Posted on 06/17/2010 5:51:53 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
After Rick Santorum lost his Senate seat in 2006, he was, to many, a political dead man. Not only did he lose, but he lost big — by 18 points — to Democrat Bob Casey. Statistically, it was the worst loss for a sitting senator since Ronald Reagan’s first term. So, when Santorum travels to Iowa and New Hampshire these days as a possible 2012 presidential candidate, he’s a dark horse only Anna Sewell could love.
(snip)
Santorum, however, doesn’t play coy when I ask him about what his endorsement means to a fellow Republican, if anything. “Palin is the only endorsement anyone wants,” he laughs. “If you ask who the most influential endorsers are, Palin is numbers one, two, and three, with maybe Sen. Jim DeMint at four. Her endorsement is the only one that matters this year. Just look at what she did for Nikki Haley.”
What about Romney, the man Santorum supported in the 2008 presidential campaign? “No offense to Mitt, but he doesn’t carry the weight,” Santorum says. “Mitt can help you with some finance people, maybe in some small way, but his pull is insignificant compared to Palin’s.”
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
“Sure she has done some stupid things that make me wince...”
.
But what you didn’t pick-up on is that while we were wincing, others were cheering, and her cause continued to pickup steam.
She is quite skillful, politically.
.
Sarc!
.
I wish what? That my sarcasm be true? LOL!
And tell me the perfect candidate other than Sarah who is flaweless?
You need to spend some time outside of the FR echo chamber and talk to people in the real world. There are lots of people who adore Palin but she also has a ton of folks on the other side. I don’t know what it is about her that engenders such strong emotions one way or the other but she does. I’m not trying to put her down. I’m just stating facts.
*************************************************
and please tell me who they will come out en mass for in 2012?
Huck?
Romney?
Pawlenty?
Jindle?
****************************************************
Who the hell knows at this point? Not me, but I know many, many who won’t vote for sarah. maybe the field will be so diluted that she can win by default like her favorite Senator did in 2008. But she’ll never in a million years win in the general. if she won the nomination I’d certainly support her, donate to her, work for her but I won’t expect her to win.
Well, I can tell you right now that the GOP primary battles are going to be between Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney, with Huck perhaps acting as a spoiler. No one else is even on the radar screen and time is quickly running out for getting started if anyone else is predisposed to throw their hat in the ring.
hen there is a sea of women who are not registered who would in a heartbeat would vote for her..I call it a landslide...Of course I am a nutball Sarahbot!!!!
**********************************************************
She had the opposite effect on just as many. Feminists hated her, the hypocrites.
Sarah is the ‘git’er done’ candidate.
I’m not looking for the perfect candidate.
.
i tend to agree with you but I am still holding out hope.
I will crawl over broken glass to vote for Sarah Palin!!Stupid man that I am..I love being controlled by women!!!
I can tell you---it's her deep religious faith, independence, fearlessness, and pro-life convictions---these are source of most of the GOP hand-wringing. Plus she graduated from the University of Idaho and NOT the Ivy League, which makes all the snobs unhappy.
There are other conservatives I might prefer and I would like to see working vigorously for the nomination but none of them are working, even listlessly. How are such good upright morally and fiscally sound men of any use if they don't get out there early and work it? Reagan did not just appear (poof) in 1979. He had been expounding on his philosophy and goals publicly for many years and had built a very large base of support before he tried for the nomination the first time in '76.
Plus she is not a lawyer!!!!
Re: your tag line
Based on your expressed standards here, you miss the Ronald Reagan of your dreams, not the Ronald Reagan who lived and governed and compromised to get done what he could get done.
Who picked George H.W. Bush for his VP. Who endorsed and campaigned for George H.W. Bush, moderate supreme, for president. Who signed an amnesty bill.
Reagan was a common sense conservative before that phrase became common.
He was as conservative as he could be to get as much conservative work done as he could.
Based on your comments, you don’t seem to know Reagan’s pragmatic, get ‘er done, side. Which, yes, involved sometimes endorsing and working with moderate Republicans.
And sometimes not being able to get something done at all, such as eliminating the Dept of Ed.
Please. Don’t presume to lecture me about who Ronald Reagan was or what he stood for. I know full well who and what Ronald Reagan was. I don’t make a habit of demanding perfection or making the perfect the enemy of the good.
I assume that you’re referring to my immunity to the palin bug that has infected so many on FR when you presume to inform me that Reagan was only human. Any opposition I may present to a Palin campaign would not be based on her lapses from conservative ‘purity’. I simply do not believe that she is electable.
Neither was Reagan.....
wrong
Same crap said, different time, diferent person. Just cause you don't remember doesn't make it so.
I don’t care what was SAID. Reagan was electable...Palin is not.
He was:
1. Too extreme
2. Not flexible enough.
3. Didn't attend the right schools
4. Was too old
4. Couldn't get beyond canned lines.
5. Blah, blah, blah
Sorry, deal with it, it's the same stuff. New person, new time, same attack.
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.