Posted on 12/31/2010 2:46:02 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Is the idea that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin could be America’s next president laughable? Not only to many on the left, but also to conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer.
On Friday’s broadcast of “Inside Washington,” Krauthammer offered several reasons why Palin shouldn’t be considered the presumptive Republican nominee for the 2012 presidential election.
“What do you mean if not Sarah Palin in 2012?” Krauthammer said. “Who’s saying she’s going to be the presidential candidate? I don’t even hear her saying it. Her chances of being are smaller than half a dozen other people. If you talk to Republicans, I don’t think there are what, more than one in three who would tell you she has a chance of winning the presidency or even the nomination.”
Because of that, he said, she wasn’t the favorite.
“And she is not the favorite,” he continued. “She has a very strong core constituency but outside of that I think she is rather weak.”
Krauthammer has previously downplayed Palin’s chances and indicated he favors Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels. He said Palin would not be the ideal candidate to unseat a “vulnerable” President Barack Obama.
“Her negatives are over 50 percent,” Krauthammer said. “She has no chance of winning a general election. Why would you want a candidate who is going to lose against a Democrat who is going to be vulnerable and who is also extremely ideologically ambitious?”
He even employed a Keith Olbermann catch phrase to describe Palin and said even fellow Republicans didn’t see Palin as qualified.
“A half-term governor? I’m not sure Republicans think of her as qualified.” Krauthammer said.
Watch:
(VIDEO AT LINK)
I mean, really, it would have been perfectly reasonable for people to look at the competition Sarah Palin faced in the governor’s race in 2006, the incumbent in the primary, and then his immediate predecessor in the general, and say she had no chance of winning. Perfectly reasonable...and as it turned out once they ran the campaigns, completely wrong.
I don't know what to tell you, friend, except that you're misreading it.
Hang in there, and try not to let all of the happy fireworks bother you.
You’re wrong.
BTW, who’s Herman Cain? Wasn’t he a columnist for the SF Chronicle?
Oh, come on. You remember Cain. Murdered his brother then got deported. It’s been a few years, though.
I just took a quick scan of mentions he's made about the Tea Parties, and I'll admit that I didn't see a straight-up negative appraisal by him.
That said, Krauthammer has revealed himself to be an elitist RINOcrat in many of his other postings, including this one.
“Any conservative who’s even passingly familiar with her record of public service, her positions on the issues, her writings and speeches, and her admirable personal qualities, can’t possibly still question her electability.”
You actually think that no one who knows her background could possibly question her electability (if by “electability” you mean “likelihood of being elected”)? Your infatuation is making you delusional. Hopefully the bulk of her supporters have a better grasp of the real world; otherwise there will be no cohesive strategy to combat her negatives and instead the assumption that she’ll be elected simply on the basis of her undeniable wonderfulness.
“Yeah. What’s up with all of those “free thinkers” debating the pros and cons of the potential candidates ahead of the primary anyway? The nerve...”
Yeah, the nerve of you telling those people that they’re “pushing the enemy line”.
“It would be weak of you to be “turned off” Palin by anything I (or anyone else) says.”
Cults are dangerous regardless of whom they deify.
Were supporters of Ronald Reagan, a “cult”?
Sean Hannity is the Weekly Reader version of Rush Limbaugh, without 97% of the intellect.
Sadly, I think the Kraut is right. Sarah P. Needs more gravitas before she can be president. Maybe she needs to be in the Cabinate or Senate first. She must Prove herself—She can and will but—maybe not 2012—maybe 2016 (if Its Obama/Hillary).
“gravitas”?
Are you kidding me?
How more beltway, can one be?
A lot of the fervor against those who rudely or ignorantly (compared to those who have spent countless hours debating the subject here at FR) post negative comments concerning Mrs. Palin is due to the fact that those who are staunch defenders are becoming exasperated at having to continually and repeatedly explain to those who make those comments why it is believed their statement is in error.
Add to that those who continually post negative articles concerning Mrs. Palin in an effort to make her an undesirable nominee to those here at FR, by the same subset of freepers with an agenda, and you start to understand why you see such a spirited defense of a woman whose values reflect those of a very large portion of posters here at FR.
Well, it's pretty obvious that you don't know much about her background. Try reading up on her race for Alaska Governor, to get an early indication of how she'll fare as a candidate for president. She beat TWO entrenched political machines to get to the Governor's office.
Your infatuation is making you delusional.
It's not "infatuation", it's honest appreciation for demonstrated competence, executive experience, and real accomplishments.
"Delusional"? That's what happens when people supplant real life observation and information for preconceived notions and narrow-minded bias, based on little more than mainstream media's negative depictions of a candidate.
Hopefully the bulk of her supporters have a better grasp of the real world; otherwise there will be no cohesive strategy to combat her negatives...
Well, she did miss that caribou four times with that rifle with the bad sight....
Negatives? What would those be, pray tell?
Simply put - many are starting to learn, that both the left and the RINOs, use the tactics of Saul Alinsky.
So you signed up yesterday to let us know that Governor Sarah Palin can’t be elected president and call the people who want proof of Mr. Obama’s natural born citizenship (”birthers”) crackpots?
I will be working and supporting SARAH PALIN. i like Charles Krauth...but he is not listening to us ordinary Americans who who have become known as the TEA PARTY...
wake up Charles, there are many of us out here!!!!!
You're sounding more and more like a "concern" troll, or a stealth supporter for some other candidate. Folks who throw out the "cult" smear almost uniformly turn out to be working the board for some second tier, or retread candidate.
Who's yours?
“Were supporters of Ronald Reagan, a “cult”?”
No, his supporters (including me) are not. I never heard any of them proclaiming the inevitability of his election, denying that he had any vulnerabilities, or swooning like children over him. The same can’t be said of Sarah’s sycophantic idolizers. As I have said, I’ll vote for her if she’s the nominee and I think she has the potential to do good things. However, her election is anything but assured, she does have signficant vulnerabilities, and she doesn’t walk on water. Jeez people, get a grip!
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.