This week, the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake penned an original and entertaining analysis of Mitt Romney’s health care record. The main point of discussion? Whether the Governor’s past with MassCare amounts to the Republican version of Hillary Clinton’s Iraq war vote. As we recall, the vote raised substantial obstacles to Hillary’s path through the 2008 Democratic primaries and provided the then-Sen. Barack Obama multiple opportunities to endear himself to party members.
We begin with the similarities between the two situations:
Clinton’s vote was so toxic because it was an easy way to tie her to President Bush. In the same way, Romney’s health care bill is an easy way for his GOP opponents to say, ‘Hey, this guy’s just like Obama.’
Clinton, by refusing the apologize for her vote or say that it was a mistake, ensured that she would be asked about it at nearly every campaign stop. Romney, whose advisers did not comment for this article, looks to be headed down a similar path; after all, he didn’t even mention health care during his recent speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
And now, on to the discrepancies:
For one, Clinton’s vote was easy to quantify; she voted for the use of force resolution against Iraq. Period. With Romney, his opponents need to convince the public that his bill is the same as Obama’s bill even as Romney is, presumably, making the case that the two are quite different.
Second, even Romney’s potential opponents say Clinton’s Iraq vote was more of a deal-breaker for Democratic primary voters than Romney’s health care bill will be in the GOP primary.
…While Iraq was the preeminent issue for Democrats at this time in the 2008 campaign, the still-struggling economy and continued unrest in the Middle East have pushed health care as an issue to the back burner.
…What’s more, Romney isn’t as clear a frontrunner now that Clinton was in 2008. People were gunning for Clinton from the outset. That will also be the case with Romney, but not to the same extent.
For what it’s worth, I lean more toward the latter view – that the comparison does not exactly hold true, owing primarily to the fact that health care as an issue simply does not matter as much as Iraq in 2007 and 2008. While MassCare will certainly alienate some of the most hardcore members of the Republican base, it will not register as much with, say, the independents who will vote in the GOP primaries due to the lack of a Democratic contest in 2012 but don’t research each candidate’s list of policy stances in detail.
Still, we will undoubtedly hear the participants on the short end of pre-primary polling mentioning “RomneyCare” on a regular basis. How much damage that will do remains to be seen.
February 27th, 2011 at 12:43 am
In New Hampshire, due to his large lead in his “home” state. Mitt will be fine, imo.
But in Iowa, South Carolina, and Florida, where he has to win at least one to be viable, he has no room for error. If RomneyCare even cost him a few points in each of those three (and it almost certainly will), he’s toast. And burnt toast, if Huckabee shows up.
February 27th, 2011 at 12:55 am
With Hillary’s vote on Iraq, it was pretty clear-cut. She supported it and voted for it.
Romney didn’t vote for Obamacare and has said repeatedly he wouldn’t have.
I don’t think the comparisons are quite the same but regardless, I agree with the conclusion. I don’t see Massachusetts’ healthcare being the death blow to Romeny’s campaign that some do. Romney does, however, need to talk openly about the plan and explain it. He should outline the problem, cite what the data showed, talk about his original proposal, the legislative process and compromises, fully explain the precise plan he signed, and lastly talk about the changes that’ve been made since. By not talking about it and repeating the Federalsim talking points, he misses the opportunity to inform voters and instead gives the impression that what his critics claim is true.
I have seen Romney explain the plan and he does a very good job outlining what his intentions were. He needs to do more of that.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:01 am
The second section has two good points:
1) The RomneyCare is not as big a deal to Republicans as Iraq was to Dems — True
2) Romney is not as much as a front-runner as Hillary — Extremely True
Point 2 somewhat negates the importance of Point 1 — because it means it will take less to derail him.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:15 am
Craig for Huck,
If you’ll recall, Romney was leading by about five points in Florida on the weekend before the primary and likely would have won the state. However, on Saturday night, in a surprising last minute endorsement, the state’s popular governor, Charlie Crist, announced his support for John McCain. Polls conducted two days later on Monday night showed McCain with a slight lead which is how the vote turned out. Romney finished second. Nearly 70 percent of Floridians voted for either McCain or Romney. Mike Huckabee finished a distant fourth with less than 14 percent of the vote and less than half of Romney’s total.
While I would agree that Iowa and South Carolina are more natural fits for Huckabee than Romney, Florida clearly favored Romney last time and polling has indicated that Romney performs better with older voters which Florida has a lot of. Huckabee may lay claim to Florida being his “home” state now that he’s built his McMansion by the sea but I suspect that will have little impact and your wishes for burnt toast may be a bit premature.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:19 am
February 27th, 2011 at 1:33 am
4.Ci2Eye Says:
February 27th, 2011 at 1:15 am
“Craig for Huck,
While I would agree that Iowa and South Carolina are more natural fits for Huckabee than Romney, Florida clearly favored Romney last time and polling has indicated that Romney performs better with older voters which Florida has a lot of. Huckabee may lay claim to Florida being his “home” state now that he’s built his McMansion by the sea but I suspect that will have little impact and your wishes for burnt toast may be a bit premature.”
===
Poll Watch: PPP (D) Florida 2012 GOP Primary ..the last four polls
•Mike Huckabee 23% {15%} [15%] (21%) ..notice a big trend?
•Mitt Romney 21% {28%} [31%] (52%) ..again, notice a huge trend?
•Newt Gingrich 18% {15%} [23%]
•Sarah Palin 13% {22%} [23%] (18%) ..TOAST!
Among Conservatives
•Mike Huckabee 22% {14%} [16%] (23%) ..solid
•Mitt Romney 21% {25%} [26%] (51%) ..not solid
•Newt Gingrich 19% {17%} [26%]
•Sarah Palin 14% {27%} [26%] (18%)
Among Moderates
•Mitt Romney 25% {36%} [40%] (54%) ..trending DOWN
•Mike Huckabee 23% {18%} [13%] (18%) ..trending UP
•Newt Gingrich 15% {6%} [15%]
•Sarah Palin 8% {8%} [16%] (18%) ..BURNT TOAST!
February 27th, 2011 at 2:21 am
The only toast is liberal baptist preacher
from Arkansas.
He never stops praising Obama and Mouchelle,
never one negative word about Barak.
He wants Obama to have two terms.He’s white
liberal tormented with guilt feelings.
This is why he gave clemencies to over 1,000
criminals,by far most of them blacks,some of
them committed murders after they were let out
of prisons.
Huckabee running for republican nomination?!
Are you kidding?!
I alone would make commercials and expose this
liberal fake,phony and a FRAUD.
I’m sure he voted for him in 2008.
He will not run,he can’t run,he’s broke,he
always will be broke.His bible thumpers are
not giving him any money.
He’s looking for 2016,to kiss Jeb’s ass and
hope for VP spot.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:45 am
So when are Huck supporters going to insist Huck apologies for raising taxes and letting so many dangerous criminals out of prison. Never, because they have blinders on.
As a Floridian, I can promise you this, Huck will not do well here except in the Pan handle (where he built his home). Floridians for the most part are thinkers. Also, the vast majority of voters here are older retired northerners who Huck does not fit so well.
The other real issue is how the others will deal with the question of what did you do to reduce health care cost in your state. If they can’t answer, they are toast. After all, what was Huckabees answers. Raise taxes on Grandma.
For these and other reasons, Huckabee is toast.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:57 am
Clinton didn’t lose because of the war vote. And does anyone really believe that Obama wouldn’t have voted the same if he was in the senate? Please!
February 27th, 2011 at 7:13 am
Dig the hit pieces on Mitt Romney. He must be leading big time, for all the knives to be coming out so soon.
February 27th, 2011 at 10:29 am
Mr. Romney is not speaking in lengthy and detailed contrasts between ‘obama care’ vs a state solution. This is not his nature. He loves detail, data and debate. He loves a flow sheet that itemizes each point. I know Mr. Romney has shared some nuances, and given a few simple sound bites, But his past indicates he is holding back. Is it reluctance?, or anticipation to meet Obama in a direct, extended face off in a large format, with everyone watching? Mitt has said he looks forward to a direct debate with the president on the issue. That is what I am looking forward to.
Zeek
February 27th, 2011 at 11:40 am
Iraq was largely a “do it” or “don’t do it” question….Healthcare is far more of a “how do we do it?” No serious person seeking higher office can make the case that healthcare is not a flawed, if downright broken system. Further, no plan will simultaneously please the libertarian fringe (the group making the most fuss over RomneyCare) and the general population. Anyone who makes getting rid of broad-coverage Health insurance, which is the not-so-secret ambition of many of them, is DOA in a national contest.
We have seen people on here trying to claim both that Healthcare will be a killer issue for Romney because his opponents can attack him to death on it, AND that it is not a big enough issue for him to gain ground on by being the best positioned candidate on the reform issue.
You cannot have it both ways. Either healthcare will be a minor issue in 2012, in which case any candidate trying to wage war against Romney because of MassCare will be seen as distracting from the main issue; or it will be a major issue, in which case any candidate trying to attack Romney will have to explain not only their own plan, but also one of the following:
1) If they are proposing a national plan, why they are (presumably) criticizing Obama, while pushing their own national reform.
2) If they are proposing a state-by-state plan, why they are attacking Romney, who supports the same thing.
3) Why they are advocating a state-by-state plan, only to attack what one state has enacted which – contrary to what they want [people] to believe – has worked quite well.
February 27th, 2011 at 11:43 am
Anthony:
If we’re making distinctions between the Iraq war vote for Hillary and Masscare for Romney, you should also consider the fact that Romney is starting out from a much weaker position than Hillary. Back in 2007 Hillary was the 900 pound gorilla, generally pulling in 40% of the electorate in early polls. Romney, while leading the pack, usually get about half of that. Therefore, the Masscare vote doesn’t NEED to damage Romney as much as the Iraq war vote damaged Hillary to have the same effect.
February 27th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
#13:
There are fundamental differences, both between traditional Republican and Democratic primaries, and between the Republican primary in 2012, and the Democratic primary in 2008. Historically, front runner status has meant very little in Democratic primaries, while it means everything on the Republican side – in every election since 1980, the runner-up from the last primary cycle has won the Repbulican nomination. 2000 alone is the exception.
The Republican side also lacks a young, charismatic, widely acceptable contender on the scale of Obama. Palin and Santorum both alienate considerable elements of the party, and neither Pawlenty nor Daniels can be described as charismatic.
February 27th, 2011 at 12:41 pm
The Democrats are speaking in unison to bring down Romney on this issue and by all accounts, they seem to be gaining some traction.
I believe that Romney is the guy Obama most fears. Romney’s big “negatives” (religion, healthcare) are both issues that Obama can’t run against. Romney’s religion can’t be brought into the converstion by a guy whose own religion is far more suspect than Romney’s. And, how could he make an issue of ‘Romneycare’ in a general election when he repeatedly says it was the template for his own plan? If he can’t run against him on his weaknesses, he is left only with his strengths. If the economy and deficits remain premier issues, Romney would be competing in the areas he is most well versed. Thus, Obama knows if Romney gets through the primary, he is in for a tough challenge. To avoid this and ensure his re-election, he needs to defeat Romney in the primary or even better, before the primary. To achieve that goal, the Democrats have developed the talking point of saying Romneycare is equal to Obamacare with the hopes that Republicans will reject Romney outright on that single issue.
In the latest example, on this morning’s ABC program This Week, Jake Tapper asked current Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick about Romney. He said to Patrick that Romeny would likely run for President and his tenure as Massachusetts governor immediately preceded Patrick’s so what’s your assessment of him; was he a good governor? Patrick replied saying “The best thing he did was to be a co-author of healthcare reform which has been a model for national reform…he deserves a lot of credit”. Clearly he got the message from Axelrod, Gibbs, Phloeffe, and his buddy, Obama, that Romney must be alientated from his own party and defeated before we ever have to run against him.
It is obvious to me who the Democrats don’t want to run against. I hope it is obvious to Republicans because we absolutely must nominate someone who can take down Obama and save us from four more years of his reign.
February 27th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
FOX NEWS SUNDAY this morning..
http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/huckabee-softens-criticism-of-romney-s-health-care-plan-20110227
February 27th, 2011 at 12:55 pm
MK: “front runner status … means everything on the Republican side”
It would be meaningful if he were the frontrunner, as Hillary was. But he isn’t. In the current RCP poll averages, he’s in a tie with Huckabee and a shade ahead of Palin. He is a frontrunner.
How much does it take to derail a ‘frontrunner’ who can’t even get 20%?
February 27th, 2011 at 1:05 pm
Bob, the frontrunner status is more than simply polls – its concensus over who will be the nominee, it is levels of support beyond the general public, it is organization.
Romney and Huckabee are consistently tied in polls, true, but there is a far greater belief that Romney will be the nominee than that Huckabee will.
Further, his status as frontrunner comes from his position as runner-up in 2008. This is the same as McCain, Dole, Bush I, and Reagan.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
2012 Republican Presidential Nomination Polling Data
REAL CLEAR POLITICS AVERAGE:
Huck Mitt Palin Newt TP MD HB .. Spread
19.0 18.6 16.0 9.7 4.0 2.7 2.0 .. Huck +.4
Palin is pulling Huck’s number down for now, imo.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
February 27th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
““It’s not a good plan, but he attempted something that he wanted to see if it would work,” he said.”
…If only it hadn’t worked. The rough goal of MassCare was to expand coverage to all citizens, and use this broader pool to lower premiums and realocate the money being used to support hospitals treating the uninsured to help those uninsured buy healthcare.
On all these counts, the plan has been a rousing success. It has not cut costs in half, or reversed the overall trend of rising costs, but that is only testement to the work that remains to be done…not that what has been done to this point is a failure.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Matthew Kilburn Says:
February 27th, 2011 at 1:05 pm
“..his status as frontrunner comes from his position as runner-up in 2008.”
===
Nice try. Co-runnerup, to be fair.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
Thanks Bob
Now all Rombots may go on and on about how he has the organization no-one else has, but in the end of the day, he had all that in 2007 as well and it didn’t help him at all. Romney, for all his business experience, never figured out how to get a decent return on investment. That is because he is simply not what Republicans want, and no money in the world is going to change that. Money and organization can hold a bad candidate up for a while, but in the end, reality catches up.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
Not really, Matthew. I agree that there’s more to it than polls — I just cited that as one indicator of his relative weakness.
But there’s also no consensus (except among Rombots) that Romney is the frontrunner. Even those analysts who list him as a clear #1 generally hedge their comments heavily.
Very different from Hillary at this point. She wasn’t just the frontrunner remember, she was inevitable. Do you hear anyone realistically speaking of Romney in such terms?
February 27th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
“Palin is pulling Huck’s number down for now, imo.”
Palin is an interesting case – I believe there was a poll a while back that showed her pulling from both Romney and Huckabee.
But I don’t disagree that her base contains many of the same people as Huck’s…I think we can also agree Gingrich is bringing Romney down…
February 27th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
“Very different from Hillary at this point. She wasn’t just the frontrunner remember, she was inevitable. Do you hear anyone realistically speaking of Romney in such terms?”
No – but as I said, things are fundamentally different betwen the two parties. You can be “inevitable” in the DNC – and lose. It is that runner up status that makes all the difference in hte GOP.
——
“Nice try. Co-runnerup, to be fair.”
To a degree – when you drag your feet admitting the inevitable, you will pick up a few extra delegates.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:17 pm
Yahoo Daily News 2011-01-20:
And in THE HILL:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/131227-poll-palin-is-plan-b-for-romney-backers
February 27th, 2011 at 1:24 pm
Huck picks up ground from both Palin and Newt.
I think Mitch Daniels’ 2.7% definitely pulls from Mitt’s “base” but T-Paw’s solid 4% pulls about equally from Huck and Mitt.
Bottom line, Romney is not THE front runner.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
But if the press and the White House want to call him that, to put a big target on his back for the other candidates to shoot at, oh well…that’s politics.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
You know, Matthew, I think you honestly believe that next-in-line crap. It’s stuff like that that makes it tough to take you seriously.
By the way, I remember in summer of 2008, you wanted McCain to pick Romney as VP because that would make Romney the NIL. Given that, why do you not consider Palin next in line?
Really — drop it. It’s pretty much meaningless.
There may be some value to it as a predictor in cases where there’s a clear NIL (Nixon in ’60, Reagan in ’80, Bush in ’88), but not otherwise.
And certainly not in this case, when there are three plausible claimants to the title.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Definitely, Palin has a valid claim as at least one of three co-runner-ups for ’08.
I think that’s what helps her numbers average around 15 or so. Otherwise, she’d be at about a 1-2 percenter. If that.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
Huckabee admits, his growing waistline is a national security risk:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mike-huckabee-im-not-in-a-war-with-palin-bachmann-and-limbaugh/
February 27th, 2011 at 1:49 pm
“I think that’s what helps her numbers average around 15 or so. Otherwise, she’d be at about a 1-2 percenter. If that.”
I can’t imagine she’d even be in the conversation if she hadn’t been McCain’s running mate.
Though perhaps then she might have finished her term and been re-elected. But that takes us into a complicated ‘what-if’.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:54 pm
Yes, she would have not been driven from office and would have a stellar record of two terms of excellent conservative governance.
Unfortunately, he democrats recognized the political danger she represented and went after her with Alinskyite tactics that nearly bankrupted her family and shut down the Governors office.
Her selfless act of courage defeated their evil plans and she has been able to advance the message of liberty and freedom, leading the charge for the record mid-term republican victories.
February 27th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
“Her selfless act of courage defeated their evil plans and she has been able to advance the message of liberty and freedom, leading the charge …”
Wow — it’s been a while since I’ve heard such florid prose. It really needs some swelling background music, though, culminating in a choir singing “America the Beautiful” as the final credits roll.
February 27th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
Quitting on her constituents after just 30 months to go make $30 million is a “selfless act of courage”?
February 27th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
“By the way, I remember in summer of 2008, you wanted McCain to pick Romney as VP because that would make Romney the NIL. Given that, why do you not consider Palin next in line?”
No, because McCain did not win. If McCain had won, with Palin as his VP, she would most certainly have been next in line (See Nixon, Bush I, Gore, etc.). Because the ticket lost, she is something less.
And yes, I do beleive it – because it has held true in every Republican primary cycle since 1980, with the exception of one. True, things are only right until they aren’t…but until then, you go with what has stood the test of time.
In the absense of a crystal ball, you go with what you have.
February 27th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
Believe whatever nonsense makes you feel good, Matthew.
February 27th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
“Believe whatever nonsense makes you feel good, Matthew.”
Alright then Bob, if you want to dismiss tradition….what reliable indicators do you believe we have to predict the winner of the Republican Primaries?
February 27th, 2011 at 2:55 pm
Whoever wins South Carolina has been been a perfect barometer measurement for about 30 years now of our next nominee.
I’m going with that one.
February 27th, 2011 at 3:04 pm
“Whoever wins South Carolina has been been a perfect barometer measurement for about 30 years now of our next nominee.
I’m going with that one.”
Good, come back in 14 months and let us know who it is….but I’m referring to the present.
It is not that any one indicator is infallible – its that, before the contest really heats up, there are only certain things we have available to make predictions.
February 27th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
40. Who do you think is going to win SC based on everything we know today? You wanna go on record?
February 27th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
35. The Palin’s do not come from ‘money.’ Todd is blue collar working class. Giving up a $100k/year Governor’s salary in the face of adversity took a lot of courage. Not to mention the potential end of her political future.
There were no guarantee’s her book would sell, or that she would be successful in any of her endeavors. This meme that she quit to ‘make money’ is another leftist lie that doesn’t reflect reality.
She could have easily ‘milked’ the system, drew a paycheck in her last lame duck year without accomplishing anything (due to the lawsuits.)It was a huge risk that took courage and character as she put her state ahead of her personal considerations.
She knew the left would make a big deal out of it, it’s just shameful to see so called conservatives on our side parroting the same BS. It’s a reflection on them, and perhaps the candidate they support.
.40 That’s easy. Governor Palin.
February 27th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
“40. Who do you think is going to win SC based on everything we know today? You wanna go on record?”
Would you have picked pro-amnesty, “agents-of-intolerance”, moderate John S. McCain to win South Carolina over a Southern Evangelical Minister in 2008?
I doubt it.
February 27th, 2011 at 3:36 pm
Whether Palin was brave, or selfish, or stupid is irrelvent to the end point.
She served half a term as governor of the least populated state in the country. She has no major political experience beyond that. She has no high-level executive experience in business. She has never been an ambassador, a professor of foreign policy, or a military leader.
She is not qualified to be President.
February 27th, 2011 at 3:44 pm
.44 – was she qualifies to be VP?
Here are some names I hear bantered about,…
Is Chris Christie ‘qualified to be President?’
How about Herman Cain?
Or Michelle Bachmann?
Is Paul Ryan qualified to be President?
Because I never hear these names in the same sentence with ‘not qualified.’
You are parroting the narrative that has been spoon fed to sheep for over three years. Congratulations, but really, you should try thinking for yourself.
February 27th, 2011 at 3:58 pm
“.44 – was she qualifies to be VP?”
To McCain? I did not believe so.
—–
And I don’t care what you hear about the others you name – you don’t hear them from me. I believe a Presidential candidate should come to the table with significant experience relevant to the position. Being a “Wife and Mother” – while valuable life roles, does not qualify one to set economic policy or carry the nuclear launch codes around.
If Romney had not spent considerable time in the private sector, I would be skeptical whether a single term as governor qualified HIM to be President.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Does Governor Palin have any private sector experience?
February 27th, 2011 at 4:06 pm
“Does Governor Palin have any private sector experience?”
Not on the level of Romney.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:06 pm
Romney is a flip floppin’ RINO who will say whatever he has to depending on the crowd he’s in front of.
We need someone with solid convictions and a moral compass, not a political opportunist.
He has no chance without Huckabee in the race to split the conservative base, so now it’s only a 50/50 proposition that he’ll even run.
All he had going for him was the backing of the elite establishment, but they’ve moved on to Daniels.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:07 pm
Of course, you can always go back and re-write parts of your book.
Talk about tone deaf.
I think that’s when the establishment realized, he’s not the one.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
“She served half a term as governor of the least populated state in the country. She has no major political experience beyond that. She has no high-level executive experience in business. She has never been an ambassador, a professor of foreign policy, or a military leader.
She is not qualified to be President”.
===============================================
Since when being ambassador(thousands in and out
in every administration)is prerequisite to be President?
Who was the last ambassador that got elected President?
Ever!
Professor of foreign policy?Like who?Libs at Harvard?!
Military leader?Like Eisenhower?who else in the last 100
years?
Bob is right,you talk lots of nonsense.
Slow down,think before you click “Submit Comment”.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
I’m sorry.
I forgot to mention.
He does have nice hair.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
What EXPERIENCE. ACTUAL. PHYSICAL. USEFUL. EXPERIENCE. does Palin have that she can draw insight from when leading the biggest and strongest nation on Earth? When conducting warfare with a foreign enemy? When setting economic policy which will effect the lives of hundreds of millions of people?
A: She doesn’t.
Say what you want about Romney being a RINO – which I don’t believe, by the way – but he is far more qualified to be President than she is.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
Matthew Kilburn Says:
“Does Governor Palin have any private sector experience?”
Not on the level of Romney.
==================================
So?!
How about Bill Gates or The Donald or Warren Buffet or….
You are very bad in trying to tear down Sarahcuda,you need
to get some better Libs and RINOS talking points.
down Sarah Palin
February 27th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
how about you tell me…
Besides the fact that she is able, with the help of her hand and a sharpie, to regurgitate your favorite talking points – what quality does Sarah Palin have that makes her the best person to sit in the Oval Office?
February 27th, 2011 at 4:41 pm
How much ‘private sector’ experience did Ronald Reagan have?
You are making your priorities based on Romney’s resume.
The sign of a pathetic fan boy.
As for Governor Palins’ qualifications, all you have to do is look at what she accomplished in her nearly 20 years of executive experience.
She has been very successful and wildly popular in any position she has held at every level of government.
Her record is one of amazing accomplishment, while fighting not only the left but the corrupt in her own party. She has the strength of her convictions and America agrees with her positions on the issues by a wide margin.
She is the only one standing up to the Obama administration while he has tried to destroy this country. Romney has been MIA. She can change the public discourse with a single Tweet or Facebook posting.
Just last week she posted that NATO and our allies should consider a no-fly zone over Libya if Kahdaffi was using his air force to bomb the protesters.
Three days later Obama finally says he’s thinking about it.
She is a natural LEADER and an inspiration.
You will see. Leadership is easily observed. She has it in spades.
Romney looks like a midget in comparison.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:46 pm
They all look like dwarfs in comparison.
Sarah Palin and the seven dwarfs.
This thing could be over without firing a shot.
February 27th, 2011 at 4:51 pm
okay…enjoy your delusions.
—-
“you have to do is look at what she accomplished in her nearly 20 years of executive experience.”
2.5 years as governor. 6 years as mayor of a 10k person village. That is less than ONE decade of executive experience. Nice try.
—-
“She has been very successful and wildly popular in any position she has held at every level of government.”
So popular, in fact, that she doesn’t even appear able to win the primary in her own state….
—-
“Her record is one of amazing accomplishment”
fluff.
—-
“She has the strength of her convictions and America agrees with her positions on the issues by a wide margin.”
America also agrees with my friend from college on the issues…lets nominate him!
—-
“She can change the public discourse with a single Tweet or Facebook posting.”
You mean that she has fawning supporters and is an effective ringleader for the media circus.
—-
“Just last week she posted that NATO and our allies should consider a no-fly zone over Libya if Kahdaffi was using his air force to bomb the protesters.”
…and Romney has been supporting the middle eastern protests for quite some time – not that you would have noticed, I doubt you read anything about him unless its a hit piece.
February 28th, 2011 at 11:27 am
Heh hee the fear is palpable.
Wait ’til June.