Palin’s PAC fundraising suddenly looking mighty presidential
posted at 6:54 pm on July 12, 2010 by Allahpundit
The second-quarter numbers are in and people who pay attention are paying attention. It’s not the haul that’s so impressive — $866,000 is a robust figure but Romney’s PAC did more than a million in April and May alone and SarahPAC itself did better in the last half of last year than the first half of this year — but rather what she’s doing with the money. What kind of ex-governor-turned-commentator spends several hundred thousand dollars developing a direct mailing list?
One who’s keeping her options open.
The committee, SarahPAC, also spent nearly twice as much – $742,000 – as it had in any previous quarter, the lion’s share of which went to the type of list-building and fundraising (including its first major direct-mail campaign) that typically undergird top-tier political committees. It also reported its biggest-ever round of donations to candidates – $87,500 – and its highest outlays for travel costs, including $17,000 on private jet fare to crisscross the country for high-profile political speaking gigs, and speechwriting. It also showed continued payments for that speechwriting as well as foreign and domestic policy consulting, and its first ever payments to a scheduler…
But perhaps most indicative of a more traditional, robust political operation were the $330,000 in fundraising costs reflected in the report, including $154,000 to HSP Direct, a direct-mail vendor that put together SarahPAC’s first direct-mail campaign. Palin had previously used primarily online fundraising techniques, which tend to have lower overhead but cannot necessarily equal the return rate of a well-targeted but more expensive traditional direct-mail campaign. HSP’s campaign for SarahPAC, which started in earnest in April, sent glossy fundraising solicitations to more than 500,000 conservative households, asking them to help the PAC support conservative candidates in 2010, according to SarahPAC treasurer Tim Crawford.
She’s got more than a cool mil of cash on hand, inspiring GOP consultant Ron Bonjean to say, “All signs point to her running for president in 2012 with that kind of money.” She also spread a lot more money around among Republican candidates this quarter than last — a nine-fold increase, in fact, with hefty $5,000 contributions going to Terry Branstad and Chuck Grassley. Say, why’s she dumping that kind of money on a guy like Grassley who’s reviled as a RINO in many quarters? Oh, right — because he’s from Iowa, silly. More from Hotline:
What’s most notable is the number of small contributors Palin has attracted. More than 3/4 of her donations are listed as unitemized, meaning the individuals who wrote checks sent in less than $200. Much of Pres. Obama’s fundraising success in ’08 came from these small-dollar donors, meaning Palin has a grassroots folllowing — one she’s started to build significantly earlier than Obama did.
Big bucks from small donors will be more important to Palin than it was to Obama since she’ll be cold-shouldered by plenty of establishment Republicans in the primary and she knows it. Presumably that’s what the direct-mail operation is about — building a huge base of grassroots contributors as quickly as possible to convince wealthy conservatives not to be too hasty in backing Romney or Gingrich or whoever. If she can put together a huge list by the end of the year, it’ll prove not only that she has the resources to make a sustained run but that there’s enough rank-and-file support to make her the early favorite in Iowa and South Carolina. The idea of Palin as grassroots hero also plays perfectly into the media’s narrative of her as some sort of populist Bircher siren, so if she comes up with a gigantic small-donor number in the next quarter, they’ll be only too happy to broadcast it for her.
The only question: Is she running? Marc Ambinder‘s not so sure:
1. She hasn’t been recruiting fundraisers, or staff members, or activists. Her inner circle could fit in a Federation runabout. A successful presidential candidate needs fundraisers, staffers, and activists. Then again, Barack Obama had almost no one manning his presidential aspirations at this point in 2006 even as his opponents prepared conventional campaigns. While Mitt Romney makes strategic endorsements in every state and Tim Pawlenty has created PACs to help candidates in Iowa and New Hampshire, Palin is not establishing the relationships she would need to establish in order to build political campaigns in these early states. That means that she might be attempting a different type of campaign, or that she has been given bad advice, or that she won’t run at all.
2. She hasn’t been extending her brand. Republicans believe that Palin lacks the substantive chops to be president. This is not a creation of the lamestream media, even though the media’s 2008 coverage may have amplified those doubts. Palin’s friends who regularly Tweet about her doings seem to dismiss these complaints (that she isn’t smart enough, isn’t ready, isn’t developing policy chops) as stupid and uninformed. That said, given that independents’ central issue with Obama will be his failure to fix the economy, it is significant that other Republican presidential aspirants are preparing to run on competence — and Palin is not.
I think she’s still undecided and keeping her options open, but clearly a “different type of campaign” is what’s in store if she does run. Her staff will probably remain as small as possible in order to cultivate the whole anti-establishment “one of us” common touch that the grassroots admires. As for point two, here’s John Ellis, a.k.a. Jeb Bush’s cousin:
“She’s too stupid” is what the Establishment GOP really thinks about Sarah Palin. “Good-looking,” but a “ditz.” This is unfertile ground, since Palin can turn the argument on a dime and say: “They drive the country into bankruptcy, they underwrite Fannie and Freddie, they bail out Goldman Sachs, they fight wars they don’t want to win, they say enforcing the immigration laws is silly and they call me stupid! I’ll give you a choice: you can have their smarts or my stupidity, which one do you want?” A large number of GOP presidential primary voters will take Palin’s “stupidity” in a heartbeat.
Ellis’s prediction? The growing threat from Palin will lead establishment Republicans to turn to, er, Jeb Bush. Which isn’t that crazy: It might not ultimately be Jeb, but as a wise man once said, if she runs it will ultimately be a Palin vs. anti-Palin race. Exit question: Is this happening?
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 4 5 Next »
TN Mom on July 12, 2010 at 11:21
Oh lordy, by engaging the emotive half of the brain you sacrifice all posibilty of confronting the progressives, admittedly conservative principles are more humane, but you are choosing to fight on the opponents choice of terrain to fight the battle, never an example of sound decision making. Please, do not take offense by this assertion, I beleive your assertion of such to be heartfelt & sincere, and there-in lays the problem.
On the other side is employed is scientifically focused grouped cynicism that has perfected the message of them giving where we are taking, you cannot out-emoticon the opoosition on the feild of largesse that they hath created, its a lose/lose proposition.
Archimedes on July 12, 2010 at 11:54 PM
Oh dear, my rantings begin to surpass my typing skills, particularly as they seem to get increasingly vehement which each dead soldier & exacerbating the typing issue accordingly. I shall monitor the thread from a point of interest, but shall restrain myself here after.
Please carry on.
Archimedes on July 12, 2010 at 11:59 PM
I bet she wouldn’t appoint any czars…
See, if she gos to wash she’s goi g armed with an ax
she knows her duty and k OAS that gov isn’t supposed to be making all the calls
she’s the only one I trust not to forget that we want repeals of these monolithic blocks of legislation
Sonosam on July 13, 2010 at 12:02 AM
Is Palin’s ad racist.. Critics are saying that there are no minorities in the ad therefore it’s racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsUVL6ciK-c
Buy or Sell?
TimeTraveler on July 13, 2010 at 12:06 AM
Go back to Canada, Frum.
Norwegian on July 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM
I had to click on that link. Amazing look backward, and not a computer in sight
clnurnberg on July 13, 2010 at 12:12 AM
TT @ 12:06
That canard has already been debunked…the same day the ad appeared
Gohawgs on July 13, 2010 at 12:16 AM
The best one I read today was in the headlines thread that said she had the experience argument all sewn up in 2008 but now, not so much. So Palin is in fact less experienced in 2010 than she was in 2008.
That’s the “logic” of a Palin hater/closet Mitt fan for you.
NoLeftTurn on July 13, 2010 at 12:22 AM
TT check at 43 and 101 on the video. Then try again.
CWforFreedom on July 13, 2010 at 12:22 AM
Puleeeze.
Romney was one of the crappiest governors in the country. He ran on his business prowess. Ran on creating jobs. Did so well that Mass was 50 out of 50 in job creation, at a time we were having a boom!
Then there is RomneyCare.
The thought that Romney was anything but a friggin disaster is a MYTH.
On the other hand, Sarah was the most popular governor in the nation, and the most successful.
Willard is a nonstarter, ain’t gonna happen.
gary4205 on July 13, 2010 at 12:28 AM
Poor Mittens. The Rodney Dangerfield of hotair.
platypus on July 13, 2010 at 12:42 AM
I just read something this weekend (can’t remember where — probably here!) that said Obama polled pretty poorly among African Americans even up until the spring of 2008. Reason? They didn’t think he had a prayer of getting the nomination. So they got behind Hillary. Once he started racking up some early primary wins, they started flocking to him.
Certainly there are some people who will think Palin is unqualified and stupid no matter what, who will insist she does not present reasoned and intelligent policy positions even in the face of vast evidence to the contrary. I’ve said here before that she could cure cancer and some people would still have their doubts about her. She is held to a ridiculously high standard IMO. It would be fine if other candidates/potential candidates were held to the same standard, but they are not. Some of that is subconscious sexism I’m sure, some of it is insecurity about going against the “CW”,” and some of it (a lot of it here on HA) is just Mittens’ little army out to create doubt about her qualifications.
The reality is, she has over 20 years of experience in public service under her belt, and more important than that, she’s got the charisma, the work ethic, the integrity and the leadership skills to actually be a great president. I trust the American people will see that in time. They already are. She is maturing and growing more sophisticated and polished every day. Some folks continue to look for things to nitpick — like her appearance on BOR on Friday, as if anything she said or did was any more mealy-mouthed than what we get from the rest of the 2012 contenders (I thought it was quite good, tho BOR was his usual douchebaggy self) — but they are really having to search hard these days. Palin is on a roll and making few missteps. The ones she does make are magnified exponentially by her detractors of course, but it hasn’t seemed to stop her so far.
All I know is, she beats Obama like a rented mule daily and I hear precious little from anyone else. She rarely states a position I disagree with. She has the conservative bonafides, the experience, and the intangibles to be a really great leader. Unless someone else can best her between now and Nov. 2012, she’s my candidate. She has plenty of time to convince others, just as Obama did.
NoLeftTurn on July 13, 2010 at 12:52 AM
P.S. Anyone who would entertain the notion of Jeb Bush actually running against Obama and winning in 2012 is smoking some powerful hooch. Huckster would stand a better chance of getting elected. The Bush name is damaged goods, and will be for a long time.
NoLeftTurn on July 13, 2010 at 12:53 AM
Exactly!
Mark Whittington: Sarah Palin Has Offered One Of The Most Sophisticated Analysis Of Obama’s Defense & Foreign Policy Ever Published
gary4205 on July 13, 2010 at 12:59 AM
Romney could not take the republican nomination from McLame. I am so tired of hearing about the author of Romneycare.
America loved it when JFK was the Daddy President. The reason it did not go over well with ObaMao, is because the photo was so obviously staged.
I do not want another
liarlawyer, or Bush in DC.Slowburn on July 13, 2010 at 1:07 AM
I have no problem with people spending their own money in attempt to run for office. Just because you have money doesn’t guarantee that you’ll win.
Secondly, its better than they spend their own money rather than relying on federal money (which is essentially our tax dollars) to finance their campaign.
And look how good it did for McCain to accept federal funding while Obama didn’t.
Having someone run on their own dime rather than on the tax payer’s dime just might be a good thing.
Conservative Samizdat on July 13, 2010 at 1:10 AM
Why are we responding to “time traveler” here? It is obviously some unworldly kid in school on the Soros payroll. Don’t feed the troll.
karenhasfreedom on July 13, 2010 at 1:45 AM
Wishful thinking, and you never liked her so stop pretending you did.
Palin has a ton of ground to cover by November 2012. Fortunately for her, she’s a persistent runner. She’s come amazingly far since August 2008 and she will continue to surprise and impress. But don’t take my word for it. Just watch.
alwaysfiredup on July 13, 2010 at 1:45 AM
The only way Palin could win is by turning into the right wing version of Bill Clinton during the debates.
TimeTraveler on July 13, 2010 at 1:48 AM
Sarah didn’t give money to Murkowski!
She endorsed Murkowski’s opponent,Joe Miller.
Sarah Palin’s FB Notes: Joe Miller for AK
Apparently, Grassley’s the best Republican Senator IA can produce.
He does have to share the state with Harkin (Blech.).
Like who? (And McCain doesn’t count!)
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 3:06 AM
Sarah mopped the floor with Biden during the VP debates.
I have no worries about her debating Zerobama.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 3:07 AM
I have read about 30 inane comments from you in this thread, but this one takes the cake, since I have zero clue what the heck you’re even referencing. If you have the balls to call Sarah shallow go look in the mirror next time. For any policy chops you might think she lacks, well you lack any coherent critique.
She was actually not just more qualified than O in ’08, she was more fluent on the almighty policy you keep waving like a red flag. There are a few things she needs to get solid on, but for the most part she’s very solid policy wise, if you actually pay attention to what she’s saying, or even what she said in the campaign/debate with Biden.
lizzie beth on July 13, 2010 at 3:07 AM
Unfortunate (but true unless our world magically and radically changes between now and November 2012) facts:
-Palin cannot win the general election for President.
-Romney cannot win the Republican nomination.
-Newt, Huck, and the rest are either retreads, unsavory, unelectable, or all of the above.
So how do we win? Can we win? Based on these realities, I think the only chance is if we nominate an up-and-coming, policy driven candidate. Not someone who could quickly be caricatured and destroyed. Someone who is strictly the alternate to Obama — reasonable, fresh, and passionate to deliver real change that Americans want. This is the only way we can beat an Obama, as unpopular as he is and will be. The problem is none of our rising stars are expected to be ready by then.
jjraines on July 13, 2010 at 3:16 AM
Not really ot, but DUDE! Behold the power of Palin:
http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/fiorina-leads-boxer-first-time-california-senate-race
Carly is apparently ahead of Boxer by 2 points.
lizzie beth on July 13, 2010 at 3:27 AM
Why can’t she?
This is Sarah.
All the Americans I know don’t want “real change” unless that means getting their country back after having wrestled it out of the hands of the fascist/Socialist Obama régime.
This Sarah Palin can lead us to do!
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 3:31 AM
Keep plucking that chicken.
gdonovan on July 13, 2010 at 4:29 AM
A lot of “yeah, but” people on here tonite…
If the establishment Republicans in DC follow tradition for 2012 the candidate they support will be someone from 2008, which means Palin (VP), Huckabee (2nd place) or Romney (3rd)…They’re scared of Palin, they may still be ticked at Huckabee for staying in as long as he did in ’08, they like Mitt ’cause he belongs to the same clubs they do…
If Republicans, in general, want to rehash the Huckabee led Mormom bashing in 2012 don’t discourage the Huckster and Romney from running again…Even if Huckabee doesn’t run and Romney does the bashing will still be there, Mike can’t help himself…
In 2008, Romney spent a gazillion $ of his kid’s inheritence and won squat…Does he really think that spending more $ in 2012 will result in a different outcome?…No one stood in line to get a Romney autographed book and no one is going to stand in line to vote for Mitt in ’12…If Romney(care) can’t make a public stand against obamacare today how will he be able to do so in ’12?…
Pawlenty (pahleeze) sat idly by, dipping his toast in milk, while Franken stole the MN Senate election…(Besides, we already have a Precedent that bounces ceromonial 1st pitches)…
After the 1st four primaries of 2012, IA/NH/SC/NV, the mountain states come into play…
Over these past sordid months we’ve seen PACs formed, money raised, endorsements made (one even after an election) but only one consistent voice in opposition to the obamanation’s socialist (see Carville’s poll) agenda, only one consistent poll changing endorser of candidates, only one consistent endorsement that results in increased campaign contributions to the endorsee, only one consistent lightning rod for the “progressive” left’s animus…And, that ain’t the Hair nor the Preacher nor the Milquetoast…
Gohawgs on July 13, 2010 at 4:33 AM
While she did endorse Miller, she had already given something like $5000 to Lisa.
AshleyTKing on July 13, 2010 at 4:34 AM
Oh, you mean the “get the witches off my back” moose hunter.
AshleyTKing on July 13, 2010 at 4:36 AM
jjraines on July 13, 2010 at 4:39 AM
This.
Tacitus on July 13, 2010 at 4:59 AM
You think she hasn’t done this? She has just been winging it right?” I actually think she is capable of it but chooses not to engage herself in order to improve her standing amongst the people because apparently she thinks its too time consuming.
That’s why she has awfully numbers and it has nothing do with on where stands on the issues.
TimeTraveler on July 13, 2010 at 5:06 AM
This sort of stuff you pulling is racist. I have a strong feeling you have something against the traditions of the africans because they are of dark skin complexion.
It obviously makes you feel uneasy about Palin because she at least shows the courtesy by being accepting of the traditions of people who may not look like you.
TimeTraveler on July 13, 2010 at 5:16 AM
25-30% of people are hardcore dem votors who will always vote for dems. always.
Why should I give a toot what they think about Palin?
gdonovan on July 13, 2010 at 5:43 AM
I hear many comparisons between Palin and Reagan, but while the media might have called Reagan a dunce and belittled him, as it has done with Palin, Reagan -perhaps partly from his experience as a film star, and partly from years of thinking and writing about policy that he shared with the public via radio- was able to speak extemporaneously and with great volubility on a variety of issues in a way that connected with people; his charisma oozed through in an almost pre-made for television way. In contrast Palin on television, at least to me, came across in the debates either as scripted or wooden (which may have been the result of the McCain camp’s rigid control), or as uninformed (as per her interviews w Couric/Gibson). I don’t want to say that she is uninformed or some kind of a willful ignoramus (although that is how the media views her/has cast her). I do believe that if she is the serious thinker/ writer/ analyzer of policy that many believers make her out to be, she needs to work on connecting with the American people in the same way that Reagan was able to on TV. Sadly TV is still the way most Americans become acquainted with candidates, like it or not. IF she is able to do this, then I think it is true that she could become the next “Teflon” candidate like Reagan, allowing her to avoid having memes stick. As it is, I think one of the big issues that has stuck to her has been the “not a serious person” because she seems either scripted or slow on TV. That’s my 2 cents. I hope I don’t get mutilated by those sure she is going to displace teh Won. I would love nothing better than to see her do it, but as of right now…Krauthammer is right, she needs to work things over.
Tacitus on July 13, 2010 at 5:44 AM
Running Sarah Palin as the GOP nominee for President will only keep Obamao in the White House for another 4 years. It won’t be a race about issues – it will be another ‘cult of personality’ race. Absolutely lacking substance, just like both candidates.
But – this is the same group that nominated John McCain in 2008. Nominating Palin won’t be surprising or unexpected.
Timothy S. Carlson on July 13, 2010 at 6:43 AM
Wrong again, as usual because you can’t tell sh*t about either NObama or Palin from Manila!
Maobama has substance: he’s a Leftist out to remake America into a Socialist paradise for black people and to punish white people for their capitalist sins.
Sarah Palin has substance, too–she’s a true blue conservative who loves this country and all its citizens, our military, our Constitution and God.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 7:09 AM
Krauthammer isn’t right: none of his criticism of Palin is based on anything substantive.
He’s just a sexist straight up.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 7:11 AM
LOL. This counts as reasonable debate on the part of the palinistas. Your demigod will NEVER, mark it, NEVER be president.
TheBlueSite on July 13, 2010 at 7:21 AM
Hey, Jen:
Even though I am living in the Philippines, I am an AMERICAN and I have the same rights as you. I am concerned about what is going on in our government, and I keep myself up-to-date with the latest news. I have every right to comment on ANYTHING I want, from where ever I happen to be living.
YOU are NOT the arbiter of who can comment or not.
I think this is the point where I am supposed to say something particularly nasty, but … I’ve decided that you aren’t worth the trouble anymore.
Timothy S. Carlson on July 13, 2010 at 7:26 AM
That isn’t even possible if you live in a foreign country!
I don’t even know if you can or do vote absentee in American elections.
Keep up your citizenship or do you just pick up your checks from the U.S. Government?
No, but I can certainly assess the quality of your posts, and your knowledge and experience which is none too keen and it’s certainly not conservative.
Then quit bitching.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 7:31 AM
That isn’t even possible if you live in a foreign country!
I don’t even know if you can or do vote absentee in American elections.
Keep up your citizenship or do you just pick up your checks from the U.S. Government?
No, but I can certainly assess the quality of your posts, and your knowledge and experience which is none too keen and it’s certainly not conservative.
Then quit b*tching.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 7:31 AM
Sarah is gaining support in the party. I think there is definitely going to be a Palin/anti-Palin division in the party. There already is. She scares the hell out of establishment Republicans. ‘Good looking – but a ditz’ is just typical smear fodder. You can’t take that sort of opinion seriously. More likely they are worried they will become targets of a Tea Party house cleaning.
Rumors of Palin replacing Steele hint that these divisions do exist. Rumors of a division aren’t exactly new, either. I could see Steele being replaced by Palin or a Palin supported candidate at some point.
November will be key. I’m optimistic. Chances of a flip in both houses keep getting better. If Sarah and the Tea Party show muscle then Sarah could gain more support in the GOP.
IMO Sarah is the perfect candidate to confront, expose, overcome and use the ‘caricature’ attempts to her advantage. Who else is even going to call them out like Sarah?
Given a closer look I think America will see that she really has gotten jobbed by the media. She is obviously not the bumbling divisive racist beauty pageant contestant she has been portrayed as. I wouldn’t underestimate her. Many of her critics have in the past and she has used that to her advantage.
Mr Purple on July 13, 2010 at 7:33 AM
So, Krauthammer can throw Palin’s candidacy away for no real reason and you consider that “reasonable debate” but when I attribute his bias against Palin to his sexism, it’s not considered by you to be “reasonable debate.”
Why is that?
Because he’s a professional pundit on TV or what?
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 7:34 AM
It wasn’t Reagan’s telegenic skills that connected him with the people, it was his message.
Same with Sarah.
And the TV camera loves her!
You have only to watch her on Fox, watch her speeches and coming soon, watch her documentary show on AK on the Discovery Channel.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 7:37 AM
She needs to practice articulating her facebook policies. That is truly the only thing that will change perception.
AnninCA on July 13, 2010 at 8:00 AM
Ya know what…..The Cuda may just overcome her image as a quitter and run in 2012. If the Tea Party movement makes bigger strides than we expected this year, 2012 may just be her year.
csdeven on July 13, 2010 at 8:22 AM
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 7:34 AM
Or it could be because Palin comes off as an idiot most of the time, offers little true substance (sorry, but attacking Obamaon facebook is not substance), made a complete fool of herself with Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson, quit her job in the middle of her term to become a facebooking celebrity…it could be that her PAC creates videos that portray her as some sort of god sent gift to the world. It could be that, in her speeches, she often can’t get the most basic of facts straight and does little more than spout out talking points she probably read in one of the magazines she reads but won’t tell the world about (sorry, I forget, she reads ALL of them).
Krauthammer is a deep thinker. Palin is a celebrity who has made everything about Sarah Palin. She’s the right’s cult of personality in the manner Obama is to the left. So, maybe any of the reasons above make more sense than Krauthammer is a sexist.
TheBlueSite on July 13, 2010 at 8:29 AM
Your little smear tactic is stale. No one worships Palin and frankly the only obsession I see is from tools like you who can’t get enough…of smearing those who support her.
Try singing a different tune…one that’s based on agreeing or disagreeing with her policy positions and not on your lame and transparent attempt to discredit and dismiss those who like Palin.
powerpro on July 13, 2010 at 8:30 AM
You’re not gonna get mutilated by me, because I agree with you and it’s nice to see somebody else who isn’t a blind devotee completely oblivious to her weaknesses yet who isn’t an unhinged knee-jerk Palinphobe either.
I sure hear ya on your trepidation expressing a more nuanced opinion, though: it’s those of us who aren’t sitting squarely on either of those pro or anti poles in this strangely Palin-centric universe who can often get whacked the hardest – by both sides & at the same time! ;-)
leilani on July 13, 2010 at 8:33 AM
You’re right powerpro- it IS reasonable debate to call Charles Krauthammer a sexist because he doesn’t agree with Palin. Silly me. Calling someone a sexist when no evidence exists of sexism is no reason to dimiss a Palinista. Nope. Not at all.
Seriously, you Palinistas do realize you sorta come off as a little crazy sounding, right?
TheBlueSite on July 13, 2010 at 8:37 AM
It’s impossible for Palin to change the perception that she’s dim. Can’t be done. Palin could write the most brilliant position paper on energy and the economy, which any fool knows she’s an expert on, and Allah would post it with the wink picture.
I hate women in positions of authority. Absolutely hate them. In my 30 years at the phone company I saw how women manage, and I can honestly say that the worst thing to happen in society in the last 40 years was promotion of so many women into position they were totally unqualified for. I would rather work for and with men any day. I would never vote for a woman for president. Not until Palin came along.
There are those few rare exceptions and Sarah Palin is one of them. By the time she gave her speech at the convention I was a supporter. There was enough online back then to see how smart she was. I watched that speech with dread because I figured she’d blow it with a lousy speech. She blew it out of the water.
Anyone who doesn’t think Palin is up to being president simply doesn’t want to think it and nothing she does will change their minds.
Jaynie59 on July 13, 2010 at 8:38 AM
The same type of people who don’t like Palin, didn’t think Thatcher was strong or smart enough.
right2bright on July 13, 2010 at 8:57 AM
Prove it.
Aitch748 on July 13, 2010 at 9:10 AM
I’m not sure your complaints are aimed at me personally, but I can assure you that myself and most of the other Palin supporters on HA are not “blind” in our devotion and I rather resent the implication that we are: there’s reason, rationale, Palin’s own record and the facts of her life story and her stance on the issues behind our devotion to her.
Nor are we oblivious to her “weaknesses,” although for a political figure, she has very few that I can think of.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 9:35 AM
Sometimes I feel like I’ve fallen through the looking glass on this blog. Our concern trolls (and people like Krauthammer) continue to peddle a narrative about Palin that many who are not so hung up on seeing her “leave the room” have long move past. The “scandals” have slowed to a trickle. Even Levi has been pulled back into the fold and appropriately chastened. She has been speaking all over the country to many different types of audiences, just as Reagan did, spreading her message. She is presenting serious policy statements on everything from energy to national security to the economy to immigration and is even getting grudging respect from some of her critics. Her recent SarahPAC video is getting praise across the political spectrum not just for its high production values but for her effectiveness.
We are a year past her resignation and not only is her career not over, but her star is rising and shining brighter than ever. Even some lefties are now conceding the inevitable. It seems it’s only establishment types and Eeyores and concern trolling Mitt fans who continue to insist she has not grown in stature or seriousness. You can keep insisting all day long how she isn’t addressing your obnoxious (and sexist in many cases) demands that she “bone up” but that doesn’t make it so. She is and she has been. And the reality is that, no matter what her poll numbers today among indies and moderates, she is still wildly popular among Republicans and stands an excellent chance of winning the primary. What will you do if that happens? Sit home and pout? I’m prepared to vote for whoever the GOP candidate is.
NoLeftTurn on July 13, 2010 at 9:36 AM
How else would you explain Krauthammer’s aversion to her?
He’s even gone so far as to say she was right about the death panels in ObamaCare but wouldn’t give her the credit.
We don’t sound crazy; it’s you and C.K. that sound snarky and implacable.
You couldn’t be sexist, too, could you?
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 9:37 AM
It is probably partly sexism (I’m not sure how else to explain the ridiculously higher standard she’s held to) and partly Beltway elitism. She doesn’t have an advanced degree from an Ivy League institution, therefore she is useless as a presidential candidate. Never mind the fact that most presidents have been merely of above-average intelligence. I don’t know about you, but I usually find that the super-smart are usually deficient in some other necessary skills to be successful leaders. This is perhaps the quality about Palin I think is discounted most unfairly. She is a BORN LEADER. You can’t teach that stuff at Harvard. You either have it or you don’t, and she most certainly does.
And really, whether Krauthammer’s view of her is colored by sexism or not, he should be mindful that comes across that way. Patting someone on the head and telling them to “leave the room” can hardly be interpreted another way. I kind of wish Rush would have a little talk with him, since they are apparently pals. Rush has great respect for CK, but he also finds the nattering about how Palin needs to “study up” pretty insulting. I’d love for him to tell CK to stifle.
NoLeftTurn on July 13, 2010 at 9:51 AM
Really?
How come it has been quoted in places like the front page of The Times of London?
Where would you have her make substantive criticism of Obama?
Gibson & Kouric both played “Gotcha.”
(They did this to President Bush, too.)
The Gibson interview was heavily edited.
How come no one with PDS ever mentions the far more serious and unscripted VP debate with Biden, which Sarah clearly won?
She didn’t quit, she resigned due to the Left’s political attacks and left her AK desk job to take a place on the national stage of conservative leadership.
???
I do hope you realize who sounds like the idiot here and it ain’t Sarah! LOL
How can you tell?
No, she’s made everything about getting our country back.
Wrong again.
Sarah is real and we all know it, which is why we love her.
Obama “The One” was never real.
Of course they don’t.
One of these days very soon, Krauthammer, Frum, Noonan, Parker and Buckley and the rest of the “I hate Sarah Palin just because” crowd are going to be forced to eat their words about her and about NObama or they’ll be the ones looking like real fools.
This includes you, TBS.
All I can think of these days is what Sarah said at the RNC in her acceptance speech: everything she said about Obama has come true and she was absolutely on the money about the kind of President she warned us he would be.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 9:51 AM
Love your comments!
Good stuff.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 9:53 AM
You know I wasn’t the one who said that, right? Someone else did.
Unlike crazed anti-Palin/Palin supporter smear merchants such as yourself, Palin supporters do not think in groupthink.
I don’t happen to think CK is sexist. I do think that he suffers from a bit of inside the beltway elitism and that that colors his views of an outsider like Palin.
powerpro on July 13, 2010 at 10:05 AM
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 9:37 AM
You certainly have an active imagination.
Krauthammer represents intellectual elitism that could be either admired or not depending on the observer. Sure, some elitists are sexists. Kindly provide records of Krauthammer’s lack of respect for Ruth Bader Ginsberg based upon her gender, or Sandra Day O’Connor, or even Sarah Palin as you argue.
Krauthammer need not accuse Palin of flaws based upon her gender. You need to substantiate your claims as you make them; your opinion is not a valid record alone beyond yourself.
If unable to defend your argument with Krauthammer gender statements, Krauthammer not only has better intellect, but better manners than you.
Argue with his opinions. But I don’t see how you actually resolve your lack of inhibitions when projecting evil upon others that does not rest within them, but extends from yourself, from your own false accusations.
maverick muse on July 13, 2010 at 10:16 AM
She needs to be in the Senate and become our version of Chuck Schumer.
I think Palin is actually playing this pretty smart. The RNC is in shambles fundraising and she sees that so she sends out direct mailings to try and get more money from the small donors in order to help her as kingmaker. I’d bet that instead of running herself she backs a Paul Ryan (though he says he’s not running) or a Bobby Jindal type of guy. An unknown conservative who needs a boost. Or at least, that’s my wishful thinking.
cpaulus on July 13, 2010 at 10:17 AM
The biggest difference between Palin and Reagan is that Reagan was famously detached from his swirling mass of partisans – Hollywood pro that he was – whereas Palin probably identifies with her loyalists more personally. That ensures their devotion but it also tends to isolate her more from those outside her base. Even Goldwater was frightened of some of his own fans but not Sarah. So she has to be careful not to permit her candidacy to turn into a war between the Sarah people and the rest of the GOP, the way Goldwater’s campaign split the party down the middle. Goldwater was unwilling or unable to prevent that schism and while he might have lost to LBJ anyway it helped turn a defeat into a rout. You can bet a lot of people who are currently on the fence about Palin just haven’t the stomach for the acrimony they fear her nomination would cause.
Seth Halpern on July 13, 2010 at 10:18 AM
Beyond someone.
maverick muse on July 13, 2010 at 10:19 AM
The Tea Party has no organization. Palin exploited the situation with converted neoconservative support determined to usurp the movement as VP Potatoe stipulated.
The Tea Party movement was ripe for opportunism which is only marred by corruption, not necessarily by motive.
It isn’t that Palin is a corrupt politician. She hasn’t been around long enough.
maverick muse on July 13, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Palin threats sure bring out the nuts, don’t they?
bw222 on July 13, 2010 at 10:32 AM
I’ve said this in the past – Sarah may be strong enough to weather the hell-storm, but I don’t think I am.
Who is John Galt on July 13, 2010 at 10:47 AM
Why yes, yes it is.
(Are you going to read her next book, allahpundit?)
cs89 on July 13, 2010 at 10:53 AM
Sarah Palin is the beacon of light that will lead Americans out of the darkness Obama has cast over America. “Shine Baby Shine”
idesign on July 13, 2010 at 11:13 AM
I find this thread amusing. Why do the Palin-haters believe that by saying “she can’t win” ad nauseum will change anything? None of us supporting her (me included) do so because of electability reasons. We support her because of her conservative ideology and principles.
Listen, she will run for president, and we will do everything we can to get her elected. End of story. If someone else wins the nomination, fine. But we won’t stop supporting her because some Mittbot tells us she can’t win.
Norwegian on July 13, 2010 at 11:15 AM
“America By Heart” is supposed to be out Nov. 23, 2010…
Precisely 3 weeks after the midterms.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2010-05-11-sarah-palin_N.htm
Looks to me like she’s lining the dominos up, and if they fall right (swing from D to R in one or both houses, she helps some of the Rs into office, etc.) she can carry that momentum into a book tour (Dec.? Early 2011?) and maybe bank a few million more to personally backstop a campaign if she runs in 2012.
It all has to fall in place, but she appears to be doing what she can to line it up optimally.
cs89 on July 13, 2010 at 11:19 AM
I support Palin staying on Facebook and being a thorn in the progressive’s side.
moonsbreath on July 13, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Norwegian on July 13, 2010 at 11:15 AM
What the anti-Palin forces would like you to think is:
1)that the general election for Obama’s job is just around the corner
2)that the Palin version of July 2010 will be the same person who will be running against the Messiah in 2012
3)That her perception by the GOP voters or the general electorate could not possibly change in the next 17-18 months before the primary vote and 28 months before the next general election, that whatever attitudes among the voters towards Palin is fixed for all time.
4)And as a follow-up on #3 that Palin’s poll numbers will never change vis-a-vis Obama.
If you want to know one thing that really pisses off both the GOP establishment and the Obama war room is that the Alaskan bloggers did not finish Palin off in Alaska, that she somehow eluded their trap and lived to fight another day, and by resigning when she did created the worst possible situation for her enemies, that she would have time to get her ducks fully in a row to run for POTUS in 2012.
If Palin becomes the next president, historians for years will be asking the one question, “Why didn’t the anti-Palin forces just leave well enough alone and let Palin serve out her term, putting herself behind the 8 ball in terms of building an organization and being prohibited by state law from participating in any partisan activities from January to about May when the Alaska legislature was sitting?”
Instead they tried to force the issue and use Alinsky tactics against her to drive her out of office and into bankruptcy. Now they could end up being hoisted by their own petard. How fitting!
technopeasant on July 13, 2010 at 11:34 AM
I support that too, until it is time to do more than that, which is next year. If she does, that thorn will become a dagger, then a spear.
Brian1972 on July 13, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Krauthammer’s opinion, as I stated before, is based on nothing substantive.
It is, as powerpro and NoLeftTurn correctly opine, based partly on sexism and partly on his East Coast élitism.
It’s obvious because C.K. can find nothing real to base his dislike of Palin on…and comparing his opinion of her to his opinion of 2 lady Supreme Court Justices isn’t really revealing, but certainly puts Sarah in august company.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 11:44 AM
I think you can speak and read English, but I am not really sure…what are you trying to say?
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 11:47 AM
Seth Halpern on July 13, 2010 at 10:18 AM
Imho, this is why Palin endorsed McCain. Of course loyalty was also a huge factor. If anybody is the ultimate RINO it is the maverick. If he eventually gets behind her candidacy, that could tip the balance on a small percentage of moderates over to Palin which could make the difference in some key states.
Imho, for McCain supporters not to vote for Palin would entail not agreeing with her political philosophy and NOT her disdain of McCain, because Sarah has never had an unkind word to say about him. That has to translate into votes somewhere down the line, especially from military types who support McCain but may not be as conservative as Palin is.
Here is how I see Palin’s road to the GOP nomination:
1)Corner the market on evangelicals, especially if Huckabee does not run
2)Libertarian support
3)Independent conservatives who are disaffected former Republicans
4)Reagan Democrats who can vote on crossover
5)Moderates who are unhappy with the economy
6)Conservative Republicans (the base)
technopeasant on July 13, 2010 at 11:47 AM
One difference between Palin’s and Obama’s political fund raising is Obama accepted donations world wide in direct violation of campaign finance laws. But in his case it was okay since he is a liberal Democrat.
Dasher on July 13, 2010 at 11:50 AM
No. No. No.
The Senate will squelch and ruin her!
(The Senate s*cks and turns everyone into an old, stuffy fart!)
Sarah does just find fundraising on her own with SarahPAC.
And she’s not going to make the coffee, run the mailroom and organize the pompom squad for the Ryan or Jindal campaign.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 11:50 AM
One of those two might end up cutting ribbons and going to funerals for her one day.
Brian1972 on July 13, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Stop with the kingmaker garbage when it comes to the presidential election. It’s one thing to be a kingmaker to get conservatives elected to Congress this November but it’s entirely a different matter to be a kingmaker to someone who you know is inferior to your talents and abilities in a contest in which you are able to compete in. That’s like Meryl Streep saying that Brittney Spears should win the Academy Award over her. C,mon man!
technopeasant on July 13, 2010 at 12:02 PM
I think the Hammmer is open to Palin as a candidate, but only if as some here have mentioned, she changes a bit from the candidate that ran in 08. I don’t know why that is considered threatning to some. No, it wasn’t just Reagan’s telegenic skills that connected with voters, it was his seriousness as a policy thinker combined with his ability to persuasively articulate his position in a detailed way. If you think that Palin showed equal gravitas and speaking/ communicating ability as Reagan did you’re kidding yourself. That doesn’t mean she can’t become that candidate in 2012. I just don’t get the knee jerk reaction to any criticism of her at all. Its like trying to argue w an Obama bot who automatically assumes your a racist if you have some honest disagreement with the way they view a candidate. Disagree=racist. In this case its become disagree= sexist. I would be fine w/ Palin in 2012, I’m just saying I think she would better connect with the electorate by brushing up on a few things. Disagree with me thats fine, but don’t think that I’m a sexist because I have a different opinion.
Tacitus on July 13, 2010 at 12:04 PM
I have to say that I think if you expect Sarah to be exactly like Ronald Reagan, you’re setting the bar too high and are going to be disappointed.
Only Reagan can be like Reagan and follow his own unique path to the White House.
History doesn’t repeat itself.
Sarah has her own style, personality and political journey.
Too often, well meaning concern trolls make these demands that she be “like Reagan” and do x, y and z just like he did.
This isn’t going to happen.
I do think she is judged more harshly and denied having the quality of gravitas because she is a woman and she speaks plainly, but her message and her position on the big issues (her love of America and American exceptionalism, our Constitutional republic, our military and our people) are as strong and right as Reagan’s and I have no doubt he would love her as much as many of us already do.
When you think of her opponent and the gravitas he lacks while enjoying the power and honor of actually being POTUS, it’s a no-brainer as to who is the real leader with the real winning ideas.
Jenfidel on July 13, 2010 at 12:18 PM
I agree that anyone who can corner all those, or the plurality of the six, would win the nomination.
I don’t see exactly how endorsing Rand Paul would win the Libertarian votes. Palin thinks within the false economic premise of Keynes. I’ve never seen a headline featuring Palin supporting Austrian School of Economics, yet. I’m not putting that past her at all. But at this point, Palin’s platform seems based upon the perpetuation of Keynesian economy that Libertarians eschew for having destroyed free trade.
maverick muse on July 13, 2010 at 12:30 PM
I’ve never understood anyone who thought she might not run. To me, it’s been obvious since she resigned that she was running already.
I think she needs to add depth and details to her rhetoric now. The general message doesn’t need to be hammered over and over. And she needs to circumvent the questions people have about any politician who is too general. Take the hits for details that nobody else likes. That’s OK.
But get specific. This time around, the public will want to know. Obama got by with being vague. She will not.
AnninCA on July 13, 2010 at 12:30 PM
And there is the mindless clown opinion, in case someone was wondering.
Inanemergencydial on July 13, 2010 at 12:33 PM
Oh look, the little liar popped up here on this thread…what little lies are you going to propagate over here?
You spread them about the tea party,why don’t you try reading what she has been writing of late…you post lies on other threads then move on to the next one, you are a tiresome troll.
right2bright on July 13, 2010 at 12:35 PM
She must not be getting any hits off of her Craigslist posts…
right2bright on July 13, 2010 at 12:37 PM
I do think its unfair to compare any candidate to Reagan, his sort don’t exactly come along that often. However, as Rush is fond of saying, Reagan is the template to win elections; and I don’t think there is anything wrong pointing out where a particular candidate could strengthen parts of their game compared to Ronaldus Magnus, as he has demonstrated the way to win landslide elections.
Tacitus on July 13, 2010 at 12:38 PM
The Gulf oil spill may have created such a leader: Bobby Jindal. While Obama has been publicly flailing and failing in confusion, Jindal has been out on oil-skimming and dredging barges trying to DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING POSSIBLE to protect his state, and despite the worst environmental disaster to hit his state in decades, Louisiana (including “Chocolate City”) gives him a stratospheric 74% approval rating in the last Rasmussen poll.
People have known that Bobby Jindal is a very intelligent man, and he may have come across as somewhat nerdy in the past, but the Gulf oil spill has shown that Jindal can be a very down-to-earth, practical problem-solver, ready to GET THINGS DONE. It’s a long time until 2012, but the Gulf oil spill has truly tested the competence of both Obama and Jindal, and voters furious at Obama’s bumbling incompetence may turn to Jindal for true leadership.
As to how this impacts Sarah Palin–she DOES have expertise about the oil and gas industry that few Governors have, but she also respects Bobby Jindal–shortly before she was selected as John McCain’s running mate in 2008, she sent troops from the Alaska National Guard to Louisiana to help Jindal deal with Hurricane Gustav, before it made landfall. If Palin finds out that she has permanently lost the support of Independent voters, she could decide to endorse Bobby Jindal and work furiously for his election.
There’s also another dark-horse who could emerge by 2012: Gov. Chris Christie, who is already making waves in New Jersey. If he succeeds in turning that state around, he could be a formidable candidate in 2012, with support in blue-state NJ, and probably from the neighboring Philly area, which could be enough to flip 35 electoral votes in NJ and PA.
Steve Z on July 13, 2010 at 12:46 PM
I think voters would respond well to someone who offers several solutions in keeping with principles, focusing on the reality that no president can simply dictate policies.
That would appeal, in my opinion. We’re tired of ideologues and over-promising candidates.
AnninCA on July 13, 2010 at 12:51 PM
No, there is nothing wrong with that. You seem to be very reasonable about these things, which enables a good discussion.
There are others here who dismiss anything positive about Palin, no matter how much you support it with factual evidence, as “talking points” that are somehow made up.
Words like this are a giveaway:
Lazy
Idiot
Moron
Stupid
ect. ect. ect.
Of course she has some weaknesses. Everyone does.
The assertions that she is doing nothing to address those things cannot be proven. No one has been looking over her shoulder every morning to see what she’s doing on the computer, listening to the phone conversations she has, reading her e-mail exchanges and so on.
The fact is that she is very naturally talented for the task of retail politics. I have watched her events closely, looking for the small signs of how she operates.
Nobody can work a room like she can. She is magnetic and radiant in person, you can see it on the faces of the people watching her speak.
On the book tour, people regularly said that the 20-30 seconds they got with her to sign their book was worth sleeping in the snow all night, because they left with the impression she really cared that they showed up, appreciated their support and was genuinely interested in their concerns. You can’t really fake that.
It is a combination of the message she is sending on policy, and the meaning of America being what people want to hear now, and her natural talent at delivering the message, drawing attention to the message.
Her persona is a big part of the overall effect, but it is not all there is. There is substance weaved through the personal appeal, and the combination is quite powerful.
To dismiss her chances outright as completely insane, saying things like “she will NEVER, NEVER be President or anything else EVER”, just show the ignorance of those saying it. It very well could happen, things are slowly but surely lining up in her favor for a big time comeback.
To deny that is to deny reality.
Brian1972 on July 13, 2010 at 12:54 PM
Huh?
Sarah Plain has been in politics at the executive level for two decades. How much more does she need?
gary4205 on July 13, 2010 at 1:01 PM
Christie emphatically ruled out 2012 on Hannity a couple of weeks ago. They way he put it was without wiggle room.
Jindal has been pretty insistent he won’t be in the 2012 field either. They both have a lot of work to do where they are. That doesn’t mean that a VP slot can’t happen. It isn’t always a primary opponent who gets the nod, as we saw in 2008.
Palin/Jindal would have very strong energy policy credentials, and Jindal has some health care policy experience as well. They agree on the economy and taxes %100, and most social issues as well. A bitterly fought primary won by Palin may promt her to look elsewhere for a VP pick than her vanquished opponents. In the race for Governor, she was the Change candidate, the outsider.
The slogans were New Energy for Alaska, and Take a Stand.
It would fit her previous pattern.
This is all speculation, of course, but it makes sense.
Brian1972 on July 13, 2010 at 1:02 PM
mm says neocon in every post about Palin.
Keynes? She has been battering this administration’s Keynsian economic policies from the very beginning, almost every single day. I honestly don’t know where that comes from.
Brian1972 on July 13, 2010 at 1:05 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »