Palin Endorses Trump, Ensuring he can't beat Hillary/Bernie.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: DBCowboy

It's kinda hard to be a Feminist and be a Tea Party member at the same time, the values don't really match up in most circles.

~Tenth

I believe in equal rights and many on this site would love to see me drawn and quartered on the altar of conservatism.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: reldra

I think she was treated unfairly, whether I like her or not has no bearing on that.

I never understood why she didn't get the backing of feminists.

Unless the feminist movement is purely political. . .

If you are pretty or sexy-looking along with being smart and influential, you don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting backing from the so-called feminist groups. And if you are conservative, you are dead to them. They're nothing but a bunch of whiney hacks and hags.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: SpaDe_

That argument doesn't hold water.

Obama was ELECTED by voters to be the nominee. Sarah was CHOSEN by the GOP & McCain.

Big difference.

ETA: Actually a lot of people did vote for Obama because of racial reasons, they just don't want to admit it.

~Tenth

Yes it holds just as much water as your original statement because the "election process" is anything but. It is a selection by the DNC and nothing more. So yes in fact he was placed up there by the DNC. They chose race because the GOP beat them to the punch with sex.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Nyiah

Well, there's that whole gigantic ignorant dumbass aspect, too. Ask her again how that Abstinence Only junk went for Bristol after 2 kids & no marriage so far. Not that I particularly care about the reproductive escapades of others, but Palin pandered with & banked on exactly that.

I thought it was Sarah, not Bristol Palin, who ran.

That is correct. The kids should be off limits. I don't care if they were in a reality show or if their details were given to the public. It is up to the public to be mature and ignore it. I would not comment on her kids.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: DBCowboy

It's kinda hard to be a Feminist and be a Tea Party member at the same time, the values don't really match up in most circles.

~Tenth

So it IS political.

Neither of those things make her qualified to do anything. Considering she quit that job, before her term was up and didn't really accomplish much of anything as Governor.

I think that is a fair assessment. But none of this deserves sexist treatment or demonization.

I find it hard to believe the McCain passed over the dozens of much more qualified VP possibilities for anything else but imagine and the women's vote.

Again, what reasons could they have had to choose her, other than image?

I don't pretend to know their reasons, especially sexist reasons.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Meh, both liberals and conservatives tend to like to take a shot at me because I hardly support either position in most cases.

Just call them as I see them. I'm more left leaning socially and more right leaning fiscally anyway.

Subscribing to one ideology or another in it's fullest term is just silly IMO.

~Tenth

a reply to: crazyewok

There is simply no way to know that for sure. Technically, Congress has to approve those decision to use military force at that scale.

Obama is a special case who gets away with these things because ... I don't know ... race maybe?

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: reldra

I think she was treated unfairly, whether I like her or not has no bearing on that.

I never understood why she didn't get the backing of feminists.

Unless the feminist movement is purely political. . .

If you are pretty or sexy-looking along with being smart and influential, you don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting backing from the so-called feminist groups. And if you are conservative, you are dead to them. They're nothing but a bunch of whiney hacks and hags.

She is NOT smart. That is the biggest problem. If a woman were very attractive and very smart and had ideals I would want in a candidate--that is a trifecta. I am a feminist, there are many definitions of Feminist, though.

I look for smart first. Like general knowledge of the world. How many countries we have. What diplomacy we have with each. Those kinds of things and Sarah still does not have a grasp on just those things and many more are required to be President. Trump doesn;t have the necessary knowledge either.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: DBCowboy

Subscribing to one ideology or another in it's fullest term is just silly IMO.

~Tenth

I agree.

a reply to: TheTory

But none of this deserves sexist treatment or demonization.

That I agree with, I don't think she was treated fairly by the media. Entertainers didn't even need to write the jokes though, she said enough silly things on her own for that. But I agree, they did go a bit over board.

I don't pretend to know their reasons, especially sexist reasons.

But we can guess right? So if we both agree that she wasn't qualified to be a VP nominee based on her actual credentials, then the logical reasoning would be that she was a token candidate.

That's the fault of the GOP for putting her there in first place. They aren't responsible for the subsequent back lash mind you, but at the end of the day, they did it to her for reasons that sound awfully like image and getting out of the vote with women.

~Tenth

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I don't necessarily approve of her reality TV stint, but if you look at Trump, it doesn't seem to necessarily be a losing strategy.

Her problem is that the media wouldn't forget her "cardinal sin" of not being a liberal feminist and daring to attempt to breach the halls of power from somewhere the elite had never heard of.

The media is capable of turning even Jesus into a villain these days.

a reply to: queenofswords

Just because she has a million followers doesn't mean she actually has a million followers. Many of them can be bought and paid accounts to follow her. Seems fairly common place in politics, ask Hilary & Gingrich.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: DBCowboy

It's kinda hard to be a Feminist and be a Tea Party member at the same time, the values don't really match up in most circles.

~Tenth

So it IS political.

Most equal rights movements end up being purely political after they've achieved their stated goals, in an effort to remain relevant.

~Tenth

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

There is simply no way to know that for sure. Technically, Congress has to approve those decision to use military force at that scale.

Obama is a special case who gets away with these things because ... I don't know ... race maybe?

Come on your smarter than that.

McCain was/is a nut. He belonged in a retirement home not the WH.

Put GOP loyalty and partasianship aside and just accepted in 2008 you had to choose from two lame candidates . Both would have screwed the USA but in there own ways.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

I thought she was his undoing?

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Nyiah

Well, there's that whole gigantic ignorant dumbass aspect, too. Ask her again how that Abstinence Only junk went for Bristol after 2 kids & no marriage so far. Not that I particularly care about the reproductive escapades of others, but Palin pandered with & banked on exactly that.

I thought it was Sarah, not Bristol Palin, who ran.

That is correct. The kids should be off limits. I don't care if they were in a reality show or if their details were given to the public. It is up to the public to be mature and ignore it. I would not comment on her kids.

You didn't but many did, and of course those comments made their way to the mainstream press, including thigns like Trig Birtherism which was downright disgusting.

a reply to: crazyewok

I never said he wasn't lame. You will find me on the record as saying that.

But having lame candidate does not equate to WWIII. If it did, we'd be there right now. Thank Obama!

McCain likes to bang the drum, but the fact remains that the president does not unilaterally declare war ... unless he is Obama.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: TheTory

But none of this deserves sexist treatment or demonization.

That I agree with, I don't think she was treated fairly by the media. Entertainers didn't even need to write the jokes though, she said enough silly things on her own for that. But I agree, they did go a bit over board.

I don't pretend to know their reasons, especially sexist reasons.

But we can guess right? So if we both agree that she wasn't qualified to be a VP nominee based on her actual credentials, then the logical reasoning would be that she was a token candidate.

That's the fault of the GOP for putting her there in first place. They aren't responsible for the subsequent back lash mind you, but at the end of the day, they did it to her for reasons that sound awfully like image and getting out of the vote with women.

~Tenth

Sarah Palin was almost coddled by the media. Fair? She was given so many fair chances. She blew them. Or her handlers blew it. Either way, the was treated more than fairly.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

But we can guess right? So if we both agree that she wasn't qualified to be a VP nominee based on her actual credentials, then the logical reasoning would be that she was a token candidate.

That's the fault of the GOP for putting her there in first place. They aren't responsible for the subsequent back lash mind you, but at the end of the day, they did it to her for reasons that sound awfully like image and getting out of the vote with women.

~Tenth

Yes, we can guess.