Free Markets, Free People

McCain– Palin can beat Obama

Someone, somewhere has to understand that whatever John McCain says, one should bet their house on the opposite:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has said he thinks Sarah Palin could defeat President Obama in next year’s presidential election, but he’s far from certain that she will actually jump into the race.

The GOP’s standard-bearer in 2008 also shrugged off his former running mate’s poor standing in many polls, saying she would have the opportunity to turn that around if she did make a bid for the White House.

If Newt Gingrich has more baggage than Delta Airlines, Sarah Palin isn’t far behind.  Not necessarily because she earned all the baggage, although she’d done her fair share of contributing to the pile, but right or wrong, she’s loaded with it.   While she is and can remain a force in GOP politics, the presidency isn’t in her future.  And that’s especially so if John McCain, whose campaign was instrumental in helping the woman begin her baggage collection with the inept way she was handled, says so.

Frankly I’d love to see someone on the Republican side drive McCain to an early retirement (ok, not so early, certainly not early enough, how about just retirement).  He’s had his day and needs to be out of the scene.   A man more concerned with “campaign finance laws” than free speech has no business in government in a free country. 

As for Sarah Palin – rabble-rouse lady, make the left squirm, do all the things you do so well right now.  You do that well and  I love to see them prove almost daily that they embody what they claim is endemic to the right.   The irony is sweet.   But run for President?  That type of movie is still running in Washington DC as we speak and I don’t care to see a sequel. 

Somewhere out there in this great land there has to be someone better than the present GOP field, with or without Sarah Palin.  Adding her  to it doesn’t improve it one bit.  John McCain saying she could beat Obama is as ignorant as many of the other things he’s said in the past, to include saying he prefers clean government over free speech.

Why anyone would give it credence at all is beyond me.  All I can figure is Palin must have some pictures she’s holding that has McCain by the short and curlies. 

I don’t know of a single well constructed poll anywhere which gives Palin even a ghost of a chance against Obama.  So all one can figure is McCain pulled this out of the place his head usually occupies.


Twitter: @McQandO


53 Responses to McCain– Palin can beat Obama

  • “I don’t know of a single well constructed poll anywhere which gives Palin even a ghost of a chance against Obama.  ”

    COORRECTION: I dont know of a single well constructed poll anyhwhere. PERIOD.

  • I agree; and I think Sarah Palin might be the only candidate that could lose to Obama. I think she would bring out voters, who might stay home against another candidate, to vote against her. I think it’s even more true if this is a referendum on Obama election. Apathetic or disenchanted Obama supporters that might have stayed home would be motivated voted to vote against her.
    Palin supporters seem blind to the fact that their fidelity is more than matched by the hatred of her by the other side.

    • So, your argument is that if the other side hates someone enough, then there is no point in that person running.  Way to let the other side pick your candidate.  That is certainly a winning strategy.
      I submit the opposite is true, though.  If the other side hates your candidate enough, they are likely to make an incredible number of mistakes.  Hate is not a strategy.

      • No, I’m saying the most important thing is to defeat Obama. Going with a candidate that can’t increase the percentage of the vote her ticket got last time is  a sure way to lose.
        That’s just the way it is; I didn’t say I liked it. I like Palin and will vote for her if she makes it to the general election. I think the way the media treated her was disgusting and immoral; but she is not going to change the minds of people that don’t like her and there are a lot of them.
        I will not vote, in the primary for someone that can’t beat Obama, just because I don’t like the mainstream media or to flatter myself that I think I’m sending them a message.
        Defeating Obama is more crucial than standing up for Sarah.

        • “No, I’m saying the most important thing is to defeat Obama.”
          “Defeating Obama is more crucial than standing up for Sarah.”
          She pisses off all the right people, and generally for the right reasons.  I will support her in the primary.  That won’t change unless, as she become specific, her proposals are bad.  If she wins the primary with good proposals, I’ll expect her to win the general no matter what the MSM throws at her.
          I don’t care if she only gets to 50.5%, as long as that is distributed electorally such that it gets past Obama in the general.
          It is more important to beat Obama with a candidate who will do the right things, than it is to beat Obama by a large margin.

          • I didn’t say anything about beating him by ” a large margin “. There are way too many people that would rather risk losing with Palin instead of seeing that defeating Obama is the most critical issue.
            I don’t like RINO’s either and everyone wants the perfect candidate. I want the candidate most likely to beat Obama. And I’ll take a RINO over a Marxist anytime.

          • The only difference between being a Marxist and conceding to Marxists is pace.
            We need to reverse course.

    • The obsession with her is quite creepy.  Any little thing she says and does is a controversial national news story, while prominent Dem. congressman tweeting boner pics to their college aged pieces of fluff in Seattle ranks right up there with John Edwards love child on the embargo. 

      • It has to be stated that the obsession is on both sides. The dems are obsessed with hatred of her, but most of her supporters are obsessed WITH her.  Hell, on RedState I read one Palinista compare her favorably to both Ronald Reagan and George Washington.  And they will unload their full fury on anyone who questions her ability in any way.

        It is a creepy cult of personality.

        • I think some of it is definitely cultish and others just like her so much they are blind to her high negatives among the swing voters. She will bring people out to vote against her whereas they might stay home against another candidate.

  • Obama rocks! OK, please delete.

    No wonder why this place is dead

  • Darlings, if her ‘baggage’ is that she defeated a corrupt incumbent Republican Big Oil Party bastard,  cut out the GOP Ruling Class expense club, left  Alaska with $12 billion surplus, does not submit to Hollywood Media Jihad, is fearless against the totalitarian Left, put uptight Feminists Sisterhood to shame for showing they’re useless-hapless victims of their own stupidity,  is not a duplicious fat bastard, not a shapeshifting chameleon, it true to her word, loves free market capitalism, is staunch Constitutional conservative, is proud of American Exceptionalism, does believe in MANDATING American lives, looks fabulous in a pair stillettos and in a pair fishing waders, loves her children and grandchildren, has a healthy, loving successful lifelong marriage then I will take this baggage where ever  it travels.

    We’re Here, We’re Clear, Get Used to It.

    Game On.

    • Susan,

      Her baggage is that she is very, very hated – especially by independents/swing voters.  You know, the people who decide elections?  I knew many Democrats who were ready to vote McCain because they really didn’t like Obama and then went right back to Obama when Palin came on the scene.  Everything about her screamed “Not. Ready. For. Presidency.”  Love her all you want – I think she’s cool as hell – but she ain’t gonna win.  And we really, really need someone who can win.

  • Correction “does NOT believe in MANDATING American lives”

  • Palin supposedly bought a place in Arizona of all places according to a Drudge headline.  I am surprised at either considering they weren’t getting along well.  At least within the campaign.
    Weird events.  One more weird little tidbit and I would believe something weird is up like Palin getting McCain’s seat after retirement or some such thing.

  • Seeing how strongly she has supported Brewer on SB 1070, it’s not really surprising. She still retains great respect for McCain, which isn’t sometimes reciprocated.

    • “She still retains great respect for McCain,”
      It would be good if she were to show that gratitude does not need extend to obsequy, and from time to time I think her deference to him has gone there.

  • Well, McCain thought McCain plus Palin could beat Obama. Perhaps he thinks he was a drag on the ticket and she could do better without him. I tend to agree, but better isn’t good enough. 

  • I keep wondering why anyone relies so heavily on polls, especially this early in the election cycle. Did anyone Reagan stood a chance against Carter at this point in the 1980 election? And no, I’m not saying she would be Ronald Reagan, but what seems like an easy win today probably seemed like the last thing that could ever happen then.

    • I would tend to agree with that but this is a special case.  The polls reflect her negative numbers among independents, who are the swing voters.  Negatives are much much harder to get rid of.

      Reagan also had negatives with the same group, but back then, independents were a very small portion of the electorate. Now they are the kingmakers.

      • Some people would rather lose with Palin than go with a more electable candidate. I hope they live in blue or red states so that it won’t matter. If she runs, we are looking forward to 4 more yrs of Obama.

  • I would vote for Palin over anyone else in the race right now.

    • I would vote for Pawlenty, Cain, or Bachmann before her, and I hope Rick Perry runs so that we can have a real conservative with a long executive experience in the race.

  • What is McCain supposed to say?  She was his Veep pick for godsake.  If he doesn’t say that, man oh man it’s another “scandal”  I mean you are 100% correct, she can’t win,  but give McCain a bit of a break.

    I like Palin right where she is.  Influencing the party and the people, drawing the fire and the stupidity.

    • Actually, she is really vital now to stop the RINOs and provide high level enforcement of principles. I think as a candidate she would not be as effective.

      • How is she stopping Rino’s ?  Unless something changes it looks like we will be stuck with Romney as the standard bearer.  Sure he would be better than Obama, but not much.

  • Palin is to Robert Bork as politician is to judge

  • The only ones who have ever seriously criticized Palin are the uber left…the SNl crowd…the pot for lunch bunch…Fu#k’em! They hold no sway with me.

    • the point is how much sway they have over the rest of the population; over half of which will not seriously consider her. and that is a mighty big deficit to start an election from.

  • @Brown “The only ones who have ever seriously criticized Palin are the uber left…the SNl crowd…the pot for lunch bunch…Fu#k’em! They hold no sway with me.”
    I’ve noticed she has a lot of knives in her back from members of her own party. You know, RINO types that want to “win” no matter who does the winning. I’d rather lose with Palin, than “win” with RINOs.

    • Bingo! To “win” with the RINO’s is to lose. That’s how we’ve got to where we are today. Rove’s world sucks…

    • Then I hope you don’t have kids or grandkids and that you live in a red or blue state. Yeah, RINO’s suck, but not as much as Marxists. You don’t like what Obama has done so far? Wait until his second term.
      The Republican party needs fixing; after we get rid of Obama. If he gets another term, it won’t matter.

      • My kids and grandkids will be fine; I’m not sure why you said that? There are degrees of Marxists and the Rhino’s have their share of them. That being said, almost any Republican is preferable to Obama; but those that compromise principals of liberty are every bit as destructive to this nation as Obama ever will be. Every election we all hear the same story espoused in your opinion and as a result of people voting for the “lesser of two evils” the country is in the shape it is today.

        In my opinion, working the “won-loss columns” is destroying our nation.

        • In general, I think you are right. However, we aren’t in regular times. There is a lot of stuff Obama is up to that doesn’t get reported in the regular media. I’m not sure about “degrees” of Marxists. And I don’t think our kids and grandkids should have to live in Obamaworld. The debt he’s already run up will be enough.
          Hopefully more conservative Senators will be elected in 2012, but why don’t you think he’ll do anything he wants via executive action.

          • He cannot do anything he wants by executive action, and there is not one Executive Order that has any legal weight if it contrary to legislation.  I do not really fear he will openly oppose the rule of law, in fact that might make a good end of leftism here if he tried.

      • No.  It needs fixing or we not only won’t get rid of Obama–it wouldn’t matter if we do get rid of him.  Palin is a leading contender to fix the party.

        • And not in a “fix their wagon” sense either.

        • I can’t think of any scenario worse than keeping Obama. And if people that read a free market blog don’t see that, what about all those uninformed voters that think he just needs more time for his great Obamanomics to work.

          • I think you are so mired in a failed political philosophy that you can’t see the reason we have an Obama presidency in the first place…it is precisely because of that philosophy. Obama is President because of weak and ineffective representation of basic American principles by the Republicans for the majority of the country over a period of decades. I would take Palin over Romney a thousand times over.

            Anyone, who votes to pass Marxist constructed legislation, is in my book, a Marxist.


        • Reply to 5/31 @ 16:47  –  Tom he’s already openly opposed the rule of law several times. try to keep up. you apparently have no real appreciation for the danger he poses. God help us all when even apparently bright people don’t have a clue regarding this.

  • You guys are missing the point, all of you. Listen …
    I think is it fair to say that we would vote for a one-shoed wino swigging sterno if we thought he had a shot.
    Palin is important because she can take O to the mat.
    Look at his impossibleness, the Donald. The blonde Don actually wrangled a birth certificate out of the O camp precisely because he took ’em to the mat.
    Do you really think T-paw or say Johnson can grapple that way?
    I’m betting on Michele or Sarah. They know how to claw eyes out.

    • I think you are missing the point. Which is : not enough people will vote for her. They do not like her and aren’t ever going to. She has been out there 3 yrs now. People have already formed their opinion of her.
      Garnering less than 50% of the vote will not be a moral victory. It will be a loss.

      • I’ll stand by the conclusion. With regard to Sara there is no doubt that she will polarize but that does not mean that is all bad. Michele is the same with less baggage. This is going to be an absolutely filthy race and I just don’t think T-paw would be able to survive it. Listen to the pundits on the talk shows. It is all couched in polite talk describing the ways the Republicans are going to lose the election. When talk comes around to the “girls” it is genuine fear that you see on their faces because they would survive the smears and take O to task on his foreign and domestic policy and win. My personal favorite is Michele just now but you just never know what is going to happen.

      • I think you are missing the point, and drastically so.  She does not need to get to 60%, she does not need to get to 55%.
        In fact, if they were coming from the in the right states, I think she only needs to get to 47 or 48%–and Todd’s the First Gentleman.
        That’s all she needs to beat the Won.
        Gingrich, Giuliani, Romney…every one of these has better numbers than Palin (or had until recently).  None of them have much chance to beat Obama, because they offer too little for the Tea Party types to go all in for them.  The GOP nominee will need that enthusiasm to counter the the MSM, who won’t be less in the tank for Obama next time compared to last time.  His electoral success is all the MSM can have to be glad about, since reality is handing their worldview it’s head in every other way.  They will tendentiously prevaricate about any GOP candidate, so it may as well be one who will accomplish something substantial if they win.
        The only thing that can prevent Palin’s numbers from rising on balance–her negatives falling and her positives rising–is if when she becomes specific about future plans, they aren’t what the Tea Party types want to hear.
        The establishment GOP types may rail against her, and all 500 or so of them may not vote for her–the like of Brooks, Wills, and Buckley the Younger…they may even say they voted for Obama against her.  They aren’t needed.  They will not sway moderates.  They will not enthuse moderates.
        Palin can destroy Obama, and she is not clearly beholden to the GOP establishment as so many other “front runners” are.  What other “front runner” has double digit positives who will not only slaughter the Donkey’s sacred cows?
        If she avoids a serious mistake, this is Palin’s race at a walk, and any GOP nominee who makes a serious mistake is probably done.  Romney is done, it will just take several failed primaries for the zombie to fall over.

        • I am a Tea Party supporter and I will vote for whoever wins the Republican primary. And the reason Obama will probably win is that too many Palin supporters will sit home in a huff if she doesn’t win the primary and if she does win the primary too many people  that “don’t want that woman in the WH” will get up off the sofa and go to the polls.
          Also, once someone has already formed a negative opinion it usually doesn’t change. Whoever wins has to carry the purple states. Not sure where you got the 60% from.

          • In the first place, the figure was a rhetorical device.  But then there’s this:
            Strangest conspiracy theory of all. 60% or so of us don’t think he’s doing a good job.
            If Obama’s numbers are bad enough, it won’t matter if Palin’s negatives are high–Obama’s will be worse.
            If he keeps on going to people’s backyards and saying what subsidy he will take from them, and his numbers are still good, Pawlenty may be worth electing.  We’ll see.
            I, for one, don’t begin to think Palin’s numbers will stay low.
            I don’t know why you or McQuain think they must.
            I don’t know why you think any one is electable who will not credibly promise to reverse course.
            I will not vote for the GOP nominee if they are not someone who will not credibly promise to reverse course, I’d rather give the American people more time to admit they are sick of Obama.  It’ll do less harm in the long run.

          • And if Pawlenty keeps on saying what he’s been saying lately, I’d be happy to vote for him.  I’ll only vote for change that can actually produce hope.
            I will not vote for Romney.
            I’m glad I will not even have the choice of voting for Newt.  I’m glad he tapped himself out.

        • I hope Romney isn’t the nominee, too. He’ has to be better than Obama though. I will vote for Ronald McDonald if he’s the one running against Obama. You know a lot of the surprises he has waiting for us don’t kick in until after 2012.
          As for the negative numbers, it’s easier to get votes against something rather than for. I wish people would change their minds about Palin – I just don’t think they will. They’ve had 3 yrs to form an opinon.
          In general, yes I think RINO’s do a lot of harm to the party and the country; I still don’t understand how anybody thinks Obama wouldn’t be worse though. If you haven’t read them, I would suggest the newest books from Stanley Kurtz and David Limbaugh to get a better picture of Obama. If conservatives/libertarians/classical liberals don’t get it, we’re screwed worse than I thought.

  • No short and curlies necessary. Just McCain doing what he thinks is the decent and honorable thing for his former running mate.

    In fact, this reflects McCain’s shortcomings as a Republican standardbearer- 1) that he’ll put honor ahead of principle, 2) that he’s influenced by what others say is honorable.

    • Really? because he always just came off to me as a rank opportunist who hides behind ideas like Honor, patriotism and conservatism.   But that’s just an opinion based upon his actions for thirty years, and his constant attacks on other republicans, I might be wrong.

  • So if Palin is a sure winner it means that McCain brought down the McCain/Palin ticket. It seems funny to me that he now supports Palin and actually admits his mistakes.