Don’t want to get in a disgreement but Palin is not up to the caliber of the people I saw today and six months ago I wouldn’t have said that but what I saw put on today with the facts shows me that we have a lot of good Republicans to consider that have a far greater understanding of what it takes to be President.
Not sure from what I have seen her in interviews could handle being President. Resigning as AK Governor was a huge mistake and then becoming a commentator on Fox doesn’t fill the bill of the experience these Republicans brought to the table today.
CANTOR/RYAN..or RYAN/CANTOR..they’re both awesome!
I don’t know if it is fair to compare, since she didn’t have a chance to be there.
On the other hand, I don’t expect any Palin supporters are going to stand up now and say they wish she had replaced one of the Republicans in the room.
I am in agreement with you..and I AM a big fan of Palin.
I disagree,not because I like Palin (though I do) but because each of those men had BEEN PREPARED by aides. I think Palin isn’t quite as polished as she could be, but I also think it wouldn’t take her long to be up to par.
I agree
seeing this guy Paul do the numbers is a sight to behold
I’d love him to debate phony for 8 hours as phony looked clueless and never doubted one number or figure Paul brought up.
She gets me nervous when she is not scripted which is not a good confidence booster, I always think she is gong to say something stupid or get it wrong
I agree 1000%.
Look, I admire Ryan, Blackburn, and Coburn, and would support any one of them were they nominated. Right now, I support Sarah. When the primaries begin, let the best CONSERVATIVE win.
(Please note my distinctly (sarc)"feminist"(/sarc) point-of-view: I'd love nothing better than to see any of Palin/Bachmann, Blackburn/Palin, Bachmann/Blackburn, etc. All these women possess more testosterone than most of the congressional men...LOL!)
You’ve made the classic error that is common when looking at legislators. The so-called “experience” you saw with the Republican legislators would be a liability in a general election.
How many senators have ever been elected president? Ignoring 2008, which was a choice between two bad senators, how many senators in the 20th century have been elected President? The answer is only two. Both were considered horrible Presidents, and they died in office. Kennedy won election only through the vote of the House of Representatives.
The reason why Senators never win a presidential election (even though they keep running) is because legislative experience is very different than having executive experience. What you saw today, PhiKapMom, was the details orientated legislative way. This type of ‘knowledge’ is an anathema to the executive.
As the saying goes, if a presidential candidate finds out the bumper sticker was printed wrong, the guy with past executive experience would delegate someone to solve it. The senator with legislative experience would personally go down to the bumper sticker shop and fix it himself.
Obama being a radical is just one of the problems with him. Obama only having legislative experience is a big reason why he is failing all over the place.
Note that every President who has had “legislative experience” has always been considered a poor President.
Palin definitely doesn’t belong at that summit. She is not a legislator. She is an executive. Executives do not pore over the details of bills. Executives are about the ‘why’. Legislators are about the ‘how’.