Posted on 07/13/2011 11:17:39 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Obviously, Sarah Palin can't possibly run for president in 2012.
She's waited too long. Her ballyhooed 'One Nation' bus tour has virtually vanished. Have you noticed any lines to see the movie about her, "The Undefeated"? And that admiring film got panned by some people you never heard of.
Palin's not built any discernible grassroots organizations in early voting places like Iowa and New Hampshire, as traditional candidates do. And it looks like she's not going to pour a couple of million dollars into the meaningless Ames Straw Poll that will be so important for a week or so next month.
Quitting her elected job barely halfway through the first term turned Palin into a national nobody. She's missed a couple of Republican debates already.
Another tea party favorite Michele Bachmann has surged to the front in the first caucus state's early polls. The national media's gaffe detector is on full power for Bachmann and Palin, both mothers of five. And anyway, a large number of American voters say they wouldn't vote for Palin if she was a former governor with one national campaign under her belt.
But there's a couple of little-noticed problems with any facile dismissal of Palin's possible 2012 candidacy: Media derision only feeds those who don't like her already.
It actually strengthens Palin with a wide swath of overlooked Americans who don't trust mainstream institutions but do identify with the mother of five.
Why do you think Palin keeps shooting back at the media and even starting fights when things get quiet? Any media attention is better than none. Ask Rick Santorum.
Also, American voters don't matter for beans right now. American Republican voters do.....
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
I believe they'll not only eat their words but they'll be turning the spin machine into ultra-frenzy mode after she does announce.
Just another day in liberal news media land.
You posted a Kyle Smith’s review of rough cut “undefeated” which in his snarky manner made clear that he did not like Palin, of course he not only doesn’t like Governor Palin but he dislikes Alaskans judging from the review.
You didn’t tell us that he also writes op-ed pieces and that he despises Governor Palin.
Sarah Palin, weapon of mass distraction
By KYLE SMITH
Posted: 12:57 AM, November 22, 2009
Sarah Palin is going rogue. The Democrats are going rottweiler.
Liberals in the media make heinous personal attacks, dress up quibbles and debating as “fact-checking” and compare her to such noxious harridans as Evita Peron and Madonna. Newsweek went with a cover photo of a picture of her in running shorts to degrade her to the level of a spokesmodel and Stephen Colbert broke character to call her book “a steaming pile of s - - -.” They called her a “deeply disturbed person” (Andrew Sullivan) “unhinged” (ibid), a “delusional fantasist” (ibid; Andrew’s been a busy lad) and even — this is really low — “the leader of the Republican party.”
To all of these liberal attacks I say: well played, my friends. Take a bow.
Good-Lookin’ Mitt Romney: Lookin’ Good
By Kyle | July 4, 2009
I find it hard to believe anyone in 2012 is going to care that much about Mitt Romney’s change of heart on abortion. For conservatives, he came over to the right side; for liberals, he at least was temporarily amenable to their point of view. Gerald Seib of The Wall Street Journal is saying, quite rightly, that he is looking better and better as the year goes on. A key to Romney’s appeal:
>> “Palin would be a HUGE asset in a Paul presidency” <<
.
Backwards!
Ron Paul could serve in many useful, effective positions in Palin’s admin. He is not in any way capable of a successful presidency himself; his lack of understanding of foreign affairs would make him a disaster, but he would serve well in Treasury.
Palin will be the next president; there is no possible way for the MSM or the Republicrap elite to stop her. They’d do well to put their affairs in order for their prison terms; that’s inevitable for many of them.
Good story. Iowa Caucus Feb 6, 2012.
Palin’s win is already sealed up and delivered.
Every attempt that has been made to diminish her has had the opposite effect, and they are starting to prepare for the trouble that is coming when she settles into the office.
Most of the detractors will be making peace offerings in the near future, and the criminals in congress had best prepare for wearing jumpsuits or dungarees.
You know, I wonder if Reagan had this problem with people bugging him constantly if he was running or not.
I got to vote in 2008 because Sarah was on the ticket. Sarah worked her heart out to 'win', but I sure cannot say the same thing about old man McCain. AND I believe based upon what those he had on his team did and muttered about Sarah to their tools in the media Sarah would NOT have to overcome all these supposed negatives.
I personally do NOT see anything I could reference as 'help' from and by old lord McCain and his cronies. Given the things old lord McCain has done to US, my personal opinion is that him picking her was a calculated move for his own purposes. NOT that he gave a hoot about her, period. I am not one of those turn your other cheek Christians when an adversary comes calling expecting that is what I am suppose to do. NOW if I happen to say something that creates an offense then I will turn my other cheek.
IF Sarah runs then I do not want anything lord McCain attached to her candidacy.... and that is what I am waiting to discern. Because where I sit and what I have observed, honor is about the last thing I would attribute to old man McCain.
YES, I voted the 'republican' ticket in the 2008 election, because Sarah was on the ticket. AND I could not in 'good' conscience NOT vote when an admitted marxist was on the ballot.
Now, this word 'purist' came forth back in 2008, when the high minded moderates decided to spew it against people who wanted the borders secured and were against blanket amnesty. See up until then these high minded moderates use the accusation of 'single issue' voters. Welllll, when the demand and expectation of border security and NO blanket amnesty was acceptable, a new catch word was born.... "Purist".... like these people drink contaminated water.
So when I hear/read that word 'purist', I am reminded who 'birth' it and for what purpose. Might say it is like an adversary thinking it is their God given right to slap a person across the cheek and then demand an opportunity to slap the other one.
I did read the balance of the article. Is he right? Only if she runs! And according to all the “experts” she is not running, and they are all adamant about that fact. Do they know more than we do? Do they have the inside track on the political decisions of each candidate? NOT! They are all full of political opinion, but they do not know.
Sarah Palin will run...I would betcha! EAGLES UP SARAH! We will be here to support you when you make the call! GOD BLESS AMERICA...we need his blessings even more now. God will direct Sarah to the right decision for all of us.
July 15? Let’s see who wins that fight. Palin or Potter?
Greta Van Susteren Thinks Palin Will Run for President
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2747428/posts
The Extraordinary Sarah Palin
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2746969/posts
Sarah Palin’s N.H. posse rallies (Organize4Palin)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2747821/posts
Sarah Inches Closer
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2748226/posts
Can Sarah Palin Take New Hampshire with Secret Army of Supporters?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2748200/posts
Oh geez, here the idiots go again. Too late? It seems like in just the last 4-8 years candidates start running the day after a presidential election.
Frankly, to me it’s too early.
This thread is not a shining testimony to the reading comprehension of those commenting is it? I’m in and now I’m out. Good night.
I should have noted to read the entire article before posting. Good night!
You were applying the purist test to Sarah Palin for her daring to support McCain in 2010.
Yet, you not only supported McCain in 2008, you voted for him? Please explain the differences?
With all the crap going on I guess that brand of sarcasm was just too subtle for me.
I think I explained why I could NOT in 'good' conscience, NOT vote when a self admitted marxist was on the ballot. Sarah made that possible, because she fought to win, IN SPITE of old lord McCain's continual crossing the aisle to sleep with his political mistress.
I do NOT believe Sarah owed old lord McCain her support out of 'loyalty'. AND IF she still believes she owes him then she learned NOTHING for all the BS insanity she has had to go through since 2008.
"Palin's Strongly Favorable Rating of 25% is the highest of any GOP candidate tested. But, of course, she's not a candidate. Her Strongly Unfavorable is 9%. With rounding, that gives her a Positive Intensity Score of 15.And indeed, she did beat that establishment Republican machine in Alaska."Among top tier candidates who've been campaigning, Bachman's Positive Intensity Score is only three points ahead of Palin at 18. Mitt Romney, who's been effectively campaigning for more than four years now, has the same 15 as Palin. Tim Pawlenty's is 11. Ron Paul's is 9. Jon Huntsman 4.
"Not included yet were former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, both of whom are making preparatory noises but have yet to announce anything.
"In a recent Newsweek cover story Palin was quoted as saying she believes she could win a national campaign. But what does she know? She was just a former mayor who thought she could beat an incumbent Republican governor in Alaska who was part of a powerful, entrenched decades-old GOP machine."
Sarah is doing very well, especially when we factor in that she has been maligned by the mainstream media for about three years, now. And especially when we remember she hasn't even announced her candidacy (yet). If she does decide to run she can’t go any lower, but is likely to rise in the eyes of the electorate, as opposed to other candidates in the field that the public doesn't know much about. Once the media picks on those candidates, they will have nowhere to go but down.
Umm, after a page of what appeared to be the standard Palin-bashing I wasn’t inclined to sort through the entire article in hopes of discovering that the whole thing was a lame attempt at unfunny sarcasm.
So, do your standards apply to others, but not to yourself?
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.