Is It Palin Time?

Rick Perry is going down in flames. Michelle Bachmann's 15 minutes appear to be over. Herman Cain protested the n-word. No one knows what Newt is doing. Ron Paul, well, Ron Paul. Big Man Christie knows he can't win. What's left for Anybody But Romney? Ed Kilgore suggests it may be Palin time:

[I]s there any doubt a certain universally known, beloved-of-the-base politician will hear her name on the restless wind and give fresh consideration to the prospect of "going rogue" and running for president? Yes, this could be Sarah Palin's moment to confound her critics, to send the GOP establishment types she hates even more than liberals into frantic hysteria, and most of all, to gain the attention she craves.

I agree. It's time for Sarah Barracuda. And I betcha Mitt Romney would make a donation. He is running out the clock now, knowing he beats the current field easily. Palin would soak up all the oxygen, but not the votes the Mittster needs.

< Elizabeth Warren: Brown Wall Street's Favorite Senator; Warren Not A Candidate For That Award | Sarah Palin Announces She Will Not Run for President >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    and if she soaks up some money that would (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by ruffian on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 01:50:32 PM EST
    otherwise go to some GOP PAC, better yet.

    Nope, she's not (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by MKS on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 05:19:18 PM EST
    gonna do it.

    Wouldn't be prudent.


    Actually a tough decision for her (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 01:41:18 AM EST
    But above all else, Sarah wants to be able to be Sarah, and she was majorly traumatized by the restrictions of the VP campaign experience.

    Just FYI, listen to her talk some time.  It's entirely different from the halting, consistently utterly incoherent stuff that came out of her mouth when she was running with McCain.  It still makes no sense in terms of policy, but it's articulate and coherent and forcefully stated.

    (That's leaving entirely aside the fact that she has literally no clue what it takes to be a competent POTUS.  She seems to think it's mainly signing on a bunch of experts to actually do stuff, and then being cheerleader-in-chief.  Oh, wait...  Wonder where she got that idea?)


    Perry has a fair amount of cash left on hand (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 01:30:37 PM EST
    I wouldn't count him out just yet. If the choice is between "down in flames" and Romney, I think the base will go for "down in flames."

    Surely the tapes from Romney's previous debates must have some use to Perry.

    speaking of good and bad campaigners (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by CST on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 01:50:50 PM EST
    Perry has shown himself to be remarkably bad at campaigning.

    Those one liners are killing him.

    I think you overestimate his ability to make anything "of use".  That being said, they may still choose "down in flames".  I refuse to bet on the thinking abilities of the GOP base.


    well, that's what happens (none / 0) (#9)
    by NYShooter on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 02:29:51 PM EST
    when you live your life in a bubble.

    all those years in Texas, surrounded by Desert lizards and sycophants, then......

    exposed to reality....

    you know the rest


    I've saw (none / 0) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 02:28:18 PM EST
    some of those tapes back in '08. Other than making him out to be a flip flopper, which everybody already knows, there's really nothing I've seen that would be useful to Perry. Perry is shooting himself in the foot so badly that when he compares himself to Mitt, he really comes off badly.

    What hasn't been drawn out (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by andgarden on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 02:41:08 PM EST
    for the R base so much is how liberal Mittens made himself out to be.

    In other words (none / 0) (#38)
    by jbindc on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 08:18:20 AM EST
    Romney is a politician

    Agreed. Perry is on the ropes (none / 0) (#18)
    by KeysDan on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 04:51:54 PM EST
    but is not down for the count.   He could be like McCain  and wind up like those little carnival dolls--you knock them down, only for them to bounce back up.   With Christie out, and Mittens the only one still standing straight up, Perry may get another chance with his fans.  

    Somebody the other day (none / 0) (#33)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 01:29:36 AM EST
    on Matthews pointed out that at this point last time around, it was a hot and heavy "race" between Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani for the GOP nomination.



    No way Mitt makes a donation (none / 0) (#2)
    by CoralGables on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 01:37:34 PM EST
    because if Sarah runs it's as an independent.

    And I just had lunch. Thanks. (none / 0) (#3)
    by Anne on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 01:47:10 PM EST
    To answer your question with more questions, has hell frozen over?  Are pigs taking wing?

    If not, then, no - it's not her time.

    It's bad enough as it is; the consequence of adding Palin to the mix is more than I can bear thinking about.

    Did BTD find a 6 pack of (none / 0) (#6)
    by BTAL on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 02:26:03 PM EST
    Dem. Redmeat soufflés in his freezer today?

    Palin is not going to run as an independent, period.

    Sorry to pop the pastry.

    Frankly (none / 0) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 02:29:43 PM EST
    I would think that the GOP would do everything in their power to keep her OUT of the race because her numbers are in the gutter.

    Unless of course they want to lose which might also be the case.


    Ha! (none / 0) (#15)
    by lilburro on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 03:50:26 PM EST
    Funny.  :)

    This election is going to really suck! (none / 0) (#11)
    by Buckeye on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 02:54:08 PM EST
    The republicans have terrible candidates.  The only thing that punctuates their banality are their fits of crazy.  After they nominate Willard, the 2012 election is going to be Obama trying to character assassinate Romney because that is his only chance to win.  He won't (not with this economy) and we are going to have to look at Romney for 4 years (or 8).

    2012 may be the year I develop a drinking problem.

    Fakey Head (none / 0) (#12)
    by robrecht on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 03:04:08 PM EST
    Willard.   I like that.   But my favorite is still Fakey Head.

    dateline Nov. 2012 (none / 0) (#13)
    by Farmboy on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 03:19:05 PM EST
    Blitzer: "Sir, why did you vote for Sarah Palin?"
    Fox News voter:  "I voted for Sarah Palin because she was hot and got ratings," he declares.

    and that alone (none / 0) (#14)
    by CoralGables on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 03:36:41 PM EST
    and her facebook army will get her the highest vote totals for president by any woman in the history of the country, leading to more book deals and movie rights and a much extended 15 minutes. She won't get anything running with the GOP but she can get everything but the presidency running as an independent.

    Well, I've always thought (none / 0) (#16)
    by Zorba on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 04:37:08 PM EST
    that Palin was so popular (at one time) among the Republicans, particularly the males, because she was a MILF.

    So you and Tucker Carlson are (none / 0) (#34)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 01:32:33 AM EST
    soulmates or what?

    I love ya, Zorba, but that's an incredibly coarse thing to say, and I think it's also false in its premise.

    I'm old enough to remember when the Beltway pundits, such as they were in those days, all asserted confidently that Jack Kennedy beat Nixon because women voters were hot for him.

    It was insulting and false then, and it's insulting and false now.


    I don't presume to speak for Zorba, (none / 0) (#40)
    by Anne on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 08:48:05 AM EST
    but I read her comment as stating what Republicans had themselves expressed in 2008 about the reasons for their support of Palin.

    You do realize that my post was in reference (none / 0) (#41)
    by Farmboy on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 09:39:04 AM EST
    to the actual quote by Roger Ailes about why he hired Palin for Fox, right? By his own admission, he kept her in the public eye specifically because of the "feelings" Fox viewers have for her.

    Judging (none / 0) (#19)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 04:58:09 PM EST
    by all the "he's a fox" talk, the "he's a rock star" talk, pictures of Obama at the beach and on the cover of GQ, there were many Obama voters who weren't too interested in going too deep either.

    Disagree. So many people (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 05:03:10 PM EST
    were didn't want a "dynasty," didn't want endless wars, and thought Obama was the solution.  Well, no Obama dynasty so they got that part right.

    True.. (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 05:17:34 PM EST
    but that's kind of what I meant by people not going too deep when they were considering Obama.

    There was absolutely no reason to think that Obama wasn't gung-ho with respect to endless wars, for example.

    So, people voting for him on the basis that he might be opposed to them were being swayed by something else imo. Something shallow.


    Right up there (none / 0) (#39)
    by jbindc on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 08:21:11 AM EST
    With the woman in November 2008 on MSNBC who was so happy after Obama was elected because she thought it meant her mortgage was gonna get paid.

    It's all a game. (none / 0) (#17)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 04:51:25 PM EST
    Perry was and is nothing.
    The press elevated him, and then shot him down.

    They have done that with everybody.
    It sells papers - as they used to say.

    Right now they are beginning to float the idea that Obama is vulnerable - which he is clearly not. But it adds some drama to the charade.

    Palin might be dragged out again for the sheer enjoyment they have in tormenting her. They might let her look good for a moment, then she will say something that they can reveal to be really really stupid and they will pile debris on her and we will all have a hearty laugh.

    Then we'll be stuck with whomever running against Obama who will be made to look good in comparison to the warped personage presented as an alternative.

    Now - if Elizabeth Warren went out for the presidency instead of the senate -- that could be interesting. At the moment, she could make hash out of Obama's bromides. A debate would be a delight. Chips and dips.

    But it ain't gonna happen.

    Experience matters. We know that now. (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by oculus on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 05:05:09 PM EST
    It does matter. (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 05:29:32 PM EST
    The experience of the Obama presidency.
    It has been a debilitating one.

    I want someone to run who has a true passion to improve the lives of the American people. Doesn't seem like too much to ask.


    My bad. (none / 0) (#28)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 06:24:56 PM EST
    Anyone who survived Timmy Geithner (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 06:21:21 PM EST
    and Larry Summers trying to slip a knife between her shoulder blades every day in the coat closet and lived to smile back at them fully intact has some experience, many experiences.  She has done this.  I wouldn't mess with this woman.  She isn't vindictive.  She doesn't quit though and in the end you end being in full public view the dick you always were behind the scenes.

    A woman who doesn't have a bit of a (none / 0) (#31)
    by BTAL on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 06:53:30 PM EST
    vindictive streak?  

    Nah, tell me it ain't so.  


    Seems to be one (none / 0) (#32)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 09:37:00 PM EST
    And it isn't me

    Sne's certainly not the monster (none / 0) (#35)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 01:35:37 AM EST
    many of our buddies on the sort of left have made her out to be, but she most definitely is vindictive.  Not pretty, but it's actually OK by me in a politician.  Tells me they take the job seriously.  One would wish Obama were as "vindictive," but so far, only a handful like Howard Dean have been punished for some sin of insufficient adoration of The One, and that seems to have been more Rahm than Obama himself.

    MT's comment was about (none / 0) (#37)
    by MO Blue on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 07:11:27 AM EST
    Elizabeth Warren.

    See comment #17 above for beginning of discussion of Warren.