She's set up a political action committee, friends.

http://www.sarahpac.com/

*donates*

Oh please run, please run for the lulz!

be careful some people do take her seriously

I'll vote Republican in the primary just to push her forward!

Now that's a little too dangerous for me.

I think you guys have discounted her abilities a little too quickly. I think she could be a decent administrator in the Ronald Reagan mold. She's has lots to learn over the next couple of years and has to learn to publicly accept her lack of experience in some areas. She may be a bit whacky but I think she could very easily learn to curb these moments and become a contender. I just think 2016 is more achievable for her. She doesn't stnad a chance against Obama in 2012.

I'm still pissed about seeing Obama in that Steelers jersey.

really? i mean, really?

She got promoted way too fast. Overall, she improved pretty much every day while learning on the job. She has the "it" factor and seems to be a capable learner. I'd bet on her ability to learn over someone like Kerry ever adopting a personality or discover his "it" factor.

She has 7 years to learn before 2016. A person can go from high school graduation to a doctorate in that time.

I think that if the country goes downhill during the Obama years, she has a chance to win.

what, exactly, will she spend the next seven years "learning?" my guess is that it won't be the ins-and-outs of policy. she probably won't spend the next seven years developing a coherent and logical world view. she's going to spend the next seven years memorizing every play in the neo-conservative/republican playbook. she'll learn how to be a demagogue, not a leader or intellectual heavyweight (or lightweight, for that matter).

running her in 2012 is the best way for the republicans to resign themselves to spending the next two decades wandering the political and intellectual desert. as a libertarian, then, i have my fingers crossed that palin is the nominee in 2012.

I agree. I think she'd make a great secretary.

Obama got promoted just as fast if not faster. Look at the difference between the two.

If that's the route she takes then she's taken the path of least resistance which is a shame. I think you're analysis of what will happen if she chooses the path of least resistance is correct and it's not positive for the US. In a two party system both parties better be strong and have strong, well thought out and articulate positions. Democrats having a 20 year run with a weak Republican party will be no better than vice-versa.

Wouldn't you prefer a libertarian-leaning Republican-in-name who is serious about reducing the scope of government get the nomination? Assuming, hypothetically, there is one in the running, of course.

actually, no.

i think obama is a shoe-in for reelection. i'm just not sure there's anything he can do (or not do) to cause very many of the folks who voted for him this year to not vote for him in 2012. IMO, the economy will still be in the shitter at that point. but he's an intelligent and crafty politician, and i think he'll probably be able to capably sell that many problems are simply remnants of the bush administration (an argument to which there is certainly merit). i don't think the republicans would be well served to run an actual conservative in 2012 because he'd ultimately lose, and because there are so few of them, i'd hate to sacrifice a legimately small-gov't conservative.

it won't be until after eight years of a sluggish economy that people might actually give small government conservatism a chance. but make no mistake: bush has ruined the conservative brand name for some time.

i dont know if i'm just a moron or politically illiterate but all i want to do is give that woman some good hardcore anal.

I don't think you're allowed to have secretaries who have no skills except a great ass anymore.

she's got a great rack, too, david.