Sarah Palin Makes Presidential Noises In Iowa

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Palin, Republicans

We’ll have to see how all of the Tea Party candidates fare, but if they do well I’d bet $1,000 that she’s running.

From Fox News:

“If the American people were to be ready for someone who is willing to shake it up, and willing to get back to time-tested truths, and help lead our country towards a more prosperous and safe future and if they happen to think I was the one, if it were best for my family and for our country, of course I would give it a shot,” she said.

“But I’m not saying that it’s me. I know I can certainly make a difference without having a title. I’m having a good time doing exactly that right now.”

But, could she win the nomination? Well, again, I think it has to do with the state of the GOP at that point. But it’s very likely that many of these candidates will start announcing in early 2011 to get a jump on fundraising. Remember, Obama formally announced on February 10, 2007, but a month earlier had formed an exploratory committee.

So when you hear talk like this from candidates who are very popular, the die may already be cast.

More as it develops…


This entry was posted on Saturday, September 18th, 2010 and is filed under Palin, Republicans. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

32 Responses to “Sarah Palin Makes Presidential Noises In Iowa”

  1. Alistair Says:

    I do expect Palin to run in for President BUT I’ll give a little bit of history, back in early 1983 after the Democratic Party took over the House John Glenn was the darling of the Progressive left in fact he was favored to actually beat Regan going into 1984 Presidential Election. He had the same kind of a rock star mentality as Sarah Palin BUT he fell flat during the Iowa Caucus and dropped out of the race. The point being said is you can have wow factor that can electrified the base of you party but not the establishment of the entire party.

  2. Jim Satterfield Says:

    Possibly, Alistair, but I think that the Palin wing of the Republican party is the extremely active one right now with the more moderate wing questioning if there is a place for them in a party that nominates people like Angle, Paul, O’Donnell and the rest. The hyper conservative wing of the party might be able to pull off a nomination win but then the question is what will happen in the general election. If Obama is the Democratic nominee and there is any sign the economy is improving I think Palin loses in a landslide.

  3. Alistair Says:

    Jim:

    I just think in the end the GOP insiders will go with the establish candidate, whether it’s Romney Pawlenty, Pence or John Thune but it with Palin, Ron Paul or Garry Johnson the primary will be as divisive than any other Presidential Primary topping the 1996 GOP Primary and then when the Convention comes you could see a huge blood bath between established GOP delegates & Tea Party GOP delegates.

  4. Adam Herman Says:

    If there’s one thing I’ve learned from the Bush years, it’s the damage that incompetent candidates can do to your brand. I’d much rather have four more years of Obama than another Republican who will drive a stake through the heart of conservatism.

    I’m hoping for Mitch Daniels though. There’s nothing about Daniels that Tea Partiers wouldn’t like, and he’s actually got a record as a rock-solid executive.

  5. kranky kritter Says:

    I think Sara Palin is much more aware of her limits than she lets on. Running and losing would be very bad for her brand. I predict she stays in her cheerleader role. It really suits her extremely well. In the cheerleader role, she’s VERY good for the conservatve brand. As a candidate for President? Not so much.

    If she runs, she’ll discover that her support within the party is not quite as broad as either her ardent supporters believe or her ardent detractors fear. Social conservatives and populist conservatives adore her. Liberals who are appalled by social and populist conservatives loath and fear her. But there’s a very wide quiet middle of Americans who see quite clearly that she is not even close to Presidential timber. These folks are content to mostly remain mum when the topic comes up at cookouts, cocktail parties, and so on.

  6. Alistair Says:

    kranky kritter:

    I am not a Palin supporter but if she were smart, she should run in 2016.

  7. kranky kritter Says:

    I only believe that Palin is sufficiently smart to understand that she’s not equipped to be the President of the United States. She can’t really say that, but I think she understands that.

    I think she’s carved out a good niche, one that suits her strengths. Cheerleader, lightning rod, conservative evangelist, heroic head of the pep squad, beloved culture warrior against liberal heathens. That’s a VERY good gig.

    I would truly be shocked to see Sara Palin gather a majority of America’s votes to become President. Not in these times. She could probably have won in the political environment in which Dubya won, but those days are long gone.

  8. Chris Says:

    I don’t think it will happen, but would anyone else consider moving to Canada if she were to win? Not really because of her policies, but because it would be a sure sign that this country is headed for irrelevant stature.

  9. WHQ Says:

    That’s a VERY good gig.

    My prediction for Palin during the last presidential election was that she’d end up with her own show on Fox News rather than holding public office. What she has done is put herself in a position to push for her policy preferences through others and make lots of money doing it. I don’t think she would really like to take the pay cut that being president would represent or subject herself to the level of scrutiny that running for president would require.

    She’s in a good spot and only has to deal with her supporters, rather than having to respond substantively to those who disagree with her. There’s a lot of upside to what she’s doing now relative to running for office.

    If she hints as running, I think it’s mostly just to keep up her supporters’ enthusiasm for her.

  10. Mike A. Says:

    Chris,

    “but would anyone else consider moving to Canada if she were to win?”

    I laughed aloud as I had a comment, which I never posted. I stated I really needed the real estate market to improve so I could make good on my promise to leave the country should she get elected.
    Thanks
    Mike

  11. Tillyosu Says:

    The hyper conservative wing of the party might be able to pull off a nomination win but then the question is what will happen in the general election. If Obama is the Democratic nominee and there is any sign the economy is improving I think Palin loses in a landslide.

    Oh really? Because in a new poll released today, 52% of likely U.S. voters say their own views are closer to Palin’s than Obama’s, while only 40% say they are more like Obama. Geez Jim, that’s a lot of “hyper conservatives” isn’t it?

  12. Chris Says:

    tilly that just shows how delusional the american public is.

  13. JimS Says:

    Polls like that are meaningless twaddle. I doubt very many of those being polled really have a clue what the actual views of either Palin or Obama are. It’s also an automated system that is almost certainly limited to landlines. Then there is the interesting division of some people into the “Political Class”. Really? Then there is this interesting bit from it.

    Forty-eight percent (48%) of all voters now regard Obama’s political views as extreme. Forty-two percent (42%) place his views in the mainstream. Among five top contenders for the White House in 2012, however, only Palin is viewed as more extreme than the president. Just 38% say Palin’s views are mainstream, while 55% regard them as extreme.
    Voters think Hillary Clinton is more qualified to be president than Obama, but most believe that both Democrats are more fit for the White House than three top Republicans interested in the job, including Palin.

    So, 52% think their views are closest to Palin’s while 55% think her views are extreme. I don’t quote that to show support for the “other side” but that polls like this can produce some strange results.

  14. Tillyosu Says:

    So a scientific poll, conducted by a respected polling organization, is “meaningless twaddle.” But wild eyed predictions about an election two years from now, not based on any kind of polling…is not?

    Okay Jim…

  15. LCTruth Says:

    Palin stands behind candidates like the one highlighted in this youtube piece. He is a Tea Movement Candidate from Illinois
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KJs6k5RluI&feature=email

  16. JimS Says:

    Any predictions about 2012 are in the nature of a game like a Ouija board, not anything to be taken seriously except as a point of discussion. Nothing more. This poll, given the nature of the questions and the methodology, ranks just a step or two below it. Personally, I hang up if it’s not a person talking to me on the other end of the phone and I’m far from the only one. I also don’t think all that highly of the much reported general party preference polls. This was also interesting. And yes, Rasmussen does lean Republican much of the time.

  17. Chris Says:

    do they poll cell phones? because if not that right there is going to give a conservative bend to many polls. I don’t have a land line. No one I know my age has a land line either.

  18. gerryf Says:

    Rassmussen is a respected polling organization?

    By who?

    Rassmussen was at one time respected, but they gave it up to become the unofficial polling organization for the GOP. Rassmussen has taken to only polling Republicans, repeating GOP talking points, asking loaded right leaning quesitons–Rassmussen does not even try to hide it anymore.

  19. Aaron Says:

    Pretty much the only poll I’ll consider these days is FiveThirtyEight. Rassmussen throughout the 08 election cycle tended to lean right in their numbers from the other polls, and the final results.

    Show me Nate Silver’s numbers and I’ll take your’s into consideration. :)

  20. kranky kritter Says:

    Accept at face value the results of any poll at your own risk.

    Like it or not, such things can’t be made sense of by any of us unless we behave as active editors. That means understanding the sampling methodology and the limits on the efficacy of the questions asked.

    And it also means doing those things both when you like the results and when you don’t.

    Here’s the thing. When a poll is done in true good faith, close to an election, and asks a straghtforward question like “do you prefer x or y?,” it gives a good indication of where people are at. It has predictive value.

    But the farther out the poll is done and the more amorphous the judgement required, the more it becomes meaningless twaddle, just as Jim has stated. How else to explain the contradiction that he uncovered? Polls like these are done to generate interest and discussion, and sometimes to drive opinion. Or to create reality. If you aren’t a decent critical thinker and you strongly support one side or the other, the leaders on your side will fool you with such push polls over and over and over again.

    When Obama runs for reelection, he’ll face one Republican opponent, chosen largely by Republicans. At that point, it will matter who everyone likes best. But remember, the votes of a solid 25 to 35% of folks from each wing won’t be up for grabs. Once we get down to the votes that actually are up for grabs, the alleged issue of “who is more mainstream” won’t matter. Instead, what will matter is whose policies better fit these voters needs and preferences.

  21. Tillyosu Says:

    But the farther out the poll is done and the more amorphous the judgement required, the more it becomes meaningless twaddle, just as Jim has stated

    Obviously, you miss the point of my post. The point was that Jim’s naked assertion, that Governor Palin would lose in a “landslide,” simply doesn’t fit with the current polling data. I’m not trying to predict the 2012 election, I’m trying to point out the bias in his own naked assertions.

    How else to explain the contradiction that he uncovered?

    Well that can actually be explained by the fact that the “contradiction” he highlighted actually used data from two different polls, a full month apart and with two different samples. Maybe you would know that if either you or he took the time to explore the poll. You know, like you suggested.

    Once we get down to the votes that actually are up for grabs, the alleged issue of “who is more mainstream” won’t matter. Instead, what will matter is whose policies better fit these voters needs and preferences.

    Indeed. And I happen to believe that voters will decide that the candidate whose policies better fit their needs and preferences is the one’s who’s views most closely mirror their own. I dunno, call me crazy…

  22. Alistair Says:

    Tillyosu:

    As I posted up top that John Glenn and the same popular personal as Sarah Palin and he was favorite to beat Ronald Reagan in 1984. He didn’t come close to winning the Iowa Cacus. She may win the Iowa Cacus but she’ll lose New Hampshire and South Carolina once the establish Republicans starts circling around people like Romney & Pawlenty.

  23. Tillyosu Says:

    Alistair:

    See my first point above.

  24. kranky kritter Says:

    Till, i think support for Palin thins pretty quickly outside her self-crafted fishing hole. It’s deep, but not broad. Once you get to the swath of conservatives who are not first and foremost social conservatives, doubt rises fast. She’s perceived as not Presidential timber even within the party, by the folks who are quietly letting the worst of conservative anger about Obama’s election play out.

    IMO she’s very much the wrong choice to beat Obama. The GOP needs a candidate who projects shrewd mastery of details and the ability to go toe to toe with Obama on that basis. Romney or maybe Chris Christie. Even Huckabee would be better on that count.

    Polls don’t show this because no one is paying to ask the kinds of questions that would reveal this. At least not the ones being made public. I don’t know about a landslide, but my gut tells me that Palin would struggle mightily outside of red states. Once she was asked to regularly get to the next level of detail, beyond practiced talking points, her weaknesses would show up to all but her adorers.

    These are hard times. In these circumstances, I just can’t imagine anywhere near a majority of Americans thinking that Sara Palin is the best person to do an extremely demanding complicated job, moving quickly from problem to problem and digesting the details and making the right decisions.

  25. Mike A. Says:

    “Once she was asked to regularly get to the next level of detail, beyond practiced talking points, her weaknesses would show up to all but her adorers.”

    Palin could do what is becoming more and more popular. By continuing the liberal media conspiracy message, and not allowing access to her from unsympathetic venues, she could control the message by controlling the questions. In today’s anti-everything environment, could this be effective?

  26. kranky kritter Says:

    It is certainly effective, Mike. In this era of modern communication, you don’t need the mainstream media as much as you used to. You can grow from grassroots much more quickly. And grassroots or no, you can define, reach, and preach to your choir without worrying about dissent or hard questions.

    This approach is more effective than it has ever been. Notice, though, that it still tends to reach the more highly motivated and interested. For national success, you need to reach and communicate effectively with the casually interested voter.

    I think that the analogy of the hothouse flower is useful. With modern advances, greenhouse-grown seedlings thrive in an ideal environment. They grow to astonishing size in great health. But what happens outside the hothouse?

    Palin has obviously grown to substantial size and health as a political figure inside a hothouse designed ideally to foster her strengths and protect her from her weaknesses. Surely, she will be a much more polished figure in 2012 than she was in 2008.

    She will surely have perfected her stump schpiel. She’ll know where to hammer her applause lines. And to give her some credit, she’ll probably become somewhat adept at avoiding being drawn into places where her weaknesses will be revealed. Expect some carefully honed anti-intellectual applause lines, something along the lines of Yale law degrees being no substitute for good-old fashioned common sense values.

    But she still has to demonstrate that she really is capable of doing the extremely demanding and complex job of being President of the United States. In these current circumstances of hard times, I think that’s a much higher wall of doubt and worry to climb than is usual.

    So Mike, I don’t think the strategy you describe can carry a candidate all the way to the white house. It can probably win the nomination under the right circumstances. But even in the primaries, the other candidates who want to be President will find ways to question the depth and breadth of Palin’s competence. The primaries require trips outside the hot house. Either she gets hardened off by these trips, or she gets scorched by a hard frost.

    I still think she won’t run. Although as WHQ has suggested, it’s in her interest to make a show of serious consideration.

  27. Tillyosu Says:

    Actually KK, I tend to agree with you that Christie or even Gingrich would be a much tougher opponent for Obama. And I also tend to agree that Palin won’t run. She does have a great gig right now. She can play kingmaker, and have enormous power without the hassles of holding the office. My only point was that her support is much broader than you might think, and given the right moves, could be broader still.

  28. kranky kritter Says:

    And since we’re really both guessing as to how broad it is, and filling in the blanks with our own biases about her, we can agree to disagree. :-)

    I remain convinced that the breadth of her appeal outside her hothouse is substantially limited by the perception among moderates, independents, and shrewd educated fiscal conservatives that when push comes to shove she’s really not sharp/astute enough to be the President of the United States.

  29. michael mcEachran Says:

    Chris,

    “but would anyone else consider moving to Canada if she were to win?”

    And others who hold this sentiment,

    I find this sentiment, common among my fellow lefties, even when said in jest, to be insulting, short-sighted, demeaning, and not at all funny. No, I would not leave my country – I would fight like hell to wrest it back from the forces of stupid that a Palin win would indicate has taken over my country. Damn, liberals, stop being such weenies and fight. I’ve never heard a concervative threaten to deny their citizenship over an election. I find it so strange and embarrassing.

    Sorry for the rant.

  30. Chris Says:

    Michael you weren’t listening very hard, I heard and read tons of people saying that they were going to move when the socialist muslim took over.

    You’re going to fight to wrest it back from the forces of stupid that is the majority of americans? If they didn’t learn their lesson from Bush 2, and elect palin, the country is possibly beyond help.

  31. Chris Says:

    Interesting, I did respond back but it didn’t save it apparently. or is it still in moderation?

  32. Chris Says:

    Well it didn’t appear, so basically I jut said that fight back against the majority of dummies that would vote for Palin for president? By that point I would be willing to write the country off as a loss and head to greener pastures.

    And I heard plenty saying that they would leave the country if obama won.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: