Posted on 03/20/2011 9:21:53 PM PDT by Libloather
Palin: I could have brought change in '08
By Jordan Fabian - 03/19/11 12:52 PM ET
Republicans would have been more successful in the 2008 presidential elections if she was at the top of the ticket, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin suggested Saturday.
Speaking at the India Today Conclave in New Delhi, Palin was asked why the GOP ticket did not defeat then-Sen. Barack Obama (D). Palin said that Obama ran a strong campaign and effectively billed himself as a change candidate.
Pressed by India Today editor Aroon Purie that she also represented change, Palin replied, "I wasn't at the top of the ticket, remember?"
The 2008 vice presidential nominee said she was not claiming she should have been the nominee over Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), but her comments provide a glimpse of her potential appeal to voters should she choose to run for the nomination in 2012.
Palin reiterated that she has not yet decided is she will run.
"I don't think that there needs to be a rush still to get out there as a declared candidate," she said.
When asked about the greatest lessons she learned from 2008, Palin did not mention the friction between McCain's camp and hers. Instead she said the experience informed her public relations strategy.
"One thing I learned is that you cannot trust the mainstream media to accurately report on [your record and accomplishments]," she said. "You have to have the boldness, the courage to set the record straight yourself."
She even accused Republicans of not defending their records vigorously enough.
"Too often, Republicans have the fighting instinct of sheep sometimes," she said. When it comes to correcting the record, "I will put my foot down."
Rebutting a criticism often used against her, Palin said, "It's not victimization, I'm not playing the victim card."
Palin also touted her role as a key figure in the Tea Party movement, saying that it helps enforce accountability amongst politicians on both sides of the aisle.
"It's going to grow, it's going to be more influential and it's going to hold our politicians accountable," she said.
Palin even compared the Tea Party movement to the pro-democratic uprisings that have sprouted up across the Middle East.
The Tea Party is "all about empowerment of everyday, independent patriots ... to change the balance of power," she said. "The changing balance of power throughout the world today is driven by empowerment of the individual ... That's what we are seeing throughout the world today."
I'd be ashamed to be linked to a swine... but apparently it is your chosen role. Principles, sure... do anything to defeat the leading CONSERVATIVE! Your UNSUCCESSFUL attempts to redefine her are duly noted. Troll on...
Click to learn more about her...
Elect Sarah Palin for President 2012
Re-Elect President Sarah Palin 2016
Who cares? Our country’s sovereignty is being destroyed. Pissant’s posting status, or why he got banned, is not anywhere near the top of the list of what is important.Ok. I agree with you about that. And I apologize for calling you an idiot. You made me angry but that's no excuse. I shouldn't have written that.
However, I stand by what I said regarding you and AIP. You have given me a permanent distaste for that organization by your antics here.
Back in 1986...
Reagan's words and deeds regarding immigration were equally expansive. At a ceremony at Ellis Island in 1982, he spoke movingly of immigrants who "possessed a determination that with hard work and freedom, they would live a better life and their children even more so." As with trade, Reagan's record on immigration was mixed. He signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which included stepped up border enforcement and sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal workers. But that legislation also legalized 2.8 million undocumented workers. More immigrants entered the United States legally under President Reagan's watch than under any previous U.S. president since Teddy Roosevelt. Cato.org 4/24/04
I guess by EV's standards, Ronald Reagan was not conservative, and if was running today wouldn't be an acceptable candidate.
Amnesty is amnesty no matter who pushes it, or what words they use to describe it.
Are you saying that since Reagan signed off on amnesty that makes it okay? Or what?
The plumb line is principle, not personality. Not even if the personality is Reagan.
True, because Reagan was a Republican, and wouldn't run under the "American Independent Party," i.e. Sore Loser Friends of Allan Keyes, of which EV is Head Sore Loser.
Yep, a real winner of an ambassador for his party.
Are you saying that since Reagan signed off on amnesty that makes it okay? Or what?
The plumb line is principle, not personality. Not even if the personality is Reagan.
I'm saying that by your standards, the 20th century's greatest president would not be an acceptable candidate for that office in 2011, based on his decision to legalize almost 3 million illegal immigrants.
It is your argument, not mine. I just took your argument to a logical end. Any candidate who is as unyeilding as you say they must be cannot be elected. As pointed out by other posters, they would appeal to a microscopically small slice of voters, not enough to sneeze at, much less make a difference in a national election.
Truth be told, we’re going to need leadership that surpasses the leadership of Ronald Reagan if the country is going to survive. Things are that far gone, and we still have almost two more years of the communist in chief ahead.
OK, got it. That's the party. Just checked the website. Didn't realize that George Wallace played an integral part in it's early history.
Then I checked out Wallace on Wikipedia. Did not realize that Wallace was not even remotely a segregationist in his early career. In one election he was endorsed by the NAACP and his opponent was endorsed by Klu Klux Klan. Wallace lost. Once he "sold his soul to the devil" and became a vocal segregationist, his political career took off. Interesting.
And from the name, "American Independent Party" - well, it's sure not the "mushy middle" that alot of us think of when we hear "independent."
The American Independent Party, with 417,000 registered voters, is currently our California affiliate.
Just so you know, we endorse candidates based on proven adherence to America's core founding principles, not on party labels. If there are real republicans to be found, we support them.
Every one of them would be adamant that "Satan had nothing to do with it." They fool nobody but themselves.
;-\
“You got it, he has an agenda that is quite self serving. It’s why he posts here, hoping to get people to work for or donate to Alan Keyes and the party. It’s the main reason he has to trash Palin or any other candidate for that matter. It’s a true conflict of interest.”
Many ignorantly have high regards for Keyes. Being a Marylander, I do not.
When he was doing his gadfly gig for Senate in Maryland. He showed no zip in the polls. He started crying RACE, claiming he was not getting National campaign money due to him being BLACK.
After that, never had any respect for him.
I don’t see where she’s promising to shut down public education, social work programs or other worthless revenue hogs. The future of defaults will be very bleak for everyone in spendthrift politics.
Thanks for the clarification.
To be clear, Reagan did not compromise his principles when he legalized almost 3 million illegal immigrants. But it appears he compromised yours.
LMAO!!!
8^D
What are you, twelve? Better look out, your mommy will take your computer privileges.
It’s a fair point. I can see why you would see it that way.
That amnesty led directly to the thirty million plus illegal aliens that are here now. It opened the flood gates. He got suckered by the Left on that one, that’s for sure. They promised to secure the border if he would ‘just this one last time’ offer amnesty for what they swore was only a million illegals. Of course they were lying through their teeth. If he was alive I personally think he would clearly see that in retrospect.
But, in addition to his Peace through Strength position on national defense and foreign policy, he was a personhood, Fourteenth Amendment prolifer, unlike Mrs. Palin, who takes the exact same pro-choice for states, states rights trump the unalienable right to life, position on abortion as Gerald R. Ford did, and as John McCain and Ron Paul do.
That earns him a lot of points.
I dropped Rudy like a hot potato when his support for partial-birth abortion became public.
I'm just pointing out that anybody can still get more votes than someone from your party.
What, like Ron Paul? Wasn’t that your next stop after Rudy?
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.