Of course there were other factors. Jimmy Carter was the most incompetent president in decades (arguably ever). National moral was at an all time low (again having much to do with the Hostage Crisis). Ronald Reagan was a breath of fresh air.
Obviously I would agree that if Sarah Palin can bring her negative poll numbers into a more standard line she would be highly competitive. I just don't believe she can.
Reagan’s negatives were high because he was painted as an idiot actor who was constantly spouting erroneous ‘facts’, would be quick with the war trigger, was anti-environment, would be an extremist in trimming the federal government, and oh, did I say because he was supposed to be a total idiot?
He was a laughing stock in the media and according to the Democrats. And then 1980 came along and he overcame all that. But sure, Jimmy Carter certainly helped.
Independents just abandoned Obama in droves for the 2010 midterms. Almost ALL demographic groups, voters across the board just rejected Obama and the Dems liberal social policy agenda. If the economy stays flat for the next two years and if Obama keeps pushing his welfare state policies, Palin will have a unique opportunity for an historic electoral win.
Debates anyone?
I agree with you.
People compare Palin the Reagan and the comparison is that they were Gov’s, and they were Conservatives. The similarities end there.
Reagan was a successful Actor, union leader, TV Star, Conservative Columnist, and two term Gov.
Palin was a TV sports reporter, mother, mayor, and half a term Gov. Now she is an infrequent talking head.
Reagan spent years exploring and defining his conservative values. His writing, although hidden at the time, were prolific and the logic well defined. His “common sense” was based on years of experience, research, and well thought out dogma.
While Reagan fought the economic issues of the sixties, he also too significant leadership roles in the anti-war battles in CA in a time where it was a real “Law and Order” vs Anarchy movement. Serious issues hung in the balance and Reagan needed to rely on his values and leadership skills to literally keep the peace.
Palin fought the corruption in the State House. Weren’t they Murkowski’s too?
Sarah Palin is clearly a charismatic speaker and is saying the things a lot of us feel. Her “positions” are solid middle american, and I have to say I agree with a lot more of them than I disagree with.
But, and this is a big but, while the left hated Reagan’s positions, they knew they were dealing with a giant. They knew from experience in CA in the 60’s that he meant what he said, and said what he meant. They also knew that he was someone who was willing to compromise—giving up 2 yards to gain 8.
Sarah has not demonstrated that kind of leadership. Is she capable? Perhaps. But the rhetoric I hear is not one that even considers working with the other side—her positions seem to be as solidly stubborn as the people we have in place now.
Finally, Ronnie knew how to deliver his lines. I listen to his speeches now and many of them still bring tears to my eyes. I cannot fathom Sarah on the plaza in front of the Wall in Berlin—calling out Gorby. I cannot imagine Sarah delivering the eloquence of the Challenger speech. Her speech patterns are, to my ear, immature and clumsy. I know that it is not always fair to judge someone on syntax errors—we went through eight years of that—but I believe that in order to get people to listen to you, they have to be able to listen to you. And yes, I DO want a President that can string together a full sentence or two without some colloquial phrase. And really, “Mama Grizzlies?” Really?
Sarah has potential. But I personally believe that in this TV culture she digs that limelight a little too much. I am afraid that we would be voting for someone as equally unprepared for the job as Obama is.
I told my kids during the last election that you need to see past the words that people say during their speeches. You have to look at their actions throughout their lives to really judge their character. She is someone that struggled to get her education, stumbled around in the TV biz for a while and then stumbled into politics. I simply do not find her genuine. Put simply, Reagan could tell me that the aliens were landing tomorrow, but that we would pull together and it would be alright. I don’t think that Sarah could endear that much trust. I guess that is what it comes down to: “I just don’t trust her yet.”
I admire Palin for her stand for her children—both Trig and Bristol. I respect that. But, having faced similar decisions in my life I understand that it if you have values, they are not even decisions. And, as my mother taught me: “You don’t get credit for doing the right thing—because that is what you are supposed to do.”
In the end I appreciate how folks are dying for another Reagan—much as the Dems long for another FDR or JFK. At this point I am conceding that it won’t happen again in my lifetime. And that this point, I would be happy with another Ike.
No Sarah is no Ronnie. And she won’t be for a long time. If you love her, tell her not to run this time. She is very young and will be on the scene for a long time. Let her steep in life for a while.
The mood of the country would have to be right. Who knows how things will be in a year. I knew Carter was toast when the rescue mission failed, and he had no back up plan. If Teddy Kennedy had had a spine, he would have defeated Carter in the primaries.