Posted on 09/16/2010 10:22:29 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Delaware Republicans have proved it: Sarah Palin is the best asset the GOP has right now.
There has been a lot of carping about Republicans' prospects for November since Palin-backed candidate Christine O'Donnell defeated longtime Delaware officeholder Mike Castle for the Republican Senate nomination Tuesday. But contrary to conventional wisdom, the 2008 vice presidential nominee has kept the party strong. How? She has kept the Tea Party faithful inside the GOP tent. Had she instead encouraged these disillusioned voters to mount third-party challenges across the 2010 general-election ballot, dozens of Democratic incumbents, not to mention challengers, would be smiling like Woodrow Wilson in 1912.
That year, a simmering feud between two wings of the Republican Party resulted in the "Bull Moose" independent presidential candidacy of former president Teddy Roosevelt. The Rough Rider's support four years earlier landed William Howard Taft the GOP nomination, but the two had a falling-out. Their disunity allowed Wilson, the governor of New Jersey, to claim the White House with the lowest winning percentage of the popular vote since the two-party era began in 1864. Wilson was only the second Democrat elected president since the Civil War; a GOP united by a temporary, even testy, marriage of convenience would have triumphed easily. But egos proved too large. It did not matter that Wilson was, in TR's term, the "coiner of weasel words."
Establishment Republicans, including former Bush aide Karl Rove, have said this year that the strength of the Tea Party movement has sometimes forced the nomination of contenders with weak prospects for winning a general election. This is surely right; O'Donnell's upset on Tuesday is merely the latest example, but there were similar complaints about the Nevada Senate contest.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
You've forgotten the bad and only remember the good.
That's fine, but it isn't a fair standard for someone to have to live up to.
She's the best idea McCain ever had. I hope she runs in 2012, especially if Obama goes for re-election, although I have my doubts that he will.
In the habit of projecting are we? Reagan signed one of the most destructive gun control measures in history. His choice of Bush for the second term was a disaster. He failed to promote a series of ideological successors. I could go on and on.
What I am talking about here though, was his defeat of the Soviet Union and reinstatement of American exceptionalism via deregulating the American economy, particularly oil prices and environmental access, an idea of depth and subtlety unlike any President we have seen in 100 years. The measures crashed the price of oil which deprived the Russians of foreign exchange currency, without which they could not support their war machine, particularly their navy.
Sarah Palin shows no such subtlety or insight. Instead, she appears to me to be easily manipulated by the very mechanics you are suggesting. Hence, I'm not persuaded by your judgment there.
Well if she has, the GOP doesn’t appreciate it. And they won’t in 2012 either.
Post the Nuclear Weapons secrets to Chavez, just breaking
Well instead of debating it, why don’t we wait a year and see what happens (or even 6 years skipping the next cycle). Time will tell. If she puts together a team of people seeking their own agendas where she’s just a follower and mouthpiece you will be right. If not, maybe she will be offering something more. It is just to early to really know.
Because at this point, I have seen enough of Palin that I would rather elevate someone else with more diligence and potential.
Time will tell.
A fatalistic attitude that is anathema to self-government.
If she puts together a team of people seeking their own agendas where she’s just a follower and mouthpiece you will be right. If not, maybe she will be offering something more. It is just to early to really know.
Yup, that's up to her. She has yet to impress me that way. I don't care a bit if they're famous, but they do have to a clear and extensive written record.
We agree to disagree on differences of emphasis, but in the right direction.
We are on the same side.
Too many people around here assume the worst of someone if they disagree.
I will say, regarding your comparison of Obama and Palin on the faking it front.
Obama has had handlers, those working behind the scenes to promote him nearly throughout his entire life. Who paid for his expensive college education? Legislature bills with his name stamped on them that he had no actual part of. All for a larger end. He’s been a major part of the Chicago political machine where they all cover each others back to promote themselves and maintain power.
Palin has had none of the above. She’s been essentially on her own taking whack after whack and she’s still standing. You can’t fake that. Very few people have the character to take that kind of abuse and shrug it off and continue going forward gracefully. That was one of Reagan’s best qualities.
Something that would be good for all of us to learn a little of.
There is a reason I have not read your posts to me: You are uncivil, positing motives and ideas upon me that I've never stated.
Please note the difference between our exchanges and the ones I held with DB. We disagreed, but still had a respectful exchange. That's the difference.
I wish you a productive day of atonement and reconciliation.
FReegards, CO
You must be a fan of Boxer or Campbell.
The reason Palin endorsed Fiorina was to stop Tom Campbell, who before the endorsement seemed to be the easy winner of the primary.
Voting started in 6 days and Tom Campbell was well ahead with 35% of the vote, and climbing.
“Campbell supports abortion rights and gay marriage, and argues that Boxer’s greatest asset against either of his two Republican opponents, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina and state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, would be the state’s decidedly un-conservative social views.
“She has always been able to move the debate over to the social issues. She will not be able to do that against me,” Campbell told POLITICO.”
“During the campaign for U.S. Senate in 2000, Campbell touted his 100 percent pro-choice voting record. He opposed a ban on “partial birth’ abortions, one of the most horrific abortion practices. (”Conservatives Agonize Backing Campbell,” Roll Call, August 7, 2000.)
Campbell in 1992 made abortion the center stage of his campaign. In the 1992 election, Campbell’s TV ad ran with the following caption: “For choice, for jobs, for U.S. Senate.” In another ad, he said, “I’m pro-choice and one of the most conservative members of Congress when it comes to spending.”In a Republican debate, he described his abortion views, as good for voters “looking for someone who is willing to break with the party line from time to time.” (Gerry Braun, “Herschensohn Won’t Pledge to Back GOP Pick; Senate Opponents Renew Acrimony in Last Debate,” San Diego Union Tribune, June 1, 1992.)
She sure did...
That’s neat.
She has kept the Tea Party faithful inside the GOP tent. Had she instead encouraged these disillusioned voters to mount third-party challenges across the 2010 general-election ballot, dozens of Democratic incumbents, not to mention challengers, would be smiling like Woodrow Wilson in 1912... with the lowest winning percentage of the popular vote since the two-party era began in 1864. Wilson was only the second Democrat elected president since the Civil War...Thanks 2ndDivisionVet. No wonder there are FReepers who bash Palin! :')
Not actually. BOTH the Senate and House of Representatives make up the United States Congress. Senators and Representatives are Congressmen.
Delaware only has one Representative.
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.