Posted on 02/25/2009 9:07:20 AM PST by jwb0581
I may be alone on this, but as a lifelong independent conservative I don't know how anyone can compare Palin to Jindal. Don't get me wrong - I love Palin as a person and I love her positions on the issues. But some of the interviews were just embarrasing. I dislike Gibson and Couric more than anyone, but at times she was non-sensical or just plain empty in her answers and that can't be blamed on anyone but Palin.
I have seen others have their conservatism questioned because they have reservations about Palin. Just because someone has conservative positions that I agree with, doesn't mean they are presidential material. My grandmother has great positions on the issues but she would not make a good president.
Jindal may come off as a geek, and maybe he's too young to run in 2012. But this guy is the most brilliant, capable conservative I've seen in years. I live in Louisiana so I have watched him up close. He is the real deal.
I read about a lot of other subjects on this site but only find reason to post about Jindal lately. I am passionate about this young conservative leader and I’m sorry if that bothers you.
In fairness, I did say some negative things about Palin in my original post, but we need to honestly assess our strengths and weaknesses. I posted some negative things about Jindal as well (seems geeky, too young).
I think Haley Barbour would be an excellent choice, for example.
She no doubt just says whatever comes to her mind..
Why Not?.. Ann Coulter is very astute and pointed on her remarks but they are mishandled as a matter of course.. same with Sara..
Looking at stuff thru a liberal mind makes liberals see double and triple.. or even stuff that was not said at all..
Agreed, with a caveat. Palin’s vice presidential campaign was deeply disappointing to me. Conservatives can blame the MSM all they want – and the MSM was vile to Palin – but those non-answers, vapid talking points, and deer-in-the-headlights moments (not just in the interviews but in the VP debate) were mostly her own fault.
Here’s the caveat. Palin was, in all fairness, rushed to the national stage on very short notice. She was also at the bottom of the ticket and must have been following McCain campaign marching orders to some degree. Before I pass final judgment, I want to see a more seasoned version of Sarah Palin, speaking for herself.
Jindal also disappointed me last night. A more solemn, somewhat more confrontational speech was called for, but Jindal impresses me as a super-bright guy who will recognize and repair his mistakes soon enough. I’ve seen him look much, much better in other forums. A whip-smart guy like that is a breath of fresh air in a party that frankly seems to have succumbed to stupidity on many levels.
You DU punks are terrified of Palin, aren’t ‘cha?
"Tear down" is a loaded phrase. Does it serve no purpose to debate and critique the pros/cons, strengths/weaknesses of our farm system? Isn't it better to do it now than to wait until the primaries? It seems to me now is THE time to do it, while no one outside of our sphere is paying attention. When is the right time to debate the prospects?
Last time around, I got hassled up and down for "tearing down" Fred Thompson, but I was proven correct in the end. Now is the time to be picky. It's not the time to be cheerleaders. As with last time around, I'm hoping there is someone somewhere ready to lead the GOP that we haven't heard of, because the prospects look weak as hell. That's not tearing down. That's just my assessment. In fact, the GOP since Reagan has a pitiful record of finding a solid top of the ticket. Bush 1, Dole, GWB, McCain. Pathetic.
2012 is a long way away, and it’ll seem more like 20 years with Obamalamadingdong in office, so any talk of this guy or that girl as the GOP nominee is useless. And, I don’t think we can just keep rolling through warm bodies as damaged goods after every stupid SNL skit.
How are Eric Cantor and Mark Sanford?
Governor Sanford is coming out with great positions, but I’ve never heard him speak.
Eric Cantor comes off well when interviewed. I’ve never heard him give a speech, just little talking bites after major votes.
That's sad. What was that 11th commandment? I like Sarah but I don't count out Jindal either. And this is no more than a vanity topic also.
Change your bib. It’s soaked with drool.
I don’t think the bad moments were Palin’s fault. I think she was mishandled by the McCain camp. I think the McCain camp was coaching her to be something she wasn’t.
Now, that she is out on her own, she has to do well. She can’t blame anyone but herself now. We’ll see.
I’ve tried to listen to Sanford speak. Unfortunately, he put me right to sleep. I can see him drawing Joe Biden-size crowds of around 300—on a Saturday with nothing else going on.
You've been watching too much Network News.
Governor Jindal had better get some coaching in his method of delivery. He comes off as a geek because of his method of delivery sounds phony and amateurish.
“Don’t fall for the divide and conquer attempt by liberals and their Big Media friends to split Conservatives”
From Saul Alinsky’s greatest hits. Create chaos, ridicule, divide from within. Conquer.
His books should be must reading for all Republican candidates. They are the blue print for how we got stuck with this asshole we have for President. We should be able to look at the blue print and see what’s coming next and know how to fight it when it gets here.
After all TV personalities spend their career in front of the cameras, and have interviewed thousands. They ask questions framed with ‘a twist’ on the information with which they pose the question. It is done purposefully and with intent.
In Palin’s case it is difficult because even the smallest error would be blown up; and she knew that. This had become a politically correct world; and it inhibits speech for fear of being perceived wrongly/incorrectly.
In Jindal’s case he had a prepared text he was speaking from; and he had time to practice. Entirely different.
Do not allow them to succeed in turning away from the best candidates. Otherwise ... they win ... you lose ... we all do.
Of course it serves a purpose. But thoughtful and serious discussion is one thing, while playing the media's (and Romney's) game of setting camps against each other to cause enough dissension that a liberal (so-called "moderate") can win with just a plurality because of fractured conservatives.
The Thompson example shows just the opposite to me -- he's the guy who would have had the best chance to actually beat Obama, but the warfare between the various purer-than-thou conservative camps led to no conservative getting enough support to stop McCain from getting the nomination. And how did that work out?
(That said, I was hoping a successful Thompson run would also prove that you don't need to be running for 2 years to win... alas, it proved the opposite instead. Welcome to the world of the perpetual campaign.)
We can "vet" candidates without playing into the enemy's hands of throwing them overboard as "damaged goods" or "lightweight" -- the very memes created by the enemy to take down good (if not necessarily perfect) men and women.
Did you also support Juan McCain?
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.