• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Will Sarah Palin run for President in 2012?

Will Sarah Palin run for President in 2012?

  • Without a doubt

    Votes: 5 20.8%
  • Possibly

    Votes: 12 50.0%
  • Not likely

    Votes: 4 16.7%
  • No way in hell

    Votes: 3 12.5%

  • Total voters
    24
What is her incentive to run? She can wield more money and influence as media personality, and all she has to do is play to her strengths in firing up the base. Any election against an incumbent is already a gamble against the house, and to win she would have to somehow manage to appeal to the moderates who actually decide elections. Its a lot of effort and risk with not much more of a payout at the end.
 
Will Sarah Palin decide to run for President in 2012? Please give an explanation for your answers.

I say not likely, unless they want to ensure Obama wins another term. I think she flipped on some important issues and quit her job as governor which her opponents will exploit the hell out of.
 
Of course not she won't run. She is able to make more money now running the conservative rally circuit.

This is why she quit her governorship in that she can make more money doing sound bites than digging down and working hard for the constitutents.

It is easier to sling mud at whoever is in office than to be the one in office trying to dig ourselves out of a hole.
 
She might try it, but I doubt she'll get far. I honestly think she killed any serious chance she had of furthering her political career when she resigned as governor of Alaska.
 
I think Romney gets thrown out there unless Obama looks really weak, which considering the economy should be in decent shape by then is unlikely. The rest are better off waiting and not facing an incumbent. All that assumes you are right and Palin does not run.

Romney has his health care problem, which is a huge deal considering how much importance is being placed on Obamacare (and yes, it will still be an issue if it still exists in 2012). And even without that, he has the same problem he had in 2008 of inconsistent and often changing views.

The popular narrative right now is that it'll be Palin versus Romney, but I don't think it'll be either. Even if Palin runs (unlikely) she won't be nominated; there's the inexperience factor, plus she's a controversial figure even within the GOP. And she's unelectable, and most Republicans realize that.
 
Romney has his health care problem, which is a huge deal considering how much importance is being placed on Obamacare (and yes, it will still be an issue if it still exists in 2012). And even without that, he has the same problem he had in 2008 of inconsistent and often changing views.

The popular narrative right now is that it'll be Palin versus Romney, but I don't think it'll be either. Even if Palin runs (unlikely) she won't be nominated; there's the inexperience factor, plus she's a controversial figure even within the GOP. And she's unelectable, and most Republicans realize that.

I agree she is unelectable, and for basically those reasons. I also agree that Romney will face huge problems both getting the nomination and in the general for those reasons. That is why I think you throw one of those out in an election that I suspect is going to strongly favor Obama. If the economy is in good shape, incumbents are hard to beat.
 
Yup. That's a BIG problem for him. Moderates might accept him, but the more conservative probably won't. Shame. I think he'd be a pretty good candidate.

... which is exactly why the Repubs have no shot in '12. You can not win the presidency by appealing to an extreme of the political spectrum. If the Repubs insist on running a conservative, they will be sending their man (or woman) to slaughter... Obama will be essentially running unopposed just as Clinton did in '96 and Reagan in '84.
 
I agree she is unelectable, and for basically those reasons. I also agree that Romney will face huge problems both getting the nomination and in the general for those reasons. That is why I think you throw one of those out in an election that I suspect is going to strongly favor Obama. If the economy is in good shape, incumbents are hard to beat.

We don't know what the economy will be like. We don't even know what the big issues will be in 2012. This far away from 2008, everyone thought the big issue would be Iraq.

What do you mean "you throw one of those out"?

... which is exactly why the Repubs have no shot in '12. You can not win the presidency by appealing to an extreme of the political spectrum. If the Repubs insist on running a conservative, they will be sending their man (or woman) to slaughter... Obama will be essentially running unopposed just as Clinton did in '96 and Reagan in '84.

What? For one thing, running a conservative is not "appealing to an extreme". And don't forget that Reagan ran as a conservative, and won both times. Not to mention, if Clinton ran unopposed in '96, he would have gotten an actual majority of the votes.

Right now people think Obama doesn't deserve a second term, 50%-44% or so. That can change, obviously, but to say that he has no chance of being defeated at this time is kind of silly.
 
We don't know what the economy will be like. We don't even know what the big issues will be in 2012. This far away from 2008, everyone thought the big issue would be Iraq.

What do you mean "you throw one of those out"?

We don't for sure, but historically, the economy is due to be in good shape. The rest is true, but barring anything unforeseen(anything involving the future should automatically come with that caveat) I suspect that Obama will be in good shape. Let's face it, the last one term president was Bush the elder. Only 3 in my lifetime. It is certainly far from certain, and I am not making a prediction here, but it is my best guess right now, which I reserve the right to change as more data becomes available.

What I meant by that was to give them the nomination, let them run and lose. If you are probably going to lose anyway, why waste a good candidate?
 
We don't know what the economy will be like. We don't even know what the big issues will be in 2012. This far away from 2008, everyone thought the big issue would be Iraq.

What do you mean "you throw one of those out"?



What? For one thing, running a conservative is not "appealing to an extreme". And don't forget that Reagan ran as a conservative, and won both times. Not to mention, if Clinton ran unopposed in '96, he would have gotten an actual majority of the votes.

Right now people think Obama doesn't deserve a second term, 50%-44% or so. That can change, obviously, but to say that he has no chance of being defeated at this time is kind of silly.

So we are clear, I did not mean the Republicans have no shot; only that they have no shot if they run a conservative. Although Reagan running as a conservative is a good argument, I would argue that Reagan is far less "conservative" than the pool of candidates that are to the right of Romney... they are extreme. Romney could win. Pawlenty could win. People around that end of the spectrum have a shot, but people much to the right, they would likely be roadkill unless things really collapsed.

BTW - what poll are you citing that people would change out Obama? That is lower then is approval rating, which right now is about 47%. Granted, an approval rating under 50% is not a good place to be running a campaign from... that said, as you pointed out and I agree, 2012 will be an entirely different situation than today.
 
We don't for sure, but historically, the economy is due to be in good shape. The rest is true, but barring anything unforeseen(anything involving the future should automatically come with that caveat) I suspect that Obama will be in good shape. Let's face it, the last one term president was Bush the elder. Only 3 in my lifetime. It is certainly far from certain, and I am not making a prediction here, but it is my best guess right now, which I reserve the right to change as more data becomes available.

Eh, it's all speculation. But keep in mind the last two consecutive presidents to win election to two terms, before Clinton-Bush, was Madison-Monroe. So the fact that Bush I was the last one-termer doesn't really say anything about Obama's chances.

I was trying to think of the last time a president lost in a good economy, and decided it was probably 1968. Though the recession in 1992 was not that big, as well. But of course, we don't even know 2012 will be a good economy. Don't forget Carter, who won in a bad economy, and then lost in a still-bad economy. And if the CBO is to be believed, the economy might still be recovering in 2012: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc11014/01-28-Testimony_Senate.pdf
CBO: Unemployment Rate Not Likely To Dip Below 9% Until 2012

What I meant by that was to give them the nomination, let them run and lose. If you are probably going to lose anyway, why waste a good candidate?

That makes no sense at all. Republicans will want to beat Obama no matter the odds. And even if there are small odds, they won't be microscopic. And Romney's problems have nothing to do with his odds in the general, plus Palin has problems that also apply to the primary as well as the general, as I've already said.
 
Eh, it's all speculation. But keep in mind the last two consecutive presidents to win election to two terms, before Clinton-Bush, was Madison-Monroe. So the fact that Bush I was the last one-termer doesn't really say anything about Obama's chances.

I was trying to think of the last time a president lost in a good economy, and decided it was probably 1968. Though the recession in 1992 was not that big, as well. But of course, we don't even know 2012 will be a good economy. Don't forget Carter, who won in a bad economy, and then lost in a still-bad economy. And if the CBO is to be believed, the economy might still be recovering in 2012: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc11014/01-28-Testimony_Senate.pdf
CBO: Unemployment Rate Not Likely To Dip Below 9% Until 2012



That makes no sense at all. Republicans will want to beat Obama no matter the odds. And even if there are small odds, they won't be microscopic. And Romney's problems have nothing to do with his odds in the general, plus Palin has problems that also apply to the primary as well as the general, as I've already said.

Just a point of clarification/amplification: The 1992 recession was not bad, but it was scary to us. ALot of things had been going on during that period, Black Monday, spiking oil prices(we wish prices where like that now though), slow growth, so on. This all continued well into 1992, and pretty much into 1993.
 
So we are clear, I did not mean the Republicans have no shot; only that they have no shot if they run a conservative. Although Reagan running as a conservative is a good argument, I would argue that Reagan is far less "conservative" than the pool of candidates that are to the right of Romney... they are extreme. Romney could win. Pawlenty could win. People around that end of the spectrum have a shot, but people much to the right, they would likely be roadkill unless things really collapsed.

Reagan was actually pretty extreme, I can't think of anyone currently running who is more conservative than he was.
Republicans almost always run conservatives, I don't even know what you're talking about. And since when was Pawlenty a moderate?

BTW - what poll are you citing that people would change out Obama? That is lower then is approval rating, which right now is about 47%. Granted, an approval rating under 50% is not a good place to be running a campaign from... that said, as you pointed out and I agree, 2012 will be an entirely different situation than today.

I was wrong, it's 52%:
CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - CNN Poll: Anti-incumbent fever at record high - Blogs from CNN.com
According to the poll, 44 percent of registered voters say Obama deserves re-election, with 52 percent saying the president does not deserve a second term in office
 
Will Sarah Palin decide to run for President in 2012? Please give an explanation for your answers.
There is no money in running for President. There is money in appearing to be running for President. Former Gov. Palin is a mercenary for Sarah Palin. It's all about money, and, more important, it's about money that Sarah Palin can get her hands on. She won't run for President, but, she will appear to run for President for good while longer.
 
There is no money in running for President. There is money in appearing to be running for President. Former Gov. Palin is a mercenary for Sarah Palin. It's all about money, and, more important, it's about money that Sarah Palin can get her hands on. She won't run for President, but, she will appear to run for President for good while longer.

I don't think money is the issue. Most people don't get into politics for money, and most people in politics, including Palin, have enough. It's the desire for power and to(idealistically) try and make the country better. In my naivete I actually think most politicians, including Palin, think they are working to benefit the country.
 
There is no money in running for President. There is money in appearing to be running for President. Former Gov. Palin is a mercenary for Sarah Palin. It's all about money, and, more important, it's about money that Sarah Palin can get her hands on. She won't run for President, but, she will appear to run for President for good while longer.

I actually sort of agree with this, but think it's not about money, but rather attention. She is VERY good at drawing attention to herself, even when she should be irrelevant, to the point where she almost gets as much media attention as the president himself.
 
Back
Top Bottom