Allah, honey, you’re dreamin if you really think Sarah can win the nomination in 2012 at this point. She’s on her way to being a right-wing celebrity/operative/fund raiser, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But if you really believe she holds any more promise than that with the GOP, then you need a long vacation in the sun.

Webutante on November 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM

Can we get a hell yeah on that….

She scares the Media and Democrats alike……..She can shoot a varmit…..DC has plenty.

JayTee on November 17, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Yeah, right….LOL. Like it’s all that simple, she will ever be President.

The world is flat, Jesus rode on a dinosaur and they are pulling In God We Trust from all of our coins….

D-o-n-’t t-h-i-n-k s-o….

If people agree, then her polls are going to continue to rise.

Prepare to have a Mondale ‘84 showing laid on you if Palin ever got the nom, which she never will.

Moesart on November 17, 2009 at 2:42 PM

Prepare to have a Al Landon ’32 showing on you if Romney/Pawlenty/Hucakbee ever got the nom, which they never will.

Unless a better new CONSERVATIVE candidate, preferably ALPHA-MALE, shows up. The existing male ones are either RINO, liar, or BETA-MALE. Except for McDonnell, there’s no one in sight.

So, at the moment, I’ll stick with SARAH PALIN.

This blog is anti-Palin.

I don’t relate.

Please advise.

I would also like to know the location of a conservative blog that isn’t Anti-palin.

This one is.

TO QUOTE MS, THE “RED_DAIPER_DOPER_BABIES”, THEY CLEARLY NEED SOME NEW DAIPER SINCE IT MUST BE OVERFLOWING BY NOW.

That’s “MS. MOMMY” to those vultures…

jana on November 16, 2009 at 5:31 PM

or Ms. Jackson if your nasty.

Exit question one: Er, why would she (or anyone else) want to run if Obama doesn’t look beatable, i.e. if the economy starts coming back and unemployment begins to decrease?

Exit question two: If Obama does look beatable, what can the RNC do to tilt the table away from Palin and towards some more “electable” candidates?

Exit question three: Is the premise of exit questions one and two sound? Is it necessarily true that, as a Democrat opponent becomes more formidable, it actually *is* better to run a more centrist candidate on the grounds of “electability”? How does the experience of the 2008 race tend to strengthen or weaken that calculus, which is central to accepting the premise behind exit questions one and two?

Long story short, as things stand [in 2009], she’s a threat to win the GOP nomination but an almost certain loser in the general election [in 2012]…

Exit question four: Is the next election soon enough to rate Palin an almost certain loser in 2012 based on a poll, or a set of polls, taken in 2009? A lot of commenters say otherwise, and provide examples from Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan to try & prove it. But are those examples relevant? If so/not, why [not]?

Note that, unlike Romney or Huck, Palin has never stood at a debate lectern and argued why she would be a better president than her primary challengers, while both of them have (in 2008). It would seem that matchup polls would have more validity to them after this has occurred than beforehand. But maybe all this is irrelevant and unnecessary. Which is closer to being accurate?

…unless economic conditions have deteriorated to the point where any Republican would be a threat to knock off Obama.

Note that exit question four is intended to apply no matter whether the economy is still in the toilet or has started to improve by 2012.

Question to all of us that post here. Have any of you been polled for anything related to Sarah?

ProudPalinFan on November 16, 2009 at 5:34 PM

Not me.