[SamAdams76]

In 1979, they were saying the same thing about Ronald Reagan. That he was unelectable, that he was too polarizing, that he was too "right-wing" to win a nationwide election with an electorate that was clearly leaning liberal (referencing the 1976 elections).

Sarah Palin may not be as great as Ronald Reagan but Barack Obama is even worse than Jimmy Carter and so that levels the playing field. Thus, we are setting the stage for the 2012 election to be a repeat of 1980. In which a true conservative absolutely crushes a weak and ineffective incumbent Democrat.

[Polybius]

In 1979, they were saying the same thing about Ronald Reagan. That he was unelectable, that he was too polarizing, that he was too "right-wing" to win a nationwide election .....

First of all, Ronald Reagan never, ever, had polls this utterly toxic.

FOX News Poll (February 7-9, 2011)

Question 3: I am going to read you a list of names. Tell me if you think that person would make a good President or not.

Sarah Palin:

.................YES.........NO.......DK.....Never heard of

ALL...........23%.......72%.........4%.......1%

Dem ...........7%........87%........5%.......1%

Rep ...........40%.......56%.......3%.......1%

Ind ...........25%........69%.......3%.......1%

Secondly, Ronald Reagan knew his foreign policy and showed it:

From 1975 to 1979 Ronald Reagan gave more than 1,000 daily radio broadcasts, the great majority of which he wrote himself. .... These addresses .... revise our understanding of the late 1970s - a time when Reagan held no political office, but was nonetheless mapping out a strategy to transform the economy, end the Cold War, and create a vision of America that would propel him to the presidency. These radio programs demonstrate that Reagan had carefully considered nearly every issue he would face as president.

In regards to foreign policy, Sarah Palin is totally clueless and painfully shows it.

See Post 45.

Sarah Palin: "In Libya, the U.S. should overthrow Gadhafi and then get out."

What about the fact that that would hand Libya over to the rebels that are highly infiltrated by al Qaeda?

Sarah Palin is not educated enough in the very basics of foreign affairs to have thought that far ahead.

"So what our president said at first, that our mission is to see Qaddafi go, he's got to go, but then we're told by one of his top advisers, the president's top advisers, saying, Well, no, really, Qaddafi is probably going to prevail on this. He's probably going to prevail over the opposition. And then our president changes the tune again, saying, Well, it's not our mission to oust Qaddafi. A lot of confusion. I would like to see, of course, as long as we're in it -- we better be in it to win it. And if there's doubt, we get out. Win it means Qaddafi goes and America gets to get on out of there and let the people of Libya create their own government" .... Sarah Palin in interview with Greta van Sustern