Sarah Palin endorses Donald Trump’s presidential bid

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jeanne_S said:
Re the financial crisis ,before you are too quick to blame the Republicans for this debacle,let me remind you of a couple of key players on the Dems side,that have fallen off the radar.Barney Frank and Christoper Dodd,authors of Dodd / Frank Those two along with MaxinecWatwrs were part of the key oversight for Freddie and Fannie Mae.In 2005,George W Bush the favorite scape goat of the Dems,actually warned that we were headed for a housing crisis,meltdown,those two actually testified that everything was hunky dorey and continued to give sub prime loans to people who had no business getting them.
Click to expand...
The republicans controlled the house and senate during much of the bush administration. The republicans could have done something in spite of Barney, because they could have outvoted him. However, the truth was that the republicans are just as much to blame for the crisis as Barney and the democrats are. The republicans brought nothing up for a vote, even though nobody could have stopped them.
 
Leo2014 said:
Sarah Palin? The same girl that could see Russia from her backyard? That would regularly make pasquinaded commons like; riding a man like a bronco? Remember how dumbfounded she looked when asked; what was the job of the Vice President? …and couldn’t answer. In a debate, she could not elaborate on any of the policy details that were on the McCain-Palin ticket and responded with; *I have only been at this, like five weeks? *

No, I feel very confident that she still could not pass a civics class.
Click to expand...
This, a million times, this.

Personally I’m glad Trump accepted the endorsement of this boat anchor. Palin is toxic for campaigns…just look what she did in 2008. She single handedly tanked McCain’s chance to win.
 
jtauke said:
This, a million times, this.

Personally I’m glad Trump accepted the endorsement of this boat anchor. Palin is toxic for campaigns…just look what she did in 2008. She single handedly tanked McCain’s chance to win.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t put all the blame on Sarah Palin. More than anything, it was Obama’s time in history and he was a charismatic figure to many. Further, McCain wasn’t such a great campaigner apart from Palin.
 
meltzerboy said:
I wouldn’t put all the blame on Sarah Palin. More than anything, it was Obama’s time in history and he was a charismatic figure to many. Further, McCain wasn’t such a great campaigner apart from Palin.
Click to expand...
I also think a lot of people thought Obama would change the way Washington works. A lot of people saw him as a breath of fresh air after 8 years of the Bush Administration.

It’s really too bad that a lot of people don’t vote more along the common sense and solid principles.

I actually think Palin helped McCain rev up the base. As I recall, they were toying with the idea of picking Joe Lieberman for VP.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
The republicans brought nothing up for a vote, even though nobody could have stopped them.
Click to expand...
From this 2008 HotAir post:
…what many do not recall is that Bush wanted to tighten oversight with a new regulatory board for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other government recipients for the express purpose of addressing bad loan practices — and Democrats blocked it.

The New York Times reported this five years ago *
…
It was the Bush administration that wanted to rein in the madness in the credit markets, and the Democrats who wanted to extend the Clinton policies that created the crisis we have now. After the fit hit the shan, as Michelle says, these same Democrats want to shift blame back to the administration that wanted to increase oversight and curtail risk in lending practices while reducing patronage at the giant GSEs.

The Bush administration isn’t blameless in letting this get out of hand, but clearly the origins of the disaster and the efforts to keep bad policies in place fall on the Democrats in this case.
*
 
stinkcat_14 said:
The republicans controlled the house and senate during much of the bush administration. The republicans could have done something in spite of Barney, because they could have outvoted him. However, the truth was that the republicans are just as much to blame for the crisis as Barney and the democrats are. The republicans brought nothing up for a vote, even though nobody could have stopped them.
Click to expand...
ok,I stand corrected.Trust me,I am not under any illusion that the Republicsns,outside of a few,are anything more than Dem lite.They have exposed themselves,in that they waste no time in throwing the more conservative members under the bus,every opportunity.Having said that,I have to vote for whoever the nominee is,because what the Dems are offering,I want no part of that!
 
Erich said:
From this 2008 HotAir post:
…what many do not recall is that Bush wanted to tighten oversight with a new regulatory board for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other government recipients for the express purpose of addressing bad loan practices — and Democrats blocked it.
Click to expand...
How did the democrats block this when they were in the minority? Barney couldn’t have blocked anything without republican votes.
The New York Times reported this five years ago *
…
It was the Bush administration that wanted to rein in the madness in the credit markets, and the Democrats who wanted to extend the Clinton* policies that created the crisis we have now. After the fit hit the shan, as Michelle says, these same Democrats want to shift blame back to the administration that wanted to increase oversight and curtail risk in lending practices while reducing patronage at the giant GSEs.
Click to expand...
The Bush administration isn’t blameless in letting this get out of hand, but clearly the origins of the disaster and the efforts to keep bad policies in place fall on the Democrats in this case.
Click to expand...
Once again, show me which votes were taken and who voted for what.
Click to expand...
 
Erich said:
No, McCain did that himself.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I’m sure her complete lack of political, historical, or governmental knowledge had nothing to do with it.

But hey, she can see Russia from her house. So she’s got that going for her…👍
 
Question for you - Why do you take so long with your Elections. In the Uk its at most 2 months long usually less. Same in the rest of democratic Europe. And you waste so much money better used to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless and help the sick.
 
jtauke said:
Yeah, I’m sure her complete lack of political, historical, or governmental knowledge had nothing to do with it.

But hey, she can see Russia from her house. So she’s got that going for her…👍
Click to expand...
Are you sure you aren’t talking about the brainiac currently occupying the White House.Sara Palin has had a much more extensive political career than O.Also,quite buying into the late night comedy skits.SP never actually said she could see Russia from her kitchen.::rolleyes:
 
DeniseNY said:
I can’t believe people still believe that one. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I hear ha…on the other hand,it does explain why Obama got a second term.You know,the whole"fool me once,shame on you…fool me twice,shame on me"😉
 
Peccavi said:
Question for you - Why do you take so long with your Elections. In the Uk its at most 2 months long usually less. Same in the rest of democratic Europe. And you waste so much money better used to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless and help the sick.
Click to expand...
Can you really know what someone’s views are in only two months? That’s barely time to have a single debate between candidates of the same party. Much less debates against the actual nominated candidates.

I’d like to think that we’re a little more methodical with who we put in the oval.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
How did the democrats block this when they were in the minority?
Click to expand...
There’s an unfortunate habit in the Senate for a handful of members to threaten a filibuster without actually going on the record and effectively killing legislation. How convenient for Democrats.
 
meltzerboy said:
I wouldn’t put all the blame on Sarah Palin. More than anything, it was Obama’s time in history and he was a charismatic figure to many. Further, McCain wasn’t such a great campaigner apart from Palin.
Click to expand...
For the same reason Hillary will lose this election, I think she would have beat McCain if Obama hadn’t run. For a party two win 3+ consecutive terms, the sitting president must have strong popularity in his second term. When looked at statistically, POTUS popularity in the 7th year is the strongest indicator. Just like Bush was a dud for McCain, Hillary is getting hobbled by Obama.

I like Sarah as a pundit but never thought she was a good choice as VP.
 
Erich said:
There’s an unfortunate habit in the Senate for a handful of members to threaten a filibuster without actually going on the record and effectively killing legislation. How convenient for Democrats.
Click to expand...
Barney was not in the senate, so he could not prevent votes in the house.
 
jtauke said:
This, a million times, this.

Personally I’m glad Trump accepted the endorsement of this boat anchor. Palin is toxic for campaigns…just look what she did in 2008. She single handedly tanked McCain’s chance to win.
Click to expand...
Whatever you think of Trump, I think he’s too smart to keep her around for long. She might earn him a few points with the evangelicals in Iowa, but he’ll drop her like a hot potato soon thereafter.
 
Theo520 said:
For the same reason Hillary will lose this election, I think she would have beat McCain if Obama hadn’t run. For a party two win 3+ consecutive terms, the sitting president must have strong popularity in his second term. When looked at statistically, POTUS popularity in the 7th year is the strongest indicator. Just like Bush was a dud for McCain, Hillary is getting hobbled by Obama.

I like Sarah as a pundit but never thought she was a good choice as VP.
Click to expand...
Good point. I also think it is interesting that now Hillary is talking about the “unelectablility” of Bernie Sanders just as she talked about the unelectability of Obama in 2008. The truth of the matter may be that it is SHE who is unelectable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top