What was wrong with the answers Sarah gave that were cited in the article? Nobody who can walk onto a stage like at the Republican convention and give one of the most flawless speeches in televised history, partly with a malfunctioned teleprompter, or who showed absolute confidence in her introduction speech is clueless. Maybe she stumbled a bit, afterall, she’s been bombarded with national issues that she didn’t have any reason to be concerned with before, but I would bet everything I own she’s setting the naysayers up just so she can blow them away at the debate. If God’s faithfulness and our prayers have anything to do with it, she’ll do great.
I believe that Sarah is a woman of great talent and intelligence who could easily do the job of President. However, she has not been in a job that exposes her to the details of national and foreign policy she needs to know. I don't think she's going to end up in the same boat as Dan Quayle, but I fear she will be seen by the great unwashed as something of "damaged goods", especially if she and McCain lose.
Imagine how formidable she would be with a full term as a wildly successful Governor under her belt, and then an effective, high-profile term or two in the Senate. I hope that if this turns out to be not her year, she goes back to the grind in Juneau and really makes things happen, because this country by God needs her.
Do any Alaskans think she could beat Lisa Murkowski in 2010?
-ccm
My view is that there’s no way Palin could know all the ins and outs of Washington or foreign policy in the brief time she’s been a govenor. She was running a state not a federal agency. So she will be behind the curve for a period of time. But I saw a video of her debate when she ran for governor against an ex-gov of Alaska and another well-spoken fellow. She did very well in that debate. Give her time. Her instincts, conservative, are excellent.