Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah Palin floats idea of leaving the Republican Party [VIDEO]
Daily Caller ^

Posted on 06/29/2013 11:44:52 AM PDT by Jim Robinson

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican nominee for vice president responded to a Fox News Channel viewer’s Twitter question Saturday about the possibility of her and conservative talker Mark Levin abandoning the Republican Party and creating something called the “Freedom Party.”

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: freedomparty; irs; palin; sarah; sarahpalin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 541-557 next last
To: dadfly

LTs arent repelled by conservatives...at least not all of them. There are many on FR. They just keep their head down on topics we disagree on. The ones I know of most often are pretty hard right.

But even many of the ones not on board can be worked with. We at least share some values. The GOP has nothing in common with us anymore.


341 posted on 06/29/2013 4:24:06 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Some of us NEVER registered R or D because we knew early on they were ALL corrupt.

Gonna leave the RINOS? Welcome to the party sweetie.

342 posted on 06/29/2013 4:28:12 PM PDT by prisoner6 (Tea Party, Constitution, patriot, DOMA, NRA, pro-life...can you hear me now big ears?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

i’ll stick with my original statement: the libertarians i’ve talked with at length equally despise the left and and the right. that makes them nothing more than a splinter for the duration. thus, i’m not in the least worried about libertarians. now, reps have to be very worried about them.


343 posted on 06/29/2013 4:29:36 PM PDT by dadfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: dadfly

Well, whatever depowers the GOP is good for America one way or another. If they sit it out, still good for us.


344 posted on 06/29/2013 4:32:37 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Are there not enough ‘parties’ already? Is there not ONE, currently, that espouses the same beliefs (Constitution, Libertarian, etc.)?

Sorry, but until the platform is set, I’ll no more follow this group just based on name recognition. More likely, it’ll turn out to be Dem-lightest, since the 2 party cartel only gives lip service to the document that gives me their reason for being and LIMITED powers.

Sorry, I’m not one to get burned (again) without learning a lesson or two.


345 posted on 06/29/2013 4:33:47 PM PDT by i_robot73 (We hold that all individuals have the Right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives - LP.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

If Sarah leaves/leads, I’ll follow/push.


346 posted on 06/29/2013 4:36:52 PM PDT by NurdlyPeon (It is the nature of liberals to pervert whatever they touch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

That’s all fine and well. Riddle me this. How do you go about keeping the same thing from happening to this new party?

If you can keep a new party from getting polluted, why not perform that action on the old party?

Fact is you can’t. Some jackass like Rove works his way into the Freedom National Committee, and allows another jackass like Rubio to proclaim and run under the Freedom umbrella, and voila, right back where we left off - at which point we’ll have to form another party, et al etc. and so on.

Well then we’ll just maintain control of the party and not let elites set up shop. Who makes that decision? Who would you trust other than yourself to consistently say Yes or No to a new member? How would you know that someone with no track record wasn’t another jackass like McCain?

Not expecting answers to the questions, but I’d be happy to move over if there were in fact answers.


347 posted on 06/29/2013 4:37:27 PM PDT by TheZMan (Buy more ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

right. they can most likely split or go left or right. but if they go left, they will hurt reps more than anyone else.


348 posted on 06/29/2013 4:38:30 PM PDT by dadfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS; PapaNew; 4Liberty; Jim Robinson
40 posted on 6/29/2013 2:04:52 PM by AEMILIUS PAULUS: "How many people would in fact leave the Republican party? We already have a lot of splinter parties; i.e. the Greens, Libertarians, Constitutional Party, Natural Law party etc. etc. Would we become yet another splinter party?"

54 posted on 6/29/2013 2:10:42 PM by PapaNew: "The GOP was founded as a third party about seven years before the Civil War. How much worse does it have to get before a third party flies? They’ve tried unsuccessfully so many times."

149 posted on 6/29/2013 2:51:22 PM by 4Liberty: "The Rats are gleeful and in fact directly PROMOTING a Republican-Conservative (two weak small parties) split, as we type. That’s why they LOVE Rubio’s duplicity."

Several comments.

First, thank you Jim Robinson, for bringing this to our attention. We need to know about things like this.

Second -- and this is not to Jim Robinson but to everyone -- please count the cost. This sounds good in many ways, but Palin will get one chance as a third-party candidate. If she wins, she will become a major disruptor of the Republican's moderate wing. That would be a wonderful outcome, and for the reasons I cite below, it might just work if Palin runs for the US Senate from Alaska, or returns to the governorship.

But if she loses -- worst of all, if she loses in a way that hands a solid Republican seat over to a Democrat -- she will get viewed as a vote-splitter who is useful only to Democrats.

There's both positives and negatives in what 4Liberty said about liberals promoting this "conservative Third Party" agenda. It is not irrelevant that Politico, an internet news operation run by former Washington Post reporters, are the ones who reported this. However, that's a two-way street. Today, news like this can get communicated via the internet via both liberal and conservative operations which just a couple of decades ago would have been buried. Free Republic was a major part of derailing Bill Clinton's presidency and saving Bush's election against Dan Rather's attacks; in an earlier era, what Clinton did would have been effectively covered up and what Rather tried to do might very well have succeeded.

I know I'm going to be accused of throwing water on the fire, but the cold hard facts are that trying to create a third party is not a simple project. As PapaNew pointed out, it has been successfully done only one time in American history, and that was a century and a half ago when the Republicans replaced the dying remnants of the Whig Party.

In principle, just as ideologically committed liberal Democrats are willing to leave the Democrats if they abandon their principles, ideologically committed conservative Republicans must be willing to leave the Republicans. But let's count the cost first and not run off half-cocked.

Third, and perhaps most important, anyone who is seriously advocating a third party needs to look at what the Republicans did to replace the Whigs in the 1850s, as well as recent successful third-party campaigns.

While there are a small number of Libertarian and Constitution party elected officials at the local level, we have very few recent examples of third-party candidates running and winning statewide office, and none at the national level. Basically, those examples in recent history are limited to four:

* Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who won a write-in general election campaign to retain her Senate seat after she lost the Republican primary to a more conservative Sarah Palin supporter.

* Sen. Joe Lieberman, who won as a third-party candidate to retain his Senate seat after he lost the Democratic primary to a more liberal candidate.

* Sen. Bernie Sanders, who after multiple successful terms as mayor of Vermont's largest city leading a coalition of third-party city council members which effectively ran the city as a minority by having enough votes to prevent an override of Sanders' vetoes, ran for and won a US House seat and then a US Senate seat as an independent.

* Gov. Jesse Ventura, a former city mayor who won the Minnesota governor's race more or less out-of-the-blue as the candidate of the Reform Party, and had a seriously troubled administration since he didn't have a base of support from either political party.

An argument could be made that for a third party candidate to win, some or all of the following must be true:

* The candidate is very well-known, either due to incumbency or celebrity status.

* The candidate is in a small state where relatively low-budget one-on-one campaigns actually work.

* If the candidate doesn't have a prior record of elected office as a Republican or Democrat, he has served in a significant local office to get prior experience before running for a statewide post.

As of today, I have very serious doubts about whether a third party effort is viable. However, it's hard to dispute that Sarah Palin fits all of the criteria I've listed -- she's very well known, she is a longtime resident of a small state, she has significant prior service at the local level, and she's held multiple prior elected positions in the Republican Party.

I think there's a realistic chance that Sarah Palin could win a statewide race as a third-party candidate for the Senate, the House, or the governorship, would immediately get major national attention for doing so, and might be able to form the nucleus of a new party.

Would it work? I don't know.

What I do know is that if Palin won, the Republican Party would see its agenda forced rightward to avoid losing more races, either to members of her new third party, or to Democrats when moderate Republicans lost safe seats to Democrats after a third-party challenge handed the seat to Democrats.

I also think it's obvious that if Palin runs as a third-party candidate in Alaska, many people on Free Republic would become a major cheerleader for her. That could turn out to be a very good thing.

349 posted on 06/29/2013 4:42:37 PM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: boxlunch
How about not just across the board cuts of all those bureaucratic agencies (as in trimming their budgets) but SHUTTING MOST OF THEM DOWN!!!!

(Sorry to shout, that’s just how frustrated I am.)

No problem at all.

Shutting them down?

I am just fine with that.

There might be a couple of useful functions amongst one or two of them but the 10th should take care of that.

.

350 posted on 06/29/2013 4:43:09 PM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I’m there and I will not have left the GOP but they will have left me.

I’m telling GOP telemarketers if they want money get it from the Democrats because that is obviously the constituency they are pandering.


351 posted on 06/29/2013 4:50:00 PM PDT by A message
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

She has positions, but they’re not coherent and she’s risked nothing by standing outside and sniping at people who are actually trying to do something. She takes no responsibility for anything and she doesn’t have to because really, she has no job..

If she’d like to be a Rush-type pundit, that would be good too, but she hasn’t even done that.

Sorry, I used to like her, but I really haven’t seen much evidence of anything solid and we’ve had way too much of that.


352 posted on 06/29/2013 4:50:31 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: TheZMan
Not expecting answers to the questions, but I’d be happy to move over if there were in fact answers...

I'll offer one...

Imagine a new party, "freedom" if you will, organized from the ground up according to founding-like principles. Lets put our heads together and imagine our framers, as much as they were averse to factions and parties, had to come up with the organization and competing forces to make a viable party. They did so for the Constitution... and made it simple (and limited!)... same for the "Freedom" or whatever party. Should be organized simply, would emphasize individual liberty, and thus the individual within the party. It would work-in the foibles of men into its own constitution (small c) in such a way that it would promote its purity...

353 posted on 06/29/2013 4:51:38 PM PDT by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

To: livius

I’m not sure from your posts, that you used to like Palin.

But hey.


354 posted on 06/29/2013 4:51:42 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: livius

Then you haven’t looked too hard have you.


355 posted on 06/29/2013 4:52:30 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks

It’s quite shocking to see a person that a lot of people respect at this level, say something like this in public.

I approve. And I will say, if she has abandoned her prior beliefs regarding a fix for illegal immigration, then I would have a hard time not backing her.

Immigration is flat out the biggest deal-breaker I have had in my lifetime. I hope she’s on board with that too.

If not, it’s all a waste of time.


356 posted on 06/29/2013 4:53:01 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Breaking News: Hillary not running in 2016. Brain tumor found during recent colonoscopy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Potential breakthrough.

Just saying. :D


357 posted on 06/29/2013 4:54:57 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: pollywog

That’s why I called it a movement, because it’s not a party. Yet.


358 posted on 06/29/2013 4:59:30 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Who could have known that one day professional wrestling would be less fake than professional news?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

She’s tHe only reason I voted for McCain, but she has been a disappointment since she left the governorship because she really has no skin in the game. She can say whatever she wants - obviously, funded by her followers - but she doesn’t have to really justify anything and can spend all of her time attacking people who actually have jobs.

I don’t necessarily like what they’re doing, but at least they’re trying. She bailed on the whole thing.


359 posted on 06/29/2013 5:03:01 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: livius

My apologies then.

Maybe we just have hugely different perspectives, on what is helpful.

From my standpoint, I currently see nobody anwhere, except for Rush, Levin and Cruz with as much say-so in things.

I believe she is ramping up for a presidential run.

If she does that, perhaps you can re-assess her. Ok?


360 posted on 06/29/2013 5:06:20 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 541-557 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson