What's Sarah Palin's End Game?

To sit back and watch Romney, Santorum, and Newt bloody each other to hell all in the spirit of "competition" and "letting the process play out"?  With Santorum and Newt fighting for the anti-Romney vote, and Ron Paul acting as an anchor around both, we will certainly be left with Mitt Romney.

On the heels of a monster victory in South Carolina, Newt had the chance to build upon the anti-Romney momentum in Florida only to see him torpedoed by one of the most negative campaign attacks in GOP primary history at the hands of Romney. Romney outspent Newt by over $12,000,000 according to the Weekly Standard.

Then it's Santorum's turn to steal some of the anti-Romney momentum with unexpected victories in Colorado and Minnesota only to have the Romney attack machine outspend him 3:1 in Michigan and 5:1 in Ohio with almost nothing but negative ads.  Romney barely edges out Santorum in both.

Palin on Fox, February 21st:

PALIN: It is quite volatile. Lots of fluidity, and that is the nature of competition which makes all of these candidates so much better. So, I think that we should be pleased with the process, and I think the process should continue.

So, I ask Sarah Palin - is this the kind of "competition" you envisioned?  Where you have a guy with all the money who has been running for president since 2006 and has built his delegate booty winning Democrat heavy states and waging a negative ad war in the swing states to barely edge out his competition?  Is this the "process" you envisioned?

 Super Tuesday is now in the books and as Erick Erickson at Redstate.com points out (my extrapolation on his comments), the time is now or never for an anti-Romney candidate to even have a chance:

After Ohio came in tonight, it is clear Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee if Newt Gingrich stays in the race. Gingrich is now only serving as a spoiler to Santorum.

Barring a rapid Gingrich exit from the race — he cannot win outright given the states remaining, including Texas — which would suddenly reset the Santorum coalition for a one on one match against Romney, Mitt Romney is the nominee. Frankly, even if Gingrich exits, Romney will still most likely be the nominee.

Ok Sarah, we've seen the process play out and we've seen what competition (money) can do.  So, now what?  You say this is a critical time for the future of our country:

  Because this general election will be absolutely paramount to the future of America, whether we are able to defend our republic, save our republic or not because of president Obama's failed policies that we can't afford four more years of Obama.

 If you truly believe Obama must be defeated, then it's time for you to take a position.  Do you want the establishment self-proclaimed "progressive who brought us Romneycare who, if he wins the nomination, will have done so, according to Erick, " having lost the South, Appalachia, evangelicals, conservatives, and blue collar voters." Do you believe Mitt offers us the best chance at defeating Obama and advancing constitutional conservatism? I'm guessing the answer to that is "no", since you have quasi endorsed Newt. So you haven't fully endorsed Newt to allow the process to play out for Santorum (and Paul I guess)? It's played out and Newt can't win. He's done. So now what? Santorum is the only candidate who can defeat Romney who needs Newt to drop out. As a "political contributor"on Fox, will you encourage Newt to drop out and throw his weight behind Santorum? As a "political activist" and voting citizen, will you endorse Santorum? What's the end game now Sarah?