Palin endorses third party candidate
Sarah Palin has endorsed Doug Hoffman, a third party candidate for New York’s 23rd Congressional District. The endorsement (here on Facebook) boosted his fundraising and issued a decided snub to the moderate GOP candidate.
In her endorsement, Palin praised Hoffman’s independence and conservatism, invoking Ronald Reagan:
And best of all, Doug Hoffman has not been anointed by any political machine. Doug Hoffman stands for the principles that all Republicans should share: smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense, and a commitment to individual liberty.
Political parties must stand for something. When Republicans were in the wilderness in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan knew that the doctrine of “blurring the lines” between parties was not an appropriate way to win elections. Unfortunately, the Republican Party today has decided to choose a candidate who more than blurs the lines, and there is no real difference between the Democrat and the Republican in this race. This is why Doug Hoffman is running on the Conservative Party’s ticket.
Conservatives have criticized Hoffman’s Republican opponent, Dede Scozzafava, for being pro-abortion and for voicing support for gay rights. Concerned Women for America, Club for Growth, Fred Thompson and Gary Bauer have all rejected Scozzafava and endorsed Hoffman instead. Hoffman is clearly splitting the Republican vote, since the last poll had Democrat Bill Owens at 33 percent, Scozzafava at 29 percent (down 6) and Hoffman at 23 percent (up by 7). Hoffman took 27 percent of the Republican vote.














Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top55 Comments to “Palin endorses third party candidate”
I am not obsessed.
I am not obsessed.
I am not obsessed.
I am not obsessed.
I am not obsessed.
I am not obsessed.
I am not obsessed.
I am not obsessed.
Report comment to moderator
Why should any New Yorker give a flying rat’s patootie what Sarah Palin thinks about a candidate for office here? If you’d like to know what New Yorkers think of Sarah Palin, check the comments on this post (warning – language): http://gawker.com/5388269/palin-goes-rogue-all-over-new-yorks-23rd-districts-face
Report comment to moderator
And yet a third Sarah Palin discussion?
Report comment to moderator
Rush just discussed this. I agree that we don’t need any more RINO’s in Congress. Lindsey Graham was a great representative from S.C. till he got Potomac Fever.
Report comment to moderator
I see those obsessed by Sarah are on this quickly.
Report comment to moderator
If Palin eventually runs, perhaps she should go third party as well.
Report comment to moderator
Nobody cares what “New Yorkers” think about Sarah Palin.
The regular news covers that well enough, Thomas1.
And you can go ANYWHERE on the web and see people SARAH BASHING.
SARAH! Save the family and go home. When it’s ok for David Letterman (N.Y.) to verbally sexually assault your teen it’s time to go home.
NY–the friendly city that voted for Hillary Clinton, the other thug. Oh! My husband Bill had an affair? How appalling, how shocking! NOT!
Report comment to moderator
There are plenty of people bailing on the Republican Party–the other Democrats.
Report comment to moderator
TRAVIS
Can you set that to music?
Report comment to moderator
News2Me – a fact or two might help: the 23rd District is all the way upstate by the Canadian border.
I suppose I won’t be running into you at the Metropolitan Museum of Art or at my favorite downtown jazz club. But it’s okay! They have really nice framed prints at WalMart, and you can get Michael Bolton CDs there for $3.99!
Report comment to moderator
Also, sexual assault is a lot of things, all of them bad. Being verbal isn’t one of its characteristics.
Report comment to moderator
I’m not obsessed with Sarah Palin……I just like her a lot!
There are many reasons I like her; none that would make me not like her.
I told my wife the other day, ” Honey, I just figured out what you can get me for Christmas!” She noticed I was looking at a book ad in the state paper, saying “another book, right?”
It seems how women just read our minds like a book…..
Report comment to moderator
# 8 News2Me,
Republicans: the other Democrats. I like it. It’s catchy, and it has the added advantage of being acurate.
Report comment to moderator
So when a man who is heard Nation-wide slanders Palin’s daughter that’s ok. It continues to be open season on Palin and her family. (Obama said family is off-limits. I never heard him defending anyone but his own.)
To me it sends a sexual message. It makes a woman feel sexually abused.
Neither you nor Letterman would know what a woman feels like.
You can have all your parts changed surgically and become a “woman” and you STILL wouldn’t know.
Report comment to moderator
“Oh no! A Third Party candidate will drain votes away from the electable Republican!”
I mean, that was one of the reasons we supposedly shouldn’t have supported Ron Paul, right? (Despite the fact that he ran as a Republican, I mean?)
[/tongue in cheek]
As I mentioned in today’s Whirled Views thread, anything that chips away at the stranglehold the “two” parties have on the “two-party” system is a good, good thing!
Report comment to moderator
TYCHICUS (6): If Palin eventually runs, perhaps she should go third party as well.
FRANK: … or hook up with Ron Paul and learn what constitutional governance looks like.
Veep Cheney was the brains behind Dubya. No reason Veep Paul couldn’t be the principle behind Palin.
Report comment to moderator
JUSTUS331 (12): There are many reasons I like her; none that would make me not like her.
FRANK: I like her secessionist instincts.
I dislike her apparent devotion to Israel. (Could lead to more wars on behalf of “God’s chosen” — you know, “Who blesses you, I will bless” and all that … )
But there could be enough material there for Dr. paul to work with …
Report comment to moderator
News2Me: I never defended Letterman’s comments, but don’t let your opinion get in the way of the facts.
Frankly, he was tasteless and unfunny, and completely inappropriate. But he didn’t sexually assault anyone. You don’t have to be a woman (or have ladyparts installed) to read the NY Penal Code on the subject:
http://nyscasa.org/understanding/penalcodes
Our laws, thankfully, are not based on feelings.
Report comment to moderator
A quote from the Washington Times Weekly:
“Mr. Hoffman is tapping the anger of the tea party activists- the movement that gained national attention this summer with protests against runaway government spending and debt- by casting doubt over the conservative credentials of the pro-choice Mrs. Scozzafava, who supported Mr. Obama’s $787 billion economic stimulus”.
They say Mr. Hoffman is going to split the vote and put a Democrat in a seat held by nine-term Republican.
I don’t vote in NY, but I would prefer a real Democrat than a Republican who votes like one.
Report comment to moderator
News2Me #14, from CNN election center, Sept. 22 2008:
“Let me be as clear as possible,” Obama said. “I think people’s families are off-limits, and people’s children are especially off-limits. This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as governor or her potential performance as a vice president.”
Obama said reporters should “back off these kinds of stories” and noted that he was born to an 18-year-old mother.
“How a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics, and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that’s off-limits.”
Report comment to moderator
And yet a third Sarah Palin discussion?
A third one? Three?? That many??? Sure, one and two are numbers I can wrap my brain around, but three? No sir.
Report comment to moderator
#19
So, why can’t all the conservatives just vote for Hoffman? Why the party loyalty? It would be really good, IMO, for an independent to get voted in. If it happened a few more times, it might just scare the big two a little and get them to reform their act.
And, if it happened a few more times, it might even get Americans to start really considering 3rd party options.
Report comment to moderator
22 TRS: well said. I think yours is at least part of a good answer to Frank’s 15. Getting a viable 3rd party started is probably something that needs to start with regional efforts, and state and local races. I suspect a lot of conservatives and/or libertarians who liked many things about Ron Paul ended up holding their noses and pulling the lever for Mc/P because they saw Paul as a principled guy with no support whatsoever, who would accomplish little even if he could somehow win the election.
Now, time for Frank to come back and tear me up!
Report comment to moderator
TRS
More and more I fail to see any party loyalty for Rep.
How many Rep. voted for Dem.?
How many Rep. became Dem. while in office?
How many Rep. are in name only–RINO?
Report comment to moderator
KWATSON #20
That is exactly what I am talking about.
He says stuff to the media.
And then no one said anything about HIS family, but it is business as usual for everyone else’s family.
If you think that what he says and does in front of you, is the same as what he says and does when you are not watching, then I’m sorry for you and all the other people who think he is just a wonderful man.
Obama would NOT have survived in Chicago if he were the NICE GUY everyone thinks he is.
Report comment to moderator
Scozzafava = DIABLO= Democrat in All But Label Only
Report comment to moderator
He said it with a very sincere face, and then let the jackles loose.
Report comment to moderator
Blessings to you, Frank in Spokane! It is my personal belief that I should support the nation of Israel with my prayers for safety, salvation, and civility. I also support them in my desire for them to successfully withstand any and all aggression by the rest of the Middle East who want to do Israel harm. Our Blessed redeemer came to Planet Earth via Israel……therefore I biblically stand with her. In that sense, I also support Sarah Palin.
Report comment to moderator
I heard someone say that Dede Scozzafava is not a ‘RINO’ (Republican in name only), but a ‘DIABLO’ (Democrat in all but label only).
Report comment to moderator
Sexual harrassment IS verbal.
Frank, I hate to say it, but Dr. Paul lacks charisma, and until you can give him that “feature” he won’t go national. Just not gonna happen.
News2me, why should Obama do the dirty work when he can get people like Letterman to do it for him?
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer, re. 30:
I bet Frank can give you a far better response than I, but if Christians (and disaffected others) know Paul is qualified, and recognize there are no satisfactory alternatives, but withhold their votes merely because he may lack charisma, then their message never gets heard, and they continue to get what they deserve.
Anyway, Ron Paul can articulate his views clearly and in great depth, which is more than can be said of the ‘charismatics.’ If we’re too stupid to hear him out, then we get what we deserve.
Report comment to moderator
Principle and conviction over party and politics.
Report comment to moderator
NJL: Sexual harrassment IS verbal.
It certainly can be. But sexual assault is not, which was what News2Me characterized Letterman’s “joke” as.
Reading comprehension, a dying skill. I weep for the future.
Report comment to moderator
But Mac, more people than Christians vote, and I was really thinking not just of the disaffected, but the nation as a whole. Dr. Paul does not resonate with the general populace. Not saying that this is not shallow, but I think it’s true. I agree that if the country is too stupid to listen and think, it gets what it deserves. It’s got that now. Charisma is but ONE factor that people look for in a winning candidate. We’ve got charisma, but that’s not enough. Charisma coupled with dithering gets people killed. Charisma coupled with socialism leads us to turn our country into something that was never intended.
I think the Third Party should have enough members in Congress to force the two main parties to negotiate properly.
But all parties should LISTEN.
Report comment to moderator
Letterman is guilty of sexual harrassment towards Palin’s daughter. He’s a pig, quite frankly, and I think that has recently been confirmed. Sexual harrassment encourages sexual assault.
I week for the future, too. Because there are too many people who spend their time defending perversions of every stripe and making excuses for them.
Report comment to moderator
NJL – 30
Ron Paul lacks more than “charisma” – he just doesn’t have it. All his “NO” votes don’t help, along with his EXTREME Libetarian views. The last election debates were embarrassing.
Report comment to moderator
I know you’re right, Victoria. Ron Paul is not mainstream. People forget that Libertarians are not easy to categorize. Some of them seem very harsh to me. That said, he has Andy Napolitano as a buddy, and I’ve always trusted him.
Report comment to moderator
God, NJL, your inconsistencies and lack of comprehension are downright shocking.
You’re willing to punish Letterman for sexual assault when he’s not even guilty of that, or of sexual harrassment – he had no employment power over Palin’s daughter and never will.
Speech that encourages criminal behavior is only punishable in our society if a link can be established between the speech and the crime… and I doubt that a person like you is in favor of hate crimes laws.
At least, I’m sure that you’re not when it comes to gay people. I’m also sure that hate crimes laws that protect “Christians” are just fine by you. Unless you’re into the martyr thing, in which case, your comment becomes yawntastic.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer,
The charisma thing’s an excuse. I really don’t think Ron Paul is any less charismatic than your McCains and Ws. He doesn’t resonate with the general populace because he doesn’t have a chance too. He’s simply marginalized (a la Victoria’s shallow dismissal of him; I mean, NO votes are supposed to be a bad thing?). We complain about how both parties fail, but when a true, legitimate alternative runs, we don’t give him consideration because he’s not mainstream (and Ron Paul is a Republican, not a 3rd partier). Well, our “mainstream” is what’s failing us now!
Report comment to moderator
Ron Paul was dismissed by a majority. It was a hoot to see the news after the debates that Ron Paul had won the debate – that is…until it was found that his groupies were calling in over and over again to vote him as the winner, when in fact he was the BIG LOSER – That is what is called a SHALLOW attempt to twist the ratings.
Report comment to moderator
There can be sexual abuse or harassment, can there not, in cases where employment is not a factor?
Report comment to moderator
HI-larious!
Letterman is guilty of sexual harrassment towards Palin’s daughter.
Nope, he’s not. Not under any standard here or anyplace.
He’s a pig, quite frankly, and I think that has recently been confirmed. Sexual harrassment encourages sexual assault.
He’s tacky, but that’s not a confirmation of anything. If it was, your Skank In Chief, Ann Coulter would be guilty of sexcual assault for calling people “faggots”.
Sexual harrassment DOES encourage sexual assault, but your interpretation of the law is sketchy!
“I week for the future, too. Because there are too many people who spend their time defending perversions of every stripe and making excuses for them.”
Yup! Perversions like controlling the sex lives of others, diddling kids and getting away with it because of institutional complicity, allowing random divorce and contraception, and all kinds of evangelical perversion. Lots of excuses get made for evangelical molesty perverts who harm kids!
And some of them get made by people like you!
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
Ron Paul was dismissed by a majority.
Yeah, and?? This is supposed to bolster your point? We’re where we are because of the majority candidates.
The rest of your post has nothing to do with the merits of Ron Paul. It would be SHALLOW to dismiss him for such.
Report comment to moderator
MacRutabaga – 43
Ron Paul didn’t have a chance. His beliefs are not shared by most Americans – he is out of step – Paul is a very narrow minded man, who desires isolationism, that’s fine – but the majority of American’s don’t agree.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
Partly right. His beliefs aren’t shared by a majority, that’s true. I’m surprised you keep mentioning that like it’s a bad thing.
And he’s not an “isolationist.”
Report comment to moderator
MacRutabaga – 45
It isn’t good – I certainly wouldn’t vote for the man – he didn’t get anywhere in the last election – the telephone game back-fired and is still a joke.
Yes he is an isolationist, he’s frozen in the ideas of ME, MYSLEF, and I – along with everyone else who agrees with him.
Obama is a mess – he wants to give it all away, even if they didn’t work for it, OR if they never will work no matter how able bodied they are – Paul on the other hand doesn’t want to do much of anything, except keep it all. – BOTH ARE EXTREME!
We need common sense – - –
Obama is on one side and the other is Paul – we need to cooperate with the conservatives and find a candidate who fills the spot with care and thoughtful purpose, someone who has empathy for those who are unable to care for themselves, but a stern stand against those who want nothing more than to take whatever they can get and work as little as possible. That’s a tall order, but it can be done.
We need someone who thinks ahead, who doesn’t depend on empty headed pretend Czars, who are not allowed to be examined by Congress and the Senate –
There is someone out there who fills the empty spot that the American people need to run this country – lets look carefully – this is not an impossible task – but PLEASE, lets not look back at the past, those who barely scraped by.
Report comment to moderator
Thomas1, have you no sense of decorum? God, NJL, your inconsistencies and lack of comprehension are downright shocking. To begin with, your mention of our Creator in your context borders on blasphemy. I concede you really don’t care. Secondly, it appears you have no understanding of reality. You lump the homosexual agenda (as does B. Hussein Obama) in the hate crimes category. What…..speaking out against an un-natural lifestyle is a hate crime? Your lack of rationale speaks volumes about you.
He’s tacky, but that’s not a confirmation of anything. If it was, your Skank In Chief, Ann Coulter would be guilty of sexcual assault for calling people “faggots”.
Sexual harrassment DOES encourage sexual assault, but your interpretation of the law is sketchy!
A) try to use spellcheck
B) Letterman IS a pig, and the recent on-air confession of the aforementioned human pig confirms all that is believed about him. Try to pay attention.
C) Albeit, Ann Coulter can be a tad caustic, but your comment about her is WAY out of line. Try to be more sensitive.
Report comment to moderator
How this discussion has diverged as it progresses!
So I will makle a substantive comment regarding Palin as opposed to commenting on other’s comments on Palim.
Palin has the unabashed hard core commitment of the 20% or so electorate which is the solid conservative demographic of the Republican party.
Sarah Palin is higlly toxic in a signficant portion (perhaps 30%?) of the electorate and in general does not appeal to the middle of the political spectrum.
And under these conditions, it is perhaps strategically useful to let the far right fixate on Sarah Palin.
The danger comes if the country enters an environment of crisis which the far right can use to leverage their political power. We saw this during the 2008 election when Sarah Palin effectively was forced on McCain on threat of floor fight at the convention.
Then we have a situation in which a peron who has not demonstrated deep political insight and has demonstrated a shallow ability for political follow through can potentially become very close to major political power.
If this scenario develops, the situation will become very interesting.
Report comment to moderator
Then we have a situation in which a peron who has not demonstrated deep political insight and has demonstrated a shallow ability for political follow through can potentially become very close to major political power.
Anybody remember Peron in Argentina?
Is Sarah Palin going to become the Peron of America?
If this scenario develops, the situation will become very interesting.
“May you live in interesting times” is not a Chinese curse, but it is indeed a curse.
Report comment to moderator
Random Name post 49,
and indeed of course you caught the reference!
Report comment to moderator
Sarah Palin could aspire to be Richard Nixon. Instead, it’s Goldwater time again in the Republican Party.
Report comment to moderator
Scroop MOth post 51,
a very deep and important observation.
Now what will be the equivalent of Democratic support for civil rights legislation which will provide Republicans with an effective rebuilding strategy.
Report comment to moderator
Sarah Palin speaks to the heart of America, but she is not in lock-step with the traditional Political views. All in all, she is just a normal American, who goes to work every day, (if they have a job), pays her bills, worships at her leisure, takes care of her family and enjoys life. She sees what every other American sees; she knows what a can of corn costs at the grocery store, she knows what it costs to fill up her car with gas and she knows first-hand what her values means to the ‘elite-know-it-alls’, whose business is to get into someone else’s business. Would she make a good President? She certainly can beat the Progressive Socialist in there now. But, obviously she is TOO common for the elitists of the Harvard ilk.. . .. Hmmm, maybe that is what we need, someone who understands what the normal American understands?
Dr. Paul speaks to a centrist audience, but has no hutzpa when it comes to being ‘on fire.’ He is about as charismatic as a grape. No hope I’m afraid.
Report comment to moderator
TE post 53,
actualy it seems she speaks to perhaps 20% solid social conservative America.
That you consider this all of America is itself an interesting comment.
Report comment to moderator
Well, if America’s heart is only 20% of the population, then I can see why we are headed downhill. The fact you mention ’social’ and conservative in the same sentence seems awkward as well. Conservatism applies to individualism, not collectivism. But, that aside, could you please give me the source of your 20% figure?
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!