Posted on 12/31/2010 2:46:02 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Is the idea that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin could be America’s next president laughable? Not only to many on the left, but also to conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer.
On Friday’s broadcast of “Inside Washington,” Krauthammer offered several reasons why Palin shouldn’t be considered the presumptive Republican nominee for the 2012 presidential election.
“What do you mean if not Sarah Palin in 2012?” Krauthammer said. “Who’s saying she’s going to be the presidential candidate? I don’t even hear her saying it. Her chances of being are smaller than half a dozen other people. If you talk to Republicans, I don’t think there are what, more than one in three who would tell you she has a chance of winning the presidency or even the nomination.”
Because of that, he said, she wasn’t the favorite.
“And she is not the favorite,” he continued. “She has a very strong core constituency but outside of that I think she is rather weak.”
Krauthammer has previously downplayed Palin’s chances and indicated he favors Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels. He said Palin would not be the ideal candidate to unseat a “vulnerable” President Barack Obama.
“Her negatives are over 50 percent,” Krauthammer said. “She has no chance of winning a general election. Why would you want a candidate who is going to lose against a Democrat who is going to be vulnerable and who is also extremely ideologically ambitious?”
He even employed a Keith Olbermann catch phrase to describe Palin and said even fellow Republicans didn’t see Palin as qualified.
“A half-term governor? I’m not sure Republicans think of her as qualified.” Krauthammer said.
Watch:
(VIDEO AT LINK)
mitt willard commie romney.
LLS
Somebody needs to change his diaper....
“You honestly bought that poster’s “concern”? Don’t be naive.”
I don’t know that poster from Adam and don’t keep score on who posts what for which team. All on my very own, I came to the conclusion that blind adoration of Sarah Palin, to the point of disallowing discussion of her pros/cons, alternative candidates, etc., is embarrassing to any group of thinking people. I have never idolized a politician and I don’t plan to start now. Don’t be a putz.
kraut is a secular Jew... he hates evangelicals... he holds deep seething hate of Christians.
LLS
Daniels is a Princeton man, another Ivy Leaguer. We've had Ivy League Presidents for the past 22 years and look where it's gotten us.
:-)!
LLS
It’s awful to feel this way - but I think his physical problems are playing into his feelings about the beautious Sarah. About a year ago Joe Klein (admittedly a creep) suggested that Charles was limited in his view point because of his physical infirmities...could this be true? He has never seemed like a warm and fuzzy guy.
A question for you 2DV....do you fully understand that Sarah was facing personal family bankruptcy if she stayed in office to deal with countless nuisance law suits from local Dems who were doing nothing but trying to damage her ?
Find myself watching less Fox News....and more FreeRepublic.
I personally don't believe Sarah to be the answer for ending the madness taking place right now(not sure any human can pull us from this proverbial commode)....but certainly not for being...."weak"....,she and Bachmann have shown more b lls than all the GOP men in Congress combined...and she'd be a damned site better than the usurper occupying that office right now.
If he means "intellectually" weak...what do you call a narcissistic teleprompter reading Soros puppet?
Bottom line, if no one who is not currently on the horizon comes along, and she becomes the pick....I won't need a clothespin on my nose(like with McLame)to cast my vote in 2012.
The GOP yacht club better get it's head out of its arse....because the liberal establishment has declared war on this country....so jelly-spined appeasers need not apply.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.
You think and wish it were fear, as in they're afraid she is the only one who could unseat Obama. But that's exactly wrong: they think she's the one who Obama could beat. If there's fear -- and I think there is -- it's the fear of an incompetent being given great power. We already understand that fear, having felt the same way about Obama.
At the same time, Palin elicits a level of enthusiasm and "broken glass" support on the right that has rarely been seen in Republican politics.
Yes, among a certain segment. But it's not even most Republicans, much less the electorate at large.
If you simply look at these two factual circumstances long enough
That's just it: they're not "facts." They're just you, projecting your hopes onto Sarah Palin.
Actually they aren't all that well assimilated either and you'd think after hundreds of years in this country they'd gotten it right ~ but they haven't.
You’re thick.
Neither do I, but I can read. And I do, which is why I sussed out that poster with little trouble.
I came to the conclusion that blind adoration of Sarah Palin, to the point of disallowing discussion of her pros/cons, alternative candidates, etc., is embarrassing to any group of thinking people.
"Blind adoration"? Is that what you think you're seeing here? If that's your take on these discussions, then you haven't been keeping up well enough to understand where all the enthusiasm really comes from.
I'd think you'd have more trust and respect for your fellow conservatives than to believe that so many of them have been suckered into a "cult of personality", or some such idiocy.
And what's this about "disallowing discussion of her pros/cons, alternative candidates, etc."? Good grief, this is Free Republic, which is the most intensely thorough vetting assembly known to man. There isn't a single potential candidate that hasn't been studied and dissected to the inth degree here, including Sarah Palin.
Instead of thumbing your nose at the majority of us for giving Governor Palin our unreserved support, how 'bout you spend some time studying up on her record of public service and life history? Her book, "Going Rogue" is a good place to start.
But the current PO(TU)S is. That doesn't speak well for the electorate.
You can always tell a Harvard man — but you can’t tell him much!
“And what’s this about “disallowing discussion of her pros/cons, alternative candidates, etc.”?”
What THIS is about is YOU telling someone they’re “pushing the enemy line” because they expressed doubts about her electability. What two-faced bullshit.
I feel the same way. FNC does as well as it does not because it's good but because it has no competition.
But, it seems like it is more and more neocon (Krystal, Krathammer, Barnes, Hayes) and RINO (Rove, PeRINO, ditsy Nocoel Wallace, etc.) with an occasional liberal (Williams and friends).
Hannity is the only conservative and he couldn't win a debate with an eight year old.
I feel the same way. FNC does as well as it does not because it's good but because it has no competition.
But, it seems like it is more and more neocon (Krystal, Krathammer, Barnes, Hayes) and RINO (Rove, PeRINO, ditsy Nocoel Wallace, etc.) with an occasional liberal (Williams and friends).
Hannity is the only conservative and he couldn't win a debate with an eight year old.
It's only "toxic" if you plug your ears and refuse to hear Palin's reasoning for stepping out of the kill box and reloading.
And don't use the generality of "people don't care..." Trying to make it sound as though everyone thinks this way is dishonest.
Sarah Palin is more than capable of defending her actions, and I believe that most people will at least let her explain, then make up their own minds about it.
That’s why Clinton said he liked the Kraut.
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.