Skip to comments.Palin Wades Into Republican Midterm Primaries
Posted on 07/18/2010 11:23:39 AM PDT by Brices Crossroads
LAWRENCEVILLE, GA---The latest candidate to win the most coveted Republican prize of the election year stood on the steps of a gazebo here and reminded voters of a new reason to support her in the crowded race for Georgia governor.
Sarah Palin has come on board, the candidate, Karen Handel, told a group of supporters who gathered Friday on the grounds of the Gwinnett Historic Courthouse. As they broke into applause, she added: It means one thing. Were winning.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The NYT writer is forced to acknowledge Palin's undeniable appeal. He just can't resist trying to spin it against her, though, with the following piece of tortured logic:
"Indeed, the endorsements provide little evidence that she is moving closer to a presidential run. A willingness to inject herself into so many primary fights and frustrate the supporters of the candidates she overlooks is a risky way of building establishment support."
In other words, campaigning for candidates for public office and helping them to succeed (which is what every potential candidate, Republican or Democrat, has always done as a way to "collect chits" for the next election, is not evidence that Palin is planning a Presidential run. In fact, when Palin does it, it reflects a "willingness to inject herself into so many primary fights and to frustrate the supporters of candidates she overlooks" is a "risky way to build establishment support". In other words, it is a dumb political move for Palin!
First, injecting herself into elections where her endorsee wins is a good way of building support, both with the new Governor or Senator and with their supporters who are the majority. This strategy has served past future Presidents quite well and she has taken it to a level not yet attained by anyone.
Second, she is not interested in building "establishment" support. (Does this poor little reporter know anything?) Even if she was, there is no better way to gain such support than by endorsing and lifting almost singlehandedly, the candidacies of the Nicki Haleys, the Susanna Martinezes, the Karen Handels, who will soon occupy some of the most important Governor's mansions in the United States, and who will remember the most important political force that propelled them there--Sarah Palin.
Yes I heard Handel is up by 7 or 8 points but there will probabky be a runoff.
It means one thing. Were winning.
Whenever I read of one of Sarah Palin’s many successes of late, that is exactly what I think, too.
“I hope Sarah Palin endorses herself for President for 2012.”
Contrary to what this NYT mouthpiece writes (and what he is no doubt fervently hoping), I think the indications are very clear that Sarah Palin is going to run.
Some in the MSM prefer to remain in denial. The thought terrifies them more than a crucifix terrifies a vampire.
Please, Sarah, cut McCain loose. You’ve paid him back and your “thank yous” have been said, now it’s time to do what’s right for the people of Arizon and for the rest of U.S.! Let him go.
That's a good thing.
And part of the reason for it is Palin with her string of endorsements.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Sarah has made any appearances or recorded any new commercials for McCain since March.
“Never on FreeRepublic has there so much attention paid to Republican congressional primaries.
That’s a good thing.”
It sure is. It makes it harder for the Establishment to give us the choice they want us to have. The Murkowskis and their RINO ilk are just one example of Palin “taking out the trash”. There will be more.
I notice Gingrich’s endorsee in Georgia, Nathan Deal, is currently in third place. If she whips old Newtie in Georgia, what does that say about his viability against her? I wonder if the MSM will trumpet this as the defeat it will clearly be.
I don’t like newt ever since he got on a couch with pelosi. People who lie down with dogs, get fleas..
Paul Ryan/Sarah Palin 2012!
I haven’t looked up to Newt since he served his wife divorce papers while she was hospitalized.
I admire his brain but not Newt as a person. A cabinet post would be more fitting.
They absolutely love her.
Now all we have to do is pass a law that only allows Republicans to vote in the Presidential elections.
You cannot be elected President of the United States when 47% of ALL voters already have decided that they have an "Unfavorable" opinion of you.
To the majority of American voters, Sarah Palin is in the same boat as Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi is worshipped and adored by her base in San Francisco but Nancy Pelosi does not have a snowball's chance in Hell of winning a general Presidential election.
You are correct and for all the name-dropping McCain does, he didn't mention Sarah Palin's name once during the two LIVE, TELEVISED DEBATES HE JUST HAD IN ARIZONA WHEREIN JD HAYWORTH SMACKED THE BEJESUS OUT OF HIM!, so I have to wonder just how valuable her endorsement truly is to him in Arizona?
Mountains out of mole hills come to mind.... People in AZ see her endorsement for what it is: former runningmate endorsing old fossil that brought her to the national stage, just like Rush Limbaugh articulated for his 20 million listeners way back when the topic was actually reasonably newsworthy.
Sarah Palin doesn't wade. She leads.
I'm praying you're right! I still have some of her photos on my home office corkboard, I don't want to take them down :0) I'm not really a stalker, I just liked some of the ones with her holding big guns, they were in the paper last year.
I'm hoping that after talking to Gov Brewer and helping her out, SP really saw what was going on here, not just the crap McC fed her/made her say.
I love it -- wouldn't that be refreshing!?!?!?!!
Wow! Not only can you read Sarah Palin's mind and tell us why she "really" endorsed McCain, although she herself has never stated anything like you suggest, but you even know how the whole thing is understood by the "people" of AZ. Even though Palin's endorsement is hugely sought after, including by McCain, you, in your wisdom, understand that the endorsement really isn't that valuable.
She has endorsed Tiahrt in Kansas, which is very big among the people who vote.
Is s/he (Tiahrt) a good candidate? I guess I need to go do some reading....
I am with you on this, I am most impressed with her, got some backbone and tells it like it is......she will make a good president.........
For those who are surprised at Sarah Palin’s support for candidates in the primaries, they must have a blind spot when it comes to politics 101. Either they are acting ignorant of the fact that coalition building is a political fact of life, or they are more devious. They may be treating this standard political process as an aberration in politics in order to throw a roadblock into its success. I am thinking that the devious method is what’s in play here.
I believe that Sarah Palin efforts at coalition building is light years ahead of anyone thinking of running. Sarah Palin is building a coalition of Republican supporters beyond her base of populist-conservatives. She is networking and building an army of fellow patriots who know how to make things happen and will help her bring about history. It will not only be the inauguration of the first woman president. Where Ronald Reagan brought about the collapse of Communism, Sarah Palin is preparing to bring about the collapse of socialism. Those who have had thoughts of running will regret that they did not start earlier. And they will regret that they did not have the destruction of socialism as their primary objective.
I'd say that this fellow is a little unclear on the concept.
Considering this quip from the dis-honorable Trent Lott:
Former Senate majority leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), now a D.C. lobbyist, warned that a robust bloc of rabble-rousers spells further Senate dysfunction. "We don't need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples," Lott said in an interview. "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them." But Lott said he's not expecting a tea-party sweep. "I still have faith in the visceral judgment of the American people," he said.No, we probably can't clean out all the garbage (elected and/or lobbyist sorts) in one or two election cycles, but their arrogance will help ensure they stay high on the "list of things to do."
“You cannot be elected President of the United States when 47% of ALL voters already have decided that they have an “Unfavorable” opinion of you.”
Well actually you can once Sarah get out on trail and campaign’s for herself the false media image will crash and burn. The key to the whole deal is the media, the Rats and the DC elite do not want to see Gov. Palin campaign for herself. If Sarah does she will stream roll any and all comers real quick. As many on here and elsewhere have stated Palin is a master at retail politics thats her A in the hole.
The infamous name-dropping, old fossil had TWO CHANCES ON LIVE TV TO TELL ARIZONANS SARAH PALIN ENDORSES HIM, but he didn’t. Ask yourself why?
Since her gig for McCain last March, Sarah has been back to AZ several times but only to see Governor Brewer and appear with her in public and on National TV backing the AZ law.
I’m holding my breath, crossing my fingers and praying that she doesn’t appear with him again before the primary on August 24, but that will be her decision and I won’t like it at all.
Sarah is aligned with Governor Brewer. She was with her the morning after Jan signed the bill and they spent the weekend together. Recall the photos of them at the Diamondback’s baseball game with Piper? (clyde5445 might have saved one?)
Sarah also appeared with Governor Brewer again on LIVE national TV endorsing your new law.
(Keep the photos on your wall).
As the previous election showed us, if you do not FIRST bring your base, you might as well not run at all.
“Considering this quip from the dis-honorable Trent Lott”
Vacant Lott hold forth again.
Evidently, the Lott remains “vacant” after all these years, except for the “For Sale” sign.
“As the previous election showed us, if you do not FIRST bring your base, you might as well not run at all.”
He has been told this on numerous threads. Doesn’t get it. Or doesn’t want to get it. I don’t bother with him.
The last election showed that Mitt Romney and his
despicable RomneyBOTs are willing to hurt even children
to help Obama and the DNC.
Ya know, you’re right! I was so excited to hear JD blast him that that tidbit never entered my mind.
I have this *picture* in my mind of Juan telling Sarah that she WILL support him. To be blunt, he could’ve said something like *I made you what you are on the national scene and I can break you*. I honestly wouldn’t put it past the old coot.
On the Republican side, Ronald Reagan has actually improved his standing despite the fact that he has not announced his candidacy and has done little campaigning. A year ago,  45% found Reagan unacceptable as the next President; that negative rating has now dropped to 38%.
Among Republicans and independents, Reagan is still the first choice of 27% as the G.O.P. nominee, while Ford is picked by 24% and Howard Baker runs third at 14%. John Connally is fourth at 12%, although he is already campaigning hard and is regarded by many professionals as the most likely G.O.P. candidate to stay the course in what is already shaping up as a fascinating presidential campaign. Source
So to say: You cannot be elected President of the United States when 47% of ALL voters already have decided that they have an "Unfavorable" opinion of you, is presumptuous as it is almost 2 1/2 years (28 months or so) before the election, and she hasn't even announced that she is going to run.
And most importantly, as the article above indicates, in 1978 2 years before the election - Ronald Reagan had a negative rating of 45%, close to Palin's current negative rating. Like Palin, Ronald Reagan's negatives were also the product of media biases and distortions, but he was able to convince the voting public to have confidence in him and made a positive and inspiring case for himself.
If I remember correctly, Sarah's negatives have improved recently. While her negatives have to improve more, six months ago her negatives were actually higher. And a great portion of the voting public don't make up their minds until the last few months (and some don't decide until the last few days), so I think your analysis damning Sarah to failure seems a bit too premature, to say the least.
Well actually you can once Sarah get out on trail and campaigns for herself the false media image will crash and burn. .... Clyde5445
Palin WAS on the campaign trail in 2008.
Palin crashed and burned.
You are living in what is called an "Echo Chamber".
An "Echo Chamber" is when Liberals hang out only with other Liberals and hear only what other Liberals have to say.
"I can't believe Nixon won. I don't know anybody who voted for him." ..... Pauline Kael, liberal writer for the for The New Yorker magazine.
An "Echo Chamber" is when Conservatives hang out only with other Conservatives and hear only what other Conservatives have to say.
Independent voters now outnumber BOTH Democrats and Republicans. Whether we like or or not, Independents decide who will be elected President of the United States.
On Free Republic, Independents are demonized as "RINO's".
Even Scott Brown, who wrested the Senate seat from the ultra-liberal Kennedy clan, in far-far-Left Massachusetts is now being demonized on Free Republic as a "RINO".
It's time to come back down to the Planet Earth, folks.
Voters who are not Republican view Sarah Palin as a very unqualified candidate that was chosen by John McCain because she happened to be female.
Voters who are not Democrats now view Barack Obama as a very unqualified candidate that was chosen by America because he happened to have a Politically Correct skin color.
Imagine two white males:
"Hi, my name is Barry Olsen. I am the son of a bigamist Norwegian graduate exchange student and an American woman. My only executive experience is being a community organizer in Chicago and being elected a U.S. Senator because of my white skin color and the large Norwegian population in Illinois. I want to be President of the United Sates."
"Hi, I am Samuel Palin. I was Mayor of a town of less than 8,000 and then I was Governor of a State with half the population of San Diego, CA before I quit in the middle of my first term. I want to be President of the United States."
When Sarah Palin "got out on trail and campaigned for herself", in 2008, the result were extremely painful to watch. Palin could not even come up with the name of a single newspaper. Not a single one.
That's pretty pathetic.
Democrats: "She is mentally retarded."
Independents: "Well, Aunt Betty doesn't read much either. I love Aunt Betty and Aunt Betty is not mentally retarded but Aunt Betty is certainly not qualified to be President of the United States."
Republicans (all 27% of American voters): "It's the media's fault that Sarah Palin could not answer a simple, straight-foward question."
Any Freeper can rattle off a dozen news sources we see on Free Republic every day. Sarah Palin does not even bother to read Free Republic.
Sarah Palin comes across as a tap-dancing politician that has been caught in the fact that she does not read very much.
No, that will not get her elected President of the United States.
The image of Sarah Palin is false in regards to claiming that she has an I.Q. below the ambient temperature of an Alaskan picnic in the Alaskan Spring or Fall.
The fact of the matter, however, is that a white male candidate with Sarah Palin's qualifications would be a political laughing stock.
The majority of American voters know that and the majority of American voters would rather have a dentist appointment to have a cavity filled than to see inexperinced Sarah Palin as President of the United States.
The majority of American voters have already been there, done that and gotten the T-Shirt when they were stupid enough to elect the woefully inexperienced Barack Obama as President of the United States.
They are not going to make the same tragic mistake for two Presidential elections in a row.
I think Palin’s unfavorables will continue to decrease. I don’t know if they will ever decrease to the levels needed to win the general. That remains to be seen. However, the fact that Huckabee’s unfavorable rating is only 10 is a big surprise and indicates the average Republican is uninformed....maybe even stupid. Huckabee ran his state as more of a liberal than Arnold has run California. Like Fred said, “Huckabee is a pro-life liberal.” (or was that Rush that said that?)
The reason why you never hear liberals say Palin shouldn’t run because she was on the losing ticket in 2008 is because of FDR.
It is not well known that FDR was the VP candidate for the 1920 presidential election. And Cox and FDR were so completely trounced. How could a failed VP candidate like FDR come back in 1932 and realign the country?
What I believe liberals really, really fear is that Obama is the twenty first century version of Hoover. For whatever faults FDR had, the guy knew how to connect to people through radio and other media. Palin connects unlike the other sorry bunch of GOP candidates.
“The majority of American voters know that and the majority of American voters would rather have a dentist appointment to have a cavity filled than to see inexperinced Sarah Palin as President of the United States.”
The VP debate was more watched than the three presidential debates. And we know people were not watching because of Biden. Wherever Palin goes, she has high ratings.
What you are saying is absolutely wrong.
I have followed your posts for many years and, if your photos are actually your own photos, I would like to say that you are one of the most beautiful women I have ever seen.
That may be sexist, but, I just had to say it.
Now, back to the topic.
The issue is that Ronald Reagan had substance and experience.
Sarah Palin doesnt.
Ronald Reagan had eight years of experience as Governor of a State with a population of 37 million in 2009.
Sarah Palin had less than four years experience, because she quit in the middle of the first term, of a State with a population of less than 700,000 in 2009.
Ronald Reagan had years of experience on radio expounding his political views.
Sarah Palin looked like a deer in the headlights when she was asked by Colonoscopy on TV Katie Couric what newspapers she read.
When Colonoscopy on TV Katie Couric makes you look dumb on national TV, you are toast as a Presidential candidate.
I will make the same point that I have mae before:
A white, male candidate wants to be President of the United States because:
(Obamas case) He is a Community Organizer and a State Legislator and less than a full term as a U.S. Senator because he is the Politically Correct skin color.
A white, male candidate wants to be President of the United States because:
(Palins case) He has served less than a single term, before he quit, but he is the Politically Correct gender.
Im sorry, but that is blatant Affirmative Action that would get a white, male laughed off the political stage.
What keeps me awake at night is the nightmare that far-far-Left-wing Obama will be re-elected beacause American voters are less afraid of him in the Oval Office than they are afraid of Sarah Palin in the Oval Offoce.
I hope that her debt has been paid and contract expired. Do you think that she could make an oops commercial for JD.
You and me both.
We no longer live in 1920.
We live in the age of television and Sarah Palin looked like an unread, clueless idiot on nation-wide television trying to cover up the fact that she could not name a single news source that she read.
Any regular Freeper can rattle off at least a dozen news sources that we routinely post and read on Free Republic.
Sarah Palin cannot and that is scary.
In 2012, American voters will have learned the very painful lesson of the folly of electing Presidents with very little experience.
In 2012, Barack Obama is toast.
So is Sarah Palin.
He has spent his whole adult life as a nutless, gutless, RINO, capitulating to the communist left on legislation, and selling out the taxpaying citizens of the USA to foreign and domestic enemies, selling out his neighbors to multi-national corporate interests, and on, and on, and on.
would should get a white, male laughed off the political stage ... and hanged for treason.
What are you?
A Black Panther that wants to kill cracker babies?
Those mindless rants will win you applause from the extreme fringe in the Echo Chamber but it will only bring you defeat of Biblical proportions in a Real World Presidential election.
In a country of over 300 million persons, there must be at least one candidate to your liking that has not quit in the middle of her first term of office ...... being Mayor of a town of less than 7,000 not included.
“What you are saying is absolutely wrong.”
Thank you slipstream.
It seems Polybius has bought the media’s false image.
“And most importantly, as the article above indicates, in 1978 2 years before the election - Ronald Reagan had a negative rating of 45%, close to Palin’s current negative rating. Like Palin, Ronald Reagan’s negatives were also the product of media biases and distortions, but he was able to convince the voting public to have confidence in him and made a positive and inspiring case for himself.”
Thanks, Victoria, for posting this reply to the “unelectability” canard . There are numerous polls from the late 1970s that show Reagan with astronomically high “negatives” which are the result of disengaged, tuned out voters who did not know much about him except what they heard on TV. As he began to win primaries, the negatives went down. But his negatives were always higher than those for Ford or some mushy moderate candidate like McCain. And so are Sarah’s. One reason is that there are many liberals who say they have a positive impression of McCain (or any moderate)but that does not mean they will vote for the moderate over a true liberal. So the candidate with higher negatives actually does better at the polls if his support is more intense.
Another deeper reason for the higher, more intense negatives directed toward Reagan and Palin by the left is the old saying, “One always hates what one fears.”(Reagan was feared, and Palin is feared, becasue the left knows that they are serous about their beliefs) The left’s hatred will continue unabated. But persuadable independents (a larger group than the left), whose fear of the conservative is based upon a a lie, are ripe for the picking, if the conservative has the skills to persuade them. Reagan had that skill. Palin has it too. And she has it in spades.
Having higher negative ratings in the general electorate does not make a candidate less electable as long as that candidate can make up any deficit with intensity of support among his or her base. Reagan did that. He was ALWAYS despised with white hot hatred by the left. But he was loved by conservatives and by independents (who according to all the polls are conservative leaners as well). As you point out Reagan’s negatives went below 40% but unless I am very wrong, they always stayed about there. (note that Reagan never rose to the stratospheric approval ratings of the Bushes) but he always got his partisans to the polls and that meant a couple of landslides.
Palin is following the same playbook as Reagan. Her support like Reagan’s is intense. She is, as he was, the most popular with conservatives and Republicans. And her negatives are going down. They will always be higher but this is no disability for her at the polls. There will be a huge turnout of conservatives and the “persuadables” whom she will bring around. She is in very, very good shape. And the enemy knows it.
You and the lamestream media are stuck on the same tune.
I take about a three day break from FR.
I come back. And my teeth are already grinding and I already want to reach through the computer screen and...
You just hate Sarah Palin because you are just another Palin hater. There is no reasoning behind you.
Your analysis about Reagan is correct, but you have to also consider that in 1978 Reagan was 68 years old, and Sarah is 23 years younger than Reagan was at the time, so I can't expect her to have comparable life and political experience as Reagan. Yet, Sarah has demonstrated during her brief political career that she has an extraordinary capacity to lead and motivate, which helped Alaska improve on her watch. During that time she did more for Alaska than many prior governors had done in full terms.
Sarah may not have all the experience that Reagan had, but she has the wisdom, charisma, and conservative values of Ronald Reagan. And more importantly, she believes in them. She has a fighting spirit and the tenacity to follow her ideals in a way I haven't seen recently in American politics. I can't think of a Republican politician besides Palin that points out Obama's policies of destruction day in and day out. Yet no matter how much ridicule she endures from each end of the political spectrum, Sarah maintains the same passion for advancing her political values as Reagan did.
Though your post aims to ridicule Sarah and belittle her accomplishments, the fact is that she is an accomplished politician and woman, that has a large, dedicated following. You can try to diminish her, but the fact is she has accomplished a lot more than other politicians that have been successful - indeed, she is more accomplished and experienced than Obama who won with 53% of the vote.
If you think such strengths (which are present in true leaders such as Reagan and now Palin) have less weight than the innuendo and hateful comments the mainstream media peddles, or the conventional wisdom voiced by the Sarah haters, then you really underestimate Americans. It is true that Americans made a mistake when they elected Obama, and it is true that every time they elect a democrat they make a mistake, but something tells me that the USA would not have risen to its status in the world if the American people only continued to make mistakes. When push comes to shove, Americans come through.
That's why, I believe that after the mistake of electing Obama, we as a country will vote for a true conservative reformer the next time around. And if Sarah decides to run, she has what it takes to build on her public persona (much like Reagan did when he had comparable negatives at a similar point before the 1980 election) and win people over.
Even if everything you wrote was true and valid, the voters managed to elect a guy like Obama to the presidency. If an Obama can rise to the most powerful position in the world, there's no reason Sarah Palin can't.
I'm bookmarking this thread!
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.