Sarah Is Indomitable
Posted on 05/21/2011 4:08:46 AM PDT by onyx
Vote for whomever you please.
I’m huge on Pence, too... but I believe he has already declared that he wants to be elected Governor of Indiana first, before running for the Presidency.
Sarah Is Indomitable
Likewise. But offering your opinion takes the same weight as my retort to yours. Just sayin’ . . . .
Where was Sarah when the 3 GOP-controlled Houses were spending at a higher rate than Clinton? There were numerous GOP representatives who stood firm against those budgets. (19 were utterly consistent in doing so, I believe, and Indiana had more than any other state, I proudly recall!)
Just because Sarah didn't speak up then (as it was not her time and place to do so, as Governor and not a Congressperson), there are several decent potentials out there who did not choose to take up that particular fight at that particular time. It doesn't disqualify them.
Excellent. Now go away.
I 3rd that motion!
One thing I've never been accused of, hence my screen name. =)
Although, I do have many others things to work on.
When we lose, we leave gracefully and ask, “What’s wrong with us, and how can we win back the electorate?”
[Although I admit that we probably should ask, “How do we prevent that kind of massive voter fraud in the next election?”]
Democrats and RINOs are "People of the Lie"
[Although I admit that we probably should ask, “How do we prevent that kind of massive voter fraud in the next election?”]
Thirty states have some form of Voter ID legislation, in some stage of passage. Voter fraud has to be cleaned up state by state. Thank you, TEA Party voters of 2010.
Tho it depends entirely upon what you define as "history".....history shows nothing of the sort. You probably were not even alive, but do a little reading about Goldwater's 1964 run. You'll learn something.
LOL.
Your "nothing of the sort" remark is hyperbole.
You gave me only one election, way back in 1964, as an example that contradicts my claim. That was back when there were many more conservative-leaning Democrats who traditionally voted Democrat. That tradition, almost 50 years later is out the window. Today, most conservative-leaning voters are either Republicans or Independents who vote Republican in the general election.
Meanwhile I've given you 1976, 1980 and 1996 as examples that contradict your claim that the polls this far out are reliable.
As to my guess, know this, "that which can be asserted without facts, can also be dismissed without facts." I am therefore dismissing your "guess"; as you can freely and rightly dismiss mine. Now that both our guesses have been dismissed....however bad they may be....or untimely....or biased.....we've only the polls to help us along. And now.....we're right back where we started.
No we aren't back to where we started.
You're playing sematic games with the word "guess". One can make a guess based on no information and one can make an educated guess based on the information before them and based on the probability that that information is correct.
I gave you very specific information why I said that she would get 43% of the vote for starters, and you come back to me and tell me that my assertion is without facts.
And as I said, that 43% is just for starters.
Palin 2012 or doom. I see no one else. If we let them trick us again its all over.
Ooooo, I think you’re on to something there.....
LOL! I love that! :)
LOL. That and my noisy kids and wife finally left the room. ;)
Sarah is Secure
The better race to compare is Carter in 1980. Carter was an incumbent that had a poor economic record as well as being extremely liberal and he was incapable of hiding it during the campaign.
Logic n reason's "guess" is totally illogical and unreasoned.
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.
