Mitch Daniels passes on 2012 run

posted at 10:00 am on May 22, 2011 by Jazz Shaw

It may go down as one of the more ironic turns on the 2012 campaign trail. The one man who seemed to have the world beating a path to his door, offering to largely pay his tab for fundraising, some essentially begging him to toss his hat in the ring, was the one guy who honestly didn’t want to do it and had good reasons to decline. Mitch Daniels issues his “no thank you” for a presidential run.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels told supporters in an email early Sunday that he will not run for president in 2012, a decision he said ultimately came down to his family’s reticence about a campaign.

The announcement by the former Office of Management and Budget director and favorite of much of the Republican establishment will again roil the unsettled GOP field—and likely intensify efforts to convince another major candidate to join the race, such as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush or New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

The e-mail he sent to supporters was short and polite, but to the point.

“The counsel and encouragement I received from important citizens like you caused me to think very deeply about becoming a national candidate. In the end, I was able to resolve every competing consideration but one, but that, the interests and wishes of my family, is the most important consideration of all. If I have disappointed you, I will always be sorry.”

This will come as a disappointment to a lot of establishment party regulars who seemed to see Mitch as their next best hope. (Though not to the more energized wings of the base who are lining up behind their own favorites, some of whom are seen as more dark horse candidates.) But in the end, it’s pretty hard to argue with the governor’s reasons. Running for President is a draining, 24/7 affair and it affects their entire family, not just the candidate. If his wife and the rest of the Daniels clan were seriously opposed to it before he even got out of the gate, it would drain a lot of the fire out of his belly. (Or that of any potential nominee.)

The exit question, just as it was with the last several high profile departures, is who does this benefit? Will Mitch be endorsing anyone else any time soon or just taking more of a Haley Barbour approach and “support the eventual nominee?” Since he was never officially in the race, which segment of the base is left looking for a home, if any? Honestly, I didn’t see that much buzz about him outside of would-be beltway kingmakers. Call me crazy, but I really don’t think an exit by Daniels shakes up the early stages of the race all that much.

Update (Ed): In the beginning of this cycle, I expected the GOP to nominate a hypercompetent successful executive as the logical contrast to Barack Obama’s inexperienced incompetence.  So who has dropped out of the running early?  Three multi-term governors: Mike Huckabee, Haley Barbour and Mitch Daniels.  If the field doesn’t change after Monday when Tim Pawlenty officially enters the race, that will leave him as the hypercompetent executive choice against Mitt Romney’s money and established inside position.

Of course, the field could change.  Sarah Palin could enter it, which seems more likely than not, and she already has an energized base.  Rick Perry might take notice of the room in the field for multi-term successful governors and for Southern candidates.  Daniels’ withdrawal makes a candidacy from both more attractive.

I’m not terribly surprised that Daniels came to this decision, though.  He didn’t seem terribly enthusiastic about having his family history turned into campaign fodder, and I can’t say as I blame him.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7

Why are you so emotionally invested in the Mitch Daniels Cult of Lack of Personality?

Relax, it wasn’t to be.

You know where you are going to end up, so why not go ahead and take the plunge? :)

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 1:55 PM

If Palin said she’s not running, the Palinistas would lose it.

And of course, blame the “GOP establishment” and the media and herp derp

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

….the fence sitters that don’t stand for anything. Why do we have to do all the compromising?
You start giving into them, you become a “flip-flopper” and the country sees you as one who can’t “walk the walk”.

I did that once with McCain…I’ll not ever do that again.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Yup.
That’s why when I hear someone is an independt, I think one of 2 things:
1. You just want the GOP to do the right thing.
OR
2. You’re an idiot who doesn’t stand foranything & you let others make decisions for you.

Then, his flavor of the month doesn’t get in the game and he’s “tearing up”.

lol

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:01 PM

I like JB. I really do. But this I think really explains it:

Hey , dont just stand there doing nothing, help us palinistas by rooting for Mittens…

the_nile on May 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

the factors that led to her resignation would NOT simply disappear if she were elected president. On the contrary, they would be magnified on an almost unimaginable scale.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Well I say bring it on, then the truth to it all will be out there front and center for people to decide for themselves.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 1:41 PM

I know–it was meant as a reminder.

INC on May 22, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Now I’m just…apathetic.

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 1:51 PM

..:)

Dire Straits on May 22, 2011 at 2:08 PM

I know this has been hashed out ad nauseum… but that doesn’t make any difference to me when compared to the duty she had to the voters of Alaska who put her in the big chair.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM

She fulfilled her duty by stepping down. It’s not a suicide mission.

the_nile on May 22, 2011 at 2:09 PM

If Palin said she’s not running, the Palinistas would lose it.

And of course, blame the “GOP establishment” and the media and herp derp

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

What are the Mitchsters doing?

They are losing it.

Tearing up, ect.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:09 PM

You’re being a d!ckhead when you say things like that.
That was your purpose. To be a pr!ck about her ‘toting’ her kids around ‘everywhere’ etc.
I do not consider that woman’s actions during the POTUS campaign to be bad.
Evidently, you do.
Eveidently, it’s hard to put yourself in someone’s shoes & consider why they might have done something.
I personally think your comment is $hitty.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

the Palinistas would lose it.

And of course, blame the “GOP establishment” and the media and herp derp

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

So are you equating anyone who likes Palin as a Paulbot?
I do not think all folks who like Ron Paul are Paulbots. But they have to know his positions on foreign policy.
And that leads to me to at least question their sanity.
I guess IDK how Palin is SOOOOOO terribly disagreeable to anyone.
The arguments for her come down to some pretty petty stuff, IMHO.
But whatevs.
& as I said above, I’m not so emotionally invested in someone that I’ll just die if they don’t win.
I actually have a life.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

I know–it was meant as a reminder.

INC on May 22, 2011 at 2:08 PM

A well placed reminder.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Then, his flavor of the month doesn’t get in the game and he’s “tearing up”.

lol

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:01 PM

wat?

How many potential candidates have I declared support for? Just one…Mitch Daniels. Months ago.

But go on…the ‘nistas can keep putting down anyone who’s not a ‘nista. Close the doors. Kick out the RINOs. etc etc etc. And give The One another four years like you did in ’08 by attacking McCain.

Thanks. Jet, out.

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

You are disgusted by facts in a factual response to the difference between the kids of Romney/Daniels being unknown.

Factual response: Palin’s kids were targets from the moment she stepped on the stage in Dayton, Ohio. Romney’s kids have never been targets. That was the point that seems to have zoomed over your head.

Mitt & Daniels not bringing their families to the forefront doesn’t mean anything other than that was their decision.

Factual response: other than Daniels’ wife, the media are not making other candidates’ kids and spouses an issue.

Like most others, so what? Her handling of these issues was poor.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM

Factual response: for many people, the fact that Palin is drawing one breath after another seems to indicate poor judgment on her part.

pseudoforce on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

You think me saying your comment is $hitty is something that should get me banned here?
You really aren’t from ’round these parts, are ya?

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

But now she has the legal and financial resources to deal with them that she did not have as Alaska governor. She can now do the same thing every other big-name politico does and it won’t be a problem.

alwaysfiredup on May 22, 2011 at 2:04 PM

She had the legal resources that she, herself, put in place in Alaska. She had a history of working well with Democrats within her administration, and then she ran for V.P. and they became rabidly hostile. At which point, we see that there were flaws in the system.

What changes on the national level really? Do we honestly think it’s a less hostile environment?

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Taking sides.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Just one…Mitch Daniels.

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

*choke* *sob* Miiiiiitch….how COULD you… LOL

pseudoforce on May 22, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Now I’m just…pathetic.

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 1:51 PM
..:)

Dire Straits on May 22, 2011 at 2:08 PM

FTFY

VegasRick on May 22, 2011 at 2:13 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Hopefully a lot. This is not the Obama admin.

Schadenfreude on May 22, 2011 at 2:14 PM

If Palin said she’s not running, the Palinistas would lose it.

And of course, blame the “GOP establishment” and the media and herp derp

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

I think she wants Obama out of office more then anyone else, if she chose not to run it’s probably because she thinks there is a better way to bring that to reality.

the_nile on May 22, 2011 at 2:14 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

And yes, when called a name, drama queen, my passive goes to agressive.
Excuse me for the altered invectives, but if you act like one of the invectives, talk like them, walk like them, smell like them, then IMHO, it’s calling a spade, a spade.
If that is offensive, it’s unfortunate.
I think calling out Palin the way you did, regarding her children & family, pregnant daughter etc. was crap.
And I thought you were being a d!ckhead for it.
Perhaps pinhead is a better characterization of you?
I personally wanted to use something a little more insulting.
To get my disgust across.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:15 PM

If Palin said she’s not running, the Palinistas would lose it.

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

No, I wouldn’t. I would just go with Bachmann or Cai…er, hope that Perry jumps in.

pseudoforce on May 22, 2011 at 2:17 PM

the factors that led to her resignation would NOT simply disappear if she were elected president. On the contrary, they would be magnified on an almost unimaginable scale.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011

Actually they would. The ethics laws in Alaska allowed for any person or group to file lawsuits against puclic officials no matter how frivolous…and they sure filed them by the hundreds. By contrast, noone is allowed to sue the POTUS, anything of that nature takes and act of Congress.

JonPrichard on May 22, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Hopefully a lot. This is not the Obama admin.

Schadenfreude on May 22, 2011 at 2:14 PM

That’s good.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:17 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Diss Lady Gaga and you’re GONE!
/

VegasRick on May 22, 2011 at 2:17 PM

She had the legal resources that she, herself, put in place in Alaska. She had a history of working well with Democrats within her administration, and then she ran for V.P. and they became rabidly hostile. At which point, we see that there were flaws in the system.

What changes on the national level really? Do we honestly think it’s a less hostile environment?

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

You clearly do not know what you are talking about on this topic.

The Governor of Alaska, at that time, could not use the State AG Office in these complaint hearings. It had to be a personally retained attorney team, not reimbursed by the State.

Did you not know this?

This was the Achilles Heel they thought they found to ruin her completely.

At the Federal level, this situation does not exist.

For some strange reason I have not been able to figure out, members of the Legislature who had an ethics complaint filed against them would see it summarily dismissed if the complainer went to the press before the hearing.

Automatically dismissed.

For the Executive Branch, the law states that you cannot go to the media with an unadjuticated complaint, but there was no penalty for doing so.

The Presidency does not have this problem.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM

She had the legal resources that she, herself, put in place in Alaska. She had a history of working well with Democrats within her administration, and then she ran for V.P. and they became rabidly hostile. At which point, we see that there were flaws in the system.

What changes on the national level really? Do we honestly think it’s a less hostile environment?

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

She’s the most experienced to handle Liberal Lawfare by now.

the_nile on May 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Actually they would. The ethics laws in Alaska allowed for any person or group to file lawsuits against puclic officials no matter how frivolous…and they sure filed them by the hundreds. By contrast, noone is allowed to sue the POTUS, anything of that nature takes and act of Congress.

JonPrichard on May 22, 2011 at 2:17 PM

But yet ‘Palin-Haters’ somehow forget this important point.
Either that, or they thought that she should have gone down in a fiery ball, taking everyone with her & losing the governoship to a Democrat.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Jetboy on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

I have been following Sarah Palin on a daily basis since the beginning of August 2008.

I was one of the few people that predicted she would not run for re-election and she would resign from office (I thought it would be Jan 2010 rather than July 2009), I predicted she would work to get her ducks in a row which she has in the past two years, I predicted she would act like a battlefield commander during the 2010 midterms helping to lead the GOP to a massive victory, and I predicted she would run for President in 2012. And I predicted everything else in between as well except her stint on Fox News.

So with that in mind when I say that Sarah Palin is running for President in 2012, you can take that to the bank.

Sarah Palin made the decision a long time ago to run; it’s just a matter now of declaring her intention.

technopeasant on May 22, 2011 at 2:20 PM

You clearly do not know what you are talking about on this topic.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Don’t waste your time. This is merely the stand-by argument after they can’t answer the questions, “How is Palin far-right? On what issues is she out of the mainstream?”

pseudoforce on May 22, 2011 at 2:21 PM

*crickets* hardest hit.

profitsbeard on May 22, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Did you not know this?

This was the Achilles Heel they thought they found to ruin her completely.

At the Federal level, this situation does not exist.

For some strange reason I have not been able to figure out, members of the Legislature who had an ethics complaint filed against them would see it summarily dismissed if the complainer went to the press before the hearing.

Automatically dismissed.

For the Executive Branch, the law states that you cannot go to the media with an unadjuticated complaint, but there was no penalty for doing so.

The Presidency does not have this problem.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM

This point is lost on so many who resist Palin being a serious contender.
This is EXACTLY what the Democrats had in mind, I am now convinced.
And they are ecstatic everytime a Palin-Hater on the right marches out this tired old piece of garbage as the excuse to why no one should take her seriously.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Sarah Palin made the decision a long time ago to run; it’s just a matter now of declaring her intention.

technopeasant on May 22, 2011 at 2:20 PM

I believe you are correct.
This has been my feeling all along.
She got a taste for the big time & wants to do great things for this country.
She has a hunger for it, the fire in her belly.
I know. Bcs I feel just like her.
I want great things for my country.
I would do almost anything I could to stand up for what is right.
Sarah is this kind of person.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I don’t recall them toting their children around everywhere, reality shows, dance contests, back and forth with kids’ ex-boyfriends, pregnant daughters, etc, etc, etc.., so it’s not on the tip of everyone’s tongue at the moment.
nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Come on…that’s not fair. Mitt’s youngest is 30 for pete’s sake
Sarah’s kids were/are much much younger. Of course she would “tote them everywhere”….wouldn’t you?
Being a woman and running for such a high political office is now a whole different ballgame.
If Sarah would have “hidden them away” as you apparently would have preferred, you all would have been yelling how she isn’t taking care of her kids, or she should be home with her children.
She loves them, are proud of them, and she isn’t afraid to let the world see that she can do both jobs…I like that.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Don’t waste your time. This is merely the stand-by argument after they can’t answer the questions, “How is Palin far-right? On what issues is she out of the mainstream?”

pseudoforce on May 22, 2011 at 2:21 PM

I’m starting to wonder if ‘they’ are people who don’t know they really are Democrats.
‘Conservatives’ who really don’t mind big government so much after all.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:28 PM

This point is lost on so many who resist Palin being a serious contender.
This is EXACTLY what the Democrats had in mind, I am now convinced.
And they are ecstatic everytime a Palin-Hater on the right marches out this tired old piece of garbage as the excuse to why no one should take her seriously.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:22 PM

They believed they could destroy her administration, and were willing to do anything to accomplish that.

The orders came from DC, no more AK Democrats working with Palin on anything anymore. No more accomplishments allowed.

They also figured if she quits early, she’s history.

They did not count on the political talent this lady possesses could get her beyond the resignation issue with the public. Many could not, but she can.

Even many of Palin’s detractors will concede she has a natural gift, on the level of Reagan or Clinton, for the connections with people you need in politics.

This is what will carry her through.

She is a person not to be underestimated.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Am I mistaken then that Sarah Palin was the one who reformed ethics policy in Alaska? Because it seems to me that she was. And it would further seem that having done so, if there were loopholes to be taken advantage of she would bear some responsibility in that.

Anyway… I have other stuff to do today rather than rehash the Sarah Palin Resignation Debacle. I’m a person who believes that folks should do what they say they’ll do, and that when they take on a job they should finish it. So, it’s all moot. I won’t change my mind on that.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

My take.

kingsjester on May 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

What are the Mitchsters doing?

They are losing it.

Tearing up, ect.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:09 PM

I’m not seeing that happening, I’m seeing a rally cry around Sarah Palin. Not everyone who posts when Palin is brought up, was a Daniels supporter. He wasn’t one of my substantial choices, I find it hard to support a former Director of the Office of Management and Budget, when my major concerns are budgetary.

I do not see the leadership we need in Sarah Palin. She hasn’t been good at handling the spotlight of the “Lame Stream Media”, which our nominee needs to be able to take.

amazingmets on May 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

I think she wants Obama out of office more then anyone else, if she chose not to run it’s probably because she thinks there is a better way to bring that to reality.

the_nile on May 22, 2011 at 2:14 PM

It couldn’t be more obvious how much Sarah Palin loathes this POTUS. I truly believe that Sarah Palin would do almost anything to make Obama a one term President.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:30 PM

She loves them, are proud of them, and she isn’t afraid to let the world see that she can do both jobs…I like that.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:27 PM

I do, too.
I get disgusted with people who go on & on about her ‘pregnant’ daughter, the ‘Dancing with the Stars’ crap & the ‘outing’ of her kids into the political limelight.
They are so jaded they look for evil in everyone’s actions.
They do it so much they cannot see the forest for the trees.
It’s disheartening bcs they will never see the good guys when they finally do show up on the scene.
Skeptical is good.
Willingly blind is bad.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:30 PM

I’m starting to wonder if ‘they’ are people who don’t know they really are Democrats.
‘Conservatives’ who really don’t mind big government so much after all.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Sarah Palin is NOT the litmus test of conservatism. One doesn’t become and Instant Democrat if they don’t support her.

Sheesh. Lighten up, guys. lol

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:31 PM

She had a history of working well with Democrats within her administration, and then she ran for V.P. and they became rabidly hostile.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

So do you blame her for ruining her working relationship with Democrats by having her name on a national ballot, or for ruining her working relationship with Republicans by exposing corruption at the highest levels of the Alaska GOP? I’m sure one of those actions is a terrible sin.

alwaysfiredup on May 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM

We need to win the Senate and keep the House. If we do, well then I don’t see divided government as a bad thing.

MJBrutus on May 22, 2011 at 11:01 AM

What do you mean “we”, KosKid?

kingsjester on May 22, 2011 at 2:33 PM

I’m a person who believes that folks should do what they say they’ll do, and that when they take on a job they should finish it. So, it’s all moot. I won’t change my mind on that.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Well, yeah. So am I.’
But I’m also smart enough to know there are times when you have to quit & regroup for a better stragey rather than lose your a$$ like Custer did.
There’s no coming back, then.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:34 PM

I’m a person who believes that folks should do what they say they’ll do, and that when they take on a job they should finish it. So, it’s all moot. I won’t change my mind on that.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

In other words, the facts of an untenable situation do not matter to you in your decision making.

That’s nice to know.

It is moot, because despite your current assurances, you will be voting Palin in the primary.

Why, you may ask?

Because at some point in the process of this campaign, you will realize the alternatives are inferior.

Resistance is futile.

You will be assimilated.

Palin 2012.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Sarah Palin is NOT the litmus test of conservatism. One doesn’t become and Instant Democrat if they don’t support her.

Sheesh. Lighten up, guys. lol

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:31 PM

No, but if someone objects to her based on DKos memes, I have to wonder.

pseudoforce on May 22, 2011 at 2:36 PM

So do you blame her for ruining her working relationship with Democrats by having her name on a national ballot, or for ruining her working relationship with Republicans by exposing corruption at the highest levels of the Alaska GOP? I’m sure one of those actions is a terrible sin.

alwaysfiredup on May 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM

I blame her for not sticking it out and resolving the issues as they evolved.

Seriously though… I really am out of time today. And these Palin arguments are stale even when one isn’t behind in their chores.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Sarah Palin is NOT the litmus test of conservatism. One doesn’t become and Instant Democrat if they don’t support her.

Sheesh. Lighten up, guys. lol

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:31 PM

For heaven’s sake that is NOT what I am saying.
But to incessantly whine about her not doing the job & quitting wah wah wah is getting old. Bcs there is a reason she did it that really does make sense, even if you can’t see it.

I’m starting to wonder if ‘they’ are people who don’t know they really are Democrats.
‘Conservatives’ who really don’t mind big government so much after all.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:28 PM

I do not think ALL of ‘they’ are those kind.
But I think that the LAME A$$ attacks against her person & record are indicative of something akin to this.
If you’re not engaging in the lame a$$ whining about her, & are willing to be reasonable concerning her actual record, then I wouldn’t lump that person in with ‘they’.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Seriously though… I really am out of time today. And these Palin arguments are stale even when one isn’t behind in their chores.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:37 PM

You aren’t arguing, you are ignoring arguments and facts.

That’s different.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Wow, what a wuss …… how about you go AnninCA yourself.

Jerome Horwitz on May 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM

The world responds with a collective “yawn”.

Jdripper on May 22, 2011 at 2:39 PM

I’m a person who believes that folks should do what they say they’ll do, and that when they take on a job they should finish it. So, it’s all moot. I won’t change my mind on that.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Then how do you explain all the politicians that “quit” their Senate/Congress seats or Governorships to move on up….whether it’s running for higher office or accepting Presidential appointments, it’s all the same.
It’s the way of the political world.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:39 PM

I blame her for not sticking it out and resolving the issues as they evolved.

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:37 PM

She took a different route to keep the fight up.
I am guessing that you think she should have bankrupted herself & family (bcs that would have been the end result), given the true facts about the incessant neverending petty lawsuits against her that were not allowing her to really d o her job (the Democrat attack plan).
This would also very likely have resulted in the next governor being a Democrat.
Pray tell what do you think the end result would have been if she had stayed?
How would she have paid the legal bills, done her job effectively, & all without pi$$ing off the populace of AK?

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Then how do you explain all the politicians that “quit” their Senate/Congress seats or Governorships to move on up….whether it’s running for higher office or accepting Presidential appointments, it’s all the same.
It’s the way of the political world.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Very good point. That is what our Senator Rick Berg is considering doing.
Former governor of ND John Hoeven did that & left his Lt Gov in charge, who is a RINO, IMHO.

how about you go AnninCA yourself.

Jerome Horwitz on May 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM

LOL!

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Then how do you explain all the politicians that “quit” their Senate/Congress seats or Governorships to move on up….whether it’s running for higher office or accepting Presidential appointments, it’s all the same.
It’s the way of the political world.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 2:39 PM

I understand her reasons for leaving, her failure to articulate it well is problematic.

I believe a person should maintain a position they’re elected to, unless they could provide a greater service to all of their constituents, this means those who voted for them and those who did not. Palin’s presence had become a costly burden on Alaska, but the way it came off is she left to write books and be a FOX News commentator, positions which do not serve all of her constituents.

Obama left the Senate to become President, which would be a greater service to his constituents, unfortunately he’s done a terrible job at it, but his reasons were quitting were his impact could be greater elsewhere. Palin would have left the Governor’s Mansion to become VP, which would be a greater service. I have no respect for Trent Lott who left the Senate to become a lobbyist, a service to almost none of his former constituents. The problem with Palin is she let the messaging be that she left for personal reasons. A move like that must be very carefully articulated and her reasoning needed to be better explained.

amazingmets on May 22, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Good Call – We don’t need a Bush or another Clinton retread. Look at Our National Debt, look at where Compassionate Conservatism Progressivism led us.

What this country needs is a STRONG Conservative President.

Dr Evil on May 22, 2011 at 2:50 PM

What this country needs is a STRONG Conservative President.

Dr Evil on May 22, 2011 at 2:50 PM

1000+

VegasRick on May 22, 2011 at 2:52 PM

“This will come as a disappointment to a lot of establishment party regulars who seemed to see Mitch as their next best hope…”

Best news of the day…

… Anytime the political elite ruling class on either side are disappointed, it is a good day for America.

By the way…

… did I miss an open registration or something?

Seven Percent Solution on May 22, 2011 at 2:59 PM

You are disgusted by facts in a factual response to the difference between the kids of Romney/Daniels being unknown.

Why would their kids be known? Neither of them were the VP or Presidential nominee. If Romney gets the nod this time around, do you think his kids will remain unknown?

I’m a person who believes that folks should do what they say they’ll do, and that when they take on a job they should finish it. So, it’s all moot. I won’t change my mind on that.

Murf76

In other words, when the facts change, you plow along as if nothing has happened. Apparently, you’re a person who isn’t very smart as well.

By the way…..when did she say she would bankrupt her family to remain governor of Alaska?

Palin doesn’t have a chance in hell of winning, but that’s no reason to be dumb about it. I have no problem with her resigning based on the circumstances. She didn’t sign up for millions in bogus lawsuit debt when she won the election.

xblade on May 22, 2011 at 3:03 PM

By the way…

… did I miss an open registration or something?

Seven Percent Solution on May 22, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Nope. They must be getting in through Townhall.

kingsjester on May 22, 2011 at 3:06 PM

And whether we like it or not, there is one STRONG conservative elephant standing just outside the room. The Democratic establishment has had their crosshairs trained on this citizen for the past two years. Recently, so has the Republican establishment. We all know who she is, and when she steps in the room there will be a groundswell like not seen in almost 30 years. The soul and future of America will be on the line. Which side will you be on? Here’s the speech that already set the context for the coming battle….

http://www.palintv.com/2011/04/16/governor-palins-speech-at-tea-party-rally-in-madison-wi-april-16-2011/

If you never saw it, it is worth your 20-minutes to watch…

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 3:09 PM

A move like that must be very carefully articulated and her reasoning needed to be better explained.

amazingmets on May 22, 2011 at 2:49 PM

It was in her book.
And I’m not sure who else covered it, but you know sometimes you do have to make the effort a little to see beyong Fox, MSNBC, CBS etc.
That’s why I come to HA.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 3:16 PM

All in all, I really hope Sarah doesn’t drop out. The election season would be mighty dull without you ‘nistas and your infamous “cult of personality”.

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Personally, I’m getting tons of entertainment out of watching the jumping frogs.

There Goes The Neighborhood on May 22, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

yes you are mistaken. The laws Palin reformed were not the ones she was under. Those were in place before she became gov.

unseen on May 22, 2011 at 3:19 PM

It’s falling to Paul Ryan to unify the party and run against Obama. I’m sorry Palin folks, but the numbers, and personal experience with speaking to other conservatives and independent voters, tell me that far too many people are immediately turned off by her. Even if that’s not fair to her, it’s reality.

She runs too much on emotion, and we’re not going to be able to out-emotion Obama. The woman belongs in the Senate where she can be our version of Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer.

cpaulus on May 22, 2011 at 3:24 PM

She runs too much on emotion, and we’re not going to be able to out-emotion Obama. The woman belongs in the Senate where she can be our version of Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer.

cpaulus on May 22, 2011 at 3:24 PM

I plan on letting her campaing before I write her off. If she is as you say she is, she won’t win a single primary.

Kataklysmic on May 22, 2011 at 3:27 PM

So what does it take to get banned around here?

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Wow, what a wuss …… how about you go AnninCA yourself.

Jerome Horwitz on May 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM

{{{snikers}}}

OmahaConservative on May 22, 2011 at 3:29 PM

She runs too much on emotion, and we’re not going to be able to out-emotion Obama. The woman belongs in the Senate where she can be our version of Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer.

cpaulus on May 22, 2011 at 3:24 PM

You bet she’s emotional…so am I, it’s a VERY emotional time.
If you’re implying that Sarah is all rhetoric….you’re just flat out wrong, and don’t make me get out ALL the links to prove it.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Tencole you are right about Governor Palin. The woman has issued specific policy positions and analysis on every major issue confronting the nation over the past 2 years. Anyone who is not aware of this simply has not been attentive to her actions, and has accepted a false “meme.” All one has to do is peruse her facebook page, which now has almost 3 million friends, and view the tapes of her speeches over the past 2 years. The woman knows policy and has an adept ability to articulate it in plain language so that most citizens can understand it without having to decipher “political speak.”

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 3:37 PM

You bet she’s emotional…so am I, it’s a VERY emotional time.
If you’re implying that Sarah is all rhetoric….you’re just flat out wrong, and don’t make me get out ALL the links to prove it.

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Appealing to people’s emotions for the right reasons, to do the right thing is a good thing.
To use emotion like the left does to spread lies & half truths in order to lead us into tyranny & bondage, NOT a good thing.
BTW-any major readings from the Founding Fathers involved a LOT of emotion of the times.
The Declaration of Independence is pretty emotional.
I suppose today the Founders would have been labelled hysterically emotional & fear mongerers.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 3:41 PM

Anyone who is not aware of this simply has not been attentive to her actions, and has accepted a false “meme.” All one has to do is peruse her facebook page, which now has almost 3 million friends, and view the tapes of her speeches over the past 2 years. The woman knows policy and has an adept ability to articulate it in plain language so that most citizens can understand it without having to decipher “political speak.”

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 3:37 PM

Very well put.
And agreed.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Steven Hayes last seen curled up in corner crying uncontrollably while sucking his fingers.

lonestar1 on May 22, 2011 at 3:46 PM

The election season would be mighty dull without you ‘nistas and your infamous “cult of personality”.

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Cite one example anywhere on this site at any time of a Palin supporter who asserted support based on personality more than record, conviction, honesty and authenticity and did not offer, at some point in his argument, substantiation of same.

In fact, the default degeneration of the debate into imputations of “personality,” i.e., ‘nistas and cultists, is invariably made by those who cannot respond to the substantive arguments. You are the ones caught up in the cult.

She runs too much on emotion, and we’re not going to be able to out-emotion Obama. The woman belongs in the Senate where she can be our version of Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer.

cpaulus on May 22, 2011 at 3:24 PM

How many premises here are false? Why, all of them! How about that?

1. She runs too much on emotion?

No other candidate has offered as regular, qualified or as incisive rebuttals to Obama on policy matters — Obamacare,
domestic energy policy, foreign affairs, inflation and quantitative easing, etc.
2. We’re not going to out-emotion Obama?

Wanna bet? But Obama did not run on emotion so much as hysterical illusion. Emotion is a profoundly healthy form of political expression; we wouldn’t have formed our nation without it. A good politician knows how to generate the right and healthy kind — well-grounded in a moral understanding of right and wrong and the urge to see right done. Palin does.
3.

“The woman belongs in the Senate

.”
Anybody with a bare understanding of Palin — supporter or not — would acknowledge her basic unsuitability to the Senate. She is by nature executive and peripatetic. You’re not operating on knowledge or good faith.

rrpjr on May 22, 2011 at 3:47 PM

That’s why when I hear someone is an independt, I think one of 2 things:
1. You just want the GOP to do the right thing.
OR
2. You’re an idiot who doesn’t stand foranything & you let others make decisions for you.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

You don’t know the difference between an independant and a moderate. I doubt that surprises anyone.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Good analysis rrpjr. It is amazing to me that many Republicans will readily accept false “memes” about Palin, which are always driven by the Democratic establishment, and to some extent the Republican establishment as well. If Palin for example, is so unelectable, then why has the Democratic establishment used everything they can think of, including the kitchen sink, to try an destroy her politically?

In their view, she represents the greatest political threat, namely, a principled, conservative Christian woman, with charisma, who is obviously fearless. The Republican establishment fears her too – because they do not own, and thus cannot control her. They all fear that as soon as she begins to campaign, that the false memes will melt away, and that she will be formidable, and could win the Republican nomination and the electoral map.

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 4:07 PM

The big problem with calling Palin a quitter is — she never quit. Yes, she did resign as governor of Alaska, but she never gave up her agenda. She joined in the fight for the 2010 elections, even though she wasn’t on the ballot anywhere. She continued, no she stepped-up the fight against Obama and the progressives to a whole new level. She puts me in the mind of U.S. Grant: no matter his flaws, he was a fighter.

I’m open to any one who’s a better candidate, but I’m not seeing one. The one thing I’m sure of: if we try to win by running a candidate who’s just a little more conservative than Obama, we’ll lose. The winning GOP candidate must be someone that social conservatives, national security conservatives, and fiscal conservatives can agree on. No GOP candidate will win by being more competent. He has to draw a clear contrast between himself and Obama.

And if the best man for the job happens to be a woman, I’m fine with that.

There Goes The Neighborhood on May 22, 2011 at 4:08 PM

You think me saying your comment is $hitty is something that should get me banned here?
You really aren’t from ’round these parts, are ya?

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

That wasn’t the only problematic word choice. Also if you are using words that you believe in, then stand behind them and don’t attempt to hide them.

I assume that HA will ban you because it doesn’t want your vulgarity infesting their comment section.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

1. You just want the GOP to do the right thing.OR
2. You’re an idiot who doesn’t stand foranything & you let others make decisions for you.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM
You don’t know the difference between an independant and a moderate. I doubt that surprises anyone.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:02 PM

And of course you must be the all-knowing authority of it yourself.
These are my opinions.Forums like this help shape opinions.
Your contributions have only made me view many independents in the light of my #2 point.
However, I think there are many well-meaning VOTING independents who side with my #1 point, emboldened for your consideration.
It has been my experience that many people who call themselves independents fit the mold of point #2.
I wish it were different.
But from what I’ve seen, it doesn’t appear to be.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

I’m open to any one who’s a better candidate, but I’m not seeing one. The one thing I’m sure of: if we try to win by running a candidate who’s just a little more conservative than Obama, we’ll lose. The winning GOP candidate must be someone that social conservatives, national security conservatives, and fiscal conservatives can agree on. No GOP candidate will win by being more competent. He has to draw a clear contrast between himself and Obama.

Right you are!

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Why is it that every thread at HA lately seems to devolve into an argument about Sarah Palin regardless of the original subject?

Murf76 on May 22, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Oh, boy…can I field this one?

JetBoy on May 22, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Best for you to not – I envision your fielding to be similar to Obama throwing out the first pitch.

Amjean on May 22, 2011 at 4:14 PM

That wasn’t the only problematic word choice. Also if you are using words that you believe in, then stand behind them and don’t attempt to hide them.

I assume that HA will ban you because it doesn’t want your vulgarity infesting their comment section.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

How can I hide them?
If you’re offended by the vulgarity of them, then you are certainly free to ignore me.
I don’t use vulgarity much.
But I find it’s useful in getting my point across.
As I did with you.
Your characterization of Palin using her family situation as some sort of circus for bonus points was $hitty.
I could have used,
not nice
crappy
unwise
not fair
etc.
I could have also used, in place of d!ckhead:
poopy pants face
meanie
etc.
In the place of pr!ck, I suppose I could have used,
jerk
meanie
terrible person
etc.
What really is interesting is the fact that you want me banned.
Not for threatening you, but calling you a childish name.
Tell me, does that air of elitism & arrogance color your politics as well?
Mommy they called me a bad name so ban them?
You called me a drama queen, which I consider very offensive.
Obviously you consider it tame.
Difference of opinion.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:16 PM

The woman belongs in the Senate where she can be our version of Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer.
cpaulus on May 22, 2011 at 3:24 PM

Sarah Palin could never be 1 of 50.

lonestar1 on May 22, 2011 at 4:16 PM

rrpjr,

http://recovering-liberal.blogspot.com/2011/04/transcript-of-sarah-palins-speech-in.html

Does this speech have more in common with this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe751kMBwms

or this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5CcdffQ0Ic

Sorry, but Palin has the cult of personality in the same way that Obama does. People will root for Palin like people root for Obama, because they want them to win, like a sports team, not because they articulate any sort of problem or policy initiatives.

cpaulus on May 22, 2011 at 4:17 PM

…calling a spade, a spade.

No actually using vulgarity is typically a sign of desperation and lack of intelligence.

If that is offensive, it’s unfortunate.

It’s not offensive to me whatsoever. Try to keep up, kid.

I think calling out Palin… was crap.

Are you 8 yrs old? You do know that an online Thesaurus is readily available for people like you.

And I thought you were being a d!ckhead for it.
Perhaps pinhead is a better characterization of you?
I personally wanted to use something a little more insulting.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Again, you failed miserably at insulting. It is even more sad knowing that you are trying so hard.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I assume that HA will ban you because it doesn’t want your vulgarity infesting their comment section.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

People have said worse and not been banned. You need to get over yourself.

ladyingray on May 22, 2011 at 4:19 PM

She got a taste for the big time & wants to do great things for this country.
She has a hunger for it, the fire in her belly.
I know. Bcs I feel just like her.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:25 PM

This is a comedy routine, right? I have to admit, you almost had me going there….LOL!

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:22 PM

You don’t know the difference between an independant and a moderate. I doubt that surprises anyone.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:02 PM

And BTW-your handle is very telling regarding your decision-making.
I assume you chose it for a reason.
It shows you have a hard time making a stand.
There’s a time for not taking sides.
And there’a time for taking them.
In politics, everybody takes sides.
In fact, if you can’t pick a side, then chances are, you believe in very little.
Of course, again, my opinion.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:23 PM

If you are not willing to fight the phony perceptions, you have already surrendered.

Brian1972 on May 22, 2011 at 12:20 PM
I don’t know any indies to try and convince. And when I come across one, the minute I start explaining her resignation, the laws of Alaska, and the connection to Obama’s staffers, etc, there eyes start glazing over and they’re lost.

csdeven on May 22, 2011 at 12:24 PM

What a phoney statement coming from someone who has made many postings bashng Palin for the most stupid of reasons. If you actually researched her record in Alaska you would have a good opnion of her (that is if you have the capability of critical thinking). However, you, like some others, are to lazy to do any research.

This next presidential race is about getting rid of socialism that has threatened to take over our country.
If you want this country to be socialist then vote for your choice of liberal or rino idiot. If you want free market principles, conservative capitalism, then vote for the best candidate. However, do your homework.

Amjean on May 22, 2011 at 4:23 PM

I assume that HA will ban you because it doesn’t want your vulgarity infesting their comment section.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

People have said worse and not been banned. You need to get over yourself.

ladyingray on May 22, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Guess nottakingsides doesen’t realize Badger40 is well-liked and highly regarded in these precincts while she is an unknown nobody…

OmahaConservative on May 22, 2011 at 4:25 PM

This is a comedy routine, right? I have to admit, you almost had me going there….LOL!

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:22 PM

And your substance is lacking, again.
Which part are you mocking here:
She got a taste for the big time & wants to do great things for this country.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:25 PM

This? Bcs I don’t think that funny. I think it’s a great thing. Bcs it is true, IMO.
Or is it this?:

She has a hunger for it, the fire in her belly.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Bcs I don’t think that’s funny, either.
I believe her until she shows me different.
She said it in her own words.
Or maybe it’s really this you find ‘funny’:

I know. Bcs I feel just like her.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Which is just a pathetic stab in the dark bcs you really don’t know how far I would go to help save my country. Only I do.
Perhaps you feel you’re insulting me there.
I do relate to Palin on a personal level.
And if you’re making fun of me for it, AnniCa yourself.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Again, you failed miserably at insulting. It is even more sad knowing that you are trying so hard.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I wasn’t trying hard.
You are kind of acting like a pr!ck here. And a d!ckhead.
Of course, you’re free to diasgree.
After all, people like Jimmy Carter & Barack Obama think those same terms would never apply to them, either.

OmahaConservative on May 22, 2011 at 4:25 PM

;)

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Your contributions have only made me view many independents in the light of my #2 point.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

According to your logic, I am viewed as a MODERATE because of my contributions (comment in regards to Palin that you didn’t agree with).

You couldn’t be any more wrong. Not that it surprises anyone.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:31 PM

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:18 PM

BTW- just a little advice here on HA’s goings on.
If you’re wounded & scared by terms such as I have used regarding you, don’t ever talk to Drywall.
He’s a douche. He’s even threatened me once.
And I didn’t cry for the ban hammer.
Grow a skin & get a pair.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:32 PM

According to your logic, I am viewed as a MODERATE because of my contributions (comment in regards to Palin that you didn’t agree with).

You couldn’t be any more wrong. Not that it surprises anyone.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:31 PM

I’m really referring to your cry-baby style.
Please school me on what your real view is on being a ‘moderate’?
And how does Palin fall away from that view?

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:33 PM

People have said worse and not been banned. You need to get over yourself.

ladyingray on May 22, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Lolz.
Brings to mind the time AnninCA told someone f*k you, f*k you twice in one sentence two different times in the same thread and she never got banned. What I have never figured out is how she got the correctly spelled f word past the filters four different times that afternoon. All that happened was that her (Lolz *vulgar*) posts were deleted…

OmahaConservative on May 22, 2011 at 4:34 PM

According to your logic, I am viewed as a MODERATE because of my contributions
nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:31 PM

And are you stling yourself conservative?
What does being conservative mean to you?
I am assuming by your handle you aren’t anything.
Bcs you don’t take sides.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:36 PM

What I have never figured out is how she got the correctly spelled f word past the filters
OmahaConservative on May 22, 2011 at 4:34 PM

I was there for that.
Maybe she is Allah’s secret lover.
She found his password in the underwear drawer that night.

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:37 PM

You don’t know the difference between an independant and a moderate. I doubt that surprises anyone.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Okay…I’ll bite.

My opinion….nothing.
Neither is willing to take a stand and they change sides as the wind blows…making them undependable.

What say you?

tencole on May 22, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Not that it surprises anyone.

nottakingsides on May 22, 2011 at 4:31 PM

That stings so bad my a$$ hurts.
The wit.
Ouch/

Badger40 on May 22, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7