Posted on 02/21/2010 7:31:41 PM PST by Brices Crossroads
For a number of weeks now, I have noticed here on Free Republic an increase in the number of posters who say that former Governor Sarah Palin is unelectable. he reasons proffered are usually two fold: First, her resignation as Governor of Alaska forever brands her as a quitter, and the American people will never elect a quitter. Second, she has been so damaged by the hostile MainStream Media, and will be further damaged in another campaign that she can never defeat Barack Obama in a general election. Leaving aside the criticisms of her for the moment (inasmuch as they have been addressed and debated in numerous other posts), I maintain that the 2012 election will be a referendum on Barack Obama. If he has succeeded, he will likely be returned to office. If, on the other hand, he has failed, he will be defeated, in effect fired by the American people. The GOP nominee, whoever that is, will in all probability become the 45th President of the United States. In a word, the GOP nomination will be worth having.
Which begs the question, and I address it specifically to those posters among you who have been quick to point out your perception of Palin's flaws, including and especially her alleged "unelectability": name the potential candidate(s) you believe a) would be a better President; and b) have the political skills and appeal to defeat her in a GOP primary. As the saying goes, you cannot beat something with nothing.
Rasmussin Reports
Palin More Popular With GOP Voters Than McCain
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Republicans are happier with their vice presidential candidate than their presidential nominee, while Democrats feel good about both candidates on their ticket, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
With 59% in a separate survey predicting a Barack Obama win today, 45% of U.S. voters describe themselves as Very Concerned that the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives will all be controlled by Democrats. Another 10% are somewhat concerned, while 23% are not concerned at all.
Seventy-one percent (71%) of Republicans say John McCain made the right choice by picking Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, Palin has been the subject of largely critical media coverage but has attracted some of the most enthusiastic crowds of either campaign. Sixty-five percent (65%) of GOP voters say the party picked the right nominee for president.
Twenty-three percent (23%) of Republicans say McCain was not the right choice for the party, while 18% say the same of Palin.
Don’t you know they can’t handle the truth. We has all the FACTS and all they got sh!t.
I think Pence should be the next speaker of the house.
Tried old talking point. Sarah was towing Mac line. Why don’t you see what Sarah has said since. It is alot different now she is on her own.
Until tonight you never took any interest in any candidates as best as I can tell, none of them.
You don't seem to do election politics, until tonight, is it because Palin is a devout Christian and a social conservative?
Now go back 14 years in Sarah Palin's history and find me something worth watching.
Reagan ran for the nomination in 1968. That's 4 years after his '64 convention speech. Sarah made her convention speech in 2008. 2012 is four years after her '08 convention speech.
Your go-back-14-years is a strawman fallacy. Set it up -- Knock it down.
There is no statistic in that poll that confirms the earlier assertions that Sarah Palin was driving votes for the Republican party. Being popular as a VP pick is not what was being asserted earlier on this thread.
They voted Obama!! They will vote obama again!
I was hoping that you would respond to post 139, especially since you were corrected in it.
...I'm not a Romney guy. I voted for McCain...
So, you voted for McCain. That doesn't mean that you won't vote for Romney the next time around. For all I know, you voted for Romney in the primary. Did you?
Nearly everything you said about your ideal candidate in the post I responded to, paints a perfect picture of Mitt Romney. I think I was right on target for figuring you as a Romney supporter, per your post.
If you don't support Mitt Romney, then so be it. I accept that.
...(you) have labeled me a Romney fan, as apparently that is a mortal sin among the Palin faithful.
It's comments like that that cause many here to suspect the posters that make them, of being something other than someone who simply has their mind open about the potential GOP candidates for 2012.
Using a phrase like "the Palin faithful" is a not-so-subtle slam on Palin supporters. Most Palin supporters aren't bug-eyed worshipers, but many of those who don't support her seem to have a vested interest in making them appear that way.
It all smacks of a concerted effort to undermine a potential candidate who hasn't even declared her intentions to run yet. We Palin supporters are fully aware of the effect that she's created on the left and on some on the right. There's real fear being manifested, of which ad hominem slams and slights against her are the most visible sign.
Forgive me and the rest of Sarah's supporters if we suspect the intentions of anyone who resorts to that sort of behavior when they join a discussion about her.
That being said, I don't find fault with everyone who isn't a Palin supporter. People who honestly question her viability or qualifications to be president don't use invalidative language when speaking their minds about her.
That's the difference.
Oh yea? When did he sign you up? was it in 2007? Or just last year?
If you right-mouse over my screen name at the bottom of this post, and pick "open in new window", you can see my profile and the fact that I didn't join when Romney emerged from the goo of Massachusetts politics. Someone's profile date is usually a prudent thing to check before accusing them of being a RSA (Romney Sleeper Agent).
“Tried old talking point. Sarah was towing Mac line. Why don’t you see what Sarah has said since. It is alot different now she is on her own.”
but she said:
“As governor, I was the first governor to form a climate change sub-cabinet to start dealing with the impacts.”
She did that before she was picked for McCain’s VP.
My point was there’re Palincrates out there.
ping
What it says is that Republican voters were more eager to support Palin than McCain and the numbers show that.
That is driving votes, it helped increase the number that turned out, just like it did here at freerepublic.
And Reagan didn’t win in ‘68, did he? He wasn’t ready yet, I guess. My point is, a big speech doesn’t guarantee you the Oval Office 4 years later. Thanks for playing.
nice try but no dice.
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.