Posted on 10/09/2010 2:18:25 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
At a reception and dinner attended by fifty conservative movers and shakers, Sarah Palin implicitly compared herself to President Ronald Reagan. At the same time she suggested that she is mulling a Presidential run in 2012.
According to Politico:
"Speaking to a group of well-connected Republicans at a private dinner in Florida this week, Sarah Palin implicitly addressed questions about her own electability by noting that critics also said Ronald Reagan couldn't win in 1980, three attendees told POLITICO.
"Palin, at an event organized by the conservative magazine Newsmax, told the right-wing crowd that those who don't have the same convictions will always say a true conservative can't win.
"Pointing out that the knock on Reagan was that he was also too far to the right, the former Alaska governor repeatedly invoked the 40th president and conservative icon, at one point citing the quotation he was most fond of: that America is a "shining city on a hill."
"'I think she sees herself as heir to Reagan,' said one attendee."
While just about every Republican politician invokes Ronald Reagan, just as Democrats like to invoke John Kennedy or Franklin Roosevelt, Sarah Palin's implicit suggestion that she is the heir or even the second coming of Ronald Reagan would seem somewhat presumptuous, at least at first glance.
There are some parallels. Like Reagan, Palin was a state governor. Like Reagan, a large percentage of the liberal intelligentsia has labeled her, mistakenly, as somewhat dim. Like Reagan, she is beloved by many, hated by many more. Like Reagan, Palin is something of a media star.
There are differences, of course...
(Excerpt) Read more at associatedcontent.com ...
You could put and end to this. Since you say you will raise 2 million dollars for Palin, ask her what her stance is on the LOST Treaty as of now. I can’t see where she would not respond to a person that will raise 2 million dollars for her campaign.
Get back to us.
Sarah Palin would be the first one to tell she is NO Ronald Reagan. But having said that she has mastered Reagan’s wilderness playbook. learned from the Gipper by dwelling on his speeches and writings (student of the game) and understands what Reagan went through on his way to gaining the GOP nomination and finally to beating Carter decisively in 1980.
Yes, Palin is NOT Ronald Reagan but nobody else is either. 1980 is not 2012. The world has changed since then. We now live in an age of 24/7 cable channels, the Internet and social networking. Sarah Palin is Sarah Palin but she definitely stands, figuratively speaking, on the shoulders of Reagan as she goes forward.
Yes, you've been making noises about that for a while.
Good luck, if you believe that strongly, more power to you.
I don't think she plans to run for any office though.
I strongly hope we will put up a better candidate than Palin in 2012. A number of active, decision making Governors come to mind. Huck, Romney and Palin are all Obama's best gifts in terms of opponents....Huck and Romney are both awful....and Palin is not ready, IMO. I would not be confident with her being CinC.
humblegunner;
You must have been on vacation in September and early October. You are probably the only person in America now who thinks she is NOT running.
I raised over $40,000 for Fred Thompson in the very short time he was in the race, was a top Polk County GOP fundraiser in the 80’s and did some work for Al Haig in 1987-88. I have no doubt that I’ll reach $1 million, but I’m aiming for two.
SevenMinusOne:
What you see now is what you are going to get unless Jeb Bush enters the race.
The GOP has a history of never nominating DARK HORSES.
So you are left with Newt as he is the only one of the top 4 left.
Is that now the Palinoia Posse mantra? LOST? We don’t have bigger fish to fry? Like ObamaCare, FinReg, Cap & Tax, $13 trillion in debt, infrastructure, who-stole-the-stimulus?, communist czars, etc., etc...
Next question?
LOST is bigger than most of those. It is a surrender of our sovereignty.
As we all know, Reagan was a democrat most of his life. His conservative side was still a work in progress as he became governor and later president. He even spoke of his liberal side while president. I beleive that Reagan thought a great deal about this process of switching parties before he publicly declared himself a conservative, and he understood that being a conservative had many elements, not all of which were necessary to declare oneself a conservative. Sarah Palin never went through that process, and while I know her to be conservative, it is difficult and unfair to make comparisons of her to a more politically complex man like Reagan.
To me, Sarah Palin is a like a conservative rock who sees herself being carved and polished to take off her rough edges, while Reagan was like clay being molded through experience from a liberal into a conservative.
See post 30. (I'm presuming that Michael has a much better perspective on it than most, if not all, on FR.)
Some similarities, some differences. I generally try not to ponder analogies, because there’s a different era, a different culture, and different set of circumstances. Some of the things I love about Reagan are even due to generational qualities that are now practically extinct.
But I will say this: For my forty-plus years of life, Reagan was the ONLY leader I felt total, true confidence in. No one ever came close in these intervening years... until Sarah Palin arrived on the scene. There is something really special going on about her, and she’s long since won over my support, regardless of what direction she takes.
she is better than Reagan, because this time we will have a conservative congress to fix the mess the liberals have made of things the last 80 years or so.
And what Palin critics don’t want to admit is that Palin is currently a work in progress and that she doesn’t have to become a finished product until Jan. 20, 2013.
And also they don’t want to admit how far Palin has come. Do we hear the likes of Charles Krauthammer anymore advising her to bone up? Listen to Palin’s speeches; the lady has her eye on the ball and has for the past year.
Ronald Reagan didn’t quit as Governor.
And I have posed this question before. If Palin runs, are you going to wait around for another Reagan conservative to pop up and throw his hat into the ring?
If you are a conservative are you really going to vote for Mitt Romney because you think that Palin has been too “damaged” by the MSM?
If you are a strong social conservative are you going to vote for Newt Gingrich because Palin is a woman?
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.