I’m an independent voter, and I am terrified of Sarah Palin. Actually, no—it’s people who support Sarah Palin that strike fear in my heart.

I live in Massachusetts, so I have never actually met a Palin supporter, but I know they exist. I watched the National Tea Party Convention in February, and at one point Judson Phillips, the convention organizer, mentioned that “two words...scare liberals: President Palin.” In response, the crowd erupted, with people springing to their feet and chanting “Run Sarah, Run!” Palin soaked in the fervid cheers, smirking in that folksy, “aw shucks, I’m the greatest” way of hers. It was a disquieting spectacle.

Mr. Phillips is probably right: liberals would be scared of a President Palin. So would a ton of other people: 71 percent of Americans believe that Palin is not qualified to be President. Of those, a full 52 percent of Republicans don’t believe she is qualified. Yet Mr. Phillips doesn’t mention moderates’ or conservatives’ fear; by honing in on liberals, he implies that they are scared of a Palin presidency due to its ideological implications. Liberals’ fear runs much deeper than this, however, as does the fear of many moderates and conservatives. It isn’t Palin’s ideology that is terrifying: it’s her startling lack of judgment.

Last month, Palin voiced her support for Obama “declaring war on Iran.” She observed that by “playing the war card” in this way, Obama could shore up domestic political support before the 2012 elections. These statements are simply astounding. They’re unnerving. Never mind that Palin doesn’t seem exceptionally bright, having meandered through four separate colleges before finally getting a degree. Never mind that Palin is a megalomaniac with extremely thin skin. There are worse political sins than ignorance and narcissism. But can we afford to have a Commander-in-Chief who measures war in the context of domestic political gain?

Nor is Palin’s glibness about sending American youth off to war her only serious lapse in judgment. One need look no further than Palin’s incoherent political strategy for further evidence of her imprudence and poor judgment. For example, Palin’s impolitic resignation of the Alaska governorship was ostensibly due to being overwhelmed by the need to defend herself against a vast number of politically-motivated ethics complaints, which had been leveled at her after her appearance on the national stage. Although she didn’t admit initially that she wanted to devote herself full-time to a campaign of self-promotion in support of a 2012 presidential bid, her motivations are becoming increasingly apparent. So here’s the puzzle: how are voters supposed to reconcile Palin’s presidential ambitions with her admitted inability to govern Alaska effectively while under the scrutinizing gaze of the whole country? If she thought that she might want to be President someday, how did she fail to realize how utterly unpresidential her resignation would appear?

Don’t get me wrong: I don’t blame people for liking Sarah Palin on a personal level. She’s a young, attractive, spirited politician. She has a down-home authenticity that’s hard to fake. Her beliefs align well with those of a large swath of conservative voters. She has pluck and passion. But we shouldn’t elevate someone to our country’s highest office simply because, superficially, they seem electable and ideologically inoffensive. If we want America’s greatness to endure, we must demand sapience and judiciousness of those who aspire to lead our nation.

Jonathan graduated from BYU in 2008 and is a second year law student at Harvard Law School.