Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Darkwolf377
It's also why I feel Palin's backing of McCain is a very bad thing--it sends mixed messages.

If the vice presidential candidate for John McCain and the the biggest GOP superstar since Reagan had not supported McCain for reelection for his Senate seat, then it would have meant the destruction of her image, and of the GOP image and it would have been the non stop political story of 2009 and 2010, the division between the ticket of the previous year would have made the Republicans appear broken and shattered and would even have led to a widespread reevaluation of the importance of a Democrat victory in 2008, because it would make the GOP ticket look like it had been a sham, it would have damaged and have prevented this incredible change in public opinion towards the entire republican brand that Palin has helped reshape during the last 17 months.

Palin would have looked cheap and shallow to the general public for turning on the man that 59,000,000 of them voted for, she would easily be painted as a radical and unstable person and a bitter, small timer to the general public. There is a lot more going on with the national image of the republican/conservative movement here than what we McCain haters see in the Arizona Senate race, the general public does not share all of our perceptions and in depth view of the race between McCain and Hayworth. They would see the Presidential and the vice Presidential candidates of the Republican party at each others throats, clearly signaling that Obama and the Democrats represented stability and calm.

Palin’s image would have never survived, and the entire national, conservative movement would be weaker in reality and in the public’s eye.

13 posted on 04/08/2010 10:38:28 PM PDT by ansel12 ( Why are the non "social conservative" Republicans so unconservative?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: ansel12
If the vice presidential candidate for John McCain and the the biggest GOP superstar since Reagan had not supported McCain for reelection for his Senate seat, then it would have meant the destruction of her image, and of the GOP image and it would have been the non stop political story of 2009 and 2010

No offense, but that's the worst political analysis ever.

Palin would have presented her position--in my mind, she could easily say something like she supported him, but didn't campaign for anyone in that race--and those who like her would see her point, and those who hate her would jump on it, and then next week they'd be bitching about some other thing.

Sticking to one's political beliefs is admirable; actively working for someone who stands for many of the things you're not makes her just another go-along to get-along insider. I can overlook that in this case, but she had an opportunity to say "We can't keep up this 'Pelosi is a nice lady' crap--all the back-slapping Washington stuff is why we're here today."

21 posted on 04/08/2010 11:14:21 PM PDT by Darkwolf377 (Conservative Bostonian, atheist pro-lifer, mocker of those who haven't a clue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: ansel12

If the vice presidential candidate for John McCain and the the biggest GOP superstar since Reagan had not supported McCain for reelection for his Senate seat, then it would have meant the destruction of her image, and of the GOP image and it would have been the non stop political story of 2009 and 2010, the division between the ticket of the previous year would have made the Republicans appear broken and shattered and would even have led to a widespread reevaluation of the importance of a Democrat victory in 2008, because it would make the GOP ticket look like it had been a sham, it would have damaged and have prevented this incredible change in public opinion towards the entire republican brand that Palin has helped reshape during the last 17 months.

Palin would have looked cheap and shallow to the general public for turning on the man that 59,000,000 of them voted for, she would easily be painted as a radical and unstable person and a bitter, small timer to the general public. There is a lot more going on with the national image of the republican/conservative movement here than what we McCain haters see in the Arizona Senate race, the general public does not share all of our perceptions and in depth view of the race between McCain and Hayworth. They would see the Presidential and the vice Presidential candidates of the Republican party at each others throats, clearly signaling that Obama and the Democrats represented stability and calm.

Palin’s image would have never survived, and the entire national, conservative movement would be weaker in reality and in the public’s eye.


This is Liberal hogslop. Palin is supporting a Liberal RINO over a conservative. The only ones who would be concerned with Palin not supporting McCain are people who listen to the NY Times and MSNBC.

The conservative movement is weakened by re-electing another pro-illegal, pro-terrorist Liberal RINO like McCain. Your post is absolute Liberal nonsense


29 posted on 04/09/2010 3:55:10 AM PDT by UCFRoadWarrior (Sarah Palin: "I support Amnesty...not Total Amnesty". I guess they sell "Diet Amnesty")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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