Quotes of the day

posted at 10:37 pm on January 19, 2011 by Allahpundit

“Even James Carville’s polling firm cannot get Obama to get 50% against Governor Palin. She trails him by a reasonable ten points considering that it’s Carville’s firm (go ask re-elected Governor Corzine about how left-leaning Carville’s polling group is) and that this poll was taken at the same time that Governor Palin was being blood libeled. It’s quite amazing that Obama can only beat someone the Democrat Party effectively claims is an accessory to murder by ten points.

“This poll also shows that Governor Palin has room to grow among her base. Only 83% of Republicans have decided who they are going to vote for her in a hypothetical Palin-Obama matchup while 98% of Democrats have decided. So she can close the margin pretty easily just by winning over undecided Republicans while Obama does not have any more room to grow among his Democrat Party base.”

***
“A new national poll indicates that 56 percent of all Americans have an unfavorable view of Sarah Palin, an all-time high for the former Alaska governor. That 56 percent unfavorable figure is up seven points from just before the midterm elections, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday morning.

“Thirty-eight percent of people questioned in the poll say they have a favorable view of the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee, down two points from October…

“According to the survey, Palin’s unfavorable rating is up 10 points among women, compared to just three points among men, and among independent voters, her unfavorable rating has grown a whopping 14 points.”

***
“Professional jealousy and intellectual snobbery, however, only scratch the surface of the left’s bizarre attitude toward Palin. They explain the intensity of the disdain, but not the outright hatred–not why some people whose grasp of reality is sufficient to function in society made the insane inference that she was to blame for a madman’s attempt to murder Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

“This unhinged hatred of Palin comes mostly from women

“We’d say this goes beyond mere jealousy. For many liberal women, Palin threatens their sexual identity, which is bound up with their politics in a way that it is not for any other group (possibly excepting gays, though that is unrelated to today’s topic)…

“Liberal women are the active, driving force behind hatred of Sarah Palin, while liberal men’s behavior is passive and manipulative. In this respect, feminism has succeeded in reversing the traditional sexual stereotypes. If this is the result, you have to wonder why anyone would have bothered.”

***
“The time has come to put any thoughts of Sarah Palin running for President to rest. I say that not because I dislike her; on the contrary, I’m a fan. I think she did an excellent job as a vice-presidential candidate in 2008 and has been an effective spokeswoman for conservative causes in the years since. But there is no way she is ever going to be elected President, and the sooner Republicans get over that idea, the better…

“No one with a 59 percent unfavorability rating among independents has the chance of a snowball in Hell of being elected President. 2012 will be a vitally important election year; it is no time for a kamikaze Presidential campaign or for a cult of personality. Republicans (and conservatives) need a candidate who has a chance to win against an incumbent who, despite everything, is not particularly unpopular and who won’t be able to do much visible damage between now and then.”

***
Via Mediaite.


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 2 3 7

A new national poll indicates that 56 percent of all Americans have an unfavorable view of Sarah Palin, an all-time high for the former Alaska governor.

she’s just pining for the fjords!

sesquipedalian on January 19, 2011 at 10:39 PM

That’s what a campaign is for.

Either she’ll make her case for why she’s the right person… or she won’t.

powerpro on January 19, 2011 at 10:40 PM

Camille Paglia nailed it during the ’08 campaign. It’s all about abortion.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:41 PM

I guess I have to throw in my obligatory two cents-worth here:

If we’re going to nominate a presidential candidate based on “favorability” numbers, we deserve four more years of Obama.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 10:41 PM

Let’s send the pollsters on a camping trip.

backwoods conservative on January 19, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Weren’t Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in similar territory before they announced their campaigns? Wasn’t Hillary unelectable too until she changed a lot of minds by campaigning hard against Barry?

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:45 PM

:: breathing heavily into a bag ::

Who am I going to vote for? Who am I going to vote for? Can she win?

El_Terrible on January 19, 2011 at 10:46 PM

she’s just pining for the fjords!

sesquipedalian on January 19, 2011 at 10:39 PM

Because it’s just not an internet chat board without some annoying douche quoting Monty Python.

SuperCool on January 19, 2011 at 10:47 PM

Sarah Palin will crush Obama….

PierreLegrand on January 19, 2011 at 10:47 PM

Time Magazine – March 31, 1980

National opinion polls continue to show Carter leading Reagan by an apparently comfortable margin of about 25%. They also show that more moderate Republicans like Ford would run better against the President. This suggests that Reagan is not the strongest G.O.P. choice for the November election and that he clearly faces an uphill battle.”

“Party operatives are plainly unhappy with his selection. In Massachusetts, where both Bush and Anderson defeated Reagan, party leaders are not yet reconciled to the Reagan candidacy. Says one: “There’s a vacuum of leadership at the national level; and what appears to be the Republican Party’s response? A 69-year-old man who has done virtually nothing for years”

“Reagan has a history of committing rhetorical blunders that drive away voters. His quest in 1976 was damaged when he suggested vaguely, without proper research and consideration, that $90 billion in federal programs should be turned back to the states. He then spent months explaining that the affected programs would not be eliminated, only transferred. As Governor, Reagan was outraged by student unrest and once proclaimed: “The state of California has no business subsidizing intellectual curiosity.”

“Worse perhaps than the verbal gaffe is Reagan’s relentlessly simple-minded discussion of complex problems. He is aware that he is charged with this failing, and in his 1967 inaugural address on becoming Governor of California, he asserted: “We have been told there are no simple answers to complex problems. Well, the truth is there are simple answers, just not easy ones.”

Time Magazine – March 31, 1980

1980 Election Results:

Electoral vote
Reagan:489
Carter:49

portlandon on January 19, 2011 at 10:48 PM

That’s what a campaign is for.

Either she’ll make her case for why she’s the right person… or she won’t.

powerpro on January 19, 2011 at 10:40 PM

This!

We will not make the decision on these threads in our food fights. She will win it or lose it in whatever way she chooses.

Now, I guess we will have jetboy jump in shortly with a sincere call for civil discourse about her with a snark about `nistas thrown in! Sorry jet, you had ample opportunities last night to have a conversation and today I saw you be the first one on a thread antagonizing `nistas.

bluemarlin on January 19, 2011 at 10:48 PM

The woman has been accused of an accessory to the attempted murder an congressman 24/7 for almost two weeks running and her negatives are only in the mid-fifties?

That’s not a stake though the heart, that’s a pinprick.

Obama’s handlers are already thinking of ways to duck the debates in October ’12.

And VDH knocks it outta the park:

http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/the-war-against-palin-goes-on-and-on-and/

Bruno Strozek on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Why don’t you go ahead and call me a troll now so we can get it out of the way..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 10:41 PM

Indeed. Voters elected a rock star, and he’s treating the U.S. like rock stars treat hotel rooms.

Left Coast Right Mind on January 19, 2011 at 10:50 PM

Wasn’t Hillary unelectable too until she changed a lot of minds by campaigning hard against Barry?

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Hillary’s unfavorables were over 50 percent before she launched her campaign.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:50 PM

Palin threatens their sexual identity, which is bound up with their politics in a way that it is not for any other group (possibly excepting gays, though that is unrelated to today’s topic)…

Sexual Identity? OK, I just don’t understand this logic. Hillary please explain.

Electrongod on January 19, 2011 at 10:51 PM

“2012 will be a vitally important election year; it is no time for a kamikaze Presidential campaign or for a cult of personality. Republicans (and conservatives) need a candidate who has a chance to win against an incumbent who, despite everything, is not particularly unpopular and who won’t be able to do much visible damage between now and then.”

Hillary’s unfavorables were above 50% leading up to the Democrat primaries. Now she’s the most admired woman in America(guess who #2 is). How did she turn that around? Simple. By going out there for a year and selling herself to the public. Why is Palin incapable of doing the same thing? Granted, she’ll never win over Democrats, but neither will any other GOP candidate.

And as far as finding someone who can beat Obama, well who might that be according to these so-called pundits? Romney? Nominating him is insane. I’m not saying he can’t win, but the two biggest issues in 2012 will be the economy and health care, and Mittens negates the latter thanks to Romneycare.

Huckster? I think he could win as well, but the commuting of sentences for violent criminals will come back to bite him in the ass. In fact, just imagine what Palin’s been subjected to over the last week and a half and picture Huck going through the same thing. Only he actually is somewhat culpable. Plus he’ll have a hard time raising money or energizing the base outside of evangelicals.

Pence? I like him, but he seems to be leaning against running. Daniels? He’s also dropping hints about not running. He’s be a solid candidate thanks to his record, but he’s dull and uninspiring. If resumes were all that mattered in a Presidential election, the current occupant in the Oval Office wouldn’t even be there. Christie? Not running. Jindal? Not running. Newt? He has unfavorables that rival Palin’s.

That leaves Pawlenty who I like, but is from the same mold as Daniels. A solid candidate who is articulate and personable, but just bland. He’s basically someone you nominate if you either know going in you’re destined to lose(i.e. Dole in ’96, McCain in ’08) or you’re virtually assured of victory and don’t wanna screw it up. And since I expect 2012 to be a competitive race, I think it’s too risky putting up T-Paw.

Doughboy on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Weren’t Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in similar territory before they announced their campaigns? Wasn’t Hillary unelectable too until she changed a lot of minds by campaigning hard against Barry?

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:45 PM

I don’t think they were ever in the position that Palin is in.

When I saw her video, I thought she did a good job. But a lot of other people saw something else altogether. I heard Dick Morris say that to a lot of people she was not defending herself so much as whining and people did not like that with so many people hurt and dead in the shooting.

I think this is the problem, people who like her see a different person than a lot of other people see. I don’t know how she gets around that.

Conservatives like the fact that she defends herself, but to a lot of Independents and of course Democrats she is just looking for attention.

Realistically speaking, I honestly do not know how she gets past that.

Terrye on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

I’m not looking forward to the circular firing squad we’re in for on the right if she runs in the primaries.

And dreading the inevitable beating she’ll take in the general if she somehow gets the nomination.

Fairly or unfairly, she’s been forever trashed in the eyes of the non-political “independent.” And I still don’t understand the hero worship she receives when we all so justly criticized the left for doing that same thing with their last candidate.

brak on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

I will when you manifest your barely latent tendencies.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM

“[A]s recently as last March, Gerald Ford had described Ronald Reagan as “unelectable.”

Time Magazine, June 16, 1980

aunursa on January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM

:)

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM

She runs, she wins, Liberal heads explode!

I got money on it.
Money bomb at Sarahpac!

dhunter on January 19, 2011 at 10:54 PM

From CNN

Following the shootings critics suggested Palin’s at-times charged political rhetoric and use of a graphic featuring crosshairs may have contributed to the shooter’s motivations. The graphic was part of a website that Palin put up last year, during the divisive debate over health care reform, to highlight 20 congressional districts won by Sen. John McCain in the 2008 presidential election, where Democratic representatives were voting in favor of the legislation.

these guys are really a piece of work. Later, their “expert” says well, maybe it was her response to the criticize that hurt her.

the rabid dog press

r keller on January 19, 2011 at 10:54 PM

Conservatives like the fact that she defends herself, but to a lot of Independents and of course Democrats she is just looking for attention.

Realistically speaking, I honestly do not know how she gets past that.

Terrye on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

That says more about the people who won’t vote for her than it says about Palin, dontcha think?

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 10:54 PM

Terrye on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Oh she is so magical, she can appear as two different persons at the same time! Didn’t know Sarah had these powers as well, in addition to others.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:55 PM

Realistically speaking, I honestly do not know how she gets past that.

Terrye on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

I think she can do it. But there’s some truth in the advice of rising above it. If she stopped attacking the media on their level and adopted Reagan’s famous tone with Mondale, and just say, “There they go again.” Treat them as the joke they are.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:55 PM

OT:

Just read a Dude story if I ever saw one on Newsbusters.

Tucson Arizona “Gabby” Giffords’ neurosurgeon quite the hero, nice doc, and low and behold his parents live in Palm Beach. Palm Beach reporter decides to interview parents and finds they are Tea Party supporters. As the old “I Love Lucy” audience used to go: “Uh-oh!”

Marcus on January 19, 2011 at 10:56 PM

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Whatever..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:56 PM

Yes, Dick Morris, how’d that 100 house seat pick up and take back of the senate work out?

davek70 on January 19, 2011 at 10:56 PM

I think she can do it. But there’s some truth in the advice of rising above it. If she stopped attacking the media on their level and adopted Reagan’s famous tone with Mondale, and just say, “There they go again.” Treat them as the joke they are.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:55 PM

That was a re-election campaign. Don’t you remember what happened during the 1980 campaign in Nashua?

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 10:56 PM

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

I will when you manifest your barely latent tendencies.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM

?

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:57 PM

Don’t you remember what happened during the 1980 campaign in Nashua?

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 10:56 PM

I was pretty young then. Any linkage? Or just tell me, I’ll take your word for it.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:58 PM

She always replies….

Beats the snot out of someone who never replies. How many months did Obama go without a Press Conference? I can’t recall the number, I just remember it was a RECORD.

MSM holding a private citizen to a higher standard than the elected President. A President who apologizes for America and bows to everyone down to the Mayor of Tampa Florida.

To my knowledge Palin has never felt the need, desire, or even mustered the ability to apologize for America. Please post the picture of Palin bowing to anyone, because I have not seen it.

It’s funny, they have to invent a new “standard” of being Presidential just so they can criticize someone who is not President. Can we just ONCE apply that same standard in the MSM to the dork that now is actually President?

Hog Wild on January 19, 2011 at 10:59 PM

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:57 PM

Just a “Palinista” calling folks trolls..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:59 PM

?

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:57 PM

I second that.

Electrongod on January 19, 2011 at 10:59 PM

No one with a 59 percent unfavorability rating among independents has the chance of a snowball in Hell of being elected President.

And John McCain was liked by independents and was apparently the GOP candidate in 2008 with the best chance of winning them over. Didn’t happen.

As was said earlier, let Palin run if she wants. If she loses, she loses. I’ve never seen so many people trying to convince a person NOT to run. It’s downright weird.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:00 PM

I was pretty young then. Any linkage? Or just tell me, I’ll take your word for it.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:58 PM

Reagan’s Nashau Moment.

portlandon on January 19, 2011 at 11:00 PM

Terrye on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

By the way, your thinking is all muddled. Polls before the blood libel showed her gaining a lot among independents and moderates. Most of whom like her populist, anti-establishment outsider message. You are just repating the guff reported by CNN and totally ignore the poll by QUnnipiac which showed that a lof of independents liked her video.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 11:01 PM

In Jan 2009 Obama was at 70% approval. Remember that?
At the end of 2009? Not so much.

If she loses, she loses. She must try tho.

B Man on January 19, 2011 at 11:01 PM

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:00 PM

I agree..I hope she runs if she wants too..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:02 PM

Well, AP those Romney threads just don’t generate the hits…?

d1carter on January 19, 2011 at 11:03 PM

“The time has come to put any thoughts of Sarah Palin running for President to rest. I say that not because I dislike her; on the contrary, I’m a fan.”

I’ll go with Jacobson’s advice to Sunshine Fan (my words) Hindraker:

“There is an insatiable mainstream media hunger to demonize and marginalize potential Republican nominees. Feeding that beast in the wake of the Tucson shooting is not the way to win in 2012.”

Dusty on January 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM

And I still don’t understand the hero worship she receives when we all so justly criticized the left for doing that same thing with their last candidate.

brak on January 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Because she’s out there fighting for conservative principles. She’s on the frontlines with the rest of us trying to set this country back on the right track. And she and her family are being subjected to the worst smears imaginable, yet she perseveres. Where the hell are the other so-called leaders in the Republican Party?

And as for Barry, ask yourself honestly if during the 2 years he campaigned for the Presidency you ever got the feeling that it wasn’t all about him. That he was fighting for the common everyday American. All I saw was one giant ego trip. Plus it’s hard for me to respect someone who only got where he is because of affirmative action and a fawning press.

Doughboy on January 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM

Why don’t you go ahead and call me a troll now so we can get it out of the way..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

You’re a trolling troll engaging in trollish trollery.
How’s that?

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM

Sounds good to me..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:05 PM

Palin threatens their sexual identity, which is bound up with their politics in a way that it is not for any other group (possibly excepting gays, though that is unrelated to today’s topic)…

Sexual Identity? OK, I just don’t understand this logic. Hillary please explain.

Electrongod on January 19, 2011 at 10:51 PM

The writer at AT known as Robin of Berkeley gets closer to the truth, I think:

Yes, leftists attack Palin because they envy her beauty; and true, she’s a political threat. But the main reason for the hatred is something deeper and darker.

Leftists loathe Palin because she has retained something that was stripped from them years ago: a wholesomeness, a purity of heart. People on the left despise Palin because she shines a bright light on their shame and unworthiness, which they try desperately to deny.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Reagan’s Nashau Moment.

portlandon on January 19, 2011 at 11:00 PM

Holy smokes, that was all sorts of awesomeness I had to watch it 5 times.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Why don’t you go ahead and call me a troll now so we can get it out of the way..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

You’re a trolling troll engaging in trollish trollery.
How’s that?

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM

Oh the doppelganger shows up. :)

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 11:06 PM

It amazes me how easily our “so called” press can manipulate the masses. Tell them the sky is falling and most go outside to look. Why do you think they continue to pour false facts and poll numbers our way, because it works? If you are content with the status quo and want the beat to go on, continue to buy into the rhetoric the media tells us, and those who want an honest change will never see it. Instead Obama will face another candidate they have picked, and we will be voting for Romney or Huckabee or whomever until the media decides to attack them and the beat will go on! One only needs to listen to what is being said by Democratic Congress persons to know that civility is dead and those that fight back will be hated even more, so let’s just lay down and give up. It’s what the left wants. Listening to the other threads, it is working>

mistert1950 on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

You’re a trolling troll engaging in trollish trollery.
How’s that?

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM

And NO music postz!!!11!1!!

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

As was said earlier, let Palin run if she wants. If she loses, she loses. I’ve never seen so many people trying to convince a person NOT to run. It’s downright weird.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:00 PM

THIS.

davek70 on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

I was pretty young then. Any linkage? Or just tell me, I’ll take your word for it.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 10:58 PM

I have some linkage all right, but some background might be called-for….

In the 1980 election, Bush was a pioneer in focusing on the Iowa caucuses. Reagan ran a more traditional campaign, thus spreading himself a little more thinly. Bush trounced Reagan in Iowa, and it was in the wake of this defeat that Reagan’s campaign team reconnoitered for New Hampshire.

In order to avoid an appearance of conflict-of-interest, Reagan offered to pay for the entire cost of a debate held in Nashua, but arranged and hosted by the local newspaper, the Nashua Telegraph. Reagan also thought that the debate would include the other four candidates. Bush thought it would be just himself and Reagan.

In the midst of Reagan trying to explain why he thought that all five of his opponents should be allowed to debate, John Breene, a hack from the Telegraph, asked the sound man to turn Reagan’s microphone off. The microphone was not turned off, although Reagan rose from his chair looking visibly agitated (dare I say, royally pissed off), and after Breene again asked the sound man to turn the microphone off, Reagan announced into the still-on microphone, “I am paying for this microphone, Mister Greene! [sic]“

The crowd cheered quite loudly, and although I don’t recall how the debate ended (I was only two years old at the time, myself), Reagan won New Hampshire 50%-23% against Bush, taking away the “big mo” momentum that Bush thought he had gained in Iowa. The rest, as they say, is history.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

I will when you manifest your barely latent tendencies.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Hey Dire: Are those ‘latent tendencies’ like a tendency to turn into werewolf or something?
That would be like way totally cool.
*smirk*

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 11:06 PM

..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

Sarah Palin is a smart lady and you’ve got to know that she is watching these poll numbers and some of the commentary being written about her. If she decides to run, the entire primary season will be mass chaos as they trash her even more.

I personally don’t think she wants to do that to this country and until she gets out of her comfort zone i.e. Fox and learns the fine art of speaking off the cuff to random journalists, sharpens up on foreign policy, etc., I truly believe she won’t run because she knows how toxic she is.

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM

And NO music postz!!!11!1!!

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

You are being such a killjoy.
*pout* *whine*

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:09 PM

Only Palin fights.

The rest stand back and watch.

So only Palin gets attacked.

Eunuchs and benchwarmers scare no one.

profitsbeard on January 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

We need to have a music post soon..Baxter Greene told me we would get together and do it!!..:):):)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM

The rest, as they say, is history.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

Thanks for the detailed background. Makes the clip so much richer. And that’s one rich clip.

I just wish Sarah had another 10 years on her to have that kind of unassailable gravitas that Reagan had when he got pissed off. I so want her to be a Maggie Thatcher.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM

I agree. Toxic to other candidate’s chances.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 11:11 PM

Sarah Palin is a smart lady and you’ve got to know that she is watching these poll numbers and some of the commentary being written about her. If she decides to run, the entire primary season will be mass chaos as they trash her even more.

I personally don’t think she wants to do that to this country and until she gets out of her comfort zone i.e. Fox and learns the fine art of speaking off the cuff to random journalists, sharpens up on foreign policy, etc., I truly believe she won’t run because she knows how toxic she is.

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM

“Toxic”? The media are toxic, she isn’t. And they can toxify someone you actually LIKE next. What are you going to say then? “Come on, be loyal and get behind our nominee!!!”

She’s also pissed off and she hates to lose. I don’t know if she’ll run or not, but I hope she does, and I hope she wins, if for no other reason than the number of people it will send to the loony bin.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:11 PM

You are being such a killjoy.
*pout* *whine*

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:09 PM

Weren’t you there that night…? I thought you were there…? When Jenfidel came down from on high?

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:12 PM

These polls were greatly skewed.

There is no way that 46% of the American people (16 points above Favorable)think she didn’t handle that properly.

Give me a break. Morris is wrong on this one.

She does however need to have someone ELSE defending her. She can’t be the attack dog all the time. She and Todd are going to have to outside their group of 5 or 6 people to get someone ELSE to do the dirty work for her (call out names and such).

IF………….IF………..She’s planning on running in 2012.

PappyD61 on January 19, 2011 at 11:12 PM

Oh the doppelganger shows up. :)

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 11:06 PM

What can I say,it’s a gift I’ve been blessed with.
*smile*

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:12 PM

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM

yeah, let’s wait for another 10 years so that this country(and the world) is more f**ed up than it already is.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 11:13 PM

I just wish Sarah had another 10 years on her to have that kind of unassailable gravitas that Reagan had when he got pissed off. I so want her to be a Maggie Thatcher.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM

Maggie Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were old farts of a different generation. I think Sarah Palin can stand on her own as a leader if people of principle will give her a fair chance.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:13 PM

She’s running. She will win.

SouthernGent on January 19, 2011 at 11:13 PM

She does however need to have someone ELSE defending her.

PappyD61 on January 19, 2011 at 11:12 PM

You’re right there. But the milquetoast GOP powers-that-be and their lackeys in the general population aren’t the ones who are going to do it.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:13 PM

yeah, let’s wait for another 10 years so that this country(and the world) is more f**ed up than it already is.

promachus on January 19, 2011 at 11:13 PM

That’s not what I’m saying, that’s not what I said.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:14 PM

Weren’t you there that night…? I thought you were there…? When Jenfidel came down from on high?

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:12 PM
She did that few times
I’m certain I was there whenever it was.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:14 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

Definitely Werewolves..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:14 PM

I just wish Sarah had another 10 years on her to have that kind of unassailable gravitas that Reagan had

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM

A lot of Republicans in the late 70s found Reagan’s gravitas eminently assailable, from what I’ve heard.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:15 PM

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM

I remember that like it was yesterday, but didn’t know it had a “name”.

Thanks.

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:16 PM

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Thanks. That explains it better.

Electrongod on January 19, 2011 at 11:16 PM

A lot is going to happen before election day 2012. But in the battles leading to that day Sarah Palin needs to be in the thick of things. Who else will speak for us?

Metanis on January 19, 2011 at 11:18 PM

Robin of Berkeley is right. I would add that Palin’s quality of joy, in the orginal definition of the word (rejoice), existentially discomports leftists beyond endurance. Leftism is a religion of misery, a belief system based on grievance, guilt, rage and power through the deliverance into a delusional secular Utopia constructed out of this misery. To confront a woman such as Palin, a magnetic and potent political force who celebrates her life, ordinary things, this country, and embraces the vicissitudes of life with such easy grace and obvious religious “joy”, undercuts their being, their reason for being. It can’t be tolerated.

She must be brought down to a state of misery, or annihilated.

rrpjr on January 19, 2011 at 11:18 PM

I think Sarah Palin can stand on her own as a leader if people of principle will give her a fair chance.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:13 PM

No doubt. I think she can win it, and I’ll even canvass the neighborhood for her. But the fact remains that Sarah is a very attractive youthful woman who still breeds, which brings out the caveman of the Left and the hyper-sensitive envious threatened barren-womb abortionist women of the Left. They hate her. Now, I don’t think we need them to win. But a lot of those Neanderthals are behind the media hit jobs, such as Richard Cohen and Paul Krugman.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:18 PM

You’re right there. But the milquetoast GOP powers-that-be and their lackeys in the general population aren’t the ones who are going to do it.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:13 PM

It’s bizarre, but her biggest defenders are us. The Tea Partiers, conservatives, talk radio hosts. Basically people who are horrified at what our government is doing and are smeared as racists, Nazis, and morons whenever we dare to speak out against them.

If she does run, it’ll be the ultimate grassroots campaign. I think that’s what frightens the media and the establishment politicians so much. A movement like that can snowball into something huge and unstoppable. Look at virtually overnight how big the Tea Party became. Now imagine Palin out there for a year and a half building momentum.

Doughboy on January 19, 2011 at 11:18 PM

A lot is going to happen before election day 2012. But in the battles leading to that day Sarah Palin needs to be in the thick of things. Who else will speak for us?

Metanis on January 19, 2011 at 11:18 PM

Mitt!! And independents like him! LOL

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:19 PM

Definitely Werewolves..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:14 PM

Dang you!
Now I’m gonna wake up the husband and mother-in-law with my howling.

FYI: I’m neither a werewolf nor a troll…I’m a garden gnome.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:19 PM

I just wish Sarah had another 10 years on her to have that kind of unassailable gravitas that Reagan had when he got pissed off. I so want her to be a Maggie Thatcher.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:10 PM

And she does have time but at this point she is not Reagan nor Thatcher.

We are in the fight of our lives to get Barry out of the White House, lets concentrate on that, let Sarah hone her skills as kingmaker and wait for 2016?

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:20 PM

If she does run, it’ll be the ultimate grassroots campaign. I think that’s what frightens the media and the establishment politicians so much. A movement like that can snowball into something huge and unstoppable. Look at virtually overnight how big the Tea Party became. Now imagine Palin out there for a year and a half building momentum.

Doughboy on January 19, 2011 at 11:18 PM

And, get this: that’s what the Reagan candidacy was. And no, Palin is not Reagan, and the search for another Reagan is bound to be futile. But it’s much the same dynamic, and it’s opposed by the party upper-echelons for the same reason.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:20 PM

I’m a garden gnome.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:19 PM

Do garden gnomes live under bridges?..:):)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:21 PM

I think she can win it, and I’ll even canvass the neighborhood for her. But the fact remains that Sarah is a very attractive youthful woman who still breeds, which brings out the caveman of the Left and the hyper-sensitive envious threatened barren-womb abortionist women of the Left. They hate her. Now, I don’t think we need them to win. But a lot of those Neanderthals are behind the media hit jobs, such as Richard Cohen and Paul Krugman.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:18 PM

You’re barking up the wrong tree with me here, John. I don’t care if she can win. I hope she does win, but that’s not what I’m basing my support for her in the primaries on. I’ve said it numerous times in these comments and elsewhere, and it bears repeating:

I am supporting Sarah Palin because her principles, as stated, seem to most closely mirror my own out of all the current presumptive Republican nominees.

That is where my loyalty to her begins and ends. Is it possible that someone else at some indeterminate point in the future will fit that bill? Anything’s possible, but to tell me that Palin’s attractiveness is just a matter of personal charisma? Testosterone? That’s a pretty vicious insult for a “conservative” to fling at a brother-in-freedom.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:22 PM

let Sarah hone her skills as kingmaker and wait for 2016?

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:20 PM

What kind of a “kingmaker” would back a candidate who will lose, setting themselves up for a run in 4 more years?

/Logic fail.

If she wants to run, she runs. If she wins, great. If she doesn’t, too bad- lets vote for the nominee & get Obama out of office.

Fair enough?

cs89 on January 19, 2011 at 11:24 PM

The Ever Relentless Un-Stoppable March Towards
the White House,by Team Sarah!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on January 19, 2011 at 11:26 PM

If she wants to run, she runs. If she wins, great. If she doesn’t, too bad- lets vote for the nominee & get Obama out of office.

Fair enough?

cs89 on January 19, 2011 at 11:24 PM

Well, you know why there’s this chorus of “Don’t run, Sarah!!!” It’s because she has the base behind her and can win the nomination. And if that happens, there’s no guarantee that their precious “she’s only at 7% favorability” mantras will hold out. The thing is, to some people, Palin shouldn’t even have a chance at winning. She’s gotta be stopped.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:28 PM

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:20 PM

I’m still somewhat befuddled over gary’s comment yesterday that the Iron Lady could only WISH that she were Gov. Palin.
MY. GOSH!
There’s a cult of personality rising up around Gov. Palin-through no fault of hers-that is EVERY BIT as bad as the one that rose around Obama.

Danggit! The last thing we need is another celebrity in office
We need a LEADER-and if Gov. Palin is in office she will ALWAYS end up being the headline-rather than the business of this great nation.
No thank you. No more celebrities.
Jindal/Pence 2012.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:28 PM

The media picked McCain now they are demanding no one pick Palin.

Grunt on January 19, 2011 at 11:30 PM

, but to tell me that Palin’s attractiveness is just a matter of personal charisma? Testosterone? That’s a pretty vicious insult for a “conservative” to fling at a brother-in-freedom.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:22 PM

I agree, but how many times do folks that post here say “she’s hot” or “swoon” or other stuff like that? I saw some of that stuff last night, I believe.

And it’s insulting to see it posted and it’s insulting to Sarah Palin, don’t ya think?

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:30 PM

Do garden gnomes live under bridges?..:):)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:21 PM

After the rant I just went on…they might.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:30 PM

And she does have time but at this point she is not Reagan nor Thatcher.

We are in the fight of our lives to get Barry out of the White House, lets concentrate on that, let Sarah hone her skills as kingmaker and wait for 2016?

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:20 PM

Neither Reagan nor Thatcher were anything until after they entered and left office, if you get my point. I am not 100% committed to Sarah but she seems to be the only one of late that is committed to my viewpoint and has the willingness to stand up for it! Are you sure we have 10 years for her to hone her skills? Who in the presumptive candidates has actually stood up for us recently? I have an open mind for the primaries but at this point and time who is doing the yeomans work for the conservative cause? She will run or not run on her own choice and I will eagerly await the debates!

bluemarlin on January 19, 2011 at 11:30 PM

Anything’s possible, but to tell me that Palin’s attractiveness is just a matter of personal charisma? Testosterone? That’s a pretty vicious insult for a “conservative” to fling at a brother-in-freedom.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:22 PM

Woah. Serious misread. If I say I’m willing to canvass the neighborhood for her, I’m on board with her principles. So don’t get righteous on me.

I’m flinging that accusation at the Left. Not to clear-headed thinkers who don’t allow gender or race or religion to bias their support.

Other than her unforgivable audacity not to abort her special-needs child, I cannot explain the overwhelming and delusive hatred of a self-made woman of commonsense principles, and have therefore ventured into explanations of a more primal nature. Brush up on some Thatcher early in her career. She faced enormous chauvinism. I find chauvinism, like racism, to be fervent on the Left.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2011 at 11:31 PM

You’re barking up the wrong tree with me here, John. I don’t care if she can win. I hope she does win, but that’s not what I’m basing my support for her in the primaries on. I’ve said it numerous times in these comments and elsewhere, and it bears repeating:

I am supporting Sarah Palin because her principles, as stated, seem to most closely mirror my own out of all the current presumptive Republican nominees.

That is where my loyalty to her begins and ends. Is it possible that someone else at some indeterminate point in the future will fit that bill? Anything’s possible, but to tell me that Palin’s attractiveness is just a matter of personal charisma? Testosterone? That’s a pretty vicious insult for a “conservative” to fling at a brother-in-freedom.

gryphon202 on January 19, 2011 at 11:22 PM

Thank you, gryphon!
I feel the same way exactly, except that I’m a sister (and not a lesbian…!).

Jenfidel on January 19, 2011 at 11:31 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:28 PM

LOL!!..Good Post!..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:31 PM

We are in the fight of our lives to get Barry out of the White House…

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:20 PM

I don’t think that’s true of the GOP. They are in the fight of their lives to bring the base to heel. Nothing else.

ddrintn on January 19, 2011 at 11:31 PM

Fair enough?

cs89 on January 19, 2011 at 11:24 PM

I meant to type 2020, me bad. And she would still be young enough to run in 2020, right?

Knucklehead on January 19, 2011 at 11:32 PM

LOL!!..Good Post!..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:31 PM

Gary’s Thatcher comment kind of put me over the edge.
I’ll vote for Gov. Palin if she’s the nominee-but I really hope she isn’t.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:33 PM

After the rant I just went on…they might.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2011 at 11:30 PM

LOL!!..:)

Dire Straits on January 19, 2011 at 11:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 7