Sarah Palin’s removal of Bill McAllister as her chief spokesperson is the clearest sign that she intends to run for President in 2012. McAllister, a career journalist, had no previous experience in this role. Many in the media have blamed McAllister for the antagonistic relationship the Governor’s office has had with the local and national media.
Many of the communication missteps in 2009 have been traced back to the indecision from the Communication Director’s office.
Palin has hired David Murrow to replace McAllister. Murrow is an experienced political operative, who has strong ties to the evangelical community.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Kristofer Lorelli can be contacted at lorville@rogers.com, on Facebook and twitter/Kris_Lorelli.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:51 am
“This is another sign that Palin is looking towards a 2012 run.”
Whose words are those? Are these your words, or someone else’s opinion?
June 29th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Someone else’s.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
What kind of “political operative” work has Murrow done? Has he worked on Prez campaigns before? If he “specializes” in Presidential campaigns, it would be an obvious signal.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Hmmmm, maybe blowing the competition away in the Kansas Republican straw poll this weekend has something to do with it. :>
Oh, and BTW, she beats the pants off Romney. Sorry, Martha.
President — 2012
Sarah Palin: 76
Mike Huckabee: 54
Mitt Romney: 52
Bobby Jindal: 19
Ron Paul: 9
http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/19070
June 29th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
#2 Did you take into consideration that Palin may have replaced McAlister because he has cancer and no longer can do the job?
June 29th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
I have gone from believing that the chances of Palin running in 2012 were no better than 45% to about 60% in the past two-weeks.
If he was indeed pushed out, this would place me at over 80%. I would also infer that it is certain that she does not run for reelection in 2010 as well.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Watching the infamous Palin-Couric interview cures Palin-mania.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
bob,
McAllister has a new role as Director of Communications for the new AG. Plus, from what I understand, he was pushed out.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Continuing the thought of #5
Or if McAlister was to blame, as you put it, “for the antagonistic relationship the Governor’s office has had with the local and national media”, that maybe — just maybe — she released him for cause and hired someone else better?
She is either facing a 2010 re-election, or a 2012 Presidential run, or even both. Why keep an incompetent on in such a vital post as Communications Director?
Good for her. I like to see her act like a good executive. She needs to do a whole lot more of it.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
I believe Murrow actually did some work on Palin’s last campaign.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
marK, the 2010 election will not be close. Palin will easily win. Don’t believe liberals.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Murrow has ties to all the major networks and is well regarded within the leadership of the different Christian denominations in the lower 48.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Yup. Kansas wins elections. Not.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
#11.Kris,
You miss my point. If the director is incompetent, then Palin needs to get rid of McAlister — whether 2010 is going to be close or not.
I am pleased to see Palin take this step. It has been one of my chief Palin concerns for some time, the lack of Executive chops. This sort of thing makes me feel more comfortable about her. She needs to show more of it.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Come on, Kris, get with the program.
Neither the removal of McAllister as Palin’s spokesman nor the naming of David Murrow as his replacement really qualify as breaking news.
I posted these articles on Race nearly three weeks ago:
Alaska Ear
The divine appendage
June 6th, 2009
http://www.adn.com/ear/v-printer/story/822070.html
The gatekeeper – Bill McAllister’s long, strange year as Governor Palin’s Director of Communications
June 10, 2009
http://www.anchoragepress.com/articles/2009/06/10/news/doc4a301e8cac541415647782.txt
June 29th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Aron,
With all due respect…
That was a rumour on a blog entry and not confirmed. Plus, it was suggested at the time that McAllister was leaving due to health reasons, but this is not the case.
The fact that Palin is making a change to someone with ties to key interest groups in the lower 48 is important. As soon as Romney hires Karl Rove
June 29th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
…I’ll post it.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
#12:
Do you think this signals Governor Palin’s political philosophy of emphasizing the hiring of evangelicals to perhaps be her top advisors and that she will not consider anybody who is a squishy moderate?
June 29th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
#18, no, I believe she is solidifying her base (think the 2000 primary).
A lot of people on Palin’s staff and in her cabinet are moderates.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
#4 HearMeRoar
I remember when the romney supporters would tout the wins by Mitt in the straw polls only to have romney detractors downplay any significance of strawpolls.
I think the conclusion on this site was that straw polls only mean something when your candidate wins.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Not running for re-election in 2010 is a mistake for Governor Palin. She needs proof that she is not an electoral flash-in-the-pan. Winning an overwhelming victory for re-election would show she has electoral firepower. Unless of course,she doesn’t think she can win re-election or would win it by a margin narrow enough to damage her presidential prospects.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
#19:
So are you suggesting that Sarah wants to orchestrate a gradual evolution of her staff from state focused and moderate to perhaps nationally focused and more conservative-that playing to her (national) base is becoming a much higher priority for her than meeting the varied political sensibilities of the folks at home.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
#22, if Kavon is correct (not running for re-election), then yes, I agree with you.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Okay Kris, have it your way.
Sarah Palin is NOT making a good executive decision. It is being driven entirely by her desire to run for President in 2012. Otherwise, she would be more than happy to keep an incompetent on in the important post of Communications Director. Or she would have hired some local yokel instead of a seasoned hand with a great deal of experience handling the National Press and the many others in the lower-48 that are clamoring for Palin news.
So Palin should be viewed as just another politician who is only interested in improving the professionalism of her staff if it furthers her career in some way.
(Personally, between you and me, I think my take on the matter puts her in a better light than yours, but each to his own.)
June 29th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Jonathan #21:
Sarah Palin has already fought in 8 elections in her political career (4 in Wasilla, 1 for Lieutenant-Governor, 1 in the 2006 primaries, 1 for Governor and 1 for in the 2008 campaign); her record is 6-2. And in the 2006 campaign she took out a sitting Republican governor in the primaries and a former sitting governor in the general election.
If Sarah Palin ends up going up against Obama that will be 10 elections that she would have fought in.
How many elections does Sarah Palin have to engage in or win before she becomes qualified to run for POTUS?
June 29th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
This is a very wise and bold move by Governor Palin and could predicate a real gamechanger.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
#13.Knickers,
Be nice. Mitt is going to be winning his share of straw polls, as well.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
JA Pruce:“This is a very wise and bold move by Governor Palin and could predicate a real gamechanger.”
Don’t oversell it. I like the move, too, but let’s not get carried away, okay?
June 29th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
in 2012 (provided that she doesn’t seek reelection in 2010) Governor Palin will have had 16 plus years of elected office experience and 10 plus years as an executive – more than ample for a run for POTUS.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
marK,
certainly I agree with your point about the deteriorating relationship with the local media.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
#25.bob:“How many elections does Sarah Palin have to engage in or win before she becomes qualified to run for POTUS?”
Answer: None. The only qualifications for running for President are:
(1) Must be at least 35 years old.
(2) Must be a naturally born citizen.
(3) Cannot have previously been President for more than six years.
So she is qualified for running for President. So am I, for that matter.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
#25:
That is not the perception. Unfairly or not, she is perceived as a lightweight. A landslide re-election victory will be a vindication for Governor Palin and prove to a skeptical national electorate that she is the real deal.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
I will believe in Palin when she actually commits to running and has her first debate. Right now, I see nothing to make her attractive as a candidate. Besides, as a Romney supporter Huckabee has more to worry about Palin than does Mitt. Palin and Huckabee will have to fight for the same voters (evangelicals), leaving the rest to Romney. I see a contest with Romney, Huckabee, and Palin as a shoe in for Romney.
So the big question is, who will challenge Romney for the non-evangelical voters (if any). Otherwise, its going to be a blood bath between Huckabee and Palin for second place.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
#32, that is the view of liberals, just as conservatives had that view of Obama.
I believe the elections of Clinton, Bush and Obama have proven that the “experience” argument means nothing to the electorate.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
#34:
The second tier candidates like Pawlenty and Daniels will fight Romney for the non-evangelical vote.
As for the Big Three. I predict that one of the them will be out of the race by Super Tuesday.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
sorry #35 was directed to #33
June 29th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Huckabee is not running if Palin runs.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Mark. So am I!
June 29th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Palin has moderates on her court? Now, that’s a huge streach.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
However, it would be worth the price of admission to see Romney tear Palin apart in a debate! and he’d so it ever so sweetly and completly.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
#40:
Oh get over it. Romney isn’t exactly the King of Debates. If you remember correctly, a certain candidate did gain a lot of traction out of his debate performance.
What was his name? A governor of Arkansas, funny guy, hated by the Romney people, who was that?
June 29th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
#32:
Perceptions can be changed. The first primary debate isn’t till May 2011.
The facts are the facts.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
#40, I rather suspect that Huckabee with do his share of damage, as well.
Face it, Palinites. Sarah REALLY needs to work on her extemporaneous speaking. As things stand now, she will be toast when called upon to debate such tried-and-true debaters as Huckabee and Romney — and those are only the ones we are fairly certain will be there. One of her stumbling, rambling answers coupled with one of those nervous winks of hers and she will be toast. She will come across as a girl among grown men. That is the LAST things she and her supporters want.
Her problems speaking off the cuff will kill her more than anything else. The good news is it is a skill that can be learned. The bad news is there is so little time to do it in.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
#29 in 2012 (provided that she doesn’t seek reelection in 2010) Governor Palin will have had 16 plus years of elected office experience and 10 plus years as an executive – more than ample for a run for POTUS.
After the election of Obama, does experience matter anymore?
June 29th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
#37:
I have to disagree with you unless you have some inside info. Huck constantly shows well in every poll and I consider him one of the Big 3. Even if Palin runs I can’t see him at least not testing the waters until up to the primary debates.
But I could be wrong.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Palin will doom the GOP if she is on top of the ticket in 2012.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Jonathan: Pawlenty is also an Evengilical.
As for Mitch Daniels. You got to be kidding. Doubt he is even running. Besides, he will be lucky to get out of the starting gate.
So if you add Huck, Palin, and Pawlenty, its a three way split of the Evangilical vote. There will only be room for one. the question is which one will challenge Romney (if any).
June 29th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
45. I agree that Huckabee will test the waters. After all, it gives him a chance to play his guitar before an audience.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Newt will compete with Mitt over the east coast Republican intelligencia.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
BJ,
“I remember when the romney supporters would tout the wins by Mitt in the straw polls only to have romney detractors downplay any significance of strawpolls.
I think the conclusion on this site was that straw polls only mean something when your candidate wins.”
For the most part that is true, but I can remember two straw polls that absolutely changed 2008.
The first was Ames (which is always a big deal in an open race). Before it, Huck as a 3rd tier nobody. After he beat Brownback for 2nd, she was the story of Ames, his polls started to rise, and he moved into the 2nd tier “might have a chance.” The second significant straw poll was a Values Voter summit, where pretty much all the 2nd and 3rd tier candidates spoke (I don’t recall if Romney was there). Huck won the straw poll overwhelmingly. At this point, it was clear he was the SoCon pick, and his campaign really started to pick up steam.
But yeah, straw polls this far out among generic local bosses don’t mean much. The straw poll has to be given national prominence, represent some key voter group, and occur when people are actually paying attention (or at least the voters of Iowa and NH).
June 29th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
37, fine by me. I think that Palin poses a bigger threat in a one on one fight against Romney than Huck does, but I could be ok voting for Palin in the general. Provided that her new evangelical buddy doesn’t pull the same religion baiting that Huck did.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
#39:
Via the recent PEW poll 62 of Republican liberal- moderates give Sarah Palin a thumbs up. That’s 5 in 8. I wouldn’t consider that a huge stretch.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
#47:
Pawlenty may be an evangelical, but his appeal is defined by that. Pawlenty should run as Mr. Fiscal Conservative who single-handidly balanced the budget of Minnesota. And he has an advantage over Romney; he got re-elected in a very blue state while Romney didn’t
As for Daniels, don’t underestimate him. He was wildly unpopular in Indiana for selling the toll roads, but eventually, Hoosiers began to think it was brilliant. He could also go after the fiscal conservative vote.
Both Daniels and Pawlenty are from the Midwest, they could go after the Iowa vote as fellow Midwesterners, and if one of them gets in 3rd place over any of the Big Three, they are a contender.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
# Kristofer Lorelli Says: Newt will compete with Mitt over the east coast Republican intelligentsia.
You are kidding, I don’t see Newt running and with his previous affair while in office, I just don’t see it. Newt is more interested in witting Policy statements rather than running, besides, he is also an Evangelical.
http://hamptonroads.com/2009/06/huckabee-gingrich-urge-political-engagement-va-beach
The more evangelicals the better in my opinion, they can fight for an ever shrinking voter base.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
The only two credible candidates who cannot wait until 2016 or 2020 are Newt and Mitt. The rest are young enough.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
#54, no I am serious. Newt is strongly considering a run.
btw, all poltiicians pander, and Newt and Mitt will try to pander to evengelicals, as well as moderates and insiders.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Kris,
“Huckabee is not running if Palin runs.”
I don’t see Palin seriously affecting his decision. He is more than holding his own in any poll that includes all the Big 3.., so it’s not like he’s losing his base to her. Secondly, how good of a campaign Palin runs is a HUGE unknown, esp. after the snafus she ran into last fall. A lot of folks think she will implode on the national stage, so I don’t know that she will scare as many people off as her popularity and drawing power might otherwise indicate.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
We should be careful not to stereotype candidates based on our own perceptions and political belief.
There are a lot of candidates who consider themselves moderate who support Palin baded on some of her libertarian views. There are A LOT of moderates who support Gingrich, because of his success in the 1990′s and his continuing work on policy development. There are even many evangelical voters who support Mitt Romney.
Just because we have MSNBC and the NYT’s thrown in our face each day, does not mean we have rto view our candidates through their eyes.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Kristofer Lorelli Says: The only two credible candidates who cannot wait until 2016 or 2020 are Newt and Mitt. The rest are young enough
First, Newt is yesterdays news, so no big deal.
As for Palin and Huckabee, if they are smart, they can use 2012 to redeem their future value. Palin needs only to be creditable and come in 2nd to put herself in place for a future run (2016 or 2020). Huckabee has a harder task. He must find a way to make amends to LDS voters without estranging his Evangelical base.
Even thought they can not stand each other (Huckabee more than Romney), I would like to see a Romney/Huckabee ticket in 2012. But it would be up to Huckabee to play nice to Romney, and I don’t see that happening. But in many ways, Huckabee’s way back may be tied to a Romney success. Just like Romney eventually endorsed McCain in 2008, Huckabee can salvage his political career by endorse who I think will be the nominee (Romney). Short of that, Huckabee is politically dead as a Presidental Candidate.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
MWS,
With all due respect, only liberals and the large media outlets have that view. Palin has the potential to sweep the primaries.
Try to think in the context of e GOp primary, not a general election.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Thunder,
I am sorry, but you are being disingenuous. Newt has been in the headlines this year and many consider him a viable candidate in 2012.
even though I give his chances of winning the nomination at 15%, do not underestimate Newt. He has the fundraising contacts and the ear of the GOP leadership.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
MWS:
First Sarah did not run the 2008 McCain campaign-McCain and his incompetent campaign handlers did-Sarah was along for the ride and had to echo McCain’s talking points and follow orders.
Secondly Sarah has already run in 8 election campaigns; in the same 2006 election for governor she toppled a sitting governor in the primaries and beat a former governor in the general election.
I think the lady knows how to win elections and whatever she doesn’t know she will figure it out over the next 2 years by doing her homework and hiring the right people.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Reply to 58 Kristofer:
It’s true that many Evangelical voters support Romney, for Huckabee there were few non-evangelicals that supported him. This is his own undoing because of the way he ran his campaign.
As for Palin, she has a little more support beyond the Evangelicals, but that makes up the bulk of it.
As for Gingrich, I don’t see him as a serious candidate and is not worth the discussion unless something happens which makes it more likely for him to run.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
#60:
The question for Palin in 2012 is how she does on the national stage by herself. Since she is the only one out of the Big Three who didn’t run in the 2008 primaries, we have no idea as to how she will do in the various states. She has to build an organization in all these places while Romney and Huckabee already have supporters from the 08 season.
Palin is the wild card in the 2012 race. How will she do in the caucuses and primaries in places like Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and Florida? At this point, no one can really be sure.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Krisdtofer,
Certainly interesting to compare the breakdown of the 200 voters at the Olathe picnic and extrapolate the results to Kansas. Palin 34 %, Huckabee and Romney 25 % each.
For the record, in the 2008 Kansas caucus, Huckabee got 60 %, McCain 24 % , Paul 12 % and Romney, 3 %.
So, I guess Romney’s UP 22 %. Huck’s DOWN 35 % and McCain’s gone, so Palin must have picked up Huck’s 35 % .
June 29th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Reply to 62 Bob:
Its true that Palin was under the McCain thumb at the same time, his operatives are using her as an excuse for why their boss failed.
However, Palin will get a chance to re-introduce herself.
But we also can not give her credit until she earns it. Right now she is little more than a Cult following. When and if she announces she is running, she will get her chance.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
#63
You must have missed the recent PEW poll that 73% of ALL Republicans favor Sarah Palin and 62% of all liberal-moderates Republicans find favor with her. I would say that this represents ‘a little more support beyond the Evangelicals’.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
“so Palin must have picked up Huck’s 35 % .”
craogs, don’t presume. I am guessing Romney picked up McCain’s supporters and Palin took from Romney and Huck.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Some Republicans vote based on national security issues, some vote based on abortion, some vote based on taxation and spending, some vote based on candidate biograhpy.
Some people sound like liberals by splitting our party based on evangelical and non-evangelical.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
#65:
That is why I call Palin, Romney and Huckabee the Big 3. A few weeks ago CNN reported a virtual dead heat among the three.
I am even willing to go out on a limb now that one of these three will be the GOP nominee in 2012. I don’t see a dark horse gaining enought traction to dislodge any of the three from his/her perch.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
#68:
I wouldn’t make that assumption. If it is just the Big Three, then yes, the McCain voters will probably go for Romney, (unless one of the other campaigns reminds voters of the spats between the two during the primaries), but the Big Three aren’t the only ones running. Romney will get some of the McCain voters, but the 2nd tier candidates will try to take those voters as well.
There are enough undecided Republicans (most likely moderates, defcons, and the rest of the McCain voters) to either 1.) propel a 2nd tier candidate into the top-tier, or 2.) put one of the Big Three into a huge lead over their rival.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Expect Palin and Romney to control 80-90% of the GOP fundraising network and just about all of the endorsements from Governor’s and Senator’s.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
#71 Jonathan, when has that ever happened in GOP history?
June 29th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
#72,“Expect Palin and Romney to control 80-90% of the GOP fundraising network and just about all of the endorsements from Governor’s and Senator’s.”
That will suit Huckabee, the Populist just fine.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Kristofer 68
Why can’t I ” Presume” and you can ????
June 29th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
#73:
I don’t think the Republican Party has ever had a situation like the one we will have in 2012. We Republicans always have 1 front-runner, in 2012, we have 3. All three have passionate supporters and opponents. The potential to divide the party is there. Why wouldn’t the party turn to a consensus candidate who offends none and is approved by all?
June 29th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
In my humble opinion, if Mitt doesn’t win the nomination, it will be Pawlenty who comes from behind to win it, not Huckabee or Palin.
Palin will be a light weight in the debates, and has poor favorables for the general
Huckabee will not be accepted in most parts of the country.
As soon as that is recognized many will move to Pawlenty rather than Mitt. Then it will be a Romney Pawlenty race if that happens. If Pawlenty stays 2nd tier, then Mitt wins it.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
#76,
Because Romney has done nothing but court McCain voters for the last 6 months…
June 29th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
#77, that is what they said about Bush in 2000. Again, the media was wrong.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Kris and Bob,
To clarify, I’m not suggesting that Palin will definitely run a bad campaign or implode, I’m just saying the potential is there. Really, the potential is there for EVERYONE to self-destruct, but because of ’08, people are more keenly aware of that possibility in Palin.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
#76
The person would have to be of such a high profile that it would command a tremendous following.
Dick Cheney is not running in 2012; his health won’t permit it and the Bush name is still poison.
I agree completely we have 3 strong contingencies well represented and if weren’t for the maverick there would only be two.
I don’t think McCain will be on Romney’s or Huckabee’s Christmas card list anytime soon.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Jonathan
Yeah, 2012 COULD end up making ’08 look like a meeting of the Mutual Appreciation Society.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
#81, McCain and Romney are friends and talk every week.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
#80
Superstars do not implode or self-destruct, especially when they are in their prime unless they are doing drugs or messing around.
Sarah is doing neither. I will make this prediction. Whatever happens Sarah Palin will not self-destruct. She might lose the nomination to Huckabee or Romney but if either man beats her he will have earned it, for Sarah is not going down without a fight.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
#81:
Or it could be a candidate who everyone looks to and says “Candidate so-and-so. Why not?”
#82:
Unfortunately, 2012 is probably going to be a tough primary season. There are going to be hard feelings at the end of the race, especially if one of the Big Three is the nominee at the end of a long primary race.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
#85, that is how Democrats vote, not Republicans.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
#86:
It worked for the Dem’s spectacularly in 2008 and uniting quickly behind a front-runner, no matter who it is, killed us in 2008.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Jonathan Says: There are going to be hard feelings at the end of the race, especially if one of the Big Three is the nominee at the end of a long primary race
First, you can eliminate Huckabee, he doesn’t have a prayer and even if he were to get the nomination, it has been will documented that he would lose the west badly to Obama. So a vote for Huckabee is a vote for Obama.
Palin is suspect, since she has not yet been seen on the national stage (except as McCain’s running mate which she did poorly).
Hopeful all the candidates act like Romney when he lost to McCain and show some class (I know that’s a lot to hope for from Huckabee), otherwise, they will be trashed like leapers by the rest of the Party.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
This place always cracks me up. A few things:
MWS: You need to lay off the sacramental wine. You remember 2 significant polls in 08–one being the Values Voter straw poll that Huck won??? While yes–there was such a poll–but Romney won it! Memories can be funny things, huh?
Palin: As I have said a thousand times, most republicans, like me, like her. Do I think she is the best candidate for POTUS? Of course not. Will she be a formidable 2012 candidate. Of course. As for the Kansas poll–it is a STRAW poll. Those numbers do not represent percentages but actual people who voted at the picnic! So I wouldn’t get my panties in bunch just yet (on either side).
The problem with Palin, of course, is not in the primary but in the 2012 general election if she should win! We are now almost an entire year out from the 08 convention yet her numbers among the general populace CONTINUE TO DETERIORATE!! Consider the recent PEW poll (large sample): Palin’s favorables have gone from 50/34 to 45/44! If that doesn’t give everyone cause to pause you are drinking the cool-aid. With very few undecided, she now is a point or 2 away from having higher unfavorables than favorables! (And women especially dislike her.)
Me–I would actually like to win the election–just not give Palin a second chance to lose a general.
Contrast that with Romney. His numbers have gone from 28/24 to 40/28!–with plenty of undecideds still to win over. Recent numbers for Huck are also pretty good. Frankly, Palin continues to have the worst national polling numbers, by far, of all the potential candiates. Oh well.
Sure, there are still maybe 18 months or so left until 2012 election mode but at what point does the idea of Palin as something of a laughing stock–nationally–start to turn around? As strong as the evangelical wing is in the republican primary that will never get the job done in the general–especially with those sorts of numbers.
Again, don’t flame me for the numbers. I would easily support her if she wins the nomination. But does hiring a new media guy turn things around?? We’ll all find out.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Foxnews is the number one cable station. Huckabee has been a guest on most of the Foxnews shows. People are getting used to seeing/listening to him talk on a range of political/social/foreign policy issues. He has an opportunity to “talk with” voters two to three times a week. Huckabee does not have his former staff meeting with him prior to these shows to brief him on what to say and how to say it. Many who have dismissed Huckabee in the past as not having enough depth, have been pleasantly surprised by his intellect and grasp of the issues. Look to see how Huckabee becomes a strong consideration amongst democrats, independents, and repubs as a candidate who states it like it is, has common sense solutions, and is very likeable and genuine. Let’s stop putting Huckabee in the no win/no way category.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Bags,
“You need to lay off the sacramental wine. You remember 2 significant polls in 08–one being the Values Voter straw poll that Huck won??? While yes–there was such a poll–but Romney won it! Memories can be funny things, huh?”
Then we are referring to two different polls. The one I am referring to followed a nationally televised “debate” shortly after Ames. Huckabee won it was around 60-75%.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Bags- you stated “MWS: You need to lay off the sacramental wine. You remember 2 significant polls in 08–one being the Values Voter straw poll that Huck won??? While yes–there was such a poll–but Romney won it! Memories can be funny things, huh?”
My memory recalls that the people who were actually at the values voter summit unanimously voted for Huckabee. It was the people who voted “online” that made Romney the winner. So were those paid Romney staffers who voted online or Romney supporters on computers that cast their votes. It was not the crowd at the summit who gave Romney the win.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Jonathan. What if she does not win in a landslide, but suffers a crushing defeat? Bob Poe is looking really sweet over there in AK. And, he’s picking up steam.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Johnath. Romney won every debat. Unless you were watching CBN, that is.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Knickers-I thought that Frank Luntz gave a few wins to Huckabee and one to Thompson. I don’t think Romney won every debate.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
#88:
Any of the Big Three could win the nomination. As I’ve said a thousand times, don’t underestimate Huckabee. Huckabee can turn his Mr. Nice Guy persona and his base in the South into a launching pad to the nomination
Palin has a national following, if she can turn that into an actual organization, she has a chance.
Romney’s best hope is divide and conquer. Have the evangelical vote split between the other two and consolidate the rest of the base and walk towards the nomination.
Or, the voters could reject all three and go with someone else. Any of these four could happen. Should be fun to watch.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
#94, let us be realistic. Romney did well in most of the debates, but he did not win all of them…in fact there were so many candidates early on, there was not enough talking time for all candidates to ‘win’, a debate.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
How can Huckabee ever win the general election when he will be lucky to bet 1% of the LDS votes, and without them, he can not win.
Utah’s Mormons loathe Huckabee
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8322.html
And I promise you, things have not changed since then, and is not likely to change unless Huckabee goes out of his way to reach out to LDS voters. But how can he do that and win the nomination at the same time. If Huck wins Iowa again, it will be chalked up to Religious Bigotry.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Knickers, try not to promote Democrats against fellow Republicans on this site.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
With huckles the clown on the top or second seat on the ticket, Utah, Nevada, California, washington, Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Arizona and possibly New Mexico lost to Obama. Too many LDS values voters there who can’t stand his face.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Why not? I will be sending that democrate $$ to run against Palin! (and I’m a registered GOP!!).
June 29th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
#98:
The bitterness towards Iowa by Romney supporters is disturbing. I asked before; if it is religious bigotry that sunk Romney, then are NH, SC, FL, NY, CA, MO and every other state that Romney lost full of religious bigots?
June 29th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
and Kris, Palin is NOT my fellow republican!
June 29th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
MWS: You are thinking of the 07 poll where Huckabee won with those numbers when all of the top candidates (McCain, Romney, Guiliani, thompson, etc.–didn’t even attend). Romney won in 08.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
#96:
I agree. It is in Romney’s best interest to keep Huckabee in to split the evangelical vote between him and Palin so Mitt can come up the middle. And actually that is the only way I see Romney winning, except of course if Palin doesn’t run.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Jon. Mitt placed veryclose second in NH, FL, CA. He lost the nomination. So did huckabee. Your poiint? At least romney did the math and did not want to continue splitting thevotes and did what was decent. He got out and backed McCain with full force. Did huck do that? Naaaah. He wanted to get one more than Romney. And it only tookhim 6 more weeks to do ti!
June 29th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
#103, so you are a liberal troll?
June 29th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
You should promote anyone who is decent, regardless of their party afflilation.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
95- Huckabee never won a debate, other than a few people thought so a couple time. Mitt kicked butt in every debate except the first Foxnews one, which is where he fielded all fastball/slider combination questions and everyone else had lobs thrown to them. It was also the one that the others really zeroed in on picking on Mitt. Even then, he almost won it.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Kris. I am a registered republican. Have been all my voting life! But there are times, when someone with a differnt lable comes along, that works well, and plays well with others. I would vote for the person first, and hopefuly that person is in my own party! But every so often, they are not.
Reaching for Higher standards, as Mitt said so well on the Sunday Shows. It’s not a bad thing!
June 29th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
#106:
That doesn’t answer my question. If Mormon hating bigots flooded Iowa, what about the other states? Did Romney lose Florida because we all hate Mormons? Why does Iowa irritate you Romney people so much? It was ROMNEY’S MISTAKE TO COMPETE IN IOWA; he should have camped out in New Hampshire to fight McCain and Rudy there. Romney has no one to blame for Iowa but his own stupid attempt to fight there.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
They didn’t flood the pulpits until the last few weeks..by that time Mitt was fully committed.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Sarah Palin starting to look good
http://www.troymedia.com/NewsBeats/Political_News_Beat/2009/06/TMC062809.htm
June 29th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
June 29th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Is Sanford’s Loss Women’s Gain?
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/06/29/who-wins-from-sanfords-loss/
June 29th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Palin visits Kosovo Soldiers
http://www.ngb.army.mil/news/archives/2009/06/062909-Palin.aspx
June 29th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
The media really wants her…so you’ll get a lot of help from them Kris. Liberals want us to pick her sooooooooooo badly, they can taste it.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
This is from your link Kris, the one in 113. Truer words were never spoken…and you wanted us to read this why?
“Palin is not exactly the great communicator in terms of comprehension, eloquence and clarity. But she speaks with passion and humour, seems to connect with a section of the working class and the Republican Party and speaks with a clear conservative voice. She is not as well read or entrepreneurial as Romney, but she is a populist.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
#114:
I agree you completely especially when the anti-Palinite David Frum regretfully concurs as well.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
#118, just posting different articles.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
And from your #115 link, thank you for this gem also Kris.
“So who “wins”? In my estimation, it is Mitt Romney. This is true for two reasons. First, Romney and Sanford occupy similar political turf. Both are millionaire businessmen known more for their fiscal conservatism than for their social conservatism. But because Sanford was governor of South Carolina (rather than Massachusetts), it was easier for him to argue he was the most trusted fiscal conservative.
Secondly, Romney’s image problem has always been that he’s a straight-laced square. Voters may find that quality a bit more to their liking, in lieu of recent events.”
June 29th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
bob,
‘insiders; can read the tea leaves. Palin may not have very much competition in 2012.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Respond to 111 Jonathan: Huckabee’s bigotry may have won him Iowa, but lost him any chance of ever becoming President! That’s what I call winning the battle and losing the War.
Once again, Republicans can not win the Presidency without the west and the Mormon vote, and they loath Huckabee so much that they would rather vote for a left winger than vote for Huckabee, and that’s saying a lot since Mormon’s are some of the most conservatives people in this country.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Illinoisguy,
Many writers, inclusing Matt Lewis have made the error of suggesting Sanford and Romney share(d) the same turf.
This in fact, this is not the case.
Sanford receive(s)?(d) a lot of support from evangelicals and militant anti-government Paulites….this is not the case for Romney. As well, the Buchananites claimed Sanford as one fo their one, which is also not the case for Romney.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Well Kris, since many woman are values voters, I suspect the womans vote this round will go to (drumroll please) romney. Women don’t vote for a woman because she’s a woman. We actually look behind the lipliner. Romany is talk the talk, and he lives by what he preaches. That has my vote right there.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
romney does not drink tea, kris.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
#123:
This Western obsession is foolish. It is the SOUTH were the the Republicans have to win if they are going to win the White House. I don’t know about you, but I’ll take losing Utah, Idaho, and Montana if it means we pick up Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
“Once again, Republicans can not win the Presidency without the west and the Mormon vote”
LOL! hahaha!
Yes they can.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Kristofer Lorelli Says: ‘insiders; can read the tea leaves. Palin may not have very much competition in 2012
I would re-word that to say Palin may not be much competition in 2012 if she even runs.
Do you really expect her to take Florida, NY, California, just to name a few big states. She is going to get crushed.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Thunder,
Palin is VERY popular in Florida.
It wont matter anyway, the nomination will be over long before those States vote.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Jonathan: It was not a mistake at all for Romney to compete in Iowa–why shouldn’t he?? The facts, of course, are that there is a large, active evangelical Republican base in Iowa–more so than in most other states–whose affect is even multipied by an archaic and undemocratic caucus sytem–but no reason Romney (or any other candidate) shouldn’t try and reach out and connect and build support.
Huckabee, of course, attempted to belittle Romney’s religious faith for political opportunity (drawing almost universal condemnation) and he was successful in trying to appeal to some Iowans on that basis So?
The facts, of course, are that there are some (small percent) evangelicals that have plainly stated they would never vote for a member of the LDS church based solely upon their religion–including many who have plainly stated it at hucksarmy. Again, SO? I don’t care at all what, if any, name you put on that.
The point is that the Iowa caucus vote is not very representative of other states–and Huck’s attempt to contrast religions did not have the same appeal. So, Iowa doesn’t irritate me. Did Romney lose voter support in Iowa after Huck contrasted his religion with Mitt’s? Of course. Is that the same reason he lost other states? Of course not. SO?? Your point eludes me.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
No. He lost fla because of the LIE told about timetables, and the last minute endorsement by Crist. He lost CA by just a few percentage points because McCain got more moderates. But Romney did pretty decent. and his protogee is doing quite well in CA. Bigotry was amuck in Iowa. So, was it bigotory that him to lose some states? Yea. Was it the only reason he lost others? no. But, he won more than huckabee.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
#129:
No Republican will take back NY or California in 2012, even if his name is Jesus Christ.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
130, and we gop need to be smart and put up the BEST and BRIGHTEST for our party, and not someone who ONLY looks good in a skirt and a pair of Naughty Monkey pumps. Sometimes, it’s OK to rely on looks. But when running my country, I’ll take brains over beauty!
June 29th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
If Meg can sort out cA, it’s Mitts’
June 29th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
How???????
Nevada 5
Utah 5
Idaho 4
Arizona 10
Wyoming 3
Colorado 9
New Mexico 5
Montana 3
(That’s 44 out of 269 he would need)
And what states will Huckabee make up for these? What Democratic states will he Flip. Giving up 15% of your base before you ever start is a hard road to hold.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
#131:
I heard for the GOP the Iowa primary is an open primary vote and not a caucus. Was I mistaken or misinformed?
June 29th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
137 – Yeah.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
#131:
The point is that the “bigotry” charge is an easy one for Romney supporters to throw out, because it diminishes the win of his opponent. It makes it easier to ignore, rather then study. Ignoring all the yelling about bigotry, Huckabee ran a great campaign in Iowa. With no money, he managed to win a pretty shocking upset. Romney poured money and resources into Iowa hoping to convince the Iowa conservatives that he was Mr. Conservative againts the moderates Rudy and McCain. It didn’t work. Many Iowa voters had doubts about Romney beyond how he plans to save his soul, and he couldn’t convince those voters, they went to Huckabee, which gave him the win.
Oh, and don’t go blasting caucuses too loudly. Out of the 11 states that Romney won in 08, 8 of them were caucuses. I woudld say that the caucus system was good to him, outside of Iowa.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
No. He lost fla because of the LIE told about timetables
A lie AKA the objective truth.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Thunder, I am not a political novice, dont give me that baloney!
We are not talking about 40 million African Americans, we are talking about a tiny portion of the population.
1) Mormans make up 2% of the population
2) Mormans are not stupid sheep who are incapable of making a logical decision at the voting booth
June 29th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
#136:
How about Florida (27), North Carolina (15), and Virginia (13)? Those are 55 electoral votes that the Democrats won in 2008 that we can win back in 2012.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Ronmey lost Florida, because the McCain campaign was smarter.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24316.html
This is what bothers me most about Romney and what is written about him in this article:
“The Washington-based alumni have a regular monthly luncheon, are working on another reunion-like event around a 2009 candidate later this year and always make sure their former candidate is briefed on the latest political doings.
When Romney does a high-profile Sunday show like he did yesterday, for example, that means that former communications aides such as Matt Rhoades and Kevin Madden will join PAC spokesman and longtime adviser Eric Fehrnstrom to help prepare their old boss, either in person or over the phone. When he’s delivering a speech, as he did earlier this month on national security, other former campaign officials such as media consultants Russ Schriefer and Stuart Stevens are brought in.”
What are Romney’s own opinions? What are his views? Are his campaign supporters still polling to see what is the best answer to give? Why does Romney hesitate to come out with his own opinion until after a few days and he sees which way the winds are blowing?
You have to give credit to Palin and Huckabee. They both tell it like it is, they are authentic, and they give answers from their hearts not their political playbooks.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
and you base that on what facts?
http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/palm/blog/2008/10/sarah_palin_popularity_plummet.html
June 29th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
The Romney campaign went nuclear on illegal immigration before Florida and scared the crap out of Cuban Americans. As well, McCain had the GOP Cuban Congressional delegation working for him.
McCain also mobilized the vets in FL.
The campaign was over when McCain won SC.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
#145,
Palin draws record crowds in Florida
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/palin-draws-record-crowds-in-florida-938434.html
June 29th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
147 – Can you please explain to us all how crowds are an accurate indicator of what will happen at the voting booth?
June 29th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
#148, yes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27531033/
June 29th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
The GOP has to be able to win the south AND the west–states like Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, etc., and other regions (or find alternatives). Its silly to argue which is more important–if you don’t get to 270 it doesn’t matter.
As far as the Mormon vote. For the LDS it would be easy to exagerate our influence in the west. Numercially the numbers are still relatively small. Can someone win without the LDS vote? Of course–see Obama. Can a republican win a general without the support of the LDS vote in some of the western battleground states?? Not sure. Have to crunch some numbers but pretty much irrelevant except for Huck. Any other candidate, including Sarah, will get that vote (if not in the same numbers that Mitt would get). The problem would be for Huck. Mormons vote in much higher numbers than the general population so their influence is magnified in states like Arizona and Nevada. If Mormons stay home in those battleground states it could very well be the difference. Personally, I would love to see how he would do in the 2 most populace LDS states of Utah and Idaho.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Utah 72%
Idaho 27%
Wyoming 10%
Nevada 8%
Arizona 5%
And they feel it is their duty to vote, so those numbers actually represent a higher number.
As for being Sheep, you greatly underestimate the intelligence of the LDS people. They know when their religion has been attacked and will never vote for some one like Huckabee. I go to church every week, and I know how they feel, and I would image 98% of them would never vote for Huckabee under any circumstance.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
“Ronmey lost Florida, because the McCain campaign was smarter.”
What Romney experienced in Florida is what he did to McCain, Guiliani, and Huckabee. Taking a little bit of truth, twisting and adding to it, and then hammering that twist until the voters saw the light. Romney twisted Guiliani’s illegal immigration even though Romney had his own problems with the issue. Romney twisted Huckabee’s taxes even though Romney had his own problems with increased fees. Romney twisted McCain’s economic views only to have McCain twist Romney’s Iraq views. Problem was, that whenever the candidates returned the favor to Romney, Romney pouted and said it was personal and that they should stop.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
#151,
Voters in Utah will vote for Huckabee over Obama.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
#148, yes.
So in your mind, without Palin, McCain would have lost by an even larger margin?
June 29th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Yes Alex, I agree with Bill Clinton. Obama would have won in a landslide if Palin was not selected.
McCain had two campaign offices in Ohio before Palin was selected.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Not true. Romney was nick and tuck until Charlie Crist endorsed him and McCain made his time table statement. I know, I live in Florida and listen to the local Radio show. It was dis-honest of McCain, but effective. If McCain was doing better, he would never had create the lie in the first place. But that’s Politics.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Kris. Don’t be so sure. Gov. boggs lives in Huckabee.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
155 – I don’t believe Bill Clinton ever said that, but if he did, he’s completely wrong.
As to the second part: So what you’re telling me is that the campaign chose to spend its money to kick into full gear in the fall?
I like to think of Palin as McCain’s one last middle finger to the GOP. He always did love being an albatross around our collective neck.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
I am LDS, and in no circumstance will I vote for Huckabee, and I expect the vast majority of the LDS voters feel the same way. Your kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
As a previous poster said, any Republican Candidate except Huckabee will win Utah.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
#156, not true.
Some of the polls on the Wednesday and Thursday before the election had McCain ahead by the same percentage he won on the Tuesday.
Thunder, political campaigns are filled with dishonestly, heated debates and even some illegal activity.
Romney was not ready for prime time, although he may be in 2012 if he leanred his lessons.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
#146:
I think many people forget how McCain won the 2008 primary. There was not a strong conservative candidate to rally around. Thus the vote got splintered among 5-6 candidates with McCain coming up the middle. And McCain was the darling of the MSM as well.
In 2012 if Palin runs there will be a huge conservative base turnout for her. The base knows one thing: if there is one thing it has vowed is not allow the MSM to pick the GOP candidate in 2012. Palin is a three stool Reagan conservative. This is an option that many conservatives will have a hard time turning away.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Thunder. I too attend my meetings on Sunday. And I’m with you on that one. We won’t vote for Huckabee. We can’t, without some serious moves on his part towards us. BUT, as another poster pointed out, should he do that, he loses those in his bigot squad.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
#144.Texas:“What are Romney’s own opinions? What are his views?”
I am curious, Texas. Just how much effort have you actually put in to learning just what Mitt’s opinions are? It really isn’t that hard to find out. During the 2008 campaign, Mitt put out reams of detailed position papers, far more than any other candidate. Did you take the time to study them?
June 29th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
#158, Clinton has said this numerous times on national television debates. He repeated this in an interview with Larry King in the Presidential library earier this year.
#159, Utah is not voting for Obama, even with Huckabee on the ballot.
You are letting emotions get ahead of logic.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
#161
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
June 29th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Kris, Aron scooped you big time on this one.
Check out Palin’s numbers among Florida Republicans in Quinnipiac. That’s all that matters for the purposes of the Florida Republican primary since only registered Republicans can vote in the primary. It’s the only reason why Rubio has a chance.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
#162,
It is amazing how closed door promises can make political enemies support one another.
Even Dr. Dobson was trying to get into McCain’s good books in August.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
“Ronmey lost Florida, because the McCain campaign was smarter.”
That warrants a little more of an explanation, here it is, at least from the perspective of a Rudy Florida Voter:
What happened in Florida is this. Rudy’s numbers started going down the moment he placed a dismal fourth in New Hampshire. The “soft” Rudy vote was up for grabs. These included most of the moderates, and the Cuban-American community. Mel Martinez who had been flirting with going for Rudy, endorsed McCain. This helped him in Central Florida (Mel is from Orlando), and among the Cuban voters in South Florida. Then, the Sunday before the Florida primary, Charlie Crist threw his support behind McCain. Crist had a roughly 75% approval rating. Crist is from the Tampa Area, which boosted McCain there. Finally, McCain had a lot of support amongst the veteran community, which is big in Pensacola.
Combining, Orange County (Orlando), Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties (Tampa/St. Petersburg), Miami-Dade County, and Escambia County (Pensacola), McCain won all the key areas. The closest one amongst those was Orange County. Romney’s inability to solidy the anti-McCain vote in Central and North Florida (he won 5 counties in Central Florida, and no where in North Florida outside of the Jacksonville area), the perception that McCain was gaining momentum from the Martinez/Crist endorsements, and the collapse of Rudy’s campaign, all gave McCain the room he needed to win Florida, and then the nomination.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
People gather for train wrecks and slow down to see accidents. Does not mean they all go running to the voting booths! Big crowds from the Palin camp tend to be a tad trumped up. A parade goes down the street. Folks come to the parade. Heck, I went to one in my town over the weekend. If Palin had jumped in the front to lead it, please don’t count me as one who went to see her. I went to see the parade and maybe my kids play tuba for the local high school band.
Not everyone at a Palin event is there for the palinsshow.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
#169,
Yes they were.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Jonathan, we will win all of those southern states you mentioned next time, with any of the major candidates.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
June 29th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Rombots,
If Huckabee is going to get blown out in the West, and yet he polls better than Romney against Obama, then were is Romney dropiing so much support that he surrenders more votes in total than Huckabee?
Where is Romney worse off than Huck is out West? You have to explain it. You can’t get around it. And don’t give me any silly cheerleading, Kool Aid drinking crap. Look at the polls. Romney is doing worse than Huck against Obama. So where is Romney getting slaughtered?
June 29th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
#168,
The night before the FL primary, McCain gave a speech to all of the influential Cuban-American business and political lobby.
To the audience, he made a request that had people running from the event placing McCain stickers on.
“There’s a person I want you to help me find when Cuba is free, and that’s that Cuban that came to the prison camps of North Vietnam and tortured and killed my friends. We’ll get him and bring him to justice, too”
Many people in that audience could relate to torture at the hands of the Castro regime.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
#169:
I would agree with you that past popularity is no guarantee of future political viability. But when the PPP poll and the PEW poll both show that Sarah Palin is given thumbs up by over 70% of Republicans currently I would argue that she is a player. The only way you couldn’t would be to argue that the polls were bogus or that Sarah Palin will not run in 2012. Well didn’t this thread start out with the proposition that it looks more likely that she will run in 2012? So then you’re left with bogus polling or that her favor among the conservative base won’t last.
Well, that’s why they play the game, but I have a hunch that with the Sanford downfall Sarah is not about to diminish in favor but gain at least in the short term.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
#174:
I don’t remember that getting much coverage (at least in the Orlando market). Once it was clear that Rudy couldn’t win, most of the Cuban vote flocked en masse to McCain (he held his victory rally in Miami after all). The big news right before the primary was Charlie’s endorsement and the feeling that McCain was becoming the front-runner for the nomination. The perception was that McCain was going to be the winner and so lots of Florida Republicans (no independents or Democrats are allowed to vote in our primary)decided to go with the winner.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
MarK-I know Romney’s stand on the issues. I researched them and listened to him both in debates and on the shows.
What I am talking about is this article. Romney meets with his cast of political campaign strategist to decide how best to address each issue. Here is that statement: “When Romney does a high-profile Sunday show like he did yesterday, for example, that means that former communications aides such as Matt Rhoades and Kevin Madden will join PAC spokesman and longtime adviser Eric Fehrnstrom to help prepare their old boss, either in person or over the phone.”
I don’t think that Palin and Huckabee and Newt meet with a bunch of people to decide how to answer the questions. They go with their gut principles-and that is why people question Romney’s authenticity. What does he rely on-paid poltical consultants.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Huckabee’s main support are either in heavy Republican or Democrat states. In battleground states Romney does much better.
especially Florida and Colorado.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
177 its called being prepared. Sarah Palin had her handlers telling her how to answer questions. She just couldn’t pull it off like she knew what she was talking about.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
So you are saying it is bad to seek advice of others. I would think you would want a President to consider all options before he made up his mind. But of course, if you would prefer a rash of the cuff decision, thats up to you.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
#177;
Mitt Romney is like any other politician. He/she wants to avoid unforced errors. I assume one of the jobs his consultants have to brief him on the political lay of the land and to avoid saying something stupid.
That Palin or Huckabee don’t need consultants to advise them to what to say in interviews is that he/she may be more aware intuitively how the interview could go wrong or is willing to assume a bit more risk in the interview.
I’m not saying that Mitt is stupid, far from it, but perhaps he is just a little more cautious or circumspect by nature than Palin or Huckabee.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Thunder,
“Huckabee’s main support are either in heavy Republican or Democrat states.”
Sounds like the same argument that Hillary Clinton made against Barack Obama. Obama support was from rich white liberals in states that dems were never going to lose and from blacks in states that Democrats could never win (besides Bill clinton).
June 29th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Thunder,
“Huckabee’s main support are either in heavy Republican or Democrat states. In battleground states Romney does much better.”
Really? What heavily Democratic states is Huckabee doing much better than Romney in, because some Rombots are saying that Romney will win CA and MA and has the best chance in OR, WA, NY, etc…..?
What heavily Republican states is Huckabee doing much better than Romney in, because many Rombots are saying Huck will get beat by a Democrat in WY, ID, UT., etc…..?
June 29th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
173/MWS. Hardly even know what you are talking about. The recent polling essentially has Huckabee and Romney doing the same. For example, the most recent PP poll showed Huckabee losing 50 to 43 and Romney 48 to 40. That is 7% vs. 8%. Most of the recent polls are similar with Huckabee doing better than Romney by 1 or 2 points (even within the margin of error). So, don’t even know what you are trying so poorly to say.
Each candidate, of course has regions where they are more popular. Though Huckabee numbers were not nearly as good as one would think in the south during the primary, Romney had pretty good n numbers in the west and with his LDS faith and western ties obviously has strong appeal whereas huck often didn’t even get out of the single digit in support. So?? What is it exactly that we have to explain??
June 29th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
#177.Texas,
So Huckabee, Palin, and Newt don’t do any prep before going before cameras. They don’t go over possible questions that might be asked, and the best way to answer them. They don’t think through carefully every response that opponents on both sides of the aisle will go over with a fine-tooth comb looking for anything that can be used against them.
(Well, that certainly helps explain why Sarah does so poorly speaking off the cuff.
)
So you want a President who shoots first and asks questions later? You want a President who doesn’t study the issues of the day and carefully works out their best solutions? He just goes with “gut” instinct? You want a President who doesn’t give serious, careful thought on his positions and how to persuade others to follow him? Just shoot from the hip, right? No thought. No study. No preparation. No nothing. Just barge right in, guns blazing, who cares about the consequences?
No thanks. I’ll take a President like Romney any day.
June 29th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
MWS,
Thunder, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You claim that huckabee’s base of support includes support in deep blue states but at the same time, you argue that Huckabee cannot win a blue state in primary?
I’ll disagree with the latter argument. The Republicans left in these deep blue states are likely very conservative.
It’s the same concept as the Hillary/Obama battle. Obama could beat Hillary handily in Southern primaries but she would be the better nominee to put up against McCain in these states because almost none of Obama’s black supporters were going to vote for McCain anyway and she’d do better with whites.
However, I wouldn’t make the Hillary/Romney analogy…the woman was an incredible candidate. She was leading McCain in deep, deep red states such Kentucky, West Virginia, and Arkansas. For Romney to even claim Hillary’s status, he would need to be coming close to Obama in traditionally blue states, something that has yet to be seen.
In fact, McCain was extremely close to Obama in traditionally blue states after the convention.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Heavy Republican States
Georgia
Texas
Kansas
Tennessee
Alabama
Iowa
South Carolina
Kentucky
Missippi
Heavy Democrat States
Louisiana
Iowa
June 29th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Bags,
Let me try to break it down.
1. Rombots say Huck will get crushed out west, and even lose states that the GOP hasn’t lost since the last ice age.
2. All the recent national polls show Huckabee doing better than Romney against Obama nationally.
Sooooooooo………….
Where is Romney losing more support than Huck is out West? It’s a pretty simple question to a pretty simple math problem. If Huck is down say, 5 million votes to Romney in one region, but ahead of him say, 3 million votes nationally, where does Romney lose his 8 million votes?
I hope that makes sense now…..
June 29th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
I have a religious personal question to ask Romney supporters. To begin with, I have a protestant background-but did not have good practicing parents so I sought out the Christian faith on my own and found one traditional protestant faith. I married a Catholic-where we practice both Christian faiths. I have friends that are jewish, muslim, hindu, LDS, but no atheists friends. I share this to show that I am not a bigot, but very comfortable with people of all religions.
Are there any Romney supporters on this site who are not LDS?
Are there any Palin supporters on this site who are LDS?
Are there any Huckabee supporters on this site who have come out against the LDS faith?
Are there any LDS on this site who have forgiven Huckabee for his error and would vote for Huckabee in the primary or general election?
June 29th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Thunder
1. Louisiana is a heavily Republican state in Presidential elections.
2. Iowa is a swing state.
3. You are a dissenting Rombot then when it comes to the rest of the South. Most of your fellow Rombots like to pretend that Mitt just as well there.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
“So you want a President who shoots first and asks questions later? You want a President who doesn’t study the issues of the day and carefully works out their best solutions? He just goes with “gut” instinct? You want a President who doesn’t give serious, careful thought on his positions and how to persuade others to follow him? Just shoot from the hip, right? No thought. No study. No preparation. No nothing. Just barge right in, guns blazing, who cares about the consequences?”
These traits are all traits that people use to describe Barack Obama. Isn’t that one of the issues conservatives have with him? That he lacks the “gut” instinct to make a determination on Georgia-Russia or the Iran situation.
Texas is obviously exxagerating but I think Romney’s supporters should be careful, from a political perspective, from arguing such traits that could also be used to describe Barack Obama.
Here’s a question that MWS and I talked about the other day…go ask the random person which one of the four (palin, huckabee, romney, and pawlenty) is the most different from barack obama. Who do you think would draw the most responses of the four?
June 29th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
#191.Tommy:“These traits are all traits that people use to describe Barack Obama. Isn’t that one of the issues conservatives have with him? That he lacks the “gut” instinct to make a determination on Georgia-Russia or the Iran situation.”
Actually, my biggest concern with Obama is that after careful study, he STILL blows the Georgia-Russia and the Iran response. That is far more scary that if his instantaneous “gut” reaction was wrong.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
“That Palin or Huckabee don’t need consultants to advise them to what to say in interviews is that he/she may be more aware intuitively how the interview could go wrong or is willing to assume a bit more risk in the interview.”
Is this a joke? Palin and Huckabee put their foot in their mouths all the time! If you wanted to rephrase this to be more accurate, you might say that “they don’t understand how prone they are to say something stupid!”
June 29th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
It was not the main point of this thread, but I am surprised that no one has pointed out that the “60,000 see Palin” article from #147 is from September of last year.
Cautiously speaking, I am not sure that she will get that turnout again if she goes campaigning for herself in two years.
She may well become the nominee in 2012, and I would vote for her at that point, but 2008 was a different animal.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
191.Tommy:
That is a very interesting question.
I am just getting to know Pawlenty so I don’t trust myself in evaluating him.
Of the remaining three, I would say Palin is most unlike Obama. Huckabee has the same snake-oil salesman smell about him. Romney is careful and deliberate as well. Palin is not as smart, nor as polished, nor as prepared. She will have a whole lot of difficulty convincing the general public to vote for her over Mister Cool himself.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
189 I am LDS. I support Romney. I do not support Huck but don’t feel like Huck needs to apologize to LDS. Team Romney got outfoxed by a smaller, nimbler opponent. I hope Team Romney learns from this and moves on. I also hope those LDS that are holding a grudge move on as well. There is nothing more destructive than identity politics and it appears it is being played out on both sides. I support Romney the man and the issues on which he ran however I always felt that Mitt never gave people a good enough reason to elect him. Strong America was never a good strategy.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Asparagus,
I glad to read that. Hopefully for Romney’s sake, someone in his campaign reads that as well.
In truth, I think Romney completely agrees with you already. I doubt he will make all the same mistakes twice, but as someone who is prone to (over)analyzing, he may make the classic mistake of ‘fighting the last war.’
June 29th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Palin will be the Fred burnout out of 2012. People will expect too much and in the end will be disappointed.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
MarK,
I’ve said it before on this thread but Palin’s success or lack thereof in a general election depends very much on how the public views Obama’s style or brand of leadership. The more they become disenchanted with his personal style, the greater the chances for Palin. The better they view the style of George W. Bush/Dick Cheney, the better for Palin.
Luckily for her, in my opinion, most Republicans abhor Obama completely and it’s not just his policies that they abhor. It’s his personal style and presentation as well. There’s a reason why her favorables with moderate and conservative Republicans are higher than the others and it cannot be policy differences because there aren’t any significant policy variations between Pawlenty, Palin, Huckabee, and Romney as there would be with a Mark Sanford, Charlie Crist, or Jon Huntsman.
Her being completely different from Obama stylistically and substantively helps her for the purposes of a Republican primary…it obviously doesn’t help her right now in a general election but she has to hope that Americans get tired of the Messiah’s personality as well as his policies by 2012.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
If Huckabee wins Georgia, Alabama, and Missippi by 60% and Romney wins them with 54%, in the end, they get the same electoral votes, but if Huckabee loses Colorada, Utah, Idaho, Nevada with 48% (worse in Utah were he would be lucky to 20%) and Romney carries them with 55% (Utah would be more like 80%) then the difference in electoral votes is the difference of defeat or victory in the General election.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
marK,
Tommy and I also compared the Big 3 to the Last 3, personality and temperment wise (not policy, intelligence, or morality wise). I thought Palin was most like W, Romney most like Obama, and Huckabee most like Clinton.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
#185 – It doesn’t seem as if Sarah prepares at all…
Sometimes she seems to have talking points, but confuses which talking point belongs to which question.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Thunder,
Okay. I don’t think your math works, but okay. We’ll have 3 years and 12,983 polls to sort that out.
Suffice to say that if Romney does so much better than Huck out west, those votes are getting lost SOMEWHERE, because he is running behind Huck nationally against Obama.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
191 – Pawlenty…they’d be asking who he is!
June 29th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
reply to 203: Also, remember, Rudy was way ahead in polls this far out before 2008, so these polls out this far don’t mean as much.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Also, when thinking about 2012, you have to remember there is a census in 2010, and assuming Obama doesn’t stack the deck during the census (which is possible), you will see a shift in Electoral votes to the West and the South.
http://www.entrepreneur.com/localnews/1751822.html
June 29th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Thunder,
Sure enough. But if they matter in the Huck-can’t-win narrative, then they matter in the Why-isn’t-Romney-doing-as-well-as-Huck narrative.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Actually, I think analogy of Romney being like Obama because they both are so deliberate is faulty. Yes, they both carefully consider their answers (though Obama famously doesn’t do well without his Tele-prompter). But that is where the similarity ends.
Romney is famous for getting all sides to the table. He has everyone argue their point of view. He studies the data. If one side is not represented, he will often argue their side. He will then choose what he feels is the correct course of action. At this point the deliberation turns to how best to sell his policy.
Obama tends to skip the data-gathering part. His gut instincts are seldom questioned. Instead he leaps right into the deliberation on how to best sell his policy.
Now, with the economy in crisis, do we go with the former approach or the latter? Since Obama’s gut instincts seem to have markedly socialistic tendencies, I vote we go with the former. Romney may not have all the answers, but his method stands a far better chance of producing the correct response than Obama’s.
Romney’s method centers on finding the right answer. Obama’s method centers on implementing his gut reaction.
I’ll take Mitt.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Thunder,
Regarding census and reapportionment, small states have to have huge % shifts to gain or lose seats. A 10% rise in Utah would probably not garner a 4th seat, but a 10% rise in Texas (compared to the rest of the country) would probably gain 3-4 more seats.
But I think Utah probably will get one more seat in 2012. The Midwest, Northeast, and (possibly) California will be the big losers, while the rest of the Sun Belt continues to fill up.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
208 well that wasn’t the Romney we saw in the primaries. Mitt jumped to the conservative side in all cases, which made him look like a panderer. Had he gone with his habits and looked at all sides of an issue, we wouldn’t be talking about an image problem.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Texas…I think you are actually a natural Romney supporter, but just have trust issues, or don’t like the exuberance of some of his supporters. Its hard to move away from one candidate to another, especially one that has been with us for 2.5 years now on the national scene. To answer your question: I grew up Protestant with the best Christian parents imaginable. But, when I checked into the LDS faith, I believed it with every fibre of my body. I ahve not bigotry in my body whatsoever either. I very, very much didn’t like what Huckabee did with the religious thing, and I didn’t like what McCain did at the last minute in Florida either. However, unlike several of my fellow fervent Romney supporters, I would vote for Huckabee before I would ever vote for the Socialist idiot we have heading this nation now. I also disagree with Thunder that Huckabee would lose Utah. I would say the lack of enthusiasm for him may cause us to lose some states that would otherwide be close, but still be Republican, like Nevada. MWS,
MWS – First of all the numbers are essentially even now not showing Huckabee winning. They are all in the margin of error. We don’t really need to talk about the general, because there is no way in heck that Huckabee can win the primary. The delegate map just isn’t there for him.
One more point…and I’ve made this many times before…..there is a huge misunderstanding in howto interpret favorable/unfavorable polling.
I’ll use Palin and Romney to make my point. If a pollster asked me if I have a favorable opinion of Palin, I would say yes. First of all, they aren’t specific enough to be asking “If the election were held today, would you be favorable or unfavorable toward the idea of Sarah Palin being the Republican nominee for President of the United States?” If they were asking that, of course I would say NO. So when someone was pointing out that 70% of them are giving her a ‘thumbs up” it means nothing, except that 70% of them kinda like her.
It is entirely possible, maybe even probably that someone, let’s say Romney was getting only a 65% favorable rating amongst Republicans could easily beat her when it cames to a heads up vote for the Presidential nominee.
Everybody has to be honest and evaluate what the polls are actually saying.
If you guys recalls, last year before the VP selection Mitt was showing to add a huge % of vote to McCain as to whether or not they would be ‘more likely’ or ‘less likely’ to vote for McCain with Mitt as VP, Remember? Well, also remember that at that time, his favorable/nonfavorables were a little on the negative side, the overall that is, not amongst Republicans.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/2009/06/oversexed_politicians.aspx
June 29th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Reply to 209:
I don’t disagree with you on the census, I just wanted to put that out as another item. I am not sure California will be a loser, but I think the North East will be. The net effect is that Red States may gain Electoral Votes while Blue states will lose some.
Yes Texas is likely to be one of the big winners along with Georgia and Arizona. Utah is likely to add 1 or 2 Electoral votes also.
As for the Huckabee/Romney debate, we have done that to death, so until we get closer, we really won’t know much. Plus I am not totally convinced that Huckabee is going to give up his TV gig for another run. As they old saying goes, a bird in the hand is worth more than two in the Bush. Huckabee shot of winning the nomination is at best 30% even if you consider the recent polls, but the odds of his TV Gig is 100%
June 29th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Lowering the bar
http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2009/06/29/lowering-the-bar/
June 29th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
reply to 212: Its hard to respect a writer who doesn’t even know that Huckabee was Arkansas gov (not Mississippi).
However, all viable candidates will be helped by the competition falling away.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Great Answer, Tim.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iXO5fXZHduGoYIzK6hJaQ4TExteQD993SA002
June 29th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
“Former Mississippi [sic] Gov. Mike Huckabee also should fare well. A former pastor, he seems unlikely to be tainted by similar behavior”
Tell that to the family of Jimmy Swaggart, Garner Ted Armstrong, Jim Baker,…how long a list do you want to see?
June 29th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
#217,
Be careful….that was a low-blow. I disagree with Huckabee on a lot of issues, but to comepare him to sex addicts and criminals is unfair and you are not helping your own cause.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/06/29/who-wins-from-sanfords-loss/
June 29th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
I usually agree with Matt Lewis, but this is incorrect. Voters like, ‘sexy’, not ‘nerdy’.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Kristofer Lorelli, I don’t think women will think Palin is sexier than Romney.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Thunder,
huh? I don’t think Romney is a square at all.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
#214 Kristofer
I don’t think gov’t should be in the business of “creating” strong families. However, with all things that are important to a successful society I believe they should create and foster an environment in which families can thrive. (or any other facet of society that is required for its success)
June 29th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Illinois,
“We don’t really need to talk about the general, because there is no way in heck that Huckabee can win the primary. ”
We don’t even know what the calander is going to be, so you couldn’t possibly make that assessment.
And #217 was a low blow. That’s like saying Mitt must be a bigot because the LDS wouldn’t let blacks be priests until the 1970s. Take your guilt-by-association somewhere else.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
#223, I agree.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Unfortunately or fortunately for the GOP contenders in 2012 because we have an incumbent running for the Democrats (Obama) one question will clear dominate the behind-the-scenes conversation and discussion of millions of voters away from the camera. Can the person I am voting for take out Obama or how confident am I that who I vote for will do it?
June 29th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Wow this thread is painfully long. I just don’t have patience to wade through all of it.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Dan,
All the pearls of wisdom are headlined by some guy named “MWS.”
He’s really that good….
June 29th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
218 – I DIDN’T!!!! I was cautioning anyone using the fact that someone was a preacher as proof that they were true to their marriage vowels to thing again. It had nothing to do with Huckabee. It had to do with their implication that all was hunky dory because he was a preacher.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
DanL
#4 thread will tell you all you need to know where the GOP race for 2012 stands: one of the Big3 appears headed for a showdown with Obama.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
#229, so you cannot make that promise about Mitt Romney?
June 29th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
…..oops. I forgot to log in under my alter-ego, “Illinoisguy,” before writing #228.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
#189 I am Catholic and a Romney supporter. I know several other Catholics who support him as well.
We have to consider what the issues will be in the 2012 election. The economy will be devastated, the Constitution in shreds and a string of religious hypocrites will have taken their toll on party morale. The ideal candidate, whoever he or she may be, will need strong management and financial skills and a solid personal character. The idea of Obama-like charisma without substance will be unattractive.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Illinois,
“true to their marriage vowels to thing again.”
I’m very committed to O, E, A, and sometimes Y. Not so much with U and I.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
I’m very confident that he is faithful, but there is no way one can promise that kind of thing.
BTW #223, I wholeheartedly agree with that also.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
#224.MWS:“Take your guilt-by-association somewhere else.”
I agree with you. However, in fairness and in IlliniDude’s defense, I must point out that Kris started it in #212 by attempting to assert innocence-by-association. IlliniDude was attempting to point out the folly of doing so by warning of guilt-by-association.
Let us be honest. Neither method stands up to strict scrutiny. A person must stand and fall on their own, not by their associations.
To assert that Huckabee won’t be likely to suffer from such behavior because he is a former pastor is no more valid than my fellow Romneyites who insist that Mitt would never do such a thing. Yeah, tell that to all those other people “who would never do such a thing” and then did it. Nobody is immune to temptation and falling. I submit that the moment one starts to assume they are immune to it is when that person is the most vulnerable to it.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
lol, sorry about that!!
June 29th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
232.MWS:
You are so wicked!!!!
June 29th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Mitt Romney On “Meet The Press” 6/28/09
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO00RJIOORo
June 29th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Now that I reflect on my snarky comment in #234, it would seem that ‘U’ and ‘I’ would be THE marriage vowels.
Wow, I should write for Hallmark.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
#236
A PERSON MUST STAND AND FALL ON THEIR OWN, NOT BY THEIR ASSOCIATIONS.
I would disagree with you regarding the Messiah. His associations with Ayres, Wright, Rezko, Khalidi, Dohrn, Blago, ACORN, the community organizers of Chicago, the Annenberg Project, his parents both being Marxists, need I go should have brought him down.
Birds of feather do flock together; at least that was what I was taught growing up. But of course we are now living in the 1984 Orwell BS of war is peace, freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
240 – I was scrolling down to point that out, wondering if you’d done it on purpose!
June 29th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Strictly speaking, bob, a person MUST stand and fall on their own. I did not say that associations don’t strongly influence a person for good or ill. People do tend to associate with those whom they feel the most comfortable with. But people still have control over their actions and must be held accountable for them no matter what their associations may be.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
#240,
Speaking as someone who just celebrated 31 years of marriage, I would say that there had better be a whole lot more of “U” than “I” in marriage , or people will start asking “Y, O, Y”.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
#244 LOL!!!
June 29th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
MWS, I didn’t appreciate you accusing me of a bigoted remark. I made none. I only countered your atttempted implication that Huckabee was close to exempt since he was a former pastor.
Your remark about the church and the blacks, however left no doubt as to its intent, and I didn’t appreciate that either.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Palin visits troops.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhkX9Dt0oXw
June 29th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
#239 Kristofer
I thought what was an interesting line is when Romney was asked about what HE thought of the Sanford debacle he said, “The public is more concerned about the heartbreak’…
I think of this in two ways: Romney is more concerned about tapping into the pulse of the public first to determine what he should eventually say and secondly he takes to being a touchy-feely politician.
If you asked Dick Cheney the same question he probably would said something to the effect its not good for the party in the short-term, long term I can’t tell you. Governor Sanford has to decide for himself what is in the best interests of the people of South Carolina whether he should resign or not.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
bob,
yes, I might agree, although he was just trying to avoid the question…and I do not blame him.
What I found interesting was the body language with Graham. The youtube video edited some of the content out, but I am going to predict that Graham will be endorsing Romney.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
This was politics at it’s finest. Romney is now the GOP candidate endorsed by the Republican Party leaders.
Why else would he go on a National Show with Graham?
June 29th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
#250…it is his only path to the nomination….
Insider v. Outsider
Romney v. Palin
Moderate v. Conservative
Easterner v. Westerner
June 29th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
#249
Yea, I saw that as well. Wouldn’t it be something if McCain came out and endorsed Romney after his good buddy Graham does?
June 29th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
#252, if Pawlenty, Crist and Huntsman stay out of the race;
50/50 chance McCain endorses Romney by New Hampshire.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
The message about Sanford was for him to work out his marriage problems and not to step down.
Meanwhile over at Huckabee’s show, he had on the Lt. Gov of S.C., encouraging Sanford to step down.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
#254, I have to admit, I was not happy with Huck about his guest (timing).
June 29th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
So here are basically the three positions by the Big 3:
Romney: it’s all about his family and the ‘heartache’ (touchy-feely)
Huckabee: you fall from grace and you pay the price of losing your job (judgmental)
Palin (Kosovo speech): “he messed up” (objective assessment)
I think this says a lot about the candidates.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Illinois,
“I didn’t appreciate you accusing me of a bigoted remark.”
I didn’t accuse you of making a bigoted remark. I accused you of a low blow.
(Illinois) I made none. I only countered your atttempted implication that Huckabee was close to exempt since he was a former pastor.
I didn’t say that either.
(Illinois) Your remark about the church and the blacks, however left no doubt as to its intent, and I didn’t appreciate that either.
Hey, it’s your church. If your church’s history offends you, that’s your problem. If it doesn’t, fine. I really don’t care. My point was NOT to smear everyone of a particular faith because of the mistakes of some. So following my logic, that means that Mormons aren’t necessarily bigots just because they excluded blacks from the priesthood until the 70s.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
I thought it was kind of strange Huckabee had him on. There was definatly an agenda. I thought Huck shouldn’t have used his show for a political agenda.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
bob,
keep in mind, Romney was sitting next to the god-father of one of Sanford’s boys…it was probably awkward.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
#258, of course, Huck could use the endosement of the next Gov. of SC.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
lkv,
“I thought Huck shouldn’t have used his show for a political agenda.”
What do you think it should be about? Quilting?
June 29th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
#256; I’ve read the Lt. Gov is kind of strange with some strange things going on his Face Book page.Something about pictures sent to him by women. He’s unmarried and says there is no problem.
It sounds like they want Sanford to fill out his term and run a more conservative candidate.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
I turned on the show last night and he was stroking his bass again.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
Kris,
Fishing is very popular in Arkansas. Don’t be so judgmental.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
#259:
I am not one of those who is going to chew Huck out. I’m glad he exposed himself in the Sanford affair. IMHO it is one of the reasons he will not get the nomination. He is too judgmental I believe individuals have every right to observe a strict moral code for themselves, but Huck has no business insisting that Sanford resign. That’s up to Sanford.
Kristofer, I guess we have to agree to disagree on Romney; I thought his words and his theme were telling. His answer was worthy of Bill Clinton.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
MSW; Huck should not be using his show for political benefit. Huck was more or less endorsing the guy. Sanford should not be pushed out before they find out what the people of S.C. want.
The Lt. Gov. wants to be Governor and is pushing Sanford out, with the help of Huck’s show.
Huckabee was really pushing the line. This is not what FOX hired him for.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Bob,
Something like 80% of this site has said Sanford should resign, and there are a fair number of libertines here.
I don’t think asking a guy who abused his office and betrayed the public trust to resign is being “judgmental.”
June 29th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
I understand bob. I would normally agree with you, I just believe it was difficult being next to Graham.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
MWS,
It really is sad (those 80%). People act like then have not done what Sanford has done, but they all have, in varying degrees.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
lkv,
“Huck should not be using his show for political benefit.”
Right. And Romney should not be using that manufactured road show for political benefit, or his opinion pieces, speeches, appearances, or any of all those ‘amazing’ things he’s doing for the “good of the country.” And Palin and Pawlenty and Barbout shouldn’t be using the governorships for political benefit. And Thune shouldn’t use his Senate seat for political benefit.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Kris,
As one of those 80%, I recall that my Lord said that any man who has lusted after another woman has committed adultery in his heart. Few men could every pass that test. On the other hand, Sanford went AWOL chasing tail. He lied to his staff, lied to his wife, and lied to the voters (to a greater degree than we expect of politicians). He can’t run a state while he is lying to everyone and daydreaming of sunny afternoons on the beach in Buenos Aires.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
MWS,
It was his private business. Sanford violate no law and his staff could call him if they needed him.
What upsets me is that people are judging him, yet how many of us would really turn down an offer from a beautiful, intelligent woman, married or not?
We hold politicians to one standard and ourselves to another (well, not all of us).
Maybe we should accept our politicians are human, just like us….if we do this, we would never be disappointed.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
MSW: Huckabee’s show is not a political show like Meet the Press, it is an entertainment show, with down home, feel good wisdom, stupid jokes kind of a show.
Maybe if David Gregory started playing the violin and booked bands you would make sense.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
lkv,
And Rush Limbaugh has songs and jingles. Is his show not political too? Look, it doesn’t have to be all stuffy and look like “Meet the Press” to be political.
Are you concerned that people are being mislead? Are you fearful that millions of people are tuning in to a FORMER GOVERNOR AND PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE with the expectation that there will be no politics? That these people have been hoodwinked?
June 29th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
I guess I missed out on all the fun.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Martin Luther Forrester,
Just in time for a morality debate.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
#272, Believe it or not I’ve had to turn down advances from very attractive women. Now in my case it’s easier because I have to be paranoid about if they’re spies trying to blackmail me.
Still I’d never cheat on my wife. A few moments of pleasure are not worth a lifetime of guilt.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Seems like those at race42012 have a different opinion on the Huckabee/Bauer interview. Here are the links to view it yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiPYXSOr_Ro&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJMhOUo4BaQ&feature=player_embedded
I have a different take. If you were Bauer and you knew many in the MSM would want to interview you regarding Sanford and the possible governorship, who would you want to interview you-a snarky journalist from MSNBC or a friend who would not ask any inappropriate questions.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
#276 Right back at you Ayn Rand Lorelli.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
#272; Foreign Governments have been using women and prostitutes since the beginning of time to get sensitive national info. from the leaders of countries.
Politicians should be held to a higher standard.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Doug Forrester (#277):
Wow! That last sentence is one of the most powerful statements that I have ever read and digested.
Triple WOW!!!
June 29th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Kris, please tell us why you keep saying Romney is the moderate, and Palin is the conservative in the race. She is no more conservative than he, and in some cases, she is less so. You say she has the FP crowd all wrapped up, yet she is the one who wondered if the war was about oil, and whether there should be timetables. She has not done anything to show FP cred. Her son does not make her any more credible. She can say a few good soundbites, but they are no different from anything Romney or the others say.
She is pro-amnesty.
She wants to “walk across the aisle and do something for the American people, also.”
As gov, she is a moderate more than anything else. She went to DC to lobby for Alaska’s share of the stimulus, then came home and did a 180 to please her base – holding press conference to say she intended to accept about half of the stimulus funds and specifically saying her decision was based on ideology. But we all knew what would happen – she was going to take the whole tamale, and now she has.
Sorry, Kris. She is not any more conservative than Romney, but she is a whole lot less qualified to be POTUS. You continued claim that Romney is a moderate just isn’t going to work.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
#274 Okay then, If Huckabee runs for President do you think he should keep the show?
I think he should give up his show for the Candidate Romney!
June 29th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Doug,
1) You are an intelligent man, I am sure you turn away woman all the time.
2) I didn’t suggest that if I were married (someone slap me if I do get married), I meant if the woman were married.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
Texas. I have forgiven huckabee. Does not mean I ‘m dumb enough to vote for him! That won’t happen in this life or the next.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
we should not hold politicians to any higher standard than do ourselves.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
I wish Orson Welles was still around.
This time he could redo ‘Citizen Kane’ and call it ‘Governor Romney’.
The name of Romney’s boyhood sled is probably not Rosebud…
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/983771/sledding_at_the_romneys/
June 29th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
#281 Palin also shakes down oil companies for a bigger share of the oil they drill. Some smaller companies have to fold because they can’t compete with bigger companies.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Martha,
you are blind from reality. Mitt has been courting the moderate wing, siding against Rush and others.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
287, not true, Palin is bringing in competition.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
#286: Wow…why do you guys hate Romney so much. It’s obvious it goes deeper than political differences.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
lkv,
“Okay then, If Huckabee runs for President do you think he should keep the show?”
No, because at that point it would be an in kind contribution from Fox.
But he’s not running for Prez now. Neither is Romney or anyone else. So they get a little more latitude.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
I’ve never heard him side against Rush once, Kris. And I’ve never seen him move away from any conservative position.
But you didn’t really answer my question about Palin. How is she the conservative and Romney is not? I don’t think you can produce an honest answer, because it doesn’t exist. She is not more conservative than Romney on anything – social, fiscal or on national sercurity. Her words about Iraq will come back to haunt her in 2012.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Kris, Romney is courting EVERYONE. He’s speaking, writing, and helping conservatives get elected. He realizes he needs everyone to win the nomination. And yes, he realizes he needs the establishment, too.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
I don’t hate Romney. He’s probably a decent man although we can never tell. I just find him unintentionally humorous.
If we can’t laugh at politicians who can we laugh at?
June 29th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Kris, a note from earlier. It’s Mormon, not Morman. I actually thought you knew that.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Martha,
Mitt was practically molesting Graham on Sunday.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Irv. ALL Polticans need to be held to a HIGHER STANDARD. Male or female. Makes no difference to me.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Oh brother. Answer my questions.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
#289 : Some of the smaller companies can’t compete with companies like Standard, Shell, BP. These guys can afford to pay more revenues to the State. After all she says it is going to the people of Alaska. and finding it’s way into the economy.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
#295, all the same Christian theology to me.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
#298, I did…you just pretend not to read.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Martha what do you know about Mormonism?
June 29th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
I ask the same question occasionally about some of the more extreme Rombots — their devotion is so deep and unquestioning that it seems to transcend politics (and it’s rather creepy, as well).
June 29th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
#299,
what are you talking about. That was not Palin, that was the corrupt Alaskan Republican party that set that up…handing out licenses to a few big oil companies….have you not been reading the news? Palin has been trying to dismantle that.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Fine, Kris. I just thought you might like to know.
Now, answer my questions, if you can.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
For the record, MWS. I’m LDS, and the mother of a few black children who are being raised LDS. They have zero problems in the church. None.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Bob, you’re kidding. The irrational people are the Palin fans. Romney supporters are reality-based. It’s all about the competence.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
#305, which question?
June 29th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
302, What?
June 29th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Deflect, deflect, deflect. You mean, Palin takes no credit for the state she’s running? (or not running.) She either is at the helm or she is NOT. Which is it?
June 29th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
#307, LIAR!
Aron Goldman is completely irrational about Palin!
June 29th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
308. Delineate how Palin is the conservative and Romney is the moderate. With facts.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Martha,
“Romney supporters are reality-based.”
You mean……. some……….. Romney supporters are reality-based.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Okay, gotta go get my cutie pie a treat for being so good at the dentist today~
Be back later, I hope you have a good answer for me, Kris.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
#312, sure.
- Romney is courting the moderates and intelligencia. Everyone inside the beltway is talking about it. Romney is making inroads with McCain supporters and pushing back on some of the heated verbage from talk-radio.
- Romney has gone out of his way to defend some of Obama’s policies.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200905310003
June 29th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
#309 Are you some expert on Mormonism?
June 29th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Are you an expert on the LDS religion or something? You do a lot of lecturing about it.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Doug, Martha converted when she became a Romney supporter.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
#291: Fox played Huckabee’s show all day every two hours on Sunday. FOX is not all that fair and balanced. But if they say it enough times they will have people believing it, they might even begin to believe it themselves.
I’m just asking where is the equal time, Hucks show is getting way to politically preachy, How do you think he stays up in the polls?
June 29th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
#319, he stays high in the polls because he is personable and charming.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
I just found out Obama’s new pastor is a Southern Baptist.
That makes me hmmm.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
#319: If that’s true why don’t they poll Brad Pitt. Huckabee is a politician and he can’t separate it from his show.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
#321,
and…..
June 29th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
If Fox gave Romney a show, Huck’s people would be going crazy.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
lkv,
You aren’t envious of Huck’s success are you? Should Pawlenty whine because Romney gets more face time on Sunday morning? Are you suggesting in some weird socialist way, no candidate should have anything another candidate doesn’t have? If so, Romney owes a lot of other candidates an awful lot of money. Betcha’ you weren’t complaining about Romney’s wealth in 2008, and all the ads it was buying!
June 29th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
#323, Well his new pastor is a Southern Baptist and the great nephew of Johnny Cash.
That’s quite a clash with his last pastor, the Grand Wizard Jeremiah Wright.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
The proof is in the pudding and of Palin, Huckabee and Romney the latter ranks last in conservative favor in the Republican Party based on both the recent PPP poll and the PEW poll. Actually if I were Romney I would follow the same strategy of attracting, as Kristofer says, moderates and the intelligentsia and Mccain supporters.
Why is there so much resentment among Romney supporters that their man is not regarded as conservative as Huckabee and Palin. If I were a Romney supporter I would exploit the difference and corner the market on the above voting blocs. Let Huckabee and Palin split the conservatives and then Romney can come up the middle. Why is this premise not considered by the Romney supporters?
June 29th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Kris,
Southern Baptists are generally very conservative are fairly politically active. They probably vote 70% Republican now (as an educated guess).
June 29th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
bob,
“Why is this premise not considered by the Romney supporters?”
Because the Rombots are laboring under the delusion that Romney always has been, is, and always will be Mr. Three Legged Conservative (who happened to be independent in the 80s and had nothing to do with Reagan).
June 29th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
MWS,
A lot of Southern Baptists are culturally conservative and economic populists.
Obama may capture a large portion of the SB vote if Romney is the nominee.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Doug,
Obama’s new pastor is white? Cool.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Running to the center and letting Huckabee and Palin split the right is Romney’s best bet, and it appears to be what he’s doing.
His supporters don’t want to see it (or, at least, acknowledge it) because they are tired of the “flip-flop” meme.
Moving toward the center (just enough to put some space between himself and the other two) without resurrecting the flip-flop charges, is going to be a balancing act for Romney.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
#325; Huckabee worked really hard to get his show. Running for President was good for his carrier, it made him a household name. Not bad for somebody who was broke after left office.
Not a Socialist, more power to Huckabee, he earned it.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
#331
So?
The real question is whether he believes in the real presence or not
June 29th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
330 – So Obama is a cultural conservative now?
June 29th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
332 – Courting moderates is not the same as becoming moderate. What positions has he changed since 2008 to be regarded as a moderate?
June 29th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
By the way Sanford today came out today and said he now feels like James Stewart (George Bailey) at the end of movie It’s A Wonderful life.
We sure as living in bizarro world. The twilight zone doesn’t even begin to describe it.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Kris, you still didn’t answer my question. Romney is courting everyone, just as he should be.
You didn’t tell me what really makes Palin more conservative than Romney. Facts, man. The facts.
Doug. Why are you asking me about Mormonism? I am LDS, in fact I’m a 5th-generation Mormon. So, yeah, I guess I’m an expert.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
MSW; I think that if Huckabee can get away with it then he should keep doing it as long as he feels comfortable.
Just because I don’t like it, or feel that it is wrong dosn’t mean he should stop doing it. He’s playing politics and no rules are being broken, let him go for it. But you can’t deny it’s political.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
I haven’t seen Romney run to the center. I have not seen him distance himself from Rush or anyone on the right. I don’t know that people in the beltway are really, really buzzing about it, Kris. Maybe they haven’t got anything better to worry about, but Romney is not a fool, and he is not going to play into the flip-flop trap set for him by his enemies. He’s going to be exactly who he is – which is a comprehensive conservative.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Kris, can you point to one thing Romney has said that shows you he’s running to the center? Everything he has written and said is solidly conservative.
Palin, on the other hand has some questionable statements and actions. She is not exactly the politician folks think she is. She is a moderate populist. That should be good for you, Kris. I still can’t figure out why she’s your gal, other than her sex appeal.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Wow this thread is getting long. Just saw this over at GOP12.com. Maybe Bauer did the right thing by having an exclusive with his friend Huckabee so Bauer could say what he wanted to say before the media/politicans twisted it all around:
“On Sean Hannity tonight, two deeply conservative pundits (SC Sen. Jim DeMint and Sean Hannity) expressed reservations on whether Mark Sanford should continue as governor of South Carolina.
HANNITY: “Do you think that he should go? I’m of the mind that if your life is in shambles in a case like this, maybe it’s time for you to step aside. Get your personal act together. Is that good advice?”
DEMINT: “It may be. I’m not sure where he is in his personal life with his wife, and I think that does have a lot to do with whether or not he should continue. South Carolina needs some strong leadership right now, so if he’s not…. we need to do what’s best for our state, and we are looking at the right now.”
Anyone who’s watched Sean Hannity for 15 minutes knows that if he’s calling for the occupational head of a Republican, something serious is going on.
DeMint further offered his thoughts on the personal and branding aspects of the affair.
“I’m very disappointed on a personal level. I’m disappointed for our state and the whole country, because Mark Sanford was part of a conservative movement that was gaining some traction, so it really hurts us, but he dropped the flag. The rest of us have to pick it up.”
UPDATE: Peter Hamby reports on growing calls for Sanford to step down from SC state legislators.”
June 29th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
317. Doug,
What lecturing? I don’t do a lot of lecturing on Mormonism. In fact, I don’t think religion should be a topic on a political blog.
Today I merely helped Kris learn to spell Mormon.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
martha (#340):
.
Who was Romney sitting beside on the Meet the Press on Sunday? Lindsay Graham Do you really believe that it was a coincidence that they were being both interviewed together?
By the Graham is a RINO and he is a good buddy of John McCain and we all know what McCain is.
Martha, believe me I am being sincere-I am not criticizing Romney for carving out a certain voting bloc in the GOP; he has to do what he has to do gain more traction. I would say getting the support of the Republican establishment, the Beltway, the blueblood elites, and moderates is not chopped liver.
But Romney is not favored by more conservatives or white evangelicals than Huckabee or Palin and probably never will be unless he gets the nomination.
Having said that Romney IMHO will always be favored more by who he is courting now than Palin or Huckabee ever will be unless one of them secures the nomination.
It is what it is!
June 29th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
lkv-
Huckabee is in the perfect spot over at Foxnews. Britt Hume, Hannity, O’Reilly all laughed him off in 2007/2008. Now he is in the belly of the beast and letting them get to know him. He had support from Neil Cavuto before, and Neil continues to enjoy his conversations with Huckabee. Huckabee is now seen by the Fox crew as pretty knowledgeable on the issues.
As to the viewers, Huckabee is doing what Reagan did, by meeting the voters in their homes on a weekly basis on tv and a daily basis on the radio. In 2007/2008, others tried to define Huckabee, but now Huckabee can define himself, set the record straight, and let voters get to know his common sense approach.
I don’t think that Romney could have an hour long tv show. Don’t think he could hold the interest of the viewers, have the humor and casual conversation with the guests, and be able to talk from the heart the way Huckabee does.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
That is a good point of Huckabee being like Reagan in terms of keeping his name in the news while out of office. Frankly I hadn’t thought of that.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
off topic,
How do I send a Twitter msg to someone else’s page?
June 29th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Kris, how is Palin more conservative than Romney? Pray tell.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
This is laughable. Romney is moderate because he sat next to Graham in an interview! Whoo hooo!
June 29th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Martha,
Palin has always been pro-life. Mitt?
Palin has never implemented Government mandates on heath care. Mitt?
Palin has never ran a deficit. Mitt?
Palin is 100% on the 2nd amendment. Mitt?
June 29th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Texas, The standard of excellence at FOX is sorely lacking – just look at Dick Morris – he’s their big go-to guy. I don’t watch any of it, never really have.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Doug and MSW: This is a really a good site for political debate I like all the potential GOP Candidates, any one of them would be way better than what we have now. Anyway that said, I’ve gone back to read some of the things I said and a lot of it was really uncalled for. Sorry about that, but I do like the debate and the jokes.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Kris,
Romney was a pro-life governor. Just ask social con leaders in Mass.
Palin admitted to having considered abortion when she learned she was pregnant with Trig.
Palin lobbied for the stimulus, and took the whole thing. Romney spoke out against it, and he was right.
Palin lives in the most socialist state in the US, she didn’t run a deficit because of oil taxes.
Palin is pro-amnesty, Romney is not.
Palin lives in an overwhelmingly republican state. The 2nd amendment is not an issue there. It was in Mass. The NRA said the assault weapons ban was a net gain for gun rights, and David Keene, NRA VP endorsed Romney and seems less than thrilled with Palin.
You did not address Palin’s red-flag comments about Iraq on timetables and oil. She sounds exactly like a lib.
She is all for walking across the aisle.
I know she is perceived as conservative, because that’s what her fans want her to be. But when you look at her record as gov, she is more moderate than conservative. She does what works, in spite of ideology. She is more a populist than anything else. She likes to rail on Wall Street. She was all for coming down hard on big business. That’s not conservative, either.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Martha,
So it was okay for Romney to govern as a moderate or liberal, fund abortions, gay pride, etc…because MA is a liberal State?
Then how did Tommy Thompson and John Engler do it?
June 29th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Martha,
You have to understand that a lot of people like Palin. They liked her as a VP nominee and they like her for a POTUS nominee in 2012. And yes, she seems to have the three legged stool of Reagan more so than Romney. Although it is hard for all governors to have a lot of foreign policy experience. But give Palin time and she will be quite knowledgeable on the issues. She was just plucked too early by McCain.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Hi everyone. I started a new Facebook page.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=97737949647&ref=nf#/group.php?gid=97737949647&ref=mf
June 29th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Martha,
Even over at Hotair many consider Romney to be a moderate. Here is a quote “Palin/Romney: The perfect Big tent combo. Conservative on the top, Moderate on the bottom.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/29/quote-of-the-day-520/
June 29th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
Kris, Romney did not govern as a moderate or liberal any more than Palin does – and he was in liberal Mass, while Palin is a moderate in right-wing country! She has been a big porker in the past, and has now backed off of that due to presidential aspirations.
Romney did not fund abortions. Romney is no more gay rights than Palin. Romney simply believes that gay people deserve equality, as I’m sure Palin does.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
#344; Bob; Romney sitting next to Graham only showed that there are different factions to the Republican Party.
I think it was more of a symbol than anything else. They are trying to unite the party.
A Republican running in California won’t win in South Carolina. Same with Utah and N.Y.
Romney and Graham are like night and day but they are still both Republicans. They are just representing different factions of the GOP, that doesn’t mean we can’t all be Republicans.
I believe we should be a big tent party. We have our States to protect us from each other.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Texas, now your quoting a commenter on a blog as an authority? Ha ha.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
lkv,
I don’t think you’ve said anything that offended me here, but I’m glad you like the site. So do I.
And of course Huck’s show is (in part) about providing a (potential) launch pad for ’12. For Foxnews, though, it’s just about the money.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Martha,
If you cannot invest the time to research both of the governors legislative accomplishments, then a discussion with you is not worth the effort.
Take me word for it…Romney is running to the center.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
That’s funny, though. I didn’t hear that Romney called up MSNBC and asked to be interviewed with Graham specifically so that he can appear moderate.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Kris, I have. You cherry pick a couple of things, and ignore much of what Palin has done in Alaska.
Romney is running to the center only in your imagination. It helps Palin in your mind, I suspect.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Martha, Palin wrote parental notification laws, Romney funded abortions. Mitt ran a deficit, Palin cut spending.
Mitt is lobbying hard for support from moderates.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Martha, while you laughed at the comment, I gave you a link so that you could read the posts. It was a post on how Romney was ready rested and tan. Most of the comments are pro-Palin and talk about Romney as a moderate. Just helping you to see that not everyone thinks that Romney is a true conservative and they like Palin.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
I’m guessing Martha is the only member of the flat earth society in Utah.
“everyone is wrong, I am correct”
June 29th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Martha,
If you are going to argue for Romney’s purist conservative credentials over the past year, you should probably explain why he supported the TARP bill that the vast majority of Republicans Congressmen voted against.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
#355:
I agree with you that McCain may have ‘plucked her too early’ but at least he plucked her. However think of how depressed many conservative Republicans might be right now if McCain hadn’t chosen her at all.
Fortunately for the conservative movement and for Sarah Palin herself, Sarah has two years to get ready for the 2011-2012 primary season. I believe if she does her homework, she can pull it off-I really do.
We know she is a three-legged Reagan conservative. I know many veteran Reagan conservatives will volunteer their services to her as she make the jump from mainly focused on Alaska to being primarily concerned about the nation. And Rush and Mark Levin will be with her every step of the journey. They will ensure that she survives because they and their ilk know if she falls flat on her face that Reagan conservatism is dead.
Martha, you can say many things about Sarah Palin, but not in a thousand years will you ever prove that she is not a Reagan conservative.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
#368, Martha believes that it is conservative to support raising fees (taxes) on the middle and working class.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
OMG. This is one of the most-replied-to non-open-thread posts EVER.
Probably the last time we had a thread get this many posts was…
“Time to Pull the Plug On Palin”
LOL
June 29th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
#361: He’s for sure getting his message out, all is fair in politics. When he goes too far he’ll be off, or he’ll make the call to either get ready for the Primaries or stay on the show. He should say with FOX, he’s getting respect and making money at the same time, when does that ever happen in real life?
June 29th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
I have to admit that I am not familiar with Romney’s record as Governor and that is why I have not commented on it. But what I have observed recently, especially in the article in Politico by Jonathan Martin today, leads me to believe that Romney is gradually becoming the ‘establishment candidate’ or perhaps the establishment has put out feelers that it wants Romney as its standardbearer. Really does it matter? Listen to Mitt’s advisors or consultants or whatever you want to call them: they don’t sound conservative to me. Again I am not criticizing Romney for directing his efforts to constituencies that he might find great favor in-it’s like a golfer who only wants to play golf courses where he has previously played well at.
Refer to the original thread. Sarah Palin replaced her spokesman with a man who has extensive ties in the evangelical community. Palin is tailoring her efforts currently at conservatives, evangelicals and the pro-life community. She is doing the same as Romney in trying to cultivate relationships with groups who would tend to find more favor for her. Does that make her a better candidate than Romney? No. Does it make her a worse candidate? No. It’s just smart politics for both Palin and Romney to do what they’ve been doing over the last few months.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Why are there not more Huckabee posters on either race42012.com or Hot Air? Are they not Internet or blogger literate? Does anybody have any idea who supports him and why he doesn’t have more of a presence on the world wide web?
June 29th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
363: Martha; If people watch Meet the Press and listen carefully they would pick up on the fact that they were setting their veiws apart from each other. But politically saying, look, we have different views but we can get along.
It was symbolic and a great Political move to unite the GOP.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
365. Kris,
The truth is that Palin isn’t invested in any legislative matters – not even her own! The repubs even said she was even AWOL on parental notification. Romney did not fund abortions, either. You know that. He had nothing to do with it.
Romney balanced the budget. Palin had no funding issues due to high oil profits. How do you not see what is so obvious?
Romney is running as a conservative. You still haven’t showed one statement or position that Romney is moderate on, or speaking moderately on. NADA.
You are ignoring Palin’s ventures off the conservative reservation – including her liberal statement on the war in Iraq, and amnesty.
You are the one who has the attitude of being 100% right, with no arguing. all I asked was for some facts, you didn’t give any.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
368. Palin also supported TARP. Most people think TARP was necessary to keep the banking system from collapsing, and I don’t think it has been proven that it wasn’t. Hindsite is great, though. Romney had nothing to do with how TARP was implemented.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Martha,
Oil prices dropped (in case you did not notice)and Palin still balanced the budget (surplus, actually).
Romney ran a deficit ($379 million, I believe). Don’t mislead our readers.
http://massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/health_ins/
June 29th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
367. Kris, I live in OR, not UT.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Martha (#376)
What part of Palin’s position on Iraq was liberal: that she wanted to win, that she supported the troops wholeheartedly, that she did not believe America should leave Iraq until the mission was completed or the generals on the ground said so, that she called out Obama in the debate for not voting to defend the troops.
Martha, I just don’t see it.
And finally regarding Romney he is a Republican and the GOP is a right-of-center party made up of two main factions, those who are somewhat right of center and those who are farther right of center. Romney is ‘somewhat right of center’ often referred to as a Republican moderate, but it does not mean he is liberal, which he is not. But he is just not out there or let me put it this way he is perceived not to be out there on the social issues for whatever reason the conservative base of the GOP choose to view him as. Unfortunately in politics, Martha, the perception is often the reality and no matter how hard Romney tries he will never be as popular with the far right conservatives: evangelicals, pro-life community, NRA members etc as Sarah Palin.
Now fortunately for Romney there are also millions of more moderate conservative Republicans looking for a home to park their vote and it appears that Romney may be doing very well with these folks. A vote is a vote regardless who casts it.
In summary Romney is a moderate-conservative and Palin is a Reagan conservative. They both know who there favored constituencies and voting blocs are. In two years we will find how well each did with his/her strategy.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Martha,
“Most people think TARP was necessary to keep the banking system from collapsing, and I don’t think it has been proven that it wasn’t. Hindsite is great, though.”
Most REPUBLICANS in Congress voted against it, and that wasn’t hindsight, that was foresight.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
Martha, you have weird views on what is liberal and conservative.
Romney wanted troop withdrawl, Palin wanted victory.
Romney raised taxes (you supported it), Alaska has no income or sales tax.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
bob,
Palin has a couple of past statements, before she was chosen for VP, that make her look clueless on Iraq. One, she wondered if the Iraq war was about oil – and 2nd, she wondered if there should be timetables – both very liberal things for a “conservative” governor to vocalize, don’t you think?
Are you aware that Romney won the conservative vote in 08? Look at the exit polls. He doesn’t really have a problem with conservatives. Palin is no more a Reagan conservative than Romney is.
Kris is trying to affect perception, he’s not really concerned about the facts.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
#376 Martha; Your absolutely right. The top Economic brains were for the TARP bill and there would have been an economic collapse. After Bush, Obama just went wild and used it for things it wasn’t intended for.
45 banks went under this year, why didn’t Obama save those banks?
Now Barney Frank wants to use TARP money to bail out CA,…24 billion dollar bail-out.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
Oh for crying out loud, Kris. Romney never wanted trop withdrawal, nor raised taxes. Now you’re looking silly.
Don’t let the facts get in the way of good story, though.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
381. Are you talking TARP or stimulus? If I remember correctly, most repubs voted for TARP.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
None that I know of, which is as it should be. I’ve mentioned before that I think Romney’s approach to appealing to the center will (and should) be accomplished more by changing tone and emphasis than by making any major position changes.
If he does the latter, he opens up all the flip-flop talk again.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
How could Palin’s syntax not be better. Why can’t she construct a sentence?
This really hasn’t been discussed but could she maybe have something like deslexia only with having trouble putting a sentence together?
She has a degree Communications so how could she not ….. well I don’t think I want to go any further because I dont want to tick anybody off.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Wasn’t there a rumor that Saddam Hussein threatened to blow up all the oil wells in Iraq if he didn’t get his way or if the UN sanctions weren’t lifted? Thus wasn’t part of the reason for the invasion of Iraq was to prevent Hussein from doing something crazy?
Here is a web site to article that discusses this scenario:
http://www.highbeam.com
/doc/1P1-71319137.html
June 29th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
Martha,
Talking to you is like listening to Dennis Kucinich.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/romneys-tax-record-gets-a-closer-look-2007-03-27.html
June 29th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
#388, Palin is the best communicator we have. People understand her and relate to her.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
391. Possible the most ridiculous asserrtion I’ve ever seen on race.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:55 pm
Kris, still waiting to see a Romney quote sounding like a moderate.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
#391:
How did Sarah get through the convention speech and the debate if she couldn’t string two sentences together? Quite honestly Kristofer if Sarah couldn’t speak with eloquence, authenticity, and conviction I might not be in her camp now. Even Michael Reagan compared her ability to communicate and speak over the media to his dad.
The one thing I do know about politics is that the majority of Republican conservative voters who support Sarah are NOT stupid or ill-informed. They know a diamond in the rough when they find it. Sure Sarah does not speak like the elites on the east or west coasts but what she is able to do is to be cogent and be a Reagan conservative, and I’ll take cogent and her adherence to the principles of the Gipper over smooth and squishy any day of the week.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Martha.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
June 30th, 2009 at 12:02 am
Romney optimistic on Obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqeOY2zotis
June 30th, 2009 at 12:04 am
Romney on stimulus;
“Government can do some good to get the economy going”
June 30th, 2009 at 12:11 am
#391 Kristofer; I’m asking this in the most sincere way. It is just an odd way of speaking, and I don’t know of any regional dialect it could come from, and have never heard anybody speak like that before I’m just kind of curious that’s the only reason I brought it up.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:15 am
Romney hasn’t moved one iota to the center. He won’t! Why should he? He already get smost of those votes based on competence. His detractors would love for him to move left, but I want him to stay right where he is and take his same share of the conservative vote. Moving left more than a tiny amount would be a big mistake. He hasn’t, and won’t.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:19 am
#398,
I understand. Basically, Palin speaks like the millions of rural and small town resident who live between the Michigan penn. and Seattle.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:19 am
#395:
Romney in 2002 was obviously pro-choice. Now he is pro-life. His position has evolved. I accept him at his word. But unfortuately Martha there are millions of conservative Republicans who are not as ‘enlightened’ as I am. That is why Sarah Palin has more support in the pro-life community and amongst the conservative base that Romney has. It is what it is.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:20 am
#398,
I speak like that.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:22 am
Martha and Illinoisguy believe many conservatives oppose Romney because of bigotry, but bob is correct…they feel that Romney is not a true believer.
I believe Romney was misleading on abortion when he was governor of MA, not as a POTUS candidate.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:33 am
#403, actually he agreed to not let the issue move either direction…he was abole to do so by governing 100% prolife.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:34 am
#403
And believe me there are many things in politics which are not fair, and not being taken at your word when you change the way you see an issue is not fair. There is just too damn much skepticism and cynicism in the modern day electorate whether ir be Democrat or Republican. It’s like you have to had the same position since the day you were born. If you change your viewpoint you’re accused of and bring on the negative connotation of being a flip-flopper.
For example if Sarah Palin had ever had an abortion, that would have finished her politically and quite honestly if Bristol had aborted her son I think Sarah would have had a hard time to recover. If you are over 40 think about it: how many ideas that you now hold did you hold when you were 22?
Now it sounds like I’m feeling sorry for Romney but why should I-he’s got the Republican establishment presumedly endorsing his 2012 candidacy once it gets officially announced; he’s in good shape but alas he will never be the darling of the pro-life or conservative Republican community.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:38 am
excellent insight, bob.
I feel badly for Mitt because his only path to the nomination to to become the establishment candidate, but that will change people’s views on him.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:42 am
#406:
And he might just pull it off. I predict a Palin-Romney showdown in 2011-2012. And there are just too many unknown variables so early in the game to determine a winner. It may go all the way to Iowa before we have any idea where they both stand.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:45 am
#407, I agree.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:43 am
I’m not predicting any showdown. It’s not that I am saying there won’t be one. I am saying that “I” am not predicting one. It’s way too early. Any number of things might happen between now and 2012.
I’m not 100% convinced that Palin will run in 2012. Looking at it as dispassionately as possible, I would say she definitely needs the experience of getting re-elected in 2010. Not only would it beef up her resume, but she can use the campaign as a badly needed opportunity to work on the campaign skills she is lacking, skills she really needs to improve upon if she wants to survive on the National stage. Running for office in 2010 is problematic, however, because to shift from running for Governor in 2010 to running for President in 2012 will be a tight squeeze, and Alaskans will not like it. Her opposition in 2010 will use that against her unless she emphatically promises not to do it. Of course, she could pass on 2010, but then she will be stuck with a weaker resume and underdeveloped skills when she runs in 2012.
I’m not sure if Huckabee is running, either. That nice cushy, comfortable, secure TV job is going to look mighty fine compared to the campaign trail meat grinder. From what I hear, Huckabee is doing all right at Fox News. So why rock the boat? And then there are the problems of the bridges he burned in 2008 with a certain religious group. He is literally going to have to choose between placating them and not alienating some key components of his base. I don’t envy him his position. He may choose the easy route and keep his day job.
To put it in a nutshell, I will not be surprised if Huckabee or Palin or both decide to give 2012 a pass.
I think I can state with confidence that Mitt Romney will be running in 2012 unless something tragic happens.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:00 am
409: MarK; You’re 100% right about both Huck and Palin. Palin needs to learn how to become less sensitive and develop a thick skin before she run’s for President.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:17 am
#405 Bob ; Palin is kind of pro-choice. She doesn’t believe in abortion, but doesn’t feel she should tell woman what to do.
She said it shouldn’t be a political issue. That’s what she said during the campaign.
Everybody is assuming she is anti-choice because she had Trig.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:40 am
#410. Palin ha the thickest skin of them all. If Mittens faces even 1/10th of the mud that was thrown at her (and believe me the Dems n MSM will do it if he EVER becomes a threat to the One), he’ll crawl back to his Massachussets mansion again.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:43 am
mark (#409):
Nothing is 100%, even if Romney is running or not, but I consider myself a rational thinker and intellectually honest. I hate to keep referring back to the recent PPP poll and the PEW poll but GOP politicians would die to have numbers that Palin has among the base of the Republican Party, a 70%+ favorability among ALL Republicans, especially since she had been virtually on hiatus for 6 months between the beginning of December 2008(helping Chambliss to a 14 point victory when it was projected a slim 4 point margin) to the beginning of June 2009 and her visit to Auburn NY where 20,000 came out to see the Seward celebrations. She has not held one fundraiser for SarahPAC. In a couple of weeks we will find out what she took in the first 5 months of its existence.
The two week window between the beginning of June to the midway mark ending with the Letterman apology was a boon to Sarah’s popularity-witness the exponential growth of her Facebook and Twitter accounts since June 15, and with Sanford’s Presidential political career all but over before it began she stands to pick up a sizeable chunk of his evangelical and conservative supporters as well. Even the anti-Palinite David Frum admits that. And that takes me back to the subject of this thread which after 411 posts may seem lost: Sarah hired a man who has strong ties to evangelical community a few days after the Sanford incident. Perhaps it is a coincidence, but the hiring can do nothing but help her standing further, not that she needs it really.
Barring a Palin family or health challenge I believe there is a 95% chance that Sarah Palin will run for the Presidency in 2012. I have read the tea leaves and that is what they tell me in no uncertain terms. Her following in the party will not permit her to do otherwise.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:56 am
#411:
The chances that are than no more than 1% of Americans believe Sarah Palin is pro-choice. I don’t think even Axelrod and his buddies and wonkettes at the war room would even venture that assertion. You must have missed Sarah’s speech at the ‘pro-life’ dinner at Evansville on April 17th in front of people who have dedicated their lives to the pro-life movement. They gave her a standing ovation. I think they would be able to spot a pro-life charlatan when they saw one. Sarah brought Trig into the world knowing he would be disabled. Sarah has brought 4 other children into the world. If she has ever had an abortion even the Obama war room could not find any evidence of it.
By the way Sarah is also a member of Feminists for Life a pro-life organization.
lkv, you are barking up the wrong tree here.
June 30th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Vanity Fair coming out with a hit piece today on Sarah Palin and of course they have interviewed those ‘McCain staffers’ who don’t have a kind word to say about Sarah Palin. There is talk the Romney camp had something to do with this piece because the McCain camp and the Romney camp seem to be buddy-buddy these days.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:07 am
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/08/sarah-palin200908?printable=true¤tPage=all
June 30th, 2009 at 9:35 am
Kris,
395. Romney was formerly pro-choice. He is now pro-life and was a pro-life governor.Palin admitted that she considered aborting Trig. Both are pro-life now, but I’d be willing to bet that Ann and Mitt never considered abortion for their own children.
396. Yes, Romney is a decent guy and doesn’t engage in gratuitiously criticizism. Since the election, Romney has been one of the best at pointing out Obama’s flaws.
397. Of course government can do some good to get the economy going. For starters, lowering taxes and less regulation. There are many conservative ways the gov could spend money that would actually stimulate the economy. Try actually listening to what Romney has been saying for the past 6 months.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Palin is articulate? She doesn’t speak like me or for me. Most of the people I know are much more articulate than Palin. Almost everyone on this blog is, as well. I’m all for electing people who are authentic, but how about authentic and smart? Authentic and successful? Authentic and articulate? Authenticity all by itself is a pretty lame reason to elect someone.
I think it’s very important for leaders to be able to speak beyond simplistic soundbites, which is all Palin can muster. When she speaks in unscripted moments, she’s a train wreck. It’s difficult to decipher much of what she is trying to convey.
Palin’s appeal is in her sex appeal and persona, not her intellect, speech or knowledge. It is no surprise that Palin does better in the less-educated group of republicans.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:49 am
415. Oh, another accusation about Romney smearing Palin! Too bad none of them have been true to date.
Remember, bob – the accusations that Romney people were behind the initial smears of Palin by McCain staffers at the end of the campaign turned out to be 100% untrue. But they sure made a good story.
Romney doesn’t play that way. Also, I doubt Romney and McCain are buddy, buddy. During the financial meltdown, Ingraham asked Romney if he had talked to McCain a lot. Romney gave the indication that McCain does not, and had not contacted him very much.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:58 am
#413.bob,
Palin has some hard decisions to make.
Fact #1. She really, REALLY needs to work on some of her campaigning skills. Extemporaneous speaking is the prime one. A Presidential candidate (especially a Republican one) simply has to be articulate when going off script. Now nobody is expecting Shakespeare, or Lincoln, but she HAS to learn to not ramble and to speak in clear, concise statements. She really has to lose that habit of hers to give flirtatious winks whenever she gets nervous. She also needs to cultivate a thorough grasp of National and International issues. Her lack of knowledge in those areas killed her in 2008.
Fact #2. She needs better Executive skills. I have been watching her closely since she burst on the scene, wanting to be impressed by her. I have NOT been. I’ve seen a mediocre, at best executive who has no business sitting in the Oval Office. This firing of an ineffectual Communications Director and the hiring of a competent one is the first executive decision I have seen her make that I really like. She has to do more of this, not just tease us.
Fact #3. Running for re-election in 2010 will make running for 2012 a very tight squeeze. She will barely be re-inaugurated in 2011 when she will have to start running full time for 2012.
Oh, and lose the victim mentality. Americans don’t want a victim as President.
June 30th, 2009 at 10:02 am
#415.bob,
So let me get this straight — you are spreading unsubstantiated rumors about somebody being behind unsubstantiated rumors?
Is that it in a nutshell?
June 30th, 2009 at 11:07 am
“Remember, bob – the accusations that Romney people were behind the initial smears of Palin by McCain staffers at the end of the campaign turned out to be 100% untrue. But they sure made a good story.”
Do you have evidence that the rumors were “100% untrue?”
http://spectator.org/archives/2008/10/27/post-defeat-planners
We don’t know if it’s true or not. The difference is that these unsourced assertions were made a in a credible news magazine.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Tommy Boy, I don’t remember who killed the rumor, but it was found to be entirely untrue. I’ll look it up today if I have time. The specator hates Romney and especially the guy who started the rumor.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Tommy,
As I asked bob, I now ask you. Are you spreading unsubstantiated rumors about someone spreading unsubstantiated rumors?
July 7th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
It’s so amazing to read all the above suggestions and criticisms above by people who have accomplished very little in their lives(yeah nobody has ever heard of you armchair possessor’s of so much wisdom…..)render judgment and advice to someone who has accomplished more than all of you combined. What we are dealing with is a generation that what they lack in humility they make up for in arrogance and disrespect. Pay no attention to the peanut gallery Sarah. Your doing fine on your own except in the minds of those with selective logic disease.