Skip to comments.69% of GOP Voters Say Palin Helped McCain (Favorability among Republicans: ***91%***!!!)
Posted on 11/07/2008 8:31:02 AM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republican voters say Alaska Governor Sarah Palin helped John McCains bid for the presidency, even as news reports surface that some McCain staffers think she was a liability.
Only 20% of GOP voters say Palin hurt the partys ticket, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Six percent (6%) say she had no impact, and five percent (5%) are undecided.
Ninety-one percent (91%) of Republicans have a favorable view of Palin, including 65% who say their view is Very Favorable. Only eight percent (8%) have an unfavorable view of her, including three percent (3%) Very Unfavorable.
When asked to choose among some of the GOPs top names for their choice for the partys 2012 presidential nominee, 64% say Palin. The next closest contenders are two former governors and unsuccessful challengers for the presidential nomination this year -- Mike Huckabee of Arkansas with 12% support and Mitt Romney of Massachusetts with 11%.
Three other sitting governors Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Charlie Crist of Florida and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota all pull low single-digit support.
These findings echo a survey earlier this week which found that Republicans were happier with their vice presidential candidate than with their presidential nominee. Seventy-one percent (71%) said McCain made the right choice by picking Palin as his running mate, while only 65% said the party picked the right nominee for president.
The key for the 44-year-old Palin will be whether she can broaden her base of support. An Election Day survey found that 81% of Democrats and, more importantly, 57% of unaffiliated voters had an unfavorable view of her.
Palin, Alaskas first woman governor, was elected to a four-year term in 2006. She was largely unknown nationally until McCain chose her to be the partys vice presidential candidate. She quickly became a darling of the GOPs conservative base and energized the partys rank-and-file.
Speculation about her future has run high for weeks when it appeared Barack Obama was likely to beat McCain. Already this week there is talk of her possibly taking the seat of embattled Republican Senator Ted Stevens if he manages to hang on and win won reelection despite recent federal felony convictions. Stevens would have to step down if his appeal of the convictions is unsuccessful.
Palin could also run for another term as Governor in the state where she still enjoys very high approval ratings.
Among Republicans, 66% of men and 61% of women say Palin is their choice for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. Sixty-six percent (66%) of GOP women have a Very Favorable view of her, as do 64% of men.
While Palins high favorables suggest she has a bright political future in the Republican Party, it is important to note that favorites four years out from a presidential election quite often do not get the nomination. Obama, for example, was just an Illinois state senator four years ago, and Hillary Clinton appeared a shoo-in for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008.
Similarly, vice presidential candidates historically have seldom risen to the highest office by election.
Republicans are closely divided over the two most important issues in the next presidential election: 31% say economic issues, 30% say national security. Fifteen percent (15%) list fiscal issues, followed by cultural issues (12%) and domestic issues (6%). Five percent (5%) are undecided. Palin is overwhelmingly the top choice for 2012 among voters in all these categories.
Over two-thirds of Republicans describe themselves as conservative in terms of foreign policy, fiscal and social issues.
Eighty percent (80%) of Republicans have a favorable view of Huckabee, including 46% Very Favorable. Sixteen percent (16%) regard him unfavorably.
Eighty-one percent (81%) view Romney favorably, with 45% Very Favorable. Fifteen percent (15%) have an unfavorable opinion of him.
Jindal, Pawlenty, and Crist are far less known than the other candidates. Roughly 40% of GOP voters have no opinion one way or the other of these three Republican Governors.
I remember seeing that one...there are a few starting to pop up around the web. Nice job.
So I guess a Palin/Shays ticket is out of the question? :-)
Damn Straight! And we do NOT want a Sarah Palin that’s been filtered through the RINO Machine! We want only the Sarah true to God, herself and her convictions!
The anti-Palin trolls will be just like the Bush Bots....they will be removed with force from the New Conservative Republican Party
Preferably with hacksaws.
I can tell you with certainty that Saint Athanasius and rhinohunter feel EXACTLY the way you do.
I wonder what percentage of GOP voters would say exactly the same thing.
maybe a butter knife....slow and painful like the last 8 Liberal years under Bush
I think there are some guys who would never vote for a female for President or VP. On both sides of the aisle.
“But at this point, I am opposed to her being our nominee in 2012.”
What’s the nature of your opposition?
You won’t get me to disagree — I come from Red State America.
Nope. I would like someone who can persuade them, but no, they are not a concern of mine.
You ever notice when we give the American public Diet Coke (Bob Dole, John McCain, Gerald Ford) we get pounded. But when we give them the real thing (Ronald Reagan Conservatism) we are able to win.
Yup. I agree.
As for Romney, I just don't trust him. He's a slick fraud, in my view, and not a true conservative.
What's a troll? I never called you that.
Your "born on" date means diddly to me, except that I noticed you are new here and welcomed you to FR.
You did not comment on any of my comments to you, and did not answer my questions.
You mention "troll", projection on yourself I guess.
You obviously are propagating the same things about Palin that the despicable Carl Cameron and others are, and it's clear you are helping to make her illrevelant for future political influence.
You are doing more than that, you are working against conservatism and Palin.
I prefer reasoned discourse, not evading issues.
Get with the program, and don't try to snow me anymore or infer I am calling you names. But if the shoe fits, wear it.
Your www handle fits you to a T.
“69% of GOP Voters Say Palin Helped McCain (Favorability among Republicans: ***91%***!!!)”
It is my fervent hope that we can do better. She has her strengths--she's very likable. She gives a good stump speech. But in my opinion, she's underqualified. Anyone reading my posts here and there lately will know I have been harping on her answers to the SCOTUS questions in the Couric interview, but to me, her answers were so abysmal they are absolute dealbreakers.
She's personally very likable, has a beautiful family. But that's not good enough. I voted for McCain/Palin last Tuesday, because that was the rational thing to do, but I'm really, really hoping we don't get stuck with her in 2012.
People are smitten with Sarah. They make excuses for her. But I don't let my kind regards for her get in the way of my judgement. Further, she has been under constant attack, and the instinct is to circle the wagons and defend her, which I understand. But that doesn't mean she has to be our nominee. In my view, the best role for her in 2012 would be as a campaigner, giving speeches on behalf of the ticket, but not on it. And I think she'd be a good fit for Sec. of Energy. But not president.
About the SCOTUS questions, as I said, some think I'm harping, but here's how I describe it. A conservative president not understanding the Constitution is like a preacher not understanding the Resurrection. There are some questions you simply shouldn't be allowed to mangle.
Go watch her answers on the subject with Couric. First she's asked about Roe. She says it should be a state issue. Ok, fine. I agree with that. But why Sarah? Why is it a state issue. She says it's because SHE thinks states can better deal with stuff like that. WRONG ANSWER. Then she makes matters worse by explaining that she's pro-life and that she would rather have the states deal with it. DOUBLE WRONG ANSWER. Go ask Scalia, he'll tell you his stance on abortion has NOTHING to do with it. It's a state issue for one reason alone--the Constitution says so. The FEDS have no business getting into the question at all. It's left to the states.
Then, when asked to name one, just one, case she disagrees with, she smacks her lips, says "Mmmmmm", and gives a BS fudge answer befitting someone underqualified trying to BS their way through a job interview.
Anyone who thinks Ronaldus Maximus would have butchered those answers so badly is sadly mistaken. The Constitution is THE fundamental document for conservatives. Learn it, live it, love it. If you don't know what you're talking about, I'm not interested in having you as my president. It's that simple.
People say she got thrown in, she'll learn. Fine. Let her learn. But I want a president who lives and breathes the Constitution. Call me picky.
Because I want a president who understands the Constitution and can articulate it effectively. See above for more details. Being cute and likable, having a lovely family, and drawing big crowds are not on my top 5 list of criteria for a president.
Sarah Palin is our future.
No one else even comes close at this point.
Huckabee won GA in the primary, and has a lot of support here. I assume that is why the flyer with Huckabee’s endorsement of Chambliss was mailed.
I agree about Romney. He’s our Bill Clinton. Too slick by half.
PS- My trouble with her began during the campaign, but I held my tongue as best as I could until it was over. That was the right thing to do. But now that it’s over, I’m saying my peace, not that it counts for much. I really think she’d be a disaster. I want better. We should be more demanding. We should find better.
Huck + Obama = Doom.
This is so blatantly obvious.
Without Sarah, McCain would have been dead in the water three months ago. She generated excitement and hope that hasn’t been seen in decades.
That is why the long knives are out for Sarah... fear, pure fear.
I myself would love Duncan Hunter, the trouble is he just doesn’t have “it”. His views are spot on, but that won’t cut it these days. Unfortunately it’s as much an American Idol popularity contest as anything else.
Sarah Palin is as close to Ronnie Reagan as I see in the GOP these days and in 2012 she’ll be more likely to interview politically correctly and so on.
I’d rather have a conservative who isn’t brilliant than an intellectual RINO any day of the week!
After first Clinton and now the zero, the bar has been so lowered as to be a complete joke anyway.
“People need to keep sending money to Palin. Its gonna take her four years to get enough from all over the country to buy her way in like everyone else does.”
I hadn’t thought of that - and we better think of it. In four years Palin will have six years experience to Hussein’s four (I don’t care what they’re governing) assuming she’s re-elected as Governor and not conned into going to the Senate. Also the whole country might be broke by then. She’ll need what? a billion dollars? to run against He Who Buys Elections.
Good answer, with supports.
I would agree that a president, especially a conservative one, should know the constitution. But the Couric interview is not sufficient to know, accurately, what Palin knows. In fact it’s vastly insufficient. If you depend on the interview for information about Palin’s mind, you are letting Couric and her editors manipulate you.
We can be certain, based on her political actions and her language that Palin has true conservative instincts, a love for the rational method and a courageous spirit that rises to the top maybe once a century.
I have heard Palin directly criticize politicians for using the neo-Orwellian style of language that so infects our society, that way of talking around a subject, usually in order to avoid accountability. It was once only used by lawyers and politicians but today can be heard spoken commonly in the streets. I think this style of communication illustrates a symptom of moral downfall, and for Palin to take a stand against it demonstrates a mixture of wisdom and common sense rarely or never seen in politicians.
No one since Reagan has demonstrated Palin’s conservative instincts, rational mind and fierce moral courage.
Yea, you got a point.
How could anyone get more informed in just 4 years?
Lets now, in 2008, decide what she should do in 4 years.
It's sad to see how many (even here) buy into the liberal talking points.
You may not learn anything in the next four years, but don't project it on Palin.
Good comment to Huck. Thanks reason is faith.
Now, 4 years before 2012, who do you suggest?
Thanks in advance for your answer.
Genius the race was called over before Alaskans could even finish voting. Palin is plenty popular in Alaska.
Then why was the vote higher in Hawaii?
Because single women with kids will vote for a sugar daddy over someone who expects them to get a job and take care of themselves.
I think some of the “boys at Fox” are in the “we need a bigger tent” school. Of course, they haven’t figured out that’s what McCain was largely about...
All I'm saying is we should try to find other options. If Sarah wants to run, fine, but how about finding some serious competition and letting the best win? Anyway, as usual, I'm in a minority view. Groupthink rules. And I get accused of following talking points. Yawn.
We need to endlessly remind them they are apparently among a whopping 3% of the party.
That's a fair enough point. I don't think the two questions I am referring to were edited. I don't think they clipped out the part where she knew what she was talking about. She gave complete answers, they were simply horrendous answers.
But let's say you are correct, it's not sufficient. That's fine with me. That's why I suggested the other day that a conservative group host a series of debates on the Constitution, and invite Sarah. Let's see her on our turf, on our terms, demonstrate her knowledge of the Constitution, and of republican government. Put her up against a liberal heavyweight, Larry Tribe or someone, and see how she does.
My problem is that OUR side is unable or unwilling to cast a critical eye towards her, and I think that's a problem.
That makes sense.
I do and they love her!
Can you help me out and provide some examples? I am not saying she's immoral. She has a lovely family. She seems to be a fine person. But just give me an example of moral courage, because I'm not sure what you mean.
I see a very charming lady who obviously is not a liberal. I'm just not sold on her as head of state. I'd like to find better. I'd at least like to find competition. People are asking me to name names, and I wish I could. I'm simply putting out an APB. It's sad the conservatives look so dimly upon the notion of COMPETITION.
Actually she was the only one on the ticket I was voting for.
Same here. And I suspect that we belong to a very large group.
That's obviously the big question. It's hard to believe our ranks are so barren, but then, reviewing the field from the recent primaries, it doesn't look good. You can start by tossing all of them out. I have no use for Romney, or Rudy, or Fred, or Huckabee, although of those, I think Huckabee is the strongest. But he's already been tested and failed.
A lot of people like Jindal. He's not sexy like Sarah, but he's at least as experienced as she is. He's worth tossing in the mix. I don't know much about DeMint, but he seems pretty good.
We don't seem to have a lot of options. All I'm saying is instead of starting the Sarah 2012 campaign now, I would hope conservatives would look for options, competition. I would go into the primaries with a skeptical eye towards Sarah. I'd settle for her if I had to. Hell, I voted for McCain last Tuesday, clearly I'm willing to settle.
What about you? Let's say Sarah didn't run. Can you suggest any viable altenatives? Thanks in advance for your response.
Are you not aware of the fact that Palin fought against corrupt members of her own party, against the odds, because it was the right thing to do, and won?
See my tagline. Nobody else has done anything like this, it’s the absolute standard for political righteousness and moral courage.
If you want competition, you can forget about Romney.
No valid process has taken place by which Palin’s knowledge of the constituion can be questioned, therefore the question is invalid.
The Couric interview was a test of how bad Couric and the network wanted to make Palin look. Nothing more. The interview can also be described as a fraud, as can any critique of Palin inspired by the fraudulent interview.
Because of the sinister behavior of the media the true focus is on their behavior, not on Palin.
I caution you once again, don’t let Couric manipulate you.
Where did you get those? (Maybe it’s further on down the thread - am trying to catch up B4 my wife claims the computer for the rest of the evening!)
“Bought a 10 pack of bumper stickers yesterday”
Where did you get those? (Maybe it’s further on down the thread - am trying to catch up B4 my wife claims the computer for the rest of the evening!)
Again, no valid process has taken place by which Palins knowledge of the constituion can be questioned, therefore the question is invalid.
To illustrate, imagine I throw mud on you as I drive past you on the street. Then I call up your family and question your hygiene. My behavior is fraudulent, because you just took a shower that morning and the mess on your shirt was my fault not yours.
C’mon now, you didn’t need to insult Dole like that...
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.