Vanity: Sarah Palin 2012

20 October 2008 | Dodger

[pissant]

Popularity is fleeting. Principles and record aren’t. (Ask Rudy). And if you think a speech from Palin is more ‘exciting’ than one from Hunter there are three possibilities.

1) You’ve actually never heard Hunter give a speech.

2) You prefer “it” over meaningful words

3) You prefer a high squeaky voice over a baritone.

Not sure which it is, but a speech from the two is the difference between Reagan and Dan Quayle. Except Hunter doesn’t use a teleprompter or notes.

[pissant]

You’d have to read up a bit on FALCON to figure that out. Either way, you can rest assured not one dime of mine will go to another CINO.

[TaxRelief]

You are assuming, of course, that there will be elections in 2012.

[wardaddy]

i agree wholeheartedly

i was just getting my digs in at the old Powell Condi bunch here...if any are left

and admittedly maybe a swipe at the Jindhal crowd

i like him too but you can’t convince me here that the pc crowd doesn’t like him a bit much due to his skin tone

they don’t go gaga over others who have never indicated a run for POTUS who are just as conservative and WHITE

[Fiji Hill]

Nixon was actually quite a successful VP.

[Fiji Hill]

...whatever "IT" is, Sarah has it

[GLDNGUN]

Popularity is fleeting. Principles and record aren’t. (Ask Rudy). And if you think a speech from Palin is more ‘exciting’ than one from Hunter there are three possibilities.

Popularity is fleeting? Yes, it can be. First you have to get it, before it can "fleet". That's a problem Hunter hasn't had to worry about.

1) You’ve actually never heard Hunter give a speech.

2) You prefer “it” over meaningful words

3) You prefer a high squeaky voice over a baritone.

You can keep making this personal if you want, but it's not about "me" and what I prefer. Here's a news flash...it's not about YOU and what YOU want, either. It's about MASS appeal. Palin has it. Hunter doesn't it. She's been on the national scene for a couple of months. He ran for President for how long? She was a instant star, while he couldn't even get noticed. Again, it's not about what I want or if your conservative is bigger than my conservative. If you can't see that she is 1000X times more popular than any other GOP politician, including Hunter, then you simply aren't paying attention. There's no reason for that to change. As she gets more experience, she will only become better, more liked and respected, and her popularity will only increase.

It's like she just called up from AAA for the playoffs and is hitting .500% against the best pitching in the league, while Hunter has been in the majors for a couple of years and can't get off the bench because he can't hit over .150.

Not sure which it is, but a speech from the two is the difference between Reagan and Dan Quayle. Except Hunter doesn’t use a teleprompter or notes.

Unfortunately for you, that is an absurd fantasy of your own creation, unless you are comparing Palin to Reagan and Hunter to Quayle. It wasn't Hunter that Michael Reagan said was the next Ronald Reagan, was it? I guess you are now going to attack Reagan's son as not knowing anything about his dad, conservatism, and politics.

Hunter's had his chances and has fallen flat for whatever reason. Palin got her chance and has rocked the party.

Good grief, why is it the liberals HATE her so much? It's because she's electric. Funny how even the libs can see her potential and you can't.

So, go right ahead trying to convince me how much greater Hunter is than Palin. I'm not the one you should be worried about. It's the 40 MILLION or so other GOP members...

[pissant]

I know its not about “you” and what you prefer. It’s about what the GOP and what they prefer collectively. And you can see the lemons it produced as frontrunners this year and the lemon we got stuck with.

They’ll figure out that popularity contests are a bad way to select a nominee eventually. That backbone and genuine expertise and unflappable conservatism and wisdom will eventually be what is required.

[GLDNGUN]

Here we go with "electablity" again... After all, it has worked out so well for McCain, and Romney... and Huckabee, and Giuliani... and Thompson...

Huh? There's no comparison between Palin and those guys. She's already more popular than all of those guys put together. You are confusing "electability" in the primary with the general election. We've been told to vote for one of these guys, that nobody was very excited about, because they would have appeal in the general election. That's not what I'm talking about. Palin excites the base like nobody since Reagan and connects with "Joe Six Pack" like nobody since Reagan. Palin supporters don't think "yes, while she doesn't do much for me, she can probably get some indys to vote for her". No, Palin supporters simply LOVE her and her style.

Whatever "it" is, is a flash in the pan. It doesn't last. Principles do. Records do. Character does.

Fortunately, for her, she's got the whole package.

[GLDNGUN]

They’ll figure out that popularity contests are a bad way to select a nominee eventually.

Oh? You're going to do away with the primaries? LOL The only thing they need to change is to stop allowing non-party members to vote in the primaries.

That backbone and genuine expertise and unflappable conservatism and wisdom will eventually be what is required.

Well, I can certainly make the case that Gov. Palin has all of those qualities, while possessing other qualities that Hunter simply never will, especially dealing with personality. With more years experience as a governor of an energy state or 4 years as VP, she will have all the additional "gravitas" she needs. If she decides to run in 4 years, she will start the primary LIGHT YEARS ahead of any other candidate.

If McCain loses in 2 weeks, there will be a near immediate groundswell of GOP support for Palin to run in 2012. Neither Hunter, nor any other GOP pol, is in such demand.

[pissant]

Good luck with that, feller. If Palin is tied at the hip to McCain (assuming Mccain wins), she will be more poisonous than Bush is now. If they lose, she will have one hell of a hill to climb to win the primary.

Fluff and celebrity will not cut it in 2012.

[GLDNGUN]

Good luck with that, feller. If Palin is tied at the hip to McCain (assuming Mccain wins), she will be more poisonous than Bush is now. If they lose, she will have one hell of a hill to climb to win the primary.

IF Palin becomes VP, the GOP will reject her??? ROFL Riiiiiiight.

IF they lose in 2 weeks, 99% of the GOP will say Sarah was the one who even gave McCain a chance to win. "Hell of hill to climb?" ROFL! You can't be serious. Again, she'll be in demand the day after the election. She'll go back up to Alaska, get more executive experience, sharpen her already keen skills, and have MASSIVE support the day she announces she's running for POTUS.

Fluff and celebrity will not cut it in 2012.

If that's all you think there is to Palin, you are doubly delusional. You think she's accomplished all she has in Alaska and become the most popular governor in the country with "flash and celebrity"? Give me a break. You obviously have some axe to grind, and I don't really care what your problem is. You have the focus of a stalker in regards to Hunter and you want to eliminate anyone, especially a woman it seems, who might get in his way.

You are a Hunter "groupie". I get it.

[pissant]

That is not all I think of - fluff and celebrity - when I think of Palin. She’s conservative, mostly well spoken, competent and attractive.

I like her quite a bit. I also like Tom Tancredo, Jeff Sessions, Mike Pence, Tommy thompson, Dino Rossi, Jim Gilmore, Michelle Bachmann, and a whole host of conservative republicans.

And yet not one of them holds a candle to Hunter for Commander in Chief.

And if you think they do, you don’t know squat about Hunter, his record or his genuine Reaganism.

Just a quick example. Hunter was dead set against the socialist bailout, and offered an alternate free market plan. McCain and Palin went along with that turd.

People will be more than excited for Hunter when he gets his name and face out there.

But for a thumbnail that scratches the surface of the bigger view....

http://dhgrassrevolt.wordpress.com/2007/09/06/flippers-floppers-frauds-vs-duncan-hunter-%e2%80%93-part-1-a-madison-essay/

http://blog.barofintegrity.us/2007/08/31/flippers-floppers—frauds-vs-duncan-hunter—part-2.aspx

http://thinktoomuch.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/flippers-floppers-and-frauds-vs-duncan-hunter-part-3/

[GLDNGUN]

Yeah, it’s amazing what you can find when you do a little digging...

http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/afb/archives/008058.html

[roamer_1]

Palin excites the base like nobody since Reagan and connects with "Joe Six Pack" like nobody since Reagan.

ANY Conservative, given the full weight and support of the party, and the full exposure of the media, would do very well- any one.

The ready embrace of Palin by the base is in good part a result of that promotion, and the fact that finally, FINALLY, after years of exasperation, someone that the party is lifting up is speaking the things the faithful want to hear.

That she is young, vibrant, and charismatic is to her credit, no doubt, but her populist message will not last forever. And her popularity will leave with it- unless she truly is what she seems to be.

Fortunately, for her, she's got the whole package.

No, she does not. Her record is mixed, as far as Conservatism goes, and is too short to define her readily.

Unlike Hunter, whose record is as long as my arm, and who is as predictable as the sun's rising. If the same effort was made to lift him up by the party, to set his message before the people, and to give him such an honored debut, he would be greeted with every bit as much the accolades Palin has received, if not more.

Your mistake is in supposing it is the messenger that receives the praise. While that is true in part- The people must have confidence that the president has the character and confidence to do as he says, and to do so boldly- It is really the message that holds the people's heart.

There is not a doubt in my mind that Duncan Hunter now bears the torch for Ronald Reagan, and for Reagan Conservatism. There is no one even close by comparison, with the possible exception of Alan Keyes (though he lacks experience in matters of defense). Sarah Palin is weak tea by comparison.

I would not lend my support, money, networking, or otherwise, to the Republicans in the support of Palin. Hunter, however, is one of the few I would come back to the Republican party *for*. If the Republicans mean it, and want to win, they will lift up a no nonsense dyed in the wool Reagan Conservative. Reagan, or *nothing*.

[roamer_1]

[GLDNGUN:] especially a woman it seems

yeah! you chauvinist pig, you! :D

[pissant]

Well said. Palin needs to prove herself to be in the rarified air that Hunter is in. It is no knock on her. I think other than the Couric interview, she has handled things with moxie and class, with a nice dash of conservatism on several subjects near to my heart. But we know as much about her thinking on illegal immigration, the US-UN relationship, how and when to wage war, and constitutionalism as we do about Joe the Plumber’s, maybe even less. These and other topics are big gaps that need to be filled in over time - by word and by deed.

And watching Hunter speak last saturday in person - with no notes, no stutters, no gaffes, no bullshit - press the case for conservatism, against the bailout, for secure borders, for US industrial might, and against Hussein Obama and the libs was a site to behold.

And I have never, ever seen him get rattled, or forced to backtrack, or have to clarify a darn thing, and I have studied him probably more than any other human has. LOL

We need the Palin’s and Jindals and Pences and Bachmanns in the conservative movement. And some think these guys will someday make a good president, and they may be right, time will tell.

But what the country really needs is another tried and true rock ribbed man, who means every syllable he says, does not posture, does not mince words to keep from offending liberal ears, and cannot be intimidated into retreat.

[pissant]

Chauvinst pig I am. Especially when it comes to knowledge and wisdom on military matters.

[GLDNGUN]

I guess Hunter ripped a hole in his back pocket when he was stuffing all that conservatism in there...

http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/afb/archives/008058.html

So after all of these years, he's going to suddenly become a star? I'm sorry, that's in an alternate universe.

Go ahead and talk him up as the most conservative person to ever walk the planet until you turn blue in the face. He does not inspire and motivate on a mass audience level. Period. End of story.

You think even though he doesn't have this gift, that all the GOP has to do is give him a stage. You have it completely 180 degrees backward. You earn such a stage. Palin earned it because of what she's done AND how she did it. Go ahead and boohoo all you want about how unfair it is, and maybe it is, but all you will sound like is the bitter job applicant who whines that she was more qualified but didn't get the job because the other gal is better looking.

Hunter had his stage and how many debates? And look where he went in the GOP polls. Palin had her stage and her popularity among the GOP was huge and immediate. It wasn't a "creation" of the GOP machine as you like to portray it. That detracts from Sarah and her abilities. Her "problem" is that she is so good and natural at what she does, you think "oh, they could stick anyone in there and they'd be as popular". BULL HONKEY.

Whether McCain wins or loses in 2 weeks, if you take a GOP poll of who should be the 2012 nominee, Palin would be the pick by a landslide. That's the universe we currently reside in. You can add "but Palin this" and "but Hunter that". It doesn't change the facts on the ground.

So, on "Day 1" of the 2012 campaign she will be miles ahead of any other candidate, and LIGHT YEARS ahead of Hunter.

You keep talking like she's a flash in the pan and will fizzle out. That's based on what? Certainly not reality or her past. Look at her trajectory. Where has she "flamed out"? She hasn't. She has taken every political challenge put before her and proven herself more than up to the task.

Maybe you can answer these final 2 questions. If she's not really a conservative, why do the liberals hate her like death? Secondly, who was it that Micheal Reagan said was the next Ronald Reagan after saying that he never thought he'd see another person like his father? (HINT: It wasn't Duncan Hunter.)

[Don Blake]

Yes, I was wrong about most presidents being two termers. My mistake, sorry!

That being said, recent history shows that the losing VP candidate doesn’t ascend to the presidency. The last losing VP to get the presidential nomination was Mondale, and he lost in the general.

The last one to win was FDR (lost in 1920, won in 1932).

I don’t know how anyone can read the political climate and say Palin is the favorite for the 2012 presidential nomination if she loses in 2008. There’s no there, there. Sorry.