New at Reason: The Sarah Palin Candidate Profile

November 7, 2011

Not sure who to commit to in the Republican primary race? Let Reason help you out.

Picking a presidential candidate is like sorting through online dating profiles—nobody's quite right, but once a meet-cute is out of the question, the best you can hope for is to pick a mate out of a self-selected digital lineup. Today we’re focusing on former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. She’s not officially a candidate—but hey, you never know! We’ve got her horoscope, her nick-name, and her positions on the major issues facing the country.

Click here to find out if Sarah Palin is the candidate for you!

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

← Reason Writers Around the Internet: Katherine… | Main | Mitt Romney Loves Medicare Very Much… →

See all 32 comments | Leave a comment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

I|11.7.11 @ 10:42AM|#

I didn't know she was running.

Mike M.|11.7.11 @ 10:51AM|#

She isn't, but the cocktail party circuit never ends, so, you know.

I, John|11.7.11 @ 10:54AM|#

I think she's hot, and Liberals hate her, so I love her.

teh rael o2|11.7.11 @ 11:08AM|#

her 15 mins are over.

u betcha !

I, Robot|11.7.11 @ 2:34PM|#

Gloria...Gloria...Gloria

Suki|11.7.11 @ 11:30AM|#

She isn't, but the Cosmotarians wish that she was, therfore she will be treated as if she is here.

Double Entendre|11.7.11 @ 11:33AM|#

She's filler material.

Fist of Etiquette|11.7.11 @ 10:50AM|#

KMW thinks the media should pretend Ron Paul doesn't exist but Reason is shilling for a Palin presidency? Consider me OUT. RAGED.

The N word|11.7.11 @ 10:52AM|#

Duly considered.

Tim|11.7.11 @ 11:02AM|#

This is timely.

ARE YOU MOCKING US?

I|11.7.11 @ 11:05AM|#

Next up: Alan Keyes!

juris imprudent|11.7.11 @ 9:59PM|#

Followed by Duncan Hunter.

Colonel_Angus|11.7.11 @ 11:05AM|#

I haven't bothered to read any one of these things.

Barely Suppressed Rage|11.7.11 @ 11:06AM|#

I can't bring myself to commit to any of the Republican offerings. They each are so flawed in their own precious way.

anon|11.7.11 @ 11:21AM|#

Even Gary Johnson? Bold statement there.

Colin|11.7.11 @ 12:05PM|#

Perhaps he/she meant people that actually had a chance of winning.

Colin|11.7.11 @ 12:14PM|#

I meant Running.

Barely Suppressed Rage|11.7.11 @ 12:34PM|#

Who?

Barely Suppressed Rage|11.7.11 @ 12:44PM|#

I have to admit, I never took much of a look at Gary Johnson. He seems to be pretty much lurking in the shadows. The fault of the MSM, of course.

Now that I've perused his website, I see that yeah, he looks like he's pretty good on the hot button issues. Too bad the MSM and the entrenched interests would have a field day making him look like he's completely batty. Legalize pot? You want drugs on our playgrounds? Concealed carry? You want guns on our playgrounds? Let gays marry or engage in civil unions? You're anti-marriage! yadda yadda....

I guess I have a hard time seeing how he has a serious shot at getting the Republican nomination, let alone the presidency. I would think too many mainstream Republicans would have a serious problem with his stance on gay marriage, abortion and controlling military spending.

Apogee|11.7.11 @ 5:02PM|#

I would think too many mainstream Republicans would have a serious problem with his stance on gay marriage, abortion and controlling military spending.

That's the story on the cover. The problem with the story is that those specifics are exactly what Obama used to get elected by a majority of voters last election, and if anything has changed since then, it's the focus of the electorate on anyone's ability to generate economic growth. The fluffy social stuff works well when times are good, but if a candidate has a platform to boost the economy during a downturn, everyone will ignore the social stuff.

That's not why Johnson is getting no traction.

It's the insiders that have a hard time with Johnson's proposal to turn off the crony capital delivery system that makes up the majority of the insider's earnings, and the insiders are majority in both parties and the media.

Apatheist|11.7.11 @ 11:52AM|#

Looking at the current GOP field outside the two libertarians I kind of wish she HAD run. She is certainly better than Romney, Perry or Cain by a large measure. Hell she would almost definitely be better than Obama on marijuana. Could have been like the whole only Nixon-China thing.

anon|11.7.11 @ 12:14PM|#

I'm pretty partial to Cain. At least he's willing to consider real tax reform rather than just adding loopholes to the current FUBAR system.

Apatheist|11.7.11 @ 12:22PM|#

Cain is better than the other two and Gingrich as well (who is better than Romney/Perry). Still he is shitty on WOD/foreign policy/the gehyz and even though the Fed isn't my biggest concern I'm not sure I could vote for a Fed insider. Plus I absolutely oppose a national sales tax no matter how catchy the slogan. It might start out as 999 with no deductions or modifications but it will be raised and gutted later (hell he's already changing it to pander to people).

Who knows maybe Palin would have been just as shitty with a full campaign about her beliefs but from what she has said in the past I had hope (I know she has said alot of dumb shit too). For me marijuana is a bellweather issue even though it is no where close to the most important one. If a candidate can't even give a little ground on just that one part of the drug war they can't possibly believe in individual liberty and I won't ever consider voting for them.

anon|11.7.11 @ 12:35PM|#

I've just always opposed the logic "Well it can be changed later!" That can already happen, with ANY tax system, and using it as a crutch to oppose reform is self defeating.

Apatheist|11.7.11 @ 12:48PM|#

Yes but it adds one more tax to be changed. If we have a 10% flat tax then even if they gut it it still just the income tax. I of course support the whole get rid of the income tax and replace it with nothing notion but I'm just a crazy person.

get real|11.8.11 @ 1:17AM|#

in this case the argument is more like "it WILL BE INCREASED later, GUARANTEED".

|11.7.11 @ 12:39PM|#

This profile was prepared earlier, right?

The filing deadlines are over in too many states. She's not possibly running.

|11.7.11 @ 1:49PM|#

Actually, Nate Silver had a piece on this very recently. It is unlikely that Palin (or anyone else) could enter the race successfully at this point, but (a) it wouldn't be mathematically impossible, although it would require being very successful in the early caucus states, and (b) even as an unsuccessful late entrant she could potentially play the role of spoiler, denying Romney an outright majority of delegates and forcing a brokered convention (which would make every political reporter in the country cream their shorts).

Eduard van Haalen|11.7.11 @ 2:42PM|#

Only 25 comments on a Palin thread?

This must be Palin Fatigue.

A fan|11.7.11 @ 3:10PM|#

Next week Reason profiles Harold Stassen!

Mr. Soul|11.7.11 @ 3:45PM|#

Palin would have left us alone. I wish she had run, I could use some of that.

Trig|11.7.11 @ 4:53PM|#

wut he sed

Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptions

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

(310) 367-6109

Editorial & Production Offices:

3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245

Reason.com