Posted on 11/24/2008 7:14:12 PM PST by teg_76
When asked who he though would be the future of the Republican party, he went out of his way NOT to mention Palin. He pretty much mentioned every other Republican governor. Even Rick Perry which made me queezy.
I really think these guys have trouble with the fact that a woman is out shining them.
Sanford is also my current favorite for 2012.
You need to look at Pain’s RECORD. While she is clearly a social conservative, she is first and foremost a fiscal conservative. Not as mayor or governor has she ever introduced legislation on social issues, deeming them a “private matter,” and she has never made social issues a part of her platform. She has always emphasized fiscal and reform issues.
McCain had very weak credentials in the social conservative arena, hence his campaign used Palin’s social conservatism to his benefit and built it up into something it hasn’t really been in terms of her governance so far.
I don't think it will hurt him much. All he really failed to do was come up with some BS "difference" between McCain's and Bush's economic policies--a difficult task considering McCain's failure to articulate any clear economic policy outside of his opposition to earmarks (which Bush has also opposed). The interview reflected at least as badly on McCain as it did on Sanford, and Sanford will have a much easier time articulating his own views, which are actually grounded in a solid conservative philosophy.
I think that’s the real story. Competitive pols—or businessmen or whatever—would much rather be compared with and matched against those they come off well against. She’s the only charismatic star they have, and the relatively less compelling candidates are fairly transparent in wanting to see the left’s stereotypical smears against Palin stick. Of course, it makes them seem even smaller in contrast!
If she'd gained more experience as governor, taken more time to prepare for a national campaign, and had her own team of campaign advisors before making her national debut on 2012 she'd have had far more control over her image, and likely would have had far more success coming off as a fiscal conservative/reformer. As it stands, she has an uphill battle changing the image she got within a few weeks of entering the national stage.
On the same topic, there’s a reason candidates often pick boring and/or already well known running mates: it’s always going to be difficult to control the image the country gets of someone in such a short time, and there’s no guarantee that initial image will be fair.
She has made a great impression on the American people but she has allot to show me in the next four years. I will have to see substance, something more than I have so far. I don’t mean that in a bad way. My biggest area of concern would be in foreign relations and to be fair any current potential candidate still has the same things to show me. (Except Duncan Hunter.) I like Palin too, I wish her great success, I just don’t want to hand out a crown three and a half years to soon.
It’s Ford-Reagan all over again. The mushy East Coast Republican establishment is especially unhinged about her. Reagan was painted as an empty-headed extremist kook in ‘76, but he broke through to convey more than that after four years of Carter made independents and moderates ripe for a compelling message. Perhaps a term under Obama will set the stage for a strong message once again.
Your points are excellent, Arguendo. I would consider Palin “done-in” if this were 10 or 20 years ago. But, given that we now live in a world where news is made 24/7 and there is so much more to media than network news and papers—such as internet and cable/satellite TV. Things change on a dime. IF Palin wants to be involved in national politics in the future, and if she becomes as proficient in national and international issues as she is on energy issues (see her IBD interview 7/11/08—25 mins. long and she was outstanding), travels, does a few editorials, and then goes on a number of talk shoes and clearly articulates her positions and where she would like to lead this country, and I believe she can completely resurrect her image. Viewers will say, “wait, I thought she was stupid-—obviously she isn’t-—what did the media feed us in ‘08?” With her obvious charisma, she could pull in many new supporters.
Plus...remember, McCain/Palin received 58 million votes, 8 million fewer than the One/Biden. If those 58 million voters had problems with Palin, they wouldn’t have voted the ticket, so she starts out with a huge base.
I've been a huge fan of Sanford for years, and so he certainly has my initial support if he enters the race. But if Palin comes back more experienced and with broader appeal I'd be happy to support her.
I’m not sold on Sanford, Arguendo, but it sounds like we’re on the same page with Palin. The next 4 years will prove interesting.
Question re: Sanford—I heard him say that his gubernatorial re-election campaign was the last campaign of his life. Is he really interested in national office? His previous quote from 2 years seemed pretty clear he was not.
He is impressive; but does not breathe ‘political fire’ so to speak. Which, in truth, makes him more impressive. . .but just hard to read.
Not sure, but he recently (since the election) refused to rule it out. My biggest worry about him is that he lacks the charisma to win a campaign; luckily, that is what the primary season is for.
Well, in this day and age, it seems that a candidate without charisma is going to be lost in the glow of the ones who have it.
Where would O be without charisma? Probably still community-organizing.
Gov. Palin gets the highest rating of all republican presidential nominees and Stanford is scared shetless.
Stanford does not even warrant a mention in the poll.
What’s a “far right” ?
Given that Governor SANFORD is one of our most accomplished and successful Conservative Governors in the nation, I think he’s a little more deserving of respect. We don’t need to be fanning this stupid little media-coerced infighting amongst our best and brightest leaders.
Palin is the reason I voted for McCain. I know many others just like me. I think she helped the ticket by bringing in conservatives who hate McCain more than she hurt it by driving away moderates who would’ve most likely gone for Obama anyway.
Oh, and I strongly disagree with your assertion that “younger voters are even more hesitant than older ones to support a candidate who’s seen as socially divisive.” That’s only true if the person in question is a right-winger. They’re very willing to support extreme social liberals.
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.