Staying on as governor of Alaska fielding endless, inappropriate ethics complaints doesn't do the state of Alaska any good and it doesn't make her in real terms any more qualified to be President.
If she wants to be President, she needs to start now. If she starts now, if certainly is in the best interest of Alaskans that she step down.
Why is the above strategy considered "outside the box"? It seems like common sense to me.
Do you think Bill Clinton was effective for his cause as President?
How many ethics complaints were filed (and unlike Sarah, deservedly so) against him?
At one point the Special Prosecutor was handling around five complaints at one time.
He was both defended and trashed in the media. He mounted a defense in the media and stuck it out.
He was impeached for God sake. He stuck it out. His wife was eviscerated, he was lampooned continuously. He stuck it out.
He was a real prick, but to this day he can play all of it off like it was one big witch hunt, and he outfoxed them all. He got his license to practice law suspended for a few years. I doubt many people even know it.
You can tell me what you like. I’m thinking that if he had resigned most folks would have respected him a lot less, and his legacy would have been almost totally destroyed.
For you and me it actually has been. For a lot of Democrats and Independents, it’s my fear Sarah’s will have too.
We shall see.
I believe I was faithful on the out of the box comment, but if I paraphrased it, I’m sorry.
Stepping down from public office with a plan to go your own route, is outside the box, even if you think it’s just the right thing to do. It is unconventional.
Note:
My comparison above was to highlight someone else who had many charges brought against him while he held office. It was not to say Sarah and Bill had comparable exposures based on the validity of charges brought against them.