- This topic has 6 voices and 16 replies.
-
Posts
-
My thoughts and opinions about her now. When I first saw her, I saw leadership, intelligence, political ability, experience and everything else that I would look for in a President. After a while, and I blame the media for this a lot, I saw a different Palin. She looked frazzled, unprofessional, too folksy (which is my only problem with her now),unsure of herself, and I could clearly understand why people strarted saying she's unpresidential or unintelligent. And even though I started to turn against her somewhat, I never really gave up I just gave up on any hope she'll ever be President.Well, not anymore. I'm back! I LOVE....absolutely love...her narrative on Revere. So she didn't use"intelligent" or "academic" words. So what? I especially love how the Leftist intellectuals are now the ones all frazzled and eating crow. When I write a paper for school, yes I use academic wording and cite sources, but if I'm talking about something history to the guys I work with, I use more common language (Sparta kicked Athens' a$$, for example). I didn't use the "correct" words (according to intellectuals) but I got the history accurate. And this is what Sarah did in telling the Revere story. She wasn't 100% correct, she wasn't up to Boston intellectual standards in her wording, but she got the gist of the story correct. She certainly knows US history far more than any Leftist or MSM reporter.I do think, however, that she needs some type of speaking or voice training especially when she's ad libbing. But than again, I'm not so sure about that. When she is in front of an audience, she totally commands it. Not so much when she's caught off guard. She also needs to learn how to face the media. I don't know if it's a confidence issue with her or if it's just fear (which I can't really blame her after they practically raped her and her family), but she needs to get over this. Go on MSNBC. Go on CNN. If she does this, she might change some people's minds.Personnally, I want the Sarah Palin back who I saw at the Republican National Convention. If she can return to this and maintain it, she can easily beat Obama.
What about Herman Cain? I like Palin, but I will not vote for her. She is much more effective outside of elective office than inside of it.
I don't know enough about him yet, and he doesn't have government experience…but then again, that might be a good thing. He does make it very interesting though.What if if came down to Palin vs. Obama?
Cain's lack of government experience is one of the biggest points going for him, he does not have the political baggage that other candidates do. His proven ability as a CEO is another. What is the essential difference between managing a national company and being governor?Yes, if it came down to it I would vote for Palin over Obama. Then again, I would vote for my dog over Obama. She would probably do a better job too and she is as dumb as a box of rocks.
Personnally, I want the Sarah Palin back who I saw at the Republican National Convention. If she can return to this and maintain it, she can easily beat Obama.
Funny, since I would be more impressed if I saw a Palin not like the one at the RNC. The part of Palin I am not a fan of is her seeming lack of seriousness in some of her speech. The uses too many "zingers", when I would prefer more structured arguments. I think I am a fan of her ideas (though I admit I do not know them in much detail) but not in her delivery.
Funny, since I would be more impressed if I saw a Palin not like the one at the RNC. The part of Palin I am not a fan of is her seeming lack of seriousness in some of her speech. The uses too many "zingers", when I would prefer more structured arguments.
Hmm, interesting. I can see that in her campaign after the RNC. She said good things, but they sounded too much like soundbites or zingers. She could have and should have made a much stronger argument about Obama's ties to Bill Ayers for instance. And she should have answered Katie Courics question!I think her RNC was awesome because she commanded the stage, ad libbed without any stumbling whatsoever (totally different than what I've seen of her of late), made some very good arguments about economics,oil drilling, and some other topics, and if she used a teleprompter I couldn't tell. Plus her personality shined through. I think her zingers towards Obama were classic. What did she say? Something about Greek columns and lowering ocean levels. I think she should hire me for her campaign.
I haven't seen the “stumbles” she's made recently. But I recall back during her debate with Joe Biden, how she seemed to use “folksy” answers with a grin on her face, which wasn't the best idea. Also, when I see her going around, it almost seems like it's become more about her than about her message; that is, she's campaigning on her personality more than her message. So she didn't tell reporters her itinerary, so they followed her around like paparazzi. On one hand, I can't blame her; on the other, it comes across as a sideshow. I'm sure she realizes that this creates even more “buzz”, but “buzz” isn't the main thing I'm looking for in a political leader.
I guess by stumbles I mean just the way she's been presenting her statements. It's like she lost her confidence and seems unsure. It's funny because her Facebook posts and opeds are very well written and she does a good job presenting her arguments.I was wary about the bus tour thing, because I thought this would totally end any chance she had for the reasons you mentioned. But in seeing the media reaction and confusion, I thnk it was brilliant. Is she looking for attention or has it being given to her by the media frenzy? What I think she's doing now is saying "yes, this is me and this is who I am". But I'm hoping that this will change if or when she announces her candidacy. I want to see a more professional looking and acting Sarah Palin. The biggest thing I'm worried about is that she may become too distracted having to defend herself from all the media lies rather than campaign on her message. I KNOW, even though this Paul Revere thing has been proven correct and should just be dropped, that the media will still say she was wrong and there will be no one to challenge it. I can already see Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews continuing it by making snarky little comments about how she doesn't know history.
I think the ship has sailed for Sarah. It would be the political comeback of all time if she were to win the presidency.
Lab? She looks the Lab I had. He was dumb too, but the friendliest dog in the world.
She is a cross between a Lab and Red Tick Hound.As to Palin, I reiterate that she is more effective out of office than in it. It lets her shape the debate. Plus, I am not 100% sure of her decision making abilities. I don't like the way she left office in Alaska. I can understand her concerns but I still think she let office with a cloud. If the allegations were so groundless then she should have been willing to defend herself. Even if there was nothing to the ethical charges, (and I am inclined to believe there was nothing to them) the way she left leaves the impression that at least soem of them may have stuck. I also think that her folksiness seems forced at times, like she is trying to keep up a front.
The excuse she resigned was to save taxpayer money in defending herself. Not so sure I buy that, but it could be legitimate. (I'm also curious what's going to be revealed in these emails of hers that are going to be released)I agree with the folksiness, which I had had mentioned. It does seem contrived and not genuine. That's why I want the RNC Palin back. No folksiness there, just awesomeness.
She decided not to run, and I feel like crying. :'(Oh well, I guess it's Herman Cain for me (but I need to check out his 9-9-9 plan some more)
