What's Sarah Doing?

Dick Morris' Website ^ | June 1, 2011 | Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

[sargon]

The polling suggests that she could not be nominated.

No, the polling just suggests...

[Polybius]

"In any case, Sarah Palin is doing a disservice to her party. There are many good candidates wanting to nurture their infant campaigns who cannot grow in Palin’s shadow."

Oh, really? If she is so 'unelectable', then how could she possibly be hurting any candidate?

A candidate can be absolutely "unelectable" in the general Presidential election and still be very "electable" in their own Party's primary.

Exhibit A: George McGovern in 1972.

George McGovern hurt other Democrat Party candidates in 1972 that would not have suffered a 61% to 37% bloodbath in the general election by being very popular with a base that represented only a small minority of all voters while 61% of all voters wanted nothing to do with him.

Palin's numbers are even worse than George McGovern's.

Sixty five percent (65%) of ALL American voters have stated that they will DEFINITELY NOT vote for Sarah Palin in the general election.

In the GENERAL PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, that is about as "unelectable" as you can possibly get.

However, that does not means that Palin is not very popular with many Republicans. As a matter of fact, as Palin threads show, Palin has very loyal following among many Republicans.

The only problem is that Republicans make up only 29% of all voters.

One hundred percent (100%) of the Republican vote in the general Presidential election and 65% of all other voters stating that they will DEFINITELY NOT vote for Palin works out to an electoral bloodbath that would make George McGovern look like a strong candidate.

Whatever "infant campaign" is out there now or in the future is not a campaign that has already alienated 65% of all voters to such an extent that they say that they will DEFINITELY NOT vote for such a candidate.

The danger with Sarah Palin is that she has a GOOD chance of winning 60% of the 29% of all voters who are Republican.

Once Palin is nominated as the GOP candidate, however, Barack Hussein Obama is guaranteed at least a 65% to 35% landslide reelection since sixty five percent (65%) of ALL American voters have stated that they will DEFINITELY NOT vote for Sarah Palin in the general election.

The reason that I am so opposed to a Sarah Palin nomination is beacause the numbers show that a Sarah Palin Nomination will guarantee the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama by at least a 65% to 35% magin.

American simply cannot afford four more years of Barack Hussein Obama in the White House.

[Polybius]

Why doesn’t the media just ignore her? If she can’t win, the media would focus on the pubbie that will win and go after him. But they are focused on Palin. Why?

Why?

Because 34% of all voters love to love her and 65% of all voters love to hate her.

THAT sells newspapers and THAT generates clicks on a web page and THAT generates $$$$$$ for the media companies which is what the media foot soldiers are hired to do.

Why the media frenzy over Charlie Sheen these past three months?

Because Charlie Sheen sells newspapers and Charlie Sheen generates clicks on a web page.

THAT generates $$$$$$ for the media companies which is what the media foot soldiers are hired to do.

[SuziQ]

...sixty five percent (65%) of ALL American voters have stated that they will DEFINITELY NOT vote for Sarah Palin in the general election.

Why do you assume that Sarah can't move her approval numbers during a campaign? And if it's a head to head match with Obama, don't you think some folks will look at his record over the previous four years and be worried what else he could do to ruin the country during four more?