Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah Palin: ĎIím Not Going To Be Askedí To Step Up In A Brokered Convention
Mediaite ^ | March 3, 2012 | Frances Martel

Posted on 03/03/2012 5:51:14 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet

With the Alaska Republican primary on the horizon, Alaska’s most prominent Republican has been making the rounds on Fox News, and this morning Sarah Palin stopped by to tell Republicans to keep their eye on the Democratic ball, not to fear a brokered convention, and not to watch Game Change. But in doing so she made a new revelation in being asked whether she would take the convention stage should it be brokered: she doesn’t expect anyone to support her.

Giving a similar evaluation to the field in Alaska as she did last night– that Mitt Romney would probably take it, and Rep. Ron Paul would make a strong showing– anchor Uma Pemmaraju asked the question that everyone always asked Palin about the primary, just in case she changes her mind: would you throw your hat in the ring, in a brokered convention? “I’m not going to be asked!” Palin laughed, but added, “if it results in a brokered convention, that is nothing to fear.” She noted that she would support any candidate, “anybody but Obama.”

Palin also weighed in on Rick Santorum‘s attempts to woo independents and Democrats in open primaries, which she found fair. “A dirty trick is when your kids are attacked,” she argued, not “soliciting independent Americans.”

As for Game Change, Palin said she wouldn’t give it the time of day, but knows it is false because “there were people on my side who were with us 24/7″ who saw and read the story and knew it was false. She ended by throwing Rep. Allen West‘s name out as a good potential vice presidential candidate.

The segment via Fox News below:

(VIDEO AT LINK)


TOPICS: Alaska; Campaign News; Parties; State and Local
KEYWORDS: allenwest; palin; romney; santorum

1 posted on 03/03/2012 5:51:30 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I still think Mclame chose her because they thought it would destroy any chances of him winning. The establishment GOP did not want to win 2008. Turned out people loved her they almost won despite their efforts.


2 posted on 03/03/2012 5:56:55 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I am not sure what to make of this, but I do note that she didn’t close the door completely.

I still think she’s the only person we have on the Republican side that could potentially throw the base into overdrive.

Now, whether the RINOs running the Stupid Party would WANT to win with her at the helm — that’s another question.


3 posted on 03/03/2012 6:04:27 PM PST by Ronin (Sarah.... We really need you now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

She damn sure isn’t going to take VP, and I guess we just haven’t fallen far enough yet to see the need for a true conservative God-fearing rogue at the top of the ticket.


4 posted on 03/03/2012 6:08:27 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
There is no way I will vote for Santorum, especially after he threw Rush under the bus. I won't vote for Paul for president although I think he has a lot to offer in other areas. Newt....I'm NOT a Newt fan although it would be interesting to see him debate Obama. I doubt Obama would actually debate Newt in a fair debate though so I won't vote for Newt.

I have no puppy in this fight. It isn't about defeating Obama, it's about saving the Republic. The only way I see to do that, given the WEAK GOP candidates, is to start from the ground up and work to elect conservatives to local, state and Congressional office. Expose and block the next term's socialist agenda.

Gridlock for another 4 years? Yes.

If a weak GOP candidate is elected that candidate will bear the responsibility for whatever bad ensues. If that happens the socialists gain the upper hand in 2016.

Sometimes you have to stoop to conquer.

All that is unless a CONSERVATIVE candidate emerges before or during a deadlocked convention.

5 posted on 03/03/2012 6:10:25 PM PST by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts bolt the Constitution together as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I fail to understand why people insist on believing this fantasy that Palin could somehow wind up as the GOP candidate

She has made it perfectly clear she isn’t running....

She can’t win for multiple reasons.....the powers that be from both left and right would never allow a Palin presidency to happen....

Would I vote for her?.....in a heartbeat


6 posted on 03/03/2012 6:18:53 PM PST by Popman (America is squandering its wealth on riotous living, war, and welfare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Popman; All

She can’t win for multiple reasons.....the powers that be from both left and right would never allow a Palin presidency to happen.

Sounds like Regan 76 an 80. If you accept your statement, then we’ll never get a conservative in office. Just lay down and play dead. Or, if you wish to be civil, announce your “death” to the civil authorities, then report to the nearest disintegration chamber. Anan-7 commands you.

Would I vote for her?.....in a heartbeat.

But you gave up. Your heartbeat has flat-lined.


7 posted on 03/03/2012 6:34:15 PM PST by ak267
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
The establishment GOP did not want to win 2008.

The go-pees are doing a pretty good job of that this year...

.

8 posted on 03/03/2012 6:34:27 PM PST by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Popman
Upon reflection on my last post I have had an epiphany into what is happening and why Sarah is not running but doing what she is doing.

For decades my definition of a Man/Woman has been this.

The measure of a Man/Woman isn't his/her standing in the community, it isn't his/her intelligence, his/her looks or how well he/she speaks.

The Measure of a Man/Woman is how he/she takes his/her God given Strengths and uses them to:

1. Provide for his/her family.
2. Help his/her neighbors.
3. Take care of him/her self.

By doing this he/she honors and fulfills his/her obligation to God.

Over the years I have amended this to make it more gender accommodating because the language has been changed by those who would divide us. Other than that it is something I have held to be Truth, and a way of Life I have personally tried to live.

Sarah is doing the same. As president she would possibly destroy her family, damage the country - her neighbors, and herself as well.

Working the way she is fulfills the principles of my definition.

Whether it is best for all is open for debate.

9 posted on 03/03/2012 6:39:03 PM PST by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts bolt the Constitution together as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks 2ndDivisionVet.


10 posted on 03/03/2012 6:39:39 PM PST by SunkenCiv (FReep this FReepathon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I’m pretty sure we could get 10m people to ask...

would that be motivating enough?


11 posted on 03/03/2012 6:40:39 PM PST by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

As much as I would like to see her sworn in as President of the United States, she’s not running (at least not this year). We have to do the best we can today, if we have an acceptable candidate. I’m leaning toward Newt and hoping he can close the deal with enough voters. If we really want her to run in 2016, we have to get out there in person and on the Internet, on news sites and blog sites, and defend her name and her values, correct the lies, and call out the sleazy attackers. We need to prove to her that America is ready to support her, and we need to convince the oblivious 80% to listen to her with an open mind.


12 posted on 03/03/2012 6:46:11 PM PST by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; All

I don’t understand why people don’t understand what Sarah simply is saying — the Establisment isn’t going to ask nor want her to be involved in a brokered convention - she said so a few weeks that the GOP establishment would NEVER come to her and she’s right, the only way she gets in is because the people demand that she be there


13 posted on 03/03/2012 6:51:50 PM PST by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ak267
In case you have not recognized it, but 76, 80 and 2012 are vastly different political worlds

The left in this country are vastly more willing to destroy anyone who they perceives as a threat....Reagan has a lot of dirt tossed at him but nothing in comparison to the outright evil Palin had to endure

Of course we can elect a conservative to the WH....

Newt, Santorem both are conservative, maybe not the perfect candidates but both have a very good chance of beating Obama if nominated

14 posted on 03/03/2012 6:57:02 PM PST by Popman (America is squandering its wealth on riotous living, war, and welfare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

I can’t disagree at all...

I am sure God has plans for SP politically in the future....


15 posted on 03/03/2012 7:03:24 PM PST by Popman (America is squandering its wealth on riotous living, war, and welfare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

I think we are heading toward a perfect storm for a third party. Romney seems like the inevitable nominee, and never in recent history have we had such high negatives for both nominees. If the economy keeps tanking, Obama is toast. Romney can’t get more than 40% of the base. We would need someone that could pull together the Reagan Dens and the tea party. Sarah could do it if she were willing.


16 posted on 03/03/2012 7:14:28 PM PST by mongrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Popman

In case you have not recognized it, but 76, 80 and 2012 are vastly different political worlds
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No, not really. Humans are still the same, only the capitulation of some and the inability to accept the new realities of others have things become so “different”.

Evil is still the same. The only variable is what good people do. To hence, a long slog to follow.

Reagan had to set up an infrastructure beyond the establishment. To same must be done now.


17 posted on 03/03/2012 7:34:31 PM PST by ak267
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Sounds like a pretty clear no from Palin for 2012. (I figure "I won't be asked," means GOP doesn't want her, not necessarily that she wouldn't do it.)

Heard Palin will run in 2016. Anyone else get that? Would that be because she could better handle the attacks on her kids because they would be old enough to handle it?

Today we were discussing Reagan, Thatcher, and Palin.
Similarities: plain talking, to-the-point liberal bashing, no nonsense cutting taxes and big government).
Differences: liberals can only "win" by marginalizing opponents through personal attacks because they can NEVER win the debate in the forum of ideas. They tried demeaning Reagan with things like "Bedtime for Bonzo" but nothing stuck. Could it be that they could not overcome the reality of Reagan's eight stellar years as CA Governor. This was a solid credential they couldn't get around. Palin was successfully marginalized by attacks on her children and by being cast as a lightweight. I wonder if she made a mistake by not staying in as Governor of Alaska all eight years. I think this could have given her the authoritative background to shut the left up.
Between Palin and Margret Thatcher: Palin did battle with the Left but did better in talking directly to the American people. Thatcher (and Reagan) spoiled for a fight with the Liberals and seemed to enjoy every minute of it and rarely didn't come away as the clear winner of the skirmish.

18 posted on 03/03/2012 9:25:32 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
Who was going to give her the tens of millions of dollars she would've needed to fight the bogus ethics violation leveled at her nearly every day? You? Me? I don't have millions laying around. Heck, her legal defense fund was even found unconstitutional by a democratic judge!
19 posted on 03/03/2012 9:33:14 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (You can't invade the US. There'd be a rifle behind every blade of grass.~Admiral Yamamoto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

And I bet she sighed in relief.
She talkes a good game but when she might be asked to step down from her role as king maker and get dirty,she makes excuses as to why she wont be asked.
IMHO she let down the country and the party.


20 posted on 03/04/2012 12:42:52 AM PST by Yorlik803 (better to die on your feet than live on your knees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

She would damage the country as president?


21 posted on 03/04/2012 1:06:06 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Although among the other factors mentioned, money was also probably a factor, I don’t think that’s the main reason she’s not in it now. I think it was the attacks on her children.


22 posted on 03/04/2012 6:56:47 AM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I hope what I saw was true about her running in 2016, which, if true, must mean she feels her family would be old and seasoned enough to handle the Leftist attacks.


23 posted on 03/04/2012 7:01:03 AM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
Same reason she resigned as governor of Alaska. The endless accusations were costing the state in both money and her time.

If she becomes president do you think those attacks will end? No, they will be a continuous distraction and that will be a drain on The Republic.

24 posted on 03/04/2012 7:10:27 AM PST by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts bolt the Constitution together as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

Wow. I guess you weren’t backing Reagan back in the 70’s and 80’s.


25 posted on 03/04/2012 7:11:54 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Yorlik803

See post #9.


26 posted on 03/04/2012 7:23:09 AM PST by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts bolt the Constitution together as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

Yes, as a matter of fact I was. You are comparing apples and oranges.


27 posted on 03/04/2012 7:23:58 AM PST by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts bolt the Constitution together as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

You got it right. The GOPEes are going to do everything they can to keep her away, if there is a brokered convention. They are almost as nasty as the libs, within their own party.


28 posted on 03/04/2012 3:46:11 PM PST by Moorings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson