You asked for any poll, then a recent poll, and I provided one.
Sarah was within 6% on that poll with LV, which is within the margin of error if I'm not mistaken. Why would you try to focus on the less reliable RV figure? Nevermind, I know why.
Sarah is competitive, even during a relentless smear campaign, and even though the poll I cited oversampled with women, youth, and non-whites, all demographics in which Palin is supposedly weak.
You do realize that Reagan was 30 points behind for quite some time, including after he announced? Then, eventually, the 1980 election happened, and the rest is history.
So, to summarize, after asking for ANY poll, you then said show you a better poll. You didn't ask specifically for Rasmussen or anybody else. That's a moving target.
Alas, you are believing the negative LSM spin. Maybe I'm believing the "Palinista" spin, but I'm happy to stick with that versus the nabobs. Don't be afraid, LS. Sarah can win.
Sarah's numbers will come around, and naysaying serves no purpose at this point, 2 years out. Once a few people throw their hats into the ring, the polling data will become much more relevant.
If there's someone else you'd rather cheer for, by all means do so. But you don't have to tear down Palin in the process.
I bet there's at least one thing we can agree on: Romney getting the nomination is a recipe for a GOP disaster. IMHO, Romney's one of the few GOP candidates who would guarantee an Obama reelection, since he would totally de-energize the TEA Party base, which will be critical in 2012.
It's just not in the cards for Mitt, and thank God for that...
Now, PRV mentioned another possibility, a third party candidate and today Trump was talking about running. That would really throw a wrench into things, because he would pick up votes that otherwise would likely go to the Republican.