Posted on 05/18/2009 7:22:04 AM PDT by redk
The Republican strategist who helped Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman prepare for a possible presidential run says the Republican party is in for a devastating defeat if its guiding lights are Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney. "If it's 2012 and our party is defined by Palin and Limbaugh and Cheney, then we're headed for a blowout," says strategist John Weaver, who advised Huntsman and was for years a close adviser to Sen. John McCain. "That's just the truth."
Huntsman, a favorite of GOP moderates, left the Republican presidential race last week after accepting President Obama's offer to become U.S. ambassador to China. Before that, Huntsman appeared to be working hard on preparations for 2012. "He had not made a decision to run for president, but he had made a decision to prepare to run," says Weaver. "We were probably a month away from announcing the formation of a political action committee, so we were pretty far down the road."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
When the people had an opportunity, according to the custom of releasing a person from their criminal sentence at the Feast of Passover, the people chose to release Barrabas, a notorious criminal, instead of the only person who has ever lived a sinless life on this earth.
Frankly, I don’t care how this supposed “three-headed monster” is perceived by people. Perceptions can be changed with enough exposure to truth and time.
If the left can lionize Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton...I’m at a loss to think of a perfect role model among the Dems, yet their far more egregious flaws are overlooked for what is perceived as their “greater purpose”.
Satan would be acceptable as a candidate if he ran as a Dem. Jesus Christ would be depicted as a hypocrite, and too flawed to run as a Republican.
We aren’t going to find a perfect human being to run for office, so we’re going to have to learn to choose those flawed human beings who have the conviction and courage to stand for, speak up for, and vote to implement policies that best represent the Founding Documents that our flawed Founders bequeathed to us.
Dick Cheney is reviled by the left because of his effectiveness in doing those very things. He has fought as hard for our founding principles throughout his career of gov’t service to this country as he could ever have done on a foreign field of battle.
Rush Limbaugh’s effective influence for the same principles are the reason for the manufactured perception of him.
Her effectiveness is why those on the left are working so diligently to destroy Sarah Palin, and anyone else who threatens the facade of perceptions created by the left.
I respect VP Cheney, Rush, and Gov. Palin, despite any flaws - real or perceived - and I’m thankful for their courage to withstand the barrage from those that oppose the things for which they stand.
Do you even like Palin? Somehow I don’t think you do. In fact, I am almost sure you don’t like her at all. But I bet you anything you won’t ever admit it. At least I can admit it that I don’t care for her, which is more then I can say for you.
Palin was saddled with McCain,
Correct but who accepted the saddle? Ma Palin wasn’t horse whipped into wearing it I don’t think. She had about as much national recognition as Dan Quayle did when GHWB selected him for the VP slot. I personally think she was selected for what McCain’s advisors thought she could bring to the ticket such as gender, governor, conservative image, etc.
And by the way, I no longer give a hoot about Romney. It’s not about that at all. You’re people made your point, you won’t accept Romney. Fine, I don’t think he is worth destroying the country over, he is just one person. But apparently, some people are willing to throw everything away for Palin. And I want to know why? She isn’t a real leader. For a woman who can’t talk she does way too many press releases. That is unacceptable to me.
THANKS!
John Weaver an adviser to loser McCain telling us how to win. I love it when losers tell us how to win. Until Palin joined the race, McCain’s numbers were in the dumps.
The short answer is that it was a different country in 1980. In the nearly 30 years since Reagan first came to power, the country's demographics have changed remarkably.
The fact of the matter is John McCain won 55% of the white vote and still lost the election. The country isn't getting more white, quite the opposite. In 2012 it is not at all unlikely that a GOP nominee could get 58% or even 59% of the white vote and still lose if the GOP doesn't begin to perform better with Latinos, Asians and yes even blacks.
Moreover, the Republican conservative base is getting older every elections cycle, and frankly is dying off. The GOP can't afford to continue to spot the opposition 35 points in the youth vote (18-29) and expect to compete moving forward. It has nothing to do with ideology and everything to do with mathematics.
She doesn't...and IF YOU HAD READ my posting more carefully you'd discover that I didn't claim that she had. I said there was "perceived hypocrisy" because of Bristol Palin's unwed pregnancy. I also said that I "loved" Sarah Palin as a candidate. However, despite that, I do not believe that she will be able to carry the GOP standard in 2012. Most likely it will be Romney.
It has nothing to do with ideology and everything to do with mathematics.
It’s getting harder every cycle to find the numbers to gain the necessary 270 EC votes needed to win the Presidency. The states are changing just as the composite national scene is changing. But that has been the evolution of this world since the first single cell crawled out of the ocean onto dry land and started dividing. Evolution and adaptation are the facts we deal with.
Despite the fact that you and I both like Palin as a candidate, she'll never be the standard bearer to carry the fight to Obama in 2012 for the following reasons.
She heads one of the least populated state in America.
She was shown to be a political novice when it came to parrying critical barbs with the mainstream media.
She was too (mis)defined by the caricature skits on SNL, Letterman, etc.
My ideal candidate now is Gen. David Petraeus.
I read your post fine and the smear you attempted against Governor Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Vice President Dick Cheney.
It was a message post, the kind that is meant to spread a “perception”
oh, so if we don’t go along with your coronation of Palin you are getting kicked out of the tent? Thanks for telling me. That does wonders for building bridges to nowhere. So sorry to hear you are willing to throw away your country for a woman you didn’t even know existed a year ago. Very interesting. And I want to know why? And what’s with Palin’s press releases? Meanwhile, the real leaders are getting arrested. It sounds like some people need to get some priorities. I’m sorry, Palin is never going to be President. She ain’t no Ronald Reagan, she is more like Bush, another front. Maybe a good conservative, but still a front. It’s only impressive to those who are already in her corner. It won’t help her to get any more votes then she already will get.
Exactly! But you're wasting your time trying to explain it to the die hard conservative purists around here. Their idea of a "big GOP tent" is somewhere between David Duke and Rush Limbaugh--all others, despite their beliefs in limited government, need not apply for membership!
Smear? What smear? Are you denying the fact that Cheney got 5 student deferments during Vietnam; that Rush Limbaugh has been divorced three times and abused prescription pain medication, or that Bristol Palin was unwed and pregnant?
Yeah that attempt at smearing.
How does Sarah Palin fall short in either morality or patriotism?
You asked the same question (#75), I answered (#138). Perhaps you should review them again.
In post 134, you didn’t even mention Sarah Palin.
She doesn't...and IF YOU HAD READ my posting more carefully you'd discover that I didn't claim that she had. I said there was "perceived hypocrisy" because of Bristol Palin's unwed pregnancy. I also said that I "loved" Sarah Palin as a candidate. However, despite that, I do not believe that she will be able to carry the GOP standard in 2012. Most likely it will be Romney. "
It is your perception and your smear that you are trying to sell about Governor Palin.
It seems that you want to promote the truly despicable Mitt Romney.
Actually it’s more like the moderate-progressives in the party who are insisting that conservative-right voices be silenced. I never mentioned coronation of Palin or Cheney or Rush. She may or may not run for President in 2012. Things change. Obama today - Who tomorrow? But to answer your accusation, if the Republicans run another luke-warm liberal I won’t vote for that person. I would gladly vote for someone like Palin or Cheney. I won’t vote for moderate-progressives.
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.