I think Palin rates them on electability, nothing more. Like Rush said, she’s a Republican first. She is stacking up favors of people likely to win office so she has favors to cash in when 2012 rolls around. Are Fiorina, Whitman, McCain and Handel really the Tea Party choices? Would Palin do anything different if she had already announced she’s running?
It doesn’t make sense then that she endorsed Rand Paul, unless she thinks there’s enough Ron Paul supporters who’ll support her if she runs in 2012. Rand Paul wasn’t the more electable candidate in the primary.
The most electable conservative (or the most conservative electable) is the always the best choice.
You know nothing.....according to the PAC payment papers ...she pays one of the best research group to vet the candidates.....now she does make her own judgments like: She didn’t endorse Jane Norton, who all of the FR Sarah-haters said that she would....and other candidates she stayed out of the race....
Palin is following the EXACT same path that Ronald Reagan did after 1976.
And the parallels are striking.
You are very selective. Palin has not just selected cronies from the campaign. I expected her to go with McCain. Fiorina upset me but I have to give her Handel she is a great pic and is conservative in all the ways we need. Georgia Republicans haven’t been the best and the last thing we need is a big spending Republican running in GA.
Sarah has been mostly right on her picks which given the track records of her potential opponents she is doing very good. Jim Demint is the only person who has endorsed everyone I would have.
I don't think that's it. Handel and Haley were both well back in the polling field before Sarah's endorsements. Also, she's endorsing the primary opponent of Lisa Murkowski in AK. If "electability" were the goal, she'd stay with Murkowski, for sure. I regret not being up to date, but what's the beef with Handel?