Palin Media Strategy: Reagan 2.0

Sarah Palin seems to be spoiling for a fight with the media in her latest Facebook posting. There are going to be people, assuming political consultants are people, that are going to call this foolish. They'll rely on conventional, read old, wisdom that says you don't pick fights with people who buy ink by the barrel. But does that alleged wisdom still apply?

Reagan didn't fight with the media. The usual descriptor for what he did is, he went over the media's head directly to the American people. Is Sarah Palin really doing anything different, except for having Facebook, blogs and a great many other New Media resources today to which Reagan didn't have access? Just imagine how even more effective his communication strategy would have been if he had?

Because of media advances made in the last several years, Sarah Palin doesn't have to go over the media's head. She can go right through them. It appears to me that's precisely what she intends to do. Don't be surprised if it works, even as the media and some old-line politicos point how what a bad idea it is. If those folks had truly good ideas, most of the country wouldn't be so upset with them right now. But that's just another thing old media and large portions of the political class seem to be missing.

Amazingly, but not surprisingly, the AP somehow nabbed a copy of the book before it was released. They're now erroneously reporting on the book's contents and are repeating many of the same things they spewed during the campaign and afterwards. We've heard 11 writers are engaged in this opposition research, er, "fact checking" research! Imagine that – 11 AP reporters dedicating time and resources to tearing up the book, instead of using the time and resources to "fact check" what's going on with Sheik Mohammed's trial, Pelosi's health care takeover costs, Hasan's associations, etc. Amazing.

Comments

[Reaganite Republican]

Yup, that's JUST how it was in the glory days of the 80s... re. Reagan's going around the press barricades-

And the Arctic Fox intends to just that, too... while utilizing today's new media to far greater effect- great observation Dan.

The old wisdom of not picking a fight with the press is now irrelevant, what with their commitment to the Left and full frontal assault employed against Palin- it is THEYH who picked it, and her only choice is to fight, or run... BUT this is not a woman who shrinks in the face of a challenge.

IMO they've pushed it to the point to where she has little choice but to take them on, like SOMEbody should have a long, long time ago- the nonsensical portrayals of Palin like Newsweek yesterday are striking an increasing number of Americans as outright bizarre. And who is listening to David Brooks et. al. call her a "joke" while millions or REAL Americans rally behind her... and her book is shattering sales records?

The MSM have really teed-themselves-up for 'Cuda to smack it 500 yards too, boy- their betting-it-all-on-blue is becoming the death-knell or the dinosaur media, as this incompetent administration's failures stack-up- they bet it ALL on a radical narcissist who hates the team he's managing... talk about desperation, their business model is dead meat anyway.

[Gary Ogletree]

Sarah Unchained. Bring it on troll media, and have your first aid handy. She's got your number. The Thrilla from Wasilla looked strong on the Oprah teaser clip. President Wee Wee had to leave the country for some reason, too bad, so sad, he's gonna miss Sarah Palin Week in the USA!

[Pasadena Phil]

The reason the "politicos" don't approve is because she is going around them too. Everyone is territorial. That is how the status quo is maintained. The political party machinery will soon have their delusions of exclusivity destroyed as thoroughly as newspapers and conventional media had theirs destroyed. Both parties's registrations are shrinking yet the denial persists. We may see a new party emerge next year to replace that failed 3rd party known as the GOP.

[WPE]

She quit. End of Story.

[KP]

Yeah wpe, she quit. And she makes more of an impact than Oboner, the groveling boy amateur pretend president boot licker.

Its not good when even countries like Burkina Faso neither respect you nor admire you....so when real world powers don't, expect trouble in short order. You don't like the current war(s) in Iraq and afghanistan? What are you going to think when 3 or 4 more countries join forces to roll obie?

Yeah, you won. The American people lost.

[unseen]

She quit. End of Story.

Posted by: WPE

Old news. How long you going to beat that dead horse? The fact that she resigned and the next day went on the offensive against the liberals and Obama tells anyone who is paying attention she didn't quit the fight just change battle plans. So stick with the tired old talking pointds if you want but Palin has movedon into well fortified postion and is in a great postion to have an all out offensive.

[Jonathan w.]

As a democrat, I will be changing my registration to independent very soon, I had to post that I absolutely support Sarah Palin.

I am pro-choice, but not a radical pro-abortion nut, but for me there are bigger issues, like the future of economic progress for America, the spending, the sociliasing of all these industries. What I find pretty stunning is that the elist MSM doesn't realise that when they are attacking Sarah and her values, they are attacking me. I'm just an average working American who wants the best for my country. And I actually do believe in the US constitution and the founding principles of this country, I want smaller govt, more indiv. rights, a strong national defense, and NO socialized heathcare.

I may not have gone to Harvard, but I work hard to provide for my family, and now I feel like I am being insulted by the MSM. Do they really think I am supposed to form my opinions based on what THEY say?
I feel like my eyes have finally been opened, I was not a supporter of Sarah Palin's before, but I decided to give her a fair shot and did my own research, and listened to her ideas, and was very impressed, they are common sense pro-america ideas.

I can honestly say, the MSM is so biased at this point, I cannot trust anything they say anymore. nothing!

Anyway, just wanted to put my 2 cents here.

[WPE]

"well fortified postion and is in a great postion to have an all out offensive"

That's hilarious. She bailed on running a state with less than 1 million people. Now we're supposed to believe she's ready to deal with problems magnitudes more difficult.

She's not interested in governing - remember, she QUIT when she had that job. She does LOVE the attention from her wingnut minions, though.

All Hail Sarah - The One!

[Jonathan w.]

"remember, she QUIT when she had that job."

well so did Obama, and I'm not sure what in the world Obama did for the 2 yrs in the Senate before he ran for president, I suppose padding up his nonexistant thin resume and getting everything ready to run, instead of doing his job as a Senator.

and I am no "wingnut", I am an soon-to-be-independent-registered voter.

[Dan Riehl]

You really are an idiot WPE. And you don't get it. Palin doesn't have to run for anything if she doesn't want to. She can have as much, if not more influence outside of politics for however long she wishes.

What's important is the conversation she has the power and visibility to drive in America more than anything. And it is a conversation progressives don't want to have. They know they will lose.

[EllisWyatt]

"and I'm not sure what in the world Obama did for the 2 yrs in the Senate before he ran for president"

Come now, you know what he did. He voted "Present" on every controversial issue and stood for photo ops with Pelosi and Reid.

[Lala]

He's still voting "present"

[Brian]

"She quit"

Thanks to liberal bloggers paid off by Obama who perverted the state's ethics law.

[unseen]

And it is a conversation progressives don't want to have. They know they will lose.
Dan Riehl

Of course they will. and they know it. that is why they call themselves progressives now instead of liberals. Because they already had that conversation and lost. Not only lost but lost in landslides. So they changed their name, rebranded thier party and hide their true ideas. they lied to get elected. The blue dogs ran to the right of the GOP in the South, Obama campaigned as a blue dog dem in the South and was the only reason he won NC and VA. The only way liberals win elections is if they lie about what they believe. If Obama would have stated in the campaign that he was for taking over 1/6th of the USa economy with a massive government program, if he would have stated in the campaign that he was ashamed of his country and would grovel and beg and bow for the world's forgivness for our "sins" committed over the last 200 odd years, If Obama would have told the NATIONAL audience that he wanted to give away our nukes, betray our eastern europeans allies, slap our British friends in the face, pass a massive tax on our energy use he would have lost. If he would have said he wanted to pull out of Afganistian he would have lost.

the liberals do not want to have a conversation where the truth is known. Whenever the Americian people are given the truth (like Congress has done in the last 10 months) they reject soicalism, liberalsim, big government.

[Huey]

WPE: "She quit."

Palin, who considers herself a "public servant" who serves with a "servant's heart" decided that a Governor who wasn't saddled with 80% of his time consumed by defending himself from frivolous ethics charges (none have stuck out of more than 20...) so she "quit."

Politically, it was an unusual move, but, if she actually believes what she says, then, "quitting" better served the people of Alaska. Their current Governor (with the same agenda as Palin) can govern without such concerns.

Is there something wrong with that? Certainly, we don't want to start a TREND where lefty radicals can "chase" someone from office by simply lodging one unfounded ethical complaint after another, but, frankly, that won't happen. Two things have to happen for it to become a trend: 1) There has to be someone who draws such ire that deranged leftists obsess about her, and 2) The person who raises this ire must be of such integrity that they would risk their future political career just so that the job they were hired to do could be competently performed -- by someone who isn't so attacked.

I think that Palin is unique in this regard, so lefties shouldn't get their hopes up...

She told us in her resignation speech what she was going to do. Now, she's doing it.

She changed the Health Care Debate with a Facebook posting.
She remains one of the most popular Conservatives without constant campaigning -- or ANY campaigning, for that matter.
She can alter the direction of a debate with a simple Diary entry.

She will be a force in the 2010 primaries and general elections.

By the time 2012 rolls around, I think that the majority of America, searching for an honest politician who will do what is necessary to fix what obama has messed up will turn to Palin.

I can hear the screams now...

Music...I tell you...

Music.

[Brooklyn]

Sorry, but I am sadly unimpressed and I like Mrs. Palin. Reagan would not be blaming the McCain Campaign for a bad interview. And I am not certain he would bother writing a book about it.

Mrs. Palin's true record is one of a moderate reformer, who stuck it to her own Party. She even gave populist tax increases to the Oil Companies, which is quite unlike Ronald Reagan. (A Policy which raises the cost of living for all).

Don't get me wrong. Mrs. Palin is a fine American, and seems to be on the right side politically, understanding the basics. She is a very decent human being with so much to offer.

But her newly created Iconic image doesn't match up when I study her record, or when I see her speaking on her own. (The speech made on her leaving the Governorship of Alaska was not impressive at all).

It all reminds one of the hype around FRED, which was utterly baseless. Fred Thompson was a good guy, well past his prime, with a record that matched the Maverick. As soon as the fantasy many created with their desires for the mythic superhero, was finally confronted with reality in the GOP debates. Fred's manufactured 'cult of personality' flopped.

I worry the same will happen to Mrs. Palin, who has been unfairly enlarged beyond anyone's ability to live up to.

The Democratic Partisans trying to destroy her, as they did with Bush, Reagan, even Romney during the last Primary, look like children.

These Democratic Partisans are pathetic. And we all deserve better, including the Palin Family.

Perhaps it would be ironic justice to get Mrs. Palin into the White House, just to spite these mindless Democrats. She would be a far better President than any Democrat.

But so far, I am not feeling it. I remember Ronald Reagan well, and this is not another Reagan.

[WPE]

Sarah The One driving America's political dialog - that's delusional. The vast majority of Americans don't care what she says, don't want her as the Republican nominee and certainly don't want her as President. Moat of what she has to say is either outright lies or distortions of the facts.

She's a publicity hound. Careful not to get between her and a TV camera, you'll get trampled.

[unseen]

But so far, I am not feeling it. I remember Ronald Reagan well, and this is not another Reagan.

Posted by: Brooklyn | Monday, November 16, 2009 at 12:35 AM

I also remember Reagan well and Palin is his disciple in every way. there is no othe national politician talking/campaiging on reagan's conservatism. and the media attacked rommey? yeah right.

Name another pol that talks about less spending, less government, more freedom, the US consitution, limited government, federalism.? Name another that has governed with anything aspproaching that record like Palin has.

Nope if you really studied her record there is no way you could have posted your post with a straight face. Mitt who?

[unseen]

She's a publicity hound. Careful not to get between her and a TV camera, you'll get trampled.

Posted by: WPE | Monday, November 16, 2009 at 12:46 AM

Yeah right. that was why she went dark from July to NOV and only posted a faceless facebook blog gave no interviews, did one speech out of country. It is also why after the eclection she went home and stayed out of the spotlight as much as possible from Nov 03 until her vist to NYC in the spring. of 2009.

A publicity hound? LOL heard it all now. She has activily tried to aviod the media for months upon months. She was holed up from July to august writing her book in San deigo and NO ONE KNEW. Does that sound liek a publicity hound?

Nice fake character you are trying to draw there. And you have the balls to accuse her of lying and distorting facts.

[MJ]

Listening to wignuts fawn over Palin is pretty hilarious. It's surprising considering Alaskans were already starting to get tired of her. People in Juneau were pretty happy the day she quit and gave up.

[OneMonkeysUncle]

@unseen: I doubt very much that "going dark" was why Sarah Palin didn't give any interviews after the election... More like, she learned not to get in front of people with actual human brains, because her own lack thereof would be so apparent. She confines herself to ghost-written Facebook notes to get you dimwits to buy "her" book... I'm not sure who's more delusional, you or her...

[Dave B]

Why are there so few of us that see what is actually going on? The entire left, the Republican "in-people" and/or political "advisors" that have done such a wonderfull job lately, and all elitists are scared sh..less! Maybe because I have been a cop and a detective for so long I can read these pundits and lefties so well. Trust me please. They're easier to read than a pedophile in a schoolyard. They "doth protest too much" when they try to trivialize her and make her a "joke". Why would they do that? Wouldn't they actually want to have her as the Republican candidate? Common sense dictates that if that were the case then they would be promoting her like they did with JOHN MCCAIN! They knew McCain couldn't beat Hillary or Obama, they promoted him until he got the nod from Republicans. They're scared to death of Sarah Palin and her connection with us unclean common folk and as it stands at this very moment, know deep down she would beat Obama in the next election. They feel the need to recite that Palin cost McCain the election and people voted for Obama because McCain picked Sarah Palin? Wasn't McCain losing badly PRIOR to picking Palin? The only time he was ahead was after she gave her speech. He managed to screw that up by being... McCain. Where are those five people that changed from McCain to Obama located? I'd like to interrogate them... I'd find out in five seconds that they had no intention of every voting for McCain and thought it would be prudent to make such statements... because they're scared sh..less of Sarah Palin! They did the same thing with Ronald Reagan... the guy that unseated a sitting President and won by landslides.

[unseen]

Posted by: OneMonkeysUncle | Monday, November 16, 2009 at 02:25 AM

do you understand how unhinged you sound right? secret ghost-writing cabals?

avoid the people with brains for 10 months then go on a massive media blitz?

you do understand that your logic is close to 3rd grade level right?

[Bill589]

Taking on the press will ruin her?
I was sad after McCain/Palin lost and all the experts said Palin’s fifteen minutes of fame were up. Then the (bogus) ethic complaints made her politically dead for sure. After that, Levi and his stories were nails in her coffin - her reported divorce clearly ended her. Then, she was assuredly dead when she resigned as governor; all the experts agreed on that one. Of course, she was absolutely finished with that over the top ‘death panel’ posting. . . .
-
Somewhere around that point I stopped listening to political experts about Sarah Palin.

[william doolittle]

I would go further. My recollection of M. Thatcher is that she did take the media head on. Polls have shown for years, if not decades, that people have an abysmally low regard for journalists - below used car salepeople -, I have long thought it is a wise - not foolish - strategy to do battle with the media, provided one has the truth on one's side. Most politicians don't dare since most are empty suits, devoid of facts at their command.

[syn]

" just wanted to put my 2 cents here."

Jonathan w. | Sunday, November 15, 2009 at 09:35 PM

You and I may disagree on some issues however your 2 cents are worth a trillion dollars to me. Further, since you are not a groupthink Collectivist you'll be called a 'wingnut' anyway.

Welcome to our world, we've been ostracized and have lived to share the experience.

Now if Mitt Romney had been ostracized as brutality as Sarah Palin I might give him consideration but groupthink Collectivists do not fear Mitt Romney-this indicates to me that politicians like Romney, Huckabee or McCain are part of the Collectivist problem and not the solution.

Those MSM hates and fears the most are America's strongest freedom fighters.

[Lala]

I read "Brooklyn's" post and thought to myself "what a liar." Then I saw "unseen" called it too. Good to see we have the same BS detectors.

[Mr. Sauce]

At C4P, Dan gets the nod over Surber. Palin becomes DeGaulle.

http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/11/should-governor-palin-call-out-media.html

Wounds my heart with a monotonous languor.

[FKD]

A comparison to Nixon than to Reagan would be more apt though.(see below)

From friends on the left, on Nov 07, 2008:

"Yes, my friends, we will have Sarah Palin to kick around once more, and she will be formidable. Mark my words." ~Adam B

From The Wilderness Years [Daily Kos] http://tinyurl.com/y9dmn8w

Excerpt:

_________________________________________________________________________
"I leave you gentleman now and you will write it. You will interpret it. That's your right. But as I leave you I want you to know — just think how much you're going to be missing. You won't have Nixon to kick around any more, because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference and it will be one in which I have welcomed the opportunity to test wits with you."

-- Richard Nixon, November 7, 1962

There he stood, humbled and jobless, having unexpectedly lost his bid for Governor of California. Just two years earlier as vice president, Nixon had lost in one of the closest presidential elections in history. He was humiliated that August when President Eisenhower, in a televised press conference, couldn't give an example of a major idea of Nixon's that he had heeded. "If you give me a week, I might think of one," Eisenhower said. "I don't remember."

There was no reason to think Nixon's public life was anything but over. He moved to New York City and became a partner in the law firm of Nixon, Mudge, Rose, Guthrie, and Alexander, where he argued a major libel case before the Supreme Court.

But he also wrote a bestselling memoir, Six Crises, which reviewed the major events in his public life from the Alger Hiss scandal through Khrushchev and Caracas to the 1960 campaign. He penned articles on foreign policy for magazines and journals. And he fundraised and campaigned relentlessly for Republican candidates across the country.

And by 1968, the laughing-stock of 1960 and 1962 was seen as the leader of his party-in-exile, a Serious Thinker for serious times. As he wrote in his memoir, "I have never regretted what I said in 'the last press conference.' I believe that it gave the media a warning that I would not sit back and take whatever biased coverage was dished out to me. I think the episode was partially responsible for the much fairer treatment I received from the press during the next few years. From that point of view alone, it was worth it."

[...]
__________________________________________________________________________

[bishop]

The problem with the Nixon analogy are several, there's the timeline issue, but more important, Nixon was ill at ease, almost shoe horned into politics, she is the farthest thing from, a Happy Warrior, much in the Reagan vein.

[FKD]

Amazing...how prescient these thoughts are about Sarah Palin two days after McCain/Palin lost the election, even die hard Palin fans wouldn't have had anticipated it right away....

More from the blogpost linked above:

_________________________________________________________________________
There are many in our party, and in the DailyKos community, who believe that Gov. Sarah Palin is finished in public life, that she has been humiliated, disgraced and permanently retired to an ice floe off the Pribilof Islands for a long, quiet life of snowmobile races and muktuk dinners. I am not among them.

The media loves a comeback story, as will her die-hard band of loyalists. So after some time outside the public eye, expect Palin's memoir to come out in the next year or two, with appearances on all the major news magazine shows and daytime chat shows. She'll call up Hannity and Limbaugh when she gets bored, and even Hugh Hewitt when she's really bored.

Palin will be the most in-demand GOP fundraiser in the country, and will begin to build her own network of contacts and supporters in all the key states.

And she will gain over time the one thing she was missing this cycle, and it isn't "experience" but what experience is often a proxy for -- 'mastery'. What Gov. Palin needs to do if she is to return to national politics is to find ways to convince people that she knows what she's talking about, and this can be done. She can develop her own views on the role of government and America's role in the world. [...]

Or to take another example: the losing candidate for Vice President in 1920 lacked experience, but gained much respect as an energetic campaigner for his party's ticket, especially in the West, where he railed against the large sums of money being spent by the other party in the election. Still, his party failed to win outside the South, and the Electoral College was a rout. After the election he returned to his home state, built up quite a record as Governor, gave rousing speeches at his party's conventions, and in 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected to his first of four terms as President of the United States.

Yes, my friends, we will have Sarah Palin to kick around once more, and she will be formidable. Mark my words.
__________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

[FKD]

The Palin FDR comparison(see the above comment) as two losing VP candidates is not convincing now as she is no more a Governor. The Nixon comparison is perfect in many ways though.

[FKD]

The Palin FDR comparison (see the above comment), as two losing VP candidates, is not convincing now as she is no more a Governor. The Nixon comparison is perfect in many ways though (although there are dissimilarities, as in personal characteristics and style as pointed by commenter "bishop", the similarities are in the strategy and re-inventing your public image.)

PS. No one has any doubts that Palin(consciously and strategically)--any Republican/Conservative rising star, for that matter--wants to be compared to Reagan, of course.

[Neo]

The "Acela cocktail" crowd will must likely wake up on day to real change, not that poor facsimile put forward by the Rorschach candidate, turned bowing President.

[FKD]

How about Dan Quayle 2.0?

GOP12 on a latest ABC Palin poll:

"c. Again, Palin's biggest hurdle is getting over Dan Quayle 2.0. Only 61% of Republicans think she's qualified to be Prez, 37% of indies, and 22% of Dems."

http://www.gop12.com/2009/11/abc-43-view-palin-favorably.html

[Huey]

Reagan wasn't Reagan in 1960, either.

Capturing the hearts and minds of the vast majority of the American Populace takes time and a pulpit.

Reagan made good use of both.

Palin will too.

Going to be fun to watch.

She will never again allow herself to be manipulated by others who "know more" about national political campaigns. She will never again be second fiddle. She will do what she wants, speak to whom she desires, say what is in her heart and mind. She will win or lose whatever she attempts based solely on her ability to cut through the "talking heads" and reach the hearts and minds of the voting public.

Pretty much starts today.

She's Reagan in 1977 -- or the closest thing we're likely to see resembling Reagan in this lifetime.

[FKD]

Huey, if say Palin loses by 40-60 to Obama in 2012, you would blame the media, you would blame ACORN, you would blame Fox News(for not doing enough during GOP primaries, not attacking Obama enough or whatever), you would blame Big Business, you would blame her campaign Team who let her down, you would blame the American public who are largely brainwashed by Obama, you would blame.... you get it; anyone other than Sarah Palin. You would convince yourself that Reagan would have lost like Sarah Palin in such a situation.

[FKD]

"She's Reagan in 1977 -- or the closest thing we're likely to see resembling Reagan in this lifetime."

Sarah Palin may wish to mold and portray herself in Reagan's image but this ain't no 1977.

[bishop]

Depends on how slavishly unscrupulous the media is next time, now using a poll with the most unrepresentative sample is a flag, of bad faith, you get the voters who really mistook Tina Fey for Palin, how's that bet working out for you.

[syn]

"but this ain't no 1977."

Tis true; even Jimmy Carter was not as anti-American Democrat as is the current Democrat Party molded by Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod.

PkD, you might consider the real possibility that in 2012 whatever remains of the Party formerly known as Democrat will have to end President Obama's first term out of their own necessity to survive.

Sarah Palin may be on your mind however the Democrat Party is very worried about the destruction Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod have brought to their own party's future.

For America's sake please keep your concentration on the lady from Alaska, pay no attention to the destruction within the Democrat Party.

[Anon]

Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan? Reagan had a lot of very smart people around him, as far as I can tell Sarah listens to Sarah and maybe Todd, she has no kitchen cabinet of advisors with any relevant experience in national politics. Alaska is not California. She isn't as dumb or evil or incompetant as the media and her liberal detractors make her out to be, but neither
is she the savior of the GOP.

She might make a good Senator or a cabinet level secretary, but a presidential candidate? Ridiculous.

I like Palin and think she has been treated terribly by the media and the Washington establishment and she was probably treated pretty shabbily by the McCain campaign, but, just like Bush being bad doesn't make Obama good...the fact that she has been treated verly unfairly doesn't make her a good candidate.

[WPE]

http://www.lifenews.com/nat5581.html

Among likely Republican primary voters, Palin now trails pro-life former Arkansas governor-turned-Fox-TV-host Mike Huckabee by 20 points -- 55% to 35%. When matched up against Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who ran as a pro-life candidate in 2008, Palin loses by 15 -- 52% to 37%.

"Twenty-one percent (21%) of primary voters also say Palin is the GOP candidate they would least like to see win the party’s presidential nomination. Just nine percent (9%) say the same of Romney, and eight percent (8%) feel that way about Huckabee," the polling firm notes.

"In early July, 40% of Republican voters nationwide said Palin’s decision to resign as governor of Alaska hurt her chances of winning the party’s presidential nomination in 2012," it added.

[Lala]

the above post by WPE is dated Oct. 20,2009

[Rick Caird]

WPE, who cares? Palin has three years to get in front of the public and change that opinion. She has started with her book and her facebook postings which manage to reframe the debate. She also has the interview on Oprah.

If Palin were as ineffectual and ignorant as you believe, why are you trying to change the opinion of those who support her? What makes you think you even can? Wouldn't you prefer your opponents support a buffoon?

Your continuing trolling merely confirms the left's fear of her. You are afraid that she can win over the voters.

Rick

[David R. Graham]

"Where are those five people that changed from McCain to Obama located? I'd like to interrogate them... I'd find out in five seconds that they had no intention of every voting for McCain and thought it would be prudent to make such statements... because they're scared sh..less of Sarah Palin! They did the same thing with Ronald Reagan... the guy that unseated a sitting President and won by landslides."

Bingo!

"PkD, you might consider .... For America's sake please keep your concentration on the lady from Alaska, pay no attention to the destruction within the Democrat Party."

Bingo!

The comparison of Sarah Palin with Ronald Reagan is unsurprising and certainly apt and useful. However, there are unique and incomparable qualities about both of them and these, as much, merit consideration. Age. Gender. Work history. Marital history. Social affiliations. Family life. Spouse(s) and spouse(s) family history. Communications abilities and resources. Personal beauty. And perhaps most salient, "the spirit and needs of the times."

Overall IMO, it reflects failure to grasp and enjoy the freshness of the times and the person to weigh much at all the similarities of Sarah and Ronnie. Useful and unavoidable, but not tactically significant. History never repeats itself, nor does any individual. Long-wave patterns recur, surely, but never in precisely the same direction as before and certainly never in the same context.

Life is fresh moment by moment despite the fact that its repertoire of behaviors, while extensive, is finite. Of course, the irony of life -- and what makes it delicious -- is that it IS fresh moment by moment because its repertoire of behavior is potentially infinite! Man is life self-transcending itself. Sarah Palin in these times, as was Ronnie in his (also mine), is life self-transcending powerful efforts to kill it off.

[Rick Caird]

Also for WPE:

http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2009/11/if-i-were-sarah-palin.html

Some things to confirm his thinking and some things to scare him (not that he will admit to being scared).

Rick

[gary gulrud]

"her wingnut minions"

Got that orks, Gollum just flipped you off. Tremble in fright.

"likely Republican primary voters"

With Gallup as polling source, consider PantsAfire-Mittens-Cuda faceoff in 2012 with 40% Indies, 33% Donks, 27% GOP divided among 45% Cons, 35% Moderates and 20% zombies. Further expect turnout among students and working class Donks 80% that of 2008. Turnout among retirees 99%.

Compute that, planarian.

[unseen]

History never repeats itself, nor does any individual
David R. Graham

That is one of the dumbest statments i have every read. Any student of history understands that Humans always repeat history. sure the names change, and it is not 100% a repeat but humans have been making the same dumb mistakes over and over agains from generation to generation. The battle in the political world right now is just a rehash of the american revolution. IRT to the fact that there is a large minority of people that feel the world would be better controlled by elites then individual freedom. Most of those "elites" are no longer called Kings,Queens, Lords and Ladies but the history is the same. the concepts are the same. People are repeating the same mistakes. The reason the US consitution is such a powerful document is that the Framers understtod that the history repeats itself and people make the same boneheaded decsions. the the thrist for power is a timeless quaility and that history has shown that people will do the same actions over and over to gain that power.

As the old saying goes those that fail to understand history are doomed to repeat history. that saying is there for a reason because unless you actively try to aviod it you will make the same decsions over and over because those decsions are "correct" from a society point of view or an individual point of view however thety are incorrect from the opposite point of view and therefore you have to go "against" either your own interest or that of your societies as the case may be at times to "rewrite" the course of the history. that is why the great leaders were great leaders. They led the people to make the "different" decsion at the time it was needed. Be it Reagan or FDR or chruchhill. there were powerful reasons to make different decsions then these men made. Yet they made them and hisotry was written differently at that point.

[Huey]

FKD: If Palin runs, she will have to win the Primary. If she wins the primary, she ain't going to lose 40/60.

And, you're right...it ain't 1977. It's worse than 1977. And, unless something fundamentally changes, it's going to get even worse.

Palin might not be the one to amp up the American voter as Reagan did in 1980, but, of those on the horizon, she's the only one I see who COULD. Huck is not going to do it. Neither is Mitt. None of the Republican potential candidates can give a speech that inspires ANYONE.

Palin can.

Whether she'll overcome her own shortcomings and those foisted upon her by the MSM is yet to be seen. Thus far, since her resignation, she has been extraordinarily effective doing very little. Will "more" result in better results or will we become used to her...?

Time will tell.

But, one thing is certain. She told us when she resigned that she was going to continue to attempt to affect the course of American politics. She's done just that since that resignation, and, I don't see anything to make me think that she isn't going to continue doing so.