Republicans Against Sarah Palin

Dixie said:
Why don't you liberals shut the fuck up and worry about how you're going to advance your socialist communist agenda, now that you won't have a fucking Congress anymore?
Click to expand...
Oh, someone is feeling their conservatism today! Grumpa!
 
Oh, no not Joe, too!

"That reality hardly makes Palin unique, but this is one Republican who would prefer that the former half-term governor promote her reality shows and hawk her books without demeaning the reputations of Presidents Reagan and Bush," Scarborough continues. "These great men dedicated their lives to public service and are too good to be fodder for her gaudy circus sideshow." Joe Scarborrough
 
Woman of Mass Delusions

sarah_palin_wmd.jpg


"And yet the same leaders who fret that Sarah Palin could devastate their party in 2012 are too scared to say in public what they all complain about in private...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/30/trending-palin-must-be-stopped-says-scarborough/
 
Damn Yankee said:
Yet my position is different than the one that you seem to be addressing. My actual position is:
Click to expand...

she is also the type to run away from confrontations - could she win by just going with faux news for support?

she likes the applause too much to take on a hostile interview -also, the money
 
Dixie said:
Yes, I understand we have a political process, and Palin would have to win the primary. I also understand a lot of Republicans would find someone else to vote for, and it wouldn't be a 'slam dunk' for her to win a primary. I don't know how 'handily' she would lose, because she does have a fairly significant following, despite not announcing a candidacy. From my perspective, if she didn't outright win the nomination, she would finish a strong second.

But here's the thing elitist establishment and libertarian type republicans need to be thinking about... what if she does win the primary? Are you going to be able to walk back all of this negativity you've participated with the left in generating on Palin? Because if Palin is the GOP nominee, and you can't vote for her, you may as well be voting for Obama. All I am trying to get any of you to do, is stop this uncontrollable urge to join the left in the character assassination of Sarah Palin. Understand that your 'objections' to Palin thus far, have been empty and weak. We've elected peanut farmers, actors, and community organizers in recent years, so now is an odd time to cling to the importance of 'gravitas' and 'experience' as deal breakers.
Click to expand...
"All this negativity?"

Um... All I said is that at this time I'd bet she'd lose, and by a large margin, in a Primary. There's nothing personally negative about it. I think Huckabee will also lose by a wide margin. It doesn't mean I hate either of them. I wanted McCain over Bush in 2000, I had no problem voting the first time for Bush. It was the second time I agonized and finally, knowing he was going to win my state anyway, I voted my conscience and went Libertarian.
 
Damocles said:
"All this negativity?"

Um... All I said is that at this time I'd bet she'd lose, and by a large margin, in a Primary. There's nothing personally negative about it. I think Huckabee will also lose by a wide margin. It doesn't mean I hate either of them. I wanted McCain over Bush in 2000, I had no problem voting the first time for Bush. It was the second time I agonized and finally, knowing he was going to win my state anyway, I voted my conscience and went Libertarian.
Click to expand...
So, did you state who will win the nomination? I missed it if you did.
 
Rana said:
So, did you state who will win the nomination? I missed it if you did.
Click to expand...
No. I'm not sure at this point. I like Romney for it, but that is just who I like at the moment. I'd like to see who is in the race before I really take a poke at prognostication.
 
Damocles said:
"All this negativity?"

Um... All I said is that at this time I'd bet she'd lose, and by a large margin, in a Primary. There's nothing personally negative about it. I think Huckabee will also lose by a wide margin. It doesn't mean I hate either of them. I wanted McCain over Bush in 2000, I had no problem voting the first time for Bush. It was the second time I agonized and finally, knowing he was going to win my state anyway, I voted my conscience and went Libertarian.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're a regular Karl Rove on this, aren't you? Look, maybe you're right, maybe Republicans are determined to nominate a northeastern moderate republican blue blood, who implemented government-run health care before Obama did? Maybe John McCain didn't teach them one single thing about being moderate and going with a moderate candidate? You could be absolutely right, and that's who we end up with.... it's too early to tell.

My hunch is, if Palin runs, Palin will have an enormous base of support, and will be difficult to beat. Not saying she'll win the nomination, but I wouldn't bet anything against her. Likely, she will be a close second if she doesn't win it outright, and that will certainly cause Tea Party issues to be adapted into the GOP platform for 2012, regardless of who does ultimately win the primary.

But Damo, you're welcome to think whatever you like and live in whatever fantasy world you'd like to live in, I can't do anything about that. I don't think the nation is majority libertarian-agnostic, longing for a candidate who will take a dump on social conservative issues completely. Maybe that's what you believe we should have, and maybe that's what you hope we will have, but I just don't see mainstream Americans supporting such a candidate.
 
Dixie said:
Yeah, you're a regular Karl Rove on this, aren't you? Look, maybe you're right, maybe Republicans are determined to nominate a northeastern moderate republican blue blood, who implemented government-run health care before Obama did? Maybe John McCain didn't teach them one single thing about being moderate and going with a moderate candidate? You could be absolutely right, and that's who we end up with.... it's too early to tell.

My hunch is, if Palin runs, Palin will have an enormous base of support, and will be difficult to beat. Not saying she'll win the nomination, but I wouldn't bet anything against her. Likely, she will be a close second if she doesn't win it outright, and that will certainly cause Tea Party issues to be adapted into the GOP platform for 2012, regardless of who does ultimately win the primary.

But Damo, you're welcome to think whatever you like and live in whatever fantasy world you'd like to live in, I can't do anything about that. I don't think the nation is majority libertarian-agnostic, longing for a candidate who will take a dump on social conservative issues completely. Maybe that's what you believe we should have, and maybe that's what you hope we will have, but I just don't see mainstream Americans supporting such a candidate.
Click to expand...
Honey, you are the one who is living in the fantasy world if you think Sarah has an enormous base! She comes out and watch how many people come out of the woodwork to defeat her! I will work harder than I ever have on a campaign against her!
 
Rana said:
Honey, you are the one who is living in the fantasy world if you think Sarah has an enormous base! She comes out and watch how many people come out of the woodwork to defeat her! I will work harder than I ever have on a campaign against her!
Click to expand...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
Rana said:
Honey, you are the one who is living in the fantasy world if you think Sarah has an enormous base! She comes out and watch how many people come out of the woodwork to defeat her! I will work harder than I ever have on a campaign against her!
Click to expand...

Well that's fine Renal! That's what is supposed to happen in elections! Do you think Republicans should nominate someone liberals would not work hard to defeat? That's what we tried with McCain... remember, the Liberal's Favorite Republican? Smart guys like Damo, convinced us that McCain or Romney were the type of conservative we needed to run against Democrats, they didn't seem to rile Democrats like Bush, and this would help us secure the swing vote. We ended up nominating someone conservatives didn't "work hard" to elect!

As long as you beat Sarah Palin fair and square, without having to count dangling chads, or depending on the dead to vote, or finding the ever-popular box of ballots in the trunk during the recount... you know, all the sleazy tricks Democrats pull to win elections? As long as you beat her legitimately, I don't have a problem with it, let the chips fall where they may! And I don't care, nor will I apologize, for nominating a candidate that you don't personally like. I think that was a mistake in 2008, and it will be a mistake again, if we try it in 2012. Our nominee shouldn't be someone who wins a popularity contest by liberals and elitist republicans.
 
Dixie said:
Well that's fine Renal! That's what is supposed to happen in elections! Do you think Republicans should nominate someone liberals would not work hard to defeat? That's what we tried with McCain... remember, the Liberal's Favorite Republican? Smart guys like Damo, convinced us that McCain or Romney were the type of conservative we needed to run against Democrats, they didn't seem to rile Democrats like Bush, and this would help us secure the swing vote. We ended up nominating someone conservatives didn't "work hard" to elect!

As long as you beat Sarah Palin fair and square, without having to count dangling chads, or depending on the dead to vote, or finding the ever-popular box of ballots in the trunk during the recount... you know, all the sleazy tricks Democrats pull to win elections? As long as you beat her legitimately, I don't have a problem with it, let the chips fall where they may! And I don't care, nor will I apologize, for nominating a candidate that you don't personally like. I think that was a mistake in 2008, and it will be a mistake again, if we try it in 2012. Our nominee shouldn't be someone who wins a popularity contest by liberals and elitist republicans.
Click to expand...
Or Supreme Courts selecting the new President, that too?
 
Rana said:
Or Supreme Courts selecting the new President, that too?
Click to expand...

Well, we had to go to the Supreme Court to settle it in 2000, because you fucktards would have still been re-counting ballots! See sweety, the idea of a recount is not to keep recounting until your guy wins. I know democrats view it as sudden death overtime, and that's when you all pull out the mysterious box of unexplained missing ballots, or start haggling over dimpled chads and 'voter intent' like the sleazy cheaters and liars you are.
 
Dixie said:
Well, we had to go to the Supreme Court to settle it in 2000, because you fucktards would have still been re-counting ballots! See sweety, the idea of a recount is not to keep recounting until your guy wins. I know democrats view it as sudden death overtime, and that's when you all pull out the mysterious box of unexplained missing ballots, or start haggling over dimpled chads and 'voter intent' like the sleazy cheaters and liars you are.
Click to expand...
Tell that to Joe Miller, he needs to hear it, you guys will steal the election, anyway it takes~
 
Rana said:
Tell that to Joe Miller, he needs to hear it, you guys will steal the election, anyway it takes~
Click to expand...

Froggy, its not fair to send me a message and then not accept a reply. How am I supposed to answer your question?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top