Based upon the above ad, and other signs, I think it is clear that Sarah Palin is going to run for President. I have two modest predictions to make if she does get in:
1. She will win the Republican nomination.
2. She will beat Obama decisively in the general election, gaining over 300 electoral votes.
1.) I doubt she will even seek the nomination.
2.) If she IS the GOP candidate Obama will win in a landslide.
3.) Why are we even talking about this? The election is 1.5 years away. My proposal: no primaries until after 4th of July, then conventions after Labor Day.
Better yet, no primaries at all. I don’t see we’re better off with the pee-pul choosing candidates than when party hacks were in charge.
She’s become too polarizing. I don’t think she’ll get very far if she runs for office.
Maybe she can hope to become the Secretary of State…
Wow. Nice.
No Thomas she will run and she will crush Obama. With his numbers today and the wretched economy, which I think will only worsen by this time next year, almost any Republican could defeat him, but Palin, who I think has more raw political talent than anyone I have seen since Reagan rode off into the sunset, will humiliate him.
Our election system is what it is. I see no great virtue in short campaigns, especially when major issues are at stake, and this election will have no shortage of these. However, I like politics which I realize makes me an oddity among most Americans.
I think she is “too polarizing” because the media has made her appear so. She is far less polarizing in reality that, say, Obama.
The news media will do everything in its power to ensure Sarah Palin is defetaed. They cannot stand a conservative Christian woman, especially one who is beautiful and shows by that beauty how godlessly ugly their liberal feminist sexual perversion is.
I wish Don’s predictions would come to pass, but that’s more hope than reality.
They did that in 80 against Reagan Paul at a time that the lamestream press had far more credibility and a near monopoly on news. Their being in the tank for Obama, as they clearly were in 08, will work to Palin’s advantage as they have no credibility left with the vast majority of the American public.
It won’t happen as long as the negativity of “I don’t think she can win” talk keeps up..You think ANYONE is just gonna walk in & take it? Your gonna have to have faith pray then work like a dog to make it happen..She is gonna run,,she will beat Obama as long as WE DO OUR PART! She was ONLY ONE fighting against Obama the last three yrs..men put your ego’s aside-women put your jealousy aside..remember Moses led the people to freedom and he was mocked because he studdered..She is good decent hardworking woman that is not owned. This may be our last shot of saving our country..She has NO ties to oil,pharma,wall street,banks,muslim brotherhood…They fear her cause she WILL bring down entire foundation they spent 100yr sbuilding
3 Years of Attacks:
attempt to burn her church down, accuse her of murder, 1,000s death threats, 40+ reporters sent to AK for e-mail dig, Dozens of CNN, CBS, NBC, NY Times “polls” saying negs are high / not liked etc., Obama “media” repeating Can’t win a general, to divisive, obama landslide win & promote bachmann & perry to keep her out!!
ALL THIS TELLS ME SHE WILL EASILY BET OBAMA!!! twitter: @MaxCUA
Well, maybe Donald, Bellez and Max are right. I will say this: the dripping putrid hatred that liberal blog meisters demonstrate for Sarah Palin on their message boards is almost palpable. I even know some who are otherwise very intelligent and well-balanced when it comes to science and engineering. In fact, I can’t believe that the pro-nuclear energy forums I “attend” are all so in love with Obama (who himself appointed an anti-nuke as NRC chairman, thereby stifling the nuclear rennaissance) and in hatred against Sarah Palin (who is very pro-nuclear). I just don’t get it. That’s the reason for my pessimism – the liberals control what’s said in the media.
BTW, the actual people who work in nuclear energy – those without time to administer blog sites – are for Sarah Palin and against Barack HUSSEIN Obama.
Delusional.
Obama has a better chance of winning the Republican nomination.
RR I would doubt my prediction if you agreed with it. You know as much about GOP primary politics as a pig does about penance.
“That’s the reason for my pessimism – the liberals control what’s said in the media.”
No longer Paul, thanks to the new media. TAC is one small part of that new media and there are tens of thousands of organs like it around the nation. The days when Walter Cronkite could say “And that’s the way it is” and be believed are as dead as black and white TV.
Donald,
I thus thank God for TAC, Real Catholic TV and similar outlets. I mean that sincerely.
Don, a wager? If Palin enters and wins the nomination, I’ll upload a pic of me with literal egg on my face. If Palin enters and fails to win the nomination, you do it.
In this age of “gotcha” journalism dominated by leftist media, the sharks will be out en masse picking up on every alleged Palin”gaffe.”
Bachmann’s pretty much finished after her Elvis blooper (despite the triviality of it). When you become the constant butt of late night comics and political cartoonists and the jokes go viral, you’re done in the eyes of many.
In an age when appearances rather than substance matter most, Chris Christie also wouldn’t last long given his corpulence. Imagine him, for example, counseling Americans to “tighten our belts” and the reaction.
Palin has hard core support on the right, especially the Tea Party, but there are millions of haters out there who would still stick with Obama rather than see her win. She ran a small state, which as governor would be comparable to being mayor of Columbus, Ohio, and while charismatic she lacks intellectual depth and gravitas to be president. However, if she were on the ballot against Obama, I’d hold my nose and vote for her.
Right now, I’d say it’s a two-man race between Romney (well financed and a good campaigner) and Perry (the best resume by far), and while neither is ideal in my view (although a Perry-Ryan ticket would be attractive), both are superior to the hapless McCain and likely have the best chance to beat Barack.
Speaking of which, while the economy is in the crapper, don’t discount Obama’s ability to turn things around by fudging the numbers and pushing his theme that the Repubs have been the obstructionists to everything he’s trying to do. He’ll play the blame card for all its worth.
Penultimately, there’s a Hollywood movie about the Seals raid on Osama in the works, planned to be released in October 2012 (note the timing) that will portray the CinC as a rock-solid patriot totally in command evoking images of Ike, Patton and MacArthur.
And, as one poster mentioned, it’s early yet and there’s always the unexpected. Another 9/11-scenario, in which Americans would become united again, could be enough to get Obama over the hump.
Don, I wish I shared your optimism on this, but I just don’t. Lord knows, I love Sarah Palin – she was the ONLY reason I voted for McCain in ’08, and I’d happily vote for her again. But I know too many people to whom she should be an appealing candidate who can’t stand her. I just don’t see her winning enough support from waivering independents, and her presence at the top of a GOP ticket would inspire Obama’s currently uninspired base to turn out in droves. And that’s assuming she won the GOP nomination.
With a viable conservative alternative like Perry in the GOP race, Palin’s winning the nomination becomes even more difficult than it already would have been. More likely, Perry and Palin and Bachmann and Paul will so splinter the conservative vote that Romney will win the nomination by default.
That’s the scenario Obama would love to see play out. If that happens, what should be a fairly easy win for a Republican will turn into either a narrow Obama victory, or, worse-case scenario, a very narrow Romney victory that will result in Romney governing like the Rockefeller Republican that he truly is (I honestly see an Obama victory as preferable to that).
At this point, I hope she doesn’t run.
Max reminds me that the e-mail dig was supposed to find dirt. Didn’t the MSM enlist the aid of volunteers to dig and analyze.
Did they complete the review and find nothing or are they still digging?
Thomas Collins, RR.
Three of the President’s more recent predecessors have had at modest recovery in public esteem at some point or another during the fifteen months or so antedated a stand for re-election, so it is not unusual at all. These recoveries occurred over a period of months in 1948, 1975-76, and 1992. The quarter-to-quarter changes in gross domestic product (expressed at annualized rates) were as follows:
1947 q2: -0.3
1947 q3: +6.2
1947 q4: +6.5
1948 q1: +7.5
1948 q2: +2.2
1948 q3: +0.6
1949 q1: -5.5
1949 q2: -1.4
1975 q2: +3.1
1975 q3: +6.9
1975 q4: +5.3
1976 q1: +9.4
1976 q2: +3.0
1976 q3: +2.0
1976 q4: +2.9
1977 q1: +4.7
1991 q2: +2.7
1991 q3: +1.7
1991 q4: +1.6
1992 q1: +4.5
1992 q2: +4.3
1992 q3: +4.2
1992 q4: +4.3
1992 q1: +0.7
I do not think we will see economic performance this good in the coming year and a half, sad to say. You may have noticed that two of the three individuals in question were voted out of office anyway. If I were employed on the President’s campaign crew, I would not be particularly confident unless the GOP nominated Darth Vader.
Polarizing! Obama is the most divisive, class/race-hate generating cad in American History.
Polarizing? Is “polarizing” the obazombie vocabulary word for this week?
Obama will win in a landslide.
The following have been returned to office in landslides:
Franklin Roosevelt (rapid economic growth, tarnished opposition)
Dwight Eisenhower (broad and durable public esteem, modest economic growth)
Lyndon Johnson (general if brittle public esteem, prosperity)
Richard Nixon (mixed public opinion, prosperity with problems)
Ronald Reagan (improving public esteem & liked by all but partisan Democrats, rapid economic growth)
Which precedent is analogous?
RR:
If Governor Palin wins, meds wouldn’t be sufficient. You will be in a padded room wearing a straitjacket.
I will be singing “Non Nobis Domine . . .”
If she enters she has to be considered a front-runner for the nomination. It basically become a three-way bloodbath between Perry, Romney, and Palin. Bachmman’s candidacy would effectively be over. My fear is that Perry and Palin would split enough votes to swing the nomination to Romney.
As for a general, the idea that Obama would win in a landslide is laughable. Yes, Palin’s negatives would make it a close election, and it might turn a few swing states towards Obama. That said, at a minimum Palin or any GOP candidate will win every state McCain won, and at this point Indiana, Virginia, and North Carolina would almost certainly return to the red column regardless the GOP nominee.
All that said, I’m more or less with Jay in my preferred outcome at this moment, but there’s a long way to go.
“Don, a wager? If Palin enters and wins the nomination, I’ll upload a pic of me with literal egg on my face. If Palin enters and fails to win the nomination, you do it.”
Done RR, but with the caveat that the wager only applies if she gets in.
Destiny is an unmovable force. So we will see whose side She is on.
If Palin gets in she will win the nomination by acclimation. By the time Iowa, NH, South Carolina, Nevada and Florida are done it will be so clear what Republicans want the GOP will have no choice.
If the Establishment Good Ole Boys continue to try and manipulate the outcome the Republican Party will be finished.
“With a viable conservative alternative like Perry in the GOP race, Palin’s winning the nomination becomes even more difficult than it already would have been. More likely, Perry and Palin and Bachmann and Paul will so splinter the conservative vote that Romney will win the nomination by default.”
Romney is a pathetically weak candidate Jay, as demonstrated by Perry obtaining front runner status just by getting in. I don’t think there is a sizable vote for him outside of New Hampshire against a first rate opponent. Bachmann gets out after Palin gets in. She will have no choice as her money and support collapses. Her appeal has basically been as an imitation Palin. Santorum will also get out, after throwing his support to Palin, in hopes of getting a cabinet position, which he will. Paul’s vote doesn’t come mainly from Republican conservatives, but rather from disaffected left wing Democrats and Libertarians. He and Palin will not be fighting for the same votes in the primaries. Her main opposition will be Rick Perry, who may well end up as her Veep.
Don, okay.
(Guest comment from Don’s wife Cathy): G-Veg, the MSM finished digging through all the Palin emails released by the state of Alaska — and found nothing/zip/zilch/nada.
Rove and the rest of the GOP establishment will play divide and conquer like nobody’s business. They will play Perry and Palin (and Bachmann – she still has a significant following) off of one another, planting stories here and there to make it look like they’re backbiting one another. When all is said and done, they WANT Romney and they will have Romney, unless there is a single viable alternative to Romney. As much as I love Sarah, I’m not sure she represents the viable alternative.
By the way, what will be the “theme” of her campaign? Perry has shown us what his theme will be and has shown some discipline in sticking to it, even in the face of all the sharp knives that have been out since his announcement. He is campaigning on jobs and the economy and pointing to his own 10-year record as governor of the 2nd-largest state as an alternative to what Obama has to offer. If the economy and jobs is the focus of the next election, the Republican nominee will win. What will Sarah’s theme be? What record will she run on to point to as an alternative to Obama. At this point, she has less executive experience than he has, which was not the case in’08, when she had more experience than he. If Sarah’s campaign becomes about her (and the Dem and the media will pull out all the stops to make it about her), she will lose. We already had one election in ’08 that was all about the candidate and the precedents that electing him would set – he won and the current state of affairs is the consequence of that. Sarah will need a compelling reason to vote for her over Obama. Perry offers that. Heck, even Romney (as pathetic as he is) offers that. Even Ron Paul, believe it or not, offers that.
Unfortunately, I’m not sure Sarah does. Next year’s election has to be about the economy and jobs and restoring America’s confidence and good name. What does Sarah point to as being her qualifications to do this?
“Sarah will need a compelling reason to vote for her over Obama.”
Actually I think any GOP candidate will be have a compelling reason to vote for them: they aren’t Obama. President’s who preside over lousy economies during election years lose. That is a simple fact of American political life.
She has spoken out against virtually every economic and fiscal mistep of this administration. Go to the link below to read her facebook page which chronicles her views quite well.
http://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin?v=wall#!/sarahpalin?sk=notes
She has been building her platform ever since 2008. She will win due to the bad economy and a promise to reverse the course that Obama has set for us.
In regard to Perry he is a good enough conventional politician with a tendency to be a bit too Texan for the rest of the nation. (Does he really think that the 1845 treaty of annexation gives Texas a right to secede?) I think he will give Palin a good race and keep up excitement and interest in the Republican primaries which will be all to the good for the general election. If Palin does not get in, Perry will be the nominee, absent some major scandal, but I think that Palin will get in.
JA Has it 100%.
The campaign will be about “compare and contrast” four more years robbing Peter to pay Paul to prosperity for all: economic growth and job creation.
The MSM can’t broadcast Obama’s utter failure so it will character assassinate Governor Palin or Governor Perry, or whomever.
To be honest, I’m hoping that Palin stays out.
She’s an attractive political personality, and I had a lot of hopes for her when got the VP nomination last year, but it seems to me she showed a lot of weakness in quitting the governorship without finishing her first term, and she did honestly fall down badly in unscripted interviews.
I hate saying anything against her, since the Left (and the elitist Right) managed to show some of the most despicable behavior in our political arena in the last 30 years towards here — behavior which shows how truly loathsome a lot of them really are.
But overall I’m just not sure she’d be that good a president. (Better than Obama, but then would would be some yard gnomes.) And I’m concerned she wouldn’t do well in the election.
That said, the GOP field is staggeringly weak. I’m slightly leaning towards Perry but no one has my enthusiasm.
Being a Texan myself, I can’t comprehend what “too Texan” might mean. Is that like having “too much money”? Or “too much love”? Or “car too fast”?
Or “economy too good”? “Too much job creation”?
In ’08, the “rest of the country” chose for President an infantile amateur with no governing experience who likes to make everything all about himself. At this point, even one of them there Texans might look good to the “rest of the country”.
(And, by the way, MOST Texans, including expat Texans like myself, adopt the interpretation of the 1845 treaty of annexation that Gov. Perry put forward. In fact, I adopt the position that the treaty of annexation is completely irrelevant to the question of secession, and that Texas could just tell the “rest of the country” to go to hell and do whatever it wants.)
😉
Ditto Darwin. I will add however, that I actually feel some despair about the situation in our country and the world as a whole. The only hope I have for any type turn toward sustainability is for the Republican Party to put forward a candidate with a solid vision, strong convictions that are good. I just don’t see it happening though. I would likely vote for just about anybody the Pubs put it up because the odds of that person being worse than Obama or any other Dem are slim, but holding your nose while you pull the lever does not bring relief to the soul. It’s so cliche to say it, but what need a Reagan type of candidate. Not a clone, not someone who pays lip service to him, not someone who tries to be like him, but just a sharp, decent human being who is unafraid to work for the right thing in spite of all the opposing forces.
the GOP field is staggeringly weak
Most of them would be passable in a different set of circumstances (say, 1996). The trouble is the culture in the Republican Party. They are no longer able to talk turkey in any setting.
Maybe the Chileans could lend us this fellow:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernan_Buchi
” I can’t comprehend what “too Texan” might mean.”
I believe there was a state advertising slogan for Texas a few decades back Jay that said, “Texas, it is a whole other country!” Sometimes Texas politicians translate well on the national stage and sometimes they do not. John B. Connelley wasted quite a bit of money in 80 to go noplace. I doubt if LBJ would have ever gotten to the White House, but for his ability to steal the 60 election for Kennedy in Texas, and an assassin’s bullet. Bush 41 was elected President in 88, but I doubt if he ever made a convincing Texan. His son was pure Texan, and he just barely made it to the White House in 00 and it was a lot closer than it should have been in 04. I personally think that Texas has been a success and that other states should emulate it in many ways, but that there is potential hurdle for a Texan politician going national is undeniable.
The treaty of annexation does not say anything about secession, but it does allow Texas to split into four other states, something which might come in handy in the future if the citizens of Texas found that desirable.
“but it seems to me she showed a lot of weakness in quitting the governorship without finishing her first term, and she did honestly fall down badly in unscripted interviews.”
I believe that she has been planning this run since 2008 and I think quitting the post was a necessary part of her plan. She has used it to build up a national movement and to amass favors owed from Republican politicians across the nation. In regard to unscriped interviews, I think that was true in 2008, but it is no longer true this year.
I and almost every other Texan knows what the treaty says. The fact that the notoriously independece-minded Texans didn’t feel the need to explicitly reserve the “right” to secede tells me that it wasn’t even questionable. Of course they could do with regard to the U.S. what they had just done with regard to Mexico.
Apart from Sam Houston, who was a late interloper into the Texas Revolution acting as Andrew Jackson’s stalking horse with the interests of the U.S., as opposed to those of Texas, closest to his heart, I doubt most Texans believed entering into the Union foreclosed future options. And it wasn’t 15 years later that they decided to exercise those options.
As for Texas being a “whole other country”, is it REALLY that different that frickin’ Alaska?
And let’s not forget that the Palins have a secession advocacy problem of their own in their past.
“And it wasn’t 15 years later that they decided to exercise those options.”
And what a rousing success that was Jay! 🙂 A lot of misery could have been avoided if Texans had listened to the man who led them to victory at San Jacinto.
Alaska has never had a politician in the White House. Palin will be sui generis on that point, as well as many others.
Wow. For people opposed to the hate shown by the media toward your devout Sarah, there certainly is a lot of hateful speech here toward anyone who doesn’t worship at her stilettos.
Fact: she left Wasilla in debt by building a sports arena on land the city did not own.
Fact: her mansion was built by the same contractors as the arena, with many of the same materials, supposedly by Todd’s ‘buddies.” Mayor Sarah suspended the need for building permits, so no one can find out facts about who, what, or how much.
Fact: Sarah is afraid to be interviewed anywhere but Fox, which feeds her softball questions in advance so she can have her answers in front of her (you can often see the prompter reflected in her glasses.)
Fact: Sarah Palin has nary a good word to say, ever, about the other side. President Obama has done all he can to work with the GOP, to the extent of hurting his initiatives and making himself look bad.
Fact: the people here who support her will dismiss everything I have written, because you have bought her picked upon genius meme. So be it. But Sarah has so many skeletons in her personal and financial closets that I don’t think she wants scrutinized. For example, why is a PAC paying for ‘family vacations’ in a vehicle that costs millions to drive, and then they pay for her hotel rooms as well? Her PAC, which was set up to help candidates of her choice, has spent a teeny amount doing that, and much more on speechwriters (surprise, she never writes what she says, or writes) and personal things for multimillionaure Sarah.
Keep thinking she is your savior: she is not.
“And let’s not forget that the Palins have a secession advocacy problem of their own in their past.”
If you can ever find anything where Sarah Palin ever said that Alaska had a right to secede Jay, you would have a comparison to what Perry said.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1891829,00.html
I just mention it as evidence of what Texans might have been thinking in 1845. Clearly, slavery played a role (although a much more minor role than left-wing historians would have us believe) in the Texas Revolution. And it was one of the sticking points blocking an earlier agreement on annexation with the U.S. And it was clearly the reason behind secession 15 years later.
There is no way Texas agreed to statehood thinking that they wouldn’t have a future option to secede over the issue of slavery. As ashamed of Texas’ slavery past as I am, that is just the plain intent of the parties based on the facts.
“that is just the plain intent of the parties based on the facts.”
If such a provision had been inserted Jay it would never have made it through Congress. Northern Democrats and Whigs were already leery about Texas coming into the Union as a slave state, and a proviso allowing secession at the whim of Texas would have driven them over the edge. In any case, Texas had been begging for admission since 1836. This was not the case of the US wooing a reluctant Texas but quite the reverse.
As for the hero of San Jacinto, you will find that I am a big fan of Sam Houston. “The Raven” is one of my favorite books of all time, albeit fairly poor in the way of objective biography. More recent biographies and histories of the Texas Revolution offer a much more balanced assessment of Sam’s role in the Runaway Scrape and eventual victory at San Jacinto. It appears that Houston’s intent had been to retreat all the way across the Sabine and enlist the aid of U.S. troops to defeat the Mexican army. Much of the credit for the victory goes to Houston’s subordinates who forced Houston’s hand on meeting Santa Ana at Buffalo Bayou.
Again, Texas would never have entered the Union believing itself barred from acting in what it believed were its interests with respect to slavery. And all I’m saying is that what happened just 15 years later is evidence of that.
I hope she runs. She mentioned the blessings of liberty. I connect with that, so do others. To early to predict anything about anyone. I want Obama defeated and sent home.
I tend to agree Jay with those authorities who say that at the Council of War held by Houston prior to the battle of San Jacinto that a majority of the participants were in favor of going on the defensive and waiting for Santa Anna to attack, and that it was Houston who pressed for an immediate assault. Certainly several of Houston’s officers had various hare-brained schemes during that campaign including abandoning Texas to Santa Anna and marching on Mexico City. Houston who was a flamboyant personality himself, was, by comparison, restrained and sober in his command of the Texan army. I have always treasured this quote by Houston about those days:
“All new states are invested, more or less, by a class of noisy, second-rate men who are always in favor of rash and extreme measures, But Texas was absolutely overrun by such men.”