Posted on 02/18/2012 2:22:31 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
36, then another 36. Coincidence? I don't know, but I do not tend to believe in coincidences.
Best case scenario at this point.
Everything you said. Amen.
Hmmm. I know about the Tecumseh curse, but the Republican convention curse?
This is just silly. Before the primary, her chance of winning was very high. Why drop out of the primary when she had at least 50-50 chance, and go for the 1% chance of a brokered convention. By going for that 1% chance, she’s leaving her chances to the Gods
I don’t believe in curses, nor do I believe in coincidence.
There’s no question that Sarah would make the best possible candidate. Also, that the GOP establishment would rather shoot themselves upside the head than let her win.
But who knows what the convention delegates from 50 different states might do, if the convention is deadlocked?
I’m inclined to agree with those who have already commented that it seems as if, at this point, we are in the hands of God. Because nobody else is capable of straightening this mess out. But this is probably our last chance to do it.
Let us pray.
Well, that is the choice. We might as well find out now where we are.
Let us pray.
Amen!
IF that happened, if it was a Romney/Santorum ticket, I'd pass. If it was a Santorum/Romney ticket ... horrible. There'd be expanding socially-directed government via "compassionate" big government "conservatism" at the helm, with four to eight years more waiting in the wings ala Romney. Pretty bad risk.
Santorum without Romney, I'd go for that, though he'd be a place-holder at a time when place holders are getting riskier and riskier. Can we afford another four or eight years of Dubya reincarnated as The Church Lady? Gingrich is risky, but he's the clear choice for pressing on, calculating to advance an overhaul in the name of limited government to rebuild American prosperity and reduce government "severely."
Gingrich is risky. Santorum is riskier. Romney presents no risk -- he is a SURE bet for failure and malaise.
I’m not happy with our current crop of candidates, and I think a brokered convention could be good depending on who we nominate.
Let’s for a second say Sarah still doesn’t want to run. Who are possible alternatives besides Jeb Bush and Mitch Daniels?
Jindal?
Paul Ryan?
Gingrich?
Perry?
Huckabee?
Pawlenty?
Petraeus?
Demint?
Great, make it a trifecta, throw in the third less likely republican to win - Romney, Gingrich, Palin.
What a bunch if clowns. Hopefully Santorum can win this nomination and give us all a better chance to eliminate the Alinsky socialist dictator. Not my first choice, but compared to the other three, the best chance.
Of course the idiots could still panic and throw Jeb Bush in there.
Grasshopper, seek first to know your own journeys beginning and end. Seek then the other journeys of which you are a close part. But in this seeking, know patience. Wear that travelers cloak, which shelters and permits you to endure.–KF
She may have seen all the destruction coming her way. I have said it before, IMHO she may payback Romney for all he and the E-GOP did to her in her family in the last 3 years.
This unconventional you speak of CNN was the same unconventional when she left to Governship. It hit me then, my friends thought I was nuts, I said she is running and maybe go Indy. She didn't but in a way she has run and gone independent from the EGOP.
My wise old Conservative and Jewish Professor friend last week said he is praying for a brokered convention and has noticed film footage of her wearing The Star of David and the Jewish Flag in old photos in her Gov. Office. Yes, he is that sick of the oatmeal mush that is our field...
CNN you maybe onto something, your ready? Heck my better half might diss-own me for all the time I would spend volunteering for her, that is how ready I am...
Thanks for that post. I share your admiration of Sarah. Had the privilege of visiting Skagway where she spent her years as small child and then went to Wasilla. I remember thinking about her as I walked where she had grown up and served, and wondered if our nation would ever be worthy of such a leader again.
I’m completely against it. I have noticed for awhile that Palin is strangely non-committal. I haven’t really seen much in the way of “leadership” from her, but definitely lots of commentary. She says things, but then doesn’t take it to its logical conclusion. She makes points about what candidates need to do, and then suggests that none of the candidates have done them. She bashes Mittens, but she softens it later and doesn’t really stick her head out for one of the candidates. She then promotes the idea that this brokered convention could actually be a positive experience, even though there’s no evidence that some RINO isn’t going to cheat his way into the Presidency. I assumed it was part of her contract with Fox that she had to be utterly objective and avoid bashing any one candidate too much, since I had no other explanation for her commentary. However, the thought did occur to me, even before this rag picked it up, that maybe she thinks she has a chance at the nomination in a brokered convention.
I am utterly against it. I do not believe that the convention is guaranteed to go her way even if she believes it. And number two, I’m against the idea of some candidate getting the nod who didn’t participate in this bloody primary. It seems unethical.
I am not a mind reader so I can’t say anything with any certainty, but her commentary certainly would leave some paranoid people, such as myself, just wondering where she stands. She might not be an evil Machiavelli, (and yes, Machiavelli actually was a supporter of a Republican form of government and a great historian. I consider his Discourses on Livy to be required reading.) but she has a lot of supporters who are in her ear telling her that she can take over at the convention.
“There’s no question that Sarah would make the best possible candidate. Also, that the GOP establishment would rather shoot themselves upside the head than let her win.”
Where is the evidence of this? Keep in mind, I was a Cain supporter. I value ideas. What would Palin’s platform be? What would her tax plan be? What would her social security plan be?
I find the idea offensive that she could possibly sweep in and take a nomination she didn’t fight for, and she certainly wasn’t involved in fighting for a good candidate when she had the chance. She’s not leading, only providing commentary. Does someone providing commentary deserve the fruits of a victory she earned through simply being as neutral as possible while making sure no single candidate got too much momentum?
Between Soros and his minions, the EGOP, and various nuts ( because what I list below had to be from some evil characters) look at what has happened to her in the last 3.5 years as to prevent her from running...
* Someone burnt her Church to the ground.
* Endless media bashing...
* Going after her kids ergo the bar scene with her daughter.
* Her parents lives threatened.
* Rumors just before she was possibly going to annouce that had her rattled.
* Having McGunniess live next door for a summer...
Compared to this ( and these are a fraction of them off the top of my head ), maybe the Run would have been a cake-walk, but has she not been "bloodied"?
“Works for me”...I was thinking that as read the article. :)
How much executive experience, if any, does Sen. Rick Santorum have? Didn’t we just go through this in 2008? What has he EVER accomplished, other than getting Sen. Specter re-elected and getting beat like a drum himself? Buehler? Buehler?
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.