Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Erick Erickson: “moving on from Sarah Palin is like leaving Scientology”

Erick Erickson: “moving on from Sarah Palin is like leaving Scientology”

I guess that makes me a Scientologist, because I’ve posted repeatedly that Palin holds a special position because there is no one — not even George W. Bush — who has been the subject of the Democratic, mainstream media and left-blogosphere smear machine to the extent Palin has.

So yes, I do take it personally when conservatives lash out at Palin not because of her policy positions or what she’s done or not done in her career, but with personal invective.

It’s not religion, its a cold hard understanding of what is to come, and how those who call Palin a diva or a tease or any of the other names coming from media conservatives do damage to us all.  Palin is simply the test case for how the Republican nominee, whoever that person may be, will be treated, and we pile on her at our own peril.

Erickson’s post is here.

It’s feeding on Ann Coulter’s claim that Palin supporters are scary:

Simply by waiting to announce, Palin has driven media conservatives mad.  It all seems so familiar.

The nonsense coming from Coulter and Erickson and others is why I am not overly optimistic about 2012, regardless of what the polls now show.  We are our own worst enemies.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

Erickson is one of the biggest RINO’s out there.Like Rush always says:” The left will always tell us who they fear the most”.

    And look who Coulter likes, Christie, an egotistical, arrogant RINO. Go figure.

      boudicca in reply to Rosalie. | September 7, 2011 at 4:59 pm

      Christie recently outed himself as one who considers those apprehensive of Shariah law creeping into the US legal system as “crazies”. I had, up until that utterance, been a big Christie fan. No more.

    Actually, a lot of us would love a Palin/Perry ticket. 🙂

    “16 years of bliss” one blogger called it, since between the two you could expect two full terms each.

    Dammit, people – stay on target – Obama. Don’t beat up our own. The media will do that. the Democrats will do that. The media will tell us “they can’t win” no matter who we run.

    Don’t fight. Save it up, schedule a big giant pillow fight or oil/mud-wrestling match the day AFTER the 2012 election. Until then, “Hold!”

Stopped reading Red State regularly quite some time ago. The commentary is “off” and the points either redundant (and made better elsewhere) or facile. This latest is no exception.

I have come to see EE as another Joe whatshisface from MSNBC. Maybe they were once conservatives, some time ago, before they got paid not to be.

As to Ann Coulter, attacking Palin is something that she’s thus far avoided. She’s been clear in not supporting a Palin run, but she’s remained respectful. Ditto Laura Ingraham. The question here is really: what’s changed that these “staunch conservatives” are so publicly anti-Palin now?

Professor – I think you missed his main point (though I say that with all due respect, since I am not particularly fond of Erick’s “style” of commentary and don’t often agree with him.) I think what he was trying to say was that some Sarah Palin’s supporters are becoming zealous to the point of fanaticism; mix that with her reluctance to make a decision and the end result is stirring up these Palin fanatics to the point that they will damage our chances in 2012 because they will refuse to support the eventual nominee, regardless of who that is. I’d tend to agree with that assessment to a point – Palin is damaging her own credibility right now with this waffling on whether or not to run, which is a choice that is hers to make, but at some point she needs to make a decision before she starts damaging the chances of defeating Obama in ’12. That’s a point I think she’s getting very close to. I’m a fan of Palin, and it hurts me to say that, but she just needs to make a decision and move on, either way.

    “Sarah Palin’s supporters are becoming zealous to the point of fanaticism; mix that with her reluctance to make a decision and the end result is stirring up these Palin fanatics to the point that they will damage our chances in 2012 because they will refuse to support the eventual nominee, regardless of who that is.”

    Where are these supporters who are “zealous to the point of fanaticism”? And where have you heard/read that “they will refuse to support the eventual nominee, regardless of who that is”?

    I may be living in a bubble, but as hooked into the pro-Palin crowd as I am, I have yet to meet someone who fits that description. So enlighten me, please.

      Zeke in reply to Kitty. | September 7, 2011 at 12:00 pm

      I agree with Kitty – I’ve yet to see a Palin supporter say anything but “I’ll support whoever wins the nomination.” This meme that Palin supporters won’t vote for a less-conservative Republican nominee is pure projection. Those who promulgate it are simply revealing that they wouldn’t vote for Palin if she were the nominee.

        leeatmg in reply to Zeke. | September 7, 2011 at 12:32 pm

        The comment about Palin’s supporters comes from months of comments I have read in many blogs across the conservative spectrum. There are some (many; few; I don’t know the number) who have made those comments, and I still see them all the time. The longer Palin stirs the pot, the more risk there is of those who are that invested in Palin becoming so disappointed if she doesn’t run that they follow through on their threats to stay home in ’12.

        I think it’s telling that my comment was clipped to imply that I was saying all of her supporters, when I was very careful to say “some” of her supporters (the part that got left out.) Assuming that I wouldn’t vote for her simply because I suggested a different interpretation of EE’s comments on RedState is just silly and a generalization that is both untrue and helps no one.

        Not to defend EE and RedState, but if you go back to 2008, EE was one of the first to champion Palin as a VP candidate, and his is a fan of hers by his own admission. I agree on some level with EE that she’s doing damage to herself and to the effort to defeat Obama when she dithers like this.

          hrh40 in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 12:43 pm

          No dithering going on by Palin.

          And Erickson supports Palin like he supports Radtke? No thanks.

          You’ll be surprised at how prepared Palin is when she does come out of the box. She’s getting all her ducks in a row. Privately.

          If we’re going to change the way DC does business, we need to change the way we send people to DC. The way it is now, there are so many wheels and deals between politicians and other politicians, between politicians and fundraisers, between politicians and professional campaign staff – that they are practically corrupt by the time they get to DC.

          They have a list of I.O.U.s a mile long – and none of them are to the American people.

          Palin isn’t going to run for office in that conventional way. She has said it many times.

          The conventional permanent political class, which includes political pundits, either are incapable of conceiving such a paradigm shift – or they are afraid of such a shift happening.

      Phil Smith in reply to Kitty. | September 7, 2011 at 2:32 pm

      Where are these supporters who are “zealous to the point of fanaticism”? And where have you heard/read that “they will refuse to support the eventual nominee, regardless of who that is”?

      Right here in this thread, votermom, Fuzzy, and JRD all threatened to go PUMA. Good enough for you?

      boudicca in reply to Kitty. | September 7, 2011 at 5:01 pm

      Kitty:

      As Sarah says: ABO – Anybody But Obama.

      All she has to do is endorse a candidate and her supporters will follow suit.

        Rosalie in reply to boudicca. | September 7, 2011 at 6:13 pm

        I’m all for Palin and hope she runs, but I’ll vote for anyone who runs against O. And Palin will be out there telling us to do the same thing.

      I love Herman Cain, Bachmann has been impressive, Rick Perry’s looking good. I’m a Sarah fan all the way. If she doesn’t run, I’ll vote for a Pet Rock over Obama.

      Surprising that Coulter and Ingraham don’t acknowledge that Sarah is ALREADY running. Those spots she’s got out are top-notch, first rate productions. Her schedule is that of a candidate.

      We are pretty darn lucky to have all these great people running – stop letting the media beat you down. They all did pretty well in this latest debate, the Pounce on Perry Show. They expressed clear and articulate ideas and concerns – even with the strangely biased questions. We have all the new energy. We have all the fire-in-the-belly candidates. We have the up and coming talent, some of it waiting in the wings and some on that stage. All the Dems had, even when they got Obama elected, were warmed over Clinton retreads and Pelosi/Reid cadavers.

      Republicans are the new force – Embrace it and make it into a wave. Eric needs to get back on his board.

      As for the angst – remember Braveheart, “HOLD! HOLD! HOLD!”

      Sarah knows. The time to strike is coming.

    William A. Jacobson in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 11:54 am

    “Zealous to the point of fanaticism” is in the eye of the beholder. I’ve seen plenty of very strong anti-Palin comments here and at other conservative blogs. She may very well be damaging her chances by waiting, although if she has no chance of winning anyway as some say, I’m not sure what difference it makes. On the other hand, it may be that she is sitting back waiting for others to impode; Karl Rove is calling Perry all but unelectable due to his social security stand; Bachmann has faded; waiting may be the best strategy. Look, I don’t know if she’s running, if she has a chance, if she is electable, etc., but the hyperventilated reaction to her waiting is beginning to remind me of the other side. Also, a word of advice to other candidates — if Palin is unlikely to run as you say, you will want her supporters moving your way. It doesn’t help Rick Perry when his vocal supporters like Erickson trash Palin, or Michele Bachman when Ed Rollins does the same. Mitt Romney may end up the beneficiary of this conservative wrestling match.

      [quote]Mitt Romney may end up the beneficiary of this conservative wrestling match.[/quote] Chilling.

      But you’re right. When Rollins, acting for Bachmann, trashed Sarah, that was it for me. Perry’s camp would be incredibly stupid to do that, and their supposed supporters will indeed hurt him by trashing Sarah. Whatever people want to say/argue/claim/whatever, trashing Sarah is an excellent way to find yourself off the “we’re going to go to the mat for you, GOP Candidate X” list. I’m not sure what it is, Sarah’s a fighter, more than capable of defending herself, but there’s been so much vitriol and so many lies and so much disgusting behavior with regard to her that most of us feel that you trash her, you trash me. Personally. As a related observation: the trashing Sarah thing does seem to seep into people on the right, but not many. And I don’t think it will ever be enough to “save” a GOP candidate who goes after her personally.

      “but the hyperventilated reaction to her waiting is beginning to remind me of the other side” Agreed…there’s already another post on RedState on the same topic. It’s like a floodgate has opened over there. I’m just suggesting that she may be reaching a point (and who knows – maybe not) where she’ll damage more than just her chances, and that’s bad for all of us. As for other candidates’ supporters trash Palin, that’s just plain foolish and certainly makes me less inclined to vote for them. You’re right about the direction this is going – some on the right here are starting to look like the folks on the left, and that’s unfortunate. We don’t need any Ed Schultz types on our side.

        hrh40 in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 1:03 pm

        But the damage is being done by the conservative pundits who are all wee weed up over Palin’s announcement date.

        Why is it Palin’s fault the permanent political class, including pundits/bloggers, are the ones creating all this gnashing of teeth?

        The pundits/bloggers are creating the story by writing the story. There wouldn’t be a story if they didn’t collude to keep ginning it up.

        Journolist has got nothing on Conservolist! Sad, sad day.

          leeatmg in reply to hrh40. | September 7, 2011 at 1:22 pm

          Because, whether we like it or not, running for President involves getting the approval of voters and others. That’s the nature of the business. She may choose to be unconventional, and it may work. Or, it may be so unconventional that the voters may simply say “no thanks – we like conventional.” We’ll all have to wait and see, but unconventional and a complete disinterest in the process are two different things.

          Tom_Ohio in reply to hrh40. | September 7, 2011 at 7:36 pm

          this comment is to leatmg, but i could not see the the reply button.
          Yes, the approval of “others” means the approval of “voters”
          why why why why why do the coulters, the ingrahams and the ericksons never speak of her record, her platform, her policy positions, but instead some sorty dismissive attitude of her supporters?
          this concerted effort reminds me more of a push poll, then anything else, trying to infuence.
          the only thing coulter is doing is infuencing me to not buy her book, erickson infuencing me to not go to or link to his website
          that is all they are sowing here, but they know it not, they think that people forget that in the long run it will not matter.
          it could be true, but I think they are only damaging their own selves by trying to foment something in order to have some influence.
          it is also an issue of “self importance” for them. they think that since the are celebrities that conservatives listen to, then their opinions should be respected and ANY pushback by ANY other supporters gets their ire up.
          I can hear them now, “How dare they question me?”
          Almost sad, I tell ya

          leeatmg in reply to hrh40. | September 7, 2011 at 9:34 pm

          Tom_Ohio – I noticed that earlier – apparently, you can’t reply to a post within a post within a post. Regarding the criticisms from Erickson/Coulter/Ingraham, I couldn’t agree more. It’s odd that it all came at once – maybe they wanted her to run, and are frustrated that Perry is sucking all the air of Palin’s balloon before she can declare and their comments are meant to encourage her to get off the proverbial pot. I certainly don’t think they are helping matters at all. I like RedState to a point, but am getting tired of the intolerance for differing opinions there, and I’ve never been a fan of Coulter or Ingraham, so I can’t pretend to understand why they are doing what they are doing.

      Professor, I suggest you read some of the comments made by Palin supporters on sites like TownHall, Gateway Pundit and others. The vitriol and hatred spewed by Palin supporters for Rick Perry is palpable. Rick Perry is a Bilderberger. Rick Perry is gay. Rick Perry is yada, yada, yada. And when they end their posts with Palin 2012, it is pretty hard to count them as anything but Palin supporters. They also use links to Daily Paul, Ron Paul’s website. Why is that?

      Now, perhaps you subscribe to this heroine worship, but most of us understand how that has worked out when it comes to hero worship for the last three years.

      You are not seeing Romney, Bachmann and Perry supporters bashing Governor Palin, but last week on C4P, there were six articles bashing Governor Perry. Can you explain that?

      Governor Palin has not deserved the hatred spewed against her by the MSM, but it is not right that her supporters now push false memes about other candidates.

        William A. Jacobson in reply to retire05. | September 7, 2011 at 1:32 pm

        I have no doubt over the top comments are made on blogs! Do Palin fans have the exclusive, are they even Palin fans? Or just trolls trying to create trouble?

        You have been a defender of Perry here, and I am glad because nothing I have ever said here is anti-Perry or anti-Romney for that matter. I think there is an opening for Perry to pick up the bulk of Palin supporters if she does not run. Romney, in my estimation, has been the smartest. Neither he nor his people have been trashing Palin. Smart.

          Professor, to resort to the “troll” accusation is pathetic, at the very least. These same people bash all other GOP candidates, as well, not just Perry. But Perry seems to be where all the vitriol is directed. One only has to go to Conservatives4Palin to verify that fact.

          As I have said before, our entire nation changed in September/October, 2008, and not for the better. How has Palin addressed that other than resigning her job? What has she really accomplished in the last 2 1/2 years except giving speeches? Did she rally the troops to get legislation, like the Balanced Budget Amendment, passed? Was she on the front lines for specifics? The answer is no.

          We know what pretty speeches produce; NOTHING.

          The first year Palin was governor was a pretty good year. What was her job creation numbers, or the rate of unemployment during her short administration? Why did she choose a lobbyist for a running mate when most people have a lousy opinion of lobbyist, especially one that defended Exxon in the Exxon-Valdez case?

          I find most of the Palin supporters are doing the same damn thing the Obama supporters did in 2008; projecting their own hopes and dreams on one person who has, for the last 2 1.2 years delivered nothing.

          SmokeVanThorn in reply to William A. Jacobson. | September 7, 2011 at 2:06 pm

          Professor – You are entirely correct.

          retire05 – You are the primary source of “vitriol” on this site – and it is directed overwhelmingly at Sarah Palin. That, combined with Your claim that Perry is “where all the vitriol is directed” reflects a fundamental dishonesty.

          SmokeVanThorn, where have I said ANYTHING about Palin that was false? I have said, many times, that she is smart, seems to know where her talent lies, and her good looks adds to the package.

          But because I am not down on my knees in Palin worship, you make false claims about me.

          I suggest you go to C4P and see who they are bashing.

          So you tell me what vitriol I have directed Palin’s way. Or do you consider pointing out that she quit her office half way through and chose a lobbyist as her running mate to be vitriol?

          And my oh, my, how dare I asked what she has accomplished in the last 2 1/2 years beside giving speeches.

          retire05 – You should go take a peek at HotAir which has now become a defacto Perry cheerleading site, if you want to see some thin-skinned Perry fans jump down anyone’s throat… and that includes even Michelle Malkin, for daring to bring up a concern she has of Perry.

          Like most “nistas”, I won’t have a problem supporting whomever is the gop nominee because it is ABO at this point. But my preference is Sarah Palin.

          Palin played a significant roll in the 2010 elections.
          She continues to play a big roll in highlighting Obama’s “almost daily now” failures. Death Panels ring a bell? Quantitative Easing or whatever rubbish they call it these days? I would have to say that she has been a very outspoken conservative voice on the issues of the day. Thankfully.

        @retire05 | September 7, 2011 at 1:21 pm

        You say, above:

        “They also use links to Daily Paul, Ron Paul’s website. Why is that?”

        Well, maybe it is because they know they can dupe people like you into believing that they really are Palin supporters, when the truth may very well be that they are “griefer trolls” who fanatically support Ron Paul, but who are seeking to deflect the annoying aspect of their behavior toward Sarah Palin.

        That would explain the “pointing” or linking to Ron Paul’s site, because that is where they want you to end up.

        It certainly wouldn’t be the first time the ever-annoying Ron Paul supporters have taken to flooding website threads with their comments. It is standard operating procedure for many of them, and has been for years!

        In the meantime, I just posted my own troll accusation, so I guess you’ll conclude that my response to you is “pathetic” as well.

        But the fact is that no one referred to you a troll. As leeatmg correctly suggests below at | September 7, 2011 at 1:59 pm, please re-read the comments.

          retire05 in reply to Trochilus. | September 7, 2011 at 2:17 pm

          Where did I say that anyone referred to ME as a troll?

          Invest in a reading comprehension course.

          leeatmg in reply to Trochilus. | September 7, 2011 at 2:34 pm

          “Invest in a reading comprehension course.”

          This is exactly the kind of thing that gets one labeled a “troll.” Can we avoid the personal insults here? While you have a right to say what you want to say (this is still America, and will be for at least until ’12) no one gains anything with name calling and insults, and it’s counter-productive.

        retire05 | September 7, 2011 at 2:16 pm

        Then explain the links to the claims made by Alex Jones by Palin supporters.

        I really have no idea what you’re talking about, nor do I think I am particularly interested.

        Except to say . . . Alex Jones? Are you kidding me?

        So, maybe some of the punk conspiracy theorists with video cameras wearing too-large Yankee caps and calling themselves “investigative journalists” have gotten into the troll game as well? Who knows?

        My response to Sarah Palin as a political leader, and to what she says, is a consequence of having listened to her and what issues she raises and focuses on, as well as having made a personal evaluation about her.

        My opinion of her was not arrived at (nor will it be in any way tainted) by reference to the alleged actions of what you claim were some groupy-nutbag followers of hers . . . legitimate or otherwise.

        Looks like in the meantime, leeatmg | September 7, 2011 at 2:34 pm more than adequately responded to your other snarky comment aimed at me, above. Thanks, leeatmg . . I’ll try to return the favor, or pass it forward. ‘Nuff said.

          SmokeVanThorn in reply to Trochilus. | September 7, 2011 at 10:30 pm

          Bingo, Trochilus.

          Retire05 is hardly the person to complain about the way supporters of other candidates conduct themselves.

        Those comments you refer to may be made by ‘Ellie Light’ style astroturfers, NOT real Palin supporters. the trolls and astroturfers are operating at full force desperately trying to create a split in the GOP, and run down every candidate we have.

        Remember Ellie Light? It may even be a program, not people at all.

    hrh40 in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 12:38 pm

    Regarding Palin’s not announcing her candidacy yet, check out this video, which gives the announcement dates of several former presidents, right up to the 2008 election:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/CTO4P?feature=mhee#p/f/8/pRP6OKNIvow

    ANYONE who says Palin is “damaging her credibility” by not announcing is being TOTALLY influenced by the media meme that she’s “damaging her credibility.”

    See the above video for past presidents’ announcement dates.

    And see the legal deadlines in various states to get on the ballot do not come until October/November.

    So.

    The facts are that all the other candidates have gotten in EARLY.

    As is their prerogative to do.

    Some don’t have name recognition. Organizations. Fundraising abilities.

    Palin already has all of the above. And the legal deadlines are not here yet.

    So. she. does. not. have. to. announce. yet.

      Viator in reply to hrh40. | September 7, 2011 at 3:16 pm

      That’s a good video hrh40, I recommend it to anybody.

      thanks for video… you are spot on… she can wait and if she sits 2012 out, I as an avid supporter, will be bummed but will understand… I will support just about any R candidate for 2012… it is critical for America’s survival to get the usurper O out of the people’s white house…

      HE.MUST.GO

    leeatmg | September 7, 2011 at 11:39 am.

    I agree with some of what you are saying, though I would hastily add that having been around politics for many many years, there are always true believers around any major candidate who are zealous to the point of displaying what seems like an “all or nothing” fanaticism.

    But I don’t agree with you that Sarah is damaging the prospects of any of the other candidates with this “tease.” It is her game plan, and she is playing it out well. If she runs, she will have kept the public’s attention up to the point of declaration. If she does not, she will have demonstrated a skill on her own that will likely serve her well in the future.

    She is also engaging in the public debate in a way that few other Republicans ever have in my lifetime. I say good for her. She was the only national Republican to stick it to Obama’s surrogate, Junior Hoffa. I only wish she had tied it a bit more directly to the President and for that matter to Biden’s unseemly comment, but her angle was a good one.

    Regardless, that willingness to engage in open public debate is unsettling to some Republicans for reasons I have never been able to quite fully fathom. But what it tells me is that she is well-grounded in common sense, and does not need a poll result to tell her what she ought to think.

    Likewise, it tells me she is a person who is comfortable in her own skin. You can also see it as plain as day in interviews.

    Whether she should run is an assessment she will have to make, and I expect she will indicate that one way or the other very soon.

    Whether she could win in 2012 is another story. And I think it is a fair question for Republicans to ask during a primary season!

    What is fanatic about Palin’s supporters waiting until the end of September for her to decide? She has stated many times that this was the case.
    If it is too late for Palin to get in why isn’t it too late for Chris Christie to get in the race? Hypocritical don’t you think. Where is Coulter and Erickson saying Christie is a tease?
    Palin has a game plan and the elites are desperately trying to get her off her game. Too flippin’ bad.
    There real fatigue is the “political class fatigue” that Palin supporters are experiencing because the political class just keeps telling them to move on. They aren’t listening to the political class any longer. Palin’s supporters will move on when they are damn good and ready.
    Extremely stupid for the political class too tee off the base. Don’t they realize if Palin’s supporters stay home they lose? Palin is to be commended for telling her supporters not to go 3rd Party. Nice way to thank her for it.

    katiejane in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 1:02 pm

    I don’t want to suggest that your support of Palin is questionable but she has said several times that she wouldn’t make her decision about running until Sept and I would have thought supporters would know and accept that. Why should she announce her candidacy on your timetable rather than hers?

    I can’t speak for other Palin supporters but I was firmly in the camp of “I will support whomever the GOP nominee is even if it’s not Palin.” But I have to be honest and admit that the months of ragging on Palin and her supporters is beginning to p*ss me off. People like Eric seem to think they can insult her supporters and still expect them to rally behind the nominee. Ever consider that it’s not the best idea to ridicule people you want to vote for your guy?

    I don’t even mind the criticism of Palin based on policy and most on the Right have even moved on from the personal attacks on Palin. But now the attacks are mostly about her supporters and how fanatic they are. You know – the people whose vote you want

“some Sarah Palin’s supporters are becoming zealous to the point of fanaticism”

Agreed. Some are acting like Ron Paul supporters and it’s starting to turn people off. I base this not just on people is usually see, but on the various blogs I visit.

Professor,

If you’re ever going to move up to the next level in the Tea-Party Zombies game, you’re going to have to grasp that machete that the MSM media is holding out to you … and whack Sarah’s head off.

Then, maybe you won’t be considered such a barbarian terrorist sonofabeach in need of being “taken out” on the Teamster Town by the good workers with the union pinkie rings.

LukeHandCool (who is disappointed in Ann and Laura … and actually wishes they sounded a bit more like MoDo at this point).

I have personally drawn that “zealous to the point of fanaticism” charge, by pointing out that Sarah Palin is a reader, and that unlike the Attorney General of the United States, she knew the content of the famous Arizona Immigration law.

Fanatic I am, for expecting a person interested in our public laws to find out what is in the text.

Now, Sarah Palin is failing us, and “damaging the chances of defeating Obama at the end of next year, by adhering to a more traditional election schedule than the latest fad.

I had been trying to find a reason to use the word obtuse in a sentence and Erick Erickson finally gave it to me. I stopped going to Red State long ago.

I find Laura Ingraham to be very tedious to watch because she’s so full of her snarky self as opposed to putting forth considered positions. Ann Coulter went from being vitriolic to the complete opposite side of the spectrum where she is now continually laughing (OK, she could read the polls). The problem now is that her continual laughing is such an over-correction that she too is becoming tedious to watch. Can we please start bringing up some new talent from the conservative women’s farm team?

With respect to Palin, I hope she runs for Senate in AZ in 2012 when Kyl’s term is up.
With 6 years in the Senate, Palin could have ample time in the national spotlight in DC and she could develop the skills some people feels she currently lacks. At that point, what objections will they have to her running for President in 2020 after a two term Perry Presidency?

    Yep, I think that’s her actual intent. Running for Senate in Arizona will put her in a good position to move for a WH bid later, I’m thinking 2020ish, but it could be as early as 2016. I’ll be surprised if she runs this year; not floored, but surprised. There is a more clear, more sure path to the WH for her, and I hope that she takes it. I’d like to see a President Palin one day. And a term or two as a U. S. senator will help that immensely. She got McCain reelected, so it’s not like she doesn’t have support in AZ. 😉

      Watch “The Undefeated” and read Governor Palin’s over 24,000 e-mails and then come back and tell me that.

        I know what you mean, but she’s savvy and getting a Senate term under her belt would be smart. She just bought a house in AZ (why else but to establish residency for a run?). But hey, I’ll be the first to say that I have no idea what she’s doing or going to do with regards to 2012. I’ll just be surprised (not shocked) if she runs.

    boudicca in reply to Ipso Facto. | September 7, 2011 at 5:18 pm

    Ipso Facto:

    I like the way you think!

Professor J, you should read this from hillbuzz today to see why this is deja vu to PUMAs.
http://hillbuzz.org/2011/09/07/an-open-letter-to-sarah-palin-asking-her-to-save-america-from-the-cocktail-party-and-the-leftists-it-enables/

In fact the conservatives who are attacking Sarah Palin unfairly now are creating pumas on the right. All her supporters want is for Palin to get a fair shot at the nomination. If there is any hint of shenanigans in the GOP primary process that leads to Palin’s votes being in any way unfairly counted, then the GOP can kiss half the Palin voters goodbye in the general.

    OMG, PUMAs on the right. That is exactly what will happen if this path is pursued. And frankly, if I were an establishment GOPer, the LAST thing I’d want to face is a Mama Grizzly backed by outraged PUMAs.

      Palin already has the support of the PUMA’s. Nice to meet you.

        And nice to meet you, as well. I was more talking about the future conservative PUMAs, but I think, at this point, our goals are the same. 😉

        The dynamics of alienating a large, motivated, active segment of your base because they “aren’t needed” was a huge mistake on the dems part in ’08. It’s about to be repeated, apparently, by the GOP.

        Big mistake. Big.

        Mutnodjmet in reply to JRD. | September 7, 2011 at 3:04 pm

        Many of you would be surprised how many PUMAs roam conservative website. We are everywhere. 🙂

          BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Mutnodjmet. | September 7, 2011 at 10:31 pm

          PUMAS- whoah .

          I began following the Dem Primaries in Oct 07 & saw the evolution of this group through sites like Noquarteusa.net.

          Wow -when I visit it there now they are Guy Fawke-ish.

          Interesting indeed.

What the GOP needs are supporters who are apathetic and mute.
All the better to take orders from their betters.

Some examples of “Zealous to the point of fanaticism.”

“We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.”

“This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal.”

Ummmm … that’s fanaticism.

Palin is the opposite of all that rubbish.

LukeHandCool (who is depressed at the power to set the narrative which the MSM still wields).

I suppose my question will lead to accusations of ‘being a zealot’ however I must ask:

How is it that a person who has 20 years of proven Conservative governing experience (Palin) is less electable than someone who has 4 years of questionable Conservative governing experience (Romney) or someone who has 1 1/2 years of questionable Conservative governing experience (Christie)?

PS: I will agree that though Paul Ryan is Conservative warrior (especially on all things money) he has clearly stated-to the point of writing an official letter to the professional pundit class- that he is not going to run for President.

Also from RedState:

“Having studied Sarah Palin now for just shy of 4 years, I have noticed a recurring trend that is now playing a big role in her 2012 campaign/non-campaign. The trend is that she has this awful habit, dangerous in politicians, of meaning what she says and saying what she means. This habit, coupled with the media’s (and other pundits’) insistence on looking for the “hidden meaning” in every politician’s utterings is a bad combination.”

“The Real End, or 2012

For well over a year now, Sarah Palin has stated time and time again that yes, she is indeed considering a run for the presidency in 2012. She has never wavered from this position, nor given any indication which way she will choose. And when asked when she would make an announcement of her decision, she has only given one timetable. By the end of September.

So why is she now accused of being a “political tease”? Why did Drudge feature a headline “The Tease” with a photo of her bus? Why did Erick Erickson say “I give up, and I’m tired of being teased.”?

The answer is simple. Once again, folks just cannot accept that she means what she said. She said the end of September. But surely, like most other politicians, she’ll give us a hint ahead of time! Surely some “aide” will let the truth slip, either planned or unplanned. Surely she won’t actually make us wait that long!

She said end of September. She meant end of September. (And stop calling me Shirley!)

I find it somewhat ironic and amusing that so many on the right (Erick included, apparently) are giving up on a woman who has been openly and consistently considering a run because she won’t tell us her answer weeks early. Yet these same folks are happy to jump on the bandwagon of a guy who lied about not running, then magically changed his mind and “explored” a run for a month before jumping in. (Frankly, this is what many politicians do, so I won’t use that against Perry in my decision. But I’m still struck by the irony of this.) And many will support Chris Christie if he changes his mind, despite the fact that he has said he would have to “commit suicide” to convince people he isn’t going to run.

On a side note, a solid argument can be made that the end of September is too late. I’ll leave that discussion for a different venue.”

http://www.redstate.com/azaeroprof/2011/09/06/what-the-hecks-up-with-sarah-palin/

Stephen Bannon put it another way. Unlike most politicians:
“Her words and her deeds are one and the same”

Oh, and smart money is betting on Constitution Day, September 17th

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_Day_%28United_States%29

    rightConcept in reply to Viator. | September 7, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    Yes I have noticed this also. People just don’t want to believe that Palin could actually mean what she says. That is quite a statement as to how we perceive our permanent politicos that a politician can not be taken at her word.

    We will soon know though. For my part, I just can’t fathom the Governor waiting so long only to say she is not going to run. There are a lot of people out there that have sacrificed their own time, energy and money on her behalf, thinking that she is running and she just doesn’t seem to be the type of person to string it out for the sake of stringing it out.

    I think she is in and we better fasten our seat belts because we haven’t seen anything yet.

What a refreshing show of chivalry from a real gentleman. Thank you, Professor, for your kind defense of Mrs. Palin.
I believe Mrs. Palin is following G-d’s plan for her life. She is definitely a “kingmaker” for other politicians ie.
Governor Perry in the last gubernatorial election as well as others. She actually seems to have more influence in not running in the presidential race, the media will not leave her alone. She has divine grace under pressure, wish she was secretary of state. My choice is Perry but I do see how valuable Mrs. Palin is to the party and will be to the coming Republican administration.

One last observation, the difference between Legal Insurrection and Redstate is that unlike Erick Erickson Prof Jacobson does not ban every dissenter who dissents (here at Legal Insurrection anti-Paliners are allowed to voice their anti-ness as much as he has allowed me to voice my anti-lawyerness stuff. And unlike some of the anti-paliners, at least I do try to keep that bias at a miminum!)

Couldn’t agree more, Professor.I just don’t get it; Palin’s decision is hers to make, so why are so many pundits and would-be pundits on the Right getting so worked up about her waiting until the end of September to decide, which is what she has been saying she’d do for weeks? That said, there are Palin fans who react to the least criticism of her like weasels-on-crack (I see it on Twitter every night), which only provokes reactions like Coulter’s and Erickson’s. Speaking as a strong Palin supporter, I think both sides need to calm down, quit reacting emotionally, let Palin make her choice at her own speed, and concentrate on the real goal: getting Obama out of office.
PS: To call Erickson a “RINO” as was done in a comment above is to strip the term of all meaning, much as he can be annoying and sanctimonious.

    “PS: To call Erickson a “RINO” as was done in a comment above is to strip the term of all meaning, much as he can be annoying and sanctimonious.” Agreed. He may be many things (and the intolerance for dissent on RedState is pretty frustrating) but a RINO he is not. He’s somewhat the opposite – a little too far to the right sometimes.

TheLastBrainLeft | September 7, 2011 at 12:39 pm

It’s intellectually dishonest to compare conservative criticism of Palin to liberal. The former is legit. She’s stringing us along with this “will she or won’t she” mind game. The latter is driven solely by bigotry and hate.

    No, she is not stringing anyone along.

    That tells me that you don’t think for yourself. You let the MSM and conservative media think for you.

    See the video I posted above.

    And to repeat: the legal deadlines are not for another month or so.

    She has said end of September for months now.

    If you’re impatient, that’s your issue. Not hers.

    She stated her timetable. She’s sticking to it.

    No stringing along going on at all.

    Stop letting the paid talkers think for you.

      great points hrh40… and why don’t the Perry supporters allow any critiques? I mean COME ON center/right, YOU need to VET your candidates just like we expected the left to (and they didn’t)…

      RETIRE05 is on GatewayPundit CONTINUALLY BASHING Sarah Palin ANY CHANCE he/she gets… and now, sadly retire05 is HERE doing same thing… crikey THAT is being a CONCERN TROLL

      Perhaps I am a Palin fanatic because I am patiently waiting for her to run, but the true vitriol from supposed center/rights against Sarah is NOT warranted and I will continue to defend her on either side

      the battle contineus

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | September 7, 2011 at 12:44 pm

I wonder if everybody who is putting pressure on Palin to either declare or not declare are aware that Reagan did not officially announce his candidacy until November 1979?

    True, but Reagan had all but announced nearly a year before. Much like Pawlenty (who was running for the last two years before he announced he was running, and everyone knew it.) With Palin, no one knows, and her moves could be interpreted either way. It’s getting her a lot of press, for sure. I just hope she’s not turning off potential voters – they don’t tend to like indecision in a president very much.

      hrh40 in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 12:56 pm

      There’s NO indecision going on. She stated when she’d announce. Anyone who is impatient is impatient on their own.

      Legal deadlines are not for a month or so.

      Citing Pawlenty et al is citing the status quo conventional way of running for President.

      Palin has stated repeatedly that she would run an unconventional campaign.

      She said September.

      She means what she says. Either you believe her. Or you’re impatient.

Coulter, Ace, Erickson, Ingraham all dumped on Palin in the last 24 hours with a resulting uproar.

From a comment I made earlier today at another website:

“Boy do the critics of Palin and supporters of other primary candidates have their panties in a wad. So much so they are now accusing Palin supporters of that very sin. Relax boys and girls, she is either running or not running. She will either win the primary or lose. If Palin gets to be the nominee of the Republican Party will anyone be able to say she didn’t earn it?. It would seem to me that it would be good for the GOP and the United States of America for her to enter the primary. Her arguments will contribute a great deal to the Republican campaign (not to mention continuing Palin’s ongoing and valiant fight to keep disgusted voters inside the GOP tent). As I read on Ricochet (no friends of Palin) the other day, complete with a little anti-Palin snark at the end, “is it just me or is she the only present-day prominent political figure that actually makes arguments in an extended prose format – whatever you think of the prose?”

What’s all this sudden ruckus? Did Palin’s populist anti-cronyism speeches set off alarm bells in certain quarters?

Oh, and maybe this also set off alarm bells in certain quarters: The single biggest crowds in Iowa and New Hampshire this election cycle were at the non-candidate Sarah Palin speeches.”

    “What’s all this sudden ruckus? Did Palin’s populist anti-cronyism speeches set off alarm bells in certain quarters?”

    EXACTLY… like SOME EMPLOYEES AT FOX!

[…] Legal Insurrection) Share this:FacebookTwitterDiggRedditStumbleUponLike this:LikeBe the first to like this […]

Erickson is no RINO, but Red State as a whole has been on the Palin bashing wagon for some time now. I’ve stopped reading them regularly because I have no tolerance for it. Mostly what gets to me is the way pro Palin posters are treated there. The treatment they get from commentors wouldn’t be tolerated if it were directed at anyone but a Palin supporter (Palinista in Red State’s lingo). I suppose sometimes Palin supporters might come off a bit strong, but it’s hard to remain completely civil when getting dumped on from both sides of the aisle.

Erickson and the rest of the front pagers at Red State, and a lot of the commentors too, think of themselves as the Conservative elite, and it’s certainly true that they’ve been at the front of the movement for quite a few years now. The problem with being an elitist I guess is that it gets frustrating for you when lesser creatures aren’t performing the way you want them to.

“We are our own worst enemies.” True that. No one knows how to lose like we do. Erickson, Coulter et. al. won’t much care win or lose I don’t think. They’ll still have their soapboxes and the income from them.

    leeatmg in reply to abenson229. | September 7, 2011 at 1:32 pm

    I could not have said that any better myself. If you disagree with the majority opinion there, shortly thereafter the words “troll” “RINO” and other firebombs come fast and furious. I read it anyway, but tend to give them less and less time and attention. It’s too bad, because they used to be on the forefront of the new conservative movement, and did quite a bit of good there, but now they are becoming increasingly difficult to read. That’s a shame.

      retire05 in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 1:55 pm

      Seems if you disagree with the Palin supportes here, you will be labeled “troll.”

        leeatmg in reply to retire05. | September 7, 2011 at 1:59 pm

        At no point did anyone here say that. It’s what I like about this blog – we can have an intelligent discussion and differing opinions without name calling. The professor was referring to some of the comments at other blogs, to which the “troll” moniker certainly applies. Perhaps you should reread what was said.

          retire05 in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 2:20 pm

          The good professor questioned whether the Palin supporters on other blogs were actually “trolls.” I responded to that comment.

          I have no way of knowing who is, or is not, a “troll” and neither do you. If they say they are for Palin, and they are trashing another candidate, I can only assume they are who they say they are. If you have a different, and proven method, of telling who someone posting on a website supports, please share it.

          leeatmg in reply to leeatmg. | September 7, 2011 at 2:43 pm

          You said: “Seems if you disagree with the Palin supportes here, you will be labeled “troll.” ”

          It’s hard to imagine any other interpretation of this comment other than you felt that Palin critics (of which you admittedly are one) are labeled as “trolls” here for disagreeing. Then you said, elsewhere in this discussion :

          “Where did I say that anyone referred to ME as a troll?”

          Uh…yes you did. Which is it?

          If you want to continue to bait folks so you can make a few sarcastic comments, then I won’t stand in your way – its fun to watch. If you want to contribute to the discussion, though, your criticisms of Palin are duly noted, and are mostly fair.

        retire05 – you bash Sarah anywhere you go therefore YOU an anti Palin troll… embrace your own reality

      I’ve experienced this myself, and I can say that it’s not fun. 😉 But there’s an inherent fallacy at work on the right: you either babble and drool support for the candidate of the day, or you’re a RINO fake, possibly a Soros plant (yes, I’ve been accused of that), who hates America.

      Whatever.

      If we demand unity, loyalty, faux-fawning of the “anointed,” how are we different from the communists (and yes, Virginia, they really are commies, not socialists)? There is a false premise here that undermines true conservative thought. Do you blindly follow any candidate because the establishment has decided it’s their “turn”? Likewise, do you blindly follow any candidate because if you don’t . . . well, gee, that person’s supporters will bash, harass, and shame you into supporting them? This is exactly what we are faced with.

      It’s important because what you choose defines America. That’s not hyperbole, that’s fact.

      We have two choices: we think for ourselves or we vote the party line. My vote, always, is for thinking for ourselves, for freedom and personal responsibility. For American ideals and values.

      If I don’t like what someone is saying, as with Red State and EE, I just stop reading. But I see, very clearly, that my freedom is in jeopardy, that who and what we are is being challenged, that 2012 is the final showdown.

    Erickson has long been an establishment Republican. People get banned from redstate.com because they are too conservative, not because they are too liberal.

    “I suppose sometimes Palin supporters might come off a bit strong, but it’s hard to remain completely civil when getting dumped on from both sides of the aisle.”

    THANK you… I’m there already and it is frustrating!

[…] Professor Jacobson: I guess that makes me a Scientologist, because I’ve posted repeatedly that Palin holds a special position because there is no one — not even George W. Bush — who has been the subject of the Democratic, mainstream media and left-blogosphere smear machine to the extent Palin has. […]

Erickson has always been somewhat of a jerk and a total fraud. Now that he has a gig with CNN, he has to “dance to the music” like the other “house Republicans.”

Palin Criticism Thread = Comment/Traffic Bonanza!!!!!!

I’m on to you Professor.

    Meanwhile, my county has seen 45,000 acres go up in flames, 5,000 people are displaced, over 600 homes have been lost and not ONE word from Professor Jacobsen about Americans who are suffering today.

    But hey, remember all that wind and water his area suffered under?

    I guess 5,000 displaced Americans is just not as important as someone who doesn’t bend at the alter of Sarah Palin.

    Got to go; my fire department pager is going off.

      Weirddave in reply to retire05. | September 7, 2011 at 4:07 pm

      This is beyond the pale. Just because people here aren’t falling all over themselves to agree with your unending Perry worship, you accuse the blog owner and the rest of us of somehow hating Texas or not caring about the disastrous fires down there. That is disgusting, using a real human tragedy to deflect criticism of your politics. If this is the caliber of people behind Perry, he needs to get new supporters.

    Cowboy Curtis in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | September 7, 2011 at 3:05 pm

    I was speaking playfully.

    I’ve got folks around Austin, I know its bad out there. Hope you and yours stay safe an that the weather breaks.

[…] THIS WILL NEVER END Palin is just the beginning, if they can attack her . . . Wil+liam+Ja+cob+son warns, ” those who call Palin a diva or a tease or any of the other names coming from media […]

retire05 – I knew I could count on you to provide additional evidence for my point.

Let me speak for Sarah and say, Don’t Bring Me Down

LukeHandCool (who is predisposed to use a “B” word when he hears a song with so much fuzz … bitchen and boss, baby).

I stopped reading Redstate after listening to some of Erick Erickson’s Palin commentary on his radio show, and I cancelled my podcast subscription to Laura Ingraham for similar reasons. Now I’m even more dismayed at the price I paid for the Kindle edition of Ann Coulter’s new book. Sarah Palin’s post on her facebook page yesterday is more profound than anything any of these three have ever penned or said.

Sarah Palin’s post from yesterday on her facebook page:

Welcome Union Brothers and Sisters

The Republican primary candidates should start talking like this.

[…] she says: “. . .let this cup pass from me. . .”More at The Lonely Conservative.Color Professor Jacobson unimpressed:The nonsense coming from Coulter and Erickson and others is why I am not overly […]

Now take it easy all. Ronald Reagan said that the time he spent in the wilderness was the best thing that ever happened to him. All those years he spent touting 20 mule team borax allowed him to crisscross the country and actually listen to the citizens. It does come to my mind that Sarah Palin is also going throughout the land speaking to citizens away from the media. As I am sure she realized that she wasn’t ready for prime time she has done three things that she had to do; 1. make enough money to finance her education along with paying off the left’s legal jihad bills, 2. obtain the elite introductions, education and coaching from the RNC doners, movers and shakers and meet the advisers/think tankers and 3. put together her own team for the future.
My POV on her performance thus far is that she has created her own wind where she can speak her mind, play her brand of politics while moving along with her training. It appears that she has won the hearts and minds of a large portion of the conservative side of the party. She has in her pocket the Tea Party side all she has left to persuade are the liberal (small “l” intended) wing and the social conservative wing.
Is she angling for a Veep slot, I do not believe so. A Secretariat more than likely. Should she spend some time with Cheny, Rumsfeld, Rice or Powell you can be assured that is her pound of flesh in the coming election. At this point she can run and lose while coming out ahead for the next go round in four or eight years.
Judging by her trajectory from the previous four years she has come a long way baby. Where she chooses to take this down the road is up to her.

Considering the almost instantaneous mass communication technlogy available now, I wonder why the need to announce 18 months before the election.

Obama is a good example of why the reason cannot be the longer you are in the public eye the more vetted you are.

No, the most obvious answer is a lengthy run up means lots of money for talking heads, political operatives, and all forms of media.

I’m glad the Conservative Blogosphere has plenty of time to sort this kerfuffle out ….

IMV, it boils down to the following Q

Is Gov Palin correct in her assessment about Crony Capitalism (whether it be with Big Labour or Big Business) and it’s effect on the American Economy?

She wants to lead “Sudden and Relentless Reform”, as she did in AK ….. she is so bold, and fearless …..

but those whose gravy train will be derailed are SQUAWKING, … SQUEALING …..(either in the open, or via surrogates)

Think about it Conservatives …. Watch “The Undefeated”, read the Palin Admin emails ….

Do you think that America needs restoring or not?

If you DO think she needs restoring, do you think that a POTUS who is beholden to *this* special interest* or that *special interest* can get the job done? (read = big campaign donors)

In my own mind, I have answered those two Qs. I’ve joined the Palin Army …. but my preferred name is The Palin POSSE

*__*

    I am with you – and so are millions of others

    America needs a HUGE restoration and a HUGE clean up on BOTH sides of the aisle R and D – Federal spending has gone up EVERY year for 40 years! it is WAY past time to cut and reform…

    Palin can deliver that… she IS a reformer

      exodus2011 in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 7, 2011 at 6:56 pm

      Hey LisaG! – I too am in NZ … married to a Texan American over here *__*

      BannedbytheGuardian in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 7, 2011 at 11:11 pm

      Reire05 & the wildfires in Texas.

      As an Australian we do fires much much bigger than Texas ever could.

      Fact is that the damage is not in acreage or houses . These will recover & homes can be rebuilt.

      If an area is burnt & rains come again there is amazing regeneration. Like a political system & country at risk -prioritize protection & let the rest burn.

      Tomorrow is a new day.

86 comments and counting…

And most all commenters feel strongly pro or con.

Whether Sarah declares her candidacy in September or not, she is not going away and she is going to continue to tweak noses on the Left ’cause they just can’t resist the bait. She also will continue to have a significant impact on the political stage.

Sarah is calling for Tea Party Unity. When she endorses a candidate, she will repeat that call to unity – and mean it. Did Hillary do as much?

It seems to me the initial questions regarding any candidate have to be:

1) Can they win?- Does this person have a viable, realistic, path to the 270 electoral votes it’ll take to beat Obama. He’ll get 40% of the vote just by having his name on the ballot, can our prospective candidate pull a majority of that remaining 10%?

If so, then:

2) How likely are they to win?- We live in a world of near infinite possibilities. Just because something can happen, doesn’t mean its likely to. I might sink a free-throw from half-court, but don’t bet any money on it. Possible does not equal probable.

If the likelihood is sufficiently high, then:

3) Is this candidate the most conservative option of the field of viable candidates?

Then:

4) Does this candidate have the capacity to govern effectively if elected?

Finally:

5) Taking 1-4 as a whole, are this candidate’s qualities and likelihood of success worth risking the fate of the nation on. Because that’s what is at stake.

I’d encourage a dispassionate consideration of each one of those questions. This election is for the whole enchilada.

1. It nonplusses me to agree with Coulter, but that’s been my perception of (some) Palin supporters for some time. And the comparison with Obama seemed obvious to me; it’s about time that it was disseminated.

2. Bill, you may recall that in one of her early posts, while you were traveling, Kathleen mildly criticized Palin. She and you were flashmobbed for it. (Digging out her post takes time. I know, having done it on a previous occasion. I don’t propose to do it again.)

3. I searched the text of Palin’s speech in Indianola. The word ‘Republican’ never appears; the phrase ‘permanent political class’ appears six times. Draw your own conclusions.

4. It was a brilliant speech. Had she delivered it as a sitting, emphatically reelected governor, I’d be pounding the table for her.

She didn’t and I’m not.

    gs in reply to gs. | September 7, 2011 at 6:18 pm

    1. 3. I searched the text of Palin’s speech in Indianola. The word ‘Republican’ never appears; the phrase ‘permanent political class’ appears six times.

    The term ‘GOP’ appears twice.

    a. It was three years ago on this very day that I spoke at the GOP Convention where I was honored to be able to accept the nomination for vice president that night. This, and the rest of the paragraph, is more about Sarah Palin than about the GOP.

    b. Now to be fair, some GOP candidates also raised mammoth amounts of cash, and we need to ask them, too: What, if anything, do their donors expect in return for their “investments”? This is an imputation against some GOP candidates, not support for the GOP.

    2. I have no love for the Republican Establishement. I’m trying to understand what Palin is up to.

I find it utterly fascinating long-time Republican/conservative pundits are now bashing Palin supporters. After seeing the enthusiasm of the Palin crowds this weekend in Iowa and New Hampshire, shouting “RUN, SARAH, RUN”, they deride our passionate support for one candidate. I sense they now attack us, as Palin has not disappeared as the elites have long desired.

I Palin isn’t “electable”, then what worry about her running or not? If she goes down to defeat, then one of Coulter’s or Ingram’s approved choices will be the candidate — no big deal.

However, until such time I find a person better than Palin to back, I will remain a Palinista.

PS. I understand Coulter will NOT watch “Undefeated”. Why not, as it is a political documentary covering one of the post important figures in recent events? Coulter prides herself on being fully informed, so it makes me wonder from whom she is getting her direction from.

    “I sense they now attack us, as Palin has not disappeared as the elites have long desired.”

    spot on… a few Fox employees must have got a memo from the top – their beltway elitist gang is uncomfortable with the thought the status quo might, their meal tickets and cash flow JUST might get cleaned up with a Palin presidency… they don’t reform at all… Rs nor Ds

    only Greta and Sean seem to be nice to Sarah at Fox these days…

    if you are unhappy with status quo over spending, cronyism / business as usual Ds AND Rs, you should be embracing the truth Sarah tells

Interesting that Coulter boosts a candidate not afraid to get in voters’ faces personally but finds candidate supporters who get in pundits’ faces offputting.

And conservative pundits have never gotten “hate mail” from the Left? Thus, the much milder criticism from supporters of a conservative candidate is worse and more frightening to them?

Surreal.

Forgot to say how much I appreciate your balanced, good sense assessments, Professor Jacobson. Visiting Le-gal In-sur-rec-tion is a must each day.

I like Palin, I think her intellect is seriously under-rated by Dems and the MSM, and at the end of the day, she is the reason I ended up voting for McCain (http://energeopolitics.com/2008/11/04/in-the-end-i-voted-mccain/).

That being said, I think the conservative critiques of her are fair. She has done a very good job of remaining in the spotlight, of “working the crowd” and of supporting the right causes, but she has not done any serious policy work in the last 3 years. And, of course, she quit on her constituents in Alaska. Her reasons for doing so are might be understandable, but they also disqualify her from seeking the presidency, IMO. I think she knows it, too. If she wants to keep pretending otherwise, I guess that is relatively harmless, but it is almost certainly a pretense.

She is a strong voice on important issues and one of the most charismatic Republicans on the national scene and I hope she keeps fighting, but she will never be President.

    “And, of course, she quit on her constituents in Alaska. Her reasons for doing so are might be understandable, but they also disqualify her from seeking the presidency, IMO.”

    this makes you a “concern toll” who lovingly states they love Sarah sooooo much, but of course she should NEVER ever ever ever consider running for Potus….

    that job is being done Sooooo well by Obama now, ain’t it?

    Sarah would make a great potus

    get over yourself

    It’s a little confusing as to how you think someone who holds no elected office & speaks in no official capacity would do “serious policy work”

    As for thinking quitting disqualifying her from ever seeking the Pres – that is your opinion- not a fact. HEr departure left Alaska in no worse situation that the states of those who got elected. At least there was a sitting/elected LT Gov who could assume the duties of GOV – rather than requiring a special election to fill the vacancy – a la Clinton, Biden, etc.

      “It’s a little confusing as to how you think someone who holds no elected office & speaks in no official capacity would do ‘serious policy work’ ”

      it’s disciplined writing and analysis

      and, for Lisa – the choice isn’t between Palin and Obama, it is between Palin and the other GOPers who are already fighting to take on O. You have created a false dichotomy to avoid confronting the actual issues I raised. I am perfectly happy to engage in debate and even to be proven wrong, but you have to ACTUALLY ENGAGE with what I have written in order to do so.

        then quit trotting out the very old liberal baseless bashing points like “she quit” as being a valid reason to NOT support her… its annoying and shows you listen to the lamestread media nonsense – and believe it – instead of a) looking at her record and b) understanding the legitimate reasons she quit: hint, it was hurting Alaska

        she was elected govern Alaska and did it quite well… her record says so

          Cowboy Curtis in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 7, 2011 at 8:01 pm

          Discussing the fact she quit the governorship half way through her term is off limits for discussion? Is anything in-limits?

          to Cowboy Curtis, why does her resignation upset you so? Her reasons made perfect sense to me… So I ask the anti-Palin people here, why was resigning a negative? I just don’t get why that was SUCH a HUGE deal you could NEVER support her because of it?

          really?

          Cowboy Curtis in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 7, 2011 at 9:04 pm

          Did I just say it was a huge problem, or that I never could support her? I’m just wondering why you’re deeming it an issue beyond discussion. Do you feel it won’t be an issue in a general campaign? I’m sure if you tell Obama its off limits, they’ll comply.

          leeatmg in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 7, 2011 at 9:11 pm

          I think the point here was that she was elected to govern and chose not to fulfill her obligation. One qualification for the presidency should be resolve, and another experience. One could argue that quitting 2 years and change into her first term becomes a relevant issue based on those criteria. Those aren’t the only criteria, but they are fair criteria to judge one’s fitness for the office. It doesn’t necessarily rule her out for me, but it is a consideration, and to casually treat her resignation as a complete non-issue gets us into the zealotry territory we’ve been discussing here. If you can’t see any faults whatsoever in her as a candidate, then it’s hard to take your advocacy seriously. All the candidates have faults, including Ms. Palin.

          Cowboy Curtis in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 7, 2011 at 9:12 pm

          Heretic!!! Burn him!!!

[…] of fairness, at that same Memeorandum link are rebuttals to the criticisms from Stacy McCain and Professor Jacobson, among […]

Um…excuse me if I make mention of something here. Has anyone noticed that this thread has 107 comments so far? Are the people who think Palin has no chance taking note of this?

I still think she should run for Senate in AZ, but if she does run for the presidency, I would fully expect that she will fill up stadiums all over the country with very enthusiastic supporters.

The truth is that Palin is indeed a pohenomenon. No on can take that away from her.

    leeatmg in reply to Ipso Facto. | September 7, 2011 at 9:23 pm

    I don’t think there’s any argument that Palin stirs up quite a debate, with both avid supporters and detractors (both with valid viewpoints.) No other candidate, thus far, stirs such passions. That said, not all of them are positive, and therein lies the rub – can she channel that passion to a victory, or will she push people’s patience too far?

    The original point of this entire post was a discussion about how Ms. Palin may be alienating some of her potential base by dragging this out, as “unorthodox” as her methods may be. It’s a fair point, and one that, in my opinion, is reinforced by the number of comments to this thread – she is starting to alienate some people, and those who are her most ardent defenders are becoming very defensive of her. Nothing wrong with either of those viewpoints, until one side or the other becomes bitter and disenfranchised to the point of not showing up at the polls in ’12. Some above in this thread have already raised that possibility. It’s already started.

    For all the slamming of the “establishment”, the “conservative elite”, the “punditry”, and so on, the fact is that they are voters too, and ones with influence. I’d love to throw out the whole bunch of them and start over, but that’s not a realistic approach. For all the Republican establishment does wrong, they do get it right occasionally, and just as they need the Tea Party backing them and pushing them to the right, the Tea Party needs them too.

    Personally, I’m in the ABO camp – I’ll vote for a turnip if it can beat Obama at this point. Can’t be any worse. I’d love it if it were a true conservative, and I’ll tolerate it even if it’s a RINO. Sarah Palin would be great in my book – but if it’s not her, I’m OK with that too so long as it’s not four more years of this socialist nightmare experiment we call “The One.”

I know, I know, I forgot to spell check…sorry!

Since Palin has come unto the political scene I have asked questions about her and Alaska’s pro-union environment. Alaska is a forced union state and was under Palin’s governorship.

What has Palin done, or what did she do while governor, to change this? This structure existed before, during and still exists after her time as Gov. of Alaska.

Here is a link entitled Big Labor vs. Taxpayer, the lower the ranking the more Big Labor friendly a state is. Alaska is 36th: http://workplacechoice.org/state-map/

OneVoiceInAmerica | September 7, 2011 at 8:28 pm

I wonder, is she stringing folks along, or flushing them out? I’ve found most of these “timeline/willshe or won’t she” conversations very revealing, lick your hole cards and stick ’em to your forehead revealing!

It’s nice to know a source’s bias, makes it easier to digest information sometimes. I’m sure taking mental notes and wouldn’t be surprised if Mrs. Palin is too. Nice to know whe has your back and who has a dull knife.

FYI first post of a long time reader, really like your blog!

[…] And she just completed 3 new jackalopes today: Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and Erick Erickson. […]

Kevin Dujan of HillBuzz just wrote a open letter to Palin, which was brilliant and inspiring. In it, he refers to her as the American Artemis: You are our American Artemis, when we need an epic hero more than ever.

With that in mind, I have a take-off I would like to share.

Dialog, tailored a bit from a quote in Richard Riordan’s “Percy Jackson and the Olympians” series:

That politico in Alaksa,” Zoe said. “You turned him into a jackalope.”

Ah, yes.” Artemis nodded, satisfied. “I enjoy making jackalopes…”

And she just completed 3 new jackalopes today: Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and Erick Erickson.

Professor, this post has stirred up the hornet’s nest. A vertible Republican riot. Good on us. IMO Palin doesn’t need to run for POTUS. While she is in the woods, a place she actually likes, she is free to do and say what she wants. One poster points out that the left automatically gets 40% and then asks can Palin get the other 10%? Doh, she only needs 5%+ 1 vote. Another points out that she QUIT her Governorship and that disqualifies her for further office. Let’s admit that Alaska is small potatoes (kudos to Dan Quayle) and she believes that she has bigger salmon to fry. Cue the Momma Grizzly meme.
Oh and Palin didn’t mention the Republican Party, she rarely mentions the Republican Party and that is what gets the Republicans all riled up. I can’t say that since 1988 the Republicans have gotten much right on the economy and the culture so what are we talking about? Time for a 3rd. party? Not since Lincoln and later Teddy R have we had a successful third party bid for POTUS. Hmmmm funny when the Republican Party splits the offshoot wins the prize but when the Dems split……

    leeatmg in reply to Karensky. | September 7, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    I don’t think anyone here thinks that her quitting the governorship disqualifies her for the office, only that it’s a fair point of discussion regarding her fitness for office. One could argue that the same reasons she gave for resigning in Alaska (she was hurting the state because or the firestorm of criticism surrounding her) could apply to her as President – would she resign the Presidency if the fire got too hot, citing the fact that she was “hurting America?” I doubt it, but it’s a fair question based on her history. To be sure, though, this is a contentious topic and has stirred up quite a discussion.

    Professor – thanks to you for hosting such a remarkable blog in a sea of mediocrity. It’s great that we can have (mostly) a reasonable and intelligent discussion here. It’s why this blog replaced another on my menu bar – read it every day, at least a few times.

      “… don’t think anyone here thinks that her quitting the governorship disqualifies her for the office, only that it’s a fair point of discussion regarding her fitness for office.”

      Exactly. Speaking as a strong supporter of hers, it is fair to bring up and she should have to defend it. I’m satisfied with her reasons, but the issue needs to be aired again, if only because opponents will be sure to try to define her by it.

    In a way, she does need to run. “To say to the left, your crushing smear campaign will not prevent one me running, and it won’t work on anyone else either.” T o nip that in the bus.

    If for no other reason.

    BUT, I would contend that there are many GOOD REASONS why she should run. For one, She was our standard bearer last time, and because of her, McCain almost got to even against an opponent who had the entire media on his side. Against overwhelming odds, this woman, who is a phenomenon, saved McCain from a 60/40 loss. To say she should now be nothing more than a cheerleader is both sexist and demeaning, and damaging to our party.

    We need her clear vision for the difficult days ahead. She won’t dither – and you have to admit the world would be an entirely better place if she was sitting in the White House right now. There’d have been no bowing to dictators. No tax-cheats in charge of the treasury. No Czars. No Fast&Furious. And probably no need to raise the debt ceiling (unless of course, Dems still controlled both houses)

    She has done more to influence the debate against Obama than anyone else over the past few years – armed with the simplest of tools, her Facebook account. On every single issue, she has called him out, stood her ground, and forced a change in the debate. Remember, they took out the ‘death panel’ language that they denied existed?

    She has to run. And we have a golden opportunity.

David R. Graham | September 7, 2011 at 10:09 pm

“The nonsense coming from Coulter and Erickson and others is why I am not overly optimistic about 2012, regardless of what the polls now show. We are our own worst enemies.”

Concur. Several reasons we are our own worst enemies, known, no need to recount.

“Palin is simply the test case for how the Republican nominee, whoever that person may be, will be treated, and we pile on her at our own peril.”

That is the heart of the matter. One: don’t play the enemy’s tune or dance to his gig. Two: don’t try to control the wind. Three: say what you mean and mean what you say. Four: what you talk about do, what you cannot do do not talk about. Five: be still and observe developments – and practice the Eleventh Commandment.

And I am disappointed in retire05’s fusillading, even attempted enfilading. Unbecoming. Quite against the welfare of the party, the government and the nation.

“Sudden and relentless reform.” She has given there the strategic goal (re-form the USA) and the tactical means (sudden and relentless movement towards the goal). That is a fighter speaking. Fighters frighten crony capitalists such as Erickson, Ingraham and Coulter. The job of fighters (professional soldiers) is to protect the vulnerable from liars, cheats and thieves. Michelle Bachmann, also, is a fighter, but she attacked her benefactor, thus demonstrating disloyalty, the greatest of all sins! God help us!

The unease with Mitt Romney is aroused by his lack of presence as a fighter, a warrior. A good man otherwise, a skilled politician, bureaucrat and businessman, no doubt, but a POTUS is first and foremost a battle commander, a warrior, and Mitt is not to that manner born. Ditto Herman Cain, a fine businessman, and Newt Gingrich, a fine professor: neither is a battle leader. Ron Paul likewise, a fine medical doctor but not a warrior. There are fine leaders who are not warriors. In fact, most fine leaders are not warriors. Warrior is a calling, not a job, a profession, not a career. POTUS is par excellence a warrior’s role. Head of State, no matter the polity, always is and always will be a warrior’s role. In our system, in civilian dress and status, but a warrior.

Christie and Ryan are not warriors. They are lawyers, which is close to warrior, but they are not called as warriors per se. (Same for Scott Brown.) Lawyer is not the same as warrior and not, therefore, automatic fundamental qualification for POTUS. There are warriors who upon retirement become lawyers.

That leaves Perry, Bachmann and possibly Palin. All are warriors, although Bachmann and Perry have, at least through proxies, attacked a fellow warrior, which, in the profession, is not done. That the Bush warrior and civilian formation of the Republican Party has attacked Perry is not a good or commendable thing. The Perry and Bush formations are both American.

I do not see anyone qualified who the Democratic Party could advance for the role of POTUS other than Stan McCrystal and there is little to no chance of that happening.

Still, that does not mean a non-warrior cannot or will not be elevated to the role of POTUS, bad as that always is.

So, this side of Election Day 2012, I commend letting the winds blow as they may, enjoy the drama, work for whomever warrior one desires as POTUS, help define their concepts for re-forming the nation, including in contra-distinction to those of other warriors seeking the opportunity, and abide the finitude of one’s opinions and frame of reference. “Sudden and relentless reform” is the goal. Cunning, charitable, committed speech and action are the means.

[…] assessment of Palin’s rabid fans was probably a bit harsh. I think there is a segment who could be described that way, but essentially any candidate will […]

Her’s a thought. Some of you are castigating Palin for quitting the governorship of Alaska (albeit for sound reasons) and say such a resignation disqualifies her from running for POTUS. These same people are now saying that even though she has said she would announce her candidacy, yea or nay, at the end of September, she should now renege on that and announce now for no good reason at all except for their own personal peace of mind. Why play into the media and the dims’ hands? Why gie them more talking points? What am I seeing here? You are asserting that she should change her mind? And some are making the statement that she cannot be elected. Just who do you think the 46 million people voted for in the last election? McCain? Come on. The republican ticket would have gotten a h*ll of a lot more votes if McCain had not been on the ticket. The base did not want him. And many of the base refused to taint their principles so they either stayed at home or refused to vote for president or voted for the boy wonder in lieu of McCain.

    leeatmg in reply to BarbaraS. | September 8, 2011 at 12:08 am

    Barbara;

    Maybe. There are some who voted for McCain, some who voted for Palin, and some who voted for both. I know people who fit all three categories (my wife liked McCain, and hated Obama and Palin, for what it’s worth, and still does.) The base didn’t want him, but the moderates didn’t want her. So we lost.

    I don’t think it’s fair to say she is unelectable at all, but I always go back to William F. Buckley’s credo: to elect the most conservative person that is electable. We’ll see if Palin is that person soon enough.

I have never ever seen the attacks on a non-candidate as I have seen against Sarah Palin. Why? I smell fear for their jobs the establishment holds — Pundits, columnists, politicians. Sarah has a knack for exposing those who are not honest and tells it like it is.

Will she–?–won’t she–? Should she, shouldn’t she?
Whatever.
I remain firmly committed in my support of a Palin candidacy.
Until such time as she announces she will not seek the nomination, or in the unlikely event that she seeks but does not win the Republican Party nomination, for me, it is all in for Palin.

Should she not be the Republican nominee, I will support ABO – Anyone But Voldermort.

As to the potential for her to win the nomination, I read the Palin Electability Series last April when it came out. I found it very persuasive then, and find nothing to challenge that assessment today.

In my view, if she seeks the nomination, she earns it; ultimately winning the election on 6 Nov 12 becoming the 45th President of the United States.

Take good care,
Sandy

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend