59 Percent: Palin Can’t Be President

Yes, it’s a silly poll.  Maybe all polls are.  But it gives me hope that Republicans really could nominate her.

Sarah Palin may be on a hot streak with her congressional endorsements, but 59 percent of Americans think Sarah Palin is not fit to be president of the United States, according to a new 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair poll. Meanwhile, 26 percent say they think she would be an effective commander-in-chief. The poll also shows Republicans splitting 47-40 on the question of whether Palin can lead the country.

Will Republicans continue to employ their litmus tests, ignore who might be electable, and nominate the person who passes all their tests on ‘conservative enough?’



Filed under Sarah Palin

41 responses to “59 Percent: Palin Can’t Be President

  1. itolduso

    Not this Republican. Perhaps those who decided to change their affiliation from Democrat to Republican during the Primaries may do so. That, and those totally disgusted with anyone at all that is currently part of the political BS.

  2. wicked

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Backed by the Tea Party Express and Sarah Palin, a little-known conservative lawyer from Alaska became the latest newcomer to the national political stage to take down an incumbent in 2010.

    In arguably the biggest political upset of the year, Joe Miller claimed the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate when incumbent GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski conceded Tuesday evening.


    Aside from a failed legislative bid in 2004, the Kansas-raised Miller had no experience running in political races before jumping into the race to take on Murkowski. He is friends with Sarah and Todd Palin, and they both endorsed him.


  3. From today’s local newspaper “Opinion Line”:

    I have listened carefully to many of Sarah Palin’s speeches, and I think she’s one of the most serious, sensible and intelligent people in American political life today.

    Read more: http://www.kansas.com/2010/09/01/1472772/opinion-line-september-1.html#ixzz0yHhY7ol0

  4. I figure it this way… There are some like that person who called “Opinion Line” above, there are probably some democrats who would ‘help’ make her the candidate in any way possible, there are those who pay little attention at all and choose a candidate in whatever way… And, just maybe those together make a number large enough to get her nominated! 🙂

    Nominated and elected are two separate issues.

  5. tosmarttobegop

    I keep coming back to an old saying among men, “The surest way to get a woman to do what you want her to do. Is to tell her she can not do it!”.

    Palin is on a number of level the worst of all possible candidates and leader.
    I stand by my statement of, Palin is the Lucy Ricardo of politics she is a loveable goof but nothing more then an accident waiting to happen.

    Continuing to make her a focus point of ridicule and as an example of how stupid the Conservatives and the Tea party is. Will result in her gaining stature to the point she will be the elected candidate for the GOP.
    and then once there she would stand a chance of being elected President.

    As I pointed to yesterday, the majority of voters do not make any real distinction between the R and the D except for in voting their displeasure at the booth against the party currently in the majority. Otherwise they see not difference between which is in control.

    If the displeasure is still in effect in 2012 and Sarah Palin is up against Barrack Obama she could beat him.
    Many of us voted for G.W. Bush because of our displeasure with Clinton and Gore was seen as just Clinton lite. Not that we thought that Bush was any better, if fact I thought he would be rather Vanilla and un-notable.

    But as it turned out if Gore had been the President it would be doubtful that the Invasion of Iraq would have ever happened or that Bin Laden would still be free.

    • itolduso

      It is impossible, given the circumstances of what happend on 9/11, for anybody to predict what AL Gore would have done.

      • tosmarttobegop

        Yes and no, if Gore had been in office there would not have been a already existing preoccupation with Saddam. Members of the administration before 9-11 had already talked of the intent to invading and deposing Saddam in 2002.

        At the first meeting to decide what to do in response to 9-11 Wolfowitz said that they should have an intense bombing campaign of Iraq! Powel then pointed out it was not Saddam in Iraq who attacked us it was Bin Laden in Afghanistan!

        Wolfowitz countered with there were more viable military targets in Iraq then there were in Afghanistan!

        After that meeting Richard Clarke spoke with President Bush about Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden and the President told him to stop focusing on the small fish and find him something indicting Saddam.

        It is true that both Republicans and Democrats were saying that Saddam had WMDs before 9-11 and afterwards. But the reality is and was that no one actually knew for sure.
        It boiled down to he was known to have some right after the first Gulf war.
        But there was no indication he still did.

        It would be doubtful that Gore would have been sidetracked from those who attacked and killed some many innocent Americans by a preoccupation with someone who had not.

        I want to get something straight though, I qualify that it really depends on what your definition of what a lied is?

        Is it still a lie if you truly believe what you are saying is the truth in spite of any evidence that counters what you believe? I have not doubt that they truly believed what they were saying was the case.
        But there was quite a bit of evidence and question as to the facts or presumptions given.

  6. Palin is a hateful and mean-spirited person, a political hack, a person capable of whipping people into a frenzy of excitement and enthusiasm. I have great confidence she could pick up where bush the lesser left off and finish destroying America. Maybe that’s what American voters want?

  7. wicked

    To me, Palin is just one more bug on the windshield of life. Not really worth my attention, yet a small distraction of the view ahead.

    I’m not sure the Republican Party wants Sarah Palin as their candidate. They saw who she is after McCain (bless his heart) chose her as his VP running mate. Unlike Dubya, she is not easily controlled.

    BTW, for those Rs out there, my use of the name Dubya is not and never has been a slam. In fact, I kind of feel sorry for him. I don’t hate him, never did. I tried to refer to those who I felt were actually running the show during that time as BushCo, not Bush. I don’t recall calling for his impeachment, his death, bad health, an accident, or referring to him as Hitler. Too bad others can’t say the same about their treatment of the current CiC.

    • itolduso

      “Too bad others can’t say the same about their treatment of the current CiC.”

      agreed. And too bad others can;t say the same about the previous CIC.

      • indypendent

        When was George W. Bush threatened with impeachment?

        In fact, GWB had every Republican lockstepping behind him rubber stamping everything he did.

      • wicked

        There are radicals in all groups. I’m seeing some really nasty radicals these days.

        Portraying the POTUS as a chimp isn’t kind, but it doesn’t carry the hate that portraying the POTUS as Joker does. This started long before the election.

        What we’re seeing now is racism at it’s worst. We should’ve moved beyond that after almost fifty years.

      • wicked

        Indy, to be fair, I did hear some random calls for Dubya’s impeachment, although they were from the public, not those in office. I won’t swear there wasn’t a Congresscritter who didn’t use the word, though.

        I think there were more calls for investigations, yet Pelosi backed down on that, along with most others. They seemed to think it would bog things down. Considering how achingly slow things have progressed, thanks to the Party of NO, I can only imagine adding “bogging” to it.

        And I am not happy with the majority of Democrats in Congress right now.

    • Our country and her citizens barely survived bushco, some didn’t, some still won’t. He and his screwed the pooch royally. He expanded the power of his office and the Senate didn’t exercise any oversight. He did make his Dad look better, he did give back to the haves and have mores, and he appointed judges at all levels including Roberts and Alito so his philosophy and influence lives on well past the eight years he was in office.

  8. tosmarttobegop

    She seem to have no distinction between simply parroting the popular talking points and original thought.
    People can have the same opinion of a subject, two people can look at a flower independently of each other and conclude it is pretty.

    But when they use the exact same wording in their statement concerning a subject it tends to be simply mimicking what they heard. To make matters worse is when it is point out how stupid one or the other was in what was said. It is not an insult to the person who said it first but to the one who said it last.

    and of course since it becomes group speak that insults the group.

  9. If the Republican Party can’t find a nominee other than Palin, they deserve her. If she becomes POTUS they’ll all join in saying she’s wonderful, great, at minimum better than the alternative and any blame they may need to place they’ll place on the democratic party. She can’t mess up our country anymore than bush the lesser did. We survived two terms of bushco, we’re resilient.

    • wicked

      Are we resilient? I’m kind of feeling like an old piece of elastic. Once upon a time, I snapped back when jerked around, but now my snap is gone.

      Maybe I’m projecting my old elastic feeling on the country, but I’m just not sure how much more division and hate this country can take.

      • indypendent

        I feel the same way that you do right now but I watch the History Channel alot. There was a documentary on Jefferson a few weeks ago.

        If we think politics is vicious and hateful today – it was even worse in those days.

        We will always have division and hate in our country because we will always have those people who truly believe they are ‘right’ and all others are wrong. And not only wrong – but they are going to hell for not being the on ‘right’ side.

        I think that is what we are seeing today – more of the division and hate is being done in the name of someone’s version of God.

      • That’s why, wicked, I remain sadly steadfast in my belief that there will be an armed “revolution” in this country. I have retreated a bit from boldly predicting that it will occur in the decade of the 2020s, but I believe one is coming.

        It will be due to economic disparity, IMHO, not on race, ethnicity, etc., grounds. The result of this will be a tyrant in power “for our own good”. Again, those interested should read Republic by Plato for a discussion of how this arises.

    • I suspect you’re correct — we still haven’t managed to ‘snap back’ from bushco. If Palin gets the presidency and a majority in the Senate who neglect their duties as the Senate did during the bushco years I suppose anything could happen.

  10. tosmarttobegop

    It will be the continuation of the struggle between the Republicans and the Conservatives as to who will be the next candidate. Unless one of the leaser known’s comes out to the forefront I think Romney.
    He has appeal for many on different levels.

    Huckabe has the Religious Right vote but lacks the real appeal to many outside of that segment of the party.

    Newt is seeming to self destructed as the time is passing.

    There maybe a Dr. Paul like come out, but so far no one has showed up that has his ability to inspire.
    His son is the worst example of that Political ideology.

    Right now, there appear to be a oxymoron going on with the strict Constitutionals and to have the same wanting to amended the Constitution to suit their desires.

    • These factions inside the Republican Party will show us the differences between ‘nominated’ and ‘elected.’ Each faction has their own litmus test.

    • wicked

      If I voted on dimples, I’d vote for Huckabee. 🙂

      Seriously, I bet he was a cute little boy. As for the rest–and for him now–gag me with a spoon.

      Sorry, but I have to find something to laugh at somehow.

      • I think Huckabee might be a truly good man, on the lines of President Carter. They are few and far between when you look at those who want the office of POTUS, and of course we all know how ineffective the good man Carter was in that office.

  11. “This started long before the election.”

    Yes, wicked, it did. That’s one of the reasons I am most profoundly sad and discouraged. It started simply because the Republicans feared they would lose an election, before President Obama ever took office.

    • itolduso

      sorry, most Republicans that I knew that the elecion was lost before the campaign ever got started. Of course, the party could never admit that, and activists will say what they will, but they knew. At least most of the Republicans I know, knew from the outset that the election was going to go to the Democrats. No surprise here.

      • tosmarttobegop

        Boy was that not the truly! I went to the caucus and it was so apparent.

        Shoot Hank even agreed to vote for Dr. Paul with me I am not sure who OKO voted for.
        The second vocal group was Terry Fox’s Huckabe crowd after the Paul supporters.

        But even one seem to know it was just going through the motions I think that is why McCain got it.
        It was realistically speaking McCain’s last chance and they gave it to him.

  12. Remember how instrumental Palin was in whipping up the masses at her campaign stops? Remember the hate she generated?

  13. indypendent

    I think there were more calls for investigations, yet Pelosi backed down on that, along with most others. They seemed to think it would bog things down

    You bring up a very good point – investigations. Wasn’t it just last week when Republicans proudly boasted that they intend to launch investigations into the White House when they return to power.

    So if Nancy Pelosi is so wicked and evil – then how is it that she did not launch any investigations into the Bush White House? But now the godly Republicans are already getting those investigations lined up before they are even elected into power.

    Even with that issue put aside – where is the money going to come from to pay for these investigations?

    If Republicans are against massive federal spending – then why are they for additional spending of which we don’t have the money to pay for them?

    Republicans – God love em because they make it hard for anyone else to even stand them.

    • itolduso

      If you read the article, some of the informants or whatever, were Democratic party leaders. Not a bit of “scare tactics” there I suppose.

      • indypendent

        I was talking about the already reported GOP plan to launch investigations.

        I don’t know what you’re talking about except that both parties are capable of bad behavior.

        But Pelosi did not launch investigations into Bush and Gang – and GOP is already planning to do their witch hunts before they even have that gavel in their hand.

        But I must remember – Republican = good and Democrat = bad.

  14. indypendent

    I used to think Huckabee was a good man until the past few years. Do some research into this man and his game of how he plays politics.

    I don’t like what I found out.

    The phrase – a wolf in sheep’s clothing comes to mind.

  15. indypendent

    I think if Republicans regain power in midterm elections – their chances for the White House in 2012 will be very slim.

    Especially if they follow through on their threats of endless investigations, spending more of taxpayer money to make the top 2% wealthier, giving corporations more taxpayer money in subsidies and the deregulation each of these corporations want and have paid for through their personal politician.

    And then, of course, we will have the Religious Right Republicans cramming their version of God down everyones’ throat – so their popularity might wane alot.

    • Their base will eat up the investigations and say that is money and time well spent. Remember from the git go on the Clinton impeachment proceedings the Republicans knew they couldn’t convict, they spent that time and money knowing full well all they could do was make Clinton look bad, and their base applauded those efforts! It’s possible they can ‘spin’ it so Independents and those who pay little attention before voting are told they’re rooting out the bad and keeping the good. Maybe that’s what they’ll do?

      I think Congress critters from both parties are guilty as hell of putting their own interests above those of America, and if investigations are brought and they only investigate democrats, dig no deeper, I will probably conclude it’s just playing politics and certainly not rooting out the bad.

      One thing I think we can count on is that they can’t both rescue our economy and not raise taxes. Which will they do?

      • indypendent

        Anything Republicans will do they will paint with the broad brush of democracy, patriotism and God.

        After all, they are the ‘real’ Americans – correct?

        I keep forgetting that part – LMAO

  16. If they have any ideas or solutions, they’re keeping them secret. If that’s the case, and all they want is to ensure solutions go in the column where they get the credit, I’ll take that. We could use all the ideas and solutions possible! Maybe they will be brand new ideas they just this moment thought of, not secrets at all!

  17. tosmarttobegop

    WOW this is part three of the series on using the human flaws to control and cause them to act against what they think.

    It talks about politics and the masses.

    • tosmarttobegop

      It basically said that we are more control by the irrational self then we are by the rational self.
      So by the appealing to the irrational self we can be controlled and manipulated.

      Perhaps is what Palin appeals to, she does not say anything beyond the catch phrase that does not demand any real thought or in-depth understanding.

  18. Daniel

    Sarah Palin is slated to appear at a GOP fundraiser on September 17 in IOWA….


    Run, Sarah run!