“political reasons” is generally correct - but lets be honest - she was a VP candidate on an presidential ticket on a campaign that started well before she joined, and like all conservatives wanted to beat obama (did you?). Can you think of a quicker way of losing then everybody in a campign expressing there own views?
“flip-flop”. I think most people, not you obviously, that palin does not equal McCain are interested in her real positions. I doubt anyone is judging her on following a script, except you.
Have you read her book? She admits she was a team player, keen to know what the script was to help the ticket?
That is what VPs do, or don’t you know?
Not making anything up. It’s possible that she held that “view” before the election or are you suggesting she changed her public position twice for political reasons?
At the risk of losing quickly (sic), she “expressed her own view” by disagreeing with McCain on energy issues, presumably per your logic (or lack thereof) because she had credentials. IIRC, she said she was trying to change McCain’s mind on ANWR. Did her lack of credentials prevent her from trying to change his mind on a path to citizenship, a code term for amnesty? Does she have those credentials now?
I never said that Palin equaled McCain. I commented on the fact that she publicly shared one of his views on a critical issue while not publicly sharing one of his views on another issue, then asked you questions about your pretzel logic. A flip flop is a dramatic change in a position, usually for political expediency. Is the term only selectively applied?
Illegal immigration is a huge issue for Conservatives. Convoluted excuses for holding a disastrous opinion won’t cut it. This will be an issue in a primary. Do you really think “I compromised my principles to be a good RINO team player” is going to work?
bttt