Sarah Palin Presidential Run: Will She Run for Office?

International Business Times ^ | August 18, 2011

[2ndDivisionVet]

Former George W. Bush chief of staff Karl Rove has been an influential GOP strategist for decades.

When Rove speaks, many Republicans listen. So when the outspoken campaign manager spoke up about Paul Ryan or Chris Christie joining the race to become the GOP nominee for the 2012 presidential election, his hint about another potential candidate entering the field also raised eyebrows.

"And I also think looking at the schedule of Sarah Palin after Labor Day that she's got a campaign style schedule post-Labor Day that's either going to accentuate her celebrity hood or lay the predicate for running for president," Rove said.

Palin has been mum about a possible run, though she has a solid base of supporters. Some political experts believe her candidacy may hinge on the success of Michele Bachmann, the only female candidate in the GOP field. Bachmann won the recent Iowa straw poll, but with the addition of Texas Governor Rick Perry, it's possible Bachmann's popularity might fade.

Should Bachman not poll well in the coming weeks, Palin may throw her hat into the race. It's also possible Palin may run no matter how well Bachmann is doing.

The big difference between Palin and Bachmann is immigration policy, a hot topic going into the 2012 Election. Palin has spoken about granting legal amnesty while Bachmann has been strongly opposed to mass legalization.

Palin is well-liked amongst Republicans. Research in June by Public Policy Polling showed 62 percent of Republicans giving Palin a favorable rating.

It's possible the former Alaska governor could be waiting for more candidates to join the race, since a crowded field could strengthen her chances of winning primaries. Palin has strong name recognition, and also has a decent foothold in the Tea Party movement.

In a March Pew Research poll, of those who agreed with the Tea Party movement, 24 percent had Mitt Romney as their first-choice candidate, while 19 percent chose Mike Huckabee, a candidate who won't be running. Palin was at a respectable 12 percent, below experienced candidates Newt Gingrich at 15 percent and Ron Paul at 13 percent. For Palin, a 12 percent showing, is a solid showing amongst a key GOP voter block.

In the same poll, Republican voters showed they cared more about electability over ideology when it comes to picking their candidates -- a similar sentiment to liberals in 2004 when the Democrats tried to unseat Bush. The poll showed 56 percent of conservative voters prefer the candidate with the best chance of beating Obama, compared to 31 percent who would prefer the candidate with conservative positions on every issue.

Those numbers may work against Palin. Top-tier candidates like Romney are less polarizing than the former vice-presidential candidate and would likely fair better in a general election. However, Palin seems to challenge conventional political wisdom, as evident with her abandoning her term as governor. She may run in spite of poll numbers and public sentiment.

So will she run make the big leap?

One piece of evidence says she will. Palin named George Washington as her favorite founding father because of his reluctance to serve at President but still serving as form of answering the call of duty. Her long delay in announcing her candidacy might be her way of showing that running for president is for the good of the country and not for her own personal gain.

Palin recently seemed to describe herself when discussing the ideal presidential candidate.

"That candidate's not fearing so much what the interpretation is going to be when it comes to the comments and positions you are articulating, but just speaking from the heart, saying, 'Here's how I think we can turn the economy around, and here's what I've done in the past to show you truly a foundation of where my beliefs come from of what works in a small town, in a state, in a big industry like oil and gas - what it is that can be done to turn the economy around,'" Palin said.

[editor-surveyor]

One of the Sarah threads has a link to the Megyn Kelly interview where she said it.

[editor-surveyor]

Here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2765652/posts

[editor-surveyor]

>> “The right-wing Leftists (aka RINOs) in the GOP will do what they can to stop her from running if she decides to do so” <<

.
They’ve been doing it for close to three years now.

[ansel12]

Didn’t Palin support or endorse about a hundred candidates in 2010?

[eyedigress]

I think it was 400 candidates, yet she knew they would be pulling for American sovereignty and kicked them to the curb. s.

[SoConPubbie]

I am curious about the “amnesty” policy the column attributes to Palin, and how that holds up among her supporters?

I wonder how Rick Perry's support for the following holds up among his supporters:

1. Against a border wall
2. Against Interior Enforcement provided by laws like AZ1070
3. Supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform
4. Against using E-Verify to help effectively lesson the ability of Illegal Aliens to get work in the US

So Rick Perry wants to burn through more TaxPayer cash by putting more people on the border, an approach that have never been shown to lesson the crush of Illegal Aliens, and eschews every approach that is effective in lessoning Illegal Immigration and you want to take Governor Palin and her supporters to task?

Try getting your own house in order before pointing fingers at someone else.

[SoConPubbie]

Sarah will endorse Perry before mid September

Don't put to much hope in that Hope!

She came out in the Meghan Kelly interview today and said she didn't seen anyone in the current list of candidates she could really support.

I guess Hope springs eternal, even in the face of facts, for you Perry Supporters.

[SoConPubbie]

Isn’t it hilarious how much the Perrydrones are so against Palin yet still dreaming and wishing she’ll endorse Jimmy Rick?

Yes, and look how they will brook no discussion about the non-conservative words and Actions of Perry and will Deny, Deny, Deny, and if that does not work make excuses for every bad action.

It would appear they have a real bad case of Hypocrisy.

[SoConPubbie]

Sorry NewzJunkey, in today’s Meghan Kelly interview she stated flat-out there was no-one in the race today she could really support.

WIshing it is so or falsely posting a picture when she supported him for GOVERNOR is not the same as when he is running for President.

Apparently, she thinks he is good enough to be Governor of Texas when he was running against a strong candidate who was also a very big RINO in Kay Baily Hutchinson, but as for being President of the US, not so much.

But you keep hoping Newsjunkey, miracles can happen.

[NELSON111]

I guess that’s a no.

[9YearLurker]

The article is a pretty crappy unsigned analysis of ‘electability’. Romney? He’s McCain II as far as electability is concerned.

[EDINVA]

Thanks. Leaving aside all the politics and tea leaf reading, amazing to see two spectacularly beautiful, bright, quick, accomplished women. “We’ve come a long way, baby!”

[RitaOK]

SP is said to be for “amnesty” and you are stuck on Perry opposition to a border wall? BwahahaHa!

[SoConPubbie]

SP is said to be for “amnesty” and you are stuck on Perry opposition to a border wall? BwahahaHa!
No, I'm stuck on Perry's complete abdication of any conservative principles where Illegal Immigration is concerned.

Perry is against any effective means of even limiting Illegal Immigration.

He has stated publicly the following positions:

1. Against the usage of E-Verify which would lower the number of Illegal Aliens being able to work in the US which would make the whole proposition of coming here illegaly less-attractive to those considering coming here illegally.
2. Against a border-fence/border-wall which would also have the effect of slowing immigration to a trickle as the border wall in southern California already proved by reducing Illegal Immigration by around 90% in those areas where the fence was installed.
3. Against AZ1070 whose measures provide for effective interior enforcement (away from the border) once again making the whole idea of being here illegally unattractive and also removing the incentive to come here illegally.
4. He is for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which in all of it's forms offered up has always been either out-in-out Amnesty, or some forms of back-door amnesty
.
Whereas, Sarah Palin has spoken out forcefully for 2 and 3 (Rick is against 2 and 3) and since E-Verify is wrapped up in 3, she is defact in support of that as well, the only ding I have against her is her (I believe) stated support for Comprehensive Immigration Reform while VP for John McCain, which in my mind, was nothing more than supporting the top of the ticket and which her strong vocal of both AZ1070 and a physical border fence, that would seem to bear out my conclusion.

All of which begs the question, why would you support somebody so weak on border issues?

Are you not a conservative?

[SoConPubbie]

SP is said to be for “amnesty” and you are stuck on Perry opposition to a border wall? BwahahaHa!

No, I'm stuck on Perry's complete abdication of any conservative principles where Illegal Immigration is concerned.

Perry is against any effective means of even limiting Illegal Immigration.

He has stated publicly the following positions:

1. Against the usage of E-Verify which would lower the number of Illegal Aliens being able to work in the US which would make the whole proposition of coming here illegaly less-attractive to those considering coming here illegally.
2. Against a border-fence/border-wall which would also have the effect of slowing immigration to a trickle as the border wall in southern California already proved by reducing Illegal Immigration by around 90% in those areas where the fence was installed.
3. Against AZ1070 whose measures provide for effective interior enforcement (away from the border) once again making the whole idea of being here illegally unattractive and also removing the incentive to come here illegally.
4. He is for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which in all of it's forms offered up has always been either out-in-out Amnesty, or some forms of back-door amnesty
.
Whereas, Sarah Palin has spoken out forcefully for 2 and 3 (Rick is against 2 and 3) and since E-Verify is wrapped up in 3, she is defact in support of that as well, the only ding I have against her is her (I believe) stated support for Comprehensive Immigration Reform while VP for John McCain, which in my mind, was nothing more than supporting the top of the ticket and which her strong vocal of both AZ1070 and a physical border fence, that would seem to bear out my conclusion.

All of which begs the question, why would you support somebody so weak on border issues?

Are you not a conservative?

[BillM]

And that would be said by whom???

Sarah Palin Quote - “What don’t you understand about ‘illegal’? They have to leave!