Mitt Romney-Sarah Palin in 2012? You betcha!
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Conservative superstar Sarah Palin opened the door yesterday to joining forces with Mitt Romney for a 2012 White House run – a hot ticket that has some Republicans licking their chops at the prospect of unseating President Obama.
“Sounds pretty good,” Palin declared at yesterday’s Tea Party Express rally on the Common when asked about pairing up with the former Bay State governor – giving the idea a big thumbs-up as she left the stage after her headline speech.
Last night, as Palin stopped for cannoli at Mike’s Pastry in the North End, she said she was “serious” about the idea.
“I have a lot of respect for Mitt,” she told the Herald.
Asked who would be on top of the ticket, Palin roared, “Ha! I haven’t even thought that far ahead yet.”
Indeed, Palin said she hasn’t decided whether she’ll run in 2012 – with or without Romney.
Romney, a presumptive 2012 Republican presidential contender who recently embarked on a nationwide book tour, has not ruled out an alliance with Palin, the GOP’s 2008 vice presidential candidate.
“Mitt Romney respects Sarah Palin and he appreciates the contributions she makes to the party,” said Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom. “But his immediate focus is on helping Republicans win back the Congress in 2010.”
Some veteran political observers were intrigued by the notion of the two telegenic former GOP governors on the same ticket.
“They both have a lot they can offer a campaign,” said Douglas Lorenz, a California-based GOP consultant. “Romney has the experience as a governor and experience as a candidate for president, and when you combine that with Sarah Palin’s ability to get people motivated, that could definitely be a formidable ticket.”
Republican gubernatorial candidate Christy Mihos called the matchup “the best of both worlds.”
“They both come at it from totally different parts of the spectrum,” said Mihos, who attended yesterday’s Tea Party rally. “One deals on a gut level with people and the other is highly successful on the business end of things.”
Speaking before a rapt crowd estimated at 5,000, Palin squarely targeted Democrats, pounding away at Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package. She also lobbied for domestic oil drilling.
“I want to tell ’em, ‘Nah, we’ll keep clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion – and you can keep the change,” Palin said, later adding, “Yeah, let’s drill, baby, drill; not stall, baby, stall – you betcha.”
Meanwhile, Palin said last night she had no hard feelings about U.S. Sen. Scott Brown’s decision to skip the rally. “He was in Washington doing his job,” she said.
State Treasurer Tim Cahill, who also is running for governor as an independent, joked that a prospective alliance between Palin and Romney would “a good-looking ticket.”
This ticket equals disaster for America.
Mitt Romeny brought us RomneyCare, predecessor to ObamaCare. Why would the country want him?
And Sarah Palin’s crazy newspaper interview (“I want to tell ’em, ‘Nah, we’ll keep clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion – and you can keep the change,” Palin said, later adding, “Yeah, let’s drill, baby, drill; not stall, baby, stall – you betcha.”) was nothing short of embarassing.
Well, it certainly would be a disaster for the republican party – they’d not be elected in big numbers for decades
so I kinda hope it happens
I imagine that they’ll fight for who’s on top…..
I think it has a chance at being a very good ticket. FAAAR better than Obama-Biden was for ’08.
Jimmy Carter gave us Ronald Reagan. What will Barack Obama give us? I certainly hope it’s not either Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin.
Michelle Bachmann would be great on a ticket.
I agree she probably would. Too bad she and Sarah can’t run together as I don’t think Americans are ready for TWO women in the White House. Lol
I could never vote for Palin. Just the fact that she’s campaigning for McCain (not a conservative) and getting chummy with Romney (a wolf in sheep’s clothing) shows her true colors.
McCain was not my number one choice I have to admit. No he’s not a right right wing conservative but he stands up on issues that are important to me. You can’t agree 100 percent with anybody as we’re all individuals. I’d even venture to say that I disagree with Palin on issues but on the whole she’s proven herself conversative on issues that I care about and that’s what matters to me. I also like what I’ve seen of Romney although I’ll admit I’m not to familiar on most of his viewpoints. I know he’s a mormon but I don’t hold that against him. What do you mean a wolf in sheep’s clothing?
First off, Mormonism is a cult. I’ve done a lot of research on the White Horse Prophecy… although the LDS’s official stance is that they don’t believe that, their records prove otherwise.
Besides, I wouldn’t want a man sitting ion the Oval Office with his finger on the nuclear button, who has a “God complex”. And Mormons certainly do. Again, they try to downplay it, but if you read their literature on their official websites, it’s there.
Other than that, Romney pushed hard for state health insurance in Massachusetts — not much different from ObamaCare. And he personally pushed for abortion coverage (there’s a $50 co-pay). Next, he illegally forced justices of the peace and town clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, despite the fact that the state legislature NEVER passed same-sex marriage. Read the court decision… it said the legislature needed to look at the issue and come up with a solution. Romney took the matter right out of their hands and made law unilaterally. That’s unconstitutional. The executive branch CANNOT make law.
Plus, the man is not pro-life. I don’t have the research handy right now, but he only used the issue to gain votes.
Now to McCain. I admit I voted for him and Palin, which I now wish I hadn’t done. I’m tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. McCain is pro-amnesty, not pro-life, not in favor of free speech (that’s why SCOTUS overturned McCain-Feingold). McCain and Obama are both heading in the same general direction, just at different speeds. The best thing about Obama winning is that it has awakened many people.
And Palin has shown herself not to be prolife. She said Roe v Wade should be overturned, and that abortion should be decided at the state level. Well, that’s what they said about slavery in 1861. And if she’s pro-life, and so conservative, why is she campaigning for McCain rather than Hayworth?
Yeah I completely agree with mormonism being a cult. I’ve looked into myself. I however didn’t know any of that about Romney so thanks for the headsups and I’ll make sure to look into it. As far as Palin I do believe I recall her saying that. It’s been awhile since I read her book but I own it so…but anyway I agree with her that it should be overturned but I also agree that this is a state issue. The federal government is not the decider of life and death and shouldn’t be given that authority. Also if it’s going to remain at the federal level I do believe that we are American citizens should have a vote on it. And if that can’t happen I do believe that were Roe Vs Wade overturned that voting should be held at the state level.
There are many issues that should be decided at the state level, but life isn’t one of them. If we did that, 51% of the population could vote for abortion or the killing of newborns or the elderly. Life is the greatest of our God-ordained rights, and in the face of attacks on it, must be defended at the federal level.
why do you guys think that mormonism is a cult and all the other religions are not?
xtian armageddon lovers have driven US policy on Israel – Bush had his grubby fingers near The Button – and probably all the Left Behind books on a shelf
51% of Americans support prochoice and euthanasia?
so, progress is being made after all.
but I do agree that these issues should not be left to a referendum, rule by the mob is rarely a good thing
abortion and euthanasia should be private medical decisions
doctors are not supposed to do harm and sometimes, extending a life for the sake of extending it, causes a lot of harm, not only to the patient, but the family as well.
http://ntrygg.wordpress.com
Nina, you didn’t read that right. Fifty-one percent of Americans don’t support abortion or euthanasia. I said that if these issues were decided at the state level, 51% COULD vote for them, then they’d be law.
Okay, my misreading that makes more sense – it didn’t seem consistent with the rest of your posts.
so, why do you think mormons are a cult, rather than all religions being cults?
I know you won’t agree with this, but…
Any religion that purports to be Christian but doesn’t follow basic biblical beliefs is a cult (Mormon men believe they will someday be gods, rule over their own worlds, and have billions of spirit children). And any religion that denies Christ is a cult.
Well, I think all religions are cults – but I can’t really disagree with how you interpret the difference between cult and religion.
As an outsider who doesn’t really see a lot of differences between the various versions of the same thing – the fighting in between is very interesting.
I think it was last year that Sony released yet another Elvis compilation of religious recordings – advertised as gospel – but the song Miracle of the Rosary was on it – and people lost their minds about this catholic song being on it.
And I find on line, many believers fall into the no true Scotsman fallacy when confronted with facts about what believers do, they revert to no true xtian would do that
and really, it’s not down to anyone to define anyone else – if a person says they are xtian, then they are – even if they conduct themselves differently from other xtians.
Because it’s extremely difficult to take the bible literally and live by it – http://www.ajjacobs.com/books/yolb.asp
nina
http://ntrygg.wordpress.com/atheistindex/
Nina said: “Because it’s extremely difficult to take the bible literally and live by it”
That’s true, but there are actually people who have done it. The rest of us plod along, thankful that we have a Savior who’s forgiven us.
But not everything in the Bible is literal. Some of it is apocolyptic language, something the Jews often used. It would be like us saying, “It’s raining cats and dogs.” It’s a problem when someone tries to force a literal meaning onto something that’s not literal.
Maybe like saying it’s raining cats and dogs who are vampires and going to eat everyone…..
Hyperbole is a lot different from apocolyptic , after all.
Okay – so if your savior is so forgiving, then why not just be as good a person as you can and not worry about the details like not wearing polycotton blends?
Don’t you think that judging others – like gays and lesbians – is a very bad failure? That judge not lest ye be judged?
why be bothered about what other people do – especially when it doesn’t impact you, deny you anything or take anything away from you?