Posted on 10/22/2010 7:13:45 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
Sarah Palin has unquestionably made her voice heard in this election cycle - but if the GOP falls short of taking back the Senate as most prognosticators expect, the Pride of Wasilla will take a hit from party leaders who think she turns off independents.
"If we don't win the Senate I have one thing to say: ‘Thank you, Sarah Palin,'" a household name and bigtime player in Republican circles tells The Mouth.
This source and several other party elders believe Palin's endorsement of Christine O'Donnell has made a difficult Senate seat pickup in ideologically centrist Delaware hopeless.
They also believe Palin could be the difference between winning and losing in several other Senate races, including Nevada and California.
Palin is extremely unpopular among indie voters, especially in California. A recent Field Poll found that 69% of California independent voters have an unfavorable opinion of Palin. And independents are nearly a quarter of the California electorat
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Down with the RINOS!!
Just vote them OUT!!
Rebellion is brewing!!
Senate??? Win the House first, Senate next election. Who needs the Senate with a bare unworkable majority? Let Obama have that,
Is this the best they have?
Hmmm. Since Sarah Palin wasn’t around when they lost their Senate Majority in 2006, and haven’t recovered it, what is their excuse? They’ll always look for someone, other than themselves, to blame for their poor performance.
They forget Palin could have at least 6 Governors to her name and countless house seats. Palin is going to have her own block of elected supporters that are hopefully loyal to her and us.
They were losing and Sarah was winning......the Governorship of Alaska.
Ya know, the media destroys conservative candidates with lies & scare tactics. Yet if the average everyday American were to actually meet, know, or see the real Sarah Palin; they couldn’t help but agree with her, and support her. It’s spooky to watch how much power over people’s minds there is in the hands of the media.
She may be YOUR leader, but for many of us, no position is open for any politician who wants to be a leader.
Her included.
Politicians are simply people who step up, outline the positions they intend to support, and are hired by the voters.
I don’t have a leader in the sense that you do, except for the constitution - which is not a person but a document.
I am by no means alone in my reasoning, particularly not on these forums.
I have ZERO interest in any cult of personality worship.
None.
If a politician want my support, and doesnt want my opposition then two political causes they have to dump are suppression of non party political participation (Which is the nuts and bolts of old Juan’s McCain/Feingols bill) and they have to secure the borders and eliminate people who have come here who either do not support themselves entirely or who came illegally.
Period.
Now you personally may support both of those causes, as McAmnesty does. You may see nothing wrong with Palin having himon board because you like those two things.
I will not however, and my support for her has to be conditional on her getting rid of him first.
This is not debatable.
It might be better if the GOP doesn’t have the senate majority...with Barry having veto power. His blaming the Repubs will only go so far without control of both houses.
If this pantywaist is too scared to be identified, then he needs to shut his trap. Sarah Palin is a main face of the Tea Party movement, and the Tea Party IS the only reason the Republican party has a chance.
Citizens, sick and tired of bailouts and government control of our nation, are standing against politicians of both parties--but especially Democrats--and Republicans are poised to take advantage.
But Republicans had better use this newfound power wisely, or they're going to face the same fate as the Commie 'rats.
Well, the presidential primaries kick off in a few weeks, you may want to avert your eyes as the rest of the conservatives start choosing that "politician who wants to be a leader" to replace the present one who is the leader of America.
I will go further, it WILL be the best thing for Republicans and the worst thing for Obama if Republicans take the House, and just make gains in the Senate.
If Republicans took both houses like 1995 Obama would veto the budgets for not funding his stuff enough, then dare Republicans to shut down the government so he can blame them for it like 1995. But if it looks like Obama still has the Senate (with little control of it) then it will be more difficult for him to veto the budgets and score points.
Republicans are still not trusted. Democrats have only been unpopular and getting blame for <2 years. We need that to cook a little longer before voters will be really willing to see things turn around. And it wouldnt hurt to get rid of the TARP RINOS.
GOP does well: Palin was a meddler and should just butt out.
GOP does subpar: Completely Palin’s fault.
The present occupant is administrator of one branch of government, and he convinced a large part of the populace to hire him.
He is not, AM never has been a leader of anything and if you are even remotely honest - you will have to admit that he makes no major decisions (those are probably made by Soros) and can not even speak for himself. He merely postures while reading out whatever someone else types into his teleprompter.
Now, in ansel12's book that may be leading, but quite a lot of us see it as being a pathetic puppet.
Do you wish to try to defend your point and show that all of these policies and moves are of O'bonghit's devising?
Perhaps you wish to explain why YOU PERSONALLY have chosen to defend allowing the third world to dump it's criminal element here? And why do you personally oppose groups like The Family Research Council or The Second Amendment Sisters being able to advocate their positions in the media during the final weeks of an election?
Those is your positions after all, since those are the positions I insist Palin abandon with her actions as well as her words.
Make no mistake - these questions are not going to go away. I will avert nothing and I will be right here on these forums, and debating people in person to advance my positions and make others defend theirs.
So far, you personally have been unable to say just why the positions Palin supports by supporting McCain are okay, and you are using every rhetorical dodge you can come up with to try to avoid answering.
That post made no sense, I thought the previous one was drifting, but this one is way out there.
Or you are attempting to use yet another rhetorical trick to avoid defending McCain (admittedly a futile task).
But no amount of shucking and jiving will escape the reality that McCain/Feingold and amnesty for illegals coupled with open borders come part and parcel with John McCain.
And requiring Palin to abandon support of him is a reasonable prerequisite on the part of pro military constitutionalists.
Actions speak louder than words, and an action is required on Palin's part.
She can chose to step up or not.
A big time player, my ass.
“rove if i had to guess”
My first thought was Mittens. Upon reflection my second thought was Mitt or campaign staff.
I’m sure it’s a Romney ploy one that will be repeated for the next two years........just another reason I’ll never vote for the sleasy used car salesman with the perfect hair, teeth, wife, life. Begone Romney!
You might want to read the article, and figure out that this thread is not about Senator McCain.
Well, Sarah has her own strong connections to "The ruling class" and has refused to disavow some critical positions her allies there hold paramount by dumping them.
An attempt was also made to lift her up as some patron saint of the Tea Party Movement - which she is not. She is welcome in it, but she and her supporters will have to answer for her actions.
I note you are still trying to dodge the very specific questions I put forth to you.
Why is that, do you think?
Do you actually believe there is a snowball's chance in hell that I and others with the same questions will not be demanding an answer to them at rallies, conventions, and political forums as the 2012 campaigns begin to shape up?
There is not going to be a place to hide from this, any more than Mitt can hide from Romneycare.
McCain is both old and short on bridges he has not burned. there isn't that much negative political fallout to be had from putting him out to pasture from her plans and activities.
McCain/Feingold?
What do you think should be done with our borders and the people flooding in here unvetted and frequently not self supporting from around the world ?
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.