What does it mean? Sarah Palin changes Facebook profile from 'Republican' to 'Conservative'

The London Daily Mail ^ | October 15, 2011 | Staff

[2ndDivisionVet]

She has always been known as a Tea Party darling as well as a staunch Republican.

But now Sarah Palin has nailed her political colours to the mast and changed her Facebook profile from Republican to 'Conservative'.

The move on the 'political views' section of her page has left political commentators struggling to decipher what the the former Alaska governor is trying to say.

(GRAPHIC AT LINK)

One long-time blogger and Palin supporter wrote: 'I suppose one could draw a multitude of conclusions regarding this status change.

'I know that I certainly have. You can be certain that any move Sarah Palin makes has been well thought out and is with purpose.

'Could she possibly be sending a message to the RNC that they need to strengthen the conservative planks of the Republican party.

'Perhaps her promise of 'sudden and relentless reform' as addressed in her Indianola speech and more recently in her October 7th St. Louis speech is a sign that as in the past, neither party is safe from her scrunity.

'One thing is for sure, time will tell.'

The news comes as polls continued to indicate that Republicans aren’t sold on Mitt Romney and they’ve been looking for other presidential candidates.

At least eight other Republicans have seen their standings soar in GOP primary surveys since the beginning of the year.....

[se_ohio_young_conservative]

If there were a Lee Atwater type in the Republican Party now, Mitt Romney wouldnt have over 10% in the polls right now and he would be on tv every day trying to explain why he was trying to out liberal than Teddy Kennedy when he was running for gov. Even Jay Leno has made jokes about that.

We need leaders who fight back against the elite people who think they are so much better than us. Romney is a part of the problem.

[se_ohio_young_conservative]

If more than 1% of the Republican party is like you, I don’t want to be a Republican anymore. You are happy to throw people like Palin under the bus while you are willing to give Mitt Romney a..(explicit act that you will know on the first guess)

[Springfield Reformer]

I’m no fan of the sit-it-out-for-Romney school of thought, but SOYC makes a valuable point. Romney has had his fingers in a number of very bad things that have happened to the GOP. It has been argued on this forum that it was his people inside the McCain campaign who sabotaged Sarah in 2008, possibly costing us the election. It is further arguable through the emerging Romneycare-Obamacare connection that he is every bit the anti-constitutional statist that Obama is, if not quite fully Marxist.

Thus, his greatest weakness going into the general is that both parties will be confronted with a choice where the philosophical differences between the two candidates are so weak the race will dissolve into identity politics, in which case we will lose one of the most winnable presidential elections in GOP history, to an open Marxist.

Furthermore, I have interned at a constitutional law firm where I learned first hand how heavy handed he can be in implementing his statism.

So, in my mind, should he win, he might actually be worse for us than Obama. That is not intended as jump-the-shark rhetoric. That’s a real impression that has been growing in my mind, especially as I see how he is attempting to game the primary system at a deep level to guarantee his nomination, at a time when he knows the will of the people is beginning to run against him. In that I see the same spirit that governs Obama, the spirit of the would-be tyrant, the impulse to power, no matter who he has to run over to get there. If Romney actually does become the GOP nominee, the game is changed significantly for the worse, and I do not yet know what I will do.

[ScottinVA]

I`m trying to discern the part in which you conclude I`m throwing Sarah under the bus. MY COMMENT WAS THAT i didn`t believe she had a chance to win, not that Ibwas casting her aside. One can be supportive of a person`s ideology and at the same time realistic about their electoral chances.

[Rapscallion]

Palin doesn’t matter now if she’s not running for president.

Neither do you....dumb one.

[arthurus]

That’s kind of how I see it. But. With a Romney/Obama contest I would have to vote for a conservative other if I were to vote at all. Romney is not and will not be the “lesser of two evils.” I will not vote for a Democrat or a pro-abort even if the Republican Party is running him.

[Politics4US]

Yes, I do, because I was one of her supporters.

[Calif Conservative]

Seriously, the notion of comparing Sarah Palin to Ronald Reagan in any substantive way:

A two-term governor of California
vs.
a portion-of-one-term governor of Alaska

Someone who was determined to get rid of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe — and who did get rid of the Soviets in Eastern Europe and got Germany to “tear down this wall” and to “open that gate.”
vs.
Someone who knows where Russia is located

Someone who was firm in his view that taxes needed to be cut dramatically — and did cut them, leading to a boom that essentially began in 1982 and — with the exception of the recessionary hiccups of 1991 and 2001 — continued unabated until about 2008
vs.
Someone who raised taxes on an American industry, the oil sector in Alaska

Someone who restored American pride at home and this nation’s leadership worldwide at a time of great danger to our republic
vs.
Someone who talks about crony capitalism — whatever the heck that really means.

Someone who was clear-headed in his belief that he needed to serve his country by attempting — and succeeding — in becoming president of the USA
vs.
Someone who changed her Facebook profile

Reagan wasn’t perfect, although he was a great president and deserves to be on Mt. Rushmore and on the currency.

But side by side as if they are comparable? Seriously ? Really ?

-George