Posted on 07/19/2011 7:32:24 PM PDT by Ocarterma
Who has a better chance of winning the Republican nomination?
(Excerpt) Read more at gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com ...
“Coolidge? You’re claiming that Silent Cal picked talk show hosts and columnists for his cabinet?”
As you said, “I didn’t get all the cabinet posts listed.”
I only took what Coolidge used.
“You can keep on asking me for “m,y list” until the cows come home; I don’t have to post one.”
Sure, but you demanded that I post one. So I did. Is it perfect? No.
“And what about judge-ships? How many judges do you personally know? What about advisers?”
As for personally? I wouldn’t nominate someone because I knew them personally. The only one that I do know personally who I would consider, is someone I would appoint for a position that got axed.
“people who don’t know about the minutiae of government and don’t have advisers who do are left out in the cold; lacking the cornerstones that every president needs.”
I don’t accept your premise. If we were to take a look at Bush’s choices, would you say they were all the best out there? Nobody should pick people because he knows them or they were in the right frat, but because they are the right person for the job.
“And if you can’t figure out why, I’m not going to explain it to you.”
Still waiting on your list, BTW. :)
Your continued replies are without merit, senseless, lack any facts/knowledge, and are childish.
Just drop it, as you are hijacking this thread, wasting bandwidth, and apparently are far too dense to understand the simplest of idea.
You are an MSM drone aren't you.
Get out of here ya big dummy!
Sarah Palin's comments about Paul Revere's ride were accurate. As Paul Revere rode through the towns to warn them that 'the Regulars are coming out', the bells were rung to call out the Minutemen, and guns were fired in excitement of the muster. And Paul Revere wrote later that he did, in fact, warn the soldiers who had detained him on his way to Concord that the colonists in Concord were well armed, and were waiting for them. He also told them that the British would not be able to disarm the colonists. He wasn't being a traitor, simply telling the soldiers what was waiting for them; that's why the Regulars were coming out, anyway. They knew about the cache of weapons in Concord.
Now the way Sarah said it might have been slightly disjointed, since the reporters caught her as she'd finished the tour of Revere's house, and on her way to the bus, but she didn't commit a gaffe.
Here I hoped for an interesting discussion over possible cabinet memebers in a 2012 republican administration.
Majabagwaduce would suggest he was a traitor. Notwithstanding Longfellow propaganda.
Funny how the man who actually did nothing but defend the republic is the traitor while Revere is revered.
And FYI......even IF we had a GOP nominee, at this point, we wouldn't know who that person would choose. Neither will we know, until it happens, who the next president will pick, and it IS the president's choice, not ours, so who YOU or I would pick is completely irrelevant, not to mention pathetically moronic as a topic of discussion!
The bells were not rung to warn the British. His ride wasn't about warning the British.
I thought this would be an interesting thread. Turns out it’s just a pissing contest.
Old North Church vicar defends Palin on Revere
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1344806
You’re obsessed, you drone.
Get outa here ya big dummy!
Your first post on the thread and it looks like you won. Congrats.
I guess you can zip it up now. Pick up your trophy on the way out the door.
NO, NO, NO.
OK...one at a time....just so you understand.
1. The approval ratings you cite above were from Alaska...and ONLY Alaska
2. You have no idea (nor do I, truthfully) as to how the polls were done, nor the sample of the population that responded.
3. To be sure....these are both significant and "great" numbers for a governor. I don't believe any governor of any state ever achieved anything even remotely close to that.
4. That said....these data were compiled BEFORE she became a national figure. You simply cannot apply data gathered in a "tiny" state (population-wise) and apply it to the present time and circumstance. You just can't.
I'm pretty sure you know that there is a huge gap between the "left" and the "right" in this country. A "unifying" or "uniting" individual would be required/tasked to join or unite at least some of these two sides.
In Mrs. Palin's case...this hasn't, isn't, and won't happen. Period.
Hell, she's even "divided" (or to use the "evil" word - "polarized") the right (or repub/rino/conserv/tparty)! She does not have even grudging support from all members of the Republican party. I might even go so far as to say that some actually hate her (Krauthammer, O'reilly, j. williams, m mcconell, etc.). This does not signify "unification".
Understand...please...I am a Palin supporter. I am sure she would make a wonderful - if not great - president. But is she a "uniter"??? No. Hell No!
But that's fine by me. I'll march in her "army" and be united with others of similar mind and political bent. But I will never, ever kid myself into believing that because she "is now president" that a mass unification of "left" and "right" will occur. It won't. Truth be told, the division will become deeper and wider. Hatred knows no boundaries, no law, no rules. It just hates. And - unfortunately - Mrs. Palin is hated (to some greater or lesser degree) by many voters in this country. And that is not going to change. Not now, not ever.
I support your support of Mrs. Palin. But if we (you, I, and others) are going to go to war with her, we'd better understand clearly one thing. This is, in fact, a war. It is a war against those who would tear this country apart. Bankrupt it. Destroy it. And leave an empty shell for our children to live in. I don't want that. And if I must fight to prevent it, than I will....along with Mrs. Palin.
But...and it'a big BUT...there are just as many enemies that would have all of us shipped out or destroyed could they manage it. And if they can't, they'll settle for tearing our country apart and bringing it down around our collective ears.
"Uniter"??? Mrs. Palin??? No...not by any measure you'd care to name. "Polarizer"??? You BETCHA! And high time too!
Thank you, and a big shout out to my God, family, friends & supporters. I will cherish this moment forever.
Governor Palin sustaining statewide approval numbers of 80% to 93% as determined by multiple polling groups proved that she is a unifying leader.
Polarizing figures do not win elections with 76% or govern an entire state with 85% and 93% approval and become the most popular Governor in America, and probably the most popular official in America.
Governor Palin has never governed at the National level, so we can only look at her past offices to see the effect that she has as an executive office holder.
I’m not aware of any Governor who has been more unifying and held such high poll numbers statewide.
Mitt Romney is a devisive figure, and his Governorship proved that when he governed with approval numbers mostly in the 40s.
This response is a poor substitute for actually debating the facts.
When, out of blind loyalty, conservatives defend statements by candidates that are obviously wrong, it makes conservatives look foolish among the undecideds. It gives moronic comedians like Jon Stewart, who are wrong on the issues, ammunition to mock conservatives. All that is bad for conservatism.
http://www.paulreverehouse.org/ride/real.html
On the evening of April 18, 1775, Paul Revere was sent for by Dr. Joseph Warren and instructed to ride to Lexington, Massachusetts, to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that British troops were marching to arrest them.
###
On the way to Lexington, Revere "alarmed" the country-side, stopping at each house, and arrived in Lexington about midnight. As he approached the house where Adams and Hancock were staying, a sentry asked that he not make so much noise.
I asked you about 3 years of gaffes and all you could come up with was the Paul Revere statement which was factually correct. The fact is that the MSM has made it their principle duty to paint Palin as a dummy and you have bought into their propaganda hook line and sinker.
If Perry announces you can bet they will ridicule everything about his life and family and country accent. He will be Dan Quayled and Robert Borked until you won't recognize him.
So stop droning on about Palin's gaffes. They are nothing but democrat talking points, and you are one of their drones.
Governor Palin sustaining statewide approval numbers of 80% to 93% as determined by multiple polling groups proved that she is a unifying leader.True...not disputing this polling data...from AL...from May of 07 (93%) to June of 09 (56%). A drop of 37% in her "approval" rating...thos still impressive. At the end....a "unifier"??? Well, certainly for 56% of those who responded to the poll.
Polarizing figures do not win elections with 76% or govern an entire state with 85% and 93% approval and become the most popular Governor in America, and probably the most popular official in America.Sure they do!!! 76% FOR means there are 24% AGAINST. And as noted above, the approval ratings went DOWN in her second term. As to the assertion that she was "probably" the most popular official in America is both unfounded opinion, personal feeling, and unsubstantiated by fact. But I'll grant you this...by 2009, Mrs. Palin was certainly one of the most recognized ex-officials in America.
Governor Palin has never governed at the National level, so we can only look at her past offices to see the effect that she has as an executive office holder.Yup...no dispute, but a qualification. Add these words to your last sentence..."has as an executive office holder in Alaska.
I’m not aware of any Governor who has been more unifying IN ALASKA and held such high poll numbers statewide.True...and also completely irrelevant...as it pertains to the present day US national political scene.
Mitt Romney is a devisive figure, and his Governorship proved that when he governed with approval numbers mostly in the 40s. Is that what this is all about??? That Mrs. Palin is a better choice than Romney??? Well Duhhhh! Ya think!!???? If - and I hope it is a huge IF, romney wins the republican nomination, I will hold my nose, close my eyes, and vote for him. But that is only if he should win the nomination. Do I support him or believe in his political stance?? NO. Emphatically NO!
Once again, you and I are down to bedrock. Both Mrs. Palin and romney are prominent figures on the political stage. One has announced their candidacy; the other not. And while romney may or may not be "devisive"...he is so "beige"; so wishy-washy, that even his devisiveness is weak.
Mrs. Palin, on the other hand, is crystal clear in her politics, morals, stands, and agenda. Those kinds of political figures tend to be polarizing if for no other reason that the voter must make a choice. There is no "middle ground" with Mrs. Palin...and there shouldn't be. Therefore, one must choose to be on her side...or dead set against her.
Once again....that is called polarization. Plain and simple. And in this particular case, that is not at all a bad thing.
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.