Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

Which Title Doesn’t Governor Palin Need?

Since Governor Palin’s On the Record appearance Tuesday night, the blogosphere and media outlets have been buzzing with opinions that she’s not running for president in 2012. Her conversation with Greta Van Susteren left some to ponder, perhaps more than ever, if she has decided not to relinquish her freedom–not to be shackled–for the sake of a title. Comments left in various and sundry places revealed that some people were angry, some were confused, some were frustrated, while some remained encouraged. No one was unmoved, however. No one was without some type of reaction. No one was neutral. It was, quite simply, that consequential an interview, if for no other reason than that viewers deemed it so.

I saw the same interview everyone else saw. I saw the full interview twice, and I saw portions of it several times. Allow me to offer my perspective. Please note that this is just a theory. It is one that some will dismiss immediately, and perhaps that’s the deserved response. However, it may also be a theory that some will think long and hard about, and I’d like to think there’s merit in that as well. Which category you fall into remains to be seen.

Last night, as I rewatched the Governor’s exchange with Greta, something jumped out at me that had not caught my attention the first time. It begins at 9:25 into the video. Please watch it again. Governor Palin says:

Through my process of decision-making with my family and with my close friends as to whether I should throw my name in the hat for the GOP nomination or not for 2012, is a title worth it…does a title shackle a person? Are they–someone like me who’s maverick, you know, I do go rogue, and I call it like I see it, and I don’t mind stirring it up in order to get people to think and debate aggressively and to find solutions to the problems that our country is facing, somebody like me–is a title and is a campaign too shackling? Does that prohibit me from being out there, out of a box, not allowing handlers to shape me and to force my message to be what donors or what contributors or what political pundits want it to be? Does a title take away my freedom to call it like I see it and to effect positive change that we need in this country? That’s the biggest contemplation piece in my process.

So here’s my theory, which I offer in the form of a question: Is it possible that Governor Palin is contemplating a third party/Independent run for the presidency in 2012? Is it possible that the title she’s referring to, that she repeatedly says she doesn’t need, is not the title of President of the United States, as some are fearing, but rather the title she mentions in the above quote: GOP nominee? Again, some will dismiss this idea automatically because 1) it doesn’t make sense in their political minds, 2) success would be a nearly impossible task, or 3) she said previously she wasn’t in favor of such a strategy.

To point one, I offer this: she’s unconventional and has prognosticated, "Mark my word, it is going to be an unconventional type of election process." What would be more unconventional than what I am theorizing?

To point two, Neil Cavuto offers this perspective on the prospects of a third party success story:

How many outside-the-Petri dish candidates would have made it if so many weren’t so busy insisting they couldn’t possibly make it?

Me? I can’t take it.

Remember, no one has voted.

So I hardly think it fair anyone’s voted off.

Besides, we could do worse than looking for our next leader outside the usual Petri dish…

More here.

Furthermore, Governor Palin told Greta she believes she can win. She said she wouldn’t even be considering running without that confidence. Does that confidence disappear when she contemplates a third party run? I think not. I submit, rather, that she believes she has the name recognition, the record, and the boots on the ground to win period.

To point 3, let’s have Governor Palin speak for herself. She told Sean Hannity as recently as June:

You know what? A year ago, I would have said, "Please don’t even consider a third party. We’ve got to sure up what is good and strong and principled within the Republican Party, and we’ve got to run on a Republican ticket, stand strong on the planks and a strong platform that is the GOP." Well, I think conditions have changed in this last year…Well, too many in the GOP are still resistant and resisting that movement of this new crop of common sense conservatives. And if they’re not careful in the GOP, there will be a third party rise-up, just like back in the day when the Whigs finally went away and Republicans rose up. That is what the GOP should be fearing today: the electorate will get fed up with business as usual in the GOP, and a third party will rise up–not that I want to see that because I still have belief, strongly, that the GOP planks are best for our country, but just the machine that runs the GOP has got to be very careful.

See that video here.

This takes us back to her conversation with Greta Tuesday night. Her biggest contemplation–perhaps what she’s been struggling with and what’s been delaying her decision–is whether securing the GOP nomination title is worth the cost of being shackled to the machine, to the establishment–with all its cronyism, permanent middle class pandering, and resistance to common sense conservatism. In other words, there’s too much business as usual going on. Perhaps this is Governor Palin’s struggle. And yes, Greta did go on to discuss that one could be more effective as President than on the sidelines. And yes, the Governor responded to Greta by insisting she could have an impact regardless. But what did the Governor then say? She commented that one must decide, "Which is the place for that candidate to be?" She spoke about the process of decision-making a candidate endures, not a private citizen simply deciding whether or not to be a candidate. Is it possible she and Greta were having two different conversations? You decide.

Some supporters went to bed discouraged after the interview, and some were furious, for they thought Governor Palin, when talking about "which is the place" to be, meant inside or outside the race altogether. I’m suggesting that maybe "the place" she’s pondering is something completely different. I’m suggesting she might be pondering whether she should fight this battle for America’s future inside the Party or outside, if she should take the road less traveled, as Robert Frost would say, or go the way most others have gone and all are expected to go.

Governor Palin intends to do things her way, for her previous national experience as a GOP candidate left her with a bad taste in her mouth. Did she not mention to Greta the 2008 VP campaign in which she was "being molded, being shaped…being caricatured by those around [her], which prohibits the freedom that one needs to really make a difference, and influence, and begin some aggressive debate that is needed"? Indeed, she did.

Again, this is simply my theory, for I certainly have no inside information. Each of you must weigh its value for yourself. If nothing else, it should provoke some thought and hopefully some conversation. As for me, upon watching the interview the second time, I no longer felt the suffocating blanket of heaviness that rained down via social media comments Tuesday night. Instead, I felt encouraged that Governor Palin is in a struggle to decide, not whether to right America’s ship, but the best possible method she should use to do so–and this is as weighty a decision as the first.

Is it possible I’m wrong about this whole thing? Sure it is. But is it possible that I might be on to something? The answer to this is the same as the first. I don’t know which road Governor Palin will take in all this, but I am certain of this one thing: wherever the road leads her, she’ll find me still walking beside her when she arrives.

Tags: , , , , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • wodiej

    that is certainly a good possibility of what Gov. Palin meant.   We will know in good time. As for me, I am not going to rant and rave about it until she announces one way or the other.

    • Pete Daniels Band

      Same here.  Would be exciting to watch Sarah run and compete, but if she doesn’t than so be it.   

      Go, Sarah! 

    • goldenprez

      wodiej … When one is asked the same question, 3,000 times, that one does not wish to answer, one has to "non-answer" the question in as many different ways as possible.

      Sooner or later, one is going to say something unintentionally provocative.

      All this doubletalk about "a title," is so much mumbo-jumbo.

      "President of the United States" is not "a title." It is the most powerful position on planet Earth.

      No other "title" reaches, and affects, more people, every minute of every day, than any human being alive.

      No President has to be "shackled" or "unshackled" to anything. There is no one on Earth who can "shackle" the President of the United States to anything.

      Mrs. Palin has shown, and proved, that she cannot be "handled" by "handlers."

      No third party candidate, at this time in our history, has a snowball’s chance in hell of being elected "President of the United States." To think otherwise is completely delusional. The popular vote simply determines who is "supposed to" receive a state’s electoral votes. There is nothing stopping said delegates from casting those electoral votes for someone else.

      Do not believe for one nano-second that a third party candidate who splits the Republican vote will receive one single electoral delegate’s vote at the GOP convention, where the formal vote is taken to determine the GOP nominee for that "title" President of the United States."

      Mrs. Palin is completely aware of all of the above.

      She knows that her clout is based upon her being a candidate for the Republican nomination to run for, and win, the "title" of "President of the United States." Any other avenue to that goal is as realistic as jumping out of an airplane at 10,000 feet with an umbrella and expecting to land safely.

      I suggest that people stop over ventilating over what she said to Greta. It appears to me that she was attempting to "non-answer" the question once again, and attempting to give another "rationale," dopey as it was, as to why it was taking so long to make a "decision."

      If Mrs. Palin really believed that "President of the United States" was just "a title," then she would really be as stupid as her opponents have tried to paint her. Anyone who believes that Mrs. Palin believes that "President of the United States" is just "a title," is even more stupid than that!

      Keep in mind the admonishment of the first line of my signature close:

      Believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see.

      Illegitimi non carborundum.

      Barracudas Maximus.

      • socon

        I disagree.  Sarah Palin is a free spirit and from her point of view, I believe the presidency could be suffocating. 

    • Leroy Whitby

      Yah, this is just speculation and bull$#!+ . . . passing the time. ; )

  • Marie Culbreth

    I agree that it is a possibility.  However, I don’t believe she will split the party.  She will run as a Republican, or not run, but do her best to get Conservatives elected in the House and Senate. 

    She is too principled.  She is too much like Ronald Reagan – she would work to take back the Republican Party before she would be the person to split the ticket.  All IMHO, of course.  ;)

    • John Norton

      Yes I totally agree…!


      Yeah, this makes the most sense to me Marie. Sarah may be a Rogue, but she’s not crazy.
      Who among us voted for Ross Perot the 1st time around —- and then he had his "convention"
      —– and his convention "theme song" was that famous tune by Patsy Cline, — "Crazy" ????
      I stared @ the TV in horror while it all sank in. Sarah would not be controlled by the GOP establishment, she has made that as plain as can be.—– She , IMHO, would do just what she did in Alaska, work with the best patriots [ read conservatives ] wherever she would find them.

      • CharterOakie

        The reason Perot had the band play Patsy Cline’s "Crazy" on election night was to poke fun at those in the media and the GOP operatives who worked so hard to persuade people that he was crazy and that his supporters were crazy for "wasting their vote."

    • Guest

      Did you see the story on Drudge about the GOP considering Rubio as VP? The machine is working to ride roughshod over the wishes of the prospective candidate. It is quite possible that Sarah is considering a run that would sideline the machine. They’re looking to shackle whomever even before the person has been chosen. That a big heap of arrogance right there. Why Rubio? Is he more of a party man than West?

      • William Van Henley

        Yes, Rubio is a mini-bush.  Has no interest for doing anything other than the rino masters tell him as can be seen by his refusal to call Sarah after she said several times that they could talk if he would just call her.  He refused to call so Sarah stayed out but I’m positive that Sarah could have caused him to lose his election if there were anyone else running against him that she could have supported.. jmo

        • wandrako

          This is wrong.  Rubio is a principled, courageous leader and would make an excellant VP no matter who is presidential candidate.  Don’t start bashing a good man because he has a lot of support.  As for Bush, he was a good president that had to deal with many problems and never answered his critics which was a bad move.  People forget he had Katrina and couldn’t get the idiot governor in LA to move and then judges kept ruling that all those from the area had to be kept in hotels for over a year.  Then there were the attacks.  He will be seen by history as a very good president.  Rubio is a good candidate with principles and good judgment.  Even tempered and  unflappable by the rable. 

          • larrygeary

            Correct me if I’m wrong, but Rubio is not a natural born citizen under the Constitution. He was born here, but neither of his parents were citizens at the time. He could never be President, thus he could never be VP.

            • Gr-Eyed Conservative

              You’re not wrong. He is native born, not natural born. There are some who claim Cubans are exempt from parents needing to be citizens, but I believe they’re wrong. Bobby Jindal has the same problem, yet good people still clamor to have him run. 

  • Spec 5

    The hypothesis is interesting.  If it is true I would urge Sarah to reconsider.  I guess I am of the Rush Limbaugh wing of the Tea Party if such a wing exists.  The first priority is to take control of the Republican Party.  Barring that then we go to the streets.  I would need to hear Sarah give her reasons.  I think she can win the Republican nomination if she goes for it and if she can why wouldn’t she want to do so?

    • CBDenver

      Regarding "taking control of the Republican party" — I don’t really see that occurring, do you?

      • Rightmindedmom

        Yes.  Ronald Reagan did it.  The Establishment GOP didn’t want him.  They wanted George H.W. Bush instead.  The Reagan revolution rolled all over that idea in 1980, and the Establishment had to grudgingly accept that RR won the nomination.

        History CAN repeat itself in that respect.

        Mom in Wisconsin

        • larrygeary

          He took over the GOP, but he didn’t implement any lasting changes in it. He was forced to accept the liberal GHW Bush as his VP, and the liberals are in control of the GOP today.

          • CharterOakie

            Agree with you larry.  Reagan won the nomination, but did not "take over" the GOP.  Accepting Bush as his running mate is, imo, proof of that.

    • bedr1

      So …there were candidates that won a GOP primary in 2010 and then those candidates were thrown away by the GOP.

    • wandrako

      If she goes for Third Party we will have Obama again for another four years if the country survives it will be cave man era all over again.   Full destruction.

      • NoMoreMeh

        You will maybe vote ABO, then, and not vote for Sarah, if she ran third party?  Me, I would vote for Sarah, and with the added benefit of having her represent my voice for the next 13+ months.  She has spoken the last three years, as has the tea party spoken, both have represented me, and look at the historic November 2010 elections.  The GOP estab doesn’t want her around.  They push her out, then I have no voice.  None of the other candidates currently represent me.

        • wandrako

          I will not vote third party.  That person will have no base in congress and will not be able to enact whatever needs to be dealt with.  The main thing is it will split the republican vote and give Obama a win.  Every time it has been done, Perot, etc we got a dem in office.  Yes she has spoken for us and would be a good leader but apparently cannot make a decision.  The GOP establishment cannot push her out with the amount of support she would have had.  Don’t know how many she has lost thru this indecisive dance she has been performing over the last few months but it is a telling characteristic.  They didn’t want Reagan but got him.  Same would be with Palin if she really wanted it.

          • NoMoreMeh

            I understand your points.  It is a risky thing.

            The success of Sarah running third party demands the premise that such thing as last November 2010’s election was not a fluke.  Do you think it was a fluke, or do you think that the same impetus and desire for returning to Constitutional govt and getting rid of crony capitalism, getting rid of BHO’s socialism, etc., still exists today?  Will it still drive the 2012 election?  I think it will.  But it is risky, yes.  But high reward, if we win.

            And the whole time, Sarah can continue framing the debate, keep on urging us to vet the candidates thoroughly, she keeps the GOP estab dancing on their toes, trying to please The People, trying to represent The People (because they want to win, and it is a competition).  So, the whole year, we have a GOP estab nominee trying to dance to Sarah’s parameters, and at the end of the year, we have the choice of Sarah (#1) or a more fully vetted, 2nd best Repub that has been "molded" by Sarah, me and you… either could beat Obama — or they might lose.  But the debate will have moved more towards the type of representation we might hope to see again in our country.  There is the risk, yes.  But in the secret quiet of our voting booths, after having framed the debate all year, having our voices represented all year, you can choose to vote your choice: Sarah or a best-we-have-formulated GOP estab person.  It has that built-in redundancy.

            Sarah is not dumb, far from it.  If she would run third party, I trust her instincts, I would have her back, if even just to frame the debate.

            • NoMoreMeh

              Besides, there is somewhat of a "base" in Congress already, and many upcoming, qualified tea party people wanting to come in for 2012.  It is one fight in a long war.

  • SonOfOriginalTed

    And the beauty of this is it’s a threat to the GOP ‘establishment’ which only Palin is in a psition to make — that is, either the GOP take Palin & Tea Party or the GOP is doomed to defeat, irrelevancy and destruction — like the Whigs of olde.

  • 4rcane

    Sarah, the country  is a mess while you have no title. Don’t kid yourself. You need a title to implement the changes

  • Lee Davi

    I HIGHLY doubt the third party run.  Wishful thinking.

    What I find most telling is that people are having the reactions they are from anger to confusion to disappointment.  All for one person who everyone has said "can’t win".  This proves that there is no real leader for the party-yet.  I for one, am saddened.  But perhaps this is the lesson all of us need to learn.  We are the one who shape not just our destiny, but the country.  Even if Palin (or anyone) is elected president, when they’re gone- who is left?  Just us.  We shape policy, we shape culture, we shape the future.  We are the foundation.

    But just in case, redstate or the rest of the anklebiters are trolling for their next hit piece- don’t get it twisted. If she runs, she’s my preferred candidate and I will back her to the hilt.  But at this point I have to start examining choice #2.

  • Right_Wingnut

    This is quite a stretch.

  • Political_Insider

    This is something to ponder that nobody has mentioned. Has anybody forgot about this? Back in June, Bristol said this that made headlines:

    Bristol Palin says her mom has decided whether to run for president

    CNN:Bristol Palin says mom has made presidential decision

    CNN) – Bristol Palin said her mother, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has made up her mind about whether to run for president in 2012- but didn’t reveal the decision."She definitely knows," Bristol said Tuesday during an appearance on Fox News. "We’ve talked about it before. Some things just need to stay in the family."

    Read more in the links.

    If Sarah has made her mind up already as Bristol stated back on June 28th, something has changed since then.

    • Jen4Palin

      All the more reason why people are reading WAY too much into the Greta interview. She has put out clear indications all along that she is running, from the campaign-style bus to the campaign-style ads to popping up in early states and being received like a rock star. The only thing that has changed is that all of the flavor-of-the-month candidates have imploded and her poll numbers are increasing.

      Sarah was never going to give Greta an indication of whether or not she is running, and simply used a different description of her thought process than the family excuse that she has been falling back on ever single time. The fact that her family has been A-OK with the idea for quite some time makes that consideration less and less plausible as her reason for staying out so long, and maybe she knew Greta would call her on that if she tried it again.

  • CBDenver

    The idea that the gov is struggling with the shackles of the establishment Republican party occurred to me as well yesterday as I pondered the meaning of her statements during the Greta interview.  Many people see a third party as no more than a side-show that will throw the election to Obama.  However with the weakness of both parties and the majority of Americans disapproving of government in general, perhaps the time is ripe to go outside the system.

    • Jen4Palin

      You know what I just thought of…maybe she’s referring to the fact that the GOP is all-out begging other candidates to jump in rather than allowing her an opening. First it was Perry, now Christie and maybe even Jeb Bush. They are doing everything in their power to discourage her from running and communicating her principles that threaten them. We hear about all these people getting phone calls from party insiders, but nobody (apart from her supporters, of course) is begging Sarah to get in. She knows she is not going to have establishment GOP support.

      I don’t believe that she will go third party, BUT she knows that even with the R next to her name she essentially will be running as an independent because the establishment simply will not support her. I think she knows that the real reason the GOP is still trying to recruit the "perfect candidate" is because they want to keep her out, otherwise they would just shore up Romney. She is trying to fake them out so that they’ll stop recruiting.

  • Guest

    How can she think that she can "beat Obama" but not be able to win a GOP primary???

    • Adrienne Ross

      The article doesn’t suggest she cannot win the GOP nomination. It suggests–and only suggests–she may choose to go a different route.

    • bedr1

      Oh …..the establishment within the party is so fixed to basically guide who they want in, whenever they want. That’s why you don’t play the game: See Reagan

    • RobBennett

      The establishment has more influence in the primaries because they can make all kinds of rule changes to favor their candidate and not enough people are paying attention for them to be effectively called out. 

      Another thing to consider is that she may well NOT be able to beat Obama if the entire Repub establishment decides that it is better to throw the election than to let Palin win. It may be that she is hearing that this is what they intend to do, to make sure that even if she wins she loses. Why fight so hard for a prize that will end up amounting to nothing? Lots of middle-of-the-road voters would be swayed to vote for Obama if the Repub establishment heavily promotes the idea that a vote for their own party’s candidate would be a terrible mistake. 

      And don’t forget that both the Dem and Repub establishments may well put their financial resources behind a third-party candidate in an effort to beat Palin if she wins the Repub nomination. If there is going to be a third party candidate this time anyway, why not go ahead and be that third party candidate rather than let it be the thing that beats you? Again, it may be that her intelligence is that plans are being laid for a third-party run in the event she gets the nomination. Obama has a base of 40 percent. Can Palin really beat Obama if there is a third-party candidate taking away all the Anybody But Palin votes in the Republican party?

      If she IS that third party candidate and positions herself effectively to win Independent votes rather than how she would need to position herself to win Repub votes, she may be able to peal away votes both from the Dem side and the Repub side that otherwise would be lost to her. In a three-way race, you don’t need 50 percent to win. 40 percent might do it. Perhaps she starts with a base of 30 percent. She might have a better chance of getting to 40 percent as an Independent if there are many Republicans not willing to vote for her in any circumstance (because they are ashamed of their unwillingness to speak up for her when she was under attack and can’t get past that emotionally).


      • AmsterdamExpat

        Yes, as a strategist it stands to reason that SP is evaluating these various possible modes in which the GOP establishment could sabotage her candidacy — and how best to forestall, to outflank them. (A number of people might be utilized for the role of a third-party spoiler instigated by the GOP establishment itself, rather than, as with Ross Perot, the DNC: Michael Bloomberg alas comes to mind here, and perhaps others of his ilk as well.)

      • Guest

        Man, I just don’t see how this is a winning strategy. You have the Tea Party driving the Republican victory in 2010 which was very ‘anti-Establishment’ (and which demonstrated that you can take on the establishment candidates and win), and with all that momentum going into 2012, she’s now going to forsake that party structure for the sake of going ‘solo’ ala Perot? – Don’t see it. I just don’t see it. She will get my vote whatever she decides to do, but I just don’t see it. If she does that, forget about putting Rubio on the ticket then (which to me, would be the best choice of everyone out there).

      • NoMoreMeh

        "Another thing to consider is that she may well NOT be able to beat
        Obama if the entire Repub establishment decides that it is better to
        throw the election than to let Palin win. It may be that she is hearing
        that this is what they intend to do, to make sure that even if she wins
        she loses. Why fight so hard for a prize that will end up amounting to
        Lots of middle-of-the-road voters would be swayed to vote for
        Obama if the Repub establishment heavily promotes the idea that a vote
        for their own party’s candidate would be a terrible mistake."
        [my emphasis]

        Yes, I think this too.  Could explain her anger and frustration lately, if she knows the fix might be in.

        "And don’t forget that both the Dem and Repub establishments may well
        put their financial resources behind a third-party candidate in an
        effort to beat Palin if she wins the Repub nomination. If there is
        going to be a third party candidate this time anyway, why not go ahead
        and be that third party candidate rather than let it be the thing that
        beats you?"

        Well said!

        "If she IS that third party candidate and positions herself effectively
        to win Independent votes rather than how she would need to position
        herself to win Repub votes, she may be able to peal away votes both
        from the Dem side and the Repub side that otherwise would be lost to
        [my emphasis]

        Yes, this is what I think too.

  • RobBennett

    I have a few variations to offer:

    1) If she went independent, she wouldn’t be waiting until the two big party nominations were settled to begin her campaign. The campaign would begin next month and she would be commenting on the Republican primaries as they unfolded. This would give her an edge in fundraising and in organization and in name recognition and in policy formulation that earlier third party candidates did not possess;

    2) A less radical approach would be to run as an independent within the Repub primary system. She could disassociate herself in every possible way from the establishment, promise that the cabinet will be comprised of Democrats and Independents as well as Republicans, take stands on several important issues that are generally viewed as Democratic stands and that have much support among Independents, and welcome participation from Dems and Independents in the Republican primaries;

    3) The most radical approach of all would be to run in the Repub primaries while announcing in advance an intention to run as an Independent in the event that she fails to win the Repub nomination. She would of course be called disloyal for doing this. A perfectly legitimate response would be that it is the Repub establishment that is being disloyal to Repub voters by employing every trick in the book to defeat the candidate that the voters would want if their will could effectively be expressed. She could point to the change in the primary rules which are aimed at lessening the impact of the early primaries where she is likely to do well (by making the delegate allocation proportional in the early months and then winner-take-all when we get to states more likely to favor Romney) and all sorts of things along these lines. The idea would be to save the Repub party if it can be saved and to move on if it cannot be saved.


    • jerseymark

      As far as the theory of running as a third party, that has been talked about at length before and it has always assumed a victory for Obama as happened with Clinton. While the threat of such a run if she is not elected as the Nominee should definitely be out there as Trump has stated in the past – strong arm the Party. 

      However, I have a variation on your theme. How about she run for the Republican Nomination and when she wins, others associated with her establish a third party apparatus under the Tea Party name, unite the Tea Parties under the umbrella, hold a convention and nominate Sarah as it candidate so that she runs on both tickets as happens in New York State where they also have a Conservative Party and Liberal Party. She would get the benefit of votes given to both while establishing the strength and viability of the Tea Party as it transitions to the replacement of the Republican Party. THAT WOULD BE UNCONVENTIONAL IN THE EXTREME.

      • AmsterdamExpat

        This is a quite interesting proposal (and I vote in New York). Presumably it would be possible in many states to run as the candidate of two tickets concurrently, though in others it may not be an option legally speaking or otherwise not feasible.

    • AmsterdamExpat

      Ad 3. I don’t know the specifics of the rule changes that institute proportional allocation of delegates in the early primary states while retaining the winner-take-all rule for the later ones: do you have a convenient source for them, or can you summarize briefly? Is it the RNC that has instituted these changes, or the various state organizations, or some combination of the two?

    • Jen4Palin

      #2 is what I am thinking. She knows that even with the R by her name, she is on her own.

  • Jules

    Well thought theory, Adrienne. You are definitely a believer that Sarah will run one way or another.
    Going independent is a losing proposition that will only allow Obama to win a second term like Nader allowed Clinton to win with under 50% of the vote TWICE. I also doubt many pf her supporters will follow her in a losing third party candidacy. Removing Obama from office is a must for many in her base and they may only support her within the GOP embrella since that’s the only way to win in 2012.

    If Sarah wanted to go 3rd Party, she should have started that rift during the 2010 election by moving the Tea Party into an Independent Party. It’s way too late at this stage to do that. So I don’t believe she will run as a 3rd Party Candidate.

    In my view, she is trying to find a way to be a GOP candidate that can campaign as a free citizen and that can be done. She has huge grassroot support that can carry her like the TP carried many in 2010. She just needs to get out there and perform well in debates and interviews.

  • Nicole Olmstead Coulter

    Very nicely theorizied, Adrienne. It’s always good to think outside the box. ESPECIALLY with Governor Palin. I wouldn’t have thought it possible, but you make a strong argument that she may just be thinking in those terms! If anyone could pull off a third-party run, my money would be on her.

  • Matthew J. Weaver

    I’m waiting for a clear decision from Governor Palin, either she has the fire in her belly to run or she does not. It’s her choice. Should she run, she’ll have my support and I am confident that she’ll win.     

  • BostonBruin

    One thought I had recently is that perhaps we should take her more literally when she says that her campaign would be "unconventional". Is she literally referring to the RNC convention process iself? Will she run a campaign in which she makes the RNC convention irrelevant in some way? A third-party run would certainly be a way to circumvent the convention in Tampa. However, she did say in her last interview with Hannity earlier this month that the solutions lie with the GOP to turn this country around.

    The question is what are the "shackles" that the Governor refers to? Does she think the RNC convention will be rigged and she has no chance? If she is the GOP nominee, can the RNC force her to hire certain people, can they control or affect her message in some way?

    IMO, there is another way to make the RNC convention irrelevant. And that is to win the GOP nomination in a landslide. Anyway, given the filing deadlines coming up, we’ll know in a few weeks.

  • sarahhasmyvote

    I am hoping that as soon as Sarah announces, the courthouses in America are inundated with Independents registering to be Republicans. Independents CANNOT vote in the primaries. We need Sarah to win the primaries. 

    A 3rd party is not necessary for Sarah to be our President. She will start the long clean up process and choose a strong VP who can help continue the work.  

    She is running and her strategy is brilliant, cliffhanging, but brilliant. 

    Sarah 2012 

  • bedr1

    Who else is else is waiting for Sarah that has run third party before?

    Donald Trump

  • AmsterdamExpat

    Thanks, Adrienne, for this. It has a certain plausibility.

    What seems pretty evident to me is that SP plans ahead and thus has given thought to a number of contingency plans to deal with the various possible ways in which the current situation might unfold. One of the eventualities she seems to be considering, judging from her remarks in that interview, is how to resist and turn back the attempt of the RNC to force a campaign apparatus on her as the nominee in the general election that would actually conspire against her rather than work for her — how to do this, not whether it’s even possible.

    Yet there’s another question about which she didn’t speak in that interview but which may be weighing on her mind: namely, how she ought to proceed in the event that the RNC has determined to stop at nothing to prevent her from being the nominee and is prepared to utilize tactics similar to those that the DNC employed in 2008 in favor of Obama. (In this context, the revision of the schedule of the early primaries, such that it’s unclear when they’ll be held or when the deadlines for getting on the various ballots are, as well as the prospect that some states will have their delegations to the convention reduced, is a disquieting sign.) If this is what the RNC is now or will shortly be up to, it would be well for SP to have some idea worked out of how she would proceed in the event that she would win the requisite primaries and yet by various machinations be denied the nomination — as opposed to being necessarily "shackled" by the outcome of such a fait accompli.

    (Of course, the implication that she would not let such low methods prevent her from running as an independent could well deter the RNC or the other powers that be from employing them in the first place: this would be the best outcome for everyone.)

  • KJack

    What if they’re planning a Palin/Trump independent run if they don’t like the leaders in the field?

  • Mary Beth House

    I would not support a third party run.  I’m sorry but that would be a recipe for disaster.

    I would however support what she did in Alaska…to be the people’s candidate running as the voice of the people.

    I would support her setting herself apart from the GOP party apparatus while utilizing the party framework.  It’s a tough, tough battle…but doable.

    Third party = splitting the opposition and destroying any chance we have to win in 2012.

    Running as an independent/3rd party MINDED Republican however is a recipe for WIN.

    • CharterOakie

      MBH – your premise assumes that all the anti-GOP voters who typically vote Dem will still be in Obama’s camp if there is an attractive Independent to vote for instead.  That’s contrary to actual historical experience.

      I absolutely would support a Palin independent run.  Preference is to overhaul the GOP.  But as I’ve occasionally stated here for over two years, that is NOT an easy task.

      • Mary Beth House

        No my premise is that Governor Palin cannot take on both political machines gunning for her in full force in November 2012…and that the opposition vote to Obama would absolutely be fractured at a time we need unity.

        • CharterOakie

          I understand that’s your POV.  My POV is that a substantial majority of the electorate is sick of both machines and now may indeed support an independent courageous and strong enough to challenge both of them.  And Sarah Palin is both.

          Secondly, merely replacing Obama is.not.sufficient!  The beltway duopoly, a TWO-headed monster, must be defeated.

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets