Ram Posted July 9, 2009 Posted July 9, 2009 For all your summaries, you still haven't given a single solid reason to support your claim in the first post: You said :"She’s the Republican party’s biggest hope in the next Presidential race" The reason so far I see in your posts is : " Palin is capable of energizing the Republican base more than any other R politician. And this was evident in the previous election. That and the fact that she will be better prepared, well read etc etc" And thats exactly what I am countering. No way in hell is she gonna convince the non-base republicans and hence she will NO way be the biggest hope of GOP. Thats all. Now that you’ve stop misquoting me, lets start talking :winky: You’re obviously assuming that Palin will continue to be this anti-evolution, Science hating, anti-abortion, religious conservative she was in the previous election, in the next election. Sure, she might still preserve all of the core values, but I can promise you that if she decides to run next time, it will be a far more moderate, centrist Palin. During the last election, she was this ultra-conservative, right-wing politician because she was TOLD be so. That was the main strategy of the McCain campaign. John McCain will be this old, experienced, moderate hand, while Palin is the eccentric, right-wing cheer-leader. Much of what she said during the campaign, were things she was TOLD to speak. BUT, politicians evolve all the time. They change stances, ideologies constantly. Besides, I don’t see a single Republican anywhere in the horizon who seems even remotely capable of mounting a serious challenge to Obama, apart from Palin.
punjabi_khota Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 Now that you’ve stop misquoting me, lets start talking :winky: You’re obviously assuming that Palin will continue to be this anti-evolution, Science hating, anti-abortion, religious conservative she was in the previous election, in the next election. Sure, she might still preserve all of the core values, but I can promise you that if she decides to run next time, it will be a far more moderate, centrist Palin. During the last election, she was this ultra-conservative, right-wing politician because she was TOLD be so. That was the main strategy of the McCain campaign. John McCain will be this old, experienced, moderate hand, while Palin is the eccentric, right-wing cheer-leader. Much of what she said during the campaign, were things she was TOLD to speak. BUT, politicians evolve all the time. They change stances, ideologies constantly. Besides, I don’t see a single Republican anywhere in the horizon who seems even remotely capable of mounting a serious challenge to Obama, apart from Palin. The she won't be Palin anymore. What would distinguish her from other Republican candidates then ? She has been found out to be a stupid bimbo and that image itself is gonna hurt her for far too long. If she does what you are saying , she would be trying to be someone who she is not. And many republicans maybe stupid, but not stupid enough to not see what she is trying to do.
Ram Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 The she won't be Palin anymore. That’s ok. I never claimed ‘Sarah Palin, as we know her today will mount the single biggest challenge to Obama’. The central point of my argument was, is and will be – She will learn from her mistakes in the previous election and come back a smarter, more acceptable candidate’. What would distinguish her from other Republican candidates then ? She doesn’t have to. She is quite simply, one of the VERY few Republicans (I say very few because I don’t want to rule out the possibility of the existence of other Republican contenders) capable of taking on Obama. And I repeat again, I am not saying she will or is capable of defeating Obama (or any other Democratic candidate). I always maintained ‘of all Republicans, she seems to be only one capable’. And I don’t say this out of some admiration of Palin, but more a recognition of the fact that there are hardly another Republicans worthy of note. If you do know of someone, let me know. She has been found out to be a stupid bimbo and that image itself is gonna hurt her for far too long. Dude, if George W. Bush is capable of winning two terms as President, you think Sarah Palin is not even good enough to be Republican candidate for President in the next election? If she does what you are saying , she would be trying to be someone who she is not. And many republicans maybe stupid, but not stupid enough to not see what she is trying to do. I doubt if she will fundamentally change her ideology, but she will be more adept at what to say or more importantly, what not say, when it comes to ideological issues (and that is something Obama is an expert at. He’s terribly good at not saying something he can be held accountable for later on..). And Presidential races are all about what the candidates say and whether they contradict themselves.
triam Posted July 12, 2009 Author Posted July 12, 2009 When it comes to a potential presidential run, the USA TODAY Poll displays Palin's strength in the Republican base and weakness among swing voters, who traditionally decide national elections. Republicans by 71%-27% say they'd be likely to vote for her if she ran for president in 2012, while independents by 51%-44% would not. link http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-07-07-palin-poll_N.htm
yoda Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 Sarah Palin vs Obama might be like Mondale vs Reagan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1984 Juicy proposition for Obama.
Brainfade Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 Dude, if George W. Bush is capable of winning two terms as President, you think Sarah Palin is not even good enough to be Republican candidate for President in the next election? But who were his opponents? Al "stoneface" Gore and John "stiff" Kerry. She stands no chance against Obama' s charisma. Like someone said, she will not sway the swing voters - and that is what decides elections.
Macj Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Obama's charisma ends when words come out of his mouth, period. That being said Palin is a Flintstone wannabe, she doesnt even know thus understand what 'cap and trade' means. If this is his opposition, he can sleep easy.
graphic23 Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Obama's charisma ends when words come out of his mouth' date= period. That being said Palin is a Flintstone wannabe, she doesnt even know thus understand what 'cap and trade' means. If this is his opposition, he can sleep easy. Yeah, I can't believe the more charismatic leader like John McCain did not win the elections. Its a sad day for the world when the left wing axis of evil wins over the more unbiased, fair, non-judgmental conservatives.
Macj Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Yeah' date=' I can't believe the more charismatic leader like John McCain did not win the elections. Its a sad day for the world when the left wing axis of evil wins over the more unbiased, fair, non-judgmental conservatives.[/quote'] Graphic - Being sarcastic and presenting an argument by comparison doesn't do us any good nor does it help the argument itself.Anyways should you wish to discuss this, lets.
Brainfade Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Obama's charisma ends when words come out of his mouth' date=' period. [/quote'] I wish that were true. It is no secret that I don't care for many of the man's misguided policies but I give him credit - whatever his shortcomings may be, lack of charisma is not one. And that, apparently, is more than sufficient to win an election in the US of A. I heard this interview on the radio: Interviewer: Do you approve of the government bailing out the big banks? Interviewee: No. I'er: Do you like the government buying up big automakers? I'ee: No. I'er: Do you approve of the government taxing us more so everyone can have public healthcare? I'ee: Ummm ... I don't think I do. I'er: Do you approve of the job President Obama has done since he took over? I'ee (all giggly): Oh man ... he's awesome. :headshake: With that kind of star-power, Palin stands no chance. Check this out: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/07/14/poll-majority-of-republicans-dont-think-palins-qualified-to-be-president/ Only 33 percent of Republicans questioned in a CBS News survey released Monday night say that Palin would have the ability to serve effectively as president. Last fall, 71 percent of registered Republicans felt that way. "It's unclear whether the change in Republicans' view of Palin is the result of her decision to step down as governor, or whether the GOP rank-and-file felt they had to defend their party's vice-presidential nominee during the campaign but don't feel the same tug of party loyalty today," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "Either way, this is bad news for Palin, whose first task in 2012, if she runs for the White House, will be to convince Republican primary voters to support her."
yoda Posted July 15, 2009 Posted July 15, 2009 Obama's charisma ends when words come out of his mouth, period. Are you kidding? I would rate Clinton higher than Obama's speaking abilities, but no other recent President comes close to either of them.
Ram Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 But who were his opponents? Al "stoneface" Gore and John "stiff" Kerry. She stands no chance against Obama' s charisma. Like someone said' date=' she will not sway the swing voters - and that is what decides elections.[/quote'] And I agree with that. If the Economy stabilizes and picks up towards the latter half of Obama’s first term, he will be hailed as some sort of messiah who saved the world from collective destruction and will almost be unbeatable if he decides to run for a 2nd term. But I still do think Sarah Palin has it in her to mount the best challenge among all current republicans against him in the next election.
Lurker Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Call me a cynic or call me an old hag but I am at a loss to understand why are Indians, or Non-Residential Indians, more interested in matters American than Indian these days?? Seriously who gives a freak about Palin when there is so much more to discuss about India? Do understand that this comes from a person who has had his share of discussion on US politics but seems like we have reached the overkill stage.
Ram Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Call me a cynic or call me an old hag but I am at a loss to understand why are Indians, or Non-Residential Indians, more interested in matters American than Indian these days?? Seriously who gives a freak about Palin when there is so much more to discuss about India? Do understand that this comes from a person who has had his share of discussion on US politics but seems like we have reached the overkill stage. I don’t know about others, but I can answer that from a personal standpoint; I am just interested in general with world politics and affairs. For me, its not an Indian/American thingy. Its just something that interests me. Tomorrow, if it were conflict in Iraq that takes my interests, I’d discuss it too. I do not live in India, so I am not as in-touch with Indian politics as I was before. I try as hard as possible not miss the major events that may happen (like the elections), but it has become easier to follow American politics than Indian politics for me these days.
triam Posted July 16, 2009 Author Posted July 16, 2009 Call me a cynic or call me an old hag but I am at a loss to understand why are Indians, or Non-Residential Indians, more interested in matters American than Indian these days?? Seriously who gives a freak about Palin when there is so much more to discuss about India? Do understand that this comes from a person who has had his share of discussion on US politics but seems like we have reached the overkill stage. Main reason for me is that I am frustrated with Indian politics and mainly the politicians. All the parties have similar populist agendas, have similar corrupt or sometimes even criminal leaders, indulge in the same variation of vote banks, have the same leaders forever and ever, have no new radical young charismatic leaders that come up (dont tell me Rahul Gandhi, although I have decent hopes for him, he would be a nobody without the "Gandhi" as his surname.) And India's democracy has a big shadow of Nepotism cast over it, which is hilarious if not for the fact that is so sad.
Brainfade Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Main reason for me is that I am frustrated with Indian politics and mainly the politicians. All the parties have similar populist agendas' date=' have similar corrupt or sometimes even criminal leaders, indulge in the same variation of vote banks, [s']have the same leaders forever and ever, have no new radical young charismatic leaders that come up dont tell me Rahul Gandhi, although I have decent hopes for him, he would be a nobody without the "Gandhi" as his surname.) And India's democracy has a big shadow of Nepotism corruption cast over it, which is hilarious if not for the fact that is so sad. And American politics are not far behind. They just do it with suits and ties. IMO, the only difference is that corruption in India trickles down to daily life. Here, in the US, the average American has not seen it creep into everyday dealings ....... yet.
Brainfade Posted July 16, 2009 Posted July 16, 2009 Call me a cynic or call me an old hag OK ... CYNIC!! OLD HAG!! There ... fell better :-)? but I am at a loss to understand why are Indians, or Non-Residential Indians, more interested in matters American than Indian these days?? Seriously who gives a freak about Palin when there is so much more to discuss about India? Do understand that this comes from a person who has had his share of discussion on US politics but seems like we have reached the overkill stage. In my case, it is simple - unless something dramatic happens in my life, my roots have shifted to the US - my only attachment to India is an emotional one (elders still in India plus love for one's birthplace); my kids will grow up here in the US, and it is American politics that will affect my long-term future.
triam Posted July 16, 2009 Author Posted July 16, 2009 And American politics are not far behind. They just do it with suits and ties. IMO' date=' the only difference is that corruption in India trickles down to daily life. Here, in the US, the average American has not seen it creep into everyday dealings ....... yet.[/quote'] US politics has its own problems, but atleast there are ideological differences between the two front running parties, where you can pick an issue and stick with it. What are the ideological differences between Congress and BJP? or BSP and SP? Can you imagine someone like Sarah Palin out of nowhere rising into the national limelight in India? Agreed the 2 term presidence plays a big role in this or else the US still could have had Bush Sr and Clinton going at each other. So most of the time the debates or discussions when it comes to India is down to personal or religious preferences and not really based on values or ideologies or principals. Atleast this is how I feel.
Recommended Posts