« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Palin Supporters Are Now Fair Game

110903_palin_fans_ap_605

Suddenly, we are seeing what appears to be a coordinated effort on the part of some on the right to go after Sarah Palin fans by attacking them for their ‘extremism’ or by comparing them to Ron Paul supporters, known for their fanaticism.

Or suggest that Palin fans would actually consider tipping the election to Obama should she decide to run in the GOP primary and come up short, which ridiculously ignores the passion on the right to elect ‘anyone but Obama’.

Is it possible that ‘some’ on the right have come to the realization that after being attacked so relentlessly by the Left in every manner possible, that Sarah Palin has become immune to criticism in the media.  So much so that the only avenue left to discredit her possible candidacy is to disparage her supporters?

The queen of conservative snark, Ann Coulter, in a bit Tuesday night with Laura Ingraham, who was sitting in for Bill O’Reilly, signified to all that it’s now fashionable to go after Palin supporters when she said columnists and bloggers on the right refuse to challenge Palin publicly because they don’t want to deal with the hate mail from her supporters.

Coulter and Ingraham then go on at length to remind all that Palin is just not electable, citing the most negative of polls.

Of course, we know how Sarah Palin feels about poles polls;

Polls are for strippers and cross-country skiers.”

And in what could be seen as a possible effort to clear the field for her fantasy candidate, N.J. Gov. Chris Christie, Coulter then compares Palin to Obama;

“She’s become sort of the Obama of the tea party, she’s just ‘The One’ to a certain segment of right-wingers.”

A certain segment… what segment could that be Ann? Certainly not those who provide you with the platform you have by buying your books, right? And to hear her utter ‘right wingers’ with such distaste in her mouth, one has to believe those book sales must be pretty good for her to risk alienating a fair number of potential buyers.

Erick Erickson of RedState was quick to take his queue by posting a blog yesterday morning comparing Palin fans to Ron Paul supporters, making this claim;

“…Palin fans have become an online fixture with more venom and insanity than the most rabid Ron Paul fan.”

A very bold statement indeed. Then, AllahPundit following suit on Hot Air and actually taking it further to dismiss any criticism of the ‘beltway cocktail party’ circuit for taking such a position as “nonsense”.

Naturally, there was no consideration of the remote possibility that Palin supporters could be just a bit sensitive to any criticism directed toward her after witnessing in the last presidential election one of the greatest attempts in the history of politics to destroy a person.

And what has these conservative pundits all atwitter? Simply that Palin doesn’t conform to their ideal of a timely announcement about whether or not she’ll run. Never mind that Palin has been consistent all along about when she’ll do so. That she would have the audacity not to yield to those who have such a false sense of power is simply unforgivable!

Although, I suspect there could be more at play here. If Palin decides to get into the race, it clear to all that she’ll run a very unconventional campaign and will rely little on columnists and pundits, right or left. Meaning many of these same pundits will have to stamp their own meal tickets without the privileged access they’re so accustomed to.

It’s clear that more and more Americans look at the current field of GOP candidates and realize there’s no game changer among them.  Americans who continue to see that it’s Sarah Palin alone taking the bold risks to fight the good fight and to stand up to the political establishment on both sides of the aisle with little regard for political expediency, doing so simply because it’s the right thing to do. And for these reasons and more, many are beginning to see Sarah Palin in a different light.

And if the political “experts” on the right cannot bring harm to the candidacy of Sarah Palin, attempting to do so, of course, not out of any personal dislike due to the great respect they have for her, but only in the best interest of conservatives everywhere because she’s just “not electable” – never mind that Palin’s ‘star power’ outshines the entire GOP field combined and that the national media still can’t get enough of her – then these same experts will simply discourage any who may be inclined to join Team Sarah by thoroughly denigrating her current supporters.

Of course, tea party activists will instantly recognize this tactic from the playbook of the Left, but then again, these average Americans are much like Sarah Palin in that they’ve endured every vile attack possible and are still standing. Something these pundits on the right don’t seem to get.

Cross-Posted at Florida Political Press

COMMENTS

  • APA Guy

    It’s about electing the best conservative Republican to replace Barack Obama…period. Sarah Palin gets squashed by Barack Obama in a general election, while Perry whips Obama soundly in the same instance.

    THAT is why Sarah Palin shouldn’t be our nominee…something Palin loyalists can’t seem to grasp.

    • J. Leg

      What’s your problem with Sarah Palin other than you “think” she can’t win?

      Who says Palin, the most thoroughly vetted person in the history of modern American politics (they released her freakin emails for God sakes), loses and Perry. who’s been the scene for five minutes, “wipes the floor” with Obama?

      • JSobieski

        Palin is an iconic figure who everyone knows, but few know much about her or her time as governor. That is not Palin’s fault (although I don’t think she does anything to change it either).

        Palin is only the most thoroughly vetted person in the history of modern American politics if you mean the kind of vetting that People or Us magazine would conduct.

        • J. Leg

          Read “Sarah from Alaska” by Scott Conroy and Shushanah Walshe. Watch “The Undefeated” And Google “Palin emails”

          The reason no one knows is because they don’t bother to look.

          • aesthete

            Campaign pablum and propaganda issued by Palin or her close supporters is not a “vetting”. Examination and criticism of that record on the part of opponents has gotten basically no play — that would be required for a vetting. Palin is criticized mostly by mouth-breathing morons who fixate on what came out of her vagina, and when. That is tragic and deplorable, but is *not* vetting. I, and the rest of America, had nothing to learn from how Palin would govern based on that info; a back and forth on Palin’s record, OTOH, quite possibly would prove revealing.

          • J. Leg

            is not campaign propaganda, it discusses thoroughly Palin’s flaws (and BTW, some of them are doozies) as well as her successes.

            “The Undefeated” is a fluff piece, but it’s not inflating anything. It’s a documentary giving a positive look at her accomplishments as Governor of Alaska and leader in the national movement to unseat President Obama. God forbid someone do that!

            And the Palin emails demonstrated how hands-on Governor Palin was in handling her agenda in Alaska. And that IS significant, because the next president is going to have to be bold and take the lead in solving the problems we face.

            We’re going to need tax reform, entitlement reform, spending reform, we’re going to need to repair our important relationships abroad the Obama Admin has damaged and more. All of that is going to require bold leadership, not wussy limp wristed leadership we’ve seen from Republicans in Washington in the past.

          • snowshooze

            Well…I suppose documentary is an acceptable classification…
            I can’t watch it. I should, I helped pay for it. That was about the first film out of Alaska when we put this program in that would underwrite production cost’s of movies and films made here in Alaska to help spotlight Alaska, as well as generate a bit of revenue for our local service businesses.
            Sarah, bless her heart, was all over it.
            Hey, did your copy come with the official Sarah, bless her heart rose colored glasses? Were they really made in China?
            Did you notice if reading her book was even more fun whilst wearing them?
            Sarah, bless her heart comes from a very wealthy state. This may be a very temporary condition though.
            And she knows how to run a budget. Yep… we need more money…ok, let’s take it. Now, what shall we spend it on?
            Anybody got anything else they want?
            It’s really easy to demonize the oil industry. And tax the daylights out of them. We should sit in the bar in Fairbanks, drink beer and watch for the next truck of oilfield equipment headed to North Dakota.

          • JSobieski

            As a VP candidate, I would say Palin was vetted by the media in the most irrelevant ways, but not on the substance of her record. There was remarkably little discussion of her time as governor and virtually nothing about her time as governor.

            A proper vetting is not what the MSM does nowadays. What the MSM did to Palin was not a vetting, it was an assault.

          • Scope

            Sarah Palins Big Labor Problem is one of the substantive problems I’d be willing to bet that most of her supporters either don’t know about, or are unwilling to acknowledge. The article makes a good point about Palin’s Labor Day speech, and subsequent tweet about Trumpka and his fiery rhetoric against the Tea Party people (SOB’s), yet signed an executive order while Governor, in support of her brother’s and sister’s in the Big Labor unions. How many even know that she is in fact a Union supporter? I’ll bet not many. There are some Tea Party groups that are beginning to feel resentful of Palin’s attempts to speak as the Tea Party leader.

    • Finrod

      After all Romney polls better against Obama than Perry does.

  • APA Guy

    It’s about electing the best conservative Republican to replace Barack Obama…period. Sarah Palin gets squashed by Barack Obama in a general election, while Perry whips Obama soundly in the same instance.

    THAT is why Sarah Palin shouldn’t be our nominee…something Palin loyalists can’t seem to grasp.

    • desertfox

      There is no proof that Perry is going to whip Obama. He has to prove himself. To me, he is a career politician, I don’t see any fire in him.
      And I have been in Texas since before Perry was anything.
      Mitt Romney-more of the same.
      Rick Perry-business as usual(big business).
      Sarah Palin-citizen politician, constitutional conservative, and accomplished reformer.

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

    Palin’s “fans” for what they are: a new and virulent strain of the same cancer that brought us RonPaul’s army.

    I am by no means tarring her supporters who are capable of rational thought and good argument, and I’ll use Redstate’s own azaeroprof as the poster boy for those people. I certainly am including about 90% of the raving idiots who showed up yesterday, many for the first time, to pile on Erick and Leon for their affront to Ste.Sarah.

    I’ll throw in most of the C4P crowd too.

    She’s nothing more, and has never been anything more, than a candidate with some good qualities and some warts. As with any candidate, the warts need to be dealt with as part of the vetting process. RomneyCare, Perry on immigration and immunization, Cain on his lack of governmental experience, Newt on just being Newt, Bachmann on executive experience, etc.

    The problem with Palin’s little troupe of idiots is that they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that her resignation from office, the ACES business tax, the phantom pipeline, her strident unwillingness to address her attackers directly, her amazing ability to both piss of and turn off the political middle, her questionable ability to be a successful executive, etc are problems for her. Can arguments be made in her defense? Sure. azaeroprof has made any number of them. Most of the raving loons who were posting here yesterday not only can’t, they won’t even try. Kind of like your diary.

    • J. Leg

      It’s a leftist tactic to go an attack the “fans” of a particular candidate.

      “little troupe of idiots” is a particular stinging zing, considering RedState’s preferred candidate, Rick Perry, is going to need Palin’s “little troupe of idiots” to win the general election.

      If you are a decent person (and you seem like it) you would apologize and redirect all the energy you’ve put into trashing Palin’s supporters into supporting your preferred candidate.

      • Finrod

        .

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

        And you’re obviously not good at it.

        The “little troupe of idiots” are the folks who owe the apologies, they’ve been wasting bandwidth for months. They’re idiots.

        And, Finrod doesn’t fall into that group. He does well at rational thought. Unlike you.

        • J. Leg

          and it’s crystal clear to me. You think some Palin supporters are reasonable, but most are foaming out the mouth.

          I’m sorry people aren’t supporting your preferred candidate, but that doesn’t give you any right to treat people with the same civility the left treats us.

          You owe Palin’s “little troupe of idiots” a BIG apology my friend, it’s just uncalled for.

          In fact, Erick needs to take the lead and change the tone in the way he talks about Palin’s fans, because it’s gotten out of hand.

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

            You get the civility you earn. You – and that’s a “group you” troop in here and demonstrate that you have absolutely no clue about how the political process works, are clueless about what “vetting” is, are in total denial that Palin actually has some real problems with issues, with her experience and with a major section of the electorate and you can’t make a rational argument to save your life and then you have the absolute audacity to get your panties in a wad because you get called out on your ignorance.

            Palin’s little troupe of idiots won’t live long enough to see an apology from me. I have no use for sustained ignorance.

          • azaeroprof

            They could be part of the ‘large cadre of morons’ who support Obama.

            I appreciate the props from you and others about being a “reasonable” Palin supporter. However, EVERY successful politician has a mix of folks who like that person for a variety of reasons, many of which you would consider irrational or ignorant. So I consider all Palin fans to be fellow soul-brothers and soul-sisters. Your attempt to separate me out from them is appreciated but only marginally successful. Insults directed at Palin fans from you, or Erick, or anyone else are at least partly directed at me also. I’m thick-skinned, so it doesn’t really bother me too much.

            What does kind of bother me is pretending that supporters of other candidates are somehow different, that there isn’t some emotional element in all of this. Seriously, if RedState had been around in the 80′s, there would be plenty of Reaganites on this site that sound much like the Palinites today. And he was no more perfect than any other politician.

            And to be honest between friends, your lecturing Palin’s ‘idiots’ on civility is frankly the pot calling the kettle black.

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

            more than willing to tar and feather anybody who has the audacity to bring an argument based in anything but facts, or at least a representation of facts and is willing to discuss issues and perceived problems with a candidate.

            You, and Finrod to expand the pool, have always been good to have discussions about Palin with because you both make well thought out arguments and we tend to weight things differently. You make assumptions, label them as such, and draw a conclusion. We can differ on the conclusion without real issues.

            Paul’s acolytes and people like the ones who have descended on RS over the past couple of days wouldn’t know a rational argument if it bit them in the butt. They mistake sound and fury for facts, assumptions and cogent argument.

          • J. Leg

            You haven’t brought any of them up and you’ve made endless assumptions about me and you don’t even know me.

  • http://thethinkingvoter.blogspot.com abierubin

    From the articles of the front page one would think having an army of volunteers ready to spread information about a candidate is something negative which all candidates should avoid.

    Of course, this excludes a guy from Texas and his fans.

    • http://www.floridapoliticalpress.com/ tomtflorida

      Just stating the obvious from out here in the swamplands of Florida!

    • azaeroprof

      I think the conflict here is in differing expectations of what RedState is all about. Some apparently view this as largely a political discussion site, where ideas and candidates can be evaluated, pro and con.

      When folks show up to advocate for a particular candidate (or issue), they tend not to want to discuss the ‘cons’ of that candidate. (Seriously, if you’re advocating for a person, why would you want to even bring up their negatives. Can you imagine “Choosy mothers choose Jif…but it’s really fattening.”??) mbecker and others who don’t like Palin want to discuss her record and point out problems with it, but an advocate will be reluctant to engage that kind of argument, and understandably so.

      Personally, I see RS as both a discussion and political action/advocacy site. So I enjoy both discussing pros and cons of my favored candidates (Palin this case), and I’m not bothered by folks who want to just advocate for a different candidate (even Paul if they weren’t banned by the site already). I expect that if someone wants me to support their candidate, they will only tell me good things about them.

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    has decided to jump on her now, that I can’t speak for, but I and many others and been saying for many months now what is becoming crystal clear to anyone who can check their emotions and the door and look at her steps over the last two years…..she is only interested in furthering Sarah Palin, not the United States of America. Now the retort by the palin fan club to this will be the usual: you are just spouting off leftist talking points, your candidate is worse, you are scared of her…so on.

    I think the reason they have to resort to those accusations is that if you really look at a simple historical timeline of Palin over the last two years, it is embarrisingly clear that those kinds of accusations are valid. Yes, you can say I just know in my heart of hearts that Sarah is a great American Patriot and you are wrong, but you cant make that arguement based on her actions.

  • The_Gadfly

    So you only became politically aware in 2008?

    Because having watched elections since 1980 I can assure you that’s only a true statement because we haven’t had a Presidential election since 2008. EVERY presidential election in my lifetime can be characterized as the fascist left engaging in “one of the greatest attempts in the history of politics to destroy a person” since the last presidential election.

    And that would be one of my bigger beefs with Palin and her supporters: they think this is the first time it has ever happened to a Republican candidate. Or worse, that once in office they will be in a better position to defend against such attacks. What the LSM launched against Palin is spitballs compared to what they launched against Reagan. In fact, I’d say the only person who might have suffered a more despicable attack would be Barry Goldwater.

    • kywrite

      So they questioned whether Reagan had actually parented his own child? Or what kind of horrible parent he was that he couldn’t control his kid’s sex life? Did they dissect his wardrobe? Was he accused of banning books, being a secessionist? Was he spoofed as a complete moron on Saturday Night Live? (well, maybe that one) Did the press and everyone else go after his kids on a regular basis?

      During the 2008 election, the press went places with Sarah they could never go with a male candidate – like whether she’d endangered her youngest child by flying at the end of her pregnancy, or if she was a terrible mom. They’ve had a hard-on for the last year speculating that her marriage might be in trouble. They have repeatedly treated her like eye candy, ignoring her proven intelligence and considerable political and leadership skills. I don’t think anyone, anywhere, has ever been treated so unfairly or in such a blatantly sexist manner by the press as a whole. It’s insane. It has also fueled a real conservative feminist movement that has yet to show its true power.

      Look, I’m one of those dumb Sarah supporters, but I have no illusions about the things she’ll need to do in order to be taken seriously. Frankly, I don’t see her running at all. I think this election she’s going to play her old basketball position, point guard. She will keep others on task, toss the ball where it needs to go, draw fire – and stay out of the election itself, focusing on enabling the team to win rather than becoming the star herself. She, like Gingrich, is more in the position of kingmaker than potential king. Then in a few years, we’ll see. She’s very young, and no way has she peaked.

      • APA Guy

        …and his intelligence (24/7/365)

        …and his temperament (What’s red and glowing? Iran the moment Reagan is sworn in)

        …and his age

        …and his SS plan (103…Johnny Carson holds card to head…according to the Reagan plan, the age at which I can receive SS benefits)

        Hell, they even ripped him at the Nashua primary debate when he got angry that all the candidates weren’t allowed into the fray…even though their presence would obscure his growing status as he sought to overtake Bush Sr.

        These are only a few off the top of my head. Read a little history about how Reagan was treated both as a candidate and as the president. I’ll bet a buffalo nickel you’ll see past your Johnny-come-lately political short-sightedness in a hurry.

        • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

          really gave the LSM a license to speculate on everything from infidelity to spousal abuse.

          When she finally did speak about him, after Ronald passed away, the media wound up with so much egg on their faces over it, they’re still wiping it off to this day.

          Anyone who thinks that Palin has been more abused by the media than Reagan either wasn’t paying attention, or was still drinking out of a sippy cup when Reagan left office.

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

        It saves us the trouble of pointing it out. You did make it obvious though.

      • The_Gadfly

        Did they question whether he had actually parented his own child?

        No, instead they questioned whether he RAISED the children he parented. For this, they frequently used criticism raised by his daughter Patti in public forums, something with which Palin has NOT had to contend. Frankly, I think for a father, being accused of abandoning your children is worse than of not having parented them.

        Of what kind of horrible parent he was that he couldn’t control his own kid’s sex life?

        See above. Also, the media was constantly rife with rumors his son Ron was gay, which was meant to be a wedge issue with social conservatives. And there were unending attempts to “out” the son as such, all because he was in the ballet.

        Did they dissect his wardrobe?

        No, they dissected his WIFE’s wardrobe and how much she spent on it, even though none of it was government money. Frankly I expect that as is the case with the children, this is the more sensitive spot for most men. You can pick on me as much as you want, but when you pick on my wife/girlfriend you cross the line.

        Was he accused of banning books, being a secessionist?

        No, he was accused of burning them and wanting to roll back history to before the civil war so that secession would have been unnecessary.

        Was he spoofed as a complete moron on Saturday Night Live?

        I guess you’ve never heard of Steve Martin. Or Johnny Carson. And never heard that ‘Bonzo was the real star of the movie and smarter too.’

        Did the press and everyone else go after his kids on a regular basis?

        See above about Ron Jr. See above about at least one of the kids being on the LSM side. There was no Fox News. And CNN only started broadcasting 5 months after Reagan was first elected. They didn’t have money back then, so they mostly just let the cameras roll without the spin. Oh, and add in that there was no Internet so there was no alternative news path.

        I could continue to dispute the rest of your drivel line by line, but won’t waste the electrons. This is why Palinistas are becoming the new Paulbots of RedState: you think everything happening to Sarah is either happening for the first time, or in such an extreme as has NEVER happened before. The truth is, is no different than what every other Republican out there has to face: smears and lies of the most despicable kind. But guess what? That ain’t gonna change for any Republican candidate. So get over it already. Because until you do you can’t advance the conservative agenda, which is the only agenda that can save the country.

  • http://www.floridapoliticalpress.com/ tomtflorida

    Kywrite, no need to add to your commentary… the facts are what they are and cannot be denied by any rational thinking individual.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    The attacks on her supporters reveal an even uglier side of this.

    • acat

      Aint' no party like a communist party

      Just curious.

      Mew

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    They don’t win majorities by attacking their own.

    • acat

      Party Unity My {donkey}

      Or, if you prefer…

      Party Unifier, their {donkey}

      I mean, for reals? Dems go after each other hammer and sickle, erm, tongs! You’re fooling yourself if you don’t think this happens. It’s the nature of people.

      Mew

  • mdw9661

    Paul Gigot recently wrote a small piece “Palin Fatigue” which was entirely unsurprising.

    What is more interesting than the establishment telling us who our nominee should be is the comments that follow these articles. In Paul Gigot’s case, there were well over 100 comments of which the vast majority came out in resounding support for Palin.

    So, what makes Erick, Paul, Ann, Laura and Karl so adamant about dismissing Palin as a candidate? Why not let Palin make her decision like the others and see where the chips fall?

    Did any of them come out so adamantly against Romney, Gingrich, Cain, Bachmann, Johnson, Huntsman, Rick Santorum, Tad McCotter, or the unannounced Christie and Ryan?

    No. So, you have to wonder, what is it they are afraid of? Or better, who are their candidates they are shielding?

    • acat

      And I’ve been quite vocally opposed to Romney, and will remain so unless he wins the nomination. At that point, I waffle and Romney becomes the greatest candidate evah!

      Vocal commenters mean precisely zip. If they meant something, we’d be enjoying our gold and silver coinage because Ron Paul would be in charge.

      The problem with Palin is twofold. If all of her support goes to Cain, for instance, he’s suddenly much closer to the front. If all her support goes to Bachmann, she’s back in the race. So, in a way, she’s hurting the rest of the field.

      More importantly, it takes time for people to decide on a second choice if their first choice becomes unavailable – like Daniels or Pawlenty or Fred(!) from 2008. Palin is preventing people from starting that process, if she is, in fact, not running .. and the longer she keeps her supporters twisting in the wind, the harder that transition becomes.

      Looking for conspiracies tells me that Palin’s supporters have been twisting for too long.

      Mew

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    They never really turned on Grayson, and it took Weiner’s package on the internet before they sold him down the river.

    Name any whack job with a D after his name, you won’t see his party going after him like the tastemakers in the GOP do Palin and her supporters.

    The circular firing squad is something uniquely Republican.

    • acat

      What you’re seeing is media bias. The media love to go after repubs, whether conservative or not, who screw up, but will cover for Dems as much as possible. Dem infighting doesn’t get covered.

      That means you need to look beyond the media to see it, but .. it’s there. Consider the pile-on against Howard Dean following the “Dean Scream”.

      Dem politics is no less ugly, it just happens more in tastefully decorated suites and meeting rooms than the GOP does. Do you really think anybody knew who Bubba Clinton was before Time and Newsweek started running hagiographies?

      Mew

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    but she can magically imbue it on someone like Cain or Bachmann and sabotage the erstwhile frontrunner(s).

    Sheesh. Talk about conspiratorial.

    • aesthete

      Sarah Palin appeals (quite strongly and viscerally) to a subset of conservatives. Among other groups? Not so much. She can use her influence *in the former group* to mobilize support from said group to help other Republicans. She cannot mobilize it in the second group. There’s nothing conspiratorial or magical about that line of though, even if you disagree with it.

      • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

        The masses who follow Ann Coulter or Laura Ingraham? Will they suddenly turn to the party of Jimmy Hoffa and Richard Trumka? Is this the base Palin can’t win over but others can?

        • aesthete

          more independents, but yeah — as a matter of fact, I think that many conservative voting blocs will be less enthusiastic to vote for Palin than for some other candidates at this point.

          Oh, I forgot to note that Palin being at the top of the ticket instantly energizes Obama’s depressed base — particularly the SWPLs.

          • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

            I don’t have a problem with that.

            If the conservatives stay home and let a Marxist re-up for four more years in the White House, then shame on them.

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

          Tea Party folks. She’s in the tank pretty much across the board, even in the primary.

          • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

            What’s the harm in that?

          • aesthete

            a fractured conservative vote in the primaries which would result in a subpar candidate being nominated. Romney, in particular, stands to gain from Palin’s entrance, since she does not have the support necessary to win but does have enough that she could knock Perry or whoever ends up being the conservative alternative to Romney down to #2.

          • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

            If Palin is a flake like we’re told Bachmann is, Perry has nothing to worry about when it comes to either of them splitting conservatives.

            I don’t have a problem with people’s opinion of Palin. It’s this cowering about the conservative groundswell being to frail to tolerate her entrance in a primary.

          • aesthete

            In a fractured primary, a moderate could potentially pick up enough moderate Republicans and crossover Dems to end up as our nominee — that’s how we got McCain last time ’round, after all. Moreover, the victor of a bloody primary feud is by no means qualified for the general simply because he or she has won the primary — Christine O’Donnell, for example, had no business being anywhere near a Senatorial race.

          • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

            n/t

          • aesthete

          • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

            I didn’t miss the point, since the point was a premise about what got us McCain.

            I had go Google it. I did not even remember.

            Huckabee and Romney both came at McCain hard from the right and diluted the consrvative groundswell?

          • JSobieski

            Both had glaring deficiencies, which is why conservatives didn’t unit behind one of them, and yes, that brought us McCain.

            The fact that Romney and Huckabee were both poorly suited for the conservative mantle doesn’t alter what happened.

          • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

            Thanks to Bush damaging the brand.

            And it’s funny how neither Huck or Mitt are considered conservatives now, just a few years later.

            Were they ever?

          • JSobieski

            I chose my words carefully. Conservative VOTERS were very much split in 2008. Some went to Huckabee for reasons that I won’t characterize. Some went to Romney for the reason that he was trying to sound more like a three-legged Reagn conservative than anyone else. Some went to McCain because they thought he had the best chance to win.

            Aesthete’s theory requires conservative VOTERS to be split. Palin would definitely cause infighting in the conservative camp. Heck, we spend a lot of time arguing about her now, and she isn’t even running.

            Bottom Line: The risk is that conservative VOTERS split their votes, allowing the Rockefeller blue bloods to determine the victor.

          • JSobieski

            Romney and Huckabee, imperfect as they were, were actively trying to paint themselves with that label. McCain united the moderate elements, Romney and Huckabee split the conservative elements–along fault lines of economics and social issues.

          • JSobieski

            Uniting afterwards would be difficult.

            The conversation, both pro-Palin and against-Palin will end up being 99% substance free. Different sides will call each other establishment hacks, DC elites, etc. People will declare that the Republican party has left them, etc.

            When the debate turns to Palin, the quality of the discussion here at Redstate goes way down.

      • acat

        of work on a national level. Some combination of Senator from AZ, or Sec.Energy or running HHS or HSA …

        She’s had since 2009 to change her poll numbers, and hasn’t. It may be that her media image has a longer half-life than that.

        Mew

        • aesthete

          well… I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for it to happen in the future.

          • acat

            her best opportunity since the last election has been as an outsider and private citizen.

            There’s no point in her pretending to be a Huntsman-style Obama drone.

            There’s almost no point in her pretending to be a D.C. establishmentarian. The wiggle room there is that, should she decide to run, she will need to figure out how to get along with other establishment types.

            That said, what if she hasn’t really tried to change her image? If we see her not run – as I expect – and we don’t get 4 more years of Jimmy Obama, I’d look for her to suddenly be much more “inside” and competent than she’s been so far…. especially if Perry wins.

            Mew

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

      She’s been the #1 face on TV for two and a half years. Not a word falls from the mouth of Obama that she doesn’t have a well publicized remark – if you count Facebook as well publicized. She has the media at her beck and call, she could get on any news program with an hour notice.

      And yet, among conservatives and self described Tea Party supporters, her polling sucks.

      There’s no conspiracy, she’s simply a lousy candidate. Good at feeding red meat to those who can’t process more than a ten word concept, but no so much at anything else. Including running a state, which of course she won’t talk about.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Talk about devotion to an undeclared interloper who does nothing but muck up the real race with his faux candidate speeches in primary hotbed staters.

    At least Palin has not slammed the door on running as Christie declares he has.

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

    If you are a Concerned Palin Fan and are a bit surprised that many conservatives are now attacking you, then here is what you do.

    1) Stop being so fanatical
    2) Stop being so obnoxious
    3) Stop attacking every other candidate
    4) Stop attacking everyone who offers the least criticism of Palin
    5) Stop being a jackass.

    That is all.

    • aesthete

      Why do you hate America, Kyle?

    • ruexperienced

      .

  • snorp73

    I have been reading her columns and buying her books for years.

    I just don’t get the point of some who suggest that Obama is THAT BAD that we HAVE to make sure we replace him with something better.

    IF that were true, and Obama was THAT bad, why not use that opportunity to run the best candidate for the job.

    Unless Palin announces she is not running, my support for her is not dithering.

    • rightwingmom52

      being a conservative is that, unlike the Democratic party where the sheep are told to get in line or they’ll lose their entitlements, we each get to decide who we think is the best candidate in the primary, and then vote GOP in the general. Until then, I’m under no obligation to agree with you or anybody else as to who is the “best” candidate.

      Coulter is entitled to her opinion, and even if I disagree with her perception about Palin, her books and columns support conservatism and makes no apologies for it. I’m not about to write her off because we disagree on a couple of issues. And I’m willing to bet that if Palin runs and gets the nomination, Coulter will certainly support her.

      If Palin doesn’t run, are you prepared to support someone else in the primary and vote GOP in the general?

      • snorp73

        It would be the case where she and we collectively could support one of the others. She has already said that, too.

        It does not seem Coulteresque to use a phrase like “electable” and as a matter of fact I promise I can dig up a column of hers leading up to 2008 where she used that term in jest.

        This is Carter on steroids. We will only get this chance once in a lifetime. Democrats can do some damage, yes. But this is the “crisis” we as conservatives should not let go to waste.

        Yes I would support whomever the GOP nominee is, but honestly it is far too early to make comments about that.

        Clinton waited until Oct., Reagan waited until Nov. And why Ann and Laura on O’Reilly keep taking Christie and Ryan seriously who say they aren’t running no questions asked, it is odd they pick out Palin who’s been honest in telling us she is still thinking about it.

        In most of the polls, Christie and Ryan don’t even make the list. Palin consistently makes third place without announcing.

        Coulter is entitled to her opinion. I just hope she realizes that when she refers to Palin supporters like myself as “fans” when in fact we’ve been on the ground, donating our time and money and energy to this cause, it’s a little discouraging particularly since many of Coulter and Palin’s “fans” intertwine.

        She’s can do it at her own risk, I suppose, But I support Palin because on the simple reason that I believe she’ll finally extinguish politics as usual in Washington.

        • snorp73

          Words roll off of my mind faster than my fingers accommodate for sometimes.