« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Why is it okay for Christie, Rubio & Bachmann to run, but not Palin?

By: The Server X-Angel (Diary)  |  May 27th, 2011 at 01:42 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

One of the many things that irritate me about our side of the aisle is that some of us think that people who were just elected are “presidential timber.”

Many people after the election of Chris Christie – even though he hadn’t done anything yet – were saying that he needed to run for president (Ann Coulter among many)

Many people after the election of Marco Rubio – even though he hadn’t done anything yet – were saying that he needed to run for president.

Many people after the budget proposal of Paul Ryan – even though this is first real big thing he has done that has received real national attention

n (other than the Roadmap for America’s Future) – are saying that he needs to run for president. (He has said he is not going to.)

Many people are saying that Michele Bachman – because of the Tea Party Wave – should run for president…although she is another lawyer that has been a representative for 4 years.

Some were slobbering over the possibly of Mitch Daniels – Indiana’s version of John McCain – running.  

But for many of the people who say that the above SHOULD run…the same people say that Sarah Palin SHOULD NOT RUN.  

Can someone please explain this to me? I am not saying that the above people have not done good things; I am just looking for consistency here.

Palin was picked out of absolute obscurity in 2008 from Alaska. She took on things well before there was a Tea Party Movement. (Corrupt GOP party officials, Oil Companies, even the McCain Campaign HQ during the 2008 Election.)

She was Tea Party before Tea Party was cool. She never asked to be plucked from nowhere.

So what I find funny is that these people FROM NOWHERE are trying to ride the Tea Party Wave or what might even be more dangerous, some Tea Party People are trying to MAKE them ride that wave, and some are all too willing to ride it.

 But somehow, a true conservative who is just a “possible” candidate has a bus tour and ALL HELL BREAKS loose.

Why is this?

Is it because Palin is damaged goods because of the 2008 Campaign? (Which is mainly due to the McCain Campaign overall)

Is it because she is an idiot?

Is it because the country is still sexist…. And not ready for a woman president? (Obviously not is Michele Bachmann’s name is being bandied about)

Is it because she didn’t abort a handicapped kid?

Is it because Palin is just too hot looking?

It’s because Sarah Palin is truly who she is, and does not shy away from it.

Neal Boortz has stated that we lost the 2008 Election because of Sarah Palin. How is that? Was Sarah on the top of the ticket?  Did Sarah drive the agenda? Was it not John McCain’s Campaign’s responsibility to win the campaign?  

Was it was because of social conservative issues?  Boortz is a libertarian, and I respect that (hell, even in some cases, I follow the same beliefs.)

Also  Herman Cain fills in for Boortz . But that is a side topic. (By the way.. I like Cain as well.)

Why are we as conservatives so scared of people that are truly who they are?

I wrote an article right after the 2008 Election results

http://www.redstate.com/xangel/2008/11/04/we-lost-this-because-of-our-own-obsession/

Do we want to go through this again? The obsession about beating someone, rather than find the right candidate. If we find the right CONSERVATIVE candidate then there won’t be a problem.

The Tea Party happened because of the lack of Constitutional government happening. It started with the Great Society of LBJ, was amplified by Roe v. Wade, and then everything that all presidents – both Republican (Nixon – EPA, OSHA) and Democrat (Healthcare, government takeovers, and just plain idiocy on foreign policy) have done to completely run this country into the ground.

(Reagan is slightly exempted from this, because he just took Congressmen at their word that they wouldn’t spend anything more)  

If it is supposedly “Christie’s time” to run [according to Erickson], wouldn’t that require him to resign, or at least take much time away from his state that it becomes a distraction? Wouldn’t Christie running for President just over a year into his term be the same as Palin running after she was picked for VP?

I am just looking for some consistency here. Don’t hate on Palin leaving Alaska Governor’s office if you think Christie should run. Palin ran for governor with no aspirations to run for VP, much less President.  

Palin would mop the floor with Obama. But then again, so would Daffy Duck. That’s not to say that Palin is Daffy Duck, but I think you know what I mean.    

[Damn it, just as I am writing this, Rush is on roll that is echoing this.]

We need to drop this whole thing of “finding the person that can beat Obama.” A true conservative will beat Obama. We already tried the whole “someone who can reach across the aisle” candidate, and look what we got.

Now Vinny (at 1:34 PM EDT) is saying on Rush that Sarah can’t do it. But he is from NY, even though he is saying that he is a conservative. REALLY? 

Geeze, people get a grip.  She hasn’t been destroyed. If she’s is destroyed, why is she still able to pull the crowds that she does? And even at that.. if the MEDIA  destroys a conservative person..what does that mean? If the media hates someone… well.. I rest my case.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • The Server X-Angel

    This is eaxactly what I am talking about.

    I will comment more on tis in the morning.

    • wilgolden

      to the question in the title.

      Stay with me, here.

      For all of the reasons mentioned above (and others), most of the “pushed” possibles (for want of a better term) are flawed or not yet ready for prime time. Bachmann, for all of her appeal, seems to have no Executive experience, and not enough real world seasoning. I respect her, but she’s not ready. Rubio is brand new to politics (poli – many; ticks – little blood sucking insects) (sorry), and needs to actually, you know, accomplish something. Again, no executive experience. Christie is a GUN GRABBER. Hell, I would stay home, and I managed to force myself to drag myself to the polls and vote for McLame, Dubya and even BobDole. I cannot ever vote for an active gun grabber. I have been involved in politics since I was NINE. I don’t stay home, Christie is a line too far.

      All of the above (not just them, either. Quite a few of the other candidates are one a one way trip to a beat-down if they win the nomination, and will permanently damage the country by being the nominee) will lose, and would be safe for both the Democrats and the “Go Along – Get Along” RINOs running the Establishment Republican Party. They can point and say “SEE – We Told Ya So! A KKKonservative CAN’T WIN ANYMORE!” Wait for it – the speaches are already written.

      THIS is why you keep hearing “Bachmann” or “Christie” or “Rubio” (or “Newt” or . . . oh, you know who is on the list) keeps being pushed down our collective throats.

      BUT –

      For all her faults

      For all the complaints

      For all the indignation

      For all the shaking heads

      Sarah Palin can win. They know this; and if she wins, it spells the end of the Progressive vision the anointed have been pushing since Teddy Roosevelt (yes, Teddy).

      Palin / Bolton, 2012!!!!

      You heard it here first . . .

      • aesthete

        to keep the one true conservative out of the running.

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

          they are sure giving them a run for their money.

          • aesthete

            I think the Palinites are much worse. I had a much more rational conversation here with the Ron Paul supporters who popped up a couple weeks ago than I am currently having with some of the Palin supporters here.

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

            I find the supporters of both .. difficult.

            The difference is RonPaul!’s a known commodity this go’round. A bat-{guano} crazy commodity, but a known one.

            Palin doesn’t have Crazy Uncle Ron’s problems – his are right out in the open, well-documented, and therefore he’s only supported by goofballs.

            Palin doesn’t have problems … but.

            She’s not the best possible candidate. Her executive record is not one of fiscal conservatism, her media profile is in need of a major overhaul, and while she can boil down issues and connect with her supporters, her outreach to the squishy middle – the ones she needs to win the general – has so far been nonexistent.

            This, unfortunately, is harder to explain than RonPaul!’s issues.

            Mew

          • rightwingmom52

            I’ll take Paulbots for 1,000, Alex.

            Supporters of this man running for POTUS refuse to acknowledge the facts, will not read transcripts or watch videos provided of the candidate’s own words and then stop just short of calling you a liar and taking liberties by providing weak links to support the evidence you’ve provided and do so under the cloak of writing for the group while you have provided your full name and relationship to the group and the community of the group.

            Who is Luap Nor?

          • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

            …and you’ll find the answer to your question.

            I can’t quite figure out your second paragraph, though. Are you saying that you prefer interacting Paulbots over Palinbots, or vice versa?

            Though that raises a larger question: once you’ve entered the realm of the unhinged, does ranking matter any more?

          • rightwingmom52

            becker’s comment. In any event, what I meant is that I like Palin supporters more than Paul’s supporters. My preference is mostly based on the discussion I described with a Paulbot who all but called me a liar and accused me of providing weak evidence of his positions.

            Palin may have her issues, as do some of her supporters, but my opinion of her is far better than what I think of Paul. There are many things I admire about Palin – not so much with Paul.

          • rightwingmom52

            Here’s a link to what I think may be it’s origination in case you missed it first time around. And if it’s not the origination, I apologize to whomever actually coined the name.

            http://www.redstate.com/athensrunaway/2011/02/15/ban-hammer-time-ron-paul-gets-the-ol%E2%80%99-heave-ho-from-young-americans-for-freedom/

          • wilgolden

            Think back to 2008.

            Everyone was expecting McCain to nominate someone “safe” and “respectable” and, honestly, someone just as exciting as John McCain (the right-side’s AlBore).

            I was on line, watching blogs. Waiting to see the reaction when, as expected, the VP nominee was “sure to be” either Romney or T-Paw or some other “respectable”, “seasoned” politician.

            I was lurking here, Ace, Hot Air, Stacy McCain’s place, Misha’s Palace, PowerLine, Eject, Eject, Eject, InstaPundit, Black Five, and even IMAO. Fox News. Drudge. CNN. All at once (thank’s FireFox!)

            Remember the excitement that swept through the on-line community?

            I’ll never forget. “IT’S PALIN!” swept through the ether like a prairie fire. ONE OF OUR OWN! ALMIGHTY G*D, HE NOMINATED ONE OF US!

            McCain’s polls changed overnight. The excitement was back. It was like “little blue pills” were given to the entire Right Side of the blogosphere.

            And the wind went out of Kos, MoveOnAlready, Puffington Host, and all the rest.

            Mock me.

            Compare me to the RonBots.

            I don’t care. I’m just me, a poor ol’ dumb cowboy.

            I could happily vote for anyone currently running, and almost any of the people being mentioned / pushed / etc. by the MSM and Republican establishment.

            But I was there in Fairfax when Sarah came to visit.

            The kids soccer field she was scheduled to speak on will easily hold 15K people, if they are friendly. The field was PACKED. The area around it was packed.

            Fairfax PD said the crowd was closer to 50K, and more WANTING to get in. Traffic was at a standstill a half mile away, and there was a line four blocks long.

            No, Sarah Palin isn’t perfect. She has made a few choices, that in her position, I would have at least tried to go the other way. Or at least would like to think I would have.

            But she can win. She has a rare, and, frankly, refreshing attitude. A tough minded innocence (yeah, I know, jumbo shrimp) that is just compelling.

            You find me another Conservative who can do that, and I’m there.

            I couldn’t in good conscience vote for Christie, as I said above, and I couldn’t vote for Ron Paul. Any of the other names I see or hear, fine, I could at least hold my nose, and vote against Odumbo.

            But, where is T-Paw’s energy? Romney? Johnson?

            WHERE IS THE FIRE?

            Palin has been counted out before, and keeps coming back.

            ————————–

            You are welcome to your own favorite. Your business, your vote, your conscience. And I don’t mean that to be nearly as condescending as it sounds.

            Just, please accept, she is my favorite.

            And yes, there are a lot of people trying to keep her from running. When they really are out to get you, that not paranoia or conspiracy theory. Facts don’t need to be respectable to be true.

            And they said the same thing against the first guy I EVER voted for. He went on the be President. Why can’t Palin?

          • acat

            it is not fine, however, to discuss the favorite in a primarily emotional context as Server X-Angel did in the diary above.

            My main problem with Palin, contrasted specifically with Reagan, is that Reagan wrote four years worth of editorials, op eds, opinion pieces with lots of memorable lines for newspapers to explain to the citizens who he was, how he thought, what conservatism meant, why it worked every time it was tried.

            Palin throws genius-level sound bites .. “Drill, baby drill!”, “Death panels”, etc. but it’s *just* the “memorable lines”. No context, no conservative framework.

            Reagan pushed conservatism as hard as he pushed his own brand. I do not see Palin doing the same…

            That’s a problem to me .. and if we can discuss it rationally, if you can show me where I’m wrong and she’s published long-form stuff explaining conservatism, I’ll accept that I’ve just missed it.

            If, on the other hand, your first reaction is emotional, “How dare that cat say that!” .. then we have a problem – and by we, I mean you – because I’ve been much less critical of Palin than I have of Romney and Giuliani … and yet, it’s the Palin supporters who, in my experience, tend to overreact.

            Mew

          • lineholder

            about Palin is this…if she gets in the race any times soon, the left hates her so much that it could unite the Dem base like nothing else could, not even support for Obama himself.

            Right now, every time Obama goes down this path of Executive over-reach on something, he ends up alienating portions of his own base. I’d just as soon see that trend continue for a while unchallenged and undisturbed.

          • acat

            I phrase it differently – “Right now the race is about Obama .. if Palin gets in, the media will try to make it about Palin instead.” – but it’s the same thought.

            I’m not too concerned about the GOP winning the White House. There’s almost nothing Obama can actually do (without alienating his base) to improve the economy, and most folks vote their wallets, in my experience.

            I’m very concerned about getting a candidate who has proven cred fighting a two-front battle against a legislature and a government bureaucracy.

            Daniels appeared, initially, to have a good record on both, but the man has a worse tin ear than Hillary!

            Pawlenty has a good record, and is saying the right stuff, but his polite schtick makes it hard to tell if he’s got the goods or not.

            Cain has no govenrment experience, but in every other way is a great fit for the job….

            Palin, I’m afraid, does not measure up either… her “fighting the bureaucracy” was more about destroying an old-boy-network, not shrinking government, and the legislature are the ones who passed her signature ethics bill – the one that later was used to force her out.

            Mew

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            Obama is a caged rat at this point, he will use any means he can get his hands, if Palin were to get in the race think “operation chaos” coming from the left.

          • lineholder

            can we really present a solid platform regarding the kinds of spending changes that will have to take place in order to get our country back on the right track if we have this kind of “operation chaos” going on? I don’t know. I really don’t. I’d like to say that between now and Nov. 2012 we will have a candidate that comes on that strong and motivates voters to that extent, but we just have to wait and see at this point.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            I think electablility is going to trump most of the other arguements in the GOP primary since everyone agrees beating Obama is the most important goal.

          • azaeroprof

            I read most of Reagan’s op-eds and listened to a lot of his radio commentary during ’76-’80.

            I have read the vast majority of Palin’s facebook posts over the last couple years, including several that doubled as op-eds in the Wall Street Journal.

            Characterizing her posts a “genius-level sound bites” is really not fair. Your are extracting what the MSM has extracted from what are really more length, detailed, and generally well-thought-out opinion pieces. Are her posts as intelligent and thoughtful as Reagan’s? I don’t know, but they’re not bad. And remember that 2011 is a different era than 1977 (for better or worse).

            You’ve highlighted something that has been a real problem for Palin, which is her inability to get her message heard by the larger electorate. The media looks for the one little tidbit of each speech/column that they can make controversial, and uses that to convince people that she is just “throwing red meat”. Perhaps she should be more careful to avoid including these things in her message (e.g. “blood libel”), but frankly I would rather see ALL the candidates go after the Dems harder rather than asking the one that is actually doing it to back off.

            This is why I feel strongly that Palin should be given a chance to run without preconceptions about her electability. A campaign will give her the best opportunity she has had in the last 3 years to get her message across to the public, her WHOLE message. If it doesn’t resonate, she won’t do well and I’m ok with that. What I’m not OK with is letting the media once again disqualify our candidates for us.

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

            as long as there are F/U poll numbers and they are moving in an Unf direction, the “electability” meme is going to be in the background. The key will be coming over the next 60 or days, IMO. First, the “bus tour”. Who is she speaking to? Second, the “movie”. We’ve discussed that. If it gets off to a bad start, I doubt she’ll be able to recover with non-Palin supporters. And third, the eventual release of the Alaska emails. While I seriously doubt there’s a smoking gun in the lot of them, it will be a “bad publicity field day” for the media, and unfortunately for Palin, the people she needs to attract actually pay some attention to the media.

            We’ll see.

          • jimmyg

            Which is problem of her own making. SP has, and encourages other candidates, to avoid media, and communicate only through FOX and Facebook.
            If a candidate wants to reach the general electorate, they will have to deal with the media. Her media relations are a mess and she is not making any moves to improve those relations. (See Rebecca Mansour) If you are only going to speak through Fox and Facebook she cannot expect her message to get out to the larger electorate.
            http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/19/news/la-pn-sarah-palin-newt-gingrich-20110519

          • acat

            Reagan got the tag “the great communicator” in part by going around the media firewall, in part by knowing what worked and what didn’t.

            The only current candidate or proto-candidate with the same kind of innate understanding is Herman Cain. The other possibility was Mike Pence.

            Palin does not have the experience of interacting with the general public that Cain has (or Reagan had) and at this point, I don’t see where she’s got the chops to force her message through the media firewall the way Reagan did, and the way I expect Cain will.

            This doesn’t mean she shouldn’t run. As I said elsewhere, she’s doing a great job just waiting in the wings, being a clear presence in the campaign without being formally present.

            We’ll see what happens.

            Mew

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

            by going directly to the people with his message. He could do that, and be successful doing it, because he was perceived to be a “common man” by the American people. Palin doesn’t have that advantage, most Americans don’t care what she has to say and have no interest in listening. She’s talked (and Facebooked) herself into a deep hole that she may be able to get out of, but not likely in this election cycle.

            I think the next 60 days or so will tell the tale.

          • azaeroprof

            Even the next 60 days won’t be the decider.

            She really has nowhere to go but up. I think her numbers are at their floor. If she gets in and runs a good campaign, rallies conservatives with a solid message, sounds reasonable and intelligent in debates, her numbers will go up. Will it be enough, who knows?

            If any of us think that some magic Repub will take hold and not be savaged by the libs/media, we are naive. Yes, maybe some will do a better job handling the heat than Palin in 2008, but there’s no guarantee. And we really don’t know what skeletons could be lurking in any of their closets.

            Remember, for all the credit we want to give Reagan for all the great things he did from ’76-’80, he was still 25-30% down 7 months before the 1980 election and was largely discounted by many of the public. It was only in the face of the relentless failure of the Carter administration that folks started to give Reagan a second look, and even then, mostly only in the last few weeks of the campaign after he surprised in the debates. Even going into the last weekend, many expected Reagan would lose.

            So IF (yes, a big IF!) Palin were to do what I described above and get conservatives and Republicans to rally behind her, things could change late and in a hurry. Could someone else do it, absolutely. But remember, with the exception of maybe Gingrich, the rest of the field are largely untested in the “oh, crap, we’d better stop this Republican” media assault.

          • azaeroprof

            the more I think about this, the more I think a strategy that has Palin trying to improve her numbers among independents at this point is a losing strategy. These folks will not pay attention to her in a GOP primary campaign, nor will they pay attention to a bus tour or documentary.

            So how can she get them to pay attention to her. The only way I see it is to leave them no choice. She will have to be the GOP nominee, and the only person on the stage with Obama (literally and figuratively) before they will listen to her.

            And the more I reflect on 1980, that is indeed what worked for Reagan. He was seen by independents as a clown, an actor, a warmonger who wanted his finger on the nuclear button. They ridiculed him, they ignored him. So when did they start paying attention to him? When they realized their choice was between Carter and him, and Carter was proving more and more to be a failure. And like I mentioned above, only very late in the campaign.

            If I were advising Palin (and she for sure wanted to run), I would tell her to focus on shoring up conservative and GOP support. Worry about independents later when the audience is a bit more captive.

            Would it work, I don’t know. If I were really advising her, would I tell her not to run in 2012 at all, perhaps. But I really think any attempt to reach the “middle” at this early stage would be fruitless.

          • acat

            where even the majority of those squishy-middle types who try to keep their fingers on who’s running tune out until Labor Day (or Halloween) .. and then, it’s 2011, not 2012.

            Yeah. Palin can’t hurt herself any by running the clock, and she can continue to build bridges among down-ticket candidates. I’m content to let her “loiter with intent”. If nothing else, it keeps the RINOs nervous, and that’s just how I want ‘em!

            Mew

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

            comparison. He was a likeable man and, going into the election in ’80, he’d already run for POTUS once in ’76 and got beaten by Ford. He was also a staple on the national scene for over 10 years AFTER he finished two terms as Governor of CA. And, even people who disagreed with his politics like him. (Clinton is a pretty fair comparison on the other side.)

            Palin’s negatives aren’t driven by her political positions. People simply do not like her. It’s personal. JD Hayworth and AZ voters would be the closest example we can both relate to, but I think JD is in a MUCH deeper hole than Palin.

            The problem I see with the strategy you’ve outlined is that by campaigning right and rallying “conservatives” she’s going to drive a much bigger wedge between her and the non-conservative majority of the electorate. My caveat here is that she absolutely could pull off a small miracle and with the nomination. Doing that with the “campaign right” strategy will most likely give us a rerun of 1964.

            We’ll see.

          • azaeroprof

            Though I caution viewing Reagan too much through the post-successful-Presidency glasses. He was really seen by independents and moderate/liberal Republicans as a bozo and right-wing wacko. It wasn’t until he had secured the nomination that they backed off and got behind them.

            The other thing is that Palin, of all people, doesn’t need to “campaign right” to get the GOP nomination. Notice that I did not say that, rather I said she needs to “shore up conservative and GOP support.” In fact, she needs to solidly support conservative principles (which hasn’t been a problem for her), but reach out to the more establishment wing of the party (mostly by just appearing reasonable and studied). Frankly, I think she has an easier sell to your average non-Tea Party Republican than Romney has to your average Tea Party Republican.

          • acat

            Romney has an easier sell to moderates than Palin will … unless she can turn around her media-mangled image, she’s going to be a very tough sell among the squishy middle whose votes in the general are the key to the White House.

            Mew

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

            First, with respect to Reagan, you’re absolutely right about the general opinion of him as a dangerous buffoon prior to his election, and frankly even after. My point wasn’t that people respected his opinion, rather that they personally liked him and that listening to him was always an adventure in the marvelous. I doubt there was an American alive who wasn’t thrilled at his “Morning in America” speech. And you had to be a hard-headed partisan not to stand and cheer when he said “Mr. G, tear down this wall.” Now I know both of those examples were after his election, but the impact of his presence and his words were no different pre-election. People were willing to listen to what he said and give him a fair hearing because they liked him.

            Palin does not have that luxury.

            With respect to running right, anything she does that isn’t a blatant outreach to independents and non-Palinistas will be perceived as running right. And I think you’ll be surprised if she tries to shore up her conservative principles. It’s not hard – actually it’s pretty easy – to build a case that she’s never ever governed as a conservative, never met a tax dollar she couldn’t spend and is now all talk. Combine that with the fact that she’s never been much at actually working with a legislature – and in AK that’s a Republican legislature – to get things accomplished.

            I really see her biggest problem as one where lots of people think she’s been extensively “vetted”. In fact she hasn’t. She’s been attacked a bunch, but rarely on issues or her positions. And she’s yet to sit down with a talking head and actually lay out her position on any issue and answer hard questions. Personally, I think she’ll fold like a cheap tent because the same attack-mode responses (not answers) that have served her pretty well in the personal attacks will get her head handed to her in a real interview.

            Obviously, YMMV. :-)

          • aesthete

            that Reagan personally was seen as a nut, annoying, etc. — his ideology was seen as all of the above by the non-engaged and the establishment, but he, personally, was seen in a good light. Because most people personally liked Reagan, he was able to sell an ideology that most people were unsure of at the time in the debates and other contexts.

            Most people don’t get around to caring about Palin’s ideology particularly: they either love her uncritically or dislike her intensely because of her public appearances, gaffes, initial speech in ’08, family, shrill voice, gun use etc. It is the rare bird indeed who adores Palin for what she did as half-Guv in AK or in her other political positions; most people like or dislike her and then find things in her record to justify their emotional state.

          • Change Jar Conservative

            This is a combination of how she came across in the 2008 campaign and also the perception of her quitting as governor.

            I don’t want Palin to run because I think that will guarentee a win for Obama (assuming she gets the nomination).

            What do I base that on?

            At least four people I know who are reliable Republicans (not just Independents who slide back and forth) who have said equivically that they wouldn’t vote for her and would just sit out the election.

            There take is that as much as they hate Obama’s policies, they simply don’t believe that Palin is competent to be President.

            Her polling negatives are much higher than other GOP candidates while her favorables are not much higher.

            I do disagree with Boortz. We got Obama simply because people wanted to try out something new … in other words, the “Hope/Change” mantra worked.

  • cmac1225

    In terms of the 2012 election, it comes down to electability.

    Christie was a ‘breath of fresh air’ with what came across as a no-nonsense approach to dealing with politicians, the media, and the people.

    To me, the only reason Rubio and Bachmann are even mentioned is their Tea Party connection,

    As for Palin, she can run, but I don’t think she should. Looking back at the 2010 mid-terms, she played a greater role, as a “queen-maker”, by fund-raising and campaigning. What is her record of getting candidates elected?

    All of that aside, it comes down to electability. Palin could win the primary, but she can not win the election. She is as polarizing as Hillary guaranteed to motivate the Democratic base to get out and vote.

    But I would take any of these over another four years of Obama.

  • http://www.think-o-sphere.com roblue

    People on the other side of our political divide can’t stand her, for she is too big a threat. People on our side of the political divide can’t “accept” her, for she is too big a threat.

    She is the typical out-of-the-box individual with an incredible amount of passion and love for country, and what bothers me the most about all this is that people continue to put power and politics first before our nation’s best interest.

    Her skin has gotten so thick these last two years that I believe the bigger the smear the more she thrives, coming out with her typical unconventional ways of sticking it to them. Here goes another reason why they can’t stand her, for she continues to get back at them with ways they would have never thought of — due to the typical inside the beltway (inside the box) type of thinking that they have. She has not been destroyed; she’s gotten stronger.

    She WILL be the one to beat, if she ever decides to run — and as Rush always says…don’t doubt me!!

    • acat

      her quitting the governorship?

      That would certainly appear to be an example of *not* “thriving on smearing”. I’d go so far as to call it an example of exactly what *not* to do when smeared.

      Go on the offensive – use RICO to prosecute the compainers, get the A.G. involved, make it cost the Dems something to keep filing baseless complaints, and – of course – find a way for the State to pay to defend its’ employee if the complaints are truly baseless.

      Yes, Sarah Palin has stood up under fire – but she’s also left a good bit of trouble in her rear view mirror. I would like to know which Sarah we’ll get as Commander in Chief.

      Mew

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

      I would note that perhaps your definitioin of “thrive” and that recognized by the real world might be a tad different.

      She certainly has been the brunt of a boatload of personal attacks and the shots taken at her kids are pretty inexcusable. The really interesting thing is that she’s not yet been really looked at (you can call it attacked) with respect to her performance as governor, her resignation, or her stands on issues. It’s also interesting that her commentary has been pretty much limited to Facebook frenzies with her “friends” and she hasn’t faced off against a real critic, one on one, in nearly two years.

      I also would note that her F/U ratings with non-third-standard-deviation conservatives have been highly negative and dropping for those same couple of years. Her negatives with Independents – who like it or not elect Presidents – are well above 55% and climbing. I wouldn’t call that “thriving”.

      Now, maybe she can turn all of this around. When I first heard about the “movie” and the “bus tour”, it did get me scratching my old, balding head. The tour hasn’t really started and who knows what she’ll do with respect to distribution of the movie, but I guess that the Rolling Thunder thingy won’t help her much with those who don’t already have a SarahShrine™ in the basement. If she continues to preach to the choir, she’s going to be not much more than an afterthought.

      We’ll see.

      • acat

        into the political process – and since something north of 40% routinely don’t vote it’s not impossible to do so – I don’t see this as anything other than “loitering with intent on the presidential stage”.

        That is, unless she can recruit a campaign in a completely new way – all volunteer, no paid staff, no campaign manager, no visits to the “big donors”, etc. etc., then she’s polishing her image, and making sure she’s consulted by all the other candidates in the same way Paul Ryan will be consulted regarding the Road Map. (in Newt’s case, a snit fit will have to suffice)

        I don’t know whether or not she’s running. Nobody does, maybe not even her. I do know that if she is, she’s writing her own rules.

        Mew

        • wilgolden

          and going back three branches, I don’t think “we” have a problem. My real objection is to the automatic dismissal by a number of people.

          Being a certified “old fart”, I sometimes get cranky.

          I also know I’m the new guy on the block (kinda). I’ve been lurking for years, but just registered last month. If I offend, sometimes it’s the pain speaking, and I ask for understanding.

          ——————-

          Different? Oh, Yeah, no argument there. And as I said, she has made some choices that I would like to think I would have made differently. But all of them are at least defensible.

          I will be happy to help almost any of the current Republican possibles. Almost.

          But, quite frankly, I’m getting real tired of having to hold my nose, and making a vote based on “at least he’s better than ________ .”

          I don’t want another “go along – get along”. I want bright, primary colors. I want excitement. I want someone who will make Chuck Schumer’s head explode on National Television.

          Too much to ask? Ok, how about someone who makes me actually want to go to the polls?

          “In a good cause, there are no failures.”

          • acat

            and I mostly agree – bold colours, and a full-on unapologetic three-legged conservatism.

            I am perfectly happy to not have excitement over the candidate if I can get a candidate who gets the ideas right. I’m reasonably happy with Pawlenty’s blandwagon in that regard.

            Mew

          • wilgolden

            I could happily go to the polls. But he won’t make Chuckie have a vapor lock. :(

            Frankly, I’m running out of chances to vote . . .

          • aesthete

            because you seem like a nice enough guy, but statements like “he won?t make Chuckie have a vapor lock” are common among some conservatives, and quite troubling in many ways. The idea of politics shouldn’t be to make the loyal opposition suffer; it should be to advance policies that benefit all of the citizenry. Picking fights with your opposition over piddling non-issues may annoy your opposition, but it does nothing to advance those policies and ideologies that benefit us. Paul Ryan has not gotten bogged down in pointless bickering, and has done much more for our cause than a thousand Hannities screaming about the Ground Zero Mosque ever could.

          • wilgolden

            I just don’t agree.

            I don’t feel this way about all liberals. I really miss Pat Moynahan, for example, and I liked several others. Truman was a great man. John Kennedy was special. Zell Miller was a friend.

            But some a**Hats are just that kind. Chuck Schumer has earned a special place in the legion of DisHonor.

            Again, if that bothers some that after 50 years, I take politics personally, so be it. I’m just me.

            —————

            And I’m off. Barbeque calls, and my wonderful daughters are hungry. Keep the shiny side up, and save your Confederate money, Boys!

            Y’all have fun now.

          • acat

            Dems used to believe in nationalism, a very full-throated pro-America agenda .. just not a conservative agenda. Further, for a long time there weren’t really two functional parties as we know them – there were conservative-democrats (blue dogs) and liberal-democrats (democrats) both under the same banner.

            Zell Miller’s a great example of a blue dog, but .. that breed has gone extinct, killed by the resurgence of the Southern GOP.

            Regarding the internet, Thune vs. Daschle is a good example – Dashle would press release relatively conservative back home, but had a very liberal record in D.C. Thune tied Daschle to his record, and sunk a high-ranking Dem quite effectively. Schumer’s from New York, so has always been able to be himself.

            Enjoy the barbecue! Lots of storms coming through this afternoon, hoping for sun tomorrow for our day of roasted meat and family.

            Mew

      • http://www.think-o-sphere.com roblue

        @Mew and mbecker…

        She faced a number of court proceedings on ethical issues where she had to spend 500k on those proceedings — which she was able to get herself exonerated. ?According to the provisions of the ethical law in force in Alaska, the expenses of a governor’s ethical proceedings should be borne by the Governor, and the state will not bear it. She just couldn’t afford to stay to clean-up her name. I bet you anything that these expenses played a big role in her resignation. ?Let me just say this, she HAS thrived on all the smearing; talk about the hit that her family has taken thus far (which you are right, it’s inexcusable), and the ongoing bombardment from both sides. Had this all weaken her and destroyed her, she wouldn’t be doing what she is doing today. She does have a long ways to go, and by no mean she has earned my vote. She WILL have to earn the majority vote just like everyone else. All I’m saying is this woman has withstood attacks that most would have gone under water. She continues to get stronger and stronger, regardless of what everyone else says. She is her own brand, and I can’t wait to see how everything will pan out for her.?

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

          That is a fallacy perpetrated by the SarahShrine™ idiots.

          Alaska law provides both legal defense and indemnification in actions filed against a State officer or employee if the complained of act was within the scope of the officer or employee?s employment. See, Alaska Statute (AS) 09.50.250 and .253 and the implementing regulations at 9 Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 33.010.

          But, the key is that the event has to be examined to determine if it was within the scope of the officer or employee?s employment.

          That “$500K” in legal fees that she paid, she took on herself BECAUSE she would not pick up the phone and call the AG, who was her guy, and ask him for certification that her actions were within the scope of her employment.

          You figure out the reason she wouldn’t make that phone call.

          And, as far as playing a part in her resignation, she got caught in her own ethics law. She cut and ran out the back door rather than fighting. And, had she called the AG and gotten certification, there would have been no cost to her and no downstream liability of ANY kind. This is a standard indemnification agreement used by most if not all states and virtually every business for their officers. I’ve been covered by this type of agreement many times.

  • victrola

    That’s what puzzles me most about the drive from Palin supporters. What about her makes it worth taking such a risky gamble versus another Republican that has a better record and a better chance at beating Obama?

    At some point, you can’t just ignore all the polls that say a HUGE majority of Americans simply don’t like her and think she’s unprepared for the White House. Can those numbers change with an expensive PR campaign? Maybe a bit, but so can Charlie Sheens. Why on Earth would you want to go into a tough race with such a handicap right at the start when so many Americans have already made their mind up about her? Palin’s been running for President since November of 2008 with plenty of exposure, and her numbers have only gone down dramatically, despite the fact that Obama’s Presidency is on the ropes and flailing. It’s obvious to me we’re now dealing with a cult of personality more than the grassroots effort at putting a solid conservative in the White House.

    The reason I’ve gone from being a big Palin supporter in 2008 to being hostile at the idea of her running is A) the way she has carried herself has shown me loud and clear she’s not ready for prime time (quitting in the middle of her first term for a book deal and reality show sealed it for most Republicans) and B) I’m simply afraid she’ll destroy the Republican Party and hand Obama and Democrats a landslide election. It also doesn’t help that many (but not all) of her supporters react to every conservative critique and criticism of Palin like someone just called their wife a whore, which only creates even more hostility towards her candidacy.

    • Remington_Steele
  • http://thethinkingvoter.blogspot.com abierubin

    If Michelle Bachmann would announce now that she’s running for the senate seat in Minnesota, all those supporting her now would suddenly come out and declare her as gonna-be-loser.

    Where were all those that are now supporting Marco Rubio when he ran for his senate seat back in ’10 ? I’ll tell you! Backing Charlie Christ, claiming that he’s the only one that could win!

    No matter who wins the primary, whether Bachmann, Rubio or another candidate, we’ll watch them go through grinder just as Palin had the last few years.

    Conservatives keep on backtracking. Instead of abandoning one candidate after the other because of the lefts’ attacks, we should take a step forward and fight back.

    Like Rush Limbaugh always says: If you’re so convinced that Palin is qualified and has principles but the media has destroyed her, then why don’t you come out and defend her and retaliate against the media?

  • swvapatriot

    One of the things that draw me to Palin is that she is so mindlessly reviled.

    No one has attempted to debate her on the issues – the economy, energy, healthcare, etc.

    Instead, from RINO’s to Demons, er…Democrats, she is reviled as a redneck rube, a (gasp!) believing Christian, who was…a small town mayor, and who didn’t abort her son. Oh, and she didn’t get indoctrinated at the right schools.

    Even more, they hate her for her passionate belief in, and love for God, her country and its history, its Constitution, its people, and its exceptionalism. She alone tells Americans that it is they, not the government, not academia, not the political parties, who are the strength of this country, that it is they to whom those in government must bow before in obedience, and not the other way around.

    Of everyone who has announced, or who have been spoken as a possible candidate, only Herman Cain, in my mind, comes anywhere close to the atributes I see in Sarah Palin.

    I think she has a gut instinct for those things the average working/middle class Americans hold dear, and can relate them clearly and passionately in their own simple terms.

    As she begins this weekend at Rolling Thunder, where Patriotic American are gathering to honor those who have sacrificed all for their country, we will see over the following months who it is real Americans choose to carry the standard of freedom into the 2012 elections.

    I, for one, sincerely hope it is Sarah Palin.
    ______________________________________________________
    Give me liberty or give me death

    C Baker,
    Christian, Patriot, Veteran

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

    Her supporters seem to be motivated, not by her qualifications or issues so much as by a knee jerk reaction to the way she was treated.

    I just think that is sort of dangerous.

    As to what Server X-Angel says in this post, It is a bit of a strawman.

    No one I know who supports Bachmann or the others has a problem with Palin’s record, we have a problem with her huge negatives.

    Rightly or wrongly, it is a big hurdle to jump. National elections are swung by the independents. We hate that, we rail against it, but it is still the truth, and there is not much that can be done about it.

  • williamjameson

    Palin has shown a lack of knowledge in certain areas as well she QUIT her job. There are many other reasons which you can find by using search on this site.

    No one has said members can’t talk about Palin, just that she isn’t ready for various reasons.

    I read Palin may have bought property in AZ and some think she’ll run for Senate as Senator John Kyl is retiring.

  • swvapatriot

    I say, “one of the things that draw me to her….” and this is what you pick up first.

    I have read many of her posts on Facebook, columns, and listened to her speeches, and think she has what it takes, primarily, good principles, but also passion, and a tremendous ability to communicate to, and connect with, ordinary Americans. The problem many have with her is that she doesn’t say what she has to say in elite-speak, with many layers of nuance, etc. hence, she is ‘stoopid.’ That is just a bunch of vainglorious, self-righteous crap.

    And you consign her supporters to the same condemnation. Maybe you should develope a little humility yourself, come down off your own high horse, and listen to her, without the filters.

    Finally, what will we do when the MSM tars and feathers whoever you like, bringing huge negatives? Surrender with our hands in the air believing all is lost?

    Whoever ends up being the candidate, Palin or another, we must do whatever we can to overcome all of these things which seem stacked against us, work ’till we drop, and never, never surrender.
    ____________________________________________________
    Give me liberty or give me death

    C Baker
    Christian, Patriot, Veteran

  • swvapatriot

    Obama’s unreadiness with the seeming unreadiness of Palin is simply a false premise.

    Had Obama ever run a business? Been elected to an executive position – mayor, governor? He had done nothing to prepare or qualify him for this office.

    I think your lack of meaningful objections leaves no real arguements against her at all.

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

    because they can only do a hatchet job that sticks on people who actually screw up. That is what Palin supporters don’t want to admit. She screwed up badly last election cycle, same as Newt screwed up this cycle.

    As for what you see in her books and speeches, Well I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think she speaks good middle of the road conservative principles, but lots of other people do the same.

    I do not think she is very good or gifted in the way she speaks, I know a lot of you guys think so, but I really don’t see it. Her delivery has a high pitched whining quality to it.

    I think she would be an OK president, but a losing candidate. Her negatives are astronomical, and the are not ALL caused by the opposition.

  • Darin_H

    to answer your question – it’s not. But then again, that’s not the right question.

    My full answer is that I don’t want any of them to be the nominee:

    Bachman – not enough xp and no executive xp
    Christie – little xp, moderate record outside of fiscal issues (pro-choice and gun-grabber)
    Rubio – not enough xp and no executive xp
    Palin – little xp, mostly moderate record as governor (tax hiker)

    It’s funny that you lump Palin in with those 3, pretty good comparison IMO.

  • Darin_H

    Christie is pro-life

  • acat

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55905.html

    So, do we take at face value the idea that she’s taking her husband and younger children on a tour of historic American sites? Or is this more loitering with intent on the presidential stage?

    Seems to me, she’s just playing rope-a-dope with the media at this point, making them look as foolish as they’ve made her appear…. It’s a fun sport, for those who have the ability, but I don’t see the point unless .. it really is just the Palin Family Vacation.

    Mew

  • Xasteius

    Just between us, I admire shrewdness in a woman.

  • acat

    but either way works.

    I still don’t think she’s running…. I think she’s just looking like it to draw attention, to be one of the ones whose approval the actual candidate must seek.

    I am, of course, prepared to be mistaken.

    Mew

  • drsandykramer

    Palin is being tarred by the same broad brush of ridicule that made Dan Quayle appear to be a deer in the headlights. Don’t underestimate the power of Obama, Soros, and the Main Stream Media. Their ilk tried it on Reagan, but he had the fortitude to resist succumbing and turned things around. It remains to be seen whether Palin can survive the war that awaits her.

  • williamjameson

    couldn’t hack it as governor. Why should we think Palin won’t quit again when the going gets tough? Palin isn’t ready and she knows she has a lot to learn as did Obama.

    We don’t won’t a work in progress because On the Job training isn’t acceptable. She must know all areas of importance before running for office. Palin lacks broad Economic Policy skills and she certainly has a lot to learn about Foreign Policy and US history (Paul Revere). I can argue against Palin all day long and cite legitimate objections.

    Voting on emotion is how Obama got elected.

    On another thread someone is Sex Baiting as if people don’t like her because she’s a mother and has several kids………..it was a totally bunk dairy.

  • gekster

    At least it would be more at home there.

  • aesthete

    I daresay that it has many characteristics that would qualify it as a post well in line with what conservatives believe (desire for an experienced candidate, dislike of gender politics, and a dislike of voting based on emotionalism, among other things).

  • williamjameson

    so good luck. You can praise Palin all you want here or there, makes no difference to me.

  • acat

    And no, I don’t think Palin is ready .. any more than George VI was ready to be king of England back in 1935.

    Her continued inability to compose and reply with complete thoughts to on the spot questions is a problem. It doesn’t mean she’s stupid – clearly she’s not. It doesn’t mean she can’t be president. It does mean that, like King George VI, she’s going to have to overcome herself first.

    Obviously, her answer to the Paul Revere question was historically correct, but ..how can you listen to it and think “This is a person who can communicate” ? In an election containing Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, RonPaul! and – most importantly – Herman Cain and Barak Obama – if Palin can’t get through this, she’s not going to win.

    Mew

  • gekster

    But like I said, I read the same “type” of things about Palin on the leftist sites.
    It seams every other poster is saying she can’t do this because of this, and she can’t do that because of that, where as no one has a true crystal ball and can’t accuratly predict the future.
    I do find it irritating that people spend more time tearing down potential candidates, et al, then building up anyone.
    And if they do manage to build up someone, it allways comes with tearing into potential rivals,
    Guess I’m getting Palin can’t syndrome.
    Getting tired of seeing it here, but I guess I have to put up with it.
    But it IS irritating to no end.

  • williamjameson

    what I meant. He can support Palin, I see nothing wrong with it. Too many are falling prey to the “liberal style” of bashing anything they disagree with.

  • Tbone

    is like trying to talk a cat into taking a bath. The concept is not within any frame of reference that they have ever managed to develop.

  • aesthete

    of any candidate on our part will probably be replicated on the left. Case in point: Romney’s being for RomneyCare has been repeated ad nauseum on both the right and the left, yet failing to mention it in the context of a pro- or anti-Romney post would be a grave error, IMO. I haven’t been following williamjameson’s postings, but from the post that you responded to it seems like he is concerned about things that in no way motivate the left: desire for experienced candidates, distaste for identity politics, and a dislike of emotionalism. I like your general positive outlook, and I definitely like you as a poster, but I don’t agree that one needs to present an alternative presidential candidate to have an opinion on a candidate (positive or negative).

    To be perfectly clear, though, I don’t particularly care about the Paul Revere thing: it appears that Palin communicated something in a garbled but accurate fashion, which does not change my opinion of her as a potential candidate one way or another. The pedantry on display from some quarters trying to characterize Palin’s remarks as a “gaffe” has been highly obnoxious, though…

  • williamjameson

    with emotion and let it overwhelm you into drawing an “inference” to interpret my words . Fact is your thoughts evolved into far more than what I was saying.

    Think of it this way, if Chris Christie says he isn’t running because he’s not ready then why would you think Palin is ready? I made a short response rather than type out everything about her that defines why Palin isn’t ready, I’ve done that twice already. I think she’ll run for the senate or continue TV work and stumping speeches and rebuild herself later.

  • gekster

    I must evolve. ;)

  • gekster

    then you would see I do not praise Palin.
    And did you read any of the responses after my post?
    I didn’t think so.
    It is just people like you who keep trashing her for no reason other than a personal dislike.
    And all your reasons ststed are the same the lefts use to trash her, so I see no difference.
    I don’t see other politicians get the raw treatment here that Palin gets.
    And before you say it, I know others politicians get hit on this site,
    but not to the extent that Sarah does.

    Instead of bashing on Palin, why don’t you espouse the canddidate you do like, and explain why.
    Or is bashing Palin easier for you.

  • williamjameson

    you didn’t like but you no admit you agree with. You are reacting with emotion and its pointless. I don’t recall your Palin responses,not important either, what’s important is your reaction to my words. I don’t take offense but I’m not wrong in saying Palin isn’t ready. People like you can’t trash others and think it will matter because you are using the lefty tactics to bash and its not working. No I’m not saying your a lefty, I’ll say that before you overreact again. Your welcome!

    You do not get to decide what I say, lefties try to silence people all the time with rants, it doesn’t work. I’ve seen people at RS say far far worse than I said and I’ve seen people beat up on members too. I will say what I want about Palin, so get over it.

    I have spoken about candidates I like including Herman Cain, Haley Barbour, Pawlenty and so on, you’d know this if you read my posts. Yea right, didn’t think so.

    If you want people to stop mentioning Palin in a manner you disagree with then ask for a Palin rule.

  • gekster

    I’m probably wrong, I usually am. ;)