Sarah Palin Says She Could Beat Barack Obama in 2012

But family comes first, of course

This article is from the archive of our partner .

Sarah Palin thinks she could take Barack Obama in 2012, but her biggest hurdle is proving her record, she says. Naturally, what's best for Palin's family will be the first consideration in deciding whether to run.

In an interview for Barbara Walters's show, 10 Most Fascinating People of 2010, Palin said, "I'm looking at the lay of the land now, and ... trying to figure that out, if it's a good thing for the country, for the discourse, for my family, if it's a good thing." Could she beat Obama? "I believe so," Palin said.

  • Palin Must Correct the Distortion of Her Record by the Lamestream Media, she told the New York Times Magazine's Robert Draper in an in-depth look into her circle of advisers. "I know that a hurdle I would have to cross, that some other potential candidates wouldn't have to cross right out of the chute, is proving my record," Palin said. "That's the most frustrating thing for me -- the warped and perverted description of my record and what I've accomplished over the last two decades. It's been much more perplexing to me than where the lamestream media has wanted to go about my personal life. And other candidates haven't faced these criticisms the way I have."
  • This Is a Crap Question, Christian Heinze writes at GOP 12. "It goes without saying that if any Republican runs for President, they think they can beat Obama. ... For Palin fans, I feel you on this one. The question is an implicit attack on her credibility. I doubt Walters would ask it of Romney or Pawlenty."
  • Winning the GOP Nomination Isn't a Long Shot, Christopher Weber writes at Politics Daily. "A Gallup survey released last week found Palin might have a good chance of capturing the GOP nomination in 2012: fully 80 percent of Republicans polled had a positive opinion of her. But the poll showed she might have a harder time in the general election. Fully 81 percent of Democrats and 53 percent of independents viewed her unfavorably -- while fewer than four in 10 viewed her favorably."
  • Yes, Please Yes, Michael Tedesco wishes at Comments from Left Field. "Dear God in Heaven, If you do exist please take care of my family, smite my enemies and grant Sarah Palin her wish to face Barack Obama for President in 2012."
  • The Left Is Way More Excited About This, the Guardian's Paul Harris writes. Palin probably won't run, Harris says, but she's a smart media manipulator. "Her fame and influence – now that she has no real job to actually do since she quit as governor – relies purely on this 'will she, won't she' question." The liberal media loves the tease, but the conservative press? Yawn. Matt Drudge showed little interest. In reality, Harris writes, "the main cheerleaders behind these sort of Palin stories are the more liberal newspapers (and shamelessly pageview-hungry sites like Politico). They are the ones – other than Palin herself – with a vested interest in stirring up the story in order to generate outrage and interest... The right, on this rare occasion, seems to be taking a more measured and sensible 'wait and see' approach."
  • A Republican First Woman President? Joe Gandelman asks at The Moderate Voice. "Taken together, these two interviews sound like a GO...all but officially declared," Gandelman writes. "The irony here: for years it was assumed by Democrats and many in the news media that the first woman to become President would be a liberal or modrate Democrat. Now it has shifted — and speculation centers on a conservative woman. Could Sarah Palin’s Alaska be followed by Sarah Palin’s White House?"
  • She'll Never Make It, The Washington Post's Jonathan Capehart writes. She's too thin-skinned, first of all. "Palin is going to have to quit whining and 'man up' if she is going to jump in the main ring of presidential politics to compete for the privilege of having the toughest job on the planet." And, "if Palin is running for the nomination, she is half-assing it right now." Her organization is a mess; interviews and events fall through the cracks. Third, "she is spectacular at being a star. Look how the media hang on her every tweet, Facebook musing or Fox appearance. ... Much of that will disappear if Palin jumps into the presidential sweepstakes."
  • Palin's Learning, Ben Smith observes at Politico. She's revealing "a self-awareness she has not previously shown. And it’s an indication of why she responded with such fury to accounts of her disorganization – she knows it is a problem. But to her credit, it now seems like it’s something she’s willing to accept and, perhaps, address."
  • Nothing About Palin Is Authentic, The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan writes. "When you have as many lies to defend against as Palin does, when your entire public persona is a fiction, when you have nary a clue about the issues of the day ... of course, you have to have protectors rather than advisers. No one advises Palin, except Todd and God. She has the glib cruelty of George W and the character of Richard Nixon. But Nixon, for all his faults, was authentic."
  • Liberal Media Must Decide When to Tear Palin Down, Roger L. Simon argues at Pajamas Media. "Is it better to tear down Palin unmercifully now, as was done by most of the MSM earlier, or to give her a pass for the time being, so that she might actually get nominated to be branded later, when it counts, as a dangerous extremist, not to mention an illiterate moron? This is a tricky problem indeed for the 'objective journalist.'  For the most part, Draper does an elegant job of splitting the difference, noting on the one hand that no one could any longer 'underestimate' Sarah Palin, while only a few paragraphs before reminding us the dullard used the word 'refudiate,' instead of 'repudiate,' in a Twitter posting."

This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.