Posted on 05/05/2013 1:04:02 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Edited on 05/05/2013 1:07:16 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
“Seriously?”
Of course not seriously.
“get a damn life.”
Get a sense of humor...and stop ignoring the arguments in the post.
Thank you very much for your kind words. I must confess, though, that the work was not done three days ago, but over more than three decades.
Yep. I don't even care if he is viable. If I don't vote for someone who agrees with me, my positions will not be known and I will have wasted my vote. My 3 requirements are pro-life, return of exported jobs, formal declaration of war prior to any military action.
Absolutely!
Jim, Yaelle is right, and we need to think this through seriously. For some reason we have never fully understood, Palin considered running and decided against it.
Also, Rockingham raised five very valid concerns at post #192, of which the most important are that her “brand” has been seriously damaged and she doesn't seem to have a solid set of advisers. Those problems can be addressed, but they are real and they have to be addressed if Palin is going to run a credible national campaign now as opposed to, for example, going back to Alaska and using her “ground game” and decades of Alaska political experience to run for the US Senate, and develop a national profile that way.
Do we have any reason to believe the calculus has changed this campaign cycle and she'll run now when she decided against running in the last campaign?
The only things I can see changing are that 1) trying to defeat Mitt Romney and his millions won't be an issue in the 2016 Republican primary campaign, and 2) the Democrats may very well have Hillary Clinton as their nominee or at least as their presumptive front-runner, which means a female Republican could have an advantage in the primary.
On the other hand, one of the biggest things that I like about Sarah Palin is that she appeals to at least two and probably all three legs of the three-legged conservative stool — definitely the social conservatives and the military conservatives, and to some extent also the economic conservative/libertarian wing of the Republican Party.
When she talks Christian conservative language, she's not just saying what social conservatives want to hear — she's walked the walk on the pro-life issues with her child. Likewise, she has legitimate blue-collar credentials and a son in the Army. Her husband runs his own fishing business and that has at least some appeal to the business wing of the Republican Party, and while Palin certainly isn't a classic libertarian, the anti-government atmosphere of Alaska is much more libertarian than what is advocated by many Republicans.
Palin has a lot going for her. But do we have any reason to believe she'll run in 2016 if she didn't run in 2012? I'm guessing that only she and her husband have a good clue on that, and they may not even know what to think.
Bottom line: Let's not put all our eggs in one basket. That's a recipe for disappointment, and maybe for disaster. If Freepers and Tea Partiers put their hopes on a candidate who isn't going to run, and nuke other good candidates, we'll end up with a re-run of 2012 and 2008. None of us want that.
Amen!
Also, please see my post 705 on this thread. I think one of the biggest advantages to Sarah Palin is that she can unite the SoCons and MilCons, and while she is not a libertarian, she has enough leanings in that direction that she won't alienate the libertarians as much as a person perceived as being primarily a Christian conservative.
That's not necessarily saying I want Sarah Palin as president, but I do want someone who can win support from all three “legs” of the Republican stool.
She’s the only one i will support!
The rest of them in the running are scumbags!
Palin/West ‘16
Absolutely.
That particular mess has the ability to turn into a political nightmare for the Democrats. She's going to find that being on the right side, rather than on the wrong side like McCain, is of considerable benefit to a serious candidate for President.
Sure.. why not? She won’t fare worse than any other GOP candidate.
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.