When will Sarah Palin Announce? (I think I may Actually Know)

Vanity ^ | 09-21-2011 | Parksstp

[stephenjohnbanker]

I remember em : )

[PhilCollins]

Like you, I wish that Republicans had better candidates. We should have at least a few candidates who have been a governor and either a cabinet member or a U.S. senator, including John Ashcroft, Dirk Kempthorne, Judd Gregg, and/or Ed Schaefer.

Among the current candidates, Roemer is the best, since he’s a conservative who has a variety of political experience.

[BillyBoy]

>> Cain seemed sharp enough. Perhaps he can emerge, overtake Bachmann? She’s unfortunately not doing so hot. Santorum I don’t love but he looks good compared to Mick Pomney. He’s getting high marks as well for the debate. He has gotten almost no traction at all. If Perry does drop off that would hopefully cause some other alternative to Romney to move up. <<

It's slim pickings for sure, especially give the number of decent conservatives who didn't run (Paul Ryan, Jim DeMint, John Bolton, etc.) or dropped out (Pawlenty, McCotter, etc.) Of the second tier candidates, I still rank Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, and Herman Cain above Mick Pomney. Nobody seems to have any momentum at this point. Of course Huckabee was polling about 2% in fall 2007 against Rudy McRomney, and he went on to win the Iowa caucus in January, so who knows?

Cain was a long-shot to begin with and after Gingrinch he had the most problems early in his campaign, and it seemed for a while he wouldn't last long. He does seem to be improving now. We'll see. As I've told Cain supporters, if he's still in the race and winning delegates by the time Illinois voters, I'd be happpy to vote for him, but I don't see that happening.

I like Santorum. Pre-Arlen Specter endorsement I would have considered him a great candidate for a presidential ticket (at least for veep), but after his 2006 loss I figured he was just embarrassing himself and would be DOA in a 2012 presidential campaign. Still, if he somehow won the nomination I think he'd be a far better GOP nominee and President than Mick Pomney.

Bachmann I've already covered. I think she's the best of the three candidates when it comes to conservaitve principles but I sure hope her campaign can get back on top, it's not looking good.

>> Like you, I wish that Republicans had better candidates. We should have at least a few candidates who have been a governor and either a cabinet member or a U.S. senator, including John Ashcroft, Dirk Kempthorne, Judd Gregg, and/or Ed Schaefer. Among the current candidates, Roemer is the best, since he’s a conservative who has a variety of political experience. <<

I consider Roemer a non-candidate because he's pretty much invisible (sorry Phil), but that's also due to the media ignoring him. And he's another one that used to be a RAT. But heck, I'll add Roemer to the mix and put him to the list of candidates I'd perfer over Mick Pomney just to show how much I dislike those two. If the choice on the ballot was Romney, Perry, or Roemer, I'd be for Buddy too!

One name I didn't include on the second tier list is Newt Gingrich. From what I hear (and admittedly I haven't watched most of the debates), he's done an excellent job debating and really shined at these events. I don't doubt that, Newt has always been a extremely sharp-witted guy and great at giving off-the-cuff remarks. But I'd rank him before Romney at this point. Way too much personal baggage, he was a terrible leader for the GOP when he was Speaker, and I met him in person and he's an a-hole. Can't see myself ever voting for the guy.

>>> On immigration Perry is pandering to his Texas voters many of whom are Hispanic. But Romney probably had three Hispanic voters in MA when he came out for amnesty and vetoed an MA Dream Act. He was for amnesty then simply to provide cheaper labor to business, as with TARP and stimulus's are all his big business priories . Romney gets no points from me on that issue. <<

I've seen the argument "Perry only panders to illegals cuz he's from a border state and he needs to win over the hispanic vote there" blah blah blah, and sorry, I'm not buying it. Part of the reason is because I live in a state (Illinois) that is nowhere near the Mexican border but they pander to illegals just as much as Perry does. New Mexico is a fellow border state that actually has a GREATER percentage of hispanics than TX, but a LOWER percentage of illegals. The Governor there is a conservative Republican of hispanic decent (Susana Martinez) and she has been very outspoken AGAINST handouts to illegals (she's even been attacked as a "bad Catholic", "traitor to her heritage", etc. because of it).

Again, I refer freepers to THIS map. You can see which states are crawling with illegals and which aren't. I believe Texas is crawling with illegals because politicians like Perry and GWB have rolled out the welcome mat for years. Look at Pennysvania and NJ on this map. There's geographically in the same area and both are on the east coat, nowhere near the Mexican border. One is filled with illegals and the other has less than 2% illegals. Why is that? I would say it's because of leadership in their states. NJ was a corrupt illegal alien loving cesspool for years. (and one could argue it still is):

[sickoflibs]

It looks like you just replied to muliple comments from multiple freepers in the same comment.

I didnt say it was OK that candidate Perry is defending the Dream Act even if that is what Texas voters wanted(which appears to be true) , but I did say that I dont give Romney ANY credit for vetoing Dream Act and supporting amnesty when he had no political risk for being firm on immigration as a governor. Your map shows my point with Texas versus MA. Perry was giving his voters what they wanted and now he is defending it and it raises lots of doubts. But I dont trust Amnesty-TARP-stimulus Romney a second.

[CaliforniaCon]

Re: “Lets face it, Romney and Perry are just placeholders until Sarah announces and EVERYBODY knows it - or its a least in the back of their minds. Including Perry/Romney/and the MSM.”

***********

Agree; she’s sitting back, taking it all in, touring around and speaking out — her strong suit... Every time she weighs in on something that’s just happened, I feel more strongly that she is getting into the race. She was never my candidate but she is now! I believe she has been monitoring Perry for signs that she could cast support for him but I doubt she is convinced. Go Sarah!

[Eva]

For me, Romney’s answer on schools and No Child Left behind was an eye-opener.

Romney is a big government guy who puts no value on states rights. Perry values states rights above all. For many that is not enough.

It’s too bad that Perry isn’t able to articulate that and make his argument, that he made is decisions on what was best for Texas, not what was best from the stand point of the federal government.

For instance on the border fence, Perry should just say that a fence is wrong for Texas because Texas cannot afford to be cut off from the Rio Grande, a valuable source of water, by a fence. Perry assumes that people know that. He asked Santorum if he had ever been to the Texas border, but he didn’t ask him if he say the Rio Grande when he looked at the Texas border.

[sickoflibs]

Dream Act (ref Texas Perry) implies amnesty which is a disaster but Romney had already come out for Federal Amnesty in the past.

That dirtbag Romney complains about Perry-Dream Act but if we got Bush-McCain-Pelosi-Amnesty which Romney supported the taxpayer money going out to the illegals would be endless.

Romney is a non-starter for me. Perry scares me.

[sickoflibs]

I will be back later but there is a popular phrase here :FUMR!

[stephenjohnbanker]

Remember , I offered to sell you both Romney & Perry for 50 cents. ......oh.... OK.....make me an offer!

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Remember , I offered to sell you both Romney & Perry for 50 cents. ......oh.... OK.....make me an offer!”

I am not the person to come to for optimism about this. Last night I reminded you of my October 2008 reply to someone asking me(us) to promote McCain. ref here at #122
December 2006 after the lost election when GWB fessed up about HIS ‘2 year + stay the course’ failed strategy and he said it was a great great opportunity to pass immigration reform and other bipartision stuff with a Pelosi congress, I thought : “Holy sh...We are screwed. I have to live through this hell for another two years?” And each year it just got worse. My predictions were too gloomy for most at the time but they were proved to be optimistic.

No, I am not optimistic.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” December 2006 after the lost election when GWB fessed up about HIS ‘2 year + stay the course’ failed strategy and he said it was a great great opportunity to pass immigration reform and other bipartision stuff with a Pelosi congress, I thought : “Holy sh...We are screwed. I have to live through this hell for another two years?” “

Whatever ounce of respect I might have had left for W vanished after I heard this, and saw him FAWNING all over Pelosi.

[Lower55]

“No. You’re talking about comparing TWO numbers.”

No, I’m not, and I’m sure you agree 110%.

[SideoutFred]

Like I told you....she wasn’t going to run.