There is much speculation about whether or not Sarah Palin will enter the 2012 Presidential race. Some of the naysayers base their opinions on the assumption that time is running out for her to put together a nationwide organization.
Well, I’m no fancy-dancy political pundit, but it occurs to me that some of these royal smart people may not be considering a few 21st century political realities…
Starting right after the 2008 election, Sarah made the first of a series of political investments that she can cash in over the next 14 months: Saxby Chambliss, Georgia Senate runoff. In 2010 she made 64 similar “investments” all over the country:
In the real world of politics, favors count. Sure, not all of those candidates won – but even the losers got thousands, and in some cases millions, of votes. Every one of them can most certainly be counted on for a little quid pro quo, as it were, when the time comes. Go play on the interactive map. Take a look at some of the people who owe Sarah, at least in part, for their current jobs: Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio. Could be some valuable “quids” there, huh?
Notice how many states she’s already campaigned in and where she’s probably made contacts with some of the highest profile political leaders in both the TEA Party and the Republican Party. Gosh, how many phone calls do you think she’ll have to make to round up a few “important” endorsements in a few key primary states? Then realize that her two book tours, her various non-campaign speaking engagements, and most recently, her “One Nation” tour have earned her a whole lot of political capital. A whole lot. Gazillions. She is the Warren Buffet of political investors. And those investments have already paid off big time by earning her millions of supporters who have seen her in one or more venues or are regular posters or visitors on one of the more than 100 blogs and websites dedicated to supporting Sarah Palin. That’s even better than money in the bank – that’s votes in the ballot box.
Sarah has almost 3 million Face Book friends, and nearly 500,000 followers on Twitter right now. Mitt Romney, by contrast has just over 1 million friends on FB, Michele Bachmann is close to 500,000, and Rick Perry barely passed the 100,000 mark. I’m sure they have Twitter accounts and the number of followers is growing daily – but Sarah’s been “investing” in this stock for a lot longer. The announced field of candidates is seriously lagging behind Sarah in these assets.
When it comes down to push or shove, a successful campaign needs a huge network of leaders and followers, organizers and volunteers, generals and soldiers – in all 50 states. Sarah has that force ready and waiting – they just need the call to action. She has spent the last two and a half years carefully, quietly, wisely investing in her candidacy for President.
At the end of the day – or more appropriately, at the end of the primary season, who will have the most committed delegates at the convention? My money is on the candidate who understands the economics of the political world; the candidate who can see the immediate opportunities and the long term objectives and act accordingly; the candidate who has knowingly invested her time and efforts in promoting and supporting a better, stronger America for the past three years. Because that’s an investment that will pay real dividends. Sarah Palin isn’t the lightweight the LSM makes her out to be. Check back here this time next year and see how her stock is doing as we head into November, 2012.
Auntie Lib,
She is a very wise investor, indeed. Are you signed up for Organizing4Palin in Montana? It is going to be fun, while working hard.
Hi Ting –
Thanks for stopping by. Yes, I am. Apparently it’s a real small group so far – but that will change. We have a very late primary (June) so we’re not really on the radar yet. I’m developing plans for an exciting event net spring and then you see a whole different level of enthusiasm. In the meantime, I just keep pushing onward and upward here on the blog and one on one as I talk to friends, co-workers, etc.
She can’t win. I like her but she can’t win. She’ll run but she can’t win. Ahhhhhhhh…………..
Auntie Lib — Very interesting analysis. It’s hard not to laugh out loud when I hear people claim that Sarah lacks intelligence (that’s a bowdlerization, of course, but I wouldn’t repeat the Sarah-haters’ actual language in polite company).
Oh, Annie! Not only can she win, but she will win. Do you honestly think that right-minded people would actually – in the privacy of the voting booth – pull the lever for Obumbles again?
You were at the L/R dinner. Remember the general feeling before Michele spoke: “She’s way too conservative for Montana” – and then Tuesday did you hear the good senator and his wife at our end of the table praising her? Once they got to “know” her they had a different opinion of her. The exact same thing will happen during the campaign with Sarah. People will remember why they loved her in 2008. She’s not only a master (maybe PhD) in retail politics, but she’s been the voice of the opposition to this administration since January 2009. Remember “death panels”, for instance? She’ll wipe the floor, policy-wise with BO in any debate and in every campaign stump speech.
I know you’re behind Perry – but he hasn’t been vetted or attacked yet. His record has a few potholes in it. If Sarah hadn’t endorsed him in the primary against Kay Bailey Hutchinson, he wouldn’t be governor today. But wait until the charge of “quitter” gets thrown at him along with his promise that he wouldn’t seek higher office if Texans elected him for a third term. Romney isn’t going to let him walk away with the nomination, so plan on things getting real ugly on that front.
Michele….Sarah………both good people but it’s the independents who are going to elect….and the economy will be THE factor. Michele only talks about her opposition to the President’s issues and her staff is keeping her at arm’s length from potential tough spots; Sarah ploughs through the crowds and has become a the cheerleader and celebrity – although I’ve been more impressed when she is asked on Greta’s show to field policy questions. Not convinced either can win the nomination and honestly haven’t really made up my mind about Perry yet.
PS Upon reflection, Sarah quit too and walked away from her gubernatorial job with less reason than Perry would. See, I forgot for a minute, but remembered – even without a reminder from the drive by press….
That’s one way to look at it, certainly. The other way is that Perry – like Obama, Clinton, and others just continued to collect their salaries from the taxpayers while campaigning for a new job. There’s quitters and then there’s moochers. Given the specifics of Sarah’s situation, she did her constituents a favor by resigning and making sure that frivolous ethics complaints didn’t overwhelm the governor’s office and take away the focus from doing the people’s business.
As a taxpayer, I think all candidates should have to take a leave of absence from a publicly funded position – sans pay – for all campaign time.
I agree, BCM!
What about incumbents who are having to take time from their elected jobs when seeking re-election? I daresay a holdover senator is spending more time on the job than his compatriot who is busy busy busy holding fundraisers and haggling with a campaign staff!
Anyway, not sure I like the word “moocher” associated with the guy from Texas who looks SO great in jeans and a work shirt. I know, that’s a little off-topic but you have to admit it is distracting….
I never said the man doesn’t have a certain “distracting” quality about him. I just didn’t want to seem sexist :-).
What changed?
Just kidding……!
I didn’t claim that I wasn’t sexist – I just didn’t want to “seem” to be so.
Small change, I know – but these days you have to take whatever change you can get and be happy with it.
Oh me….we need to have lunch.