Skip to comments.What Sarah Palin Needs To Win The Republican Nomination
Posted on 11/23/2010 1:52:05 PM PST by dselig
Last week was the week when the idea that Sarah Palin is going to run for president began to sink in properly. As I explained, she is an immensely viable candidate for the 2012 Republican nomination.
Frank Rich, in the New York Times, argues that she is a shoo-in for Republicans because time is ripe for her populist stance, and because her defects are no greater than George W Bushs when he jumped into the 2000 primary race.
I am not so sure. The debates would prove a stiff test of her grasp of detail, and if she found the slings and arrows of running as vice-president and governing Alaska hard to cope with, how would she fare in the brutal terrain of a presidential race?
Palin is the best known quantity among the likely candidates. As First Read notes, her main task would be to broaden her appeal among a primary electorate that in the past has always opted for the candidate most likely to win the general election. With her negative numbers among Democrats and independents still high, that is quite a challenge.
Karl Roves comment that she lacks the gravitas for the top job continue to define the battle over Palin among Republicans. Barbara Bush, with the ultimate back-handed compliment, has now underlined how the old school views the Alaskan queen as an upstart. Palins unique style has already changed the game, but to win the nomination she may well need another game changer
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
Well she isn't going to get the Democrat vote anyway. No Republican would (except possibly Romney). She's going to have to bring her negatives among independents up though.
I have said this over and over to the Palin cult - “populist stance”. We need a conservative and NOT a “populist”.
Palin has the one great thing going for her that Romney/Rove, et al, just don’t understand and never will. She has the support of the God-fearing, Life & Liberty loving American people.
A Brit quoting Frank Rich.
Alex Spillius has a terminal case of PDS. His columns are all the same.
It's the general election that she has to worry about.
Nationally, she has high negatives.
That's the challenge.
I don’t think the debates will be a big problem at all for the Mama Grizzly. She did fine against Joe Biden!
Simply throw a freshly field-dressed bull-moose head into the ring...
After all, this slide into tyranny acquired it's first major impetus with the first progressive/closet-marxist President.
Assume Obama drops out, Palin wins primarys now America can choose Palin or Biden. Only in America.
Sarah Palin is the only one who stands for liberty straight up if she cant defeat a Marxist for president who is destroying this nation intentionally then America no longer deserves to be free.
It cracks me up when people speak to presence, gravitas and debating skills.
How are those qualities going to save America?
How about lets start with principles such as, love of country and the reverence to our constitution as founded, then work our way down the gutter to what the inside the beltway elitist think?
Palin would make a counter commentator to Joyce Behar. Palin could unload on her and pull out all stops on her sharp tongue - of course with a s.e.g. smirk on her face. Palin only appeals to confused conservatives who think being a “populist” is being conservative.
This coming election is too important to screw up with another O'Donnell type. As ridiculous as Obama is and LOW poll numbers, with cheating and OUR stimulus money that he uses as a SLUSH fund, he could get a second term. We literally can't afford to lose this coming election and Palin will do THAT for the GOP.
Make her a VP and use her as an attack dog and a fund raiser for the cult. Let her be the "pit bull" she is. VP are supposed to be "pit bills". Or throw her a bone and replace Steele with Palin. Even as a VP she would need someone with a brain to guide her and clean her up and get her up to speed on issues ... . There truly is NO substance there beyond the fun patriotic sound bytes.
Some people are so fanatical they'll donate their savings to her. Just don't vote for her as President in the primary. Of course she's running! She basically wants to be anointed and just being coy.
I don't know who the RIGHT person is ... I just know Palin isn't it.
She needs to stop using strident speech. Like Reagan,people know she’s conservative.
She needs to pass the “reasonable”test that Reagan had to.
People wanted to toss Carter but wanted to know Reagan wasn’t a fanatic. When he said “there you go again” to refute Carters lies about him Americans decided Reagan was OK to elect.
Palin needs to stop alienating Independents in the middle. If she doesn’t, she’s going to be isolated to far to the right like Buchanan in 92. She needs to think about how non-rightists view her. imho
You must be a liberal. As in typical liberal fashion, you attack all that do not think the way you do as a “cult” or stupid or some other derogatory comment. You weaken your own argument and belittle yourself by accusing others . It couldnt possibly be that anyone could not agree with your obvious genius and winning personality, now could it
It’s her personality. She is a CONFRONTATIONAL kind of person. These people wear thin fast. She pretends she isn’t THIN skinned but she IS thin skinned. She has no charisma at all beyond her cult following. We will need Independents to make up the difference and WINK at her “polulist stance” which is NOT conservative.
Doesn’t ANYONE read her book? Going Rogue? Palin is NOT a friend to business. People that “love” her need to UNDERSTAND her. Her actions and half term as a governor highlight how she does NOT work well with people = especially business people.
I’m not sure she can pull it off, but the shrieking liberal media seems to think she can, or they wouldn’t become so hysterical at the mention of her name.
There was this guy, named Reagan. He did OK with the Democrats. Sadly and strangely, Reagan was also the last Republican to get a majority of the "moderate" vote, both times.
I think we sometimes lose sight of the importance of the individual candidate, and how a "greatness" (for lack of a better term), transcends political division. Again, like Reagan did.
Marco Rubio - although far too young to think about 2012 - I think could be just like that. Remember, he's about as orthodox conservative as you can get. And, in a state that went comfortably for Obama and in a three-way race, he darn near got 50% of the vote. I haven't seen his exit polls yet, but I bet he received some Democrat voters and a good percentage of independents/moderates, given the under-representation of Republicans in that state.
Does Palin transcend political divisions in this way? I'm not so sure.
I don’t mind her populism, because it is a conservative variety. She is pushing the book Save Capitalism from Capitalists, an Idea I rather like.
She does not pass muster with independants at this point, and that is where the rub is.
She’s best at rabble rousing and has not done herself any favors with the reality TV bit.
I like her as converative principle facilitator, but not as presidential candidate. Plus, she’s got McCain’s stench hanging about her.
Let her take to the airwaves and do damage and hope a Pence/DeMint like character (if not Pence himself) emerges at some point.
I'm listening to HER read it again on an audio version that is unabridged. Sharp tongued and confrontational puts downs are cute but it won't carry her.
If she can’t win Indy and Moderate voters she can’t win. You don’t win the Presidency with just conservative voters. And she does have an image problem with Indy voters. Thats just the fact.
You dont know thats the only thing I agree with you on.
Do you think the American people are stupid?
What is an independent in the face of tyranny and marxism?
The sad part of it people like you and Rove would choose tyranny over conservatism which is why RINOS are truly radicals and need to be defeated.
I think we live in a more partisan America than we did in 1980 and 1984. Back then there were still a lot of Scoop Jackson Democrats. I’m not saying that a Republican can’t get the votes of moderate Dems. It sure is harder though.
It is the mid-1970s and Margaret Thatcher's aides send for a voice coach. The rest is history. The Conservative leader ditches a voice that could strip the paint off the door of No10 for something deeper and more resonant. It might still make small children cry when it booms out of the television and cause Whitehall buildings to crumble when raised in anger against a cabinet wet. But there is no doubt that this voice has authority. Thatcher goes on to win three general elections.
Are you going to name one who is running and can win?
You'd be taken a lot more seriously if you did.
No, I would not disagree with that at all. It's measures more partisan than it was. It's also considerably "darker" today, than it was back then, and that complicates things as well.
Im tired of people like you calling people liberals and Romneybots just because they don’t like Palin. You and your ilk are simply hurting the conservative cause (of which there are others besides Ms. Palin who are viable presidential material.
Where does one begin with the glaring differences.
Reagan managed to appeal to Californians, who are fickle as Governor. He didn't serve half a term and pat himself on the back. Alaska has only 500,000 people. Guess how many Californian had when Reagan was around? Look at the budgets. While being head of the Alaskan National Guard is nice ... it's not at all like being in charge of the military.
Reagan was charismatic - Palin is NOT. You couldn't help buy LOVE Reagan with his humor. Palin's "humor" is cutting and sarcastic in a shrill way. Palin’s sharp tongue and shallowness wear thin. Her heart is in the right place but the substance is NOT there. We really need another Reagan type candidate.
She is also preoccupied with a throw back to the old feminine days where women were held back. Wake up Sarah - those days are GONE so DEAL WITH IT. Sarah is quite enamored with this aspect of herself - being female and "breaking through the "old boy network." GEESH! Heck, you'll NEVER hear Condi Rice get all self absorbed over her accomplishments. COndi is smart. THERE is a COMPETENT woman that is comfortable with herself and working with men. Palin is not in the Condi Rice league.
Someone like Jim DeMint, maybe. But unless he's playing it ultimately coy, he's not running. Romney? You gotta be kidding. The Hucksterjoke? Pawlenty? Pawlease. Gingrich? Good grief. Barbour? Jeb? No more Bushes! Who ya gonna call?
Palin has the support to keep idiot establishment favorite RINOS like Romney OUT!!
Of the current field, I'll go with Palin!! If she runs.
No one’s holding Sarah back.
You: Are you going to name one who is running and can win?
You'd be taken a lot more seriously if you did.
Me: I am telling you I, yes I, am NOT part of your Palin cult and WHY. Stating THAT is not dictating who will win or who else might run. What’s the matter with you? I am also giving you my opinion on WHY she will NOT win.
Me: So, because I don't have a magical crystal ball and can not state with 100% certainty on who will run and who will win then
“You'd be taken a lot more seriously if you did.”
I suppose YOU know with 100% certainty who will WIN and WHO will RUN? What's the matter with you? Oh, I forgot, you are part of the Palin cult. Never mind.
You're not going to get any argument from me.
I'll take that to mean you can't name one.
I also knew your original premise was flawed. She is a conservative. I just wanted to know who you thought was better, but you couldn't answer.
I have been enjoying a quiet read until I came upon your missive.....Pray tell; who is your very, very best candidate suggestion....We need to clear the air here. Thanks.
What does she need to win? Probably about 1200 delegates and 270 electoral votes.
She’s a conservative. Of course, one of the ways to pigeon hole someone and try to defeat them is to apply terms which have myriad meanings but imply the ‘worst’ of those meanings. So, what do you mean by populist?
..the agrarian movement fighting against corporations, banks, the rich elites?
..the ‘clasical’ conservative populist movement to have government by the people not an elite class of people which is what our founding fathers used to create this great country and in the modern U.S. a movement back to those constitutional basics and limiting the Federal government?
..the U.S progressive movement trying to establish a socialist government and redistribute wealth on ‘behalf of the people’ based on a European model socialist government?
And so many more. It means whatever the particular country, group of people, religion, political party, want it to mean, though they all chant ‘for the people, for the people’. Populist in general just means the ‘common’ people as opposed to the elite. I have to think that Sarah Palin supports the ‘common’ people, opposing the elite, the elite in the political parties, in government etc.. Beyond that she is a conservative with regard to big government, the constitution, the people’s liberties, etc., etc..
So you believe what the leftist media tells you?
Well then, you're free to vote for Obama since you're of the "anybody but Palin" mindset.
Heh...does that include THIS man?
I disagree. The supreme right protected by our founding documents is the right to life, and she, like Gerald R. For, John McCain and Ron Paul, is pro-choice for states on abortion.
And I have a question for you: Can you name one department of the U.S. government she has advocated eliminating? Do you have a link, for example, to her ever calling for the abolition of the unconstitutional Dept. of Education?
Great picture! Freeper heroes...nice to see them together.
Heh...have you ever seen her live and in person?
My fear- and it’s a real fear- is that we are doing to Palin what the left did with/to Obama. She’s becoming idolized and it’s a destructive force to have idols for leaders.
I normally don’t even go on Palin threads because I have several dear freeper FRiends who adore her and I see no value in getting into a fight about her.
I like her. I admire much of her life story. I don’t support her for POTUS and honestly- after seeing her daughter getting death threats for dancing on a TV show I would think she’d think long and hard about running.
I don’t know who it’s going to be that the GOP finally chooses- but someone who alienates Independents will ensure 4 more years of The One.
I wish I could get excited about any of the apparent contenders- but none of them have “it”- and Reagan’s dead.
Wait and see. The pressure is on the GOP now, to find somebody who's smart, engaging, accomplished, and experienced, who can take some of the shine off of the Palin celebrity train.
Party-wise, Indiana seems to be a mixed bag and yet Daniels won both his campaigns handily.
I can see him gaining establishment support pretty early on.
Reagan had many years as a celebrity to develop his personal skills -- still, he was despised and seldom taken seriously by the opposition. For the relative short time Palin's been on the radar, she's done a remarkable job. Hell, most of the votes McCain got were for her. Palin may need to refine the skill-set somewhat, but she has the basic mojo and instincts needed for winning a national run. And, no I'm not in the Palin cult. There's no one on the scene right now on our side who can hold a candle to her in a national campaign. Your incessant venting against her makes you sound like you work for PMSNBC.
Well, unless he changed his mind he said recently that he was definitely not running.
Actually she did not say she was pro-choice, she said that if Roe vs Wade were over-turned, let the State’s decide. That does not say ‘I’m pro-choice’ It says I am State’s Rights believer.