Online bookies: Palin the odds-on favorite for 2012 nomination
posted at 4:45 pm on January 2, 2009 by Allahpundit
Ever so slightly over Mitt and Huck.
Despite a slew of negative press this fall about Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) running mate, online gaming site Superbook.com puts Palin’s odds at 3.5-1, the best among Republican hopefuls.
Other top GOP contenders include former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whose odds are set at 4-1, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, at 5-1…
Another online site, BetUs Sportsbook, made Palin and Romney 4-1 co-favorites.
We’ve been over this. Barring a catastrophic first term, The One will be heavily favored for reelection, leading young’uns like Jindal and Palin to bow out and bide their time until 2016. (Even Palinistas as devout as Coulter agree that she should wait, as do you guys.) Mitt might run since he’d be 69 and facing a crowded, charismatic field in 2016, but unless he stands a real chance to win, I figure he’ll pass too in the interest of avoiding further expense and aggravation. Result: A Huckabee-Pawlenty snoozefest, leading grassroots conservatives to tear at their hair in anguish and boredom until some dark horse like Mark Sanford jumps in to make things moderately more interesting. Exit question one: Can you feel the excitement? Exit question two: Might Mitt run, conceivably, out of some sense of party loyalty even if he thought he was likely to lose? If there’s a leadership vacuum at the top of the GOP and the frontrunners are all weak and southern, would he jump in to rebrand the party with a midwestern/northeastern face and a reputation for financial expertise? Dean Barnett always swore to me that Mitt was motivated by a true sense of civic duty more so than any personal ambition. We’ll see.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
The 2012 republicam primaries will be reserved for me-too (liberal/moderate) republicans and vanity candidates. Yeah, I know they ran McCain and it didn’t work, but they haven’t got it out of their system by any means.
The careerist politicians in the republican party are determined to run a candidate in 2012 that will appeal to moderate republicans in the northeast and on the west coast.
kcewa on January 2, 2009 at 8:12 PM
Actually…..
upinak on Jan 2,2009 at 8:08PM.
upinak:Your typing! You didn’t freeze?hehe:)
canopfor on January 2, 2009 at 8:12 PM
you may be right about some of her positions; I had not heard or read that though. If she were to decide to run, we’d have ample opportunity to learn her policy positions.
Don’t care if she is a lesbian, but I realize that would hurt her chances of getting a nomination on a Rep Natl Ticket
Agree that she has worked very hard for Bush’s administration.
I don’t agree with those who make broad brush general comments like “No more Bushes” ; I’d prefer to measure the particular candidate rather than automaticaly assume they’ll be like their kinfolk ;although there are statistically relevant examples where political families have very similar meanings, I want to see for myself.
Red State State of Mind on January 2, 2009 at 8:18 PM
Anchorage and the valley to be -25 to -30 tonight.
I may freeze :|
upinak on January 2, 2009 at 8:22 PM
It was when she first started. The interview was, but I can’t remember who did it.. maybe newsweek…
I am not a “Down with Bushes” person. So I understand.
upinak on January 2, 2009 at 8:24 PM
Mark Sanford – Gary Johnson 2012 FTW
Rae on January 2, 2009 at 8:29 PM
That ticket would drive Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and MSLSD crew out of the country once and for all!
jencab on January 2, 2009 at 8:29 PM
I was disappointed with Dad & W, but always liked Jeb. however, what little research I’ve done thus far makes me cautious.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Jeb_Bush.htm
I do hope if there isn;t a stronger conservative candidate in FL for Martinez’s seat that JEB runs for the seat in 2010.
Red State State of Mind on January 2, 2009 at 8:34 PM
You Betcha!
I see the Palin thread brought all of the douches out from under their bridges.
HornetSting on January 2, 2009 at 8:34 PM
Ever been to New Mexico? Land of Retardment. I HOPE you are kidding about Johnson. He’s a crackhead.
HornetSting on January 2, 2009 at 8:43 PM
Benny, for once I agree with you, and it got me thinking about some other tickets for 2012….
Palin/Bachman 2012 on the Continental Ticket,
promising to annex Canada and Mexico and strictly guard the border with Guatamala
Larry Craig/Mark Foley on the Don’t Ask Dont Tell Ticket
promising to eliminate unemployment by offering everyone who loses their job a new one as a Congressional page
Cynthia McKinney/Don King on the Cheveux Ticket
promising to …….
any suggestions?
Red State State of Mind on January 2, 2009 at 8:43 PM
I may freeze:
upinak on Jan 2,2008 at 8:22PM.
upinak:(-25 to-35)Crap,it’ll be that cold again!
Let me put my other foot in my mouth,upinak!:)a hem!
canopfor on January 2, 2009 at 8:45 PM
I found this old clip of Gov. Palin talking to this local alaskan radio jock…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ_Lg_90zm4
An Era of Hate on January 2, 2009 at 8:53 PM
Obama vs. Palin? The most intellectual pol in the country vs. the stupidest? The come-together candidate vs. the polarizing social con? The good father vs. the bad (grand)mother? The Constitutional Law professor vs. the sportscaster? President of the Harvard Law Review vs. Miss Wasilla? Columbia Univ. & Harvard Law vs. Hawaii Pacific U., N. Idaho College, Univ. of Idaho and Matanuska-Susitna College?
Oh please let it happen!
Noneya on January 2, 2009 at 6:22 PM
Point by point… 1. “Uhmmmm” 2. Unless you’re a woman, Jew or bitter, gun-toting redneck 3. baby killer 4. Factcheck says: not really, and at least Palin paid her own tuition instead of having Khalid Al Mansour write the school checks 5. snob, plus we don’t know whether AA/ legacy helped Obama
No, it’s just a lying douchebag / piece of trash.
Palin already has the brain to be a popular governor of the state of Alaska, a strong fiscal conservative and a quick study. Most governors are not strong on foreign policy, yet she did well in a debate against Joe Biden. Her interviews with Couric and Gibson were awkward, but that is something she could study with a media consultant. What she has is her undeniable public appeal, more than her looks. She is a trustworthy person just coming into her own as a politician.
chunderroad on January 2, 2009 at 8:59 PM
Palin / Ridge 2012
chunderroad on January 2, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Not kidding at all. I’m inclusive like that.
Sanford will please the socons, ficons and defcons, and Johnson will bring the libertarians home (who have been running screaming into the streets from the GOP since ’04).
It’s the rule, there’s a stool, there’s a stool!
Rae on January 2, 2009 at 9:01 PM
WTF? How did I get jumbled together with that crackhead noneya?????
If you didn’t get my drift…Douches equals trolls which equals hatred for Palin because she upholds conservatives values and ideals and that makes socialist crackhead Obamaites quake in their boots……
HornetSting on January 2, 2009 at 9:04 PM
Alas no one but the base will vote for her.
If Palin runs in 2012 she will lose.
harry on January 2, 2009 at 9:05 PM
I found this old clip of Gov.Palin talking to this
alaskan radio jock…
An Era of Hate on Jan 2,2009 at 8:53PM.
An Era of Hate: Thanks for the video!
I love the part where Governor Sarah Palin says she doesn’t
want to be censored!hehe.
Hey,what SarahCuda says in this interview,is more articulate
than Hopey has said in his entire campaign,or anything else
for that matter!
canopfor on January 2, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Sorry to break it to many of you, but that would be a disaster. I like many things about the woman, but not for POTUS.
worlok on January 2, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Rae on January 2, 2009 at 9:01 PM
Wow the Palinites should read that Reagan interview in your link. What an elitist he was, articulating issues and such…
LevStrauss on January 2, 2009 at 9:15 PM
But sadly they don’t listen….goodbye 2012
harry on January 2, 2009 at 9:21 PM
As long as she forgets everything she’s learned from McCain I’d say she has a strong chance. Unfortunately, the last I heard she supports some form of shamnesty. The longer she waits to correct this the less credible it will seem, assuming she doesn’t actually share McCain’s view on the issue.
FloatingRock on January 2, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Not if she runs with Gary Johnson as her running mate.
And you know she’s studying hard* I just hope it’s under the tutelage of the Sanfords, Flakes, Johnsons, McClintocks and the like.
*And attending Toastmasters for Extemporaneous Speaking meetings, if such a group exists.
Rae on January 2, 2009 at 9:27 PM
If SP was only given 20 to 1 odds that she would win the nomination in 2012 then the anti-Palin crowd would say that she was yesterday’s news, but because she is still number one in the forefront in the hearts of the GOP base they continue the template that she is unelectable and that it is too early to look to 2012. Look I believe strongly in clarity. SP is still extremely popular and despite the fact that things will change over the next 2-4 years it will also change for Obama as well. I am confident of letting the universe unfold and that SP will be a far better GOP candidate in 2012 than McCain was and she was as a VP candidate. Finally, for those who say it’s too soon to look to 2012, please get out of the way, the Reagan conservatives are coming through. It will never be soon enough to think about taking Obama out in 2012.
technopeasant on January 2, 2009 at 9:30 PM
If Palin wants to maintain her viability for ’12 she’s going to have to speak out during the next comprehensive immigration reform battle.
FloatingRock on January 2, 2009 at 9:34 PM
…and choose sides. Wishy washy won’t cut it.
FloatingRock on January 2, 2009 at 9:34 PM
So, who do you suggest, harry? John McCain, Lindsey Graham, change the constitution and run Ahrnold?
HornetSting on January 2, 2009 at 9:47 PM
Yup, nobody but the base would vote for that Reagan … we need to run Gerald Ford again in 80
to bring in those “moderates”
joey24007 on January 2, 2009 at 10:01 PM
As much as I like Sarah Palin she will probably never be POTUS. Looking back at the last 12 months I can still see that there is a mysogynistic undercurrent in the US.
The United States won’t vote for a female President,ever.
I wait to be proven wrong.
Crux Australis on January 2, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Their campaign slogan… HAIR TODAY-GONE TOMORROW
katy on January 2, 2009 at 10:40 PM
Well..we’ll see.
I like Palin. It’ll be good to see her in a primary. And really take some shots and give some shots. I’ve seen her in debates other than the vp debate. But it’ll be good to see her against other repubs.
I think the fireworks could come with her and huckasneeze.
Gosh..I can’t stand huckabee…
Bugs the bejeepers outta me.
Handel on January 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM
Uh, sorry, she’s no Reagan. Again, I like many things about her, but not for POTUS. Put her up and watch many people defect to the Dems, once again. Well, that depends on how badly Slick Barry does over the next 4, so I guess it’s up in the air.
She really needs to study and learn A LOT more. To be fair, she was thrust into this rather quickly and didn’t have enough prep time. Perhaps if she really wants it she can start preparing NOW. I fear though that the Press has already painted her, to many, as Dan Quayle 2.
If you don’t like what I say, don’t shoot the messenger. I voted for McCain and if it came down it it I would vote for her over anything the Dems could put up there.
worlok on January 2, 2009 at 11:20 PM
It’s at least two years too early to be worried about that.
And FWIW, although I’m very Conservative, I’m not completely convinced that she is. So I haven’t made my mind up.
But we’ve got a long time to worry about it, after we do the 2010 Congressional elections. Priorities, people.
jefferson101 on January 2, 2009 at 11:23 PM
Noneya, I heard you are a woman. And I was thinking gay beta-male the whole time. Forgive me honey.
Obama intellectual? Hmmm…he thinks there is a right to murder an unborn baby (and born babies) in the Constitution.
Obama thinks babies are punishments.
The come together candidate that brings up race at almost every point, especially in a disgusting way in the hispanic communities.
Obama, President of the Harvard Law Review. That is NOT a good thing to have on a resume for POTUS if you didn’t know that already. By the way, have you found all his writings during those years? No.
Palin WORKED for what she accomplished. It was not gifted to her by anybody like it was for Obama and soon-to-be princess light-weight Kennedy.
‘Perceived’ brains are a dime a dozen honey. Guts and leadership are in short supply. Palin has BOTH in much larger amounts than cipher Obama.
Who is going to be POTUS come Jan. 20th? Rahm Emanuel. Why? Because O-man has no cajones to confront his own Chief of Staff.
Sapwolf on January 2, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Liberals already have some buyer’s remorse with Obama. he will makes things MUCH worse and the whole country will have buyer’s remorse, including the Republican and conservative turncoats who supported him.
Since when has an Administration been so riddled with obvious corruption and scandal BEFORE taking office? Anyone?
worlok on January 2, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Harding?
joey24007 on January 2, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Australis?
Another Australian who thinks Americans are sexists?
The USA will get a female POTUS. It is only a matter of time. The question is who? Sarah? Hillary? It’s bound to happen. Our schools have been catering to women for the last two generations and women are graduating from college at a greater rate than men. Incomes for the same work are now even for the most part.
The USA is probably the least racist country in the world. I’d laugh at visitors at my past company who came in from Ireland and Australia. I’d have to correct them of their ridiculous views of US politics. They get there news from leftist sources like the BBC, etc. One woman from Australia HATED east asians, and I mean it was obvious she hated them. She made us southerners WAY uncomfortable being counseled by such a bigot.
Sapwolf on January 2, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Maybe Australia is more progressive than the US as far as womens issues are concerned? At least for women in political office.
To me it doesn’t matter whether someone is a man or a woman, as long as they are doing a good job.
As far racial issues in Australia I think the fact that racial homogenity – having the same racial makeup (white european) up until recently is the reason why racism is a problem in Australia.
Crux Australis on January 3, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Dead pool.
Palin, maybe. Huck and Mitt are exactly what we don’t need.
angelat0763 on January 3, 2009 at 1:04 AM
Mark Sanford.
angelat0763 on January 3, 2009 at 1:06 AM
Never too early to give up.
Jim Treacher on January 3, 2009 at 1:08 AM
I used to be Huck supporter but am now on board totally for Palin…the hubby too!
CCRWM on January 3, 2009 at 1:32 AM
odds on favorite???
…let’s hope not. I’m not a fan of losing
Opinionnation on January 3, 2009 at 1:33 AM
When will you beta-brains realize law review editors do not write articles? You’re almost as bad as the birthers!
benny shakar on January 3, 2009 at 1:48 AM
Can’t wait for Sarah’s speech at CPAC. Obama’s gonna be a One Term Failure.
Sarah Palin/Duncan Hunter 2012
Mr. Wednesday Night on January 3, 2009 at 2:54 AM
This coming from a what? Lawyer? Hmmmmmmm
upinak on January 3, 2009 at 3:18 AM
Much as I love Palin, I’m actually pulling for Mitt in 2012; wouldn’t mind seeing Fred Thompson making a renewed comeback at the nomination, but I doubt he’ll go for it. If The One is reelected a second term, I’ll certainly be pushing strongly for Jindal in 2016, probably. If Palin gets the nomination, then I’ll certainly be pushing for her. I can support Mitt, Palin or Jindal, out of the prime contenders. Pawlenty truly bores me.
Shmuckabee can never run again, as far as I’m concerned. Stay on your nice little Fox News talk show forever, Mike. Just as I could not vote for McCain, neither could I vote for Huck.
Jockolantern on January 3, 2009 at 3:56 AM
Incumbents tend to win.
Given that and the fact that she sounds like Forest Gump when grilled by a reporter, I think your prediction is optimism written deranged.
Ares on January 3, 2009 at 5:14 AM
Why don’t we run Ron Paul, seeing as he knows more about pretty much everything than every other politician in Washington?
Plus, he votes exactly according to the constitution. Everyone loves the constitution, right?
lodge on January 3, 2009 at 5:29 AM
Palin/Bachman! Brilliant! I love both of these women! I’m a real live Conservative with a capital C! Both of these women are Conservative’s Conservatives! Bachman is from my state and voted against the big bailout, by the way! She’s also a lawyer and has been a foster parent to over 23 children. And…the MSM hates her! They would all die frothing at the mouth with these two running!!!
sabbott on January 3, 2009 at 6:03 AM
Obama would have to screw up really, really, really bad in order not to be re-elected in 2012. My guess is that the Republicans will just send in a sacraficial lamb like they did in 1996. The All-Stars will wait for 2016.
SoulGlo on January 3, 2009 at 7:29 AM
I’ve never seen a more moronic string of comments, all trying to explain why Sarah can’t. Of course no one explains why hordes show up where ever she goes because they think she can. The hordes vote.
Palin 2012
Onager on January 3, 2009 at 9:24 AM
What is it you people have against Sarah Palin? Is it because she is a successful woman? Is it because she has a traditional nuclear family? Is it because she is a Christian? Is it because she is the Governor of the largest state in the Union? Is it because she did not graduate college from an Ivy League School? Is it because she is not a member of the Beltway Elite? And while I’m at it, please explain the huge crowds she draws when she speaks.
In Dixie, we appreciate strong, competant women. Most of us were raised by one. The lucky ones marry one.
kingsjester on January 3, 2009 at 9:34 AM
Barry’s first term will be catastrophic. The Dems and their idiotic economic interventions guarantee it.
The GOP will retake Congress in ’10 and the WH in ’12. Trust.
Heh.
Rae on January 3, 2009 at 9:42 AM
kingsjester on January 3, 2009 at 9:34 AM
It’s an Allah thread kingsjester…. If this were an EM thread, the content would be much more intellectually honest.
Keemo on January 3, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Palin was basically picked to show how inexperienced Obama was/is. She’s a backwater entity that happened to have more executive experience than Obama. Social cons may be happy that she’s against abortion(fetus termination, not baby killing, babies are born)in cases of even rape and incest, but that pretty much will kill the woman voting block.
Thaddeus McCotter will more than likely be the next President in 2012. Obama cannot possibly please anyone in the next four years. Right of Center people don’t want more socialism pushed onto them, and the moonbat lefties need a full on Marxist Coup to make them happy.
Seeing how Obama is finished before he starts, McCotter is the rising star based on his intellectual ability alone, his IQ probably being double that of Palin. She might be a great hockey mom, but President, I don’t think so. If there isn’t someone on the Republican ticket that wants to bring the country closer to what the founding fathers gave us, I will waste my vote on the party I should have voted for in ’08, Libertarian. I voted McCain, and now sorry I did. The Republican Party is nothing more than the reverse of the Democrat coin. The two parties have been in bed together a long,long time. Notice nothing really ever gets done, except for bigger government and re-election?
adamsmith on January 3, 2009 at 9:53 AM
adamsmith on January 3, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Lot of truth to that statement Adam.
Keemo on January 3, 2009 at 9:55 AM
kingsjester on January 3, 2009 at 9:34 AM
All of the above, kingsjester. These are also the reasons why I and many, many more like and deeply respect Mrs.Palin. Allahpundit likes to put that lousy picture of her up to bug us and get the nasties to bite…works everytime. In fact, any thread about Sister Sarah gets lots of hits. HotAir wouldn’t be HotAir without her.
Peace.
gracie on January 3, 2009 at 9:58 AM
Keeno, I’m just more of a centrist than ever before and see the BS on both sides of a rigged government. As crazy as everyone made Ron Paul out to be(he WAS a truther,no?)he made more sense politically than most. The Constitution has been torn apart by BOTH parties. The 10th amendment specifically. It’s hard for me to believe that with all the intelligent people out there, that no one has figured out if the government is that corrupt, maybe it just has too much power. The power still rests with the people, hold back payment on April 15, and see how much power the American people still have. Pretty hard to run a government with no money. Boston Tea Party II.
adamsmith on January 3, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Here’s the thing about Sarah Palin. She scared those of us on the left, for all the reasons people here love her, she seems to be a true ideologue. She really believes in conservatism, few Republican politicians do. But being a true believer is not enough. Also, I’m sorry but she also needs to see if her looks hold up in 2016, her supposed hotness was a big part of why alot of men liked her. I’m sure I’ll be called a sexist, but the signs that talked about wanting to have sex with her came from the right.
DeathToMediaHacks on January 3, 2009 at 11:03 AM
I like Sarah Palin. But is to too early to be talking seriously about 2012.
Phil Byler on January 3, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Ron Paul wasn’t a truther and McCotter is a hypocrite. McCotter opposed the bank bailout and talked of returning to Republican principles of small government. But then he voted for the auto welfare package. Plus, if you look at his voting record, he’s down with medicare D and a number of other horrendous big government projects.
The ideal candidate for 2012 is Palin running on a Ron Paul platform. At the very least we need a candidate who understand Austrian economics and can espouse domestic policy solutions through free markets
lodge on January 3, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Alpha, put a better pic. of Ms. Sarah on your posts….She is beautiful.She likes America, and she doesn’t seem to mind us little people. I say to the congress and potus as it sits now…”off with their heads”. Sarah is also not afraid to stand up..say it ain’t so Joe”. For a small town mayor she made Biden look like what he is…A full time crook and flim flam old man.
nondhimmie on January 3, 2009 at 11:33 AM
She’s still my girl.
Palin / Petraeus 2012!
Let’s roll.
ex-Democrat on January 3, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching.
Obama was a part-time lecturer, not a professor. It’s a minor distinction that says little about his intelligence and more about his character. He used a term that was weightier, more impressive, but denoting a different actual experience, typical of his resume fluffing.
This is your cue to say, “But all politicians do this.”
BAIPA = Born Alive Infant Protection Act
Obama’s record on this is indisputable. “Baby-killing” will tend to provoke a knee-jerk response among the pro-choice, but it was accurate when I used it. I am not an ideologue.
chunderroad on January 3, 2009 at 12:16 PM
That last comment was addressed to
.
chunderroad on January 3, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Obama’s looks were a big reason a lot of people liked him, aside from his skin color.
Palin is a “true ideologue” who scares the pee out of the Left because deep down they know her ideas sell whereas theirs really don’t, without resorting to personal attack of the “she’s idiotic trailer/igloo trash Caribou Barbie” variety.
ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 12:53 PM
Yes and Rudy had the same 3.5 to 1 odds before he got started, maybe even better.
Romney is our next president folks.
hanzblinx on January 3, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Ummm you might want to look into Petraeus the Ex-Dem, I am pretty sure he is not your cup of tea.
Squid Shark on January 3, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Romney may or may not be the next candidate, but there’s no way he could beat Obama in 2012, no matter what sort of mess Obama may make of things. Romney ’12 = Obama’s easy win for a second term.
ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 4:25 PM
I agree. Condoleezza Rice is pro-choice and far too eager to be pleasing and subservient to Obama for anyone I’m comfortable with (for starters). She’s satisfied President Bush’s needs for SofS but I’d never vote for her for the Executive.
Also, to be blunt, the whole “black” thing is really wearing thin, and I mean by that, creating and supporting these various political figures BECAUSE they’re Black and then as celebrites because they are Black without any regard for just who they are beyond their skin tone and race. It’s very old, from my point of view, needs to be exhaustively put away as the antiquated Stone Age method that race-entitlement thing is.
Anyway, Sarah would get my vote, just because I’d far easier trust Palin when the chips were down than I would most other politicians. She’s shown she has mettle in that regard, unlike, say, Obama.
S on January 3, 2009 at 5:20 PM
No, not at all (it will not “kill the woman voting block” as to Palin’s positions on life). It would deter the LEFTWING female and male “voting block” but NOT those among the Right.
There’s a substantial number of voters who deem themselves “pro life” who will eagerly vote for a candidate from the GOP be they male or female who is also pro-life. A LOT of voters think that abortion should be “severely limited” to cases of when a female’s life is in danger or a few other tragedies, but the rising majority in the U.S. thinks that abortion should be radically more restricted than it is now.
S on January 3, 2009 at 5:24 PM
If purple lips Barry can lead the country Sara sure can. His election removes all qualifications, even the one that involves being a US citizen. It’s open season boys and girls. We should all line up for the job. Ugh.
UnEasyRider on January 3, 2009 at 6:22 PM
My personal favorite is one from the 2009 calendar where she has a gun over her shoulder.
PS, Allah: the picsw of Sen reid and SOH Pelosi are just fine as is.
Red State State of Mind on January 3, 2009 at 7:10 PM
:lol Palin 2012….Wooohooo! President Palin sounds so good!
dec5 on January 3, 2009 at 8:35 PM
It is FAR too early to be predicting the 2012 Republican nominee.
I’d love to know who was predicting George W. Bush as the 2000 nominee in 1996.
I’d love to know who was predicting John Kerry as the 2004 Democratic nominee in 2000.
And I’d love to know who was predicting Barack Obama as the 2008 Democratic nominee in 2004.
asc85 on January 3, 2009 at 8:37 PM
The moonbats are scared of Sarah. Did you guys see this?
Y-not on January 3, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Re Obama’s qualifications as a constitutional scholar/law professor. His publications would not qualify him for tenure at the University of Minnesota law school, which is ranked 22nd this year.
The U of C (ranked 7th), by their own admission, offered him a tenure-track position on several occasions. Now what quality or characteristic do you think Obama possessed that led them to pursue him so actively? I’m thinking it had nothing to do with his scholarly work.
BTW, my alma mater is getting zip from me this year. They’ve been so brazenly political whores to this guy. They can suck it.
Y-not on January 3, 2009 at 9:17 PM
If he does, he will need to finance his campaign differently. Pledge early on not to contribute more than x% of his personal fortune to the effort (similar to Ross Perot in 1992) and get people personally invested in his candidacy. Otherwise, his vaunted personal fortune will again be spun as a liability (“buying the election”, “bad money after good”), especially if Huckabee runs.
Frankly, I think that the only way Obama is likely to be beat is if a highly motivated, new-hotness nobody comes along and upsets everyone, including the by-then “old and busted” Obama. it’s how Clinton beat HW Bush in 1992, and how Obama upset HRC in 2008. Bush had it over Gore in 2000. That “hey, who the hell is that?” factor is impossible to generage externally; it has to come from within. And it has to be strong and agile enough to beat the “my turn” candidate(s).
sulla on January 3, 2009 at 11:31 PM
That would be so awesome a pair after the Dems blow the economy up. I like Palin/Paul, Palin/Hunter, Palin/Jindal, Jindal/Palin, Romney/Palin, Palin/Romney, Paul/Palin.
As Gimli in the Lord of the Rings said:
“Certainty of death. Small chance of success. What are we waiting for?”
Let’s roll.
God, being a conservative is so….purposefull. We can only go up from here.
Sapwolf on January 4, 2009 at 2:07 AM
With all the intangibles against them, McCain/Palin still would’ve won if Mac hadn’t bungled the financial crisis. That, along with the media attacks, has got to be killing someone as competitive as Sarah Palin. Not to mention the fact that she’s a true feminist who wants to be the first female nominee for POTUS.
I think she’s running, and frankly I think she relishes the idea of a “rematch” with Obama on her own terms.
Mr. Wednesday Night on January 4, 2009 at 3:18 AM
Just what I thought…and I like it:
Ken Blackwell For RNC Chair
Saltysam on January 4, 2009 at 4:45 AM
That would be so awesome a pair after the Dems blow the economy up. I like Palin/Paul, Palin/Hunter, Palin/Jindal, Jindal/Palin, Romney/Palin, Palin/Romney, Paul/Palin.
After the Dems blow it up? Um… have you looked at the news lately? It’s already blown up.
Mal Carne on January 4, 2009 at 8:12 AM
2 and one-half years is a long time in politics. Right now the focus should be on the 2010 House, Senate and Governor races.
EconomicNeocon on January 4, 2009 at 11:23 AM
I believe that guy would have trouble with citizenship requirements as he’s sold his state to about every non-US interest possible.
sethstorm on January 4, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Too Damn Early!
newton on January 4, 2009 at 1:37 PM
More skeletons in crazy sarah’s closet.
benny shakar on January 4, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Allah- Would you please use a more dignified photo of the Governor? This screencap has been over used and I am tired of the sophomoric attempt at humor? parody? or is it just plain ole misogyny?
Buckeye Babe on January 4, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Benny, you poor sap, is that REALLY the best you can do? I don’t suppose it occurred to you to wonder why the warrant didn’t come through until a month after the election, and the arrest wasn’t made until more than two weeks after that? Do the words “a final drug buy the officers hoped for” suggest a train of thought?
Anyway, if it’s scandal you’re avid for, perhaps you ought to turn an occasional eye in the direction of your Most Holy Anointed One, who’s showing an unerring tendency to surround himself with it.
Gina on January 4, 2009 at 8:09 PM
Yes. ‘Nuff said.
ddrintn on January 4, 2009 at 10:15 PM
Anybody But Palin! lol
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/01/04/cnn-places-sarah-palin-2008s-criminals-sex-addicts-corrupt
Mr. Wednesday Night on January 5, 2009 at 12:00 AM
I don’t agree that it’s too early for Governor Palin to put the wheels in motion for 2012. She can be forming alliances with other conservative pols and separate herself from the McCain loser crowd. I trust in her good sense to know the skunks in the woodpile and pick them off accordingly. All the while, she can be the governor that Alaskans voted for and continue to lead by example.
The rest of us need not hammer the big-eared freak with made-up talking points for the next four years. The truth will suffice. Just don’t count on any of it from the MSM. If some truth does manage to slip through the Obamedia, just smile knowingly and praise them for their “good journalism”.
SKYFOX on January 5, 2009 at 6:18 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »