The Sarah Palin Thread: 'Controversial Controversy' Edition

[Matt]

Palin won't get out of the GOP.

You underestimate the effect of the media coronating a candidate. And that is exactly what they will do if she wins the Iowa caucus. All the money in the world means **** if you have every media outlet in the country saying that you are the front runner (even if you're not). People like to back a winner.

 

[StorminNorman]

I know well the role the media can play in influencing an election.

The problem is that Palin has no shot in New Hampshire and so even if Palin is some how able to pull of Iowa, another Republican is going to win New Hampshire.

Furthermore, Huckabee is likely to eat at Palin's core in Iowa.

 

[Matt]

Lot of good New Hampshire did for Hill-dog. I am aware that Huckabee is loved in Iowa, but if Palin's rabid supporters are out in full force, she could overtake him.

As for New Hampshire, the media will continuation to annoint Palin even after a New Hampshire loss as she will be the more attractive candidate. I could see Haley Barbour taking New Hampshire. Do you really think the media will suddenly start to say,"Hey! What better way to keep our ratings up than talking about this old, fat, boring white guy?" They will continue to push Palin because she gets the ratings and she sells the newspapers, and I think that, will make all the difference.

I hope like hell that you're right and Huckabee ends her campaign in Iowa....but I'm not positive that he will.

 

[Kelly]

There is only one in the race right now that is a PROVEN, money maker as in donations.....Huckabee is just not good at that, and as media frenzied as Palin is, she won't take in as much as others will.....the PROVEN money maker is Haley Barbour, and the rich guy is Romney....

 

[StorminNorman]

Everything I know about Barbour comes from my father who has worked extensively in the past. He considers him and Newt to be the two smartest leaders in the GOP.

 

[Kelly]

Haley is a freaking money bag when it comes to donations....he speaks and people throw money at him...lol

 

[StorminNorman]

Lot of good New Hampshire did for Hill-dog. I am aware that Huckabee is loved in Iowa, but if Palin's rabid supporters are out in full force, she could overtake him.

As for New Hampshire, the media will continuation to annoint Palin even after a New Hampshire loss as she will be the more attractive candidate. I could see Haley Barbour taking New Hampshire. Do you really think the media will suddenly start to say,"Hey! What better way to keep our ratings up than talking about this old, fat, boring white guy?" They will continue to push Palin because she gets the ratings and she sells the newspapers, and I think that, will make all the difference.

I hope like hell that you're right and Huckabee ends her campaign in Iowa....but I'm not positive that he will.

I think Gary Johnson could make a push for Iowa if college students know about his drug policy.

It seems to me that the caucus system lends itself better to that than a typical primary.

 

[Kelly]

God I hate caucuses for that very reason.

If you work, you're screwed...

 

[Raiden]

If Bloomberg wins the presidential election, I won't have a problem with that. Problem is, he'll be a third-party candidate if he runs, and no candidate has ever win the White House that wasn't affiliated with either GOP or Dems. I won't mind to see him try, though.

 

[Kelly]

Bloomberg said about 2 days ago, that it is a DEFINITE NO to a Presidential Run.....

 

[DACrowe]

You underestimate the effect of the media coronating a candidate. And that is exactly what they will do if she wins the Iowa caucus. All the money in the world means **** if you have every media outlet in the country saying that you are the front runner (even if you're not). People like to back a winner.

She can't win in Iowa. They require town hall meetings and heavy scrutiny from citizens' questions. This will not be an interview on Fox where they will throw her only softballs and hold her hand. They'll want details and if she can't deliver, she's in trouble.

Her best bet is winning New Hampshire's primary that will keep her viable and then she can pick up South Carolina with ease. After that she becomes quite competitive.

But yes, as soon as she enters the race the media will put the spotlight on her the way they did Clinton and Obama. In fact, Romney v. Palin will be the 2011/12 equivalent of Clinton v. Obama. And it turns out that kind of media fawning does help elevate these "chosen ones" above the rest of the field.

So, her brand name is going to be quite useful in the primaries. It's the general where it becomes a toxic asset that will become a problem to have.

 

[DACrowe]

Lot of good New Hampshire did for Hill-dog. I am aware that Huckabee is loved in Iowa, but if Palin's rabid supporters are out in full force, she could overtake him.

As for New Hampshire, the media will continuation to annoint Palin even after a New Hampshire loss as she will be the more attractive candidate. I could see Haley Barbour taking New Hampshire. Do you really think the media will suddenly start to say,"Hey! What better way to keep our ratings up than talking about this old, fat, boring white guy?" They will continue to push Palin because she gets the ratings and she sells the newspapers, and I think that, will make all the difference.

I hope like hell that you're right and Huckabee ends her campaign in Iowa....but I'm not positive that he will.

I don't know a lot about NH's local politics. Why couldn't Palin win in NH? And for the record, McCain won NH after losing IOwa, so you never know.

 

[Matt]

Everything I know about Barbour comes from my father who has worked extensively in the past. He considers him and Newt to be the two smartest leaders in the GOP.

Smart doesn't win elections. Hell, Bill Richardson was the smartest and best candidate of '08. What is he up to now-a-days? Barbour is too boring, IMO, to go far.

Haley is a freaking money bag when it comes to donations....he speaks and people throw money at him...lol

Fat cats love him because he will protect them. I'm not sure that the voting public will, no matter how much cash he has.

I think Gary Johnson could make a push for Iowa if college students know about his drug policy.

It seems to me that the caucus system lends itself better to that than a typical primary.

Will Johnson have the money to get his message out there? Plus, college students in Iowa aren't exactly the same as college students in California. Im not sure it'll matter much. I see Johnson becoming the new Ron Paul. Great message, not so great election results.

Bloomberg said about 2 days ago, that it is a DEFINITE NO to a Presidential Run.....

I think that tune will change if its Obama vs. Palin.

I don't know a lot about NH's local politics. Why couldn't Palin win in NH? And for the record, McCain won NH after losing IOwa, so you never know.

New Hampshire is a New England state. Even its Republicans are fairly liberal. McCain won it based on his past repuation. Palin has never had a reputation of being socially liberal.

 

[StorminNorman]

I think the biggest positive from a Bloomberg campaign would be it's ability to demonstrate how words like "moderate" are not as great as people think, as well as busting the myth that a Third Party would make politics so much better.

 

[Matt]

The two party system hasn't exactly been working out well for us.

 

[Schlosser85]

The problem with the potential third parties is that the candidates they put forth are too goofy. It perpetuates the common perception that they're radical fringe groups who are kind of a joke and not to be taken seriously.

 

[StorminNorman]

Bloomberg said about 2 days ago, that it is a DEFINITE NO to a Presidential Run.....

I'm not going to be the Alabama coach.

Smart doesn't win elections. Hell, Bill Richardson was the smartest and best candidate of '08. What is he up to now-a-days? Barbour is too boring, IMO, to go far.

Different kinda smart. We aren't talking policy as much as politics. He is politically smart, something Richardson was not. Barbour has a big personality, he simply hasn't had his own show on Fox to show it.

Fat cats love him because he will protect them.

I'm not sure about that.

Will Johnson have the money to get his message out there? Plus, college students in Iowa aren't exactly the same as college students in California. Im not sure it'll matter much. I see Johnson becoming the new Ron Paul. Great message, not so great election results.

College students in Iowa are exactly the same as college students in California, don't fool yourself otherwise.

Johnson will have more money simply because his background is business, and the libertarian base has expanded greatly due to Ron Paul and the Tea Party. But money was never Ron Paul's problem, it was being taken seriously.

I think Johnson will have a significantly better chance of being taken seriously due to where his ideology comes from. Paul is a very classical politician, where his ideology stems from philosophy and an understanding of the Constitution. Johnson's libertarian principals came from his experience running a business - that's a message more people can relate to.

Plus he lacks the whole "Gandolf" thing.

The GOP is primed for a libertarian run.

David Frum is already lamenting the fact that this new breed of Republican has turned to Austrians, rather than Chicagians for their economic principals.

New Hampshire is a New England state. Even its Republicans are fairly liberal. McCain won it based on his past repuation. Palin has never had a reputation of being socially liberal.

New Hampshire is the most libertarian state in the union. They don't even have seatbelt laws.

 

[Matt]

The problem with the potential third parties is that the candidates they put forth are too goofy. It perpetuates the common perception that they're radical fringe groups who are kind of a joke and not to be taken seriously.

Which makes Bloomberg the perfect option.

 

[StorminNorman]

The two party system hasn't exactly been working out well for us.

That's because the two are too similar.

That doesn't mean the answer is to add another party. It means we need to fix what we have.

The problem with the potential third parties is that the candidates they put forth are too goofy. It perpetuates the common perception that they're radical fringe groups who are kind of a joke and not to be taken seriously.

The biggest negative to libertarian ideology has been the Libertarian Party. It ensured that the majority of American's first exposure to the L word was fringe third party candidate and not the most advanced political philosophy known to mankind.

 

[Paradoxium]

The two party system hasn't exactly been working out well for us.

That's why we keep doing it and hoping for different results

 

[Marx]

I think Gary Johnson could make a push for Iowa if college students know about his drug policy.

It seems to me that the caucus system lends itself better to that than a typical primary.

God I hate caucuses for that very reason.

If you work, you're screwed...

Caucuses should be eliminated. Plain and simple. They are not a true representation of the electorate.

 

[Kelly]

I totally agree.....when you are blocking out people simply because they work, that is discrimination in the form of time constraints, and that should be illegal.

 

[Marx]

I totally agree.....when you are blocking out people simply because they work, that is discrimination in the form of time constraints, and that should be illegal.

Exactly Kel. Your state was a perfect example of what is wrong with caucuses in 2008. When one candidate wins the state primary, and the other major candidate wins the caucus...something is very wrong.

 

[Kelly]

I believe I can safely say, that had all states used the Primary system. THE BETTER of the two systems IMO, more fair, wider range of voters, etc.......Obama would not be President today.

Now of course there is no way of knowing, since 4 states do not post their final counts, but we do know that the popular vote was less than 1% difference....so I do not think he would have had anywhere near the momentum that he got had it only been primaries.....just my opinion.

 

[Marx]

I believe I can safely say, that had all states used the Primary system. THE BETTER of the two systems IMO, more fair, wider range of voters, etc.......Obama would not be President today.

I completely agree.