News Why Did Sarah Palin Resign as Governor?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around Sarah Palin's unexpected resignation as Governor of Alaska, where she announced she would not seek re-election and would transfer authority to the Lt. Governor at the end of the month. Many participants speculate on the reasons behind her decision, suggesting it could be due to a looming scandal, personal issues, or a strategic move to focus on national ambitions, particularly in light of her declining popularity and the challenges facing Alaska's economy. There are mixed opinions on her political future, with some asserting she remains a significant figure within the GOP, while others view her as a polarizing and unpopular leader. The conversation also touches on her communication skills, with critiques of her speech delivery and public persona, as well as broader discussions about the divisions within the Republican Party and the implications of her resignation for her potential 2012 presidential aspirations. Overall, the thread reflects a blend of skepticism and intrigue regarding Palin's next steps and the impact of her departure from the governorship.
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,194
Reaction score
2,501
The news conference is still under way. WOW! She not only said that she will not be running again, but she gave up authority to the Lt. Gov. immediately [at the end of the month].

In part she said that she doesn't want to be a lame duck Governor. A bit ironic when one considers that when she recently challenged Obama to a foot race, she boasted that she would have greater endurance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Bizarre.

She did give a spiel about everyone trying to take down the point guard, and, like a good point guard, she was passing the ball off at the perfect time.

She also mentioned her son with Down's syndrome.

I think she has a scandal that's about to explode. Or ... her son has some complications that the public hasn't heard about before. The first seems more likely.

If this was just to focus on a more national level, she'd almost certainly finish her current term and just not run for reelection; similar to others such as Romney, Edwards, etc.
 
I swear, the flag-waiving doubletalk makes my skin crawl.
 
Maybe she could just no longer compete for headlines with the death of Michael Jackson?

Or maybe she wants to devote herself to the flagging Tea Party movement?

Or maybe she just realizes that she is at a dead end and being a national joke is no longer much fun?

MSNBC is reporting that she has told her financial backers that they are free to choose whoever they want in 2012. So maybe she has the good grace to know how limited she really is and for once is making a smart decision?
 
Paul Begala mentioned the possiblity that she could have a health problem, but assuming she is healthy, he considered that Alaskan oil revenues and her popularity are both down.

It certainly doesn't help with any national aspirations. She is now a one-term governor who attended five or six colleges [for what, a B.A. Journalism degree, I think] who didn't even finish one term of office.
 
She's going to run for President. And comedians will be able to eat again.
 
I'd expect Steve Schmidt to be the source of whatever bombshell Palin felt could only be defused by immediate resignation.

Schmidt and Palin have constantly feuded since McCain's campaign went South and he certainly has to be privy to any potential scandals since part of his job would be to defuse them.

Interesting history as election campaign staff for Schmidt. Four straight unsuccessful campaigns before finally joining Bush's 2004 campaign working under Rove. Nothing but success since (I guess he worked on the Alito and Roberts nominations, but not the Miers nomination?) ... until McCain's campaign and he obviously blames a lot on Palin.
 
Or it could be nothing really and she is just completely sick of all of the allegations which are bankrupting her. She is hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt right now.

It could also be a combination of the above and her wanting to run for 2012, if that's the case though, it's a risky move.

Her opponents would be very wrong to under-estimate her though I think.

She has been criticized for not having boned up on issues more like economics, foreign policy, etc...she still speaks in platitudes. That is okay when first going out for VP and needing to bone up, but by now, people begin to wonder (although there is still plenty of time).

I have been wondering if answering all of these allegations, plus the stress from the debts and so forth, has been preventing her from doing this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WheelsRCool said:
Or it could be nothing really and she is just completely sick of all of the allegations which are bankrupting her. She is hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt right now.

Well Sarah Barracuda should have no problem with money. I doubt anyone or anything is bankrupting her.

If someone like Glen Beck can write a book and make money spewing his triteness, there must be enough of P.T. Barnum's kind of people out there to shell out more clams to fill her larder to busting.

I suspect Roger Ailes is already on the phone with an offer.
 
  • #10
She is deeply in-debt. And you obviously have never watched, listened to, or read Glenn Beck I see...
 
  • #11
Having seen her press conference today in its entirety, it looks to me like she could have used both a speech writer and a teleprompter.

Confusing, rambling, incomplete. Those are my impressions of her performance. Pretty much like her campaign speeches this last fall.
 
  • #12
That's President Obama I think you're confusing her with there.
 
  • #13
WheelsRCool said:
And you obviously have never watched, listened to, or read Glenn Beck I see...

Well I'll grant you that he may be worse than trite. He may even be intentionally so. But deep thoughts are apparently beyond his shallow grasp. Parlaying outrageous statements, intentionally obtuse, or otherwise, into a pay check looks to be his only talent.

By the way what Tea Party Rally is he leading tomorrow? Or has that juggernaut movement for change totally run out of even Glen Beck's kind of amped up steam?
 
  • #14
She realized she needs her time and privacy to improve, whether it's because of personal issues or personal ambition, it's the first smart move I hear from her.
 
  • #15
I keep thinking about her statement that "only dead fish go with the flow". Could this be a result of her being on the losing side of the split within the Republican party? One can only imagine the fights going on between the more moderate Reps, and ultra-conservative fundamentalists. In any event, it is funny that she would refer to completing the term of office to which she was elected as "going with the flow".

Candy Crowley is reporting that friends close to Palin are saying that she is fed up and done with politics.
 
  • #16
Palin is a relatively unpopular governor of the 4th least-populous state in the county, which has been surviving on oil revenues in recent memory. The notion that she doesn't want to saddle her state with a lame-duck governor is laughable at a minimum. It is more creative than the "I want to spend more time with my family" excuse that creeps use when they are caught in wrong-doing, but only a bit.

Edit: Let's all pitch in and buy her two mules.
 
  • #17
LowlyPion said:
Well I'll grant you that he may be worse than trite. He may even be intentionally so. But deep thoughts are apparently beyond his shallow grasp.

What "shallow grasp?" Enlighten us narrow-minded individuals who do not have your profound understanding of the issues.

He is a strict proponent of classical liberalism. Few others on television are. It would behoove you perhaps to spend some time listening and/or watching him rather than spouting what the leftists in the media tell you he is saying.

Parlaying outrageous statements, intentionally obtuse, or otherwise, into a pay check looks to be his only talent.

Being concerned about the massive growth and intrusions of government are outrageous statements? Hmm...

By the way what Tea Party Rally is he leading tomorrow? Or has that juggernaut movement for change totally run out of even Glen Beck's kind of amped up steam?

Yup, how DARE people be concerned about such excessive spending by government right now! Seriously, if you have nothing really to contribute then do not post.

I keep thinking about her statement that "only dead fish go with the flow". Could this be a result of her being on the losing side of the split within the Republican party?

What makes you think she is on any "losing side" of a split within the party?

One can only imagine the fights going on between the more moderate Reps, and ultra-conservative fundamentalists.

You are over-simplifying the Republican party. What you would define as a "moderate," I define as a more Leftist Republican.

The term "ultra-conservative," what do you mean? Neither Mike Huckabee nor Sarah Palin, the religious fundamentalists, were strict fiscally conservative, limited government Republicans per se.

If you mean "ultra-conservative" as in limited government, free-market capitalism, fiscal conservativsm, strong national defense, etc...that's not really "conservative" aside from the name. It's classically liberal. Many such conservatives may believe in God, but that doesn't make them at all the same as the fundamentalists who want to ram religion down people's throats.

The ultra-conservative fundamentalists are the types who put religion first. You can be a quasi-socialist, but as long as you are a fundamentalist Christian, they'll vote you in.

Also, do not forget the Democrats have their religious fundamentalists as well in the extreme environmentalist types who worship trees and so forth.

Extreme environmentalism is nothing more than a different variant of conventional Christianity when you look at it. It tends to pop up in areas where people reject Christianity, because when you suppress religion in one respect, it tends to pop up in another.

Palin is a relatively unpopular governor of the 4th least-populous state in the county,

Incorrect. She still has a high amount of popularity as governor and as a politician period. The very reason we are even discussing her is proof of this.

When has a governor of Alaska ever resigned and led the news?
 
  • #18
WheelsRCool said:
Incorrect. She still has a high amount of popularity as governor and as a politician period. The very reason we are even discussing her is proof of this.

When has a governor of Alaska ever resigned and led the news?
Incorrect? Even the GOP in her state are ticked off at her.

And you have a pretty partisan view of her resignation. "When has a governor of Alaska resigned..." is pretty lame when you ask "When has the last Vice-presidential candidate resigned..." Time to take a breath. McCain grabbed her out of thin air and destroyed all chances that the GOP could have to retain the WH. It didn't work then and it's not going to work in the future. We don't need another air-head in the WH.
 
  • #19
WheelsRCool said:
The very reason we are even discussing her is proof of this.

When has a governor of Alaska ever resigned and led the news?

Train wrecks sometimes lead the news too.
 
  • #20
turbo-1 said:
Incorrect? Even the GOP in her state are ticked off at her.

That's because they were a bunch of corrupt politicians whom she fought and really socked it to them hard. The GOP in her state do not like her.

You need to remember, the GOP have various factions:

The elitist, big government, big business, country-club, mostly white male Republicans. They have no problem with big government social programs, and will support increased regulations if it suits their big business friends (George W. Bush and George H. W. Bush are of this kind).

The populist, more Christian fundamentalist, not necessarily big government but not per se small government either, Republicans (this is Sarah Palin).

(the above two tend not to like each other)

The strict Reagan Republicans who are for limited government, fiscal conservatism, free-market capitalism, strong national defense, etc...(this is what they all pretend to be while running for office, but very few actually try to follow through on).

And you have a pretty partisan view of her resignation. "When has a governor of Alaska resigned..." is pretty lame when you ask "When has the last Vice-presidential candidate resigned..." Time to take a breath.

No one really cares about VP candidates either. If Barack Obama had lost and then Joe Biden resigned, I doubt it would be a lead news story.

McCain grabbed her out of thin air and destroyed all chances that the GOP could have to retain the WH. It didn't work then and it's not going to work in the future. We don't need another air-head in the WH.

Now this is partisan. The truth is Sarah Palin turned what should have been a full-on landslide win for President Obama into a mild victory.

She represented a fundamental threat to the Democrats, which is why they, and the media, have been so hell-bent on destroying her. She was easily the best decision McCain made for his campaign. She galvanized the Republican base and attracted a lot more of the women vote (which is why she was such a threat to the Democrats).

McCain himself blew his campaign. Barack Obama out-spent him by about 6 - 1 and still only had a standard victory. McCain ran a lousy campaign, never criticized Obama on any of the issues he could have, did an outright ludicrous move by suspending his campaign like that, then failed to discuss his economic policies when the financial crises occurred.

He himself, earlier on in the campaign, even had admitted to "not understanding the economy." Not exactly a great way to win. More people decided to take a chance on Obama.
 
  • #21
LowlyPion said:
Train wrecks sometimes lead the news too.
When do we ever see "Train with competent, experienced engineer arrives on time! Nobody injured!" Never?

McCain/Palin was a pretend conservative ticket boosted by the Neo-Cons. Real conservatives got buried under the money that the GOP raised, and then McCain sunk himself by acting like he knew what he was doing.. Are there some real Goldwater republicans hanging in the weeds out there? If so, the GOP could embrace them and regain some respectability.
 
  • #22
turbo-1 said:
When do we ever see "Train with competent, experienced engineer arrives on time! Nobody injured!" Never?

McCain/Palin was a pretend conservative ticket boosted by the Neo-Cons. Real conservatives got buried under the money that the GOP raised, and then McCain sunk himself by acting like he knew what he was doing.. Are there some real Goldwater republicans hanging in the weeds out there? If so, the GOP could embrace them and regain some respectability.

Goldwater lost big-time against the Barack Obama of his day, Lyndon B. Johnson, for being "too conservative" and "too extremist." It was even said that the Johnson election proved something, and that if the Republican party did not start becoming more moderate, it was going to disappear soon. Sarah Palin was probably the closest to a Goldwater conservative as there was on the national level right now.

And what exactly is a "neo-con" BTW? How would Goldwater in modern times not be lambasted as a neo-con? One reason Goldwater lost was the implication he would take us to war with the Soviet Union. Johnson Leftists were anti-war or at most believed Communism needed to be contained.

Goldwater conservatives believed it needed to be destroyed. Goldwater was also against all social programs.

Lyndon B. Johnson criticized him as a "fascist" because Goldwater was against all of Johnson's proposed programs.
 
  • #23
turbo-1 said:
When do we ever see "Train with competent, experienced engineer arrives on time! Nobody injured!" Never?

Perhaps when it comes time to erect the National monument to Obama, such a headline will top the news?

I think one thing is for sure though, Sarah Palin won't be in the engine cab when it does happen.
 
  • #24
WheelsRCool said:
Yup, how DARE people be concerned about such excessive spending by government right now! Seriously, if you have nothing really to contribute then do not post.

Bush and his friends squandered wealth. Obama is taking drastic action needed to save the economy.

What makes you think she is on any "losing side" of a split within the party?

Her resignation.

You are over-simplifying the Republican party. What you would define as a "moderate," I define as a more Leftist Republican.

When you are all the way right, everything looks left.

The term "ultra-conservative," what do you mean? Neither Mike Huckabee nor Sarah Palin, the religious fundamentalists, were strict fiscally conservative, limited government Republicans per se.

Ultra-conservative socially. We all know that the Republicans are no longer fiscal conservatives.

If you mean "ultra-conservative" as in limited government, free-market capitalism, fiscal conservativsm, strong national defense, etc...that's not really "conservative" aside from the name.

Is was the classical conservative position until the neo-cons came along.

It's classically liberal. Many such conservatives may believe in God, but that doesn't make them at all the same as the fundamentalists who want to ram religion down people's throats.

Many liberals believe in God as well. No problem; it is a classic mistake made by Republicans.

The ultra-conservative fundamentalists are the types who put religion first. You can be a quasi-socialist, but as long as you are a fundamentalist Christian, they'll vote you in.

I'll agree with that one.

Also, do not forget the Democrats have their religious fundamentalists as well in the extreme environmentalist types who worship trees and so forth.

The difference is that they don't try to put religious extremists in power.

Extreme environmentalism is nothing more than a different variant of conventional Christianity when you look at it. It tends to pop up in areas where people reject Christianity, because when you suppress religion in one respect, it tends to pop up in another.

It is a result of fear and 40 years of Republican denials and obfuscations.

Incorrect. She still has a high amount of popularity as governor and as a politician period. The very reason we are even discussing her is proof of this.

We talk about Charles Manson too, but that doesn't mean he is popular.

When has a governor of Alaska ever resigned and led the news?

Apparently when she was a would-be vice President. The fact is that to most of us, Palin is a joke, but she was still thrust into the limelight by a man who later regretted his choice.
 
  • #26
There are apparently some conservatives speculating that Palin has resigned in order to free herself up from the responsibilities of governor so she can take a place on the national stage. Possibly starting by going on a speaking tour.
 
  • #27
TheStatutoryApe said:
There are apparently some conservatives speculating that Palin has resigned in order to free herself up from the responsibilities of governor so she can take a place on the national stage. Possibly starting by going on a speaking tour.

My guess is she will take some time to actually read the newspapers she couldn't remember reading before and try to get up to speed on events and policies in the rest of the world. Maybe even get a media show crafted to display her on Fox, though that may be a problem getting guests to go to Alaska. (Other than Putin popping his head in from over the horizon, there's not a lot to pick from up there, and moving to the lower 48 seems outre out of character.)

As she is doing that she will surely be writing a book, so she can go on a media book tour as an author, bag some bucks and celebrity appearances, all in time for the elections next year. After which she will announce for 2012, unless the economy is improved and the situation in the world (Iraq, Iran, North Korea, etc) is so much better that the Republicans will decide to save their money for 2016 and no one runs against Obama.
 
  • #28
WheelsRCool said:
Incorrect. She still has a high amount of popularity as governor and as a politician period. The very reason we are even discussing her is proof of this.
She has a high amount of popularity amongst a small segment of the populace.

The very reason we are even discussing her is that she became a media personality, and a rather wacky one at that. That she resigned for no apparent reason adds to the wackiness.

When has a governor of Alaska ever resigned and led the news?
When has any governor resigned out of the blue and not led the news?

Even more importantly, when has the death of a celebrity so dominated the news of political turmoil in Iran, a maybe coup in Honduras, North Korea test firing missiles, airplane crashes, ..., have barely been reported? That Palin's resignation tops the news is as much a sign of how low the media has fallen as it is a sign of the importance of Sarah Palin.
 
  • #29
LowlyPion said:
My guess is she will take some time to actually read the newspapers she couldn't remember reading before and try to get up to speed on events and policies in the rest of the world.

Hahaha...when hell becomes real, freezes over, and is then disproved by philosophers. Palin is not intelligent enough to educate herself on politics. The Palin you saw in the presidential race was the most informed she'll ever be.
 
  • #30
There are apparently some conservatives speculating that Palin has resigned in order to free herself up from the responsibilities of governor so she can take a place on the national stage. Possibly starting by going on a speaking tour.

Oh God No! :smile: She was such a polarizing figure for the GOP, probably why quite a few moderate GOP members are defecting to the Democrats or Independents. Imagine her going on speaking tours further tarnishing the reputation of the GOP. I hope she is taking time off to seriously look at what she supports and and tell herself whether changes are needed to better herself as a politician. Palin needs to immerse herself in foreign policy affairs, gain the knowledge to speak eloquently on different topics and stop portraying herself as an all out 'hockey mom'.

Even more importantly, when has the death of a celebrity so dominated the news of political turmoil in Iran, a maybe coup in Honduras, North Korea test firing missiles, airplane crashes, ..., have barely been reported? That Palin's resignation tops the news is as much a sign of how low the media has fallen as it is a sign of the importance of Sarah Palin.

Not really, depends on the newspaper you read or the TV news you watch. There has been air time about North Korea and Iran. Not so much the airplane crash if you are referring to the Yemeni Airline demise.
 
  • #31
math_04 said:
Not really, depends on the newspaper you read or the TV news you watch. There has been air time about North Korea and Iran. Not so much the airplane crash if you are referring to the Yemeni Airline demise.
I was alluding to CNN, which used to be good. Now it appears to be worse than Fox. CNN became the 24/7 Michael Jackson network last week, with an occasional side news story.

The only reason Palin garnered so much media attention is because she is yet another media personality who has done something scandalous. Even though she has nice legs, this story doesn't. CNN can return (and already has returned) to being the 24/7 Michael Jackson network.
 
  • #32
Mr. Jackson's memorial ceremony is next Tuesday. That ought to dominate the news cycle once again. (It's times like this I'm so very glad I don't watch television news.)

As for Palin, an article on Slate offers the most reasonable explanation I've read so far

The larger reason for Palin's early departure was that she was having no fun. Ever since she returned to Alaska from the national stage, being governor has been a chore. Her political opponents have launched 15 ethics charges against her. The state economy has turned sour, and she got into an ugly squabble over federal stimulus funds. It's much more enjoyable to travel the country waving to adoring crowds of GOP activists.

So Palin decided to chuck her office for the limelight.
She can now tour the country as the only superstar in a party that desperately needs one. Because she can pack bleachers, she can raise money. In addition to boosting party morale and filling its coffers (and her own), she can build relationships nationwide that will be crucial if she really is interested in running for national office again.



http://www.slate.com/id/2222221/"

Having watched a bit of her speech, though, I must say, the Couric interviews were not an anomaly, rather, when the woman actually follows a cogent line of thought is out of the norm. She needs speech writers. And coaches.

Edited to repair screwed up quote.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #33
Bush and his friends squandered wealth.

Fiscal conservatives criticized the Bush administration very much on this.

Obama is taking drastic action needed to save the economy

Depends; the stimulus was one thing, but he has been planning spend enormous amounts of money from the get-go. And I think he is nuts if he thinks his carbon cap-and-trade bill is going to help the economy and actually create jobs.

When you are all the way right, everything looks left.

Or one could easily say when you're over to the left, anything else looks to the "Right."
The Right is ultimately about freedom. Anything that infringes upon freedom is a variant of the Left. What many call a "moderate" is perhaps a Republican that believes in social programs, or "doing good with other people's money." Only this is a farce, because in order to get that money, you have to take it from the people. In other words, almost anything that calls for redistribution of wealth, social programs, etc...is grounded ultimately in violence and coercion and infringing on freedom at its core.

Many liberals believe in God as well. No problem; it is a classic mistake made by Republicans.

I never said leftists do not believe in god. Barack Obama believes in god.

The difference is that they don't try to put religious extremists in power.

Yes they do, just their religion is government and the environment. This whole carbon cap-and-trade nonsense is a ramming of religion down this country's throat. It is based on a theory that is completely unproven. We do not know if the Earth is warming conclusively. We do not know if warming will be bad if it is occurring. We do not know, if warming is occurring, if it is from the Earth itself, influence from the sun, or humans, and so forth.

Or like when Nancy Pelosi said in a Vogue interview, "I view my role in government as an extension of my role as a mother." In other words, she's a tyrant technically, she believes the people are sheep that need a big, maternal government run by the likes of her to look after them.

A loving embrace from which one cannot escape is still a form of tyranny remember. This is completely opposite of the conservative view, which is that the people are the adults, and the government is like putting your sixteen year-old in charge of the family finances. If you don't watch them closely, they'll spend extraordinary amounts of money, then when you try to criticize them and reign them in, they'll act offended and tell you they know better, even though you're the one making the money.

It is a result of fear and 40 years of Republican denials and obfuscations.

Environmentalism as religion is nothing new. The Nazis held an almost religious view of the environment, and the environmental zealots who want to control everything everyone can do are neo-Nazi in their worldview.

In the religious variant of environmentalism, you have the period of peace, in which humans lived in harmony with nature (akin to Adam and Eve), then you have the first sins, when humans started manipulating nature to their own benefit (akin to eating of the fruit), then you have the coming doomsday in which Nature will go haywire and we will all be destroyed and die for our sins against the Earth (akin to Revelations).

We talk about Charles Manson too, but that doesn't mean he is popular.

Palin is very popular though. That's why she is such a threat to the Left. Otherwise, no one would care about her.

Apparently when she was a would-be vice President. The fact is that to most of us, Palin is a joke,

Yes, and you're wrong. Palin is no joke. Don't let your ideology rule your thinking. She is far too intelligent and too much of a threat to be any joke to the left. Now a guy like Biden, he is a joke. He actually still has Presidential aspirations. He is actually naive enough to think the Democrats would make him a front-runner. Barack Obama was also easily a joke in terms of knowledge of the issues; he was not any joke however as a candidate who stood a good chance of being elected.

Having watched a bit of her speech, though, I must say, the Couric interviews were not an anomaly, rather, when the woman actually follows a cogent line of thought is out of the norm. She needs speech writers. And coaches.

I wouldn't make fun of anyone's speaking ability right now when we have a President who cannot speak without a Tele-Prompter and a Vice President who seems to make a gaffe per week when speaking.
 
  • #34
WheelsRCool said:
The Right is ultimately about freedom.

Freedom? So conservatives allow freedom of choice; they would support same sex marriages, for example?

Yes, and you're wrong. Palin is no joke.

I think the rest of the world would disagree!
 
  • #35
cristo said:
Freedom? So conservatives allow freedom of choice; they would support same sex marriages, for example?

Yes, they should. That is mostly ones wanting to put religion on people. They make concerns over saying this opens the can of worms up to men being able to marry boys and so forth, like NAMBLA, and perhaps with the hardcore left that is a concern, but overall I do not see that. Children are not adults. Two consenting adults I wouldn't care if they are gay, straight, whatever if they want to marry.

Of course an issue here and there that the Republicans want to control, that automatically makes them the party of tyranny.

When the left want to tax, regulate, and control every aspect of our lives for the most part, they are somehow the "liberals."

What separates a "conservative" from a "liberal" is that the philosophy overall of the conservative promotes freedom.

Limited government, low taxes, free trade, etc...promotes freedom. If you get some ultra-religious John Hagee type in office who wants to ram religion down people's throats, they have to go against their own philosophy overall if they claim to be a conservative.

OR, if they do not, and the people do not like their policies, they get voted out of office, because government lacks authority.

With the "liberals," it is just the opposite. Their philosophy, no matter how much they may believe in freedom or claim to, works fundamentally against it. One cannot believe in and support big government, and then expect a people to remain free because it is in the inherent design of government to always grow and grow and to infringe on freedoms more and more.

With a leftist government that is big and powerful, if they start enacting laws and controls you don't like, you may not be able to vote them out of power. They are too large, have too many government agencies, and so forth.

I think the rest of the world would disagree!

This means nothing. What the "rest of the world thinks" means little. All that matters are what the facts are.

The fact is she is a leftist's worst nightmare.
-She is highly intelligent.
-She is charismatic.
-She triangulates them on identity politics.
-She is immune from attacks on the abortion issue.
-She can really mobilize the base, along with attract moderates.

Such a person is not a joke, even if you completely disagree with her policies (of which I have never really heard any articulate arguments against the types of policies she stands for on paper, just namecalling, that seems the only attack method the left has).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
WheelsRCool said:
Yes, they should.

So, using your definition, Republicans are not conservatives...


-She is highly intelligent.

That's a joke, right?

-She is charismatic.

That's not an objective statement.

-She is immune from attacks on the abortion issue.

Why? Because she flat out refuses to budge from what "god" apparently wants her to do or think?

Such a person is not a joke

Well, she certainly made me, and most of the people I know, laugh out loud. What's the definition of a joke again?
 
  • #37
Wheels said:
The fact is she is a leftist's worst nightmare.
-She is highly intelligent.
-She is charismatic.
-She triangulates them on identity politics.
-She is immune from attacks on the abortion issue.
-She can really mobilize the base, along with attract moderates.
1. Haven't seen any evidence of this myself. I cringed every time I heard her speak.

2. I've seen plenty of ditzy women that could get a crowd, not many of them that were ever elected to anything other than prom queen.

3. You mean because she's a woman? Condoleeza Rice is both female and black and has a terrible reputation to live down.

4. Because she had herself a baby with down syndrome? I still don't see how this makes her at all "immune". You realize she also has an unwed underage(at the time) daughter who got knocked up by some random boy they tried to shotgun into a wedding right?

5. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there in the republican base that get all hot bothered thinking about an ex beauty queen that can shoot and field dress a moose but you're really stretching it to say that she appeals to moderates. My local moderate republican radio hosts all thought she was a disgrace and tore her apart just as much as any liberal.


In short I think you're drinking the Kool Aid Wheels.
 
  • #38
So, using your definition, Republicans are not conservatives...

The term "conservative" is just that, a term. A true Republican that adheres to the principles the party runs on today is a classical liberal for the most part. Unless there is a specific reason aside from religious belief, a classical liberal should have no problem with something like gay marriage.

That's a joke, right?

No. Multiple people who have worked with her have talked about how impressed they were with her intelligence, and this was prior to her coming onto the national scene. She also proved herself a quick study for the thiings she had to learn in such a short period of time.

That's not an objective statement.

Yes it is. Charisma is very important for a politician.

Why? Because she flat out refuses to budge from what "god" apparently wants her to do or think?

"God" isn't required to be pro-life. And it simply means she lives by what she believes in.

Well, she certainly made me, and most of the people I know, laugh out loud. What's the definition of a joke again?

That's because you and they are ideologues who are terrified of her. If she really was an idiot, a joke, and unpopular, NO ONE WOULD CARE ABOUT HER. She would have faded into obscurity by now. Politicians only lead the news when they are popular, such as Mark Sanford, Governor Spitzer, Governor Blago, etc...and now Sarah Palin.

When McCain chose her, you actually had lifelong feminists coming out and questioning whether a woman with five children should even be governor of a state. It would have been hilarious if it wasn't so sickening at the same time.

1. Haven't seen any evidence of this myself. I cringed every time I heard her speak.

You ever here President Obama speak without a Tele-Prompter? He is barely coherent. Or did you here Caroline Kennedy when she was after the New York Senate seat? Anyone who looks at her credentials and accomplishments can see she isn't stupid, regardless of one's political views, but she sounded like a drugged-out idiot.

Public speaking ability doesn't show intelligence, and it is silly to gauge one's intelligence by it.

4. Because she had herself a baby with down syndrome? I still don't see how this makes her at all "immune". You realize she also has an unwed underage(at the time) daughter who got knocked up by some random boy they tried to shotgun into a wedding right?

I'm talking about her, not her family. Plenty of politicians have children who get screwy acting.

5. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there in the republican base that get all hot bothered thinking about an ex beauty queen that can shoot and field dress a moose but you're really stretching it to say that she appeals to moderates.

Palin has great appeal to moderates because she has governed as a moderate and can actually relate to people. She also has much appeal to women. It wasn't too long ago during the campaign when a thread was started on this very board by someone complaining about how she was attracting the women's vote away.

My local moderate republican radio hosts all thought she was a disgrace and tore her apart just as much as any liberal.

"Liberals" couldn't tear her apart. Still can't really. Because they can't really criticize her on anything, other than that she speaks funny. That's pretty much it. Or her daughter having been knocked up, although now they can say she abandoned her post. The Left simply insulted her, and continue to do so. I never heard any decent argument against her policy-wise. Republicans that didn't like her were either:

1) "Moderates" (aka) to the left somewhat, or

2) Reagan Republicans who thought she wasn't qualified enough, in which case technically they were right, accept neither were the two Democratic candidates either, and also if McCain had run with another white guy, he'd have slit his throat. How one looks in politics is important as well, unfortunately. Palin gave him a fighting chance. What did McCain in was the financial crises and McCain himself. Republicans were left scratching their heads at all of the odd things his campaign did, along with things it should have, but did not, do.

In short I think you're drinking the Kool Aid Wheels.

Nope, just stating facts.
 
  • #39
GeorginaS said:
As for Palin, an article on Slate offers the most reasonable explanation I've read so far
slate said:
The larger reason for Palin's early departure was that she was having no fun. Ever since she returned to Alaska from the national stage, being governor has been a chore. Her political opponents have launched 15 ethics charges against her. ... So Palin decided to chuck her office for the limelight.

Quitting in the face of adversity is not a viable option. I do not want a President who might quit the job the moment the going gets tough. Her resignation was a career killer.
 
  • #40
Depends. For a 2012 run, it likely killed that (although who knows; if Barack Obama could have his Reverand Wright issue and still get elected, Sarah Palin could come back still; this last election has taught nothing is for sure in politics IMO). For a 2016 run, no one can know anything for sure.
 
  • #41
The Reverend Wright issue only rang true with those who already knew that Obama was the devil incarnate. It didn't have much impact on the electorate at large. Choosing to ignore the goofy things one's pastor says but choosing to continue going to that church because the pastor is inspirational is a commonplace occurrence to which many can relate. Palin's move will be viewed by the public at large as proof that she is not qualified to serve as president. Choosing to quit one's job because its not fun anymore is also something to which many can relate. Most of us don't follow this urge because we know that doing so is a career killer. Those who do follow this urge find a new career. Palin's move was a career killer. She needs to find a new career.
 
  • #42
WheelsRCool said:
... if Barack Obama could have his Reverand Wright issue and still get elected, Sarah Palin could come back still; this last election has taught nothing is for sure in politics IMO). For a 2016 run, no one can know anything for sure.

The trouble is that Sarah Palin has her Reverend Muthee and her End of Days Congregation up there in Wasilla. She has Reverend Wright problems up to her eyeballs.

Plus she just comes across as not a careful thinker.

Obama gave confidence that he understands what he says. That if called upon he can actually solve a problem intelligently. Poor Sarah Palin puts lipstick on Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich prose without apparently really grasping what she's talking about. I think Tina Fey does a better Sarah Palin, because she brings intelligence to the role. This is something that seems to escape Sara Barracuda.
 
  • #43
I admittedly have little to no knowledge of politics but I do however enjoy reading through these threads because its interesting to see the two sides go at it.

I have a question to pose to both Lowly/ left wing guys here and Wheels-

How are you gauging Palins intelligence?

This is a recurring issue here... and both sides are making claims. So lowly and co., what proof do you have that she is unintelligent? Wheels, what proof do you have that she is intelligent?
 
  • #44
NBAJam100 said:
How are you gauging Palins intelligence?

I'd say her body of work speaks for itself. Leaving aside her fractured academic career, anyone that would even suggest that because Alaska borders Russia across the Arctic Ocean, that qualifies her as having foreign policy experience, ... or when Putin raises his head ... or she can see Russia ... These are sophomoric statements that even most couch potato-heads find sub-par.

Even her withdrawal for the Governorship yesterday reveals a rambling declaration that raises more questions about her political sense than it answers questions about what she's really planning on doing. She seems ready to borrow from other sources like Reagan and Gingrich, but she shows little aptitude for any real analysis ... preferring to rely on ignorance and parochial simplification, like drill baby drill, that may appeal to the folks in her state, but doesn't by any stretch begin to deal with solving energy problems.

Is she an intelligent mother and caring adult for her family, she probably is, but her family does show some remarkable lapses and departure from the dogma of the conservative values that she publicly embraces.

In sum I'd say as it stands, one can only conclude that she is remarkably inept and unskilled to handle the complexities of the Office of President. She may be best suited to get her bread buttered as a talk show host and pander goods to the extreme right, like Glen Beck does.
 
  • #45
WheelsRCool said:
I wouldn't make fun of anyone's speaking ability right now when we have a President who cannot speak without a Tele-Prompter and a Vice President who seems to make a gaffe per week when speaking.

This recent talking-point slur by the radical right has long puzzled me. Do they not know that all of their talking heads and politicians all read from pre-prepared material presented on teleprompters rather than paper also? They do know that, right?

Watch an Obama White House briefing and you'd realize he can speak just fine without a script. Do these people forget the library of books published featuring Bush's inability to speak coherently at all?

So to you, Wheels, I suggest you watch the Palin interviews with Katie Couric in which Palin wasn't reading from a teleprompter (which she was during her campaign speeches at rallies, by the way) and see how coherent and capable of speaking unaided she is. Find out if she can even name one of the many, many newspapers she reads. For that matter, watch her announcement yesterday and see if you can make any sense of what the woman says.
 
  • #46
WheelsRCool said:
You ever here President Obama speak without a Tele-Prompter? He is barely coherent. Or did you here Caroline Kennedy when she was after the New York Senate seat? Anyone who looks at her credentials and accomplishments can see she isn't stupid, regardless of one's political views, but she sounded like a drugged-out idiot.

Public speaking ability doesn't show intelligence, and it is silly to gauge one's intelligence by it.
Since most things written can easily have been written by someone else we have little choice but to go by how a politician speaks. I would also say their educational background but Palin's is rather spotty so I'll leave off and go by what I can see before me.
I've heard Obama several times with and without a prompter. When unprepared he may stutter and verbally misstep but I get the over all impression that he knows what he is talking about. He does not ramble on into never ending incoherant sentences.
I heard Palin a number of times both prepared and unprepared. When she was prepared she seemed to be reciting lines as if she didn't really understand what she was talking about all that well and when she was unprepared she sounded like a babbling idiot who had no idea what was coming out of her mouth. It was frightfully reminicent of Ms South Carolina from the 2007 Teen USA Pagent.

Wheels said:
I'm talking about her, not her family. Plenty of politicians have children who get screwy acting.
You still have not said why she is untouchable in regards to abortion. And my point bringing up the daughter is that families forcing their daughters to keep children they may not necessarily want or be ready to take care of as well as pushing them into marriage with a person they may not have any interest in spending their lives with are major issues for prochoice activists.
Palin is lucky that she can afford to take care of a child with down syndrome. And her daughter is lucky to have a family that are willing and able to support her and her child. The vast majority of people are not so lucky.


Wheels said:
Palin has great appeal to moderates because she has governed as a moderate and can actually relate to people. She also has much appeal to women. It wasn't too long ago during the campaign when a thread was started on this very board by someone complaining about how she was attracting the women's vote away.

"Liberals" couldn't tear her apart. Still can't really. Because they can't really criticize her on anything, other than that she speaks funny. That's pretty much it. Or her daughter having been knocked up, although now they can say she abandoned her post. The Left simply insulted her, and continue to do so. I never heard any decent argument against her policy-wise. Republicans that didn't like her were either:

1) "Moderates" (aka) to the left somewhat, or

2) Reagan Republicans who thought she wasn't qualified enough, in which case technically they were right, accept neither were the two Democratic candidates either, and also if McCain had run with another white guy, he'd have slit his throat. How one looks in politics is important as well, unfortunately. Palin gave him a fighting chance. What did McCain in was the financial crises and McCain himself. Republicans were left scratching their heads at all of the odd things his campaign did, along with things it should have, but did not, do.
Do you see the problem here that I have underlined? Palin was not even well received by moderates in her own party. How then does she possesses an appeal for moderates?

As for the womens vote Hillary supporters were still smarting over her loss in the primaries and were already talking about voting for McCain to spite Obama. Some few people were worried that Palin gave them more of an excuse but that quickly evaporated when she proved to be a rather poor representative of women in politics.

Lets look at some analysis though...
http://politicsandsociety.usc.edu/2008/10/sarah-palin-is-no-millennial.html
There is no question that Palin’s nomination energized the conservative base of the Republican Party, which was suspicious of McCain’s commitment to their positions on the social issues dealing with “God, guns and gays.” However, beyond those Republican stalwarts, the nomination has done little to gain McCain additional support from groups such as disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters, independents and moderates — all of which the campaign hoped would be won over by Palin. Since the conventions, polls by CBS and others have shown that Barack Obama’s support among white women has gone up and McCain’s has declined. McCain has also lost support among moderates and independents since he chose Palin.
My emphasis.

Stats...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/04/obama-wins-how-he-did-it_n_141231.html
I think I have seen people complain about the Huffington Post before but I am only using it as a quick source of voter stats. If you do not like them then please provide a better source.
These are all in Obama's favour.
57-41 among women.
85-15 among Hillary supporters.
61-38 among working women.
50-48 among non-working women.

I don't see where Palin captured the women's vote for McCain.
 
  • #47
D H said:
Quitting in the face of adversity is not a viable option. I do not want a President who might quit the job the moment the going gets tough. Her resignation was a career killer.

As someone anyone would actually like to see sitting in the White House, or hold any political office? I agree with you, D H. However I don't perceive Palin as someone who would see it that way. It strikes me (given all of the attention she received recently for simply visiting New York) that she'd rather the limelight than the obscurity of Alaska. She appears to revel in the attention. I'd hazard a guess and say she's been offered lucrative speaking engagements as one of the only viable celebrity-type Republicans left. I'd further guess that would appeal to her.

I do not think that any of that or those decisions makes her a viable candidate for the White House. It's just speculation on my part, from what I've seen, (and I've tried really, really hard not to watch) about what she's up to right now.
 
  • #48
WheelsRCool said:
The strict Reagan Republicans who are for limited government, fiscal conservatism...

Ahahaha! In real terms Reagan presided over what is far and away the largest increase in the national deficit since world war 2! Calling reagan a fiscal conservative is a complete and total distortion of history, fiscally conservative describes the exact opposite of Reagan. Ahahaha!
 
  • #49
turbo-1 said:
Palin is a relatively unpopular governor of the 4th least-populous state in the county, which has been surviving on oil revenues in recent memory. The notion that she doesn't want to saddle her state with a lame-duck governor is laughable at a minimum. It is more creative than the "I want to spend more time with my family" excuse that creeps use when they are caught in wrong-doing, but only a bit.

And, in her case, it actually would have made more sense for her to claim she wanted to spend more time with her family, perhaps get her youngest son through his toddler years and settled with a good caretaker able to handle his special needs before returning to politics. Admitting to being a lame-duck governor is pretty much a death knell to any future political aspirations.

GeorginaS said:
Mr. Jackson's memorial ceremony is next Tuesday. That ought to dominate the news cycle once again. (It's times like this I'm so very glad I don't watch television news.)

People are wondering about the timing of her announcement, and I think this is precisely the reason for the timing. She knows she can't just slip out without anybody noticing, so what's the next best thing? Slip out when nobody is watching the news, over a long holiday weekend when people are on vacation, out with the family, having bbq's and generally not inside watching TV, listening to the radio, reading the newspapers or surfing the internet as often as usual. By the time everyone returns to work on Monday, the news will be focused back on Michael Jackson's memorial, and she's made the quietest exit possible.

Has she simply realized she's not cut out for politics and it's time to get out before any more damage is done, or is there some bigger scandal brewing that she's trying to dodge, I don't know. I am sure that there's no way to spin this that looks positive for running for a higher office than governor if she's showing she's too thin-skinned to handle the spotlight that's already on her.
 
  • #50
GeorginaS said:
As someone anyone would actually like to see sitting in the White House, or hold any political office?
Any political office, let alone the White House. I generally expect anyone elected to public office, whether it is mayor of some small town or president of the country, to finish the job to which they were elected. There are exceptions of course.

Politicians elected to a lowly office often run for some higher office before the expirations of the terms to which they were elected. Politicians in a higher office often appoint people who have proven themselves to head agencies. The latter is a very honorable situation. I would feel zero ill will to politicians who resign under such conditions.

The former is a grin-and-bear-it kind of thing, but I fully understand it. Politicians who wait for their current positions to expire before running for higher office risk sinking into anonymity. It is much the same as switching jobs within the same career field. The best time to switch is when you are at the pinnacle of success.

Palin quit for neither of those reasons. She just quit.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top