Blaming the slow start to the GOP primary season (as we noted here at R4’12, it’s the latest starting primary since 1992), the Reagan Library is moving their debate back from May to September.
The debate, co-sponsored by NBC News and Politico, was originally scheduled for May 2, and the Reagan Presidential Foundation made a point of saying they would enjoy the tradition of kicking off the primary debate season every election at the Reagan Library.
Well, that tradition has ended after just one campaign (2008). Now, the debate will be held on September 14, after four other debates to be held in the early states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida.
That gives us the following calendar for the 2012 primary season:
| May 5, 2011 | FOX News / South Carolina GOP Debate | Greenville, SC |
| June 7, 2011 | CNN / NH Union Leader / WMUR-TV Debate | Manchester, NH |
| August 11, 2011 | FOX News / Iowa GOP Straw Poll Debate | Ames, IA |
| August 13, 2001 | Ames Straw Poll | Ames, IA |
| Week of September 5 (TBD), 2011 | CNN / Tea Party Express Debate | Tampa, FL |
| September 14, 2011 | Reagan Library / NBC News / Politico Debate | Simi Valley, CA |
| October, 2011 (TBD) | FOX News / Florida GOP Debate | TBD |
| Oct/Nov (TBD) | Nevada GOP Straw Poll | Las Vegas, NV |
| November 5, 2011 | Illinois GOP Straw Poll | Statewide |
| December 10-11 (TBD), 2012 | ABC News / Iowa GOP Debate | TBD |
| January 30, 2012 | FOX News / Iowa GOP Debate | Sioux City, IA |
| February 6, 2012 | Iowa Caucus | — |
| Between February 7-13 (TBD) | ABC News / WMUR-TV Debate | Manchester, NH |
| February 14, 2012 | New Hampshire Primary | — |
| February 18, 2012 | Nevada Caucus | — |
| Between February 19-27 (TBD) | FOX News / South Carolina GOP Debate | TBD |
| February 28, 2012 | South Carolina Primary | — |
| March 5, 2012 | Reagan Library Debate | Simi Valley, CA |
| March 6, 2012 | Super Tuesday | — |
| April 1, 2012 | First eligible date for winner-take-all contests | — |
Did I miss an event? Let me know in the comments.
March 30th, 2011 at 8:42 am
It’s good that they’re moving the debate back, I agree with someone (I’m not sure who posted it), that the debate at the Reagan Library should become something like the traditional kick-off debate for the GOP race.
Anyways, an uber-long pre-primary campaign won’t help the GOP; it’ll force the candidates to burn through their resources that much earlier and it just gives more of the possibilty of a lot of nasty mudslinging that’ll turn off voters. Best to start late and end late (as in, have as many primaries as possible).
March 30th, 2011 at 8:45 am
just wondering whats going on with these 2012 announcements Are our candidates falling behind Obama to announce in Chicago his reelection April 14th that is the rumor or is it better to let him announce fist and start raising his money ?
March 30th, 2011 at 8:51 am
Should other candidates delay their entry even further now that one of the debates has rescheduled?
March 30th, 2011 at 8:58 am
I would have to say no more 2012 Announcements delays because it’s rumored obama is flying to announce his reelection in Chicago April 14th if we keep delaying these announcements it gives obama more time to raise more $$ then our candidates for the 2012 general election. basically i think it’s time to get in or get out of the way and stop delaying this process…
March 30th, 2011 at 9:06 am
Smart move…now let’s see if any top tier folks are smart with the timing of their announcements. I think romney would be downright insane to announce in april, no way he should show up at the first debate in sc either. In fact, he should come out right now and declare he won’t make a decision until summer, maybe use the shut down as an excuse, ie saying let current elected officials focus on governing without candidates running around. The smart announcement time is july for top tier picks to insure their isn’t pushback against them thus allowing a late entry.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:12 am
They overcompensated. They gave up their important spot as the first debate, I understand why they did it, but this completely changes things.
No longer is the Reagan library debate an important pilgrimage to the founder of the modern Conservative belief system – its just two debates mired right in the middle of all the others.
Still – 2/3 of the first debates are held by Fox…doesn’t exactly change the viewpoint of the party. Its a good thing the candidates won’t have an excuse to shun the other networks – it makes us look like fools.
====
All that said, however, only [likely] two debates before Ames? Yikes – that doesn’t give much recovery time for a bad performance.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:14 am
“Smart move…now let’s see if any top tier folks are smart with the timing of their announcements. I think romney would be downright insane to announce in april, no way he should show up at the first debate in sc either. In fact, he should come out right now and declare he won’t make a decision until summer, maybe use the shut down as an excuse, ie saying let current elected officials focus on governing without candidates running around. The smart announcement time is july for top tier picks to insure their isn’t pushback against them thus allowing a late entry.”
BS. I love Romney as a candidate, but now he – and all the others – are dragging their feet. It was one thing that they didn’t want to start in January or February, but now we are to the point of waiting until April, May, or even later…its to the point that you are denying the voters the opportunity to analyze and compare the candidates.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:15 am
do you think now that it’s rumored obama to announce April 14 in Chicago our side needs to speed it up now even more i wonder because if we sit back and do nothing on our side he announces and that gives him more time to raise more $$$ then us correct???
March 30th, 2011 at 9:21 am
I personally think now that it is known and rumored that obama is Announcing relection in chicago april 14th that OUR candidates need to set a DEADLINE of at April 14th TO AT least Announce there exploratory announcements! let the games begin!!
March 30th, 2011 at 9:26 am
#7:
Matthew, I think now that we know the President is announcing in mid-April that our candidates should defer to him. Wait until after he announces and then jump in. At the very least they can then use his words against him.
Also, some of our candidates might be delaying their announcement because they aren’t going to go through the charade of the Exploratory Committee. Some of them might just jump in immediately, like Gov. Johnson appears to be doing.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:27 am
Great news, folks!
So Huck will likely only miss 2-3 early debates and attend the next 8-9 before Super Tuesday…
March 30th, 2011 at 9:29 am
Repubs are running against each other not obama.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:29 am
“So Huck will likely only miss 2-3 early debates and attend the next 8-9 before Super Tuesday…”
We still have no substantial evidence that Huckabee has decided on a run, he keeps talking. and talking. and talking. and really not doing much else. With the others – Romney, Gingrich, Pawlenty, even those who haven’t officially announced, they are making clear moves towards a run.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:32 am
“Repubs are running against each other not obama.”
Yeah – thats kind of necessary, otherwise we could end up with the favorite candidate of stoners and gay activists in Gary Johnson or some other fringe libertarian nut.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:34 am
7) bill clinton announced in october of 1991. What is BS is having a constant prez cycle, there is no need for an endless campaign. In romney’s case, he can afford the luxury of waiting till july. Why subject himself to the arrows coming his way when he announces, not to mention worrying about opening the door for a late entry if their is a backlash against him…its really holding the ball for him to run down the clock, than take the last shot. In pawlenty’s case, he should announce in april.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:36 am
just wondering and thinking politically speaking would it look bad if let’s say 1 or 2 2012 candidates (maybe Some high rumored candidates even) circle April 14th on calendar and now announce on obama’s rumored big day?
March 30th, 2011 at 9:39 am
I finally put a few bucks (for me) down on Huck yesterday at Intrade, and he proceeds to shoot up about 20% in one day.
I see what they’re doing since like TEX I’m a regular in Vegas..
Now they’ve got me hooked, too!!!!!
March 30th, 2011 at 9:42 am
I think we’ll see some announcements in April.
There was a big online rumor that Governor Palin would announce this Friday. Check the date.
http://www.hollywoodlife.com/2011/03/29/sarah-palin-president-announcement-political-office-run-2012/
March 30th, 2011 at 9:44 am
11 debates!?……Seems like overkill to me…
March 30th, 2011 at 9:46 am
“In romney’s case, he can afford the luxury of waiting till july. Why subject himself to the arrows coming his way when he announces, not to mention worrying about opening the door for a late entry if their is a backlash against him…its really holding the ball for him to run down the clock, than take the last shot. In pawlenty’s case, he should announce in april.”
RIGHHHTTT….so Pawlenty gets all this time to build up support, and organize, and win over people who are waiting, wondering when the heck the other big names will get in.
I don’t care when Bill Clinton announces – that was 20 years ago, in completely different circumstances.
Romney and the other big names can wait a little longer than Pawlenty, but not 3-4 months. Just look at how much support Romney built up through a long campaign – he can’t let Pawlenty do the same…some people are already writing off Romney completely in Iowa (which I must admit is irritating, I would much rather win Iowa than New Hampshire, but that doesn’t seem the way things are going).
March 30th, 2011 at 9:50 am
“There was a big online rumor that Governor Palin would announce this Friday. Check the date.”
The date doesn’t concern me as much as linking to anything with the work “hollywood” in it that leads to a bright pink page…
=====
“11 debates!?……Seems like overkill to me…”
Debates are by far, the most beneficial (to the country) form of campaigning. Rallies and speeches don’t really give people the ability to compare candidates side-by-side, much less put them on the spot to answer difficult questions.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:51 am
Maybe the Reagan library has some reason to believe the top tier candidates will skip the first 4 debates and thus make the Reagan Library debate the real kick-off debate…
March 30th, 2011 at 9:53 am
be fore these announcements really start Is about 5-8 announcements the final total we expect ?
March 30th, 2011 at 9:53 am
#19:
I was thinking the same thing. 11 is too much. I know every network, every state party and every special interest group wants their slice of the candidates, but there should be a way to cut that number down.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:53 am
“Maybe the Reagan library has some reason to believe the top tier candidates will skip the first 4 debates and thus make the Reagan Library debate the real kick-off debate…”
That would mean skipping Ames, AND not starting to campaign until September. Its insanity.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:56 am
blue,
“Why subject himself to the arrows coming his way when he announces”
That’s coming regardless, unless somehow he’s not a frontrunner anymore when he announces. I think it’s better for him to start earlier and get some of that out of the way, so he has time to recover or at least come up with a plausible response. I’m sure he would rather have the attacks on RomneyCare coming fast and furious in July, rather than December.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:57 am
#21….Humm…Most of my memories from the 2008 cycle debates are lots of stupid/impertinent questions, tough questions with only 30 sec to answer where the candidate made to answer first has a huge disadvantage compared to the candidate who gets to answer it last, people interrupting each other with wise cracks, lots of gottcha stuff, and people judging the candidate’s ability to be POTUS by how well they could trash talk against the other candidates…..yeah, real cerebral stuff it was…
March 30th, 2011 at 9:58 am
11 debates may not be overkill if we have 11 candidates, 7 of whom are 3rd tier no-hopers, which would give each candidate about 5 minutes to sling talking points at each debate.
I loved what Ric Warren did with Obama and McCain, asking more philosophical questions that weren’t easily answered with rehearsed talking points. We got a much better idea of how these men think.
March 30th, 2011 at 9:59 am
Jerald,
#27, that’s pretty much how I remember it.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:00 am
Its a delicate balancing act for romney. I would think romney should be more concerned about closing the window for a late entry, nor getting 4 months of possible negative campaigning rather than worrying about tpaw getting some early traction. In fact if tpaw is the only announced top tier person to join the early crowd contenders, he might look buffoonish running around with them.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:01 am
#25…..Yeah, I thought about Ames. I was wondering how important it’s going to be this year.
Does Huckabee need to be at Ames?
Should Romney be at Ames?
Does not being at Ames let somebody come from nowhere like Huckabee did last time?
March 30th, 2011 at 10:02 am
#28:
I liked the Rick Warren format too even though I’m not a religiously inclined voter. Maybe they should have like Larry Kudlow do the same thing with the candidates and economic issues and a GOP foreign policy wonk (John Bolton if he doesn’t run?) do the same. Let each candidate answer the same questions without hearing what the other guy says and maybe we’ll get some good answers out of these guys.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:03 am
One of my fears is that Trump will continue his publicity stunt long enough to attend debates, which will guarantee about 15 birther questions to the candidates.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:03 am
lets just say for fun palin is to announce soon does that make the other candidates scramble and announce faster then ”the plan”?
March 30th, 2011 at 10:05 am
Other than the media and political junkies no one cares about the debates until after Labor Day.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:06 am
#33..MWS
Oh horrors…you could probably bet on it.
Do remember that awful YouTube debate?
When I read your post, that’s what flashed into my mind…
March 30th, 2011 at 10:07 am
#34….I don’t think the other top-tier candidates really care when Palin announces…
March 30th, 2011 at 10:09 am
mac (#35) — except that the early debates in 2008 were what set the “Big 3″ as Giuliani, McCain, and Romney. Without those debates (combined with his first quarter fundraising success), Romney would likely have not broken through into the top tier by the summer and become the frontrunner at Ames.
For everyone who thinks 11 debates is too many… in 2007 there were 15 debates, with another 6 added in 2008 for a total of 21 debates in the 2008 primary.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:10 am
I imagine the Fox debate will get moved as well. I’m glad to see the candidates are not allowing the media to dictate the schedule.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:14 am
after the conventions Just wondering once it’s GOP candidate vs obama like how much money will we need to have in the ”money chest” to just keep up with the obama reelection team? I am guessing we need to start raising that even now?
March 30th, 2011 at 10:14 am
#36:
I think that the CNN/”Tea Party Express” Debate has the ability to rival the YouTube debate for banality.
#38:
Ok, so we can 11 (or 10 or whatever), but they should shake up the format, or at least make them long enough so that it isn’t 30-second sound bite A and 45-second sound bite B the whole time. Heck in 2008, you could have had a drinking game based on the cliche’s that were used in every debate.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:15 am
The ’11 Ames Straw Poll = NASCAR Nationwide Series
The ’12 Iowa Caucus = Sprint Cup Championship
March 30th, 2011 at 10:22 am
#41…Yeah, when I saw CNN/”Tea Party Express” I immediately thought, “I hope Romney, Pawlenty, Daniels? skip that one”…
March 30th, 2011 at 10:28 am
These candidates should not be skipping any debates! Our side is WAY behind then obama side already!
March 30th, 2011 at 10:29 am
“Do remember that awful YouTube debate?”
While there may be a need for better question selection – the format is a good one, allowing individual voters to challenge the candidates to answer issues important to them.
Judging from some of the comments here – ABC/CBS/NBC would all be banned, as would politico, as would any form of new media, as would any new organization on the Conservative side of the debate.
We’d end up with debates hosted only by the state parties, shown only on Fox News, only taking questions from CATO and Heritage.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:29 am
Jerald,
“Do remember that awful YouTube debate?”
Ouch. Yes. I think there were lots of questions about 7 Day Creation, the parting of the Red Sea, how Jesus fed 5000, and whether gays should be stoned.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:30 am
Off topic, why nobody is talking about this:
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/263344/uh-oh-problematic-tax-breaks-sarah-palins-alaska
March 30th, 2011 at 10:31 am
“Ok, so we can 11 (or 10 or whatever), but they should shake up the format, or at least make them long enough so that it isn’t 30-second sound bite A and 45-second sound bite B the whole time. Heck in 2008, you could have had a drinking game based on the cliche’s that were used in every debate.”
It all depends on how many candidates there are. You really don’t have many options when you have 12 candidates trying to hit on all the issues in a 90 minute debate. Once the field thins down to four or five – Romney, Palin (?), Huckabee (?), Gingrich, and Pawlenty – then yes, you can look at debates, perhaps with rotating 5-minute question segments from a panel…but until then, there really isn’t an alternaitve to 30 sec. soundbytes.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:36 am
“Ouch. Yes. I think there were lots of questions about 7 Day Creation, the parting of the Red Sea, how Jesus fed 5000, and whether gays should be stoned.”
An attempt marginalize Republicans. You’ll notice that the democrats got the more serious questions (or at least the questions that play well to their dynamic) than the Republicans got.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:37 am
Off Topic (but speaking of Fox News) on HANNITY show last night..
Is Hannity becoming unwatchable?
March 30th, 2011 at 10:39 am
“Ouch. Yes. I think there were lots of questions about 7 Day Creation, the parting of the Red Sea, how Jesus fed 5000, and whether gays should be stoned.”
Religious mockery aside, all the questions are available on wikipedia, and I got zero hits specifically for “creationism” “intelligent design” or “evolution”. There was a question asking how Jesus would feel about the Death Penalty, a question asking whether candidates believed the Bible to be accurate, and a question as to why African Americans – who agree with Republicans on social issues – generally vote Democrat. There was also a question about abortion.
Our govenrment can’t impose a religious test on office seekers, but individuals ARE permitted to, and asking whether someone believes in God is not just a religious issue, but one which can be useful in juding that candidate overall. I could never vote for an atheist (MAYBE an agnostic), for example, because I believe it is either arrogant, ignorant, or hipocritical to reject any possibility of a divine power – often a combination of the three.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:40 am
August 11 debate is the starting line in my book.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:40 am
.47 Because it’s a bullsh*t non-story and another weak feckless attempt to damage Governor Palin by a clueless Romneybot.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:43 am
“or at least the questions that play well to their dynamic”
Last time I checked, Conservative Religious people WERE a major part of our dynamic. I’m not saying there were not plants or fakes or questions to intentionally mislead people, but the idea that we should treat any question about religion/faith/morality/values as a pathetic distration is disgusting.
Last time I checked, we were the party of people who believed the Bible to be more than fairy tales or morality stories, we were the party of people who believed in supporting traditional families over alternative lifestyles, we were the party of free and open religious pratice in public, and we were the party of life.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:44 am
Matthew,
That was hyperbole, and I don’t mock religion.
Just so we’re clear……
March 30th, 2011 at 10:46 am
teledude, why is BS?
March 30th, 2011 at 10:49 am
“That was hyperbole, and I don’t mock religion.
Just so we’re clear……”
…perhaps this is a sad statement of how things have fallen in our party, that there are enough legitimate faith-bashers within the GOP that it becomes difficult to pick them apart.
March 30th, 2011 at 10:54 am
Do we know what states are slated to be on Super Tuesday, March 6th, 2012? I know the list will change, but do we have a slate of states as of right now?
TPAW was very strong on Hannity last night. TPAW has a gift of gab much like Huck, but more wonkish with a lttle less personality. After the birther question from Sean TPAW was quite good at cutting up the Obama agenda. With a couple more appearences and with all the other stuff he is doing his NAME ID will be up to 50% in no time.
Keep on, keeping on!
Pawlenty/Rubio 2012!
March 30th, 2011 at 10:59 am
#51:
I don’t want to stir things up, but why in God’s name did they select a question about Jesus’s feelings on the death penalty to a potential President of the United States?Its rather arrogant to assume that they can interpret Christ and the death penalty. Also, a question about the literalist interpretation of the Bible?
If you want an answer about government, ask the politicians. If you want answers about religion, then go to church.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:02 am
why do i have this feeling that we will see only a few announcements then what i thought i think now maybe 8….?
March 30th, 2011 at 11:04 am
“Also, a question about the literalist interpretation of the Bible? ”
I think its important for a lot of people as a judge of character…and I can’t say I necessairily disagree. While I don’t think a person necessairily needs to believe exactly. word. for. word. without. any. symbolism. that the Bible is 100% acurate, I believe its important they acknowledge it as far more than a book of made up works, literary exercisies, and parables to get people to behave properly.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:05 am
56. Freddy
I don’t know, maybe because Romney’s Massachusetts, Mitch Daniels Indiana and Haley’s Barbour’s Mississippi offer the same sort of film tax credits to attract business?
What? Another double standard for Palin?
Perhaps the fact that when she signed the law three years ago she had no idea she would be tapped for the VP slot and then driven from office by phony partisan lawsuits and would end up making a documentary on Alaska?
If you go back and read it now, Geraghaty has had to make a few changes from his original misleading piece, as he was called out pretty quickly.
The lies and distortions about governor Palin continue..it must be because she is so irrelevant and unelectable.
Yeah, that’s the ticket.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:07 am
Jennifer Rubin has been praising TPAW quite a bit lately…and sure enough after the Hannity show…
By Jennifer Rubin
Tim Pawlenty went on the air last night with Sean Hannity. He smartly avoided wading into Donald Trump’s birther swamps and instead showed himself to be fluid on both foreign policy and the economy:
Most interestingly, he identified both his biography (“I grew up in a blue-collar background, in a meat-packing town”) and gubernatorial record as ways to distinguish himself from the rest of the field, but put particular emphasis on his ability to “unite not just the conservative movement but the party.”
And that may be his ticket to the top of the pack. Aside from the flaws that will weigh down his competitors, Pawlenty has another key advantage. He has staked out a message that plainly is not trying to subdivide the electorate. Unlike Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, he hasn’t spurned social conservatives. Unlike Mitt Romney, he hasn’t turned off limited-government advocates (by support of an individual-mandate health care reform plan). And unlike Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, Pawlenty isn’t playing the isolationist card.
Whether that is enough to win the nomination remains to be seen. However, whoever does win the nomination better be able to unite not only all the factions within the GOP but also those independents and Democrats who have had enough of President Obama. In that regard, it might be wise for each 2012 aspirant to make the case that he or she is a solid conservative but not an off-putting one. That means squelch the conspiracy talk, avoid ad hominem attacks (independents don’t like those) and focus on themes that appeal to the center-right coalition that turned out in droves for Republicans in 2010.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:07 am
are we expecting most of these announcements to be like in the candidates hometown cites ect like for example palin in anchorage Alaska ?
March 30th, 2011 at 11:09 am
“driven from office by phony partisan lawsuits”
So, either:
1) She quit when things got tough, despite a comittment to serve the people of Alaska for four years, and not having been elected to a higher calling….
or
2) She got so obsessed with the spotlight and her newfound “influence”, that she decided it was more interesting than serving out her term.
In either case, she is coming to the table with little experience, a questionable track record, etc. Being mayor of a village that did not even have a fire department does not qualify one for the Presidency.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:12 am
63. Pawlenty just waits to hear what Palin says and then he repeats it.
This is not leadership.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:18 am
“Pawlenty just waits to hear what Palin says and then he repeats it. ”
Your woman candidate is not God. She does not walk on water. People (at least those with a brain to think for themselves and realize how underqualified she is) do not bow low before her. The sun does not shine from her eyes. The is not struting through the heartland dragging other candidates behind her like fawning dogs over her every word. She does not have the respect of the vast majority of indpendent Americans. She does not have the experience or the resume to trump Romney, or Huckabee, or half a dozen other candidates. She shows no ability to seirously challenge Obama. She runs several points behind even more moderate Republicans in CONSERVATIVE states. She does not even display the potential to win a primary by any large margin in her home state.
Sarah Palin is the Conservative version of Obama – young, exciting, and completely unqualified for the Oval office, but with a pack of supporters who display almost cult-like loyalty to her every move and word.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:20 am
Tele,
Meet the true leader of the Tea Party 2012.
TEA PARTY FOR TPAW.
“He’s not exactly throwing tea into the harbor, but Tim Pawlenty is set to headline the Great Boston Tea Party’s tax-day rally.”
“We looked at where Minnesota was when he came into office and where Minnesota was when he left,” the group’s president, Christen Varley, told POLITICO. “We looked at where we are in Massachusetts and where our governor is taking us and felt he was one of those voices we really need in Massachusetts.”
Pawlenty has advocated lowering taxes across the board — corporate rates, individual rates, dividends, capital gains and the estate tax . But a proposal that’s earned him plaudits in early voting states is one mandating members of Congress to file their own tax returns.
“No help of an accountant, a lawyer or a tax specialist,” he said. “And if they can’t do it, we give them a certification they can go get some help. But I’d like every one of those individuals to have to do their own taxes every year and live with the mindless burdens we put on the American people.”
The Boston tax day rally drew 2,000 people in its first year, and when Sarah Palin headlined the 2010 event, 10,000 people came out. Varley expects about 5,000 to rally for Pawlenty — as long as there’s no blizzard.
Pawlenty will join John Stephen, who he supported in a unsuccessful bid for New Hampshire governor. The Plymouth Rock Foundation, Americans for a Balanced Budget Amendment and the Pioneer Institute will also be on hand.
Earlier in the day, Pawlenty will join Rick Santorum and Herman Cain to rally the masses in Concord, New Hampshire, at an event sponsored by Americans for Prosperity.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:24 am
65. Wrong Matthew
She was driven from office, and resigning was a selfless act of courage.
It took away the target of the partisan lawsuits and allowed the Governor’s office to get back to dong the work of the people. There were no guarantee’s she would be successful in her future endeavors, and she knew it was a huge political risk.
But she couldn’t stand by and watch the state spending millions on frivolous lawsuits and FOI requests, which had hamstrung the governorship and virtually stopped any progress on her agenda.
As for her credentials, she has plenty of experience and a very successful track record. She was the most popular Governor in the nation, and you don’t get to a 90% approval rating without appealing to independents and democrats as well as republicans.
She is also the strongest advocate for republican principles and fearlessly takes on Obama as none of the other candidates have the guts to do.
You may have fallen for the phony narrative, trust me, the establishment republicans haven’t.
They know.
She’s the game changer, and when she gets in all bets are off.
(sorry for the thread hijack…they started it, I am just responding.)
March 30th, 2011 at 11:30 am
HONEST QUESTION Is palin the real reason these 2012 announcements are being delayed longer or is every body waiting for obama to offically announce reelection??
March 30th, 2011 at 11:32 am
67. Are you a misogynist? LOL
You suffer from a very bad case of Palin Derangement Syndrome, an affliction that usually strikes groupthink liberals, but a few clueless republicans are susceptible as well I guess. LOL
Your hatred of Palin is not rational, you have been programmed. You spew the establishment talking points very well.
Congratulations, you’re a sheep.
Spew on, oh courageous woolly one …baaaa baaa
March 30th, 2011 at 11:35 am
Even if I were willing to concede that she was targeted, that she is selfless/courageous/w.e. – it matters not.
Because she does not have the experience to be President. On a personal level, I think Sarah Palin is a fine person. I agree with her on virtually all issues. But I will fight tooth and nail against her achieving anything remotely clsoe to the Republican Nomination OR the Presidency, because she is not qualified, and gives both our party and our country a bad name.
You need only compare her to her most likely opponents to see that she should be at the bottom of the pack. Romney spent DECADES in the private sector, up to the executive level of major companies, and was governor of a large and wealth state for a full term. Mike Huckabee was governor for 10 years, Tim Pawlenty was governor for two full terms. Barbour has been a governor for full terms. Gingrich served in a very high level position in the federal government, and is exceedingly familir with the very type of legislative battles likely to occur over the next decade. Even Donald Trump, who I view as very much a media whore, could honestly be recognized as one of the most powerful, influential, and recognizable businessmen in America today. Within that pool are candidates who believe in the very same Conservative principles as Sarah Palin, and have far more knowledge and experience to implement them successfully.
The only thing Palin has over ANY of them is star power and media attention – in no small part, because she seeks it out, and because [fairly or not] her family life has been enough of a circus to keep the attention of the same media that seeks out stories on Miley Cirus, Paris Hilton, and Lindsey Lohan.
That is not a reason she should be anywhere near a campaign for high office.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:39 am
“Your hatred of Palin is not rational”
Opposing a candidate for lack of experience, particularly in relation to their opponents, is not rational?
Yet it is rational to have idol worship for said candidate simply because they have star power.
Gotcha.
I fully agree with Sarah Palin’s positions, but she is not qualified. That is all I need to know about her.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:40 am
Dude, you should just stop. You are just making yourself look bad now.
We get it. You buy into the narrative. It’s okay, we can’t all think for ourselves.
The things you mention are mostly false, but they are part of the narrative that’s been spread.
Because they have to try to take her down.
Because they know.
You will see.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:46 am
70. bingo
March 30th, 2011 at 11:48 am
Explain to me what part of Palin’s RESUME, RECORD, or EXPERIENCE makes her better qualified to lead the nation, military, and economy through difficult times than her opponents?
Palin’s resume is one of a city council person who became mayor of a small locale that did not even provide traditional city services, who then went on to become governor, who promptly quit halfway through her term.
She is running against candidates who have years, and in many cases, decades of high-level executive experience in the public or private sector.
The only derangement involving Palin is with those who believe she is qualified to be President.
She is, as I said, a Conservative Obama (And the MSM you want to attack would never say this, because it would make Obama look even worse): she is hugely partisan, attractive, and appealing to fawning crowds – but otherwise completely incompetent for the Presidency. The fact that she is Conservative is only a slight redeeming feature, because it doesn’t do any of us much good to have a President who agrees with us, but still can’t do the job.
March 30th, 2011 at 11:52 am
62(teledude): “I don’t know, maybe because Romney’s Massachusetts, Mitch Daniels Indiana and Haley’s Barbour’s Mississippi offer the same sort of film tax credits to attract business?”
I didn’t know that Romney, Daniels, Barbour or any other governor have a reality tv show with the contribution of the taxpayer.
March 30th, 2011 at 12:13 pm
76. thread jack continues. I didn’t start thsi.
She is younger than most of the other candidates, so yes her experience doesn’t equate to the years some of them have put in.
But this isn’t a union position of seniority being sought. She has stated she could have stayed on the job and milked it, drawing her salary as the state’s agenda was thwarted by her political opponents. She’s not wired that way.
She has more than ENOUGH experience in many varied positions that may in fact make her MORE qualified, having been a city council member, Mayor, Oil and gas Commissioner, President of the Mayors Council, Governor, and VP candidate, as well as a small business owner.
Her experience is in executive positions where she’s been personally responsible for the decisions she’s made.
She sold the jet, (interesting, Haley Barbour flew to Iowa last week on his state’s private jet) fired the chef, cut the budget, (her 2010 budget was about $1 billion less than Murcowski’s 2007 budget) socked away billions for a rainy day fund, cut taxes…
Her record is one of stellar governance. Your assertion she couldn’t “do the job’ is pure nonsense stemming from your clouded judgment caused by the false drumbeat against her.
Her decisions and instincts are right in line with the American people and what they want in a leader. Speaking of which, she is a real leader, as has been shown consistently during the Obama administration, as she fearlessly takes on this regime with barely a peep coming from your so called front runners.
She has a hill to climb. As you’ve demonstrated, the media narrative has been firmly implanted in many.
If she can’t change opinions, she will lose. What are you afraid of?
LOL
March 30th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
77. You must’ve missed this:
Perhaps the fact that when she signed the law three years ago she had no idea she would be tapped for the VP slot and then driven from office by phony partisan lawsuits and would end up making a documentary on Alaska?
How dense are you? There was no ‘contribution of the taxpayer’. Do you even know what a tax credit is? Or are you a brainless liberal?
March 30th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
Here ya go Freddy.
Governor Palin has a message just for you:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_113724385374908¬if_t=group_added_to_group#!/notes/sarah-palin/setting-the-record-straight-on-states-film-production-tax-credit/10150142191023435
March 30th, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Now I wonder if the FoxNews/SC debate on May 5th will be re-scheduled as well. If not, then perhaps the issue with the May 2nd debate had more to do with the fact that the candidates want nothing to do with NBC/Politico (and not the early date).
March 30th, 2011 at 12:42 pm
Right or wrong, do we really want a nominee who can’t eat breakfast without having to make a media appearance or YouTube to “set the record straight” about it?
March 30th, 2011 at 12:44 pm
“I think its important for a lot of people as a judge of character…and I can’t say I necessairily disagree. While I don’t think a person necessairily needs to believe exactly. word. for. word. without. any. symbolism. that the Bible is 100% acurate, I believe its important they acknowledge it as far more than a book of made up works, literary exercisies, and parables to get people to behave properly.”
The problem with this question is that too many people on both sides think that the only options are either to view the Bible as verbally inspired and 100% factually accurate down to the number of people in the tribe of Gad, or to view the Bible as fairy tales concocted by nomadic desert wanderers. There are, however, views of thought inspiration which support a conservative theology, but do not present the same factual problems as verbal inspiration. There are various levels of this, for example one could say that every single thought no matter how trivial is inspired or you could say that only the broad themes are inspired. This allows for a whole spectrum of theological viewpoint. A one minute soundbite does not allow a person to give this issue the nuance it deserves. Also many politicians won’t actually try to give an honest answer (afterall there’s no way of proving whether they are lying on an issue like this), they simply try to walk the tight rope of satisfying all sides by really saying nothing at all. So even if this issue was important to politics there would be no way to adequately adress it at a debate.
March 30th, 2011 at 12:46 pm
82. Would you advocate the George Bush tactic of not responding to lies and smears about you?
How’d that work for him, compared to Clinton’s rapid response team that vigorously attacked any negative thing about said him, even though true?
March 30th, 2011 at 12:48 pm
“It’s okay, we can’t all think for ourselves.” Telenude I’m glad you apropiately use the first person.
March 30th, 2011 at 12:49 pm
“the number of people in the tribe of Gad”
That should be Sarah’s question, but it will probably go to Huck.
March 30th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
Great picture of Mittens here. That is a man you can trust! *Gak*
http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/03/fashback-massachusetts-governor-signs.html
March 30th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Telly,
We don’t nominate someone to vindicate them, we nominate someone to win the Presidency and chart a better course.
Even if Palin is the biggest martyr in the world, the stakes are too high to base our vote on pity.
March 30th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
88.
Who said anything about pity?
I pity Palin’s opponents.
She just ripped Obama another one this morning.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150142243663435
And your snide reference to Palin as some type of religious fanatic is way of base as well. More liberal falsehoods.
Haters gonna hate.
March 30th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
I do not, however, believe a politicians view of hermenuetics or inspiration is generally relevant. I care about the broad principles of their beliefs as it relates to how they believe mankind should be treated through the institutions of state. Whether they get these principles through a fundamentalist reading of the Bible or through Hindu meditation I don’t really care. Also I will oppose them if they pursue policies that go against what I consider the most important principle, rather those policies are derived from a certain interpretation of the KJV or if its principle of Sharia law.
March 30th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
85. John Monk
context Johnny, context.
It so important unless you’re intellectually dishonest, then anything goes. Thanks for the peek into your character.
March 30th, 2011 at 1:18 pm
You are quite welcome Telenude. And may I just say that your reading comprehension in being able to detect sarcasm is excellent.
March 30th, 2011 at 1:55 pm
Actually it was the state of Alaska who turned its back on Sarah Palin. The fact is that states who have a similar ethics process realizes that the process can be turned into a political weapon to march public officials to bankruptcy court. For example, Arkansas re-imburses public officials for legal expenses if they are exonerated of ethics complaints.
I also don’t go by the seniority system in presidential politics. I look at the quality of work. George Bush had a long history of public service yet his administration was a disaster. Newt Gingrich’s tenure as Speaker was a disaster. Newt also quit on the people in his congressional district. The fact is that Sarah Palin completely changed Alaska. Alaska was a hotbed of corruption. Shortly after she took office, federal raids led to the indictment of several state legislators. Oil companies had a sweetheart deal in relation to oil royalties. The higher the price of oil, the less oil companies paid to the state. A pipeline deal that was so favorable to oil companies that Murkowski couldn’t even get it passed by a Republican legislature.
Palin ran against Republican corruption and generally had to work with Democrats and a handful of Republicans. She passed a royalty deal that was fairer to the people of Alaska. She passed major ethics reforms. She worked out a deal for a natural gas pipeline that saved Alaska $1.5 billion. She also had to work out a agreement with Canada since they take a dim view of building a pipeline that goes through Canada without an agreement. When big oil companies defunded a state office to regulate oil companies, she fought and successfully restored the funding. Fighting with oil companies is big league stuff.
Being mayor of a small but growing community does not make one ineligible. You still have to balance the budget. The reason the city does not have a fire department was because they found a cheaper alternative.
She is also a part owner of a family fishing boat. Maybe that is not as sexy as being CEO but it is much less forgiving. One bad year on a fishing boat and you are likely out of business. That is about as blue collar as you can get.
March 30th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Wall Street Journal
PAUL JOHNSON-Eminent British historian
“She’s(SARAH PALIN) got courage. That’s very important in politics.
You can have all the right ideas and the ability to express them. But if you haven’t got guts, if you haven’t got courage the way Margaret Thatcher had courage—and [Ronald] Reagan, come to think of it. Your last president had courage too—if you haven’t got courage, all the other virtues are no good at all. IT’s THE CENTRAL VIRTUE(my emph.).”
=======================================
“Palin has more courage in her little finger than our entire Presidential field!” – Rush Limbaugh
========================================
It’s not about who has better resume on paper.
Remember mr “read my lips”,pesidental candidate who had to
fight “wimp factor”?
He had the best possible resume plus he was VP for 8 years
under Ronald Reagan.What more a sitting President(thanks
to Reagan) could ask for.There was no better resume,ever.
Yet,G H W Bush got kicked out of Oval Office(rightfully so)
by Bubba Clinton.
He had everything,except spine.
All this crap that some squishy RINOS have longer resume
than Sarah Palin who has character and spine of still
is just that-crap.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
I can understand the experience argument in regard to Gov. Palin, but I think an equally persuasive argument can be made against her based on this narrative that has been noted in the above posts. It is the “greater good argument,” which means I will vote for any of the potential Republican nominees in the general election because of who the incumbent is and how dangerous another four years of his leadership would be. I have enjoyed reading the many thoughtful posts here on this site for some time, but I am always surprised, and disheartened, when the impassionate pleas for one’s candidate leads to the statement “I will not vote for him/her if they win the nomination.” Really?! You would rather have another four years of Obama? That is nonsensical, and I don’t care who the candidate is in question. Anybody but Obama
Indeed the narrative against Palin is false, but the reality is the majority in America do not see it that way. Her dilemna is how she can change that narrative, if she can at all. Because as it stands today, if she were to win the GOP nomination, then Obama would be re-elected. That is something I should think none of us want.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
Right now there are 6 contests scheduled for Mar 6. The states are Massachusetts, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Virginia. Virginia recently moved their primary back from Feb to April 6th. The Massachusetts situation is muddled because the Secretary of State says he does not have enough money to run a seperate presidential primary. There is a possiblity that it could be delayed or turned into caucuses. In Ohio, some officials are questioning whether redistricting will be completed by then. Connecticutt, Tennessee, and Oklahoma have bills to move their primaries from Feb 7 to Mar 6. Missouri has bills to move it to May, Mar 6, and a week after NH.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:29 pm
#94
Sorry,spine of STEEL not still
March 30th, 2011 at 2:39 pm
Btw, out here in Cali we’re moving our primary to June.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/05/local/la-me-2012-calendar-20110206
Super Tuesday on March 6th, 2012 could now consist of these 11 states:
Texas
Virginia
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Missouri
Minnesota
Ohio
Massachusettes (may change to caucus)
Rhode Island
Vermont
Maryland (competing bill introduced to move the primary to April 3rd)
March 30th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
We don’t know that any of the candidates can win. There are no guarantees on anyone. At this point in time, Reagan was trailing Carter by around 20 points and never led until the final week of the convention. It is also worth noting that the majority know nothing about Palin except what they hear. Also corrupt pollsters mean their results are likely corrupted. That goes for PPP/Daily Kos/SEIU polls. It seems we should be waiting until October, November, and December to see where things stand. That also means that more polls will be available from more reputable organizations.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
Telly,
“And your snide reference to Palin as some type of religious fanatic…..”
It wasn’t. I’m a religious fanatic myself. My point is that is the sort of “gotcha’” question Palin would get.
Dang, lighten up.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:44 pm
Georgia could jump to Super Tuesday They ARE considering it, and I hope they do it.
Utah and Minnesota may squeeze in there as well.
http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/03/update-on-utah-locked-in-on-feb-7.html
March 30th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Franklin,
“At this point in time, Reagan was trailing Carter by around 20 points and never led until the final week of the convention.”
False comparison. ALLLLL the Republicans were trailing Carter by about 20, so Reagan was not an unusually weak candidate, it’s just that Carter was strong at that time (yes, hard to believe).
Palin, on the other hand, is unusally weak, and if she ever ties Obama in a poll, it means other Republicans are about 15 points ahead.
She’s seriously poised to win about 5 states right now, losing in places like Tenneessee and South Dakota and running even in Nebraska.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
#95 Alvin: Her dilemna is how she can change that narrative, if she can at all.
Whenever people hear Palin in person, the majority come away impressed. For example, the recent Q&A she did with investors on Long Island and the speach and Q&A in India drew positive reviews from the attendees. Should she run for the Presidency, you’ll she her doing a lot of similar, unfiltered events. Secondly, Palin has been very specific in her positions on the issues like being against raising the debt ceiling and entitlement reform. If she can’t win enough people in these ways, then fine. I would expect her to support whoever does win the GOP nomination (and that person better make her Sec. of the Interior).
March 30th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Governor Palin’s Posts
Governor PALIN: FLASHBACK: What We Were Saying One Year Ago About Obama’s Failed Energy Policy
Posted on March 30 2011 – 1:48 PM – Posted by: Sheya
Via Facebook
It’s unbelievable (literally) the rhetoric coming from President Obama today. This is coming from he who is manipulating the U.S. energy supply. President Obama is once again giving lip service to a “new energy proposal”; but let’s remember the last time he trotted out a “new energy proposal” – nearly a year ago to the day.
The main difference is today we have $4 a gallon gas in some places in the country. This is no accident. This administration is not a passive observer to the trends that have inflated oil prices to dangerous levels. His war on domestic oil and gas exploration and production has caused us pain at the pump, endangered our already sluggish economic recovery, and threatened our national security.
Through a process of what candidate Obama once called “gradual adjustment,” American consumers have seen prices at the pump rise 67 percent since he took office.
Meanwhile, the vast undeveloped reserves that could help to keep prices at the pump affordable remain locked up because of President Obama’s deliberate unwillingness to drill here and drill now. We’re subsidizing offshore drilling in Brazil and purchasing energy from them, instead of drilling ourselves and keeping those dollars circulating in our own economy to generate jobs here.
The President said today, “There are no quick fixes.” He’s been in office for nearly three years now, and he’s about to launch his $1 billion re-election campaign. When can we expect any “fixes” from him? How high does the price of energy have to go?
So, here’s a little flashback to what I wrote on March 31, 2010, at National Review Online’s The Corner:
Many Americans fear that President Obama’s new energy proposal is once again “all talk and no real action,” this time in an effort to shore up fading support for the Democrats’ job-killing cap-and-trade (a.k.a. cap-and-tax) proposals. Behind the rhetoric lie new drilling bans and leasing delays; soon to follow are burdensome new environmental regulations. Instead of “drill, baby, drill,” the more you look into this the more you realize it’s “stall, baby, stall.”
Today the president said he’ll “consider potential areas for development in the mid and south Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, while studying and protecting sensitive areas in the Arctic.”
As the former governor of one of America’s largest energy-producing states, a state oil and gas commissioner, and chair of the nation’s Interstate Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, I’ve seen plenty of such studies.
What we need is action — action that results in the job growth and revenue that a robust drilling policy could provide. And let’s not forget that while Interior Department bureaucrats continue to hold up actual offshore drilling from taking place, Russia is moving full steam ahead on Arctic drilling, and China, Russia, and Venezuela are buying leases off the coast of Cuba.
As an Alaskan, I’m especially disheartened by the new ban on drilling in parts of the 49th state and the cancellation of lease sales in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. These areas contain rich oil and gas reserves whose development is key to our country’s energy security.
As I told Secretary Salazar last April, “Arctic exploration and development is a slow, demanding process. Delays or major restrictions in accessing these resources for environmentally responsible development are not in the national interest or the interests of the State of Alaska.”
Since I wrote the above, we have even more evidence of the President’s anti-drilling agenda. We have the moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico as well as the de-facto moratorium in the Arctic. We have his 2012 budget that proposes to eliminate several vital oil and natural gas production tax incentives. We have his anti-drilling regulatory policies that have stymied responsible development. And the list goes on.
The President says that we can’t “drill” our way out of the problem. But we can’t drive our cars on solar shingles either. We have to live in the real world where we must continue to develop the conventional resources that we actually use right now to fuel our economy as we continue to look for a renewable source of energy.
If we are looking for an affordable, environmentally friendly, and abundant domestic source of energy, why not turn to our own domestic supply of natural gas? Whether we use it to power natural-gas cars or to run natural-gas power plants that charge electric cars, natural gas is an ideal “bridge fuel” to a future when more renewable sources are available, affordable, and economically viable on their own. It’s a lot more viable than subsidizing boondoggles like these inefficient electric cars that no one wants. I’m all for electric cars if you can develop one I can actually use in Alaska, where you can drive hundreds of miles without seeing many people, let alone many electrical sockets. But these electric and hybrid cars are not a quick fix because we still need an energy source to power them. That’s why I like natural gas, but we still have to drill for natural gas, and this administration doesn’t like drilling or apparently the jobs that come with responsible oil and natural gas development. They don’t have a coherent energy policy. They have piecemeal ideas for subsidizing impractical pet “green” projects.
I have always been in favor of an “all-of-the-above” approach to energy independence, but “all-of-the-above” means conventional resource development too. It means a coherent, practical, and forward-looking energy policy. I wish the President would understand this. The good news is there is nothing wrong with America’s energy policy that another good old-fashion election can’t solve. 2012 is just around the corner.
– Sarah Palin
Sarah Palin is always the first and most of the time the only one to counter Obama’s destructive policies.
Don’t mean to hijack this thread,as always I’m just reacting
to provocations by some hypocrites.
March 30th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Here is the schedule as it exists.
Jan 30 Florida
Apr 7 Alabama(Bill filed to move to June)
California(Bills filed to move to June)
Connecticut(Bill amended to move to Mar 6)
Delaware
Georgia(Bills filed to give Sec of State authority to set date
Minnesota caucuses
Missouri(May move to May, Mar 6, or a week after NH)
New Jersey(Bills filed to move primary to June
New York
Oklahoma(Bills filed to move to Mar 6)
Tennessee(Bills filed to move to Mar 6)
Feb 11 Louisiana(legislature not in session)
Feb 14 Maryland(Bills filed to move primary to Apr)
Feb 21 Wisconsin
Feb 28 Arizona(governor has authority to change date)
Michigan
Mar 6 Massachusetts
Ohio
Rhode Island
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
March 30th, 2011 at 3:23 pm
Alvin,
#95. Well said.
The principle question of the primary is not whether Sarah Palin was mistreated by the media, or misunderstood by voters. Life isn’t about Sarah Palin, and politics doesn’t always give second chances. We need to win this election. At the end of the day, whether Palin deserves her reputation or not will be debated by historians, but as far as the election, it doesn’t matter. Losing is losing, whether it’s her “fault” or someone else’s.
March 30th, 2011 at 3:33 pm
#103
I personally do not doubt Gov. Palin and I think that the comparison made between her and the President is faulty in a lot of ways. There is a comparison in terms of charisma, appeal, etc. but couldn’t you say the same about Romney or Huckabee (or among some, even Donald Trump!) Charisma is a good thing, as long as it is not all that they have
The comparison that sticks the most is the experience comparison, and it is a question that I have. That is not to demean Palin, it is simply to wonder whether or not she has had the kind of experience that would make me comfortable in thinking that she could handle the enormity of the presidency. She will have the forum to attempt to answer the questions herself, though I am sure the media will color her comments as much as they can. Reality is nothing to the media, they make their living on perceptions, and the more distorted they are the better that they sell. And lest the other GOP contenders think that this is specifically Palin’s problem, it won’t be come the general election. That is why it might be a good idea for some of the lesser known GOP contenders to get their names out there now, before the media can make them somebody they are not.
March 30th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
#107 Alvin: I think you need to decide what you want to see the next President to do wrt balancing the budget, addressing the $14T of debt, respecting our constitution (esp. the 10th amendment), etc. and then look at who has addressed these types of issues (on a smaller scale, of course). No candidate has had to deal with major wars, although that’s where the VP might come into play.
March 30th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
I think we’d do considerably better as a country if we could remember that politicians are nothing more than servants- we elect them to enact our will. We shouldn’t be overly sentimental or attached to them, especially as conservatives. I’ve always thought that Sarah Palin was badly treated during the 08′ election cycle. I think, since then, she’s done little constructive to correct the misapprehensions but, again, she hasn’t exactly been playing on a level playing field. That said, Sarah Palin isn’t going to have a chance to rewrite her narrative anytime soon. It is inane to think that if we nominate her she’ll be able to reverse some very settled opinions. She has been, short of the President, the most watched political figure in the country for nearly 3 years now. She can do any sort of media she’d like and get enormous attention. It’s not as though she has to wait for an official campaign to start rehabilitating her image. Despite the ability to direct a spotlight her way at will, she hasn’t made any headway in improving that image. It degrades, outside of her base of followers, each day. Rationally, I’m forced to conclude that, for whatever reason, there will be no rehabilitation. She shouldn’t be nominated to “stick it to” anyone. Not when defeat is all but certain. That’s giving politicians more importance than they deserve. The conservative cause began long before Sarah Palin and it’ll do OK without her.
March 30th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
She is someone who is a unknown known. The only thing that is known about her is what the media tells about her. If she should run then she will have a platform to talk directly to the people unfiltered. We know that when she talks directly to the people, she is able to connect. Rationally we should ptake a look at the polls in November and December. Skewered polls in Jan, Feb, and Mar mean nothing especially when we consider that no one has officially announced.
March 30th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
Franklin,
Nonsense. She has a platform right now. She could book herself on any major television show tomorrow- she could convince them to cancel any or all of their guests. And yes, then she’d be putting herself in their venue. Which would be terrible. Because goodness knows no politician has ever faced hostile questioning and done admirably. No, the bottom line is that Sarah Palin is that Sarah Palin wants to play by a different rulebook, she has insisted on doing so thus far, and a presidential campaign won’t change that. It also won’t change how the skeptics perceive her- she’ll continue to get massive attention, but refuse to do the things that would make her a credible political figure (face hostile questioning with grace and gravitas). Again, it astonishes me that people think that somehow a presidential campaign will change any of this- that she’s been, I don’t know, strategically allowing herself to be tarnished month after month but will suddenly flip a credibility switch when she starts running. What exactly do you think she’s going to change? If she’s not giving major interviews (which, I remind you, she could be doing easily right now)? Because she’s got the facebook thing covered pretty well and it hasn’t helped. And no presidential candidate can actually personally talk to every voter. Give me a blue-print more coherent than, “yes, but now she’ll have a venue- like, people will pay attention to her and stuff, whereas they’ve been totally ignoring her so far”.
March 30th, 2011 at 6:56 pm
Metthew E. Miller
“The conservative cause began long before Sarah Palin and it’ll do OK without her”.
=======================================
Oh,no!
Not with bunch of squishy moderates and phony conservative
pretenders.
I give it you though,you think high of yourself to even
think of giving advice to Sarah Palin.
Save it!
She’s been very,highly successful so far,all on her own.
She’s among top three contenders,no matter what Libs,RINOS,
and corrupt GOP Quislings do.
She showed to everybody who wants to see how effective she
was at Long Island among N.Y. moderates and how good she
was in New Delhi,India.
In both occasions interviewers asked all kind of questions,
the difference is they wanted to probe her brain and stances on vital issues,while being respectful.
Campaign and primaries are made for her to show who she is
and what she’s made of.
If she fails in her quest to wipe the floor with her dull,
“reach across the isles pragmatists”,boring to tears opponents,then and only then people with PDS can harp and dance in the streets.Until then you should worry about
whoever little dwarf is your sad choice of a candidate.
March 30th, 2011 at 7:07 pm
“No, the bottom line is that Sarah Palin is that Sarah Palin wants to play by a different rulebook,”
=====================================
Finally you said something correct.
Yes,all her political life she played by her own playbook,
Sarahcuda playbook.
No corrupt GOP hack and flack stuff.That’s why she was
hated so much by John McRINO’s lap dogs losers in the campaign of 2008.
of 2008.
So far,she got very high,very far!!!
March 30th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
“We shouldn’t be overly sentimental or attached to them, especially as conservatives.” I absolutely agree. This cult-like worship of one canidate as the only hope for America is incredidbly unconservative no matter how conserverative they are. Conservatives should be acutely aware of the weakness of individuals. Yet some people seem to have sworn an oath of loyalty to never admit any error in their canidate. I also find it disturbing that some will never discuss anything except in relation to their canidate. No one person should be considered all that is important in this country. Its not a Monarcy afterall.
March 30th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
Well, I’m moving ol’ Haley up to my number 5
Video: http://bcove.me/nzmoyh59
“Mike Huckabee hasn’t decided not to run,” Barbour said
1. Huck
2. T-Paw
3. Bachmann
4. Huntsman
5. Barbour
March 30th, 2011 at 9:53 pm
At this point in time maybe 20% of the people are paying attention. The other 80% are not and are likely to be swayed by false stories about Palin. Some polls do agree that Palin has very negatives in the 30s. That is not too bad if you consider that probably at least 30% of America is liberal or liberal leaning. Liberals despise Palin. They may not hate other Republicans as much but there is no evidence they would support other candidates in any great numbers. A presidential run means that the other 80% will take a second look at her and make a decision. For example, the Long Island business association invited Palin because they wanted to see what she was about. Undiplomatically, they wanted to see if she was an idiot. There was skepticism but after the session, one participant said,”When you see her in person, you realize she’s not the idiot they make her out to be on TV,” said Michael Raab, 39, chief operating officer of CMS LLC, an insurance wholesaler based in Massapequa, New York. “She’ll change more minds if she does more interactions like this.”
There are so many opportunities for her to interact directly with the people. She can hold town halls that allowed McCain to gain around 17 points in less than 1 month. There are local tv shows and talk radio and there tends to be more diversity there than the mainstream media. Obviously you have debates as well. I don’t think she has to win them. All she has to do is hold her own and she likely is a winner. That’s where the LSM may have shot themselves in the foot. There is no way she can come across as stupid as the LSM makes her out to be.
There is nothing wrong with doing interviews with the LSM provided you control the message. Either you do it live or do it on tape and uncut. Doug Schoen calls it “controlling the message.”
March 30th, 2011 at 11:06 pm
Huck, I would agree that Super Tuesday calendar would shape up well for Huck IF he decides to run and IF he manages to win Iowa and South Carolina. Still Florida will be huge and it isnt anything like Mississippi or Arkansas. It’s a totally different demographic.
By the way, Romney won Minnesota in 08. And I think Ohio and Virginia will be in play too. Utah will obviously go to Romney.
Huck’s Super Tuesday problem is that he wont have the money and organization that Romney will have to compete in so many states at once. He cant out-fundraise my daughters girl scout troop. No way he puts up ads in all these states when the competition REALLY gets going.
March 31st, 2011 at 12:08 am
If he wins IA, SC, AND FL, there is no money problem.
March 31st, 2011 at 12:09 am
John Mark,
#114. I’m the resident monarchist here, and all these little cults of personality- regardless of object- make me blanche. These people seem to think the person stands larger than the movement or concept or institution. Monarchists don’t even believe that…….
March 31st, 2011 at 12:21 am
Regarding Minnesota in the Huck column in my post #98..
Here’s my thinking: On Super Tuesday, I doubt both Huck and T-Paw are still in it. And you know which one I think will be ahead.
And I have a feeling that if T-Paw wants to run again in 2016 (and you know he does), he’ll have dropped out by then and endorsed Huck.
Say Huck loses to Obama (it’s possible depending on the economy), T-Paw becomes the super front runner in ’16 with Huck’s full powerful (think Fox News and 600 ABC radio stations daily)ENDORSEMENT AND PROMOTION.
Huck wins, T-Paw is also rewarded with about whatever he wants.
If he endorses, Romney..there is still very likely no VP position available since Mitt is already from the nearby upper midwest state of Michigan. If Romney loses to Obama, Mitt’s endorsement in ’16 is about worth as much as McCain’s is today.
So T-Paw goes with the Huckatrain, imho.
March 31st, 2011 at 12:29 am
Craig,
I’m not sure about all those scenarios (though I agree that a defeated Romney’s endorsement won’t be worth much in ’16). But I do see Huck and TPaw winding up on the same side before the nomination is finally settled.
March 31st, 2011 at 12:52 am
“But I do see Huck and TPaw winding up on the same side before the nomination is finally settled.”
Matt,
Yeah, that’s how I see it in a nutshell, too.
If I thought T-Paw could carry his state for us, I’d be up for a Huck/T-Paw ticket.
I still think due to the importance of Ohio, we’ve got to go with the governor or senator of that state, whichever one is most popular by the time we get to Tampa. As you know, Kasich has really plummeted in the polling. As for Portman, I kinda wanted to get away from Bush administration guys, but he is a very popular pro-life Methodist who happeneed to have won seven consecutive congressional elections with over 70 percent of the vote. And those are always nice to find.
March 31st, 2011 at 7:19 am
I actually think Romney/Pawlenty would be a great way to make a play on the rust belt states. The south is unlikely to desert and if we won a michigan or a wisconsin it would be game over for Obambi.
April 3rd, 2011 at 12:04 am
#70 Greg: “Is palin the real reason these 2012 announcements are being delayed longer or is every body waiting for obama to offically announce reelection??”
I think it’s safe to say that Obama’s official announcement has nothing to do with the delay of Republican announcements. I think more likely it’s a reaction to the fact that much of the primary campaign that took place in 2007 was unproductive; note that Giuliani led the polls for most of the year, but his support collapsed in December and he didn’t win a single primary. Meanwhile, McCain, the eventual nominee, was largely a non-factor for much of 2007. If getting into the presidential race early isn’t that helpful for becoming the nominee or getting elected president, why do it?
September 7th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
of course like your web site but you need to check the spelling on several of your posts. A number of them are rife with spelling issues and I to find it very bothersome to inform the truth then again I?ll certainly come back again.