Sarah Palin for president in 2012, is this possible?
Asked by
babaji (
1448
)
February 8th, 2010
So Sarah Palin could be our future? What do you think would happen if she got elected? Any improvement in our lives?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
94 Answers
“Palin 2012. Hell, the world’s ending anyway”
I think we’ll see her campaign, absolutely. I think the Tea Partiers will think she’s going to win. But I don’t think she’ll get nearly enough support.
I think it’ll split the Republican party more and make a Democratic victory a bit easier.
Just no. No.
She already committed political suicide by resigning as governor of Alaska, and if people are stupid enough to elect someone who quits mid-term to the highest office of the US, or even vice-president, I will move to Canada. And I bet I wouldn’t be the only one.
No, she’s a joke, at best.
good topic, unfortunately definitely NO
she killed McCain if you ask me in the last election. I thought many women would choose to side with their party but it just made it worse no doubt
This is comical, I know there’s a lot of dumbass americans, but not that many. It’s simply too hard to take her seriously…...all the dumb mistakes she’s made that everyone knows about now….she’s done.
Oh, I think she’ll run alright. But I sure won’t ever vote for her. If she quit in the middle of her governorship, would she quit in the middle of a presidency, too? She’s a nut case!!
Look anything is possible (Bush did have two terms, didn’t he?) but lord knows (and I don’t believe in him) that it’s time to start praying…so that this doesn’t happen.
I think she’‘ll make a run for it; I doubt she’ll get the nomination. It will be interesting to see how many splinters the Republican party will split itself into by then, or if they wil make a united effort to defeat Obama. (And will the dumbass Democrats make a united effort to support him?)
could it happen? yes. i think republicans could very well all band together and really push to get control again in 2012.
what would happen if she got elected? being president would be reduced totally to the position of spokes person, and all the real decisions would be made by the presidents staff who just tell him/her what to do and say.
or, if palin gets elected and does indeed have real power, we are all screwed. it would just mess up the entire planet so badly. problems in the middle east would escalate like never before, there would be more war, more patriot act kind of things going on, the economy would go to hell and everything would just turn to crap.
Maybe if she became president she could stop writing on her hand. But really, she doesn’t have what it takes.
@dverhey Bush didn’t have what it takes but he still became president.
She’s not our future.
She won’t get elected.
Her not getting elected negates any chance for or against improvement of any kind.
Gosh, maybe the world really will end in 2012…
To answer your question, yes, it is possible.
@HTDC Bush was awful, but I honestly believe Palin is even worse.
I hope she runs. She will come under real scrutiny for the first time, and she will be forever unmasked as being perhaps attractive, appealing and ambitious, but also one-dimensional, having no gravitas, and not up to the presidency. She also plays fast and loose with the truth, and under scrutiny that will become more obvious.
I hate to admit it’s a distinct possibility..never thought that W could squeak by either but some things defy reason.
@dpworkin I don’t argue with any of the things that you think should happen to her (those wouldn’t be bad things for the country, if they’d happen soon enough), but I hope that shit knocks her out in the primaries or earlier, to leave room for a decent candidate. Even if the ‘worthy candidate’ from that party isn’t elected, at least it makes the other guy (or woman) run a more centrist campaign.
@HTDC Bush had a approval rating of 90 in 2001. 90. That’s absolutely ridiculous. I don’t really agree with you about no one being worse than Bush (Bill O’Reilly, Dennis Hastert come to mind), but Bush did have the highest approval rating of any president at one time, and people do seem to forget that. Granted, he also had the lowest.
@dverhey that’s because people were scared – scared people aren’t smart people.
@dverhey :: Nader would have had a 90 percent approval rating after 9/11.
I know, it was all bullshit.
When flying monkeys are pushing cotton.
I think that is very disgraceful and humiliating. She is supposed to be a politician; not a fifth grader writing state capitals on their arm for a quiz!
Besides rants about her personality largely generated by a hostile and not-quite-honest press, care to name exactly what she’s done to deserve being pilloried?
Don’t forget that Barak Hussein Obama was elected largely on the strength of his alleged “charisma,” and in reaction to eight years of “Dubya.” He had almost no experience at managing anything besides a one-term senator’s office staff.
@CaptainHarley you can’t be serious. we just don’t have that kind of time – listing her inadequacies and the issues with your statement would take forever. I think instead I’ll go look at some honest press: maybe Fox News? they’re great.
If whatever shreds of faith I have left for humanity legitimately stand, she’ll be dead by then.
I’d like to spank her though.
So then… you really don’t have anything to point to as actual negatives about Sara Palin, other than you simply don’t like her?
And personal attacks on me only serve to make me discount anything you have to say.
Sounds like a walk-off by the GO to me. No hope of unseating Obama, so just don’t try too hard.
@Simone_De_Beauvoir
I did read what everyone posted and I am still mystified at the total dearth of substantive reasons for your dislike. Did she somehow bankrupt the State of Alaska as Obama seems determined to do with the United States?
@CaptainHarley you will not bait me…i am perfectly focused on enjoying a very dark chocolate brownie thingie right now…enough that you think mentioning Obama’s middle name is necessary
Seriously, she doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Narnia.
@CaptainHarley
Captain please. Her staff was trying desperately to get this woman up to speed with things as simple as WW2 and basic American History. You could drive a tractor trailer through the holes in her knowledge. This was not just someone who was inadequate for the job. She is seriously unqualified for any position which demands a high level of education. Political acumen is only 1/10 of the job. She’s an embarrassment to the country. And as far as running Alaska- every citizen gets a check from the government for the oil pipeline, the state of education is far from stellar and the state basically runs itself. Now if she ran NY or Texas that would prove something.
P.S.-The country was bankrupt before Obama entered office. He’s actually turning this ship around. The Democratic congress is actually accomplishing far more than they are being given credit for.
Errr… no and no. Well, at least I hope for the first no or the second no shall occur.
I can easily see moving to Canada if she got in.
Hopefully the Republicans can come up with a decent candidate because, at this time, I am not too happy with Obama. Palin does not constitute a “decent candidate.”
@CaptainHarley I think it’s something like the snarky comments that accompanied Ronald Reagan’s run for the presidency in 1976, and then again four years later (and throughout both terms): “Oh, really, a cowboy president? An actor?”
But Reagan, at least, had been a more or less successful governor of California (serving his full term, of course), and president of the SAG. He may have been a B-list actor, but the man did have a certain amount of gravitas.
I can’t see it in Sarah Palin yet; not to say that she can’t develop it, but while Reagan’s folksiness was part of his schtick, I think (even though he was born to it in Illinois), he was a lot more intelligent than Gov. Palin can yet aspire to.
But you’re right, of course: it’s not like she’s some kind of monster. I just think she’s an idiot.
@CyanoticWasp
I don’t think anyone doubts she’s a sweet woman and yes you can’t compare her to Reagan who of course had a proven record of running California and decades of involvement in both parties. As much as I disliked some of his policies he was certainly a statesmen whereas Palin is better suited for a cushy position in a government department somewhere say like parks and recreation..
Sara Palin actually wrote cheat notes on her hand at that Gaylord Opryland rally! She wrote crib notes on her hand like a kid who forgot to study . This is who we want running the country and representing our nation? I have nothing against this woman personally but come on.
OH GOD NO.
@HTDC Um, Cheney is worse than Bush. Bush was just the mouth; Cheney was the mastermind.
Ok, so let’s see… “she’s an idiot,” “she wrote on her hand,” “you mentioned Obama’s middle name,” and “you could drive a tractor trailer through the holes in her knowledge.”
How very substantive.
@CaptainHarley
Say Whaaaat? What else do you need? She sacrifices children in dark masses?~
@lilikoi Worse—in terms of general intelligence. No one surpasses Bush. He could barely string a proper sentence together at least Palin has that over him.
So it’s ability to “string a proper sentance together” which qualifies someone to be President? I’ll grant you that she’s not as well-spoken as many others I could name, but I personally don’t really trust glibness very much. Seems like we have selected some of the worst people for political positions based on their ability to juggle the language only to discover that’s about all they could do.
I honestly don’t know all that much about Sara Palin, but I do think that she should at least be given the benefit of the doubt for now. I strongly suspect that many of you oppose her simply because either you don’t like her politics or just because she’s a Republican.
@Simone_De_Beauvoir… do you have anything to actually contribute other than snide remarks and aledging that asking you for substantive examples constitutes “baiting you?”
@CaptainHarley The next time you want to “string a proper sentance together”, you might want to spellcheck.
@CaptainHarley “So it’s ability to “string a proper sentance together” which qualifies someone to be President?”
No, but it sure helps.
This is pointless. The fact that someone who had nothing of substance to contribute except to suggest that I use a spell-checker, got two “Great Answer” votes indicates that that I have somehow landed in the midst of a group of people who value form over substance. And I STILL have yet to hear a valid reason why Sara Palin should never even be considered a viable candidate. Does this bother no one besides me? What are you looking for, Hollowood glamor of some sort? Someone who’s good at sound-bites?
@filmfann… Oh, and by the way, the comma always comes before the quotation mark when closing a quote ( being just as trivial as you were ).
If I thought that it were possible for Palin to actually win, I would slit my wrists right now.
However, moderate Republicans are generally intelligent enough to see through her MILF-factor charisma, see what sort of person she really is, and vote for someone else, and people who generally vote Democrat anyways sure as hell aren’t voting for her. Therefore, it’s unlikely that Palin could get more than 25% of the popular vote so I am not terribly worried.
no, unless everyone suddenly lost their marbles.
I honestly don’t see it happening. No matter how badly people view Obama right now, you can bet he’ll shape up come election time, and Palin will need a hell of a campaign to get the people who abhorred or ridiculed her last time to like her this time. No matter that the most important thing about being President is making good policies: charisma and a clever ‘marketing’ strategy is what gets you elected. That’s mainly how Bush got the job, isn’t it?
@CaptainHarley That rule about commas coming before quotation marks only applies to American English. I know @filmfann is American, and you were being pedantic to make a point, but just for future reference.
@CaptainHarley Filmfann got two “great answers” because the irony in your post surpassed any credibility you might have had. Someone who endorses a politician that is blatantly ignorant and then misspelss sentence, i’m sorry, is something worth a comment.
As for why Palin is not suited to be president: Banning books is against the constitution, and if she tried to do that AS MAJOR imagine what kind of a powertrip we might expect if she becomes president. By the way, John Stein is one of those who helped her run for mayor, and he’s saying this, so you can’t even say “he’s a democrat and that’s why he’s against her”.
Also as a personal reason why she shouldn’t be elcted, she run for vice president with an old fart who stated that the constitution extablishes the US as a christian country. I’m not even from the US and i know that’s bullshit! And McCain was RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT! The highest office! He made it to the final race, too! How the fuck is that possible?
Anyway, her preceeding policies are not aligned with the constitution, how’s that for actual reasons?
Well, Bush was elected came to power twice…
In a sane & intelligent country this wouldn’t be possible…... however, in America, who knows, they elected that Chimp ‘Bush’..... twice! What would happen? It’d be a right-wingers wet dream.
@Thammuz
What the hell is WRONG with you people? Nowhere and at no time did I ever “endorse” Sara Palin for anything! Perhaps if you would actually learn to… you know… like, read!
You know what? I don’t GIVE a crap. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans actually LISTEN to what the people want. The Republicans run up the deficit holding unnecessary wars, and the Democrats run up the deficit trying to buy everyone off. Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee.
Palin is a demagogue, who spreads lies and misinformation about her opponents to further her own goals. She is the one who started the “death panel” nonsense. She abused her power as governor and then abandoned her office without finishing one term to avoid facing charges for the abuse, while lying through her teeth claiming it is ‘for the good of america’.
She is uneducated and anti science. She thinks that fruit fly research is a waste of money, despite all the evidence to the contrary. She believes in abstinence only education, while her own daughter proved that this approach does not work and she is a creationist.
What all this means is that she is unable and unwilling to look at the data and make logical conclusions and decisions based on them and instead makes decisions based on her preconceived and baseless beliefs, while lying and abusing her power to further her own petty personal goals. As a president she would make wrong decisions left and right, her being president would be detrimental to the country.
Enough substance for you?
@Thammuz
By the way, you misspelled four words, so by your measure of “credibility” anything you have to say is in the toilet. : )
@CaptainHarley you have just as many snide remarks – I don’t want to discuss anything with you because you say things like ‘don’t catch your butt in the screen door on the way out’ to other people – this doesn’t mean I don’t have a good argument, it just means I don’t want to have a debate with you, because you haven’t shown yourself to be worthy of one..that’s why I discuss baiting, you won’t bait me
I think people above have given good enough reasons in that we don’t need to go into any other reasons if we can’t get past her sheer inability to do simple tasks. If she can’t do simple tasks, she can’t do complex tasks.
Let’s not take me seriously… If I were to flee the country for a president I couldn’t tolerate it’d have happened some time in the last 8 years.
@onesecondregrets well, actually, if you really ‘couldn’t tolerate’ a president, then you’d be dead, in prison or a mental institution (and probably under a suicide watch) or you actually would have fled the country. ‘Not like’ does not equate to ‘not tolerate’. But we all exaggerate from time to time. I’m sure that I’ve exaggerated millions billions of times.
@CaptainHarley I read your arguments (between the snide remarks) and I get what you’re saying. It’s not like Sarah Palin is the second coming of Josef Mengele or something, and anyone is pointing to any of her ideas as “pure evil and destruction”—they just happen to not like some of her ideas. We have to look beyond her malapropisms and her folksy (often somewhat if not extremely naive) commentary and listen when she does have some real ideas. Especially because she does have a lot of popular appeal, and whether we like it or not (and I generally don’t, no matter which side wins) “popularity sells”.
George Will had a good column yesterday on an Indiana Republican who seemed to have some actual (sensible, comprehensible) good ideas. I’ll have to follow up on that. Sorry that I don’t have the link—and I know that this isn’t the crowd to follow George Will, anyway. (You have to pick your battles, @CaptainHarley.)
Was hoping I wouldn’t have to repeat the “let’s not take me seriously” bit. Oh well.
Touche, touche.
@CaptainHarley: For your information, english isn’t my mother tongue, so a “duh” is in order, expecially because they’re quite blantant typos.
As for your remark, your credibility didn’t go down the toliet because you misspelled a single word. Your credibility went down the toilet because you apparently consider the fact that she doesn’t even have the bare minimum of knowledge necessary to be a politician, or even the brain power to remember four fucking words without having to write them on her hand, insufficient grounds to consider her a bad pick for a politician.
I couldn’t care less about your politics, i know half of what is there to know about your political system, but i do have a measure of common sense and seems to me you don’t elect an ignorant, borderline retarded, costitution trampling religious zealot to the highest charge in a state. Or to any charge really.
@Thammuz
borderline retarded
Only Rush Limbaugh can use that term with impunity~
You see it’s all about Political Correctness except of course when it implicates the Grand Ole Party
@CaptainHarley okay, I withdraw. You seemed to be surrounded and firing at all comers.
I really do love some of these knee jerk responses though. It’s bad form, and not to mention ignorant, to not acknowledge at least some of the opposition’s position regardless of which side of the aisle you are on. Nothing is black and white.
Sigh. I see it does absolutely no good to explain anything to this crowd, so I shall forthwith cease to attempt doing so, with this final exception: I am neither Democrat nor Republican, but independent; when it comes to politics in the USA, I am a constitutionalist and a pragmatist, preferring whatever works within the confines of the Constitution. What I see in politics today in America is a vast number of people from both parties seeking someone who can lead in newer, saner, less ideological directions. All politicians of both major parties ignore this at their peril.
@all except CaptainHarley:
Though @CaptainHarley and I don’t see eye to eye on many things (personally, I think Sarah Palin is unfit for any office higher than Vice-president of the Wasilla snowmobile club), I have to say that you’re being a bit hard on the guy.
@CaptainHarley
You’re being slippery and not acknowledging the very salient points that have been raised. You’ve ignored a lot and now chosen to take a stand behind an apparent place of neutrality? That hardly fosters solutions but rewards ignorance.
@jerv heh heh heh You said hard on
What do you get when you cross Sarah Palin with a fruit fly?
A fruit fly whose memory is even shorter than its life span.
@CaptainHarley what @SeventhSense said.
It doesn’t matter who you vote, and i really don’t care wether you’re a republican a democrat or an indipendent, the point is that you still ignore the points we brought up. Is being ignorant not enough to be considered unfit for a high office? Fine, how about having a past of attempts at trampling the constitution? You said you consider yourself a constitutionalist, isn’t banning books against the first aemendment? And if so, why don’t you agree that Palin is unfit for office?
You said it’s no use to explain, i say you’ve been explaning things that are not relevant, i couldn’t care less about your political affiliation, that’s not the point, regardless of your political affiliation you’re saying that there are no good reasons to consder palin unfit for office, and THAT statement is what we’re arguing against. That statement, regarldess of who it comes from, should you have been a democrat i’d have had the same reaction to it.
Explain me this, if you care enough: Why do you not consider sarah palin to be unfit for high offices, after all the reasons to do so that we brought up? And if you do, then why didnt you say so?
@Thammuz
This is the aspect which is unsettling about some politics in this country. There is a reactive response that politicians tap into. Now it may not have any substance but it connects with a disgruntled part of the population who fear that they are forced to adapt to changes which they don’t feel serve them or fear will cause them to sacrifice. Of course there is no real argument against equality, tolerance, and health care for all. In order to avoid a true head to head challenge certain politicians will tap into the angst of a section of the population and incite them in “opposition to” rather than in “agreement to” any particular platform. I.E.-Obama’s a socialist, Muslim, spend thrift etc. (Failing of course to remember that it was the Bush adminsitration who was the overseer and instituter of the largest bailout in American banking history, the take over of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac by the US Government basically making the central government the largest mortgage holder in the world. (Talk about socialism!) And thereafter handing the largest deficit in the history of the nation to the oppositional party. But I digress.)
Regardless of absence of substance there are people who are happy to take an oppositional view just to maintain the status quo. This sentiment goes back to the beginning of our country. Which of course in the world’s estimation is still quite in its fledgling or adolescent stage. As late as the 1960’s voices in the south said- “Why should I have to accept a child who has been discriminated against and allow him to be part of my school?” “We can still have separate but equal” The fear of course being that this is a challenge and will certainly require everyone to adapt and maybe make sacrifices for a child who has been denied basic equality for decades.
This requires effort and if one has a mindset that they are not part and parcel of the whole of society then they should be able to secede with their status quo. It’s really no coincidence that the Civil War was started with the same sentiment that is expressed by those who would like Texas to secede from the union today. Of course I’m not saying that it’s all racial but it does seem to split on a fairly homogeneous/heterogeneous fault line. Only now it’s also married to a strange conglomeration of religious, ideological and business differences which obfuscate it. After all, highly individual and proud individuals are what made this country outstanding but it is also that which is easily manipulated by those who would maintain a divided nation and secure their position of authority and the perceived comfort of their constituents.
@Thammuz not that @CaptainHarley needs me to support his arguments, but nothing about ignorance makes a person “unfit” for high office. After all, Obama is pretty ignorant of economics, and all political leaders are ignorant about many things. The idea of Chief Executive as Chief of Everything is, hopefully, dead and gone.
I do tend to think that Sarah Palin really is as “folksy” as she appears to be. Which is to say, a babe in the woods on just about any topic there is. (That pun was unintended when I first typed it, but I like it, so it stays.) She certainly is ignorant—and apparently deliberately so—and on that basis “unsuited” for high office. But I just wanted to take issue with your use of the word “unfit”, which seems to indicate a moral failing. If ignorance in the Chief Executive were a disqualifier, we probably wouldn’t have had a single president since Lincoln.
@CyanoticWasp I agree with you that mere ignorance makes one unsuited but not unfit, and that everybody is ignorant about many things. After all, that is what advisers are for since anybody smart enough to be a master of everything is likely too smart to run for office.
However, being willfully ignorant can be considered a moral failing that renders one unfit as opposed to merely unsuited, though it’s more likely that it will be considered a different type of failing, namely a profound lack of sound judgment.
@CyanoticWasp I’d agree with you, on a general basis, the problem is that we’re not talking about your run-of-the-mill ignorance level here, we’re talking banning-books-creationist and abstinence-only-sex-ed ignorant.
It’s not like “she doesn’t know everything but that’s what the whole point of having advisors” it’s more like “she’ll be the hand who signs what they tell her to because she has NOTHING to bring to the table”
Besides we’re talking about someone who has to write shit on her hand because she’s too dumb to remember 4 goddam words. It’s stunningly idiotic that one would do that, but furthermore it shows how little effort she’s willing to put in the whole thing or how little effort she CAN put in even if she wants to, whatever suits you best.
She didn’t exactly have the whole speech written there, mind you, she had FOUR WORDS! A gorilla can learn sign language and she cant learn four words, how low a brain power does that entail?
Say what you will about Obama, he’s been through college and a senate mandate, he might not know everything about everything but sure enough he’s a decently knowledgeable human being. We’re talking about a beauty pageant winner who attended Hawaii pacific university and Idaho university versus a harvard law magna cum laude. And i bet you can tell which is which, but that’s not relevant to the point.
@Thammuz
Again it has nothing to do with issues. It’s a distinctly backwards and archaic part of the American landscape. At one point they will be driven from their country clubs by pitchfork wielding mobs and stakes will be driven through their hearts but meanwhile we have to listen to their nauseating folksy bigotry. These same folks deny that the top of the world is melting because we had some good snowstorms. Their ignorance is staggering. The one thing the voices like Mr W.A.S.P. knows though, (otherwise known as White Anglo Saxon Protestant) is how to keep the money in a very tiny segment of the population. They love the folksy drones.
P.S.- I’m Scottish and Norwegian so I can dis the WASP with immunity :)
@SeventhSense Well, really, it does. I mean, everything does have to do with the issues on some level, but particularly it has to do with them when we’re talikg about charges who actually have the power to solve some of them. Sarah Palin shouldn’t be considered a good pick because she’s in league with people who have no interest in solving the problems of the US, but rather to fuck it up a little more so that they can make more money. It’s simply a basic conflict of interests problem, with the difference that she’s not directly invoved with any great tycoon, she’s just involved with people who are. And even if that wasn’t the case she’s still visibly not prepared enough to actually do something about the issues.
Bush, for one, shouldn’t have been allowed to run, IMO, not because he’s an unmistakeable dumbass but because he’s the heir of a huge fortune. I don’t trust people whose first priority is to have more money for no reason other than to have more money, but that’s me.
@Thammuz
Well I should correct that. Not that it has nothing to do with the issues. The platform behind her has no interest in addressing the real issues being faced by Americans. It’s simply a desire to maintain the the status quo enjoyed by a section of the population unchallenged.
I’d either kill myself or leave the country!
Answer this question 
