Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I think Palin's unfavoribles are wide, but less than an inch deep

Posted on 09/18/2011 3:07:02 PM PDT by se_ohio_young_conservative

Obviously there is no logical reason for her unfavorables in the polls to be what they are. Did she do anything like let an intern give her oral sex or get involved in some disasterous scandal ? absolutely not. There is NOTHING on her. They have looked and looked and looked. Nobody has found a thing. She seems to be the kind of leader that the American people are wanting to represent them.

They do. I contend to you that her unfavoribles mean NOTHING. It is useless polling data and should have no impact on who wins the nomination in 2012. If she gets the nomination, she would win electoral votes based on national and global events (the economy, ect)

I believe the number of Americans who hate her with a passion is very very small. The unfavoribles you see in the polls are a result of some very shallow group think left over from the 2012. Nobody has seen Saraj Palin run her own national campaign. It would not take much at all to turn those numbers inside out.

What we see here is that the anti palin people in this country are just very loud. Conservatives hear them and for some reason think the high volume of their voice mean they have huge numbers. Even some here on FR get their information from people who hate them and then they are ignorant enough to toss it around like it is fact !


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: flamebait; idiot; iquitarod; libtrolls; notrunning; ohiosucks; palin; palinistas; pds; troll
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-277 last
To: Niteflyr
but it's not going to help when people learn he's a big government RINO campaigning as a conservative.

Unless Perry supporters can keep the truth from getting out....

Your NRO poll is showing the truth is getting out. The PerryKrishnas hate it, but his record is his achilles heel.

251 posted on 09/18/2011 9:32:12 PM PDT by Lakeshark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
The PerryKrishnas hate it, but his record is his achilles heel.

Ain't that such a damn shame they hold you to your record?...hahahaha!!!

252 posted on 09/18/2011 9:33:44 PM PDT by Niteflyr ("The number one goal in life is to parent yourself" Carl Jung)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

One of them.


253 posted on 09/18/2011 9:35:31 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Sarah Palin - 2012 !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

Hmmmmm, your candidate is “not Rick Perry.” Figures. But yer good for a few laughs regardless!


254 posted on 09/18/2011 9:35:53 PM PDT by magritte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: magritte
I noticed you can't deal with the dude's actual record, I suppose you really like that he can shoot coyotes though.

Good for you.......enjoy your evening, maybe you can pull up the replay of that coyote thing.......

255 posted on 09/18/2011 9:39:30 PM PDT by Lakeshark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969
She could have kept her job as Governor, stayed out of the limelight, brushed up on all manner of issues she is not used to dealing with, given an occasional speech at non partisan events, etc. She needed to just go away for awhile, stay out of the spotlight, let time pass and come back stronger.

Not true. She would have been the first sitting American governor to be forced to declare bankruptcy, due to the personal expenses incurred by defending herself from the malicious "ethics" complaints.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Now, it's a more nuanced (and more serious, IMHO) complaint against her that the ethics laws that eventually forced her from office--despite the facts that she did nothing unethically while in office--the problem was that the ethics complaints allowed by law were essentially unlimited and unregulated and the defense of which was not paid for by state funds but by the individual office-holders, something that unscrupulous Democrats seized on and took full advantage of--were the ones that she herself championed and got enacted into law. She was hoist by her own petard, so to speak.

But the "quitter" complaint is just an blind and/or ignorant copmplaint, representing either a lack of understanding of the situation, and/or blinkered, biased partisanship.

256 posted on 09/18/2011 9:40:05 PM PDT by filbert (More filbert at http://www.medary.com--GAME ON!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
Your NRO poll is showing the truth is getting out. The PerryKrishnas hate it, but his record is his achilles heel.

Final results from that "meaningless internet" NRO poll after a massive 50,000 votes was : Palin~74% Perry 26%..."By any standard, and even allowing for multiple voting by enthusiasts-if that is the case NRO's 50,000+ poll result is astounding. For one candidate to get 74% of the votes shows, at the very least, a huge degree of enthusiasm for that person. This of course contradicts the lie of the latest media theme that “Palin's support is declining”,"

link here~

257 posted on 09/18/2011 9:41:38 PM PDT by Niteflyr ("The number one goal in life is to parent yourself" Carl Jung)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: magritte
You are too disgusting for words. You do not think she has been victimized? If you Palin haters would show a little decency and speak out against the pond scum that have been trying to destroy her and her Family for three years you might look less like freaking no feeling Robots. What are you going to do? Are you going to wait around until all Conservative Women are treated this way.

Get some courage, and get rid of that loathing of Sarah, and Puppy loyalty for Perry, which does not allow you see his warts that the everyday person will see when the Media runs with them, You are a lost cause.

258 posted on 09/18/2011 9:43:13 PM PDT by samantha (Sarah is our TEAple. candidate for America the Beautiful...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
You yourself alluded to his drop from previous polls...

It is funny to watch you twist yourself into little knots of illogic to try to force a point.

I mentioned his drop from the previous poll from that same polling company, not from previous polls. A single poll cannot be a trend. It may signal a true shift in support, or it may be an anomaly. Now, if the other polls start showing a large drop from their previous numbers for Perry, then you can start talking about a "trend".

259 posted on 09/18/2011 9:44:35 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: flowerplough

That’s what I remembered her saying.

And Joan Jett rocks.


260 posted on 09/18/2011 9:45:25 PM PDT by Hugin ("A man'll usually tell you his bad intentions if you listen and let yourself hear it"--- Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: filbert

Actually, according to an Alaska Attorney General’s opinion in 2009, “Executive branch agencies have authority to pay or reimburse the legal expenses public officers incur in defending against ethics complaints, if four conditions are met: (1) the public officers are exonerated of violations of the Ethics Act or other wrongdoing; (2) the officers acted within the course and scope of their offices or employment; (3) the expenses incurred are reasonable; and (4) appropriate sources of funds are available to the agencies to pay the expenses.”

It may not be much since the office-holder will probably have to front her own legal expenses before getting them reimbursed, but as you can see, an innocent officer can have her expenses paid for by the state.


261 posted on 09/18/2011 9:46:21 PM PDT by The Pack Knight (Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

That opinion was rendered after she resigned and appears to be a blueprint for a way forward, not a means to redress prior abuses.


262 posted on 09/18/2011 9:54:39 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Spartan79

“She only lost the support of mindless ignoramuses by resigning. Unfortunately, 2008 proved that mindless ignoramuses comprise about 52% of the electorate.”

Do you want to think that over? It doesn’t make sense.

You’re obviously calling the 52% of those who voted for obama in ‘08 “mindless ignoramuses” but they, ipso facto, never supported Sarah Palin. So who are the mindless ignoramuses, as you would deem them, whose support she lost when resigning the governorship? Those, of whatever percent, who voted for her in ‘08.


263 posted on 09/18/2011 10:05:13 PM PDT by EDINVA ( Jimmy McMillan '12: because RENT'S TOO DAMN HIGH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: winoneforthegipper
...right after seeing my Dolphins face defeat one more time....

Bummer, huh?

Oh, wait....I'm not at all bummed.

Never mind.

264 posted on 09/18/2011 11:46:37 PM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: samantha
Facts are neither positive nor negative....they just are what they are.

If you don't like the facts about palin's time as Wasilla's mayor take it up with her. I had nothing to do with the 2300% increase in the town's long term debt or the botched ice-rink deal...that's all her.

Or, you could try to refute the facts but that's really just not possible.

265 posted on 09/19/2011 4:30:51 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Interesting and telling that you don't dispute what I said but simply hint (without any supporting detail) that there's more to it.

So, then, why don't you give us "all the facts" regarding the mismanagement of the ice rink deal, and all the facts regarding the 2300% explosion of Wasilla's long term debt under palin's leadership.

266 posted on 09/19/2011 4:40:43 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

Not only did The Undefeated tank big time in theaters it is already being discounted by 40% in pre-release sales at Walmart.


267 posted on 09/19/2011 4:43:08 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: samantha

Okay Bristol! Yer a larf riot !!!


268 posted on 09/19/2011 5:58:40 AM PDT by magritte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

” He’s an open border/amnesty/LaRaza squish, his pay to play the Texas way is deeply disturbing, and his Gardisil EO shows his nanny state tendencies.

Mistakes? Meh. I’d say it’s just who he is, a deeply flawed RINO, W redux,”

Perry= “ Obama-Lite.

And I HATE watered down Obama for breakfast!!


269 posted on 09/19/2011 6:23:13 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: se_ohio_young_conservative

*****
do you have inside info ?

the nomination is not offically decided until.. heck.. the Republican National Convention. So you don’t know if she is running or not.

*****

One relevant question is ... what is the filing deadline for the first primary ?

It sure would help to be on the ballot if you want to win !

-George


270 posted on 09/19/2011 5:19:06 PM PDT by Calif Conservative (rwr and gwb backer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

Reagan was hardly the safe choice for the GOP nomination in 1980.

George H.W. Bush and John Connolly were the establishment candidates that year.

GHWB won Iowa, and that left Reagan’s candidacy hanging by a thread.

Reagan won Iowa. Trounced Connolly in South Carolina. The rest was history for a great man, Reagan, one of our 5 greatest presidents ever

The establishment did all it could to dump Reagan. He was NOT viewed as the safe choice.

So your theory is marred by the most striking of victories, Reagan’s.

Reagan was variously viewed as too old, too conservative, too much of a cowboy, too volatile, too dumb, too senile, too radical, too dangerous. Reagan was too polarizing. He was hardly the safe choice, as you claim.

So the GOP did pick someone like Sarah Palin — and like Rick Perry — previously. That candidate was Ronald Reagan.

-George


271 posted on 09/19/2011 5:30:23 PM PDT by Calif Conservative (rwr and gwb backer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Calif Conservative
George H.W. Bush and John Connolly were the establishment candidates that year.

Then why did Reagan out poll all other candidates by almost 2 to 1. GOP voters overwhelmingly supported him regardless of the George Will types going after him. Were talking about the rank and file voters here, not the establishment. Just look at Primary polling for the day. The difference between Reagan and Palin is that Reagan had the support of the people. No one can point to me where Palin has that right now.

272 posted on 09/19/2011 5:42:21 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: winoneforthegipper

so you call Rooster a “feathered socialist?” Just because he’s not a Palin acolyte?

Maybe you haven’t figured something out. But I’ll spell it out for you

Gov. Palin is fine. She’d She’d make a fine president. And She can win. She can beat Obama.

And there’s no “... but...” or “...however...” appended to that. She can win. Just look at 270towin.com and you can see that it’s uphill for Obama today.

But it’s not Gov. Palin who is the problem.

It’s her acolytes that are the problem.

Mysterious references to Sun Tzu. “Just read it.” “The Sting”-like nose taps. Secret handshakes. Sarah has a plan.

The sheer arrogance of the Palin acolytes — they’re right and everyone else is wrong — is breath-taking. But it’s on display every day on FR and elsewhere. And every day, that arrogance reveals itself, little by little.

If she runs, she runs. If she doesn’t, she doesn’t.

Ultimately, your arrogance and name-calling will be put in their proper place by a force more powerful than you can comprehend. You will be reminded, week after week, who has the real power. The power resides not with the bloggers, or the acolytes, or the talking heads, or the corporations, or the government bureaucrats.

The American Voter. That is where true power resides. Whether Gov. Palin wins, or doesn’t win, whether she runs, or doesn’t run, the true power in this country — fortunately — doesn’t reside with your commentary.

“The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here.”

-George


273 posted on 09/19/2011 5:53:04 PM PDT by Calif Conservative (rwr and gwb backer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: OwatonnaNative

*****
if you want to tell me where you disagree with any policy publicly supported by Palin, I and most of her supporters would be happy to engage in that debate.
*****

Palin apparently is in favor of higher taxes on American corporations.

She raised taxes, as governor, on the oil industry.

I disagree with raising taxes on American corporations.

Instead of raising taxes, like Gov. Palin did, I would prefer

1. a tax rate of 10 percent on income. The only deduction is for primary residences

2. zero percent corporate tax rate

3. zero tax on capital gains

4. no tax breaks or shelters for capital losses

I call on Gov. Palin to give up her tax-raising inclinations and join — even at this late date — the conservative movement that demands lower spending and lower taxes. Gov. Palin should admit she was wrong to raise taxes on American corporations doing business in Alaska.

-George


274 posted on 09/19/2011 6:07:02 PM PDT by Calif Conservative (rwr and gwb backer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Interesting and telling that you don't dispute what I said but simply hint (without any supporting detail) that there's more to it. So, then, why don't you give us "all the facts" regarding the mismanagement of the ice rink deal, and all the facts regarding the 2300% explosion of Wasilla's long term debt under palin's leadership.

Excuse me? You made the charges and the accusations and I am suppose to PROVE you wrong. Where is your evidence from 'day' one of Mayor Palin's mismanagement? Media accounts are NOT evidence that Palin and Palin alone mismanaged and is responsible for Wasilla's long term debt.

275 posted on 09/19/2011 9:22:24 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

A retread is a poster who’s been banned and rejoined under a new name.


276 posted on 09/19/2011 10:00:39 PM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

iow...you do not dispute the facts.


277 posted on 09/20/2011 3:46:56 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-277 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson