Sarah Palin gave a rousing speech in Minnesota this weekend. From all reports (on the right) it was a very good speech and it has many pundits convinced that Sarah is making a real run at the nomination for President. I still have some concern that Sarah has not fully laid the groundwork she needs to do for a serious run, but she’s ahead of where Barack Obama was at this time four years ago, so she could do it.
I have to admit though, her voice does make me cringe sometimes. That’s going to be a hard problem to overcome since I’m a big fan of hers and I still have that reaction. For people who don’t like her, I’m sure her voice is like fingernails on the blackboard.
16 users commented in " She’s back! "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackYeah, her voice is grating at times.
But, I heard the speech (only 15 minutes) and MAN it was as good as it gets.
“Game on!”
I still don’t think she has a chance to get it, I doubt she’d even win more than maybe one primary.
Right now she’s better as an inspirational figure and one that get’s out the vote. (not to mention fundraiser). Her running could risk that, she’s better where she’s at IMO
So, who on the Republican side do you think is a superior candidate then?
There isn’t a single establishment Republican I’d cross the street to shake hands with.
Give me Rubio. Ryan. West.
GIVE ME PALIN. She’ll whup all their butts in the debates.
Sarah will lose if she runs. She has a role, but “candidate” is not it. I honestly think we may see a “draft” at the convention. Probably Ryan, or Pence.
Either one will shellac ObozO.
Haley Barbour would be a darn fine President, and he could clean O’s clock head up…but I doubt he’ll get enough traction to win the nomination.
Hey! Buddy Roemer’s running!!! Nyuk…
I’ll have to see how the field shakes out. Right now Palin & Romney have been vetted more or less so we know more about them.
Neither can win.
Reagan couldn’t win.
Then, he did.
Palin doesn’t have anything like the negatives Reagan did. He, on top of being stupid, “Bedtime for Bonzo” stupid, remember, he was also going to “blow up the world.” He was not only laughably stupid, he was infinitely dangerous. (Again – from ALL the MSM (there weren’t no alternative media then), from the left, and from the establishment right. Echoes…)
Then, about 10% of the people who voted looked really hard at the state of the U.S. and the other choice…compared the propaganda of the MSM to what they actually saw/heard from Reagan in the debates … then held their noses pulling the lever for “someone who is not Carter.”
She can win. IF she does well in the debates and comes off as smart, informed, good, and funny. (And, her chances of winning will significantly increase if Obama is seriously challenged in a primary.)
oh, sure Palin can win. She’s in a better position right now than Obama was four years ago, and is better known (which is a double-edged sword, obviously).
But she has to be Reaganesque to do it. And that’s going to be her challenge.
It was a fine speech. To win Palin needs to appear more optimistic about America than Obama does. To do that she should sucessfully portray him and his political positions as pessimistic about America. This can be hard to do without expressing pessimism about America herself, which is key. Her own philosphy is optimistic about America, and his pessimistic, so she has that going for her.
Yours,
Tom
We’ll see,
Reagan wouldn’t have won if his ability to communicate wasn’t so good.
Neither would Clinton.
And comparing Bush 2 to Gore – same thing.
Palin can’t hold her own compared to Obama.
We’re not talking about intelligence, or grasp of the issues or competance. We’re talking communication. She simply can’t do it as is.
Maybe if she takes some serious speaking lessons for a national scale she’d have a better shot.
Take this to the bank – she can’t and won’t win.
Yup.
Perhaps you were watching a different debate with Biden than I was. She communicated effectively in that one. And, she’s had 4 years to perpare for the upcoming debates.
And, if you mean her ability to communicate via prepared speeches…again, I seem to have a completely different memory of her speeches which were extraordinarily effective.
And, if you mean here ability to answer questions off the cuff, then, perhaps you’ve been watching different Q&A sessions than I have.
“There isn’t a single establishment Republican I’d cross the street to shake hands with.”
Hehe, I agree.
I guess we have no choice but to nominate Mr. Cosmic to run? I don’t agree with his entire platform, of course, but I think he’d lead us well. And we can get a D&D-mini section added to the White House tour, or something…
No, I like Reaper minis much more than D&D minis.
I am still trying to locate a copy of “Shae – half-elven archer”. I’ve wanted that mini forever… (Of course, mine would have green hair, for obvious reasons to the folks I game with…)
However you saw her debating skills is however you saw them and not how the general public did.
When both you and Cosmic say her voice is “grating at times” and “voice makes me cringe at times” That cannot be overcome.
Read again what I typed, you certainly must be confused.
Yup: Her “grating” voice can be overcome. Ask the Alaskan voters. (Ask those who continue to put Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi et all back into office.)
Her voice isn’t her problem; her problem (to the extent there is one) is her syntax, her loose grammar, her rather unique pacing – all issues which I have seen in her interviews but have never seen in her public, prepared events. (Speeches, Q&A on policy issues and whatnot.)
This is the only important and significant metric I consider when looking at such things as “who won the debate:”
“However a focus group of independent voters gathered by the pollster Frank Luntz, …, called the debate in favour of Mrs Palin.
Among the group, half of whom voted for the Democrat John Kerry in 2004, an overwhelmingly majority raised their hands to signal Mrs Palin had won the debate when asked.” The Telegraph, April 11, 2011
With polls, you have to go into the numbers, figure out where the bias is. Here, you have a group of people (split 1/2 and 1/2 Bush/Kerry voters – a better metric of likely voting patterns for 2008 unlikely to be found) who were asked directly after watching the speech – without any coaching by the MSM (a sequestered jury as it were) – “who won?”
Answer? “An overwhelming majority” for Palin.
Since debates became televised – they have not been about who’s correct on a position or smarter or more in tune. It’s all show, all appearance.
i.e. Cheney/Edwards debate, Nixon/Kennedy and countless others.
What do Pelosi, Frank, Reid and Palin all have in common?
None will ever become President.
If you’re betting she will – I’d advise not betting money on it.
Leave A Reply