It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Rasmussen's poll of the 2012 Republican presidential primary:

Sarah Palin 64%
Mike Huckabee 12%
Mitt Romney 11%
Bobby Jindal 4%
Charlie Crist 2%
Tim Pawlenty 1%
Undecided 6%

And the piece de resistance:

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republican voters say Alaska Governor Sarah Palin helped John McCain's bid for the presidency...

Consider this an open thread.

Tags: Open Thread (all tags)

Comments

92 Comments

Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

my god what a pathetic roster.

by obama4presidente 2008-11-07 05:01PM | 0 recs
Only pathetic at the top

The rest of them, even Mitt to a degree, but especially Huckabee, Jindahl, and Christ could be credible candidates.  Disrespect of your opposition is a dangerous thing.  That is a big part of the reason the GOP is where they are now.

by lombard 2008-11-08 06:40AM | 0 recs
Rescaled

I assume Palin will be a non-issue by 2012, so here is the rest of the field rescaled:

Mike Huckabee 33%
Mitt Romney 30%
Bobby Jindal 11%
Charlie Crist 5%
Tim Pawlenty 2%
Undecided 16%

That looks about right to me -- 1/3 religious, 1/3 economic, and 1/3 looking for something new to unite the other thirds.

by username 2008-11-08 07:08AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Poor Mitt.

No matter how much he spends, he can't be the front runner.

by Bush Bites 2008-11-07 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

we need to tell our republican friends she is perfect - perfect to destroy them and they don't even know it!

by lilaruby 2008-11-07 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

"Fool Me Once, Shame on.... Shame on You. Fool Me Twice... Fool Me - Can't Get Fooled Again"

-W

by flux08 2008-11-07 05:16PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

"What... Africa is a continent, not a country? What about South Africa then. Isn't it a state?"

by Trey Rentz 2008-11-08 04:08AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

This proves it - 69% of Republican's are dumb as a post

by jsfox 2008-11-07 05:17PM | 0 recs
All Your Base Are Belong to Us

The Repub base loves Sarah Palin.

They think she is the female reincarnation of Reagan; her frontier qualities delight, charm and emboldened them.

That's why the recent Fox News reporting of various McCain aides' denigration of her was the most disingenuous reporting since, well, the day before and the day before that, etc., etc.

Fox News knows what the base likes; they trashed her to endear her even more to them.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-11-07 05:23PM | 0 recs
Re: All Your Base Are Belong to Us

Heck, she might even wreck Fox, or at least keep them at each other's throats for some time to come.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-11-07 05:27PM | 0 recs
They really have become the Know Nothing Party!

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republican voters say Alaska Governor Sarah Palin helped John McCain's bid for the presidency...

by NM Ward Chair 2008-11-07 05:28PM | 0 recs
I think Fox is torn between two sides

They do what they're told by their Republican masters -- but now some of the masters are trashing Palin and some are praising her.  So they are confused.

by John DE 2008-11-07 06:11PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

this is very good news for repu....   bwahahahahahaha  I can't say it without laughing... I just can't.

Only one on that list that might get both the corporate and fundie bases together is Jindal.

by its simple IF you ignore the complexity 2008-11-07 05:19PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Jindal's not stupid... the only way he runs in 2012 is if Obama's favorables are in the toilet.... otherwise, he knows Obama will hand him his ass.... Better to wait until 2016 and not face an incumbent.

by yitbos96bb 2008-11-07 08:02PM | 0 recs
Palin

Newsweek has a long kind of gossipy series of essays on the campaign, kind to both candidates but with some very funny stuff about Palin.

Nice to know their faith in her hasn't been shaken.  Nice for us certainly.  You betcha it is.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/167582

by mady 2008-11-07 05:22PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

100% of Democrats want Sarah Palin to be the candidate in 2012. Why didn't they report that?

by QTG 2008-11-07 05:24PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Overstated... there's a couple percent holding out for the Mitt.

And personally I'm still hoping Lieberman will get the nod...

;-)

by its simple IF you ignore the complexity 2008-11-07 05:46PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Awesome.  And bad news for Republicans.  Who would have thought that McCain's hasty 'Hail Mary' VP pick would have crippled the Republican party for the foreseeable future?  She's their problem now and it's a massive one, squarely astride the path to rebuilding their party for sane Republicans.  And she ain't going away any time soon, either.

She's America's very own Pauline Hanson, the xenophobic populist who single-handedly wrecked the reactionary National party of Australia and hastened the conservative Liberal party on it's eight-year long journey into the political wilderness.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-11-07 05:26PM | 0 recs
I just want to add one thing...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HA HA hA ha...!!!!!!!!!!

by kevin22262 2008-11-07 05:26PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Please do.

Maybe Obama will get another shot at that 400+ electoral vote landslide in '12.

by BlueGAinDC 2008-11-07 05:28PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

535-3

by NJIndependent 2008-11-07 06:13PM | 0 recs
Re: 535-3

   519-19 is more like it. AK-3, WY-3, UT-6 and OK-7. That is about as low as it could go, I believe. I figure UT gets another EV after the reapportionment; that's why I have 6 EVs there instead of 5.

by Zack from the SFV 2008-11-07 10:34PM | 0 recs
PUMA comedy
Here's your Hillarious Pumasm of the day, courtesy of our own Alegre:
MoveOn shelled out over $5 million to help elect BHO.  I sure hope he remembers to send George Soros a thank you card once he gets to the White House.

Yep, she's swallowed the Grand Soros Conspiracy theory, hook, line, and sinker.
by username 2008-11-07 05:28PM | 0 recs
Re: PUMA comedy

Oh my gosh, she's still at it?

I guess she can't claim that only Saint Hillary can possibly beat McCain anymore.  I haven't checked out the PUMA site(s) recently, but I guess that I had assumed that they had mysteriously disappeared.

by auronrenouille 2008-11-07 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: PUMA comedy

That moron is mentally ill.  It scares me she is allowed to raise children.  

by yitbos96bb 2008-11-07 08:04PM | 0 recs
Re: PUMA comedy

Yep, though the whiff of anti-Semitism was a nice new touch.  Plus, Riverdaughter's The Effluence is still going on, and PUMA-PAC is still asking for money.  It goes far beyond normal post-primary disappointment.

If nothing else comes of this election, it will at least be good to have excised these raving lunatics from the party.

by username 2008-11-08 07:01AM | 0 recs
Re: PUMA comedy

Whiff of anti-Semitism?  I didn't bounce over there for very long.

by auronrenouille 2008-11-08 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: PUMA comedy

That's a slight exaggeration, but when she says "I sure hope [Obama] remembers to send George Soros a thank you card once he gets to the White House," you do have to wonder.  Is it just general craziness, or a fear of rich Jews controlling the world with their money?  None of the rest of her post had anything to do with Soros.

by username 2008-11-09 08:03AM | 0 recs
Re: PUMA comedy

Ah, I had no idea Soros was one of the tribe ;).  Well, learned something new then, thanks ;).

by auronrenouille 2008-11-09 10:46AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Is it considered concern trolling if we tell the truth?

A Palin presidential candidacy would absolutely destroy the republican party for the foreseeable future.

I think I'll stick to "She's a formidable candidate, the republican party would do well to nominate Sara Palin."

Fer sure.

by lojasmo 2008-11-07 05:30PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Please don't throw us in that briar patch!!!!

by its simple IF you ignore the complexity 2008-11-07 05:48PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Wow...the new Know Nothing Party.

This poll bodes well for the Libertarian Party soon becoming a major force in American politics.

by gorebeatbush2 2008-11-07 05:36PM | 0 recs
Nixonland alive and well

I'm reading Perlstein's Nixonland right now and it's clear that the whole anti-elitist culture war argument that propelled Nixon to power still reigns among the GOP base.

The rest of us are laughing.

by elrod 2008-11-07 05:40PM | 0 recs
Poor Timothy....

Pawlenty only got 1%?  Damn that's fucked up.

by nzubechukwu 2008-11-07 05:50PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Out of curiosity regarding the potential re-election of Barack Obama.

Is it a written rule that Democratic Primaries are not allowed during a re-election bid.  Can a potential Democrat try and seek a primary bid if the situation deems it?  Or is the incumbent automatically the nominee no ifs-ands-or-buts?

I am just curious.  Obviously I am hoping Obama has success in implementing his policies.  However, I was just playing devils advocate if a scenario arises when Obama's popularity tanks or if he has difficulty with his policies.    Or if improvement in the nation's crisis with the economy, etc.....

by newmexicodem 2008-11-07 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Carter was primaried in 1980. Johnson was primaried so hard in 1968 he dropped out of the race.

In some horrible imaginary future where the Obama presidency is a disaster, it would be perfectly possible for someone to run against him in the Democratic primaries.

by letterc 2008-11-07 05:59PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

He would have to seriously f up to lose the nomination in 2012. Token candidates have run against a sitting President in their party's primary in the past. A sitting President can be denied the nomination though. It happened to LBJ at the height of the Vietnam war. He lost the New Hampshire primary in '68 and dropped out of the nomination race.

by newms 2008-11-07 06:00PM | 0 recs
actually Johnson won the 1968 NH primary

But he got less than 50%, so the rest proceeded as you say.

http://www.primarynewhampshire.com/new-h ampshire-primary-past-results.php

by John DE 2008-11-07 06:14PM | 0 recs
Re: actually Johnson won the 1968 NH primary

Thanks for the correction

by newms 2008-11-20 06:02AM | 0 recs
Re: actually Johnson won the 1968 NH primary

Thanks for the correction

by newms 2008-11-20 06:02AM | 0 recs
Ted Kennedy ran against Carter and Fuc$$d up

Carters's re-elction in bid in 1980. I hope no other Democrat would be that foolish.

by indydem99 2008-11-08 12:38AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

I can't see the Republican party ever choosing Sarah Palin...they'll embrace her as their party's standard bearer's VP choice and the far right/social conservatives will be excited by the presence of one of their own as part of a national ticket and consequently defend her passionately...but they will never give her a shot a being their Presidential nominee. Once the wounds have started to heal a bit they will realize that at least some of the things she supposedly said or did are in fact true and at least some of those will be recognized as disqualifying.

Huckabee will take away tons of the religious conservatives....sorry, but being a mom of 5 doesn't trump being a ordained preacher (who happens to actually know a bit about policy).
The business crowd will never embrace her and the 4 or 5 moderates that will still be part of the Republican party (the rest having been killed off or in museums) will do everything they can to keep reminding everyone what a disaster she was/is. Palin has no shot.

It will probably be a Crist/Romney ticket (if only because I'm still convinced that Aaron Sorkin is secretly orchestrating this whole thing and Crist is the definition of "some hair-do from Florida") Although, I think he might be somewhat more politically savvy and dangerous than many on the left might imagine.

on a related note....I think the previous few paragraphs that I just wrote are totally signs of some sort of sickness....didn't the election just end 4 days ago??? I need help

by ACR 2008-11-07 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

The religious right is poised to take control of the Republican Party. Palin's #1 and Mike Huckabee is #2. Palin's at 64% and Huckabee's a distant second with 12%.

The other Republicans might have to ditch the party and morph into Libertarians. That's their closest ideological kin right now.

by Hempy 2008-11-07 05:55PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

It's fashionable to rip Sarah Palin. I see everyone is having a jolly time. Meanwhile, there's that 53-46 McCain margin among white women, which makes absolutely no sense in this political climate, without an artificial boost. It certainly doesn't jive with a +6 Democratic margin, or the results of other major demographics.

Politico reported similar, mentioning that 53-46 number in its exit poll rundown, and wondering if Palin wasn't the influence.

The white female block should have been about a 2-3 point McCain advantage in this type of Obama win, not 7 points.

by Gary Kilbride 2008-11-07 05:59PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

I actually avoid ripping Palin around my republican friends because I want them to nominate her.  She would be a disaster as a national candidate.  If she went back to Alaska and spent 2 years keeping a low profile and building up a good pool of knowledge on policy, she could have an average chance at winning the nomination.  But I am willing to bet she will surround herself with people who like her and will enter the primaries surrounded by yes people who will do her a massive injustice.  The biggest problem for her is going to be that she now has a massive bulls eye on her back from the point of view of the other contenders.  Limbaugh and Hannity are actually hurting her by making her the obvious threat for someone else who wants a shot at the title.  I can't see her surviving politically for 4 years with the other contenders trying to destroy her.  A good example would be if Obama had been the front runner after 2004.  By the primaries Hillary (or the whole field) would have destroyed him and we would be having a much different conversation.

I am more worried about Jindall or the scenario with Crist as a previous poster mentioned.  Crist could lock down Florida and Jindall is actually a really good Governor.  

But I am going back to my self imposed exile because I am kind of interested in how this governing thing works out before I start obsessing about another election.

by Xris 2008-11-07 06:09PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

It was well-established that she doesn't have the discipline needed to study. She learns her talking points, folksies it up a little bit, then steps onto the stage.

by vcalzone 2008-11-07 07:54PM | 0 recs
2012 is too soon for Piyush Jindal

    He is 37 now; in four years he will still be younger than anyone that has ever been elected President. Even if he is successful as LA-Gov, that's still unlikely for the GOP. Also while racism is diminishing in politics, the fact that he is a nonwhite son of immigrants can't help him in a GOP primary.

by Zack from the SFV 2008-11-07 10:43PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Also, the 60% of voters who reported that McCain's selection of Palin was an influence on their vote supported McCain over Obama by 56% to 43%.

by letterc 2008-11-07 06:10PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

That only means McCain had crappy support among Republicans. Most Obama supporters supported Obama. Besides that, her "hardball" interview was with Katie Couric. She never had the chance to be REALLY stupid.

by vcalzone 2008-11-07 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

I actually went to the exit polls to prove the previous poster wrong, but found both that white women had a lower shift towards Obama than most other groups, and also that people who admitted to being influenced by the choice of Palin voted for McCain. Still, your interpretation, that the Palin choice firmed up right-wing support, but didn't help at all in the middle, does also seem to fit the evidence reasonably well.

by letterc 2008-11-08 12:11AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

If I were asked both whether Sarah Palin was qualified AND whether her selection influenced my vote, I'd say no to both. I was never going to vote McCain. If it was only the last one, then I might have said it did influence it.

by vcalzone 2008-11-08 12:34AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

So if you were asked did Palin's selection influence your vote, you might have answered yes, since you wouldn't already have the "Is Sarah Palin qualified?" frame in your head, and if you were then asked if she were qualified, you would answer no, since she wasn't.

I've never actually checked the fine print, but I assume the exit poll questions are randomized in order in some manner.

by letterc 2008-11-15 01:20PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

  I see.  So when we attack Romney I suppose we should be worried about hurting the feelings of white men?  They lost.  Remember?

by cilerder86 2008-11-07 06:18PM | 0 recs
interesting

I see the 2004 exit polls were
white men  62-37
white women  55-44

The 2008 ones as you say were
white men 57-41
white women 53-46

Obama improved by a net of 9 with white men and only 4 with white women. It should have been 50-50 for white women if Obama had the same improvement, although I don't know if that is a fair comparison.  

Did Palin convince an extra 3% of women to stick with the Republicans?  It's certainly possible, and wouldn't be reflected in liberal blog sentiments.

by John DE 2008-11-07 06:30PM | 0 recs
by John DE 2008-11-07 06:31PM | 0 recs
also, 2000 ssupports your theory

Bush hammered Gore 60-39 with white men but edged him out 49-48 with white women.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/results /index.epolls.html

So you'd think Obama could have matched Gore with w.w., having gotten a better percentage overall, but he didn't.

by John DE 2008-11-07 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: also, 2000 ssupports your theory

It's debatable.  I'd argue that Obama's race gave him a lower ceiling among white voters than other candidates have faced.

by Jess81 2008-11-07 06:51PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Dude, don't be Joe Scarborough. Look at the fucking numbers.

John McCain might have gotten a few stubborn white women that voted for him (or rogue PUMAs), but Palin would have lost the election in a landslide. Her entire campaign technique is to attack and play the victim when she gets attacked back, and Obama's strategy made her completely unlikable by the end. Even my Republican father knows she's a moron. He closed his eyes and voted McCain anyway. TONS did not.

by vcalzone 2008-11-07 07:53PM | 0 recs
What if . . .

What if Sarah Palin was just acting this whole time, pretending she was stupid, in order to lower expectations for a 2012 run?

/crazy conspiracy theory

P.S. Jerky Mclaughlin (of the Mclaughlin report) raised the possibility of a Palin-Jindal primary as if melatonin and/or ovaries were the sole keys to electoral success.  I imagine that sort of primary would lead to a stream of vicious sexism/racism that would make our recent primary seem like a tea party.

by the mystical vortexes of sedona 2008-11-07 06:05PM | 0 recs
Re: What if . . .

for some reason i thought you typed mytaclorines (star wars crap) instead of melatonin.  For a brief second I thought you were suggesting that Jindall was a Jedi.  

I wonder how being a Jedi polls in the swing states?

by Xris 2008-11-07 06:10PM | 0 recs
Re: What if . . .

I don't tend to have a great opinion of swing voters or a couple of the swing states (FL and OH, I'm looking at you!), so I'd say they were like the folks building the Death Star--too stupid to realize what they were doing was wrong, too stupid to get on the right side of history and, in the end, hurt by their own stupidity.

by the mystical vortexes of sedona 2008-11-07 06:19PM | 0 recs
Re: What if . . .

well they would argue that we need the death star to combat jihadist terrorists:P

I purpose that we always debate politics from a star wars or video game perspective:)

by Xris 2008-11-07 06:22PM | 0 recs
Re: What if . . .

Jedis: Freedom Fighters or (Insert Religion) Terrorists?

by the mystical vortexes of sedona 2008-11-07 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: What if . . .

Damn Buddhist terrorists.

by fbihop 2008-11-07 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

"Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republican voters say Alaska Governor Sarah Palin helped John McCain's bid for the presidency"

Still "Proud to be ignorant" I see. its OK we can do with a bigger landslide next time!!

by YourConcernsAreNoted 2008-11-07 06:05PM | 0 recs
Mark my words

Stevens out... Palin in.

Senator Sarah Palin

by twinmom 2008-11-07 06:10PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

They just.don't.get.it!  It is beyond their comprehension that everyone outside of the whack job fundie base of the GOP might not be of the same mind as them with regard to anti-intellectualism coupled with intolerant evangelism and theocracy.  Wow!  Just.... wow!

by lockewasright 2008-11-07 06:14PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Deep thought:  Palin seems a lot more human with her hair down giving post-mortems of the campaign.   It's probably some secret lady wiles thing that men don't understand, but she seems like a totally different person.

by the mystical vortexes of sedona 2008-11-07 06:16PM | 0 recs
Round II

Talk about blowing yourself up (no pun intended).

by nzubechukwu 2008-11-07 06:17PM | 0 recs
One thing everyone is overlooking

Look who is in the field.

A woman
A non-'christian'
a dark guy
a gay guy

actually kind of impressive

by oyo 2008-11-07 06:31PM | 0 recs
Re: One thing everyone is overlooking

Well, the "non-Christian" repudiated folks who didn't share his Judeo-Christian faith (in his big "faith" speech earlier this year) and the gay guy is marrying a beard later this year.  Palin seems to have wilted under the lights of the cameras, but Jindal may prove to be the real thing.

Republicans pretty much always move left socially over time, they just do it after the Democrats (and usually after the American center).

by the mystical vortexes of sedona 2008-11-07 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

I think Palin is still a viable threat, although I feel like 2016 is more appropriate timing for her, as 4 years may not be able to reverse the image she's cultivated.  One thing to remember is that most people viewed her negatively due to her lack of experience.  That's something that can be developed.  And there is a very viable case that the McCain camp screwed her introduction up very badly.  That said, her remarks in the next few years will be critical to her future political success.

The person I'm watching is Mitch Daniels.  I can't think of that many issues about him that would cause tabloid like headlines.  Who knows, maybe there is stuff in the closet.  I can see the Republicans trying to move in on the Midwest and make the Midwest the battleground area in 2012.  Daniels term, as Governor, will be coming to a close.  I imagine, through his association with Lugar and Bush, that Daniels would have enough allies.  I don't know if he can rally the social conservatives, but he could always pick someone like Huckabee to address that area of concern.  Daniels background could play a role if the economy is still a mess.

by toonsterwu 2008-11-07 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

pondering some other repub names that I could see

Huntsman
Rounds
Sanford
Heineman

I guess Thune should be on that list, but eh, I don't really view him as a viable threat for some reason.  There's a couple young moderate House Repub guys whose names are slipping me at the moment.

Oh, I expect Newt to make a push, I honestly do, but I don't think he can emerge.  I've been proven wrong before, but I just don't see that one, at all.  Too much of the old guard and I think even the Republican Party has to realize that they need to turn the page a tiny bit.

One guy I would be worried about would be JC Watts, but I don't think he's indicated a desire to step back into politics.  I could be wrong, though.

by toonsterwu 2008-11-07 06:43PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

It wasn't her lack of experience that sunk her - her initial approval ratings were too high for that.

As the campaign went on, the number of people who said she wasn't ready to be Vice President increased, which means that it was probably something else.

by Jess81 2008-11-07 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

This is like Jerome's wet dream!

by wasder 2008-11-07 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Obama's team will tear her apart.    She is only effective against someone whose charisma is less than hers... John Kerry for example.   Obama exudes way more Charisma than she does and will be the sitting President as well.   He seriously could win more than 400 EVs if they pick her.    

And if she tries for 2016... Hillary will tear her apart... its like a high schooler going up against an adult.    It won't even be a contest.    

I weep for America if Palin ever got elected.    She'd make Bush look like FDR in comparison.

by yitbos96bb 2008-11-07 07:41PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Truthfully, no Republican scares me for 2012.  That election will be SOLELY about Obama.  If he shores up the economy, creates job and pushes his long term middle class plans such as Healthcare, then it will be a question of HOW BIG a win rather than who will win.  The sole argument against Obama was experience.  That argument is gone.   The muslim smears won't work.  The whole election will be solely on his performance.  He does well and he's in, he fucks up, and he'll probably lose... although we know bad Presidents can get re-elected (See 2004).

by yitbos96bb 2008-11-07 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

You know guys, not everyone thinks Palin is a joke, Jerome Armstrong is (or was) in awe of her.;)

For the GOP, I watched the TV speeches tonight in full, and have just one word.

Palin.

We have met someone that we will be doing battle against for a decade or more. Seriously. I've never seen a woman, or a man for that matter, speak that way, prime time, national, convention, live, ever. She blows away Hillary Clinton. Sorry, but that's what it is. Palin's deft speaking style is like watching visceral connective tissue being torn-- with a child in arms.

by animated 2008-11-07 09:07PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

He's got a point, on 'style.'  The problem is that every time she speaks she actually says something.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-11-07 09:14PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

We ALL were scared of her when she entered. But for some of us, once she spoke, we started realizing that she had two speeds: friendly and catty.

Joe Scarborough can bloviate all he likes about Reagan being patronized, but he's so far off base it isn't funny. Reagan was a fucking player. He was involved in real discussions with real politicians in the 70s. He ran California, a HUGE state that has actual, relatable issues, where the biggest decision is not what to do with an excess of oil revenues. And you know what else? He was a long-time Weekly Standard reader. So he knew shit. He could elaborate on shit. He wasn't stupid. Palin lacks curiosity. If she gains it, then bully for her, and we'll see her in 2012.

Until then, all this talk about how people are underestimating her is based on some faulty notion by big-city apologists that people care so much about charm that they don't care about competence. To an extent, that is true. A charmless, intelligent man will lose to a charming, mediocre one every time. But Americans still need to know that a person isn't DANGEROUSLY ill-informed. There is a line that they need to separate them from their leaders. Nobody wants to vote for someone dumber than they are.

by vcalzone 2008-11-07 10:04PM | 0 recs
I believe Repugs would nominate Gen. Petraeus

I think he would run as center right candidate and could be formidable.Obama from all indications could be a great president but I am not sure about the Democratic congress.

by indydem99 2008-11-08 12:54AM | 0 recs
Dangerous

Demagogues who can connect to the dark side of a population don't need smarts or an ability to govern. Look at Amadinajad and Hugo Chavez. From countless remarks that would be comical if they were not actually running countries they don't appear to be the sharpest tools in the shed. They may be ignoramuses on a par with Palin but they have galvanized majorities, come to power and done huge damage to their nations (and their supporters).

Obama has been handed an economy that has been destroyed, a crushing debt and two wars screwed up almost beyond repair. If he can't thread the needle perfectly you can be sure the hate-mongers and demagogues will be looking for an in. Under the right circumstances Palin could be a dangerous force to be reckoned with so be careful what you wish for.

I'd rather see a more sane Republican opposition even if it means they are more competitive and credible with the center then a Republican Party reduced to it's KKK/Taliban wing that is a clear and present danger to our democracy and society. While short term it might marginalize them you never know what damage they could cause in the future.

by hankg 2008-11-08 01:20AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

How many republican "leaders" and "talkers" who are pushing palin are actually thinking with that "tingle" between their legs? Mr. evolution (Pat B.) was on asking the old scopes trial question. Is he really that old and that absent of education?

by wjbill 2008-11-08 04:18AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

does anyone know whether Charlie Crist called off the marriage to his beard seeing as he wasn't selected as VP?

by safford 2008-11-08 05:00AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

I think you people like to worry WAY too much.  I suppose we are all addicted to politics right now, coming off of our various highs...

...but, let's let Obama actually get INTO office and let's see what his first 100 days are like.  That should give us a very good idea of what he is doing.

BTW  my wife heard about Obama's remarks of Nancy Reagan AND that he called and apologized to her.  APOLOGIZED!  She was stunned.  After 8 years of a Pres. who cannot think of one mistake he made (I know, a generalization) to hear about the Pres-elect apologizing, IN PERSON, the SAME say...stunning.  Who let the adults into the White House?

(Shh...but I think Obama's shot at a Reagan shows some of what he really has underneath his public post-partisan appearance.  He has something good up his sleeve and I think it is hard fro him to keep it covered up until Jan 20th.  But Shhh, don't tell...)

by Hammer1001 2008-11-08 06:15AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

You've gotta remember, these are the same people that believe that the earth is only 6000 years old.

WTF does anyone care what they want or believe?

by bleahey 2008-11-08 06:27AM | 0 recs
Oye, talk about ratifying Chait!

He has an article in TNR calling the GOP base "slow learners."

That fact that anywhere close to 69% of GOP respondents would indicate a top preference for Palin in 2012 is truly a lamentable discovery for the political health of our country even if it portends to continued success for the Democrats.  Let's hope that at least most of them can be cured of this chronic case of ignorance in the next four years.

The continuing acumen of the Democratic party is not helped by having a chronically stupid party in opposition.  Any of those candidates listed below her would be far better and some of them could be pretty good candidates.

by lombard 2008-11-08 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Oye, talk about ratifying Chait!

someone needs to find the courage to find a republican party free of hatred and bigotry. One that works for United States and not just a conservative kneejerk. Why do the other countries around the world seem to get some progressive laws like healthcare completed and not degenerate into hating and violence?

by wjbill 2008-11-08 07:13AM | 0 recs
That is an excellent question my friend

And one to which we could probably devote numerous forums of discussion.  I don't know the answer although I have my theories.  Although the Republican party in my lifetime always seemed to have this element, these tendencies never seemed so large and controlling for them 30 years ago.  

I remember a few years back when right wingers were crowing about the financial difficulties of Air America vs. the health and popularity of right wing talk radio.  I tried to explain to them that the popularity of right wing talk radio vs. the relative unpopularity of left talk radio spoke more unfavorably about them as a political base than it spoke about the quality of the programming or the ideas.  I've only listened to Air America less a handful of times and I've never been able to get through more than 10 or 15 minutes of it.  In contrast, their base seems to have an insatiable appetite for scornful bombast.

by lombard 2008-11-08 07:30AM | 0 recs
Televangilists

I know, in general, that religion has been a good business, (robertson, haggard, the bakers, dobson, etc are fairly comfy), but how many can be supported by the population? Seems they are always buying tv time to advertise their next "healing or preaching" event and I see new ones all the time. Do all these guys get tax breaks like charities?

by wjbill 2008-11-08 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Two things:

1. What will be the state of the countyer in next four years? If it imporves, things will be difficult for the GOP.

2. Even with that, the Republicans should be infromed that Rite Aid has a 2-for-1 special on clues this week.

by spirowasright 2008-11-08 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: It's Never Too Early Open Thread

Two things:

1. What will be the state of the country in next four years? If it imporves, things will be difficult for the GOP.

2. Even with that, the Republicans should be infromed that Rite Aid has a 2-for-1 special on clues this week.

by spirowasright 2008-11-08 08:57AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads