Skip to comments.Palin: I could have brought change in '08
Posted on 03/20/2011 9:21:53 PM PDT by Libloather
Palin: I could have brought change in '08
By Jordan Fabian - 03/19/11 12:52 PM ET
Republicans would have been more successful in the 2008 presidential elections if she was at the top of the ticket, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin suggested Saturday.
Speaking at the India Today Conclave in New Delhi, Palin was asked why the GOP ticket did not defeat then-Sen. Barack Obama (D). Palin said that Obama ran a strong campaign and effectively billed himself as a change candidate.
Pressed by India Today editor Aroon Purie that she also represented change, Palin replied, "I wasn't at the top of the ticket, remember?"
The 2008 vice presidential nominee said she was not claiming she should have been the nominee over Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), but her comments provide a glimpse of her potential appeal to voters should she choose to run for the nomination in 2012.
Palin reiterated that she has not yet decided is she will run.
"I don't think that there needs to be a rush still to get out there as a declared candidate," she said.
When asked about the greatest lessons she learned from 2008, Palin did not mention the friction between McCain's camp and hers. Instead she said the experience informed her public relations strategy.
"One thing I learned is that you cannot trust the mainstream media to accurately report on [your record and accomplishments]," she said. "You have to have the boldness, the courage to set the record straight yourself."
She even accused Republicans of not defending their records vigorously enough.
"Too often, Republicans have the fighting instinct of sheep sometimes," she said. When it comes to correcting the record, "I will put my foot down."
Rebutting a criticism often used against her, Palin said, "It's not victimization, I'm not playing the victim card."
Palin also touted her role as a key figure in the Tea Party movement, saying that it helps enforce accountability amongst politicians on both sides of the aisle.
"It's going to grow, it's going to be more influential and it's going to hold our politicians accountable," she said.
Palin even compared the Tea Party movement to the pro-democratic uprisings that have sprouted up across the Middle East.
The Tea Party is "all about empowerment of everyday, independent patriots ... to change the balance of power," she said. "The changing balance of power throughout the world today is driven by empowerment of the individual ... That's what we are seeing throughout the world today."
....and for the better. Drill baby drill.
Unfortunately, the maggots weren’t looking for “change” in 2008. They were looking for freebies and government handouts. Government freebies are the new American dream.
The headline misrepresents the body of the commentary.
Unless I missed something?
>>Government freebies are the new American dream.<<
The multitude of “obama gonna pay my rent” and the paramilitary “obama uh huh” and little girls who have no idea of what they sang of “obama gonna fix the world” are going to boomerang with a ferociousness that even Samuel Jackson would gape at.
If only we could find a candidate that could capitalize on such a huge negative weight. So far, no one in sight (and IMHO Mrs. Palin nor Paul the senior ain’t them).
She said something to the effect of that she wasn’t at the top of the ticket and not that she deserved to be ...
The usual bastards totally edited out that rather important qualifier.
No republican ticket could have won in 2008. After 8 years of W it was near impossible.
Just look at 1980. It would have been much tougher for Reagan if we was trying to succeed a failed and unpopular GOP President. He’d probably have lost.
It’s tough to win 3 straight terms even in good times, ask Al Gore. He had a good economy under Clinton, no wars, and he still lost.
When you look at the the 8 years of Bush, the unpopularity of the Iraq War, the bad shape of the economy, Obama’s massive 400 million dollar spending edge, the GOP was pretty much doomed. And that was before the market crash and Lehman collapse and the implosion of the economy.
I’ll always wonder what would have happened if Lehman hadn’t collapsed and the economy stayed as it was through the summer. I think McCain would have won a very narrow win.
But once the economy collapsed in September the election was over.
Fortunately, in 2012 Obama won’t be an agent of change. He’ll be representing more of the same.
Perhaps someone can explain how this can be when she doesn't even advocate ending any programs or agencies of government, even those that are plainly unconstitutional such as the Dept. of Education.
Happy talk, at a time in history when that won't be anywhere nearly good enough.
>>She said something to the effect of that she wasnt at the top of the ticket and not that she deserved to be ...
The usual bastards totally edited out that rather important qualifier.<<
Maybe I misread or misunderstood the OP — was this supposed to be a friendly/supportive piece? Or was it yet another in a long line of anti-Mrs. Palin spots.
*sigh* It is getting hard to tell anymore.
This was news to her? Oh boy!
Tell what My Leader.
Feel free to Bring about change in 2012 and take the trash out too.
Sarah Palin/ ? 2012!
But I didn’t help that McCain acted more like Obama’s enabler or partner than his opponent.
McCain ran a very pucillanimous and apologetic campaign.
I knew McCain would do that before he'd even won the nomination.
Well, I thought it was sort of snarky but not even close to the really bad ones...they’re sort of polite snarks.
Yeah, he did. Almost intentionally. Almost as if he was thinking "I'll get back at those 'right wingers' by throwing the election away to my good friend Obama"
You people are nutty, why don’t you wait until she actually runs, if she is asked such question about eliminating any departments and she says no then you have a right to complain, now having said that she has said programs like NPR and PBS are a waste and should be gone from the budget
Then why didn't she run in '08? This is an odd statement. Was she suggesting that the GOP party apparatus install her on the top of the ticket to beat Obummer? I don't get what she was trying to accomplish with this part of her answer.
Why is it “nutty”? There isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between any position she’s ever held and John McCain’s positions.
Do you know any real conservatives who don’t advocate for an end to the federal Dept. of Education?
I think it’s nutty to call someone a leader of the TEA Party if they won’t even tell you any part of this bloated government that they’re willing to eliminate.
If you were to compare what she actually said in the Q and A compared to what the writer “interprets” and “ad libs” about what she said, then you get a slight twist here and there that takes it out of context -— my suggestion to any FReeper is to after reading these headlines or stories about Palin or anybody else, if there is video out there go look for it and find out for themselves what someone said.
That's not pertinent right now. Palin's cornerstone issue is energy. Everything revolves around energy because high energy prices drive up the costs of all goods and services.
If you've bothered to look at her record as Governor rather than touting a political party who's total membership is the equivalent of a local fitness center, you'd discover that she drastically reorganized the state government and discontinued funding redundant and obsolete programs. I'm confident she'll put forth a plan on reducing the size of the federal government or endorse Rand Paul's plan.
Yes there are many of them. Somehow I’m not one of them. I find it unbelieveable that after 70k a year minus deductions that I come out basically even on taxes.. meaning I owe not a penny. Sure I pay state and property taxes but nothing to federal? And the middle class needs a tax break? It’s a joke.
>>I don’t get what she was trying to accomplish with this part of her answer.<<
Laz, she didn’t say that. What she said is that she isn’t responsible for what the top of the ticket did or didn’t say.
That is a fair statement and answers the question completely. As VP Candidate it was her job to commit completely to the top of the ticket’s agenda.
And she did that — 100%
In the last 3 years, Ak has banked 14 billion from her oil tax changes; heck before that most the oil fields were not paying any taxes for the State's oil. Palin put Big Oil back in their place quick. She scared the heck outta the majority of crooked Repubs (we have a mess of them too), put some in jail.
Parnell & the Repub Party up here still hasn't been able to take it back to where it was before Palin, the corruption I mean; but they are sure trying.
One thing about Palin, she does what is right for the people and good government and she ain't scared to shake the tree; I'll give her that.
When I talk to people, they all say it was much better when Palin was gov in Ak; even the dems.
“McCain ran a very pucillanimous and apologetic campaign.”
Yeah ... he was the Roberto Duran of politics.
I hear similar comments all the time. There's no doubt that she's a politician that makes it easy for people to project their fondest hopes and wishes onto, that's for sure. She's a regular political rorschach test.
And that stupid stunt of suspending his campaign to fly back to Washington during the TARP process to do......nothing.
My guess is that,no, the Dims would have won. Hillary must have kicked herself for not demanding more from Obama after September 15. Palin’s approach would have cut Obama’s lead but only marginally. The Republicans were like Wilkie in 1940. Wilkie signed on to the war, McCain signed on to Bush’s policies. Why not, he sure as hell didn’t know what else to do. What bothered me was the way he rolled over for Obama in the debates. Nobody better touch the magic negro.
I read her as furious. If she doesn’t run. it will be because her camp finds too many roadblocks have been thrown up —by Republicans. If she does, it will be because shet hinks she has found a way she think will by-pass them. Pretty clear they don’t want her. Pretty clear she has some elite support,how much is hard to tell.
If MCcain was against the TARP, he may still win. TARP was very unpopular with the GOP base
She didn’t say that she is the leader of the Tea party! In fact she said in the interview that she isn’t the leader and that there are no leaders because it’s the people’s movement - so you don’t know what you are talking about in the first place -
second of all I mention being nutty of those that demand she explain everything like what she is going to cut....etc...etc before she actually runs, you people always put hight demands on her NOW that is not expected on others or anyone else for that matter at this current moment - I haven’t heard any other major potential candidate say that the Dept of Education should be eliminated (I didn’t hear much from Herman Cain so he may have) where is your demand on them?
If Sarah doesn’t propose or answers a question about eliminating depts when she is running then you got a legit complaint but to run with what a news guy say incorrectly and then wrap that with Sarah Idnt doing this or that is indeed nuttty
Definitely! But honestly, they could not have done much worse than they did. I'd even say that with Sarah Palin on the top of the ticket Republicans would have been much more successful in the 2008 presidential elections. Not sure if she would have been articulate enough in the debates with Obama.
I don't think she would have won in 2008. Obama's too good of a talker.
Back in 2000 after 8 years of Clintonism (a very strange couple) Americans wanted someone they could relate to. They wanted someone they could drink a beer with. They were seeking someone who used regular words like they did. That was Bush. But it was also a Sarah Palin.
This time around 2012, we are in so much trouble, so many problems that Americans are going to be seeking someone that is very knowledgeable about the world, about current events, who can articulate their philosophy and agenda, and can respond to every claim and charge Obama will make in the debates and do it swiftly (not the next day in a news conference). That person is going to be someone very close to a Jean Kirtpatrick.
Anything less, Obama will run circles around our candidate with his long lawyer words that sound good and trick people into thinking he's the smarter of the two.
Hey, at this point in the last election cycle you were supporting Rudy Giuliani. So you’ll have to forgive me if I don’t put much stock in your prognostications.
Also, he would yell angrily and immediately ‘apologize’ if anyone said Hussein. He basically banned the name Hussein from being spoken because ha thought it was ‘too Muslim’.
Well john, What does that tell you? idiot
And what gives McCain the right to change or omit his opponent’s name just because McCain thinks the name is no good?
What if John winds up running against a guy named Tyrone LeRoy Jackson? What name will McCain drop to sooth his White guilt sensibilities?
How can you run against an opponent if you won’t even say his name?
McCain was an absolute joke as a candidate. It was like he was trying to lose to give the Black guy a turn at President. It was like he was an Obama supporter.
Excuse me, but the reason why Palin's supporters are so passionate about her is because she's a fearless leader who isn't afraid to speak out. We are not supporting her because she is promising us another tax credit or another liberal-lite program. We've examined her record, we've seen the smears and lies and how the media and both GOP/Dem establishments treated her. There's no "projection" there. It's pure excitement and passion over a conservative who is finally fighting the Left on her terms without apology.
Now, you can call her a RINO or a McCain in a skirt but her record, Facebook notes, interviews, op-eds, and speeches completely refute your assertion. NO CANDIDATE right now is more suited to oppose Obama and the left-wing agenda than Palin is, and I am not supporting any other candidate besides her or whoever she endorses.
Whatever. I guess the Tea Party really isn’t about much, then. Just a bunch more empty Republican rhetoric. They always say they’re for “limited government,” and then won’t tell you what it is that they have the principles and the guts to limit.
Sorry, but the hard times that are coming on us are not going to allow for cotton candy faux conservatism. I hope you wake up to that fact soon.
I don't know if anybody remembers or even saw it but during the primaries for the 2000 elections when he was running against Bush. I was watching C-Span and he was either going on stage or coming off stage and the cameras caught him and he was showing the worst temper tantrum I had ever seen on TV (with the exception of maybe Dr. Gene Scott on a slow night). He was yelling, ranting waving his arms.
But no mention of it the next day by any of the media. Just something that was on live and then forgotten.
How many times are you going to bring this crap up? He still got more votes than whatever candidate who lost at bar quarters at the AIP convention held inside some tavern.
If anything the Tea Party saved the republican party. At least in 2006.
Hmmm...I guess that's why she is pro-choice for states on abortion, and a judicial supremacist, supports a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens, endorses the sovereignty-destroying Law of the Sea treaty, and refuses to support the elimination of the U.S. Dept. of Education, right? These are all just figments of my imagination, which could be dispelled if I would just read her Facebook posts, right? Even though every one of these positions can be verified in minutes using a search engine...
So, you justify supporting pro-abort leftists based on how many votes they got? You might as well go vote for Obama then.
“I am not supporting any other candidate besides her or whoever she endorses.”
There isn’t anyone else out there right now that can touch her. No one. All this “her negatives are too high” is horse shit. There is no one else put forward. And I am tired of the hacks people keep pushing forward. They’re the very members of the CB Club that she will take on. This whole circular firing squad thing is getting tiresome. We have people here on this board, who are knowledgeable enough to know she is the only electable CONSERVATIVE we have right now, that are parroting that nonsense.
“Her negatives are too high.” All of a sudden that’s something to be concerned about. Horse shit. Let’s stick to basics, kick the asses that need kicking and let one of our own get nominated and then let’s elect her. Name anyone else that can beat her, in the real world, not in some WaPo Poll, but someone you know in your guts can beat her.
“And that stupid stunt of suspending his campaign to fly back to Washington during the TARP process to do......nothing.”
I couldn’t believe it.
She also needs to stop with the "I am a Reagan republican". That was good at the beginning but now she has to define herself and tell us in detail what she wants to do and let the conservatives decide if she is a Reagan republican now.
I would be interested in hearing her list of enemies by priority. Obviously Obama has his list backwards. Of course North Korea will be placed in order according to if it acts up but the others: Syria, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Pakistan... what does she know about these places and which one would she go after first.
Also, what does she think about Obama putting Qadaffi on the top of that list when in Libya's northeast there's a lot Al Qaeda Qadaffi had been keeping under control. What's Sarah's list look like?
That's what mean by details.
That is nice to hear especially because I’ve read posts on other sites from people who claim to be from Alaska and some have said really awful things. I had a hard time reconciling these comments with her 85% approval rating. Who knows, maybe these people are really sitting in the White House basement and never set a foot in Alaska.
I do think a lot of the reason much of the GOP sticks their nose in the air at the mention of Sarah is that they’re afraid of what would happen to their gravy trains if she became POTUS.
He really lost me there! I voted for the man but I held my nose. And when I have to hold my nose that indicates to me that many people on our side didn't even bother voting.
I could not post anything about him because I had nothing exciting to say. I kept neutral. It was boring. I was far from excited to get voters for him. I just held my nose and voted. We do not want another candidate like that in 2012.
"The higher the chimp climbs the tree, the more people can see its puckered red ass."
Just keep climbing, Bonzo. The view is hilarious.
It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." -- Jonathan Swift
Besides the things which you enumerated earlier, one of the biggest things turning me off from her are her most rabid followers. Can’t bring up sourced, fact-based, rational points of policy disagreement without getting a “PDS!!!1!” flag thrown within 5 seconds.
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.