or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Palin And Obama Thread.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Palin And Obama Thread.

post #1 of 41
Thread Starter 
Will she hand another win for Obama?

This in the Guardian-

"Sarah Palin is on the brink of deciding to run for the US presidency in two years, and has said she is consulting her family before making up her mind.

However, the final decision could still be months away and may ultimately be influenced by growing evidence that while many on the right of the Republican party like Palin, they consider her unelectable.

Palin, who was John McCain's vice-presidential running mate in 2008, told the New York Times she was in advanced discussions with her family and political colleagues on a bid for the Republican nomination for president.

"I'm engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here," she said.

The New York Times said that Palin went on to say that "her decision would involve evaluating whether she could bring unique qualities to the table".
~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...ident-bid-2012
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #2 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Will she hand another win for Obama?

If she gets the nomination and if Obama both runs and gets his party's nomination, then yes, I think Obama would win. Three reasons:

1. Palin has already been sufficiently demonized by the media and they continue to do so.

2. Obama has already been sufficiently glorified by the media and they continue to do so.

3. America is most likely to elect the idiot they know.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #3 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

If she gets the nomination and if Obama both runs and gets his party's nomination, then yes, I think Obama would win. Three reasons:

1. Palin has already been sufficiently demonized by the media and they continue to do so.

2. Obama has already been sufficiently glorified by the media and they continue to do so.

3. America is most likely to elect the idiot they know.


I don't think the GOP will give her the nomination. Like many, I think she's unelectable. And while I agree with a lot of what she stands for, I find her SO annoying to listen to and watch. At least she's hot.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #4 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I don't think the GOP will give her the nomination. Like many, I think she's unelectable. And while I agree with a lot of what she stands for, I find her SO annoying to listen to and watch. At least she's hot.

Why do you think she's "unelectable".

I think she has a good chance of winning the nomination but then lose to Obama. My view is she could even win Potus, but more likely is she'll be too devisive within her own party plus she'll get out the vote for Dems, like Bush did.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #5 of 41
I think Mitt Romney has more of a chance than Palin does.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #6 of 41
Since 2008, Palin has engaged numerous political targets and come away with enough successes that she could credibly be the GOP's Vice Presidential candidate next time around.

But not the top spot. And I think she understands that, and will play the long game.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #7 of 41
I'm pretty sure Reagan was unelectable until he was elected.

One other variable to consider with Obama is whether he will have a challenger from the Democrats if they think he cannot win the election. In 1976 it wasn't just Ronald Reagan who beat Jimmy Carter, it was also a very damaging primary challenge from Ted Kennedy. (Amazing how people forget stuff like that.)

The same could be true of George H.W. Bush and Pat Buchanan with regard to damaging support. In both cases the primary challenge ripped away enough support to make the candidate unelectable in the general election.

I can imagine a lot of Democratic challengers willing and able to show that they can replace Obama. They don't even have to be great candidates to do the damage they do. It isn't like Buchanan was close to winning the Republican nomination as an example.

The choice of Republican will be important but equally important will be making sure no one wants to knock Obama out from the left. If someone like Hillary Clinton wanted to run and declare she is just the type of middle of the road DLC type Democrat that should have won in 2008 and almost did then it would destroy Obama. Likewise you even get to play the history card again if she were to challenge. (First woman president)

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #8 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I think Mitt Romney has more of a chance than Palin does.

I think Romney destroyed his chance of ever being president when he signed health care in Mass.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #9 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I think Romney destroyed his chance of ever being president when he signed health care in Mass.

Yes and Palin would I imagine paint him as a rino, which the Tea's would love.

If moderates can't win the nomination, Palin stands to.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #10 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I think Romney destroyed his chance of ever being president when he signed health care in Mass.

Perhaps. But I think if he can articulate the distinctions between the MA plan and Obamacare (there are plenty) and acknowledge the mistakes of the MA plan, he might have a chance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJewSrTXUIg

I think people are sick of Obama's "pass the buck", "can do no wrong" attitude and want a leader who is willing to acknowledge past mistakes and learn from them.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #11 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Yes and Palin would I imagine paint him as a rino, which the Tea's would love.
If moderates can't win the nomination, Palin stands to.

Here's one Palin lost.

Write-in votes send Murkowski back to Senate

Quote:
JUNEAU, Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski became the first Senate candidate in more than 50 years to win a write-in campaign, emerging victorious yesterday over her Tea Party movement-backed rival after a painstaking, weeklong count of handwritten votes.

The victory completes a remarkable comeback for the Republican after her humiliating loss in the primary to Joe Miller.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #12 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Will she hand another win for Obama?

This in the Guardian-

"Sarah Palin is on the brink of deciding to run for the US presidency in two years, and has said she is consulting her family before making up her mind.

However, the final decision could still be months away and may ultimately be influenced by growing evidence that while many on the right of the Republican party like Palin, they consider her unelectable.

Palin, who was John McCain's vice-presidential running mate in 2008, told the New York Times she was in advanced discussions with her family and political colleagues on a bid for the Republican nomination for president.

"I'm engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here," she said. I hope she runs Obama would walk away with the election than. Palin is a complete and utter fool in so many ways.I agree she is a moneymaker but otherwise she is a zero in politics and foreign affairs.

The New York Times said that Palin went on to say that "her decision would involve evaluating whether she could bring unique qualities to the table".
~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...ident-bid-2012

I hope Palin runs she is a victory for Obama in 2012.She is a loser all the way in politics and foreign affairs.
post #13 of 41

Why Sarah Palin Is Silent on Tea Party Candidate Joe Millers Loss in Alaska


Quote:
Yesterday evening, write-in candidate and Republican incumbent senator Lisa Murkowski defeated G.O.P. nominee and Tea Partydarling Joe Miller in a protracted midterm race that persisted for more than two weeks. In the end, Millers plan to contest all ballots that contained Murkowski misspellings fell short, as did Operation: Alaskan Chaos, a Tea Partybacked attempt to sabotage Murkowski by encouraging Alaskans to run for Senate in order to clutter the list of write-in candidates given to voters.....

The Associated Press broke the news of Murkowskis win at approximately 4:15 p.m. E.S.T. on Wednesday, but so far, Sarah Palin, the best-selling author of twitter.com/sarahpalinusa whose endorsement of Miller netted him national attention, has remained mum on his misfortune.....
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #14 of 41
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #15 of 41
Thread Starter 

So much for being a "Real American".
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #16 of 41
Wow and double WOW.

This point made by Nate Silver was amazing when you think about this in terms of people and their own interests in these matters.

Quote:
Ms. Palins search traffic, since the start of 2010, is roughly 16 times that of Mitt Romney, 14 times that of Newt Gingrich, 38 times that of Mike Huckabee, and 87 times that of Mr. Pawlenty. (It is about six times greater than these other four candidates combined.)

Ms. Palin, in fact, draws almost as much search traffic worldwide as the man she would face if she wins the Republican nomination: Barack Obama. And her name is searched for about 30 percent more often than the Presidents among Google users in the United States.

Within the United States, people are looking up Sarah Palin 30 more than Barack Obama and an order of magnitude more than anyone else.

I was struck by this from the Real Clear Politics article.

Quote:
"Look at what's happened over the past two years, and you tell me that we don't have a more effective strategy than our peers," Palin aide Michael Goldfarb told RealClearPolitics. "Who's been able to get their message out more effectively? Who's had greater influence? And you tell me why we should play by the same rules that the press wants everybody to play by. It doesn't make any sense."

Since resigning from office, Palin has proven time and again the primacy of her influence in the Republican Party, setting the tone and defining the parameters on issues ranging from health care to monetary policy. And she has done it by shattering the traditional rules of communication, using Twitter, Facebook, and her regular appearances on Fox News and conservative radio to bypass the traditional media to whom she and her staff have taken a special delight in deriding.

"She's been very effective at setting up a new paradigm for communicating with people, and it's been a great success," Goldfarb said. "If that marginalizes reporters sometimes, well then boo-hoo."

Now that the midterms are over and the campaign before the presidential campaign has begun, Palin is making some adjustments, fully aware that she cannot tweet, Facebook post, and Sean Hannity her way to the White House. She recently granted extensive interviews to the New York Times and ABC News, and her SarahPAC staff intends to make a more concerted effort to highlight to the media her prepared remarks on the frequent policy speeches she gives.

Meanwhile, Palin's ratings-shattering TLC show, "Sarah Palin's Alaska," will continue to show millions of American homes the kinder, gentler side of Palin's personality each Sunday night for the next seven weeks.

Sarah Palin is sort of like.... Apple!

There are established rules for the market. There are market leaders and folks who reinforce the consensus of the market and an understanding of the dynamics within the market and who controls them, etc. You know like a smartphone has to have a keyboard for example.

What you do then is just bypass the entire market with something that works for you and something different.

I'm not saying it will work but it is something interesting to think about. I've not seen her television show since I don't keep paid television. In fact I'll admit I don't watch or "get" almost any of reality television. To me it seems so transparently fake. Yet maybe that is what the Palin's are doing here. Either they are using the fake mechanism to get ahead or in using it they discredit it and render it unusable for others due to the now revealed deceptive nature of it.

Apple notes that Android really isn't open for example. Developers don't contribute to the code. They just can compile it on anything or add to it for their own products. If you knock out the chief premise of the opposition, then what have they got to stand on?

If the liberal media complex is understood as a giant fake reality consensus generating mechanism, then what better way to beat it then to ignore it and substitute your own message instead?

It can't be proven one way or the other but it is interesting to think about.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #17 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Wow and double WOW.

This point made by Nate Silver was amazing when you think about this in terms of people and their own interests in these matters.



Within the United States, people are looking up Sarah Palin 30 more than Barack Obama and an order of magnitude more than anyone else.

I was struck by this from the Real Clear Politics article.



Sarah Palin is sort of like.... Apple!

There are established rules for the market. There are market leaders and folks who reinforce the consensus of the market and an understanding of the dynamics within the market and who controls them, etc. You know like a smartphone has to have a keyboard for example.

What you do then is just bypass the entire market with something that works for you and something different.

I'm not saying it will work but it is something interesting to think about. I've not seen her television show since I don't keep paid television. In fact I'll admit I don't watch or "get" almost any of reality television. To me it seems so transparently fake. Yet maybe that is what the Palin's are doing here. Either they are using the fake mechanism to get ahead or in using it they discredit it and render it unusable for others due to the now revealed deceptive nature of it.

Apple notes that Android really isn't open for example. Developers don't contribute to the code. They just can compile it on anything or add to it for their own products. If you knock out the chief premise of the opposition, then what have they got to stand on?

If the liberal media complex is understood as a giant fake reality consensus generating mechanism, then what better way to beat it then to ignore it and substitute your own message instead?

It can't be proven one way or the other but it is interesting to think about.

Is there something you're not telling us here? I'm sure this reminds me of some quite long and complex posts you've made in the past about reality or the lack there of, in regards to Palin's Gone Wilderness.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #18 of 41
Thread Starter 
Palin from her new book on Simon Cowell from American Idol-

"Cowell, Palin writes in America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag, is "almost alone in his willingness to tell hard truths" to contestants deluded in their belief that they are talented singers.

In one of several scanned pages of the book on the US website Gawker, Palin says: "No one they've encountered in their lives from their parents to their teachers to their president wanted them to feel bad by hearing the truth. So they grew up convinced they could become big pop stars like Michael Jackson."
~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...s-simon-cowell

I think, given the chance, she'd put Boehner to shame- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmlgwwCHof8
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #19 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

... while I agree with a lot of what she stands for, I find her SO annoying to listen to and watch.

Then don't listen, or watch.

The US would be a far better place if we'd just shut off the TV and read for a change. If that were the case we could have a President Paul in 2012 (either one would do). Ron Paul writes brilliantly, but like Palin he is often dismissed as "unpresidential." Why? Because he has a squeaky voice? So what. So did Lincoln. *

All TV has done for society is to ensure an ugly bald guy will never get elected again. Chris Christie? Too fat. We do ourselves a disservice by valuing appearance above substance. If people only read Obama, he'd still be a community agitator - oops, organizer. No thinking person would have ever elected Obama on the basis of his writing. He has a gift for reading whatever the prompter says though, and looks oh, so Presidential while flashing his nice straight teeth! Speak four seconds while looking to the left, and another four while looking to the right. Gesture. Repeat. You too can be President. **

Unfortunately reading requires literacy, largely a product of the American public education system. We're doomed.

Quote:
At least she's hot.

Of course that helps There's nothing wrong with Palin that a few speech lessons couldn't fix. I don't know why the RNC didn't insist upon this long ago. Who knows, perhaps they did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm pretty sure Reagan was unelectable until he was elected.

Correct. Actually, he was practically unknown until perhaps a year before the election. At first all the talking heads pronounced his name "Reegan".

Quote:
One other variable to consider with Obama is whether he will have a challenger from the Democrats if they think he cannot win the election.

The DNC must now be seriously considering if O is worth the effort. More than any other single factor, money wins elections. The DNC will need hundreds of millions for a reelection campaign. Many potential sources of funding are asking themselves who's worth their donations, and the time to decide is rapidly approaching.

Much of Obama's electability rests upon willingness to compromise with Republicans as Clinton did after 1994. Clinton successfully realigned his strategy, Obama has shown himself to be completely intransigent. The right often criticized Clinton for not having core beliefs - no moral compass - but his malleable nature worked to ensure his reelection.

Many factors present in 1980 are present today, but more so - a poor economy, high unemployment, and an overwhelming perception that government has grown too big. If O doesn't quickly demonstrate a willingness to bend to the degree Clinton did, the funds won't appear. He's finished before the race begins.

Quote:
If someone like Hillary Clinton wanted to run and declare she is just the type of middle of the road DLC type Democrat that should have won in 2008 and almost did then it would destroy Obama. Likewise you even get to play the history card again if she were to challenge. (First woman president)

I wonder if there are any hypothetical Obama / HRC polls... but I can't imagine any circumstance in which O could defeat her. The RNC would be wise to nominate a candidate that can defeat Hillary, and not concern itself with Obama.

Then we can discuss who's more irritating to watch or listen to... Hillary or Palin

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Yes and Palin would I imagine paint him as a rino, which the Tea's would love.

If moderates can't win the nomination, Palin stands to.

Moderates were shown the door on November 2. The Blue Dog Donks are practically an extinct species. The public may soften their stance between now and 2012, but at the moment running as a "moderate" will ensure defeat. We don't need another McCain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Palin from her new book on Simon Cowell from American Idol- ...

I haven't read it but it's disappointing that Palin would concern herself about pop culture enough to write about it. If she wants to be taken seriously she should act appropriately.

---

* no, that's not from personal experience
** interspersed with a downcast glance while biting lower lip, and you too can be Clinton
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #20 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by john galt View Post

Then don't listen, or watch.

The US would be a far better place if we'd just shut off the TV and read for a change. If that were the case we could have a President Paul in 2012 (either one would do). Ron Paul writes brilliantly, but like Palin he is often dismissed as "unpresidential." Why? Because he has a squeaky voice? So what. So did Lincoln. *

All TV has done for society is to ensure an ugly bald guy will never get elected again. Chris Christie? Too fat. We do ourselves a disservice by valuing appearance above substance. If people only read Obama, he'd still be a community agitator - oops, organizer. No thinking person would have ever elected Obama on the basis of his writing. He has a gift for reading whatever the prompter says though, and looks oh, so Presidential while flashing his nice straight teeth! Speak four seconds while looking to the left, and another four while looking to the right. Gesture. Repeat. You too can be President. **

Unfortunately reading requires literacy, largely a product of the American public education system. We're doomed.



Of course that helps There's nothing wrong with Palin that a few speech lessons couldn't fix. I don't know why the RNC didn't insist upon this long ago. Who knows, perhaps they did.


Correct. Actually, he was practically unknown until perhaps a year before the election. At first all the talking heads pronounced his name "Reegan".



The DNC must now be seriously considering if O is worth the effort. More than any other single factor, money wins elections. The DNC will need hundreds of millions for a reelection campaign. Many potential sources of funding are asking themselves who's worth their donations, and the time to decide is rapidly approaching.

Much of Obama's electability rests upon willingness to compromise with Republicans as Clinton did after 1994. Clinton successfully realigned his strategy, Obama has shown himself to be completely intransigent. The right often criticized Clinton for not having core beliefs - no moral compass - but his malleable nature worked to ensure his reelection.

Many factors present in 1980 are present today, but more so - a poor economy, high unemployment, and an overwhelming perception that government has grown too big. If O doesn't quickly demonstrate a willingness to bend to the degree Clinton did, the funds won't appear. He's finished before the race begins.



I wonder if there are any hypothetical Obama / HRC polls... but I can't imagine any circumstance in which O could defeat her. The RNC would be wise to nominate a candidate that can defeat Hillary, and not concern itself with Obama.

Then we can discuss who's more irritating to watch or listen to... Hillary or Palin



Moderates were shown the door on November 2. The Blue Dog Donks are practically an extinct species. The public may soften their stance between now and 2012, but at the moment running as a "moderate" will ensure defeat. We don't need another McCain.



I haven't read it but it's disappointing that Palin would concern herself about pop culture enough to write about it. If she wants to be taken seriously she should act appropriately.

---

* no, that's not from personal experience
** interspersed with a downcast glance while biting lower lip, and you too can be Clinton

Quote:
Then we can discuss who's more irritating to watch or listen to... Hillary or Palin

I can tell you who's more electable.

Hint : She doesn't come from Alaska.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #21 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I can tell you who's more electable.

I can tell you who I'd rather watch
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I think Mitt Romney has more of a chance than Palin does.

Mitt Romney is like a piece of meat with no taste. he is drab and boring. palin is just a plain idiot.
post #23 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by john galt View Post

I can tell you who I'd rather watch

If that's Palin you can guess what negative box that puts you in right?

And are you really trying to claim this:
Quote:
Correct. Actually, he was practically unknown until perhaps a year before the election. At first all the talking heads pronounced his name "Reegan".



Yeah. No one knew who Ronald Reagan was back in 1980.

Uh huh.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #24 of 41
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #25 of 41
Thread Starter 
""Sarah Palin's Alaska" set a TLC ratings record when it debuted to 5 million viewers last week, but the second episode showed a huge drop-off in viewership.
Episode two of the Palin reality show averaged just 3 million viewers, down 40% from the previous week.
Perhaps more troubling are the viewer demographics. The show averaged just 885,000 viewers in the advertiser-friendly 18-49 demo, and the median age of the show's viewer is a whopping 57 years old. According to The Live Feed's James Hibberd, that's 15 years older than TLC's median age of 42."
~ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_787454.html
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #26 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

""Sarah Palin's Alaska" set a TLC ratings record when it debuted to 5 million viewers last week, but the second episode showed a huge drop-off in viewership.
Episode two of the Palin reality show averaged just 3 million viewers, down 40% from the previous week.
Perhaps more troubling are the viewer demographics. The show averaged just 885,000 viewers in the advertiser-friendly 18-49 demo, and the median age of the show's viewer is a whopping 57 years old. According to The Live Feed's James Hibberd, that's 15 years older than TLC's median age of 42."
~ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_787454.html

Lucky for Democrats voting is prohibited by after you turn 55!

Oh wait that isn't true. Uh... lucky for Democra....

Darn it what's the point of the age thing again?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #27 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Lucky for Democrats voting is prohibited by after you turn 55!

Oh wait that isn't true. Uh... lucky for Democra....

Darn it what's the point of the age thing again?

If her ratings keep dropping at this rate, she'll get pulled off the air!
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #28 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

If her ratings keep dropping at this rate, she'll get pulled off the air!

Hopefully the same is true for Obama with whom being "on the air" has much more dire consequences than unelected political celebrity with no political power.

My goodness, the left's obsession with Sarah Palin is downright pathological.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #29 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Hopefully the same is true for Obama with whom being "on the air" has much more dire consequences than unelected political celebrity with no political power.

My goodness, the left's obsession with Sarah Palin is downright pathological.

I wouldn't watch that "Palin Gone Wilderness".
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #30 of 41
Sarah Palin: 'We Gotta Stand With Our North Korean Allies'

I guess she forgot to write it on her palm......and you want her to be Prez?
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #31 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Sarah Palin: 'We Gotta Stand With Our North Korean Allies'

I guess she forgot to write it on her palm......and you want her to be Prez?

Well, when you have 57 states to protect, yes. You do need to stand with your North Korean allies.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Sarah Palin: 'We Gotta Stand With Our North Korean Allies'

I guess she forgot to write it on her palm......and you want her to be Prez?

Wait...popular people make gaffes?

I guess I've been paying too much attention to Joe Biden. He never makes gaffes.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #33 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Wait...popular people make gaffes?

I guess I've been paying too much attention to Joe Biden. He never makes gaffes.

jg, you seem to respond here more than you do in Climategate. I think that Biden knows that NK is not our ally. "Refudiate" that. Have a happy tg.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #34 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

I think that Biden knows that NK is not our ally.

Perhaps. But does Obama know that there are only 50 states?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #35 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

jg, you seem to respond here more than you do in Climategate. I think that Biden knows that NK is not our ally. "Refudiate" that. Have a happy tg.

I respond when I feel something is worth responding to.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #36 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:

She can't blame this on Courick.

Truly shocking and sad that she's seen as presidential material by so many.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Truly shocking and sad that she's seen as presidential material by so many.

Agreed. Presidents should even know how many states there are in the country.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #38 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

She can't blame this on Courick.

Truly shocking and sad that she's seen as presidential material by so many.

You guys can't be serious.
She correctly identified North Korea as the enemy less than 10 seconds prior. So this was clearly just a verbal slip, not a serious factual error.

It was more embarrassing when Obama said he really wanted to meet "the President of Canada"...
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #39 of 41
[QUOTE=Hands Sandon;1754361]Will she hand another win for Obama?

This in the Guardian-

"Sarah Palin is on the brink of deciding to run for the US presidency in two years, and has said she is consulting her family before making up her mind.

However, the final decision could still be months away and may ultimately be influenced by growing evidence that while many on the right of the Republican party like Palin, they consider her unelectable.

Palin, who was John McCain's vice-presidential running mate in 2008, told the New York Times she was in advanced discussions with her family and political colleagues on a bid for the Republican nomination for president.

"I'm engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here," she said.

The New York Times said that Palin went on to say that "her decision would involve evaluating whether she could bring unique qualities to the table".
~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...ident-bid-2012[/QUOTE Palin is an imbecile who has money and hardly any intelligence. She is an entertainer not a politician.I hope she runs in 2012 Obama will destroy her when the economy starts to increase again and more jobs prevail.
post #40 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerald apple View Post

This in the Guardian-

"Sarah Palin is on the brink of deciding to run for the US presidency in two years, and has said she is consulting her family before making up her mind.

However, the final decision could still be months away and may ultimately be influenced by growing evidence that while many on the right of the Republican party like Palin, they consider her unelectable.

Palin, who was John McCain's vice-presidential running mate in 2008, told the New York Times she was in advanced discussions with her family and political colleagues on a bid for the Republican nomination for president.

"I'm engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here," she said.

The New York Times said that Palin went on to say that "her decision would involve evaluating whether she could bring unique qualities to the table".
~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...ident-bid-2012[/QUOTE Palin is an imbecile who has money and hardly any intelligence. She is an entertainer not a politician.I hope she runs in 2012 Obama will destroy her when the economy starts to increase again and more jobs prevail.

If the economy recovers then Obama is a shoe in no matter the candidate. However in the meantime we have reality.

In reality, Obama and Biden make just as many verbal gaffes as Palin. The issue for them is the liberal media complex doesn't fill up half their coverage with it. The second part of this reality is that the Federal Reserve just lowered their economic growth forecast for all of 2011 and 2012.

Before any idiot spouts off and claims the Republicans haven't wanted to fix the economy, the intention claims there justified or not will not alter the point that we will have spent trillions, held interest rates at zero or nearly zero and via qualitative easing actually pushed the rate effectively below zero, etc.

By 2012, when President Barack Obama faces the electorate, unemployment will be 7.7 percent to 8.2 percent, up from the previous forecast of 7.1 percent to 7.5 percent.

If it is 8.2% of higher, then Obama is done and might even be facing a primary challenge. If it is 7.7%, he will still be a hard sell because that is what the rate was when he took office. It would be an easy argument to say that four years and trillions of dollars later, the economy was exactly where it was when he took office and we need something new. If the unemployment rate is still anywhere at 9 or above, he shouldn't even run because he and his party will be embarrassed and destroyed with regard to returns.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Palin And Obama Thread.