Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the username or e-mail address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 10/28/2008 8:29 am

Sarah Palin for President in 2012?

By The Staff at wowOwow.com
© Getty Images

There’s more than just a few rumors out there that conservatives and Sarah Palin fans are planning for a Sarah Palin Presidential run in 2012.  The thinking among these "Saranistas" is, if McCain loses this year’s election, Palin not only could emerge as the party’s 2012 nominee, but she could be the GOP’s next Ronald Reagan.

In fact, one Republican even called Palin "the new Ronald Reagan."

There’s also a grassroots effort cropping up on the Web to put Palin in the White House in 2012.

A Google search of "Sarah Palin for president" turns up pages of results. Many sites like Palintology.com and palinforpresidentblog.com are championing her candidacy, and there are even some YouTube "ads" out there promoting her 2012 candidacy.

Among the chattering class, the positioning of Sarah as the Republican Party’s standard bearer for the future has already started:

"Win or lose, there is a ready-made conservative candidate waiting in the wings. Sarah Palin is not the new Iain Duncan Smith, she is the new Ronald Reagan," Jim Nuzzo, a White House aide to the first President Bush, told the U.K.’s Sunday Telegraph

David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter, has said Palin isn’t ready to be president now or then, but he still acknowledged that she likely could be the nominee four years from now. Palin "emerges from this election as the probable frontrunner for the 2012 nomination," he told the Telegraph. "Her supporters vastly outnumber her critics. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win the presidency."

Frum also told New York magazine in an article for this week’s issue that, "The people who criticize her do so because we have some hope that we could be in contention in 2012, and there’s some risk that she could be the party’s nominee, and she’d probably lose – and even if by some miracle she won, she’d be a terrible president."

Not everyone is so pessimistic about her chances, however.

One key Republican promoting a Palin run in 2012 tells USA Today: "As of today, Palin is the top contender. She clearly has the potential to be a winning top-of-the-ticket candidate: solid character, solid values, fire in the belly, etc. But four years is a long time. Neither [Mitt] Romney, [Mike] Huckabee, or others have the complete package. If Palin spends a bit more time traveling overseas and domestically, broadening her horizons, and wins re-election in Alaska in 2010, she will be the nominee in 2012."

Greg Mueller, who was a senior aide in the presidential campaigns of Pat Buchanan and Steve Forbes, told Politico that if John McCain loses the general election to Barack Obama next week, Palin "has absolutely earned a right to run in 2012." He said Palin has given conservatives "hope" and "something to believe in."

But even if McCain only serves one term – Palin could also try for her own bid. By then, she would have had four years of experience as a vice president and would be much more knowledgeable of not just Washington, but the world. If McCain loses, Palin could win re-election in Alaska, raise her national profile by, perhaps, take a leadership position in the Republican Governors Association or the National Governors Association, and better prepare herself in the next four years.

Palin is now trying to break free of her campaign handlers’ constraints that have restricted what she talks about, when, and to whom, since McCain announced his vice presidential pick. Even one McCain insider said the Alaska governor is "playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party.”

Palin has repeatedly stated that she would be more aggressive in making the case against Obama that the McCain campaign has – which has made many conservatives who say McCain has been too soft on Obama even more wild about her future role in the party - while she’s also distanced herself from campaign tactics such as robocalls.

One National Review post written after Palin’s much-anticipated debate against Sen. Joe Biden, said: "She’s a natural saleswoman. She certainly saved her prospects for national office in 2012, if she so chooses. She certainly, my guess is, reenergized the GOP base and independents, centrists, and undecided, if they’re honest with themselves, will conclude that they witnessed an impressive woman tonight."



234 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

MaryNSBFlorida
Well Reagan was older and knew enough to let the brighter people in his party pull the strings. Ms. Palin isn’t there yet but I’m sure even she will learn. I believe that the Republicans should put her up as the candidate every election year… over…and over…and over. It will make the elections easier for the Democrats, Independents, Libertarians and any other party with anyone as a candidate.
By MaryNSBFlorida on 10/28/2008 10:06 am
FrannieEm
Oh Brother, no no no. Palin is not the next Ronald Reagan and conversely Obama is not the next John Kennedy. The predatory nature of the political pundit is astounding. The country has just been dragged through 2 years of being torn back and forth between issues and candidates, a total financial collapse, citizens don’t know what is going to happen to the economy, and now since this election cycle is almost to an end, they have to begin a new controversy? Or is it? Biden made what seemed to be one of his famous gaffes last week by saying Obama was going to be tested on an international scale. Many of us wondered whether he was thinking he should be the one running for president. Was it a stupid gaffe, or was he dumb like a fox because he connected Obama to President Kennedy (a long shot to that conclusion)? There are many boomers who are undecided or independent, and that is the big vote everyone is trying to secure, so if you mention Kennedy, who boomers revere, although as children we really did not have that much idea what his policies were, you may pick up some votes. Brilliant. At the same time, if you connect Palin with Reagan ( another really long shot), voters who are undecided, might just take a chance. It is all politics ladies. Just another bone to argue about. It is still a long way to 2012.
By FrannieEm on 10/28/2008 3:13 pm
MaizieJames
Hello Frannie: The idea is so outrageous, it’s almost amusing. I agree with you: Absolutely NO WAY!!! “… Palin is not the next Ronald Reagan and conversely Obama is not the next John Kennedy.” I sincerely hope that if Obama wins in November, Sarah Palin will go home to Alaska, focus on her family, serve as a political adviser for her State’s next administration, and become the leading national spokesperson for special needs children and their families, which she claims will be her primary (social) objective. I also hope that during the next eight years, Palin will become better educated in national and world affairs. Then perhaps by 2016, she might emerge smarter, and with more credibility and experience so that she will be taken more seriously as a possible candidate for this country’s highest office.
By MaizieJames on 10/28/2008 3:41 pm
FrannieEm
Maizie Is her term over as Governor? Or, like Obama and McCain, do they go back to the old job when the campaign is over. I hadn’t heard that if they don’t win, that she does not fulfill her term. I don’t think Gov Palin is finished. It isn’t in her to just drop out. I think that speaks to her tenacity.
By FrannieEm on 10/29/2008 12:11 am
MaizieJames
Frannie, No. I meant when her term as Governor is over.
By MaizieJames on 10/29/2008 4:10 pm
Jane Becker
Did you seriously just write that this Governor should go home and focus on her family? I’m sorry, I thought we were in 2008, not 1958. Jane Becker http://thedamedomain.blogspot.com
By Jane Becker on 10/29/2008 11:23 am
MaizieJames
Jane, Yes. As a mother, I would have A LOT more respect for Palin if she attended to the needs of her family. They need her ‘spunk’ and attention. (I’m praying that her daughter will not be rushed into an early marriage, simply because she is pregnant.) Certainly she can accomplish being a more ‘focused’ mom, while completing her term as governor if Obama wins next week. I also said that Palin needs to better educate herself on national and foreign policy … to gain knowledge and insight so that she can stand on her own and not sound like she is reading a script, which someone else handed her. (For many of us, Palin comes off feisty, yet ‘out of touch’ (educationally). Actually, considering her personality, Palin has the assertiveness to accomplish whatever she wants. Yet (I still believe), that Palin needs a bit of discipline and patience to ‘fine tune’ herself to become more savvy. And with time and experience behind her, Palin will emerge as a credible candidate if she decides to run for the office of President within the next eight years.
By MaizieJames on 10/29/2008 4:39 pm
IrishEyesNY
Maizie: I agree BO is not the next John Kennedy. Kennedy was not a Marxist. BO is.
By IrishEyesNY on 10/31/2008 9:47 am
ZeraLee
Obama is no Marxist, that’s just propaganda from the far right fear machine. With regard to the economy, Republicans are right to the extent that the customers ultimately pay the taxes charged to companies. The customers also pay for the undeserved bonuses, the golden parachutes, the corruption, the waste, the profits, and the mistakes of companies. This is what makes the middle class the most critical part of the economy. This is what Obama understands but McCain and the Republicans cannot grasp. Trickle-down prosperity has failed the middle class for too long. Flat salaries and exported jobs, trade deficits and an unprecedented concentration of wealth have all drained money from the middle class. A failure to save, home equity loans, and carrying large credit card balances have all been used to compensate, but with the collapse of real estate values and the credit industry these options are no longer available. The only way to recover the economy is for more money to flow through the hands of the middle class. Otherwise, we will spiral into depression. There is just not enough margin left in the economy to compensate for supply-side economics and further concentration of wealth. Tax breaks just are not going to create meaningful numbers of jobs in an environment where lack of customers is the problem. Obama is neither Marxist nor Socialist. He simply wants to put the brakes on the excessive concentration of wealth that is sucking the viability out of the economy. This is critical for economic recovery. Obama calls it “trickle-up”. McCain would continue the same policies that have already failed disastrously. As for McCain’s health insurance plan, it is based on a fantasy. The idea that insurance companies will compete for unprofitable customers defies sound business practices. It is the same thing as selling below cost and hoping to make a profit on volume. It is a plan for guaranteed failure that will send most people to the ill-considered catch-all government program nobody wants and the funding for which he would leave mostly to states that are barely solvent and cannot afford it. McCain’s plan is a plan for failure. McCain’s preference for partisan judges would continue the Republican agenda for undermining the Constitution: http://www.wowowow.com/cl/116398 America would continue to fail under McCain. It would begin to change for the better and return to it’s previous position in the world under Obama.
By ZeraLee on 11/02/2008 8:51 pm
IrishEyesNY
zera lee. Well if BO gets in then we shall see!
By IrishEyesNY on 11/03/2008 9:53 am
LadyGator
Frannie E. ——“It’s still a long way to 2012.” And aren’t we glad about that! Maybe the country will cool off a little — or maybe, the ladies on this site will all cool off. Or maybe I’m just way out there in my thinking! LOL
By LadyGator on 10/28/2008 8:02 pm
NoelineRudland
Dear Frannie regarding Biden’s comments - I watched The View the day they showed the whole of the interview and what Biden actually said. If some parts of the media and the Republicans were more honest and not cut and paste to serve their agenda, there would be no questions as what Biden said. If a political party in Australia cut and paste the way the Republicans do here in the US, the ads pulled and appropriate reports in the media would expose their dishonesty.
By NoelineRudland on 10/29/2008 1:50 am
RoH
Noeline, Thank you for that! It is so true, and we pride ourselves in… what? Here in America?? The longer this p.Resident is in office, the longer I will be getting shorter on my patience, and tolerance, and pride (?) in this country. The media is just another reflection of who’s in office, in my opinion.
By RoH on 10/31/2008 8:43 am
IrishEyesNY
Noeline, my dear: That is what the media does. Only its usually the other way around about 95% of the time. Its the liberal press taking things out of context regarding the republican candidates. I mean have you seen Michael Moore’s movie about W? Talk about taking things out of context. So B4 you criticize the press on some small mis-calculation against the liberals, look at both sides.
By IrishEyesNY on 10/31/2008 9:56 am
StarLawrence
Be careful whatyou wish for—the biggest reason your candidate is a few pts ahead is media “dishonesty.”
By StarLawrence on 10/31/2008 10:45 am