You recommend that we pick candidates for their star power rather than their substance. That sounds good. Lets see, we have a few actors, perhaps Arnold is your ideal.
Governor Palin has been great on TV since the election. She’s being herself and she’s been fine.
I've got no idea how you glean that from my posts. I would like for the GOP to start picking candidates that don't come across as inarticulate, uninformed, inexperienced rubes that have never been out of the country.
As for Sarah Palin's substance, can you point to one book or article that she's published? Can you point to a speech, or conference where's she's presented well-reasoned and informed ideas about pressing domestic US policy? Can you cite a single instance where's she been even quoted about international affairs, let alone publish anything on the topic? She has demonstrated ZERO substance, only style that is appreciated by a minority of Americans.
When Ronald W. Reagan ran for President the first time, he had volumes of material, oral and written that addressed the most pressing, relevant topics of the day. Sarah Palin had none of the this before John McCain chose her as his running mate.
Somehow, we've reached a point in our party where the only people that can get the nomination and keep the support of the "base" are people that believe in a literal bible (despite volumes of empirical science), attend an "acceptable" church and are folksy to the point of irritation. This is not a recipe for success on a national ticket.
When those of us expect our candidates to be experts in the subject matters that are critical to running the world's only superpower, we get labeled RINO's, star-chasers and eletist. Again, that plays well to the base of 29%, but it will never win another national election.