Skip to comments.Four Reasons Why Sarah Palin Will Win
Posted on 08/20/2011 11:45:34 PM PDT by Windflier
Ive been approached several times today by doubters who advance arguments as to why Sarah Palin cannot win the nomination, or if she secures it, why she cant defeat Barack Obama.
All of the theories Ive had pitched in my direction today share a couple common faults, and its important to point them out here. The most common reason Ive heard today is the belief that the Media will destroy her. Thats silly. Is there a single Republican, never mind conservative, who the media will not seek to destroy to defend their darling, Barack Obama?
Anybody who watched the media in action after McCains nomination in 2008 should by now be thoroughly disabused of that shoddy notion. The Lame-Stream Media has been trying for three years running to destroy Sarah Palin, and there is no chance, having failed thus far, that they will improve results on their limited success.
The problem is that if the media narrative about a person is based on lies, in the longer run, those lies lose effectiveness as people learn the truth from other sources, and worse yet, the lies come back to haunt their purveyors because once the audience, having originally believed them, in the second instance realizes theyve been scammed, they will thereafter no longer be inclined to believe another pronouncement given voice by that source.
The second most common flaw in the arguments Ive been hearing and reading today is the dubious assumption that shes an intellectual lightweight. Truthfully, there couldnt be a more ridiculous claim upon which to base ones criticisms, and yet this is the default argument of those who wish to suggest that Sarah Palin isnt qualified.
Its the constant harangue of the elite media types, and it has been a failure repeatedly. They tried to paint a similar picture of Ronald Reagan, and in fact, every Republican in my memory.
Its a claim that falls on deaf ears in most quarters, because in the final analysis, its simply not believable given all she has already accompished. Having covered what critics have said, let me move on to my own list of reasons in opposition to these notions.
I firmly believe that Sarah Palin will run, win the nomination, and ultimately the Presidency.
There's no advertising on his site, and not even a tip jar, that I can find. I posted an excerpt. You can see the rest of this article at the link.
Meh....I'm starting to think of them as local 'color' now. They give the place a certain edge - or is it an itch? LOL
Someone call my name? I didn’t know she announced today. Where did she do it?
She hasn’t got a chance. She quit in Alaska. “If she thinks that was to tough wait til she becomes president”. That is all they have to say once she officially gets into the race.
As posted on another thread we need to guard against the Roves of the world putting artificial announcement dates on the wall. If they don't come to fruition, they will be used to dispirit her supporters.
That is all they have to say once she officially gets into the race.
What's sad, is they've been using that same ineffective ammo for two years already, and it hasn't stopped her advance one bit. She must be laughing her head off at their lame attempts to knock her out.
Matter of fact, she always does look pretty upbeat, doesn't she?
Your middle name is Surrender? Who knew?
Learn something new around here every day...
Wrong target alert! Check the post again. It was said in jest.
Thanks for being on your toes, though, soldier. ;-)
Gotta sign off for the night, fellow patriots. See ya tomorrow.
If she enters she will split the conservative vote and we will get stuck with another McCain (Romney)
Absolute rubbish! If this were true George Bush would be utterly exonerated for the calumny: "Bush lied and people died." But if you take a poll of the American people today, a substantial number will tell you that Bush lied to get us into the Iraq war about weapons of mass destruction. Karl Rove says that the biggest mistake in the Bush administration was George Bush's decision not to go on a public relations campaign to put aside that lie. Compare that with how Bill Clinton handled the impeachment. Was it Mark Twain or George Washington who said: "A lie will be halfway around the world before the truth can pull it's boots on."
It is much more difficult to disabuse people of their opinion then it is to convince them in the first place. Hence the aphorism, you only get one chance to make a first impression. Politics is not fair, it is ruthless. Electoral contests, like the battlefield, is not a place to play catch-up.
The general electorate is not comprised of political junkies like us who will scour the Internet to disprove a lie about George Bush's military service or exhaustively examine into the bona fides of a birth certificate. They will hear a sound bite or see a bumper sticker and draw a lifelong conclusion.
If you try to disturb their fixed opinion they will resent you.
I don't know whether Sarah Palin can overcome these obstacles to her electability but in making that judgment none of us should be confused by nonsense like this.
What do the French have to do with this?
“If she enters she will split the conservative vote...”
This is what I’m afraid of.
Is Palin better than Perry?
Because I think Bachmann has had about 2 gaffes too many and clearly Palin’s entry will sweep Bachmann aside.
I DON’T KNOW!!!!
I as you know am a big palin supporter. But he’s wrong. The average lib or apolitical American considers her a joke. They learned this on tv. Her name is spoken in a scornful tone. That ain’t nothing. She truly has a very hard road ahead. The media did not destroy Sarah, true. But they did successfully destroy her image in the minds of many americAns.
The work that should not be denied is her strategy to reach those very people. Her advantage : the media perception created of her is absolutely a lie. Americans hate to be fooled. They were fooled by the glory of the Obamacle. Sarah has to o ercome. She can. But let’s not pretend it will be easy.
I don’t think Sara will split the conservative vote.... I think she will rally it!
“The general electorate is not comprised of political junkies like us...”
Yes, and this is something political junkies like us seem to repeatedly fail to grasp.
I guess that is true for the poltical junkies on the other side too, that’s why they never understand say, how “W” got re-elected in 2004.
The average voter knows NOTHING about politics or politicians.
And there’s no point nattering on about how they know all about American Idol, etc. Yes, sure, the public should be better educated and maybe someday we can all help to make that happen.
But let’s face it, those of us here and our adversaries over on Kos or wherever, we’re ideologues. We care about the BIG THINGS.
That’s why we slog through all the incredibly boring parts of this political stuff.
Because to most people this stuff is DEADLY.
Most people can probably name the Pres, Veep, Gov, Senators, Mayor.
Here, we all know who Maxine Waters (just as an example) is, right? Well we saw a bit of her on TV the other day (it was probably because her townhall meeting went badly) and hubby, who watches Fox News Sunday with me, and suffers through the talk radio in the car said “Who’s Maxine Waters?”
And yes, the public does know Sarah Palin, and for that she can thank the MSM.
Now, does this help her? Yes. Can it ruin her? Yes. Has it already ruined her? The jury is still out.
I will say this, I hope she announces one way or the other on Sept. 3rd.
If this is another “big announcement” like: I’m going on a bus trip across the USA; or worse not an announcement of any kind, well at the risk of getting slammed I’ll just say that’ll ruin Sarah Palin’s “brand” for me.
She needs to get in or stay out because we need to get somebody who isn’t Romney ASAP and rally behind that person to rid ourselves of the incompetent and destructive Barack Obama.
Good to see you post. You are on-target, as usual.
Has there ever been an example of a politician so loathed by the media who has successfully turned around such wide-ranging negative perception?
The folks who think Palin can do no wrong, or who think that just because she has large and DEEP support among conservatives believe she will overcome that negative perception because they really, really want her to, don’t seem to want to put aside their passion and look at Palin’s situation without emotion.
This has been the trouble with her opponents, as well—they cannot put aside their blinding hatred and see WHY she is so popular with so many.
In the end, I can’t think of a single politician so thoroughly loathed by the MSM, and whose image is so set at this point in the presidential election season. If Palin runs, in order to win she has to overcome a media blockade unlike any other. Just because we’d LIKE her to change her perception by the public, doesn’t necessarily mean it is possible.
Not in the primaries she won’t, she will split the vote with Perry and Romney will sneak in.
Perry is more electable.
“Perry is more electable.”
Yes, that is what I meant, not “better” “electable”.
The one big advantage to Palin is that the MSM has already thrown everything at her; and also that she doesn’t give a hoot what they say about her, so that is good.
However, I’ve got some lingering doubts.
She was OK stylistically in that debate with Biden, but he came out with some howlers and she let them pass by.
I forget them, but they were pretty glaring at the time.
He said something crazy at the end, I forget the details, but it was right up there with the “poland not under soviet domination” remark in terms of truth and accuracy.
She didn’t pounce on that at all, which is why I can’t remember it. Because if she had it would have been the talk of the town for days and we’d all remember it.
She’s great Sarah Palin, I love her to death, but well, we’ll see what happens.
Windflier, thanks for posting a bit of my article. I’ve been pretty busy lately, and haven’t been back over here in a week or so. Thanks for the compliment. You’re right: I actually paid extra to dispense with advertising, so I make no gain whatsoever by clicks, except I suppose a wider exposure. I decided I didn’t want to annoy my readers much more than I wanted some modest revenue stream of some sort for the inconvenience and eye-poking nature of most advertising on the Internet. Thanks for noticing. Of course, there’s the big ugly with the hat on the left margin, but you’ll just have to deal with that. Don’t whine. I have to LIVE with that...LOL Thanks! Mark
The truth is Sarah Palin still has the stink of Juan McLaim on her..
She has tried to wash it off... BUT the stink is strong.. very very strong..
Supporting Orin Hatch doesn’t help either.. the odor of Romney is ripe.. suggest staying away from him..
I like Sarah but she MUST wash off if she intends to run...
Bachmann seems to be a bit more careful.. maybe she has a better nose..
Nixon. He was despised. But, he waited until he got to the White House to quit.
Palin will split the conservative vote?
Who is the other conservative, that conservatives should submit to?
Perry is the other conservative in the race that will divide conservatives.
True, Palin is the chose for conservatives.
Palin and Perry will split the conservative vote in the primaries.
When I look back at how she handled the negative waves after the election we see that at the time when she held the chief executive office, when she held, I think, control of the Legislature, she was either incapable or unwilling to win in Alaska.
I understand she was financially beleaguered and I understand that the state was to some degree suffering by the Democrats' scorched earth war against her with ethics complaints. But, for whatever reason, she did not turn it around then against charges that subsequently have been proved to be baseless and that performance does not give me confidence that she will be able to it turn around on the national stage against the whole of the establishment media.
It is now 3 years since Tina Fey and Katie Couric took her apart on national television and she has not put herself back together for the mass of the country since.
This is not so much a question whether she can be nominated but whether she can be elected when the jury changes stripes. I agree with you, once a candidate acquires nomination he or she acquires a degree of legitimacy, but not always. I am old enough to have lived through the Barry Goldwater debacle and I will never forget what the media did to him. By the end of the campaign my neighbors thought he was a raving racist and a nutcase who would no doubt blow up the world.
I once attended a rally for Barry Goldwater and personally witnessed his supporters unable to gain admission to the event because there were so many of them. I went home, turned on the 11 o'clock news and was astonished to see that my eyes had been lying to me. Through the magic of television his supporters had morphed into protesters.
These are the realities which I have seen. The question is, is the risk of electability carried by Sarah Palin worth taking a chance when we could have almost everything we get with Palin in Bachmann or even in Perry with the last being eminently more electable?
A couple of days ago I put it this way in a reply:
"As for Palin, we know we would get a bona fide conservative but we fear she cannot get elected. My subjective conclusion is that her disadvantages concerning electability are more to be feared than Perry's defections from orthodox conservatism. I weigh the likelihood of the two and the degree of harm from the two and come up with a subjective judgment: if we lose the election we lose everything (and that includes our whole experiment in democracy) but if we get Perry, we get almost everything.
"I fully understand a subjective judgment that says we have got into this mess because we had 12 years of Rinos, 8 of them out of Texas, and we don't need any more. In other words, if we win the election with Perry, we won't get much of anything."
We will know soon whether Palin is going to force this decision upon us.
Palin is running circles around the nitwits at The Ministry of Truth. She (intelligently) is refusing to engage them on their battlefield. All the rest, Romney, Bachman, all of them are dancing like puppets for the idiots in “journalism”. She has something big up her sleeve IMHO. Time will tell but I will say this, we cannot have another election like those in the past where “it doesn’t matter much who wins”.
All the best.
“She (intelligently) is refusing to engage them on their battlefield.”
Yeah, but she won’t be able to continue to do that once she becomes a bona fide candidate.
She’ll have to do the debates, the meet and greets, etc.
Nobody can run a “front porch” campaign nowadays.
We’ll have to see if she gets in, how she does in the debates, and look at some polls.
The one thing I would say is she should not be the veep nom. again, that’s just really going to turn people off.
And on that subject I agree with whoever said it where ever it was that neither Romney nor Perry would take the veep slot. Bachmann probably would.
I’m actually liking the last 2 veeps, well of course I only like Cheney, Biden’s a moron (but he seems to be a worker, and I respect that). But the older, more experienced pol as veep is good I think. And it prevents the creation of an heir apparent.
The above statement is, of course, inoperable in the case of Marco Rubio.
As long as Palin wins, I don’t care about the fringe people and moderates.
That is very true...many of my apolitical conservative friends have swallowed the baloney. That said, with hard work by her and the grass roots, that perception can be overcome.
Do you know who Gov. Perry is?
...I start to wonder if some bone-brained schmuck isn't sitting there with two P.C.s and a laptop, all on different ISP's with unique "Absolute Adresses" posting as several people, all of whom simply "love each other's brilliance and beauty..."
Because, quite frankly, the cynical defeatist drivel offered up by Nate B. in fact deserves but to be ignored by actual thinking Americans, not applauded like some particularly prescient precept.
"I cant think of a single politician so thoroughly loathed by the MSM, and whose image is so set at this point in the presidential election season. If Palin runs, in order to win she has to overcome a media blockade unlike any other."
Ahem. Ummmm, the Lamestream Misleadia has spent the last three years attempting to knock her off her pins with every imaginable onslaught available, tired to shut her up and convince America that she's already all washed up.
I guess you haven't noticed, but...
...they failed. Badly. Monstrously. Indelibly. Forever. Sarah Palin is better known and better liked today than when they started their assault on her all those years ago. Her Facebook fan base has tripled over the last two years. Her volunteer ground support has organized ready-to-launch teams of "get out the voter" commandos in virtually every State in the Union, basically as a response to the FAILED media attempts to destroy her.
Anyone who at this point thinks they can effectively point to the media's repeatedly ineffective assassinations of Palin as a reason why she cannot win is simply and quite obviously as blind to the truth as they'd like to paint us as being.
In fact... they, like the media, are just whistling past the graveyard. Make no mistake.
Sarah Palin is coming, and the TEA Party is coming with her.
I want Palin to enter the race.
Great and sobering observation, which also touches on the essence of her problem.
Palin's strongest supporters hear someone say "But she quit" and unleash the "Democrats were hunting her down and she had bills to pay and" etc.
They do not realize that the game is lost before they get to the end of that explanation.
If anyone we disliked could be labelled a quitter, we would shut down any explanation that followed, too. This is my problem with the celebrity status of Palin--she isn't praised for her excellence (I'm not saying she doesn't have this in her--read exactly what i wrote), she's praised because she 'drives the libs crazy.' She isn't discussed for her amazing successes in Alaska, she's discussed because she's a colorful character who says things that drive people like Chris Matthews crazy.
Some folks can't seem to grasp that most voters DO NOT CARE about any of this. They pay attention to the news and read the paper around the rest of their busy lives. Come a year from October, they will sit down and think, "Well, what about this Palin?" And if they think "She's a quitter," you can have phonebook-sized stacks of explanations that will show how she was right, she was wronged, everyone else was the villain and she was the hero...and it DOES NOT MATTER.
When she was smeared by Couric and company, the response here was "Look what Katie Couric did!" That's a legitimate response to Couric's bias. But back in the day, no one said "Look what Mondale said about Reagan!" They were too busy laughing about how Reagan dismissed the entire age question by casually saying, "I won't hold my opponent's youth and inexperience against him" (paraphrasing from memory).
These things just are or they are not. And the reality is, Palin is capable of blowing off stupid reporters like the one at that event last week (she was more interested in seeing a calf or something than talking to the incredulous reporter). But the stage has already been set, so every Reagan-like dismissal is seen not as coming from strength and experience (as Reagan was able to do) but because Palin is some hick.
That's the burden she's under, and as much as we root for her and want her to turn the tables on them, if that were possible, I don't think we'd have Obama in the White House and more than a handful of Dems in DC in the first place.
First, too bad you can't find someone whose posts you enjoy as much as I enjoy nathanbedford's. If you can't handle someone giving someone a compliment, poor you. He's a good poster. His and my political beliefs are very different, but that doesn't matter, except that he doesn't deserve to be compared to lowly me in terms of writing ability.
Responding with "Ahem" and "Ummm" doesn't help, btw, it just makes you look too emotionally involved in an intellectual discussion.
The section quoted above is as far as I got in terms of reading your post. If that's really what you're thinking--and that you can say 'forever' about anything in politics--there's really no point in going on. Have a nice day.
NB, normally I would agree with this, but if nominating Palin is suicide, do we have time for any more slow-motion suicide (i.e, more years with a RINO prez)? There are only a few more years, at best, to turn this economic train wreck around. Hear you about Goldwater, but with the internet, maybe the MSM spin can be overcome. Maybe the grassroots will work the a** more than they did with Goldwater. One can only hope.
For me right now, it is Palin. If I go down with that ship, so be it.
My actual comment:
"Good to see you post. You are on-target, as usual."
No need to be a drama queen. Saying hello to a fellow FReeper is simply good manners. Saying "Good post" doesn't involve all kinds of conspiracy theories.
I added this P.S. because some of the snarkiness around here just doesn't sit well. I can be as snarky or snarkier than anyone, but not over something as simple as "Good post." I was brought up with manners and the ability to give a compliment, and it's disappointing how even something so small is considered suspicious behavior around here.
More like a hemorrhoidal burn.
CBS (Couric Bull Shoot) - when she asked Palin to name Supreme Court decisions she disagreed with, didn’t Palin say “Roe v. Wade and Kelo v. New London”? That’s what Sarah said, right? And then Fightin’ Sarah gave a really great take-down of how Stephens’ majority Kelo opinion was an anti-Consitutional treason, right? I remember it well.