Posted on 03/20/2011 9:21:53 PM PDT by Libloather
Palin: I could have brought change in '08
By Jordan Fabian - 03/19/11 12:52 PM ET
Republicans would have been more successful in the 2008 presidential elections if she was at the top of the ticket, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin suggested Saturday.
Speaking at the India Today Conclave in New Delhi, Palin was asked why the GOP ticket did not defeat then-Sen. Barack Obama (D). Palin said that Obama ran a strong campaign and effectively billed himself as a change candidate.
Pressed by India Today editor Aroon Purie that she also represented change, Palin replied, "I wasn't at the top of the ticket, remember?"
The 2008 vice presidential nominee said she was not claiming she should have been the nominee over Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), but her comments provide a glimpse of her potential appeal to voters should she choose to run for the nomination in 2012.
Palin reiterated that she has not yet decided is she will run.
"I don't think that there needs to be a rush still to get out there as a declared candidate," she said.
When asked about the greatest lessons she learned from 2008, Palin did not mention the friction between McCain's camp and hers. Instead she said the experience informed her public relations strategy.
"One thing I learned is that you cannot trust the mainstream media to accurately report on [your record and accomplishments]," she said. "You have to have the boldness, the courage to set the record straight yourself."
She even accused Republicans of not defending their records vigorously enough.
"Too often, Republicans have the fighting instinct of sheep sometimes," she said. When it comes to correcting the record, "I will put my foot down."
Rebutting a criticism often used against her, Palin said, "It's not victimization, I'm not playing the victim card."
Palin also touted her role as a key figure in the Tea Party movement, saying that it helps enforce accountability amongst politicians on both sides of the aisle.
"It's going to grow, it's going to be more influential and it's going to hold our politicians accountable," she said.
Palin even compared the Tea Party movement to the pro-democratic uprisings that have sprouted up across the Middle East.
The Tea Party is "all about empowerment of everyday, independent patriots ... to change the balance of power," she said. "The changing balance of power throughout the world today is driven by empowerment of the individual ... That's what we are seeing throughout the world today."
So, you justify supporting pro-abort leftists based on how many votes they got? You might as well go vote for Obama then.
“I am not supporting any other candidate besides her or whoever she endorses.”
There isn’t anyone else out there right now that can touch her. No one. All this “her negatives are too high” is horse shit. There is no one else put forward. And I am tired of the hacks people keep pushing forward. They’re the very members of the CB Club that she will take on. This whole circular firing squad thing is getting tiresome. We have people here on this board, who are knowledgeable enough to know she is the only electable CONSERVATIVE we have right now, that are parroting that nonsense.
“Her negatives are too high.” All of a sudden that’s something to be concerned about. Horse shit. Let’s stick to basics, kick the asses that need kicking and let one of our own get nominated and then let’s elect her. Name anyone else that can beat her, in the real world, not in some WaPo Poll, but someone you know in your guts can beat her.
***crickets***
“And that stupid stunt of suspending his campaign to fly back to Washington during the TARP process to do......nothing.”
I couldn’t believe it.
She also needs to stop with the "I am a Reagan republican". That was good at the beginning but now she has to define herself and tell us in detail what she wants to do and let the conservatives decide if she is a Reagan republican now.
I would be interested in hearing her list of enemies by priority. Obviously Obama has his list backwards. Of course North Korea will be placed in order according to if it acts up but the others: Syria, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Pakistan... what does she know about these places and which one would she go after first.
Also, what does she think about Obama putting Qadaffi on the top of that list when in Libya's northeast there's a lot Al Qaeda Qadaffi had been keeping under control. What's Sarah's list look like?
That's what mean by details.
That is nice to hear especially because I’ve read posts on other sites from people who claim to be from Alaska and some have said really awful things. I had a hard time reconciling these comments with her 85% approval rating. Who knows, maybe these people are really sitting in the White House basement and never set a foot in Alaska.
I do think a lot of the reason much of the GOP sticks their nose in the air at the mention of Sarah is that they’re afraid of what would happen to their gravy trains if she became POTUS.
He really lost me there! I voted for the man but I held my nose. And when I have to hold my nose that indicates to me that many people on our side didn't even bother voting.
I could not post anything about him because I had nothing exciting to say. I kept neutral. It was boring. I was far from excited to get voters for him. I just held my nose and voted. We do not want another candidate like that in 2012.
"The higher the chimp climbs the tree, the more people can see its puckered red ass."
Just keep climbing, Bonzo. The view is hilarious.
8^D
After all:
“It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." -- Jonathan Swift
Besides the things which you enumerated earlier, one of the biggest things turning me off from her are her most rabid followers. Can’t bring up sourced, fact-based, rational points of policy disagreement without getting a “PDS!!!1!” flag thrown within 5 seconds.
Think again, Sarah. That traitorous bastard would have been sabotaging the United States, just not the same way Obama and the Democrats planned on doing it. It may be bitter medicine to swallow but four years of Obama may prevent the next 20 years of Democrat rule.
You would have seen change, but not the sort of change the GOP should be proud of.
Margret Thacher Was like Palin, she didn’t let lies roll off her back, the great lady of England let them have it back!
I agree you may be right but I sure is bitter medicine especially if 0bama death care is foisted on us.
Read on you self absorbed knower of all, then qualify your earlier statement with any other typical politician. Arghhhh. Hint, in the event you can't find it I pasted it below. The next hint, she was addressing an audience in India. So tell us now the fine details of the political squabbles in India. She was reiterating a known fact here that may not have been so obvious to them.
"One thing I learned is that you cannot trust the mainstream media to accurately report on [your record and accomplishments]," she said. "You have to have the boldness, the courage to set the record straight yourself."
She even accused Republicans of not defending their records vigorously enough.
And then what I considered the money line of the entire appearance;
"Too often, Republicans have the fighting instinct of sheep sometimes," she said. When it comes to correcting the record, "I will put my foot down."
Me also!
We know Sarah wanted to make Rev Wright and Barry`s terrorist pals part of the campaign, but McCain would have no part of it.
I think it could/should still be a issue in 2012. Barry said that he did not share the views of Rev Wright, I think the list is long that he does in fact share Rev Wright`s views.
Whether or not that is a issue in 2012??? I think it should be!
Looks like we got us another pissant. You whack one, and another pops up to take his place.
I shouldn't waste my precious timing doing it, but there may be other Palin doubters on the lurk, and they may be sucked into your vortex of lies, so here it comes: a point-by-point refutation (nay, refudiation) of the above:
she is pro-choice for states on abortion
What EV means here is that Gov Palin, according to the rules of the State of Alaska, had to choose between two candidates for jurists to the Alaska Supreme Court. She didn't get her choice of candidates; they were chosen for her. The one she ultimately chose was pro-abortion. Since Roe v. Wade, abortion hasn't been a state matter. I hope one day we can get it back, but it's just that, hope. In sum, saying that Palin is "pro-choice for states on abortion" twists the facts into a PDS pretzel.
a judicial supremacist
This one is more arcane. Many people mistakenly believe that the judicial branch is the most powerful branch of the federal government, because it decides cases on the Constitutionality of laws. However, this is not true, because Congress has the power (Art III Sec 2) to limit jurisdiction of the Court. EV believes that Palin is a believer in this incorrect theory, probably because of her comments on the Westboro "Baptist" Church case. Palin was contrasting the standard for Westboro's antics to the standard for Christian & Jewish speech in the public square. This does not make her a "judicial supremacist".
supports a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
This is most likely a distortion of her comments on Bill O'Reilly's show July 10, 2010. Palin: illegal immigrants should not be "rewarded the bad behavior." ... Palin responded that she would like all illegal immigrants to register and that, in an ideal situation, "you deport them. you have to get them out of here." Deport them. Doesn't sound like a special "pathway to citizenship" to me.
endorses the sovereignty-destroying Law of the Sea treaty
This assertion is a logical error of the "baby and bathwater" kind. EV wants you to think Palin is a stealth, New World Order politician who wants to give away our sovereignty. In fact, Palin is acting in US interests. Palin wants a method to stop Russia from claiming minerals in the Arctic that should have been US claims. Here is an analysis of the letter she sent to Senators Stevens and Murkowski in 2007. In the letter, she takes on those "concerned about the perceived loss of U.S. sovereignty. I believe quite the contrary is the case. If the U.S. does not ratify the convention, we will be denied access to the forum established by the international community to adjudicate claims to submerged lands in the Arctic."
It's a legitimate point: If other countries are going to claim the Arctic by treaty, why shouldn't the US get in the game and try to make it go our way? But as you can see, Palin is not what EV claims, some stealth agent against US sovereignty that portrays herself otherwise.
refuses to support the elimination of the U.S. Dept. of Education
This last one is just stupid. It'd be like saying Lincoln refused to support reunification before Fort Sumter! Has Palin run for President yet? No. So is she or anyone she endorsed in a position to eliminate it? No. Has she supported a Presidential candidate since McCain? No. So why whine about this now? Because it is a red herring. Something else to throw in Palin's path to get the dogs to run toward her. Nonsense.
Bullcrap, EV. Some of your assertions have basis in fact, like all lies. You have twisted the truth to attack your enemy, like all good followers of Alinsky.
funny thing is that wasn’t what Gov aplin was suggesting nor is it what she said.
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.