Posted on 09/17/2011 1:03:44 PM PDT by SamAdams76
Much speculation going on the past few weeks with regard to Sarah Palin and whether or not she will be a presidential candidate for 2012. As we move through mid-September, the majority of those speculating have decided that she is not going to run. Even among those who remain hopeful that she will run, they seem to have given up on the prospects of a Palin candidacy, many of them holding the opinion that even should she enter the race at this point, it will be "too late".
Three questions for those who are convinced that Palin is not going to run:
If you can answer YES to any of the above questions, then you can make the case that Palin is not running for president. However, as the facts stand today, the answers to all of the above are an unequivocal NO.
I also have a multiple choice question for those who feel that it is now too late for Palin to get into this race:
Which of the following presidents announced their candidates prior to October of the year before their election?
a) Bill Clinton
b) Richard Nixon
c) Ronald Reagan
d) None of the above
If you answered: d) None of the above; you would be CORRECT! All three of those presidents announced their candidacies relatively late in the process. To be precise, Bill Clinton announced his candidacy on October 3, 1991. Ronald Reagan announced his on November 13, 1979. And then we have Richard Nixon…he of the high negatives, who waited until January 31, 1968 to announce his candidacy. All three of these candidates not only won their elections handily, but were re-elected four years later. Another interesting factoid: All three of these presidents were considered divisive and had relatively high negative approval ratings throughout their presidencies. They were mostly beloved by those who supported them but were loathed by the opposite party. Yet in the case of Nixon and Reagan (easily the two Republican presidents who are most despised by the political Left), they were both re-elected in two of the largest landslides in presidential history.
Enter Sarah Palin. Like Clinton, Reagan and Nixon before her, there is not much middle ground with respect to where people stand on her. They either love her or hate her. Yes, she is divisive and her entry into the race is going to generate some very strong emotions on both sides of the political fence. But she is a game-changer and perhaps just the person we need at this point in our history to lead our nation out of the abyss that it is currently in. Can she win if she get in? Yes, you bet she can! It probably won't even be close.
The stakes are very high this coming election year. Our nation simply cannot endure another four years under a corrupt and incompetent president who has reduced our standing in the world, degraded the health of our nation and is now in the process of destroying our future prospects. As Ronald Reagan said of the Carter Administration during the 1980 campaign, an "unprecedented calamity has befallen us." Only this time, under the Obama Administration, the calamity is far, far worse. We are now suffering under a chief executive who is not only the most unprepared and unable man to ever hold the office, but one who holds un-American socialist views and surrounds himself with others who feel the same way and who are looting our tax dollars right under our noses to reward themselves and their cronies. Our current president got himself elected with the empty slogan of "hope and change" and once he got into office, he proceeded to destroy all hope and while he brought plenty of change, none of it is good. His supposed solution to our failing economy is to tax working Americans out of more of their money so that it can be flushed away on socialist government programs that are doomed to failure and transferred to people who are either unable or unwilling to work.
It is for these reasons that many Republicans want to play it safe again this election year. Rather than getting behind somebody who can advance the conservative cause, many feel it is more prudent to elect somebody that they believe can more easily beat Obama. Which basically means a watered down Republican who supposedly has appeal to "moderates" and "right-leaning Democrats" (such as those who crossed over and voted for Reagan in 1980 and 1984). This has proven to be a FAILED strategy time and time again.
It is that very line of thinking that has saddled us with weak "RINO" nominees in the past like John McCain, Bob Dole and George Bush (both of them). I simply do not understand why so many conservatives feel that we need a watered-down RINO in order to win a general election. RINOs tend to LOSE general elections, and even when they win, it is usually in a squeaker that produces no mandate for change and with little coattails so that we end up with a mixed Congress. The result is that very little changes - even in the best case scenario, the conservative cause does NOT get advanced using this strategy. The end result is we have a weak president that usually gets replaced by a Democrat.
Ronald Reagan was the last "true" conservative that represented the Republicans in the White House. Yes, he was divisive and polarizing. His negatives were always high because liberals and Democrats did not like him one bit! His approval rating in his first term rarely went over 50% and his negative approval ratings were consistently in the 40s - peaking at 53% negative in January 1983 (just before the recovery started building steam). For those old enough to remember Reagan's first term, it was a very exciting time to be an American. We were transformed from the malaise of the Carter years to a respected world superpower once more with a roaring economy to go with it. This was all brought about not because Reagan tinkered with the economy like Obama and his henchman are trying to do. It was brought about because Reagan did the best he could to lessen the tax burden on both citizens and corporations and to move federal government OUT OF THE WAY as much as possible. Reagan succeeded because he allowed capitalism to actually work. Reagan truly believed that a rising tide could lift all boats while on the other hand, Obama's administration seems intent on draining our economic system so that our corporations and businesses are all run aground or stuck on sandbars.
Now back in the early days of the 1980 campaign, there were whispers in Republican circles that Reagan "can't win the general" and that his nomination would result in another four years of Carter. The knock on Reagan was that he was too extreme, too divisive, too polarizing. Many Republicans of the day felt that we would be better off with George H.W. Bush (with whom much of the establishment got behind early on) and even when Reagan sewed up the nomination, the anti-Reagan feelings were still so strong that moderate John Anderson was encouraged to break from the Republicans and run an Independent campaign.
So lets circle back to Sarah Palin. Now it is not my intention to state that Sarah Palin is another Ronald Reagan. But I think I can state with confidence that Sarah Palin is the best conservative candidate the Republicans have had on a national level SINCE Ronald Reagan. It is apparent that the liberal mainstream media and the Democrats feel the same way because how else could you explain their non-stop three-year crusade to absolutely destroy and marginalize her? I am sad to say that many conservatives have sat on their hands while allowing the other side to "Dan Quayle" Sarah Palin and even sadder to say, some of those conservatives are going right along with the program, by themselves hurling the same arrows at her.
If we sit idly by and allow a fine American like Sarah Palin to be destroyed, simply because she poses a threat to the establishment status quo, then we might as well just turn in our conservative card now and move on over to the other side. Because if we allow Sarah to be destroyed, we have just given the Democrats the necessary blueprint to ensure that another Ronald Reagan is never allowed to emerge again. They will simply destroy any good candidate that we have early on, thereby ensuring that only the John McCains and the Mitt Romneys will ever represent us at the national level again.
Also, I am sick and tired of hearing about how Sarah has waited too long to get into this race and that she is playing her followers for fools. Listen up people, we are still MONTHS away from the Iowa caucus and as mentioned at the top of this article, Sarah has not missed any of the filing deadlines. So why all the hand-wringing that it's "too late…too late"? So why the rush to embrace Rick Perry because he is our "only hope." Now as a Palin backer, I'm not saying that I'm not going to support Rick Perry should he get the nomination. But it's too darn early to be rallying around Perry and settling for second best now when we have other announced candidates still in the race that better represent the conservative cause such as Herman Cain, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann? Yet before the first meaningful vote is cast and before the first delegate is assigned, many of us are already saying those three (in addition to Palin) have no chance to win!
Why are we allowing the mainstream media and a few polling outfits decide for us who should be in the running for the Republican nomination? It's too early to be looking at polls. Let's focus on the candidates who will best advance the conservative cause and support them while they are still in the race. It appears that mainstream media want to shove Romney and Perry down our throats - why do you think that is? It is because those two represent less of a threat to liberalism and the entrenched establishment in Washington. Even if one of those two beat Obama, not too much will change. Neither of those two candidates have the coattails that will result in taking back the Senate and perhaps creating a super-majority in the House. Yet a Tea Party conservative like Sarah Palin can definitely achieve that and that is what has the liberals scared to death - especially after the shocker of the 9th Congressional district election last Tuesday. We've got the liberals on the run - why stop the momentum now? I have no doubt that Palin will get into this thing and when she does, we just might be able to secure a massive mandates a year from November and get ourselves out of the mess that we are in.
I will end this column with the following lines from Ronald Reagan's acceptance speech at the 1980 Republican convention:
"The major issues of this campaign are the direct political, personal and moral responsibilities of Democratic Party leadership - in the White House and in Congress -- [who are responsible] for this unprecedented calamity which has befallen us. They tell us they have done the most that humanly could be done. They say that the United States has had its day in the sun; that our nation has passed its zenith. They expect you to tell your children that the American people no longer have the will to cope with their problems; that the future will be one of sacrifice and few opportunities.My fellow citizens, I utterly reject that view. The American people, the most generous on earth, who created the highest standard of living, are not going to accept the notion that we can only make a better world for others by moving backwards ourselves. Those who believe we can have no business leading the nation.
I will not stand by and watch this great country destroy itself under mediocre leadership that drifts from one crisis to the next, eroding our national will and purpose. We have come together here because the American people deserve better from those to whom they entrust our nation's highest offices, and we stand united in our resolve to do something about it…(snip)
Can anyone look at the record of this administration and say, "Well done?" Can anyone compare the state of our economy when the Carter Administration took office with where we are today and say, "Keep up the good work?" Can anyone look at our reduced standing in the world today and say, "Let's have four more years of this?"
I believe the American people are going to answer these questions the first week of November and their answer will be, "No--we've had enough." And, then it will be up to us -- beginning next January 20th -- to offer an administration and congressional leadership of competence and more than a little courage.
Ronald Reagan - July 17, 1980 at the Republican National Convention
“Why did Reagan wait so long?”
Reagan ran in 1976 and was a known candidate for 1980 for years prior to his official announcement. In truth, Reagan took years running for President.
BOTH sides of the aisle are selling us down the river.
Agreed. I have said many times that we don't need a third party, we need a second party.
Right now, the closest thing up there to a Reagan Conservative is Perry
I am not impressed with Perry as a true conservative, but he would be better than Obama.
If you aren't voting for a dyed-in-the-wool, rock-ribbed Conservative, you are simply whistling past the graveyard.
And if you aren't casting a vote against Obama, you are wasting your civic duty to support and defend our country and its constitution.
Some plastic-banana, feel-good win ain't gonna change a damn thing.
I don't get the whole banana thing, but I will feel very good about sending Obama and his puppet masters into retirement.
it cannot be fixed without a total reboot
So who is your candidate? Who is a true conservative, and can win the primaries and defeat Obama? Please, I'd love to find that person and get on board. We all would.
Principles are 'first things'... You do right because it is the right thing to do.
Absolutely agree. That's why my first principle is to defeat Obama. It's the right thing to do. It's just my opinion based on my analysis.
Where the hell did you get the idea that there is victory in compromise on our side?
I never asked for compromise. Maybe that's where you misunderstand me. Getting rid of Obama is job one at this point in America. He is the enemy coming over the wall. He and his little group are eroding our chances of ever rebuilding our country back to the founding fathers' vision.
We just disagree on priorities, but we agree on a lot. I respect your strong principled views, but I believe we have an emergency situation this time around.
I also believe the Obama presidency is creating and fortifying conservatives all across this great country. This tipping point on which we find ourselves may prove to be a great moment for conservative Americans and for the country. We may well be thanking him like we thanked Carter for giving us President Reagan.
Thanks, roamer. I look forward to reading more of your posts on other threads.
Reagan was doing all kinds of TV stuff in the 1970’s before he first ran in 1976.
Guest announcer on NBC Monday Night Baseball, appearances on “Dean Martin Celebrity Roast” shows etc. etc.
If Sarah Palin wants to put herself on TV and make some money that’s fine with me.
Why not keep yourself in the spotlight before a campaign begins??????
I really don’t want to tear into the various candidates, but I believe this is a serious game with political insiders pushing their candidates hard and tearing into the others.
My operating assumption is that the powers that be in the GOP want Romney.
But there’s been a big push for Perry in the last month or two. Is it to replace Romney or suck up conservatives so their votes will be split between Perry and others so Romney wins?
My guess is the latter.
Sarah Palin is probably the strongest candidate in the GOP field who is authentically an outsider.
She would really change things in Washington instead of just slowing down the debt and spending slide.
This gauntlet of debates that the GOP candidates have to go through right now is like a series of minefields with the MSM given chances to snipe and cut up the field.
Meanwhile Obama is able to go around unscathed by the process.
Sarah Palin can also be unscathed by staying out of the fray for now.
ALL I SEE HERE IN THIS ENTIRE THREAD IS BANTER AND POSTURING, NO WHERE DO I SEE ANY REAL ANALISYS OF THE ISSUE, WILL SARA OR WONT SARA... THERE ARE SOME FACTOIDS THAT EVERYONE HAS OVERLOOKED.
1. WHY DID PALIN BUY A HOME IN ARIZONA RECECNTLY ?
>>THERE ARE SEVERAL VERY EXCELLENT REASONS FOR THIS ALL OF WHICH ARE POSITIVE TO HER POSITION AS A CANADIDATE
2. SARA SAID “ILL JUMP IN IF I SEE THE NEED”
>>ONE MUST COUPLE THIS STATMENT WITH ONE THAT IS ONE OF A MORE PERSONAL NATURE TO HER..
SHE SAID..I VALUE MY FREEDOM AS A CITIZEN MORE THAN ANYTHING,EVEN BEING PRESIDENT, BUT I WOULD SACRIFICE IF IT WAS OK WITH MY FAMILY AND AMERICA NEEDED ME
3. SO WHAT POSITION AS A CANADIDATE WOULD FIT SARAS LATE ARRIVAL UPON THE SCENE, FIT HER NEED TO HAVE FREEDOM AND MOVEMENT THAT SHE SO VALUES, AND YET GIVE HER THE POSITION AND POWER THAT SHE REQUIRES TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE...AND WOULD ALLOW HER TO JUMP IN AT ALMOST 120 DAYS FROM NOV 2,2012 ????
ITS EASY GUYS.. SARA IS GOING TO RUN AS THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANADIDATE OF THE NOMINEE..IF SHE SUPPORTS HIM...OR IF SHE DOESNT AND SHE FEELS AMERICA NEEDS HER, SHE CAN JUMP IN ANYTIME FROM OCTOBER TO JANUARY...
AHHHHH...NOW WE COME TO ...WHY DID SARA BUY A HOME IN ARIZONA AND WHY IS ARIZONA SO HYPED ON BEING FIRST...EH....
JUST PUT 2+2=PALIN TOGETHER AND YOU GOT IT !
YOUR GOING TO SEE A PERRY PALIN TICKET FOLKS..UNLESS PERRY GETS TORPEDOED OR REALLY SCREWS IT UP.. THEN YOU WILL SEE A PALIN BACHMAN TICKET... YOU CAN BET YOUR CAJONIES ON IT..
JUST RELAX..QUIT GETTIN YOUR PANTIES ALL IN A TWIST..RELAX..AND WATCH THE LIBTARDS GO SUI-SIDAL !!!!
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE 4TH OF JULY IN THE DEAD OF WINTER...LOL
WHAT YOU CANT SEE AT THE END OF YOUR RATHER FAT NOSE SAM IS THAT SARA IS USING THE MEDIA TO GET BACK AT THE MEDI AND THE LIBTARDS BY MAKING MILLIONS OFF THEM...ITS REVENGE FOR WHAT THEY DID TO HER...AND THEN SHES USING THAT MONEY TO DEFEAT THEM...THERBY LETTING THEM DEFEAT THEMSELVES....
AND GEEE YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE SO SMART...SARA HAS YOU OUTFOXED SO BADLY THAT IF I WERE YOU..ID HIDE UNTIL..SAY..3012 A.D.....FROM INTELLECTUAL EMBARRASMENT..LOL
When one realizes that Rick Perry is saying things today that are different from what he has said in the past, you can’t help but think he’s just another politician.
He switches his words around like a Mitt Romney or a Bill Clinton and for us folks in Pennsylvania, old Arlen Specter who would turn right before a primary election.
When one realizes that Rick Perry is saying things today that are different from what he has said in the past, you can’t help but think he’s just another politician.
He switches his words around like a Mitt Romney or a Bill Clinton and for us folks in Pennsylvania, old Arlen Specter who would turn right before a primary election.
As a Pennsylvanian, I used to have faith that Santorum would be different when he was first elected in 1994.
But in 1996 he was supporting the presidential candidacy of Arlen Specter (the Huntsman of that campaign).
In 2004 Rick flew all the way to Alaska to support RINO Lisa Murkowski.
He twisted the arms of the local pro-life group to prevent endorsment of a pro-life candidate (backed by Sarah Palin) opposing Pro-Abortion Murkowski in the GOP primary.
The recent change in rhetoric by Santorum is just to fit the times. He learned a lot from being the junior senator to Arlen Specter for all those years.
Santorum’s fundraiser worked for Romney in 2008. Santorum is in the race to take conservative votes and help divide the conservative vote so Romney wins the nomination.
You summed it up pretty dang WELL! KUDOS, and a tip o' my hat to you!
It's been a fun thread! Just got home from work and have to the the sheets. Later all!
Cheers!
Well, there’s certainly alot of speculation about the scenarios you suggest.
Romney is the anointed establishment candidate, it’s his turn in their world.
That being the case, the establishment’s job will be to tear Perry down and keep Palin out.
I sure don’t want Romney, so somebody has to beat him. Bachmann is toast, so Perry, Palin if she runs, or even Cain will have to get it done. Anyone of those three is fine with me.
...and expect to be taken seriously on FR treating a mere poll by them as either honest or significant over a year before an election?
Cheers!
The moment Perry or one of his spokesmen begin speaking, a bell goes off in what you call your mind, and you begin to salivate reflexively.
Cheers!
Our esteemed correspondent is manifestly NOT telling people on FR what they want to hear, from which I draw the conclusion that no money is being made from the audience, either.
Concerning any under-the-table contributions from a candidate or operatives working for that candidate, I am not in a position to be sure.
Cheers!
Corollary: Palin's fans are strong minded, since it isn't working on them.
Cheers!
I'd resist projecting your personal problems onto others...
You noticed that too...LOL!...:oP
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.