Replies

No. She’s doing exactly what she should be doing, party-building. It’s under the radar enough that the MSM are leaving her alone (compared to when she was a candidate), and she’s got the right positions and the right abilities for talking to the base.

Now that the cult that used to surround her seems to have simmered down, it’s relatively safe to point out the simple fact that the MSM attacks on her worked—she is disliked by many of the center we’d need to get her in the White House, and the dems in DC would spend 4-8 years fighting her every step of the way. We don’t have to like it to acknowledge reality.

Her quitting the governorship (we all know the reasons) was a very, very bad move if she wanted to be considered president. It also wasn’t the first time she did such a thing.

I don’t think she’d be a good president for various reasons, but there are countless people I like and admire who wouldn’t be, either.

BUT...she is the one person who seems to be able to break through with Republicans and get them to support Tea Party candidates. She is irreplacable in the unofficial position she’s in now, and she truly needs to stay where she is, working at building the party with conservatives, keeping the country clubbers at bay.

So...no.

BUT...she is the one person who seems to be able to break through with Republicans and get them to support Tea Party candidates.

And we're really going to need that for the 2012 Congressional elections.

It is equally important, IMO, to get even more Tea Party representation in Congress as it is taking back the White House.

Sarah Palin can be a huge asset here.

the MSM attacks on her worked—she is disliked by many of the center we’d need to get her in the White House

. . . and the "MSM" attacks on Herman Cain will not work?
The saying is that any prosecutor can "get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich." Well in case you haven't noticed, wire service journalism functions exactly as a prosecutor against any conservative politician. And in a race for POTUS against a Democrat, they treat a John McCain exactly like they treat a conservative.
Herman Cain is Sarah Palin - without the political experience and the "Governor" title. Black man, white woman, otherwise the same difference. Neither one can be attacked conventionally as "racist, anti woman." So they resort to vicious smear campaigns against both of them.
To withdraw support from Palin, or Cain, in the face of what I admit is a powerful political assault is to give up all hope of getting a conservative president. And, considering that a Romney nomination would take Obamacare off the table, to give up hope of nominating a conservative is to give up most of the ammunition against Obama and is just as risky as facing the open hostility of journalism head on.
We want someone who wants a free America for our nominee - not just some rich guy whose objective is to be president. Even Teddy Kennedy couldn't pull that off against an incumbent Democrat . . .
We are better off riding out the storm of negative publicity (and negative poll numbers running up to the election, as was the case in 1980) which wire service journalism can and will dish out with a Cain - or, yes, a Palin - than we are to back down from a fight with wire service journalism. If you are up against a great linebacker you can't run away from him, you have to run at him.