Would you compare Sarah Palin with Ronald Reagan?

Reagan's statement of positions was much more coherent that Palin ever thought of being as he had some substance behind him and she does not. (Do you actually believe she reads the New York Times and The Economist?) Both are, or were, very much governed by wishful thinking (as in "trickle down" is an actual theory which it wasn't and isn't and didn't and won't work.). Both were great "communicators" (read "glib") who communicate very little of substance and both care nothing for details and are not very truthful. She, according to the record, was terrible as a chief executive doing great damage to her administrative personnel while he let them suffer from benign neglect.