Is Palin the future of the Republican party?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

She'll be 2008's Katherine Harris, and good riddance.

Personally even though I'm a raging liberal I like Mike Huckabee. Disagree with everything he stands for except weight loss, but he's a likeable guy with a good sense of humor, he's got integrity, and he ran a state that's bigger than PG County.

They don't' like women to be on top.


Katherine Harris became a Congress woman in FL. Seemed like a step up from whatever she was doing previously.

Huckabee knows how to work a room. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't like too much Bible in national policy and the Supreme Court.
Anonymous
Hmm. I didn't think much of Huckabee's integrity when he played the demagogue with Romney's Mormonism.

OP, I know you asked for Republican opinions. I'm not a Republican but my parents are active in Republican political circles and spend a lot of time with a couple of recent retirees from the Senate who are pretty aware of current sentiment in the party. My parents are pro-choice and are atheists, so religion isn't a factor in their choice, but they really like Palin. At any rate, my dad's retired Senate pals like Palin. I have no idea if she will be a real contender in 2012, but she does have a constituency and she will play a role in the party's next four years. I was traveling for Obama in rural Virginia last week and I saw a lot of huge signs that read Sarah! Underneath was McCain-Palin '08. They were 6-foot plastic banners from the national campaign office. Those banners reinforced what my dad's retired pals said, which is that McCain chose Palin in part to help launch a new generation of Republican candidates. Their assumption is that Mark Warner will be the Democratic nominee in 8 years and that the GOP will need a young, attractive candidate to compete with him. Bobby Jindal is the other person they talk about a lot. Certainly Palin will play a role in the party, but we have no way of predicting what will happen with her or with any other candidate. Four years ago Obama was still serving in the Illinois state legislature. Now he's the heavy favorite to win the presidency next week. All this is assuming McCain loses, which does look likely. The blame will be split, but the GOP chattering class never really liked McCain to begin with. They'll do a lot to shape opinions within the party. Huckabee is a good politician but he's going to have to maintain visibility while getting further and further from his governorship; same with Romney. Neither is going to be able to do much to build foreign policy bona fides while out of office and the Republicans are entirely out of power. Palin and Jindal will be able to do a lot more to build future candidacies.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

She'll be 2008's Katherine Harris, and good riddance.

Personally even though I'm a raging liberal I like Mike Huckabee. Disagree with everything he stands for except weight loss, but he's a likeable guy with a good sense of humor, he's got integrity, and he ran a state that's bigger than PG County.

They don't' like women to be on top.


Katherine Harris became a Congress woman in FL. Seemed like a step up from whatever she was doing previously.

Huckabee knows how to work a room. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't like too much Bible in national policy and the Supreme Court.

Yeah, but she embarrassed herself terribly in the Senate race she lost. Clearly was a flash in the pan and Palin has the look of someone who will go the same way -- but you never know!
Anonymous
There doesn't appear to be a Republican answer in the room. I don't think we have heard the last of her, and with the low expectations expressed here even mediocre would be a huge success on her part!
Anonymous
Say, I was reading this morning that Palin called on Stevens to resign but that her comments could be read as suggesting he could do it after the election. If he left that way, would she be able to run for his seat???? Or would the new Senator be appointed by....the....wait a minute, the governor!! Could she appoint herself Senator? Okay, I'm just joking about the latter but I wonder about her thoughts on her next step with regard to the former.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Say, I was reading this morning that Palin called on Stevens to resign but that her comments could be read as suggesting he could do it after the election. If he left that way, would she be able to run for his seat???? Or would the new Senator be appointed by....the....wait a minute, the governor!! Could she appoint herself Senator? Okay, I'm just joking about the latter but I wonder about her thoughts on her next step with regard to the former.

Actually, I don't think it's that much of a joke. Whatever he does, his name will be on the ballot. If he resigns now or after the election, Palin will get to appoint a successor. If he wins and she does not, she will surely consider appointing herself. That's my understanding, anyway; if I'm wrong, somebody please correct me.
Anonymous
I am not sure that taking the Senate seat will be a step up for Palin. She will move from being a state executive to being one out of 100 senators. Unless there is a huge surprise on Nov 4, her party would be in the minority and while its possible I doubt that she will be in a leadership role in the Senate (would Steven committees assignments automatically transfer to her?). I cannot see what she gains from moving from Wasilla to DC. In fact, if McCain loses, I would think she would be better staying in Alaska and fighting the "power" from afar instead of becoming one of the Washington "insiders".
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I am not sure that taking the Senate seat will be a step up for Palin. She will move from being a state executive to being one out of 100 senators. Unless there is a huge surprise on Nov 4, her party would be in the minority and while its possible I doubt that she will be in a leadership role in the Senate (would Steven committees assignments automatically transfer to her?). I cannot see what she gains from moving from Wasilla to DC. In fact, if McCain loses, I would think she would be better staying in Alaska and fighting the "power" from afar instead of becoming one of the Washington "insiders".

I see your point. It makes sense when one is thinking rationally about one's future. However, if the unnamed McCain source is telling the truth (and I don't automatically assume he/she is), Palin is acting like a diva. A diva who sees herself as an up and coming leader of the Republican Party might think she has to be in Washington to enhance her leadership credentials.

But there is no reason to assume that an unnamed hostile source is telling the truth about her. At any rate, it will be very interesting to see what happens after the election!
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am not sure that taking the Senate seat will be a step up for Palin. She will move from being a state executive to being one out of 100 senators. Unless there is a huge surprise on Nov 4, her party would be in the minority and while its possible I doubt that she will be in a leadership role in the Senate (would Steven committees assignments automatically transfer to her?). I cannot see what she gains from moving from Wasilla to DC. In fact, if McCain loses, I would think she would be better staying in Alaska and fighting the "power" from afar instead of becoming one of the Washington "insiders".

I see your point. It makes sense when one is thinking rationally about one's future. However, if the unnamed McCain source is telling the truth (and I don't automatically assume he/she is), Palin is acting like a diva. A diva who sees herself as an up and coming leader of the Republican Party might think she has to be in Washington to enhance her leadership credentials.

But there is no reason to assume that an unnamed hostile source is telling the truth about her. At any rate, it will be very interesting to see what happens after the election!


Maybe all this popularity is going to her head and she thinks she can walk on water.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am not sure that taking the Senate seat will be a step up for Palin. She will move from being a state executive to being one out of 100 senators. Unless there is a huge surprise on Nov 4, her party would be in the minority and while its possible I doubt that she will be in a leadership role in the Senate (would Steven committees assignments automatically transfer to her?). I cannot see what she gains from moving from Wasilla to DC. In fact, if McCain loses, I would think she would be better staying in Alaska and fighting the "power" from afar instead of becoming one of the Washington "insiders".

I see your point. It makes sense when one is thinking rationally about one's future. However, if the unnamed McCain source is telling the truth (and I don't automatically assume he/she is), Palin is acting like a diva. A diva who sees herself as an up and coming leader of the Republican Party might think she has to be in Washington to enhance her leadership credentials.

But there is no reason to assume that an unnamed hostile source is telling the truth about her. At any rate, it will be very interesting to see what happens after the election!


Maybe all this popularity is going to her head and she thinks she can walk on water.


Well, according to her beliefs, the Second Coming IS right around the corner!
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote: I see your point. It makes sense when one is thinking rationally about one's future. However, if the unnamed McCain source is telling the truth (and I don't automatically assume he/she is), Palin is acting like a diva. A diva who sees herself as an up and coming leader of the Republican Party might think she has to be in Washington to enhance her leadership credentials.

But there is no reason to assume that an unnamed hostile source is telling the truth about her. At any rate, it will be very interesting to see what happens after the election!


Maybe all this popularity is going to her head and she thinks she can walk on water.

Well, according to her beliefs, the Second Coming IS right around the corner!

Well, haven't they been saying that for 2000 years? I guess that's what keeps them going, the stupid and the crazy.
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: