Gone are the virtues which made leaders electable before, now all you need is to be an Obama to be electable.

There’s a clear difference. What used to get people elected, now no longer do. Because the Left has changed the rules of the game. Instead of winning the game by doing better, the Left changed the rules. See how that works.

I thought her speech in India was a clear step forward–though just a single step–toward restoring her in my eyes. The Madison speech was a reversion to the Palin whom I no longer support.

As pure oratory, it was her best performance since her convention speech–but water has flowed under the bridge since then. She absolutely lost me when she attacked the GOP Congressional leadership. I don’t know whether the supposed budget cuts are legit and I’m all for holding the GOP’s feet to the fire, but half-term, newly enriched Palin is not someone with standing to attack Republicans for not standing and fighting.

2. If she doesn’t get her way in the GOP, will she do a third-party run? When/if she takes questions, someone should ask her.

3. She invoked Scott Walker, but afaik–correct me if I’m wrong–there was no interplay between her and any member of the Walker team. Afaik she did not meet with Walker privately.

4. At worst, she’d still be better than Obama, I tell myself. Then again, we’re learning how much worse Obama can be than Bush. And a catastrophic failure of the GOP’s presidential campaign could cost the party one or both houses of Congress.

5. This agnostic would have been impressed had a dove appeared above Palin; I was not impressed by her wearing a crucifix. (Unless I’ve overlooked how male fashion has evolved, it’s a signal that male candidates cannot match. Interesting.)

6. “Maybe I should ask some of the Badger women’s hockey team – those champions – maybe I should ask them if we should be suggesting to GOP leaders, they need to learn how to fight like a girl!” Last month, Pajamas Media columnist Carey Roberts asked, Or is she an old-school, quota-embracing, male-bashing feminist who also happens to be pro-life? Is she a shake-and-bake liberal whose political resumé includes support for the ill-fated bridge to nowhere and a record-breaking $6.6 billion state operating budget in 2007? Indeed.

7. A personal impression: Palin’s power lust is even more blatant than the Clintons’. Only the Kennedys come to mind as topping it.
*************************
No, give me a competent sitting GOP governor. (That’s not to exclude someone like Paul Ryan emerging from a divided convention.)

Yet, if its a choice between Palin or any of these characters: Pawlenty, the Newt, Santorum or Huckabee; I go with Palin. ( BTW rickl, IMO the Donald will not run as an independent.)

A real wild card in 2012 will be someone running against Obama in the early primaries. My home, Iowa is a swing state. Democrats in Iowa are roughly a 50-50 mix of prairie populists and ‘Reagan democrats’. I believe a considerable percentage of the populists would go for a challenge by someone like Russ Feingold. Likewise, a considerable percentage of the ‘Reagan democrats’ would rush to HRC. Obama could receive a serious bruising in the Iowa caucuses.

I completely agree with you. Common sense, courage and the ability to make right decisions are highly necessary for any president and any serious candidate for president.

Necessary, but not sufficient. Experience, preferably managerial experience (in government or business or the military) is crucial as well. And this is where Palin is lacking. Yes, she was a governor and a small-town mayor. But, this limited experience pales in comparison to Reagan’s two terms as governor of the nation’s largest state and Truman’s 10 years in the U.S. Senate.

Another crucial quality: the ability to neutralize one’s opponents without alienating those indecisive souls known as “independents”. And here, Palin is especially deficient. As I said before, it is not entirely her fault. But, it is reality. I understand how much she excites tea partiers; I respect her chutzpah when, quite frankly, many other GOP prospects are too demure, too unwilling or unable to go for the jugular. And I appreciate that she has matured in that she now seems to understands that being on the defensive against the MSM is counterproductive; the key is to make light of them and subtly imply that, no she doesn’t take them that seriously or care all that much what they say about her.

All that being said, the simple fact is that a she will never be acceptable to vast number of independent voters. A Palin nomination would mobilize and unite the left behind Obama to an extreme that no other GOP nominee would, while alienating a vast majority of “centrists”. It is a recipe for certain defeat.

Don’t misunderstand me: I am NOT saying that the GOP nominee should abandon all principle in a shameless effort to pander to the whims of fickle independent voters. Not at all. But, ideally, he or she should be able to motivate and excite the conservative base, while appealing to independents and keeping the left relatively indifferent (“meh, I’ll vote for Obama, but I can live with ‘GOP Nominee’ as president”).

I don’t know if such a candidate exists. But, I know that it is not Palin.

Everything you just said about Palin was said about Reagan and Truman…two of my favorite modern-day presidents.

Common sense and ability (and courage) to make the right decisions go a long way in my book.

“The bottom line: experience and a proven record will (and should) matter much more than charisma…This eliminates Palin immediately.”

What “proven record” are you tallking about? Who has a “proven record” of dealing with the exact issues facing America right now?

Sorry, that’s a ridiculous platitude.

In our present situation we have need of two or three things, in a very precise hierarchy of orders.

First, we need someone with the right principles. That is, someone who knows the basics of America, the Free Market, Freedom, the Constitution, the American People, our History and traditions and Way of Life and so on and so on. That person will know that the U.S. Constitution is bedrock, for example. And that the government serves the people and not vice-versa.

Second, we need someone who will act on principle first and politics second. We are in need of a great President and the sine qua non of that is a great person.

Third, we need a strong person who will stand her ground on the principles and on her faith in those principles as they have always worked in the American people. In short, even a person who can stand there and do nothing against the rages of the machine if it calls for that….or to call against raging machine to do something when it wants to not.

Fourth, we need someone who knows she doesn’t know everything. Socrates called that the height of Wisdom. We now laugh at it. That only proves our smart people are un-wise.

Finally, we need a strong leader. There is none like Palin. None. Not even a close second. I am frankly embarrassed by the men. They are wimps and losers. I wish everyone of them would gracefully concede now because based on leadership they’ve shown none and deserve nothing.

I could add in business experience and appreciation of what it takes to work.

Palin has everything we need now in over-abundance.

I am going to predict that not only will she run; she will win.

Why? Because she is the answer to the problem of the unthinkable demise of America under Obama. Since that cannot happen, it will not happen – and the person to beat him and restore America is Palin.

You lose.

The GOP must respond in kind if it is to have a decent chance at defeating Obama. This requires a candidate with a strong, conservative record. One who doesn’t compromise principles, but has shown himself or herself to be able to build bridges. Okay, this sounds rather cliched. The bottom line: experience and a proven record will (and should) matter much more than charisma.

This eliminates Palin immediately. Now, before the Palinphiles jump all over me, I will gladly concede that she has more experience than Obama did in 2008. But, that’s irrelevant. Remember, we need a candidate who is un-Obama (2008) in experience and persona. Sarah Palin is, to be honest, more celebrity than substance. She is a great speaker, a great fundraiser, and a tremendous asset in inspiring and leading the grassroots, the Tea Party…. But, she is not experienced enough to ever be taken seriously as a presidential candidate. Furthermore, she is far, far too much of a divisive figure. This is mostly not her fault, but it is a fact. And I do not believe that it can ever be surmounted. I know that Reagan was seen as divisive before 1980 too; but, not to the same extreme. A Palin nomination will virtually guarantee Obama’s re-election, period.

I believe that Palin understands this. And while she undoubtedly enjoys her celebrity status, I do not think that she is an egomaniac (unlike a certain real estate mogul turned reality t.v. star turned unserious prospective presidential candidate). In the end, I think that Palin will gracefully decline to run, stating (quite correctly), that she can have the most influence right where she is currently.

Heretofore, I’ve been concerned about her electability. My attitude now is I really do think she can win and even if she doesn’t I’ll still want a chance to vote for her as opposed to the other Republican wimps who seem to be forerunners. I HUNGER for a chance to see her debate Obama.

How about Palin/Cain in 2012?