Kirsten Powers Wouldn’t Rule Out Sarah Palin Beating Barack Obama in 2012

Democratic strategist Kirsten Powers being interviewed on Fox News said that she wouldn’t former Alaska Governor Palin beating President Barack Obama in 2012.  Watch below:

What I find interesting in that clip is the theme that she is constantly underestimated… from Vice President Joe Biden to Kirsten Powers.  Everybody keeps on saying she’s done or that is a disaster.  Let me tell you if beltway people are clucking about – say her show on TLC.  It’s probably playing well with mainstream America.  Because one thing that Beltway folks, even the ones in my own party, have demonstrated is that they don’t have a clue.  But I think that’s a positive.  Keep on underestimating her, please.

HT: Conservatives 4 Palin

If you like what you read, sign-up to get CT in your inbox!

Comments

  1. Ted says

    SARAH PALIN CAN SAVE AMERICA WITH ONE SIMPLE ACT

    Governor Palin is a courageous person, no doubt. In view of her massive following, if she would simply, briefly, tweet about the upcoming case before the US Supreme Court next week, it would change the course of American history.

    November 23, 2010 marks a fork in the road for the future of America of more than historic proportions — perhaps on par with events leading to the Civil War. To date, virtually all federal and state courts where actions have been brought seeking decision on the meaning of the Constitution’s Article 2 “natural born citizen” clause as a prerequisite for Barack Obama to be a lawful President and Commander in Chief of the United States (Mr. Obama having been born to a father of British/Kenyan nationality and father not a citizen of the United States), have been shut down, never getting beyond the issue of standing. To date, courts have very strategically (narrowly if not artfully) characterized and applied law and legal procedure steadfastly to prevent the question from ever rising to the merits — this on a host of different types and classes of plaintiffs, causes and defendants — admittedly under the most intensely implicit (if not more) pressure to do the same.

    The national media (some say our 4th branch of government) has aided and abetted the avoidance by mischaracterizing this as a “Hawaii birth” a/k/a “birther” issue which is nothing more than a “red herring” in that the issue for Article 2 “natural born citizen” is Mr. Obama’s father. Moreover, the legal community has aided and abetted the avoidance by mischaracterizing the 1898 Supreme Court Case, Wong Kim Arc, which dealt with the meaning of “citizenship”, not the meaning of “natural born citizen” under Article 2.

    November 23, 2010 may very well be the last chance for the Judicial Branch realistically to take up the issue, this on a case of legal standing solidly presented by Attorney Apuzzo and Commander Kerchner. If the Court finds no standing here, by a narrow interpretation of the same or otherwise, coming after all the rest of the “no standing” cases, it is doubtfull this important Constitutional issue can and will be resolved in any court of law. The question will nevertheless continue to fester, at tremendous national cost, never to abate, potentially to reach crisis stage, and in any event to undermine the structure of our Constitutional Republic.

    It is more than chilling and says volumes that NOT ONE member of Congress will publicly speak on this or, better yet, since the Congress of the United States has more than a vested interest, opine if not as a “friend of the court” at the Supreme Court, in the court of public opinion — BEFORE the Supreme Court convenes on November 23, 2010.

    The world is (should be) watching!

  2. Chris Murphy says

    We have a man in the white house that was able to get elected because of his image.
    We need a challenger of substance. Palin is not the appropriate candidate. She is very weak when discussing politics—sticks to talking points—this begins to wear thin after a while.
    Just like Obama she is coasting on her image.
    With a fawning liberal press, a liberal can get away with that. The GOP cannot. If she’s the candidate, the GOP will lose—indubitably—guarantee it—-no question in my mind. She is not Reagan.

    • says

      In your opinion, I think there is more substance than that. Saying she is weak on discussing politics, I think you mean issues, is rather dismissive. She’s been out there on QE2 and the devaluing of the dollar, Obamacare, sanctity of life and the economy.

      Differences of opinions like these is why we have primaries I guess. Nobody should be anointed, they have to earn it.