Posted on 12/02/2010 7:47:53 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Though Pence says he won’t decide on whether or not to run for president until next year, conservative leaders I spoke to were equally as bullish on Pence.
Chris Chocola, president of the powerful fiscally conservative Club for Growth tells me Pence may benefit from being less well known, and less of a lighting rod than Palin. He also notes that “[Pence's] conservative credentials are really unquestionable.”
“[Pence] appeals to every group that Palin appeals to — and probably a little more,” says Chocola.
“Pence is Palin with gravitas. Pence is Palin with experience,” adds Brent Bozell, chairman of For America.
Regarding experience, FreedomWorks Chairman Dick Armey says of Pence: “He’s been a rock solid fiscal conservative, showing up not only for the high profile TARP and ObamaCare battles, but also championing issues that are maybe less glamorous politically, but are critically important for our country, such as fundamental tax reform, specifically the flat tax.”
I’ve written about this a bit before. The guy who’s usually mentioned as the threat to Palin is Huckabee, of course, because they’d compete for social conservatives. But establishment Republicans dislike Huck almost as much as they do Sarahcuda, as he’s ever eager to remind us. So imagine for a moment that you’re Karl Rove, nervously weighing the possibility that one of those two will be the nominee. You can try to head them off by pushing Romney or Daniels or Thune, but then you run the risk of a pure “centrists vs. the base” primary — and because the base tends to be more motivated to turn out, they’d have the upper hand. The alternative is to try to coopt part of the base by backing a compromise candidate instead, someone who might be more fiscally and/or socially conservative than the establishment would prefer but who would peel off base voters from Huck and Palin and would stand a better chance of appealing to centrists against Obama. That’s Pence. He’s got 10 years of legislative experience, he’s deeply respected by fiscal cons and social cons, he gives a good speech, and he’s less ostentatious about “values” than Huckabee is so he runs a smaller risk of alienating moderates in the general election.
What he doesn’t have is name recognition, and he’ll need to catch up on that in a hurry to have a serious chance against Palin and/or Huck. Which makes me wonder if, in the next few months, we aren’t about to see a serious public pro-Pence push among people like Rove and other GOP chieftains. I’ve been assuming that we’d see that on Daniels’s behalf, but between his gaffes about calling a truce on social issues and the calculus I described above about needing base voters to win, maybe Beltway types will give up on him as a lost cause and back Pence, the other Hoosier, instead. The big question is whether he’s willing to run for president now or if, as rumored, he’s thinking of running for governor first with an eye to 2016. He’d be a formidable candidate then too, especially with some executive experience under his belt: None of the obvious contenders — Christie, Rubio, Jindal — are especially closely identified with social conservatism, so Pence could clean up. Still, that’s a tougher field than 2012 would be, so maybe GOP insiders could persuade him to go for the big prize now by promising to back him. Honestly wouldn’t surprise me. Exit question: Would it work?
Update: A commenter reminds me that Palin said she won’t run if no other satisfactorily conservative candidate steps up. Well, by virtually any measure, Pence would qualify as satisfactory. Is that reason enough for the establishment to try to push him into the race — to call Palin’s bluff on that promise?
Never mind.
Enjoy Romney.
I’ll take Palin over Romney. What I won’t take is a coronation for Palin because others here think she deserves it.
“It riles them to believe
that you have perceived
the web they have drawn for you.”
Note:
1 percenters are factored into all political polls in the margin of error.
They are desperate for someone to emerge and give Palin a fight
Well it’s not like we want Sarah to just be given the nomination. It should be a tough fight for the nomination. Not sure what you are trying to say. Are you saying that everyone should sit down and let her have it just because?
The only lies are your lies by omission in some desperate attempt to contort her comments and policy positions.
I relied on her exact words and have posted them for you. She supports "a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants". That is amnesty to most sane conservatives, and was one of the the major contentious issues which killed the immigration bill (supported by her running mate McCain). It's illogical, bordering on surreal, to parse her comments by saying that she doesn't support "total amnesty" (her term) therefore it's not amnesty. But ok, for the sake of discussion, she supports "partial amnesty"? Is that really the axe you want to grind?
VAN SUSTEREN: Governor Palin, if you were vice president today, what would you be telling a President McCain about what to do about immigration, if anything?
PALIN: I support his position on immigration. It all comes down to securing the border. And he who has actually proposed some solutions, the Obama administration does not want to listen to Senator McCain or any other Republican, and that, of course, leads to a greater problem that we have in Washington, D.C. And it’s that lack of the new administration’s ability and enthusiasm for listening to those on the other side of the aisle who have some good solutions that they want considered.
I’m on the east coast.
Try to keep you delusions to yourself.
As I’ve said, you frequently lie. You know Gov. Palin stated in the Lars Andersen radio interview that she does not believe in Amnesty.
Your lying speaks for itself.
LOL, the VP supports the President’s policies, you can do better than that naps....distinguish yourself from the PDS he man woman haters club on here.
“The cultists know it too. But they are now reduced to running interference for their goddess. It’s frankly so pathetic, it’s funny.”
You are right about cultists being overeager; but there really are fewer cultists than you think. And there must be a reason that the same vigor resides on the other side - the anti-cultists, if you like, people like yourself.
Both the pro and con cultists have a visceral reaction to the person. You saw it with Obama. His positions and personal history were laughable. Nothing. Empty suit and voting “Present” yet he was elected. He had, as does Sarah Palin, the ability to create that visceral reaction. There is one tremendous difference however. His was based, truly, on simple illusion; hope and mirrors.
Sarah Palin inspires a nearly equal amount of adoration and disdain, as did Obama but she adds something Obama lacked; true admirers and a real center that is undeniable.
She is, in fact, the anti-Obama. That is why she scares people.
You are obviously in the disdainful crowd which leaves you blind to her positive qualities while you search for her flaws. Some are blind to her flaws because they search for even more proof of her character being genuine. And finding such a pearl thrown before the usual swine in politics is so hard to believe that it drives a powerful need to destroy or protect her; to allow the hope that she is genuine in, without either constant validation or constant affirmation, would be difficult to do.
It’s sad, really. The real blessing she has been given is that she has the qualities that attracted the swing vote and is the personification of the movement we saw in 2010.
The middle American, the grass roots sees neither perfection or total disaster; the woman who lives the way she wants to and says the things that she believes at the moment; who reflects back to them what they want.
I personally couldn’t ask for more. And her stances are her stances, but she will not morph into a beltway insider. I know that and that is what we need right now.
I know that. And so does the vast majority of people who are attracted to her.
You can’t name anyone else in the field about whom that can be said. It really is this simple.
Sorry she upsets you so. This must be really awful for you, but you are dug in like a tick. Your need to destroy her is as fierce as the need for some to elevate her. The irony, of course, is that she is in need of neither and that is her greatest strength. You’ll see. Try to study her less and intuit a little bit more and see if there is any chance I might have a point. I might be full of shit. There are certainly a few folks here who think so. But I don’t care about that. I’m working all of this through just like the rest of us, but I have come to the conclusion that she has one thing and one thing only that I haven’t found anywhere else. I trust that she is no way going to become another beltway insider. It’s not in her character.
You gotta see that. Seriously.
Laugh it off if you want, but you will have to admit that. And who do you have that you can say that about with absolute surety? Anyone?
Interview with Lars Larson on 12/3/09:
LARS: The amnesty proposal that was defeated in Congress — in your view, was that amnesty for illegals and would you back amnesty for a path to citizenship, as the current president calls it?
SARAH PALIN: No, I’m not for amnesty. Let’s ratchet this down quite simply to remember what we’re referring to. Illegal aliens are called “illegal” for a reason. We need to secure our borders and I am not for amnesty. And there are humane ways to deal with the 11-13 million illegal aliens who are in our country right now, but if they’re not going to follow the rules, they need to get out.
Great. Thanks!!!
I agree Pissant, no coronation. Not that it’s an option! But yes, if Sarah runs it will take everything she has. Like a Stanley Cup Winning goalie, she’ll need some breaks along the way to win.
Her comments on Lars Larson are similar to her previous comments. She says she is not for "amnesty" then proceeds to support a path to citizenship, which is a form of amnesty.
"LARS: The amnesty proposal that was defeated in Congress — in your view, was that amnesty for illegals and would you back amnesty for a path to citizenship, as the current president calls it?
SARAH PALIN: No, I’m not for amnesty. Let’s ratchet this down quite simply to remember what we’re referring to. Illegal aliens are called “illegal” for a reason. We need to secure our borders and I am not for amnesty. And there are humane ways to deal with the 11-13 million illegal aliens who are in our country right now, but if they’re not going to follow the rules, they need to get out."
She cleverly dropped the word "total amnesty" from her remarks, which she used previously, that was in December 2009. However, here is what she said to Greta in March 2010:
VAN SUSTEREN: Governor Palin, if you were vice president today, what would you be telling a President McCain about what to do about immigration, if anything?
PALIN: I support his position on immigration. It all comes down to securing the border. And he who has actually proposed some solutions, the Obama administration does not want to listen to Senator McCain or any other Republican, and that, of course, leads to a greater problem that we have in Washington, D.C. And it's that lack of the new administration's ability and enthusiasm for listening to those on the other side of the aisle who have some good solutions that they want considered.
She's been consistent, she supports a path to citizenship for 11-13 million illegals...amnesty.
“Great Conservative, but that is not a qualification for leadership.”
And that is why we are in the trouble we are in.
I like Pence and I like Palin. Resumes are cool, but I want a great conservative first, resume second.
I feel like the wallflower student who raises his hand and no one notices. What I know for sure about Palin I like, except for her position on abortion being a states rights issue. What you’re missing here is that pulling in quotes from hither and yon without citation to specific sources leaves one wondering about the history behind those quotes. She supposedly backed McCain’s position on illegal immigration, but flatly denies being for amnesty. That’s conflicting data. Do we really resolve it just by arbitrarily picking one quote over another? Or do we try to fit those quotes into her personal/political evolution? With what degree of granularity did she support McCain’s position? Every last detail, or the nice squishy part about being humane? Has she shifted in her thinking since the original quote? How much? Why? Reagan shifted to more conservative positions over time. That’s why citations are helpful. They help you see the timeline.
And would someone please tell me what LOST is about. I don’t recognize the acronym.
“She’s been consistent, she supports a path to citizenship for 11-13 million illegals...amnesty.”
That is your weak conclusion.
“She’s been consistent, she supports a path to citizenship for 11-13 million illegals...amnesty.”
That is your weak conclusion that is not supported by the evidence. However, if you make personally biased assumptions, use conjecture, you can certainly misrepresent her stand.
Law Of Sea Treaty (LOST).
"VAN SUSTEREN: Governor Palin, if you were vice president today, what would you be telling a President McCain about what to do about immigration, if anything?
PALIN: I support his position on immigration."
Are you familiar with McCain's position on immigration?
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.