Palin finds running mate for 2012!!

It wasn't easy, but the "You Betcha'" girl found her intellectual soulmate for her 2012 candidacy.




At least Rev. Jim had drugs to blame.

Palin tells us to beware of Obama's socialist terrorist tendencies, then tells us she is "proud of him" (as if she contributed to the making of who he is) and optimistic for his presidency.

In the words of farker Pocket Ninja: She's like a chameleon. It really is uncanny. She can adopt whatever tenor, message, or mindset a specific group requires. The irony is that the same group of people who saw these traits in Clinton and hated him with white, hot, venomous hate see it in her and love her for it. I think she's going to be around for a long, long time. And she's also learned that she needs some polishing and refinement, so will spend the next four years getting ready for her next step onto the national stage. She's going to be a scarily tough candidate to beat next time around. I'd put money on her.

I would go farther and say that she would have got about 28% of the vote if she were to have run for Prez at her peak (about a month or so ago). Coincidentally, that is the same number of people that want a third Bush term and the return of 8-tracks.

It is interesting that here it is 10 days after the Election and the wackos are still trying defeat Sarah Palin's bid for the V-POTUS job.

Would someone please tell them the Election is over and Biden won that job.

It is truly amazing that such numbnuts are allowed "out" without 24 hour supervision.



.

I think it just goes to show HOW afraid the far left is of Palin and I do believe they'll spend the next 4 years fighting her tooth and nail. I wouldn't be surprises to see them throw everything they have at her in the next Alaskan gubernatorial election in an attempt to keep her from the national stage.

And if something does happen with Stevens and Alaska has a special election in the next month or so and she runs, I think the DNC will be tapping any unused money they can to keep her from winning.

Plain and simple, they are simply terrified of her.

Aaron wrote:Plain and simple, they are simply terrified of her.

Oh, PLEASE don't let that she-devil, Sarah Palin, become the face of the Far Right!!!

I guess if considering how your side took it with no lube whatsoever in 80.

and 84.

and 88.

and 94.

and especially 2000

and 2004,

I understand why you cower in fear of the far right and why Sarah Palin scares you so much.

Why, I'll bet the sale of adult depends has increased 10 fold since she was announced in Dayton.

Aaron wrote:I understand why you cower in fear of the far right and why Sarah Palin scares you so much.

I'm soooooo scared. PLEEAASSEE don't let Palin take over the GOP. I don't know HOW we can live through that!!!!!!

A good Finishing School would do her some good.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/13/gop-governors-unhappy-with-palin-press-conference/

Well judging from the photo in this article, there is a lot of resentment amongst the republican also-rans.

I think the ideal ticket would be Palin and Haley Barbour.

It is interesting that here it is 10 days after the Election and the wackos are still trying defeat Sarah Palin's bid for the V-POTUS job.

Would someone please tell them the Election is over and Biden won that job.

It is truly amazing that such numbnuts are allowed "out" without 24 hour supervision.

That is your witty observation? No wonder the GOP partisans are floundering.

If she actually runs in 2012, she may divide the party into a "values" party and a "constitution" party. Either that or, if she becomes the face of the GOP, the libertarians will get the GOP "lepers".

Would someone tell Palin that it is over? She has done more interviews since the election than she did before it.

I did like the observation that many on the far right love Palin for the same reasons they hated Bill Clinton.

ziggy wrote:A good Finishing School would do her some good.

Karl Rove came out and said what she needed.

He also said Alaska was a wee bit too cold for him.

But I've no doubt that with some work over the next two years, she could be a force in national politics for some time to come.

And the far left thinks the same thing. That's why they're so scared of her.

At any rate, Whether it's Palin or Tim Pawlenty or someone else who takes the leadership role in the Republican party, I doubt that the leadership at the DNC is going to write her or the right off as willy nilly as some on this board have.

At any rate, Whether it's Palin or Tim Pawlenty or someone else who takes the leadership role in the Republican party, I doubt that the leadership at the DNC is going to write her or the right off as willy nilly as some on this board have.

Not being a member of their club, I don't get the democratic newsletter.

Still, I would hazard to say that they would be ecstatic over a Palin nomination.

Why would they be ecstatic? McCain received more then a 10 point jump amont consertatives just by announcing her in Dayton and then actually took a lead in the polls after the convention.

Are you naive enough to think that with some work, she may not achieve the oratory skills of the chosen one, she can still become a polished speaker in much the same manner Bill Clinton was.

And she can certainly surpass the lingual skills of our current President. You remember him. He's the one the right rose to victory over two very well funded and backed liberal politicians.

Or do you honestly think voters are going to remember the Couric interview in 4 to 8 years? Come on Terry, you're not that naive, are you?

Why would they be ecstatic? McCain received more then a 10 point jump amont consertatives just by announcing her in Dayton and then actually took a lead in the polls after the convention.

And how much support did he lose later?

McCain was moderate enough on social issues to have gained my vote.

Then he grabbed Palin, an obvious sop to throw to the christian coalition, and used her to make the outrageous attacks that he had to distance himself from.

This turned off many in the GOP as is evidenced by the number of Obama Republicans (remember those Reagan Democrats?).

If he had been in better heath, I would have still voted for him. As it was, though, I didn't want her that close to the Oval Office. She promotes ignorance as a virtue and I think the past eight years have given me my fill of that.

Like I said, if she becomes the face of the GOP, it may well be trouble for the party.

Are you naive enough to think that with some work, she may not achieve the oratory skills of the chosen one, she can still become a polished speaker in much the same manner Bill Clinton was.

Funny, seeing as how many on the right are treating Palin as their own "chosen one"

Or do you honestly think voters are going to remember the Couric interview in 4 to 8 years? Come on Terry, you're not that naive, are you?

You jest, right? People STILL make jokes about Dan Quayle.

You're letting your personal feeling toward Palin cloud your thinking Terry. Quale never energized any faction of the Republican party like Palin did.

Go ahead and dismiss her. Your not alone.

I just don't happen to think the Rahm Emanuel's of the world will.

They know what a mistake that would be.

Well another thing that will keep her in contention is she can flip flop and not bat an eye.

So the far right might be dead set against her b4 four years is up.

You're letting your personal feeling toward Palin cloud your thinking Terry. Quale never energized any faction of the Republican party like Palin did.

How am I letting my personal feeling get in the way, Aaron?

Again, you didn't address a single one of my arguments.

Yes, she energized McCain's campaign for about two weeks. What happened later?

How do you explain the fact that republicans came across the aisle in fairly substantial numbers?

Go ahead and dismiss her. Your not alone.

Where did I dismiss her, Einstein? I'm the one that pointed out that she has given more interviews since the election than she did before. I KNOW she isn't going away.

So are you going to address a SINGLE one of my arguments or just keep on with the gratuitous assertions about my person?

TerryRC wrote:

And how much support did he lose later?

McCain was moderate enough on social issues to have gained my vote.

Then he grabbed Palin, an obvious sop to throw to the christian coalition, and used her to make the outrageous attacks that he had to distance himself from.

This turned off many in the GOP as is evidenced by the number of Obama Republicans (remember those Reagan Democrats?).

If he had been in better heath, I would have still voted for him. As it was, though, I didn't want her that close to the Oval Office. She promotes ignorance as a virtue and I think the past eight years have given me my fill of that.

Like I said, if she becomes the face of the GOP, it may well be trouble for the party.

TerryRC wrote:
So are you going to address a SINGLE one of my arguments or just keep on with the gratuitous assertions about my person?

I'll answer the one question you ask. He lost about 7 or 8% but I don’t think that had as much to do with Palin as it did with many other factors.

I do not think there was a mandate for liberal policies or the democratic party. What I do think is that there was a lot of anger at Republicans over the past 8 years, the economy went in the tolit and overrode every other issue, a very liberal media was clearly biased towards the democratic party and it showed and all that coupled with the historical results of an Obama Administration, there was no way John McCain could have won. I think it was remarkable that he kept the race as close as he did for as long as he did.

Had John McCain won, it would have done more harm then anything, elections would have been contested, I do think there would have been mass riots and given the Congress, McCain would have never gotten any legislation passed and and that's the reason I voted for Obama. But then I’ve said all of this before on other threads.

As fare as your ‘arguments’ go that you’re so hell bent on me addressing, frankly, I don’t see any arguments. What I see is your personal opinion and no, as you’re not going to change your mind, I’m not interested in addressing that.

I think the reason Obama won was because of the anger at Republicans over the past 8 years, the economy, a very liberal media who was clearly biased towards the democratic party and then when you take all of that and add the historical implications of an Obama Administration, there was no way John McCain could have won. I think it was remarkable that he kept the race as close as he did for as long as he did. But then I’ve said all of this before on other threads.

Yep, that "liebral media".

If anything, they took it light on Palin and McCain because they needed to pretend the race was close to keep their rating up.

I made plenty of arguments. You dismissed them as "personal feelings".

The fact that even GOPer's like Pat Buchanan didn't approve of Palin? My personal opinion?

The fact that, for whatever reason, moderate and left republicans crossed the aisle on their vote for president? My personal opinion?

I'll answer the one question you ask. He lost about 7 or 8% but I don’t think that had as much to do with Palin as it did with many other factors.

[sarcasm]Yes, because what you "think" is so much like an actual fact...[/sarcasm]

No Terry, you didn't make 'plenty of arguments'. Like it or not, for the most part you stated your opinions. Stating that moderate republicans left McCain and went to Obama without any type of numbers to back it up is not an argument and neither is saying Palin was "an obvious sop to throw to the Christian coalition". Those are your opinions.

As for the media, I've posted links on other threads that showed their bias towards Obama. 2 to 1 on stories ran for Obama and 61% positive stories on Obama compared to 14% positive stories for McCain is clearly a biased media.

Now if you're saying that McCain is liberal and Obama is conservative then I will retract my statement about the liberal media and restate that the conservative media didn't want McCain elected.

Is that the case Terry?

Now if you're saying that McCain is liberal and Obama is conservative then I will retract my statement about the liberal media and restate that the conservative media didn't want McCain elected.

Aaron, what do you mean by "liberal" and "conservative". Palin is socially conservative but not fiscally conservative, for example. Perhaps you could better define your stereotypes?

As for the media, I've posted links on other threads that showed their bias towards Obama. 2 to 1 on stories ran for Obama and 61% positive stories on Obama compared to 14% positive stories for McCain is clearly a biased media.

Bullcrap. I watch FOX and CNN. Let's see this "source of yours". Fox was running the "OMG, Obama pals with terrorists" right up to the election.

Even if what you say IS true, perhaps it is because McCain, as a candidate, had more negatives associated with him. I don't say that is so, because I just don't know.

Stating that moderate republicans left McCain and went to Obama without any type of numbers to back it up is not an argument and neither is saying Palin was "an obvious sop to throw to the Christian coalition". Those are your opinions.

Whatever.

Palin wasn't chosen to offset the fact the the GOP caucus chose a nominee too moderate for the religious right. That is just my opinion. Well, not just mine - many old school republicans (in the model of William Buckley) agree.

Many prominent republicans came out for Obama, from Jim Leach to Colin Powell. I guess that is just my personal opinion.

Republicans For Obama The Nation: "Obamicans" Are Throwbacks To The Days Of Traditional Republicanism

McCain IS fairly liberal, as republicans go. That is why I liked him. I don't know what Obama will be.

I do know that he has a degree in Constitutional law. If he pisses on the COTUS, I will be one of his most vociferous opponents.

BTW, do you go back on your erroneous assertion that I have "discounted" Palin?

Question, Aaron.

Do you feel that Palin represents the face of true conservatism? Would someone like the late William F. Buckley would support her?

If you answer "yes", you have shown why the GOP is in real trouble.

No.

"No" to which question? That Palin is the face of true conservatism, or that Buckley (a man I truly respected) would have approved of her?

So how about those Obama republicans? I even provided you with a starter link.

Why do you think Palin was chosen to run with McCain if not for her social conservatism and "family values"?