Step 1 would have been to acquire financial resources and backers. She appears to be doing that in spades.
__________________________________________
As I wrote above there is that possibility, especially given the way she endorses and defends the RINO establishment.
Here, however, is how it would end...
Televised debate question; "Mrs. Palin, we know what it took to get you to quit as governor, what would it take to get you to quit as President?"
It would be naive in the extreme to doubt that they would use this over and over. It would become their mantra, supported by the MSM in all its forms and recurring SNL Tina Fey skits of Palin taking her ball and going home.
There is a segment of the voting population to whom the issue is moot. That segment is a small slice of the 140 million or so Americans who will decide if it's relevent and defining. I know many small 'c' conservatives who have never voted any way but GOP. This issue is a deal killer for them. I would think that the same would hold true for Reagan democrats and independents.
So, imo, no matter how much money she can get her hands on as a result of walking away in Alaska, doing so was an egregiously ill-advised step vis a vis national office viability.
She won’t be the first politician with issues to deal with in the campaign.
Clinton, famously, had the bimbo eruptions that everyone worried about. He was able to deal with it via a complicit media that simply refused to acknowledge it. Palin would get no such treatment from the MSM.
Do I think that the simple explanation: “She left the office to lay the groundwork for a run at the presidency and to counter a financial attack in Alaska.” would be acceptable to the American public?
I don’t see that as a bad explanation myself, so I don’t know why others would have that much trouble with it.
Will it win?
That’s why they have primary campaigns.