[ActrFshr]

Palin is a refreshing figure in the scene, but I just hope she takes it slowly. Reagan was extremely knowledgeable about matters economic, diplomatic, an military even in his ‘64 speech, way beyond Palin in ‘08. Yet it was still 16 years before he was the Republican’s nominee. Palin’s at least 10 years behind Reagan in experience and study. Let her run in ‘36 and she may get my vote.

[excopconservative]

What you saw in '08 was Sarah reading McCain's scripts. Even when answering questions, she had to stop to edit her answers not to conflict with the top of the ticket. Every word was monitored to keep her from "Going Rogue". What you are seeing now is Sarah. Remember that Reagan's best strength was that he used the talents of others to best advantage rather than trying to master everything himself. He was the delegator in chief. Not a bad model to follow for leader who has great decision making skills and good common sense.

[torchthemummy]

Palin’s at least 10 years behind Reagan in experience and study. Let her run in ‘36 and she may get my vote.

What a retarded statement. Of course YOU don't have the experience level of Reagan let alone Sarah Palin but apparently you are able to determine who is qualified or not. Go run a state government and get back to us.

PS: You're anti-Palin slip is showing since you mentioned how Reagan needed (by your count) 16 years to qualify which would mean she shouldn't, by your standards, be a legitimate candidate until the 2024 election (earliest date that fits your 16 year "experience builder" criteria starting with the 2008 election.)

[kralcmot]

ok

so if you could pick the nominee to face 0 in 2012, who would that be?