Quotes of the day

posted at 10:33 pm on July 13, 2011 by Allahpundit

“The average Republican voter, based on this data, wants a mix of 26 percent tax increases to 74 percent spending cuts. The average independent voter prefers a 34-to-66 mix, while the average Democratic voter wants a 46-to-54 mix…

“If we do take the Republicans’ no-new-taxes position literally, it isn’t surprising that the negotiations have broken down. Consider that, according to the Gallup poll, Republican voters want the deal to consist of 26 percent tax increases, and Democratic voters 46 percent — a gap of 20 percentage points. If Republicans in the House insist upon zero tax increases, there is a larger ideological gap between House Republicans and Republican voters than there is between Republican voters and Democratic ones.

“It would be foolish, in my view, to render any overly specific predictions about how the negotiations are likely to be resolved. But I would put greater weight on scenarios that would involve House Republicans not having to violate the pledge they signed to Mr. Norquist, including an end-around like Mr. McConnell’s — or even a failure to raise the debt ceiling at all, resulting in some combination of a debt default, a government shutdown, and a Constitutional crisis.”

***
“Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R., Wyo.), who co-chaired the White House’s deficit reduction panel last year, said he has lost hope the White House and Congress will be able to reach a deal to raise the debt ceiling by Aug. 2.

“‘I don’t think they’ll get it done,’ he told Washington Wire. ‘I did for a long while. Now that I see the total rigidity of the parties, if that is going to continue, there’s just no hope. I thought there would be.’”

***
“‘Our problem is we made a big deal about this for three months. How many Republicans have been on TV saying, ‘I’m not going to raise the debt limit.’ You know, Mitch [McConnell] says, ‘I’m not going to raise the debt limit unless we talk about Medicare.’ And I’ve said I’m not going to raise the debt limit until we do something about spending and entitlements.’ So we’ve got nobody to blame but ourselves,’ [Lindsey] Graham told reporters after a GOP caucus lunch.

“‘We shouldn’t have said that if we didn’t mean it.’”

***
“A blow-up between Obama and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor at the end of Wednesday’s White House negotiating session captured the building tension. ‘He’s frustrated, we’re all frustrated,’ Cantor said, describing the president as ‘abruptly walking out.’ Democrats took a different slant: ‘He (Obama) lit up Eric Cantor like he’s never been lit up,’ said one in the room…

“Cantor, who sparred on several occasions Wednesday with the president, complains of what he sees as a steady retreat from the higher level of savings that he anticipated would come from the Biden talks…

“Silent like two bookends throughout were McConnell and Reid. And it’s clear the two men are moving toward some variation of McConnell’s draft, sweetened perhaps with Democratic options and some savings, perhaps, to attract conservatives.”

***
“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is working with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on an updated version of a proposal McConnell floated on Tuesday to allow President Obama to raise the federal debt ceiling in multiple steps.

“Reid has proposed linking McConnell’s plan with spending cuts—totaling perhaps $1 trillion over 10 years—and identified talks led by Vice President Joe Biden as the likely source of those cuts, according to Senate leadership aides. When each chamber voted to approve the process allowing Obama to increase the debt ceiling, they would also vote on the cuts, the aides said.

“‘The Republican Leader’s proposal combined with ideas he and I have been discussing to force a vote on deficit-reduction proposals could go a long way toward resolving the impasse we now find ourselves in,’ Reid said Wednesday morning.”

***
“There seems to be a sense on the Right that McConnell’s concession to reality was far too broad, far too soon, and far too permissive—that Obama and the Democrats must be made to account for the increase in the debt limit with significant spending cuts that will at least mitigate in some way the damage they did by piling on new debt in 2009 and 2010, and that McConnell is letting them off the hook. Fair enough; maybe he was. But the question he was attempting to answer is which will be more damaging to the GOP and conservatives generally: Raising the debt limit without making Obama pay or failing to raise the debt limit? McConnell is betting that failing to raise the debt limit, or even contributing to the general uncertainty about whether the debt limit will be raised, is worse for him and his party.

“It is, of course, a guessing game, trying to figure out who would be blamed for bad stuff. But peddling the ‘narrative’ in which the GOP gets blamed for irresponsible and unreasonable negotiating tactics has a long history of working for Democrats. McConnell’s sense that seeming to be recalcitrant about raising the debt ceiling is more perilous than the alternative is sound pessimistic politics, which takes into account that very danger.”

***
“[L]et’s be serious: there is no dealing with Obama on entitlements in the next eighteen months because there is no common ground to be found with him. Sure, he talks a good game about controlling spending, but consider his actions. The country handed the keys of the kingdom to Obama and the Democrats in November 2008. At that point, CBO was already projecting that entitlement spending was going to break the bank, and what did Obama and his party do? Create another new entitlement, one designed not for long-term durability, but short-term political calculations. Since his midterm rebuke, he’s decided to channel hyper-partisan Harry Truman and run against the evil Republicans, who are threatening to kill seniors with the Ryan plan. Clearly, his focus is on his reelection, which is dependent on firing up the Democratic left once again…

“This is the party’s best bet: rein in spending as best it can in a debt ceiling deal as well as the upcoming budget, then take the battle on deficits to the November 2012 election, offering the public this position: Our entitlement system is no longer sustainable with the taxes we raise to support it; either taxes must be raised substantially or the system must be reformed; we Republicans oppose tax hikes and believe that reform of the system can be achieved without reducing benefits.”

***
“I don’t trust this President… He doesn’t know how to make those cuts. He’s never had to do this before. He’s always just been one to spend other people’s money even if that money is just borrowed money or printed out of thin air. He’s never had to exercise real executive authority like that.” Click the image to watch.



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 4 5

Neither has she….

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-10-23-palinspending_N.htm

Dreadnought on July 13, 2011 at 11:01 PM

I’ve disagreed with you before without thinking you were an idiot. That’s changed.

Did you bother reading the article you linked to?

I’ll save you some of the trouble; check the 4th and 5th paragraphs:

Palin tried to restrain legislative spending, pare back earmark requests and steer money into reserve funds, he said. He acknowledged, however, that Palin had to sign off on numerous pet projects in legislative districts.

“Sure, there are some political realities,” McAllister said.

Palin used her line-item veto power to strike nearly half a billion dollars in spending items in 2007 and 2008.

Sounds like she has never cut spending any more than O’Bama, right?

rwenger43 on July 13, 2011 at 11:26 PM

Check out the website http://www.usgovernmentspending.com to see how she increased spending as Governor of Alaska.

2007: 7.8 Billion
2008: 8.6 Billion
2009: 8.9 Billion
2010: 9.5 Billion

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spend.php?span=usgs302&year=2010&view=1&expand=8T&expandC=&units=b&fy=fy12&local=s&state=AK&pie=#usgs302

Dreadnought on July 13, 2011 at 11:45 PM

I knew this interview would end up on here tonight while I was watching it. The part where she basically calls him incapable of understanding that you meet your major commitments first and everything else gets cut, because he’s never had to do anything like this ever in his worthless life so far, was pure gold. I love how unimpressed she is by him. She’s like us. With the possible exception of Bachmann, the other GOP contenders are too a-skerred to take this clown to the woodshed. The rest of them are too deferential out of fear of being labeled racists. Palin doesn’t have that problem. It’s quite refreshing.

NoLeftTurn on July 13, 2011 at 11:45 PM

Saw the interview on Hannity, again very poised, took O to the cleaners and stuck to her guns (pun not intended/).

She is looking more beautiful, radiant and confident than ever. God is on her side, and I hope that the Newsweek reporter that is getting a lot of crap from the media awakes and realizes what a serious problem they have on their hands right now.

Anyhoo, they’ll go down the toilet along with Obama as I predicted in the past. Issa is on it again and correct me if I am wrong but he’s handling two scandals at the same time.

Pass on the popcorn, it’s nacho time!

ProudPalinFan on July 13, 2011 at 11:46 PM

Sarah knows that McConnell and Boenher are looking for a way to cave. Don’t any of you get it. The longer these people are in Washington the more blurred are the lines between the two parties. SO MUCH money that NO ONE knows where it is or where its going. Lobbyist throwing money around for favors. How does a Rep. from anywhere come into office broke, and leave a multi millionaire. How does a Senator like Harry Reid own half a state. My point! Sarah would disrupt the natural flow of cash into greedy coffers, no one in Washington that has been there for 6 or more years wants the golden goose to go. Sarah will run Sarah will win. This group of Republican leaders will cave creating a maelstrom of conservative furry that will usher her in. G-D bless Sarah.

jainphx on July 13, 2011 at 11:46 PM

It’s a shame what some of the Palin supporters are doing to both Bachmann and Perry here.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Your concern would be more credible if you didn’t do the same times 10 to Palin. Exactly what I was saying to unseen.

miConsevative on July 13, 2011 at 11:47 PM

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:05 PM

As I’ve said…repeatedly-Palin’s a good conservative-but she is NOT the next Reagan(or Maggie Thatcher)-no matter how much you and yours might believe otherwise.
Perry 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:49 PM

miConsevative on July 13, 2011 at 11:35 PM

I gave Bachmann creit last night when she said we should repeal obamacare with a raise of the debt limit. The first orginal idea I have heard her say. I liked it. I think Rollins made a big mistake by having a campaign strategy to make Bachmann the smart Palin. Bachmann stands a better chace as the smart bachmann. You brought up the coyping of the talking point not I. I was agreeing that that campaign strategy of rollins will be her downfall.

i will happily vote for Bachmann if somehow she wins the nomination but I think next to mitt she is one of the least qualified people to be running.

And she will not have my support in the primaries unless its her vs Mitt.

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:50 PM

Dreadnought on July 13, 2011 at 11:01 PM

In her 2009 budget, Palin had a 9% cut. She froze salaries of many state employees and refused a $25k raise as oil royalties dipped. In 2007 and 2008 Alaska revenues were incredibly high because she renegotiated the state’s royalties on oil. Palin left the state with a $12 billion surplus.

bw222 on July 13, 2011 at 11:50 PM

Sensing the ABPers getting more desperate and strident by the day…I love it!

VidOmnia on July 13, 2011 at 11:50 PM

OT: There’s a strong rumor that Casey Anthony could move to Puerto Rico to attempt to regain an anonymous life.

Good luck with that one, she’s despised there and nobody wants to do anything with her. Interesting, a lot of them mention that she will receive tons of freeloading courtesy of taxpayers. Meaning welfare, healthcare, housing and whatnot-she will mooch out of everybody if Baez gets his way.

This is a rumor so far but there’s a lot of gossip on how the process will be when it’s time to leave prison.

Stay tuned.

ProudPalinFan on July 13, 2011 at 11:51 PM

It’s a shame what some of the Palin supporters are doing to both Bachmann and Perry here.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Save your righteous indignation, Knuck. I was very strong in my opposition to comparing Obama and Bachmann. And I’m still a Palin supporter.

gryphon202 on July 13, 2011 at 11:51 PM

Please tell me why “Don’t call my bluff, Eric” is NOT the quote of the century? Right now Sarah Palin is insignificant to this travesty of a President playing three card Monty on the American public’s well being.

Rovin on July 13, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Ditto this. I thought the press told us this guy was the greatest mediator in all of recorded history? Really what he is is the most arrogant prick to ever walk the planet.

NoLeftTurn on July 13, 2011 at 11:51 PM

As I’ve said…repeatedly-Palin’s a good conservative-but she is NOT the next Reagan(or Maggie Thatcher)-no matter how much you and yours might believe otherwise.
Perry 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:49 PM

And i have said repeatly that Palin is the only reaganite in the field. Your point?

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:51 PM

Saw the interview on Hannity, again very poised, took O to the cleaners and stuck to her guns (pun not intended/).

She is looking more beautiful, radiant and confident than ever. God is on her side, and I hope that the Newsweek reporter that is getting a lot of crap from the media awakes and realizes what a serious problem they have on their hands right now.

Anyhoo, they’ll go down the toilet along with Obama as I predicted in the past. Issa is on it again and correct me if I am wrong but he’s handling two scandals at the same time.

Pass on the popcorn, it’s nacho time!

ProudPalinFan on July 13, 2011 at 11:46 PM

God is on SP’s side?
I trust God will be on the side of whomever is the GOP nominee, this great nation, and all of us.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:52 PM

As I’ve said…repeatedly-Palin’s a good conservative-but she is NOT the next Reagan(or Maggie Thatcher)-no matter how much you and yours might believe otherwise.
Perry 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:49 PM

That’s your opinion and you’re welcome to it.

alwaysfiredup on July 13, 2011 at 11:53 PM

And i have said repeatly that Palin is the only reaganite in the field. Your point?

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:51 PM

For starters, she’s not in the field.

KingGold on July 13, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Your concern would be more credible if you didn’t do the same times 10 to Palin. Exactly what I was saying to unseen.

miConsevative on July 13, 2011 at 11:47 PM

Show me. My only critisism of Palin is that I feel she needs a voice coach and that I don’t believe she can win in the primaries, nor a general election.

Now you can find something outrageous that I’ve said about Palin. Maybe you can dig up something in the blood libel threads where I defended her to the hilt.

I’ll wait.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Aren’t you too busy assigning all of the people supporting candidates other than Palin to the “Bush wing” of the party?

They aren’t going to exile themselves, you know.

KingGold on July 13, 2011 at 11:31 PM

You’re not a typical ‘supporter of another candidate.’ You’re an ABPer. There’s a huge difference.

fossten on July 13, 2011 at 11:54 PM

It’s a shame what some of the Palin supporters are doing to both Bachmann and Perry here.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Examples of posts here that are leading to your outrage?

portlandon on July 13, 2011 at 11:55 PM

Perry 2012!
annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:49 PM

In the past three months you have gone from T-Paw to Cain to Perry. Whose your candidate for August: Santorum, Mitt, Newt, Huntsman or Rohmer? Go with Buddy, you can double his fan base and really make an impact.

bw222 on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

Dreadnought’s plainly the same sort of disingenuous turd that makes a practice of selectively misrepresenting reality, while pretending to play the pendant. Tiresome at best, destructive to a site at worst.
Notice his sleight of hand as he swaps in ‘total spending’ in place of ‘she never cut anything’. He’ll just keep re-casting his argument / moving the goalposts. Dishonest POS.

rayra on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

And i have said repeatly that Palin is the only reaganite in the field. Your point?

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:51 PM

Reagan didn’t star in his own reality show. Reagan finished two terms as governor.
Yeah-Reagan was an actor…BEFORE he became a governor.
I came of age during the Reagan years-so I remember his tenure well.
Palin is a good woman, a good conservative, and a patriot-but she is certainly NOT Reagan.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

For starters, she’s not in the field.

KingGold on July 13, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Until she says she isn’t or the legal deadlines pass. She is. Or do we now make new rules up just for Gov Palin once again?

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

Show me. My only critisism of Palin is that I feel she needs a voice coach and that I don’t believe she can win in the primaries, nor a general election.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:53 PM

On what basis? Polls? My respect for you won’t fall off if you’re not a Sarah Palin fan. My respect for you will fall off if you formulate your opinion of her based on how she polls.

gryphon202 on July 13, 2011 at 11:57 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

and Palin was never a democrat. your point. Palin is the only reaganite in the field. Deal with it.

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:57 PM

You’re not a typical ‘supporter of another candidate.’ You’re an ABPer. There’s a huge difference.

fossten on July 13, 2011 at 11:54 PM

I oppose those who would destroy all others with their bile and hate in order to soften the field for Palin. If that makes me an ABPer, I’ll happily cop to it.

But if ABP truly does mean what it says, I’m not. There are plenty of other candidates who I deem irreparably unelectable for the 2012 cycle. Palin’s just the one being hyped the most, that’s all.

KingGold on July 13, 2011 at 11:57 PM

It’s a shame what some of the Palin supporters are doing to both Bachmann and Perry here.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Yeah, nobody ever bashes Sarah Palin here./sarc.

bw222 on July 13, 2011 at 11:58 PM

For starters, she’s not in the field.

KingGold on July 13, 2011 at 11:53 PM

She’s in as much as Perry is in.

alwaysfiredup on July 13, 2011 at 11:58 PM

Show me. My only critisism of Palin is that I feel she needs a voice coach and that I don’t believe she can win in the primaries, nor a general election.

I’ll wait.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:53 PM

I’m not digging for comments to cut and paste. Waste of my time.

miConsevative on July 13, 2011 at 11:58 PM

Examples of posts here that are leading to your outrage?

portlandon on July 13, 2011 at 11:55 PM

Comparing Bachman to Obama?
Foster kids for money?
Supposed crazy pictures of Bachmann hiding in the bushes?

Dig them up yourself, I’m busy getting these pasties put back on for the big poll dance tomorrow.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

She’s in as much as Perry is in.

alwaysfiredup on July 13, 2011 at 11:58 PM

Which is to say, not in.

KingGold on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

Palin is a good woman, a good conservative, and a patriot-but she is certainly NOT Reagan.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

Of course she’s not Reagan. She’s Palin. There was only one Reagan. But even Reagan did a few things that royally pi$$ed off conservatives. No one’s perfect. I just happen to believe that Palin is the best prospective candidate at this point in time. Subject to change, of course…

gryphon202 on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

Reagan didn’t star in his own reality show.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

They didn’t have reality shows back then. Instead he starred in a movie with a chimpanzee. Real serious work there.

alwaysfiredup on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

Palin is a good woman, a good conservative, and a patriot-but she is certainly NOT Reagan.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

Who said Palin was Reagan?

And i have said repeatly that Palin is the only reaganite in the field. Your point?

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:51 PM

I take Reaganite to mean someone who is a follower of Reagan and his conservative principles.

You Reagan Cult people won’t even allow anyone to use his name.

portlandon on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

KingGold on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

She’s a maybe.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:00 AM

Dreadnought on July 13, 2011 at 11:45 PM

So you’re using a link to refute your original link, when neither one lays the “blame” for increased spending at the feet of the governor, and one actually states that she used a line-item veto pen to cut almost .5 billion out of the legislature’s spending increases over 2 years.

And you are sawing off this limb you’re standing on because you believe Obama’s spending increases compare favorably with SP’s 2-3% real cuts via line item veto?

rwenger43 on July 14, 2011 at 12:00 AM

Comparing Bachman to Obama?
Foster kids for money?
Supposed crazy pictures of Bachmann hiding in the bushes?

Dig them up yourself, I’m busy getting these pasties put back on for the big poll dance tomorrow.

Knucklehead on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

Now I lost my train of thought…..What were we talking about??? =)

portlandon on July 14, 2011 at 12:01 AM

She’s a maybe.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:00 AM

No, that’s not how it works in this game. Campaigns need time, and they need to be registered in order to raise and spend money. It doesn’t matter how much media buzz someone gets or what kind of poll numbers they have; until they file and declare, they’re not in.

Primary voters don’t cast ballots for intentions. Palin and Perry are not in the field.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:02 AM

Dreadnought on July 13, 2011 at 11:45 PM

Umm she was a line item veto gal that vetoed so much that the Alaska legislature when behind her back and used back door sessions to pass items.

Opps.

And this:

2007: 7.8 Billion
2008: 8.6 Billion
2009: 8.9 Billion
2010: 9.5 Billion

Murkowski was still Gov in 2007 and Sean Parnell has been the Gov since 2009 sweetie. Did you forget that?

Opps again.

Keep it up, you are making this Alaskan smile.

upinak on July 14, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Primary voters don’t cast ballots for intentions. Palin and Perry are not in the field.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:02 AM

No sh!t sherlock? Remind me again how far away we are from the first primaries!

/EyeRoll

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:04 AM

No, that’s not how it works in this game. Campaigns need time, and they need to be registered in order to raise and spend money.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:02 AM

Palin has no trouble raising money. We’re already organizing critical states for her. The primaries aren’t until 2012.

She’s a maybe.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:05 AM

bw222 on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

My first choice was Jindal. He’s not running. Pence isn’t either. T-Paw’s a squish. Cain isn’t ready for primetime/no XO experience, and Palin lacks enough XO experience and has the whole Obama celebrity vibe going on thanks to some of her most ardent believers-I mean supporters
No thank you.
Perry is a conservative with plenty of XO experience. He crosses me as a level-headed grownup. A mensch.
This nation could really use a Mensch right now.

I will vote for whomever win the primary-as long as it isn’t the Ronulan, Huntsmann, or Newt.
I will only go all out campaigning for Perry.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:05 AM

Primary voters don’t cast ballots for intentions. Palin and Perry are not in the field.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:02 AM

sure they are untill they say they are not. The moment that Palin and/or Perry says they are not running like christie, danials, barbour they take themselves out of the field of prospects. as long as they say they are thinling seriously of running and the legal deadlines have not passed they are considered part of the field. Sinc elike Mitt, bachmann, Cain, timmy and others were condiered part of the field. Perry and Palin are not declared candidates but they sure as hel! are part of the field.

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:06 AM

I will only go all out campaigning for Perry.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:05 AM

Flavor of the month. Palin abides.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:06 AM

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Good. Glad we’re in agreement. I’ll take this as an implicit assent not to complain about polls that are supposedly useless because they don’t include Palin, and wondering why more people aren’t connecting “The Undefeated” to a Palin presidential run.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:07 AM

Palin is a good woman, a good conservative, and a patriot-but she is certainly NOT Reagan.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 13, 2011 at 11:56 PM

Palin is a disciple of Reagan. She has never claimed to be another Reagan or compared herself to him.

But, neither are Tim Pawlenty, Herman Cain, Rick Perry or Buddy Roemer (had to check to see how Buddy spells his last name, but I imagine he has to also).

bw222 on July 14, 2011 at 12:07 AM

I will vote for whomever win the primary-as long as it isn’t the Ronulan, Huntsmann, or Newt.
I will only go all out campaigning for Perry.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:05 AM

Just a polite recommendation, but don’t waste your keystrokes telling us you’ll “vote for the nominee whoever it is…” blah blah yadda yadda yadda. All that means is that you’re not a total dumbsh!t, and we know that cause you don’t want another four years of Obama. Your support of Rick Perry says far more about your politics. ;-)

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:08 AM

No, that’s not how it works in this game. Campaigns need time, and they need to be registered in order to raise and spend money.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:02 AM

She knows the deadlines – she mentioned them tonight. And if you think she’s going to have a problem raising money, you’re quite out of touch. And beyond that, she has volunteers waiting out the wazoo so will probably need less money and use it more effectively than a regular campaign. Which do you think would be cheaper – an exploratory committee or a bus tour with just you and your family? The 100 volunteers that are already organized and ready to launch in NH – how much would a staff that size cost (thanks unseen for that thought from another thread).

You’re sound just like my step-dad. Can’t think outside the box. When my mom came home with a few hula skirts and a some old cane-back chairs he thought she was crazy. But now they sip mai-tais at the quite nice tiki bar they have on the back deck. You obviously just don’t get Palin or much that is unconventional, I’m guessing.

miConsevative on July 14, 2011 at 12:08 AM

Now I lost my train of thought…..What were we talking about??? =)

portlandon on July 14, 2011 at 12:01 AM

I don’t know but you know as well as I do what we’re talking about being that you are of sound mind and more reasonable than others.

Excuse me while I look for my new black thong. Gotta look sharp for tomorrow.

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:07 AM

Bitter, nasty flakes tonight. Who pis$ed in your cheerios?

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

I will only go all out campaigning for Pawlenty, Cain, Perry (at least through July).

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:05 AM

bw222 on July 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

Good. Glad we’re in agreement. I’ll take this as an implicit assent not to complain about polls that are supposedly useless because they don’t include Palin, and wondering why more people aren’t connecting “The Undefeated” to a Palin presidential run.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:07 AM

Polls are not how I make my decision. They never have been. The entire premise of your mocking “agreement” with me is based on people’s respective opinions of Sarah Palin, concerning which I really couldn’t care less. I base my politics on substance.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

gryphon202 on July 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM

and Palin was never a democrat. your point. Palin is the only reaganite in the field. Deal with it.

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:57 PM

And I disagree.
We usually disagree with each other.
If nothing else we’re consistent.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:10 AM

liked the fact that Palin said Mcconnells plan was unconsitutional based on article 1 sect 8 power of the purse

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:11 AM

Excuse me while I look for my new black thong. Gotta look sharp for tomorrow.

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

it’s on legend’s head.

upinak on July 14, 2011 at 12:11 AM

We’re the Undefeated (Iggy Pop, youtube.com).

Kenosha Kid on July 14, 2011 at 12:11 AM

Flavor of the month. Palin abides.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:06 AM

To you and yours-but not to everyone.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:12 AM

To you and yours-but not to everyone.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:12 AM

A lot can happen between now and next year.

/PokePoke

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:12 AM

I base my politics on substance.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

Then stop premising your arguments on anecdotes and hope, and start showing me numbers that say Palin can beat Obama. Because if she can’t, and you acknowledge that she can’t, that’s an endorsement to make a statement and throw the race a la COD in ’10.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

If nothing else we’re consistent.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:10 AM

true

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

Polls are useless because they only measure current attitudes, not how likely it is that those attitudes will be the same in a year. Polling on Palin is particularly useless because she’s not a declared candidate and a lot of her erstwhile supporters won’t consider her until and unless she announces. It’s a rational response, but it does skew the polls, so we don’t even really know how much support she has.

We shouldn’t live our lives by polls. We will chase a lot of flavors-of-the-month that way. There’s a reason “poll-driven” is an insult.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

To you and yours-but not to everyone.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:12 AM

It’s not my imagination that she’s still around long after the conventional wisdom predicted her utter flameout. Palin abides.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:15 AM

Then stop premising your arguments on anecdotes and hope, and start showing me numbers that say Palin can beat Obama. Because if she can’t, and you acknowledge that she can’t, that’s an endorsement to make a statement and throw the race a la COD in ’10.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

Anecdotes and hope?! Dude, I’ve only ever said that Palin’s record is proof enough to me that her beliefs and principles match mine more closely than any other [prospective] candidate. If for some reason her name is not on the ballot when my state’s primary rolls around, I move down the list o’ candidates, which by the by is not set in stone. How you got “anecdotes” and “hope” out of that is beyond me, douchebag.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:16 AM

Seriously Twerp – I do agree with your current evaluation of T-Paw and Cain. Cain surprises me because he is a very bright guy and had plenty of time to prepare for a run as he wasn’t employed, but just sitting home counting money.

bw222 on July 14, 2011 at 12:16 AM

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

anyone that takes a poll 16 months out to make a decision on who to support is a bloomin idiot

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:16 AM

There are two distinct concepts which apparently need some clarification. One is SIMILARITY, the other CONGRUENCE.

Now someone will make a remark such as “Palin is a Reaganite.”

This means that Palin is philosophically aligned with Reaganism. This argues for SIMILARITY on the basis of principles of governance. Its a school of thought.

Now the refutation is parroted, invariably as, “Palin is NOT Reagan.”

This rebuttal is utterly fallacious because it argues against CONGRUENCE; but CONGRUENCE was never claimed. Only similarity was claimed.

The debate should revolve around the degree of similarity; and I submit on a sliding scale that Palin is more intimately aligned with Reagan than all other candidates in the field.

There is public opinion data to support this as well and there was a thread on Hot Air about it; Palin is most closely aligned with Reagan by a wide margin in a comparative survey analysis.

QEF

Geochelone on July 14, 2011 at 12:16 AM

There’s a reason “poll-driven” is an insult.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

I call the poll-driven voters “poll-o-philes.” They’re the kind of people who aren’t going to know how they’ll vote on priamry day until they open up their newspaper to the latest poll numbers.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:17 AM

anyone that takes a poll 16 months out to make a decision on who to support is a bloomin idiot

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:16 AM

Good thing my numbers are more comprehensive than that.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:17 AM

We shouldn’t live our lives by polls. We will chase a lot of flavors-of-the-month that way. There’s a reason “poll-driven” is an insult.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

I’m filing this away for the next time Patrick posts his HotAir poll and everyone screams “looky there, this proves she can win” or “Patrick is an idiot for taking a swipe at Palin claiming that Bachmann is closing in”.

Fair enough?

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:18 AM

anyone that takes a poll 16 months out to make a decision on who to support is a bloomin idiot

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:16 AM

As the numbers change, so will the intentions of the poll-o-philes. There’s always a handful of them every election cycle, but I don’t remember them being quite this vocal back in 2008.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:18 AM

And I disagree.
We usually disagree with each other.
If nothing else we’re consistent.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:10 AM

But you point out differences between Reagan and Palin that are inconsequential – he had short hair, hers is long. Who friggin cares? They govern similarly, they have the same political skills, they share the attacks of both the media and their own party.

If the fact that Reagan never wore high heels makes Palin not like him – and that’s what you focus on, your basis for comparison is insane.

miConsevative on July 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Good thing my numbers are more comprehensive than that.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:17 AM

It doesn’t matter what polls say today, KG. They’re going to say something different closer to the election, for every candidate.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Good thing my numbers are more comprehensive than that.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:17 AM

So comprehensive, they predict a general-election matchup before the Ames straw poll. Really credible there, buckshot./

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

There is public opinion data to support this as well and there was a thread on Hot Air about it; Palin is most closely aligned with Reagan by a wide margin in a comparative survey analysis.

QEF

Geochelone on July 14, 2011 at 12:16 AM

good points. i think the ABPers are afriad of admitting even a similarity to Reaganism with Palin.

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Tea Party Tribune:  Sarah Inches Closer

In part:

I firmly believe that she fully intends not only to throw her hat into the ring, but that she has a very innovative and strategically sound plan for winning the 2012 presidential election. By reiterating that she would not necessarily run if she saw the right person positioned to seize those reins, but that she did not see that person in the current group of contenders, this is the closest we have gotten so far to a firm statement that she intends to run, and intends to officially announce this quite shortly.

While I titled this “Sarah Inches Closer,” I actually feel she did quite a bit more than that tonight. She made it clear that she feels she can win, that there’s nobody already running whom she trusts to do the job, and that it’s only a few short days or weeks at most before she plans to make an official announcement.

What she didn’t come out and explicitly state precisely the same words, she said exactly the same thing with the words that she did use, and quite frankly I could not be happier. For the first time in the 2012 general election season, I have every good confidence that we now not only have some light at the end of this tunnel. We truly have rapidly rising, very brightly shining star.

http://www.teapartytribune.com/2011/07/13/sarah-inches-closer/

idesign on July 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Good thing my numbers are more comprehensive than that.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:17 AM

thanks for amditting you are a bloomin idiot.

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:20 AM

Remind me again how far away we are from the first primaries!

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Question re. the 2012 primaries for those of you who know:

We know NH and IA are–when, Jan 2012? So then comes the real test, SC’s first-in-the-South primary in early Feb(?), where no candidate will have a regional advantage (SC does not favor Georgians). I think FL is making noises about moving up in the primary season, too.

My greatest question is about the splitting of delegates as a result of a primary performance. Didn’t the RNC reform the rules so the winner no longer takes all a la John McCain did with only 40% of the vote? Or is it left up to the individual states to decide delegate assignation?

If Romney–or anyone else–wins an entire state with only 20% of the vote, we are going down the same stupid road as 2008. Hello, RINO candidate, especially in those states where Dems can vote in the R primary.

rwenger43 on July 14, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Palin 2012. Accept no substitutes.

Now more than ever.

Emperor Norton on July 14, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Fair enough?

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:18 AM

I dare you to find a post anywhere on HA in which I say a poll proves anything.

Go on, try.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Moving away from Palin for a minute. I am sure most of you know that Alan Simpson brokered the amnesty of 1986 that provided amnesty for 3-million illegals but had no enforcable enforcement measures.

Simpson, now a dottering old fool, is a favorite for Democratic Presidents to name to bi-partisan commissions because they know he will make a fool of himself and the GOP. Some guys just don’t know when to quit.

bw222 on July 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM

We shouldn’t live our lives by polls. We will chase a lot of flavors-of-the-month that way. There’s a reason “poll-driven” is an insult.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:13 AM

There was a time when Donald Trump was ahead – WAY ahead – in the polls for cripes sake. What more proof do people need?

miConsevative on July 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM

Unlike some of the Sarah Palin supporters here, I’m not comfortable saying that I think she will run. I think she might. But the truth of the matter is at this point, I. Just. Don’t. Know. Maybe that’s where KingGold got his “anecdotes and hope” bullsh!t from. I sure do hope she does run. But believe me, folks, my world will not fall apart if she doesn’t run. I won’t feel any worse than when they discontinued my favorite AXE spray scent.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM

It doesn’t matter what polls say today, KG. They’re going to say something different closer to the election, for every candidate.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

I don’t just look at today. That is precisely my point. I look at the trend. It’s quite true that poll numbers change, but Sarah Palin is not an unknown quantity. She has near-universal name recognition and disastrous unfavorables. Who’s mind is she going to change in that time?

What should be more unsettling for Palin supporters is that her numbers tend to drop the more she’s talked about, for whatever reason. A presidential campaign would only increase that effect.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM

Excuse me while I look for my new black thong. Gotta look sharp for tomorrow.

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

Now I have this song in my head…..

portlandon on July 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

If Romney–or anyone else–wins an entire state with only 20% of the vote, we are going down the same stupid road as 2008. Hello, RINO candidate, especially in those states where Dems can vote in the R primary.

rwenger43 on July 14, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Hmm…what this tells me is that Palin’s entrance into her gubernatorial tenure on a plurality vote might be more of a feature than a bug. But that is genuine unvarnished and totally illogical optimism on my part. LOL

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

bw222 on July 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM

I totally agree w/you about Simpson.
He needs to retire from the political spotlight.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

here’s the problem that the left has. McConnell’s plan makes barry responsible for everything. That forces his hand. He has to ID the cuts, the amount and the targets. Reid in working hard to protect his king. He want McConnell to agree with 1T of cuts. That shifts the blame to Rs, so that the Left can go crazy…crazy with their ads, and gin up the mob.

And Reid is so desperate he is floating a new commission:

Reid has also proposed creating a bipartisan committee tasked with drafting an enforceable debt-reduction plan with rules that would allow its proposed spending cuts to receive expedited consideration in each chamber, Senate aides confirmed.

I know that most people here are against McConnell. But I think there has already be salutatory effects. Mitch grabbed their attention…they said no way we want that responsibility, let mikey eat it.

Barry’s theater this pm was probably about that too. He has to reclaim the “high” ground for his leftist base (they loved the walk out on HuffPo and the “dressing down” of Ryan). We have to stop pretending that Rs can work with these people.

r keller on July 14, 2011 at 12:26 AM

Fair enough?

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:18 AM

Sure, if you pull (or poll?) it out when people are spouting off polls against Palin. If you’re consistent, that goes a long way.

miConsevative on July 14, 2011 at 12:26 AM

Moving away from Palin for a minute. I am sure most of you know that Alan Simpson brokered the amnesty of 1986 that provided amnesty for 3-million illegals but had no enforcable enforcement measures.

Simpson, now a dottering old fool, is a favorite for Democratic Presidents to name to bi-partisan commissions because they know he will make a fool of himself and the GOP. Some guys just don’t know when to quit.

bw222 on July 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM

didn’t know about his partt in amnesty. that explains much on why this guy shouldn’t be listened too.

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:26 AM

What should be more unsettling for Palin supporters is that her numbers tend to drop the more she’s talked about, for whatever reason.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM

Not true. Her favorability numbers improved with the bus tour. However, sub Obama for Palin, and you have a true statement.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:26 AM

I dare you to find a post anywhere on HA in which I say a poll proves anything.

Go on, try.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Well you can go and look for those Palin bashing posts everyone claims I made or you can help me with these pasties and thong for tomorrows poll dance.

But seriously, you did give Patrick a hard time in that last poll. And you weren’t the only one.

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:28 AM

Comparison of Sarah Palin’s F/UF on May 25 and today in the PPP poll of North Carolina:

——————MAY 25 TODAY NET DIFFERENCE

SOMEWHAT CONSERV —50/39 52/39 +2

VERY CONSERV——-61/29 72/22 +18

GOP—————-57/34 63/26 +14

INDEPENDENTS——-30/59 44/50 +23

WHITES 38/53 41/50 +6

HEAD TO HEAD MATCHUP BETWEEN PALIN AND OBAMA (PALIN FIRST):

—————-MAY 25 TODAY NET DIFF

SOMEWHAT CONS—-61/26 64/22 +7

VERY CONSERV—–78/15 85/9 +15

GOP————–75/14 79/8 +10

INDEPENDENTS—–40/51 51/38 +24

WHITES———–50/39 53/37 +5

This is an incredible leap in support over the last 2 months in one of the most important battleground states of 2012 in the most category of independents. Palin leading Obama among independents in NC by 13 points in a Democratically skewed poll.

Yes sirree, Obama is in a lot of trouble.

technopeasant on July 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

I won’t feel any worse than when they discontinued my favorite AXE spray scent.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM

I just cant see it. Weird commercials.

upinak on July 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

What is astonishing is that Newt rode the wave of the Reagan R3volution to the betterment of his fame and glory. I don’t deny that he was one of our better weapons at the time.

However, was he not one to suggest recently that we move away from Reagan, leave that legacy behind as a fond remembrance of yesteryear, and search for traction in a brave new world?

There was more than one to suggest such a tectonic shift; Lindsay Graham comes to mind. Who was it?

Geochelone on July 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

But seriously, you did give Patrick a hard time in that last poll. And you weren’t the only one.

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:28 AM

I gave Patrick a hard time for his conclusion. It was lame. As I said: Polls don’t prove anything.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

But seriously, you did give Patrick a hard time in that last poll. And you weren’t the only one.

Knucklehead on July 14, 2011 at 12:28 AM

Well I was one Palin supporter who didn’t. So now you can’t say that it’s “all” Palin supporters.

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:30 AM

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM

ROFL you need to stop digging. Seriously I think you beclowned yourself enough. using your logic we should just give the next 4 years to OBa ma since based on the trends and polls Obama is unbeatable.

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:31 AM

Her favorability numbers improved with the bus tour.

alwaysfiredup on July 14, 2011 at 12:26 AM

They did, for a time. Then she got dragged into the muck of the Paul Revere stupidity and that rise was halted.

The media will always find a way. They have a searing hate for this woman.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:31 AM

They did, for a time. Then she got dragged into the muck of the Paul Revere stupidity and that rise was halted.

The media will always find a way. They have a searing hate for this woman.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:31 AM

That “Paul Revere stupidity” isn’t Palin’s stupidity. It’s the stupidity of the American people who fall into two categories: Those that don’t know Palin was correct, and those who know it and don’t care.

So tell me again why you think it’s okay for the media to pick our candidate for us AGAIN?!

gryphon202 on July 14, 2011 at 12:32 AM

Seriously I think you beclowned yourself enough.

unseen on July 14, 2011 at 12:31 AM

Not yet. I didn’t write this yet.

You really don’t get it do you? did you think Palin was just a flash in the pan? and not only will she win the nomination get elected win re-election she unlike Reagan because of his illness will stay on the stage after her term like clinton and make sure the next GOP admin doesn’t go wobbly and become bush lite again.

unseen on July 13, 2011 at 11:05 PM

Real classy, too, the crack about Reagan.

KingGold on July 14, 2011 at 12:34 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5