Reply With Quote
She was a one-hit wonder. Nice nasty speech at the Republican convention and then complete incoherency until she had to apologize to McCain for hurting him in the election.
Palin/Plumber in 2012 would completely kill your party.
I remember creating a thread back in the election asking everyone one major issue they didn't agree with their candidate on, and you absolutely refused to give an answer. What kind of idiot thinks everything a politician says is gold? I can't think of a single person here who doesn't have a gripe with something Obama's done, yet you and your kind accuse us of making him into a messiah.
She was a one-hit wonder. Nice nasty speech at the Republican convention and then complete incoherency until she had to apologize to McCain for hurting him in the election.
Palin/Plumber in 2012 would completely kill your party.
There were things I didn't agree with her on, but I don't remember now. I never agree with someone 100%
Why do you think everyone has the time to respond to all your threads? I don't even recall seeing such a request. There were so many duplicate threads and so little time to read everything during the elections.
But yes. I agreed with most of her own points. Few of those she adopted from McCain however. I simply disliked McCain less than I dislike Obama. I like Palin.
I was thinking Huckabee/Palin would be a good mix.
I think she might be a one hit wonder too. Not because she doesn't have what it takes, but because of the tremendous amount of slander the left threw at her. I wouldn't ask her to go through that again.
You did respond in it. You gave a half-assed "she's too nice to the other guys" answer, and refused to come up with a real issue.
Sorry, I don't remember. Actually, after re-reading your post, there were no Major Issues she ran with that I disagreed with. Only smaller ones.
You want someone who can't handle CBS and ABC to be running our country? Palin's whole campaign was crying that the media trashed her and then in response, she goes and starts trashing Obama. She can't deal with Katie Couric but she could handle Putin, Ahmadinejad, the energy crisis, the economic meltdown, two wars, etc.?
It's amazing that you can make a statement like this with a straight face considering there is a thread about a freaking IPOD that's EIGHT PAGES LONG in this same forum targeted towards Obama.
Crack is wack.
Palin was a disaster for republicans like John McCain, who isn't really a republican. His camp got jealous of the overwhelming enthusiasm she generated from the traditional base of the GOP, and they ended up attempting to trash her after the election, when they spent the majority of the time during the campaign sequestering her from the media and packaging her up for canned speeches and no-question appearances. Don't make the mistake of thinking that the campaign was "her" campaign.
It's actually just as well that McCain lost. He'd have done the same stupid that Obama's been doing, aside from the international blunders, and, unlike Obama, would have actually gotten the blame he deserves for it from the media. She'd have probably been caught up in the disaster and wouldn't have a chance to run later.
I'm sorry. What does pointing out Obama's continuing insults and public disrespect to our closest ally have to do with slander?
Sarah Palin was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. That people who call themselves conservative continue to see her as politically desirable validates my assessment that incurious obscurantism is now a prerequisite for running for national office as a Republican, and that the conservative Zeitgeist in the present day has come off the rails.
There are plenty of Sarah Palin supporters and websites supporting her run in 2012.
Has whottt ordered his shirt yet?
/thread
Palin was/is a disaster. That fact has nothing to do with McCain.
You're right. They hate him. He's such an asshole to them that I've heard that the Obama's have been ordered never to speak to any members of the British government again.
I didn't read it. OK... Silly gift, and I just didn't feel like opening that thread.
Didn't you get the memo?
The tape was edited. You should read the unedited transcript. She dealt with Couric just fine.
I'm sorry. How does giving a gift the queen specifically asked for and adding a special personal touch (that board Republicans still haven't bothered to look up -- talk about incurious) cons ute an insult and public disrespect?
So what news periodicals did she tell Couric she reads?
Give us a link to that.
Are you serious? Every time she got interviewed it was a disaster. It definitely wasn't right to hide a candidate for an office that high from the media, but I can see why McCain did it. Every time she opened her mouth it was fingernails on the chalkboard to any middle of the road voter that McCain was desperately trying to take from Obama. She generated enthusiasm in one speech, but that died off steadily for all but the right-wing base that would have voted for that ticket anyways. The rest of the country rightfully saw her as someone completely unqualified to run this nation. The thought that McCain sabotaged her and was jealous of her support is laughable too. 2008 was obviously his final shot at the presidency, so there's no way he was holding her down to thin out the compe ion in the future. I find it unreal that people on the left are considered to have a messiah complex for Obama when I've never heard the right here say they remotely disagreed with anything major in Palin's platform (whatever that is aside from Bill Ayers and the gotcha media).
And she was lights out with Charlie Gibson too, I assume?
The fundamental problem is that the party leadership believes in the Reagan coalition (defense hawks, economic conservatives and social conservatives).
Rove threw a great deal behind the social conservatives. That's why you saw an allegedly conservative Republican administration run through the largest expansion of an en lement program since the 60s. If the last two federal elections do anything for the powers that be in the GOP, it should signal that the social conservatives are a spent force.
The GOP needs to embrace individualism. Most Americans want to be left the alone. The spokesmen/leaders of the social conservatives certainly do not embrace that concept, which is curious given that the point of their political engagement was originally to cease government encroachment on the exercise of faith. Electorally, I think a sizable portion of voters is looking for an economically and fiscally conservative party which advocates minimal government intrusion in personal, as well as economic affairs.
Of course, Congressman Paul made that case in the GOP primary and got 3% of the vote. :-/
I asked a question. I didn't realize she'd asked for it. Thanks for answering it in as un- baggy a way as is apparently possible for you. That always fosters debate.
She may not be the best with good spontaneous answers, but far better than president Telepromter... I mean president Obama is without his teleprompter.
People who make good decisions are who we want to elect. Not those who are charismatic over wise.
Besides, I never said she did a great job. Just that the criticism is uncalled for, especially when programs are edited to make liberals look good and conservatives look bad.
so, conservatives had nothing to do with what's making them look bad?
if that's true, then they have no business at trying to be legitimate.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions