Isn’t she just an historical footnote? Why does anyone create threads about her? How about a thread about the 1954 World Series, it’s just as topical.
STOP.
Sarah Palin - why are there still posts in threads about her?
Isn’t she just an historical footnote? Why does anyone post in threads about her? How about bumping a thread about the 1954 World Series, it’s just as topical.
Because of people like you
Because it’s fun to watch what she does. Before the election nobody knew who she was. Now that she is a “leader” of the Republican party everyone is curious how she, (and unfortunately for her her family), behaves.
She was thurst into the spotlight and now is an easy target for those of us that see flaws and contradictions in her right-wing positions. What’s so wrong with writing about her? Her 15 minutes may not be over quite yet…
Another in a series of SDMB humorous title/username combos.
No.
See previous answer.
No.
People who discount her or call her stupid are making a serious mistake. She was not fully prepared for the last campaign (although in some important ways better prepared than some). However, she’s very sharp. If she wants to run for president in 2012 or 2016, she will do so fully prepared and she will be a formidable opponent.
Palin is a leading candidate for the party’s presidential nomination in 2012 (just ask her). So is Jindal, and there’ve been threads about him too.
The US President and the US Presidency are alwaysalwaysalways going to be major topics of conversation, and not only in the US. About time you got used to it.
OK, I’ll bite. In what ways was she better prepared than some?
Besides the fact that she isn’t a footnote as others have mentioned, now that W. Bush is keeping a low profile she’s a handy substitute for dumb politician news/jokes/discussion.
She was a vice presidential candidate and she’s probably going to run in 2012. That and she can shoot wolfs from a helicopter.
What state is the '54 World Series governing?
Delaware.
She’s a much better extemporaneous speaker than the current occupant of the White House, and let’s not forget that comedy goldmine, Joe Biden.
Here’s Obama’s most recent effort where he goes to the trouble of phoning up a reporter who had the temerity to ask Obama if he was a socialist.
In 2.11 minutes, including several remarks from the reporter, he bumbles out 26 ‘uhs’ and ‘ers’.
Without a teleprompter Obama’s pretty much incoherent and a dead loss as an impromptu public speaker, possibly even worse than Bush the Younger.
It’s clear that Obama’s very much inferior to Palin on that score and I suspect that’s why she’s still under constant attack by democrat partisans.
That’s a ridiculous measure of eloquence. Instead, look at a single one of his extemporaneous sentences, stripped of “uhs”:
[quote=Obama]
And so I think it’s important just to note, when you start hearing stuff throwing these words around, that we’ve actually been operating in a way that is entirely consistent with freemarket principles, and that some of the same folks who are throwing the word ‘socialist’ around can’t do the same." This is a complex, nested sentence.
Rest of his answer: “I think it’s clear that by the time we got here, there already had been an enormous infusion of taxpayer money into the financial system. The thing I constantly try to emphasize to people is that if, coming in, the market had been doing fine, nobody would have been happier than me to stay out of it. I have more than enough to do without having to worry about the financial system, and the fact that we’ve had to take these extraordinary measures and intervene is not an indication of my ideological preferences, but an indication of the degree to which lax regulation and extravagant risk-taking has precipitated a crisis.”
Again, we’re talking about a man who uses three dollar words correctly, who speaks in paragraphs, who correctly uses hypotheticals and conditionals in his speech.
Yes, when speaking off the cuff, he uses plenty of “uhs.” This is common in our language, something any linguist can tell you; people do it to buy time to think. That’s a trait I like in a leader.
I’ll hold his extemporaneous eloquence up against that of any living president except, perhaps, Clinton. Certainly I’ll hold it up against someone who reads all the papers–ALL of them.
She was better prepared than Rudy Giuliani. I can sort of grant her that one.
She’s actually had executive experience, whereas Obama incredibly claimed his campaign was his experience. And she’s had the experience of successful campaigns and office tenures without fawning media or illegal leaks of her opponent’s sealed divorce documents.
No he didn’t.
And she’s performed so well at it.
A. Cite that the media fawned in any of his several campaigns?
B. Jack and Jeri Ryan both consented to have their divorce documents released.
C. Obama was beating Ryan handily before the worst stuff came out.
D. Certainly neither of these charges applies to any of his state Senate races, or his (failed) House primary run.
In summary, you have no idea what you’re talking about. Which is no surprise.