Sarah Palin: Could She Run as an Independent or Third Party Candidate?

H/T Peter Gemma:

Suzi Parker at Politics Daily speculates that may run as something other than a Republican. Excerpt:

Palin certainly has many of the qualities of a third-party candidate – charismatic and passionate, with a status as an outsider intent on storming the barricades of the establishment.

Consider previous candidates with engaging and controversial personalities who attempted to carve their own path to the Oval Office.

Larger-than-life Theodore Roosevelt ran on his Bull Moose Party ticket in 1912. He won 27.4 percent of the popular vote and carried six states, totaling 88 electoral votes. Roosevelt’s candidacy split the Republican vote, and Democrat Woodrow Wilson won the election.

In 1948, Strom Thurmond ran as a Dixiecrat segregationist, a major draw in Southern states. Former Democratic governor George Wallace of Alabama ran in 1968 on the American Independent Party line. He remains the only third-party candidate since 1948 to win a state.

104 thoughts on “Sarah Palin: Could She Run as an Independent or Third Party Candidate?

  1. Bryan

    There you go…the former mayor of a town of less than 10k…a 1/2 term gov. of one of the least populated states in the country….and even they don’t like her….

    Sister Sarah for Prez! I guess her supporters will point to her “canned hunts” on TLC and occasional appearances on fox as qualifications….

  2. Robert Milnes

    She can easily get The Libertarian Vote.
    Asshole plumbline radicals won’t work with anyone impure, so they wind up with no one to vote for exept the republican or whoever is left.

  3. Ayn R. Key

    I seriously doubt this.

    She knows it would split the Republicans.

    IF she is the one floating the rumor, then it is only for the purpose of getting more speaking fees from Republican groups.

  4. Robert Milnes

    Vote Independent Sarah!
    Or write in RonPaul!
    LOLROTFLMAO!
    Fools.Losers. Morons. Lemmings. Paultards!
    paulie, who you going to vote for?
    Oh, that’s right, you don’t vote.
    Nevermind!

  5. paulie Post author

    I lost my voting rights due to not using an SSN, so I can’t renew my ID, and I’d need that with a voter registration at a new address.

    Otherwise, I would probably vote Libertarian.

  6. HumbleTravis

    “Now the smart thing will be for independents who are such a part of this tea party movement to, I guess, kind of start picking a party,” she said.

    Palin suggested the grass-roots activists consider “Which party reflects how that smaller, smarter government steps to be taken? Which party will best fit you?”

    “And then because the tea party movement is not a party, and we have a two-party system, they’re going to have to pick a party and run one or the other: ‘R’ or ‘D,’” she said.

    February 2010, from:
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33077.html

  7. paulie Post author

    I didn’t say of course.

    I was undecided in 2008, had I voted, and had I done so in a state with all the candidates on the ballot.

    In 2012, it would depend on the LP’s choice of candidate as well as the other options.

  8. Jill Pyeatt

    I wouldn’t vote for Mrs. Palin for the single fact that she quit her governor job. I don’t happen to care for her otherwise, but being a quitter is a big deal in my book.

  9. Robert Milnes

    MG, I voted McCain/Palin.
    I couldn’t stomach Barr/Root.
    Jay/Knapp not on ballot or I would have voted BTP.
    I was very mad at Progressives for Obama/ Tom Hayden =Moron.
    GP crazy ticket McKinney/Clemente.
    Guaranteed losers so give everybody a finger.
    Nader proved he didn’t know what he was doing by picking Gonzales.
    2012 will probably be just as bad.

  10. Mark Seidenberg

    Jill Preatt
    In 2012 Sarah Palin husband will be on the California ballot for President of the United
    States. His name is Todd Palin. I met him in
    Anchorage, Alaska in 2006. He is a fine man.
    What state are you in?

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg
    Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

  11. paulie Post author

    Milnes

    I voted McCain/Palin.

    ROFL. And you give me shit about “rightists” I did not actually vote for?

    Seidenberg

    Why do you constantly spell people’s names wrong? Is it on purpose?

    Don’t be so sure about Todd Palin being on the ballot. The legislature or the courts might stop your scheme to force unwilling people to be on the ballot with your party. For that matter, the courts might give the Constitution Party control of the AIP ballot line again.

    Jill is in California.

  12. Robert Milnes

    paulie, don’t you write & comment enough-must you also answer a question asked of someone else?
    I’d rather vote for a real rightist than a fake libertarian or progressive.

  13. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie,

    I type very fast with typing errors. Sorry.

    Next, do you have some insight that the CP will
    file its fourth lawsuit? It is to late for the California
    legislature to amend the election code on the subject for the February 7, 2011 election. The
    Courts would stay away from the issue of Palin
    on the ballot as a political question. Palin will be
    on the California ballot. The AIP Chairman gave
    the OK. That is all that is needed.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party

  14. Mark Seidenberg

    The date above was typed wrong, it should of stated February 7, 2012.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party

  15. paulie Post author

    Next, do you have some insight that the CP will
    file its fourth lawsuit?

    No, I’ve already told you I have no idea.

    It is to late for the California
    legislature to amend the election code on the subject for the February 7, 2011 election.

    Huh? What are you talking about? I’m talking about the 2012 election. The legislature could pass a law that you can’t force anyone to be on the ballot if they say no.

    The Courts would stay away from the issue of Palin on the ballot as a political question.

    We’ll see about that. Maybe, maybe not.

  16. Melty

    It makes it sound as if Wilson won because of Roosevelt’s Bull Moose run, but that’s not true.

  17. Melty

    The writer’s suggesting that Palin should form a party around herself for a presidential run, like what each of her examples above did. Well, the Libs n Greens sure won’t have her. Consti Party maybe?

  18. LibertarianGirl

    she doesnt stand a chance… while Icant believe I actually like her more after watching her reality show , the act remains she quit her Governorship and has a reality show , not exactly Presidential material

  19. wolfefan

    Hi Mark S –

    Is it really your position that your party can force someone to be on the ballot without their permission?

  20. Mark Seidenberg

    wolfefan

    Answer is no. We do not need permission to place Todd Palin on the ballot. We are not
    using force. Todd Palin would make a good President of the United States.

    Ron Paul was on the Montana ballot for President in 2oo8 without his approval on the
    Constitution Party line.

    Sincerely. Mark Seidenberg
    Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

  21. Matt Cholko

    I fail to see what the point is of putting someone on the ballot who doesn’t want to be there. Would the hope be to reach some vote total that gains ballot status in a future election? They’re certainly not going to do anything to bring members or support to your party.

  22. paulie Post author

    MC They already have ballot status and are not in any danger of losing it.

    MS Yes you are using force if you force him to be on the ballot over his active objection.

    Still got three questions waiting for you in another thread.

  23. paulie Post author

    @18, how do you figure that is not true?

    Wilson and TR both ran as progressives, and split the progressive vote. As a former Republican president, TR also took some of the Republican vote.

    If he hadn’t run, some of his votes would have gone to Taft and some would have gone to Wilson.

    Most likely, Wilson still would have won.

    A big chunk of Republican Party supporters were clearly unhappy with Taft, so I don’t think he would have been re-elected.

  24. paulie Post author

    We do not need permission to place Todd Palin on the ballot.

    So how would you feel if the Socialists or Communists put you on the ballot and millions of people saw your name with that label?

    It should be obvious to anyone that doing such a thing would be wrong. I’m surprised it’s not illegal already and hopefully that will be fixed as soon as possible.

  25. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie

    I do not understand you. In California the Communists cannot get ballot status. I could
    not be on the ballot, because I have dual citizenship, viz., Canada and the United States.

    I however an one step above Barack H. Obama II
    and John S. McCain III, viz., I am a citizen of
    the United States and an other county, viz.,
    Canada. Obama is not a citizen of the United States because his mother was not a resident of the United States for five years after the age of
    14. Obama is a British Protected Person at
    Birth and a Subject of the Sultan of Zanzibar on
    his August 4, 1961 birth on Mombasa Island,
    Sultanate of Zanzibar.

    John S. McCain III was born at the Colon Hospital , Colon Island in the Republic of
    Panama on August 29, 1936. He was not
    born in the Canal Zone. He was born out
    of wedlock, because his parents when through
    the same type of sham marriage as Ike and Tina
    Turner in TJ, Baha California in January, 1933.
    His mother Roberta Wright was not employed
    by either the United States Governement or
    the Panama Railroad Company or its successor
    at the time of his birth. Which was a requirement under Section 2 of the Panama
    Collective Naturalization Act of August 4, 1936.
    That Act of August 4, 1936 must be read with the
    Hague Convention of Nationality of 1930 which
    was ratified by Mexico, Panama, Zanzibar (by
    United Kingdom) and the United States. Because of the fact there was not lawful marriage
    in Baja California at an Office of Civil Registry,
    McCain was a bastard at birth and could not
    be declared a citizen of the United State, because
    of his mother’s lack of employment status under
    the Act of August 4, 1937, at Section 2.

    Both Obama and McCain needs to be deported
    for being illegal aliens. Obama to Indonesia and
    McCain to the Republic of Panama.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party

  26. Mark Seidenberg

    I made a date error above. The Panama Collective Naturalization Act was of August 4, 1937. The year 1936 was a typing error. Sorry!

  27. paulie Post author

    In California the Communists cannot get ballot status.

    Suppose they did, or suppose they could run you in another state. Or, if they were on the ballot in California, they could nominate you say, for Governor or Senator.

    Or, how about if they ran Alan Keyes? You probably wouldn’t like that, and neither would he, would he?

    I however an one step above Barack H. Obama II and John S. McCain III,

    Disagreed on both, but you already knew that. Let’s not get side tracked.

    Would it be acceptable to you, if the Communists or Socialists placed you or someone you support on the ballot under their party label, over their objection, in any state?

    While you’re at it, there are still three unanswered questions on another thread from last night. Last night your excuse for not answering them was that it was late and you were tired.

    So, instead of going on and on with your silly schpiel about Obama and McCain for the umpteenth time, why not go over there and answer those questions?

  28. Jill Pyeatt

    MS @ 12: I’m curious why you would think I care about Todd Palin being on your ballot?

  29. wolfefan

    Hi Mark –

    Why do you insist on pretending you don’t understand Paulie’s simple questions? It does not reflect well on you or your party. Whether it is legal or not, do you think it is ethically right to place someone on the ballot without their consent? How would this help your cause, whatever it is?

  30. paulie Post author

    Thanks wolfefan,

    BTW those other so far unanswered questions were

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    1. What is the position of Alan Keyes on foreign policy, intervention, and military spending?

    2. What is the position of America?s Independent Party on foreign policy, intervention, and military spending?

    3. What is your position on foreign policy, intervention, and military spending?

    To see them in the original conyext see

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/03/california-has-bill-which-proposes-to-make-it-illegal-to-pay-people-to-collect-voter-registrations-on-a-per-registration-basis/

    As you can see Mr. Seidenberg is quite talented at answering questions in a manner that does not really answer them, or answering only the questions he wants to answer 🙂

  31. American Independent

    Todd Palin is a good man. I hope they do place his name on the ballot.

  32. Mark Seidenberg

    Wolfefan

    You do not need consent to be place on the ballot in California.

    No one ask for my consent when the Government of Canada declared me to be
    a Canadian Citizen, so I could not run for
    President of the United States, viz.,
    making me a non-natural born Citizen of the United States.

    No one can force a person to take office. The
    question is be on the ballot. Fredrick Douglass
    was on the Presidental Ballot in 1872 as a Vice
    Presidential candidate. No one asked him if he
    wanted to be on the ballot. Others wanted him
    to be on the ballot.

    I do not see what the problem is. If Todd got
    elected he could chose if he wanted to take office.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party

  33. Jill Pyeatt

    paulie @ 34: ” As you can see Mr. Seidenberg is quite talented at answering questions in a manner that does not really answer them, or answering only the questions he wants to answer “.

    Gee, this is beginning to become a bit of a trend here at IPR.

  34. paulie Post author

    No one ask for my consent when the Government of Canada declared me to be
    a Canadian Citizen, so I could not run for
    President of the United States, viz.,
    making me a non-natural born Citizen of the United States.

    If you were born in the US you can run for president, if you were born in Canada you can’t.

    Fredrick Douglass
    was on the Presidental Ballot in 1872 as a Vice
    Presidential candidate. No one asked him if he
    wanted to be on the ballot.

    There were no government printed ballots in 1872, people just voted for whoever they wanted to.

    I do not see what the problem is.

    Hmmm, maybe that he might take away votes from his wife if she runs, and he might not want to do that? Or maybe he would rather not be on the ballot, because he would prefer that people vote Republican? There could be a lot of problems, and I don’t believe you don’t see them, especially since they have been pointed out before.

    . If Todd got
    elected he could chose if he wanted to take office.

    He can’t get elected because he won’t be on enough state ballots to get elected, so what you really mean is that you want to trick the less politically astute voters in your state into voting for your party by mistake.

  35. paulie Post author

    Gee, this is beginning to become a bit of a trend here at IPR.

    Have you tried to log in to the dashboard to post articles yet? Give me a call at 415-690-6352 if you have any problems or questions with that.

  36. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie,

    You asked if the American Independent Party supported involentary servitude. Unlike the
    Constitution Party, the American Independent
    Party believes that the 13th Amendment was
    ratified , Even if it was not ratifed there is
    still a violation of Title 18 U.S.C. section 1584.

    Is your problem that you think the wrong number was applied to the amendment at the
    so called 13th Amendent should be the 14th
    Amendment, I can understand, because the
    original 13th amendment is waiting to be ratified
    still.

    Is that what you are getting at?

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chaiman,
    American Independent Party

    Is the problem you want to

  37. Red Phillips

    “Consti Party maybe?”

    The Constitution Party wouldn’t have Sarah Palin for the same reason it wouldn’t have Alan Keyes, both are interventionists.

    paulie, don’t be surprised if Rainman Seidenberg has trouble answering your theoretical question. He’s a tad bit concrete.

  38. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie

    1 I am sorry that there are extra words below
    American Independent Party, It is just a typing
    error.

    2, I would like to know your view of the Corwin
    Amendment. Since you asked me about
    the view the party took on the ratification
    process on the 13th amendent. If the required
    number of states pass the Corwin Amendment
    how would that effect what I call the 13th Amendment?

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party.

  39. Don Grundmann

    Todd Palin is a honest and honorable man of unquestionable integrity. To be placed on the Presidential ballot line of the AIP while it is controlled by the Robinson Crime Syndicate, of which Mark Seidenberg is the ” bag man,” would be a tremendous and horrendous insult to his honor and integrity. The Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center, de-facto controllers of the state recognized Robinson corruption faction of the AIP via their agent Mark Seidenberg, are the greatest possible enemies that Sarah Palin has, much less her husband and family whom they are also only too happy to attack. Hence for the Robinson criminal enterprise, the current state recognized faction of the AIP, to place Todd Palins name on the ballot, and to attempt to sanitize their criminal organization by hiding behind his integrity, would be a tremendous insult to and attack upon both Todd and Sarah. It would be equivalent to the Communist Party, a mortal enemy of our nation and everything that it stands for, nominating Todd for President. On the other hand it would bring a good measure of scrutiny to the Robinson Crime Syndicate; exposure of which can only aid in stopping their corruption and sending them to prison where they so richly belong. The very idea of them nominating Todd Palin shows that they are already, relevant to election day 2012, getting desperate as their hope was/is to auction off the party Presidential ballot line for hundreds of thousands of dollars and thus gain a good monetary payoff for their criminal actions. Once any potential candidate recognizes the criminality and corruption of Mark Robinson and Mark Seidenberg their dreamed of payday will vanish as the stench of their anti-American evil awakens such candidate to the dangers of having any association with them in the slightest degree.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  40. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie

    You are correct that the government of New York did not print ballots in 1872. However, I was not taking about Goverment Printed Ballots.
    In New York in 1872 the ballots were privately
    printed.

    Fredrick Douglass was listed on a party ballot without his consent. You need to read some history books on 19th century elections.

    My friend William Shearer gave me a gift of the
    book by Kenneth D. Ackerman wich was titled:
    DARK HORSE The Surprise Election and Political Murder of President James A. Garfield.

    William Shearer could retell the vote for all
    36 ballots by state totals at the 1880 Chicago
    Convention of the Republican Party.

    Read DARK HORSE it should give you a good
    understanding of who the system worked.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

  41. paulie Post author

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    All that typing and yet no answers to simple questions that have been up for a while.

    So, I won’t be answering yours either.

    A number of questions still await your response.

  42. Don Grundmann

    paulie – If you have some questions for myself, as the Chairman of the REAL AIP, I will be happy to answer them. I bet that I will do so far faster than any answer you get, if ever, from Mark Seidenberg or any of his criminal partners.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  43. JT

    Milnes: “I’d rather vote for a real rightist than a fake libertarian or progressive.”

    Then you really are a lunatic. You’re a Leftist and you repeatedly chastise those Libertarians who support Ron Paul. Yet you’d rather support McCain and Palin than a guy who wants to end drug prohibition, end government surveillance, end corporate welfare, end censorship, and end foreign militarism? Geez.

    Paulie: “It should be obvious to anyone that doing such a thing would be wrong. I’m surprised it’s not illegal already and hopefully that will be fixed as soon as possible.”

    I’m amazed it’s not also.

    Paulie to Mark: “Still got three questions waiting for you in another thread.

    I’d really like to know the answers too. I’m not holding my breath though.

    Paulie: “As you can see Mr. Seidenberg is quite talented at answering questions in a manner that does not really answer them, or answering only the questions he wants to answer.”

    I agree. I find it infuriating. What’s worse is that he pretends not to understand them or that he’s answering them when he’s really making irrelevant statements.

  44. Matt Cholko

    Seidenberg does this constantly on IPR. I know very little of the AIP drama out there in CA, and even less about Mr. Seidenberg, but based on his foolish comments on here, I cannot imagine how he could be elected to any kind of leadership position.

  45. paulie Post author

    Dr. Grundmann,

    You are of course free to answer Mr. Seidenberg’s questions for him, although your answers may be different from his, were he ever to provide the answers.

    If you’d like to answer some questions posed directly to you instead, you may look through questions Mr. Seidenberg has asked me at various points in this thread and others about your legal strategy going forward. I, of course, have no idea what your legal strategy is or whether you want to reveal it, but if you do, those questions would be more accurately addressed to you, rather than to me.

    JT,

    I don’t find it infuriating. Mark is what and who he is. What he doesn’t answer, in many ways, tells us just as much as what he does and how.

  46. Tom Blanton

    Unlike many people that comment at IPR, I have never declared Robert Milnes to be insane.

    Now that I have read his confession to voting for McCain and Palin, I will now take a stand on Sanity of Milnes Issue.

    Milnes is a psycho and he needs a Thorazine IV Drip. It’s too late for professional help at this juncture. He needs to be closely monitored to make sure he stays on the Thorazine and does not vote again. Under no circumstances should he be allowed anywhere near a poll ever again.

    To be fair, society would be well served if everyone who voted in 2008 would be prevented from ever voting again. We can’t rely on the police state to stop them, so friends and family are the only hope.

    Remember, friends don’t let friends vote.

    For those of you who refuse to abstain from the practice of voting, at least vote for someone who is deceased.

  47. JT

    Paulie: “JT,

    I don’t find it infuriating. Mark is what and who he is. What he doesn’t answer, in many ways, tells us just as much as what he does and how.”

    I didn’t think you’d share that, Paulie. Actually, I’d say it’s more frustration than fury for me. I dislike evasiveness, and I dislike even more when someone who’s being evasive pretends he isn’t.

  48. Don Grundmann

    paulie – As a quick synopsis the legal suits to stop the attackers of the AIP ( what I refer to as the Robinson Crime Syndicate; a group inclusive of Mark Robinson, Mark Seidenberg, Ed Noonan, and associated lackeys ) will continue. A new front in the war to stop The Syndicate will be opened shortly. I will send a notice of its occurance at that time to the e-mail address of this site which you can perhaps use as a new thread at that time.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  49. Melty

    @26 Paulie
    Right. TR or no TR, Wilson’d’ve won, not Taft.
    That’s exactly what I’m saying.

  50. Cody Quirk

    Seidenberg does this constantly on IPR. I know very little of the AIP drama out there in CA, and even less about Mr. Seidenberg, but based on his foolish comments on here, I cannot imagine how he could be elected to any kind of leadership position.

    = Luck & conspiracy, that’s how.

  51. TinFoilCap & JockeyShorts to Match

    Sarah Palin is not an enemy of the establishment. She is a member. If not there is no way she gets on the ticket. Anyone ever hear Jesse Ventura tell the story of his inaugural day in MN? After the pomp and ceremony he was led to the basement of the state capital where over twenty CIA member were waiting to “inform” him what and what not were his duties ! Said those agents were all different types and looks. Even had a “little old lady” telling him what’s what!

    “The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaeda. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity…. The country behind this propaganda is the US.” – Robin Cook – Former British Foreign Secretary

    “What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system.” – Henry Kissinger 2007

    Also hear Sarah is a little light in the loafers, I guess that should be highheels! Pretty face not much between the ears! She will do whatever her appointed handlers will tell her to do !

    As for the mess that is AIP/CP CA. You guys made a mistake when you listed it as CP of CA or however you have it now. With less than 20 registered voters from what I understand. Independent Constitution Party is how you should have went. The Independent name is how AIP gets all those registrations. If you get a chance to change it you should to INDEPENDENT CP!

    “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” —Groucho Marx

    “Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.” —Lester B. Pearson

  52. whatever

    society would be well served if everyone who voted in 2008 would be prevented from ever voting again.

    To be fair, only those that voted for the Panamanian or British candidates should be permanently barred from voting again, as they have failed the voter literacy test.

  53. Robert Milnes

    Tom Blanton, I usually agree with you.
    However, you seem to advocate voting for the deceased or not voting at all…
    ! I beg your pardon! Say what?
    First, my vote is not news. I discussed it in IPR shortly after the election. I was so frustrated & outraged, particularly with radicals-like you. Tom K. said he voted for McKinney/Clemente. & actually Charles J./Tom K. would have been my top choice of available if they were on my ballot. McKinney/Clemente would otherwise likewise have been my second choice. Except voting for McCain/Palin served as such a good protest/outrage vote!
    & voting for Ron Paul is part of the radical stupidity. He’s NOT a libertarian! He’s a rightist! Even Tom wrote about that in 2008.
    As long as radical libs forfeit the LP to rightists like Root & fail to support BTP as the alternative & are acquiescent about lemming lib. support forRon Paul & advocate voting for the dead or not voting at all, throwing away theonly alternative to the sword, that makes the radical libertarians-like you-the luniest of the lunes.

  54. JT

    Milnes: “Except voting for McCain/Palin served as such a good protest/outrage vote!”

    No, it wasn’t. It was moronic.

    Milnes: “& voting for Ron Paul is part of the radical stupidity. He’s NOT a libertarian! He’s a rightist! Even Tom wrote about that in 2008.”

    He’s a hell of a lot better than McCain and Palin on some social issues, corporate welfare, and foreign policy, which are supposed to matter to so-called progressives. You just lost your progressive credibility.

    I’m starting to think the reason you attack Ron Paul so much is because he was able to raise so much $ and you raised nothing. Your envy seems to be the determining factor.

  55. citizen1

    The question should be “should she run not could she.” She obviously could run. I am not sure if she should run. She should if it splits the globalist vote but otherwise who need another globalist on the ballot?

  56. Ayn R. Key

    I thought about it some more.

    I’ve been toying with a theory that Obama is playing to lose. Basically everyone knows the economy is getting worse, and that it will soon be in such poor shape that the current doldrums will look rich by comparison. Obama is frantically pushing that outwards so it is not during his first term.

    For more on playing to lose read this blog entry.

    Now if that is so, he is setting the Republicans up to win in 2012 and lose it all as they are in the hotseat when the economy crashes.

    And maybe the Republicans are catching on and want to play the same game.

    Consider, I’ve not heard Republicans talk about Palin as a presidential candidate until after the 2010 election. The only people who talked about it were Democrats trying to use fear to motivate their fellow Democrats.

    If the Republicans are trying to counter the Democrats on “who can lose”, then the response of “top this if you can: Presidential Candidate Palin” is sure to knock the Democrat’s game back several steps.

    But Palin won’t win the Republican primary. The Republican base doesn’t want that. So they need to retool her into a new role.

    There’s no way she’d infiltrate the LP the way Barr did or the CP the way Keyes tried to do. Both those parties would reject her without having to pause and consider. Only someone as insipid as Dondero could possibly think Palin would make a good LP candidate, and even he might maybe possibly not be that stupid. Maybe.

    So independent candidate Palin might be just the wedge the Republicans are looking for.

  57. Robert Capozzi

    ayn65: Now if that is so, he is setting the Republicans up to win in 2012 and lose it all as they are in the hotseat when the economy crashes.

    me: Novel idea. The presidency as hot potato? You seem to suggest that BHO is trying to keep the economy from REALLY tanking until after he’s out of office in 2013? To, what, salvage his reputation?

    If so, anything’s possible. I suspect most presidents are playing for the short term, and want to hold onto power as long as possible, even if they think storm clouds are on the horizon. They probably start to believe that they are most qualified to weather the storm.

    They do gather scapegoats as insurance…the GOP Congress, in this case.

    If they are wise, they recognize that exogenous factors will likely rule the future, factors they have no control over.

    ayn: So independent candidate Palin might be just the wedge the Republicans are looking for.

    me: Here you imply that the Rs also don’t want to win, is that right? A Palin independent run would take the wind out of the R candidate’s sails, leading Obama to a second term.

    They toss the hot potato back, I guess?

    This compounds the conspiracy. Neither party wants to win, as it’ll be the ultimate Pyrrhic victory?

    Power is an intoxicant. It leads to a form of grandiosity that we probably can’t imagine.

    My guess is Obama, Romney, Pawlenty, etc. all want the job. If they didn’t, why would they run for it?

  58. Robert Milnes

    JT, I don’t think I lost progressive cred. By stating my opinion early on that Obama was a liberal democrat-at best, endorsed by Kennedy-and it was a mistake to support him & they would regret it & in protest I voted for McCain, I should gain progressive cred.
    Paul may very well be better on some issues than McCain. But much worse on others as McCain is a reactionary & Paul is much worse-a counterrevolutionary.
    I’m not so much jealous of Paul’s contributions as amaed, resentful & covetous! Send me 35 million & I’ll beat Obama’s billion. Paul can’t even win one primary.

  59. paulie Post author

    Independent Constitution Party is how you should have went.

    If I recall what Richard Winger told me correctly, that would have been against state law, since AIP is already using the word independent. Don’t you think they already thought of that?

  60. paulie Post author

    To be fair, only those that voted for the Panamanian or British candidates should be permanently barred from voting again, as they have failed the voter literacy test.

    Luckily, there were no British or Panamian candidates on the ballot. Agreeing with your conspiracy theories is not a “literacy test.”

  61. paulie Post author

    Milnes

    First, my vote is not news.

    Not everyone hangs on your every word. If I read that before, I forgot it. So in a way it’s news.

  62. Ayn R. Key

    Robert @ 66

    Of course it’s a conspiracy theory. It involves thinking that, if not Obama and Palin, then at least their handlers know strategy and tactics, and how to employ them to the maximum advantage.

    Their handlers, the real brains in their teams, would see the presidency as a hot potato, as it was for the Republicans for Hoover in 1929. By being in the wrong place at the wrong time, Hoover gave us 3 1/2 terms of FDR – five Democrat terms in a row when you throw in Truman.

    If I’m right, and I admit there is no solid proof, both parties are trying to arrange that the other party provide the next Hoover. But there is circumstantial proof on the linked article.

  63. paulie Post author

    Milnes: “Except voting for McCain/Palin served as such a good protest/outrage vote!”

    No, it wasn’t. It was moronic.

    Agreed with JT.

  64. paulie Post author

    The question should be “should she run not could she.” She obviously could run.

    Could, as in, is it in any way likely or plausible.

  65. JT

    Milnes: “Paul may very well be better on some issues than McCain. But much worse on others as McCain is a reactionary & Paul is much worse-a counterrevolutionary.”

    On which issues should libertarians view Paul as “much worse” than McCain??

  66. whatever

    there were no British or Panamian candidates on the ballot.

    Incorrect. Obama says he was “governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948.” If you think he is lying, please post your evidence.

    McCain said he was born in Panama. If you think is lying, please post your evidence.

    If you cannot backup your wild theories to the contrary, you are a national security risk and should be barred from voting for life.

  67. paulie Post author

    But Palin won’t win the Republican primary. The Republican base doesn’t want that. So they need to retool her into a new role.

    I don’t know about that. Rank and file Republicans I have met lover her.

    There’s no way she’d infiltrate the LP

    Why not? Barr seemed implausible until shortly before it happened. Murkowski as a potential LP candidate for Senate was taken seriously. Gravel was a fairly serious candidate for the LP nomination, dropping into the race just before the convention after washing out with the Democrats and without changing his views.

    The Constitution Party would certainly consider other interventionists, for example Tancredo. So why not Palin?

    Only someone as insipid as Dondero could possibly think Palin would make a good LP candidate, and even he might maybe possibly not be that stupid. Maybe.

    Are you kidding me? Dondero would cream his jeans at the idea.

  68. NewFederalist

    “Are you kidding me? Dondero would cream his jeans at the idea.”

    What idea? Palin as the LP nominee or just Palin in general? 😉

  69. paulie Post author

    I’ve been toying with a theory that Obama is playing to lose.

    Actually, I think your scenario may have already happened…in 2008. The Republicans picked a guy way past his prime who looked like a comic supervillain and paired him with Dan Quayle with tits. McCain could have easily been hit hard in the primaries on the gun issue, but wasn’t. Why not?

    On the other side, I have reasons to believe dating back to my involvement with the Democratic Party (sorry, not allowed to get into them) that Clinton could have beat Obama for the nomination. Think dirty tricks and back channels. I think her supporters demanded that she at least look like she went out fighting, but did she take a fall in a non-obvious way? I can’t prove this, or even discuss why I think it may have been likely, but there it is.

    So, Obama may be the guy that ended up with the hot potato. As for his efforts to push the coming crisis to 2013 or later, I don’t think he has enough gas in his tank.

  70. paulie Post author

    Milnes

    I voted for McCain, I should gain progressive cred.

    Not in this universe.

    Paul may very well be better on some issues than McCain. But much worse on others

    Not on any issues libertarians and progressives agree on.

    Send me 35 million & I’ll beat Obama’s billion. Paul can’t even win one primary.

    And you can’t even get on one ballot or get someone to send you $35, much less 35 million.

    Your home state of New Jersey is 800 valid signatures. You can do that by yourself with no help and no money whatsoever.

  71. paulie Post author

    “Are you kidding me? Dondero would cream his jeans at the idea.”

    What idea? Palin as the LP nominee or just Palin in general?

    Either, or both.

    To be fair, if she wanted to have sex with me, and Todd Palin didn’t kill me, I’d do her. But LP nominee? No way.

  72. paulie Post author

    On which issues should libertarians view Paul as “much worse” than McCain?

    Progressives would view Ron Paul as being worse on economic issues, but libertarians would disagree with them.

  73. paulie Post author

    Obama says he was “governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948.”

    If he ever actually said this, it is probably irrelevant, since he was born in Hawaii, and that makes him a natural born US citizen regardless of anything else.

    McCain said he was born in Panama.

    Of US citizen parents. Thus, also a natural born US citizen.

    If you cannot backup your wild theories to the contrary

    You are the one with wild theories, which are more than amply disproven at the following sites:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/, http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/, http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/,
    http://badfiction.typepad.com/ , http://barackryphal.blogspot.com/ , http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/

    More proof there than you can shake a stick at.

  74. JT

    Paulie: “Progressives would view Ron Paul as being worse on economic issues, but libertarians would disagree with them.”

    Certainly, Paulie. But Milnes (obnoxiously) demands an alliance between Libertarians and Greens, which would have to be around social issues and foreign policy. That says to me that he cares about those areas far more than the economic sphere, in which Libertarians and Greens agree on hardly anything. Given that perspective, when he said Paul is better on some issues but “much worse” on others, I assumed he was talking about within the social sphere (Paul is obviously pro-peace).

    And given that perspective, why support McCain and Palin based on economic issues where they have nothing in common with progressives, while heaping vitriol on Libertarians for supporting Ron Paul, who does have views in common with progressives on some social issues and in foreign affairs?

  75. paulie Post author

    I didn’t say Milnes’ position here makes sense, I just want to make sure we are describing it accurately.

    Actually, I’ve already stated that I agree with you, that I don’t think it makes any sense.

    Voting for McCain makes the rest of everything Milnes says even more laughable, as hard as it is to imagine that this was possible.

  76. Robert Milnes

    paulie@70, come on, gimmee a break. My vote for McCain along with Tom’s vote for McKinney was thoroughly discussed in IPR shortly after the election.
    & please, a protest vote announced after the election is a completely different thing than supporting a candidate.
    I did not support McCain. Tom did not support McKinney.

  77. JT

    Paulie: “Actually, I’ve already stated that I agree with you, that I don’t think it makes any sense.”

    Yes. I wasn’t trying to be argumentative. I was only trying to say that’s the reason I thought he was only talking about within the social sphere and not the economic one. He’s bizarre regardless.

  78. TinFoilCap & JockeyShorts to Match

    @64 The question should be “should she run not could she.” She obviously could run. I am not sure if she should run. She should if it splits the globalist vote but otherwise who need another globalist on the ballot?

    me__> Well stated! If OLD MAN RIVER Paul decides to run he and Johnson will split the small L vote! Each and every person who votes must decide if they want Obama or the R nominee to win. The LP can pull votes from either side possibly helping the other side win! It’s all according to who you (LP) nominate!

    I heard Ron Paul is leading polls in the ’12 TX-R US Senate race. If he got there with his son they might could make a difference. If he runs for POTUS again I’m afraid he will be disappointed with le$$ money and less “enthusiasm” overall.

    What? Some may say or think. With someone else on the stage saying about the same thing and that person a two time elected Gov. from a D state means some of Paul’s ’08 support is going to the Gov. Hear me now and believe me later, between a squirky US Rep. and a squirky 2-term Gov. saying the same things, the younger Gov. WINS across America in that matchup. Mark it down ! In fact Johnson was a much more sucessful Gov. than the Runsney and Huckeflea ever was in conservative terms. Those R primary voters eat that “proven” conservative record stuff up! Johnson has already been to NH and IA thirteen times and he’s unannouced. I truly don’t think Ron Paul made very many more campaign swings than that in the entire ’08 race. Again a very good man, but Ron Paul is too old to be POTUS and America knows it and you do too.

    “Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” – Ron Paul

  79. JT

    Milnes: “I did not support McCain.”

    No. You did support McCain by casting your vote for him, even though you don’t agree with him on issues and only did it out of spite.

  80. paulie Post author

    My vote for McCain along with Tom’s vote for McKinney was thoroughly discussed in IPR shortly after the election.

    I have no recollection of ever reading about you voting for McCain until now. Give *me* a break – I don’t remember everything. And a vote for McKinney is not nearly as bad as a vote for McCain. I considered a McKinney vote myself, had I actually voted, but she was not on my state’s ballot either. McCain was possibly the worst candidate on the ballot, although Obama may well be just as bad in practice.

    You did support McCain by casting your vote for him, even though you don’t agree with him on issues and only did it out of spite.

    Exactly.

  81. Robert Milnes

    Come on, the whole system/process is insane/bizarre.
    We all should be self-reliant. Able to live in peace & prosperity with everyone else.
    Just about nobody votes for their first choice.
    I do not think voting for McCain is supporting him.
    & given the choices I had, he was in fact the best IMO.
    I didn’t like or support ANY of the choices on my ballot. It was always the least bad one in the bunch.

  82. paulie Post author

    There’s no measure by which McCain is least bad. He sucks on pretty much every issue.

    That he was the least bad in your opinion says a lot about your opinion and how far it is removed from the Greens and Libertarians you claim to represent.

    Teddy Roosevelt and John McCain are so far from a progressive-libertarian position it’s ridiculous.

    Also, if you didn’t like your choices, all you had to do was get 800 valid signatures and you could have been on your state’s ballot for president and voted for yourself.

    I suppose you may have had to go to Trenton at some point to file paperwork, but you may have been able to do it all by mail.

  83. Robert Milnes

    The system being what it is,
    The fact that Ron Paul cannot win even one primary is a reason to NOT support him from the beginning.
    The fact that McKinney was not on enough ballots to possibly win, is a reason to not vote for her.
    The fact that Nader was on enough ballots to possibly win is a reason in favor of voting for him.
    The fact that Barr is a counterrevolutionary is a reason to vote/not vote for him. Despite the fact that he was on enough ballots to win but objectively had all but zero chance to win.
    Only Obama & McCain had any realistic chance to win. So in a way it came down to a choice between those 2.
    Palin being a heartbeat from the presidency was a reason to NOT vote for McCain.
    That Obama was a deliberate fake progressive was a reason to NOT vote for him.
    It is very complex…and CRAZY!

  84. paulie Post author

    The fact that McKinney was not on enough ballots to possibly win, is

    …actually not a fact at all.

    Only Obama & McCain had any realistic chance to win. So in a way it came down to a choice between those 2.

    There are lots of reasons to vote for someone who “can’t win”.

    Palin being a heartbeat from the presidency was a reason to NOT vote for McCain.

    Duh. Really?

    Also, given that you are actually just voting for your state’s electors (there’s no national popular vote currently), McCain did not have a chance to win either, so what’s the point?

  85. Robert Milnes

    I stand corrected on whether McKinney was on enough ballots to possibly win.
    According to Wikipedia, yes, 32 plus 18 write in.
    Realistically-next to zero.
    & just because you times your comment by infinity does not mean it actually becomes infinitely more pursuasive.
    Quite a spin, though!

  86. Tom Blanton

    Is there a law in New Jersey that requires everyone to vote? If so, does that mean those Jersey Shore freaks vote?

    It seems that when all candidates running suck, the best option is to not vote – or write in the name of somebody with an advanced case of rigor mortis. The pirates among us are aware that dead men tell no tales. Just make sure you aren’t voting for the undead.

    By the way, candidates are usually politicians and all politicians suck – even libertarians – as that is their nature.

  87. paulie Post author

    Is there a law in New Jersey that requires everyone to vote? If so, does that mean those Jersey Shore freaks vote?

    Most of them are not from New Jersey and I have no idea whether they vote, but I vote for J-Woww.

  88. Pingback: Independents Support Charlie Sheen over Sarah Palin for President, according to Public Policy Polling | Independent Political Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *