Mitt Romney Wants Sarah Palin to Run for President

Bookmark and Share    In an interview with USA Today’s Susan Page, Mitt Romney states that he hopes Sarah Palin runs for President.

According to Romney;

“I think it would be a good thing if she did. She would make the race that much more exciting, bring more people to watch the debates, and I hope she gets in.”

Romney is totally correct on those points.

Palin’s entry into the race would have an incredibly positive affect for Republicans in the 2012 election. It will especially take a lot of ink away from President Obama.

However Romney does not mention the real reason why he would like Palin to run.

With Sarah Palin in the nomination contest, candidates like Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, and Herman Cain, will have their vote totals suppressed by Palin’s candidacy which will absorb much of their support. And while she holds down the vote totals of candidate like Bachmann and Perry, Romney has a good chance to see his establishment conservative vote totals surpass all others and wrap up the nomination earlier rather than later.

Of course, with Palin running, there is also a good chance that Romney will lose…………..to her.

Bookmark and Share

Palin’s Presidential Write-In Candidacy

Bookmark and Share    Sarah Palin had originally indicated that she would make a decision about a run for President in 2012 by the end of September. Yet in a recent interview with Sean Hannity she seemed to indicate that her decision might not come until November. When asked about her intentions and after being reminded by Sean Hannity that crunch time is approaching soon, Governor Palin responded by stating;

“There is still time, Sean, and I think on both sides of the aisle you’re going to see people coming and going from this race,”

According to Palin;

“In the Republican race, in this primary, I think people are still going to be coming and going because there is still time. And I’m still one of those still considering the time factor.”

When Hannity asked she didn’t need to make a decision by November, her response was;

“You do, legally you do, because you have start getting your ducks lined up to have your name on these ballots.”

But probably the most telling comment she made during her interview was;

“This is going to be such an unconventional election cycle. … Mark my word, it is going to be an unconventional type of election process.”

Trying to dissect Palin’s words is probably futile. The former Governor and Vice Presidential nominee is keenly aware that her every word is scrutinized, and from them are extrapolated some wild hypotheses . As such, she quite smartly, and intentionally throws out phrases that keep speculation about her front and center.

But there are several realities that can’t be denied. The most glaring one is that if Governor Palin intends to run, in order to get her name on the ballot in South Carolina and Florida, she must make her candidacy official and file the proper paperwork within the next 5 ½ weeks.

Or does she?

As Palin said in her interview, “Mark my word, it is going to be an unconventional type of election process.”

When it comes to unconventional, Sarah Palin is the quintessential queen of unconvential. No politician is as unconventional as her. And while some suggest that her unpredictable nature makes her an unlikely political leader, it can not be denied that much of Palin’s popularity is based on her unconventional tendencies. It is what makes her the anti-establishment candidate at a time when the popular TEA movement that decided the 2010 midterm elections, is looking for an anti-establishmentarian figure to lead our nation.

So what could Palin have meant when after admitting that by typical legal standards, one would have to make a decision about the presidential election soon, but then suggested that this election is not going to be typical?

It is true that Palin would have to make her candidacy officially within the next several weeks if she intended to have ballot access in the South Carolina and Florida primaries. But it is also true that Palin could still win both those contests without appearing on the ballot. If an aggressive write-in effort were waged, Palin could actually catapult herself into frontrunner status and turn this election on its ear. That would certainly live up to her promise that we are about to enter into “an unconventional type of election process.”

To help make that promise come to fruition, Palin could remain an undeclared presidential candidate and continue to draw thousands to the appearances she she is already making around the country. But with a shifted focus on visits to Iowa, South Carolina, and Florida, and a few additional words, she could be in this race until the Republican national convention concludes.

With all the talk about Republicans not being very confident or excited by any of the existing candidates, Palin can appeal to those dissatisfied Republicans, and TEA movement voters by remaining the anti-establishment Republican. She can simply suggest that if you really want to send a message to Republicans and Democrats alike, we should think outside of the box that the establishment has put us in and do not limit ourselves to the candidates that the two Parties offer. And then all Palin needs to say is……

“Write in the name of the person you want to lead this nation, don’t just mark off one of the names that the Party machine allows you to choose from”.

From then on, a movement will be born, a movement that will make writing Sarah Palin’s name in as a symbol of protest and dissatisfaction with the establishment……of both Parties.

In the end, Governor Palin may not be able to win the nomination solely as a write-in candidate, but it could also be that Governor Palin does not intend to be President. Such an effort could simply be an ingenious way for her to insure that her voice is heard and that she continues to influence politics in the way that she intends to………… by keeping the establishment on their toes and preaching the virtues of limited government and bountiful freedom.

Then again, no one can say that Palin would have to remain simply a protest vote. A strong write-in candidacy could actually provide Palin with enough delegates to significantly influence such things as who the next vice presidential nominee is and numerous planks in the Republican Party’s platform. And if this happens to be a very close nomination contest, she could even garner enough delegates to select who the next presidential nominee is.

But that’s not to say that Palin won’t be the next President herself.

If her promise of an unconventional election bears out to mean a Palin write-in candidacy, a strong showing in Florida or South Carolina as a write-in candidate could create enough waves to propel her ahead of the official candidates. If that were to happen, all bets are off.

Bookmark and Share

The Polarizing Truth. Why Republicans should nominate a divider instead of a unifier.

Bookmark and Share    If you’re like many Americans, it’s too early to be thinking about the presidential contest next year. Even if you are aware of some of the candidates running, chances are you’re not glued to the set watching the early debates. Wednesday’s MSNBC sponsored GOP debate was interesting though. I managed to catch a few minutes of it and although I thought Romney was particularly sharp and Rick Perry made a very good case as a solid conservative, it was clear why the current field leaves something to be desired among many in the Republican Party. A former George W. Bush speechwriter said this past weekend that “I don’t think Republicans regard this as a strong field. So there is still talk of people getting in the race.” 

Let’s forget all the conventional reasons why there is a lack of excitement from the current cadre of presidential hopefuls. Romney has a problem effectively discussing the failings of Obama-care given his own health care bill in Massachusetts, add to that his 59 point economic plan…59 points? I’m worried there might be a test at the end! Governor Perry, although articulating many strong conservative principles, has the challenge of the latest critique of his Texas job creation efforts through government subsidies and ‘poaching’ from other states; there’s Bachman’s lack of executive experience and Ron Paul’s difficulty overcoming the fringe label among many voters. Gingrich, Huntsman, Santorum and Cain round out the field but lack funding and have thus far failed to light a spark among earlier likely primary voters. 

Despite the short-comings of the top-tier, they may all be able to put up an effective fight simply based on the current economy and the President’s own poor performance. Mishandling the economic crisis; the deepening of unemployment and under-employment; vast expanse of government beyond what it palatable for the average taxpayer; and out-of-control debt have all contributed to a general lack of enthusiasm for his re-election in recent polls. That said the GOP is very skilled at the art of snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

Only a candidate with the courage to polarize the electorate on the issues and present a stark contrast with the Democratic incumbent will win. We need someone to unapologetically pursue a new policy course focused on economic growth and individual liberty in order to win.

The first step is to challenge the conventional wisdom that our nominee needs to be a conciliator and a unifier instead of a polarizer by looking at the facts of history. There are plenty of successful Presidents who ran in the center and then governed from their partisan corner. Then there are a few who campaigned from a solid partisan position, specifically outlining an enemy, who won decisive victories.

President Reagan, President George W. Bush and President Clinton were highly partisan political leaders creating vehement opposition from the other side. Each had the polarizing effect of a wide gap between the support of members of their own party and the lack of support among voters in the other party as they entered the second year in office. See Poll Results

And each were winners of a second term because they appealed to the core of their own party and created enough momentum to show strong leadership on the issue of the day which won over the average voter who only pays attention at the end.

Obama, like his predecessors, has embraced the role of polarizer-in-chief as he knows that his success is dependent on his aggressive far-left agenda energizing the core of the Democratic base. As long as he offers some hope for a recovery and continues to redistribute your wealth he’s got a good shot at keeping the job.

That same zeal on the side of individual liberty and economic growth is the only way for a Republican challenger to have a chance of unseating this administration. Why is it that the Democrats are unafraid to be aggressive champions of their big government ideology while Republicans more often look for a middle ground thinking that they will appeal to everyone? Democrats like Obama and Clinton understood the value of the base and the importance of ‘dividing and conquering’ the electorate. Bush understood that as well when he stood for re-election in 2004 and certainly President Reagan understood the value when he used divisive terms like ‘welfare queens’ and ‘evil empire’.

Perhaps the best model to view for the upcoming election are the three Presidents who, in addition to causing divisiveness while in office, actually campaigned successfully by exploiting a major issue of the day and defining a clear position outlining the ‘enemy’.

Abraham Lincoln took a strong anti-slavery position and campaigned on stopping its expansion. His position was so strong the half the states threatened to secede if he won and then followed through. 1860 Campaign

Franklin Roosevelt ran a campaign pointing the finger at the ‘economic royalists’ and laid out a very effective populist campaign that defined the enemy as greedy businessmen and changed the country in a direction that set up the great expanse of government today. 1936 Speech

Ronald Reagan campaigned as a strong anti-communist defining the foreign enemy effectively and readying the nation to capitalize on their weak economic position. He also effectively defined the domestic enemy as government itself. 1980 Campaign

All of these men faced defining moments in American history, the Civil War, The Great Depression and the Cold War respectively. America is again confronted with a generational crisis that will have a resonating impact for decades to come.

The economic crisis today is beyond the dreadful employment numbers and slow growth. It encompasses the vast expanse of government that has put our nation perilously close to the tipping point of having more Americans taking from the government than paying to sustain it. If that happens and the Democrats feel secure knowing that entitlement benefit receivers outnumber working, taxpaying Americans, don’t expect a conciliatory or unifying tone from the other side.

Current polling shows that the economy and jobs is and will likely continue to be the number one issue heading into the next Presidential election. With nearly one in ten Americans out of work and another nearly one in ten working at a job that is insufficient to sustain a modest family’s standard of living, we’re in serious trouble.

The Democratic solution – which unfortunately has been aided and abetted by some weak, compromising Republicans in Washington – is to spend more of your tax dollars through new ‘stimulus’ spending – err sorry, just saw the White House talking points – it’s now ‘jobs’ spending. We’ve seen the failure of increased government spending under the current administration as well as the last Republican administration.  Not only is this an economically ruinous course to take, but every dollar the government spends to ‘create jobs’ is not wealth created, it’s a dollar redistributed by coercion. Of course the American people are starting to ‘get it’ and the anger that is growing among taxpayers regarding the over-reach and failure of these policies is becoming palpable. Many Americans seem ready to fire the President but simply won’t replace him with someone who will be perceived to do more of the same.

It’s one reason that Governor Christie is talked about as a potential top contender. His brash style, aggressive decision making and willingness to take on tough fights has some Democrats in New Jersey speaking positively about his administration around the water cooler. There hasn’t been a more successful polarizing figure in recent New Jersey history than Governor Christie. He hasn’t taken on the role of chief conciliator with the teachers and public workers unions. He’s stepped up and taken on the role of chief agitator and walked away with several key victories for the taxpayers. Christie’s success is contrary to conventional wisdom about reconciling and being palatable to the other side. He’s a fighter pure and simple and is earning the respect of former foes because of his unapologetic style and aggressive pursuit of solving problems. He’s a straight talker who isn’t posturing for image and acceptance. Instead he’s going for the jugular of those forces that are bankrupting the state and destroying the economic future for the next generation.

If it’s working in a blue state like New Jersey, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by a nearly two-to-one margin, it can certainly work in swing states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Florida and New Hampshire where the registration numbers are much closer. Although a more moderate, conciliatory Republican may fare better in states like New Jersey, we’re likely to lose those states and do worse than expected in the swing states unless we energize the folks who are suffering the most with the current economy. The game plan in 2012 can’t be to earn the respect and admiration of the Democrats who will vote against us anyway. We need to be on the right side of history and champion the free market ideas that are the only way to create a robust and productive economy -and secure our future liberty.

 This is not the time to play nice with the side who has levied on us the highest tax and debt burden in our history. This is not the time to play nice with the leaders on the other side whose agenda is not economic growth and freedom but the destruction of the very core of our capitalist system. Big government and debt are the goals of the other side. It’s time to take a stand and choose sides.

 Of course Governor Christie has emphatically repeated that he is not going to be a candidate in 2012. Given his track record, I think it’s a safe bet to take him at his word. Without Governor Christie there is only one other Republican leader with the same style of tough talk and conservative record with the ability to deliver the message and energize the party as we haven’t seen since Ronald Reagan, former governor Sarah Palin. Her Iowa speech recently was an outright attack on the ‘crony capitalists’ who are turning profits with the aid of the taxpayers. She’s correctly stated that these are not champions of capitalism creating growth in the economy – instead they are parasites earning a living off of government bailouts and subsidies. Palin rightly attacks those businesses which have benefited from tax loopholes and redistributed wealth from taxpayers. She’s got a long history of success with her aggressive style challenging conventional wisdom and fighting entrenched government. She’s taken on the tough fights in her own party and won. Her leadership and decision making helped create a strong economy in Alaska. She’s rooted out corruption and stood firm in the face of criticism and every kind of vitriol thrown her way. She’s got executive and life experience necessary to be an effective commander-in-chief. Family values, patriotism and an unapologetic approach to supporting our military and putting the interest of America first in the world.

 The country needs leadership, and we’re overdue for a tough talking sheriff not afraid to act who will get to Washington and clean up the mess left by years of apologetic and weak Republicans and big government Democrats.

Palin is already a champion of the right policies that will restore a growth economy nationally creating sustainable employment and revenue. She’s got the courage, conviction and charisma necessary to polarize the electorate enough to win.

 The good news is that Americans are slowly waking up from the Obama-induced slumber that allowed government to explode overnight and not especially pleased with what they see.

 We cannot fear standing up and aggressively fighting those political elites that would ruin our economy and create the ‘shared scarcity’ that Congressman Paul Ryan warned of in a speech in Chicago a few months ago. We cannot fear stepping up to the plate with a contentious, strong willed, leader to articulate the position of the taxpayer who is on the hook for the debt and the future liability of a nation of dependents. Instead we should embrace the opportunity and select a nominee who will be unafraid to champion the free market…unafraid to put American interests first…unafraid to take the beating that will surely come from the political and media elite.

 Time to fight…are you ready?

Photobucket

Click here to find out more about Bill Spadea

Bookmark and Share

Why Palin?

Bookmark and Share    The current Republican presidential contest remains in flux. One of the reasons for that is due to the anticipation of several more potentially, politically potent, candidates into the race……….Sarah Palin and Rick Perry. Part of the reason so many are taking this wait and see attitude is due to a lack of enthusiasm for any of those who we know are running.

That said, I do not subscribe to the school of thought that suggests that the current field of Republican candidates for President has no giants in it. I maintain the position that after a long and hard fought campaign, one of them will rise to the top and along the way, they will become so admired, so appreciated that on Election Day 2012, people will enthusiastically go to the polls to support them. I find many positive things in each of the candidates and could easily get behind someone like Romney, who I supported in 2008. I could also easily get behind someone like Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty or Newt Gingrich. On top of that I do not underestimate the magic that a well run campaign can produce.

Still, no matter how many excuses I make for a lack of popular energy for the existing candidates  it is still true that there is an enthusiasm gap.  But that is not the case with one name who may still enter the race.

Sarah Palin.

Of all the candidates and potential candidates, I find that Sarah Palin is the only potential presidential nominee who already inspires a great sense of enthusiasm within me and tensa of millions of others.  More so than any of the other conceivable nominees, Palin not only has a humongous loyal following, she has an immense and extremely energetic following and her popularity far exceeds that of any of her possible opponents.

Take for example Sarah Pain’s Facebook page. Facebook may not be the best barometer of political opinion, but its preeminence in contemporary internet communication offers a good idea of popularity.

Of the still evolving Republican field of candidates Sarah Palin’s fan base exceeds her nearest opponent by 2,140,214 people. Here’s a breakdown:

But putting those numbers and pop culture aside, there is no doubt that Sarah Palin energizes the base of the Republican Party. She provided whatever energy there was in John McCain’s doomed 2008 presidential campaign and since then, Sarah Palin has increased her role and visibility as a leading voice for constitutionalism and fiscal sanity.

Still, many believe that Palin can never win. They believe that even if she were to enter the race and somehow win the Republican nomination, she would be slaughtered in the general election. I am not so sure of that.

Despite left wing attempts to paint TEA Party enthusiasts to terrorists and equate them to kamikaze pilots, most Americans are coming around to the realization that government has become too big and spends too much and that Washington, D.C. bureaucrats have little ability to turn things around. Such a view fits right in to the message that Sarah Palin has been offering long before she was ever asked to run for Vice President. At the same time, few people are seen as having the resolve to do exactly as they say, as much as Palin does. People know she holds no punches and is not your typical politician. These quality are great positive contrasts to our current President.

So when it comes to the general election, some people may claim that Palin’s greatest liability is that she is too extreme. While many claim that this may destroy her chances of winning the general election, I contend that on the issue of the economy, Palin’s extremism is an asset. The economy is more than likely going to remain the number one issue. It is also likely that people will want a President who is willing to lead on the economy and not play the same old political games that both the left and right play when they come in to office. Palin has convincingly demonstrated that she would not be a politics-as-usual President. When she says that she would cut the budget, few doubt that she would, even if Congress fights her on it.

And insofar as other issues go, few if any conservative Republicans doubt Palin’s conviction to conservative values. This is not an issue which Palin would need to campaign on. If the religious right doubts Palin’s moral compass and faith, then they would probably doubt Jesus himself. The truth is that among the conservative base Palin need not prove she is conservative enough. This puts Palin in a perfect position to focus on the preeminent issue of the day………the economy. If she were to pursue the Republican presidential nomination, she need not be distracted by any other issue. At the same time Palin is in a perfect position to argue that on social issues, she maintains the most conservative position of all her opponents. Palin believes in the Constitution and her limited government values force her to hold the conservative position that government does not belong in our bedrooms. Take for instance Palin’s veto of the Alaska state legislature’s attempt to preclude the same-sex spouses of state employees from receiving state benefits. Despite Palin’s own personal opposition to same-sex marriage, she refused to allow the state legislature to deny these benefits on the grounds that it was discriminatory and unconstitutional. In other words, Palin believes that the Constitution settles political debates, not personal opinions. That is conservative. But it is also a conservative view that liberals and moderates should be able to appreciate.

The bottom-line is that if Sarah Palin does decide to run for the Republican presidential nomination, she should not be underestimated. Over the past two years, not only has she increased in popularity, she has also become one of the most vetted possible presidential candidates in history. Every aspect of her life has been under endless assault ever since she was first nominated for Vice President in 2008. The media has never let up on scrutinizing her every move and every word. From her clothing, to her family and even her personal emails, everything Palin-related has been dissected, investigated, examined, commented on and publicized. And what has come out to damage her? Nothing.

Ultimately, unlike the current existing field, Palin’s leadership has been inspiring. For me, the last time that there existed a potential candidate for President who inspired me was in 1988 when former Congressman and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development  Jack F. Kempran in the Republican primary. Kemp’s candidacy help draw me in to a life and career of conservative politics. Of course it must be mentioned that despite the inspiration, Kemp did not make it past New Hampshire. He lost to George “Read My Lips” Bush. But four years later President George H.W. Bush was denied reelection. Many voters were not happy with the fact that Bush broke his promise and caved to liberal calls for tax increases. So in retrospect they might have actually been much happier with the strength and conviction of Jack Kemp more than that of George H.W. Bush. That may perhaps be a lesson for Republicans to remember if Sarah does decide to run.

Bookmark and Share

Bachmann Needs to the Pull the Knife Out of Palin’s Back

Bookmark and Share   After hiring controversial veteran Republican strategist Ed Rollins, it is expected that Minnesota Congresswoman and Congressional TEA Party Caucus Chair Michele Bachmann, will at any time announce her candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination. If she does run, while Bachmann could very well prove to be formidable in early nominating contests like Iowa and South Carolina, her plight to become the Republican presidential nominee will be far from easy. Now, thanks to her new loose cannon political operative, Ed Rollins, that plight has just gotten much harder.

On a radio show hosted by Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade, Rollins took the opportunity to trash Sarah Palin.

In addition to claiming “Sarah has not been serious over the last couple of years,” Rollins stated “She [Palin] got the Vice Presidential thing handed to her, she didn’t go to work in the sense of trying to gain more substance, she gave up her governorship.”

Rollins who was up until recently an operative for Mike Huckabee, claimed that now that Mike Huckabee’s not in the race, in terms of the Republican running for President, Bachmann is “probably the best communicator” He also added “Michele Bachmann and others worked hard, she has been a leader of the Tea Party which is a very important element here, she has been an attorney, she has done important things with family values.”

And Sarah Palin hasn’t?

At 68, perhaps Rollins is losing what good judgment he has left. His claim that Palin “has not been serious” is not only an utterly ludicrous charge, it is a very politically dumb and strategically damaging statement for him to make. Millions ….. “millions”… of Americans take Sarah Palin quite seriously and they take her efforts to elect limited government, family values oriented, fiscal conservatives who have an appreciation for the U.S. Constitution, very seriously.

As for the charge that Palin can’t be taken seriously because she was, as he argues, simply handed the vice presidential

Ed Rollins

nomination in 2008 and then gave up her governorship, perhaps Rollins memory is slipping. I guess he forgets all the legitimate reasons why Palin was picked to run for Vice President. Some of those reasons include her willingness to oppose and defeat a popular sitting Governor from her own Party after rooting out corruption and standing up for justice. Another reason includes her defense and promotion of family values and her ability to govern as a Mayor and a Governor in a way that was fiscally responsible and legislatively efficient.

As for her giving up the governorship, Rollins should really avoid using the propaganda of liberals to promote one conservative and denounce another. As unbelievable as it may seem to Rollins, Palin is not your average politician. She brings to her politics a level of sincerity that is rarely seen in the D.C. beltway that Ed Rollins is familiar with. And it is that sincerity which forced Palin to decide that stepping down was the best thing for the state of Alaska because it would have allowed her very capable Lieutenant Governor to continue the business of the state, unhindered by the ridiculous number of expensive, time consuming, frivolous lawsuits that liberals were relentlessly attacking Palin with.

Ever since she was nominated for Vice President and delivered some energy to the lackluster campaign of John McCain, the left lost all self control and could not give up on trying to tear Palin apart. She embodies everything the left fears in a conservative. And so they undertook an assault on Palin that she believed was not in the best interest of the people Alaska. So instead, she allowed Sean Parnell, the Lieutenant Governor, to take the reigns of power and run with the agenda she set, but to do so unincumbered by the liberal effort to take Palin down. Palin could have easily thought of what might have been best for her personal political career. But she didn’t. Instead she put the people first. And when it was all said and done, what new responsibility did Palin undertake? She set out on a mission to help insure that in 2010, true conservatives got elected to positions as Senator, Congressmen and Governors.

Rollins may not want to see it that way. But it is obvious that he doesn’t want to see the truth. The truth makes Sarah Palin the greatest threat to Michele Bachmann’s popularity and success that there is.  So instead Rollins resorts to trash talk.

But that’s Ed Rollins. For as good as he once was….and he was good, Rollins has also shown a penchant for putting his foot in his mouth.

In 1993, after working on the upset victory of Christine Todd Whitman over New Jersey Governor Jim Florio, Rollins deposited himself right into in the middle of a scandal that involved political campaign payoffs to New Jersey ministers. He told Time Magazine

“We went into black churches and we basically said to ministers who had endorsed Florio, ‘Do you have a special project?’ And they said, ‘We’ve already endorsed Florio.’ We said, ‘That’s fine, don’t get up on the Sunday pulpit and preach. We know you’ve endorsed him, but don’t get up there and say it’s your moral obligation that you go on Tuesday to vote for Jim Florio.'”

He later tried to backtrack by claiming his original statement was an exaggeration.

This latest gaffe, only enforces the perception that Rollins is losing it.  For someone who was hired to promote Bachmann, in just a few moments of air time, he has hurt her far more than he has helped.  One need to go no further than Michele’s Facebook page to see evidence of that.

In just a matter of hours since Rollins comments came out, hundreds of Face book “Fans” have begun to turn on the Congresswoman. For instance there was this from Allen Pishotta:

“Why have you stabbed Sarah Palin in the back after all she did for you last year? Why have you forsaken the Tea Party Movement in order to become a “stalking horse” for Mitt Romney and yes we all know that you are working for the RINO Romney campaign so it is no secret. What was the political bribe needed to become a “Judas” and sell …conservatives out? I once heavily supported you now I will never give you another dime after this. You nickname is now Michele “Backstabbing” Bachmann because that is what you did.”

And this from Doreen Graney:

“Hey, Michelle, the last time Ed Rollins was part of a winning campaign my oldest son was a newborn baby. Today is his 30th birthday. Hope you’re not paying him much. You won’t be getting any support from me, financial or otherwise.”

Sue Lynn writes:

“Lost my support….Your just another politician…Backstabbing a good friend that helped you get re-elected…So much for that Christian talk you talk about…sure don’t practice it…I will never support you in the future because of your actions to a good friend”

Jolyn Colon demands an apology and states:

“Ed Rollins has a reputation for being a bomb thrower. Did you know that when you hired him? You need to step up personally and 1.) issue an apology to Sarah and 2.) fire this idiot before he steps in it again. Anything else is not good enough.”

And Gary Jackson was particularly mad:

“Michele, Sarah Palin and her millions of supporters have ALWAYS had your back. ALWAYS! Now you go hire one of the biggest scum bags on earth to run your campaign and the first thing he does is trash Sarah Palin.

You realize you have effectively ended any chance you ever had at ever being elected, right?

Good luck winning your House se…at again without any Palinista support and $$$$

What a pathetic loser you are.”

Most offhand comments usually have a short political shelf life. So very often statements like those made by Rollins,  which inspired the type of anymosity seen in the words above, are normally healed by time. But that is not the case here. Unless Michele Bachmann makes some very substantial overtures to Palin  and isnure that not only are Rollins’ remarks are retracted, but that she in no way shares his thinking about Palin, Bachmann will be seriously hurt by this. As Republican red as Palin supporters are, they are also true blue to Palin and quite defensive of her.  After witnessing over two years of endless, unfair, attacks on her and her family, Palin’s supporters have a right to be defensive. And they especially have a right to defend her against one who is suppose to be on their side.

Ed Rollin’s remarks were incredibly stupid, in every way. Politically, he alienated Palin supporters, the very people who could have easily been backers of Bachmann if Palin does not run, and cost Bachmann that potential support .  And there was absolutely no reason for that. Just this past Sunday, when Sarah Palin was asked by Fox News’ Chris Wallace, if there was room for her and Michele Bachmann in the 2012 Republican presidential race, Palin gave Bachmann credit for having stregths of her own that she would bring to the race, and went on to say that Bachmann would be a welcome addition to the race…. “the more the merrier” said Palin.

Unlike Rollins, who claims that Palin is “not serious”, in that answer, Palin proved to be more politically savvy than Rollins, a so called political expert. Well now it is time for Michele Bachmann to show how politically savvy she is. Does she have the ability to correct the wrong done to her by her own political consultant? Short of firing him, Palin supporters may not ever believe so.

Bookmark and Share

For Republicans, the First Step Is the Primary Within the Primary

Bookmark and Share    As we finally begin to understand what the likely field of Republican presidential candidates will look like, it is becoming clear that the same dynamics which influenced the 2010 Republican primaries and general election, are likely to play a significant role in the 2012 Republican presidential nominating contest. In 2010, the influence of a strong TEA movement, shaped the platform that incumbents ran on, and determined the outcomes of many primary contests. The now former Congressman from Delaware, Mike Castle, is one of the most notable people who can attest to that.

In Delaware’s Republican U.S. Senate primary, Castle, a former Governor of the state, was an establishment candidate. He was defeated by Christine O’Donnell who, for better or worse, was the anti-establishment candidate. In Nevada, Sharron Angle, another anti-establishment candidate, defeated a number of other establishment Republicans in her attempt to win the G.O.P. nomination. In both cases, those ladies may have lost their general election races, but many other anti-establishment candidates, won both the Party nomination and their general elections. There was Marco Rubio,  Rick Scott, Daniel Webster, and Allen West in Florida, Tim Johnson in Wisconsin, Niki Haley in South Carolina, New Mexico’s Susana Martinez and many more, including hundreds more on the county and local levels. Ultimately, the TEA movement brewed a potent formula that is still infusing itself in to the electoral and legislative process and it will continue to do so in the nomination process of the next Republican presidential candidate.

The same anti-establishment sentiment that propelled statewide and local candidates to victory in 2010 is going to again play itself out in presidential primaries and pit the anti-establishment against the establishment. In fact, in many ways, the race to nominate a Republican presidential candidate is likely to come down to two people……..the establishment candidate and the anti-establishment candidate. Consider it a primary within the primary.

On the establishment side, you have frontrunner Mitt Romney, followed by Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, and possibly other major players like Texas Governor Rick Perry, along with minor candidates like former Governors Buddy Roemer, George Pataki, Bob Riley and possibly even former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. In the end though, the establishment primary will really be only between Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, Pawlenty and if he runs, Rick Perry.

As for the anti-establishment primary, who will be competing in this field is still a bit unsettled. With names like Bachmann and Palin not yet in the race but seriously considering it, this inner-primary has yet to take shape. At the moment, Herman Cain is the anti-establishmentarian frontrunner. Competing against Cain is former two term New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson and Texas Congressman Ron Paul.  Both Paul and Johnson have a very low ceilings of support, but we have yet to see how high the roof on Herman Cain’s popularity is.

While Cain has a definite ability to outperform both Johnson and Paul, the entry of Bachmann and/or Palin in to the race, will give Cain a good run for whatever money he can raise.

On the establishment side, while Romney has the inside track, he can easily be thrown off pace and with the specter of RomneyCare hanging around his neck, he could be quickly overcome by Pawlenty, Gingrich, Santorum, Huntsman or Perry.

But in the final analysis, the nomination will most likely come down to the candidate which the establishment gravitates towards and the candidate that the anti-establishment coalesces around. It is hard to say which two will win their primaries within the primaries. I tend to believe that unless Texas Governor Rick Perry enters the race, Mitt Romney will be the system backed candidate.

Despite fears of Romney being a Benedict Arnold to the conservative cause and having a government-centric mindset, Romney will be a strong candidate. Say what you want, but Romney has a good record. Especially when it comes to management and economics, two things critical to the immediate needs of our nation. He will strike all the right chords and do so in a way that could earn him not just the Republican presidential nomination, but the confidence of Republican voters as well. And in the general election, as the nominee, Mitt Romney has the ability to craft a campaign that can beat President Obama. But Mitt can easily be derailed from his seemingly likely road to the nomination and even the White House, if a during the primaries and caucuses, a certain former Governor winds up becoming the candidate that the ant-establishment forces gravitate toward.

That person is Sarah Palin.

In 2010, she was the needle that the TEA movement used to inject its brew into the G.O.P. with. In 2010, she was the TEA Party’s Cheerleader-in-Chief and the quintessential anti-establishmentarian. And right now, it looks like Palin has the staying power to still be that Cheerleader-in-Chief in 2012.

While people like Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann could prove to be quite formidable, Palin is really the only anti-establishment candidate who has the ability to maintain the enthusiastic support of a majority of TEA movement Republicans while also being able to attract a significant portion of support away from the establishment candidate ……..especially if that ends up being Mitt Romney. In fact, if the primaries within the primaries pit Palin against Romney, I believe Palin wins the nomination.

That  is obviously conjecture. For it to even be possible, Sarah Palin will have to first decide to become a candidate for President in 2012. Additionally, the opportunity for any number of game changing events to take place is endless, and I still contend that the logistics of a well run campaign can make a candidate who looks weak now, seem quite strong later. But what is not conjecture is the fact that the G.O.P. will be encountering a primary within the primary. The anti-establishment forces are firmly ensconced within the G.O.P. and they are ready to do battle again in 2012. For these people, trust does not come with “political experience”. In truth, political experience is a minus to them. For these people, being a “good Republican” is not enough. They want a different type of Republican, the type who is willing to push the G.O.P. establishment and who can demonstrate that they are not willing to play the political games that have gotten us to where we are today. These sentiments are going to certainly produce a divide that will lead not to the usual competition between liberal Republicans and conservative Republicans but rather one between Republican insiders and Republican outsiders.

The final outcome will depend upon on which Republican outsider runs against which Republican insider.

Bookmark and Share

Sarah Palin Tells Chris Wallace What “President Palin” Would Do

Bookmark and Share   I have stopped predicting who will enter the race for the Republican presidential nomination. After seeing names like Pence, Thune, Barbour, and Huckabee, all shy away from a bid for the nomination and after being convinced that Mitch Daniels would run, only to find out that he won’t, I have stopped trying to figure out what any other potential candidates will do. This is especially so concerning former Alaska Governor and vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin. Pain is a master at throwing people off guard. She relishes her ability to befuddle the media that tries to follow her every move and she holds her cards close. However, in a rather extensive 25 minute interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday, Governor Palin sounded like someone prepared to challenge President Obama in 2012.

Palin came across as calm, cool, and in command of the issues. Her opinions were also presented in a way that made her come across as a  populist with a common sense conservative approach to the problems being denied by our President, but understood by the people.

In one of her brightest moments of the interview, Sarah hit Democrats and the President on the economy and said;

“Their [the Democrats]plans for bigger government, more federal control over our private sector, more regulation and burdensome mandates on the people, and on our businesses, its not working and we need to shift gears and change course.  And it is very noble of President Obama to want to stay at the helm and maybe go down with the sinking ship, but I prefer,…… many Americans prefer…… that we start plugging up the holes, powering up the bilge pump, and start to get rid of this unsustainable debt that is sonking our ship.”

Palin sounded most like a presidential candidate when host Chris Wallace asked the former vice presidential nominee, “What would President Palin do, specifically, to boost the economy?

Without any hesitation, Palin simply said that she “would go in the opposite direction of what these Democrats and President Obama have tried in these past 2 ½ years.” But as she continued her answer, at about 4 minutes, 10 seconds into the interview, she stated,

“What President Palin would do is cut the federal budget….making sure that we’re not crowding out private sector investment. And we will cut that spending”

Another telling point came when Wallace pointed out that Palin and Bachmann are both popular TEA Party figures as well as social conservatives and as such, asked Palin  if there was room for both her and Bachmann in the race, or would they split the same base of support between them?

Here , Sarah Palin gave a response that may have offered a “between the lines” interpretation indicative of her sense that she fully expects to become a candidate.

Palin stated;

“No, we have differences too. I have many years of executive experience too, and she has her strengths to add to the race. But no, yeah, there is certainly room. The more the merrier. The more competition, the better.”

That segment of the interview can be found at almost the very end of the video at about 23 minutes, 30 seconds in to it.

While I once leaned towards believing that Palin was not going to run for President, the last month has made me begin to think that she might actually go for it. For a while, she was suspiciously absent from the political scene as she laid relatively low. For me, that was a sign of Palin preparing for something big and trying to not overexpose herself too early. Now, while Palin vigorously argues that she is simply celebrating our American history, her recent bus tour for that  purported purpose, offers up an oddly timed, campaign-like experience, that affords her valuable attention.

Now we can add to that this nearly half hour long interview, an interview in which Palin talks about decisions that would come from a “President Palin”, and discusses room in the race for her and other candidates, so matter-of-factly, that it almost sounds as though she is welcoming candidates to challenge her for the nomination. But I am still not getting my hopes up.

The positive potential that I believe exists in a Palin presidential candidacy is endless. In 2008, I was part of a movement to nominate her for Vice President and became one of the happiest people in the world of politics when she actually was nominated. I believe it was the only smart decision made by John McCain and his campaign. However; I do admit that since then, Palin has been somewhat marginalized by a vindictive, liberal element and relentlessly brutal media. To a degree, her image was damaged and her negative ratings surpassed her positive ratings. But I also believe that if Sarah Palin can transition from playing the role of Republican cheerleader to Republican statesman, she could easily turn those ratings around. All Palin needs to do is come across a bit more Thatcher-like than pop star-like, and she could easily become America’s “Iron Lady”.

This latest interview was a step in that direction.

Bookmark and Share
%d bloggers like this: