David Corn and Republican "Close" to Romney Say Palin Just Does Not Understand Politics...

It does seem I’ve touched a nerve. Now, you’re making personal threats? Anytime, anywhere, Chester.

Anyways, I really don’t care if you said McCain wasn’t your candidate. You may not have liked him, but the media sure loved him. That would make him ‘electable’ in your mind, therefore, he would seem to be exactly what you are advocating for right now.

Nobody is pretending that the MSM doesn’t have an impact. One of us, however, (**hint...it’s you**) is giving in to the MSM and letting them choose the candidate. They chose the candidate last time and look what happened. What you are doing is asking for a repeat of the same.

I’m not saying you should support Palin. I’m saying you should stop repeating lame MSM talking points about Dan Quayle and start thinking for yourself. Then, let Palin stand on her own as a candidate.

Now, go get your shinebox.

The analogy between Palin and Quayle is a non-starter.

Yep. Quayle NEVER came close to drawing crowds in the tens of thousands and had he written a book, no matter WHAT the media had done (and it wasn't close to what it's already done to Palin), there is not a snowball's chance in hell it would have hit the top of Amazon (had there been one in those days) before it was even in print.

RatRipper, your way of thinking, no matter how much you shiver and cower and shudder about "the little people" and independents who you think are fool enough to let the MSM's "Quaylization" of Palin ruin her, IS GUARANTEED TO CREATE A SITUATION WHERE THE MSM CALLS THE SHOTS.

And don't give me the tired old "Well, more than half the electorate elected Obama! What does that tell you!" If more than half of honest, real voters are why Obama won, why did ACORN have to gin up so many votes?

The majority of American voters rejected Obama. Democrats have to cheat to win because if they didn't, their candidates would lose. But because you and so many Americans fall for the MSM illusion that pretends Obama is popular, you are sucker-prone to manipulation AND ARE STILL DOING IT!!!

First, guys, I am on your side. My main objective is to flush the Democrats and the leftists out of power for good.

Second, if you think I am going to “shudder and cower”, I think you are coward for making those kind of accusations over the internet. That is no productive. Again, the objective is to beat the enemy, not each other.

Third, there is nobody that loathes Obama and his band of Commies more than me. I agree 100% that the 2008 elections was ONLY won by using a massive campaign of lies and deceit. That is why a recent poll showed that only 43% would now vote to elect Obama.

I agree that the leftists in power and their media are masters at manipulation. Not running Sarah Palin is not necessarily admitting the MSM has beaten her, bowing to their wishes and relegating her to ruin. Think about the politicians that succeeded only after several attempts at the presidency. To win the presidency, the stars have to align. As much as I like her, she has a whole lot of growing to do before she an effectively weather the storm.

In some aspects, she did well in the last election. In some ways she was skewered. In some ways she is like Obama with the rock star appeal. But as you have noted, that kind of quality and appeal can be short-lived and invite huge disappointment, as it has for Obama. She is clearly an asset to the conservative side. That does not mean that she is the candidate that is best positioned to beat the Democrats. That is my opinion. You will not convince me otherwise with your curt insults.

I agree that Quayle never had the appeal that Palin does. But again, I fear that her appeal to a significant portion of the electorate, though not most, is related to the “rock star” side. Quayle never had that going for him.

But there is a difference in MSM tacit opposition from news organizations and the kind of ridicule that I have mentioned before. The ridicule comes from the Jay Leno’s, Conan O’Brien’s of the world. I have heard pundits and political strategists talk about ridicule and what it means to a candidate. It is something that is almost impossible to overcome in the public mind. I can still remember the newsclips of Dan Quayle mis-correcting a student by putting an “e” on the end of “potato” on the blackboard. Those kind of images, even though they mean almost nothing in terms of leadership qualities, are burned into the minds of the electorate. You probably don’t watch Saturday Night Live, but I assure you that the millions of young voters remember the ridicule that Sarah Palin was subjected to on that show. It has an effect. We cannot afford to cede such a block of voters over something like that.

It is going to take time and a strong public perfomance by Sarah to overcome that disadvantage. She is not going to be able to change that image with 4 years of speeches. She has to DO something, stand tough, perservere, and be successful. So far, she has not done that.

Does that point of view constitute cowering and allowing the MSM to dictate my course of action? I think not. We are not engaged in a pi$$ing contest. We are trying to keep our country from being stolen by thieves and thugs that are extremely smart, cagey and media savvy. I think we need to be smart instead of hammering square pegs in round holes.

Sarah Palin is still unproven. We do not have the luxury to make a mistake by running her too soon. We need her support. We need her star appeal. We need her leadership in moral and social values. But for a political candidate to beat the leftists, we need a proven, hardened, solid conservative strong enough to withstand the withering fire. Pence? Duncan Hunter? I don’t know if there is a good alternative. She might be the best we have, but I doubt it. She will be ready one day if she prepares correctly. I do not think she will be ready in 2012.

Does that point of view constitute cowering and allowing the MSM to dictate my course of action?

YES.

Hand-wringing over what the Conan O'Brians and Jay Lenos of American pop culture are going to say about a conservative candidate is an exercise in failure because the Conans and Jays will find something -- anything -- to do this to ANY CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE. Period. Letting it be a pointer in the choice of a Republican candidate is a form of cowering to them. Period. Sorry if you take that as a personal insult or a "curt insult." That's your problem and it's also the Republican party's problem.

You say that Sarah hasn't stood strong and persevered. I think she's got a record in Alaska that soundly proves otherwise. It's early days yet, and I believe in miracles. Things can turn on a dime. However, Republican politicians with what you call "rock star" qualities don't happen on a dime -- they're born, as was Reagan. Only a very foolish political party looks such a gift horse in the mouth, and I think that the reason you are inclined to look this gift horse in the mouth is because you're afraid of the Conans and the Jays of this world. Again, you can take that as a "curt insult" if you choose; you'll be mistaken in your interpretation, as it isn't meant as one. I can't control how you interpret things; only you can do that. I'm just calling the ball on what the real motivation is, and it's FEAR.

Fear of ridicule is a sure path to being manipulated. Pence? Is he one of "us"? You tell me -- I don't know anything about Pence; I don't see many fellow FReepers singing his praises; I'd be genuinely interested in your list of reasons he deserves my support.

Hunter? I am a California native from way back, and have a whole lot of relatives ... I don't think any of them knew anything at all about Hunter, yet ALL of them know about Tom McLintock. What does that tell you about Hunter?

So far, Palin is the best we have, and because Palins are so rare, I think what you advocate is like finding the bargain of the season and squandering it waiting for something better, and walking away with ... the same thing we walked away with running Rudy McRombee.

You're right, this is no pissing contest. This is a matter of changing course. Your way, in my opinion, is maintaining course -- right toward the shoals.

Tell me about Pence. If I feel inspired, I'll tell you about McLintock, but it will take me a bit to do some research. But the real challenge has less to do with the candidates and more to do with sheep herds of voters. I think it's time to make the Conans and the Jays have "fear of ridicule" by ridiculing those who watch them.

WE can agree to disagree on Palin, and it has NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! to do with fear on my part. I just don’t think you are admitting reality. My oldest son discussed this issue last night. He is very well informed, largely outside my influence. He listens to a lot of conservative talk radio and reads voraciously. He absolutely agrees with me that Palin has great potential, but she is not ready. She has had some successes, but she definitely has not clearly withstood the trials of fire. I still think you are mistaking star power attraction with what it takes to be a quality presidential candidate. If she is nominated, I will be behind her 100%, and before that if nobody but the usual retread suspects are in the race.

I agree wholeheartedly with changing course. RINO politics is killing principled conservative politics. I do not know who will surface. Most of the people out front that we know will run, Romney the most prominent, are just flat not acceptable. I will definitely support Palin before I would support Romney, Crist, Pawlenty and Huckabee. I know I have homework to do on Pence, Hunter, and I will take a look at the McClintock guy. Takes a little time, which I don’t have a lot of.

I thnk we agree on where we want to go. The question is how best to accomplish that goal. The best thing that each of us can do right now for ANY conservative candidate is to shine the light of truth continuously on Obama and the Democrat Congress. Truth is, I am not far at all from where you are.

All indications are that Palin HAS withstood the "trials of fire," as you put it; her Alaska record proves it, not to mention her private life. I come from a commercial fishing background, and it's not so much the fishery, but the kinds of people involved with which I'm familiar.

There was a thread titled "Some things you may not know about Sarah Palin" posted at 11:43 last night by American Dream 246 (I'd link it here but don't have the code nearby), and it was a letter (the header says the writer is a commercial fisherman, but I think the header is mistaken -- in the letter he mentions that he lives in a commercial fishing town and is in the oil business), and he write point by point accomplishments that illustrate Palin's toughness.

Wasting time trying to find someone better than Palin, who is so clearly and overwhelmingly promising on a scale not seen in this party since Reagan, is an exercise in stupidity. It is looking a gift horse in the mouth.

I will definitely support Palin before I would support Romney, Crist, Pawlenty and Huckabee.

Six years ago, I'd have said "ditto." Today, because I will be applying what I've learned in California ever since voting for Schwarzenegger, if Romney, Crist, Pawlenty, or Huckabee are the nominees, my vote will go elsewhere. IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO CHANGE COURSE. Voting for them because "they're better than Obama" is maintaining course to the shoals. There is no "teaching a lesson" or "protesting" or "taking my football and going home." It is purely a matter of using my vote to make the GOP and the nation change course.

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.