Posted on 07/17/2011 8:52:39 PM PDT by techno
Many folks who do NOT support Sarah Palin may wonder in silence or aloud what constitutes a Palinista or why one become a Palinista. I am going to tell you why I am Sarah Palin supporter. And many of these reasons are NOT the usual reasons you might hear. In addition I am going to provide you the reasons that did NOT lead me in the direction of becoming a Palinista.
Here are 10 reasons I support her:
1)It will take a political aggressive superstar to knock off Obama in 2012; mediocre milquetoast will NOT cut it while Obama demagogs our side on a daily basis during the campaign with frequent charges of insensitivity and racism causing our RINO nominee to pull his punches and not land telling blows on Obama, similar to McCain in 2008.
In addition Palin is by far Obama's #1 nemesis. Palin has the unique ability to get under the Messiah's skin and will put Obama constantly on the defensive. There is nobody a close second.
2)I despise Barack Obama more than I love Sarah Palin. He is a Marxist, extremely dangerous and evil. I hate communism with a passion. Sarah Palin is an American patriot who is fully aware of how dangerous Obama is. The RINO's aren't.
3)Palin is a fiscal conservative who happens to be a social conservative and not primarily a hardcore so-con who is too radical to be nominated or elected; only 25% of the overall electorate are comprised of evangelical Christian voters.
4)Her relative youth and energy; 2012 will be about match-ups; Obama vs McCain in terms of this element was really a joke; with Sarah Palin the GOP nominee at least it will be a fair fight (In 2012 Palin 48 vs Obama 51)
5)Palin is an expert in Sun Tzu tactical warfare and in OODA (observe, orient, decide, act)and can match up with and thwart the Alinsky tactics of Obama and the Left; in addition she will fight back against the unfair and inaccurate things that the MSM has said and written about her. She will not be like Bush 43 and refuse to fight back. And finally Palin is an expert in the new social media (Facebook, Twitter etc) which will allow her to circumvent the MSM.
6)Palin is a conservative; 1976 (Ford) 1996 (Dole) and 2008 (McCain) prove that squishy moderates cannot win elections under the GOP banner; with Palin at least the GOP has a decent shot of winning back the Presidency.
7)Palin has already been fully vetted after 3 years of constant MSM attacks, smears, ridicule and vituperation.
8)Palin is or will be strong in the South, the Midwest and the Rocky Mountain west (Republican strongholds) while the other prominent candidates cannot boast strength in all three of these regions.
Now why Palin should be strong in these 3 regions:
South: evangelical supporters
Midwest: rural/farm-oriented lifestyle; fewer minorities
West: libertarian/gun owners
9)Palin will maximize the turnout of the WHITE vote in 2012; critics will argue that these WHITE voters may instead vote for Obama. I'll take my chances. In 2010, the GOP won 60% of the WHITE vote and the Democrats 37%. n addition the GOP won the white working class vote (non-college grads) by 30 points. I'll place my faith in the angry WHITE male and female that they will march to the polls with the same anger at Obama and his radical agenda as they did in 2010 under the leadership of Sarah Palin.
By the way on March 28, 2011 Rasmussen released a poll revealing that overall 69% of the electorate is somewhat angry and that includes about 90% of those who self-identify as conservative.
By the way one of the main reasons why McCain lost in 2008 was millions of WHITE voters stayed home.
Timothy Noah of Slate Magazine wrote this shortly after the election:
"The greatest favor the white race did for Obama this year may have been to stay home."
And from Larry Sabato, political analyst:
"I think absolutely white Republicans did not show up. They were turned off, disillusioned. They did not turn out. Democratic voters did come out. They couldn't wait to vote."
With Palin at the helm stoking and galvanizing the "anger" of our side and marshaling the troops I am confident that we will again win the "enthusiasm gap" as our side did in 2010.
10)Sarah Palin is the only GOP prominent presidential candidate who can bridge any divide that exists between libertarians, social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, evangelicals, conservative independents, Reagan Democrats, and Tea Party supporters. A divided party cannot defeat Obama in 2012.
If you notice most of my reasons for supporting Sarah Palin have to do with Obama and NOT Sarah Palin.
Now here are 10 reasons commonly given why some Palinistas support Sarah Palin which I do NOT include myself in:
1)Sarah Palin's family
Frankly I couldn't care less how many children Sarah Palin has or if she never had any children. Sure I care she has a loving supportive spouse but only for political reasons. Notice how many GOP "prospects" did not run because of a lack of support from their spouse.
2)Palin's record in Alaska as mayor and governor
By any objective standard as revealed in The Undefeated it is a sound record with accomplishment. Frankly I am more concerned about getting rid of Obama and fixing the economy and reducing govt spending than to paying homage to Sarah Palin for the job she did as governor.
Thus I consider The Undefeated only a means to an end.
3)To be a member of a cult
I call myself an iconoclastic conservative. No cult would want me as a member. I do not consider Sarah Palin as a high priestess.
4)Her strong Christian faith
I like her more for her libertarian credentials.
5)Because she was raised in Alaska
I am not from Alaska and never lived in Alaska.
6)Because she is a strong proponent of the Second Amendment.
I have never owned a gun and never wish to.
7)Sarah Palin will run an unconventional campaign
As an iconoclast you would think I would embrace unorthodox methods. Quite frankly, there is a limit to everything including being unconventional. Frankly I would support Sarah Palin if she ran a high-tempo conventional campaign that consistently hit the mark.
8)Because she endorsed John McCain
Like many freepers I gave her a mulligan for endorsing McCain. Every candidate should get one mulligan.
9)Because Sarah Palin is a tea party supporter
I am not a Tea Party member or supporter and frankly Palin will have to win over more GOP primary voters than just TP supporters to win the nomination.
But don't get me wrong. I don't oppose the Tea Party. It's just not my cup of tea. Different strokes for different folks.
10)Sarah Palin is a nice human being, sincere and honest.
Frankly if Palin were not quite as nice, more ruthless, not as forthcoming or did NOT strictly play according to the rules, I could live with that.
In conclusion, Palinistas come in all shapes and sizes and I am only speaking for myself.
“She is tainted by neocon to some degree. But she is working to rid herself of that by hiring realist foreign policy advisors.”
Since that school of thought is alleged to be of the followers of Strauss and I have read Strauss it is hard to see what the problem is. My suspicion is that no one can tell me how his students by following his beliefs could harm our nation and that whoever hung the term, neo-con/Straussian, (initially on W’s people) knew no one knew what the hell it meant and the media ran with it.
“If you had Palin at the top of the ticket and Ron Paul underneath it would be an absolutely unstoppable ticket.” ROTFLMAO. Not only would any such ticket be transforming certain defeat for Urkel into certain victory it is one Sarah would NEVER agree to. She waaay too smart for that.
It is as rational as your doubt that he is going to run again. Cast it aside.
Let me translate the “elites” opposed to Ron Paul. elite = has a brain. Ron Paul would be a disaster though our enemies across the globe would love to see him in the White House.
Your cabinet is not realistic. Steve Forbes has no qualifications to be Sec. of State, Levin would not take the pay cut (Rudy might), Sowell isn’t that political and probably would not go to treasury.
If Alexander Hamilton were with us merging everything into a Treasury that he headed might not be a bad idea but, since he isn’t, it is a terrible one. We don’t even have an Albert Gallatin much less a Hamilton.
None of the others will be abolished by Congress so you will have to staff them, too.
Oh, and Bolton has no political constituency to justify making him VP, put him at State. Sarah would pick a big state governor who could help her get elected which Bolton (as much as I love him) cannot do. Maybe from the next biggest state?
Of course the Left would love to see Palin as the nominee that is why it has unleashed its malignant pack of LIARS on her. That is why it has pried endless into her family willing even to destroy innocent children.
She stands for EVERYTHING it hates and cannot be allowed to escape its baleful attacks.
Never has anyone been attacked with such venom without a LOOONG record to justify the hatred NEVER.
That shows the depth and intensity of that hatred. Why?
Whatever the reason, the elites do not like Palin either. But the elites like Ron Paul less. Palin would probably feel more comfortable if the elites don’t prefer her VP to her.
The argument was that Palin has “no allegiance to any industry, or “school of thought”” I was arguing that was pretty accurate, except for some “neocon” and she’s remedying that by hiring “realists”.
Palin is best described as a “Populist” as far as I can see. But this is kind of a neutral term.
What I what is someone explain to me how neo-con/Straussian came to be a pejorative term and why you used it as such?
From what I know Strauss’ thought is or is close to classical rationalism which is as “realistic” as any school of thought.
I don’t think Sarah will have any choice but to chose a VP whose appeal to the elites will be greater than her own. NO ONE is more hated than her by them.
She will choose the person who can best help her win, I have no doubt. One person whom that will not be will be Ron Paul who would bring only negative support with him.
I don’t know. I think the elites would prefer Palin to Paul.
I’m not arguing they want either. They just are dealing with each differently. They decided, by looking at how famous and popular Palin was (and still is) that they couldn’t handle her by ignoring her. So they decided to attack her instead. They’re sticking with ignoring Ron Paul, or diminishing him in one way or another.
Palin is said to be weak with Independents and Democrats. But really shouldn’t have too much trouble getting Republicans.
Ron Paul does poll better than anybody with I’s and D’s. Having Ron Paul on the ticket would help Sarah Palin win by bringing in Independent and Democrats.
Is there anyone out there who is both Conservative, and appeals to Independents and Democrats besides Ron Paul?
I don’t believe Ron Paul polls well with anyone.
The PPP poll of Texas from a couple weeks back, with the head to heads, had Ron Paul 45, Obama 40. And Palin losing to Obama. Only Romney did better than Paul against Obama.
We’re talking about 2 different things here.
One is - is Palin too closely tied to a school of thought?
That was the original question. I said, perhaps too closely tied to neocon, which is a school of thought. And then I said that she has new advisors, who are said to be realists, thereby working to untie her from a specific school of thought.
The other question is the merits of neocon. That’s not really what we’re talking about here. The argument is about whether or not Palin is too closely tied on any school of thought, and she isn’t.
Actually you are talking about that. I am trying to determine what you think a neo-con is and wonder where that influence is being manifested with Palin. And how would a neo-con not be a realist as well?
Laughable.
Ron Paul is no conservative.
He's a useful idiot for the left.
Limited Constitutional Government across the board. There might be a different kind of conservative than tea party conservative, but Ron Paul is all about limited constitutional government and always has been.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2011/05/palin_get_out_o/
Palin Getting out of Neocon Business?
Politico’s Ben Smith has the scoop that Sarah Palin and foreign policy advisers Randall Scheunemann and Michael Goldfarb have parted ways.
According to the article, the neoconservative Scheunemann said flatly to Palin, “We can’t give you the time.” All are saying that the split was friendly — even though Hoover Institution’s Peter Schweizer, a skeptic of America’s intervention in Libya (and thus not at all where the neocons are on interventionist crusading), was just brought on board.
And Alex Jones trutherism for all as per Ron Paul!
That article is crap and it makes a false claim about what a neo-con is. There is no desire to wily-nily invade other countries which results from being a neo-con.
This is about what I figured no one really knows what the term means. Initially used to attack supporters of the Iraq war it has no relevance wrt Palin or anyone actually.
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.