Posted on 11/24/2008 7:14:12 PM PST by teg_76
“I really think these guys have trouble with the fact that a woman is out shining them.”
Its not because she’s a woman. Its because she’s not ivy league.
Mark Sanford is my top choice to be the nominee is 2012.
Sanford ain’t an elitist. He’s as anti-Washington, anti-elite as they come. He truly is a grassroots conservative. I’ve never heard him say one cross word about Sarah Palin.
He doesn’t have to give her free publicity just because hes an R.
“I’ve never heard him say one cross word about Sarah Palin.”
That only means he’s a gentleman and has some class. Which by itself makes him more highly qualified than most in Washington.
Why isn’t Rick Santorum’s name mentioned more often?
Mine too. Palin (perhaps through no fault of her own) is probably too divisive to lead the party to victory on a national level, while Sanford is at least as conservative and offers exactly what we need right now: obvious competence and fiscal credibility that is second-to-none. And there’s no question he’s socially conservative, but his manner makes him unlikely to turn off socially moderate Republicans and swing voters the way Palin and Bush do.
Palin is awesome. These guys are old news and need to just let her lead. She is a real leader.
Santorum could never be successful on a national level.
At some point, the “good ol boys” in the RNC will wake up from their stupor and realize they have to raise $1 billion for the 2012 election cycle. Maybe they’ll make nice with the human ATM machine from Alaska then...LOL. I hope she has a long memory when that happens.
Sanford is as conservative as Palin-—maybe even more so. In looking at her record, Palin has governed more from the center-right than the far right.
Sanford also has his “Katie Couric” moment in the CNN interview. If/when he runs for national office, the lefties will be replaying that one ad nauseum.
Palin is first and foremost a social conservative; while she may be conservative on fiscal and foreign policy issues, it's obviously she's strongest on social issues. Our country has never elected a President (on either the left or right--at least in recent history) who's been most prominently known for his social positions, or who's put social issues at the forefront of his campaign. And younger voters are even more hesitant than older ones to support a candidate who's seen as socially divisive.
This isn't to say we need to nominate social liberals or even moderates (in fact, I think it's critical we remain socially conservative for the sake of the party coalition and the country), but we need to nominate candidates whose message is still focused on economic and national security issues. We need candidates who are strong enough on these issues that social moderates and liberals are willing to overlook their differences on social issues and nonetheless vote Republican.
It's getting more subtle, but these guys are extremely envious and jealous of Palin’s almost instant acceptance with the Real America.
Even the strong conservatives don't want her around so they don't have to be in the shadows of her popularity.
I saw Perry being interviewed on CNN last week, and he was asked something about Palin (I don’t recall the question but the interviewer was looking for a derogatory comment about Palin—that much was obvious). Anyway, Perry just laughed at the question and said something like, “we’ve (meaning the Republican governors)known her longer and better than any of you all, and trust me, you all don’t know the real Sarah Palin. She’s great—competent, sharp, and we love her.” He was definitely sticking up for her.
As far as what?
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.