Posted on 12/16/2011 2:18:42 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Greencastle, Ind. — "Is Palin electable? Absolutely," says Mark Tatge, Eugene S. Pulliam Distinguished Visiting Professor of Journalism at DePauw University, tells the Christian Science Monitor. Tatge is cited in an article headlined "Sarah Palin speaks, but are Americans heeding her anymore?".
The professor sees Palin as a viable contender to potentially serve as running mate to Newt Gingrich, should he emerge as the GOP nominee. "Such a partnership is not out of the question,” Tatge tells the publication, adding that he believes that Palin would likely need to "atone for quitting the job of governor."
Gloria Goodale writes, "Less-likely candidates, he says, have made it to the top spot. 'Consider the former B-movie actor who was seen as a bit of a lightweight with a messy divorce in his past,' says Professor Tatge, 'and Ronald Reagan not only got elected but went on to become a two-term president.'"(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at depauw.edu ...
I don't know about you, Windflier, but indylindy -- one of the FReepers who exhaustively posted deliberately misleading partial truths and outright falsehoods about Palin ("windfall profits tax," "quitter," for example) MAKES ME SICK.
"Didn't run because she doesn't want the job" -- wrong. She didn't run because unfortantely, the efforts of ruthless enemies, including liars similar in lack of honor and ethics to indylindy, were successful in pressuring, threatening, or forcing her to stay out of the race.
Indylindy, you stink.
"... just file an ethics complaint ... she hates that ..."
Man, humblegunner. You've revealed something about yourself that I'd rather not have known.
I don’t see what there is to object to about that statement.
Ethics suits drove her out of office in Alaska, did they not?
Romney lacks that -- Romney is consistently progressive statist sympathizing, so I will always oppose Romney. My vote will go elsewhere.
And it is galling to read from posters who always wanted Palin to thrown in the towel, and who rationized their reasons in a way that made them lose ethical credibility with me. There are plenty of criticisms of Gingrich and Romney that are honest and accurate. To denigrate Palin as fully, on the other hand, required conscious misrepresentation or outright falsehood. Well, they got their wish -- Palin threw in the towel.
I and many others concluded that Palin was most likely derailed by enemies who threatened harm to her or hers. Considering that her most vocal enemies here were the types to morally stoop to lies and deliberate misrepresentation, it stands to reason.
"Palin supposedly writes at an 8th grade level ..." wrote one of FR's most ardent Palin antagonists. *sigh* All I can do is shake my head in sorrow.
“In short, he would be only marginally better than Obama as president.”
Not a Romney bot by any stretch of the imagination but =
In short, you are WRONG.
Sign a blank check backed by your entire net worth, cashable by any lefty idealogue...then criticize Palin, dung-for-brains.
Does stupidity of the type you possess hurt?
Is that what she did?
Not too swift, is she?
Why? Because Romney has an R behind his name?
Explain to me how Romney would be substantially different (or better) than Obama in kind or quantity. He wasn't when he was Governor of Massachusetts.
It pains me to come to Romney’s defense regarding your ignorant comments about him. You have obviously not watched the debates or have chosen to ignore his debate comments which place him to the right of everyone except Bachmann and Santorum. Ok maybe he’s lying. Maybe Newt is lying about disavowing the Nancy couch potato episode. Maybe many of his colleagues who are against him because of his actions while speaker don’t realize he’s changed? Rick Perry was Al Gore’s campaign manager and wanted to force Gardasil on young girls.
All of these guys have made mistakes in the past and some of them even in the present. History on one = history on all.
Which one of the two do you agree with regarding illegal immigration ie wetbacks regarding their comments at the debates?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a Romney bot. I despise the fact that the establishment has been hawking him from day one, but Newt is a loose cannon and his star is already falling fast. While I don’t like Romney, I like Obama much less and we simply have to have someone to depose him at election time or the country is dead. That may mean we are stuck with another RINO, but let’s face it, there are no REAL Tea Party candidates left that have a chance barring some type of miracle. Newt is NOT a Tea Party candidate, but if he becomes the nominee, I will support him too.
DOJ, Court nominees, EPA, Voter ID, Union loving re South Carolina & Boeing, Iran nukes, border security, business experience, queer marriage are just a few of the areas where Romney and all the others for that matter would be superior to Obama. Here in Texas there used to be a saying that some of the old time Democrats would vote for the devil over a Republican. Made me think of Obama.
Palin should have gotten in. She had already run the gauntlet.
Which is more ignorant - judging a candidate by his record, or judging him by what he says in debates?
...Romney and all the others for that matter would be superior to Obama.
Like I said the first time, a Romney presidency would be only marginally better than a second Obama term. He's a liberal statist who wouldn't know a core value if it bit him in the ass. Stop listening to what he says, and read up on his record. The man is Obama-Lite.
Get a job and get out of DU!!Admit it you hate Sarah!
I don’t see you working today.
I have never been in DU, but you seem to know who is so maybe you should get out of DU.
Your overly emotional responses today are a hoot.
Why don’t you take a stab at thoughtful consideration, scooter?
Why didn’t the Alaska legislature introduce new legislation to undo the ethics law that got Palin in such a tangle? Was the Republican party in Alaska so weak that they couldn’t?
http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/sarah_palin_in_talks_for_alaska_avDhXUM2jCL8ZOXR40tlHM
Burnett about the reality show. Confirmation from the NYPost.
Obviously if she is planning on filming another year of the reality show, she isn’t planning on running.
So the Todd part was just a segment. Not that it matters. LOL
Thanks for the link.
Most of the anti-Palin posts I’m seeing seem to be various forms of genuinely felt “FUD”.
It’s a term often used in reference to propaganda, the acronym stands for “Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt”.
With Palin’s hesitations and contradictions, it’s pretty effective.
There’s an important difference however, between the anti-Palin FUD many actually feel, and the opposition to some of the others, which is based on genuine opposition to what they say and stand for.
Lots of good people on our side agree with and believe, many of the positions and life choices, Palin so inspires with.
It’s the FUD, which is the big concern so many are currently stuck in. The uncertainty, whether she’ll run if they support her. The doubt, that she’s going to. “fear” is probably too strong a word, but it’s part of FUD.
In Palin’s case there is one, astoundingly simple solution to all that FUD.
She need only declare, and it all goes away. Poof.
And she’s back on her game.
It would take one second. And all that FUD will evaporate. That’s why I’m supporting the idea - she should get back in this thing.
imo.
When Palin was in Indianola she talked about “My Plan” and how she would change things.
Then she didn’t throw her hat into the ring to run for the primaries. Inexplicably, her plan just disappeared like smoke in the air.
Then she said that a third party run by herself would not be the way to go.
Now she’s shopping another reality show.
One thing about Palin that most people found refreshing is that she says what she means and means what she says and somehow her fanatical supporters are trying to read tea leaves and divine magical meanings, clinging to a mythical image of Palin that has never existed.
Didn’t she say “No.”? Do you think she is a drama queen who needs to be wooed and begged to reconsider? And if so, why would you want a candidate who doesn’t feel a determination of purpose and knows their own mind? Why would you want someone who could equivocate on one of the biggest decisions in their lives?
This is not what I would want in a president. Far from it. I want my candidate to feel in their bones that they were called to serve.
She’s not an idiot by any stretch of the imagination. She knows her brand (and remember she has trademarked her name) only holds so much power so getting another reality show now will be much easier than should she attempt it after the 2012 election. It might not be as attractive as a product at that time.
She can have a reality show, stay with her Fox contract, tend to her family and do what she likes.
I do not see her running for president this time around. We’ll see if she is so inclined in 2016 when her children are a little older. Maybe then she’ll have that fire and she’ll reconsider.
I have always believed that the number one reason why she didn’t want to run was her children. And there is something about motherhood that is much bigger than the presidency.
Your wanting her to run is not changing anything when she’s home in Alaska with her family. Maybe you’ll enjoy watching them all on television next year.
LOL! Duly noted! :)
;^)
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.