Posted on 11/07/2012 1:32:47 AM PST by Timber Rattler
There are too many ppl who have an issue with ordinary ppl becoming president. They have an elitist view of a president. Must have the right pedigree
You can't run and win if the party says it won't back you.
Regardless, Palin is only a side issue here...the real issue is that the GOP-E plotted and schemed against Conservatives and the TEA party movement to clear the way for Romney, and ended up shooting itself in the foot and dooming us all to four more years of Marxist rule. That's what this thread really is about--pointing out where it all began.
The wrong peeps - directed at her and NOT Obama. They treated her like she was the enemy and not Obama. So now they have Obama. They got what they wanted!
That is exactly right!
>>”you just don’t remember the history..”
Of course I remember it. I just don’t interpret it as THE unsurmountable challenge and reason Sarah never entered the race. This is your take:
>>”He ambushed her.. Perry made it impossible for her to join and to win the nomination..”
My goodness what a weak candidate that would be that was stopped by Perry?
If she’d entered the race earlier, she’d outsmarted them. But they ‘lied” so her mistake was trusting their lies...
and on and on.
It’s all so weak and comes down to you thinking Sarah couldn’t overcome obstacles - the obstacle of the brief and unstellar campaign of Rick Perry.
Has Sarah ever hinted this was it or agreed with your scenario?
At least she would have fought Obama with every last breath,
WRONG!!! This is your comment..She didn’t fight Obama this election with every breath.
KEEP IT HONEST!
Did the “party” say it wouldn’t back Sarah if she entered and won? Who? Who said that?
>>>”Palin is only the side issue here..
I see it as your evidence for your theory. And I see your theory falling on the evidence offered.
But you are right on one part: Palin is a side issue. She didn’t enter the race. You can’t win the primary if you don’t enter; you can’t win the general if you don’t win the primary.
We had a pick of those that entered. Romney defeated those handily. It is debatable now whether that speaks highly of Romney or lowly of the others.
But, Palin is moot.
This defeat started with Todd Akin and his idiotic remark about rape. Mourdock sealed it. Women as a group were really turned off.
The momentum came back with the debates, then Christie turned Obama into Saint Barack.
We lost by very little, but those were enough to turn the tide.
Whaat???!
She didn’t fight Obama with every last breath. If you think so, show me where. I’m open.
She just didn’t.
If Palin thought she could have won, she would have been out there. She wasn’t.
Buy her new exercise video and get off my back.
Oh, so the GOP-E has NOT been attacking Conservatives and trying to co-opt or undermine TEA party candidates?
You are so clueless about SARAH. Believe me, you know diddle squat. I keep telling you but you are determined to be thick headed.
I stated an opinion, nothing more.
I'm sure she thought long and hard about running, and decided not to, for whatever reason.
Do you think there's something so special about Palin that she shouldn't have to compete for something she wanted?
As for Perry, he dropped out because he flamed out badly in the debate and after that his numbers tanked. It's as simple as that.
“So I take it that you are not part of the TEA Party movement?”
My take on the TEA party movement is that it became early on the “Save Medicare Status Quo” and was the genesis of the GOP rhetoric echoed by conservatives here decrying the “$716B diverted from Medicare to Obama Care”
How did the GOP become defenders of unconstitutional, budget-busting Medicare - the traditional domain of democrats?
We would have had LESS votes with Palin, who is overrated, just as Obama is.
And you the same. You didn’t disappoint. Some people know God, other know about Him. Sarah knows Him - the One who knows the future, the One she takes direction from and not the GOP-E or what you call a ‘weak mind’. Like I said, you didn’t disappoint trying to smear a godly woman.
Cristie is now the hands on nominee for 2016 for the Dem's with that move.
As to Mourdock and Akin, yes may have done us in with women. But what does that say about the state of women-hood if they will sell their soul for $9, (aka Mizz Fluke) All that stuff gets cost shifted to their employer in terms of higher premiums and they are to stupid to see it and that it will help collapse the system into single payer.
The Republic is over....
“You are so clueless about SARAH. Believe me, you know diddle squat. I keep telling you but you are determined to be thick headed.”
**********************************
Gee OK! I am clueless about “SARAH”.
She’s a god and can do no wrong, I should have known better than to walk anything other than lock-step fool.
I shall lash myself about the back with a hundred wet noodles!
Praise Sarah! She will save us all but just decided not to this go’round! Because she loves us SO MUCH!
Next time she may decide to save us...we await her decision!
You are the one who knows about she having an exercise video, I didn’t. Seems you are so enamored by what she does. Yet you missed 3.5 years of her fighting obama along with obamacare.
The GOP-e doesn’t have a club with membership cards. There are pundits, consultants, editorialists who have an audience, but no role or office in the party. There are people who hold office in the party on all levels who are determined on the local who send them to state, who send them to national. There are pros with various skills who are hired for those skills, there are policy people and campaign people.
All of these official job roles are, trust me, extremely tenuous. Two years is real longevity.
So:
A) How are you defining the ‘elite’ and specifically who are they and which of these are for or against conservatives and tea partiers? I have my own answers in the areas and locations I know. What are yours?
B) You should know that politics is the ultimate power game and alliances come and go determined by who has power at the moment. If you can build a movement of people of sufficient strength, as in votes, you have power.
C) Those in power always seek to maintain that power. Those without it always seek to take it. The latter win regularly, if they did not, we’d have the same party for decades. We rarely have the same party for four years, barring a two term president.
D) Anyone new candidate vying for the presidency of the United States knows they will have to find a way to neutralize, win-over or defeat the current in-power group. Reagan had a hell of a task with the Ford group. I happened to watch that one up close. It was truly brutal.
So, you say the “elite” were against Palin. I say, some and so what? If that scares a candidate off, they don’t have what it takes to fight anyway.
You seem to be saying this was the case with Palin. I don’t know of any evidence to support that, certainly not from Sarah.
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.