# Sarah Palin - Seriously? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 7, 2010, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029 "2010-02-07T14:42:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![YamatoTwinkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/cc9497/32.png) [@YamatoTwinkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YamatoTwinkie)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/141 "2010-02-08T21:19:50Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > The fact also remains that Obama feels the need to work from a teleprompter when speaking to the media, which is even worse than an outline, and an outline is pretty much all Palin was using when delivering her speech. How come Obama gets to speak to the press with a teleprompter and gets no grief while Palin gets called stupid for using a three or four point outline when delivering her speech herself? > > I’m sure some of you will try the out of claiming that speaking to the press is more important than speaking to a group of righties, but hey, words is words and if Palin is stupid for not relying on her own memory to deliver her speech (and likely a longer one), why is Obama not even more stupid for having to have every word laid out in front of him? > > Answer: Neither is stupid, and accusations of Palin stupidity are no more than hypocritical partisanship. I think there are two reasons why people are critical of Palin doing this: (1) It immediately followed Palin _herself_ being critical of Obama’s teleprompter usage. Thus showing \*her own \*hypocrisy. People aren’t necessarily giving Obama a free pass for his “reliance” on a teleprompter, they just don’t like hypocrites. And by the way, I agree with your point that it’s much more authentic to give a speech with only few notes than it is to just read it off the teleprompter, which does weaken the above argument. (2) it’s not so much the notes as it is the hand-written nature of them. You’ve got to admit that its a little hokey, and If Obama did the same thing, he’d get no end of people making fun of him for it. (3) She appeared to be relying on her notes during the “Q&A” portion. Prepared speeches meant for dissemination are one thing, but depending on notes during an “interview” with a friendly audience are another, and appear to show either: A: how manufactured the whole thing is. B: Palin’s troubles with speaking on things she hasn’t prepared for. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/142 "2010-02-08T21:21:53Z")
> [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > She \*\*\*SOUNDS \*\*\*like an idiot. > > I think there is a very simple reason for this. She IS an idiot. She sounds like an idiot because she was governor of a state. She is smarter than the average American, but dumber than the average governor – so much so that I can’t understand how anybody could seriously consider her presidential material. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/143 "2010-02-08T22:24:09Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Please provide a cite for your claim. His post is his cite. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/144 "2010-02-08T22:32:40Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > His post is his cite. Well, I hope that he comes back to clear it up. I would hate to think that I had taken note the first time **Sam Stone** ever came in and confidently made a false statement. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/145 "2010-02-08T22:39:19Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I ask because so far, despite how stupid you think she is, she has somehow managed to A) derail healthcare reform with her ‘death panels’, B) make perhaps a bigger splash in the media with her speech at a tea party convention than Obama made with a State of the Union Address, C) raise millions upon millions of dollars, D) have one of the best-selling books of the last year, and E) be the apparent leader of an entire new grassroots movement that is at this time kicking the ass of Washington. Each of these points, particularly A) and E), is less a refutation of Palin’s alleged stupidity than strong evidence that her stupidity is contagious. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/146 "2010-02-08T22:43:29Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Just out of curiosity - if Palin runs a brilliant campaign, will that be accepted of evidence of her ability to be president, the way Obama’s was? > > I ask because so far, despite how stupid you think she is, she has somehow managed to A) derail healthcare reform with her ‘death panels’, Even granting the point that Palin’s remarks were instrumental in healthcare reform running off the rails…it says more about the idiocy of the American people (who fell for the ‘death panel’ comment as containing anything remotely like the truth) and the spinelessness of Congress, than it says about any gravitas that Palin brings to political debate. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/147 "2010-02-08T22:45:09Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Please provide a cite for your claim. > > Here are Palin’s favorability ratings from Polling [Report.com](http://Report.com): > > [Political Figures: P](http://www.pollingreport.com/p.htm) > > Here are Obama’s: > > [Obama: Favorability](http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_fav.htm) > > I can’t see any recent favorability ratings across polls for Obama that are below 50. I cannot find any for Palin that are above 50. I was using the last numbers I had seen in December, where Palin was at 47%. And this most recent [Marist](http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/US100201/Obama/Complete%20February%208,%202010%20USA%20Poll%20Release%20and%20Tables.pdf) poll had Obama at 44%. However, now that I look at it again, I see that’s job performance. His approval rating is at 50%. So yes, he’s still slightly more popular than Palin (or not - the difference looks to be within the margin of error). He should be WAY more popular. The good news anti-Palin types is that so far, her increased popularity hasn’t translated into an increased desire for her to run for President, which is still very low. ---
**Author:** ![sinjin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@sinjin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sinjin)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/148 "2010-02-08T22:59:07Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > He should be WAY more popular. Why exactly should he be way more popular? He is leading a large country with a diverse, vocal demanding population thru the worst economic times we’ve seen in most peoples lives or memories. He stepped into the middle of two, count them two unpopular wars started by his predecessor. He is dealing with a minority in the senate who are willing and able to hold up any and all legislation until doom’s day. Palin on the other hand just continues to play to her base, mug for the camera and moan about how people are dissing her and her family. I sincerely hope the following is not what you consider valid political discourse: > [@](#): > > “How’s that hopey, changy thing working out for you?” ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/149 "2010-02-08T23:01:40Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Just out of curiosity - if Palin runs a brilliant campaign, will that be accepted of evidence of her ability to be president, the way Obama’s was? That’s about as likely as her being able to fly like Superman, so the question is pointless. She cannot and will not “run a brilliant campaign.” > [@](#): > > I ask because so far, despite how stupid you think she is, she has somehow managed to A) derail healthcare reform with her ‘death panels’, Cite that eother HCR has either been “derailed,” or that Palin’s idiotic “death panels” accusation had anything to do with it? The biggest obstacle to HCR is the insurance industry, plain and simple. > [@](#): > > B) make perhaps a bigger splash in the media with her speech at a tea party convention than Obama made with a State of the Union Address This is complete horseshit. > [@](#): > > D) have one of the best-selling books of the last year The significance of this is what, exactly? > [@](#): > > and E) be the apparent leader of an entire new grassroots movement that is at this time kicking the ass of Washington. The teabaggers are not a “grassroots” movement, and they aren’t “kicking” anybody’s “ass” except for the elected memebre of their own party who are now afraid to go against the racist, hysterical hate mobs whipped up by Fox News and talk radio. Maybe you can’t tell all the way up there in Canada, but the teabaggers in the US are perceived a something of a national joke, not a serious movement. > [@](#): > > Her popularity rating is now higher than Obama’s as well. Cite? > [@](#): > > If she keeps growing in popularity and clout like this She is not growing in either popularity or clout. Her fan base, if anything, has shrunk, and it never expanded beyond the backwards, racist, Bible thumping, paranoid, uneducated rump of the electorate that adored her during the election. > [@](#): > > As for the ‘crib hand’ - you guys need to pick your battles better. There is no battle here, just a PALATR moment, and the noting of a little hypocrisy. No one thinks it’s an outrage that she wrote her little simpleton bullet points on her hand, believe me. What’s amusing about is not that she was prepared, but that she accused Obama of relying on teleprompters (just as Palin herself does), then had to write cheat notes on her hand to be able to handle a scripted Q&A from the friendliest audience possible. Let’s see your precious Sarah do what Obama did at the GOP retreat. Let’s see her take 90 minutes of unscripted, hardball questions from a roomful of hostile politicians grandstanding for their own constituents. Yes, she is that fucking stupId. She doesn’t know why there’s a North and South Korea. She can’t name a Supreme Court decision besides Roe. She’s afraid of witches. She thinks Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11. She is not craftily concealing a razor sharp intellect. The new book, _Game Change_ says that John McCain’s own staff became terrified at the possibility of Palin becoming President, saying it would be a “disaster,” and telling Mccain he would have to relegate her to the most ceremonial of roles if he was elected. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/150 "2010-02-08T23:03:47Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Just out of curiosity - if Palin runs a brilliant campaign, will that be accepted of evidence of her ability to be president, the way Obama’s was? > > I ask because so far, despite how stupid you think she is, she has somehow managed to A) derail healthcare reform with her ‘death panels’, By that reasoning we can thank Mrs Murphy for the rebuilding of Chicago. ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/151 "2010-02-08T23:23:17Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I was using the last numbers I had seen in December, where Palin was at 47%. And this most recent [Marist](http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/US100201/Obama/Complete%20February%208,%202010%20USA%20Poll%20Release%20and%20Tables.pdf) poll had Obama at 44%. However, now that I look at it again, I see that’s job performance. His approval rating is at 50%. So yes, he’s still slightly more popular than Palin (or not - the difference looks to be within the margin of error). He should be WAY more popular. > > The good news anti-Palin types is that so far, her increased popularity hasn’t translated into an increased desire for her to run for President, which is still very low. In what recent poll did Palin achieve a 47 percent favorability rating? Most of the polls I’ve seen have her, at best, in the low 40s. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/152 "2010-02-08T23:49:59Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > I ask because so far, despite how stupid you think she is, she has somehow managed to A) derail healthcare reform with her ‘death panels’, **Sam** , can you provide a cite for the assertion that Palin is somehow uniquely or primarily responsible for the current situation of healthcare reform? That assessment sounds to me kind of like saying that Al Franken “derailed” Bush’s Social Security privatization efforts because he made fun of them in a popular book. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > B) make perhaps a bigger splash in the media with her speech at a tea party convention than Obama made with a State of the Union Address, Well, Kanye West at the MTV Awards also made a bigger media splash than Obama’s SOTU address. I don’t think that the mere ability to attract media attention proves anything about intelligence or qualification for high office. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > C) raise millions upon millions of dollars, So did, for example, John Edwards in his most recent presidential campaign. Again, I don’t think you’d necessarily regard this achievement as an indicator of high intelligence or Presidential fitness in somebody who wasn’t Palin. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > D) have one of the best-selling books of the last year, Does “having” (i.e., co-authoring) a best-selling book necessarily imply high intelligence or Presidential fitness either? Paris Hilton also had a best-selling book in _Confessions of an Heiress_, for example. Just because a lot of people buy your book doesn’t necessarily mean you have something important to say. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > and E) be the apparent leader of an entire new grassroots movement that is at this time kicking the ass of Washington. What do you mean by “kicking the ass of”? If you mean that the Tea Party movement is enjoying its belligerent anti-government posturing, I agree with you. If you mean that the Tea Party movement is actually accomplishing something in opposition to “Washington”, what is it you think they’re accomplishing? The things you’ve come up with here are evidence only that Palin is a media celebrity on political issues. Well, sure; I don’t think anyone’s denying that she’s a media celebrity on political issues. But so is, for instance, Al Sharpton, and I don’t think you’d consider that celebrity and media attention a reason to take Sharpton seriously as somebody who has the ability to be President. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/153 "2010-02-09T00:05:57Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > In what recent poll did Palin achieve a 47 percent favorability rating? Most of the polls I’ve seen have her, at best, in the low 40s. Sorry - 46%. This is the article that prompted my comment earlier: [From the Los Angeles Times](http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/12/sarah-palin-barack-obama-poll-gap-narrows.html) > [@](#): > > Shocker polls: That Sarah Palin-Barack Obama gap melts to 1 point > > Lordy, Lordy, Lordy, look what the pollsters just brought in. > > A pair of new surveys revealing that President Obama is still declining and has hit a new low in job approval among Americans just 56 weeks after they elected him with a decided margin. > > And – wait for it – Republican Sarah Palin is successfully selling a whole lot more than books out there on the road. Even among those not lining up in 10-degree weather to catch a glimpse of pretty much the only political celebrity the GOP has these days. > > Obama’s new Gallup Poll job approval number is 47%. Last month it was 53%. > > Regular Ticket readers will recall how in this space in late November we pointed out that Obama’s closely watched job approval slide was coinciding with Palin’s little-noticed rise in favorability. And it appeared they might cross somewhere in the 40s. > > Well, ex-Sen. Obama, meet ex-Gov. Palin. > > The new CNN/Opinion Research Poll shows Palin now at 46% favorable. [A previous version of this post said that, at 46%, Palin was “just one point below her fellow basketball fan." The CNN/Opinion Research Poll did not ask respondents about Obama.] So, it was one point in December, then I saw the new Marist poll showed Obama at 44%, and I thought - “Wow, Palin’s actually more popular than Obama now.” But it turns out that in the interim, her popularity has dropped back to 43%, so he’s still got a lead. Not that I think this means a whole lot - and it’s a lot easier to be popular when you don’t have to actually make the tough calls. But her popularity was much lower after she quit her job as Governor, so she’s been slowly building it back up. I did note, though, that this hasn’t translated into people wanting her to run for President. That’s still a very low number, even among Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/154 "2010-02-09T00:15:42Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > So, it was one point in December, then I saw the new Marist poll showed Obama at 44%, and I thought - “Wow, Palin’s actually more popular than Obama now.” But it turns out that in the interim, her popularity has dropped back to 43%, so he’s still got a lead. At 5:45, you expressed a comprehension of the difference between approval ratings and favorability ratings. At 7:05, you’re back to trying to confuse the two again. At what cost integrity? If this incident from Palin is not worthy of our mockery, is it worthy of your disingenuous defense of her? How much time are you going to spend on these posts with their childish constructions and misrepresentations? A trivial matter, and all I’m doing is pointing and laughing about it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/155 "2010-02-09T00:23:37Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Sorry - 46%. > > This is the article that prompted my comment earlier: [From the Los Angeles Times](http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/12/sarah-palin-barack-obama-poll-gap-narrows.html) > > So, it was one point in December, then I saw the new Marist poll showed Obama at 44%, and I thought - “Wow, Palin’s actually more popular than Obama now.” But it turns out that in the interim, her popularity has dropped back to 43%, so he’s still got a lead. > > Not that I think this means a whole lot - and it’s a lot easier to be popular when you don’t have to actually make the tough calls. But her popularity was much lower after she quit her job as Governor, so she’s been slowly building it back up. > > I did note, though, that this hasn’t translated into people wanting her to run for President. That’s still a very low number, even among Republicans. This compares Palin’s favorability rating to Obama’s job approval. Those are two different things. Obama still leads Palin in favorability by double digits. [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama\_favorableunfavorable-643.html](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_favorableunfavorable-643.html) ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/156 "2010-02-09T00:26:52Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > **Sam** , can you provide a cite for the assertion that Palin is somehow uniquely or primarily responsible for the current situation of healthcare reform? That assessment sounds to me kind of like saying that Al Franken “derailed” Bush’s Social Security privatization efforts because he made fun of them in a popular book. How am I supposed to give you a cite for that? It’s not a citable fact. It’s an opinion. It’s an opinion fairly widely shared, though - her ‘death panels’ comment put the Administration on the defensive, and as more than one wag has said, any time a politician has to start a debate on his policy by promising he won’t kill your grandmother, he’s in trouble. > [@](#): > > Well, Kanye West at the MTV Awards also made a bigger media splash than Obama’s SOTU address. I don’t think that the mere ability to attract media attention proves anything about intelligence or qualification for high office. Well, it proves _something_. Maybe it just proves that she’s got some brilliant people hiding behind her in the shadows. But so far, everything has turned up roses of Palin. She’s now a kingmaker, worth millions of dollars, she’s had Fox build a TV studio in her home so she has a pulpit to preach from whenever she wants (and get paid for it, while other politicians pay for airtime), and the Tea Party movement is smitten with her. For a dunce, that’s pretty impressive work in a few months. > [@](#): > > So did, for example, John Edwards in his most recent presidential campaign. Again, I don’t think you’d necessarily regard this achievement as an indicator of high intelligence or Presidential fitness in somebody who wasn’t Palin. Are you saying that John Edwards isn’t intelligent? I certainly wouldn’t. So he’s a pretty lousy example to bring up. John Edwards, in fact, might be a good example - a pretty-boy populist who went a long way on charm and innate brains, despite having many serious flaws. > [@](#): > > Does “having” (i.e., co-authoring) a best-selling book necessarily imply high intelligence or Presidential fitness either? Paris Hilton also had a best-selling book in _Confessions of an Heiress_, for example. Just because a lot of people buy your book doesn’t necessarily mean you have something important to say. Stop adding ‘presidential fitness’ to everything - I never said she was fit to be president. I don’t think she is. Look, Palin clearly has some kind of intelligence. It may not be analytical intelligence - it might be emotional intelligence, or a gift for reading the mood of the public, or something. But she seems to keep pushing exactly the buttons that her followers want pushed. She has a long track record of doing that. Maybe she’s just well tuned in to the _zeitgeist_. Whatever it is, she seems to have it. There are an awful lot of politicians who have tried to build themselves up to her level - even populist ones with the same kind of message, and they keep failing. She succeeds. I don’t know exactly why. I’ve come to dislike her more as time goes on. As I said in my first message, there’s something about her that sets my teeth on edge. She comes across as one of those brash know-it-all women who just repeats the soundbites she hears from the TV, but with way more conviction than her actual understanding should warrant. That sounds horribly sexist, but I’ve known women like that, and I’ve never liked them - even when they’re on my side. Maybe especially when they’re on my side. > [@](#): > > What do you mean by “kicking the ass of”? If you mean that the Tea Party movement is enjoying its belligerent anti-government posturing, I agree with you. If you mean that the Tea Party movement is actually accomplishing something in opposition to “Washington”, what is it you think they’re accomplishing? So far, they’ve accomplished the destruction of the Democrats’ supermajority, and they’ve put Obama on bipartisan spin cycle. That’s quite a lot, actually. > [@](#): > > The things you’ve come up with here are evidence only that Palin is a media celebrity on political issues. Well, sure; I don’t think anyone’s denying that she’s a media celebrity on political issues. But so is, for instance, Al Sharpton, and I don’t think you’d consider that celebrity and media attention a reason to take Sharpton seriously as somebody who has the ability to be President. I don’t take Al Sharpton seriously as a candidate for President, and I don’t at this time take Palin seriously, either. But would you deny that Al Sharpton is smart? From what I hear, he’s very smart. So is Jesse Jackson. So are almost all the populist demagogues who have risen to high levels of popularity. I’m not saying any of this to support Palin. She wouldn’t be much choice for President. I’m saying this as a suggestion that maybe you all stop sniggering about her and her hand-printing, and starting thinking of her as a serious threat. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/157 "2010-02-09T00:30:07Z")
Gallup has Obama’s job approval [back to 51%](http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx), by the way. ---
**Author:** ![Kolga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e56c9b/32.png) [@Kolga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolga)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/158 "2010-02-09T00:30:22Z")
For me, the most hilarious quote is this: > [@](#): > > “How’s that hopey, changy thing working out for you?” since I saw that on a Facebook flair button months ago. So, really, that’s what Palin is reduced to - quoting FLAIR from FACEBOOK? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/159 "2010-02-09T00:31:55Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > At 5:45, you expressed a comprehension of the difference between approval ratings and favorability ratings. > > At 7:05, you’re back to trying to confuse the two again. > > At what cost integrity? If this incident from Palin is not worthy of our mockery, is it worthy of your disingenuous defense of her? How much time are you going to spend on these posts with their childish constructions and misrepresentations? > > A trivial matter, and all I’m doing is pointing and laughing about it. Hentor, it was the _Los Angeles Times_ that made the comparison. I simply cited it as my original source for my memory that they had been within one point of each other. And you’re right - it is a trivial matter. But you’re the one who demanded cites and then starting picking nits with the trivia so you could somehow work in your never-ending tiresome thread-hijacking ad-hominem attack dog schtick. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029/160 "2010-02-09T00:44:03Z")
> [@Kolga](#): > > So, really, that’s what Palin is reduced to - quoting FLAIR from FACEBOOK? What can one say? Her sources have gotten better. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palin-seriously/528029.md?page=9)