Posted on 02/16/2012 7:42:19 AM PST by abigail2
On Wednesday, on FOX Business’ “Follow the Money,“ Palin told Eric Bolling she ”would do whatever [she] could to help,” leaving the door open to any and all possibilities should a brokered convention take form later this year.
Sarah Palin Talks About 2012 Prospects & Possible Brokered Convention
SCREW that fat RINO POS Christy.....he's no better then Mittens.
Moving in a spy next door in and of itself is no problem, as she had nothing criminal to hide, only personal stuff, same as any other family. The spy came up empty.
her 24 K e mails was another bust.
That is why they resorted to making things up out of whole cloth, re, Trig's "real" mom, who she slept with 30 years ago, a few ethics charges here and there, pretty much anything goes, because no one stood up and said enough of this shiite.
there were, and still are people, even on this site, that relished the attacks.
The libs have carte blanc for use of media outlets and 100% untruths for character assassination for any conservative candidate, because they can.The conservatives take it in the rear time and time again, because after all, he/she is not my candidate, he/she is not pure as the wind driven snow.
If the delegates fail to consolidate around a conservative, then the back room will decide.
I'm guessing it's highly likely to be brokered between the four candidates and the GOP RINO elite.
That could be more than interesting, and hardly guarantees a RINO.
I'm all for a brokered convention at this point, although I'll take it if either Newt or Santorum wins outright.
The GOP in a brokered convention are not going the way of Paul, either one. But I did not think about them and you are right, they could play a role. They could be the factor that cause the GOP insiders to come aboard for Palin or Rubio and end a brokered convention, if it looks like some Paul faction is growing or threatening to get near the votes needed.
What are you blabbering about? This is a discussion about what might happen in a brokered convention. Do you not understand that?
She could not easily step into a “Brokered” nomination and I think she would turn it down if it was offered to her.
She is doing what she is best suited for, as a staunch advocate for smaller government and lower taxes. Not to mention getting out of debt. But as the one to fix the mess? I don't think she is well suited for that task. For that it will take a Newt Gingrich or Ronald Reagan.
“I’m not sure I’d want anyone who didn’t have what it takes to run for office to be given the nomination.”
OK, what do you think of the current field?
I wish it was better, but at least they are running, campaigning, fighting for the nomination.
So, I think it would be wrong to give it to someone who sat it out.
On practical grounds, it would also make sense rather than have a candidate who has to build a campaign organization from scratch in a very very short time.
I pointed out the fact that you forgot about the POS leftist RINO slob in the form of Governor of NJ.....
Don't like the answer then don't ask the question....or support an obvious fake conservative...
Obama hasn't been a disaster for his constituents at all. He's been very successful at getting left-wing policy passed. If we had a right-winger who was as effective as Obama at passing his agenda we'd be very happy. So I'm not worried if a candidate was a governor, senator, house member or private citizen. There are far more important factors to look at.
I would say the most important quality in a president is being able to sell the American people on their agenda. The Congress will go wherever the poll numbers go. The key is to be able to communicate your message to the public, beat back leftist attacks any way you can and win the argument. Reagan, Newt and Obama are people that have shown an ability to convince the public that they are right on the issues.
Disagree...after seeing what we have to deal with, Sarah is no wallflower, or doe not have alot of baggage. She is a woman and that might turn alot of people off, but these are dire times... the worst!
Why not have some form of instant runoff voting? There have been local elections with ballots where you rank the candidates, or put in a 2nd and 3rd choice right on the ballot. Then it’s just a matter of recounting the 2nd choices of anybody who didn’t vote for one of the top two vote-getters.
This ought to happen on the presidential level for sure to ensure the legitimate will of the people was respected. But either way such a change would have to implemented on a state-by-state level, and we see how all the various states already can’t agree on caucus, primary, winner-take-all, proportional, what date to hold their elections, even when the RNC penalizes them for doing it the wrong way.
The guy who moved in next door to her accused her in his book of having an affair during her marriage. Did she deny that?
Newt has a temper. Anger blinds one. It does not sit well on a President. That is why Reagan was so great. He was the teflon president.
OMG, whose side are you on?!
According to whom? I haven’t seen Newt lose his temper. I’ve seen Mitt get angry and fly off the handle under far less pressure than Newt’s faced in various interviews, but not Newt. I’ve seen Newt under incredible pressure and intense criticism and handle it expertly, deftly, calmly and sometimes even with a smile. If you have video of this ranting, raving, angry Newt, please send it along.
If so, conservatives are screwed only if we stay home and don't get involved at the precinct level and get conservatives elected to the national convention.
Sitting at computers doesn't cut it.
There aren’t “super delegates.” But each state sends a few of their party leaders along as delegates who can vote for whoever they want. They’d probably make up 5-10% of the total and they have an equal vote.
Ron Paul people are trying to sign up to be delegates wherever they can. On the first vote, they might be bound to elect whoever their state voted for, but on the second vote they can switch to Ron Paul.
It is 99% guaranteed that if Ron Paul can’t win, most if not all of his delegates will switch to Romney. Which means for anyone else to have a chance, Paul’s and Romney’s delegates added together have to total less than the 1144 needed to win.
The way things are going, even if the convention is brokered, it looks like Romney will enter the convention in the lead. It will be his to lose. The establishment will have no qualms about pushing for him hard if he has a plurality of delegates at that point. They can always argue he was in the lead so it’s more democratic to make him the winner.
She would not go on national TV to prove that something that did not happen in fact did not happen. That is what the media wanted to frame her as, for character assassination, pure and simple.
The media was out of accusations, so they needed another source of gossip, non valid, like all the other attempts, but attention getting never the less.
If someone moved next door to you, and then wrote a book, pushed by big publishers, and believed by 47 per cent of voters, that stated you repeatedly snuck over and had a relationship with your neighbor's wife, how much time would you spend defending yourself, especially if you were in a position to threaten the current pol, and the news was played 24/7 in ALL outlets?
Has any of the accusations of her over 4 years come to fruition?
The sole purpose was to present her in negative lighting, and by God, they succeeded, with people of your mindset as willing enablers.
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.