Posted on 10/06/2011 12:06:35 PM PDT by bigjoesaddle
Sarah may have the last laugh when she endorses Herman Cain.
not quite. and it’s a mark of her character that she made her decision knowing full well there would be an idiot’s chorus singing this tune.
Let me sum it up for the author...
WAH! WAH! I’m a two year old! WAH! I’m taking my toys and going home! WAH!
So let me get this straight, the fools who hated her from the start now wish she had run?
If she endorses Cain and Cain loses, Palin’s rapid descent into political irrelevancy will be complete.
That sounds like the theory for AGW.
It’s hot - global warming
It’s cold - global warming
Weather is good - global warming
Weather is bad - global warming
So you would have been saying the same thing either way.
She is a quitter, but I am glad she is. If she had ran as a third party, she would have guaranteed Obama a second term by default.
whaaaaa?
The “fire in her belly” turned out to be a bad case of gas.
Who knows how she would have done in debates? But does anyone think she'd have gotten any softer questions than the junk they threw at Perry? Nope.
The left would complain if she was hung with a new rope.
Exactly. I don't see why she should endorse anyone.
How do you “quit” being a candidate when you never WERE a candidate?
She’s not defeated she didn’t want to take a pay cut and she doesn’t have to be PC to the msm.
Looks like the msm has to suck it up.
In 2010 she endorsed 64 people and 33 won/31 lost - including 10 who didn't even make it through a primary.
Her backing is not necessarily a guarantee of success.
You HAVE to have the JOB (president) before you can be called a Quitter.
Sort of like..... OBAMA had a job as a Senator, and he QUIT. That’s a Quitter.
Geez, people can’t even insult Palin anymore.......too eager and too desperate to prop up Obama.
I wasn’t pro-Palin, I said so a few times. Why? I believed her story had been written, and that she could not overcome the negative press that she had gotten in the 2008 election. Too soon in the election cycle, because the American voter, for the most part, is influenced by the media.
So I said what I thought, occasionally. I was raked over the coals every time I expressed the least bit of trepidation about a Palin candidacy. Look at my history, this was seldom mentioned by me, but to hear others respond to my posts, it would seem like every day I was on FR posting negatives about Palin (which obviously was not the case.)
Now I find it kind of odd that those who trusted her to “save” our country, don’t trust her to make the right decision about whether to run or not. They’re mad, disappointed, questioning her motives...it strikes me as rather odd, the fickleness of the Palinistas.
Sarah made the decision not to run for President for a very similar reason to bowing out of the Alaska Gocernorship.
The lame-brained, half-witted Demonrats and their bedfellows the media would have pelted her with a barrage of stupid charges (lies) until she wouldn’t have had time to tend to her job of President. In Alaska the Demonrats were inundating her with false charges that she (the state) had to pay lawyers to refute.
They would do a similar thing again and it would mount up to a large mass of needless distractions. She’s smarter than they are and she saw that coming.
It's the fickleness of FReepers, the fickleness of headline junkies and armchair quarterbacks.
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.