You assume the McCain-straight-jacketed over-"handled" Palin of 2008 is the REAL Sarah? The Sarah of today? Bad assumption, my friend.
You think the left wing media has ANY punches left to throw at her they haven't already thrown? What are they going to smear her with THIS time? What?
You think Trump will spend his own precious money to run 3rd party after he repeatedly went on record ripping Obama and praising Palin? That's quite an assumption.
Independents are not a coherent group. What you mean are the suburban types and the Democrats in all but name. I am not sure that Palin is running, but do take a look at the woman as she is. Firdst of all, while she is a beautiful woman, she is now a grandmother and nearly fifty years old. She has been in politics for twenty years, and since 2008 she has learned a lot. About policy, she probably has as much in her head as Rick Perry. Intellectually she and he are about on the same level. Perry likes to live more lavishly than Palin, although she is not exactly wearing rags these days. She can dress up or dress down. So can he. He is much more used to exercising power, and she never has got onto the inner circles. That is a real handicap, if you want to govern. But she has an authenticity—still has it— that gives her a different kind of advantage, at least during the campaign.
Yawn. Same old tired propaganda and fearful projection. It's almost like some GOP voters want to impose some sort of political prior restraint policy, which is utterly absurd.
The pundits and hand-wringers of the time said that Independents wouldn't vote for Reagan, either. Then the election happened and Reagan won, and he won by getting plenty of Independent and even Democratic votes.
You see, ultimately, people will have to choose between Obama and the GOP nominee. And if that nominee is anybody besides the indistinguishable Romney, then the People will elect the GOP candidate.
It is abject hysteria to parrot the "Palin can't win" meme, when the election is still so far away, and the primary season is not yet even here.
There is time enough so that if, after Sarah announces her candidacy, enough Republican primary voters really believe such hand-wringing, then perhaps they will select a different nominee.
But your ilk seems to fear Sarah even running for the nomination. You seem to uncritically accept the LSM talking point that Sarah is unelectable.
If Sarah is so unelectable, then why is the LSM so intent on convincing everyone of that, instead of promoting her candidacy? Because, on the contrary, she is eminently electable, that's why.
I have an idea. Why don't we let the GOP voters decide for themselves? I honestly don't need to be told who should or shouldn't enter the GOP race at this point. Do you? It's that simple.
For instance, I know that Romney would be an awful, disastrous choice for the GOP, but since he's a Republican, I certainly am not going to try to tell him he can't try to win the nomination. Any and all comers are welcome, as far as I'm concerned, and let the chips fall where they may.
The fact is, just like Reagan did, Sarah can convert enough skeptical voters to win the general election, including voters such as yourself.
Ideologically, and in terms of passion, heart, leadership, and integrity, Sarah Palin is the best choice, albeit she is not perfect, just like anybody else.
So, I say, bring it on. Bring on this "unelectable" woman, Sarah Palin.
Faced between choosing Obama or Sarah Palin, the American people will elect Palin.
This is a fight for the heart and soul of the country, and I'm all for putting forth our best candidates. And to me, that best candidate is Sarah Palin, hands down.
On a daily basis, with her effective statements and responses, Sarah continues to shame the other GOP candidates in terms of leadership and proactivity. Who has shown MORE national conservative leadership since the 2008 election than Palin?
If Sarah doesn't run (or even if she does, and loses) I may have to "settle" for Perry, but only if I have to.
In any event, the bigger the field of candidates, the better, I say. This concept of artificial, premature exclusion serves no constructive purpose whatsoever.
Independents would not vote for Sarah Palin-—TODAY. By next November, they’ll flock to her in droves. They will not vote for continuation of the catastrophe. That’s why we must choose the BEST, not who the left, Ann Coulter and Karl Rove select for us.
.... sez the polling data, more than a year out, long before many Americans know much about her.
But sez my formerly liberal sister-in-law, who went with my brother to see Palin when she was in Nevada during the Reid fiasco:
1. There were a lot more people there than what the media reported. A LOT more.
2. There were a LOT of younger folks there, all colors, all types (my SIL had been expecting to see more boomer-age and older type folks).
3. "There were a lot of liberals there," she said. And being a former liberal herself, she knew them when she saw them.
I think the opposite of what you say is true. I think Independents will vote for her IN DROVES. Why? Because she's making it clear that it's only secondarily about Republican vs. Democrat; first and foremost, it's about We the People vs. the entrenched political class. As another FReeper (I've forgotten who) pointed out, whereas Obama and liberals try to foment class and race warfare based on haves vs. have-nots, Palin is naming the REAL class war here -- the minority corrupt political class who use government to suppress freedom and steal our money and prosperity, Democrat and Republican, vs. The Rest of Us.
Palin presents huge appeal for independents.