Wash Times: Palin to Support Conservatives, Regardless of Party
Ralph Hallow of the Washington Times has an exclusive interview with Governor Palin, in which she reiterates a point that she had made in her resignation speech -- that she'll speak out on behalf of conservative candidates regardless of party affiliation:
The former Republican vice-presidential nominee and heroine to much of the GOP's base said in an interview she views the electorate as embattled and fatigued by nonstop partisanship, and she is eager to campaign for Republicans, independents and even Democrats who share her values on limited government, strong defense and "energy independence."
"I will go around the country on behalf of candidates who believe in the right things, regardless of their party label or affiliation," she said over lunch in her downtown office, 40 miles from her now-famous hometown of Wasilla — population 7,000 — where she began her political career.
[...]
The governor, 45, said she shared former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's view that Republicans, now trailing Democrats and independents in registration in many states, should back moderate-to-conservative Democrats in congressional districts and states where Republicans stand almost no chance of winning.
The object would be to build a majority coalition that reflects what polls suggest is the current center-right tilt of the U.S. electorate as a whole.
Oddly, Hallow extensively quotes Andree McLeod and Randy Reudrich on the subject of Palin. He never once mentions that McLeod is an unhinged disgruntled office-seeker nor that Reudrich is the corrupt GOP party chairman that Palin turned in after resigning from the AOGCC. Reudrich was forced to pay the largest ethics fine in the state’s history. Anything he or Andree McLeod says about Sarah Palin should been seen in light of that information.
Not sure what Hallow and the Washington Times are going for with the tone and headline of the piece, it just seems "off". Are they trying to separate Palin from the GOP base? Just a vibe that I get, read and decide for yourselves.
UPDATE by RAM: It should be noted that Gov. Palin has never believed in obsessive partisanship. However, that's not to say that she's going to campaign for Democrats that she philosophically disagrees with.
She has obviously taken a play out of the book The Thumpin' which she mentioned last night on the Michael Duke's Radio Show. The book describes how the Democrats in 2005 decided to endorse conservative candidates in conservative districts in order to win back their majority in the House in the 2006 elections.
Gov. Palin is saying that we must win back districts in places like the Northeast and the Pacific Northwest and the various blue state strongholds. We must be fearless and go for a 50 state strategy. She's willing to fight. We'll fight with her.
UPDATE by Tim: Tammy Bruce has posted her thoughts on the article, and sees hope for a Palin-led conservative movement independent of the GOP establishment:
Enter now Sarah Palin with very encouraging comments that lead one to believe that she is indeed planning to do what she must: build an independent conservative movement and take this nation back from the liberals which now control both parties.Thanks liberals, for provoking Sarah into the national scene while vetting that family at the same time.
UPDATE by Daniel: Tammy Bruce discussed Governor Palin's interview with the Washington Times on her radio show this afternoon. Take a listen:
UPDATE II by RAM: Not to beat a dead horse here, but Hallow actually describes Randy Ruedrich as "another friend turned critic." When the hell was Ruedrich ever her friend? Did Hallow do even basic background fact checking? How in the world could he not have known that Palin blew the whistle on Ruedrich, and as a consequence he had to pay the largest ethics fine in the state's history? And how could he fail to note that Andree McLeod's animus towards Palin stems from the fact that Palin refused to give McLeod a government job?
If you're as annoyed as I am, feel free to email Hallow and ask him if he has a clue.
Posts
303 comments:
Memo to Team Palin (incl Meg Stapleton):--
Carefully listen to Mark Levin show from Friday nite (guest host Michael Berry). I think Palin should carefully weigh in, now, on the Sotomayor hearings coming up this week. Other Republicans -- including not "true" conservatives will not have the cajones!
It was a good read. Though I agree it would have been nice if he had given a little bit of background about why McLeod and Reudrich really don't like Sarah.
My favorite part of the article was the green feet at the end :) Maybe ordinary barbarians can also be called "the green feets".
That's the media's modus operandi, to divide and conquer. Comes as no surprise.
I get the same vibe. Truly, where Sarah is concerned, nothing surprises me anymore. Her mere presence has exposed the cleavage between the "Statists" in both parties and those who value Liberty and individual responsibility.
She should support Peter Schiff , one of those who warned about the house bubble , he's running for the senate.
Nothing can separate Sarah's base of (true) supporters from her.
Nothing.
Washington Times piece re Sarah supporting conservative Dems NOW ON DRUDGE!
can you say marco rubio?
SARAH PLEASE ENDORSE MARCO RUBIO
Well, one thing is for sure, even though Gov. Palin went on a whirlwind rally tour last election...hardly stopping to take a pee...she gets to choose this time where she stops, and the GOP better get in the attitude adjustment line now or risk losing those campaign dates.
2010 is so not very far away. Heck, neither is 2012.
The thing is I am not sure if Marco Rubio has fire in the belly. He's playing it very mildly or maybe it's too early. Crist is way ahead in funding, if Sarah endorses Rubio and he doesn't fight, Sarah would've made an enemy of Crist needlessly.
BTW, is Crist still in office? And he can happily collect his salary and keep campaigning, can he?
I think the headline is a distortion of what Gov. Palin said. She never stated that she was going to support conservative Dems. Never used that phrase at all. She said she was open to supporting conservatives and candidates friendly to her agenda regardless of their party label.
The truth is that 99.9% of the federal candidates who will be friendly to the Palin agenda will be Republicans.
Good article overall, but wildly distorted headline (probably to drive website hits).
Ted,
That video is not new. It has been out for some weeks now.
Been thinking a lot about the pros and cons of Palin publicly supporting Rubio vs. Crist.
In any case, will be interesting!
Ted , she could support Rubio just to make a point.
This is what makes Sarah so dangerous to the Statists and Elites. She doesn't play by the "Rules"! She follows a guiding principle of "What's best for my State and Country. She won't be "handled" or controlled. I also think she is kinda saying " You want to see going rogue, I'll freakin' show you going rogue!" And that is one thing her critics fail to grasp.
Hef, sorry, still a GREAT video (and hadn't heard about it) till someone raised it on a below thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKXhR_0zs7s
This tweet probably captures what she's really railing against:
http://twitter.com/AKGovSarahPalin/status/2584648914
She gave this interview in her office?
Hope that does not come up?
If she is on her lunch break though she can do what she wants.
Debstar, I tend to agree.
In fact I CANNOT THINK OF ONE SINGLE GREATER "CAJONES" ACT BY PALIN THAN PUBLICLY SUPPORTING RUBIO NOW!
As I say, it will be interesting to watch because doing that certainly is the ultimate in cajonehood!
...and truthfully even I would not fault Palin for passing on that now (publicly endorsing Rubio over Crist).
Once, again, Sarah shows she has a political instinct that is sorely lacking in other politicians. Supporting a conservative Dem in a state that NEVER votes Republican will, in fact, keep the far left loons out. That shows true political wisdom. Notice I did not say intelligence. There IS a difference.
"Don't get my toes in the picture-they're green on the bottom."
"Indeed they were. She said the marks were grass stains she had got from her mowing her lawn the previous day."
Reason 327 why I think she is awesome.
This is a shot across the bow of both parties.
Does anyone still think SarahPAC has only raised $100,000 up to the end of June?
Anyone now think Sarah is going to disappear into the woodwork, go Hollywood or get spoiled by money as Levi Johnston suggests, or retire permanently from politics to hunt moose every day.
Well, I read the green toe statement and I think it is just terrible. Now OSHA will be upset. Was she mowing barefoot?
Good grief, that just proves how reckless she is.
She does not think through anything. How careless. /Sarc
Well right of the back, McLeod is lying, we've seen her pressreleases
on policy issues, like the
stimulus, missile defense,et al. there is no I in her statements, it's the State of Alaska, doing this, and that. Not surprising Ruedrich is distorting the way things really were. We've seen how Ramras,Hawker, et al, don't give a darn about conservativeprinciples.
How there are maybe four members in the legislature that subscribe to the same principles she does.
What she is doing, is pretty much what Reagan did after he was elected, wrangle the Boll Weevil Democrats who made up part of the coalition, many of theseeventually defected to the Republican side. but to assemble the coalition, beforehand is
trickier
RAM, thanks for this info: "Gov. Palin is saying that we must win back districts in places like the Northeast and the Pacific Northwest"
From Vancouver, WA I say "Hello, Sarah." I was so hoping she was going to directly use her influence down here against Brian Baird and Senator Patty Murray in 2010. Both extreme greenies and extreme Obamaites. I've written them both and it is so frustrating to know they don't give a crap about listening to either reason or their constituents. Baird is my Congressional Rep who just went to the Galpalous Islands on a fact finding mission on the tax payer's dime while ignoring the suppressed EPA report. And Murray has been voted the stupidest person in the Senate I don't know how many times. Taking these two out would definitely be in Alaskans best interests. They vote against EVERYTHING Sarah supports.
By going this route Sarah just took attacking her political credibility as a conservative right off the table.
And what she also did was broaden the fight to include a sixeable percentage of Democrats who vehemently oppose Obama but have no political home at the present time. Well now they will.
Robert_Paulson-I agree. There's sort of a 3rd Party innuendo there also, and Sarah's too smart and has too much humility for that. Too good a student of Reagan too.
And you're right--where are you going to find a Dem who's a better choice??
I think her statement is a warning shot to RINO's that she's coming in full CUDA mode. It's Repubs like Crist and Lindsay Graham who should be doing an "Uh-Oh" right about now, if/when they face a Primary challenge.
MarkRNY:
The key to the announcement that Sarah will support OTHER candidates and nothing about her own personal political future.
And who is the first person that Sarah is supporting now that she's out of politics?
None other than Texan Governor Rick Perry, who at one time wanted to secede from the United States.
Excellent choice, IMO.
WOOOOOOOOO GO SARAH!!!!!!!!!!
Good point Techno.
This sites addicting! I'm late for a wedding!...Am I in the Wedding Part?...
That article is a pile of poop. Wasted 10 min. reading that. the journalist is a border-line psycho, he was trying to write a hit piece but ended up neither here nor there.
I'll tell you one thing bout publicly supporting Rubio over Crist, IT WOULD CERTAINLY DECLARE SARAH'S INDEPENDENCE FROM OLD-TIME ESTABLISHMENT GOP!
How bout a poll/discussion here: should she or should she not?
(arguments for: Crist is an Obama-loving self-serving typical no-princpled pol)
(argument against: Crist will likely win anyway -- even with Sarah backing Rubio)
Techno,
I wouldn't expect that Sarah raised $10 million with SarahPac. I would guess she raised between $2 to $4 million in this quarter. Those would be great numbers for someone who isn't running for anything right now. But I wanted to ask your thoughts on this book, "The Thumpin," and what Sarah sees as an orchestrated strategy from this book executed on her? I think this really bolsters her credibility, because her enemies were willing to stop at nothing to bankrupt her to drive her out of politics. This is according to her account of what the book says. IF this is true, as far as what the book says, then what do these pundits and elite bloggers have to say now about her unjustifiable reasons for resigning? Obviously, if her opponents were willing to stop at nothing to bankrupt Palin, then they had no regard for Alaska. THIS IS PRECISELY PALIN's POINT. So in my mind, her credibility is even more solid with this book revelation. I am going to the book store to find that book and if need be order it on Amazon. This is a blockbuster, what's your thoughts.
Why don't they ever just post the precise Q and A?
We already know the circumstances surrounding her resignation. Why try to make your story a narrative rather than just the straight interview?
Just do what TIME did.
Tammy hits the nail on the head. The movement to take back America from the liberal nutroots, is on full force with the leader being Sarah.
Michael Steele has done a horrible job so far, and the Liberal elitist North-easterners have plagued both parties.
Sarah is ultra-confident and she must be garnering a lot of money from SarahPAC. She knows we ordinary barbarians and average Americans are sick of most of the people in Washington.
The only two people that come off the top of my head are Heath Schuler and Walt Minnick from her place of birth.
She could be just saying this for the rhetorical effect because there really aren't any Democrats in office who support the three things she mentioned (limited government, strong national defense, and energy independence).
Where are the pictures by the way?
Steven:
Thumpin did not work- With Sarah leaving Alaska--end the strategy to bankrupt Sarah. Back to tried-and-true Alinsky, if you know what I mean.
Surprisingly I predicted she would raise $6-$7m from Jan. 27th to the end of June. You say $2-$4m in the last quarter. Our numbers are not that far apart.
tammys opinion is right on the money. I think Sarah is backing away from the RINO GOP who are all a bunch of Romney lovers. Sarah is gonna create her own Independent Conservative party, Count me in, I will join. I was done with the GOP a long time ago. I don't have any party affiliation, I consider myself a Conservative. I vote for people who share my views, regardless of what party they belong to. If Sarah creates a new Conservative Movement Ronald Raagan will be smiling from heaven. Remember, Reagan was done with the GOP too, he hated what the party had become, he would be rolling over in his grave if he knew what was happening to his beloved party
Techno,
If you say $6 to $7 million then it must be true! If so, then wow! That's going to knock the socks off of all those prognosticators doubting this woman going forward. That would be huge and put Obama on notice!
Jenny , I think Sarah should support Steel as RNC chairman even if he's a moderate , that way mitt etc has less support. It's a crack in the GOP mess.
Laker , she should create a pseudo party , less hassle almost all the power.
The same ones who are upset with Sarah doing this are the same ones who would want her head on a stick if she came out to support Charlie Crist and Susan Collins. I'll support ANYONE over those two RINOS. Lets all look at the list of those who voted FOR cap and trade and those Republicans who voted FOR the stimulus package..she is sending a message to the GOP establishment, either wake the hell up or lose us Conservatives
abstract question:
"Why is your index finger the same size as your nostrils?"
I keep telling people that Republicanism is dead thanks to Bush. Conservatism has been reborn, thanks to Sarah and partially to Obama for showing us his threat.
If Palin Were President:
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/07/11/if-palin-were-president-now/
Daily Kos??? You've got to be kidding me! LOL! Do some FACTUAL research & get back to us!
Sarah is creating a powerful Conservative voting block and will make the party come to her.
Doesn't matter what letter Sarah has after her name on the ballot. As far as I'm concerned, she's the perfect leader of the Tea Party, which consists of fed up D's, I's, and R's. She's going to be like the pied piper, picking up support everywhere she goes. The Obamacrats are going to turn on any Blue Dog Dems that don't fall in line, and it sounds like Sarah is offering them a viable alternative. Hang on folks, I think the Second American Revolution may be underway, and Sarah has fired the shot heard round the world.
Ha Ha.
What a load of bull. That is the biggest lie, Perry wanted to secede.
LOL.
As a Texan who has a minor in history and has even taught Texas History as well as sat under Dr. Ralph Wooster in a Texas History college class (He is THE guy in Texas History) all that shows how dumb and uneducated libs are.
Texas cannot secede from the Union.
Dimwits. Instead Texas may divide itself up into UP TO 5 states total.
PLEASE. Perry is an Aggie for goodness sake. He never said we should secede.
LAUGHING MY TEXAN REAR OFF....HA HA.
"Irrefutable evidence" from the Daily Kos. What's next, it will be confirmed and verified by the Huffington Post?
I wish the Daily KOS would have a print addition.
I live in hurricane country...when one hits supplies are tight for a while.
Daily KOS would be great to use to wipe my Sarah Palin supporter butt with until toilet paper was available again.
Left my comment on the Washington Times article:
Decent article – with the exception of a few elements of it. You seem to quickly quote McCloud and Reudrich, w/o giving your readers any background information on who they are and what their relationship is with the Governor. I’ll help you. First of all, Andree McCloud is pissed off that she never got a job in Palin’s administration – so be it, the way she now attacks the Governor just proves she would not have been a loyal person to work with. But, since then she kind of went off her rocker, filing fatuous ethics complaints right and left and trash talking the Governor. Talk about holding a grudge. Randy Reudrich was/is the chair of the Alaska Republican party, also who Sarah blew the whistle on for unethical behavior, as she was the ethics director of the AOGCC. So he holds contempt for her because of that. So no wonder you say “the temperature must have dropped 20 degrees with the mention of his name.” To put it bluntly, McCloud and Reudrich are no friends of the Governor’s, you might go as far as labeling them as her political enemies. So for you to quote them - of all people - is not only odd, it’s dishonest that you did not give insight into their relationship with the Governor, believe it or not, when it comes to the Governor, they will always be bias. But, I don’t hold that to strongly against you, it’s a typical thing the media does, especially when it comes to Palin. Also, this isn’t so “Exclusive” as you title it. Palin has never been beholden to the Republican party or any party for that matter, she’s more independent than anything, yes conservative in nature, but she governs libertarian, trying to do what’s right – not trying to appease any one party or person, hence the appeal she has with many who are sick of the Washington political establishment and the two-party system. Everyone just tried to paint her as a partisan politician on the campaign trail, only because she was stumping for McCain, her record shows otherwise.
I believe in Sarah whole heartedly. Wherever she leads I will support her financially and spiritually.I will vote for her regardless of party or no party.
I have always said Sarah is a True American Patriot, and will always place Americans First. She Loves God and Country and that is what makes her special. She has a proven record of accomplishments and I will continue to stand with her because she represents me.
God bless Sarah and her precious family in the name of Jesus.
This same story has been on Free Republic for awhile now, and the response is overwhelmingly positive. If the headline was meant to divide her from her base, it backfired, everyone thinks it's another brilliant move on Sarah Palin's part, and it is. I don't see many or even any democrats inviting her to campaign for them, but it will definately get attention. When and if she runs, her slogan should be: Putting the People and the Country Above Party.
No one can honestly say that Palin is "politics as usual," because there is nothing usual about her, and that is one of her primary appeals. She's not a cardboard cutout like most in politics, she doesn't focus group her speeches, she doesn't poll to find out what her position should be, none of the "usual" stuff politicans do.
As far as SarahPAC goes, I'm still confident that she has raised a significant amount, but what will be really alarming to those in power is the number of people who donated. She has probably raised twice as much as Romney, from 20 to 50 times as many people. She'll have a formidable donor base by time 2011 rolls around, and the potential to massively out fundraise any and all competators.
Just read morning editorial by Kathleen Parker titled...
Palin was 'invented' by the media..... usual hit piece lunacy but my point in bringing this up is to say Parker was critical of Sarah supposedly complaining of her $500,000 debt defending ethics charges when she is making big money on a book.... and this statement of how, in the first month of SarahPac, donors gave about $500,000.
If that is true SarahPAC should be substantial when reported.
How convoluted of Parker to now want to take credit for Inventing 'Palin' and by inference wanting to de-Invent her with garbage logic and stinking thinking.
Steven:
I haven't for awhile broken down where I get my $6-$7m figure. Of course I could be way off-hey my middle name isn't Nostradamus.
Here is what I considered from Feb-the end of June:
(before her resignation)
1)Sarah's Facebook membership around 500,000, Team Sarah membership 68,000 and Rush Limbaugh listeners-a potential 22m
2)the monthly sustaining donor option that allows a contribution despite what is going on positively or negatively in Palin's world
3)along with #2 a minimum $25 option on SarahPAC
4)Michael Steele driving many Rush Limbaugh listeners to donate only to SarahPAC
5)if only .5% of Rush's audience donated to Sarah PAC only on a one time basis that would be 100,000 listeners donating $2.5m
6)And if 20% of TS membership donated one a one time basis that would be (13,600 x 25)=340,000
7)and if 10% of her Facebook members gave her $25
55000 x$25=1.375m
8)now I have not accounted for any monthly sustaining donation.
Is it inconceivable that Sarah could have raised $6-$7m over a 5 month period?
There is a huge, maximo problem with endorsing Blue Dogs, even when their heart is in the Right Place.
Now this is actually how Sarah Governed! But it is not how Washington actually works. Blue Dogs get to D.C., and find out that they are actually creatures of David Obey, Steny Hoyer, and Nance-in-Your-Pants.
They end up being used by the progressive caucus because of the Whip System in the House.
HOWEVER, Sarah could be playing a really, really shrewd long, long, game.
Suppose she becomes President of the United States in 2013, against EVERYTHING that EVERYONE is saying.
She'll have to undo all the damage that both the Bushtard and Barack Obama Administrations have done. That means that she will have to work with a COALITION in the House and Senate, much as Reagan did in 1981.
And exactly as she did from 2007-2008.
So, why shouldn't she canvass for Republican Study Group types who mean what they say when it comes to budgets. Why shouldn't she canvass for Blue Dog Democrats who feel betrayed by Obama's reckless spending and start voting against Health Care.
Palin clearly intends to lead a populist, fiscally-conservative, Jacksonian Coalition against entrenched power in Washington. You cannot do that, maintain your authenticity, and assume a hyperpartisan stance.
But you can undermine the Democratic Party in power, reach across the aisle to "Hillary Democrats" and capture Independents who are looking for a Harry Truman. Only now they are waking up to the fact that they elected a Used Car Dealer who misplaced his plaid jacket.
The long and the short of what I wrote above: Sarah is much smarter than her opponents think she is, and is already thinking about how to build a governing coalition in the first year of the Obama Administration by thinking how to do two things:
1. Take over the Republican Party by electing Reaganite fiscal conservatives.
2. Conduct an insurgency inside the Democratic Party by working with former Hillary Supporters and Fiscal, Jacksonian Blue Dogs.
Popcorn, anyone?
The outlines of what Palin has planned are only beginning to be felt. Brilliance, imho. Indeed, can one say, "Reaganesque"?
addition=edition opps.
I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with her supporting conservative candidates on the other side of the isle. The current crop of Republicans have done major damage to the conservative movement--George W. Bush being the biggest offender--so this makes perfect sense to me. I only registered Republican last year so I could vote in the FL primary. I've been registered as "NPA" most of my adult life while still voting for conservative candidates. I would support a Democrat if he/she was more conservative than the Republican opponent.
Look, I think the optimism about SarahPAC fundraising is great, but the truth is that it is very unlikely that if the Gov raised even only $500K for the first half of the year, that would be considered a solid performance, and if she cleared $1 million that would be considered impressive, and $1.5 million-plus would be amazing by any conventional historical standard.
Talk of $2 million plus in less than six months sets the bar way too high.
Regarding Techno's estimate of SarahPAC: Franklin Graham used her in his fundraising for Samaritan's Purse a few months ago, sending out millions of fundraising letters featuring a picture of him with Gov. Palin. The NRA featured the story of her getting a custom built rifle in their magazine, 4 million+ subscribers, plus the story was BIG news for a couple of weeks on the blogs.
If you take a look at the graph of SarahPAC traffic at this link, you will notice that there was pretty steady, low level traffic, with a big spike in May then increased traffic through June, and a huge spike in July.
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/07/07/sarah-palin-sees-big-gain-in-facebook-friends-following-announce/
I thinh some are missing the point about Sarah's strategy. She is not saying she will campaign for any Democrat over the Republican opponent. I believe she was saying that she would help conservative Democrats out in their PRIMARIES against far lefties.
Take this example. A Congressioonal District in New York State. Based on past elections, the Republicans have no chance of ever winning the district. The current incumbent is a conservative Dem. But he is being challenged in his primary by an ultra liberal who is being heavily financed with Soros money - and the race is close. I think what Sarah is saying in this case, she would support and fundraise for this conservative Dem to ensure he doesn't lose his primary to the ultra liberal. She would also encourage Republican voters to cross over and vote for the conservative Democrat in the primary (assuming an open primary) in order to ensure this district continues to be represented by someone who has conservative views. However, once he wins he is on his own in the general. That's all I think Sarah is saying and it makes sense.
This is a good strategy for Sarah to pursue for two reasons. First, because of her attack dog role in 2008 she is viewed by many independents and Democrats as being too partisan. She needs to show she is not a hard line partisan in order to attract these voters to cross over and vote for her in 2012.
Also, if elected President in 2012, she will need a conservative minded Congress - both Republican and Democratic to get her reforms through. Remember Reagan was able to get his agenda through with a Democratic House because apart from the leadership, there were a lot of conservative Democrats who supported Reagan's initiatives.
If Democratic Congressional seats keep being won by the loonie left, even if Sarah is elected as President she won't be able to do much. It will be just like the Alaska Legislature all over again.
Greg:
Did you notice that I never even brought that up and still got to $6-$7m?
Please strike the phrase: "it is very unlikely that" from my comments above.
Greg:
Correct me if I'm wrong. If one signed up for the monthly sustaining donation, one would only have to visit the SarahPAC web site once and thus the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th donation would not show up in SarahPAC traffic.
Techno,
Its not inconceivable, but it would to me most likely happen in a year 2011 and not 2009. All I am saying is that if your number is the number then this will send a political shockwave to the system. It will more than silence anyone who thinks that Palin's political prospects for the presidency is finished. With that type of fundraising base, which would be unrivalled on the GOP side, she can at her whim run for the nomination and be a force. Not to mention that the only way she will be able to make inroads with independents and women, would be to have the resources to take her message to them. But let's not also forget that a $2 to $4 million number also is a very substantial amount and pretty much says the same thing, but without the shockwave to the system.
Steven:
I think we may be talking apples and oranges. Is your $2-$4m a quarterly amount or since Jan 27 when SarahPAC was unvelied to the end of June?
techno, you and I've been sort of at the forefront of predicting a highly successful fundraising effort. I know that SarahPAC has great potential, whether it has tapped that potential is what were all waiting to see. Perhaps one of the reasons she chose July 26 to transfer power is that SarahPAC's numbers will be revealed a few days later, and she didn't want the state to grind to a complete halt by the barrage of "ethics" complaints that would be filed regarding her fundraising. Just a thought.
Yeah, just visiting the site, without donating would show up as traffic, but I'm still confident that there was significant number of visits that resulted in donations.
I used to watch Feedjit quite a bit, and would count numerous C4P visitors exiting via SarahPAC, sometimes at the rate of 4 or 5 per hour. I've seen a number of people at Free Republic who report telling the RNC that all their donations are going to SarahPAC, which is something I've done with all their fundraising letters.
Robert Paulson:
For SarahPAC to have raised only $500,000 in the period from Jan 27 to the end of June based on the minimum $25 donation and assuming only a one-time donation that would mean:
20000 donors contributing $25 on a one-time basis.
Anybody who thinks that Sarah Palin had only 20,000 donors contribute to her during this period I will sell them some swamp land in Florida.
And to boot if you think that everybody only contributed the minimum $25 or even more important that everybody only contributed once then I'll sell you the entire Everglades.
My assumptions are not out of line with reality.
I am settling on the 1.2 million number for now!
I want to add to the strategy arguements from section9 and Rusty.
When Sarah said she would support like-minded conservatives - regardless of party - she immediately put the Repubs on notice that she will not tolerate CINO candidates, and that the party runs the risk of her throwing her support behind a blue dawg Dem or a conservative independent. I view this as a shot across the RNC's bow. They had better recruit and support Reaganite conservatives!
I'll go on a limb here and declare that Sarah Palin has quietly realigned the Republican Party with a well-timed remark in an interview.
Greg:
Do you remember how I was slammed for my advocacy that Sarah not run for re-election and devote her full time to the 2010 midterms?
I was crazy, remember. Now many pundits have picked up on that. And today we have the story from the Washinton Times.
And with regards to SarahPAC I predicted 4 months ago Sarah would raise $100m by Nov. 2010. I made a mistake by suggesting it would be all under SarahPAC. Let me qualify that statement by saying 'under the Sarah Palin financial umbrella'. But with that qualification I still stand by my prediction.
Witness what has happened in the last 2 weeks apparently in terms of her exponential increase in Twitter membership and her Facebook members.
For superstar like Sarah only the sky is the limit.
Wow, she even mows her own lawn.
Just finished reading the Washington Times interview where she said don't take a picture of her tows.
Lawn mowing requires a lot of strength to do unless she has one of those where you ride around.
She is one strong lady.
Robert Paulson,
you can always delete your post and then re-post with the correction.
And to bear in mind how not ASSUME anything, for new readers of C4P SarahPAC, Sarah Palin's fundraising arm to defray her travelling her expenses and to help her support 'like-minded conservatives (see Wash. Times thread)is set up where the minimum SUGGESTED donation is $25. In addition there is a section for the 'monthly sustaining donation' (via credit card) that allows SarahPAC to receive a donation from the donor each subsequent month after the first donation without SarahPAC having to get any additional authority to do so from that donor.
Much of my projections are based on the minimum suggested donation and the monthly sustaining donation feature on SarahPAC.
John:
Looks to me more like $1.9 mil. A far cry from the $296.42 you posted.
And, before you start this crap about...blah, blah, blah it's off $26K from the $2 mil she stated...oh, never mind...you'll need to something to bleet about, I'm sure.
Her attorney said she had $250,000 or was it $300,000 in her Fund Trust.
The Fund Trust started after the Sarahpac and the max. donation was only $150.00 per person.
If you use that as a base starting point. Then I think she probably has raised 2 mil. in her Pac.
I simply take Sarah at her words, if she says she will support whoever... regardless of party or no party, thats exactly the way it will be.... looking for a code, if you will, or al-terrier motives is simply not Sarah.... she is not calculating that way!
I've commented before..... Sarah's 'VISION' is one of her most underrated attributes and consequently we should always be looking out-side the box with her.... her statement of supporting whoever, is looking to bring into focus all that is wrong with party affiliation and partisanship and not looking out for the best interests of the people, as their servants.
HUGE OPPORTUNITY! .... her vision is showing us what Alaskans saw clearly in 2006, a totally different politician committed to them regardless
of party affiliation. Sure she ran as a Republican but they all knew she loathed them as much or more as Democrats.
Free now, Im very confident Sarah will build on what we and millions like us already know, she will STAND FOR US and take on the establishment of all politics in America, turn it on its ear as you will,... the media better watch out too!
Sarah's Golden Opportunity is here and now and American politics is ripe for the picking,... 'FEED UP' is her mantra and I cannot wait for her coming out.
juju:
On C4P in 5 days the legal defense campaign raised over $100,000 and remember C4P is not as widely known and does not have the Palin resources to encourage contributions, let alone support from Rush Limbaugh over the past 5 months.
Project that average of $20,000 over the days between Jan 27- to June 30 (154 days)you would get a minimum $3m.
What I have simply done is to double that based on Sarah's own e-mails that she sent out, a newletter than went out by Human Events, and Greg's mention of the Frankin Graham letter and NRA letter.
Tech: I believe you are in the ball park. It won't be long and we will know.
Techno:
A basic benchmark for comparison would be Barack Obama's HopeFund PAC during the 2006 cycle, but specifically during the 1st half of 2005.
Between January and June 30, 2005, HopeFund raised $852K.
Let's look at some others.
Kerry's "Keeping America's Promise" PAC - $385K
Clinton's "Hill PAC" - $716K
McCain's "Straight Talk America" PAC - $2.3M (between 7/1 - 12/31/05)
Now this isn't a perfect picture of the fundraising politicians in the presidential orbit perform early in the process, but it does provide a decent sketch, and for me at least, guides my expectations.
Even under the best of circumstances it takes a lot of work to raise money, and I haven't had the sense that the Gov (for very admirably reasons) put a lot of effort into Sarah PAC. She doesn't have a team of regional staff meeting and cajoling GOP donors. She doesn't appear to have put a lot of "dialing for dollars" time in. She's not holding lots of "getting to know you" dinners with the sorts of people who can raise you $100K simply by calling a a few friends and colleagues. In terms of small donor stuff, She has sent out less than a half-dozen emails from Sarah PAC and she hasn't put out any direct mail.
Based on her own effort, there's no reason to expect that she's raising historic levels of funding. Which isn't necessarily saying that she isn't raising impressive levels of cash. I just don't think we have reason to expect jaw-dropping performance this early.
I freely admit I'm probably being overly cautious, but I think the mostly likely range for SarahPAC is $500K-$1.5M
"We have a very popular President."
Not according to the polling. George W. Bush was more popular than Barack Obama this time in 2001. More independents disapprove of Obama than approve of his performance. Obama is just hoping that conservative Democrats don't desert him.
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/jobapproval-obama.php
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Robert,
We know she raised $400,000 in the first month of the PAC.
TommyReport:
I had completely forgotten that. It was the oggedly-boogedly girl (Kathleen Parker)that reported that. And remember that was before Rush Limbaugh's speech at CPAC.
Thank you TommyReport-you always bring a measure of common sense to the proceedings.
Tommy,
Of course. She got a great burst at the beginning from the website launch. And it definitely looks like she got a burst at the end.
My question is about what happened in between. I expect that there was significant drop-off during the middle period simply because of the lack of staff support and the Gov being unable to devote much of her time due to official duties.
paralleluniversetroll said:
Hey, the Obama administration is going to create that 3 letter word: J-O-B-S!
Robert Paulson:
It's called Rush Limbaugh, Rush Limbaugh and Rush Libaugh. Throw in Freepers pledging only to donate to SarahPAC after March and the April 17th Evansville pro-life speech for good measure you have the prescription for a steady or exponential growth.
Don't forget Rush has a potential 22m listeners, many of whom saw on his web site the movie-like poster called Sum of All Fears featuring Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin together. Rush's dittoheads are not mind-numbed robots but they are open to persuasion. This imagery says it all, Robert. And again Rush has a potential 22m listeners.
Can anyone name a conservative Democrat in Congress?
John,
Your logic fails. At this time, Barack Obama is not a "very popular" president. He's not even as popular as George W. Bush was at this time in 2001.
The polls do not support your claim about Reagan.
The only person Barack Obama is statistically ahead of according to gallup is Bill Clinton. He's less popular than everyone else effectively. Gallup's polling also is more optimistic than his pedestrian average of 54% approval.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121553/Obama-Job-Approval-Drifts-Down-58-So-Far-July.aspx
Robert: The people you named, probably had fund raisers for their pacs. Sarah has not had any fund raisers.
This isn't about starting a third party, it's about a movement....and anyone who believes (or is sympatetic) are invited to join.
Reagan's message was broad and attrated a huge swath of people (conservatives, moderates and blue dog democrats).
John,
In other words, you have data that you can cite to that provides support for your argument that Barack Obama is a "very popular" president.
He simply isn't according to the average of all the data. If you want to argue that 54% is "very popular" then you would have to concede that George W. Bush must have been very very popular at this time in 2001 since he is higher than Barack Obama.
You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own data. Now get the hell off this blog. Some of us deal in the data world.
"We're talking about the worst economic crises since the great depression for God's sake."
No we aren't. Most of us conservatives are doing just fine. We don't blame the government for our problems.
It's your low-income minority class that is crying about it. Are you hungry for some food John? Are you going to stop by the welfare office and give it to more of Barack's low-income minority supporters?
Hit the road, the welfare offices are closing John.
The data indicates that the majority of Obama's supporters are low-income minorities on welfare.
Rick A. Evans --
Sure. One is Brad Ellsworth whose district includes Vanderburgh County, Indiana. Another, just off the top of my head, is Gene Taylor of Mississippi. Others: Schuler of NC, Collin Peterson of MN, Jim Marshall of GA, Dennis Cardoza of CA.
offaclifftroll said:
I like very steep job losses!
John,
The appropriate comparison between Obama and Reagan would be Reagan in 1981, since that was the first year of his first term.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121553/Obama-Job-Approval-Drifts-Down-58-So-Far-July.aspx
Obama still has a long way to go down. Gallup has him at 58% while his average according to pollster.com is 54%.
It's tough when most of your support comes from low-income minorities on welfare. There aren't enough low-income minorities on welfare for him to stay over 50%.
Robert_Paulson - thx
When she says "conservative" Democrats, she means she'll be partnering with DLC types, use her connections with the Hillbot Dems, help Blue Dog Democrats n make sure the progressive choke hold on the Dem party is weakened. Remember she did exactly this in Alaska. She got rid of the corrupt Republican establishment, she partnered with conservatives, appealed to Dems and libertarians.
Even if she can get rid of the progressive GOP establishment she'll have done us a huge service.
Gang,
20% of Democrats now disapprove of Obama's performance. These may be the same 17% of Democrats that indicated that would be very likely or somewhat likely to vote for Palin.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
John , Jimmy Carter was very popular , in the beginning...
lovethosegreekcolumnstroll said:
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barney Frank are economic geniuses, the economy is in good hands.
Debstar,
Don't concede that point. Barack Obama is not "very popular." The polls disprove that argument.
Carter was much more popular than Obama at this point in his first term.
The Palin conservative coalition is a reality. Conservative Democrats, Independents and hard core conservative republicans. This will be a HUGE force against Obama-Biden-Pelosi-Reid-Swarzenneger-Christ-Romney-Hutchinson!
This sounds like a winning force for 2012.
TommyReport:
What has to be made abundantly clear is that Sarah Palin has yet to go through a training camp, has not set her roster, and will not see any action on the field of play until at least July 27th, yet she has amassed as many points on the scoreboard as Romney and Huckabee who have burning the midnight oil and been fully up to speed for at least the last 3-6 months. Perspective and context have to be borne in mind when assessing the true potential of Sarah Palin.
In a small Texas town circa 1975:
Me: Oh, Mom. He is so much fun to play with.
Mom: He is annoying. Just ignore him and he will go away.
Me: But I HAVE been ignoring him and, look, he is still here.
Mom: He is starved for attention, leave him alone and whatever you do DO NOT FEED HIM OR HE WILL NEVER GO AWAY.
Me: But it is fun to watch him run around acting so silly. If he could talk I bet he would quote biased sources that only tell lies and repeat the old talking points and make points that are really silly.
Mom: DO NOT FEED HIM. Some take longer than others to get the hint that they need to leave. Just give it time, honey. Listen to your mother. Just step over him to other things you want to play with and don't even look at him or think about the silly comments he may make if he could talk....besides dear we HAVE a pet already.
John and Tommy , Carter didn't get a second term , and the economy is about to tank totally , on Obamas watch , Obama is a one termer.
"Palin's favorability rating as governor is considerably lower than Obama's as president. Even before she resigned. Har dee har har."
Unfortunately John, that result is of one pollster. The average of a multitude of pollsters puts Obama's national average at 54%.
Palin's favorable rating of around 46% in the last three national polls is respectable in my opinion. It's higher than any other Republican at the moment and is not too different from the numbers held by the current Secretary of State at this time in 2002 and 2003.
Tommy, are you saying that Palin's favoribility ratings are higher than Romney and Huckabee?
This was Axelrod's worst fear come to pass, that Sarah Palin was not as dumb as the MSM made her out to be and that she has developed a sure-fire blueprint of how to take America back from the Far Left and send the Marxists to the sidelines for the foreseeable future.
Maybe Sarah can read, and what she has read a lot on lately is the strategies employed by those in the wilderness like Nixon and Reagan to claim or reclaim their spot on the national stage.
And perhaps Palin understands the nature of the Reagan coalition far better than the young pip-squeak pundits do who claim that 'the RC cannot never be put back together again'.
And finally perhaps Palin understands what the meaning of what Messala said to his colleague on the rise of Christianity in Palestine: "...you know how you defeat an idea--with another idea."
Sarah's facebook page just posted some of Tammy Bruce's comments:
Excerpts from TammyBruce.com
Enter now Sarah Palin with very encouraging comments that lead one to believe that she is indeed planning to do what she must: build an independent conservative movement and take this nation back from the liberals which now control both parties.Thanks liberals, for provoking Sarah into the national scene while vetting that family at the same time.
One thing I will say, the Washington Times with their headline for this exclusive interview reveal an anti-Palin stance. She is, don’t doubt, a threat to every existing political status quo. I hope the Washington Times and their editors realize, sooner than later, that the Palin movement is unstoppable and their credibility would be saved simply by reporting the news instead of becoming a GOP version of the NYT.
http://bit.ly/13KoAA
Interestingly, she keeps the same title as Tammy Bruce's write up:
"Palin Hints at an Independent Conservative Movement".
John , dont worry , Obama is going down , he will have nothing to show for his squandering.
And you know it , otherwise you wouldn't be here , you won right?..
Techno , i think her enemies were betting on that she had too much pride and was too in love with her title to make this move.
They were wrong. And now she got supporters looking for revenge.
Wise,
Yes. Her unfavorables are higher as well but her favorables are higher than anyone in the party not named John McCain.
Sarah may never be POTUS, she may never even run.
I admit though it is fun to see all the liberals and RINOS just have a big ole cow over every thing she does.
She will not go away, she will be on the national stage doing something. I know she will also make lots of money.
Main thing is that she is so good at just making all the people whom are hurting this country mad.
It is just funny to me. She is just a petite woman and yet she gets all these people so riled up.
I just love it.
They keep screaming how she is dumb and she is over and she will never do anything else on a national level, she is off the radar, blah, blah,blah....Ok.......then why the heck are you writing about her all the time. talking about her, trolling sites that support her?
If she is over, well, great, you should be able to go on with your happy life....
Me thinks you protest to much.
Debtstar:
I don't know Sarah Palin personally and have never met her, but I know what she stands for.
My favorite movie star, male or female, is James (Jimmy) Stewart. People often refer to John Wayne as as being the paragon of traditional American virtues. Although I am a John Wayne fan, I believe that Jimmy Stewart did it better in the sense of being the everyman. I just wish more people could watch and study Jimmy Stewart in Of Human Bondage, The Mortal Storm, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and of course It's Wonderful Life because he represents the decency of America as represented in its Judeo-Christian heritage, one who always sought the truth or tried to do the right thing, somebody who was a patriot, and above all somebody WHO COULD NOT BE BOUGHT OFF.
Yes, through Jimmy Stewart movies, I know who Sarah Palin is. She is a person with a conscience, a person who exemplies the best of those who have faith in God and I know as God made little green apples she will fight to the bitter end to see that the truth wins out and yes SHE CANNOT BE BOUGHT OFF FOR ALL THE TEA IN CHINA.
Thanks Tommy, I really don't understand with those numbers how can anyone say with a straight face that she's finished.
I have taken to trolling race42008. I will try and enjoy it.
James (Jimmy) Stewart
Brig General, USAF Res.
B-17 bomber pilot.
Didn't meet the ht/wt requirement (was underweight) and sought help to pack on a few extra pounds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Stewart_(actor)#Military_service
Oh John, John, John.
If only you had the wisdom and maturity of Jesus' most favorite disciple.
What's the matter? You already spent the 30 pieces of silver??? You want Obama to give you someone else's siver?
John,
Nearly half the country admires Palin.
Barely over half the country approves of Obama's performance and he's been on stunning drop in approval since his inauguration to where he is now less popular than George W. Bush was at this time in 2001.
That's what happens when your support is based on low-income minorities on welfare as it is in Obama's case.
Wish I hadn't been off-line for a few hours. Great thread.
Linda: only 327 reasons? Are you sure you've been paying enough attention? ;)
Section9: yes, the next American revolution may be here. If so, the first volley was '92 imo. But Sarah is the one who can see it through if we all remain stedfast.
Lipstick: I knew I liked you. God bless Texas, baby! "No place but Te-e-xas, my home..sweet..home."
(Naturalized citizen; now back in my native Northeast.)
Sarah is several steps ahead. Confounding her critics.
Gotta love it. Gotta love her. And we surely do.
Johnny get a new set of crayons you will be happier!
No, no, no...hold on just a minute Mr. Troll
USA Today poll dated July 9th:
As for a possible presidential campaign, 72 percent of Republicans say they would likely vote for her, compared to 44 percent of independents and 17 percent of Democrats.
The poll also found that 75 percent of voters believe a GOP candidate could defeat President Obama, 41 percent of whom said it was “very likely.”
17% of Democrats & 44% of Independents...And, heck, she'll still be Governor a couple more weeks. The election is a looong way off.
And in addition to the fact that Sarah Palin cannot be bought the next disturbing feature of Sarah Palin is her support is 'tribal'. Once a Palin supporter, always a Palin supporter.
Andrew Sullivan...OMG!!!
I should charge you for having to wipe the coffee off my monitor!
John , your own presence on this site is a evidence that shes a big threat to you , why else would you fight so relentless with your lies.
Your not on a ron paul site and smearing him right.
John,
There's something we call data. Her average favorable rating from these three pollsters is 47.7%, nearly half the country. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own data. Now hit the road because the welfare office is closing. The majority of Obmaa supporters are low-income minorities on welfare.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/republicans_like_gop_s_conservative_direction_democrats_don_t
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1263/gop-favorability-romney-palin-gingrich-steele
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_708.pdf
Republicans are 20% of the country? PPP, Gallup, and Rasmussen all show over 30% as Republican.
The welfare office is closing John. You can meet more Obama supporters there considering that most of his support comes from low-income minorities on welfare.
Uh...well...maybe it's where you normally prowl. I actually get my figures from reputable news sources. Ever tried it?
Dianne,
Data is data. We didn't conduct the polls but rather it was Gallup, Rasmussen, and PPP(D).
If you don't like the data, take it up with them.
DianneP , so why do axelrod keep sending you here? Cause you're not that stupid that you're trolling for free?
DianneP:
If you want one sign the MSM is in the tank for Obama not one outlet (except for Fox news) has reported the results of the Rasmussen daily tracking poll showing the Messiah will an approval number of 51% and a disapproval number of 48%.
This is noteworthy because in the last election he came the closest to predicting the actual disparity %, calling it at 7%. It was actually 7.2%.
What is the MSM afraid of: the truth?
I have a question for all the trolls who are posting here and they know who they are, if you are so convinced that Sarah has NO career in politics and that she is done, why are you here? Why are you wasting your time here. It's a beautiful Saturday afternoon(Well for some of you it's already evening) and your here, posting, why, why even bother, she is done right..no political future, so again, why are you here again obsessing about someone who is supposedly finished, just asking?
You remind me of a 13 year old boy. My cousin came to me last week and said "There is this boy in my class who hates me, he pulls on my hair and calls me names, why does he do that" and I said "Because he likes you."
That fits the trolls here to a T. Children, who in reality like Sarah but instead of ADMITTING it, come here and troll. Pretty damn pathetic if you ask me
Dianne P:
And that's after blanket coverage of Obama on a 24/7 basis for the last 5 and 1/2 months and he can only muster 51% approval.
And in contrast Sarah Palin has not even gotten out of the gates yet and according to PPP polling now has a favorable number of 46%; yes she still has an unfavorable number of 45% but what is significant is that since June 18th when the last PPP poll was taken that represents a 7 point uptick in 3 weeks, including a 6 point uptick among women and a 5 point uptick among men.
And by the way PPP is a Democratic polling firm.
Jimmy Stewart, that's who she is Techno, specially the earlier parts in Mr. Smith, and It's A Wonderful Life. Jefferson Smith, and his boy's clubs, and George Bailey and the Bailey Savings and Loan. correspondingly she was the same age when she took on the entrenched AOGC. She would not knuckle down to the powers that be, then, and she won't know. One could consider that whole nine week period last fall,like Smith's filibuster,in the well of the Senate
I posted these numbers earlier in the week regarding the difference in the PPP polling results of June 18 vs July 7 for Sarah Palin. Here they are again for anybody who missed them:
Favorable (F)/Unfavorable (UF)
1)overall 46 (43) 45 (49) +7
2)liberals 20(4) 74(92) +34
3)moderates 27 33 58 59 -7
4)conserv 77 72 17 21 +9
5)women 43 40 49 53 +7
6)men 48 47 40 45 +6
7)dems 15 18 75 76 -2
8)rep 79 75 16 20 +8
9)indies 45 44 38 42 +5
People, people, please ignore the trolls. You may think they're entertaining but they're not. They are a waste of time and space.
John , if you think she's got no chance , why hang around here , you're contradicting yourself.
We know Obama is dead in the water , we don't hang around on any obama site trying to be "concerned".
Since I'm not a conservative I do not know who Tammy Bruce is, but I am really getting a kick out of this talk...she is really great!! I love her. Wow...you go Tammy! I'm send this on to some of my former Hillary suppporte friends who voted for Mccain/Palin, but not sure where they stand now. This program rocks.
Well John make sure you keep your eye on the ditch the Obama administration is driving towards. I have a simple rule for all Presidents...keep it in the road. Turn your attention to your dear leader and his comrades in congress.
John is such an IDIOT, no wonder Obama won. You voted for Obama, you have ZERO credibility, in fact, I despise you for causing the havoc we have in our country right now, it is because of morons like you that are bankrupting this great country. Yeah John, your here to "watch the car accident in progress" good God what an absolute IDIOT you are. You give human beings a bad name. is there anyway to ban these lowlifes. Oh and by the way, Tammys article has been posted on SarahPac and on her official facebook page which I find VERY odd since Tammy does not even know Sarah and have never met, yet an article that someone writes in on her Pac page, inquiring minds want to know
Puma for Life,
Tammy Bruce was a Democrat and the former Los Angeles Chapter president of NOW. She's like the first PUMA practically.
Oh, thanks RAM...I really like this lady. I will have to find out when her program is on the air; I know she isn't carried locally. Just forwarded the link to my friends...I really got a kick out of her bluntness...
Here is the breakdown of the 2008 vote results provided by Joel Mowbray: How Conservatives Helped Elect Obama:
5 Myths about Obama's win:
1)The Republican party suffered a death blow
losing 6 Senate seats and 24 House seats and the WH is not a death blow
2)a wave of black voters and young people was the key to Obama's victory
exit polls suggest no statistically significant increase in voting among either group (11 vs 13 and 17 vs 18%)
3)now that they control the WH and Congress, Democrats will usher in a new Progressive era
1/3 of the Dem majority sits in seats with GOP underpinnings
4)a Republican candidate could have won the Presidency in 2008
George Bush, the economy, McCain is a moderate
5)McCain made a huge mistake in picking Sarah Palin
of 60% of voters who told exit pollsters tha McCain's choice of Palin was a 'factor' in their final decisions, McCain won 56%, lost 43%...without the base, McCain's loss could have been far worse
OTHER CONCLUSIONS:
1)CONSERVATIVE VOTERS (CV) provided the margin of victory for BO-consists of 2 factors:
a)many conservatives who used to consider themselves Republicans no longer do
b)almost 1/5 of Bush 2004 voters chose Obama with the biggest defectors being conservative-leaning independents, 'Security Moms' and RC
2)the electorate is almost exactly center-right as it was in 2004
3)the Bush 2004 voters rejected Bush and the GOP not conservative principles
4)defying CW Obama's ground game only boosted liberal and youth turnout by 1% each of the total electorate
5)BO (20%) picked up 1/3 more CV than Kerry.
6)of the RC voters who defected from Bush 2004 Hispanics accounted for just over 50% but the remainder was composed of value voters or Reagan Democrats
7)John McCain (JM)lost independents and moderates 60-39 and Latino voters 66-31
OT - Just noted that SarahPAC is back advertising using Ads by Google.
I was just researching some past archieved newspaper articles on Sarah and on two occasions SarahPAC came up as an Ad by Google.
I know SarahPAC used this before, but for the last several months I didn't see any SarahPAC Ads by Google. So it looks like SarahPAC is getting aggressive again in raising funds.
You can bet that the Beltway G.O.P. isn't terribly happy with Sarah right now.
Too bad. So sad.
Rusty,
What's your prediction for the first quarter of her PAC numbers with the knowledge that her first month raised $400,000?
I think she's having a month of July that's on pace to break $400,000 easily but the months in between are hazy.
Rusty;
This is what John Ziegler called the 'bread crumbs' which he announced on his program about a couple of weeks before the announcement and that I referred to on C4P as well.
If someone who calls themselves a political reporter or analyst fails to do a thorough study of SarahPAC before coming to the conclusion that Sarah is through with the politics then they are dumb, ill-informed and clueless.
Techno:
Regarding your below figures: the factor is that they voted as a block. There may not have been more of them but something like 90% of the blacks that voted, voted for Obama. Similar for youth, I would wager.
wave of black voters and young people was the key to Obama's victory
exit polls suggest no statistically significant increase in voting among either group (11 vs 13 and 17 vs 18%)
Asking Andree for her opinion of Governor Palin, is like asking Kris Draper what he thinks of Peter Forsberg, back in the 1990's! Although, I think Kris Draper would be more honest and complimentary toward Peter The Great.
nancy:
Or asking Nancy Kerrigan what she thought of Tonya Harding
bittertroll said:
I wonder how bitter I would feel if Obama had lost?
techno,
LOL! You nailed it! Great comparison!:)
"3)now that they control the WH and Congress, Democrats will usher in a new Progressive era"
"1/3 of the Dem majority sits in seats with GOP underpinnings"
Stunning. Have two catastrophic elections and what to do?
Easy. Just say the winners, the democrats, are really republicans.
You guys are utterly absurd.
Now that you have had a chance to digest those numbers by Mowbray and his conclusion about how the conservative vote propelled the Messiah to victory, you might begin to appreciate why Sarah has embarked on this strategy and why Obama and his war room have been on a search and destroy mission full of pre-emptive strikes against Sarah Palin since Aug.29, 2008.
Moneyrunner on The Virginian blog made this really great observation:
The rest of the Republican hopefuls are sparklers while Palin is the whole damn fireworks display.
http://moneyrunner.blogspot.com/
RAM,
Thank you for providing the email for Hallow. I sent him a friendly email with information on McLeod and Ruedrich asking him to edit his article to give his readers the proper context.
TommyReport:
I did an analysis a couple of weeks ago on an open thread - based on traffic patterns to SarahPAC from Alexa.com for the 5 month period.
My guess is somewhere in the $1.2 to $1.6 million range for the 5 months. This would be fantastic if she achieves it given no fundraisers, no direct mail etc.. Also, don't forget this is the hardest time to raise funds in a 4 year eletion cycle. Everyone is tapped out from last year's Presidential election and the bad economy will further depress fundraising.
The unknown here is what her Treasurer, Tim Crawford, was up to over this period. People who donate large amounts do not generally do so over the internet. It's the job of the Treasurer to identify these large donors, contact them by letter or over the telephone, court them by taking them to lunch etc.. Part of the reward for a large donation might be a 15 minute telephone thank you call from Sarah etc.. It is also the job of the Treasurer to remind these potential large donors that those who get on board early will get special status when and if Sarah becomes a candidate etc.. That is why it is important to have a Treasurer in the NY-DC corridor, where these potential large donors are. So if Crawford has been active the numbers may surprise us on the upside. If Sarah has kept him on a leash and told him not to be aggressive then the numbers could be in the low $1 million range.
Another thing people have to keep in mind is a lot of Sarah's (and other Republican candidate's) supporters are not big internet users. They do not like donating over the net. Direct mail campaigns are still the best and most effective way to raise funds. The RNC gets way more individual contributions from direct mail than the internet - unlike the DNC. To my knowledge SarahPAC has not used any direct mail campaigns yet.
It will be interesting to watch SarahPAC in the next 6 months rather than the first 5 months. Will Sarah do big fundraisers for SarahPAC? Will she personally court big contributors? Will SarahPAC do direct mail campaigns?
In my view the next 6 months performance of SarahPAC will be far more telling about Sarah's political viablity than the first 5 months.
Finally got a chance to listen to the Tammy Bruce clip. She is awesome. I love her unwavering support for Sarah. It was interesting to learn that Tammy Bruce switched from the Democratic Party in Feb 2008.
As for campaigning for a conservative Democrat, I'm glad how Tammy pointed out the unlikely-hood of any Democrat candidate who dare be endorsed by Palin. :) Would be interesting though, like in California where there are 2 Democratic senators. We need to get rid of Barbara Boxer. She'll be an easy one to defeat after her "Can you call me Senator" comment.
SA-RAH! RAH -SIS-BOOM-BA
Watch those GOPs go, WAH! WAH! WAH!
Stream of consciousness.....GO!
-I'd risk a double flip on the top of the cheer'amid for you Sarah Palin!
-This Sister is three steps ahead of those Repug-a-thugs who tried to shut her out. Check mate suckaz!
-I'd love to see the Fred Flintstone ANGER smoke blasting out the ears of the old boys network tonight.
-SARAH AMERICA is going to change the face of politics forever and this site is ground floor -and heading to the penthouse.
(R.A. Mansour: great point about Tammy Bruce being the first PUMA)
They put Tammy Bruce's blog article up on Facebook and SarahPAC. Wow.
There is also a link to the Washington Times article.
Woo-hoo, AmeriCuda is back!
Rusty:
I don't usually disagree with you but how can you justify your SarahPAC numbers when Kathleen Parker already declared SarahPAC raised $400,000 in the first month up to Feb. 28, and remember that was before Rush Limbaugh's CPAC speech. You could argue that was a low point for SarahPAC.
How could you argue $1.2-$1.6m when even average of $400,000 for 5 months would net $2m and also bearing in mind the upticks associated with the pro-life speech in Evansville and Sarah's two week excursion to NY about a month ago.
Beehive:
There is a reason for everything under the sun; the problem is to figure out what that is.
techno: re 5 myths about last year's election.
I agree completely. As you may remember, about a week ago I posted an analysis about how close this election really was - and that the switch of 500,000 voters in 7 swing states would have resulted in a McCain win.
The point I made was that while Sarah needs to go after the Hispanic vote, it is not crucial to achieving victory. All she has to do is get back these formerly GOP - now independent - white middle class voters, in about 8 traditionally "red" states. She may not win the popular vote - but she will win the electoral vote.
These voters deserted the GOP because of fatigue after 8 years of Bush, government overspending, the financial collapse of Lehman and TARP, and because McCain was clueless on the economy and could not communicate a coherent economic plan. Remember he said the economy was strong and then one week later the whole financial system collapsed. Then he was erratic in cancelling his campaign only to go along with TARP and offer no contrasting position to Obama in the debates. No wonder middle class center right voters deserted him. How could Obama be any worse----well I guess now they know!!!
Rusty:
Got a hunch: I think the subject of this web site also gets that as well.
There are two things I am never going to do: to claim that Obama is stupid and to never underestimate the intelligence and savvy of Sarah Palin.
This is from the Times of london:
Their view of Palin.
Yes, the Galston mentioned in the article would be a very distant cousin of mine
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6689560.ece
techno:
The reason for my projection follows TommyReport's observations. She had a great first month and a great last month. But in between SarahPAC internet traffic was very low according to Alexa.com. As I already mentioned this is a tough time to raise political contributions.
Also,, while many people will contribute to campaigns, few will contribute to PACs. Romney is the only politician who has ever raised more than $2 millio a year through a PAC. Even Hillary Clinton at the peak of her political career never raised more than $2 million a year through her PAC.
Finally, most PAC contributions are raised through large donations from wealthy donors ($1,000 to $5,000 per individual). To raise more than $1.5 million over a 5 month period through small internet contributions will be very difficult.
Hello again to NANCY. My nearest, dearest, BFNCH (Best friends, no clue who) in the short but illustrious history of C4P. I see you're still knockin' em dead, gal! Keep up the always awesome work and GOD bless you.
Actually, I wish I could be here more, but I try to spend as much time outdoors as I can in the summer. Gotta shed those C4Pounds don't cha know! By the way, does C4P have a confessional for people guilty of swiping a certain TIME magazine from her mitten smitten brother's house? I didn't think so. EAT IT BRO!
Take care everyone
Rusty,
To raise $1.2-$1.6 million in a quarter is pretty darn amazing.
As you've noted, even Hillary only raised $2 million in a YEAR once.
Palin is going to beat that easily by the end of the year.
Rusty:
I just don't think Sarah Palin would resign from her job and hit the national stage in a few weeks with the knowledge that she could only raise $1.5m over a 5 month period.
To me that would not be a good enough gauge to make a life-and-death decision. I would not have pulled the trigger.
Instead I would have waited until the end of the year to see if I could get a boost over the summer or fall.
That Sarah decided to go on July 3 and that Seah Parnell by his own admission was not given much lead time tells me Sarah was waiting for the final totals of SarahPAC ending June 30 and those numbers had to be extremely significant.
$1.5m would not do it for me Rusty.
Rusty,
Does your $1.2-$1.6 million prediction include July?
My guess is on the low end for the first quarter: $1.2 million but we're going to have an absolutely huge July. Perhaps around $600,000-$800,000.
Beehive,
I don't see it on her PAC's website. Can you post the link?
AmeriCuda,
LOL! I think someday we are all gonna have a grand time actually getting to put faces to names! C4P party, that will be awesome!
God bless, ya, AmeriCuda!
Rubio?
I like Rubio but I'm concerned about:
1. Fire in the belly comment earlier by another poster. Does he really have it or is he just playing/running for his next run?
2. Jeb Bush, Jr supports him and I heard he is supported by the Bushes. I will NEVER vote for another Bush FOR ANYTHING!!
3. If he were to win....would the Bush family then try to get Rubio run for President in 2012 (like Obama did in 2008) to try and split the Conservative base in the party and deny Palin the nomination?
Rubio? I'd like to but I'm just not there yet.
1-20-13, The rebuilding of America that started in 2010 begins in earnest. Goodbye Aunt Esther!!!!
Rusty,
I think your analysis regarding only 500,000 votes separating Obama and McCain is flawed because it's unusual for states to operate completely independently of one another.
Now for a candidate like Palin, states operate independently of one another probably more so than other candidates.
PPP will release a North Carolina poll between Obama and Palin next week. They show her down 21 to Obama in Minnesota, so logic would have it that she's down 11 to Obama in North Carolina. But PPP has already indicated in its comments section that it's not double-digits.
So your theory works better with a candidate like Palin because she could get absolutely hammered in blue states while performing significantly better relative to the blue state percentage in swing states. But there would still to be around a 3-point popular shift nationwide for her to win.
Link to SarahPAC's write up...
http://www.sarahpac.com/news/news51.aspx
techno, TommyReport:
My projection was for the first 5 months not a quarter - and I agree with you $1.5 million over 5 months projects to $3.6 million and that would be an incredible achievement, especially since she hasn't aggressively raised funds. Also, don't underestimate the impact the economy has had on suppressing donations.
As I said the wild card here is what Crawford has been able to raise directly in large donations.
Techno, Sarah based her decision to resign on the reality that she was going to "die" politically if she stayed on another year as Governor. In other words she had no other "good" option. SarahPAC numbers had little to do with her decision.
The reason why SarahPAC cannot be judged by other criteria is:
1)the backlash caused by Michael Steele, the GOP members of Congress, the GOP establishment and RINO's sucking up to Obama in the first 3 months of the year causing thousands of previous RNC donors to send back fundraising letters and to hang up on RNC money solicitors; Rush Limbaugh confirmed that on his program
2)you cannot underestimate the impact that Rush Limbaugh's CPAC speech had on the conservative base; it was palpable-you could feel the base was given newfound hope after feeling utter despair-the leader of the conservative movement had spoken; this definitely exacerbated the rift between the base and the RNC and NRSC
3)with #2 it my contention that these dollars were transferred to SarahPAC beginning in March and the onrush of donations from this source has not stopped. The reason why the traffic was down in the middle is that most people had set up a monthly sustaining donation In March and felt no more need to go back to the SarahPAC web site.
4)The Evansville pro-life speech and the two week excursion into NYC had a major impact on SarahPAC
5)And finally the Sum of all Fears poster at Limbaugh's web site that all but endorses Sarah Palin
I really think that most people just cannot wrap the heads around the fact that Rush Limbaugh has a potential listening audience of 22m; that's 7% of the US popn.
If only .5% of his audience gave Sarah the minimum $25 on a one time basis that would be $2.5m alone, without any other source.
By the way remember how so many people were criticizing the SarahPAC web site for being too bland: I'll leave you the words of Sun Tzu:
"All war is based on DECEPTION."
"When you are strong, act weak."
Rusty:
This is where we have a fundamental disagreement. I think SarahPAC had everything to do with her decision to resign on July 3rd rather than at the end of December 2009.
Follow the money is the number one rule in politics.
If SarahPAC were not bursting at the seams Sarah would not be making the claim that she would be travelling all around the country supporting all kinds of conservatives.
How do I know this? Once her figures are released sometime this month, the MSM will slice and dice her any which way for boasting of her clout if her fundraising totals have not backed her up. No Rusty that does not compute. There is no way that Sarah would be boasting now on what she wanted to do next year if she only raised $1.5m in 5 months. Her credibility would be shot down in flames.
And Politico this week has reported that Beltway GOP now wants to make friends with Sarah.
Sarah is not stupid and neither is the Beltway GOP.
Huck and C. Powers on FNC and Huck doing his routine again that he had lots of law suits and ethic complaints and he with stood them.
You just don't get up and leave because of complaints.
Geezz. what a jerk.
TommyReport:
I agree with your analysis. It would of course be impossible to shift votes in these 7 states without shifting votes in the same direction in all other states. The exercise though was to show that the election was closer than most think, and that the key will be in shifting middle class white voters especially in those formally 7 or 8 red states.
I agree that Sarah would have to reduce the national popular vote loss to no more than 3 points to get a narrow 270 electoral vote win.
The key thing again, I want to emphasis, is that the 7 point win Obama achieved was because of huge popular vote wins in high population states like New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California and Mass.. Obama's win was far less impressive than Clinto's win over Dole in 1996 of 8 points where Clinton had sizable wins in Ohio, Florida etc.. Clinton's win was a more even - overall beating - of Dole, whereas Obama's win was more concentrated with huge wins in the deep blue states.
Therefore, Sarah needs to close only 4 points of that 7 point gap - not the full 7 points. This is my rationale for arguing the election was much closer than most realize - and that the voters she has to shift are voters who have voted GOP in the past - not long time Democrats. So a win is much easier to achieve than most people think.
juju,
re: Huck implying he was a better man for sticking out the ethics complaints while he was Governor.
- Is this man insane? I really don't know him beyond being a Gov, losing 100 lbs, and being a preacher.
But I think I just lost all respect for the guy.
The Republican DEMOLITION DERBY HAS JUST BEGUN !
I think after July 25, 2009 the world will see a Sarah Palin UNLEASHED!
Hey guys...interesting. But, please explain how the larger vote counts in Ca. N.Y. etc., the large population areas, made the difference when it boils down to the electoral college. Wouldn't it be the states themselves that made the difference. Such as Florida, Ind. etc.
Gov. Palin will wipe the floor with Huck.
NEWS FLASH. LISTENING TO S. MOORE ON THE RADIO.
She says Gov. Palin may be asked to stay on beyond the 25th. because they don't have Lt. Gov. situation under control.
how much money did huck make during that time?
and lets debunk this claim.
lets see if he is lying.
bill in baltimore:
Huckabee has just signalled to his supporters that he is in the game, which doesn't surprise me one bit-his ego is too big. But I can't see how Huck is going to win if Palin enters the contest.
Perhaps he's pulling out a high-stakes gamble that Obama or Romney may be able to dig up a skeleton in Sarah or Todd's closet or that the 'Levi' issue will explode Sarah's conservative support. Other than that help me out.
Sarah's support is 'tribal', diehards, would walk over broken glass for her. I know she is supposedly trailing Huck substantially with evangelicals but I can't see it getting beyond 15 points as it is now.
The quitting issue has already been absorbed by her supporters and disregarded. They know why she made the move.
I just can't see how Huck can win.
"I am NOT one to preach that you have to be a registered Republican....Some of the sharpest,most conservative,nicest...most common-thinking,practical and good people I know are NOT registered Republicans.
"They have seen that politics...gets in the way of doing the right thing and making a positive difference."
-Governor Sarah Palin (March 20th,2009)
juju:
In polite terms Sarah will tell the state legislature to 'go to hell'.
I would like to know how much the
complaints cost him out of his pocket and how much they costs the state. He is a jerk of the first order.
I hope she does tell them to go to hell. If they can't get their act together to know who is going to be Lt. Gov. that is their problem. That would be just too stupid for words.
Post a Comment