonameteapot

    Gov. Palin as the candidate.

  • JSobieski

    So besides that, you are obviously 100% right!!!!!!

    “She is not my first choice” clearly is the same as saying “I am not open to the person”

    In fact, its really just MSM code for “I really really hate her, hate her family, and hate all of her supporters.”

  • nonameteapot

    is not a convincing reason. If you want Coke, why would you chose a drink that is almost like Coke, but not Coke. You can have Coke if you want. It is Pepsi who is telling you that you can’t have Coke.

  • JSobieski

    Nobody on this site . . . and I mean NOBODY thinks Obama is better than Palin.

  • JSobieski

    Annecdotal data points that proved to be de minimis

  • JSobieski

    Are you going to check in the Daily Kos to see what they think?

    The Time article could be written about a lot of R candidates over the years. If the candidate is a mushy moderate, they say conservatives prefer someone else. They always try to strike dissentiona and suggest that we nominated the wrong guy.

    Readers Digest Summary: Time magazine will write whatever they think hurts us the most. If Pawlenty is the nominee, they will say Palin would be a stronger candidate. If Palin is the nominee, they will Pawlenty was a far superior choice.

  • AceInTX

    you can’t tell me there were less dedicated people that I am about voting who didn’t stay home…

    we pandered to independents and lost them anyway…and our base was demoralized…

    we were spoon fed the same tripe writersblock is feeding here…play to the blue and purple voters because the Red voters weren’t going to vote for Obama blah blah blah

    I won’t go through another presidential election like that again…not if I can help it…I thought the hardest time I’d ever have walking up to a voting booth was in 1996…and i’ll me darned if McCain didn’t make it exponentially harder

  • yea37ey

    Wow,Tex.I guess I hit a raw nerve.First off,I’M BAAAACK!Just for the record, I don’t do scared or intimidated.You guys seem to only want to read comments that agree with you.Another lesson you learned from the progressives!To my points.How will you get the independent vote when one of the self appointed leaders of the purist,Rush Limbaugh,regularly tells his listeners how much he despises then are calls them cowards and closet liberals.Don’t take my work for it ,just listen when Rush and some of his callers comment on independent voters.Yes,Rush and these callers do count.I have a question for the purist out there,other than Palin,who would you support?Erickson hinted he would support Pence,a solid a conservative as any.Yet he got so much blow back from some in the purist camp he had to back track.Lests start off with a few names.Huckabee,Romney,Guliani and Pawlenty would not do.jindal and Cristi most likely are not running.Gengrich is too old and too much an insider.Bachman and Demint?Bachman is too abrasive and drive away the independece we need to win .Demint,with his idiotic statement about rather having thirty pure conservative Senators than a fifty seat majority demonstrates he is TOO STUPID to be President.Lastly ,as to a poster calling John McCain an old fart.The poster,many other purist like Rush,Eric,Ann and Libertarians like Glen are not worthy to shine that man’s shoes.

  • gekster

    Just some friendly advise. ;)

  • powertothepeople

    what you wrote turns out to be. Too bad I could not roll it up and use it to remove excrement as that is all it is worth.

    Lets start the countdown to when Neil Or Moe sees this idiot’s post.

    10…….9……….

  • NHConservative0227

    This just goes to show how the first priority by far is to repeal Obamacare. We can’t afford to have the Congress or the next GOP president get soft on this and think they can allow certain parts of it to stand.

    The entire thing is nothing but a socialized disaster which will lead to an even more out of control federal govt controlling every aspect of our lives.

    I like that the GOP House has introduced the repeal bill. Obviously its not going to pass, but they need to keep passing it to make Obama and the Dems in the Senate go on record against it.

    We also need to make sure that every conservative, libertarian, and independent is aware of Barbours and Huckabee’s stance on Moochelle’s food police bill. Acat, if you’re ok with Barbour being for it, that’s your business, but it’s my goal to make sure that everyone is aware of where these guys stand.

    Finally, we need to ensure that the next GOP POTUS candidate has a strong backbone and will not cave in to letting any part of Obamacare stand. I think that is by far the worse thing to come out of the Obama regime. It’s our job during the upcoming campaign to find the candidate who will not cave on this under any circumstances.

  • NHConservative0227

    This just goes to show how the first priority by far is to repeal Obamacare. We can’t afford to have the Congress or the next GOP president get soft on this and think they can allow certain parts of it to stand.

    The entire thing is nothing but a socialized disaster which will lead to an even more out of control federal govt controlling every aspect of our lives.

    I like that the GOP House has introduced the repeal bill. Obviously its not going to pass, but they need to keep passing it to make Obama and the Dems in the Senate go on record against it.

    We also need to make sure that every conservative, libertarian, and independent is aware of Barbours and Huckabee’s stance on Moochelle’s food police bill. Acat, if you’re ok with Barbour being for it, that’s your business, but it’s my goal to make sure that everyone is aware of where these guys stand.

    Finally, we need to ensure that the next GOP POTUS candidate has a strong backbone and will not cave in to letting any part of Obamacare stand. I think that is by far the worse thing to come out of the Obama regime. It’s our job during the upcoming campaign to find the candidate who will not cave on this under any circumstances.

  • emgbane

    Really you should not include her in a list of ‘excellent heads of state’.

  • acat

    Smoking and lung cancer is a pretty good trade-off for Uncle Sam.

    Excessive salt and sugar are less so – the results (kidney problems, diabetes) are more treatable than lung cancer, but treatment isn’t free.

    The same could apply to excessive alcohol consumption – you can live for a long time with a bad liver .. with the right cocktail of drugs.

    That said, I do see your point regarding a guy who lives to 95 costing more – but that’s due to the way Social Security was set up. Recall that the original goal was to pay for at most 5 years after someone retired. Removing that market distortion should also be pursued.

    Mew

  • emgbane

    I see little point worrying about the views of people who will not make up their mind until after August 2012. What is important is closing the deal with Moderate and Establishment Republicans. Republicans will not win the general election if we cannot unite behind our candidate.

    I am looking forward to this primary season, because there is no front-runner. Everyone is stuck under or around 20 percent. All the leading candidates are within the margin of error. Once we have a nominee who has slug it out through a tough primary season, the nominee will pull independent voters that are soft on Obama because of his policies.

    A potential candidate like by over 70 percent of the Republicans is a strong candidate for uniting the party and winning the general election. Even if it is a squeaker, a win is a win.

  • acat

    and what looks like a large blind spot to me…

    The free market only offers as many choices as it has to… offering different choices costs money, and manufacturers want to select for maximum profit, i.e. fewer choices.

    Then, there’s the matter of artificial bars to entry to markets.

    Translated into English, the typical argument for free markets regarding more choices is that untapped desire will be recognized and a new manufacturer will spring up to fill that desire.

    The counter-argument is that the existing manufacturer can take steps – in a pure free-market environment – to protect their existing product line, such as locking in contracts with resource providers to starve other manufacturers, or buy them out and bury their products, or to otherwise warp the market. It’s not just government that distorts, eh?

    My favorite example, and one of the reasons I like it is because the market was relatively unregulated at the time, was the “bug” in MS-Windows 3.1 that Microsoft built in that threw an error message when it found Digital Research DOS running instead of Microsoft DOS. Windows would still work fine, it just .. complained. Lots of case law around this.

    Microsoft distorted what was a free market, and drove a competitor out, resulting in less consumer choice.

    Again, I have no objection to free markets, but to say that they “always” work best for the consumer seems to ignore human nature .. which applies equally well to humans-as-consumers as it does to humans-as-manufacturers.

    Note – I’m not saying I want government-as-nanny .. just that government is one way to counter some of the anti-free-market tendencies …

    Mew

  • emgbane

    ?I believe Palin has higher name recognition than Reagan did at this point in the 1980 cycle, and that her negatives are higher. More importantly, her likeability is lower than Reagan?s was.?

    I have seen you write this before and I am curious why you believe ?Palin has higher name recognition than Reagan did at this point in the 1980 cycle ?.? Your view seems historically inaccurate with regard to name recognition. Look at an excerpt from Gallup?s most admired men. I know it is not proof of anything, but is does lend support to the view that not only Reagan?s name, but also his views were widely known by 1980.

    ?Ronald Reagan won his first presidential election in 1980, but debuted on Gallup’s Top-10 Most Admired Men list fourteen years earlier, in 1966 — the same year he won the governorship of California. He appeared again in 1967 and 1970, each time ranking at the low end of the Top-10 list. From 1974 to the present, he has appeared continually on the annual measure.

    By 1978, after mounting his third challenge for the Republican presidential nomination (the first being in 1968 and the second in 1976), Ronald Reagan had emerged as the national leader of the conservative wing of the Republican Party and had risen to 6th on Gallup’s Most Admired list?.

    Overall, Reagan has appeared 26 times on Gallup’s Most Admired list. His longevity on the list is somewhat unique among other former presidents this century, due in part to the fact that he had a national reputation so long before reaching the White House?.? http://www.gallup.com/poll/3415/most-admired-men-women-19481998.aspx

  • Aaron Gardner
  • Tbone

    Gallup?s Top-10 Most Admired Men list. ;-)

  • Aaron Gardner

    ;)

  • emgbane

    Rush did not want Obama. Rush wanted the primary to continue. He said he wanted Obama to be bloodied by the process. He asked his listeners to vote for Hillary. He did not care who the Democratic nominee was.

    I’m sorry if I misunderstanding your post.

  • emgbane

    Rush did not want Obama. Rush wanted the primary to continue. He said he wanted Obama to be bloodied by the process. He asked his listeners to vote for Hillary. He did not care who the Democratic nominee was.

    I’m sorry if I misunderstanding your post.

  • yea37ey

    Hey scope,you mean those great champions of the conservative cause likeCristine and Joe?These to new Barry Goldwaters?First off,Cristine has been running for office for years in Delaware.The problem with her was not that the people of Delaware didn”t know about her, they new plenty.Cristines problem was that she was a bad candidate and campaigner.Joe Miller,even though better qualified than Cristine could not even beat a write in candidate.My guess is since he got the backing of Palin for Senate he could just coast to victory.He waged a bad campaign.Just because you put the monicure Tea Party next to your name does not make you a good candidate or make you qualified to hold public office.

  • AceInTX

    and I note you didn’t answer my challenge…

    Please link to one comment in this thread by ANYONE who says they will stay home or go third party if Palin isn’t the Nominee

    Note..

    I issued that challenge in reply to this asinine comment from you:

    Many so-called pure conservatives say if Palin doesn?t get the nomination,they will either sit out the election or go third party.I?m begining to think many of you like the thought of losing because it?s much easier to sit in front of a key board typing about how rotten everything is and being negative than say something positive

    Finally…I find it both amusing, and infuriating at the same time to be called stupid by someone who seems to have an elementary level grasp of the English language…

    Maybe teacher didn’t explain to you that by saying “so called” in front of a name or descriptive suggests it is a name we use to describe ourselves or puff ourselves up because we’re proud to be thought of in that way.

    We don’t call ourselves purists…that is a derisive term used to describe us by the go along to get along crowd you apparently belong to

    Yet YOU keep referring to “so called purists”, “so-called pure conservatives” and similar idiotic references as if we call ourselves “purists”…or “Pure Conservatives”

    which begs the question…did you fail elementary English composition and reading comprehension classes….or are you too stupid to keep up with current events enough to know these are insulting terms used to describe us rather than terms we proudly use to describe ourselves?

    Hmm?

  • AceInTX

    and who sit in Senate seats today…

    Care to open your mouth again and display how inconceivably ignorant one person can be?…or maybe you should just move along?

  • AceInTX

    but my faith and site rules prevent me from giving them full throated voice to them…

    Sorry if I offended your delicate sensibilities by calling the on again off again Maverick an “old Fart”

    He did a good job acting the part of a conservative to get reelected didn’t he?

    I’m guessing there won’t be a line of people lining up to take any bets on how long it’ll take him to leave that all behind now that he’s parked his spineless flesh into his Senate seat for another 6 years…

  • AceInTX

    and create a mess

    heh

  • gunslingr45

    UNN because we have to many who bought into the hope and change bull.
    I also voted for McCain because of Palin, like they knew we would.