Don’t pin your hopes on Palin
No one can doubt Sarah Palin’s status as bright, charismatic and deeply popular among hard-core conservatives. But she won her national prominence not through political victories or governing achievements of her own, but through McCain’s surprise decision to anoint a first-term Alaska governor as his running mate.
McCain himself, meanwhile, turns up as Exhibit A for another oft-repeated political conclusion with no basis in recent history.
According to many outspoken right-wingers (particularly on talk radio), Republicans of McCain’s “maverick” or “moderate” stripe doom the party whenever they’re nominated.
But the fact is that in 2008 McCain did better than his fellow, more conservative, Republicans. For example, Republican House candidates that year — most of them unequivocally conservative — captured 42.5 percent of all ballots cast. McCain drew 45.7 percent.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 8:28 PM
Fine. Sarah can run in the primary and sell herself — her 20 years of executive experience in Alaska, her accomplishments, her stick-to-itiveness, her servant’s heart — to the fence sitters. As far as the media is concerned, they’ve fired everything they have at her already and she’s still standing.
Even the “quitter” meme can be overcome — because as far as I know, there is no way to do to the President of the United States what the haters could do to the Governor of Alaska in 2009, because the President is not bound to defend himself against ethics charges using nothing but his own personal salary, so there’s no reason to believe she’d have to resign from the Presidency; the rules are completely different; you can’t just bankrupt him and his family just by filing one bulls__t complaint after another against him.
Have a little faith if you’re a fan of hers.
Aitch748 on December 8, 2010 at 8:43 PM
I’ve haven’t said “Screw you.” yet but now I will because you just lied about my comments here.
Virtually all Palin supporters are cogent, patient and polite in their response to folks like you who are Palin h8ters but after 2 and 1/2 years of this, our patience is wearing a little thin.
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 8:43 PM
Here’s my logic:
-Obama will be to the left of anyone challenging him.
-Anyone challenging him will be closer to my governing philosophy.
-Between the two, I want the closer to my philosophy to win.
Katie Couric would likely pick Obama to be my candidate. I reject that, of course.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 8:44 PM
Is this a serious question?
Of course they would support her. The only other choice will be Obama.
She’s already been beating Obama like a drum on a daily basis. Hell, he probably hides under the Resolute Desk curled up in the fetal position at the mere mention of her name.
Once the Presidential debates start she will destroy him. You think he stutters like a fool now, wait till she starts in.
Her 2006 debates are on You Tube. You’d do well to go look at them.
There’s a reason why Pete Rouse and Anita Dunn, both who spent time in Alaska and both who have lost to her before, tried so damn hard to destroy her while she was Governor.
They KNOW they can’t beat her.
It’s only the weak of heart on our side that seem to be wimping out.
Obama and his bunch are scared to death of her.
gary4205 on December 8, 2010 at 8:45 PM
Indeed, he would.
conservative pilgrim on December 8, 2010 at 8:47 PM
No, you missed my point: you’re basing your assessment of Palin’s “qualifications” to be President on her interview with Katie Couric.
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 8:48 PM
No it isn’t. Let’s see, the point last time was to make sure that Obama (or Hillary) wasn’t elected, so we nominated a guy who was touted as being loved and adored by independents and moderates, and that the media really really liked…and golly gee, if those independents and moderates didn’t vote in droves for that moonbat god Obama anyway.
If the GOP is counting on an anti-Obama, anti-Democrat vote to pull them through, they’ve got a rude awakening in store.
ddrintn on December 8, 2010 at 8:49 PM
This is a good point and it’s certainly one I’ve considered. It’s also two years away so alot can change with that bunch (the fence sitters)–by definition.
I hear ya. I just am under the belief that beating Obama trumps electing her. The ideal would obviously be both.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 8:50 PM
Really???
This is really polite……
I rest my case. “Unseen” hasn’t been in here calling everyone haters yet, but the day ain’t over yet.
Knucklehead on December 8, 2010 at 8:51 PM
No, you haven’t said the actual words “screw you”, but you might as well have.
So i’m a Palin hater? Is that why I said before the ’08 election: When it comes to the economy, Obama can see the Soviet Union from his house ?
TedInATL on December 8, 2010 at 8:52 PM
..:)
Dire Straits on December 8, 2010 at 8:53 PM
She’s taken a whole heck of alot for the past 2 years+ and gotten stronger. What makes you think the next 2 years will be different than the last?
denniscb on December 8, 2010 at 8:54 PM
I don’t know what you are, but you haven’t come up with any reasonable arguments for your stance on Palin.
Hence, the reason that Reason flees our responses sometimes…
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 8:56 PM
Respectfully, this is not accurate. My assessment is not on Palin’s qualifications as I believe her to be not only qualified but a wonderful replacement. My assessment is about her support from the squishes. I’m merely not convinced yet that she would garner enough to defeat him.
And Katie Couric has nothing to do with it on my end.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 8:58 PM
For me; yes, it absolutely is. That trumps all.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 9:00 PM
You are messing with fire now…..
……and you’re going to get burnt.
Knucklehead on December 8, 2010 at 9:01 PM
???
I have no idea what you’re talking about.
All that need concern you is her stance on the issues.
Leave it up to her to draw up the battle plan.
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 9:01 PM
If you have followed the presidential elections for any time, you would know that the “squishes” don’t decide their vote until the election is more or less decided for them. The “non-squishes” for Palin will resolve the issue well in advance.
denniscb on December 8, 2010 at 9:02 PM
You clearly have no idea how off-putting you are for yourself and Sarah Palin. I sometimes wonder if you’re a plant to make Palin supporters look bad. YOU are the reason I’m still questioning whether I can support a Palin candidacy. I will probably vote for her if she’s the nominee. I will vote for any in the current field, except Huck, against Obama.
TedInATL on December 8, 2010 at 9:06 PM
And the ad hominems and personal attacks just keep coming…!
Frankly, whether or not Palin’s supporters look bad or not has nothing to do with her as a candidate for higher office.
Before Palin came on the national scene, no one ever judged a political figure by their supporters.
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 9:11 PM
I have and that’s what the pollsters suggest. I do wonder how it is that we know when these things like ‘when’ are decided. The analysis can only be offered after the results.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 9:13 PM
Not true. Many of us knew Obama was bad news based on his supporters. All you had to do was look at those O BA MA videos to see the cultish mindset.
TedInATL on December 8, 2010 at 9:15 PM
Other than the candidate, what makes this any less absurd than the Katie Couric strategy?
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 9:17 PM
Why is this “absurd?”
Don’t you always look for the candidate’s values (to find a good “match” with yours) in their platform and in the way they govern, if they’ve held office?
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 9:19 PM
Disagree.
The cultish, witless followers were just icing on the cake.
My main objection was to 0bama himself, based on his history, experience and background…or lack thereof.
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 9:21 PM
That too.
TedInATL on December 8, 2010 at 9:25 PM
Last page, the fuss was about Katie Couric (or the media, in general) deciding my reasoning on how I should vote. That idea is absurd.
That quote and question is in response to you deciding my reasoning on how I should vote. Equally absurd.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 9:27 PM
Good luck. Like I said, that was the overriding goal in 2008 as well. You have to give people something to vote for, not just saying you’re not this or that.
ddrintn on December 8, 2010 at 9:30 PM
Not really.
I’m merely talking about you giving Palin an opportunity by familiarizing yourself with her books, FB Notes, speeches, Tweets, Op Eds and Fox News analyses, as well as her record in public office before making up your mind, rather than basing your opinion on the Couric interview and/or Tina Fey’s impression on SNL.
Jenfidel on December 8, 2010 at 9:34 PM
“When” is a really subjective term. But I will use a really overdone term to point out that it does have some relevance. “If not now ‘when’”. If I may add, Palin’s supporters aren’t just on the comment pages. They’re everywhere an American lives and breathes and believes what the Founders fought for and put their fortunes and lives on the line for. We are the Great unwashed and unheard from multitudes that are the vast majority of Americans that have just had enough of Washington’s B.S.
denniscb on December 8, 2010 at 9:53 PM
We’re not exactly having a discussion it seems. My mind has been made up from the beginning. I will support, vote for, contribute and campaign for the person who challenges Obama. Palin needs not to convince me; I’m sold. That was in my original comment. I cannot quite get why you are on about that and Katie Couric and now Tina Fey.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 9:55 PM
Apparently that goal was not met. Many people may argue the reasoning but the inarguable reason is because not enough people voted for McCain. I only want that mistake to not be repeated in 2012.
anuts on December 8, 2010 at 10:05 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3