Why Not Palin for President?

I doubt the Republican Party wants Palin to be their nominee for president any time soon. Even if she managed to win, she could damage the whole party if it was clear that she wasn't qualified. I think they know she isn't qualified and too stubborn to let somebody else call the shots. If she gets a party's nomination, I believe it will be the new Tea Party (or whatever they will be called).
 
I'd vote for just to laugh at all the people who'll have a conniption fit if she's elected.
 
ksbluesfan said:
I doubt the Republican Party wants Palin to be their nominee for president any time soon. Even if she managed to win, she could damage the whole party if it was clear that she wasn't qualified. I think they know she isn't qualified and too stubborn to let somebody else call the shots. If she gets a party's nomination, I believe it will be the new Tea Party (or whatever they will be called).
Click to expand...

Hard to put a new dent in a can that has been run over by a cement truck.

TAM:)
 
ksbluesfan said:
I doubt the Republican Party wants Palin to be their nominee for president any time soon.
Click to expand...
Well, she's gearing up for some reason. I would hope for her sake that she has been talking to 'people' and is confident of party support. But, who knows? After all, she is a maverick.
 
roger said:
Well, she's gearing up for some reason. I would hope for her sake that she has been talking to 'people' and is confident of party support. But, who knows? After all, she is a maverick.
Click to expand...


Or she just might be trying to make as much money as possible before her time runs out.
 
roger said:
Well, she's gearing up for some reason. I would hope for her sake that she has been talking to 'people' and is confident of party support. But, who knows? After all, she is a maverick.
Click to expand...

It is amazing how one person can make a word like that go from appealing to abhorant.

TAM:)
 
My answer to the OP...

Because if Sarah Palin were President of the U.S., she'd have to ability to push a button and do this



'Nuff said.
 
dudalb said:
Because leaving her wacky views on science aside, she is totally unqualfied to be President?
Click to expand...

Actually, she is fully qualified to be President of the United States.

Natural born citizen? Check.
Thirty five years of age or older? Check.
Lived in the United States or its territories for at least 14 years? Check.

Those are the "qualifications" required to be President. What people are really discussing when they opine on someone's "qualification" to be President is whether, in the speaker's opinion, that person would make a good President. It is, of course, an attempt to set certain characteristics and criteria that fit their notion of what makes a good President as prerequisites for any candidate.

I don't know if I would ever vote for Palin for president; Presidential elections are multiple choice questions, not essay questions. If she somehow ended up running against Nostrils, yes. If she was running against Evan Bayh, probably not. If the GOP primaries came down to her and the right's version of a nanny state busybody, I would vote for the beauty queen.
 
I'd just like to make a few comments on the Ivy League vs. non-Ivy League discussion.

Yes, Ivy League schools can offer a superior education for a number of reasons:

- They can attract top educators with incentives and salary
- They can hire educators who may not hold mainstream ideas and yet whose ideas inspire thought and exploration (in other words, they can be nascent think tanks)
- They have huge endowments which can attract top students who don't have the financial means to attend them
- They support the idea of a "liberal arts education" where education isn't closely focused on getting a job but on thinking and exploring and than, therefore open up new avenues of exploration.

There are many fine non-Ivy League institutions that offer the same benefits. They may not have the same resources but in certain areas they are the equals of or even outshine the Ivys.

One the bottom line, I think that the discerning factor of an educational institution is on how they select and inspire their students. You only get out what you put in. If an uninspired student (in this case Sarah Palin) doesn't care or if isn't inspired enough to take advantage of the opportunities offered, I really can't blame the institution, but only the student. You get out of it what you put in. You're not really ambitious if you think things (knowledge) should be easy and hand fed to you -- then you're just lazy. Knowledge is hard won and you've got to work for it.
 
Debaroo said:
I'm trying to understand why people either like or dislike Palin.
Click to expand...

We will never know.

She is the country's most popular Governor. But with the Liberal Mainstream media, we will never know her good side. And with SNL situated in NYC, we will never forget her mistakes and we will come to think that her comments taken out of context or exaggerated are what she really said.
 
drkitten said:
Why?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the University of Idaho (another school that Palin attended, off and on) is simply not that good a school. The faculty aren't as good, the resources are pathetic, and it's far enough in the sticks that you can't even make useful contacts at other good schools (like taking the T from Harvard to Northeastern to hear a guest lecture).
Click to expand...
(My bold)
Yes they are great schools but... stupid people with the right pedigree can get an Ivy League education and go on to hold powerful positions. (i.e. George Bush). Too much nepotism is involved in those schools. Just a weird quirk I have.

And no, I'm not impressed with the University of Idaho.

drkitten said:
But that's not the claim here.

What's the advantage to U of I?
Click to expand...
None. I didn't want to elaborate because I didn't want to start the derail that I ended up starting anyway.
 
Last edited:
Bill Thompson said:
We will never know.

She is the country's most popular Governor. But with the Liberal Mainstream media, we will never know her good side. And with SNL situated in NYC, we will never forget her mistakes and we will come to think that her comments taken out of context or exaggerated are what she really said.
Click to expand...


One way to forget her "mistake" of quitting in her first term as governor is to continue to refer to her as governor in the present tense. You're good at forgettin'!
 
T.A.M. said:
Here is why I do not like her.

(A) I do not think she is very smart. I mean intellectually. She is cunning.
(B) She is cunning.
(C) She is a far right conservative
(D) She, IMO, is not qualified, IN ANY WAY, to be leader of the free world.
(E) She lacks any form of world or international curiosity.

Redeeming qualities.

(A) She is a parent, and seemingly a decent one
(B) She worked hard enough to obtain a US State Governor title.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

Intelligence is not two dimensional. Some of the Presidents with high IQ's were the worst ones.

Would she make a better VP than Biden?
 
hgc said:
One way to forget her "mistake" of quitting in her first term as governor is to continue to refer to her as governor in the present tense. You're good at forgettin'!
Click to expand...


People refer to Clinton as president still.
Is governer different?
 
hgc said:
One way to forget her "mistake" of quitting in her first term as governor is to continue to refer to her as governor in the present tense. You're good at forgettin'!
Click to expand...

I was reading the other day that at her book tour events, people are required to refer to her as governer.
 
hgc said:
One way to forget her "mistake" of quitting in her first term as governor is to continue to refer to her as governor in the present tense. You're good at forgettin'!
Click to expand...

You see my evil trickery even when I am oblivious to it.


Cynic said:
I was reading the other day that at her book tour events, people are required to refer to her as governer.
Click to expand...

It might be the same kind of deal as being president. Once you are, the title sticks. Bill Clinton came and gave a speech where I worked and everyone called him President Clinton. That has always been that way with Jimmy Carter too.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom