News Sarah Palin: Will She Run for President in 2012?

[CAC1001]

Palin didn't meet that hurdle, nor does she currently. As soon as she has to deviate from a script, she starts verbally spinning the wheels, delaying for time; hence her very bizarre style of speaking in non-scripted situations.

During interviews, yes...

There is just no way she would be capable of handling herself when dealing with other world leaders.

I don't know if I buy that. I think she could be plenty capable. How Palin behaves in interviews is not necessarilly the same way she'd be in private when dealing with world leaders.

Remember, Palin is a woman who muscled the oil companies in Alaska; there is a book about this called https://www.amazon.com/dp/0982163207/?tag=pfamazon01-20. She also overturned part of the Republican establishment there.

Now yes, the woman may be an airhead in terms of many areas of policy, but I highly doubt that a woman who is truly an idiot would be able to take on Big Oil and the establishment Republican party. Remember, Palin HAS governed and served in plenty of positions where she has to be able to talk and think clearly: she was on the Wasilla City Council from 1992 to 1996, she was mayor of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002, she was Chairperson of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission from 2003 to 2004, and then she served as Governor of Alaska. I doubt she'd have made it past the City Council if she truly can't speak or think or was a fool.

In this sense, I think she would have little problem dealing with world leaders.

 

[Evo]

Now yes, the woman may be an airhead in terms of many areas of policy, but I highly doubt that a woman who is truly an idiot would be able to take on Big Oil and the establishment Republican party. Remember, Palin HAS governed and served in plenty of positions where she has to be able to talk and think clearly: she was on the Wasilla City Council from 1992 to 1996, she was mayor of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002, she was Chairperson of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission from 2003 to 2004, and then she served as Governor of Alaska. I doubt she'd have made it past the City Council if she truly can't speak or think or was a fool.

In this sense, I think she would have little problem dealing with world leaders.

You're going to make me dig up again how little she actually did in office? I thought once was enough. Unless someone else posts her "accomplishments", I guess I'll work on it tomorrow.

In the mean time, please research and post her actual accomplishments in the roles you named.

 

[CAC1001]

You're going to make me dig up again how little she actually did in office? I thought once was enough. Unless someone else posts her "accomplishments", I guess I'll work on it tomorrow.

Barack Obama did not do much in office prior to being elected President, the man is still very intelligent though. And I'm not talking about her accomplishments per se, just on what she served.

 

[lisab]

Barack Obama did not do much in office prior to being elected President, the man is still very intelligent though. And I'm not talking about her accomplishments per se, just on what she served.

We've already established earlier in the thread, this isn't about Obama. Just Palin.

 

[CAC1001]

We've already established earlier in the thread, this isn't about Obama. Just Palin.

I know, BUT, I was explaining why in my opinion, Sarah Palin can be an intelligent person, and I was citing her previous roles. Evo said she didn't accomplish much during any of them, I was pointing out that neither did Obama prior to President, but he is still a very intelligent person, so even if Palin did not accomplish much doesn't mean the woman lacks intelligence.

 

[Evo]

I know, BUT, I was explaining why in my opinion, Sarah Palin can be an intelligent person, and I was citing her previous roles. Evo said she didn't accomplish much during any of them, I was pointing out that neither did Obama prior to President, but he is still a very intelligent person, so even if Palin did not accomplish much doesn't mean the woman lacks intelligence.

But we've already established she's not intelligent.

Here's one for Palin to get you started.

The Huffington Post has obtained an exclusive first look at the April 2009 Portfolio cover story about Sarah Palin. The cover, which (as mentioned below) features a photo of Palin from her Vogue shoot, is headlined "Palin & Big Oil: The Cold Hard Truth."

Joe McGinniss' cover story, "Pipe Dreams," focuses on Palin's failure to build a gas pipeline in Alaska. The subhed reads:

Forget "Drill, baby, drill." Sarah Palin says she's building a $40 billion gas pipeline, which even President Obama wants. The only problem: It isn't there. And it's her fault.

Based on a press release by Portfolio to promote its April issue, it appears McGinniss' article is highly critical of Palin's efforts: "...McGinniss finds that not only is the pipeline not being built, but Palin herself is the biggest obstacle in its path."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/17/sarah-palin-emportfolioem_n_175636.html

That's all for tonight.

 

[CAC1001]

Start a thread about Obama ande cite which projects he headed they he messed up. No troll tactics of trying to deflect Palin's failures.

I'm not. Again, I wasn't talking about Palin's accomplishments, I was talking about her intelligence. I do not see how mentioning Obama's lack of accomplishments yet him being intelligent to point out that Palin can also be intelligent with lack of accomplishment, is any "troll tactic" to "deflect attention."

 

[turbo]

I know, BUT, I was explaining why in my opinion, Sarah Palin can be an intelligent person, and I was citing her previous roles. Evo said she didn't accomplish much during any of them, I was pointing out that neither did Obama prior to President, but he is still a very intelligent person, so even if Palin did not accomplish much doesn't mean the woman lacks intelligence.

Sarah Palin couldn't be prepped for an interview with Katy Couric to the extent that she could answer a softball question about what periodicals she reads. Duh! If you actually read periodicals regularly, you'd be able to flip that question off without thinking. She couldn't. That says something about how well she is "informed", though I hate to use that word in the same paragraph with that flake's name.

Palin seems driven, crafty, and ruthless judging from domestic accounts of her actions in Alaska. None of those equate to "intelligent". All equate to dangerous if the person has a lot of power. Let the suckers pay to hear her speak and let them buy her books, so she can have millions. She is far too dangerous to run for high office.

 

[CAC1001]

But we've already established she's not intelligent.

We have?

Here's one fro Palin to get you started.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/17/sarah-palin-emportfolioem_n_175636.html

That's all for tonight.

Yes, but there's also that book I cited on her dealing with Big Oil. But I am well aware of her not getting the pipeline done, her bridge to nowhere, leaving Wasilla in debt, etc...

 

[CAC1001]

Palin seems driven, crafty, and ruthless judging from domestic accounts of her actions in Alaska. None of those equate to "intelligent".

No fool can be crafty.

 

[lisab]

I'm not. Again, I wasn't talking about Palin's accomplishments, I was talking aobut her intelligence. I do not see how mentioning Obama's lack of accomplishments yet him being intelligent to point out that Palincan also be intelligent with lack of accomplishment, is any "troll tactic" to "deflect attention."

OK, for argument's sake, let's say she's very bright. The problem is, she *really* doesn't come across as very bright, and so much of politics is perception.

For example, when she's interviewed she is frequently asked a question that she doesn't know. So, she will throw out a mishmash of all the talking points she's ever heard, blended with all the facts she's been coached to memorize. It comes out like word salad.

I believe she's just too far gone in the eyes of the most important voters: independents.

 

[CAC1001]

OK, for argument's sake, let's say she's very bright. The problem is, she *really* doesn't come across as very bright, and so much of politics is perception.

For example, when she's interviewed she is frequently asked a question that she doesn't know. So, she will throw out a mishmash of all the talking points she's ever heard, blended with all the facts she's been coached to memorize. It comes out like word salad.

I believe she's just too far gone in the eyes of the most important voters: independents.

I agree.

 

[Evo]

Don't forget the debate where she wrote the answers in the palm of her hand.

 

[CAC1001]

Don't forget the debate where she wrote the answers in the palm of her hand.

She wrote them for a speech, but I would think that was just to remember points to speak on.

 

[Evo]

She wrote them for a speech, but I would think that was just to remember points to speak on.

Heads of state don't write on their hands. She's not in middle school anymore.

 

[John Mario]

I consider the Tea Party's focus on 2012 to be counter-productive. As a voter, I don't want campaign propaganda. I want Congress (including Tea Party Congress members) to focus on the recession.

 

[ThomasT]

The question might be - is the US ready for a female President? I thought Hillary tried too soon. Here is an overview of female candidates in the various 2010 elections.
http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/elections/candidates_2010.php

From the list, I think Meg Whitman would be an interesting candidate - had she won. Her support outside of CA appears to have been greater than inside the state, and people LOVE ebay.

Missing from your example is the election of President Obama. He ran from the mid-point of his freshman term, very little experience, and quite unknown - yet the voters embraced him.

Thanks for the link WW.

re Whitman, yes, people love ebay, but it seems she might be perceived as a sort of female Ross Perot. I think that average folks would tend toward Palin and away from either Clinton or Whitman.

re Obama, well, he got a LOT of exposure (both positive and negative, but mostly positive wrt what I recall -- at least that's my impression) after a certain point.

 

[ThomasT]

Oh, I thought you were talking about Paris Hilton.

I don't think so.

Actually Palin's show only got that handful of viewers the first day from curiosity seekers, the next show dropped to half that already.

Ok, I didn't know that. Even so, she's still 'out there', a lot, and like it or not she seems to have made a favorable impression on lots of people.

Honestly, if your list about what the "right stuff" to become President of the US were true, the winner of the next American Idol would be our new President.

I'm just saying, imho, that all other things being more or less equal, then the amount of exposure is a most important factor. Of course, 'all other things' aren't equal wrt a comparison between an American Idol winner, or Paris Hilton, and Palin. She's perceived, it seems, as a serious candidate by lots of people.

Thomas, something you and WhoWee both failed to bring up as a quality that is mandatory for President, and why Obama won - Intelligence.

I got into trouble with that before in this thread. It's a somewhat 'nebulous' term, don't you think? Eg., we like to identify Bush as a sort of Alfred E. Neuman character, but he got elected to the Presidency ... twice. We elected Ronald Reagan (a most affable sock puppet) twice. We point to Palin's gaffs, but she was the governor of Alaska and picked as a candidate for the Vice Presidency of the United States by a major political party. As Forrest Gump would say, "stupid is as stupid does". Palin made $14 million last year, and, apparently, tens of millions of Americans think she would make a fine President.

Like it or not, Palin is a serious contender for whatever political office she might choose to, or be chosen to, run for.

 

[Evo]

Like it or not, Palin is a serious contender for whatever political office she might choose to, or be chosen to, run for.

Thankfully, the fringe she attracts are a very small fringe. If she runs in 2012, she'll have to do it as an independant, she won't get the Republican nod.

 

[turbo]

Like it or not, Palin is a serious contender for whatever political office she might choose to, or be chosen to, run for.

And she would make more money winning it and quitting it than she could have earned by doing the job. Anybody see a problem with that?

 

[ThomasT]

And she would make more money winning it and quitting it than she could have earned by doing the job. Anybody see a problem with that?

Not sure what you mean turbo, but the OP simply asked how Palin was doing and whether she has a chance. A chance to ... what? Be a candidate for, say, the Senate or House? Sure. To win? Who knows? For the Presidency. Big question mark. To win if nominated? Bigger question mark.

How's she doing? Apparently just fine. She is 'rich' after all. And every day's a good day when you're rich.

 

[turbo]

Not sure what you mean turbo, but the OP simply asked how Palin was doing and whether she has a chance. A chance to ... what? Be a candidate for, say, the Senate or House? Sure. To win? Who knows? For the Presidency. Big question mark. To win if nominated? Bigger question mark.

How's she doing? Apparently just fine. She is 'rich' after all. And every day's a good day when you're rich.

She is famous for being famous, thanks to McCain's idiocy. She will continue to be famous for being famous as long as the American public and their media want to fluff her.

 

[ThomasT]

She will continue to be famous for being famous as long as the American public and their media want to fluff her.

Well, yeah.

 

[CAC1001]

Thankfully, the fringe she attracts are a very small fringe. If she runs in 2012, she'll have to do it as an independant, she won't get the Republican nod.

I wouldn't say so. There are parts of the Republican party establishment that are terrified she could run and win the Republican Primary. IF SO however, I highly doubt she would win the General, as I do not think Independents would go for her.

 

[WhoWee]

I think the criticism of Palin (much like the posts in this thread) actually endears her to millions of average people.

I don't think she will be the Republican candidate. However, if she does run - and more importantly is elected - it will probably be push-back to the personal attacks by the hard Left that makes it happen. Again, IMO.

 

[BobG]

I think the criticism of Palin (much like the posts in this thread) actually endears her to millions of average people.

I don't think she will be the Republican candidate. However, if she does run - and more importantly is elected - it will probably be push-back to the personal attacks by the hard Left that makes it happen. Again, IMO.

I think that's already happened. Some of the attacks on Palin before she had a chance to demonstrate her qualifications were disgraceful. Once having started defending her honor, the defenders had put a little of themselves on the line, making it harder to admit she was a dead end candidate.

Given a fair chance for people to form an unbiased opinion of her, I think the reaction would have been similar to the reaction Harriet Miers received as a Supreme Court justice.

 

[Bull Killgore]

Palin is just a red herring. The greatest danger is that she will tempt reasonable people to think that an unreasonable politician is good by comparison.

 

[WhoWee]

Palin is just a red herring. The greatest danger is that she will tempt reasonable people to think that an unreasonable politician is good by comparison.

Care to elaborate - and welcome to the PF.

 

[Bull Killgore]

Care to elaborate - and welcome to the PF.

I mean that there is very little danger that she herself will be elected, but the bigger problem is that she normalizes an uncomfortable degree of craziness in American politics.

Although she's hardly the first one to do so.

And yeah thanks for the welcome. I posted here first when I realized that as a first year uni student I wouldn't really know what I was talking about in the science threads. Maybe in 4 years.

 

[ThomasT]

I mean that there is very little danger that she herself will be elected, but the bigger problem is that she normalizes an uncomfortable degree of craziness in American politics.

Although she's hardly the first one to do so.

And yeah thanks for the welcome. I posted here first when I realized that as a first year uni student I wouldn't really know what I was talking about in the science threads. Maybe in 4 years.

Hi ... Bull? What's a first year uni student? I have no formal education in physics but have read (1) David Bohm's Quantum Theory textbook, (2) Rodney Louden's Quantum Theory of Light textbook, and (3) somebody's textbook on Fourier Analysis, so I'm in your camp. I think. Personally, I love Sarah Palin. Publically, I will deny any knowledge of her. And, of course, I'm voting for either Nader or Zappa. Wait, Zappa's dead. Ok, whoever.

 

[WhoWee]

Personally, I love Sarah Palin. Publically, I will deny any knowledge of her.

I've repeatedly heard similar quips in my travels.