Sarah Palin 2012 .......(preparation for that time begins today)

John McCain's greatest contribution to the conservative movement was naming Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Barack Obama will be sworn in as the 44th President of the United States in 76 days from now.

He has now been placed in the awkward position of having to back up his own lofty oratory. With lofty oratory come lofty expectations.

Americans expect Obama to command our armed forces in Afghanistan and Iraq responsibly and to protect us in the ongoing War on Terror.

With our economy in the worst shape it has been in nearly three decades it is unlikely Obama will be able to provide any quick fix for the economy. Under these conditions it is also unlikely Obama will be able to change our health care system in any meaningful way.

Aside from inheriting two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is very likely Joe Biden's prediction will be realized. A foreign power or a terrorist organization (possibly both) will test Obama's resilience before 2009 has passed. By Biden's own admission it will not be readily apparent that Obama has passed such a test.

Americans have taken a leap of faith with Obama. Under Obama's leadership will America soar to a new horizon or will America fall hard and fast to a spectacular crash?

Barack Obama is our first black President. By the end of his term I believe his hair will be whiter than John McCain's.

John McCain is indisputably an honorable and noble man. However, he not considered a conservative icon. However, McCain's greatest legacy to the conservative movement was naming Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Sarah Palin has reinvigorated the conservative movement. Obama's victory does not diminish this renewed enthusiasm in the least. In Palin, conservatives have someone to rebuild the movement around. Given her unusual circumstances and the transcendent nature of her persona in her possession she has already proven that she can attract people who had no previous interest in politics much less describe themselves as conservative or Republican. Despite the disdain of the liberal media and a handful of conservative critics, Sarah Palin has captured the imagination of everyday Americans in her own right and would be a formidable foe for Obama in four years time.

Yes, I am putting it out there less than 24 hours after the Presidential election. If she runs I will support Sarah Palin's bid for the White House in 2012. I know I am not alone.

Palin will be four years older and wiser but no less charming and dynamic. Should she run Palin will have more experience as a state Governor than Mitt Romney.

This isn't to say that Palin's path to the White House would be easy. Her status as John McCain's running mate and following she has developed might make her the frontrunner but we all know what has happened to frontrunners lately.

Palin hasn't always made nice with Republicans. Who can guarantee that she won't face a challenge in the 2010 Alaska Republican Primary? Could Frank Murkowski challenge Palin as Palin challenged him in 2006? Even if Palin survives a strong challenge from Murkowski or any other Republican it could hurt her chances for re-election.

GOP challenge or not every Democrat in the country is going to fly to Juneau to ensure her defeat in November 2010. Democrats will do with her what Republicans tried to do with Bill Clinton when he ran for re-election as Governor of Arkansas in 1990. Republicans charged that Clinton would not serve a full term because of his Oval Office ambitions. Clinton denied he was contemplating a White House bid in 1992. Well, I think we know how that turned out. Suffice it to say, Democrats will be making this charge and Palin will have to walk a very fine line.

Assuming that Palin survives both a GOP challenge and wins re-election in Alaska it is unlikely she would win the Republican nomination for the White House by acclamation. You can be sure Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee still have aspirations for higher office. One must also consider up and comers like Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who was elected to office a year ago, and perhaps Virginia Congressman Eric Cantor, the only Jewish Republican in the House of Representatives. Both Jindal and Cantor were discussed as potential running mates for McCain last summer.

No one is going to hand Sarah Palin the Presidency on a platter and she hasn't asked for any such thing. If Palin is nominated by the Republican National Convention and goes on to win the White House in four years it will be because she has earned it like she has earned everything else in her life.

Sarah Palin is an American success story. She is a self-made woman who has raised a family while serving the public good. This resonates with a large segment of the American public who see her in themselves. We say to ourselves, "If she can make it then I can make it too." If Obama's time is now she will resonate that much more should he be unable to make the most of his time in office.

Sorry, but no. I like Sarah Palin, and the packaging is quite appealing; but in terms of what she's done over her career, she's not all that much better qualified than Obama is. Give her 10 more years in positions of responsibility, and then she'll be ready.

In the meantime, let's a) figure out what the hell "conservative" means in this day and age; and b) figure out how to get the message out and make it stick; and c) find ourselves a responsible and undeniably qualified adult to lead the ticket.

I predict within 4 years there will be a 3rd party for conservatives. Perhaps Sarah might be interested in that.

I agree that there will probably be a third party, but I think it will be center-right, and attract the large majority of folks who are sick of the current style of politics. In that sense there will be a "conservative" 3rd party ... but it will be about as effective as the Constitution Party. Similarly, there will be a "leftist" 3rd party, which will be about as effective as the Greens.

I agree with you. All this Sarah worship troubles me. I like Sarah. My wife likes Sarah. But to me it is very important for us to keep our feet on the ground, keep our emotions in check, and be smart, cynical, and careful.

The comparisons to Reagan are beyond troubling. Anyone who saw Reagan in action firsthand, or has studied him, understands that Reagan spoke with great depth on a wide range of issues. He had America's values and principles running through his veins. Sarah connects because she is a decent person who seems genuine. But I haven't heard her speak about our government in any great detail. I don't truly know what she thinks, how much she knows, what sort of vision she has, what goals she has, if any.

Reagan came to office with a clear set of goals, informed by a well-grounded philosophy. Sarah is a likable politician who gave some good stump speeches, but that's all we really know. Sarahmania, to me, has been Fredmania in a skirt. The mania preceded any actual results, and those invested in her guarded their mania jealously. They protect her and defend her, which is fine. But I think we need to let her prove herself to US.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I'm Peggy Noonan. Fine, whatever. I think it's a mistake to look for a savior, whether it's Palin or Jindal or whoever else comes up in conversation. And I think we should be very demanding of what we do seek in a leader. I'd like to see us so demanding that Sarah fails to meet the test, because that means whoever does meet it will be even better. We shouldn't buy the first car we test drive. We should be picky. Let her prove herself to us, instead of buying in completely first, and then spending our time justifying the choice.

Am I falling for the efforts to tear her down? No. She may in fact be our best choice in 2012, I simply remain unconvinced. The details aren't there. She hasn't proven herself. I'd like to think we could find some serious competition to put up against her and find out. If we could find a couple more excellent candidates, and have them compete, wouldn't we be better off for it? Do we have to buy now, without benefitting from the leverage of competition?

Another thing I think we need to do is please, drop Romney. That guy is a fake, phony, fraud. So that's my take.

“I think it's a mistake to look for a savior, whether it's Palin or Jindal or whoever else comes up in conversation.”

I like both of them, but I also think it's entirely possible 2-3 years from now we won't be talking about either one of them.

“Another thing I think we need to do is please, drop Romney. That guy is a fake, phony, fraud. So that's my take.”

Absolutely.

Jindal is a lightweight, the MSM will eat him up. He is a first term Governor of a corrupt state that still has problems in New Orleans. To all the people who have pushed him as a viable candidate I ask one question, what has Bobby Jindal accomplished? His resume is as thin as Palin’s (actually thinner) Jindal also has a problem with earmarks, think this won’t be mentioned by the MSM, think again.

Remember all the police officers interviewed by the MSM in WalMart with their carts full of stolen goods. Are they still on the job? If so, why? Jindal should have raked Nagin over the coals until all the thieves in uniform were prosecuted. THAT would give him some credentials. Instead, well....and lastly, how about all the “phantom” officers that were on the New Orleans payroll. Did he pursue this, NO. So please, don’t tell me he is a strong candidate. And yes, I understand a lot of the problems were confined to New Orleans and it is technically not a “State” problem. But if he wants to show he is a reformer, he has coruption right under his nose and chooses to look the other way. The MSM would have a field day.

Look, we all want a good CONSERVATIVE candidate to run in 2012. First order of business though should be to get rid of the RINO’s that have crept into this party and is rotting it from within.

The history is very clear, John McCain was going nowhere until he brought Gov Palin to the ticket. His crowds were non-existent and she was bringing in thousands. Heck I was at the rally in Toledo and there was more excitement about a suprise visit by Sarah Palin or Joe the Plumber than there was for McCain. I mean he had a good crowd, but the buzz wasn’t about him.

Lastly, if Palin is such a “lightweight’ why are all the Romney and MSM operatives attempting to throw her under the bus so quickly. She could be the frontrunner or not, but please let’s take a good hard look at who we promote as our next candidate. We have a mid-term election that should be of more importance than speculating on a front-runner for 2012.

I must respectfully disagree. With the level of current corruption and shananigans in the halls of congress, I don't think a good honest person who truly wants to serve her country NEEDS that kind of experience.

I disagree. Even if she wasn't pro-amnesty (which in the long run means the death of the GOP as a viable party), she needs more national experience. What goes over well in Small Town, Alaska does not necessarily work everywhere else. Just because she can see Russia, not literally - it makes me mad that people think she was talking literally, doesn't mean she can handle everything else. I also don't ever want to see another debate performance from a Republican like she gave either, nor do I want to see Republican candidates allow themselves to be used by Saturday Night Live (and to allow themselves to be insulted to their faces).

I'm not worried about her being the candidate in 2012 - Sarah has history against her. VP candidates from losing tickets don't have much of a history of making it to the White House (Nixon actually was a VP and not merely a VP candidate). It's unfortunate that she's getting blamed by Fox News and members of McCain's campaign so soon after the election, but she took the job knowing Obama could very well win.

As for Newt and anybody else currently serving,...they HAD their chance, and they refused to act responsibly.

They never really had a chance and were forced out of power by other parts of the GOP rather quickly, but I give them credit for forcing Bill Clinton more towards the center.

As far as Sarah, I think she would make a great replacement for Stevens, and I think that would give her some experience towards 2016 or beyond (she's still young, folks). I would like to see what a Sarah Palin with some national experience is capable of.

I honestly liked the “idea” of Palin when she was initially chosen as VP. But after a while it became clear that she is painfully inadequate to hold either the office of President or Vice President. I think she should just stick to doing her best to govern Alaska. They should be glad to have her, she seems like a really nice down-home person. I wish her luck.

Also, she may have been able to bring out big numbers of ‘the base’ during rallies, and I’m guessing helped bring them out during the election. But you guys have to admit that the base can’t win elections by themselves, and will continue to grow smaller in the years ahead. Independents and moderates see her as an embarrassment. Young people especially loathe the hyper-religiosity of politics, the hyper-partisanship, and the lack of intellectual curiosity in its leaders.

That is why I think the Republican Party, if it doesn’t shape up and start electing smarter, more able people, are going to be the minority party for a long, long time.

That is why I think the Republican Party, if it doesn’t shape up and start electing smarter, more able people, are going to be the minority party for a long, long time.

Especially if there is not a consistent message and if the leadership is not in tune with the party members. I've been saying for months that McCain was going to lose, once his campaign started going all over the place with a different message every week. You've got to be consistent from the beginning. Both Clinton and Obama won on the same simple platform - health care, economy, and change. The platform is incredibly stupid, but it was simple enough that it sounded nice in the soundbites the media played. McCain's messages on the other hand kept bouncing around, and Palin didn't help in that regards (although I've heard she was just saying what she was told to say).

This is another thing you guys have to lighten up on.

Now, I never liked Obama much. I never liked his policy promises either. And I was disgusted by all the obama-worship. But some of the vitriol here was beyond insane. Just as bad as the stuff on dailykos or DU.

People can’t take us seriously if we don’t even understand the opponent. And some of the stuff here was just completely off-the-cliff paranoia. It’s differences in philosophy and a question of degree. This nonsense about “hating america” and “anarchy” is completely ridiculous.

It’s good for firing some of us up and getting us to work harder, but honestly, how many of you actually believed that gay guy and his cocaine-sex party with Obama?

In the end, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents all have friends and family. We all care about those closest to us. We all want to see our children succeed and their schools and our workplaces safe and able to provide us with jobs and upward mobility. And we all want to be proud of this country.

Well, I’m still proud of this country, no matter who wins.

And I hope President-elect Obama succeeds in keeping us safe and keeping our economy from collapsing. For the sake of all of us.

Sorry about these posts, I’ll go back to my Marxist/terrorist/RINO/liberal hideout now.

Exactly. "Moderate" Republicans demanded (and were given) carte blanche opportunity to demonstrate, once and for all, that they knew how to win at the national level, this year. They got exactly the candidate they wanted. They got exactly the party platform they demanded. The campaign was run exactly the way they insisted it be run. How'd that end up working out for us, again...? They actually managed to lose to a one-term Senate Marxist with open and unapologetic terrorist ties. The ONLY thing I want to hear from Team McCain or any of its shrill little online apologists, from this day forward, is a meek and contrite: "We're sorry." They have nothing else worthwhile what. so. EVER. to contribute to any meaningful discussion, re: either conservatism or winning electoral strategies. It was the late-added presence of SARAH which energized an otherwise moribund and apathetic conservative voting base. It was SARAH who drew record-shattering crowds, everywhere she went on behalf of a sour and ungrateful McCain campaign. Friendly little word of warning to any/all RINOs out there reading this, and thinking about standing in the way between this woman and the conservative base that adores her, anytime during the next four years: You're expendable to us. SHE isn't.

Good post. The first concerning thing about a McCain candidacy was his obvious desire to replace the Reagan Coalition with a new "McCain Coalition" of "independents" and "moderates". Only way to win, he said.

The moral bankruptcy of that approach and its marginalization of social conservatives was always apparent.

But it must be said again and again and again that it is an election loser too. "The McCain Approach" must forever live in infamy as a defense against those in the Republican Party who proclaim conservatism to be a losing path.

It is not. It is a winning path when articulated by the right leaders. Sarah is such a leader, and has my vote for 2012. Mike Pence is also awesome, and has the same combination of principles and charisma.

I like Palin and all, but to be honest, her only appeal to me and many conservatives was that Palin reminded them of their mothers or the neighbor across the street, and not a real canidate.

Again, I like Palin, and I hope she’ll bring a lot to the Alaskan Senate, but she’s too soft to be president. Make her the back end of the ticket with the Ragin Curried Cajun and we’d have a good ticket.

BTW, I wonder what curried moose would taste like, not that I’d ever eat it.

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.