Posted on 03/25/2011 4:19:14 AM PDT by WatchYourself
At the end of Part 1 of this series I asked the question: What happens when Americans, perhaps watching a debate, a speech, or a town hall meeting, begin to realize that Palin is the candidate that they agree with? Yet we had been told, countless times, that Palin is controversial and holds extreme positions (though Obama is never described as such), and here we sit, agreeing with these “crazy” ideas. How will this effect her electability? There are 5 major issues that will win or lose the 2012 Election for someone, if they can handle those issues correctly.
And for the first time ever, Barack Obama will be running in an election where he actually has a political record and has actions to be judged on. Pretty startling fact for a guy running for his second term in the White House. There can be no more myths about where he stands on economic, social, foreign, and domestic issues. No more imaginary “take a scalpel to the budget” or tax cut talk. Not even the media could spin that very well today. There are a handful of major issues that the Republican nominee can use to beat Obama over the head with in 2012. Sarah Palin is the only major candidate who can debate all of these issues without serious conflicts of the past. This makes her both credible and electable.
So fine, Obama and Palin are debating. 100 million people are watching. They are all expecting Palin to be a moron and then are shocked when she isn’t. And then the issues come up. And here we are, wondering who the extremist is. And they debate The Big 5.
Healthcare: Obama, obviously, supports his healthcare plan. Republicans, even he of Romneycare, unequivocally vow to dismantle and replace the program. It has never been popular, even one year after. Even with the most leading questioning pollsters can only come up with a tie. A March 13, 2011 CNN Poll found opposition to Obamacare at a stunning 59%, with support at just 37%. Rasmussen Regular polling finds double-digit support in opposition. A March 19 Gallup poll found that 70% of respondents thought the expensive overhaul would either do nothing for them or make their care worse. A Bloomberg poll found 65-32% of respondents opposed the main clause of the bill, the individual mandate. A February CBS Poll found 51%-34% oppose the bill. This is what we call consensus. And who holds the extremist view? Not Palin. Who agrees with the public? Not Obama.
Spending/Deficit: I think the election of 2010 speaks for itself. As voters rushed to throw out as many Democrats as they could from local and state positions and replace them with “right-wing extremists” the Obama White house was still pretty sure that this whole “hissyfit” was because he was half-black. Yes, because if throwing out a bunch of old white liberals and replacing them with young, and quite diverse I might add, conservatives isn’t a sign of racial hatred towards Obama, I don’t know what is. Obama’s spending is indefensible. It is easy pickings for a Governor who cut spending even while running surpluses. A little-know fact among the public that will be sure to warm their hearts. A March 21 CBS poll showed 68% of respondents thought the deficit was a serious problem, while another 26% said it was somewhat serious. That’s a whopping 94% who think it’s serious. And no, Obama does not fall into that 94%. For someone who has never run anything, he is really good at running a deficit. Obama’s main theme in 2008 was Bush’s deficits. I think that card may run out (but he will try).
Jobs/Taxes: Obama promised if we spent $1 Trillion, unemployment would never go beyond 8%. Not only did it immediately soar past 8% into the 10% range, it hasn’t even flirted with 8% in almost 2 years. As Palin pointed out in a March 24th Facebook posting, the real unemployment is almost double that (unless you believe giving up looking is a sign of a recovering economy). Despite Obama declarations that “The stimulus has worked as planned” the plan was “never go above 8%.” And Republicans always win on taxes. Except, of course, in 2008 where Obama positions himself as the tax-cutter with constant promises of tax cuts for 95% of Americans. Obama simply out-taxed McCain.
Immigration: Jan Brewer won the hearts (and votes) of Arizonans by being one of the first border-state politicians to take this issue seriously. Again, who would be controversial here? Despite laughable claims by the Obama administration on their “border toughness” the public is squarely in the opposite camp. A Jan. 17 USA Today/Gallup poll found opposition to amnesty at 55-43%. An NBC poll was a near identical 55%-43%. A Quinnipiac Poll found 60% Disapproval (28% approval) of Obama’s handling of Immigration with 68% stating he should focus more on enforcing laws to prevent illegal immigration that worrying about legalizing them. A CBS Poll found 88% of respondents feeling illegal immigration is either a very or somewhat serious problem. Who is extreme here?
Energy: The Green movement is becoming less important as gas prices are skyrocketing along with everything that relies on gas to get made. The Green Movement is losing ground as impractical and costing jobs and money. And who has better experience here than a certain governor from a certain state? In 2008, Obama voters were running through the streets announcing they weren’t gonna have to worry about silly things like gas prices and mortgage payments, because Obama was going to deliver. So there they are: The Big Five. Five issues that can win or lose a Presidential Election, and Palin is on the right side of all of them. She can be on the offensive on every one, as Obama is left defensively responding or flat-out lying (but, alas, he has a record now!). She can go after spending, healthcare, jobs, energy, and immigration. Where she can succeed, the other will stumble. Romney’s big skeleton is Healthcare. Sure, he can say it was different because it was a state issue. But, alas, the principals of his state law were liberal. Gingrich loses on immigration and energy. Huckabee loses on immigration and spending.
In 2008, McCain dropped the ball on half of these issues. Obama out-conservatived (in rhetoric anyway) John McCain on spending, taxes, jobs, and energy. Immigration was a tie for equal ineptitude. McCain had the edge nowhere. Palin is electable because she is most in tune with public opinion on all of the issues. Supposed “electable” candidates like McCain, Dole, and Bush 41 (after a courtesy term) are DOA as they believe what they have been told: Americans like moderates. They don’t, really. Conservatives sat 2008 out because they did not have a candidate at the top of the ticket to vote for. America is a conservative country, and it takes a conservative to win. Not only is Sarah Palin the only major candidate that is completely tuned-in to public opinion on the big 5 issues, but she is also the only candidates who can put together all of the necessary components to win against the $1 billion candidate. But that is a matter for “Elites Way Off on Palin Electability: Part 3 – Components of Victory.”
I have got in more than a few heated arguments here agreeing with Palin on her statements and positions against others, but I notice that disagreeing with any of these specific narrative articles questionable premises really result in the long term grudges.
As far as her being a presidential candidate I will consider her after she announces, like I will any others. I have no reason to rule her out or select her before she selects herself.
LOL. I’m not going to argue semantics, so please let it suffice that I don’t hold “grudges” per se. With you, I am always watchful andsomewhat disgusted by your posting habit of pinging the parents on Palin threads in the hopes of turning the threads into disputes.
I’m not into fighting, although I do enjoy a spirited debate. I rarely hold a grudge - and then only when the opponent wallows in ad hominem attacks and logical non-sequitors. At which point I simply refuse to engage the individual in debate any further.
My comment has to do with the fact that, outside a direct confrontational setting, there is little way to compare Palin to Obama directly for many people. The same is true for Bachmann, and any other conservative.
Sorry if you thought I was picking a fight.
That appears to be a sound argument. I think a lot of folks have a problem with PDS'ers attempting to make the point she shouldn't even try for the nomination.
AHHH, that was it. This particular thread I wouldnt mind some other contrary opinions. Have any of them appeared? If one of those OBE examples eventually takes place then some new and more interesting disputes can take place replacing these.
I could speculate on why some would have that opinion, but what if hypothetically Romney becomes the front-runner by default? I cant see demanding that Palin not run as making sense. I want to see Romney as president as much as I wanted McCain as president, not at all. So why would Palin getting in the ring be bad then? There are too many unknowns right now.
I dont like Newt either.. you get the idea. Looks like Bachmann is going to run, that will make it interesting.
That sounds logical - wait until she announces, if she does.
Although, I hope that she doesn’t run, she will be destroyed and it will be brutal - actually brutal on all the candidates.
As I noted on another thread, America is way too important to me to entrust her to a female version of Gomer Pyle.
Don't flatter yourself by rubber stamping other Conservatives with labels simply because they do not agree with you.
The actual, real truth is, Plain is the only one who will answer these questions for herself. And there is great cause for concern from some who see Palin as a nominee. Based mostly on her past record and baggage and the fact that the MSM already has a massive battle plan ready and waiting of she does declare. And this is a legitimate concern and will be used against her.
P.S. Please refrain from the usual paste of pointing out all of Palin’s vast “greatness”. We have been hearing these things for years and don't agree no matter how hard some try to sell them. And the “PDS” mantra is especially pointless.
Right now, the premise of the article suggests that Palin is not generally popular, especially with independents. But as I said in another comment, there are so many things that can happen between now and 2012. If Romney automatically gets the front runner position, a Palin or Bachmann debating him would be good, needed, as I want Romney as much as I wanted McCain. On the other hand a candidate I really like may come forth, and in that case I may wish that Palin is not running. But first she needs to decide first, as do the others.
Tming and tactics.
Sarah has said if she throws her hat in the race, that she won’t run a traditional campaign. She didn’t when she ran for mayor or governor, so why stop now.
Declaring, and declaring early, traditionally has it’s value. But it also has a new set of rules to play by that can be a hindrance. When she’s ready to play by those rules, she will. But for now, she’s playing by her rules.
And left, right, and everyone in between is left scratching their asses trying to figure her out.
And that, I suspect, is right where she wants them.
I don't like “Big Spenders” which is also one of the problems I have with Palin.
Bingo. I saw a recent poll that the same number of people who didn't have an opinion of Barack Obama also didn't have an opinion of Sarah Palin - 1%.
Every other candidate was somewhere in the double-digits. Guys like Pawlenty & Daniels were close to 30%.
This will not be like 1980, where Reagan came from well-behind to close the gap. Reagan didn't live in an age of 24/7 news coverage, to say nothing of the internet. Reagan rebounded in the polls after the first debate. Why? For two reasons - first, he did unbelievably well. And second, for MANY Americans, this was their first real opportunity for them to see him on a national stage, outside of the convention. People didn't necessarily like Reagan because people didn't fully know Reagan. People know Sarah Palin.
When people have an opinion of someone, it doesn't change (and it especially doesn't soften if it's a poor opinion), unless that person goes away for a while. Nixon went away after losing in CA, and 4-years later, he could reinvent himself. Bush, who has been gone for a bit, is also starting to enjoy a popularity rebound. Palin has never gone anywhere. She's been the most visible candidate out there, and because of that, people's opinions are fixed.
Plus, I agree with your point about "why doesn't she do it now." In the period of time that Palin has been everywhere, she has demonstrated absolutely no ability to identify with people who aren't already predisposed to vote Republican - unlike Reagan. She cannot, thus far, make a compelling argument to the people nominees need to win elections. It's that simple.
If Palin thinks she can win from doing staged events and drumming up support from just her Face Book account, she is about to become “experienced” in how American Politics really works.
Bingo.
Winner winner chicken dinner.
It is also notable that Palin has been steadily slipping, even among the base. Statistics clearly show that politicians who have over 90% name recognition, are not easily able to change their position in either direction.
All I’m saying is giver her a chance. Let the people decide.
Two wimmin’ folk in the primary would certainly be historical. I do believe Michelle has been drinking the Beltway water for far too long, however. She’s a voter, not a leader. I’ll vote for Palin before her. Bachmann’s IRS history gives me the creeps a bit too. But, I am leaning toward Herman Cain at the moment.
The initial premise of the article is flawed in my opinion, it was that she is unpopular now but will become instantly popular once she wins the nomination. But some really seem to buy it, more faith than me.
I think it's premature to tell Palin or anyone not to run. I was of the group that saw a McCain presidency with a Democrat congress as being a disaster. (the other two frontrunners were not that great either.) At this stage I just assume the candidates actually get their own skin in the game first, and Romney is definitely not working for me. Does that mean I support someone else besides him not yet in the game, no!
All these politicos starting these committees to see if they have a chance.....are not Leaders.
If you are a Leader ....you go out and TAKE the lead and lead the Charge.
If you look behind to see if they are following you, your eyes are not on the Objective.
Just get in the ring.
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.