The 2012 Republican presidential primaries are two-and-a-half years away, but if they were starting today Sarah Palin would enter with the highest net approval ratings among self-described Republicans, according to a recent Pew poll.
According to Pew, the Alaska governor's popularity among Republicans, as measured by her net approval-minus-disapproval ratings, is +56, with former Gov. Mitt Romney and former Speaker Newt Gingrich a bit further back, at +39 and +33 respectively, and Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele trailing far behind that trio with a +14 and 58 percent of Republicans having no opinion or unable to identify him.
Although Palin's approval is high, and sustained compared to earlier Pew-conducted polls, Pew emphasized Romney's steady increase among not just Republicans but the broader public:Since February 2008, shortly before he abandoned his race for the GOP presidential nomination, opinion of Romney has improved across most political and demographic groups, but the shift has been particularly pronounced among independents. In February 2008, just 29% of independents had a positive impression of Romney while 46% had a negative view. Today, that balance is reversed: 44% view Romney favorably and 25% unfavorably.
Positive opinions among both Democrats and Republicans have increased by eight points since early 2008. Among Republicans, Romney has made identical nine-point gains in favorability among conservative Republicans and moderate and liberal Republicans; currently, 61% of conservative Republicans and 52% of moderate and liberal members of the GOP express positive opinions of Romney.
Given the troubles encountered of late by any number of first- or second-tier GOP presidential contenders, from John Ensign to Mark Sanford to Michael Steele, it may be that Romney is benefitting from a perception of a steady-as-he-goes maturity and scandal- or blunder-free eights months since the 2008 presidential election.
The Pew results reveal strong levels of support for Palin among evangelicals, but overall her support from self-described conservatives actually ebbed a bit from their highs last autumn during the late stages of the presidential contest. Oddly enough, since then her approval actually improved from 18 percent to 24 percent among Democrats, though this may be a result of a sympathetic boost resulting from David Letterman's jokes about Palin and her family earlier this month. (The poll was taken June 10-14, at the height of the national controversy over Letterman's remarks about the governor's daughter.)
In the days immediately following the 2008 presidential election, among Republicans surveyed by Gallup, Palin and Romney led the field. Eight months later, they're still out in front. Perhaps the duo are riding a name-recognition advantage against a pretty weak GOP field to date. And, of course, plenty can change during the 30 months between now and the Republican caucuses in Iowa. (I'd still bet on Gingrich to be the nominee.)
But for now, at least, Palin and Romney remain the frontrunners. Whether or not the GOP in fact nominates for president the person "next in line," a myth Ed recently debunked, Mitt and Sarah are still the king and queen of Republican presidential hopefuls.
6.29.2009
Palin-Romney '12
@ 6:51 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
75 comments
I don't see Sarah Palin winning a competitive republican primary. They are not going to treat her with kid gloves like democrats did. They are going to swat her down.
Also FIRST!
They failed to ask the key question... Would you vote for her? PPP did a recent survey and found that while Republicans like her they wouldn't vote for her. While favorability is important, you have to follow up and ask if you'd vote for the person too.
The poll did not include Mike Huckabee...who's seen as the most likable republican candidate.
I think a strong ticket would be Romney/Huckabee. Huckabee would shore up the evangelicals that Romney would initially scare away.
Romney is a pretty skilled debater. Sarah Palin on the other hand is easily the worst out of any of the prospective candidates as well as the least intelligent. Every single time there was ANY unscripted interaction with Sarah Palin it went horribly wrong. Mitt Romney would rip Sarah Palin to shreds in the republican debates.
I think the interesting thing in 2012 is how important are idependent voters going to be in the primary elections. If they aren't enegised for the primaries, then Palin could have a real shot at the nomination.
I say this for a number of reasons, one is that the least energised Republicans in 08 tend, it seems to me, to be the most energised about Palin. I think right now I expect a Palin vs Romney battle. If Romney can reach beyond the party, and in a year when its unlikely that there will be competitive Democratic Primaries, then he has a decent chance. But also remember that Iowa Republicans went for Huckabee as a religious conservative. If Palin can get those votes, and get momentum, and not get her backside handed to her in New Hampshire, then she could easily go forward and pick up some momentum for the big state challenges.
Another thing is that Republican Primary seasons tend to be shorter than Democratic ones, even taking 2008 out of the reckoning. If Palin gets early momentum, then she may not get the close search of her and her policies before she has the nomination in her back pocket.
But the interesting thing for the GOP right now is that there is no obvious front runner. Even allowing for Palin and Romney, if you consider how they performed in 2008, you had a guy who really made little impact politically in the primaries, against a woman who was roundly ridiculed from most sides after her veep nomination. Hardly sounds like a strong field emerging.
Let's not forget that no one in June 2005 would have thought a freshman senatory whose middle name was Hussain would have had any chance against the Clinton Machine.
That said I agree with markymark that independents will be key especially as the Democratic side should be very boring. I'm not sure when the 2012 primary schedule will be set or rules committees and all that. If I were Romney I'd be arguing for more open primaries (my recollection is the Republicans had fewer open primaries than the Democrats) since those voters are less likely to be Palin voters.
What is the record of polls taken this early in cycle wrt their predictive power in indicating the nominee?
I'm guessing it would be pretty low, but does anyone have any real data?
Palin is a joke. She remains popular among republicans because they are sexually repressed, and she's not Susan Boyle.
What is she going to do, wink her way through 20 or so primary debates?
As a democrat I would love to see Palin as the GOP nominee because she would probably lose 40 states.
With all the problems we have the american people would never trust this country to a likeable woman who is lacking the knowledge and intellect to lead this country.
If she had her way she would turn this country into theocracy.
I can just see Obama and her in a policy debate, she could only wink so much and I don`t think intensive studying could overcome her obvious shortcomings. I just don`t see a GOP candidate who can compete in 2012, Romney would never win but would be a lot more credible than anyone else they have.
.
Sarah and her kids would have been great with Michael Jackson. But he's still dead. I just checked all the cable news channels.
Checking again...
.
It seems like Romney is starting to look good simply because the rest of the Republican field looks so bad.
Romney will not win a Republican primary cycle, ever. He will never play in the south. He is responsible for Mass's universal health care, which will be revealed to be the worst of all worlds, as the consumer still has no rights but is now forced to pay for private insurance. He's a mormon, which will still be an issue for the evangelical wing. And as crazy as we think they are, a lot of Republicans will have a problem with his attendance record (or lack there of) at his only stint in public service. His last 2 years as governor, he may have been in the state a totla of 125 days.
"but overall her support from self-described conservatives actually ebbed a bit from their highs last autumn during the late stages of the presidential contest."
Nothing that a few winks won't fix. Just ask Rich Lowrey from NRO.
@ joel
As a democrat I would love to see Palin as the GOP nominee because she would probably lose 40 states.
With all the problems we have the american people would never trust this country to a likeable woman who is lacking the knowledge and intellect to lead this country.
the american people trusted a student-president with less experience, a ultra-leftist muslim-friend, speaking about 57 states, only able to speak with a teleprompter - I guess they even would trust an alien...
what we need is a real conservative (not a liberal republican), who brings America back to the real and traditional American Values!
I think a lot of people don't realize how much of a horrible ornery person Mitt Romney is. He has his little fan club for whom that is actually a positive, but outside of that, I don't think he would be very palatable to the general public. People in general really liked Obama's positive inspirational style, and this guy is like the polar opposite. And Sarah Palin, well...no.
You know, a lot of people in the GOP base (and in the country generally, let's be honest) see Palin's brand of "unscripted"-ness as a strength, a mark of authenticity, and they perceive any attempts to characterize her as unsophisticated or unintelligent as the condescention of a media elite. This is exactly how populists render themselves immune to criticism, and it's exactly why populism is so dangerous: they rally their supporters against the so-called experts, the so-called professionals, the so-called intellectuals, the so-called people who actually know what they're talking about. With the right campaign manager and enough distance from Bush 43, I can definitely see Palin getting the 2012 nomination and even making a run at Obama, depending on the state of the economy.
1. Its way too early (How well did Obama poll in early 2005 ha)
2. Its going to come down to how the coalitions are split. (Security, Economy, Social)
As an example, Romney would love Huckabee and Palin to both run because it would split the social voters.
I'm not going to go on because it is way too early.
"Let's not forget that no one in June 2005 would have thought a freshman senatory whose middle name was Hussain would have had any chance against the Clinton Machine."
Ah, yes, the old "no one would have predicted" routine...
Obama may not have been a favorite for 2008 in 2005, but he was already seen as the future of the Democratic Party, and to say "no one" thought he could win in '08 is just not correct.
For you to really have a point, though, Snarky, you'd have to be able to identify the equivalent person seen as the future of the Republican Party. There isn't one -- Jindal spit the bit in his first shot at the big time, Sanford self-destructed, Housemen got co-opted and bundled off to China...
The Pubs simply do not have a stud prospect like Obama in the upper minors of their farm system.
I suspect that Palin's ratings are increasing among Democrats and independents because they're starting to realize that the left-leaning media really do have serious problems with misogyny, as evidenced by their Obama/ Clinton coverage last year. As Palin is the only Republican woman with a high enough profile to be a serious 2012 candidate, she's perfectly poised to ride the backlash into the Oval Office.
Palin still has nothing to say. And to those old men who would vote for her because they think she's hot, enjoy!
I hope that when talking about VP candidates for 2012, people will remember the Golden Rule that was proved oh so right last year.
A VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SHOULD DO NO HARM
Apart from that, anything else is just a bonus.
I sincerely hope that Palin is not a candidate, because something might go wrong, and she'd end up as president. God help us all then.
Huckabee doesn't stand a chance. He is a social conservative and failed on fiscal issues, he won't win.
It is Romney in 2012!
Let's not forget Dick Cheney's approval rating went up 8 points once he left office, too. Numbers right now are very soft - just ask Pres. Hilary Clinton.
I do reject any analogy from Obama to Palin. Lots of people in and out of DC thought Obama was going to be a Presidential candidate in the near future once he got off the stage after the keynote speech - the only question was whether he could beat Hillary (which a lot of people assumed he wouldn't try). Tom Daschle was one of those who believed - he actually let Obama use his chief of staff in DC to help work the system better. David Axelrod was another, and Romney/Palin don't have a team like Axelrod and Plouffe in their corner. Unlike Palin, Obama was also working on building his cred within the party power centers like Iowa and NH by speaking at Dem fundraisers. He was good enough at Harkin's 4th of July fish fry (a straw poll type event for potential candidates), even when he wasn't a candidate, he actually ran off some people also considering runs. He kept that up for years, something which Palin hasn't shown any interest in and Romney failed at last time around.
In fact, Palin has done her best to alienate the party organization, seemingly thinking she can win without a strategy or power base since people show up when she speaks at already scheduled events like the Autism Speaks walk in New York. She may figure it out someday, but right now she doesn't seem to get how important courting local party folks in the early primary states really is.
Romney just hasn't shown the ability to relate to people at all. He tries hard, he does the right things, but people just don't seem to like him the way they like Palin and even Huckabee. Maybe he'll find that touch, but right now he's got the wrong history (Wall street money manager, MA gov, flip flop on social issues) to fire up the core of the GOP. Huckabee and Palin will probably split the core in some manner, and it might wind up being those two on the ticket in some order (if there's no one else who emerges).
Palin as the nominated republican candidate is a dream scenario. I invite all my progressive brethren to engage in Operation Chaos by voting/caucasing for Palin in 2011.
Mitt has a ton of negatives that are latent right now because he currently deserves no attention. Still, in my opinion he is the repub's best shot. He will most likely be their version of the 2004 John Kerry. yikes!
Tom said...
Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele trailing far behind that trio with a +14 and 58 percent of Republicans having no opinion or unable to identify him.
You mean Minnesota's Michelle Bachmann was not totally correct when she said to Steele "You da man, Michael, you da man!"???
Bachmann couldn't be that wrong, could she?
On reflection, it WAS Bachmann who said that.
Never mind.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
In addition to the total lack of charisma Romney displayed in 2008, he will now have to answer for his business background and his very liberal policies when he was governor of MA. He’s still a Mormon too, which a lot of evangelicals consider as alien as Islam.
Huckabee will have the same troubles he had in 2008—a lackluster presence matched with an equally lackluster following—plus he will be four years older. His star, never bright, is sinking rather than rising, and there’s nothing he can do about it.
Newt Gingrich—it’s safe to laugh him off the planet in terms of hopes he’ll ever be president. Even in his Republican Revolution glory days polls consistently showed him with much higher negatives than positives. (Look what his own party did to him after less than two years as Speaker.) Even plastic surgery couldn’t get that weaselly look off his face. Gingrich represents the true blind and deaf core of cores of the GOP, half of whom will be dead of old age in four years.
Then there’s Sarah Palin. I think she has a better chance than anyone else to be the 2012 GOP nominee, and the disaster at the polls will be spectacular. Of course she has four years to read the Constitution and discover some useful facts she presently doesn’t know, so the likelihood of upcoming “gotcha” moments with the press will be minimized, but despite all the GOP PR and ballyhoo a lot of conservatives don’t like her very much. Too much of the trailer park clings to her—her husband’s sleazeball political past, her trampy daughter, the jillions in GOP campaign money spent on her wardrobe—and this will fester over the next four years rather than go away. But Palin’s chief trouble will be in attracting new, young voters to her cause, and she simply doesn’t have anything in her bag to offer them. Plus I predict a facelift to find a home with her over the next few years, and given her tastes and proclivities she’s liable to overdo it. That won’t sit well at all in those conservative Midwest farm kitchens.
Notice how the T-shirt model was too embarrassed to have her face appear in the shot?
When was Michael Steele ever considered a candidate for the Presidency?
If Obama cannot bring the economy roaring back and unemployment remains stubbornly high by historical standards (over 6%), then Palin ought to have a good shot.
It is the height of delusional self-confidence to think that this woman cannot educate herself to be able to speak as forthrightly about the issues as any other candidate.
Her appearance on the scene last August electrified the nation and was the only thing that managed to catapult John McCain into the lead which he held despite the historic convention of Barack Obama and his own hurricane-decimated affair until the collapse of Lehman Bros and the beginning of the great crash of 2008.
The charges against Palin have been rude, scurrilous and unfounded. They are even more bizarre than the persistent questions bout the true locus of Obama's birth or his history of aberrant sexual behavior and drug use.
With a President in office who seem blithely unconcerned about the plight of the poor and unemployed and the fate of the economy, who will have steadily caused America’s potency in the world to decline, Obama's political bones will be easily picked over.
Many of us on the right would find delicious irony to see Sarah Palin chew him up and spit him out!
petekent01 (on twitter)
This poll is great news--FOR JOHN MCCAIN!
@ Foregone Conclusion
I sincerely hope that Palin is not a candidate, because something might go wrong, and she'd end up as president. God help us all then.
Do you really think it can become worse after "the one" (by the way: has anybody found his birth certificate?)? O'bambi is on the best way to destroy America and here are some folks really thinking it can become worse. Unbelievable
PeteKent:
Her appearance on the scene last August electrified the nation
Yes. And then the nation got to know her.
and was the only thing that managed to catapult John McCain into the lead which he held despite the historic convention of Barack Obama and his own hurricane-decimated affair until the collapse of Lehman Bros and the beginning of the great crash of 2008.
McCain lost the lead in the polls several days before the Lehman Bros collapse. Look it up. Facts should matter. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/did-lehman-kill.html
The turning point correlates with the Palin-Gibson interview, but I won't conflate it with cause.
Ok, first off, don't go comparing Palin to Obama, anyone (unless you comparrison is along the lines of Palin is nowhere near as intelligent as Obama). This includes the 'its far to early' line. Compared to Obama 4 years ago, Palin has far higher name recognition for a start.
I think that the 'its far to early line' is not a great line of hope for the GOP right now. I think that experience will become a key if things do go wrong for Obama. I don't think the GOP is going to be hit by a meteor, and Palin's stock with the public, despite [possibly because] of her name recognition is not as high as Obama's was. (Given that a lot of people's only real knowledge of Obama 4 years ago would have been his DNC keynote, which was a damned awesome speech. (Still not seen O top that, despite everything, IMO)).
I also don't think GOP nominees ever come out of nowhere, whereas the Democrats are more likely to take a punt. (I guess maybe through a hail mary is a better sports analogy there!) That being said, I think the 2012 GOP field is not really taking shape yet. My personal gut feeling is that Romney and Palin have to run (age, and fading memories respectively make it imperative for those two.) Beyond that, who knows, Huckabee has boxed himself into a Fox shaped corner for now (tough for him to go on Meet The Press, This Week etc as he would probably need to do.) Gingrich is interesting, though personally I still think his ego is keeping his name in the dicussion rather than a realistic aim at running. Haley Barbour seems the most likely to come from nowhere to run, but someone (I forget who) mentioned Mitch Daniels on one of the morning shows yesterday. A respected purple state governor would be a good paint by numbers candidate. But I think the problem a GOP governor is going to have right now is that to run from a statehouse, you tend to need to have done something kind of showy. I think Jindal would be wise to wait out this cycle and think of 2016 or 2020 or even 2024 as more likely. I wonder if Giuliani would be shameless enough to give it another punt?
PK said
'The charges against Palin have been rude, scurrilous and unfounded. They are even more bizarre than the persistent questions bout the true locus of Obama's birth or his history of aberrant sexual behavior and drug use.'
-----------------------
There are only 'presistent questions' because freaks on the right keep raising them.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Obama has been pretty open about his youth drug use.
To my knowledge, the left don't go bombarding websites demanding to see Trig Palin's birth certificate. The 'charges' against Palin are that she isn't up to the job of being President. Thats not bizarre, and if you think its unfounded go check Charles Gibson or Katie Couric's interviews. Now that is something that over the next 3 years she could disprove, given hard work and some good advisers. But so far I haven't seen much evidence of it yet.
It's funny. We have a ultra-leftist student president without any experience (he hasn't even a birth certificate..lol), ramming the USA in the ground and then there are some folks discussing about the experience of Sarah Palin. Are you kidding me?
And if it comes to intelligence: I would like to remember, that O'bambi can't speak one sentence without his teleprompter, spoke about "the 57 states" of the USA (a president -even a student president- should at least know some details about the country, he wants to change in a socialistic Europe2.0) and some more nice things, Palin or any other Republican would have been blamed for by the MSM...
markymark,
Daniels' name is being ballyhooed by many. He is an R governor in a still red purple state. He also rather handily won the gubernatorial election in 2008 (although his opponent was definitely NOT first, or even second, tier competition). That makes a lot of people think that he is a hot prospect.
However, go to Indiana, and Daniels is viewed more as a 'better than the others', but still a slime ball.
Anecdotal:
Some of my family in Indiana are very 'rock-ribbed Republican'. Some bought and put on their cars the personalized Bush/Cheney '04 license plates sold by the state GOOPer party (Indiana only requires a rear plate, thus the front plate 'area' is available). One of those relatives told me in early 2007 that they would probably vote for Daniels in 08 only because they had a friend who worked for the state, and if Daniels and/or the GOOPers lost, his friend would lose his job. I asked if there was any other reasons to vote for Daniels, and I was given no other reason over the next hour or so of conversation. He also couldn't come up with any other candidate he would support more than Daniels. Not a very strong endorsement.
Also, right now the state legislature is going into special session to balance the state budget. Daniels is proposing $1 billion in education cuts to help balance that budget. Even some in the GOOPer party are seriously questioning that amount of cut, especially when several studies have shown that the state needs to increase, not cut, education funding to stay competitive with other states.
Add in the lease of the Indiana Toll Road that many people are calling one of the biggest follies EVER in the state (to mildly paraphrase their words), and Daniels probably would win the state, but just barely, as the GOOPer candidate. Remember, before President Obama, the last Democratic Presidential candidate to win the state was LBJ in 1964. Clinton lost it twice (both times by about 6%), even with Perot taking almost 20% of the vote in 1992, and more than 10% in 1996.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Every single potential Republican candidate will make mince meat of Palin in the primary debates. She's already toast.
Mike in Maryland,
My sense is that the GOP are throwing out any and every name that might make sense in an attempt to get some excitement going. I have yet to see a candidate that would excite the whole party.
Jan, and everyone else who has pointed out that Palin will be toast come the Primary debates, I'm not quite so sure. In the expectations game, she will have a media led advantage. And remember that these primary debates are often less confrontational, and people aren't as keen to tie opponents up in knots. The problem might be more with Meet The Press or This Week type interviews.
"aberrant sexual behavior"
Um. What?
Palin again ????
Madre de Dios !!!
Jan,
Markymark is correct. The GOOPer 'debates' are more like Senate debates - 'collegial', not confrontational. The GOOPers try to outdo each other in their 'allegiance to the party platform' - not much drama and confrontation in that method of 'debate.'
The debates where you can expect much more 'drama' are the Democratic debates, where differing policy issues are hashed out in front of the public.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
v8fan said...
there are some folks discussing about the experience of Sarah Palin. Are you kidding me?
June 29, 2009 4:35 PM
Yes Sir,you are right.
People here forgot that she has International experience,as she said by herself:
"I can an eye on Russia from my window"
And mostly by the fact she got her first passport in 2006.
...come on...
"between "can" and "eye" I would put a "keep"...
:P
"...Tomorrow, June 30, U.S. troops will begin withdrawing from Iraqi cities and towns as part of the Status of Forces Agreement that was ratified by the Iraqi Parliament last November..."
balls explode !!!!
buena noches hermanos .
:)
v8fan:I would like to remember, that O'bambi can't speak one sentence without his teleprompter
Someone hasn't been watching a whole slew of press conferences.
balls explode !!!!
I miss real joe.
Palin has destroyed herself, she hasn't realized it yet.
Using her knocked up daughter as a political tool was not only creepy, but downright bizzare. Could you imagine the shitstorm if Obama had a knocked up teen daughter?
Let's not forget her hate rallies that got the GOP base excited but turned off every thinking person. What does that say about the GOP.
She blew softball interviews in the most ridiculous way.
Her behavior since the election has been even more bizarre. It is true that Obama was a relative unknown in 2005 and was not on the national radar, and that is exactly why Palin will thankfully fail.
She is proudly ignorant and extremely loud, there is nothing she can do to win over even 5% of the independent moderates in 2012. By the time 2012 rolls around the GOP will lucky to still be a party, much less have over 20% of the population identify with them. As a whole they have veered further right and have engaged in truly bizarre behavior, not too mention that they have offered no ideas, just obstruction.
There is no way she has the education to make it through the primaries. No PK, she can't be educated, she is proud of her ignorance and will not change.
I hope she does the GOP rebuttal at the state of the union address next year, that should seal her fate as it did the infinitely more intelligent and likable Jindal this year.
The only known candidate today that is intelligent and can speak intelligently of at least a few important issues is Romney, but that dog-abusing, Reagan-humping psycho is not acceptable to the rabid fundie nutbag base. Neither was McCain, and they will use that as an excuse to demand someone that appeals to 5% of the population.
Barry Goldwater was prophetic when he talked about the dangers of giving the religious right power in the party.
The teleprompter "insult" is weak. It was expecially funny when Beck ripped on Obama for it while reading a teleprompter.
What president or any political figure have not made extensive use of it since they were available?
No one can memorize a 30 minute speech, but they are useless in press conferences.
It is funny, all the freeptards that infect this site have are stupid things like that and the birth certificate that has already been certified.
They have been reduced to nothing more then being the crazy guy shouting nonsense on the street corner.
@ beavis
besides birth certificate (btw: the bc is not certified. "the one" is still paying hundreds of thousands to lawyers to block this document. Question: why does he hide a document that can stop all the duscussion about this issue?) and the teleprompter, here are some real issues:
he will turn America in a socialistic Europe2.0 - and believe me, you wouldn't like it (I lived too long in Europe so I know, what you can expect with this ultra-leftist gang in Washington).
He will socialize the health insurance. DOESN'T WORK!!! Check the situation in Germany!
The crap and fake (formerly known as cap and trade) will kill the economy. It's a fraud! Only "invented" to make some guys very healthy, especially Al Bore, the false prophet and pope of the Church of Global Warming. OK, I know, also 8 stupid Reps voted for this Bullshit.
The bailouts cost a lot of taxpayer money and some people ("the One's" friends) and organizations (UNIONS!) will become very healthy. It's socialism - nothing else!
Forget the Free Speech. The ultra-leftist gang will do what they can to stop the Free Speech (at least the Free Speech that doesn't cheer them)
Forget the 2nd amendment. Within a very short time-frame no private person will be allowed to have a gun!
All together: the government (socialistic dictators) will tell you what you are allowed to say, what you are allowed to eat, which car you are allowed to drive, etc. - it's like the former East-Germany!
With this ultra-leftist gang we will loose all our rights!
So you are right - compared with this, teleprompter and birt certificate are nuts. But "finding" the birth certificate is a way to impeach this person who claims to be president.
Fortunately some states begin to pass state Senate legislation refusing to comply with insane laws coming from the federal level.
After the election, many of the independents swung to the democratic side. This always happens after presidential elections -- they swing toward the party of the president. Anyway, would this account for the increase in favorability of Romney among independents? Now all of the independents are conservatives who don't like to publicly identify with the GOP, especially now that they are dead in the water. Just a thought.
Honestly, when those of us on the left were criticising Bush, did we sound as paranoid and just plain crazy as V8fan? I hope not! But besides the tone, there was an awful lot of conjecture about things Obama has no plains at all to do. Kind of takes down the rest of the post really!!!
I think underestimating Palin is a mistake. I wonder what lefties were saying about Reagan in 77 for instance. Like it or not Palin has appeal. Presidential elections aren't intelligence tests and if conditions favor the GOP in 2012 she might be able to gather a coalition of paranoid southerners, concerned moms, and populists to the GOP.
markymark, with all due respect: you have no clue what's going on. Im come from Europe and it started in the same way in Europe and where did it end? Have a look to Europe and you see what you can expect. Unlike you (and most of the others and especially the Obama-followers) I have the experience and if this ultra-left gang in Washington will not be stopped in their insane way of politics, you'll see results, you'll never have expected and believe me, you don't like it!
Yes, we need a change in America, but a change back to the traditional American values (and unfortunately the lefts have no values) and one of this values is SELF RESPONSIBILITY and not the European way, that means the government takes care of you from birth to death.
v8fan?
In your post at 6:13 pm today, you mention East Germany.
If one clicks on your blogger profile, you have written something in German.
When did you emigrate from Germany to the US and why?
Are you a legal alien or illegal? Can you prove it? You are questioning President Obama's birth certificate, so that means we can question any bona fides you try to present to us, doesn't it? If not, why not?
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Guys, you don't understand! v8fan LIVED in EUROPE, so he can read Obama's mind, predict the future, be the sole arbiter of what is and is not a forgery, and tell when someone's lying.
He's also a shapeshifter that can cloud men's minds.
"(and unfortunately the lefts have no values)"
That's where the right comes in. We need the moral terpitude Larry Craig, John Ensign, Mark Sanford, and Sarah Palin to guide us right now.
"one of this values is SELF RESPONSIBILITY"
That's where Sarah Palin comes in. Only the governor that takes the most federal funding per state resident can really teach us about self-responsibility and NOT letting the government "take care of you from birth to death".
I lived in West-Germany, but also know the situation in former East-Germany because I have closed friends from the former East-Germany. I immigrated (legally) to the USA (but "the One" loves the illegals more than the legal aliens because with this insane amnesty he produces voters for the lefts) and love the America of the "true Americans" and only to your information: this are not the LIbEralS!!!
v8fan?
Amnesty for certain persons given by President Obama?
Which persons?
When?
How?
More crackerjack logic from a looney Reich-winger.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
By the way, v8fan, when you speak of "true Americans", just what is your definition of a "true American"?
I have one ancestor who was born in Switzerland after the American Revolution. Every other of my ancestors who came to the New World arrived in the (then) colonies prior to the start of the American Revolution. In case you haven't heard, the American Revolution started more than 225 years ago.
So, do I qualify as a "True American" in your book?
Or is there some other definition of a "True American"?
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
With rational, cogent, and well-thought out political thoughts such as "crap and fake", "Al Bore", and "LIbEralS", I think the number in this guy's handle is giving us an important clue about his age.
Palin would be my dream.
During the Palin bubble was the first time Obama moved ahead of McCain in Florida (look it up). Her extreme evangelical nature turns off Floridian Jews (Bush was seen as an evangelical but not extreme) + her association with militia groups turns off Latinos. Obama was the 1st democrat to win Florida's Latino vote. Palin can't win Florida. The Latino vote in Fl will be a few points larger in 2012 and they really don't like her.
The wingers who post here are under a delusion. The GOP base is no longer big enough to win by rallying just conservatives. Unless any GOP candidate can win independent converts they won't beat Obama. I see no evidence Palin can do this. Screaming Obama is a socialist isn't a recipe to win independents. This is example number one of why liberals support talk radio. Conservative have walled themselves in so much that they have lost the ability to talk to the middle.
Romney has a problem. I could see him rallying enough Mormon support to keep Arizona, and contest NV and Colorado. But his religion would hurt him in North Carolina (he can't flip it unlike Palin who might be able to rally enough evangelicals to do this). He also could lose West Virginia. I know that seems like a shock, but enough hard core evangelicals could stay home (they won't vote Obama). If you voted against a guy because of his middle name you won't vote for a Mormon. If Obama wins all the Gore/Kerry states plus NM and NC he still wins (so Romney could take FL,Ohio,NV, and Colorado, but his religion could kill him in NC). By the way I was the guy on DailyKos who said the Dems could win Indiana back in 2005, and promptly got alughed at. I have the same handle there go look at it. I noticed Indiana's demographics didn't match her voting patterns.
The GOP has both a South East (FL, NC,Virginia, and Georgia) and a South West (Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona) problem. They have to solve both, AND then contest the MidWest. Obama's strength is he could win reelection in any of these three regions. Plus hold the Blue states. The blue State have if anything become more Democratic, so this is a major problem for the GOP. They don't have a guy (or gal) who can compete in all three areas, that I have seen yet.
Obama generate such support because for what ever reason Westerner loved him (Hell look at his improve numbers in Montana), he could get out huge numbers in the South East, and he spoke MidWest. If the economy is growing an unemployment is below 7% he won't lose. PERIOD
Dopper,
I agree with most of what you say.
The one place where I'd quibble is Indiana.
I was born and raised in Indiana, and still have dozens of relatives living in the state. I WAS surprised when Obama won it, as it has been a solid red state for decades - the Democratic Presidential candidate has won the state only 5 times in the last 25 Presidential elections (1912, 1932, 1936, 1964 and 2008).
Yes, it can be purple at the state government level, but a lot of that is because of the Blue Dog Democrats from Southern Indiana, and in Indiana, a Blue Dog Dem is more a moderate to liberal Republican than even a conservative Democrat.
Southern Indiana is also home to a lot of evangelicals, while central and northern Indiana is home to the majority of the state's Catholic population (a particularly conservative version of it, too), especially from Fort Wayne west to the IN/IL border, especially the ethnic areas around South Bend and the Calumet. There also are the Mennonite- and Amish-influenced areas of NE Indiana, from Adams County through Allen, LaGrange and Elkhart counties - very conservative.
I'm glad I was wrong about Indiana last year, but it's not a sure bet that a Dem will win in 2012. Part of it will depend on who the Rep candidate is (Palin might play very well in the primary, but not Romney [IF the Rep primary is still contested by early May]; Huckabee probably would win the state in the general), but it will depend moreso on the unemployment rate. Even then, Indiana will not go for Obama, even as the incumbent, unless he campaigns there. He was forced to campaign there in 2008 because of the extended Dem primary - it will be a different picture in 2012.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
v8fan, I live in Europe! I have experience of the NHS in the UK and it works, as do the schools and other public services! Are they perfect? No but then (shock horror) neither is the US, which is why it needs to keep striving for a more perfect union!
v8fan said...
not the European way, that means the government takes care of you from birth to death.
June 29, 2009 7:27 PM
You are speaking "Palinese" my dear.
#1-is not so bad knowing that "just in case" you can count on GUARANTEE pubblic healthcare,welfare,schools,retirement,and so on,where there are not PRIVATE ASSHOLES that make profit from your life (and believe me: there are enough even when these service are pubblic).
#2-You can't say that all these benefit I mentioned at #1 is worse in Europe than in US,probably is quite the opposite.
#3 and you can't absolutely say that they cost more in Europe than in US,for SURE it's the opposite...
#4-in case you don't know all these"benefit" are NOT for free,europeans' workers pay taxes on their income for that:
in my country is +/- 35% of my gross salary.
Now,
I know that comparing US lifestile whit European lifestile is quite silly,but as far as I know I wouldn't change.
Gretings from Europe.
:)
v8fan said...
I...love the America of the "true Americans" and only to your information: this are not the LIbEralS!!!
June 29, 2009 9:16 PM
the "true Americans" elected Obama with an incredible LANDSLIDE.
Face the fact,and as "true Americans" say:
"Take it or Leave it".
p.s.
...maybe you would came back in Europe...for istance here in Italy we have a fascist moron in charge,You would love him...think about it...
:)
v8fan said...
"...Forget the 2nd amendment. Within a very short time-frame no private person will be allowed to have a gun!..."
**********
Eurpeans are NOT allowed to have a gun and this is just FINE:
I can have an argument with my neighborhood without fearing if he gets upset he could shot me down,or for istance,I can send every morning my kids to schools being sure that they don't have CRAZY school-mates whom go to class carring Dad's automatic machine-gun.
***************
v8fan said...
"...All together: the government (socialistic dictators) will tell you what you are allowed to say, what you are allowed to eat, which car you are allowed to drive, etc. - it's like the former East-Germany!
*********
You must be an ignoramus in a garde variety:
east-germany was NOT "Europe".
Most countries in Europe fought that kind of dictatorship.
For istance,I say what I want,eat what I want,and drive the car I can allow (in my "socialist"-family we are 5 people and we have 4 cars...not bad for a socialist country)
***********
v8fan said...
"...With this ultra-leftist gang we will loose all our rights!..."
**********
Looks like the only thing you lost for now is your brain...
June 29, 2009 6:13 PM
the bc is not certified. "the one" is still paying hundreds of thousands to lawyers to block this document. Question: why does he hide a document that can stop all the duscussion about this issue?
It has been validated, just because you freeptards can't understand that, doesn't change facts.
Let's assume for a second you are correct. Why wouldn't Hillary bring that up? Why wouldn't the RNC, or McCain?
Dumbass.
He will socialize the health insurance. DOESN'T WORK!!! Check the situation in Germany!
Germany's system is superior to ours. Yes, single payer is not perfect but is much better then what the US has. Last I checked over half of America is 1 accident, 1 health issue away from total and complete financial ruin, not too mention a good chunk will die for the crime of being poor.
The crap and fake (formerly known as cap and trade) will kill the economy. It's a fraud! Only "invented" to make some guys very healthy, especially Al Bore, the false prophet and pope of the Church of Global Warming. OK, I know, also 8 stupid Reps voted for this Bullshit.
That is intelligent. (sarcasm) You know, you will be happier over in freeptard land.
All together: the government (socialistic dictators) will tell you what you are allowed to say, what you are allowed to eat, which car you are allowed to drive, etc. - it's like the former East-Germany!
With this ultra-leftist gang we will loose all our rights!
I am not sure how how can loose(sic) his or her rights.
You are forgetting how many rights Bush took away and Obama has taken nothing away and is hopefully going to restore those stolen by Bush.
All you are spouting is lunatic fringe nonsense from the mental midgets on the far right.
Your ignorance and inability to form intelligent arguments is why the Republicans are in a death spiral.
I think underestimating Palin is a mistake. I wonder what lefties were saying about Reagan in 77 for instance. Like it or not Palin has appeal.
She has appeal to a very small minority, mainly the trailer-trash paranoid racist.
Yes, we need a change in America, but a change back to the traditional American values (and unfortunately the lefts have no values) and one of this values is SELF RESPONSIBILITY and not the European way, that means the government takes care of you from birth to death.
You mean back to Bush?
Who brought torture?
Who allowed buildings to fall and cities to be destroyed?
Who lied about Iraq which cost trillions and tens of thousands of lives?
Or destroying the economy?
What about stealing people off the streets of foreign countries, many of whom are not dangerous?
Letting Bin Laden get away while hatching lies to start another war?
Throwing 3 countries into turmoil, one of which has nuclear weapons?
Killing health care for poor children?
Outing CIA spies for political purposes?
What exactly are you missing from those dark days? He brought us to the brink of oblivion and he couldn't care less because his buddies got rich.
You might be able to find what you are looking for in China or Iran.
Their chemistry together would be worth the price of the ticket. He can't contain his contempt for her, and after a nasty, brutish primary season with both of them bashing each other, neither is going to be tenable to each other's camp.
Wait until you see her version of 'PUMAs' after the primary, Mittens is going to look like Jame Gumb when they're through with him.
The reason Palin is popular is because the Average American has been 'educated' in a system which gave up teaching critical thought and reason years ago in favor of the 'babysitting system'. Now, with a steady diet of Reality TV, NASCAR, cheap beer and Copenhagen, plus 'git-r'dun' cowcrap music, the Average American thinks the likes of O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, et. al. are geniuses.
The real problem is that the Average American has the brains of a turnip.
Small wonder the Average American who also 'self-identifies' as a Republican is in love with Palin.
@Mike in Maryland
Just so you know why I said what I did on Indiana. I will paraphrase what I wrote in 2005:
1) All the states surrounding Indiana are Blue (IL,MI) Purple (Ohio) or Pink ( I had said Kentucky was pink at the time because it had voted for Clinton twice, and Carter). States tend to vote similarly to the states surrounding them. Part of this is leaking (people moving to nearby states) part of it is similar environments breed similar cultures.
2) It has in the bottom five for voter turnout. This means it's electorate was less reflective of it's population. In states like this the electorate tends to be more affluent and Republican than the state as a whole since these voters tend to turnout more. A good turnout machine will have a greater effect on the make-up of the electorate there than in a higher turn out state.
3) My wife grew up in Indiana, and her mother serves in the state Government in an unelected roll. I know something about the state. The rural (read Republican) areas are contracting in population, the growth in the state is the Indianapolis area, and the college town. New suburbs tend to be republican but as they age they turn blue. The Indy suburbs started out very red, now they are bluing. It's natural evolution. I predicted that Indy would become the little Chicago of IN. Not as big or as blue, but it (and her suburbs) would start dragging the state purple.
4) Heavy manufacturing states tend to be purple/bluish. IN is the number one manufacturing state by percentage of people in this field. White working class social concerns, conflict with free trade skepticism. Even Nate picked up on this. It was one of his "purpling" factors.
Yes southern Indiana is red, but remember that area of the state is losing population. I grew up in NH. I saw what a state that is going Blue looks like. I use to hear similar stories about all rural areas of NH would never vote for a Dem. Sorry the only thing constant is change. Remember all those people shocked at the loss of WV. I mean it was the prototypical working class Democratic state. Only won once by a republican (Reagan's 1984 landslide) since 1960. Now it's considered safe Red territory so don't think political realities last forever. Being a swing state once, will change the political climate in IN. As Nate said, "once politicians start treating a state like a swing state, the voters there start acting that way".
Dopper,
Again, I agree with you on most points, but on several others I don't.
Yes, there can be similar politics across state lines, but then consider:
About 95% of the IN/IL state line is downstate Illinois, not a very Democratic area of Illinois. The major exception would be Lake County in Indiana, next to Chicago, but it's also a high minority area, and has been a Democratic stronghold for decades. Go even one county south of Lake, and county after county is GOOPer country. Parts of SW Indiana (Terre Haute, for example) are more blue (but still purple at best) than the areas of Illinois to the immediate west.
Much more than 50% of the IN/MI state line is SW Michigan. Western Michigan is the 'heartland' of Michigan Republicanism. And ALL of southern Michigan more than 50 miles from Detroit is also part of the 'heartland' of Michigan Republicanism. It's more than 50 miles from any part of Indiana to Detroit.
The IN/OH state line is totally the most GOOPer part of Ohio down to Cincinnati, which has been Republican for most of the last century (although Cincinnati is starting to change political viewpoint now). However, the part of Indiana contiguous to Cincinnati is some of the least populated part of the state (the non-Ohio Cincy burbs are in Northern Kentucky), and has very little influence on the rest of the state, so the gradual bluing of that portion of Ohio has little to no effect on the rest of the state of Indiana.
The IN/KY state line, except for the immediate Louisville area, is contiguous to some of the most conservative parts of Kentucky, especially the parts downriver from Louisville. Louisville itself is bluer than almost all the rest of Kentucky, but that doesn't say a whole lot - 'bluer' can still mean (and does) that the area is red, or at best purple.
The entirety of North East Indiana is GOOPer territory. Go two counties in any direction of Allen County (Fort Wayne), and you'll still be in GOOPer territory. Of those 14 (plus Allen), McBrainless won all of them, anywhere from a .02% win (in Blackford County, low population of 14,000) to as much as by 37.4% in Kosciusko. In Allen County (second largest in population in Indiana at 349,488), McBrainless won the county 51.7% to 47.3%.
As to Indy, one of its fastest growing burbs is Hamilton County, immediately north of Indy. In 2000, Hamilton County gave 74.2% of its votes to little shrub; in 2004, it gave 74.2% of its votes to little shrub; in 2008, it gave 60.6% of its votes to McBrainless.
Yes, Hamilton County made progress in going to the blue side of the spectrum. Consider that McBrainless' total was 13% of the total vote less than little shrub, but the state as a whole went from little shrub getting almost 60% to McBrainless getting just under 48%, or a more than 30% shift in vote.
Also consider that the population in Hamilton County grew from 182,740 in 2000 to an estimated 261,661 in 2007. Between 2000 and 2007, Hamilton County had 30% of the state's total population increase. Hamilton County is now the fourth largest county (pop. wise) in the state, and thus will gain lots of influence.
As to the agricultural industry in Indiana - it has a grossly inordinate influence in the state in comparison to the number of people employed, and the economic contribution. And as manufacturing has left the state, the agricultural influence seems to be getting greater in the state.
But as I also stated above, I'm very happy that Indiana finally voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate. However, when you consider the political history of the state, it's not a given that the state will stay purple, or even go blue, but rather more likely it will start to retreat back to its GOOPer roots. I don't think it will go all the way back to one of the reddest of the red states, but it will most likely retreat quite a ways in that direction, at least in the near term.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
I'm all for them running. If (and I'm working off of the article's premises here) they were to run right now Obama would have a second term guaranteed. Even if the Palin Romney ticket won every single self-identified republican currentlt they'd still lose, by about 4/5ths of the American population. The biggest problem for the GOP is that it's a shrinking party, and polarization never once expanded a party, in fact polarization is meant to isolate true party members even more.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment