Some of Sarah Palin's Ideas Cross the Political Divide (good, from NY Times)

Come off it. You are the one who makes the following assertions:

"She is a populist. Her favorite movie is about populism. Did you read her books?"

You say she is a populist, you prove it. I am not going to undertake an absurdity on your behalf which is to disprove your assertion on your terms but without your citations. You assert that there is something in her books (I have in fact read Going Rogue) that identifies her as a populist, provide the citation. It is, after all, your assertion and your reference, where is your citation?

It is not up to me to go rummaging through book after book in an effort to disprove some assertion of yours which you are not willing to substantiate. I do confess, however, that I am ignorant as to what Sarah Palin's favorite movie is but I am not at all sure that Sarah's "favorite movie" will settle this argument one way or the other-that is if you are willing to cite the movie by name, at least.

I prefer somewhat more substantial resources on which to draw conclusions. I saw nothing in "Going Rogue" which shows her to be anything but the kind of good government conservative that I asserted in my original post. Her fight with the oil companies was a matter of opposing crony capitalism-perfectly consistent with a true reading of her speech, inconsistent with the author's version, and not at all indicative of populism. Her wars against the corruption of the Republican Party in Alaska are hardly populist but merely good government conservatism.

In case you do not know what a populist is,or how the definition might apply to Palin, have a look at this article:

Sarah Palin a populist?

Populism has many flavors. Some people think a populist cannot also be conservative, but that’s not the case. Palin is a conservative populist, as is Perry to some degree. Even Trump came across as one (the legitimacy of such a view is in question).

You can also have a liberal populist - Dennis Kucinich comes to mind.

This is either genuine, or the left has decided that Sarah is the easiest to beat and they are now trying to encourage her to run.

Alternatively, they may think that Romney is acceptable and are hoping that Sarah and Rick split the conservative vote and let Mitt get the nomination.

Sorry, but I have a hard time believing the NYT is saying anything positive about Sarah without an ulterior motive.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.