Did Sarah Palin really say Mitt Romney is our weakest candidate?

posted at 4:50 pm on January 10, 2012 by Tina Korbe

On “Hannity” last night, Newt Gingrich responded to the news that Todd Palin had endorsed him for president — and made a point to mention that Sarah Palin has said recently that “Mitt Romney is our weakest candidate.” But did Sarah Palin really say that?

Not exactly. On the Fox News show “Justice with Judge Jeanine” Saturday, Palin said she thinks the mainstream media wants Mitt Romney to be the nominee so as to enhance Barack Obama’s chances at reelection.

Palin said the mainstream media would take a hands-off approach to Romney “in order to bolster Romney’s chances” to “finally face Obama.”

According to Palin, the mainstream media and Obama would then portray Romney as someone who is out of touch with regular Americans in the general election.

“They are already gearing up to portray him, accurately or inaccurately … as being out of touch with the working class,” Palin said, noting that Romney’s wealth and perfect family may make it easy to paint him as someone “being a bit out of touch from working and middle class Americans and from the challenges we all face.”

 

How did that become Sarah Palin saying Mitt Romney is the weakest candidate? Simple: Rush Limbaugh referenced SP’s comments in connection with remarks from NBC/MSNBC’s Donna Brazile, who did say Democrats think Romney is the GOP’s “weakest candidate.” Here’s the transcript:

RUSH: There is a story on the Drudge Report today from Sarah Palin in which Sarah Palin says that the White House wants Mitt Romney to be the Republican nominee. Now, not only did I tell you that the Broncos were gonna beat the Steelers, for months I have been telling you that the Democrats want Romney — and you all know it. You’ve been listening here and you’ve heard people call me and tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about, that I’m full of it, that they’re scared of Romney. “Romney is the only guy who can win.” And I have said, “No,” and I’ve stood tough, and I’ve said, “They can’t wait for him. What’s Occupy Wall Street all about but running against Romney? He’s the Wall Street guy on our roster — and then Romneycare,” and I’ve laid it all out. So here comes Palin, she says it, and makes news — and Donna Brazile has said it. This is post-debate coverage on ABC Saturday night. George Stephanopoulos, Democrat Party hack disguised as the debate moderator on ABC, had this discussion with Jon Karl and Donna Brazile.

BRAZILE: Mitt Romney won tonight because no one touched him — and for Democrats, you know what? It was good news for us.

KARL: Why is that?

BRAZILE: Because we believe that the weakest candidate is the candidate that the Republicans are not attackin’, and that’s Mitt Romney.

So, it was Rush who connected the dots for Newt. Rush assumes Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Sarah Palin has said she thinks Democrats want the GOP to nominate Romney (and, lo and behold, per Brazile, they actually do!). Thus, Sarah Palin must think Romney is the GOP’s weakest candidates.

But that’s not actually airtight logic. Perhaps Sarah doesn’t think Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Maybe she just thinks Democrats think Mitt is the weakest, but she herself thinks she’s strong.

So, Newt technically said Sarah said something she didn’t exactly say. At this point, though, he’ll say whatever to weaken Romney. Still, Newt’s comment didn’t come out of nowhere; Palin has given the impression she thinks Romney is a weak enough candidate to be effectively discredited as a presidential potential by the MSM.

All of that aside, the bigger issue is: Are Sarah and Rush right? Was Donna Brazile speaking truth? Do Democrats want Romney because they’re confident Obama would destroy him in the general? And, if so, would any of the other candidates stand a better chance?

Update: This post originally incorrectly identified Donna Brazile as primarily affiliated with ABC, when she is, in fact, an NBC/MSNBC contributor. The post has been corrected above.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

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

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Sarah Palin…still the smartest person in the room!

SMACKRUNNER on January 10, 2012 at 6:08 PM

You may be right. I’m just pointing out to libtard4life that unlike lefties, we only care about the results someone can deliver. We don’t stand out in the street and crap on cop cars because they have more than we do.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2012 at 6:05 PM

We also believe in anti-perspirant and personal hygiene.

BruthaMan on January 10, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Palin is an airhead dingbat and an anti-endorsement from her is gold. Keep it coming snow queen. Perhaps your boy Newt will rise above 4th place tonight. hanzblinx on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

What are you, like in the 7th-grade or so? Please leave so that adults around here can have a conversation without being interrupted by children.

Harbingeing on January 10, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Palin’s being paid a million smackeroos for that analysis? Really?

Buy Danish on January 10, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Yeah. Here you are commenting on it. Get it?

Mitt Romney is going to drive Reagan Democrats and working class whites back to the Democrat party. The media has largely held their fire on Romney for the last 3 years that is everything you need to know. Damn right he is weak!

CoolChange80 on January 10, 2012 at 6:04 PM

As a ‘nista, will we be entitled to echo and parrot the MSM attacks when they unleash them on Romney, or are we going to be urged to come to Romney’s defense?

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Most rick folks are ruthless so I’m not surprised Romney hates the middle class

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Almost all the democrats in Congress are filthy rich. No wonder they laugh at all the misery they’re causing.

Democrats say To hell with jobs!! To hell with cheap energy!! Let’s make everything so damn expensive the middle class will come begging to us for help!!

darwin on January 10, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Since everything the Dems and the MSM say during a campaign is a laughable lie or transparent distortion, you can bet they really wanted Palin as their opponent and anyone but Romney to win.

profitsbeard on January 10, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Tina Korbe are you superficial, an elitist, or just not conservative, or have you bought into the lie that Romney is most electable?

Tina Korbe, my guess is superficial. Most of Romney’s supporters are superficial and don’t give a crap about substance or conservative principles. Though some have bought lie.

CoolChange80 on January 10, 2012 at 5:24 PM

..you sure are comfortable in that snug, warm basement making your generalizations and Eeyore-ish predictions, aren’t you?

Isn’t it about time your mom called you up for dinner? I hear she’s making your favorite, meatloaf, tonight.

The War Planner on January 10, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Since everything the Dems and the MSM say during a campaign is a laughable lie or transparent distortion, you can bet they really wanted Palin as their opponent and anyone but Romney to win.

profitsbeard on January 10, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Yeah, right. I’m sure Romney keeps them in a cold sweat.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 6:15 PM

^ But come to think of it, didn’t the Dems say outright several times that Palin is the one they wanted to face? Hmmmmm…

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 6:17 PM

The War Planner on January 10, 2012 at 6:14 PM

he..he..:)

Dire Straits on January 10, 2012 at 6:18 PM

alwaysfiredup on January 10, 2012 at 5:39 PM

You suffer from the “if the poll doesn’t say what I want it’s not valid” syndrome.
I hate to bust your fantasy bubble, but the poll averages at RCP are usually pretty accurate.

NickDeringer on January 10, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Yeah, right. I’m sure Romney keeps them in a cold sweat.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 6:15 PM

..quite possibly. I cannot figure why they are spending all of that money essentially parroting what Newt’s pissing and moaning about and having that mayo-headed skank track through the snows of IA and HN dogging Mitt, misquoting his “firing line”.

The War Planner on January 10, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Rush and Palin are great armchair quarterback, but who do they say CAN beat One-bama? Who can beat him, Rush?? Who can beat him, Sarah?

Put your money where your mouth is.

NickDeringer on January 10, 2012 at 6:20 PM

You know, Mitt could turn his “I like to fire people” quasi-gaffe into a real winner.

Just start with a list of current Cabinet Secs, Czars and lib judges – NAME NAMES, Mitt. LEAD for a freakin change!!!

“For instance, I can’t wait to fire ___________” Fill in the blanks. Come on, Mitt. You can do it.

Harbingeing on January 10, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Do you believe Romney knows how to worry about a pink slip?

liberal4life on January 10, 2012 at 5:48 PM

DO YOU think Obama does?

Stop it. Your arguments are so vacuous.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Does drooling all over it count as a “kiss?”

Horace on January 10, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Don’t know. I don’t have such fetishes :)

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2012 at 6:23 PM

The War Planner on January 10, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Now is the best time for it though. Every skeleton on the table, right now.

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Has anyone noticed who the lib trolls here keep rooting for? Yes Mittens, why would our resident trolls tell us Mittens is the man? They see what I see, Newt sees and Sarah sees Mitt is the weakest and will not win in the general. Newt would pull out all the stops on “The One”and would have a better chance to win. Mitts hands would be tied because of heath care and jobs.

angrymike on January 10, 2012 at 6:30 PM

But come to think of it, didn’t the Dems say outright several times that Palin is the one they wanted to face? Hmmmmm…

ddrintn on January 10, 2012

Not that I recall.

She was never taken that serious as a potential candidate.

Just mocked, villifed, slandered and caricatured.

I was an early (Summer 2008, before McCain picked her) supporter of Palin, but after she bailed from the Alaska governorship I knew she had made a major tactical error that only a term as a Senator (hopefully John McCain’s seat) would patch up.

And some vocal coaching to get over her “Gee willickers!” rube twang that irritates the hell out of a lot of people who would have otherwise given her a second look.

She has a lot of character and native smarts, but is nearly fatally tainted in the general mindset by these two negatives, and needs to rehabilitate her image BIG TIME before she has any popular political credibility again.

I’d support her if she ran for office, but it would have been a losing effort because of the Quitter meme and her grating sonics.

Romney is less threatening to the average, indifferent independent doofus, and thus has a better chance to take on the also-tainted Obama, Crown Prince of Massive Unemployment, a Stagnant Economy and Global Chaos, Goofily Golfing and Vacuously Vacationing as Rome Burns.

profitsbeard on January 10, 2012 at 6:31 PM

So, Romney is the weakest candidate…Is SP sure? I think, by default, the candidate who is polling the best is the best candidate. I mean, what other metric is there? So, Newt who will finish a distant third or fourth in New Hampshire is the guy? How about Perry who is in single digits in South Carolina. Santorum? Please…Despite all the prognostications of the political genius class the man who is polling best, who happens to have a real resume in the private sector, who has an impeccable family life, who can actually think and talk on his feet is the strongest candidate to oppose Hussein. Gingrich is yesterday’s warmed up leftovers from the mid 90s. Perry just can’t seem to think and talk or when he does his delivery is terrible. Paul is Paul. Santorum doesn’t deserve consideration. He managed to glad hand his way to a strong Iowa finish. He has absolutely zero mainstream appeal. They did’nt even want him in Pennsylvania. He lost his Senate seat as an encumbant…Terrible. Is Santorum the best candidate? Sarah Palin continues to show why she is a talker not a doer…Keep talking Sarah and counting those millions…

Nozzle on January 10, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Mittbots engage in every one. Actually portlandon is off just a little bit in that analysis. Mittbots usually are and were just nasty toward any possible competition for Romney rather than doing anything to extol the guy…which can’t be done much beyond praising him for his educational and business background. Romney’s a weak candidate, and they know it.

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM

I actually prefer “Romnrrhoids”.

rotorjoe on January 10, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I actually prefer “Romnrrhoids”.

rotorjoe on January 10, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Palinistas

Ronulans

. . . Romnrrhoids.

Stealing that for the other thread :)

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 6:43 PM

But that’s not actually airtight logic. Perhaps Sarah doesn’t think Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Maybe she just thinks Democrats think Mitt is the weakest, but she herself thinks she’s strong.

WTF does this mean? Maybe that graf needs to take a second pass through the magical TK Airtight Logic Machine so I can see how “she herself thinks she’s strong” relates to “doesn’t think … would want … to nominate …” i.e. you think Palin thinks she’s strong so therefore she doesn’t think Mitt is as strong or is therefore weak based off your interpretation of her interpretation of what Donkeys want?

King B on January 10, 2012 at 6:50 PM

But that’s not actually airtight logic. Perhaps Sarah doesn’t think Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Maybe she just thinks Democrats think Mitt is the weakest

The terms “logic” and “sarah” should never, ever, ever, ever be used in the same sentence.

Jailbreak on January 10, 2012 at 7:04 PM

CUDA

Metro on January 10, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Has anyone noticed who the lib trolls here keep rooting for? Yes Mittens, why would our resident trolls tell us Mittens is the man? They see what I see, Newt sees and Sarah sees Mitt is the weakest and will not win in the general. Newt would pull out all the stops on “The One”and would have a better chance to win. Mitts hands would be tied because of heath care and jobs.

angrymike on January 10, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Not only the demented libs/LSM, but RINOs as well. If that is not a clear sign of who NOT to nominate I have no idea what is.

riddick on January 10, 2012 at 7:09 PM

The terms “logic” and “sarah Jailbreak” should never, ever, ever, ever be used in the same sentence.

Jailbreak on January 10, 2012 at 7:04 PM

fify

idesign on January 10, 2012 at 7:11 PM

CUDA COULDA…but didn’t

Metro on January 10, 2012 at 7:07 PM

fify

M240H on January 10, 2012 at 7:13 PM

See,, I get the brilliance of removing herself from the equation, it forces the establishment to own the results after doing the same trick over again this time around.

And the results are going to be more Obama if Mitt is the nominee.

I needed neither Sarah Palin or Rush to inform me about it. Doing the same thing you did last time around, minus he enthusiasm which Sarah brought to the ticket is sure to result in a huge pounding.

Sharr on January 10, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Aren’t all three correct?

Bmore on January 10, 2012 at 7:36 PM

As a ‘nista, will we be entitled to echo and parrot the MSM attacks when they unleash them on Romney, or are we going to be urged to come to Romney’s defense?

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 6:12 PM

You (‘nistas)– or perhaps to be more accurate, those who’ve said they won’t vote for Romney– have already been told many times in these threads that your vote isn’t needed. Why should they need your defense? The independents have got their back.

de rigueur on January 10, 2012 at 8:04 PM

And oh yeah, the “Anybody But Obama” platform is not a surefire route to victory. I would not be staking the republics future on it anyhow… There needs to be a positive, affirmative, enthusiastic vision beyond that.

Unfortunately Barack Obama is not a GWB, or a Republican. Which means he has the Media backing him and his image and who control the news cycle.

“Acceptable”, is simply not good enough.

Sharr on January 10, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Stealing that for the other thread :)

Axe on January 10, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Feel free.

rotorjoe on January 10, 2012 at 8:26 PM

As a ‘nista, will we be entitled to echo and parrot the MSM attacks when they unleash them on Romney, or are we going to be urged to come to Romney’s defense?

ddrintn on January 10, 2012 at 6:12 PM

I’m gonna get some popcorn and watch the Dem massacre of Romney. Then vote for good candidates down ticket.

Ahhhhhh….a GOP Senate (maybe).

Like that Veep candidate Stockdale: “GGGGGRRRIDDDDLOOOCCCCKK!”

KirknBurker on January 10, 2012 at 8:59 PM

BradTank on January 10, 2012 at 5:27 PM

The media will begin to attack Mittens if he wins the nomination.

Count on it. Then he’ll lose.

They have been attacking Palin over three years now.

Once the Dem Kracken rises and goes medieval on Romney, people like you will look surprised.

Conservatives remember what McCain did to Palin in late Sept. 2008, and what he did to practically worship Obama.

KirknBurker on January 10, 2012 at 9:09 PM

So, Newt technically said Sarah said something she didn’t exactly say.

yeah that’s blog worthy…lol

Anyway, Mitt isn’t going to fight back against Obama. Not milquetoast Mitt.

Then Coulter, Christie, Rover and the rest can have 4 more years to faux complain about how bad Obama is and how bad we need conservative candidates…. until 2016, when they will flush good conservatives down the drain again.

rightConcept on January 10, 2012 at 9:11 PM

“Vote for ME..Mitt..F’in Romney!”

Because he is not John Kerry.

KirknBurker on January 10, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Regarding Religion, if they try to attack Mitt on his Mormonism will they do the same to Harry Reid?

sandee on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Is Reid a Republican?

The answer to your question is the same as the answer to mine.

Midas on January 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

It doesn’t matter if a little spills on Harry, that idiot’s usefulness is about finished anyway.

S. D. on January 10, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Looks like another election year where we hold our noses to vote. The GOP is deathly afraid of putting up a conservative candidate and the best they can come up with is a warmed over democrat from a liberal state.

savage24 on January 10, 2012 at 9:46 PM

She is basically saying that they will do the same thing that they did to McCain. Sounds about right to me. But that doesn’t mean Romney can’t win. He just has to be prepared for it and the last debate at least gave me some hope that he will be smart enough to effectively counter some of the media cheap shots. Also, the MSM has and will continue do what they can to boost him up, but Obama still won’t have the same appeal he did in 2008. He has a record now.

Costa on January 10, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Mitt: the 21st Century’s Bob Dole.

landlines on January 10, 2012 at 10:27 PM

“I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice.”
-Mitt Romney in a 1994 Senatorial debate

“I respect and will fully protect a woman’s right to choose. That choice is a deeply personal one, and the women of our state should make it based on their beliefs, not mine and not the government’s.”
-Mitt Romney in a 2002 GOP acceptance speech

KirknBurker on January 11, 2012 at 12:44 AM

Hey, you idiot Rombots on here who are beating up on Palin for being right about Romney being such a Weak Sauce candidate:

Did you all notice the Weak Sauce GOP turnout tonight in New Hampshire?

Doesn’t that tell you something about the Frontrunner you clowns are foisting on the rest of the party?

The purges of the Squishtard Moderates that the Reagan people will lead after Obama kicks Romney’s butt are going to be a wonder to behold.

victor82 on January 11, 2012 at 12:47 AM

None of our guys BEAT One-bama.

Obama 48, Romney 43
Obama 53, Gingrich 38
Obama 51, Santorum 40

NickDeringer on January 10, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Problem is HOW SURE ARE YOU WITH THE ACCURACY OF THOSE SURVEY RESULTS?

Nope. The ultimate goal should be the RIGHT LEADERSHIP AND PRINCIPLES TOWARDS FREEDOM AND ECONOMIC PROSPERITY. We, conservatives, believe that OURS ARE BEST.

Many conservatives believe that. They were out there in 2010. They did not participate “much” in 2008.

Why? To these righteous and principled Americans:

NOMINATING A REPRESENTATIVE OR A CANDIDATE THAT DOESN’T REPRESENT ONE’S PRINCIPLES IS THE GREATEST BLUNDER AGAINST THE RIGHT TO SUFFRAGE. IT IS WORSE THAN OPPORTUNISTIC MENTALITY OF PRACTICING SUCH RIGHT MAINLY FOR ONE’S CONVENIENCE AND ADVANTAGE AT THE MOMENT.

TheAlamos on January 11, 2012 at 2:31 AM

Palin was observing the obvious. The WH is gearing up to face Romney. But this is not because he’s the weakest candidate. Just the opposite. It’s because it recognizes he’s the strongest candidate and therefore the one most likely to win the nod.

He’s also the one who will draw the greatest contrast between the parties–pitting his free enterprise background against Obama’s push for a European type socialism. Seems to me of all our candidates, Romney can best articulate our side.

writeblock on January 11, 2012 at 6:59 AM

If Sarah P. endorses anyone other than Rick Perry, she will thoroughly destroy any conservative credibility she has remaining.
Sorry, Tahaaaahd, but Newton can’t win.
(I’d hold my nose and vote for him though … maybe)
Never Mittens – the antithesis of Palin and Perry.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 11, 2012 at 8:04 AM

Sarah is right about the dems wanting Mitt as the nominee, that’s why they’ve built up all this class warfare between Wall St (Mitt) and Main St (Obummer). Newt lies. A lot.

Kissmygrits on January 11, 2012 at 9:22 AM

But that’s not actually airtight logic. Perhaps Sarah doesn’t think Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Maybe she just thinks Democrats think Mitt is the weakest…

The terms “logic” and “sarah” should never, ever, ever, ever be used in the same sentence.

Jailbreak on January 10, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Those are two separate sentences. Genius.

SD on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Perhaps Sarah doesn’t think Democrats would want Republicans to nominate their weakest candidate. Maybe she just thinks Democrats think Mitt is the weakest, but she herself thinks she’s he’s strong.

I think that’s what Tina meant.

SD on January 11, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Looks like another election year where we hold our noses to vote. The GOP is deathly afraid of putting up a conservative candidate and the best they can come up with is a warmed over democrat from a liberal state.

savage24 on January 10, 2012 at 9:46 PM

Is he “warmed over”? I was thinking Cold Fish. I get nothing from him but the same o same o.

Better than O’Blameya….maybe. Better than almost any of the others…Nope.

Problem is he gets 20-25% and that apparently makes news. What it says in my world is he didn’t get 75-80%. So it is time for the 5-9% winners to get out and let the big timers play and let’s see where the remaining 75% go.

landowner on January 11, 2012 at 11:46 AM

If she thinks Romney is weakest, perhaps she she endorse the candidate she thinks is strongest and get behind them, before it’s too late.

Norky on January 11, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Palin is an airhead dingbat and an anti-endorsement from her is gold. Keep it coming snow queen. Perhaps your boy Newt will rise above 4th place tonight.

hanzblinx on January 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Palin never said that Romney was the weakest candidate. She said the Democrats think Romney is the weakest candidate.

So Palin was right, and the Democrats do want to run against Romney, and this makes her an airhead dingbat.

That’s pretty dumb.

How about making the argument that the Democrats are wrong when they call Romney a weak candidate, rather than attacking someone for pointing out what the Democrats believe?

tom on January 11, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3