Replies

I believe part of the Palin strategy here is to let the initial field of candidates winnow itself down to a couple of serious contenders (in this case, Perry and Romney). Then enter the race as a fresh alternative to those two ....

Palin's strategy is to stay out of the Arena and allow herself to be thought of as unelectable by some rather than enter the Arena and remove all doubt.

==========================

Sean Hannity asks a Republican crowd in Iowa, "Do You Want Sarah Palin To Enter The Presidential Race?"

FOX News Poll: For Release 6PM ET Thursday, September 1, 2011

25. I’m going to read a list of potential candidates for the 2012 Republican nomination. Please tell me which one you would like to see as the Republican presidential nominee. (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS ONLY)

Rick Perry ...................... 26%

Mitt Romney ................... 18%

Sarah Palin ....................... 8%

Ron Paul .......................... 7%

Michele Bachmann ........... 4%

Rudy Giuliani .................... 4%

Herman Cain .................... 4%

27. Do you think Sarah Palin should run for president in 2012 or not? (ALL VOTERS)

Yes ...... 20%

No .......74

==========================

Palin is an a unique situation here where she already has near 100% name recognition among voters and a loyal base of near-fanatical supporters (consider me guilty as charged). Once she announces, it will have the effect of a thermonuclear bomb on this entire race.

Step back and analyze what you have just said.

Yes, Palin has sky-high name recognition (99% in the August FOX News Poll). So do Nancy Pelosi, Charlie Sheen, Casey Anthony and Attila the Hun.

(Sky high name recognition) + (High positives) = Fantastic

(Sky-high name regognotion) + (Sky-high negatives) = (The worst possible combination you can have)

A brand new and unknown candidate has the opportunity to shoot up in public esteem. A candidate that has had non-stop media exposure for 3 years and is known to everybody not living under a rock means that opinions are pretty much set in stone. That is why Newt Gingrich never had a chance in 2012. Opinions about Gingrich were set in stone long ago.

Nationally, Sarah Palin has higher Negatives than Nancy Pelosi.

Her 99% name recognition means that those Negatives, like Newt Gingrich'e Negatives and Nancy Pelosi's Negatives, are pretty much set in stone.

I've rebutted these points in other threads by stating that Palin's so called "negatives" are being driven by the media war against her and can be overcome. Once she is formally in the race and people get a more unfiltered look at her, many of those negative opinions can be reversed with the additional bonus of the mainstream media losing some more of their credibility.

At any rate, let's not give up on her before she is even in the race. If she is as unelectable as you make her out to be, she won't be in the race that long as she'll get blown out in the Iowa caucus and the NH and SC primaries early on and we will move on to discussing other things.

If on the other hand Palin is able to score some key victories in Iowa, NH and/or SC, then game on! She will have overcome her "negatives" and should then secure the nomination and then the general election and be our most conservative presidential candidate since Reagan.

So there is no long-term risk to Palin getting into this race. Let's see where it goes from here.