Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

I just don't see 'How Palin Could Win'

Sarah Palin's raw talent is not unappreciated by me. What I don't get, however, is this undying belief that she could become president of the United States. The latest comes from Matt Lattimer at the Daily Beast. I won't fine-tooth "How Palin Could Win," except for Lattimer's last assertion.

The former speechwriter to President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld advises Palin to "remember political history." He continues,

"No actor can be elected president." "No First Lady can win a Senate seat in a state where she never lived." "No one-term senator can defeat Hillary Clinton." There are plenty more opportunities to prove those in the know wrong.

Yes, Ronald Reagan was an actor in the early days. But he served two terms as governor of California (1967 to 1975). Full terms, I might add. And he ran twice unsuccessfully for the Republican presidential nomination in 1968 and 1976 before he snagged it and the White House in 1980.

Sure, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton never lived in New York before she decided to run in 2000 for the Senate seat being vacated by the late (and legendary) Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D). But that didn't stop her, in the same way it didn't stop Robert F. Kennedy parachuting into the Empire State to make his successful run in 1964. If ever there was a state where "carpetbagging" is not a problem, New York is it.

Ok, Lattimer's got me on trying to disprove the "No one-term senator can defeat Hillary Clinton" assertion. But then-Sen. Obama had to fight Clinton for the nomination to the bitter end. They were two formidable candidates with intellect and policy knowledge as deep as some of these snow drifts around here. I might be going out on a limb here, but if Palin jumps into the 2012 race with the same flimsy grasp on policy and issues she displayed at the Tea Party convention last week, she won't get very far once some of the now-silent heavyweights of the GOP get in the ring and aim their rhetorical fire at her.

By Jonathan Capehart  | February 10, 2010; 3:13 PM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Colby King's horrifying winter experience
Next: Michelle Obama takes on childhood obesity


We're in a conflict here. Who will lead this country? Thanks for your support, weakling.

Posted by: dudh | February 10, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

"I just don't see 'How Palin Could Win'"

Therein, Jonathan, lies your problem.

Posted by: mbjohnson | February 10, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

"...I just don't see 'How Palin Could Win' "

Of course you don't. You work for the Washington Post.

Posted by: pgr88 | February 10, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

if the repubs are dumb enough to nominate her, who knows. but her biggest challenge would be getting nominated. it was easy being named VP nominee and just having to make public appearances. ponder a picture of her debating Newt, Romney, Huckabee, heck, any republican for that matter.

she'll have to come up with something deeper that "main street over wall street" to pull that off. right now she couldn't tell you whether that remark means she's in favor of regulating banks or against it.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 10, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

I am not attracted to Sarah Palin's political rhetoric; nor her constant attacks on Washington D.C.

However, she does voice a peculiar "outsider" viewpoint. A viewpoint that some might see as populist.

It is hard to see how she could be seen as GOP insider. The GOP does not tolerate outsiders very well. I suppose that is an attribute of a social conservative, er reactionary.

Posted by: rmorris391 | February 10, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

....but then, he had to fight to the bitter end .....??????

Posted by: chatard | February 10, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

I work in the ultimate conseravtion bastion; the military industrial complex. I can see clearly how Palin can win.

All too many people see politics as a reality show or a sports event. Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing! And if these people throw their support behind the delightful Mrs. Palin she could indeed win the presidency.

Sadly, those who voted for her will never comprehend the damage they have done because to them it was all about winning.

Prosperity Christianity informs these voters that Christian conservatives can do no wrong (and winning the presidency will be undeniable proof of God's love and grace) so no matter how disasterous Mrs. Palin will be, it will still be the fault of Godless liberals.

Posted by: arancia12 | February 10, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

How could palin win.

A bunch of hillbilly uneducated racist bigots who they themselves think that 1+1=3 and who believe we should be solely a CHRISTIAN nation whose sole purpose is to push war on others, and who believe the poor are here to serve the wealhy.

This is how she could win. Betcha

Posted by: kare1 | February 10, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

it would be simple.
say what you believe in,
and stick to it.
do not call them 'fat cat bankers'
who are 'guilty' of giving themselves
'greedy, obscene bonus's'
and then,

two weeks later

these are talented guys who deserve every penny they make.

I know it is lost on a political liberal media type.

but in the Real World,
this is LYING!!!

Posted by: simonsays1 | February 10, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

It's astounding that she is still capable of little more than blathering a list of inane and barely intelligible talking points. Does she actually have a deep, functional knowledge of anything? If she does, I can't find it.

She sounds exactly like one my students when trying to cover up their lack of understanding of a concept: spew a pile of BS and generously sprinkle plenty of vocab words. Whenever she speaks, I can't tell if she understands anything beyond the most superficial level.

Posted by: jyhume | February 10, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Wow Capehart, this might be the first time I totally agree with you, but who remembers.

Spot on. Personally, I'm convinced that the ONLY reason the psychos like Palin is because they think that Democrats DON'T like Palin.

Hey, she's cute, she's funny, she'a a BIMBO!

List Sarah "The Bimbo" Palin's experience, and there already, Houston, we have a problem.

Plus, she's exactly where she wanted to be: She's a celebrity, and very well on her way to being rich (that is, if the tea baggers don't keep taking Sarah's lunch money).

Sarah is now among the ranks of all the Rush Limbaughs and other TV and radio personalities who will have the exact same opinion as whoever is writing their paychecks.

That's entertainment!

Posted by: lindalovejones | February 10, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Believe me, I didn't think an empty suit manchild could be elected President. Unfortunately, I was proven wrong. I'm not supporting Palin, but as a country we have to pull together and kick the imbecile out in 2012 before real and lasting damage is done.

Posted by: DCer1 | February 10, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Ah, if only she were half black.

Posted by: fishcrow | February 10, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse


Sarah "the quitter who couldn't finish dinner" Palin CAN'T win and won't win, unless there is some sort of massive brain cell-killing virus that sweeps the country.

She spouted off to 650 loons in Tennessee, and she had to write buzzwords on her little claw to even do that. And she dares to criticize President Obama for using a teleprompter? What a hypocrite (and as if Bush and Reagan didn't?)

Palin has proven that she is an idiot many times over, and as for competence.... she left the tiny town of Wasilla $30 million in debt. She may be the darling of ignorant rednecks and backwater bigots who log on to too many MILF websites, but for the rest of America she's just a carnival show.

She was on the ticket and GOT CREAMED in 2008. Too. Also.

Run Sarah, run! We need the comedy!

Posted by: losthorizon10 | February 10, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Now that we see that Obama hid history, no one can see how he won either.

She could win, for simply having a history we can see.

Posted by: dottydo | February 10, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Here's a scenario: a foreign government forms U.S. "front" corporations that sponsor unlimited pro-Palin television commercials (legal under the new Supreme Court edict). Who can stop them?

Posted by: Toasted1 | February 10, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

I don't underestimate Sarah Palin's backers - New Apostolic Reformation, the "Third Wave" of a pentecostal, charismatic Dominionist movement. Why have news organizations like the Washington Post ignored this organization & their involvement in everything she's done?

They clearly state their Seven Mountain Strategy is to take control of government, law, education, the media, etc. So have mainstream news groups already succumbed or just scared of this group? When are you investigative reporters going to dig into the connection between the New Apostolic Reformation group & Sarah Palin?

Posted by: momshugs | February 10, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

You forget that George W. Bush was elected -- after debating performances in which he showed himself to be every bit as clueless as Sarah Palin.

The GOP doesn't care about governing --only about raping the country for its wealth.

Honest to God, if Palin wins the presidency, I am leaving the country, family, dogs and all. I will never endure a repeat of the kind of flat out idiocy we have just come through with Bush.

Posted by: scott56 | February 10, 2010 5:24 PM | Report abuse

it would be simple.
say what you believe in,
and stick to it.
do not call them 'fat cat bankers'
who are 'guilty' of giving themselves
'greedy, obscene bonus's'
and then,

two weeks later

these are talented guys who deserve every penny they make.

I know it is lost on a political liberal media type.

but in the Real World,
this is LYING!!!

Posted by: simonsays1 | February 10, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Saying two true statements one complimentary and one not is not lieing where I come from but then again I am not a republican looking to be falsely outraged about nothing.

Posted by: justonevoice | February 10, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Palin's strength is that more and more people trust neither the Dems or the Republicans.

If the debt is still out of control, and unemployment is still high, President Obama is vulnerable in 2012, but that doesn't mean people will trust Republicans. Ms. Palin is positioned to run on a platform that she will keep the Republicans from running up the debt like they did under Bush and like the Dems then doubled under Obama.

Ms. Palin is uniquely positioned at this point to run as anti-Bush and anti-Obama. She in fact has a history of being critical of fellow Republicans, who fail to live by conservative principles or who are corrupt. She is reinforcing that past history every day by backing insurgents in primaries. Therefore she has substantial credibility (that is increasing)on this issue with independents.

That means if the Dems continue using anti-Bush rhetoric, it will get turned around against Obama. Every time they criticize Bush, Ms. Palin will say Obama and Bush were the same ineffective big spenders.

That won't mean as much if the deficit is under control and unemployment rate is 5% in 2012, as that would favor the incumbent and no Republican could win, but it means a lot if President Obama fails to turn the economy and the debt around. Ms. Palin has the luxury of waiting until late in 2011 to judge whether the economic and budget conditions will make Mr. Obama vulnerable. If the economy improves substantially and the debt is under control, she doesn't have to run, and probably won't.

Is Ms. Palin a sure thing agaist Mr. Obama? No. But she is pursuing a calculated strategy that anyone should be able to understand has inherent potential power - anyone that is, except people who thought the Tea Party events and the protests at Congressional meetings in the summer of 2009 didn't mean much.

A lot of people have been fired. People are ready to fire both political parties. Right now, Ms. Palin is the one who is closest to harnessing that power. Maybe someone else will come out of nowhere to contest that support, but don't expect any of the old Republican establishment politicians to succeed in that. They're coming late to the party and have histories that willwill undermine their credibility.

Posted by: jfv123 | February 10, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

scott56: in the general election, she will get the folks who vote party over candidate, which is close enough to be scary. but I take some comfort in the notion that I can't see her getting nominated in the first place, where she can't benefit from just attacking all things democrat because they all will. what potential republican candidate wouldn't make her look like a fool to republican primary voters?

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 10, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Capehart have you been away for 8 years on another planet? Sarah need only hire Karl Rove to fix voting machines, deny votes and get the Supreme Court 5 Justices to approve her as President. Yes Bush/Cheney had two terms all by fixed/corrupt elections. Right now Republicans are using sex and bribes for a vote. Sarah uses sex/wink/short-tight-skirt, while Center Fold Full Monty Senator Brown is laying it all out there for a vote. It worked very well. Now who know Levi Johnson has a Center Fold and he might run for elected office.

Posted by: qqbDEyZW | February 10, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Johnathan I agree. Just because we have a bunch of old white, fat racist wearing straw hats with teabags hanging on the brim, a winning election stragety it does not make.

We have to remember in an election cycle, 24 hours is a long time and two years is like a lifetime. Many of these tea baggers will get their way before November 2012. Thus many will be unemployed, not have health insurance, loose their house and car. They won't be happy-unhappy people jump of the horse in the middle of the stream.

I wish Palin could get the 2012 GOP nomination. Not to happen, the intelligent players for the GOP will not treat her as the Queen, they will destroy her. Palin is an ignorant fool, and doesn't know how to make her own luck.

Posted by: COWENS99 | February 10, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a loser. She has lost before and will lose again. She represents a disgruntled minority incapable of governing, capable only of criticizing. She is a spectacle, so we watch her. But those of us actually responsible for running business, government, churches, nonprofits, research, universities, etc., know that she is a moron and a noisebox, like Rush Limbaugh. She can't be counted upon for more, but she is good at that. Just because someone is on a pedestal, doesn't mean they can hack it doing real things. Has "reality" television taught us anything? She is a tragic figure, her misguided angry mob followers more so. The single best thing for progressive government is her continued active participation in politics. The worst thing progressives fear is practical, moderate republicans in league with enough morons on the right and centrists to gain votes. Palin proved in 2008 and by resigning, that she is just a noisebox, toxic to electoral success.

Posted by: dcnyhunter | February 10, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

"i don't see how palin could win"

i do, the same idiots that elected bush and then picked obama would go for palin

Posted by: newagent99 | February 10, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Oh dear, deranged, dottydodo. What were the delightful Mrs. Palin's grades in college?

But you are correct. I do know her history of quitting jobs.

Posted by: arancia12 | February 10, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

For one that watched the presidential primary debates, Hillary and Barack were discussing education, foreign policy (bomb Pakistan with drones), and a host of other issues in depth. The GOP debated whom had more guns in the gun closet. While I don't agree with Ron Paul's positions on many issues, he made more sense than most and was shut out of debating.

Posted by: jameschirico | February 10, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Unfortunately your assuming an educated and reasonable voting populous. With he right backing at the right tipping point of economic or nationalistic slant of time kermit the frog could be elected.

Posted by: dcperspective | February 10, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

This is a very interesting article and set of responses. Replace "Sarah Palin" with "Barack Obama" and the comments would easily apply to either. Mr. Capehart, millions of us had the same thought captured by your article's title when we first heard of President Obama. The obvious difference I can see betwen Sarah Palin now and Barrack Obama then though is in previous leadership experience. Ms. Palin actually has experience (like it or not). We are all discovering what the cost is when you elect someone with no real world experience. Miss him yet?

Posted by: luvpool | February 10, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

This is a very interesting article and set of responses. Replace "Sarah Palin" with "Barack Obama" and the comments would easily apply to either. Mr. Capehart, millions of us had the same thought captured by your article's title when we first heard of President Obama. The obvious difference I can see betwen Sarah Palin now and Barrack Obama then though is in previous leadership experience. Ms. Palin actually has experience (like it or not). We are all discovering what the cost is when you elect someone with no real world experience. Miss him yet?

Posted by: luvpool | February 10, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a pretty long shot. But we live in difficult times. Difficult times can bring extremes to power. One only has to look at the 1930's. In fact, when he first was talked about as a Presidential possibility, Ronald Reagen did seem as unlikely as Sarah Palin and as much at the edge of the political spectrum. I don't expect Palin to be able to follow his path. But I also don't think it is as unlikely as many people want to believe.

Posted by: dnjake | February 10, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin went to 5 colleges and scraped by with a degree. She is barely literate and totally without number sense, as is completely clear from her mangled English and rambling answers to simple questions. She is only being promoted as a "f*&k you" to the establishment, and if by some incredible combination of farfetched events, she were to be elected president, the result would be absolute calamity for the country. Comparisons with President Obama are specious. No halfway sane person would even pretend that the abilities of the two are within light years of each other. I say to the nihilists who want to ruin our country with their anti-estabishment, cut-taxes-on-the-rich platform: "You should be ashamed of yourselves. Have you no shame?"

Posted by: bertram2 | February 10, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Palin's strength is that more and more people trust neither the Dems or the Republicans.

Posted by: jfv123

Yup. And Mrs. Palin is Republican. The GOP is going to ride her like a mule until she is of no use to them and then they will most likely ruin her.

Quem deus vult perdere, dementat prius.

Posted by: arancia12 | February 10, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe you still read the Daily Beast. They lost me with the focus on entertainment news and titillation.

Posted by: JuanCochino | February 10, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Except that Kermit T. Frog was not born in the US, and I can prove it.

Posted by: HillWilliam | February 10, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Personally I think Sarah has the edge ona few high profile celebrities - such as Joan Rivers and Judge Judy. I hope they are not offended. In these tough economic times, we need someone like Sarah to give us a good laugh. I hope Tina Fay is standing by and ready to go for it.

Posted by: michael_ah_oleary | February 10, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

she can't just run against democrats for the nomination. any republican will get 40% of the vote in the general from those who hate everything democrats stand for.

How does she get the nomination running against fellow republicans?

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 10, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand how someone can seriously compare Mrs Palin to President Obama or for that matter Pres. Reagan, or Sec. Clinton, especially after they have heard them talk.

I heard then Sen. Obama being interviewed on TV, before the primaries got started last election, and I knew that he had the gravitas to be President. Of all the American politicians in modern times - since the advent of recording audio/video devices (the British leaders have to be able to stand on their feet by themselves during question hour), there haven't been many who can stand up to his oratorical skills.

A woman who has trouble remembering "Tax Cuts" is not really a Republican, and one who has to scratch cheat notes on her hand doesn't even know what she is trying to cheat.

She is just stretching her 15m of fame a little too much, till the next election, and hopefully my Republican countrymen will
fix that problem in the next primaries if she doesn't self implode before that.

Posted by: thinkagain | February 10, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Palin is the Democrats' wet dream of a Republican candidate. She speaks her mind (which leads her to say nothing). Obama himself fantasizes about facing Palin. But alas, it is not to be. Republicans are lousy at the art of government, but they are masterful politicians. They wouldn't be dumb enough to nominate her. (Would they?......)

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | February 10, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

In my youth, we had a recession for 12 years- from 1974 to 1985. This one may last as long. Ford and Carter at least did something to help those who were unemployed; Reagan did very little when the economy again turned downhill in 1981. It's not so much the personality as the strong likelihood that someone from the GOP will be elected in 2012. I'd have to see what Palin says about those who are unemployed in 2012 before passing judgment on her potential effectiveness as a president. Because this recession is going to be with us a long time.

Posted by: stillaliberal | February 10, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin BELIEVES her rise is God's plan based on prophecies of Rick Joyner & C. Peter Wagner, founders of Morningstar Ministries near Charlotte. C. Peter Wagner's Apostolic Council of Prophetic Elders is the inner circle of their Eagle's Vision Apostolic Team in the New Apostolic Reformation's World Prayer Center International.

Steve Thompson, Head of Prophecy, has led prophetic conferences for 20 years in the Wasilla Assemblies of God Church that Sarah Palin has been a member of her entire adult life, as has her husband. Ed Kalnins, Senior Pastor of Wasilla Assembly of God, is considered an Apostle in the New Apostolic Reformation

The New Apostolic Reformation has drawn various Third Wave groups with Pentecostal backgrounds into a more organized structure focused on all the sphere's (Seven Mountains) of social control.

I firmly believe these people have been behind the Tea Party groups from the get-go. The people are true believers in God's Army overthrowing & taking control of our government.

Instead of touting Sarah Palin as a titular head of the Tea Party, the mainstream media should be outing the New Apostolic Reformation as the spearhead of its support.

The GOP is shameless in letting the Party be hijacked by this group!

Posted by: momshugs | February 10, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

If the GOP wants to give Obama a second term they can nominate Pallin. I could never cast a vote for her even if Obama was the opponent. Lord help us if that is to be our choice.

Posted by: jslivesay | February 10, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

If the GOP wants to give Obama a second term they can do it by nominating Pallin. Lord help us if that turns out to be our choices.

Posted by: jslivesay | February 10, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin? Win? She is so dumb that she doesn't know she is dumb! There's a lot of bright Repubs who have just kept quiet until the right moment. In the meantime, Sarah is undergoing a self-destruction process. Soon Americans will realise she is dumb and she ain't President material.

Posted by: deecool | February 10, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

How could Palin win? Yes:

The Republican nomination: Consider that they filibuster appointments and then ratify someone by a vote of 86-0. This is lock-step single-mindedness. They exhibit much 100% unanimity (reminds one of the Politburo, doesn't it?) There is very little indepencdent though there!

The general election: Recognize that McCain got 47% of the vote, after he suspended his campaign to help solve the economic problems on 9/16/2008, and the Republicans told him to stuff it! Obviously too many of the electorate vote on something other than reason.

Posted by: AMviennaVA | February 10, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

First Palin has just proven she can save us on paper by writing on her palm.That's what the American taxps. need NOW.Frugal and with common sense.We can't say that about -this big spender Bo.
You just given a mandate to an inexp.and a commu. organ. the entire National purse and he is messing up BIG time.So let's move the next option. Or you just want a telprom.prez with meaningless words???

Posted by: somers91 | February 10, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

If Palin thinks she's anything more than a tool....she's a fool. Actually, she definitely is both. Saw a great bumper sticker today..."Please Jesus, protect me from your followers..."

Posted by: seakeys | February 10, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

If Palin thinks she's anything more than a tool....she's a fool. Actually, she definitely is both. Saw a great bumper sticker today..."Please Jesus, protect me from your followers..."

Posted by: seakeys | February 10, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin sure is keeping the Dims in conniptions. If she is nothing more than a stalking horse for the eventual GOP presidental candidate of 2012, Palin has still more than done her job.

Posted by: screwjob2 | February 10, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin will be a much need boost in integrity and intelligence from the current occupant.


Easily the stupidest and worse President of Modern America.

Posted by: LogicalSC | February 10, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Let Palin run.

Posted by: jfern03 | February 10, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

"They were two formidable candidates with intellect and policy knowledge as deep as some of these snow drifts around here."

What planet do you live on? Go back and listen to their debates, interviews, stump speeches. Neither Hillary or 0bama displayed any deep understanding of policies. 0bama's major contribution to the political debate was "Hope and Change" and "change we can believe in." Empty slogans. His election was a total fluke, his supporters know it, and that is why, after more than a year, they are still angry and bitter. It took 0bama over 2 years of non-stop campaigning, $750 million, thousands of media cheerleaders, and it still took a huge economic crisis to drag him across the finishline.

Palin will steamroll him in 2012, after she's done steamrolling Mitt, Huck, Newt, Tim and anyone else who stands in her way.

Posted by: gatshanson1 | February 10, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Demagogues, not policy wonks, win. Palin is 100% demagogue, and could win on sheer rah-rah populist flatulence. The best thing President Obama could do for his party is commit political suicide by telling the unpopular truth that Afghanstan cannot be won (the conclusion of most objective State and Pentagon analysts at this point). Then like Lyndon Johnson he should announce he is not going to run again--so that he has the freedom to do the right thing and pull out our troops. Let HiIlary take on Sarah Palin in 2012. Hillary can demagogue with the best of them but deep down (unlike Palin) there is a reserve of actual knowledge, and (unlike Plain) experience in foreign affairs and (unlike Plain) when things get tough HIllary doesn't quit.

Posted by: Rafaelo | February 10, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

I cant see her as President but after that little comedy tea party act i can sure as heck see her as a top notch comedian.Look out Jay...

Posted by: smorrow | February 10, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Her biggest barrier to overcome will be the GOP primaries. She won't be able to pull the same BS that she pulled on VP Biden at the vice presidential debate - that business about "I'm not going to answer the questions you ask. I'm going to speak directly to the American people." That stuff just won't fly when she finds herself up against people like Romney or Gingrich who have a deep understanding of policy and are prepared to speak intelligently on it. Sure, she is a popular demagogue right now, but that stuff will only carry you so far. What amazes me is that the meda continues to give her coverage as if she matters. Send her to the ashcan of history where she belongs.

Posted by: topperale | February 10, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Why are we still still wasting time on this inarticulate twit? Suppose Palin looked like Barbara Milkulski? She wouldn't get the time of day. She certainly wouldn't have been selected to be the eye-candy half of a national ticket. We know that.
You know that. It's impossible to take any group of people seriously that has such a shallow understanding of the basic intellectual requirements for the Presidency.

Posted by: st50taw | February 10, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

I say bring it on Brownie,,, please let her run. She of course would not get beyond the primaries one debate would be enough for most folks to move on to more serious candidates. But if she were to move on I would bet on an easy win by Dems and I am sure the GOP would frown on that happening.

Posted by: patisok | February 10, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse


Palin, for $100,000 and a tea party are you smarter than:

A: a five college in six years learning experience?

B: a five year old?

C: a five finger answer?

D. None the above

Posted by: MILLER123 | February 10, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Run Sarah run!

Happy days are here again. Saturday Night Live got material again. Happy days are here again.

Posted by: MILLER123 | February 10, 2010 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Except that Kermit T. Frog was not born in the US, and I can prove it.

Posted by: HillWilliam

The answer is simple, hillbill. Provide Obama wasn't born in the US. You can't.

Posted by: arancia12 | February 10, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

"Clinton for the nomination to the bitter end. They were two formidable candidates with intellect and policy knowledge as deep as some of these snow drifts around here."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Intellect and policy knowledge.
Are you referring to the community organizer extraordinaire who spent four years(the four years Senate when the economy completly tanked)and upon getting elected POTUS stated: "I had no clue how bad the mess was that I inherited." Hell, I could have told him. Palin . even, could have told him.

That statement boggles my mind. How could a supposedly intellectual not have a clue.

Is he an educated idiot?

Posted by: bnw173 | February 10, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Jesse Ventura summed it up when he said that Sarah Palin is a quitter. If she was elected, she might cut and run after a year or two, so that would require a VERY close look at a VP candidate if she by some mischance became the presidential candidate.

Posted by: FredinVicksburg | February 10, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Capehart may wish to check out Sarah Palin latest Facebook posting on DrillGate at:

The behavior of the Obama Adminstration on stonewalling offshore energy development supported by 70% of Americans is astonishing.

The Adminstration pretends to actually care about American jobs... but really really doesn't.

Sarah Palin cares and will be the next President.

Posted by: pvilso24 | February 10, 2010 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Fact 1. If George Bush and Barack Hussein Obama can get elected POTUS anyone can.

Fact 2. We have one dumba**ed electorate.

Posted by: bnw173 | February 10, 2010 8:08 PM | Report abuse


Palin, for $100,000 and a tea party are you smarter than:

A: a five college in six years learning experience?

B: a five year old?

C: a five finger answer?

D. None the above

Posted by: MILLER123 | February 10, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I guess by your Palin obsessed logic this lady is going to be one dumba**ed multi-millionaire.

Wonder if she gets elected she would be intelligent enough to know what she was inheriting. That dumb statement by Obama boggles my mind and no one seems to even notice his ignorance. Four years in the Senate and not have a clue? Damn.

How can anyone be that dumb?

Posted by: bnw173 | February 10, 2010 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"I just don't see 'How Palin Could Win'"

Russia is probably blocking the view.
Just ask Sarah to look it up on her Palm Pilot.


Posted by: JohnRCarroll | February 10, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

How many posters used the word "dumb" today ? I lost count.

The dumb Sarah Palin was the most popular Governor with ratings between 60% and 90%

How did this "dummie" do it ?

She fired under-performing staff. (tip for Obama - think Eric Holder, Tim Geithner)

She cut the budget by 10%. Sold off the executive jet and released the chauffeur and cook. And managed to increase special needs budget by 300%. (another tip for Obama - cut spending, be compassionate)

She apparently cleaned out political corruption in much of Anchorage.. winning support of both Dems and Reps. (tip for Congress)

Ok maybe not so dumb but she's a Quitter right ? Wrong. She was driven from Office by a liberal ethics complaint law that in 6 months caused her family a half-million in legal fees (four times her salary)

Threatened with bankruptcy... she retired and made millions from book sales... yup REALLY DUMB !!

And this dummie is the largest political figure in America except for the President.

This Dumb Quitter drew 240 journalists last Saturday, live coverage on all cable networks, and flattering front-page stories in all major newspapers including the New York Times !

But heck she's just a dumb quitter. Right ?

Posted by: pvilso24 | February 10, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

: a five college in six years learning experience?

Posted by: MILLER123

Posted by: bnw173 | February 10, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Hey DCer1 - last time I checked the lasting damage has already been done by the Bush-Cheney braintrust. Obama didn't invade Iraq to the detriment of finishing the job in Afghanistan. Obama didn't squander a surplus with populist tax cuts and stupid deficit spending. Obama didn't drive the economy into the gutter and create historic unemployment - Bush and Cheney did. I wish oblivious Republicans like you and your ilk who masquerade as Conservatives (certainly not fiscally) would remember who put America in this whole mess before you toss aside your responsibility in voting Bush and Cheney into office - YOU ruined the economy and our standing in the world, not Obama.

Your attacks on Obama are hyppcritical since you folks said that critizing a President during wartime was unpatriotic... was is it now? The Republican Party is absent anything resembling leadership... The GOP should be known as WOP - Weak @ss old Party.

"Believe me, I didn't think an empty suit manchild could be elected President. Unfortunately, I was proven wrong. I'm not supporting Palin, but as a country we have to pull together and kick the imbecile out in 2012 before real and lasting damage is done."

Posted by: DCer1 | February 10, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: DCeagle11 | February 10, 2010 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Could Sarah win? As scary as it seems, I think YES. Somehow, Bush Jr got elected, twice! Somehow the empty headed puppet Reagan got elected. We have a history of buying the Republican spin machine's candidate and then living to count the cost.
Every time I hear someone (especially wingnuts) praise Reagan, I want to spew. Who do you think brought us globalisation that has stripped so many jobs and industries from the country? Reagan.
Who do you think started the de-regulation philosophy that culminated in the GFC? Reagan again.
Most of the laissez faire, pro-corporate policies were formulated by Margaret Thatcher and slavishly followed by Reagan at the insistance of his corporate puppet-masters. Reagan didn't have an original thought in his head. We're talking about a guy who had to do 12 takes to get the act of standing up behind a sofa, pulling up his pants and doing up his belt buckle. He couldn't chew gum and sewat at the same time. Neither can Palin, but that won't stop Faux News and other corporate backers spending squillions on installing her in the Whitehouse.

Posted by: ScottFromOz | February 10, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Who, 3 years prior to their respective elections, saw ANY of these guys becoming president?

(a) Jimmy Carter (A Peanut Farmer)
(b) Ronald Reagan (an Old Actor)
(c) Bill Clinton (unknown, Slick,Lying, (d) Cheating, Swindler)
(e) George W Bush (Daddy's Boy)
(f) Barack Obama (Community Activist)

1) Jimmy Carter got in there because of Nixon & Watergate

2) Reagan got in there because Carter was a disaster

3) Clinton got in there because of the economy

4) W got in there because of Clinton and a few sticky chads

5) Obama got in there because of Bush & the economy collapse drastically in the last 6 months of 2008.


-et al
(Most Democrats)

Health Care Control (~17% of our economy)
Vilifying Business
Social Agenda gone Wild
Back room deals

There's plenty of time to get it right in 3 years.

Posted by: porchfan | February 10, 2010 8:53 PM | Report abuse

"Sure, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton never lived in New York before she decided to run in 2000 for the Senate seat"

Well of course not! Most Democrats could never win an election in states where people already know who they are or in a conservative state who know what Democrats are.

Posted by: williepete1 | February 10, 2010 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Palin stops Democrats from thinking. I certainly don't think she will be President, but look at her carefully. It is striking how populist she was with the Tea Partiers. The New Democrats are to the right of George Bush, as Alan Greenspan charged. Obama's health counter-reform cuts $500,000 from Bush's health reform, and it is justifiably and irreversibly unpopular. The Republicans, as in Massachusetts and Virginia, are running hard further to the left. The Democrats need to rethink where they are positioned and whether they really think the issue of Obama's counter-health reform is a winning issue in November. He should give Sebellius, a red state governor, the job of negotiating a real compromise reform with the left--that is, with the Republicans.

Posted by: jhough1 | February 10, 2010 8:58 PM | Report abuse

After George W. Bush, I don't think America will ever elect a mental defective again. Sure she has her fans, but they're mentally defective themselves and outside of that narrow base (narrower than you would think given the attention she gets) she is seen for the retarded joke she is.

Posted by: ottoparts | February 10, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

How could Palin win?
Jonathan, have you taken a good look around to see just how stupid the American public has become? Fast asleep at the wheel. Palin is a product of the American Idol era. Ask people to name the Fed Chair or Treasury Secretary and they look bewildered. Ask them to name the new judges on American Idol and you'll get a whole story. But Palin has one big flaw. Every time she opens her mouth it's a disaster waiting to happen. What makes it so humurous is that she has absolutely no idea.

Posted by: bretb | February 10, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

I can understand the electorate's current disillusionment with both political parties - effete and ineffectual Democrats stalemated by cynical and mostly incoherent republicans. But I will never understand how any rational voter could see Palin as "the answer to our problems" - much less a viable leader of the free world (even in the best of times). Except for considerable charm, she appears to bring nothing to the table - no relevant experience and a non-exceptional intellect (to say the least). She repeatedly domonstrates no more than a superficial grasp of the most complicated problems facing our nation, and she is reviled by a significant portion of the electorate. So do her supporters really think she might be able to bring this country together and solve these problems? I would like to hear from the pro-Palin contigent - does it really mean anything to be pro-Palin other than being anti-liberal/progressive?

Posted by: Sleeper | February 10, 2010 9:15 PM | Report abuse

I never thought I'd live long enough to see a neophyte black candidate with Hussein as a middle name and with a long history of close association with radical leftists and America-hating preachers become president.

So, it's not inconceivable that Sarah Palin may become president. If the economy is bad in 2012 she could win. The fact she's not a lawyer is a big plus.....people really are getting sick of an America of, by and for the lawyers.

Posted by: hit4cycle | February 10, 2010 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Hit4cycle - I agree (sadly) that it is not "inconceivable" that Palin could become president. But is there any good, positive reason to elect Palin? That is, is there any reason to think that she might do better than Obama? At anything?

Posted by: Sleeper | February 10, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

She could win simply because the majority of citizens (> 50%) are uninformed, willfully ignorant, simply too focused on their own private lives to research or think deeply about issues, and were never taught (or learned) to think critically in the first place.

If I had to vote for a air-head bimbo who's ambition was simply to revel in the limelight rather than to govern in the best long term interests of the nation, I'd probably opt for Paris Hilton over Sarah Palin. Actually, Ms. Hilton might turn out to be quite a bit more capable than S.P.

Posted by: viennatrip | February 10, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

By the way, George W. Bush was not a lawyer - so it is not ONLY lawyers that are the problem.....

Posted by: Sleeper | February 10, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Hillary Clinton was a formidable candidate in her own right - she was formidable because she had the remnants of the Clinton machine behind her and she had become the focus of feminist longings.

She's not a "native politician", by which I mean a person whose political skills, absent a husband who was president, could have gotten her elected mayor of Pittsburgh.

Obama by contrast does have formidable skills, though it's becoming increasingly apparent that he's sorely lacking in experience of the way politics are done in this country at the highest levels, and no amount of smarts and articulacy can make up for that.

Palin is skilled precisely as a demagogue: to borrow from the Merriam-Webster dictionary, she is adept at making "use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power."

Were she to become the Republican nominee, all it would take was a 3'rd party which claimed the presidential votes of 15 per cent from the left of the Democratic party to put her in office.

I don't see any 3'rd party that fits that bill on the horizon, but stranger things have happened.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | February 10, 2010 10:01 PM | Report abuse

I concur regarding Paris Hilton - was she born in America?

Posted by: Sleeper | February 10, 2010 10:06 PM | Report abuse

IF we continue to dumb down our public education, people like Sarah Palin can be the president of the United States many times over till we finally fall apart.

Posted by: dummy4peace | February 10, 2010 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Anything can happen. Reagan was elected and re-elected. Stranger, there are academic historians who will explain to you (at great length) why he was an excellent President. The same thing could happen with Palin. She could be elected by an ignorant populace, do terrible damage to the fabric of the country, be re-elected, die, and have the academic establishment fall all over themselves praising her.

Substitute Rick Perry's name for Palin in the preceding paragraph and you have a more terrifying and more plausible scenario.

Posted by: rusty3 | February 10, 2010 10:15 PM | Report abuse

It's a teabagger dream that will never happen. These people are ignorant, paranoid morons.

Let Senator Sanders (I-VT) give the teabaggers a little education. Here's what he said recently on the Senate floor:

"Let me begin by saying something to my friend Senator Gregg, through the chairman, through the chairman. I really don't like being lectured on deficits when you (Sen. Gregg) and many members of your party (Republicans) helped cause the situation we are in right now. "

"People voted, Senator Gregg, I believe you are one of them, for a war in Iraq, which some people will think will cost two or three trillion dollars, but you forgot to pay for that war. You and other people voted for tax breaks for the wealthiest 1%, costs $600 billion dollars, forgot to pay for that. You voted for a prescription drug medicare bill which will cost $400 billion dollars but doesn't negotiate prices with the pharmaceutical industry, forgot to ask how that was going to be paid for, you voted for the bailout and I believe you want to repeal the inheritance tax, which will cost a trillion dollars over a ten year period, benefiting the top 3/10ths of 1%. I voted against all of those things, so please, please, spare the lectures on deficit reduction."

Later, Senator Sanders mentioned the fact that America's top 1% of wealthiest citizens earns more income the bottom 50% COMBINED.

Posted by: losthorizon10 | February 10, 2010 10:24 PM | Report abuse

Hey Sleeper, please wake up: "effete and ineffectual democrats stalemated by cynical and mostly incoherent Republicans."
The inmates control both asylums (Oops, only one asylum now:). The Republicans can't stop, let alone stalemate anything.

Posted by: luvpool | February 10, 2010 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Palin is an incredible actor. She'd make a great stand-up comic. And enough people are willing to listen to anything she says or read anything she writes that she'll never starve again. (Sadly, some of that attention probably comes from people who are paying attention to her looks.)

But political office? She could run for sanitation commissioner and she'd probably lose. She isn't smart enough - even if you agree with her positions (whatever they are), she doesn't have the smarts. And contrary to popular anti-elitist sentiment, you want someone who's better than everyone else to be President.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | February 10, 2010 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Despite all of the wonderful things he's done for this country, John McCain's legacy may be that he introduced Sarah Palin to the nation. What a horrible, horrible legacy to leave...

Posted by: kjanes741 | February 10, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

only if all the people with a least 2 functioning brain cells fail to vote

Posted by: dem4evr | February 10, 2010 10:59 PM | Report abuse

The one insuperable problem for Mooselini:

70% of Americans say she is NOT qualified to be President.

To put that into perspective, 68% of Americans say that Hillary Clinton IS qualified to be President.

Mooselini has nothing new to show us; nothing that can possibly change our minds.

Her appearance at the Tea Party (bowel) movement, where she needed notes written on her hand to remind herself of the three things she believes in, simply confirmed what America already knows:

She is NOT qualified to be President.

Posted by: WhatHeSaid | February 10, 2010 11:01 PM | Report abuse

Mrs. Palin is our celebrity...she gets covered...even her short skirt...recent interview ...gets covered....she is hot...a mom of 5, gramma, but, still appeals to white folks who know they are who she Harvard, teacher of Constitutional Law, just a plain, middle income woman with long hair, a semi hot betcha..a little skinny but...whatever... when we see the "high" people now are of color, the tv stars,movie stars...we worry...why don,t I have others have to take a look, try to understand and move forward...

Posted by: judithclaire1939 | February 10, 2010 11:17 PM | Report abuse

Why so many Palin insults ?

People read her working-class biography !

Stanley Fish, the liberal New York Times reviewer "found it compelling and very well done."

If Sarah is a "bimbo" or an "under gifted" "cartoon" why did cable networks give her live coverage ?

Why did 240 journalists (including Europeans) show up on the Saturday night pre-SuperBowl ?

Why the flattering front-page coverage by the Post ? the New York Times even ?

Why so few attacks on her actual rather popular positions ? Her mantra of lower taxes, less spending, smaller government, energy diversity that has the support of well… all those stupid Americans !! heck the majority !!

She spoke common sense on health care (time for a reset), terrorism, and leadership (keep the Tea Party movement independent! )

She connects with Americans except for Washington elitists and liberals who loathe her.

Posted by: pvilso24 | February 10, 2010 11:23 PM | Report abuse

When Americans were told it was Saddam who attacked America on 9/11 - Equivalent of which is 'The Sun rises in the west and sets in the east', majority of them (literates and illiterates alike) took this in faster than sponge soaks in water.

All you need is a spin-machine to win elections, if you somehow get though the debates.

Posted by: pattr1 | February 10, 2010 11:26 PM | Report abuse

As sick as the prospect makes me, the fact is that modern American society is much like high school. It's a popularity contest where sound policy and facts (math is for nerds) matter far less than saying something that arouses emotions ( XXX High School Football Rules!).

Sarah Palin is a successful politician much the way she was a high school prom queen type. She can be snarky and cruel to the nerds in order to advance her own position. Add to that the fact that she believes she is doing God's work and she will have no qualms about crushing political opponents.

Posted by: MikeB8 | February 10, 2010 11:34 PM | Report abuse

luvpool: The Republican minority can most certainly produce a stalemate by overusing the filibuster. And a 59 vote majority does not count as a lost chamber.

Posted by: MikeB8 | February 10, 2010 11:38 PM | Report abuse

So far, every Washington Post columnist, OpEd writer, feature writer, cartoonist, business writer, sports writer, classified ad writer, food critic, movie critic and advice columnist has written at least seventy three pieces saying that Sarah Palin is dumb and has no chance. That's about 2,223,000 columns containing 4,356,998, 225 words. After a while, you people are a riot!

Posted by: chatard | February 10, 2010 11:38 PM | Report abuse

As a Democrat I would like nothing more than so see that Palm Reader on the Republican ticket. However it just ain't going to happen. She's still has over two years in the spotlight to blow it big time and she will. Quite simply she just has too many irons in the fire. In time she'll take the money and run back home.

Posted by: JoeNTx | February 10, 2010 11:52 PM | Report abuse

The majority of people in this country who know anything about politics agree Palin cannot be elected president. Sure Bush II won, but Palin is a lightweight compared to him, which is not saying much.

Obama and his advisors are probably praying she will be the Republican nominee in 2012. This would guarantee his reelection no matter how many campaign promises he has broken, no matter how high the unemployment or inflation rate or troops in Afghanistan.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | February 10, 2010 11:57 PM | Report abuse

The White House press room was a jovial place to be in the early days of President Barack Obama's presidency. But times have changed.
The laughter has been reduced by half in recent months: In the first six months of the Obama administration, briefings produced an average of 179 laughs per month. Over the past six months, the average has dropped down to 89.
Chalk it up to the close of any administration's initial honeymoon — and the Obama administration's tough second half of 2009, as it wrestled with health care and saw the late Ted Kennedy's U.S. Senate seat filled by a Republican.

Posted by: jahoby | February 11, 2010 12:03 AM | Report abuse

I seriously doubt that Sarah Palin will run for president. She's just holding out the possibility to string along her supporters. Besides, she's in a very good place right now and will see little reason to seek the presidency. She has a family that needs her and she's doing just fine right where she is. She gets to take potshots at Obama and others of her choosing from the sidelines and draw a big check in the process. Who could ask for anything more.

Posted by: kenger1 | February 11, 2010 12:12 AM | Report abuse

This is a very interesting article and set of responses. Replace "Sarah Palin" with "Barack Obama" and the comments would easily apply to either. Mr. Capehart, millions of us had the same thought captured by your article's title when we first heard of President Obama. The obvious difference I can see betwen Sarah Palin now and Barrack Obama then though is in previous leadership experience. Ms. Palin actually has experience (like it or not). We are all discovering what the cost is when you elect someone with no real world experience. Miss him yet?
Because of statements like the one above is the reason Palinocchio will never be nominated or win! OF course NO ONE misses Bush; he and the Republicans are the ones that got us into this mess. If they had been doing their jobs and following the constitution we would be experiencing better times. Can you imagine the 50% unemployement we'd have under a McCain/Palin presidency and all the banks closed and the country completely bankrupt w/millions more lving in the streets!

Posted by: joemcnamara1 | February 11, 2010 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is different than the party-bred insider politicians who lie to us and let our country down. She doesn't seem to put on a public face when she speaks. She seems normal and inspires trust. Being trustworthy is the most important requirement for public office because that's what public office is--a position of trust. Too many politicians have proven untrustworthy.

Posted by: allamer1 | February 11, 2010 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin taps into a vein of populism, it's true. She has chutzpah, resilience, and a sense of mission. She's fighting against... something... with vigor, but whatever she's fighting against is a vague enemy at best. She's effective at stirring emotions and anti-ism. And she's anti a lot of things. Apparently she's for "energy" and "lifting American's spirits." But to what end?

Obama has been accused of using the word "change" so vaguely that it didn't mean much, and that is still a valid criticism of him. Sarah falls into the trap of being "anti" without adequately defining what she's against, or more importantly, what she's for.

I think, in all seriousness, that she's "for" being "anti." If that's the role she wants to play, she can never lead anyone toward anything, because she is so intent on instead leading people away from everything. A win for that approach is simply meaningless.

And how exactly does she hope to form coalitions with all those people she's been throwing playground taunts at? She has a knack for inventing the kind of one liners that make "good" crowd chants, but have nothing to do with governing or actually getting things done.

Trite though they may be, hope and change sound a lot better to me than "they're all bad, especially the smart ones [she would use the word "elite"], and government is the problem, so I should be a part of the government."

Posted by: Paul_B | February 11, 2010 1:44 AM | Report abuse

"remember political history"? To a woman who needs a crib sheet (her palm) to remind herself of her core "values"/"beliefs" (energy, tax cuts, lifting the American spirit. The only thing that phony remembers is her bank account number.

Posted by: Gatsby10 | February 11, 2010 6:45 AM | Report abuse

I can't wait for Palin -- if she runs for Prez -- to have to debate other candidates on specific issues... The lazy cow will quit and whine profusely that she was given "gotcha" questions because she's a woman.

Posted by: Gatsby10 | February 11, 2010 6:50 AM | Report abuse

I don't disagree with you but...
Exactly who are these now-silent heavyweights of the GOP who are going to blow her out of the water. I see empty suits everywhere.

Posted by: ralph10 | February 11, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

I would have more respect for Palin as a political figure if she had won her election. However, I wonder at the fear and loathing she gets from the left. I think she must be their worst nightmare. A political figure that not only disagrees with the left but that often ignores it.

Posted by: GaryEMasters | February 11, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Oh, she COULD win... as long as certain elements of the American electorate heap praise on willful ignorance, ignore facts and history in favor of some make believe reality and our press doesn't challenge her or the Faux News network's lies and misrepresentations. A perfect storm waiting to happen.

The question is, what would happen IF she won?

Predictions: More unnecessary and wasteful wars, an unregulated financial market leading to an unprecedented crash, MORE tax breaks for the wealthy leading to record breaking deficits. In other words, your typical Republican results.

Posted by: CardFan | February 11, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

I have said this many times that Senator McCain dis great service as an officer of the army but he did great dis service to his beloved country by selecting trashy, valueless, clueless, uneducated, stupid, back waters female Sarah Palin, who has no class & no education. She thinks running a country is like running a brothel that she ran with her unmarried daughters. This lady & her husband have suddenly got a taste of a good life & some money & she is working on the emotions of the losers of this country. Uneducated citizen who ave no idea about the world, all they think about is killing & creating a war. If McCain had any integrity & shame he would apologize to the Nation & resign from his post. I am so glad that McCain did not get elected to the presidency, the man has lost his marbles & is a emotional wreck.

Can someone out there teach Sarah Palin some dignity and perhaps send her back to school, she sounds like a uneducated mother who has not passed even junior college.

Posted by: shamahussain | February 11, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Mikeb8: "The Republican minority can most certainly produce a stalemate by overusing the filibuster. And a 59 vote majority does not count as a lost chamber."
With 60 votes the dems could have ended any such filibuster, but they didn't. Why not? (I have a guess) Please define "Overusing." Maybe compare it to how the dems used the same tactic against judicial nominees during the last administration. Lets face it, both groups of children currently employed in the House, Senate, and White House are NOT working for our collective best interest.

joemcnamara1: You represent well the breathtaking ignorance of what caused the current economic situation and economics in general. Come on, you miss him.

Posted by: luvpool | February 11, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Wait. This writer's party was prepared to make a sociopathic plaintiff's lawyer the Vice President of the United States. And he's worried about Sarah Palin? I don't think her experience qualifies her for the highest office either, but I find the thought of John Edwards anywhere near the White House to be far, far scarier.

Posted by: Roytex | February 11, 2010 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Sarah was given a huge "pass" by the GOP after a very quick weekend vetting by Karl Rove proteges, Davis & Schmidt. Davis admitted he chose her after watching a Charlie Rose interview, thinking she could "jazz" up McCain's campaign & was impressed by her refusal to answer questions.

Davis understood her appeal to the right wing of the GOP, energizing the campaign, but overestimated how moderate independents like me would perceive her. My first impressions of her when McCain introduced her were lasting ones - she acted as if SHE was the candidate & he was the VP running mate.

Had McCain chosen Susan Collins or Olympia Snow for his running mate, he would have had my vote. Election statistics indicate many moderate independents felt likewise.

McCain's speech election night was also telling, speaking like the old McCain (without Palin). By that time the economic disaster was clearly on the horizon, which old wily John knew in August was coming.

I believe he chose Palin knowing she would make the right wing happy, but he could lose with honor. The economic mess would become an albatross blamed on the Democrats at the mid-term elections & in 2012. How convenient for McCain to have Palin available to dodge a bullet.

RNC leaders are all too aware Tea Party & Libertarian followers siphon millions of votes from the GOP just like Ross Perot did in 1992. History could repeat itself.

Posted by: momshugs | February 11, 2010 10:06 AM | Report abuse

My question for all the Americans who down our President, where in heavens name is he supposed to find jobs here in the USA? All the good jobs have moved to India or China. There is a lot of fast food jobs now to be had. As far as Palin goes, she is a goof. When she talks, she doesn't make sense. All she can do is throw mud at our President. If McCain and Palin had won, we would already in Iran and fighting the third war. Give our President a chance. Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day and jobs can't be created in a year. We finally got a man in the top position that is educated and knows what he is talking about. By the way, who is raising Palin's kids while she is chasing around the states giving dumb talks?

Posted by: kathlenemadson | February 11, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I am going to register Republican just to vote for Sarah Palin, what this country needs is comedy relief and it really doesn't matter whose president they are all not in touch even if you are a good actress with God on your side.

Posted by: honeybee1 | February 11, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

I also want to say to all the people who were not popular in High School, you still will not get popular because you think being associated with Sarah will make you, that's what it's really about,
do you not remember, most people did not like the cheerleaders and BMOC, they were stuck up and full of themselves and it was a tight group and they still are not asking you to join!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: honeybee1 | February 11, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Pray tell--who are the heavyweights in the GOP? Blamed if I can discern any of any national stature.

Posted by: smokey2 | February 11, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

First of all, public service, whether it is being a senator, governor or president, is hard work. Once you attain these offices, you are not adored as you were when you were a candidate. The pay is not bad, but it isn't continual high life pay. Sarah doesn't like hard work. She couldn't take the constant scrutiny or criticism (look at how often she plays the victem card). She is definately used to the good life she is now living and the high pay she is receiving. Palin can tease all she wants about running, but do you really think she would put herself through all that exhausting, expensive, non-stop campaigning? The last presidential electioneering started about 18 months, if not longer, before the actual election. Sticking something out is not her long suit.

Posted by: creatia52 | February 11, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

She comes accross the same way Democrats came across when trying to defeat Bush II.

She does not take positions on things; she never provides an alternative and instead speaks in platitudes. Her main theme - I know what is right and it is NOT THEM!

The Democrats did pretty much the same thing by not providing an alternative to Bush II. Instead, they tailored their campaign as just Anti-Bush. A platform that exclaimed "We are NOT Bush" to every issue or question raised:
Q - Pres. Bush did this, what would you do instead?
A - We are NOT Bush!
B - I understand that, but what would YOU do instead?
A - We are NOT Bush!

On and on and on and on..........

Many people speak loud in order to sound important. But once you turn the volume down and actually LISTEN to what they are saying, or in Palin's case, what they are NOT saying, you see them as the bombastic fools they are.

Bombastic fools have a long shelf life in politics and the media. Kate from "Kate + 8" became a total meglomaniac after entering the TV spot light and now we can't get rid of her. Palin has joined her on the stage of self importance. At least Palin doesn't need 10K worth of hair extensions.

Posted by: cgteddy911 | February 11, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin runnin as Vice president was not palpable to many. Sen. McCain was the saving grace. Sarah Palin running for President wouldn't have that advantage. She would have to deal with those on the Left and even some Independants thinking about the baggage she brings with her - her husband for one. Yes, I know that the Clintons came as a team.
The Palins may be a team, but not the political expertise. She also comes with Beck, Hannity and Beck,etc around her neck.
AND, if she received the nomination the Left, some Independants, Blacks, etc would organize behind Obama that the Tea Party wouldn't know what hit them!
Maybe she can be nominated (my bet is on Huckabee) but elected?

Posted by: mcdonalsherry | February 11, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

DCer1 is clearly blinded by right-wing bigotry: calling a Columbia BA/Harvard JD and law review president (who got MERIT scholarships, not affirmative action sops and who didn't ID his own ethnicity when applying to Harvard so he'd be considered on his INTELLECTUAL MERITS...a man who can stand in front of every GOP senator for 1 1/2 hours and knock down every talking-pointed argument they could throw at him...a man whose brilliance is demonstrated in the two books he wrote BY HIMSELF, WITHOUT A GHOST-WRITER (if only DCer1 would bother to read them...) -- anyway, calling him an "empty suit"?

GIVE ME A BREAK. The "empty suit" is the woman who has to write the answers to pre-selected questions from adoring minions in the palm of her hand...the woman whose only contact with the REAL news media is a Twitter or Facebook dump, with no follow-up questions permitted...or a carefully controlled interview by her supporters at the GOP-controlled Faux Noise. SARAH'S the empty suit -- and she won't be able to
hide that fact if the GOP is foolish enough to nominate her in 2012 and she has to face Barack Obama in debate. But she'll sure as heck work wonders for Tina Fey's career!

As for Somers91's assertion that President Obama created our now-massive deficit: get your facts straight. 6/7 of the current deficit was handed to him by the outgoing admin., and some of the "new" deficit occurred because Obama is doing HONEST ACCOUNTING, and actually including the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan...which Bush funded via supplemental appropriations that he NEVER included in the budget. And Bush NEVER vetoed a spending bill in his entire eight years in office, despite the fact that his GOP CONGRESS was ballooning our deficit spending with every bill they passed. Obama increased the deficit to stimulate the economy and save or create jobs -- and even conservative economists today admit that IT IS WORKING.

Posted by: marcywrite | February 11, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company