Sarah Palin as a Third Party Candidate? Naaah!

D

Dixie - In Memoriam

New member
I was interested in a 'theme' I saw yesterday on a couple of 'news' programs, dealing with this Rasmussen poll about a "Tea Party" third party for 2012. The name that kept popping up, was Sarah Palin, as the candidate. Rassie found that 38% would vote Dem... 23% would vote for the Tea Party, and 22% undecided... GOP got 18%! That was interesting, but the suppositions began to touch a nerve with me. Why would Sarah Palin depart from the GOP to run as a 3rd party candidate? This would essentially guarantee a second Obama term.

What this poll tells me is, the Republican "establishment" better wake up fast, and understand where the future is. A return to core principles of conservatism, top to bottom. The understanding that we are a divinely inspired nation with a moral foundation and culture we are not ashamed of, but proud of. To realize, the first step to taking our nation back, is to restore fiscal responsibility. To realize liberalism threatens our courts, schools, universities, churches, and personal property, and we have to stop it now.

Sarah Palin is resoundingly popular because she represents the average American, they can identify with her life, her experiences, even her personal adversities and challenges. Her story is not unlike many Americans, and they can relate to her on a personal level. Contrast this with the plastic face of Nancy Pelosi, and cold handshake from Harry Reid, or even the stoic haughtiness of Newt Gingrich or John McCain. Palin isn't a "politician" type, she is Mrs. Smith Goes To Washington.

I don't see Palin forming a third party, I see her taking the lead in shaping the Republican party, and eventually leading it back to power. Whether as a presidential candidate, or some other role, I think what she has to say, better be listened to by the GOP, or they are through. The Tea Party is a formidable political coalition, and this poll proved it. If this were a chess match with moderates in the party, this was checkmate.
 
The conservatives in the republican party need to press fiscal conservatism as the basis for their return to power. This country is in desperate need of leaders that understand that fiscal conservatism is our best hope for a free future.

Social conservatism, on the other hand, will meet with strong resistance. The idea that the gov't should meddle in personal lives goes against the core values of a freedom loving society.
 
WinterBorn said:
The conservatives in the republican party need to press fiscal conservatism as the basis for their return to power. This country is in desperate need of leaders that understand that fiscal conservatism is our best hope for a free future.

Social conservatism, on the other hand, will meet with strong resistance. The idea that the gov't should meddle in personal lives goes against the core values of a freedom loving society.
Click to expand...

They always have. Generally at the cost of programs to help the poor.Besides fiscal conservatism is the problem with the economy. In a capitalist society the best thing you can do to help it is to spend. The more money on the move the better the economy.And what better way is there to spend that money then giveing it to the poor and needy?
 
wanderingbear said:
They always have. Generally at the cost of programs to help the poor.Besides fiscal conservatism is the problem with the economy. In a capitalist society the best thing you can do to help it is to spend. The more money on the move the better the economy.And what better way is there to spend that money then giveing it to the poor and needy?
Click to expand...

The problem is the rampant gov't spending that has not fixed problems.

Giving money to the poor and needy is great. Helping the poor and needy to get out of their poor and needy situation is even better.

But soaking the wealthy (or not so wealthy) to pay people to do nothing is counterproductive.
 
American society never really paid for people to do nothing. Even at it's height our welfare state was pathetic, now it's just bare bones before people start dying off. What's more, axing half of of it didn't even barely begin to pay for Reagan's massive tax cuts to the rich. No, that's entirely been paid for out of the deficit.
 
you want to further ruin the republican party keep the religious shit up and trying to tell people how to live. Republicans let their preachers take away personal freedoms, without ditiching that neocons average age will go from 70 to 97.
 
yeah listen to the lefties and ditch religion that 85% of people in this country believe in some form or another and take on their immoralities that they push off on people as a norm..you betcha
 
meme said:
yeah listen to the lefties and ditch religion that 85% of people in this country believe in some form or another and take on their immoralities that they push off on people as a norm..you betcha
Click to expand...

Granny, your problem is that there are more than dozens of religions. You can't pick one and make laws based on it.
I'll check back in 2012 and see how your doing with the young vote which you nearly got none of in 2008.
 
Topspin said:
I'll check back in 2012 and see how your doing with the young vote which you nearly got none of in 2008.
Click to expand...

lol, you're going to have to pull your head out of the sand someday sonny boy..the man child in chiefs poll numbers are down to 47% so I would guess some of them not so happy would include some younguns..
 
meme said:
lol, you're going to have to pull your head out of the sand someday sonny boy..the man child in chiefs poll numbers are down to 47% so I would guess some of them not so happy would include some younguns..
Click to expand...

I won't question you on economics sinse you barely got out of high school, the economy will be back to booming in 2011 and Obama will get a second term.
 
Topspin said:
I won't question you on economics sinse you barely got out of high school, the economy will be back to booming in 2011 and Obama will get a second term.
Click to expand...

will you spin that magic eight ball to see if I will win the lottery next year...:cof1:
 
meme said:
will you spin that magic eight ball for me to see if I will win the lottery next year...:cof1:
Click to expand...

yes you will win, but you'll have to double your ticket purchases after Jan 22nd. I hope you don't have to split it and you win millions.:clink:
 
wanderingbear said:
They always have. Generally at the cost of programs to help the poor.Besides fiscal conservatism is the problem with the economy. In a capitalist society the best thing you can do to help it is to spend. The more money on the move the better the economy.And what better way is there to spend that money then giveing it to the poor and needy?
Click to expand...

When the economy is down and thus consumer spending dissipates, I agree, it can indeed be beneficial if the government finds ways to spark the growth in the economy. (ie... actual JOB creation)

However, the problem is that the idiots in DC will use deficit spending REGARDLESS of the state of the economy. Even in the boom of the 1990's, they STILL outspent their revenue. That is detrimental and detracts from the effectiveness of the government to intervene during harsher economic climates.

1960... that was the last fiscal year our nations debt did not rise.

Side note... welcome back oh wandering one.
 
Dixie said:
I was interested in a 'theme' I saw yesterday on a couple of 'news' programs, dealing with this Rasmussen poll about a "Tea Party" third party for 2012. The name that kept popping up, was Sarah Palin, as the candidate. Rassie found that 38% would vote Dem... 23% would vote for the Tea Party, and 22% undecided... GOP got 18%! That was interesting, but the suppositions began to touch a nerve with me. Why would Sarah Palin depart from the GOP to run as a 3rd party candidate? This would essentially guarantee a second Obama term.
Click to expand...

It was a generic congressional ballot, not a presidential race. And with numbers like those, the Democrats would probably win over 300 seats.
 
It's amazing how people like Dixie here a number like 23% and declare VICTORY!

The base may PREFER a party of ignorance than an electable party, but going to the insane lengths that the Tea Traitors are would result in resounding electoral defeat. The Tea Traitors HAVE to vote for the Republicans - the Republicans don't have to vote for them. Some of them might just go Democrat than vote Tea Traitor.
 
Superfreak said:
When the economy is down and thus consumer spending dissipates, I agree, it can indeed be beneficial if the government finds ways to spark the growth in the economy. (ie... actual JOB creation).
Click to expand...

And government spending is the most direct way to do this. You'd need 3x as many tax cuts to equal a direct stimulus of the say size. The problem with the old taxcutulus was that it was half tax cuts.
 
Watermark said:
It's amazing how people like Dixie here a number like 23% and declare VICTORY!

The base may PREFER a party of ignorance than an electable party, but going to the insane lengths that the Tea Traitors are would result in resounding electoral defeat. The Tea Traitors HAVE to vote for the Republicans - the Republicans don't have to vote for them. Some of them might just go Democrat than vote Tea Traitor.
Click to expand...

well golly gee at least the tea party members have moved on up from being called "teabaggers"..:palm:
 
Topspin said:
I won't question you on economics sinse you barely got out of high school, the economy will be back to booming in 2011 and Obama will get a second term.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. We need 6% GDP growth for the next year just to get unemployment back to the 8-8.5% range. That is not likely to occur. Which means we are likely to see double digit unemployment throughout 2010. 2011 it should start trickling down towards that 8% range, 2012... too far out to see due to so many variables being unknown.

IF the economy is indeed back to full employment (or close)... say back to 6-6.5% by the 2012 election, then I would agree he would be headed for re-election. Anything north of 8% and he is gone. In between the two and it will be up for grabs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top