(From AT) 2015 If Palin and Levin Walk, the 2016 Nomination Is Not Worth Having

 

My Post at AmericanThinker

It's all very simple, the Republicans lost Florida in the 2012 presidential election by 0.88, if conservatives stay at home in 2016 in the same amount they did in 2012 then there is no chance of the GOP winning. If conservatives are advised by Governor Palin, (unlike in 2012,) and Mark Levin to either stay home or vote third party then it is impossible to see how Florida could be won by e.g. Jeb Bush.

However, for arguments sake if, because of Bush's Florida connection and if the economy is in recession, Florida is won then Ohio -2.98% Virginia -3.88% Colorado -5.36% also have to be roped in. The road to 270 Electoral College votes is extremely difficult under the most optimal of circumstances, utter realism indicates it is impossible with the slightest bleeding off of actual or potential votes from 2012. 

What Ralph Nader did for Al Gore's hopes in 2000 would be a pinprick compared to what mountain a Republican nominee would face with a conservative base doing a de Blasio back turn. There is no comparison with Reagan's 1980 victory even though there was Republican, John Anderson, running as an Independent who got 6.6% of the vote. This is because a Republican won't win both New York and California,as Reagan did for the foreseeable future.

If the Republican nominee is an establishment figure, a Bush or a Christie, then they have to face the question of their relationship with Governor Palin. Mitt Romney didn't' have her as part of his campaign or even have her address the 2012 convention (at which she was the star just four years earlier.)

 What did that avail him? There is of course no way to determine if the millions of potential GOP voters who stayed home might have turned out if Mitt had reached out to Palin and if she had endorsed and campaigned for him subsequently (and vocally) but all that is know is that they didn't, and he lost.

At this point in time things are much more in flux within the GOP than they were in 2012. For, perhaps the last time, enough evangelicals and conservatives "held their noses" and voted for Romney for him to improve,by one two states, on John McCain's 2008 Electoral College performance. 

Since then the conservative activists, whose turnout in the 2014 mid-terms was crucial to the GOP's landslide, are in no mood for what they see as a RINO Establishment candidate.

If there is any backsliding on amnesty (there are other touchstone issues but that is the deal breaker) as they see it that would doubtless be the final straw-what happens then is the big question.

In a party whose conservative elements mounted the biggest challenge to a House Speakers re-election since 1923 and whose rank and file are furious with Boehner's win, the slightest spark could cause a conflagration whose end result is either mass electoral abstention or a total breach. 

Boehner and the Establishment may win positions by using money, power and the threat of loss of position on elected representatives, but they have no power whatsoever over whether the rank and file stay home on election day or bolt. If either of these two happen then the Establishment will only have itself to blame. If in some misguided manner they see this as a medium term good thing, i.e. they are willing to throw away a presidential election to rid themselves of the "Tea Party Baggage"the will inflict permanent "Whig party" damage. 

If the rank and file depart there is no possible way for a rump East Coast Establishment Republican party in name only to ever win again nationally. For the rank and file conservatives such a fate is a lesser concern. If a truly conservative third party wins conservative states legislatures, where abortion can be managed along conservative lines, then the Dem's can have the presidency in perpetuity. 

The heartland can get along quite well managing their own affairs (especially as the same-sex marriage laws seem to be cemented in and the presidency has no meaning in relation to them) and blocking leftists presidents in either the House or Senate.

This rump Establishment party is exactly what arch-Establishment figure David Brooks called for in classic elitist tomes;"It's smarter to build a new wing of the Republican Party, one that can compete in the Northeast, the mid-Atlantic states, in the upper Midwest and along the West Coast. It's smarter to build a new division that is different the way the Westin is different than the Sheraton." 

He (and most certainly the "Sheraton Party" is welcome to him-good riddance), as I, see the utter incompatibility of the two wings but sees the two "Republican" parties somehow working together to progress their mutual agendas. That this is impossible is clearsightedly set out by Dylan Byers in discussing Brooks concept;"I'm even more skeptical about this "coalition of the incompatible." That's what the Republican party is now. If it worked, the factions wouldn't need to split.' 

How real is the threat of Palin or Levin or, more likely both under the circumstances, decamping one way or the other? Very if the amnesty situation deteriorates whilst there is such of a 'Romney was the last-never again" feeling amongst conservatives who are seething at what they see as the betrayal of the "mandate of 2014." Neither Palin nor Levin have been shy in expressing their feelings on the matter;

Levin (December 15th) "I am one inch away from leaving the GOP" and in the nub of the matter "asking Republicans if they think this is a joke, if they think they can just lie to Republicans and conservatives with impunity about defunding Obamacare and fighting Obama’s illegal amnesty."

Palin (on illegal aliens June 16th 2014) "this one issue is driving me to renounce my Republican ties" and "Palin threatens to leave the Republican Party" (over amnesty).Palin has mentioned a third party on  a number of occasions.

Here is the respected pollster Pat Caddell:"

POLLSTER PAT CADDELL: ONE-THIRD OF GOP ‘HANGING BY A THREAD FROM BOLTING"

“The alienation among Republican voters is so high, that a quarter to one-third of the Republican party are hanging by a thread from bolting.”

Caddell was asked “does the math show you that there could be an uprising and could the GOP go the way of the Whig Party?”

Caddell: "The GOP leadership, the lawyers, the lobbyists, the consultant class of the Republican party, and all the big donors don’t understand that these people are angry. … They are saying that John Boehner doesn’t care about them, and all he cares about is the special interests. I’ve never seen anything like this in the base of a party. And that is why the analogy to the Whigs is not so far-fetched."

The Establishment can take up the lefts mantra that "Palin is irrelevant" or as Robert Costa advised "Palin is diminished" but her 91% endorsement success in the 2012 mid-terms belies such nonsense. Palin's endosement is the prize desperately sought after and the key to success for the likes of e.g. Cruz/Fischer/Hayley amongst many others. If she asked her millions of followers to follow her out of the GOP, or indicated to them that they would be better off fishing on election day, the effect on the presidential campaign would be massive. 

If Levin's huge listener audience (and who knows, perhaps Limbaugh might join in) was also advised of either path, then it would be foolish to imagine that the few states that the GOP desperately needed to have any chance of victory-and the loss of just one would end their hopes-would not be put out of reach.

The ball is in the Establishments court-not Palin's or Levin's. If the Establishment chooses to betray the voters who gave them control of Congress, and chooses to support Obama's amnesty agenda and other liberal policies then when, not if, the rupture comes it will be their doing. 

I wrote that possibly the GOP's best and only chance would be a Palin/Bush(in any combination) ticket as that would be the only way to heal the breech and keep the party together. A true conservative Virginia gentleman and strong Palin supporter advised he is against that "because it is the only thing that will save the GOP and it is beyond saving." Such is the plight the Establishment has visited on

 the party-they will pay the price if it goes the way of the Whigs-perhaps the old gentleman is right.

Never Forget:Jan. 8, 2011: Palin/Giffords And Media's Descent into Hell Led By Kos Moulitsas

The facts are simple and incontestable.  On January 8, 2011, deranged, obsessed druggie Jared Loughner opened fire at a political rally for Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, killing six, wounding 14, and nearly killing Giffords, who was the object of his obsession.

Loughner stands in a long line of similarly deranged murderers and attempted murderers of politicians such as Hinckley, Bremner, Sirhan, and Oswald.  

These men, as far as their mental capacity gave them a logical reason, were motivated by concepts that ranged from obsession with an actress to conspiracy theories to "prov[ing] my manhood" and other bizarre motivations.  In none of these cases could a direct causation be traced to a supposed motivation by or influence of a political figure not connected in any way to the assassin's victim.

Yet immediately after Loughner shot Giffords, Markos Moulitsas who runs the far-left "progressive" Daily Kos, tweeted, infamously, "Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin[.]"

What could have possibly motivated such a monstrous public statement, even from the purveyor of a site so lacking in morality that it was the home of the "Trig is not Palin's son" calumny during the 2008 election?  Palin's PAC had put out a map with a series of "targets" (actually surveyor's marks, not bulls-eyes, as the left claimed) on various congressional seats, including Giffords, where voters were urged to defeat the Democratic candidate in the midterms.

From that, and without any scrap of connecting evidence whatsoever, Moulitsas and, to their shame, elements of the mainline media converged on Governor Palin.  The fact that his Daily Kos had done exactly the same targeting (Kos, incredibly, had "targeted" with a bulls-eye Giffords also – as too conservative), as had the DNC, was shunted aside.

Once Loughner was identified as the shooter and his clearly psychotic, drug-addled background (and photograph) were presented, any person with the slightest discernment and thought processes could see that Loughner, who was an independent left-leaning voter, was not influenced by "Palin's map" (which it is highly unlikely he had ever seen) or Palin herself.  That did not stop the media's descent into one of the most shameful episodes in history.

At the 'New York Daily News' Michael Daly had an article out with this headline: "Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district[.]"  After accusing Palin of putting Giffords "in cross hairs of a rifle scope," Daly ranted that "anyone with any sense at all knows that violent language can incite actual violence, that metaphor can incite murder. 

At the very least, Palin added to a climate of violence."  This disgusting linkage, which had no basis in fact whatsoever as respects Loughner, was taken up, amongst many others, by the very odd Andrew Sullivan, Dem Congressman Grijalva, Eugene Robinson, and Paul Krugman.

The media, the left bloggers, and the Democratic Party personnel jumped on the Palin accusation bandwagon, without any evidence of a direct link, for utterly partisan reasons.  Morality, truth, investigative journalism, personal scruples – all were buried in a hasty effort to damage the Tea Party, and most especially their hated opponent, Governor Palin.

How have things turned out?  Moulitsas stands unapologetic, and his site continues with its hate rants.  Palin stands even more influential and powerful than ever, judged not least by her incredible endorsement success in the 2014 midterms.  

Giffords, thankfully, recovered enough to make a valued public contribution, although her condition rendered her incapable of continuing her congressional career (her seat switched from Dem to the GOP in the midterms).  Daly and all the other Palin attackers just shut up shop in the Giffords connection score, but they carry on as if there had been no damage to their reputations – such as they are.

Yet strong and respected conservative voices did challenge these leftists – not only in the aftermath (Bob Belvedere at The Camp of The Saints ["Markos Moulitsas: Blood Libelist"] and Robert Stacy McCain at The Other McCain ["Mission Accomplished, Markos Moulitsas"]) of the Giffords shooting, but whenever leftist hypocrisy raises its head.  The tragic shooting of the two New York City policemen was just such a moment where the ethics and morality of the conservative voices and Governor Palin were raised, pointing out ("Hot Air" the blatant hypocrisy. 

Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist reviewed the two instances and excoriated the leftist media for their unwarranted attacks on Palin while calling for balance in the future.  That certainly is fair, but at the same time, the pit of hell that the media and many on the left fell into in their unreasoned and unreasonable blame game toward Governor Palin should never be forgotten.  

This shameful episode should be raised whenever – sadly, since the deranged are always with us – such events occur again.
SEE ALSO;
James Joyner at "Outside The Beltway"

"Palin ‘Target’ Graphic in Perspective"

Doug Mataconis at Outside The Beltway

“Heated Political Rhetoric” And The Giffords Shooting"

and 

"Political Rhetoric You Disagree With Isn’t Responsible For Someone Else’s Criminal Acts"

Rick Moran at American Thinker

"Is Daily Kos to blame for Gifford attack?"

From Mediaite:

The website Daily Kos has also deleted a diary about Rep. Gabrielle Giffords entitled “”My Congresswoman Voted Against Pelosi, Now She’s Dead To Me,” but so far has not deleted a post by founderMarkos Moulitsas that lists Giffords’ district among those on their “target list,” and noted that “Not all of these people will get or even deserve primaries, but this vote certainly puts a bulls eye on their district.” (emphasis ours).

Moulitsas also used the occasion of the tragedy to work in a Twitter plug for his book, “American Taliban.”

The tweet, it’s worth noting, was sent well before the shooter’s identity had been released.

Fair use notice: This website contains copyrighted material, the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Excerpts of such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this website is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Original material published on this website may be excerpted and the excerpt reproduced for the purpose of critical reviews. However, such original material may not be reproduced in full on another website or in any manner without prior approval from this website’s owner. In all cases when material from this website is reproduced in full or in part, the author and website must be credited by name and a hyperlink provided to this website 

Updated:The Obama 'renaissance' lasted about a week

At 'American Thinker'

By M. Joseph Sheppard

After the undeniable thrashing the Dems took in the midterms, there were some glum faces at MSNBC, and the liberal print/blog media had all the oxygen sucked out of their various rooms.  There were no glimmers of hope to point to as the reality of a lame-duck administration and the end of any liberal agenda hit home.

But then, about December 28 (with a really jump-the-gun outlier on December 2: "What mandate? Obama's approval rises as the Republican Congress craters"), President Obama started to get an uptick in the tracking polls, and there were some positive economic reports – especially one of "5% GDP growth." 

 And, like a burst of sunshine on an otherwise cloudy day, headlines appeared advising that all was for the best for President Obama (not the Dems, mind you) in the best of all possible worlds (with a few minor caveats here and there).

"A good year for Obama, nation’s economy," gushed Tom Keane, first off the mark in the Boston Globe.  "Obama's poll bump is a message for Republicans," chided Bill Scher at RCP.  "President Obama's merry and bright new year," chirped Lisa Lerer at Bloomberg.  

And perhaps the most enthusiastic: "Republicans cringe as Obama's popularity rises to highest in over a year,” from Richard Sobel at the Orlando liberal Examiner.

What caused this huge jump in morale, the seeming parting of the clouds and the golden dawn ahead?  Witness the glowing-toothed Obama in New York Magazine's paean by Annie Lowery, "Is it really morning in America?" (yes! they advise).

The answer is a small uptick in Gallup and a ludicrous Rassmussen poll.
On Election Day, President Obama had a 43% disapproval to 51% approval rating at Gallup.  It hit 45% to 50% on December 19, and on January 4 it is at 44% to 49%.  

It is hard to discern what the left got so exercised about, as the tiny movements of between 1 and 2 points are negligible, margin-of-error straw-clutching.  Or was there something more substantial for the MSM to chew on?

Apparently so, given that there are always with us "lies, damned lies, and statistics," and cherry-picking is an art the media class is well associated with.  The Gallup poll on December 28 had Obama at 48/48, "his best result since August 2013."  

That result, plus the CNN poll of December 21, which had a 48/50 result, and the Rassmussen poll (which even Daily Kos ignores) at 51/48 favorable, was enough for the good news-starved leftist media to see Nirvana approaching.

The Reuters and Economist polls of the same time, which had a terrible 12- and 8-point deficit, respectively, were, of course, ignored.

So where are we today?  The Real Clear Politics average of all polls has Obama at 44.1 approval to 51.5 disapproval – more or less where he has been for ages (-7.4).

Is this straw-clutching something new on behalf of a press that will do anything to prop up the Obama administration?  Sadly, no; we've been here before.  Here's "Bouncing Back: Obama Shows A Nation On The Upswing, Trolls GOP" from January 2012, and "Barack Obama and his MOJO Are Back on the Upswing" from 2010 as just two examples of the endless stream of puffery that follows from any positive economic news or poll fluctuations. 

That there might be a polling lift at the feel-good Christmas season, with its concomitant job hiring and thus dip in the unemployment figures, seems to have escaped the left.  

What follows for President Obama's polls if the unprecedented 5% GDP growth proves to have been a one-off, if the economy stalls, and seasonal unemployment ticks upward whilst the much-vaunted stock market takes a nose dive can be well imagined.  What can't be imagined are any comments from the "Morning in Obama's America" crowd about the vanishing of their brief Camelot.

Update;

Obama's Approval Rating Back in the Hole

http://www.bloomberg.com/polit...

U.S. Media's Many Memes of Sarah Palin

Also at "American Thinker"  LINK

Defining a politicians personality, whether positively to build them up, or negatively to tear them down, is a basic rule of politics.Themes can define an image e.g. "Roosevelt's categorization of Al Smith as "The Happy Warrior" or Democrat folklore depicting William Jennings Bryan as "the Great Commoner" are two classic positive examples. On the negative side Mitt Romney never recovered from being defined as "Mr 1 percent" nor did

John Kerry from being "Mr.Flip Flop."

Once a politician is defined (fairly or unfairly doesn't enter into the picture) as say, Rick Perry as a forgetful ditherer, it becomes extremely difficult to shake off the perception-even though in his case it was based on one, admittedly, important, debate moment. 

Such is the power of media defining, that a whole career as a successful Governor of a major state can have that whole positive history shrouded in the fog of a slip of the tongue or a moments forgetfulness.

This eternal and unshakable truism seems to have one, and perhaps the only one exception to the rule, and that is Governor Palin. Once the media got over their initially stunned shock at her 2008 convention address, the entire subsequent campaign was involved in a Liberal media/Blog attempt to stick a permanent,negative, label on her.

That a flow of constant new Palin memes continues to this day (and into the foreseeable future) shows that for all their efforts nothing has stuck irrevocably and fatally detrimentally.

Before Palin's convention address there was some flailing about by a confused media and a number of memes were tried out."Palin's a bad parent neglecting her children, especially the special needs one for a campaign." That such nonsense has never been used against a man, and the anger of many women at such a ridiculous concept, put paid to that quickly.

 Next was "Palin's a hypocrite because her daughter is pregnant" which quickly died after Palin describe her family as "having the same up's and downs like all families which, rightly received an understanding and warm reception. There was even a despicable campaign from the likes of "Daily Kos" and the even wilder "progressive" fringes, which suggested Trig might not even be Sarah's child.

After the Gibson interview the left crowed "Palin doesn't even know what the Bush doctrine is". As it turned out neither did 90% of the population either-it being unlikely that if the question was put to those crowing they could have answered it, so that quickly died the death. 

What did have legs, and is only 6 years later fading from the arsenal of even the lowest information voters, was the"I can see Russia from my window" statement.This line of course was not even said by Palin but had a life of its own which is a sad reflection on some segments of the population.

After the Couric interviews, the media thought they could hang "she's dumb" on Palin but the debate with Biden, where she more than held her own, took the edge off that. 

The silly idea that "Palin can't name a newspaper she has read" still has some life amongst the indefatigable haters, but anyone with half a brain could see that Palin answered with "all of them" because was frustrated in being perceived by Couric as some sort of backwoods woman with no media awareness when of course she has a degree in journalism and is hugely media aware.

After the 2008 campaign the meme "Palin cost McCain the election" had a run only to be definitely destroyed by a number of academic studies, fair minded bloggers, and common sense.

All these various themes bobbed about but in reality did next to nothing to permanently define and disable Palin. That she had,for all the media's efforts, a remarkably powerful effect on the 2010 mid-terms proved her enormous power with the rank and file, especially the Tea Party element.

This was shown when candidates she endorsed in primary battles went from obscurity to winning not only the primaries, but the general elections. It is this aspect of Palin which keeps the leftist media and blogs constantly attacking her as, for all their claims that she is 'irrelevant' they well know she is not.

When it appeared that Palin might run for president in 2012 media obsession and attacks reached a fever pitch with her every word and action scrutinized for a "defining" element. Such nothings as Palin's description of Paul Revere's action against the British were mercilessly lampooned only to suffer the ignominy of her being said to be correct by academics. 

A similar fate befell her attacks on President Obama's health law plans which she described as including"death panels" as even incontrovertible leftists such as Paul Krugman lent weight to her concept.

As the 2014 mid-terms approached so did the volume of attempted defining attacks on Palin. It seems ridiculous that Palin could still be called "irrelevant" when clearly she isn't, so the likes of Robert Costa took to calling her "diminished" This "diminishment" is hard to discern given her astounding endorsement success of 21 out of 23 with, again, a number of senate candidates owing all or most of their success to her endorsement earl in the piece.

So after 6 years plus we can see that Palin is not a "bad mother"  (and is a mother of five not four). Her family is, I daresay, still experiencing the ups and downs as all families do which fact continues to endear her to her supporters.

She is clearly not "dumb" and is well read and informed. And whilst she can't see Russia from her house, she can see it from Little Diomede Island in Alaska. She could also see that Putin would invade the Ukraine if Obama was elected as he "reared his head" in the form of Russian planes entering Alaskan airspace.

Academic studies prove that Palin enhanced McCain's campaign, Academics agree with her view of American history, and President Obama's health car law. We can see that not only is he not "irrelevant or diminished but is still a powerful as she ever was.

As the media turns its attention to the 2016 presidential election one can only guess at what they will try and trot out to negatively define Palin should she run. The "quitter" meme is losing whatever steam it originally had as time is shrouding it in memory and the true facts of the vicious and costly campaign to bankrupt her whilst governor have come out. 

Astonishingly, some elements on the "Kossite" fringes push "Palin will never run because she is lazy." Anyone who saw her book tour when she spoke to tens of thousands on a grueling cross country schedule would be stunned anyone could hold that view

Since her moral character is irreproachable, and she is sincere in her faith the new meme of "she's a religious extremist" is getting a run, but it is fanciful that such an obvious nonsense will stick. Dredging the bottom of the barrel "she's a drunk" is also being tried out by it is so preposterous even the haters hesitate with it.

The media has pretty much run out of ideas (the lunacy of their coverage of a harmless picture of Palin's son Trig and his dog exemplifies this perfectly) of how to make the categorically negative definition of Palin, but one thing can be counted on-they will parse her every sentence to try and find it if she runs. 

Their success rate is pretty bad until now but their obsession will drive them on whilst fair minded people look in wonder, and "Teflon Palin" addresses the great mass of ordinary folk who see through it all.

How Might Governor Palin Do In the 2016 Primaries? Here's How

The question was asked how Sarah Palin would do in the early states. Here is the way that I see it.

The first thing is the schedule. The RNC lowered the boom on states that violate timing rules. Any state other than Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada, that schedules their primaries before March 1, 2016 will take a huge hit in delegates. 

Bigger states will see their delegates reduced to 12 and smaller states will go to 7. As a result, Arizona and Missouri have moved their contests from February to March. Michigan will likely move from February to March. North Carolina has said they will move from February.

The states in parentheses are projected while the others are either statutory or written in the rules of the GOP.

Jan 18
*Iowa - Palin is a easy winner. I suspect Bush will largely abandon the state. 
Nearly 50% of voters are very conservative and nearly 60% are evangelical.

Jan 26
*New Hampshire - Worst case scenario is that Palin picks up delegates. Her 
message of reform could push her over the top.

There is some question as to whether SC or Nevada goes next.

Feb 7
*South Carolina - This state has been very good to Palin even though she has 
never run in it. Her endorsement of Haley moved Haley from last to first
in the primary and her semi-endorsement of Gingrich helped push him
over the line in 2012.

Feb 14

*Nevada - I would favor Palin in Nevada as well. Her rally in Stoplight, Nevada,
drew a large number of people. Plus over half of voters in 2012 were 
very conservative.

Mar 1

*Colorado, Florida, *Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, *Minnesota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia

I like Sarah Palin in the caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. 

In these states, Santorum and Gingrich got over 50% in Colorado, 60%+ in Georgia, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. Idaho is Palin's birth state. Palin is well in tune with Texas. 

Palin can pick up delegates in Massachusetts and Vermont. Bush likely sweeps Florida. Virginia is a toss-up state. I see her doing well in southern Virginia. Northern Virginia can be a problem because of government workers. Would not surprise me to see Bush go after Palin for her remarks of the wealthiest counties being in Northern Virginia.

Mar 5

Louisiana - I like Palin as a easy winner here.

Mar 8 - 

Alabama, Hawaii, Mississippi, Ohio
Alabama and Mississippi are in the Palin camp. She picks up delegates in Hawaii. Ohio is the interesting state. In 2012, Romney beat Santorum by 1 however Gingrich got 15% of the vote. 

Santorum and Gingrich's share of the vote was 52%. Santorum won 6 congressional districts. Gingrich and Santorum got more votes than Romney in 5 other congressional districts and Ron Paul and Gingrich got more than Romney in 2 other districts. A Ohio win would take a big state from the Ford column into the Reagan column.

Mar 15

Illinois, Missouri, Michigan

I like Palin in Missouri. Michigan is the prize here. It is a big state that Ford won and could be flipped. Michigan is a crossover state which means blue-collar Democrats can vote in either primary. Romney narrowly won in 2012, but came within 700 votes of walking away with more delegates than Santorum. Gingrich and Santorum combined pulled more votes than Romney.

Mar 22

Arizona is generally a conservative state. I like Palin here.

*********************************************************************************
Above is an analysis of how the GOP's primaries might well shake out if Governor Palin decides to run for president in 2016. This well thought out and highly positive overview was presented by "busybee01" at Conservatives4Palin and is reproduced with permission and thanks.