Posted on 10/05/2011 10:16:14 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sarah Palin hasn’t closed the door yet on a presidential bid. But few Republicans appear to be waiting for her answer.
Never was it clearer than Tuesday, when Chris Christie’s announcement that he would not run in 2012 prompted a throng of strategists to conclude the Republican field was finally set – never mind Palin’s indecision. A new poll published on the same day revealed that two thirds of Republicans don’t want her to run.
After spending the better part of three years in the center of the national political spotlight, the former vice presidential candidate appears to have worn out the patience of the GOP.
Even as Republicans continue to cast about for new options, only a distinct minority are gazing longingly toward Wasilla – or wherever else Palin is in her secretive, largely apolitical travel schedule.
“She stirs up a lot of conservatives in the base, but I don’t think conservatives are looking to her as a presidential nominee who can save the conservative movement,” said Chuck Muth, the Nevada-based conservative activist....
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
That's odd. I seem to remember Juan McCain picking her to be his candidate for Vice President of the United States. Not Mitt Romney, or Rick Perry or Chris Crispie... I doubt he was watching Reality TV.
I agree. By “settle”, I merely meant that Cain supporters are conservatives that have found their candidate.
It is quite possible that Palin as the nominee would energize the left in a way that would help Obama.
With the left so filled with hate and always looking for an object upon which to project their bitterness, you may have hit upon the best reason for Sarah to no run and remain a 'celebrity' to campaign with the GOP nominee and House and Senate candidates!
As the filthy SEIU protesters make fools of themselves and pose themselves as enemies of We The People with their mindless protesting, what we in the tea party don't need to do is energize the scum of the earth to rally around barry bassturd for four more years of the misery and destruction he and his masters have planned. The whole fabricated outrage of the leftist scum is orchestrated to divide the nation and drum up mindless outrage in the liberal ranks. Those folks are so stupid already, there is no use helping them in their outrage by running Sarah whom we all believe would work to restore conservative values and principles in the nation and do so openly.
Perhaps stealth renovating is called for during these very barry-divisive times.
Unless Sarah has a legendary ego (which I don’t believe she does), I think she will recognize this reality and decline to run.
You forgot to mention her televised journey in Alaska with Kate Plus 8 after Palin quit her elected job.
This Palin “Will I? Won’t I?” sideshow is quality entertainment, though.
Palin spent the entire summer attacking the GOP establishment. Expecting them to support her is foolish, and I’m sure Palin doesn’t expect any support.
It’s the GOP voters that she needs to win the nomination, and it’s those voters she doesn’t have right now, according to every poll that includes her in it.
In a Washington Post/ABC News poll released this week,
But there is no link to it in the article.
???
Running a search easily takes me to the "analysis."
Here are the kind of Americans that were polled.
Americans by 44 to 21 percent say they're more apt to support a candidate who sees global warming as a problem to be addressed. And by 42 to 25 percent they're more apt to oppose one who favors a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Americans by 35 to 28 percent said they're more likely to oppose than to support a candidate who favors teaching creationism or intelligent design alongside evolution as part of the science curriculum in public schools.
Doesn't sound much like any republicans I know...
Then, on the last page, waaaay down at the very bottom the true nature of the article peeks out...
Christie’s renewed interest – he’d said he would not run, then said he’s reconsidering – garners some support, albeit not a mandate. While, as noted, 42 percent of leaned Republicans would like to see him enter the race, 34 percent would like him to stay out, and 24 percent have no opinion either way.
Christie does best, naturally, among the three in 10 leaned Republicans who are dissatisfied with the current field of candidates. In this group, 22 percent support him for the nomination.
Any way it’s sliced, Christie’s in a better position for a late arrival than is Sarah Palin. Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say by 49 to 35 percent that the more they hear about Palin, the less they like her. And by 2-1, 66 to 31 percent, they’d like her not to enter the race.
Once again I see I am being told who I am supposed to favor.
Back to the actual poll...
Two things here. One, which I do not recall having ever seen before.
The title...
ABC NEWS/WASHINGTON POST POLL: 2012 Election Update
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE AFTER 12:01 a.m. Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2011
Such an interesting date!
Then, when you get to the actual questions there is this...
(questions) 2-17 held for release.
Makes me wonder what was NOT included in the "analysis."
http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1128a22012Election.pdf
Finally, who did the poll?
The article said " in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll."
Did they do it internally?
No. This guy did it.
ABC polling director goes independent, bags ABC as client
2 August 2010 | By Brian Tarran
US— ABC’s “poobah of polling”, polling director Gary Langer, has left the broadcaster to set up his own survey research design, management and analysis business, Langer Research Associates (LRA).
http://www.research-live.com/news/people/abc-polling-director-goes-independent-bags-abc-as- client/4003278.article
Really? Now we have an in-the-bag ABC guy running polls that will be touted as "independent" when the results have a sour smell.
But lets see what is being said about him.
April 26, 2011
Categories: Polls
Belief and opinion
I just recorded a segment of the radio show "To the Point," in which ABC pollster Gary Langer articulated the point I've been trying to make about the polls suggesting huge chunks of the Republican Party "believe" discredited theories about Barack Obama's birth.
"I think these measurements are not really reflecting 'belief' in the true sense of the phrase," he said. "Many people are expressing their opinion rather than an assertion of factual reality. People who don’t like you are going to take an opportunity to send a message.... They’re simply taking advantage of an opportunity to express antipathy toward him."
Ben Smith, http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/Belief_and_opinion.html
Apparently, Mr. Langer has been pushing the "discredited theories" mantra.
Then there is peer opinion of him. I looked around, not a lot there, mostly negative.
Gary Langer Hates Robopolls, Probably Because They’re More Accurate Than His Live Interviewer Polls And He’s Apparently Just Jealous, The Poor Thing, So He’s Decided That Accuracy Doesn’t Matter.
Gary Langer, Director of Polling at ABC News, has a problem with what he calls “robopolls” and what we’re going to call interactive voice response, or IVR, polls.
As best I can tell, his root problem is that they’re more accurate than his live interviewer polls, despite using what he considers inferior methodology. But here, let him tell you:...
http://researchrants.wordpress.com/2010/01/28/gary-langer-hates-robopolls-probably-because-theyre-more- accurate-than-his-live-interviewer-polls-and-hes-apparently-just-jealous-the-poor-thing-so-hes-decided-that -accuracy-doesnt-matter/
The rub? It is because Mr. Langer likes to push the results in the direction he wants.
“Lack of respondent selection” is a major bullshit non-issue, brought up time and time again by Langer and his ilk to discredit research that threatens their world. According to them, your poll is unreliable if you don’t start every call by asking to speak to a specific random person — the youngest male, for instance, or the person in the household with the next birthday. There’s absolutely no reason why “robopolls” can’t do this — it’s just another question, for crying out loud — and as far as I know, there’s no evidence that there’s any reason for them to do it, or for anyone else to, other than because Langer says they should.
The additional info there is very revealing as to the inside methods that can produce results according to the clients wishes.
My conclusion? Unchanged.
Americans by 44 to 21 percent say they're more apt to support a candidate who sees global warming as a problem to be addressed. And by 42 to 25 percent they're more apt to oppose one who favors a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Americans by 35 to 28 percent said they're more likely to oppose than to support a candidate who favors teaching creationism or intelligent design alongside evolution as part of the science curriculum in public schools.
Doesn't sound much like any republicans I know...
.
It Sure is funny that the only person that has been told not to run is Sarah Palin, Not Perry, not Romney, not McCain last time.
No one in the history in American politics has been told not to run as much as this women.
Where are the polls asking people if Romney should run or anyone else?
Just Palin polls.
Why, because as Rush says, they will tell you who they are most afraid of,
Well, we’re BOTH off on that call...(g)
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.