Image 01 Image 03

Sarah Palin Abandons Ted Cruz, Endorses Donald Trump

Sarah Palin Abandons Ted Cruz, Endorses Donald Trump

All the drama

Seems like only yesterday I was watching Sarah Palin stump for Ted Cruz in the Texas Senate Runoff race. My how times have changed.

Before a huge crowd gathered in the smoldering July heat of The Woodlands, Texas, alongside then Senator Jim DeMint, Palin said:

But the good news is, there is nothing wrong with America that a good ol’ fashioned election can’t fix. Ted [Cruz] is a proven, common sense, Constitutional conservative. He’s a fighter and he will bring new leadership to the United States Senate. He will shrink government, he will be putting it back on the side of the people and he will defend the United States Constitution. Ted Cruz represents the positive change that we need.

In addition to Gov. Palin, Cruz also garnered endorsements from Senator Rand Paul, Senator Pat Toomey, Senator Jim DeMint, RedState, and Sean Hannity in 2012.

But that was four years ago, and 2016 has brought with it chaos and disorder.

The New York Times reported Tuesday afternoon:

“I’m proud to endorse Donald J. Trump for president,” Ms. Palin said in a statement provided by his campaign.

Her support is the highest-profile backing for a Republican contender so far.

“I am greatly honored to receive Sarah’s endorsement,” Mr. Trump said in a statement trumpeting Mrs. Palin’s decision. “She is a friend, and a high-quality person whom I have great respect for. I am proud to have her support.”

Rumors of Palin’s pending endorsement began circulating early Tuesday. Cruz’s campaign immediately responded saying:

“I think it [would] be a blow to Sarah Palin, because Sarah Palin has been a champion for the conservative cause, and if she was going to endorse Donald Trump, sadly, she would be endorsing someone who’s held progressive views all their life on the sanctity of life, on marriage, on partial-birth abortion,” Cruz campaign spokesman Rick Tyler said on CNN’s “New Day.”

Which ultimately lead to Bristol Palin, daughter of Gov. Palin, to pen this nice little note in Patheos:

Bristol wrote:

After hearing what Cruz is now saying about my mom, in a negative knee-jerk reaction, makes me hope my mom does endorse Trump. Cruz’s flip-flop, turning against my mom who’s done nothing but support and help him when others sure didn’t, shows he’s a typical politician. How rude to that he’s setting up a false narrative about her!

America doesn’t need that. We need someone who has a vision for economic prosperity, who won’t let us get kicked around in the world, and who will fight for our future.

I didn’t go to Harvard Law School, but I know this: You can like two people in a race, but there will only one president.

The audacity to suggest that because she chooses one over the other will somehow “damage” her just shows arrogance.

And then Cruz attempted to mitigate the very public spat by saying, “I love Sarah Palin,” and referring to himself as “a big fan.”

That politicians are viewed as celebrities with fandoms is only part of the problem, but that’s a discussion for another time.

And so we have a politician turned reality TV star endorsing a reality TV star turned politician. But this is what the people want, apparently. Limited government? Conservatism? Psssh. People want to be entertained!

There is no Conservative blasphemy afoot. Palin has long since forsook the Tea Party platform that propelled her into national stardom. After all, in the same year she endorsed Cruz, Palin endorsed the ultimate (by some estimations) Old Guard Republican — Senator Orin Hatch.

National Review’s Charles C.W. Cooke expounds:

Alas, there is no grand principle on display here. There is nothing but opportunism and ego. For a long time now, Sarah Palin has been apt to say anything and everything to keep the cameras buzzing around her hive. This rotten endorsement completes the decline. What, we might ask, has become of Palin’s beloved Tea Party? What, too, of her purported admiration for limited government, and of her ostensible hatred of heretics and fakers? The prospect of a mass movement that was earnestly committed to libertarianism was always a little too good to be true, but even I didn’t imagine it ending like this. All that talk of the Constitution and the Declaration; all that energy expended against the cronies and the rent-seekers; all those purifying voter drives — and for what? So that Sarah Palin could add a few zeroes to her bank balance and Donald Trump could go from the purchaser to the bought? Today was the day that Rick Santelli’s famous yelp finally melted into populism and avarice. Today, at about ten minutes past six, P. T. Barnum beat out Hayek for the soul of the insurgent Right. Today, the rebels became the charlatans they had set out to depose. What comes next will be anybody’s guess.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Humphrey's Executor | January 19, 2016 at 7:10 pm

Her speech is just a tad bit rambling and incoherent.

    Appropriate, no?

    Still she has nice legs. I just might base my vote on who has the most support from women with nice legs. It makes as much sense as just about everything else about this election so far.

    Sigh…. my liver just screamed in fear. It knows what’s coming.

    After the election…. carrot juice and distilled water. Promise. Really.

    inspectorudy in reply to Humphrey's Executor. | January 19, 2016 at 9:35 pm

    So is Trump’s. The two of them belong together.

Cruz is the only candidate backed by palin that kept his promises and didn’t go all smoke and mirrors once they were elected. Shame on you Sarah.

Well, we’re separating the wheat from the goats.


Ya’ll know what I mean.

I stood for hours in a cold rain in a North Houston suburb to see Palin and Parry when Parry last ran for governor.

She changed. I have not.

Duh Donald is a deal-making Progressive, and just AGAIN proved he’s Mr. Establishment by selling out to the ethanol lobby in Iowa…even calling for an INCREASE in the market distorting ethanol subsidies and mandates. Just like Solyndra, but corny.

The TEA party…what was left…died today.

    What in the world are you rambling about? You’re barely coherent at the best of times but this latest display is just bizarre.

      Ragspierre in reply to Vince. | January 19, 2016 at 7:35 pm

      Where did you get lost, Vince?

      Did you NOT know that T-rump sold out to BIG CORN in Iowa?

      Did you NOT know that T-rump has attacked Cruz from the LEFT as a tool of “big oil”?

      What do I need to illuminate further?

        Good grief. Get back on your meds. Something is very wrong with you.

        I’m sorry that I had to say that but you are a real mess. I’ll pray for your family tonight.

          inspectorudy in reply to Vince. | January 19, 2016 at 9:38 pm

          Why is the truth so upsetting vinne? Did you not read what happened yesterday in Iowa? Trump in not only for ethanol he actually said he was for a larger MANDATE, you know bigger government? Now he is using the left’s attack on Cruz the only conservative in the race who actually is against the ethanol subsidies and mandates.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Vince. | January 20, 2016 at 6:29 pm

          Considering everything that Rags said is demonstrable fact, I am fairly certain its not him that needs to get back on his meds. You on the other hand……..

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Vince. | January 20, 2016 at 3:00 am

      Yo, Vinnie, try to keep up, dude. Trump bought mega-corn in Iowa yesterday for votes. He even showed up today with a bag of it sporting high heels.

      But who knows? If he actually gets elected he’ll probably stiff Iowa like he does everybody else he ‘owes’.

    In March 2010 wife and I traveled far to attend a Palin event in Searchlight, Nevada.
    She was great then, not so much now.
    As Ragspierre said: She has changed. Wife and I have not and will vote conservative.

    Your comments are so bizarre and weird at times that I wonder if you’re a democrat plant. You have no compunction about insulting other readers with foul language and personal insults…

    it does make me wonder if you’re a Daily Kos groupie that is just here to sow dissent and chaos.

    I’m not really sure of your prognosis but something about you is definitely scary.. and it’s very difficult to believe that you are a conservative and/or republican. It’s just not likely…

    I’ve been reading your comments for the last 12 months and come to the conclusion that you are saying things because someone is paying you. It’s disappointing and a bit aggravating that a person would do that but… this is politics… people are bought off every day.


      gibbie in reply to Vince. | January 19, 2016 at 8:23 pm

      If there is something in particular which Rags said with which you disagree, please state it and what you disagree with about it. Otherwise, stop blathering.

      inspectorudy in reply to Vince. | January 19, 2016 at 9:42 pm

      Is this the new Trump talking points vinnie? Attacking anyone who says anything about Trump? Where were you last year when the Donald was a Demorat? Or recently when he said he wanted to keep the funding going to planned parenthood for the good things they do? Do you know the good things they do? I don’t. How about answering the people on this forum who are asking questions about Trump’s positions instead of attacking them?

One less voice to bother considering in the future.

    Ragspierre in reply to windbag. | January 19, 2016 at 7:25 pm

    Well, she damn sure damaged her brand. This was the equivalent of a Chevy Volt…

    Yep. No need to consider Cruz’s New York values talk in Iowa any longer.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | January 19, 2016 at 8:18 pm

      Why not? Duh Donald is still the Progressive deal-making, BIG GOVERNMENT crony he has always been, promoting the VERY WORST Deemocrat candidates nationwide and in New York City, where he happily swims in that corruption.

      Nothing has changed in truth.

        NC Mountain Girl in reply to Ragspierre. | January 19, 2016 at 8:47 pm

        As I understand it, a good many of Trump’s supporters say they are hopping mad because Republican leaders in Congress compromised the ideals they campaigned on in 2010 ans 1014 as evidenced by their being willing to make deals with Obama. Because of this, these angry voters are flocking to a candidate who has trouble explaining any core principle other than his twin beliefs that 1) America must be great country because it made him a celebrity and 2) he is the best deal maker who has ever lived.

        I find this distressingly close to the attitudes of Boehner, McConnell, Ryan, McCain, Gramnesty, et al that because a deal can be made with the political left that deal must be made: After all, that is what deal makers do.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | January 20, 2016 at 6:42 pm

          Well it probably doesn’t help that he changed his tune on all these issues basically right before he decided to run for President. The problem with Trumpets is that they aren’t interested in facts.

Wait, does this mean we might see a Trump/Palin ticket?

The political equivalent of an ’80s hair band!


    DuraMater in reply to rinardman. | January 19, 2016 at 7:58 pm

    I’m sure this came with a price tag that Trump was all too willing to pay. And isn’t Gov. Palin still beholdin’ to John Whacko Bird McCain? It does not stretch my imagination to envision a couple of phone calls from McCain’s office: one to Trump and one to Palin to “cut a deal”.

      Nope she paid her debt to McCain during his last run for senate.

      Maybe she can be secretary of interior or Secretary of Energy. That ought to make establishment heads explode.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to rinardman. | January 20, 2016 at 6:46 pm

    Exactly my thought. Right now Cruz and Trump are getting their short lists of running mates ready. Palin has been supportive of Cruz throughout his career.

    What I think happened is that Palin didn’t make Cruz’s shot list and she either found out or flat out asked. So she got pissed and decided to Endorse Trump.

    Honestly, though her endorsement doesn’t really carry the weight it used to, so this is actually not that big of a deal. I think she feels betrayed by Cruz for not at least being included on the short list and is lashing out.

The headline is disingenuous. Just because Palin endorsed Trump over Cruz, doesn’t mean she is “abandoning” Cruz. It’s not like she’s withdrawing her endorsment of Cruz for Senate.

I don’t see, as Bristol and others do, Cruz’s statement as a vicious attack. I do see as being a bit vindictive. What’s up with Cruz. First this attack on New Yorkers, now Palin. He’s starting to behave the same way that others accuse Trump of behaving.

I also don’t see Palin as being the most prominent endorsement. Recently Phillis Schlafley endorsed Trump, which I see as being more prominent.

    Ragspierre in reply to HandyGandy. | January 19, 2016 at 7:42 pm

    “First this attack on New Yorkers…”

    Nooooopa. Nice try, buckwheat.

    He attacked NEW YORK CITY VALUES.

    BIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiiiiGGG difference. As I would bet you knew.

      janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | January 19, 2016 at 9:00 pm

      Rags, as representative of a Cruz constituency, you are only helping to turn people off of him with your invectives.

      Grow up. What in hell has happened to you over the past year.

    pesanteur in reply to HandyGandy. | January 19, 2016 at 7:58 pm

    “Recently Phillis Schlafley endorsed Trump, which I see as being more prominent.”

    You’re right.

    Schlafley also recognize the necessity of busting the paradigm. She and Palin are free thinkers.

    inspectorudy in reply to HandyGandy. | January 19, 2016 at 9:46 pm

    If you had any reading skills you would have read that it wasn’t Cruz who made the statement crying about Palin endorsing Trump. It was a staffer. Cruz reminded everyone that he would have never been a Senator had it not been for her help.

“But that was four years ago, and 2016 has brought with it chaos and disorder.”

Right. Four years ago Palin endorsed Ted Cruz against David Dewhurst and today she endorsed Donald Trump over six other candidates including Ted Cruz.

Such chaos and disorder.

Did you even bother to explain her reasoning?

Palin is far more about “busting up Washington” than pure conservatism (if such a thing exists, and if such a thing could be embodied by anybody receiving the amount of corporate donations as Ted Cruz). Whether you agree or not, Palin is advancing a coherent and urgent cause — to send to Washington an authentic disruptive agent, as the monolith of government has grown far beyond the capacity for reformation by an insider, i.e., another lawyer/politician.

I am beginning to realize that the lawyer/politician model of governance has hit a wall. We can’t go on like this. There are risks with Trump, but I think they’re worth it.

Anyway, what callow, chippy writing.

    gibbie in reply to pesanteur. | January 19, 2016 at 8:29 pm

    At least Cruz is not in the very big pocket of Big Ethanol.

    With Trump, you’ll have to elect him to see what’s in him.

      MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to gibbie. | January 19, 2016 at 8:49 pm

      He demonstrated he is no different from the other Big Government politicians. He endorsed using taxpayer money to enrich the politically connected ethanol producers and buy the votes of Iowa corn farmers. Those subsidies make all of us poorer. The politically connected get enrich, we get poorer, and Trump gets the votes.

      He’s showing how corrupt he is before anybody has even voted for him.

        Oh wait! He’s his own man don’t you know? He’s so rich he doesn’t need anyone else’s money and he isn’t beholding to anyone. Well guess what? He is in the bag for one of the biggest ripoffs in our history. Bio ethanol made from food! Not only does it pollute the air more than straight gas but it takes even more gas/ethanol to get the same mileage as straight gas too. So it’s a lose lose for America. Thanks Trump.

NC Mountain Girl | January 19, 2016 at 7:51 pm

Palin started strong as governor and then when national attention was focused on her began to make a serious of questionable decisions. Woth her early resignation as Governor she went from being a rising politician to just another reality TV figure. At that point she lost my good opinion of her.

The pattern has been set that Palin tends to have issues with everyone she works with outside of her own family. I wonder how long it will be before she had a falling out with The Donald.

    “I wonder how long it will be before she had a falling out with The Donald.”
    Probably the first time she tries to offer any constructive criticism he’ll toss her. I’ve been told he takes no advice from advisers. Period.

    Watching and listening to the man it is clear he is quite rattled by even the slightest challenge. His strained and contorted facial expressions and body language during debates reveal his discomfort in such a venue. On some topics, relevant topics, he is indeed well versed and strikes every note. At other times it is clear he is totally unprepared, he rambles about his wealth and empire, starts pulling comments out of his…off the cuff then descends into vicious and bombastic smears against the one opponent he should hope wins the nomination if he doesn’t.

      inspectorudy in reply to DuraMater. | January 20, 2016 at 11:57 am

      One thing is for damned sure and that if Trump and Palin split, which I am certain they will, he is going to have a lot of ammo against her and her family!

I watched her endorsement speech.

WOW. She blew the doors off. This is Y u u u g e.

Her attacks on GOPe and how Trump is the man for busting up GOPe.

Her listof all his coservative values.

Her saying don’t try and tell me who is conservative enough GOPe. Don’t try and tell me Trump isn’t conservative enough when he is endorsed by anti abortion conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly.

Palin in one speech has destroyed Cruz’s whole game plan for next two weeks.

She also blew doors off Nikki Haley whom was only elected because of Palin for attacking Trump and his supporters. Basically called Haley a tool of the eztablishment.

Even the commentators on CNN WERE dumb founded at how great was Palin’s endorsement speech.

Right now on CNN a Cl8nto campaign operative is on TV saying many of the things Kimberlee and all the usual cruzbot suspects are saying above.

Big Mo Goes To Trump. Check…

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | January 19, 2016 at 8:00 pm

    Big suck goes to Gari, the cult follower.

    I’ve got you repeatedly acknowledging that T=rump is NOT a conservative, and that’s cool with you, because “this election is not about conservative principles”.

    Which, for you and your little yellow god, is true.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to Gary Britt. | January 19, 2016 at 8:10 pm

    Who other than statists watches CNN these days?

    Elect Trunp and all that happens is that America replaces one corrupt to the bone big government demagogue with another. Trump may say he loves America but I have yet to see much evidence he loves liberty for anyone other than Donald Trump.

      Maybe if you take your hands from over your eyes you will be able to see what Sarah Palin, Phyllis Schlafly, Loretta Lynn and the majority of GOP base see.

        NC Mountain Girl in reply to Gary Britt. | January 19, 2016 at 8:20 pm

        I was at one of the first Tea Party rallies held in 2009. Most Trump supporters I know were still voting for Democrats at the tine.

          Yep Trump brings the old Reagan democrats back to GOP. It was good when reagan did it and good when Trump does it. It is why Trump most electable in general election.

          Things are different than 2009. Then it was debt and obamacare now we have real existential threat from open borders and GOPe.

          Ragspierre in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | January 19, 2016 at 8:36 pm

          I’ve often noted your rich fantasy life as a fanatical cult follower of Duh Donald.

          He’s the LEAST favored to win over the Deemocrat nominee, and the single MOST disliked of all candidates.

          Why would people get out and vote for one Collectivist over another?

    inspectorudy in reply to Gary Britt. | January 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

    I heard her speech and it sounded like a 60’s car hop on LSD. You must have heard someone else.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Gary Britt. | January 20, 2016 at 6:56 pm

    Actually her speech was rambling, dis-associative, and somewhat incoherent. There has even been speculation that she may have had one to many before making it to the stage.

    She has done nothing to hurt Cruz, and frankly her endorsement isn’t that big of a deal because she doesn’t have the backing and followers that she used to.

    What will be remembered is that she did not back Cruz, not that she backed Trump.

I used to support Cruz. A lot. His ACTUAL voting record in the Senate is EL STINKO.

The continual Trump bashing at this site is really annoying.

The same old people, same old lies… I think you are paid trolls sitting around here at LI – just to bash Trump!

Yea Kimberly, these people who say they are conservative and back Trump. Who do they think they’re fooling? I suggest you call Phyllis Schlafly and tell her she’s no conservative!

    Radegunda in reply to nerkbuckeye. | January 19, 2016 at 10:07 pm

    She’s about 91, isn’t she? Not likely as sharp in the mind before.

    Radegunda in reply to nerkbuckeye. | January 19, 2016 at 10:19 pm

    No serious, thoughtful conservative (with rational faculties intact) would dismiss the disturbing fact that Trump highly praised Obama and his policies.

    His fans claim that he sincerely changed his mind. But even if he did — rather than making an opportunistic switch — why should we trust the wisdom of someone who was so terribly wrong so recently? Maybe he saw the light, but that doesn’t mean that someone with such terrible judgment in his sixties — and such fluid principles — ought to be president.

    Alternatively, his fans claim that his earlier praise and support of Democrats was simply what he “needed” to do as a businessman. Oh really? What happened to the constant refrain that Trump is “authentic”? and incorruptible?

    When the Tea Party was surging, and swinging the House to the Republicans, Donald Trump gave the maximum amount permitted to help HARRY REID get reelected.

    Yes, Trumpbots: your great, wise, principled “conservative” hero was determined to make sure that HARRY REID kept the Senate in his clutches.

Is it 1298 all over again?

Barf. I defended her for years after the 2008 election against all my Republican naysayer friends. Recognized the populist streak, but still … barf. Regret every positive word said.

We are seeing the world – repub, dems, corrputocrapts, whomever – converge to destroy the tea party right now. A defining moment. I think I will kick a few dollars more into the Cruz campaign – well spent or not, I think its important – and make a few more phone calls to friends.

The flocking to trump reminds of the expression power corrupts. Its not that power corrupts those who wield it – often, like Hillary, the powerful and power-seeking were corrupt long before they gained any – rather, power is a magnet for the weak who seek to bask in the powerful, and their power corrupts those around them as they seek it.

We are seeing that right now. Trump knows how to play them all. They all seek benefit from him, not support him, drawn as the moth to flame as he pushes their button and dazzles them with the moves of the powerful.

As they say, the super-rich – they really are different. And they attract and know how to use those who are attracted to them.

Its good to see it play out before our eyes again, on the heels of the cult of personality of Obama, and be reminded its not just one party or set of people that are susceptible.

But it sure is depressing.

    Ragspierre in reply to PrincetonAl. | January 19, 2016 at 9:12 pm

    Yeeup. Depressing and disturbing and disgusting.

    Radegunda in reply to PrincetonAl. | January 19, 2016 at 9:54 pm

    I used to defend Palin from charges that she’s an airhead, because I don’t think she is. I have the impression that she handled practical responsibilities with reasonable competence as a mayor & governor (even if she should perhaps have paid more attention to her daughters).

    But as soon as I heard her speak, I thought “That’s the woman I’ve heard about as a great political talent? Really?” And even while defending her, I found it embarrassing to see her touted as presidential material, and having a cultish following.

    Her endorsement of Trump is a case of one overrated (but now faded) cult figure endorsing another overrated (but much wealthier) cult figure.

    Radegunda in reply to PrincetonAl. | January 19, 2016 at 10:05 pm

    I don’t think Trump could possibly have such a following if he didn’t have TV celebrity. People like to imagine that a wealth celebrity really cares about them. When people say “He loves America” (as though it were a sufficient presidential qualification; as though the other candidates don’t), they’re likely thinking “He really loves me.”

    In the case of the billionaire Trump, they say “He speaks for me” because they went to believe they’re a lot like him. (Aside from the wealth, I can’t imagine why anyone would want to be like Trump.)

    In reality, he noticed what the public cares about — which couldn’t have been very hard to see — and it happened to be much different from policies and people he was recently praising. So he dramatically shifted his “principles” — and yet his fans claim he’s “authentic” simply because he’s happy to insult people and say whatever pops into his mind; no matter that he’s contradicting what he said yesterday.

Eastwood Ravine | January 19, 2016 at 9:11 pm

People are making much of this. The thing to take away from Sarah Palin’s endorsement is that above all other things, in the past, she has been a believer that candidates for president should have a strong dose of executive experience.

Trump certainly has that.

Cruz is a qualified lawyer. He would be a good candidate for a position in the legislative or judicial branch.

    DaMav in reply to n.n. | January 19, 2016 at 9:55 pm

    Ted Cruz will be a superb replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsberg if he does not end up President. The “weapin’ and a wailing” among liberals will be as music from the spheres, an Ode to Joy to conservative ears.

      And the good part for Cruz is natural born citizens of other countries are eligible for Supreme Court. USA citizenship is not required.

      I’m just sayin.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to DaMav. | January 20, 2016 at 6:38 am

      Cruz, in running for President, has shown no regard for the Constitution and over a century of Supreme Court decisions in regard to eligibility for President of US. He should not be named to the Supreme Court.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to n.n. | January 20, 2016 at 6:36 am

    Ted Cruz will be lucky if he is not prosecuTED.

Dear Bristol,

There was nothing “rude” about Cruz’s comment. If your mom wants to be a political player — as clearly she does — she should be able to handle some disagreement now and then, even from someone she used to support (but now does not).

After all, your mom just endorsed someone who turns on a dime from praising people to savaging them, depending on what serves his own purposes. What has your mom said when Trump has been nasty to others?

Your mom has endorsed someone who heartily praised Obama and his agenda while she was posing as a fierce opponent of that agenda. She used to present herself as a rock-ribbed defender of the Constitution, but now she endorses someone who thinks only in terms of what His Greatness can do by executive command.

Face it, Bristol, your mom saw an opportunity to get back in the spotlight. And she’s reminding everyone of what many of us noticed years ago: While she is not without her virtues, she’s not the brightest bulb.

Nowhere except in the semi-KOSlike fever swamps of LI has Sarah Palin “abandoned” Ted Cruz. I wish she had endorsed Cruz but she didn’t. Get over it drama-queens. This is politics, not “Make a Wish”.

    Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | January 19, 2016 at 10:14 pm

    Just curious, Mademoiselle D’Mav, do you serious believe that Bristol Palin wrote that Pathos screed?

    I don’t. I think that came from T-rump operatives. Which would kinda indicate to those of us who think that Saracuda DID abandon Cruz…along with her integrity.

    Radegunda in reply to DaMav. | January 19, 2016 at 10:28 pm

    I for one didn’t say that she “abandoned” Cruz, but clearly she is not supporting him now.

    The drama-queen act came from Bristol claiming that some terrible outrage has been inflict on Sarah by Ted. She has a right to endorse the person of her choosing. And Cruz has a right to say, publicly, that he regrets her choice.

    Trump fans have a practice of drama-queening whenever someone has the audacity to express non-support of Trump.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to DaMav. | January 20, 2016 at 7:03 pm

    “Nowhere except in the semi-KOSlike fever swamps of LI”

    With that one statement you told me how worthless your opinion would be, but thanks for saving me the time it would have taken to read the rest of your post. You make it pretty obvious that you don’t read what is written here.

This piece comes off as written by a “mean girl” in high school. Palin “abandoned” Cruz? Were they going steady? The whole thing is snarky fluff.

    And she apparently ran out of pictures of Marky-Marco’s blow-dried hair for a Tiger Beat puff piece; no wonder she’s feeling “mean”.

Palin and Trump. From one reality TV star to another.

Several points to make…

Palin owes Trump nothing. She helped him… remember?

I bet Trump worked harder to get her endorsement.

I’m guessing Cruz committed the sin of taking Palin’s support for granted.

Cruz supporters are coming off as jilted prom queens. Face it, politics is a blood sport. The whining makes Cruz look bad.

Sarah saw the lay of the land and realized she “needed a rabbi”. Trump & Palin are a natural fit and she realizes that a Trump partnership will open doors the GOPe/Romney camps closed off in 2012.

To me, this feels right and these two are gonna tear it up.

Cruz gets Glen Beck

    Huskers4Palin in reply to DaMav. | January 19, 2016 at 11:48 pm

    will Beck cry with him at the border???

      While Donald Trump was saying mean things about illegal aliens, Beck and Cruz were distributing free toys to illegals who broke the law and crossed the border.

      On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B

        Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | January 20, 2016 at 12:29 am

        And in 2013, when T-rump was backing a Dreamer bill, Cruz joined with Sessions to kill it.

        But being nice to kids is a sin in T-rump-O-verse.

        I love it that you have PRETENDED to be a Cruz backer, you lying SOS.

          Another confused rant from Rabidpierre, sigh.

          At least he thinks I am a Superbly Observant Sage 🙂 TY!

          Try to grasp this, fanboi: Just because I favor a candidate doesn’t mean that their actions may never be criticized. I realize that concept may be over your head.

        Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | January 20, 2016 at 9:18 am

        I think you’re a lying sack of shit, and you damn will know you are.

        I criticize Cruz when he’s wrong. Not for giving toys to kids.

        And Beck has your man-crush T-rump pegged…

        “Sarah Palin.

        Small Government, lower taxes, fewer regulations and the constitution?

        Not any more.

        Big government, bailouts, executive orders, not just abortion but partial birth abortion, nationalizing of banks, stimulus, pathway to citizenship.

        All of these views were held by Donald Trump during this administration. Pathway to citizenship in 2013. Some as recently as last year.

        What was the massive pivot point to make him change so fundamentally?

        When Sarah and the tea party won a hard fought election and were under attack in 2010, DJT was giving money to Pelosi, Reid and Rahm.”

          pesanteur in reply to Ragspierre. | January 20, 2016 at 11:53 am

          Knock it off. This site needs a moderator, badly. Ace of Spades has a new policy about zero tolerance for personal insults. It’s working well. Think about it, professor.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Ragspierre. | January 20, 2016 at 7:08 pm


          LOL, if you can’t hang with adults then leave before someone here offends your delicate sensibilities. As for site moderation well believe me I am pretty sure I know which one of you is closer to being banned and I got bad news sugar pants it isn’t Rags.

All in all, this site’s comments seem to be slightly ahead for Trump over Cruz.

It’d be great if they run together.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to | January 20, 2016 at 7:10 pm

    You know I actually wouldn’t be opposed to a Cruz/Trump ticket. But after yesterday I am betting we have a better chance at a Trump/Palin ticket.

I’ve been reading this blog for a long while, and this is the first post I’ve seen with large numbers of up AND down votes evenly divided.

Sarah Palin can endorse whoever she wants. If she were running, she’d be my first choice. Her endorsement for Trump? Doesn’t change my support for Cruz. Chances are by the time NY’s primary comes about, the race will probably already be decided. I’ll be voting for whomever gets the Republican nomination, because my vote will be AGAINST whomever gets the Democrat nomination. The lesser of two evils option.

It was a foregone conclusion Monica Lewinsky’s ex-boyfriend’s wife would be the Democrat nominee. Now that may not happen. The communist from Vermont, as a true believer, would be dangerous in office. Biden? Fauxcohonatas? Once it’s not the anointed one, methinks any Republican will be able to win. None of the others have the following the anointed one has. Before the internet, I thing the MSM could have sold Bernie to the masses. Not now.

Last election, I could pretty much tell how someone was going to vote by asking them- Where do you get the news? If they got it from the internet, they were’t voting Democrat.

    Eastwood Ravine in reply to gospace. | January 20, 2016 at 3:30 am

    Would I vote for Trump in the general election against Hilary or Bernie (or Biden), absolutely, but Cruz has the real record to be a conservative standard bearer in the election, and he is whom I’ll be supporting in the caucus.

“Sarah Palin Abandons Ted Cruz, Endorses Donald Trump”…the day the music died.

Phyllis Schlafly and Wayne Allyn Root have also endorsed Donald Trump.

Better than a Triple Crown.

America does not need another word-weaseling junior Senator with dubious citizenship as President.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Uncle Samuel. | January 20, 2016 at 7:12 pm

    “with dubious citizenship as President.”

    And with one ignorant paranoid statement you show how completely worthless anything you say really is. Thanks for the warning.

Since our founding and Constitution was written, the meaning has been understood and affirmed by over a century of Supreme Court decisions. The meaning of Natural Born Citizen was clearly understood for all of my life, until recently.

Only recently, have people with agendas tried to change the meaning and definition of Natural Born Citizen, just as they have tried to change the meanings of everything, conservative, citizenship… even the meaning of man, woman, marriage, truth, love, life and death, good and evil.

Sorry, I’m not buying into the ‘it has never been settled’ propaganda.

Anyone supporting Cruz or Rubio is not a Constitutional conservative.

These candidates and the people pushing them have an agenda to dilute the Constitution and diminish our national identity as well as our national sovereignty.

Especially the two Cubanos and their side-kick, the pretend Hispanic.

Hola a los Tres Amigos, Felito, Jebito y Marco!

    Ragspierre in reply to Uncle Samuel. | January 20, 2016 at 9:02 am

    You left out “pollute or natural bodily fluids”.

    What a crank.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Uncle Samuel. | January 20, 2016 at 7:34 pm

    Actually the vast majority of court decisions supports the definition of Natural Born Citizen as the one I was taught in school over 20 years ago. It is also the most reasonable definition based on the writings of the founding fathers. That definition is simple a “Natural Born Citizen” is any Citizen who becomes a citizen by virtue of their birth. Therefore, anyone born with at least one parent who is a citizen is a natural born citizen (i.e. they became a citizen naturally at birth.)

    The Jus Soli nattering has never been a main stream idea, especially since it would have disqualified a number of prior presidents all the way back to the 1800’s. We have always used a Jus sanguinis interpretation also never has it been requirement of citizenship for both parents to be citizen.

    Also, if you illegal immigrant mother managing to waddle across the Rio Grande before you pop out is enough to make you a citizen, then being born with one parent who is a citizen in good standing should be plenty.

    That is basically what you are saying, you realize that, right? That someone who gained citizenship because they managed to be popped out North of the Rio Grand has more right to run for president than a man who has lived here since age 4 and was born to a citizen in good standing.

    Also, you are saying that my God Daughter who was born in Columbia while her father was there working for his American based employer would not be eligible? Even though my friend (her father) served his country and got a Purple Heart as well as a Bronze Star and was a citizen when she was born? Just because her mother was Colombian and her location at time of birth. Or that my son (had he survived) who was born while I was on leave with my wife visiting her Family in Germany would not be eligible? Regardless of my service and decoration earned while serving this country?

    Well that not only makes you either ignorant and/or delusional, but it also makes you a bastard and a bigot.

    I suggest you go read the Professors articles on the subject.

Here’s the full endorsement — 21 minutes of political goodness
pro-American, pro-military, anti-establishment, pro-private sector,
vigorously anti-ISIS, pro-Veteran…

Not even one word of attack on Ted Cruz. Nothing about “abandoning” Cruz. That stereotyping is pure LI mis-characterization and bias about Palin’s endorsement.

    Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | January 20, 2016 at 9:05 am


    Nope. She just EMBRACED the Establishment.

    SUCK that T-rump!

    pesanteur in reply to DaMav. | January 20, 2016 at 11:48 am

    Right on.

    The commentariat is insane. I saw a hyperventilating piece this morning on Commentary about how the “Palin-Trump alliance” is the destruction of Reagan conservatism. As if “Reagan conservatism” wasn’t extinguished with extreme prejudice by George Bush I. Or as if Bush, Dole, Bush, Bush, McCain and Romney were all Reagan conservatives. The unself-awareness, and palpable fear, vibrates off the page.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to DaMav. | January 20, 2016 at 7:36 pm

    I have watched the rambling, incoherent, dis-associative and possibly intoxicated blathering once and that was plenty, thanks.

Folks this was painful to watch yesterday, I had to turn it off, her voice and cadence, and lack of sincerity was awful. Trump talked about Carly giving him a headache! No one who supports Ted Cruz would leave him for Trump just because Sarah Palin showed up in Iowa. The crowd appeared dumbfounded at the horrible speech and Trump looked clueless as she went on and on and on! This was a mistake by Trump, has not made many, but this was one.

2017: White House Reality TV season begins. Thanks low information voters.

Some of these comments remind me why republicans always manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. We’ve got one group of so-called conservatives questioning Cruz’s eligibility to become President, and another group of conservatives bashing Sarah Palin. It’s just sad to watch us self-destruct…

    Ragspierre in reply to snopercod. | January 20, 2016 at 9:29 am

    It isn’t “self-destruction”. It is a refining.

    One of the things that’s become apparent this cycle is the differences between people who call themselves “conservatives” in some nominal sense, and those of us who actually are Conservative.

    Glenn Beck…like him or hate him…made a very salient comment on Facebook:

    “Sarah Palin.

    Small Government, lower taxes, fewer regulations and the constitution?

    Not any more.

    Big government, bailouts, executive orders, not just abortion but partial birth abortion, nationalizing of banks, stimulus, pathway to citizenship.

    All of these views were held by Donald Trump during this administration. Pathway to citizenship in 2013. Some as recently as last year.

    What was the massive pivot point to make him change so fundamentally?

    When Sarah and the tea party won a hard fought election and were under attack in 2010, DJT was giving money to Pelosi, Reid and Rahm.”

    Some of us have reasonably good memories and we think critically. This T-rump fraud will not pass muster.

    Conversely, we have Cruz who has EARNED a 97%CR rating, has DONE (not talked about) things that preserved conservative values and prevented MORE destruction by the Obami and the eGOP, and who DOES both understand and revere the Constitution as THE charter of the nation.

    So, no; not self-destruction. Self correction is more apt.

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 20, 2016 at 12:43 pm

      OK, chickenspit down-thumbers, MAKE AN ARGUEMENT.

      Don’t be cowards.

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Ragspierre. | January 20, 2016 at 6:16 pm

        Come on Rags they aren’t cowards, they just aren’t smart enough to make an argument, lol.

        Btw, hope you are doing well.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gremlin1974. | January 20, 2016 at 6:34 pm

          I’m in the pink, Grem. Thanks for asking.

          Enjoying a fine cigar and a cocktail after a day of depositions. (I was representing the deponent, so easy-peasy.)

          Hope you’re doing well!

    Henry Hawkins in reply to snopercod. | January 20, 2016 at 12:55 pm

    The internet is full of noise, perhaps no where more so than the comment sections of political blogs and websites. Since the draw pile of potential commenters is set in the billions, we’re going to get every imaginable sort commenting – trolls, crazies, fake claimants to this or that party or ideology, etc. It is the readers and fellow comenters to whom the responsibility falls to separate the wheatfrom the chaffe.

    Per the specifics of your complaint, it is reasonable to question Cruz’ eligibility, if only because the constitutional writing is not sufficiently specific to the issue, while opinions vary, usually according to party affiliation rather than legal precedent and interpretation. I (for one) have scanned the salient information and I have zero problem believing Cruz is eligible to run. Each of us ought do the same.

    As for Palin bashing, there is not a fine line between bashing and honest, sincere criticism – that line is defined by the verity and reasonableness of the criticism. It is rather easy to discern bashing from honest criticism. Again, we read what we read and make our decisions as to which is which.

    I suspect that part of what triggers your (and so many others’) angst over this internecine argument among Republicans re: Trump vs Cruz is the fact that what constitutes conservativism, what a conservative is, has been hijacked so often that the line has become blurred. Many politicians who welcomed Tea Party conservative support while running for office got into bed with the GOP establishment and abandoned conservatism immediately upon election (Renee Elmers, Marco Rubio, Kelly Ayotte, etc., etc.). It is increasingly difficult to find people – including Republicans – who can articulate the basic conservative principles of small government, lower taxes, respect for the Constitution, individual liberties, and American traditions, among others. What are you, I’ve asked people. ‘I’m a conservative!’ What does that mean? ‘Uh.. um…’.

    The problem is obvious – too many conservative or conservative-leaning voters have come to place far too much value on what a candidate says rather than on what a candidate has done, and this despite having been burned so many times by the glib tongue.

    The solution is obvious – better personal vetting and checking the records of candidates, political, vocational, and characterological.

    The battle is between these two camps – those who proceed based on liking what they’re hearing from a claimed conservative candidate despite what that candidate may have said or done before, and those who seek out a candidate’s actual record, illustrative of what he or she has said and done before. Both sides are allowed to consider explanations for any discrepancies or changes and make a judgment as to whether it sufficiently explains it.

    My overarching point is that we ought to expect all manner of silliness, craziness, trollery, and emotionalism whenever we read material on the internet, wherever we may find it, and further, that since we cannot change that unfortunate result of free speech, it becomes our responsibility to separate the wheat from the chaffe.

Henry Hawkins | January 20, 2016 at 9:21 am

I suspect the media will have questions for Palin other than her endorsement of Trump.

“ANCHORAGE, Alaska – The oldest son of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was arrested in a domestic violence case in which his girlfriend was afraid he would shoot himself with an AR-15 assault rifle, according to court documents filed Tuesday.

Track Palin, 26, is charged with assault, interfering with the report of a domestic violence crime and possessing a weapon while intoxicated in connection with the incident Monday night at the Wasilla home of his parents, where he lives, according to an affidavit by police.

The girlfriend told authorities she was punched in the face by Palin, who is the oldest child of Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee and conservative icon.

The charges were filed Tuesday, the same day Sarah Palin endorsed Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump before voting begins with the Iowa caucuses.”

Think I’ll send Cruz another $100 come payday…

From what I have been reading, It sounds like Cruz, is not eligible to run for pres. Just because Oblamo, was not eligible, we are to assume that the Constitution is no longer to be followed, if it affects what Obama wants to do. I have followed Palin’s career from the start. She is the one who should have been at the top of the ticket. We once again had another RINO running for pres. Let us decide once and for all, are we going to follow the Constitution or NOT ?

    Gremlin1974 in reply to bobgood1. | January 20, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    “From what I have been reading, It sounds like Cruz, is not eligible to run for pres.”

    Well first of all I would tell you to stop reading what moron Trumpets write and actually think for yourself. Cruz’s mother was a citizen at the moment of his birth, therefore he is a natural born citizen, end of story.

    Also, coming onto a site who’s founder has written a couple of articles as to why Cruz is obviously eligible doesn’t give me the greatest confidence in your analytical abilities.

buckeyeminuteman | January 20, 2016 at 1:06 pm

So a celebrity who formerly had a reality TV show is endorsing a celebrity who formerly had a reality TV show? Please make this stop!

Like I said about 100 comments ago…

Palin changed. Not me.

Of course, T-rump hasn’t REALLY changed. He’s still the Progressive deal-maker he ALLLLLLllllllways has been.

We must find out if Cruz is eligible or not ? The more I read, The more it sounds like he is. All of the secrecy on Oblamo, it is definite that the ” O,” was not eligible, but no one had the GUTS, to do the right thing. Do we use the Constitution or not ???

    Gremlin1974 in reply to bobgood1. | January 21, 2016 at 6:35 pm

    Cruz is eligible, simple. The easiest way to tell is that his application to run for President was accepted. This silly birther stuff is just a distraction to try to keep him from gaining. So far all it has done is help him.

    I completely disagree with Obama, his beliefs, his policies, and pretty much think everything done during his administration should be reversed ASAP. That being said, he was eligible to run for President. He was born to a citizen of the US, therefore he is a natural born citizen.