Advertisement
 
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsSarah Palin

Letters: Is Sarah Palin presidential?

November 20, 2012

Re “Hey GOP, take the Palin cure,” Opinion, Nov. 18

Charlotte Allen's kidding, right?

I hope so, because if not, her opinion piece is more proof that the GOP fails to understand how out of touch it is with the emerging electoral mainstream, which Sarah Palin does not represent. Second, the GOP fails to understand that it needs to look to the future to solve its problems, not to the past — not even the recent past.

Roel Hinojosa

Los Angeles

I couldn't tell whether Allen was going for high satire or was sincere in her jaw-dropping recommendation to the GOP that it nominate Palin in 2016.

I'll be the first to admit that we live in a time in which reality and perception are often muddled, and in which “uninformed” — or perhaps more accurately “misinformed” — people vote based on 30-second TV spots. However, I like to believe that more people than not give some thought to their votes.

When Allen listed Palin's attributes as a potential presidential candidate, there was one glaring oversight: her lack of intellectual rigor. Surely most voters could pick up on that.

Julia Springer

Summerland

I would like to inform Allen that my circle of friends jumped the fence and did the unthinkable: We voted for President Obama in 2008 for no other reason than that we found Palin unprepared and unqualified to run for vice president.

Further, we questioned John McCain's sanity when he made such a choice.

Palin is not what the Republican Party needs, and if this is all we have to offer for the next election, we should fold up our tent and step aside.

As for Palin being the new Ronald Reagan, give me a break. She can't get smart enough or live long enough for such a title.

Lori Graham

Los Angeles

When I saw this piece by Allen, initially I assumed it was a joke. After reading it, I can only pray that Allen is able to persuade her party to run Palin in 2016. I cannot imagine a bigger gift to us progressives.

As a woman, I find it horrifying that Allen suggests Palin would win over Hillary Rodham Clinton because “looks count in politics.”

I guess that is the biggest difference currently between Democrats and Republicans: Democrats value intellect and ability; Republicans value “hotness” and apparently very low IQs.

So, go Charlotte Allen! Run Sarah Palin and give us the White House for at least another four years.

Maggie Bialack

Woodland Hills

Palin would be the perfect presidential candidate for the Republican Party in 2016.

Her experience as governor of Alaska makes her uniquely qualified to be a tough-as-nails president.

Who else would be able to point at their executive experience and confidently say, “Vote for me. When the going gets tough, I get going!” I can't wait for the bumper stickers.

Steve Stillman

Redondo Beach

Imagine my perplexity awakening to this opinion piece: “Sarah Palin for president in 2016”; “charming and affable”; “the new Ronald Reagan.”

Then it dawned. Silly me. It was a spoof.

Who said Republicans have no sense of humor?

Christopher Knopf

Santa Monica

Allen's article on Palin was so refreshing, parody or not. All sides get aired in The Times.

As stated in the comic strip Candorville, “The newspaper is the brain. You can't survive without a healthy brain.” Thanks for keeping us healthy, L.A. Times.

Kay O'Bryan

San Diego


More letters to the editor ...

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|