Group Tries To Recruit Sarah Palin To Presidency

[BenBurch]

If you take Kos as an indicator of anything, that is you first error. Almost as bad as Huffington Post.

 

[Brainster]

Really, Brainster? You're ignoring he was a Senator at the time?

For four years. You would have a very tough time coming up with any presidential nominee who had less executive experience than Obama in the last 50 years.

 

[BenBurch]

For four years. You would have a very tough time coming up with any presidential nominee who had less executive experience than Obama in the last 50 years.

And yet your countrymen preferred him 365:173 over the best your Party could muster.

You don't think the People are competent to choose their government?

 

[Spindrift]

For four years. You would have a very tough time coming up with any presidential nominee who had less executive experience than Obama in the last 50 years.

Executive experience? Lyndon Johnson and Gerald Ford never served in the executive until they became vice president and they were both VP's for a short time. And the VP doesn't exactly execute much.

 

[Biscuit]

JREF liberals and leftists pray the Republicans will somehow save the floundering Obama presidency.

I love it when conservatives that bag on Obama for everything admit their party would be doing a worse job right now.

 

[Crossbow]

Electorate /= base. The base was very strong for Edwards as late as December 2007. The Daily Kos poll (clearly skewed to Democratic activists, i.e., the base) had Edwards leading Obama by 18 points in September 2007, and still had him up by 9 in December.

Remember, I was responding to complaints about the GOP base.

So what?

That poll was done about a year before the actual election took place, therefore it has very little (if anything) to do with vast amount of support that Obama had when election time rolled around.

 

[Crossbow]

For four years. You would have a very tough time coming up with any presidential nominee who had less executive experience than Obama in the last 50 years.

So what?

Executive experience is helpful, but hardly mandatory for becoming President.

 

[DavidJames]

For four years. You would have a very tough time coming up with any presidential nominee who had less executive experience than Obama in the last 50 years.

When you wrote your last resume did you leave off the last 4 years of your work experience? Why did you ignore Obama's?

 

[Brainster]

And yet your countrymen preferred him 365:173 over the best your Party could muster.

You don't think the People are competent to choose their government?

So basically you are saying that whoever is elected is competent by definition? I'm sure you felt that way about Bush and will feel that way about President-elect Romney next November.

 

[Spindrift]

So basically you are saying that whoever is elected is competent by definition? I'm sure you felt that way about Bush and will feel that way about President-elect Romney next November.

Bush in 2000? When he got less votes than Al Gore?

 

[Brainster]

So what?

That poll was done about a year before the actual election took place, therefore it has very little (if anything) to do with vast amount of support that Obama had when election time rolled around.

You are comparing apples to oranges--a presidential nominee after the convention to nomination candidates prior to the convention. My point is that at a comparable time in the last election cycle, the Democratic base supported a guy who was incompetent (Edwards).

 

[Brainster]

Bush in 2000? When he got less votes than Al Gore?

Not electoral college votes, which, by the way, is where Ben got his 365:173 margin for Obama.

 

[Spindrift]

You are comparing apples to oranges--a presidential nominee after the convention to nomination candidates prior to the convention. My point is that at a comparable time in the last election cycle, the Democratic base supported a guy who was incompetent (Edwards).

How is Edwards incompetent? Because he cheated on his wife? Or because he got caught?

 

[Crossbow]

You are comparing apples to oranges--a presidential nominee after the convention to nomination candidates prior to the convention. My point is that at a comparable time in the last election cycle, the Democratic base supported a guy who was incompetent (Edwards).

Well then if that is the case, then your point is wrong.

Polling is still a rather subtle exercise and even at its best, polling simply shows how a certian population may feel about a certian question at a certian point in time; and that is hardly the same thing as the generalization that you are making about the Democrats.

After all, if what you are saying is accurate, then I guess the Republicans must be totally bonkers since national polls recently showed that Trump, Bachman, Cain, and Perry were all the front-runners and yet only one Republican will win the nomination (and possibly the Presidency).

 

[BenBurch]

So basically you are saying that whoever is elected is competent by definition? I'm sure you felt that way about Bush and will feel that way about President-elect Romney next November.

It never ensures competency! It ensures that those governed have had a chance to select the least objectionable. A government where you do not have that Right is not America.

 

[Ladewig]

Isn't it too late to get on the primary ballots?

Can't she change her name to Herman Cain and take his line on the ballot. I mean its not like he's going to be using it.

 

[Brainster]

After all, if what you are saying is accurate, then I guess the Republicans must be totally bonkers since national polls recently showed that Trump, Bachman, Cain, and Perry were all the front-runners and yet only one Republican will win the nomination (and possibly the Presidency).

You can say that those who supported Trump, Bachmann (not sure if she ever really had a lead nationally) and Cain were very naive politically. And to get back to the original point, yes, they were incompetent candidates.

Perry is a different case; he at least had the appearance of being a realistic candidate until he tried his hand at debating, at which point his support evaporated.

 

[Brainster]

How is Edwards incompetent? Because he cheated on his wife? Or because he got caught?

Or because he continued his run for the presidency after being caught? Remember, the National Enquirer broke the story on October 10, 2007. But because it was the National Enquirer, the rest of the media didn't pursue the scandal after Edwards issued a simple denial.

Edwards placed second in the Iowa caucuses. Had Obama beaten Hillary in New Hampshire it probably would have been Obama and Edwards battling it out all the way to the convention instead of Obama and Clinton. Just imagine the chaos if Edwards had actually eked out the nomination, and then been forced to admit his affair in the summer of 2008 (as he did, while continuing to deny he was the father of Hunter's child--something that he only fessed up to last year). And imagine the president under indictment (as Edwards currently is) for campaign law violations related to payments others made on his behalf to Hunter.

You may call that competence, but I won't.

 

[Spindrift]

Or because he continued his run for the presidency after being caught? Remember, the National Enquirer broke the story on October 10, 2007. But because it was the National Enquirer, the rest of the media didn't pursue the scandal after Edwards issued a simple denial.

Edwards placed second in the Iowa caucuses. Had Obama beaten Hillary in New Hampshire it probably would have been Obama and Edwards battling it out all the way to the convention instead of Obama and Clinton. Just imagine the chaos if Edwards had actually eked out the nomination, and then been forced to admit his affair in the summer of 2008 (as he did, while continuing to deny he was the father of Hunter's child--something that he only fessed up to last year). And imagine the president under indictment (as Edwards currently is) for campaign law violations related to payments others made on his behalf to Hunter.

You may call that competence, but I won't.

You seem to have a unique definition of competence.

Getting caught might be considered incompetence, depending on how hard he tried to cover it up. But, continuing to run after being caught is hubris and maybe foolish but it isn't incompetence.

 

[DavidJames]

I think the important thing here is ensure the topic moves from the subject (a Republican) to a Democrat.