Talk:Sarah Palin

message: : Bonewah (talk): In an exceptionally well documented article, Politifact, the Poynter Institutes fact checkers pretty much wrote the obituary noting the demise fourteen years ago of Sarah's marquee project/initiative, that the Trans-Canada pipeline, was extremely unlikely ever to be realized. https://www.politifact.com/article/2008/sep/15/palins-pipeline-less-meets-eye/  About the time that was written, Canada's First Nations rose up in opposition to the proposal. Palin was still touting her pipe dream four years later at the  Houston Hilton's conference center before an extractive industry audience with the aid of a tin ear. The world is a very different place than it was in 2008, with a   powerful consensus that climate change is perhaps the most issue with which the world will have to deal. An integral part of her proposal was to hook up the Trans Canadian filthy (tar sands) oil resources to be ostensibly carried to the east coast and beyond. In fact, Trans Canada pulled the plug on life  support for that boneheaded idea 15  months ago. Even  Trump  couldn't make that happen, and I expect he might himself in a lockup one of these days, so he'd have less  juice at some point  in  the future than he thinks he has now. Not only did you sweep out the  solidly sourced material I'd added, but you even reverted my tense correction  of the word that were faced by the reality the proposal "faced" back to the preexisting "faces." Politifact also correctly  noted that the pipeline wasn't Sarah's idea at all, but one she simply adopted. Her original conception was to transport gas to Valdez for compression and shipment to  faraway markets (Japan, or even Germany, one presumes these days, since Vlad's tightened up that market). It doesn't seem to have risen to the level where you're Wikistalking me, and I certainly hope it doesn't get there. I would suggest you self revert. Activist (talk) 15:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: A failed policy initiative?  So what? I see a few articles around 2008 talking about it, but nothing of any great import.  Likewise with the Politifact article you cite.  You even state that it wasnt her idea at all. Again, how is this of lasting significance? Bonewah (talk) 19:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palin zombie initiative 

message: I've quoted Sarah word-for-word as published  in a  reliable source, yet you've chosen to  make still another revert. The Alaska Republican party chose to make an endorsement of a more conservative candidate than Sarah  in the current election, and you think that's not worthy of mention?  Are you serious?  Really? Activist (talk) 20:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes i am.  The fact that the republican party endorsed someone else is of little note. The text "However, after he was convicted of seven felonies, a week before election day" is far from neutral.  Neither is the sentence before that about what the Washington Post thinks Palin 'intended'.  Speculation and opinion. Yet again, WP:Onus requires that "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content."  I.E. you.  Bonewah (talk) 20:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Interesting that you are so fixated on Steven's conviction, and not the fact that all the convictions were vacated due to 'gross prosecutorial misconduct'.  Why the insistence on mentioning one and not the other?  Lets leave the details of Ted Stevens' legal troubles to the the Ted Stevens article.  As for the endorsement or non-endorsement of the AK republican party, i stand by my statement, its of little note, just like any endorsements or non-endorsements for any of the other offices she has run for or held.  A quick search of this article reveals no mention of the AK republican party's endorsement (or anyone else's endorsement) when she ran for city counsel, mayor, governor or vice president.  I dont see why this one is any different. Bonewah (talk) 13:07, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  RSS is, by definition, reliable 

message: Update the election results involving Sarah Palin in the 2022 Midterm Election. 72.138.79.10 (talk) 16:02, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:11, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2022 

message: The first teaparty convention was held at Faneuil Hall Boston on December 16, 2007. What Sarah Palin attended was some GOP PAC The tea party the original one never did and still doesn’t endorse candidates it’s a movement not a political party and not a PAC and it is not the GOP when are people going to understand this? The 2010 event she attended was decidedly Republican. I formed the first tea party coalition in New Hampshire in 2007 so I should know. You can check out our website for references. nhteapartycoalition.org 2601:18D:8780:C9F0:8D49:CD4F:B493:B7E1 (talk) 01:29, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean this Ron Paul 2008 campaign event? Because while that may have been a precursor to the Tea Party movement, it's not the Tea Party movement. It was Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:18, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The first tea party convention was not in 2010