Posted on 11/03/2011 10:20:20 PM PDT by TwoSwords
My first and probably last vanity.
Picture a crowd of people gathered for a political rally. The speaker gives out the old bromide "Why are we here?" The crowd replies in a frenzy. "We want change!" Is this Occupy or a college campus? No, it's Free Republic. Let's face it, we all admire our favorite candidates in the Republican field. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, don't we all. The real problem is that they're unable to differentiate themselves from each other, in a defining manner. Considering the trampling of rights, unemployment, regulation, immigration, crime, education (lack of and cost of), corruption, lack of leadership, zero (he has to come last, because he's earned it), why is one of these candidates not really able to capture our desperate imagination? Some will say Cain has done this very thing. Would the majority of them have said the same thing 2-3 months ago? I think not. I think he's a better man, than I. And I truly mean that. But I don't sense the killer instinct that is needed right now. Cain is passionate, he's just not desperate. Desperation is where too many of us living. We're debating between Cain, Perry, Romney, Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrigh, Paul. It's great that we have such a diverse field to choose from and we still haven't made a decision. The right's version of diversity is reality. The left's is checking a box on a form. It will take a person willing to make unlikely political decisions. The left has torn this country usunder for many a year and many a way and it has to stop. The right has to show it's teeth, and if necessary use them. We need to draft Palin. I see no other option where we win back our country from the abject corruption we see daily reported on FR. There are many on this board who consider her a fraud. I never saw that side of her. My favorite study through my life has been military history. I've read of the most narcissitic people in the world over and over, generals and politicians. Ruthless, to the max. Of all the times I've seen her on TV I've never once sensed a need for political revenge. This, to me, is standard operating procedure for a politician. Never seen it from her. I can't think of anyone whom I'm not related to that I believe in their goodness and good intentions. No person can be all things to all people (cept Jesus) and maybe she rubbed people the wrong way. Isn't that normal? I, for one, believe she was put her for a reason, to be President of the United States. I want to re-institute the draft. Just for POTUS.
Ah jeez, not this again…
She said no. Leave it at that.
Outside of Gingrich (who has no real chance) the rest of the field look like characters from a Fellini film.
Sarah is our best (and probably ONLY) chance.
No
Go to one of the earthquake sites on Facebook and get the address to send Sarah a card or letter. I did it. Her office replied thanking me for the support. Do not count Sarah out.
People can reconsider.
Yeah, that would totally wreck the Cain train, which may be running on one rail right now.
Give it up, we’ve only yet begun to fight.
The ultimate flip-flop!
There is no practical way to draft any one candidate. The candidates must go through the primary process and win delegates. There is no “drafting authority”. Only other way is if there is a deadlock at convention.
No. She’s doing exactly what she should be doing, party-building. It’s under the radar enough that the MSM are leaving her alone (compared to when she was a candidate), and she’s got the right positions and the right abilities for talking to the base.
Now that the cult that used to surround her seems to have simmered down, it’s relatively safe to point out the simple fact that the MSM attacks on her worked—she is disliked by many of the center we’d need to get her in the White House, and the dems in DC would spend 4-8 years fighting her every step of the way. We don’t have to like it to acknowledge reality.
Her quitting the governorship (we all know the reasons) was a very, very bad move if she wanted to be considered president. It also wasn’t the first time she did such a thing.
I don’t think she’d be a good president for various reasons, but there are countless people I like and admire who wouldn’t be, either.
BUT...she is the one person who seems to be able to break through with Republicans and get them to support Tea Party candidates. She is irreplacable in the unofficial position she’s in now, and she truly needs to stay where she is, working at building the party with conservatives, keeping the country clubbers at bay.
So...no.
Excellent analysis.
How’s that?
Sarah said no and I take her at her word.
Still, she’d be very good in a lot of ways. She’s a tough cookie. She can energize a crowd like no one I’ve seen in 30 years or so. She’ll be a force.
Don't count Palin out. She said recently that she could be persuaded to reconsider her decision if she saw an "earthquake" develop. Many of her supporters heard her say that, and immediately responded with a flood of postcards and letters, begging her to reconsider her decision.
Now, even her brother Chuck is trying to get her to change her mind.
Visit Sarah Palin's Earthquake Movement on Facebook, if you'd like to join those who are trying to persuade her to change her mind.
I do hope so.
Desperate times....
Quite a contradictory sentence there.
Don’t think I will. I’m sick of the same ol same ol. The country needs a oil change.
I have come to the same conclusion myself. I was having all of the conventional wisdom thoughts about Sarah myself. Too devisive, too damaged by the MSM, etc. But things are changing fast, thanks in part to the OWS moonbats. I think the time is perfect for her to get in. What? Newt, Cain (whom I like, but big ???), Romney, Perry? I mean c’mon. Let’s think this through. If Obama can’t win, which he can’t. Who would you rather have for President? I’d take Sarah, she would put a “Scott Walker” on D.C.
No insult intended but my passion just didn’t get through to you. Keep playing by the rules unless their EO’s. Then it’s different.
We’re being crushed by rule breakers and a worthless judiciary. Keep inside the lines. You’ll go as far as some twit in charge lets you.
Now be nice...lol ;)
If you think Cain is juggling personal unsubstantiated attacks, can you imagine the scandals the Left would throw onto the Palin camp?..infidelities; etc...the Palin family would be ripped apart. It would be irresponsible for her to put her family through the vicious attacks that have quieted down now since she has distanced herself from the vitriolic media.
If the time comes and she decides to go for it, I’m there in a heartbeat. But until she’s ready to do it, it does her or us no good to demand of her things she is not yet ready to give.
I just hope your in San Francisco. Can you confirm?
Obviously I reevaluated after she announced that she wasn't running. But considering that she didn't make the Sherman declaration, "If nominated I will not run; if elected I will not serve," a call for a draft is still a valid position. And that is why my tagline stands as I called it almost 2 years ago when I considered that to be the only way to be sure of having a solid conservative nominee.
Obviously it's more of an uphill thing than I would have hoped 2 years ago - but there it is.
Cain is pretty much Palin - but without the national political experience of the past few years, and without the "Governor" credential in front of her name. Cain is now going through what she has already been through. It's the same MIckey Mouse stuff. No matter what "harassment" some handful of women may have claimed, we know for sure that he isn't Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy, and probably not even John Edwards. And we know how much weight those "peccadilloes" were given with those Democrats. It's the same old thing; if you see a news article about a politician's corruption, that politician is probably a Democrat - and if the political party of the offender isn't given in the story you know it's a Democrat.
The only way to attempt to be objective is to be open about all the reasons you can see why you might not be objective . . . which is precisely the opposite of claiming to be objective. Since wire service journalists all claim that all journalists are objective (their business model depends on that claim), obviously wires service journalists are not even trying to be objective. Democrat politicians simply align themselves with the political tendency of the journalistic profession (i.e., that journalists are pure as the driven snow, and the only reason why anyone is ever honest) - meaning that the government, guided by professional complainers, should take over the role of deciding who gets what. Rather than accepting the verdict of the people as expressed in markets, the critics rather than "the man in the arena" are to be given the credit according to the vision of the Democrat/journalist.
The media has to be dealt with. And I’ve finally figured out a way. Quid Pro Quo. At any press conference the interogatee gets to ask the reporter a question and if they don’t like/agree w the answer they move onto the next reporter. If the reporter is able to answer the question responsibly they can ask a question.
It'll be that much more crucial to have the right congress as tea partiers and Republicans are doing their best to ensure a poor candidate against Obama.
I am near San Francisco.
Why does that strike your interest, if I may?
“Draft her for what?”
I understand your cynicism. Still let me clarify: draft her for the presidential nomination.
If it becomes apparent that Romney could be the GOP nominee then drafting Palin could become a reality, as the only way to save us all.
I sure am.
Her buoyancy is contagious.
I also think it's a benefit if the candidate actually wants to run.
To beat you about the head and shoulders.
And we're really going to need that for the 2012 Congressional elections.
It is equally important, IMO, to get even more Tea Party representation in Congress as it is taking back the White House.
Sarah Palin can be a huge asset here.
Your arrogance. I made my first vanity post and your response was you hoped it was my last. Sorry if it didn’t agree with your world-view. Expected from someone from frisco.
No shit. We can’t beat a muslim/marxist. Alice in Wonderland has nothing on us.
Exactly. This is why I was so frustrated by the cries of “You’re a hater!” whenever anyone raised any question about Palin here. Some folks seem to think if you don’t think someone should be president, that’s hate.
But only one person in a nation of 300 million gets to be president. As we keep saying over and over, it’s Congress that holds the purse strings.
Well, isn’t that what the Tea Party movement is all about—the purse strings? So we need to control them. Not have the RNC control them, but conservatives.
Saying I want Palin to do what she’s doing now isn’t some kind of sop for saying I don’t think she’d be a good president. I think she’s FOUND the role she’s in public service to do, and it’s a unique one, without so many of the constraints that being part of the Republican party establishment would bring. And she’s more influential than anyone at the RNC in terms of getting the conservative base going.
We need her right where she is. We don’t need her in the White House, where her very best gifts wouldn’t be used, and her negatives emphasized.
I love that movie.
Cor blimey, I got so sick of that.
I stopped expressing any support or otherwise for Sarah Palin a few months ago because I didn't want to be associated with some of those people in any way whatsoever.
They were (and still are, just for a different candidate now) embarrassing.
I searched on your tagline but didn’t find anything. What does it mean?
. . . and the "MSM" attacks on Herman Cain will not work?The saying is that any prosecutor can "get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich." Well in case you haven't noticed, wire service journalism functions exactly as a prosecutor against any conservative politician. And in a race for POTUS against a Democrat, they treat a John McCain exactly like they treat a conservative.
Herman Cain is Sarah Palin - without the political experience and the "Governor" title. Black man, white woman, otherwise the same difference. Neither one can be attacked conventionally as "racist, anti woman." So they resort to vicious smear campaigns against both of them.
To withdraw support from Palin, or Cain, in the face of what I admit is a powerful political assault is to give up all hope of getting a conservative president. And, considering that a Romney nomination would take Obamacare off the table, to give up hope of nominating a conservative is to give up most of the ammunition against Obama and is just as risky as facing the open hostility of journalism head on.
We want someone who wants a free America for our nominee - not just some rich guy whose objective is to be president. Even Teddy Kennedy couldn't pull that off against an incumbent Democrat . . .
We are better off riding out the storm of negative publicity (and negative poll numbers running up to the election, as was the case in 1980) which wire service journalism can and will dish out with a Cain - or, yes, a Palin - than we are to back down from a fight with wire service journalism. If you are up against a great linebacker you can't run away from him, you have to run at him.
Chill.
You’ve selected ONE point from a long post and gone off on a tangent. It doesn’t disprove anything.
If you seriously think the attacks on Cain are as savage and distorting as those on Palin, you’re not seeing reality. (For example: I don’t even know if Cain HAS any kids, whereas by the first week of her choice as VP I knew Palin’s entire history.)
That said it's my opinion she won't accept a draft, but who knows.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.