Going Rogue- Sarah Palin's book tour

[karmacop]

One of my favorite politicial sites, 538.com, recently had a post giving 10 reasons why Palin might win the GOP nomination:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/10-reasons-that-sarah-palin-could-win.html

While I don't think Palin could ever win a general election, I think people underestimate the likelihood of her winning the GOP primary given the enthusiasm that the far-right base has for her. The web site agrees, giving that as the number one reason:

1. Enthusiasm. People tend to see electorate through a one-dimensional lens, in which a fixed number of voters are trying to decide between two or more candidates. But that's not really how politics works, especially in primaries. Rather, the playing field is (at least) two-dimensional: people are not merely trying to decide whom to vote for, but also whether to vote at all. Because of the reach of her brand, Palin has the ability to engage the sorts of voters who might ordinarily stay at home. In the general election, that will include some voters who turn out to vote against her -- but that's less of a concern in the primaries.

Click the link for the rest.

[ThinSkin]

In the coming months and year ahead, we will no doubt see Palin on the national stage blasting Obama and the Dems, The lib media in turn, will empty both barrels into her. How she handles all that will show me at least, whether or not she's got the pair to be the President of these here United States.

Because if she can't stand the heat,..... I don't want her in the kitchen.

[ljs]

You really don't think she uses her kids as props? Sorry, but you must not have watched her campaign. BTW, I hate what she brings to politics which is populist drivel, empty headed slogans, oft repeated half truths and out right lies, and not a lick of comprehension about the way things really are.

I think every politician uses their own or other kids during campaigns, and even not during campaigns. How many politicians go around holding babies? Most all of them. Obama had his kids on the stage numerous times. But they are young, not teenagers getting prego and maybe that is why the media left them alone.

Pointing out that this is a Redskins message board, which means that all of us are (or ought to be) aware that it's possible to get a four-year college degree without being able to read.

That said, however, I don't think Sarah was on a football scholarship, either.

:hysterical::hysterical:

Her brother attended U of I w/ my gf's brother and they are still good friends. Being a Vandal fan, (and I attended there myself)- we get a bit touchy when people start making fun of that school. We don't pay the School President over $400k a year for nothing.

Maybe not to that extreme, but the left wing press certainly does do more to "explain" Obama mistakes while they were all quick to pounce on any of GWBs.

I certainly think the press is extremely easy on Obama and his administration. When they do have criticisms, they get directed at "Democrats in Congress" etc. The whole "Buck stops here" cry we endured for 8 years has fallen completely silent.

I agree with this.

Come on man... When she winked into the camera at the GOP convention my wife and I both said... Oh ****... we're in trouble..

Like I said I don't agree with her on the issues and the more I found out about her the further I went away from her based on the issues. In Presentation she's very rough and has glaring holes. But their is something about her that is very engaging.

If she got her act together she could be a very formitable candidate in 2012 or 2016. There is a popularism element with her support.

And this..but my reaction to her being on stage was more of "wow'

here are some questions I have:

Is Palin as divisive as Hillary (it seems like she is to me)

Is she judged more harshly than others because she's a female? (it seems, in part, to me that it is also like Hillary).

#1- yes, but in different ways

#2- yes- but I think all female candidates are. T

[Heisenberg]

In the coming months and year ahead, we will no doubt see Palin on the national stage blasting Obama and the Dems, The lib media in turn, will empty both barrels into her. How she handles all that will show me at least, whether or not she's got the pair to be the President of these here United States.

Because if she can't stand the heat,..... I don't want her in the kitchen.

If the media has as much liberal bias as you claim - they'll be doing everything they can to ensure she wins the nomination for the Republicans in 2012.

[Predicto]

Because Palin has something those other GOP candidates don't. She does have some kind of gift for being genuine which escapes the rest. She connects with people better.

That was my point. MCD's thesis that she's popular because of a position on tax cuts on small business was laughable.

She is a phenomenon, and it has little to do with her position on any particular issues (to the extent she can articulate one). She is popular because a large segment of the public relates to her on a personal level.

[Kilmer17]

Obama had the phenomenon thing working for him last time around.

I dont think the country will fall into that hysteria again.

[karmacop]

Obama had the phenomenon thing working for him last time around.

I dont think the country will fall into that hysteria again.

The country? I don't think so either.

The GOP primary? There's a decent chance.

[Kilmer17]

The country? I don't think so either.

The GOP primary? There's a decent chance.

I disagree. That's a long time away. By then she'll have faded a good bit.

Or she may turn herself into something more substantive. But I doubt that.

The 2012 primaries on the GOP side will be dominated by "who can beat Obama". And even the strongest Palin supporters will see that she's not that candidate.

[Predicto]

So as far as choosing the more qualified individual, I would take the executive experience of a mayor and governor over a community organizer and halfhearted state legislator and part-time US senator.

Of course you would - because you've slanted the analysis.

Obama was a community organizer almost two decades ago, when Sarah Palin wasn't doing anything outside of her home at all. Maybe a bake sale?

No knock on Palin for being a housewife, it is an honorable role, but to attack Obama for being a just a community organizer is ridiculous - that was all the way back in the early 1990s.

Palin was the mayor of a town of less than 10,000 people, then did half a term as the governor of a small state before quitting. That's it.

[TheGoodBits]

Of course you would - because you've slanted the analysis.

Obama was a community organizer almost two decades ago, when Sarah Palin wasn't doing anything outside of her home at all. Maybe a bake sale?

No knock on Palin for being a housewife, it is an honorable role, but to attack Obama for being a just a community organizer is ridiculous - that was all the way back in the early 1990s.

Palin was the mayor of a town of less than 10,000 people, then did half a term as the governor of a small state before quitting. That's it.

Dude, Alaska is HUGE!

[Predicto]

Dude, Alaska is HUGE!

Yep. And it has less people than the City of Fort Worth, Texas or Columbus, Ohio.

[ThinSkin]

If the media has as much liberal bias as you claim - they'll be doing everything they can to ensure she wins the nomination for the Republicans in 2012.

I believe you're assuming the media thinks she'll lose handily to Obama should she win the nomination, so they're going to pimp her big-time. I'm seeing no indication of that. On the contrary, I think they're scared ****less of her. It's been mostly open season on her and the bashing will continue unabated....imho.

[karmacop]

I disagree. That's a long time away. By then she'll have faded a good bit.

Or she may turn herself into something more substantive. But I doubt that.

The 2012 primaries on the GOP side will be dominated by "who can beat Obama". And even the strongest Palin supporters will see that she's not that candidate.

It's been almost a year since the election, and based on her book sales and Oprah appearances Palin is showing no signs of "fading" whatsoever. In fact, she could write a second book focusing more on her positions to be timed perfectly for the primaries, and in the meantime be campaigning as a political speaker on talk shows, town halls, etc.

And her success among those who support her (i.e., a significant portion of the GOP primary electorate) is not based on anything "substantive," as Predicto has been pointing out. There's no need for her to gain any substantive heft for her to be successful in 2012, at least among GOP voters.

The Dems nominated Kerry in large part because they thought he had the best chance of beating Bush. How did that turn out? Also, the GOP is being dominated recently not by "moderates" who might have electability as their main concern, but by the hard-right base who demand ideological purity over everything else (NY-23 anyone?). Palin's supporters don't care about electability. In fact, they will probably say that the GOP tried and failed to pick the "moderate" and "electable" nominee the last time (McCain) and that the GOP needs to move to the right to win.

Click on my 538.com link I posted earlier for 10 reasons why Palin could win the nomination.

[Predicto]

On the contrary, I think they're scared ****less of her.

I admit that I am scared of what she represents. Angry anti-intellectual populism scares me. I absolutely admit it.

[karmacop]

I believe you're assuming the media thinks she'll lose handily to Obama should she win the nomination, so they're going to pimp her big-time. I'm seeing no indication of that. On the contrary, I think they're scared ****less of her. It's been mostly open season on her and the bashing will continue unabated....imho.

I think you're wrong on this one. Palin's positions are too right-wing for her to realistically win a general election.

To win in 2012, she'll need to win independent voters, the vast majority of which have consistently told pollsters that Palin is not qualified to be President.

[Kilmer17]

I did. I just think they're (and those of you here) are wrong.

If she did write a second "positions" book I might change my thoughts. I also didnt think Obama would have a chance with his lack of experience etc. But I was wrong to underestimate the power (read cult) of personality.

[The Evil Genius]

On the contrary, I think they're scared ****less of her.

You betcha!

She's a moron. A tool. A shiny new playtoy for the GOP. Why wouldn't any educated person be scared of her political shenanigans?

Of course, I think that same description could be used for quite a few of our elected officials.

[karmacop]

I admit that I am scared of what she represents. Angry anti-intellectual populism scares me. I absolutely admit it.

I'll second that. I'm not scared of her because I realistically think she can win. But I'm scared of her policy positions, and the fact that those positions are apparently shared by a good number of people in this country, that's for sure.

I'd be more comforted if most of her supporters liked her because they relate to her on a personal level instead of because they agree with her views on government, science and the world. To think that 30% of the people in this country agree with her policy views gives me chills.

[ThinSkin]

She says she's a Reagan Republican. I don't doubt her. If I'm not mistaken, more people liked Reagan than not. Now if she can convince enough people that she could be the next RR, she's got this thing in the bag.

[karmacop]

I did. I just think they're (and those of you here) are wrong.

If she did write a second "positions" book I might change my thoughts. I also didnt think Obama would have a chance with his lack of experience etc. But I was wrong to underestimate the power (read cult) of personality.

Fair enough. I just think that given her apparent popularity among the GOP base, along with the relatively bare cupboard of competitors, people are underestimating her chances.

As you say though, a lot can change in two years.

[Zhouse]

I'll second that. I'm not scared of her because I realistically think she can win. But I'm scared of her policy positions, and the fact that those positions are apparently shared by a good number of people in this country, that's for sure.

I'd be more comforted if most of her supporters liked her because they relate to her on a personal level instead of because they agree with her views on government, science and the world. To think that 30% of the people in this country agree with her policy views gives me chills.

Originally Posted by Predicto

I admit that I am scared of what she represents. Angry anti-intellectual populism scares me. I absolutely admit it.

Bill Maher talked about this issue a while back and how Dems/libs are horrible at squashing these things before the snowball turns into an unstoppable avalanche.

[Heisenberg]

She says she's a Reagan Republican. I don't doubt her. If I'm not mistaken, more people liked Reagan than not. Now if she can convince enough people that she could be the next RR, she's got this thing in the bag.

Right now more people like Obama than not - despite what some of you want to claim the polling data says otherwise.

[Predicto]

She says she's a Reagan Republican. I don't doubt her. If I'm not mistaken, more people liked Reagan than not. Now if she can convince enough people that she could be the next RR, she's got this thing in the bag.

Every GOP candidate has been saying he or she is a Reagan Republican for the last 20 years.

You are correct, however, if she can convince enough people that she is the next Ronald Reagan, then she will be very successful. But that is easier said than done. Convincing a true believer conservative that she is that person appears to be easy - they watch the same interviews as the rest of us but see them completely differently than we do. They have a different reality.

So on one sense, you are right. If she can fool enough people into thinking that she is the next Ronald Reagan then she will win. And if she can fool that many people, well, that is very scary indeed.

[ljs]

You betcha!

She's a moron. A tool. A shiny new playtoy for the GOP. Why wouldn't any educated person be scared of her political shenanigans?

Of course, I think that same description could be used for quite a few of our elected officials.

Glad you added the last sentence. I think it's absurd for people to Sarah is stupid or a moron or uneducated. If you disagree with her policies and beliefs, that is one thing. The woman isn't dumb. She may not be as well versed as a seasonsed politician, but she isn't uneducated and she isn't stupid. Matter of fact, I'd bet she has more of an education that many posters on this board.

It cheapens your argument when all you can say is "she's stupid."

[The Evil Genius]

Glad you added the last sentence. I think it's absurd for people to Sarah is stupid or a moron or uneducated. If you disagree with her policies and beliefs, that is one thing. The woman isn't dumb. She may not be as well versed as a seasonsed politician, but she isn't uneducated and she isn't stupid. Matter of fact, I'd bet she has more of an education that many posters on this board.

It cheapens your argument when all you can say is "she's stupid."

To be fair, she was smart enough to aline herself with the right people to get elected twice (mayor and governor) without having to give a hard answer. So that there speaks of her intelligence.

She was also smart enough to work the system to gouge the state of Alaska for tens of thousands of dollars a year so that she could stay home and get paid a per diem. Another bonus to her intelligence.

But, honestly, I haven't seen this so called intelligence shown on the national stage. The interviews with her show someone who is clearly out of their element when confronted with softball questions that any veep or pres nominee should slam home. Her college voyage also makes you wonder what exactly was going on those days. Was she a partier??? Cool - then say so. But 4 (or 5 depending on how you count them) colleges over 6 years to get an undergraduate in communications/journalism? Sorry - that doesn't look favorable. Had any other candidate had the same collegiate voyage - I suspect it would have been used as fodder for decades.

In fact, has a recent (lets go back 50 or so years) major veep or presidential candidate had a worse collegiate track record than Palin's? Honestly, I don't know. But I would be surprised if they did.