Posted on 03/16/2011 5:31:17 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Please, everyone, consider this:
Neither Obama nor his record are what the candidates we need should be running against. In this presidential shape-up most especially, it is fraught with danger because of the possibility, and it is a very real one, that Obama will be out of the race, and it will be someone else. I have no idea who -- only that it would be a very "attractive" liberal idiot. An idol.
Just think about that for a second.
If what I have recently read on non-conservative on-line forums like Yahoo news (always click on the "This post hidden because of negative reviews" posts!), ABC, and Los Angeles Times is authentic:
1. Little difference is perceived between Democrats and Republicans. They're all the same in essentials. Cynicism rules.
2. Obama is loathed by a large margin.
3. Liberalism, liberals, are the perceived bad guys. The word "liberal" as a derogatory term is thick, everywhere.
4. Commenters aim a lot of contempt and anger at the "press," the media, news reporters, for flaking out and shilling for Obama and liberalism.
THEREFORE: Obama is a symptom, not a cause, and if every focus is on drawing a distinction between Palin and Obama, and all the sudden Obama's not in the picture ... What then?
Can you imagine Romney in that spot? Or Huckabee? Or Obama or worse, the "dark horse" puppet in the wings, the sudden star of the Democrat party?
Obama is a symptom. LIBERALISM is the ailment.
Americans are begging, yearning, screaming, for a political alternative to liberalism. That alternative used to belong to the Republican party, as the foundation for its platform. Reagan rung bells all over American when he said: "Government does not hold the solution to our problems. Government is the problem."
That's what the Republican party must stand for and what the winning candidate will stand up for, and what the smart one should prepare for.
I hope she runs, too. It's nice to read your words because for the first time ever, yesterday, I found myself consciously realizing that I truly hope she runs. All along I've kind of been assuming it more than wishing for it.
I have a growing feeling that it will be Herman Cain . . . with Sarah Palin’s explicit blessing and support.
I’m not sure why I think that’s how it will unfold, but it would be an eminently acceptable situation in my opinion.
Cain in 2012.
Palin in 2016.
I like Glen Beck but he would be a drag on the ticket.
I do not have faith in polls with one exception: Rasmussen.
However, I do believe Palin is unelectable unless she is hooked up with another real good conservative candidate such as Herman Cain.
Having said that, while I like and admire Palin, I think a better female candidate would be Michele Bachmann.
She was by far the best elected official I have ever seen from Pennsylvania to Alaska. She made a few mistakes, she's as down to earth as they come; but she never sold out on the people of Alaska; something quite rare up here with big oil in the drivers seat.
I know without reservation she is the most honorable candidate in the race. Just don't want to see her destroyed by it. She could come back to Alaska and the people would re-elect her as gov in a heartbeat; she was that good and everybody has watched how quick state govt has went back to business as usual with Parnell; and our politicals sell out so cheap too; with the exception of Palin. She can't be bought.
I don't know, but this article gave me unwelcome pause.
Cheers!
(A little *too* pat in stereotypical conservative responses?)
Please keep an eye on this one.
Cheers!
I don’t suppose they’ve given much thought or weight to Mr. Obama’s freefall in the polls since January 2009–roughly the same period:
His approval rating was 69%; depending on who you believe it’s hovering somewhere between 50% and 42%. Let’s ride the middle and suggest he’s at 46%: That’s a drop of 25%. To put it another way, if you look at 100 voters Obama will be less less-favorable with five more than Governor Palin.
The (p)resident has also seen 22% of his young voters jump ship (those now headed into the real world to find jobs.
Similarly, his clout with independents seemingly is falling like a polished rock–down from 52% post election to 38% earlier this month.
At the same time Gov. Palin’s favorability with independents is hanging at about 30%-35%. That’s a fairly slim eight-point difference.
The bottom line: liberals, the left-leaning meaning, and the statistically illiterate are compulsively pouring over Gov. Palin’s numbers but are strangely indifferent to Mr. Obama’s free-fall in favorability not only among all Americans, his base, and independents but abroad as well. In the streets of the mideast he is now more unpopular than President George Bush at the end of his presidency.
A few years ago the Giants were considered 13-point underdogs to the Patriots in the Super Bowl by oddsmakers around the world who are every bit as skilled–perhaps even more–in reading the prevailing winds of public behavior and estimating probabilities of very complex situations.
They do not hunker down to formulate questions worded in specific ways to increase the likelihood they will get the answers they want.
And they still get it wrong with remarkable frequency.
I have a theory that Palin is too young. A woman of Maggie Thatcher’s age may pull it off but I think it would be to Palin’s advantage to wait a few years. Her age would add to her credibility.
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.