Posted on 01/30/2011 10:33:33 AM PST by parksstp
Yeah, but that's pretty slippery. I mean, what does it mean that didn't "get a fair shake"? She didn't win? She didn't win, AND somebody at some point said a mean thing about her (as, well, tends to happen in hotly-contested primary battles)? What if someone like DeMint or Ryan or even Herman Cain wins, who is solidly conservative? What then? It isn't Sarah, so she "obviously didn't get a fair shake" and therefore you're going to throw your vote away voting for 0bama's second term?
How much can we "give up" in a nominee before we have to say "screw it?" For me personally, Bush 41 wasn't so much of a leftist that I'd have voted for Perot, but there are some RINOs out there who I simply could not vote for because they are no different politically than 0bama.
Ditto. All I want is a solid, conservative candidate with a solid, conservative running mate.
We hear stuff like this every election, and it never happens.
It’s one thing to say you might vote third-party in a poll nearly two years before election day. It’s quite another to actually carry that threat out in the voting booth.
While a popular argument, this doesn't really stand close scrutiny. If Perot hadn't been in the race, given the way the "coming back home" vote split between the Ds and the Rs in 1996, it is pretty likely that Bush I would have won reelection in 1992, despite his failings.
No Palin, no vote. Period. And I'm not alone. Screw the GOP!
If Palin gets the nomination, I will definitely vote third party. Same goes for if some RINO clown, like Romney, gets the nod.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If vivalaoink’s candidate gets the nod, I’ll vote third party. Nanny-nanny-boo-boo!!!!
I am surprised that so many of the commenters on this thread are prepared to see Mr. Obama reelected. That, of course, will be the unfortunate consequence of any conservative third party candidate, or of some boycott or write in protest. Does the name H. Ross Perot ring a bell?
I have no idea what you're talking about, and I imagine you don't either. How is the Republican party supposed to "show support for her" in your estimation?
We have a party system. That party system requires a nominating process, and that nominating process is realized through the primary system. What would you have the Part do, endorse [insert candidate name here] before the primaries even begin.
National politics is a full-contact sport, may the best man (or woman) win. The Party doesn't get involved until the delegates select the nominee. If Palin wins the requisite number of delegates, then she'll be the nominee. If she doesn't, she has no one to blame but herself, and the Party won't have a damn thing to do about it.
Personally, I don’t think any Republican like Sarah Palin who refuses to kneel at the alter of Obama will ever get the nomination. Barry is still the king. Even to “Republicans”. Conservatives are about the only people left on the planet who do not see Barry as the second coming. It’s too bad because there aren’t many of us.
George Bush Sr is responsible for Ross Perot......within 4 years Bush lost the Reagan Coalitions by being the RINO that he always was. If Bush had simply followed the plan of Reagan he would have beaten Clinton.
I believe that many Palin supporters are afraid of a RINO slipping into the nomination based on either playing dirty tricks and not being fair on her or just that the Republican Party is a lost cause and after so many “it’s their turn” establishment types, it’s time to move on
The Romans ruled the World for over 500 years, using the “Divide and Conquer” tactic. The tactic was even more effective when it was used for elections. The Democrats and the Media have this down pat.
I thought that Governor Palin once stated that she’d never run as a third party candidate, but it was quite some time ago, so I may not be remembering accurately.
“I have no idea what you’re talking about, and I imagine you don’t either”.
When her name is brought up to any of the so called “ins” of the GOP....you tell me what their reaction generally is....it usually is...yes, she’s an important person in the elections..BUT....and, as PeeWee Herman says...there is ALWAYS A BIG BUT.....I haven’t heard one of them say yes she is an important person to the Republican Party and she would make an EXCELLENT candidate which I would support should she win the Primaries...so don’t tell ME I DON”T KNOW EITHER!!!!
I have read a number of academic studies by political scientists over the years, and all the ones that I can remember reached that very conclusion - absent Perot, it's likely Bush gets reelected, although it would have been very close.
'96 is a slightly different case. Clinton probably prevails, but it would have been a much closer election, and certainly not the electoral blow-out it was.
That's a good question, and one that people on here need to ask themselves - but they have to ask themselves in a sober and serious-minded way, rather than in the knee-jerk reaction way that I think a lot of folks here use when talking about this type of thing.
Let's face it - there are a lot of people here on Free Republic who basically subscribe to a personality cult centered around Sarah Palin. Sorry, but that's the only way to describe it. They have a personality cult for her in almost the same way many Dems have one for 0bama.
That's why they take this "Palin or nobody" mentality. they won't even consider other conservative alternatives - even ones who are MORE conservative than her, and who have done MORE to actually promote conservatism on a practical, functional level than she has.
They'll rail against other candidates or potential candidates about some thing that said candidate did that they didn't like. Okay, fine, Paul Ryan didn't call for us to rip 0bama's head off on national television. Bobby Jindal wore a funny tie and gave a less-than-inspiring speech once. Jim DeMint supported Romney (over McCain, we should note) in South Carolina. Fine. But Ryan is also actively trying to cut the budget and deficits in ways that really count, Jindal is setting an excellent example of conservative governance at the state level in Louisiana, and DeMint is both leading the conservative resurgence in the Senate AND funneling truckloads of money to conservative candidates (at great risk to his own career from the GOP establishment boys, I might add).
But none of that matters - because none of them are Sarah.
That's the kind of idiocy that needs to stop.
BTW, folks, Sarah Palin is basically identical to McCain when it comes to amnesty and illegal immigration issues. How come we never hear you talk about that?
Gee 46% out of 100% of her supporters. No one asked me. How’d they get those numbers?
“It doesn’t absolutely need to be Sarah but if the nominee isn’t reasonably conservative no way will I vote for them.”
Indeed.
Why are you being a tool for a skewed poll?
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.