My Twitter Feed

September 17, 2014

Blue Texas in Obama v. Palin Matchup?

There is a debate raging up here in the Great Land. And it goes something like this:

Position A -
We do NOT want Palin as the GOP nominee. No way, no how. We’ve suffered through more Sarah Palin than anyone, and we’ve seen the super scary morphing from affable, anti-corruption “fresh face” bipartisan ethics champion to shrieking, self-serving, rabid Tea Party ideologue. And thanks, but no thanks. As improbable as it may seem that she’d actually win, look what has happened in the past in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. To use some violent political metaphor in honor of our ex-gov turned Presidential wannabe – Do we even want to put that bullet in the chamber?

Positioin B -
OK, yes, Alaska is traumatized but we don’t represent the big picture. There has been no greater Democratic fundraiser than Sarah Palin. Her downward spiral in the polls, and her steady and determined march to irrelevance at the hand of her own ineptitude and radical nature mean only one thing – she would lose to Obama and lose bad. If the Republicans elect someone who isn’t - let’s use “insane” for lack of a better term – like Tim Pawlenty, or Mitt Romney, then we’ve got a horse race. Put Palin out there and the far-left, the middle-left, the right-left, the left-right, the center-right and the not insane go stampeding to the polls to vote for a second Obama term.

And back and forth we go. Both sides have a point. Do you root for Palin, taking even a shred of risk that she becomes President, but a greater risk we end up with President Romney? Or do you say no way, any risk is too great and I’d rather take the chance that we end up with a sane Republican running the show than any risk of President Palin? And do registered Dems and Rs who don’t like Palin vote for her in the primary to sway the results hoping for the head-to-head matchup?

Today, Public Policy Polling came out with numbers that might make you grit your teeth, wipe the sweat off your brow, and tiptoe over to Camp B if you aren’t there already. Close your eyes, and imagine…. Blue Texas.

2012 could be the year Democrats are finally competitive for President in Texas…but only if the Republicans nominate Sarah Palin.

There are vast differences in how the various different potential GOP contenders fare against Barack Obama in Texas. Mike Huckabee is very popular in the state and would defeat Obama by 16 points, a more lopsided victory than John McCain had there in 2008. Mitt Romney is also pretty well liked and has a 7 point advantage over the President in an early hypothetical contest, a closer margin than the state had last time around but still a pretty healthy lead. A plurality of voters have an unfavorable opinion of Newt Gingrich but he would lead Obama by a 5 point margin nonetheless. It’s a whole different story with Palin though. A majority of Texas voters have an unfavorable opinion of her and she leads the President by just a single point in a hypothetical contest.

(snip)

…The other reason for Obama’s closeness is the weakness of the Republican candidate field. He’d have no shot against a GOP nominee that voters in the state like. Huckabee’s favorability rating is a 51/30 spread and he blows Obama out of the water. But none of the other GOP hopefuls come close to matching that appeal. Romney’s favorability is narrowly in positive territory at 40/37, but Gingrich’s is negative at 38/44, and Palin’s is even worse at 42/53. Texas voters certainly don’t like Obama but for the most part they don’t see the current Republican front runners as particularly great alternatives.

(snip)

Texas ought to stay safely in the GOP column for 2012 but with a weak nominee Obama would have a chance and these numbers are further confirmation that you’re probably talking about 400+ electoral votes for the President next year if his opponent is Sarah Palin.

Comments

comments

Comments
120 Responses to “Blue Texas in Obama v. Palin Matchup?”
  1. kiksadi50 says:

    The GOP will exploit palin’s phenomenal ability to raise money for candidates & rally the white; fundamentalist,unable to critically think their way out of a wet paper bag Conservatives.The power brokers of the Repub. party are firmally entrenched in the values & beliefs of the superiority of the white,male,patriarchical,hierarchical,(“palin is pretty)”,neanderthals;like Pat Buchannan, Bill O’Reilly, Newt Gingrich,Cheney & Cantor.They will exploit (as they have already done) Bachmann,& Palin,but they will never give them the key to the executive washroom.The GOP know that they could never risk; allowing palin to debate,talk off script,participate a coherent interview or stop tweeting/facebooking nasty responses to people who don’t worship her.She has clearly demonstrated that she will not take advice,practice impulse control or allow herself to be ‘handled’ by anyone.”What do you call a woman with an opinion?… a b**ch”.palin has been eerily quiet since the Nat. Esquire story.N.E. is a rag but still…you know palin probably subscribes to it.

  2. Dagian says:

    If we should find ourselves discussing She-Who-Can’t-Be-Named in February (or any other time), maybe we should just call her by her alter-ego.

    Bellatrix Lestrange!

  3. frank222 says:

    NOT B ! – The presidential election is not a high school basketball game or a beauty pageant or a coloring book. The political parties have a responsibility to make an effort to nominate decent candidates that would be capable of running the country or that at least represent a rational representation of a person with some ability to run a country. Why try to shame the GOP? They used to be ‘liberals’ donchaknow. Going for B is just as bad as the shallow BS we decry about Palin.

  4. Cammie says:

    I actually don’t think she has the guts to run. But, she’s gotta keep giving the impression she is, so the cash keeps coming in from her cult-like followers.

  5. Cammie says:

    The fact that we’re even wondering if Palin will be the GOP nominee is proof of how much contempt Republicans have for America. Never, ever forget that they nominated her for VP in 2008, which introduced her to the national public. And to answer the blog post’s question, no, I don’t want her to be the GOP presidential nominee. It will be the ugliest, coarsest race ever if she is. She brings division and trouble wherever she goes, and our country already has enough problems.

  6. DF says:

    It is disengenuous to back an unqualified candidate in order to predict the rise of a favorite. One of the reasons I call myself an Independent is that I don’t believe in these games. Barrack Obama won one presidential race — why can’t he do it again? I know he’s not perfect, but let the debate begin.

  7. AKjah says:

    I believe in solidarity. My view is that Scarah should not be near a car let alone a public office. There are many views. I think consolidation to just flat NO should do the trick. Should all progressives stay solid who knows what could be done.

  8. belledame222 says:

    I don’t think there’s a chance she’ll win the nomination. She’s never really been in a real fight with herself in the lead role, let alone with a pack of Republicans fighting for the prime spot. Up till now they’ve barely touched her because they don’t know if she’s going to run or not and they don’t want to unnecessarily alienate her fanbase. As soon as it’s down to her or them, though, they’ll eat her, bones and all.

    Of course, in the *best* possible scenario, this happens, but the fight’s so nasty that it turns off a lot of voters and leaves the winner limping to the final stretch. In a dream scenario, not entirely implausible given the woman’s chutzpah and narcissism, she “goes rogue” one more time and runs third party, taking her wingnuts with her.

  9. ks sunflower says:

    Here’s something that will either make your blood run cold or make you laugh.

    I found it in the comments over at IM. I checked out the link and was dismayed to see that it was true: someone has started a petition to February a Reagan/Palin Appreciation Month!

    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/reaganpalinappreciationmonth/

    Not exactly a landslide on it yet, though – only 21 signatures but the thought that almost two dozen Americans would sign this is enough to make me feel queasy.

    Read the first Whereas clause: “WHEREAS, February is the birth month of four past and one future Presidents (Washington, Harrison, Lincoln, Reagan, and Palin), and . . . ”

    I am sincerely hoping this is a joke. Looking at the list of sponsors, I could almost imagine some satire or sarcasm, but . . . no matter, it is just too scary to be funny if funny it is meant to be (and maybe it is serious).

    • Ugh – that is disturbing if it’s real. I guess it is. I’m not quite sure how they figure that we’ll all be hearing more about Palin if the media does go Palin free for the month of February. That would mean that they can post all they want and no one else will be repeating it. Yeah, I guess that works. Maybe they think that if the blogs and MSM aren’t talking about her we will go to their sites to read about her. Good grief.

    • belledame222 says:

      please; you can get ten times that number of signatures for National Flying Spaghetti Monster month.

    • beth says:

      –’bot Alert! ‘bot Alert!–

      Yay! A small token of the esteem all Americans hold for her and a befitting acknowledgement of her positive impact on our body politic! And while we’re at it, why not mount a campaign to designate the whole month of December as Jesus/Palin Appreciation Month? “WHEREAS, our nation was founded on biblical principles as taught by Jesus and Palin is the foremost and fiercest champion of those principles…” beth.

  10. Tanaga12 says:

    Camp A all the way. My whole world tilts even contemplating option B. Isn’t this sort of like the Joe Miler primary thing. Some Dems voted for Miller thinking McAdams stood a better chance against Miller over Murkowski, than Murkowski split the Dem vote. Scary things can happen. But the thought that Scarah be taken seriously enough to get through the primary is just so wrong. I’m not over the crosshairs thing. She so needed to apologize for doing that. I can’t even pretend that she’s not a vile, vile woman even if it is to keep Obama for another term. To even pretend gives her more focus and fuels her continued persistence. Sheez, what would the debates look like? Ah – just tilted again.

  11. sali says:

    Sorry, Texans. Heathen Tools (nice name)in Arlington,TX has fabricated jewelry for sarahpac and is shilling it on their website. Also a large ad in February issue of Alaska Magazine (pg 76). Interesting design until you read the description of it.

    • sali says:

      ooops, sorry, left out Heathen Tools’ sarahpac website is
      Still won’t buy it. ;->

    • beth says:

      I had to really look hard to figure out *what* the shape of the over-all thing was…I had no trouble with the ‘bear paw’ cut-out, but I didn’t see the “genuine diamond eye” so had no reference point from which to begin. When I finally found the “genuine diamond eye” –as I was looking at the necklace version of the design– I finally realized it is a bear! A polar bear! And it did not look too well…

      It occured to me that the overall resembles a large, limp polar bear, and I sense it being hoisted –mid-body– up by some large, unseen, mechanical mechanism or other. My conclusion is that the bear is in need of such hoisting and subsequent removal because it has been mortally wounded…either by the large, fatal gash of the paw swipe across its midsection or from its demise resulting from its reading the drek at the bottom of the page:

      ““““““““““““`
      “Made in America, by Americans, by an American entrepreneur who advertises in America, through American companies, to true American patriots; thereby doing a meaningful part to help boost the American economy…. It’s hard to find something more patriotic than that, especially since the money not only stays in America but also helps support conservatism in America, helping to bring America back to her conservative and constitutional founding…. That’s patriotic, and that’s capitalism at its best, the very spirit that has made America the greatest country in the world.”
      ““““““““““““`
      All things considered, I don’t think I’ll ask for one for Valentine’s Day. Or any day, for that matter. Who wants a limp polar bear –”genuine diamond eye” or not– on their person? beth.

      • beth says:

        If you want to see the bear with the “genuine diamond eye”, here’s the link: http://pawofalaska.com/index.html
        Interesting to note, the sarahpac part is not in the url or on the page. It is, however, in the ‘title’ of the url: “SarahPac Heathan Tools Arlington, TX”. Talk about reeling in the unsuspecting… Gaaaaak! beth,

      • Seriously? It looks OK I guess, but the disclaimer at the bottom is enough that I’d never buy anything from them. Not the made in America part. Except they make it sound like they are doing well enough that their sales alone will save America. But it’s the supporting conservative bit, with SarahPac deceptively on the second page but not on the first.

      • ks sunflower says:

        Gees, is this to commemorate her attempt to wipe out the polar bears?

  12. EatWildFish says:

    Paylin “wrote” an OpEd today about Reagan being a ‘lifeguard’ for USA Today — but it wasn’t even given top billing.

    Better yet — not a single media outlet or news blog even mentioned it!!

    Methinks the media is tiring of the cowardly Quitter’s unwillingness to engage in the “political discourse” she mentions so often as she hides behind Tweets/Facebook/flaks.

    Is it true that Paylin will take one hour of unscripted Q/A at a business shindig soon?? I can’t wait for the world to hear her wax eloquently about business and finance.

    Maybe the Snowflake will talk about her business experience years ago with that ridiculous “Rouge Cou” — Palinese for Red Neck (and showing her ignorance that in French the adjective always goes before the noun). Better yet, how her AGIA plans are going down the toilet.

  13. Baker's Dozen says:

    We need at least two viable parties for our democracy to work. If you want to know what happens when that is not the case, look at Mexico. They’re beginning to have some competition, but not enough. It’s a long haul out of the corruption created by what was essentially a one party system for way too long. And Palin won’t give us that two party race. She couldn’t even win an emmy for Best Portrayal of a Politician.

  14. Bob Benner says:

    Isn’t Huckabee the coo-coo who threw his support behind Joe Miller for Alaska’s Senator? Palin and Huckabee are both Morons. But the big difference between Palin and ANY other Republican candidate is what Sarah Palin did to those who have helped her achieve her political aspirations from day one. From the ADN article by Paul Jenkins(link below) on the Sarah Palin Hunting episode: “It was Palin on the hunt; on the hunt always. First, it was small-town politicos in Wasilla who befriended her, then GOP Chief Randy Ruedrich, then Frank Murkowski, who appointed her to a cushy job, and finally, a shot at Barack Obama. If you observe how quickly and effortlessly she turned on those older white men who carried her guns, loading them and handing them to her, advising her, telling her when to shoot, showing her how to do the job, you should be plenty scared. After all, the Quitter has used these people who helped her in achieving her political aspirations to show her the way and do her work for her, and then just as quickly turned on them and stabbed them in the back for her own benefit when the time was right. Our Quitter Ex-Guv even turned on Alaskan’s, jumping the ship of state after only two disinterested, unengaged years, going for something bigger. And should Americans make the same mistake one more time by voting her in as President in 2012, what knife will she use on them as a reward for lessons not yet learned??? God help us if we ever have to find out…

    http://www.adn.com/2010/12/11/1599846/always-on-the-hunt-palin-shown.html

  15. Kat says:

    I vote for A. No way, no how should she be allowed anywhere near the primaries. Any fool thinking of voting for her to run against President Obama better get their head examined right now! The country has gone NUTZ. We can’t afford to risk anymore.

  16. Blue Longhorn says:

    I know Alaskans are sick to death of Palin. But I’m from TX and hoping she runs just because of the Huckabee factor. He is very well liked here and while she is popular amongst the hardcore TPer’s, and in some rural areas outside of Dallas, Austin, etc. Huckabee would still be a shoe-in.

    I was SO hoping Bill White would edge out Perry. I’m sick of my home state being so Republican – so damn conservative.

    Palin is so impetuous I’m wondering if she realizes she has no chance and will jump into the fray anyway. She never seems to let anything stop her no matter the odds or the popularity. She never ceases to amaze – in a bad way.

  17. aussiegal77 says:

    No way. Too big of a risk to take. I think it’s a big mistake to under estimate Palin and her ability to bring out the super conservative, super fundamentalist Christians.

    Don’t be fooled Dems – Palin as the GOP nominee is too great a risk to take.

    • aussiegal77 says:

      Also too – imagine how toxic a Palin presidential campaign would be! The GOP primaries will be brutal and if she (and us) make it thru THAT, there would still be the general election. Think she’s rabid now against President Obama – just imagine how unhinged she would be in a head-to-head competition with him. It would be terrible.

      She would surely lose but so would we as a nation (and as humanity). It just would be too much. After 2008 – it just got worse and worse. Who knows what evil would be unleashed by her rhetoric and violent imagery after a Presidential campaign? Who knows what crazies would come out of the woodwork to defend Palin? It’s just not worth it to put all of us, including the President, the first family and other public servants in danger just to gain political edge.

  18. weaver57 says:

    OK – this was during the 60′s and I am not really sure when. But we had some Dutch visitors and it was
    during one of the electoral conventions. Their comment was that the US should elect 2 presidents, one for the US and one, smarter, for the rest of the world. That has never left me.

  19. TrueBlueGirl says:

    I remain in camp A. She is unworthy to stand on the same stage as dedicated, serious, respectful and thoughtful public servants running for office – whatever their political position and how I might disagree with it. Our country needs dialogue and consensus, and I cannot think of anyone more blatantly and consistently in opposition to each and every attribute on that list. She is a disgrace, a miserable excuse for a human being, nevermind a parent and much less a political candidate. Moreover, and not to put too fine a point on it, she’s batshit crazy and calls out the crazy and dangerous in her followers.

  20. Writing from Alaska says:

    I say no Palin in the presidential running – we need intelligent, constructive dialogue as we approach the election cycle and so far all she has done is confused and degraded public discourse. We can’t afford much more of that destructive nonsense. We need another intelligent candidate who can debate coherently with Obama so we can hone our arguments and viewpoints, not someone who will (continue to) turn our whole national debate into the laughing stock of the world. And, yes, I would rather take the chance that he would lose than watch us be subjected to more of the extreme divisiveness that we have been going through the last two years.

    • leenie17 says:

      Excellent point. Having a smart, knowledgeable and personable opponent will ultimately make President Obama rise to the challenge and become better himself. As much as I support our President, he still has a lot to learn and things to improve. A tough Republican candidate will force the Democratic party to hone their skills, dissect and improve their platform and figure out how to fix some of the mistakes they made.

      I want to see debates that make us all think, not cringe at the twitchy winking and sound of incoherent screeching.

  21. I’m still in camp A for one main reason: her followers are religious nuts! They believe it’s her biblical right (Queen Ester anyone?) to be ruler…I mean President…so can you imagine how they are going to react if she becomes the Republican nominee? I swear I’ll turn my house into a bomb shelter!

    • Paddlefoot says:

      I am in complete agreement, I have underestimated the sheer number of the lunatic fringe in the past, but no more. Joe Miller’s last effort should tell us all that we cannot manipulate election outcomes with these kinds of strategies. Please AKM, don’t even entertain or in any way encourage Camp B.

  22. Lee323 says:

    The problem with allowing the lowest common denominator politicians a significant role in our political process is that they bring the whole process down…..to the lowest common denominator. Two years of Palin’s demagogic slashing and burning has demonstrated this beautifully (although grotesquely).

    Instead of trying to figure out an “easy” way to get President Obama reelected, his supporters should be preparing themselves to roll up their sleeves to do the hard work necessary to win the election, state by state…. county by county….person by person.

    If the voters expect high standards of work ethic, integrity etc. in their political leaders, then they should be damn well committed to high standards for themselves as supporters and voters. It begins with us.

    • Writing from Alaska says:

      YES and if I read your comment before I added mine below – you would have saved me the trouble. AMEN even.

  23. Blooper says:

    I really don’t think that the Republicans who pull the strings will even let her think about getting on their primary ballot. They have a .000000001% chance of winning the presidency if she wins the primary and I think they just might want a real chance at winning this time around. Nope, as fun as the speculation might be there is just no way she is going to garner enough support to get on that ballot. The Republicans are going to put up their best chance at winning and that would be Mit Romney IMO.

  24. algionfriddo says:

    I will gladly, and with all due diligence, be voting for Sister Sarah… in the primary.

  25. Moose Pucky says:

    Alaska vs Texas, contenders in so many ways. (sigh)

  26. Marnie says:

    Granting that the phrase “at the had of her own ineptitude” is just a slight typo.

    But I like to think of it as a larger phrasing of “and has been had at her own ineptitude.”

  27. Cassie Jeep says:

    This very dilemma plagues us in North Carolina. The last Presidential election BARELY gave North Carolina to President Obama. I have toyed (with evil pleasure) with the idea of switching my registration to “R” in order to vote for SWWNBN in the primary…thereby assuring a landslide for re-electing President Obama.

    I just can’t do it. There is not a less deserving candidate than Sarah Palin, in my opinion, and ultimately that is what the 2012 election will be about: re-electing President Obama or electing someone else.

    I never, never, never want his opposition to be Sarah Palin…weird election results happen and I won’t take that chance. I trust our President to continue the hard work he has been doing and that he’ll win hearts and minds in doing so.

    Besides, I can tolerate misguided thinking from any of the other potential candidates but I cannot abide Sarah Palin’s blatant lies, raging double standards, glaring lack of intellect and steadfast complacency in maintaining her own abundant inadequacies.

    • OMG says:

      Hear Hear!

    • Millie says:

      I strongly suggest NOT changing parties as to your voters registration. That is playing games and all you have to do is look at what happened in Alaska as to the Murkowski primary and final ‘write in’ procedure.

      Be true to yourself!

  28. Joe Jackson says:

    As an Alaskan from the old (pre-oil) days I say bring the trailer trash on. I’m a retired guy from SoCal living on the west slope of Colorado now, but my fondest hope is that the gopers will choose her. For once her hopes and mine align…
    J

  29. FISHEYE says:

    Having to listen to the woman whose name shall not be mentioned on the campaign trail is too horrible to contemplate. The only thing worse (other than armegeddon) would be if she was elected. I don’t think I want to gamble with the future of the USA and everything I believe in. I will vote for Obama but is it too hard to imagine a country, where the repubs might nominate somebody who actually believed in the ideals of say, Abraham Lincoln. Yes, I guess that would be the impossible dream.

  30. Kallie in Texas says:

    NO! NO! NO! I don’t want her on any ballot! She is undeserving of any nomination. Somehow, I feel this message is a conspiracy to get her elected. I trust no one that has anything to do with Palin. There are too many idiots that possibly would vote for her….don’t take a chance with this one.

  31. OMG says:

    Frum takes a look at the Palin-free proposal and explains why it is important to call conservatives out on supporting her in the first place. A good read:

    http://www.frumforum.com/time-for-palin-apologists-to-let-go

  32. Heck, I only nominated her because the consensus was she would get Obie re-elected in a landslide. This country is gone too far to the right and needs some moderation. Unfortunately,most wingnuts don’t believe in fair play and winning is the only goal for them. Obama has been a huge disappointment to me and he is still better than any right-wing candidate I have seen or heard about.I hereby withdraw what’s-her-name from consideration(afterthought) to be elected as anything. I’d nominate Mother Theresa,but, wingnuts would tear her memory limb from limb. I am officially out of the nomination business.

  33. Zyxomma says:

    That woman is a twidiot. She should not have been the VP nominee in ’08, and she should never, ever be a nominee for President. The thought of it makes my teeth clench and my head hurt (to say nothing of the stomach-churning). No, no, no, no, no. Diebold, Citizens United, Bush II, all make me say no way, no how, not now, not ever.

  34. Rick says:

    I want her in jail in 2012. I want to see her in Women Behind Bars. Then all those old guys who cream all over her can count the days ’til she gets out.

    http://www.womenbehindbars.com/

  35. TrueBlueGirl says:

    This is shaping up to be a real horse race! I live in a north Texas county that probably votes 95-98% Republican. But I’m reminded lately that we’re in the so-called buckle of the Bible belt, and the Palin brand of Christianity is a sticking point for many of my neighbors. She lost another big segment with the gun-handling and hunting nonsense on SPAk, and dropped a huge portion of the educated conservatives with some of the idiocy she’s been spewing. Add to that the recent downturn in our state’s economy, a hideous budget shortfall, and Governor Goodhair’s continued hackneyed blabbering on social conservative talking points, and you’ve got a lot of people paying attention and listening for the details of the plan. Huckabee is well-spoken, authentic-seeming and comes off as a thinking moderate conservative – I know, he scares the hell out of me! – and that’s one reason he’s so acceptable as a candidate. He’s also considered local, and Mitt and Tim are just too, well, Yankee, hah!

  36. DudleysPa says:

    It’s hard to get past the mind-boggling bit that half of Texas would vote for Palin. Surely, even Texans must be aware that when it comes to presidential qualifications, she’s all hat and no cattle.

    • ks sunflower says:

      Gosh, I loved that website during the Bush years. Have forgotten about it. Is all hat no cattle still up and running. It helped keep me sane during W’s reign of incompetency.

  37. leenie17 says:

    After what happened in 2000, I NEVER want to have a Republican presidential candidate I couldn’t live with (albeit with teeth clenched and stomach churning) for four years. With the recent Citizens United decision (thanks ever so much, SCOTUS), Diebold’s stranglehold on voting equipment and the re-districting that’s about to happen, there is even more potential for election fraud and manipulation than in 2000. The thought of Palin having even the most miniscule chance of getting anywhere near the White House frankly terrifies me.

    I also feel that choosing her as candidate legitimizes her AND makes a mockery of our political system. It’s taken a lot of work by President Obama and his administration to improve the world’s perception of our country, and that one act would completely undermine it for good.

    Besides, look what just happened in Alaska when people tried to game the system by voting for Miller…

    • My feelings exactly. While Palin would help Obama in Texas, aren’t there states where she would actually have a better chance. I can’t imagine our country with her as the leader. It horrifies me. And besides that, I want to see Obama win on his own merits, not by default because the repubs stupidly choose Palin. I honestly don’t think they are THAT stupid. I haven’t heard any names of possible repub candidates that would tempt me to vote for them, but still – they must be able to pick someone who they at least think has a chance. And please, don’t let it be nutty Michele Bachmann. She’s another one I couldn’t stand to see run.

    • marlys says:

      I am in full agreement, Leenie 17.
      No games, please. Odds are good? Goods are indeed odd, and I have lived to learn that times are plenty strange enough these days.
      Vote True.

      • AKPetMom says:

        Absolutely agree. This is the kind of monkey business that almost got us Senator Joe Miller of Alaska.

        • Valley_Independent says:

          Good point.

          She should not be allowed near the Republican (or any other) ticket. There are too many among us that will vote for her because they think she’s pretty, or because she has an “R” behind her name, or because they were living in a cave and have no idea what she really did in office.

    • barbara says:

      you make an excellent argument. i’m with you. it is not worth the risk. whenever you stop and think, oh palin would never be elected, think gwbush. he wasn’t elected but they made him president anyway, and we all continue to suffer for it. and all he was doing was pushing the republican oligarchy dream. she’d be pushing the rapture. no, no, no palin, please. i doubt she’ll run myself. i doubt she’ll be able to heave herself off the gravy train she’s got going on now and actually conduct a campaign that is so punishing for so long.

    • Writing from Alaska says:

      Agree Leenie – !

    • seattlefan says:

      Ditto, bolded and underlined!!!!!!

    • North of the Range says:

      I agree, also, too, absolutely.

    • ks sunflower says:

      Just joining the parade, leenie. You nailed it! Thanks.

  38. OMG says:

    Hmmmm…take a look at this USA Today tribute to Ronald Reagan and compare what each politician had to say about him–focus in on Obama’s remarks vs. Palin’s (that I’m sure were written by someone else) “common sense” nonsense.

    Obama’s:
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-01-23-ronald-reagan-president-obama_N.htm

    Palin’s:
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-01-23-ronald-reagan-sarah-palin_N.htm

  39. Dagian says:

    I would prefer that she NOT be a nominee, as that would imply that she is someone capable of handling the position.

    She doesn’t need the further ego-stroking.

    Okay, as a Democrat, I wish to gently chide our President. Raising the social security age for early retirement from 62 to 74 by 2075 SHOULD be adopted. Raising the general retirement age, again, by 2075, to…69? 70? is NOT unreasonable.

    My full-retirement age is higher than my parents. It’s decades away (*SIGHS*) anyway. I don’t see why my kids shouldn’t at least PLAN on retiring a little older. If you wish to retire younger, then take advantage of your IRA and other retirement fund options.

    I’m opening up a Roth IRA for my first-born, as the kid worked in 2010. I doubt I’ll be able to salt away the $1000 (matches earnings), but I see no harm in TRYING. The kid will thank me for this, someday. I hope. Let’s see 67-17 = 50 years of compound interest!

    • leenie17 says:

      I understand your point, but I must disagree.

      The job I do now I could likely continue doing until age 70 (eek!). However, many of the people who depend most heavily on Social Security for their retirement work in occupations that are physically demanding, and they are often financially unable to save sufficient amounts of money in personal retirement accounts. Many of these people may not be capable of continuing in those jobs until age 74. My father had a physically demanding job and I cannot imagine him still doing it into his 70s.

      I was fortunate to enter the NY state retirement system in 1982 and nearly all of my jobs since then have been part of the system. However, the particular job I currently hold is only now, after 12 years, coming close to what most starting salaries would pay. When I started this job in 1999, I was barely surviving financially, and starting a personal retirement account was out of the question. For most of the years since, I worked two additional part-time jobs until those were eliminated by budget cuts 2 years ago. Although, thanks to raises and promotions, I am in better financial shape than I was in 1999, I still cannot afford to put away the substantial amounts of money necessary for retirement.

      For many people, yes, increasing the retirement age to 70 or more is feasible. For many of them, contributing to a personal retirement account is also a financial possibility. However, for many of the people who need SS the most, working into their 70s is physically and financially just not an option.

      • Dagian says:

        I understand, but the early retirement option is still available. Given that the projected life expectancy in 2010 is 78.4 years (entire population), there is no reason not to raise it for those who haven’t even entered the work force.

        US population/male/female
        2010 78.42 75.55 81.43

        Yes, not everybody will salt away money for their old age. But it’s not impossible to do, even for someone who has a low-paying but very physical job. In the meantime, if someone qualifies for SSDI–they should receive it. If someone opts for early retirement, they’ll get it but at the lower rate for a longer period of time.

        I am NOT a big fan of Michelle Singletary (I find her her oversimplification grating and I don’t care for her tone regarding couples who are not married [I regularly wrote in and pointed out that there are couples who CANNOT legally wed due to both parties being the same gender. She quieted her tone, but I don't forget her sneering attitude towards unwed couples]), but her grandmother does deserve high praise for her dogged determination.

        “Big Mama raised Michelle and her four brothers and sisters on a salary that never reached more than $13,000 a year. Yet at her death, Big Mama owned her own home, had paid off a car loan, and had a beautiful collection of Sunday-go-to-meeting church hats and a savings account that supplemented her Social Security check and small pension. “

        • That’s admirable….incredible even…Big Mommas’ ability to stretch a buck, puts lots of people to shame….

        • Dagian says:

          I hate it when I think of things AFTER I post. I also want to see the way-too-low income cap raised. If you earn a million a year (or more) in income, bonuses and/or stock options, then pony up your 6.2% (?) like the rest of us.

      • Dagian says:

        Darn, forgot to mention that I’m not against means-testing SS either. If the money I put towards retirement counts against me for FAFSA (and it DOES), then I certainly don’t see why those who already have income from other sources shouldn’t see either their SS benefits reduced, or subject to taxation.

        • CO almost native says:

          I agree. Keep full-payment Social Security for those who really need it. This is one of Warren Buffet’s ideas, and has been for years. The Koch Brothers? Not so much-

    • barbara says:

      “If you wish to retire younger, then take advantage of your IRA and other retirement fund options.” millions of americans have no such options. i just got my first job that offers retirement benefits at the age of 52, 3 years ago. i’ve been the working poor all my life. i don’t expect that i’ll live to retire. i am opposed to raising the retirement age.

      • ks sunflower says:

        Me, too. Of course, there is another worry thanks to the GOP – that of having states be able to declare bankruptcy and not make good on the retirement benefits of public employees.

        My husband is a teacher and has dedicated his entire life to education. Many of his students have gone on to become teachers themselves because of his example or so they tell him when they come back to visit him.

        He is working beyond the current age of retirement because when he retires he will lose his life insurance and health insurance for me. I am younger than him and will not quality for Medicare as soon as he does. He is pushing his own health being on his feet eight to ten hours a day, routinely staying past dismissal to help students who have difficulties. This man and all those hundreds of thousands like him do no deserve to have their retirement benefits thrown away.

        Even though we both have college degrees, we are essentially the working poor – don’t have savings or even a home of our own because we had to take loans for our education, put our child through school. A lot of people don’t realize that it’s common for teachers to have to continue to take college hours in order to certify to keep their jobs. For us, that amounted to hundreds of dollars a year. We never had enough deductions to itemize either. Not whining, just explaining that since Reagan, two incomes in a family does not guarantee a well-to-do lifestyle nor does it qualify you for a cushy retirement. I just wish people would research what is really going on for average families before backing raising the retirement age or calling for cost savings at the expense of people who have worked hard to serve their community their entire lives. End of rant. Just wanted to back up what barbara and others have said – the working poor are now the middle class and we will probably all die working our lives away.

      • Cammie says:

        I am opposed to raising the retirement age, too, for both practical and idealistic reasons. Practical – it slows down the turnover we need in the labor market to mitigate against high unemployment (I know there are other factors involved, but this one is important, too). And despite the average life span numbers, there are still a hell of a lot of people who are going to die before reaching that age. They should have some retirement years to rest from their lifelong labors. Idealistic – as a civilized society with great technological advancements, shouldn’t we be moving towards fewer working years, instead of more? Fewer years punching a time clock, and more years spent with our family, volunteering in our community, pursuing creative ideas, traveling, etc?

      • Dagian says:

        If you’re 52, then a change in retirement age doesn’t affect you any further than it has already. Your full retirement age is 66, but you can retire early and receive social security benefits at 62.

        If you start receiving retirement benefits at

        •age 62, you will get 75% of the monthly benefit because you will be getting benefits for an additional 48 months.
        •age 65, you will get 93.3% of the monthly benefit because you will be getting benefits for an additional 12 months.

        ——————
        Singletary’s grandmother was exceptional, She was a nursing assistant in a hospital, I think. That certainly didn’t mean she would have health insurance at that time. Even now, many doctor’s offices do NOT have a health plan for their employees. As she had a home, I wonder if she took in boarders, too. My family has rented a room to a “cousin” for years on end. Quite illegal if anyone checked out the familial claim.

        As I say, I don’t care for Singletary too much, but I ALWAYS read her coloumns and try to catch her online chats. Even though I find her smug, sanctimonious, self-congratulatory and the Queen of Oversimplification. She’s a safe place to start.

        I contribute to my retirement acount because despite my having a pension, I am NOT convinced that it is being fully funded by my employer. In fact, I’m pretty certain it is NOT. I’m not trusting to luck or largesse, or anyone doing “the right thing” in the upper echelons. I’m betting against it, actually.

  40. Trish says:

    It might make Texas more competitive, but there’s too much of a chance she would still win the state, which has a lot of electoral votes. This Texas vote will go to someone other than Palin in the primary.

  41. karenw729 says:

    I’m not an Alaskan, but I’m glad to have found this web site and see that so many Alaskans don’t support Sarah Palin. $P, through her abuse of the english language, inability to tell the truth, and that stupid TLC show, make us in the lower 48 think that Alaskans are silly dumb hillbillies. BUT, I can tell from the quality of intellectual thought and writing in this blog that it is NOT SO. Please keep spreading the word in the professional and thoughtful manner you do! I grow increasingly concerned about what will happen to our country should she ever succeed in her narcissistic quest to be President.

    • dowl says:

      What happens is that we become an Idiocracy with a President Palin, Barbour, and the like-minded idiot others. The movie, Idiocracy, should be watched thoughtfully. Societal devolution occurs even now with a dumbed-down electorate. Think: Texas national text books, christian dominionist school board curricula, corporate personhoods, the legal right to lie by FoxNews/News Corps, push for Evangelical private schools and/or homeschooling, vitriolic rightwing vitriolic rhetoric on our airways, xenophobia, etc….

      Idiots vote,they reproduce AND by whatever means, they are elected (the means justifies the ends).

    • Zyxomma says:

      From the Daily Kos article:

      ” … Among women — the very constituency to whom she was supposed to appeal — her numbers are even worse. Ever increasing numbers of Americans, including Republicans, think she is unqualified and unlikeable. It is not a stretch to say that nearly every time she opens her mouth, more Americans decide they don’t like her. That is something for the left to encourage, not ignore.

      No matter what we think of her, no matter what the polls say, no matter how many Republicans plead with her to fade away from the public spotlight, she isn’t going anywhere. Nor should we on the left want to ignore her. She is a monster created by the Republican Party and the rancid, failed policies and values it has been trying to sell to the American people for the past three decades. Instead of hoping she will go away, we should seize every opportunity she presents to remind the country of what exactly the Republican Party believes: that all of our economic problems can be solved with tax cuts for the rich; that the best way to ensure energy independence is to drill, baby, drill; that criticizing an unjust war is unpatriotic, but chanting “nigger, nigger, nigger” on the radio is a First Amendment right; that the government should regulate uteruses, but stay out of the private lives of corporations. These are the Republican Party’s values, and she is the perfect and pure embodiment of those values.”

      Reluctantly, I concur.

    • Hope says:

      Come on guys, this is like asking the cookie monster to not eat cookies. I think is funny that they are saying that they can’t help it but they are going to stop. Ha ha ha.

      She will be in the news again until they decide not to report every far*!

  42. VernD says:

    NO NO NO…. I don’t want even the slightest chance for her to become POTUS.

    UGH.

  43. I hereby nominate Sarah”Queen Quitter”Palin as the official Reptilian candidate for Potus in 2012.Can I get a second,PLEASE!

  44. sallyngarland,tx says:

    I don’t know anyone in TX who likes Palin. Repubs may not be in such good shape in 2012 after they make cuts needed to plug the $27B budget shortfall.

  45. hwmnbn says:

    No need to fret or bother. Palin is self-burning toast. IMO, the best outcome for her is she eventually winds up shilling for some product on QVC, grifter to the end.

    Politically she is toxic but no repub wants to go on record publicly admitting that truth….YET. As soon as the dog-eat-dog primaries begin, that will change.

    • Dagian says:

      Imagine her on Meet the Press!

    • OtterQueen says:

      QVC? My god, you’ve nailed it!

      • AKRNC says:

        Having lived near QVC’s headquarters and knowing many, many people who work there, several in management positions, I think they are far too discriminating in their choice of products and those who develop them to put Palin on their show. They may have their few crazies over the years but they don’t last. She belongs on one of the more obscure shopping channels, like ShopNBC, or some of the others that are rarely heard from. However, what would she be trying to sell? A new book on “How Not To Parent Your Children!” or bumpits by the dozen?

  46. OMG says:

    I still do not want Palin as the GOP nominee because she does not deserve even consideration for higher office. She is a fraud in not have the intellectual qualifications, the knowledge, the integrity or the stature to serve as the President of the United States.

    Right now President Obama’s polling numbers continue to gain strength but anything can happen. If another economic collapse happens or a serious terrorist attack occurs then his poll numbers will again decline; they will definitely do so if employment numbers worsen. Many voters will desert him, choosing his opponent in their run to vote for change. They did just that in November by voting out incumbents and making the dems the bad guy. They’ve done so historically under similar circumstances. And in that case, I do not want Palin’s name within a million miles of any voter pamphlet.

  47. A fan from CA says:

    The Texas R party was overtaken by the Xstains over the past 2 decades and the power of their superchurches dominate the politics in many parts of Texas. It’s interesting that Huck seems to be leading the Grifter. Perhaps the Xstains do have at least one eye open to the shenanigans of that family from Wasilla.

Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying...
  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by katherine, Chris Lynch. Chris Lynch said: Blue Texas in Obama v. Palin Matchup? http://dlvr.it/F0Z8w #Barack_Obama #Democrats #50 #p2 [...]



Leave A Comment

%d bloggers like this: