Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarh Palin and how to win in 2012
Free Republic | July 5, 2009 | jpsb

Posted on 07/05/2009 9:20:18 AM PDT by jpsb

I am really enjoying the pundits bewilderment over the calculus of Sarah Palin's resignation as governor of Alaska. I just want to point out that Sarah said she is seeking a “higher calling” and not a “higher office”. Observe also that she does not believe one needs a “title” to be an effective agent for change. Both comments indicate to me that her resignation is not, by design, the beginning of a national campaign for President of the United States.

But just for grins, lets pretend Sarah is “crazy like a fox” as Bill Crystal suggests and that she is pursuing a strategy to win the presidency. There is very little reason to believe this is the case, but it is fun to play “what if” so .......

The one thing that truly terrifies our ruling elites is the outsider populist. The oligarchy is only really threatened when an outsider populist gains enough support to become a viable candidate. This shall not be allowed to stand!

We've seen a couple of populists campaigns in resent decades, Ross Peroit and Pat Bucainin. And while both campaigns failed they certainly showed that if done correctly with perfect timing the opportunity is there. Peroit's timing was excellent, however he lost all creditability when he dropped out of the race and then for the lamest of reasons re entered the race a few weeks later. Pat's timing was not nearly as good and the Government Media had already ruined his reputation as punishment for opposing Bush 1 in 1988 with a populist GOP primary campaign.

Enter Sarah Palin.

If Peroits timing was excellent in 2000, Sarah timing would be perfect in 2012. Conservatives are leaving the GOP in droves, Democrats have turned into out right Marxist, leaving many Reagan Democrat with no place to go. Independents are by definition fed up with both parties. Add to the mix the cratering economy, sky rocking unemployment, deficients though the roof and extreme anger at using tax payer monies to bail out thieves on wall street. If a populist can't win in 2012 a populist can never win.

Sarah said she is going to work for “values” candidates regardless of party label, sounds like a populist to me. And what are her values?

“smaller government, free enterprise, strong national security, support for our troops, and energy independence”

I'd buy that for a dollar and I am certain she can expand on this list. She also has a history of taking on the entrenched corrupt bureaucrats in government. She cleaned up government in Alaska. So she can legibly claim to be an effect reformer. She is already in a much better position then either Peroit or Bucainen for a populist 2012 effort and it is only 2009.

So if this is the plan or even if it is only a contingency plan, how does she best proceed .

First and foremost DO NOT TELL ANYONE THIS IS THE PLAN! Should the oligarchy even think for one second Sarah was considering going populist they would throw EVERYTHING they have at her. Think her press is bad now? You ain't seen nothing yet. Think her legal battles are bad now? You ain't seen nothing yet. The oligarchy has weapons we don't even know about. So it is a must that Sarah stay “mainstream” as long as possible.

Second she must gain as many connected allies as possible, by connected I mean other like minded elected politicians. This she can do by campaigning for them in the very difficult upcoming 2010 election. She needs to build a base of support that also has a voice in the media. Once the attacks start she will need defenders those voices can not be ignored by the media. The more supporters the better, support from corporate and main street America will also be needed. Number three should insure this.

Third she will need an agenda that address promoting her values in a meaningful way. Clever sound bites and nice speeches will not get the job done. She will need at the very least an outline of a plan to achieve “smaller government, free enterprise, strong national security, support for our troops, and energy independence”. Of the three this should be the easiest. There are a number of very bright patriotic American she can consult with and formulate a plan with. Steve Forbes for example would be excellent on monetary policy and the economy. In fact he's make a great VP for Sarah. Lol, shameless Steve Forbes plug.

Obstacles:
There is really only one obstacle to implementing “the plan” and that is Sarah herself, does she have the temperament to take the unbelievable heat that would surely come. If she did not really crack under fire in Alaska and really did resigned to take the battle to the enemy then maybe. If not forget it Sarah, don't even think about it.

Does she have the intellect to formula a plan for the nation and the ability to defend and explain her ideas. Anything she puts forward is going to be riped to pieces and she's got to both defend it and explain it to the American people . She's got to have the ability to get her message out through a howling hurricane of media noise. That will require and very smart, very savvy lady that always stays on message and is not distracted by detractors.

Fortunately if she campaigns for others in 2010 she will get plenty of practice in getting her message out and plenty of experience in handling the hack media. She'll also be exposed the many diverse points of view on what is best for the nation, that is always a plus if she keeps her mind open.

Well there is my “what if” for Sarah Palin and 2012. It is of course sheer fantasy, but it was fun to write and I hope you found it fun to read. For what it is worth I hope this blind squirrel stumbled upon a nut and something similar is going through Sarah head. Personally I am convinced that Sarah is not looking at the GOP for 2010, way to much bad blood there. IMHO her only real option with any chance of success is the above.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: palin2012; sarahpalin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: jpsb

The problem with going for the GOP nomination is....

Personally I would vote for her under any party. But, I feel like Perot she would split the vote and Obama would win.

It could be different this time if Obama was really disliked by 2012 and the GOP put up a looser candidate (which is a real possibility).

For that matter Hillary may run as the Obama Birth Certificate may get a lot of scrutiny the next time around.


41 posted on 07/05/2009 10:28:28 AM PDT by Hang'emAll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
She also has a history of taking on the entrenched corrupt bureaucrats in government

Ding, ding, ding, ding!!! That explains why both Democrats and Republicans are hell bent on destroying her. It is time to expose the sewers of corruption of both parties to daylight.

42 posted on 07/05/2009 10:29:08 AM PDT by varon (Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

Run Sarah Run!


43 posted on 07/05/2009 10:29:16 AM PDT by tcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
Interesting essay on the possibilities.

A couple things.

We can help by making donations to Republicans contingent on Sarah's approval. No money to the RNC or RSC's, only if Sarah endorses and campaigns for the candidate. Not holding office frees Sarah from many endorsement, financial, and travel rules, and harassment ethics charges. She will be able to be much more visible and raise much more cash. Her dance card will be way past full.

The MMSM (Marxist Main Stream Media) will be unrelenting, but it will be worse for them as she is now a private homemaker and the attacks will be perceived as more petty, vindictive and mean spirited than before.

Sarah's personal appeal to a wider base will pack 'em in at appearances, and popularity counts.

Finally, Sarah now can direct oppositional research without violating the law. I'm suspecting that there will be some ethics investigations of leftist Rats in the near future.

44 posted on 07/05/2009 10:34:23 AM PDT by Navy Patriot (The Golden Goose doesn't exist that Marxists can't kill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valentine_W
am just looking at the pieces and trying to make sense of them given the hypothetical that she is seeking to be elected president of the USA in 2012.If she is seeking to be president then the scenario i laid out makes sense to me. And IHMO is the only one that might work.
45 posted on 07/05/2009 10:34:53 AM PDT by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

Wasn’t Perot’s 1992 run based upon his supporters getting him on the ballot in all 50 states as an independent? Independent or 3rd party still requires gaining access to the ballot in each state. Maybe an independent doesn’t carry the baggage of a 3rd party, I don’t know.


46 posted on 07/05/2009 10:40:04 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk
Where does she stand on TARP? Does she support or opposed Obama's Afghan policy? Does she want to audit the Fed? What precisely would she cut in the federal budget to balance it? Does she support the war on drugs? Let's here fewer generalities and more specifics.

Just when and where would you have expected her to make a speech addressing the points you mention. She stopped campaigning last year and even then she had to toe McCain's line.

Since the election she's been governing Alaska yet you seem to be of the same mind as the Democrat and Republican attack dogs that she is still a candidate and is fair game for criticism on items and in areas that are outside her current duties.

Why don't you ask why George W Bush is not doing more to support the constitutional government of Honduras? Oh, you say he is no longer the president and therefore has no reason to be involved? But Sarah Palin is???

You're a hypocrite!!!

47 posted on 07/05/2009 10:40:19 AM PDT by varon (Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bob J
Sarah is now unelectable on a national stage. The “quitter” specter will hang around her neck like “swimmer” does to Ted Kennedy.

While I am not sure that the "swimmer" label has hurt Kennedy (after all, it's the party of abortion so murder shouldn't confront them), I do agree that the abrupt resignation from the governor's office will be viewed as a strong negative.

I think that she belongs in a leadership role within the RNC - perhaps she can guide it back to being a conservative party.

48 posted on 07/05/2009 10:41:44 AM PDT by meyer ( "The world is a beautiful place and worth fighting for. But not without Freedom.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
And again, the fact that everyone is trying to figure out why the hell she did something and what her *real* intentions were points to an inherently flawed decision and equally sucky communication strategy to the public. People can keep painting Sarah as the victim, but that doesn't excuse not taking the advice of folks who truly wanted to see her succeed in her political career. Quite frankly, it's tragic to see someone with so much potential throw away their political career when it could have been so easily prevented, but loose canons quickly outlive their usefulness.

It's time to start looking for the next star.

49 posted on 07/05/2009 10:42:13 AM PDT by Valentine_W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Palin freed herself up to go on the circuit to collect $10,000-$50,000+ speaking fees plus book royalties; all of which she needs.

Bingo, CFR and Finance rules would be used by the Rats to beat her to death and trap her in Alaska broke, fighting fraudulent ethics charges.

Sarah, free, is the worst thing to happen to the Marxist Rats in 110 years.

50 posted on 07/05/2009 10:42:29 AM PDT by Navy Patriot (The Golden Goose doesn't exist that Marxists can't kill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Bob J

You are dreaming, pal

And, based on your posts that I have read, to date, your dreams are all night mares!


51 posted on 07/05/2009 10:42:43 AM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Valentine_W

Aw poor baby. Step aside, dead fish!


52 posted on 07/05/2009 10:43:11 AM PDT by petitfour (Are you a Dead Fish American?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

I agree with you. This window of opportunity will not last forever. I do not think anyone can blame her for taking advantage of it. I do think her advisors told her this move will preclude her from running from office again and she probably felt she was more than fine with that after what she and her family has been through.


53 posted on 07/05/2009 10:43:57 AM PDT by DallasSun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: deport

Yes he had to get on the ballet, don’t remember if he got all 50 states but he got all but one or two. My guess is that Sarah has enough support to easily do the same.


54 posted on 07/05/2009 10:44:48 AM PDT by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: rightwingjew

I cant see that happening but then what do I know? I do know Texas cannot secede despite what our Gov Good Hair says. We can break off into three other states but would remain in these United States. And Texans really have no interest that I can see in seceding.


55 posted on 07/05/2009 10:45:37 AM PDT by DallasSun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk

And what part of her speech did you miss? All of it. Because the answers to your questions are there, but it’s easier to ignore it, hoping no one actually watched the speech, and just continue repeating the pundits’ talking points, eh?


56 posted on 07/05/2009 10:45:58 AM PDT by Freddd (CNN is not credible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Valentine_W
"inherently flawed decision and equally sucky communication strategy"

Well maybe, I buy the "sucky communication" part. However I do recall she asked her supporters to "trust me I am making the right decision". Seems she anticipated the bad communications part. Why deliberately communcate poorly? Guess we will have to wait and see.

57 posted on 07/05/2009 10:52:31 AM PDT by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

Thanks for your thoughts - I am not involved with politics anymore, so it will be interesting to wait and see. I hate to be so cynical and it pisses a lot of my friends off, but the way things are shaping up, I don’t think we are in any position to win in a Presidential election in 2012. I don’t know enough about the various congressional seats, but I hope the prospects for those are better.


58 posted on 07/05/2009 10:57:24 AM PDT by Valentine_W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
Bravo! It was a well written essay!
I wish you had spelled Ross Perot's and Pat Buchanan's last names correctly...
But other than that, I was able to tell who you were talking about and you presented your thoughts quite well!!!!
59 posted on 07/05/2009 10:59:51 AM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

NEVER UNDERESTIMATE SARAH PALIN !


60 posted on 07/05/2009 11:00:05 AM PDT by Reagan69 (No Representation without Taxation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson