LF: Sarah Palin: Is The Bloom Off Her Rose?

Tea party-backed candidates for the US Senate are offering tepid comments on Sarah Palin's qualifications for high office. Other Republican candidates decline to join her at GOP fundraiser.

Did we miss something, or is the bloom a bit off Sarah Palin’s rose?

Two prominent tea party-backed candidates for the US Senate are offering tepid comments on her qualifications for high office. Other major GOP candidates find they have “scheduling conflicts” preventing them from attending a Republican National Committee fundraiser where Palin will be a major attraction.

She continues to toy with the possibility of a presidential run in 2012, comparing herself to Ronald Reagan – another celebrity who won the White House. Yet most Americans think she’s not qualified for the job.

IN PICTURES: Who's who? Christine O'Donnell & Sarah Palin

A CBS News poll this past week shows her favorable/unfavorable ratings at a dismal 22-48 percent. In California, according to a new Field Poll, her figures are even worse with a 58 percent unfavorability rating. Tellingly, 53 percent of those surveyed by Field said they’d be less inclined to vote for a candidate endorsed by Palin. Among nonpartisan voters, that number rose to 66 percent.

That’s no doubt why Carly Fiorina (attempting to unseat Barbara Boxer from the US Senate) and Meg Whitman (running against Jerry Brown for California governor) have declined to appear with Palin just two weeks before the election. “Scheduling conflicts,” don’t you know.

That CBS News poll also has 64 percent of those surveyed agreeing that Palin is not qualified to be president – including a plurality of Republicans. Even 39 percent of those who describe themselves as tea party supporters say Palin does not have “the ability to be an effective president.”

Nobody reads polls closer than candidates, and tea party-backed contestants for high office who had Palin’s endorsement are no different. That includes Joe Miller in Alaska and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware, both of whom waffled mightily when asked if Palin has what it takes to be president.

The most Miller could offer is that Palin is “qualified” in the sense that she’s old enough and a citizen born in the United States, prompting a hurt feelings e-mail from Todd Palin. O’Donnell refused to answer a “hypothetical question.”

Meanwhile, Palin herself remains coy on the subject.

“Speaking to a group of well-connected Republicans at a private dinner in Florida this week, Sarah Palin implicitly addressed questions about her own electability by noting that critics also said Ronald Reagan couldn’t win in 1980,” reports Politico.com, which talked with three people who attended the private dinner.

“Trying to divine her intentions – does she just want to stay in the presidential mix to build her brand, or is she actually running? – is difficult,” writes Politico’s Jonathan Martin. “But the mere act of meeting with the sort of Republican donors, strategists and activists who fund and advise presidential campaigns is telling.”

“I think she sees herself as heir to Reagan,” one attendee at that high-powered dinner told Martin.

There are parallels. Both Reagan and Palin were governors. Both were major celebrities. Both butted heads with their party’s establishment.

But the details are far different.

Reagan was a celebrity before he became president, then governed one of the largest and most complex states for a full two terms. Palin was governor of a state with a population far smaller than Fresno, then dropped out after two years, becoming a professional celebrity only after she and John McCain lost their run for the White House.

But she’s got a good – and very lucrative – gig going, and she certainly continues to play a major role in electoral politics. That should last through 2012, whether Barack Obama is reelected or some other Republican burning with presidential ambition beats him.

Stone watches and punishes those who diss Mr and Mrs Badeye and calls it being 'fair". lolol

That wasn't what that poster originally posted, stupid. Stone changed it even though he vehemently denies changing other's posts. Uh Oh, I bet I get charged with smearing him with lies again.

Look cunt. Next time you diss me your gone. Asswipe was posting images of one of our posters.

Not on that particular reply. Anyway it and your sweet comment are saved to be sent to the local tea party campaign to tell them why they need to clean up their ranks..

Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.

Post it to every tea party blog/site. What you don't get is that the tea party don't like your type. They want your type swept away. So go on and advertise.

A political start up party that proclaims its UsvThem right from the start is a loser.

Its pretty weird, this facination with pic's of me from 15 or 16 years ago. I just see it as confirmation the kooks can't get me out of their pea brains... (laughing)

Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.

I was going to go look for that USBPEcocide thread, but since you brought it up here...

And of course note that your Goddmn Tea Party has not One word to say abourt CorporateStatePlanetKilling. LMFAO

But yesterday in federal court, an attorney for the oil giant sent shockwaves throughout the Gulf region by suggesting that BP may seek shelter under the $75 million liability cap polluters can invoke under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

U.S. District Judge Carl J. Barbier, who's presiding over the more than 300 consolidated lawsuits against the company, was taken aback when BP attorney Don Haycraft floated the idea of the liability cap. Barbier replied simply that "BP said it would pay whatever [is] necessary." Steven Herman, a plaintiffs attorney in the case, also registered surprise. "We're shocked over here to hear the defendants now bring up this $75 million cap," he said. "We were under the impression it was waived."

The ONLY thing holding back the rage, total chaos in the GoM is that SOMEONE was gonna pay.

Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.

Not true. The Tea Party is in favor of it, they've teamed up with big oil in California to support the right to foul the planet.

Watch your language to the lady. If you are going to be in a position of power, don't go for the genitals of the ladies.

Practice maturity, use patience, and politely explain as you should of done in the removed post instead of being a sarcastic, pompous smart mouth channeling your inner high school jock.

One look at a poster who claimed millions would be evacuated from the Gulf Coast and that thousands of others would die as a result of Obama's oil disaster indicates he has absolutely ZERO credibility.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Liberals:
-Pro nuclear proliferation.
-Support fundamentalist religion that execute gays.
-Have no issues with inmate abuse.

If he did, the cumulative IQ of the site will rise significantly. (Without you it would rise even more, jerx) Though you do serve a purpose....you do make a good pinata!

She called him on it, plus his profanity towards her. I guess AKA Loser can't handle the truth.

This place will become the playpen of Badeye and Mrs. Badeye by Halloween, if not sooner.

You tea baggers shouldn't be allowed around sharp instruments because you're dangerous.