Posted on 11/19/2010 6:50:35 AM PST by WebFocus
By telling Barbara Walters that she thinks she can defeat President Obama, Sarah Palin has dimmed hopes cherished by sensible Republicans that she might decide against a run for the White House in 2012. Here are just some of the reasons she should not run.
The Republican nominee should be someone with a vast and impressive record in government and the private sector. Voters chose a novice with plenty of star power in 2008 and will be inclined to swing strongly in the other direction in 2012. Americans will be looking for sober competence, managerial skill, and maturity — not sizzle and flash.
After the 2008 campaign revealed her substantive weaknesses, Palin was advised by those who admired her natural gifts to bone up on policy and devote herself to governing Alaska successfully. Instead, she quit her job as governor after two and a half years, published a book (another is due next week), and seemed to chase money and empty celebrity. Now, rather than being able to highlight the accomplishments of Sarah Palin’s Alaska, we get Sarah Palin’s Alaska, another cheesy entrant in the reality-show genre. She’d so much rather be out dog sledding than in some “dull political office,” she tells the audience. File that.
It’s true. She is wildly popular with a swath of the Republican electorate. And, as a conservative woman politician told me, political consultants (who get paid the big bucks, win or lose) will doubtless descend upon her with game plans showing how she can win in Iowa and then cruise to the nomination. Maybe. But the general election would be a problem, since 53 percent of independent voters view Palin unfavorably along with 81 percent of Democrats, according to a recent Gallup poll.
There is no denying that Sarah Palin has been harshly, sometimes even brutally, treated by the press and the entertainment gaggle. But any prominent Republican must expect and be able to transcend that. Palin compares herself to Reagan. But Reagan didn’t mud-wrestle with the press. Palin seems consumed and obsessed by it, as her rapid Twitter finger attests, and thus she encourages the sniping. She should be presiding over meetings on oil and gas leases in the North Slope, or devising alternatives to Obamacare. Every public spat with Dave Letterman or Politico, or the “lamestream media,” or (God help us) Levi Johnston, diminishes her.
Speaking of television, have you watched “Dancing with the Stars”? Calling the show cheesy would be too generous. Perhaps the former governor should not be blamed for the decisions of her adult daughter. Yet there in the audience we see Sarah and Todd Palin, mugging for the camera and cheering on their unwed-mother daughter as she bumps and grinds to the tune of “Mamma Told Me Not To Come.” Her parents had advised her, the 20-year-old Bristol told an interviewer, that she had to stay “in character” if she expected to win. Being “in character” evidently meant descending to the vulgarity that DWTS peddles on a weekly basis. The mama grizzly was apparently unfazed by, or — equally disturbingly — unaware of, the indignity. And she is supposed to be a conservative culture warrior?
Voters prize judgment, above all, in a presidential candidate. Some of Sarah Palin’s 2010 endorsements were sound and arguably helpful. Others betrayed flightiness and recklessness. Tom Tancredo, Palin’s choice for governor of Colorado, has ridden his anti-immigration hobby-horse in a style perfectly suited to alienate Hispanic voters (describing Miami, for example, as a “Third World city”). Her endorsement of Christine O’Donnell was irresponsible and damaging, losing a seat that would otherwise have been a Republican pick-up. Of course, O’Donnell received an absurdly disproportionate amount of ink and attention during the race (the liberal press naturally seizes upon any opportunity to make conservatives look kooky), but Palin should have anticipated that. Besides, this one cannot be laid at the feet of the biased media. O’Donnell was a thoroughly unqualified candidate.
Palin has many strengths. I admire her fortitude and her principles. Her ability to connect with a crowd is something most politicians can only dream of. I will always remember her 2008 convention speech as a rollicking star turn. She would be terrific as a talk-show host — the new Oprah.
But a presidential candidate? Someone to convince critical independent voters that Republicans can govern successfully? Absolutely not.
— Mona Charen is a nationally syndicated columnist.
Good point: Palin shouldn’t run because that might set socialist “progress” in our country back 50 years or more.
I believe Sarah will champion Rick Perry.
I love Sarah but I’m not sure she should run in 2012, at least not if there’s a strong conservative she can fully support. I don’t know if she’d win but my reasons run more to where she’d do the most good and I think it might be in Steele’s slot or someplace with that kind of influence.
Still, she’s definitely my pick over Huckabee or Romney types. I don’t want to settle again. She’s articulate, tireless, and focused and she’s able to workaround the msm very effectively when she’s not a candidate.
Governor Palin will be fine if she runs a good campaign with a good message.
“Anything but a conservative, right?”
According to the stupid masses that believe all the boogeyman stories about Conservates.
“Governor Palin will be fine if she runs a good campaign with a good message.”
I hope so, but don’t think for one second the media isn’t gonna do whatever they can to bring stuff like this up in order to convince the stupid people.
I like Palin immensely and would like to see her run. Right now, I would vote for her, but that is conditional vote since I don't know who else will be running for president.
A POTUS has to be a compromiser, even Reagan was a compromiser, and I just don’t think Sarah is very good at that role, she is much better as a bulldog who fights for her party and doesn’t have to kowtow to the opposition, that’s why she’s better as the head of the RNC.
Charen is a ROMNEYBOT:
DECEMBER 14, 2007 7:00 A.M.
A Second Look at Romney
“But no one running is more impressive than Mitt Romney...”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/223108/second-look-romney/mona-charen#
You have some good points, chickadee. Perhaps Palin might be more palatable after an additional 8 years of seasoning. That allows her plenty of time to prepare for the big job.
However, it will be tough for Palin to ever lose the “quitter” label. Or to ever overcome the perception of the bad judgment that lead her to walk out of the Alaskan Governor’s office.
Dr. Weenie is a moron.
Ditto. She is remarkably effective sniping from Mount Facebook. She would be wise to act as kingmaker in the 2012 cycle, unless no conservative catches her fancy.
I will vote for the MOST conservative person running, regardless of what their name is.
Yep, and as I stated, that "King" will be Rick Perry.
**************************
It will be especially tough if people like you continue to snipe at her.
Out of concern, no doubt.
Surely you're not supporting this loser???
Thune Willing to Sacrifice Bolton for Air Base
"The senator said he has decided to vote against Bolton, but insists that the decision is not a form of retaliation.
"Some people want to attach different motives to that, but the truth of the matter is I don't think he's the best person for the job," Thune said.
I could really get behind a Gov. Rick Perry run!
“sober competence, managerial skill, and maturity — not sizzle and flash”
But Sarah will give us sober competence, managerial skill, and maturity — AND sizzle and flash!
I’ve come around on Perry myself, somewhat, even though I know the guy is a consummate politician and will be whatever you want him to be. But right now, even Perry looks pretty good compared to the rest of field.
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.