Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Eug · Oct 27, 2008, 10:54 AM

globeandmail.com: 'Rogue' Palin eyeing 2012 White House campaign, party insiders say

To counter that possibility, she is presenting herself to the public with an eye to her own long-term political career and a possible presidential bid in four years.

On The Chris Matthews Show yesterday, four pundits predicted Ms. Palin will run in 2012.

An unnamed source told CNN that "she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party."

And on Saturday, Politico's Ben Smith wrote of an emerging "Palin insurgency," quoting four unnamed Republican insiders who said Ms. Palin blames McCain handlers for her negative image and has "gone rogue."

---

Sounds like idle speculation to me, but nonetheless that's what some of the pundits are claiming. I can see her wanting to keep things open for herself though. Otherwise I'm a little confused as to why she's gone "rogue".

Big Mac · Oct 27, 2008, 11:00 AM

She hasn't gone rogue on McCain. She may have gone rogue on McCain's appointed handlers of her, who weren't helping her image at all or making good media choices for either of them. McCain's run no better than a C+ campaign up to this point. I don't know if Palin is egotistical enough to think she'll have a shot in 2012 if McCain can't pull of a victory now, but in politics hubris is the rule and not the exception.

ort888 · Oct 27, 2008, 11:02 AM

Palin doesn't stand a chance in hell.

Dakar V · Oct 27, 2008, 11:04 AM

I don't understand this 2012 crap. Wouldn't she wait to run against someone she didn't lose to 4 years previous? (Even if it was as the VP candidate)

vmarks · Oct 27, 2008, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

I don't understand this 2012 crap. Wouldn't she wait to run against someone she didn't lose to 4 years previous? (Even if it was as the VP candidate)

Obama started running in 2004 for the 2008 election. John Edwards ran for office starting the moment he was elected to the Senate. You have to begin early if you expect to be ready in time for election day.

Dakar V · Oct 27, 2008, 11:55 AM

I can see her reminding everyone she's around in 2012, but I don't see her running against Obama. Do you?

Chongo · 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

Palin doesn't stand a chance in hell.

She does have a chance. That is why the left is trying to detroy her now. The thought of a Sarah Palin/Bobby Jindal ticket is giving them nightmares. They also don't want her in the Senate either. She could Appoint herself to Stevens seat if he resigns, or run on her own

ort888 · Oct 27, 2008, 12:17 PM

The left and right always try and destroy presidential candidates.

Do you think there is some sort of special plot by the left to destroy her? Presidential candidates becomes heros to one side and villains to the other. Reason gets thrown out the window. That's just how it goes.

This cycle is no different. Obama and McCain are both being ridiculously vilified. So are Biden and Palin.

OreoCookie · Oct 27, 2008, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by vmarks

Obama started running in 2004 for the 2008 election. John Edwards ran for office starting the moment he was elected to the Senate. You have to begin early if you expect to be ready in time for election day.

You're forgetting that if she runs in 2012, then it seems likely that she has lost this election as VP candidate. And I'm sure some Republicans will attribute this loss to her persona. Even as we speak, some Republicans are (quietly, but audibly) blaming her for what looks like a defeat. At least I've seen that in the news on this side of the pond.

Looking back, failed candidates don't stand much of a chance for a second attempt.

olePigeon · Oct 27, 2008, 12:19 PM

She'll buy a house in Newfoundland and claim, "I can see Greenland from my house!"

Hey, I know, she could set political history by having Robert Byrd run as her VP. Proof that bigotry can be a bipartisan issue they can both stand behind. They could nationalize the KKK like an antithesis to Peace Corps; it'd uphold traditional, good Christian values.

Chongo · Oct 27, 2008, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

She'll buy a house in Newfoundland and claim, "I can see Greenland from my house!"

Hey, I know, she could set political history by having Robert Byrd run as her VP. Proof that bigotry can be a bipartisan issue they can both stand behind. They could nationalize the KKK like an antithesis to Peace Corps; it'd uphold traditional, good Christian values.

Or she can by a house in Chappaqua........

ort888 · Oct 27, 2008, 12:25 PM

I don;t think she has a chance to make it through a primary. The whole "hiding from the media" thing doesn't fly in a primary. You really have to put yourself out there.

She should just go back to being a governor. She seems to have a really good handle on local alaskan politics and just got in over her head on the national level. Maybe if she works hard she can be ready eventually, but I don't think she will. I think her brand is already tainted.

Chongo · Oct 27, 2008, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Looking back, failed candidates don't stand much of a chance for a second attempt.

Like Reagan in '76?

OreoCookie · 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Chongo

Like Reagan in '76?

I didn't write it has never happened, just that it's not very likely.
Winning the primaries just doesn't work unless she shapes up (intellectually speaking) and changes her strategy on press exposure. I doubt other potential candidates from the Republican party will overlook her obvious weaknesses as generously as they may do now.

She's kinda like the Harriet Myers of McCain's campaign -- with the basic difference that Myers and Bush have a relationship of trust that goes back for many years.

vmarks · Oct 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

You're forgetting that if she runs in 2012, then it seems likely that she has lost this election as VP candidate.

I'm not sure why that's a pre-req. George Bush 41 was a one-term president, and the party chose to nominate Dole instead of Quayle for the ticket that year. McCain could hypothetically be a one term president, and Palin run in 2012.

And I'm sure some Republicans will attribute this loss to her persona. Even as we speak, some Republicans are (quietly, but audibly) blaming her for what looks like a defeat. At least I've seen that in the news on this side of the pond.

Looking back, failed candidates don't stand much of a chance for a second attempt.

That's one of the good characteristics of the GOP. It gives second and third chances to candidates who don't make it the first time out. The Democrats are far less forgiving.

ort888 · Oct 27, 2008, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by vmarks

I'm not sure why that's a pre-req. George Bush 41 was a one-term president, and the party chose to nominate Dole instead of Quayle for the ticket that year. McCain could hypothetically be a one term president, and Palin run in 2012..

I think you're mixed up. Unless the 4 year president gets booted out or caught with a kiddie porn dungeon, they run again. Palin won't run in 2012 if McCain wins.

And Dole ran against Clinton in his bid for a second term. Clinton beat Bush Sr. in his bid for a secod term.

Spliff · Oct 27, 2008, 02:13 PM

I'm saddened that there are actual American's who admire and respect Palin's opinions. Here's Hitchens on Palin's ignorance and the Republican party's stupidity for choosing her:

This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just "people of faith" but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity.

Sarah Palin's War on Science

SpaceMonkey · Oct 27, 2008, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

She should just go back to being a governor. She seems to have a really good handle on local alaskan politics and just got in over her head on the national level. Maybe if she works hard she can be ready eventually, but I don't think she will. I think her brand is already tainted.

Maybe she can be president of Alaska, post-independence!

Chongo · Oct 27, 2008, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by vmarks

I'm not sure why that's a pre-req. George Bush 41 was a one-term president, and the party chose to nominate Dole instead of Quayle for the ticket that year. McCain could hypothetically be a one term president, and Palin run in 2012.

That's one of the good characteristics of the GOP. It gives second and third chances to candidates who don't make it the first time out. The Democrats are far less forgiving.

The Democrats did nominate Stevenson twice to run against Ike.

Zeeb · Oct 27, 2008, 02:30 PM

Although I disagree with just about every opinion Palin holds, I'm impressed that she's decided to take charge of her own image. It's the first sign of leadership I've seen from her and she should have cast off her handlers sooner. Then again, is it possible this whole rogue image is intentional and coordinated to make her look like a "maverick"?

ironknee · Oct 27, 2008, 02:34 PM

i don't think americans are that dumb...wait

vmarks · Oct 27, 2008, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

I think you're mixed up. Unless the 4 year president gets booted out or caught with a kiddie porn dungeon, they run again. Palin won't run in 2012 if McCain wins.

And Dole ran against Clinton in his bid for a second term. Clinton beat Bush Sr. in his bid for a secod term.

I did make an error.

Chongo · 04:36 PM

hmmm, Stevens has been convicted. Senator Sarah Palin? Naw, she'll be VP