Replies

You are obviously in the disdainful crowd which leaves you blind to her positive qualities while you search for her flaws. Some are blind to her flaws because they search for even more proof of her character being genuine. And finding such a pearl thrown before the usual swine in politics is so hard to believe that it drives a powerful need to destroy or protect her; to allow the hope that she is genuine in, without either constant validation or constant affirmation, would be difficult to do.

Not necessrily so. I can and do see her positive qualities. And frankly, those positive qualities almost made me pull the lever for McCain, which is saying something. I see her positives differently now than I did 2 years ago, because I know more. That said, she worked her tail off for the midterms, she punches hard at the dems - sometimes scoring knockdown blows. She pisses off the liberals, always a good thing. And she is unbowed by the fire she receives from the media. And finally, most of her positions are in line with conservatism.

Despite all the battles I have with her fan club here, I don't hate her. I tend to like genuinely nice and patriotic Americans. She seems to be both. But I can say the same thing about Mitt (at least the latest version of him), Huck, Daniels, Pawlenty, etc. They all (today) promote mostly conservative postitions and I don't doubt for a minute that they are patriots.

As freepers who are interested in more than general leanings and platitudes, we tend to evaluate folks for president (moreso than senator or congressman)with a fine tooth comb. And as such, when we individually decide on who to support, it is natural (and FR tradition) to amplify the negatives of the competitors.

That is why someone like Huckabee, whose 2A, pro-life, anti-homo, anti-bailout, and pro-military postitions are rock solid, is still painted as a RINO here. His record as governor was too much nanny & taxes & pardons, and despite his Road to Des Moines conversion on taxes, illegal aliens and amnesty, few are willing to offer him the benefit of the doubt.

Same with Mitt. With just a few exceptions, Mitt ran (and continues to run) as right winger. But regardless, his record as governor had way too much liberal nonsense for his non-supporters to trust him.

And guys with better reputations, such as Barbour and Daniels, they too are already getting put through the wringer. Haley for his idiotic stance on eminent domain and illegals, Daniels for his foreign toll roads and his soft peddling of so-called social issues. Once a person decides that one of these guys is the best, that person will downplay these flaws and beat the drum against the other candidates' flaws. It's politics, amplified here on FR because of our passion for the country and conservatism.

I don't think you will see the day come anytime soon when the majority of freepers say - "yeah they all got their strengths and weaknesses and I'll be happy with any one of them except candidate X." So the dynamic now with Palin is that you have a large group of people that insist she is the best we've got to offer. And many in that group are painting her as not only the best we've got, but a new Reagan, a homerun, a no-brainer choice - proven by the large nationwide following she has gained, ratings , etc. Another group, myself included, see her in the same group of republican politicos as most of those others mentioned. And because we do, we are going to amplify that. There are certain positions I refuse to accept anymore, and Palin has some of them, as do the others mentioned above. So I will support the candidates, and only the candidates, that come closest to my positions. And like most others here, it will be at the expense of the competition.