Get ready for … Romney/Palin 2012?

posted at 10:12 am on April 15, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

The Boston Herald thinks they’ve found the unity ticket for the GOP in 2012.  Apparently, Sarah Palin thinks it sounds “serious,” too.  The only question would be the order (via Jules Crittenden):

Conservative superstar Sarah Palin opened the door today to joining forces with Mitt Romney for a 2012 White House run – a hot ticket that has some Republicans licking their chops at the prospect of unseating President Obama.

“Sounds pretty good,” Palin declared at today’s Tea Party Express rally on the Common when asked about pairing up with the former Bay State governor – giving the idea a big thumbs-up as she left the stage after her headline speech.

Earlier tonight, as Palin stopped for cannoli at Mike’s Pastry in the North End, she said she was “serious” about the idea.

“I have a lot of respect for Mitt,” she told the Herald.

Asked who would be on top of the ticket, Palin roared, “Ha! I haven’t even thought that far ahead yet.”

Something tells me Sarah was having some fun with reporters Edward Mason, Hillary Chabot, and Jessica Van Sack, although probably not about the respect.  Romney may have made some missteps, and MassCare is certainly a doozy, but he’s a serious candidate worthy of respect — as would be Palin if she decides to give it a run.  Neither one of them are focused on 2012, however, according to their respective teams, which hustled to make it clear that 2010 is the first goal of all Republicans working the stump at the moment.

Nevertheless, the Herald’s reporters found a few politicos salivating at the prospect of a Romney/Palin (or Palin/Romney) ticket for 2012.  They quote GOP strategist Douglas Lorenz in calling that ticket “formidable,” while one Republican candidate for Massachusetts governor called it “the best of both worlds” and another declared that partnership “a good looking ticket,” which may have been meant literally.  In fact, the Herald devotes a lot of column space to a notion that is as unlikely an outcome as practically anything else suggested.  If Palin ends up on another ticket, it won’t be in the number-two slot again, and Romney won’t take that slot either even if he might have done it with McCain in 2008, if asked.

Good thing the Herald gets its ink by the barrel.  Perhaps their reporters should take a lesson from the Godfather … “Leave the fun.  Take the cannolis.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 3 4 5

So…

Was that an “activist” comment or a “running for office” comment?

Hehe.

cs89 on April 15, 2010 at 4:41 PM

It is way too early to be fantisizing 2012 tickets. However, this one (either way) is probably a dream on a slow news day. There are a lot of potential tickets that make much more sense.

duff65 on April 15, 2010 at 4:51 PM

That’s funny. I haven’t liked him much lately, but I felt like he was worse in 2006 and 2007.

I really hope we get a good candidate in 2012. We deserve one, but we can still so easily hand this to the Dems.

Esthier on April 15, 2010 at 4:36 PM

I find a candidate honest about his opinions that I disagree with more honorable than a candidate who suddenly changes his positions because they were so unpopular. That’s one reason I liked Bush, and that he was unabashed about his positions. Obama doesn’t fit this, because he’s not open about his positions. He cloaks them in so much bulls**t it’s incomprehensible. That’s the direction McCain has gone in.

MadisonConservative on April 15, 2010 at 4:57 PM

Palin will run as Romney’s VP so that Romney staffers can stab her in the back after the defeat? Ain’t happening.

ddrintn on April 15, 2010 at 5:10 PM

If that somehow turned out to be McCain, would you vote for him?

I would not.

MadisonConservative on April 15, 2010 at 4:02 PM
You didn’t vote for him in the last election?

Esthier on April 15, 2010 at 4:21 PM

–Even I voted for McCain (but I’m less inclined to vote for the GOP Pres nominee in 2012 now that the GOP can block Obama in the Senate).

Jimbo3 on April 15, 2010 at 5:14 PM

My impression of Palin is that policy details are not her “thing”. She seems to have a very superficial knowledge of issues.

Chekote on April 15, 2010 at 11:05 AM

This impression doesn’t seem to be based on her actual experience in government.

Think about it like this, In Star Trek, Scotty knew a hell of a lot about the engines, Spock knew a lot about science, Bones was an expert in medicine. All these people were vastly more knowledgeable in their fields than Captain Kirk, yet he was the Captain. Why? Because he was the best person to lead. Same with Palin. Keep Ryan in the Engine Room and let Palin do battle with the large-eared alien.

Dongemaharu on April 15, 2010 at 5:18 PM

My impression of Palin is that policy details are not her “thing”. She seems to have a very superficial knowledge of issues.

Chekote on April 15, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Reagan was said to be similarly superficial while Clinton was said to be a total wonk. Your call.

ddrintn on April 15, 2010 at 5:20 PM

I noticed earlier in this thread that Chekote is still claiming that Palin is saying the pipeline exists when it doesn’t. This is obviously not true.

Sarah Palin has never claimed that the pipeline has already been built. The proposals are going through the “open season” period very soon.

If you would read up on the Constitution of Alaska, there is a fund which is fed by the production of the state’s natural resources, which the Constitution says belongs to the people of the State. The fund is invested, like a giant mutual fund, and the people get residuals checks from the investment profits. When oil was really high, Palin opted to send most of the net increase right back to the people directly, instead of the Government holding on to it.

This is in no way “oil socialism”. That is a dumb distortion of the real situation. I would submit that following the Constitution is a conservative principle. Giving the people more of their money to spend or save according to their own priorities is a conservative principle, rather than allowing the State Legislature to rob this people’s fund to continue growing the State government. That is the real issue, and Sarah Palin took the conservative path through that issue.

Brian1972 on April 15, 2010 at 5:32 PM

That’s the direction McCain has gone in.

MadisonConservative on April 15, 2010 at 4:57 PM

That’s the implication his “I’m no Maverick” thing has been for me as well. That’s my only main complaint with him right now though.

–Even I voted for McCain (but I’m less inclined to vote for the GOP Pres nominee in 2012 now that the GOP can block Obama in the Senate).

Jimbo3 on April 15, 2010 at 5:14 PM

Interesting. I didn’t realize you were that opposed to Democrat power.

Esthier on April 15, 2010 at 5:35 PM

It’s amusing to see Palin referred to as (potentially) “a serious candidate worthy of respect”. She couldn’t even finish a term as governor, for heaven’s sake.

Imagine if Obama had quit his Senate seat before running for President. You folks would be raking him over the coals for it, and you’d be right. But when it’s St. Palin, there is no such thing as wrong.

orange on April 15, 2010 at 5:40 PM

Palin would campaign for Romney for 8 months and then the Palin devotees would demand she was VP or they don’t vote.

PrezHussein on April 15, 2010 at 5:46 PM

Imagine if Obama had quit his Senate seat before running for President. You folks would be raking him over the coals for it, and you’d be right. But when it’s St. Palin, there is no such thing as wrong.

orange on April 15, 2010 at 5:40 PM

Of course Obama did pretty much just that. He didn’t even finish one term either.

Esthier on April 15, 2010 at 5:47 PM

But when it’s St. Palin, there is no such thing as wrong right and just, for you.

orange on April 15, 2010 at 5:40 PM

All exculpatory explanations are dismissed out of hand as “talking points”, implying they are %100 fabricated propaganda.

Meanwhile, every little manufactured scandal from the propagandists in the media are accepted in full, word for word, without challenge or question.

You’re no better than those you accuse.

Brian1972 on April 15, 2010 at 5:49 PM

Latest PPP poll of hypothetical 2012 matchups has Obama beating Palin by only 2 points.

Jon0815 on April 15, 2010 at 6:02 PM

Latest PPP poll of hypothetical 2012 matchups has Obama beating Palin by only 2 points.

Jon0815 on April 15, 2010 at 6:02 PM

What a disaster for the GOP. He’s crushing her!/

Brian1972 on April 15, 2010 at 6:04 PM

Sarah Palin was just being nice, and screwing with the reporters minds. Don’t forget, she is an EXPERT at screwing with the press.

Look, Palin/Romney would be like Reagan/Bush(41) with the same disastrous results.

Sarah, playing the part of Reagan, would work tirelessly to advance Liberty and Freedom, as well as common sense Conservatism for her 8 years in office. America would love her and reward Willard with a win by association.

Then, just like Bush, Romney would screw up and tear down every thing Teh Sarah built up and hand the WH back to another Marxist-democrat.

Sarah needs a real Conservative as her second. Rick Perry still makes the most sense, but you know what? I’ve been watching Herman Cain. You want a ticket that would shake things up!

Romney is a walking turd and shouldn’t even be mentioned in polite conversation. Where is he while the rest of the bunch is out there in the trenches fighting for Liberty and Freedom? That’s right, NOWHERE.

Romney would sell his mother and his children to be POTUS. He doesn’t deserve to be anywhere near the presidency.

Maybe Teh Sarah will invite him over for some tea once she gets settled in!

gary4205 on April 15, 2010 at 6:46 PM

Romney? Palin?

How about NEITHER.

You-Eh-Vee on April 15, 2010 at 6:52 PM

Oh my, Sarah within 2 of TheOne

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_415.pdf

Quick, Sarah haters. Tell me again that she is not electable

datadriver on April 15, 2010 at 7:08 PM

Oh my, Sarah within 2 of TheOne

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_415.pdf”

Quick, Sarah haters. Tell me again that she is not electable

datadriver on April 15, 2010 at 7:08 PM

A year ago, the same poll had her down 55-35. My how quickly things can change.

takeamericabackin10 on April 15, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Get ready for … Romney/Palin 2012?

No, but I’ll could get ready for Palin/Romney.

NoLeftTurn on April 15, 2010 at 7:17 PM

It’s amusing to see Palin referred to as (potentially) “a serious candidate worthy of respect”. She couldn’t even finish a term as governor, for heaven’s sake.

Imagine if Obama had quit his Senate seat before running for President. You folks would be raking him over the coals for it, and you’d be right. But when it’s St. Palin, there is no such thing as wrong.

orange on April 15, 2010 at 5:40 PM

Hell Obama did worse fool, after PROMISING Illinois voters he WOULD NOT run for President during his first term, Obama got elected then PROMPTLY abandoned his job to start running for President!

Obama only served 143 days in the Senate, period.

In the real world he would have been fired, big time.

gary4205 on April 15, 2010 at 7:25 PM

Obama only served 143 days in the Senate, period.

In the real world he would have been fired, big time.

gary4205 on April 15, 2010 at 7:25 PM

It isn’t that Obama was a “quitter”; face it, the two situations aren’t the same. The thing is, Palin took her job seriously from the beginning. For Obama, the Senate was just a mere formality, a stepping-stone. That’s worse than being a “quitter” under a barrage of frivolous lawsuits.

ddrintn on April 15, 2010 at 7:29 PM

“Imagine if Obama had quit his Senate seat before running for President. You folks would be raking him over the coals for it, and you’d be right. But when it’s St. Palin, there is no such thing as wrong.

orange on April 15, 2010 at 5:40 PM”

Obama spent 120 days in the Senate and then announced he was running for president. From then on, he spent virtually every waking minute campaigning for president, all the while collecting a paycheck from taxpayers to represent the interests of the state of Illinois. Palin could have written her book and gone on speaking junkets (when is T-Paw NOT on the road speaking in other states?) and continued to collect a pay check from Alaskan taxpayers.

Tell me who’s more honorable.

howIroll on April 15, 2010 at 7:33 PM

I don’t think it will be either one of them.

Terrye on April 15, 2010 at 7:36 PM

I don’t think it will be either one of them.

Terrye on April 15, 2010 at 7:36 PM

The window’s going to be closing on dark-horse possibilities though. They’d better appear kinda quickly if they’re going to creep onto the radar at all.

ddrintn on April 15, 2010 at 7:44 PM

I fail to understand the furvor over Sarah Palin. I don’t find her to be all that impressive or important. I don’t know why the left finds her so demonic, nor do I understand why the right finds her so wonderful.

Frankly, she bores me and strikes me as a run of the mill working woman.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on April 15, 2010 at 2:40 PM

+1

I cannot dispute that she is hot though and would LURVE to cuddle with her.

hot-heir on April 15, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Obama only served 143 days in the Senate, period.

In the real world he would have been fired, big time.

gary4205 on April 15, 2010 at 7:25 PM

It isn’t that Obama was a “quitter”; face it, the two situations aren’t the same. The thing is, Palin took her job seriously from the beginning. For Obama, the Senate was just a mere formality, a stepping-stone. That’s worse than being a “quitter” under a barrage of frivolous lawsuits.

ddrintn on April 15, 2010 at 7:29 PM

Oh yeah, he’s a hell of a lot worse. He’s a thief and a liar. He lied when he said he wouldn’t run for POTUS (in his 1st term) And stole two years worth of paychecks from the taxpayers (you and me) as well.

Sarah had already fulfilled every single campaign promise, was leaving Alaska in more than capable hands, and saving the state millions of dollars by shutting Obama’s thugs down.

On the other hand, Obama totally abandoned his people in order to advance his own career, and stole from them in the process.

Hell, he’s Mitt Romney! (the “all about ME” stuff)

Cuda wins…Obama and Romney lose.

gary4205 on April 15, 2010 at 8:30 PM

The pulse I’m getting rom people is they can’t stand Palin. I understand how much of a fireball she is and she’s really a good thing, but people just dont like her. They dont connect with all that she has done even though Alaska is a mixed bag of experience up there. She needs to talk more about what she has accomplished and drive it home. Talking about how good things can be or how bad current management is just isnt enough.

johnnyU on April 15, 2010 at 8:32 PM

I wish they would stop trying to cram Dudley Do right down our throats. Palin is hated by academia because she’s not the high intellect Harvard/Yale type, but can’t they do better than Mitt?

mike_NC9 on April 15, 2010 at 8:42 PM

Ken and Barbie 2012! Defeat Socialism!

jp on April 15, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Hahahaha!! Awesome.

Are you better off than you were 4 Trillion dollars ago?

Emperor Norton on April 15, 2010 at 11:14 AM

If a GOP Presidential candidate doesn’t use that as a campaign slogan, I’m gonna be so disappointed.

So what? Bill Clinton was a loser the first time he ran for political office, and also lost a Governor’s race in Arkansas as an incumbent. Dick Nixon lost the first time he ran for President, and later won.

As for Romney, he ran for MA Senator in 1994, and won the GOP primary in that race. He lost the election to The Swimmer.

He ran for MA Governor in 2002, and won.

He ran for President exactly once. In 2008.

Del Dolemonte on April 15, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Lets not forget Ronald Reagan. He lost the 1976 election. Came back and won in 1980.

Don’t count someone out just because they ran and lost a previous election…

–Feel free to tell me it’s none of my business, but aren’t LDSers effectively required to attend services at temples for at least part of the time. If that’s the case (and I might be wrong), how do you do that given where you live?

Jimbo3 on April 15, 2010 at 1:49 PM

Wow, there are a lot of LDS people posting today. I’m also LDS and going to the temple is not required.

Belief in Jesus Christ is required. :)

Conservative Samizdat on April 15, 2010 at 8:47 PM

The pulse I’m getting rom people is they can’t stand Palin. I understand how much of a fireball she is and she’s really a good thing, but people just dont like her. They dont connect with all that she has done even though Alaska is a mixed bag of experience up there. She needs to talk more about what she has accomplished and drive it home. Talking about how good things can be or how bad current management is just isnt enough.

johnnyU on April 15, 2010 at 8:32 PM

.

Nobody likes Mitt but Mitt and those PAID to like Mitt (see New Orleans straw poll)

Oh, the establishment LOVES Mitt, because he is a scumbag like they are, out for himself and none else. Just like the rest of the country clubbers.

Romney needs to go away, he brings NOTHING to the table.

Too many serious Freedom and Liberty loving candidates, and WAY too many COMPETENT chief executives to have to settle for a loser like Romney. WAY too many.

gary4205 on April 15, 2010 at 8:58 PM

hot-heir on April 15, 2010 at 4:17 PM

There are lots of good leadership opportunities in churches.
Too bad it has become a fighting point w/ some people.
I wish we could just get some good leadership in this country.

Badger40 on April 15, 2010 at 9:07 PM

That is a losing ticket.

AshleyTKing on April 15, 2010 at 9:52 PM

The window’s going to be closing on dark-horse possibilities though. They’d better appear kinda quickly if they’re going to creep onto the radar at all.

ddrintn on April 15, 2010 at 7:44 PM

Here’s the problem: the door is going to close real fast on the Mitch Daniels/Marco Rubio/Paul Ryan boomlets. Say, in about six months. We are where we are, with Mittens, PassTheBuckabee, and Sarah. The only real dark horse in this race is Teh Jeb, who is waiting to see if his oleagenous toady and Front Man, Mittens, collapses like a house of cards like he did when he ran and lost against the Zombie Candidate in 2008.

Then Jeb, sensing continued weakness and Carterism on Obama’s part, jumps in the race, beats back the challenge of the Reagan/Goldwater wing of the Party led by Palin, restores the Authority of The Bush Family as the Rightful Owners of the Republican Party and Sarah is given a token appointment as Energy Secretary (where she is expected by the Bush Clan to shut up and do the dishes like the rest of the Hoi Polloi) in the Third Bush Administration of the Mighty Jeb!

Jeb!/Whitman 2012! For the Republican Party that Believes in Nothing But a Good Time at the Trough…..

victor82 on April 15, 2010 at 10:56 PM

Oh my, Sarah within 2 of TheOne

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_415.pdf”

Quick, Sarah haters. Tell me again that she is not electable

datadriver on April 15, 2010 at 7:08 PM
A year ago, the same poll had her down 55-35. My how quickly things can change.

takeamericabackin10 on April 15, 2010 at 7:11 PM

–About 48% of the Tea Party people sampled said she wasn’t ready to be President vs. 40% that said she was. If she can’t get a plurality of the Tea Party……

Jimbo3 on April 15, 2010 at 11:15 PM

It is fun to see the Palin fans try to decide what to do with Sarah’s own words.

I will vote for a Romney/Palin ticket.

I love Romney, and have always thought Palin is a good person.

scotash on April 15, 2010 at 11:20 PM

It is fun to see the Palin fans try to decide what to do with Sarah’s own words.

scotash on April 15, 2010 at 11:20 PM

It’s more fun to see Romney fans engaging in RomneyCare/ObamaCare gymnastics.

ddrintn on April 16, 2010 at 12:06 AM

–About 48% of the Tea Party people sampled said she wasn’t ready to be President vs. 40% that said she was. If she can’t get a plurality of the Tea Party……

Jimbo3 on April 15, 2010 at 11:15 PM

But still…2 points behind. Pick and choose those polls til they say what you want them to say.

ddrintn on April 16, 2010 at 12:08 AM

Well I can tell you that when it comes to reading material like that, I am reading it for one purpose & one purpose only, to get acquainted w/ the enemy.
My mind has no wish to be open to the ‘virtues’ of stuff like that.
But I can be open minded to many other things, myself.

Badger40 on April 15, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Exactly why I read it, and made the kids read it before going off to college. Which was a VERY good thing as it turned out. How can you argue what you are for if you have no idea what you are really against? That is at least why I read this horrific stuff like Marx and all the evils which followed.

Part of the fun of being a Conservative has always been that we are far from ignorant or uninformed. We like to learn. The Democrats and the media assume quite the opposite about us. Part of being a great Conservative like Reagan is learning how to express what we know and have learned so others can understand why we believe what we believe. That last part is not so easy as the learning.

freeus on April 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM

Keep dreaming Ms. Palin.

Romney isnt going to make the same mistake TAFKAM. Mitt is too smart for that. He doesnt want his campaign to be a joke…he doesnt want to lose all the independents. In fact, just about the only way Mitt loses is if he does something really dumb like take an extremely divisive half-term governor and make her his running mate.

uh…no thanks.

FlickeringFlame on April 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM

Jenfidel on April 15, 2010 at 2:37 PM

First of all, I apologize for not answering you sooner. I have been diagnosed with a “frozen shoulder” and saying it was less painful giving birth to the twins is an understatement. I cannot sit for too long and type.

Despite Madison Conservative advising me not to explain my take on the term “Palinista” I am going to try so I am not ever labeled as a Palin hating troll. In addition, if she won the nomination I would vote for her.

A “Palinsta” is someone like the person who sent me a death threat via email because I defended Allah and Ed for their threads on Palin. This was about 6-7 months ago. There are some people who treat criticisms of Palin as being akin to blasphemy. Despite what these people say, it does very much resemble Paulbots and Obamazombies.

“Palinistas” I find do not look at things via ever having worked on a political campaign on a serious level. I listened to Palin’s tea party speech twice, I have most of her televised speeches on my DVR. In all honesty, they are strung together political cliches, and she can do better. I want the woman to do better, but for some weird reason she has not felt compelled to fight back those from the Left by delivering speeches with more substance. Contrast and compare speeches or interviews of others like a Paul Ryan, Newt, McCotter, Rubio, DeMint, or Lt. Col. West. You can add Michele Bachmann and Liz Cheney from the female perspective. Each of these people have better command, or delivery when it comes to getting across their message and definition of the issues and solutions. A “Palinista” does not compare, contrast or reasonably think about anything other than responding to me by name calling. It is like arguing with a fence post.

The problem for me is “Palinistas” only see Sarah Palin as great for the Base, but the Base is so not going to carry us across the line in 2012. “Palinistas” like her speeches the way they are, but every speech she gives now is not solely about the November elections. They should be viewed as building blocks for 2011, and the future of the GOP. What the woman says at this point will define whether or not we take back the GOP, and if we can convince the political illiterate, and others to do a Reagan once again.

In case no one has been listening to Rush, he has said several times, along with other Conservatives, that it is not possible for us to fight back amnesty. Certainly not with the current Congressional makeup. This will change the entire electorate. In order to win the 2012 crucial election we MUST without a question have Independents, Moderates, Reagan Democrats and more than 10% of the African-American votes in order to win. A “Palinista” sees my criticism of her speeches as being either like a troll, blasphemy, not reading her FB or op-eds, (which I have and do), or wax on and on about how saying “common sense conservative” 5-8 times per speech is somehow magically going to work on voters out there who in all sincerity do not have the foggiest idea what that means when it comes to a solution or policy. 17 million plus of the unemployed want to hear more than that. I know my solidly Conservative Dad who is unemployed wants to hear more from her on solutions. To date he and the rest of my family members are not impressed. That scares me because you could not get any more “Base” than they.

My criticism is because I want her to do better, not due to some wild fantasy created by a “Palinista”. I do not want Mitt, or so far any of the others, to out solution or out debate her. She is the only one on the proposed list who might really take down this federal behemoth. My criticism comes from knowing what it is going to take on a political basis to win. “Palinistas” seem to be so in love with her that they cannot see her faults which desperately need attention.

I hope that helps.

freeus on April 16, 2010 at 1:51 AM

MadisonConservative on April 15, 2010 at 3:12 PM

Perzactly!

I thought Conservatives utterly despised anyone who endorsed amnesty. At least the McCain amnesty. And I too was confused by her answer. I would also like some more definition on her global warming views.

In other news, Paul Ryan actually said the word “regime” today in describing the Obama Regime. It was fantastic!

freeus on April 16, 2010 at 2:05 AM

orange on April 15, 2010 at 5:40 PM

I know that it upsets you that Sarah Palin is highly public figure who is a big pain in the rear for the Democrats and particularly Obama. And I know you realize that Palin would not be as effective as she is now if she hadn’t “quit” that gig in Alaska.

But you see, you’re unable to keep up with her as far as thinking goes.

Who said she’s running for President? Or anything?

She, right now, it THE NUMBER ONE SPOKESMAN for the grassroots movement.

Maybe …

That’s all she wants to be. :D

HondaV65 on April 16, 2010 at 9:25 AM

A “Palinsta” is someone like the person who sent me a death threat via email because I defended Allah and Ed for their threads on Palin.

freeus on April 16, 2010 at 1:51 AM

Please … if you’re not a Palinista – you’d hardly know what one is.

I am the self-appointed President of the HotAir Palinista Nation. :D

Before I explain what a “Palinista” is … I hope you will inform us that you turned over those death threats to the FBI?

Hmmm … did you know that Palin also gets death threats and … many more than you have?

But back on topic …

A Palinista is simply someone who believes in the basic principles of what Sarah Palin stands for. A Palinista is NOT a mouth frothing radical. Radicals and Idiots are … Radicals and Idiots and they come in all shapes, form, sizes and political persuasions. ;)

A Palinista isn’t someone that believes Sarah Palin WILL or SHOULD run for President. A Palinista is someone who’s supportive of her efforts on the public stage to advance Conservative candidates who are “in touch” with the grass roots.

Palinistas can be “split” on the issue of her endo of John McRage – we’re “big tent” like that.

Hope this clears up the mystery and … be sure to report that death threat please.

HondaV65 on April 16, 2010 at 9:35 AM

HondaV65 on April 16, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Yes I did report it.

But you miss the point of me bringing it up. It was simply the fact that you cannot criticize Governor Palin without having some people go over the cliff. Not all people, just some people.

It is also not about comparing my death threats versus the number of death threats Governor Palin is receiving. Think about your logic. I am suppose to be okay with this because Palin receives more? What? That comment is like when Bret Baer was talking with the President and Obama goes, “Well I receive 40,000 emails a day Bret!”. That in no way changed what Bret was saying to the President.

See Honda, I have defended the woman many times. I have not reflected that I dislike her. I said I would vote for her. I simply criticized her speeches, and you automatically assumed I would not know Sarah Palin has been unmercifully targeted. Why? Why do that to someone who is simply offering the idea she needs to improve her speech content. Why do that? Why take an attitude in your writing which reflects you think I am not a Conservative, or cannot comprehend anything about the GOP? It is quite the contrary Honda. I have been very involved in the GOP for years and years. It is a family legacy. I am not a Democrat or a Lefty. You assume Honda.

Who said these people are radicals or idiots? I simply implied that “Palinistas” need to look at her speeches in a larger picture, or impact on both the November elections, and those for 2012. She is defining, because no one else has the power to attract the people, Sarah Palin alone, well other than Rush, Levin, Ingraham, etc., she is defining what Conservatism is to the uninformed. What she says quite frankly is more important than anything anyone else is saying. I believe she has the power to save not just our country, but the world with those speeches of hers. I want her to succeed. She is the only one now who can save us all. At least for now. I have no faith in the rest of the possible field of candidates. None. Zip, zero, nada.

In fact Honda, I have often here on Hot Air defended Sarah Palin. I defended the political smarts on her part to say she would run with Mitt despite the fact I pray it does not happen.

Here is something else “Palinistas” need to keep in mind. Many in other states do not have a candidate running in November. Now I have adopted a state. Sort of like what Morris suggested. But while someone in AZ is daily out there fighting the good fight, the rest of us have more time to pay attention to what these POTUS candidates are saying. After donating, there is not much we can do as far as ground work/leg work for say someone like a Rubio. We have our local issues and upcoming smaller things, but as far as looking at these people possibly running for POTUS, we have more time to ponder what they are saying. It is logical that some across the fruited plains would take the time to more closely look at Mrs. Palin’s speeches, and the same for the other candidates. I could slam Mitt, Newt, Pawlenty, Huckster, etc. for their speeches, and in no way to I get the same responses. Weird. Even the lunatic Hucksters do not respond in such violent manners, or all assuming manners.

I did not mention her endorsement of McCain. I mentioned endorsing HIS amnesty views. There is a difference. Rush said she had no choice on the endorsement. I got that. The second visit, my eyebrows did go up. But if you read my comments, it was amnesty I questioned. Do you know the answer on that one?

See Honda, the problem I have with so called “Palinistas” is I get labeled, insulted, totally misunderstood, and my questions still go unanswered or ignored. I said I wanted her speeches to improve because I believe she is our only hope at this juncture. I said I wanted her speeches to improve because I know she can. I said I wanted her speeches to improve because the nation hangs in the balance. I said her speeches need to improve not because of those who already support her, but to convince those who do not to join us. How any of that turns into what you seem to think of me is beyond my understanding at the moment.

Just do me a favor Honda, if you read my Sarah Palin comments in the future, please, please remember that I am on your side of this. I am a Conservative who believes in the ideals she stands for, but I am just a Conservative who is operating on the trust but verify standard.

freeus on April 16, 2010 at 10:55 AM

One last parting thought, which at this point may not be read, but one last thought on Palinistas. Look honestly at what I typed. Imagine an Independent, Moderate, Reagan Democrat going up to a Palinista and asking them about Governor Palin. If Palinistas respond to them in the same manner they have so far responded to fellow Conservatives; it will be a turn off to inquiring minds. One of my greatest fears about Palinistas are that they themselves are going to be the ones who nuke a possible Palin for POTUS campaign. If simple questions about Palin are greeted with false assumptions and over the top aggression, people are going to reject Sarah Palin. This must not happen.

freeus on April 16, 2010 at 11:59 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5