Seriously, Palin and Christie are not running. Christie definitely, Palin probably, and that's that. It IS wasting valuable time and resources discussing it.
Oh, and there is a RULE with regard to Ms. Cupp, IMHO
Posted on 09/30/2011 10:46:38 AM PDT by el_texicano
CNN has posted an article by S.E. Cupp and I must say I disagree with Ms. Cupp completely. She argues that the Christie and Palin question is a detriment to the GOP. Add Ms. Cupp to the long list of people trying to tell us when it’s too late for this one or that one. Lately, it’s become an absurdity to watch. I can’t imagine that it’s possible that she believes her own impatience ought to drive the party’s choices, but there she is demanding: “Time’s up, Christie and Palin. In or out?” Excuse me if I fail to take Cupp’s complaint seriously, declared as if she has anything to say about it. Perhaps she should return to tweeting all things Tony Stewart. Maybe she would have told Reagan he had better jump in. Who knows, but more to the point, who cares? What Cupp’s column demonstrates is the arrogance of the media in its attempts to influence events according to their agenda. Besides, while this article is posted on CNN, I know that Cupp’s associations have included The Daily Caller, and of course FoxNews, so I’m not surprised to see her further this particular narrative.
I would like Ms. Cupp to substantiate the following claim:
“And now, the will-they-or-won’t-they game has flipped from fun and energizing to damaging to the party. Christie and Palin now do conservatives more harm than good.”
I disagree, and her article doesn’t explain this charge very well. It seems to consist of an assertion that Christie and Palin are taking “valuable resources and attention” from the rest of the field, but what goes unstated is that if the rest of the field was compelling, neither Christie nor Palin could get any attention. The very fact that they get so much attention makes it clear that her thesis is based on broken logic, and indeed, the very existence of her own article demonstrates the point:
“With the question marks still lingering in the ether, and pundits on both sides of the aisle still performing their daily trapeze act — swinging back and forth between “yes, he’s running” and “no, she isn’t” — the focus on Christie and Palin has taken valuable resources and attention away from the rest of the field.”
She doesn’t need to pay it any more attention if she doesn’t wish to, but then she writes an article giving it more attention. More, she goes on to make the claim:
“Because of those question marks, conservatives haven’t been able to invest fully in the candidates who are running. They haven’t been able to imagine one of them as president. They’ve held back support, money and endorsements, because they still don’t know that the field is settled.”
My laughter over this jewel cannot be quieted. Conservatives “aren’t able to fully invest in candidates?” Suddenly, Cupp’s argument seems more like a “Winning The Future” moment than any sort of conservative commentary. There is absolutely nothing forbidding conservatives from committing to any of the declared candidates. What Cupp offers here is actually an insight from the perspective of the establishment: These are people who hedge their bets, and the non-entries of Christie and Palin have essentially frozen a goodly sum of cash that might go into play should one or both ultimately announce, or swear off.
Cupp finishes off with this self-aggrandizing flourish:
“Time’s up, governors. If Chris Christie and Sarah Palin want to run, get in there. If not, definitively and convincingly take your names out of the running. Conservatives need to begin the arduous job of whittling down the field and picking their frontrunner. The fact that there have been five GOP straw polls in as many weeks with as many different winners is proof that these unanswered questions are creating a dangerous ambivalence among conservative voters.”
S.E. Cupp now runs the conservative movement? Does she speak for you? She doesn’t speak for me. For whom is she speaking, anyway? That should be the question that you take away from all of this. Which conservative voters have become “dangerously ambivalent?” I don’t know any. Ambivalence will be measured by turn-out during the primary season next year, and not by gauging the number of big-dollar contributors still clinging to their cash.
I’ll give Ms. Cupp her due: She did an excellent job of trying to advance a phony narrative. All I can say is “Better luck, next time.” As I pointed out in my coverage earlier Friday, this all comes down to strategy, and none of us should fall into the trap of believing Ms. Cupp doesn’t know that. What we should also recognize immediately is that Cupp’s article is a part of somebody’s strategy, and when taken together with Williams’ article on FoxNews, it begins to paint the picture more clearly as to the identity of the driver of this narrative.
Herself. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I just had time to scan the article, but I agree with what I read.
With so many questions as to when the first primary elections will be, I don't think Palin can afford to sit on the sidelines much longer. Her coyness act is getting old. I wish she would make up her mind already. If she's going to run, then giddy up. If not, she should help influence the selection of the candidate that she supports.
Christie should stay in NJ and get on the treadmill. He'll be a good spokesman for rallying independents to the party, but he is no conservative and is not healthy.
But she is still NOT GUILTY!
Isn’t she just admitting that most conservative voters don’t like what’s there?
Seriously, Palin and Christie are not running. Christie definitely, Palin probably, and that's that. It IS wasting valuable time and resources discussing it.
Oh, and there is a RULE with regard to Ms. Cupp, IMHO
)
So not guilty...damn..:)...oh and yes she is entitled to her opinions, but I give her pass on this, as she is for the most part to the right on issues....
When Ronald Reagan announced he was running against Ford in '76 it was November 1975, if memory serves (and it does less and less so, as time goes on).
The popular conventional wisdom held that to be way too early, and the same divisions in the GOP are present now that were on display at their Los Angeles Convention in 1964, where Goldwater beat Nelson Rockefeller.
I think Ms. Cupp (If that is her real name) needs to get out of the parlors of Manhattan, out from among the chattering classes, and get down with the struggle.
The only thing I have less contempt for than the self-appointed Ruling Class of the GOP is their league counterparts holding the Democrat franchises.
These same people all tell us "the people" don't pay attention to the races until the last six weeks before Election Day, and now they want to hurry things along? For whom?
Her position seems to serve the interests of "Gerald" Romney.
With all due respect, all SE Cupp was doing is including Christie in the narrative.
Truth is, the first primaries will be in early January.
I don’t care about filing dates, I care about anyone else entering needs to participate in the process so that we can make our minds up about who deserves our vote. With the holiday season coming up, it is even more important.
Time is running out to do that. I won’t pick by personality. I will pick the person who seems to be most sincere about, and capable of, walking this mess back.
S.E. makes me think things a married man shouldn’t think.
Hot. No matter how silly her name and glasses.
This is hard ball politics. You make an assertion that presumes she is totally clueless, and is just playing a silly selfish game to the detriment of not satisfying the naive wishes of simple thinking people.
On the contrary, if you (and anyone else) care to see what the real picture is, you should have read the entire article and gone on to read THIS PIECE, so that you can see what is actually really going on in the Machiavellian political world - and not the novice silly world where punditry and clueless talk is being thrown around.
Believe me, Sarah Palin has already swam with the Sharks of the sharks, and won on her won terms. She is going to blow dust in everyone's eyes, laughing while looking at her rearview mirror at all the hapless fools, that were itching to see her eliminated, strewn about with tire marks all over wondering what hit them.
RE: name - I’d say DE Cupp might be more accurate. Just sayin’...
Your screen name suggests that either you are from Indiana or you're an independent {or both}. If you are from Indiana, the primary voting date is May 8, and by then the field will be no more than two or three, and if you are independent in many states you can't vote in the pubbie primary.
What does the holiday season have have to do with you making up your mind?
SE said quickly sounds like C.
just sayin’
Damn...
Let me preface my comments....In my humble and personal opinion, I don't think Palin can wait much longer given the fact that the primary dates are going to be moved forward (by not an insignificant amount). Also, and in my humble and personal opinion, her playing coy to whether or not she will run is getting very old. I don't know what the real picture is and neither do you. If I had to bet money on it, I'd sat Palin isn't going to run. I hope I'm wrong, but she isn't acting like someone who is. My opinion was formed long before SE Cupp's opinion. I really like looking at her though.
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.