Skip to comments.Palin's Reagan Like Poll numbers (Palin in same spot politically as Reagan in 1978)
Posted on 05/15/2010 10:25:30 AM PDT by Brices Crossroads
click here to read article
Actually, Palin is in somewhat better shape versus Obama than Reagan was at this point against Carter. In December 1978, Carter led Reagan in the Gallup poll by 57-35%. Even after he clinched the nomination, in the spring of 1980, national opinion polls showed Reagan trailing Carter by 25%. (Time, March 31, 1980) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,921912-1,00.html#ixzz0lPAErDI8
In fact, these early polls (flawed as they are) actually show Palin doing better against Obama than Reagan was doing against Carter. The notoriously pro-Dem PPP poll shows Obama ahead of Palin 50-43%, as of May 7-9, 2010.
The author makes number of interesting points including the bandwagan effect. the high number of undecided voters is key because these voters are PERSUADABLE. A campaign is about persuasion, and no one whom I see is a better campaigner than Sarah Palin
Ping the Palin list!
That has got to have a lot of folks on both sides of the political spectrum worried.
“The notoriously pro-Dem PPP poll shows Obama ahead of Palin 50-43%, as of May 7-9, 2010.”
Wellllll...not to mention that he always polls higher because we have the Pavlovian response to not be seen as “against the black man” in anything we say or do. I’ll bet those numbers are off by as much as 10-15%.
“That has got to have a lot of folks on both sides of the political spectrum worried.”
I know it does because they continue to attack her. It has to be frustrating to the leftist and to the Establishment GOPers like Jeb Bush and Romney. They are casting about for an alternative. Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Chris Christie.
Just like the pubbie establishment was looking for an alternative to Reagan right up until he clinched the nomination. Heck. Six percent left him to vote for John Anderson. They never really got over what Reagan did until Bush 41 took over and kicked the Reaganites out. They don’t want another repeat of 1980. So they are savaging Palin 24/7.
The dimwit supports McLame after he kicked her in the ass?
If she is the best the republicrats can do, God help us.
America is begging for conservative leadership, not beanbags.
Or party hacks.
Articles I've seen this week indicate the RNC is going to change the rules to emphasize far more proportion delegate selection in 2012. This makes the route that much tougher for Palin. It will make for more of an endurance contest and increase the impact of establishment backing (i.e. -- money).
I don't think it will work, though. If she runs, she'll have a ground army that will be unreal.
Palin would make a good president, and if she doesn’t run and a Repub wins in 2012 then I think she’d make a good Secretary of the Interior.
With all the hate and ridicule directed at Palin, many people are uncomfortable declaring publicly that she’s OK. Good thing we still have secret ballots in America, I remember that the “culture” mavens were shocked at Reagan’s victory too. After all their hard work vilifying RR, they were surprised when he won. They didn’t take the secrecy of voting into consideration.
When the big media, the Arts and education all pile on the ridicule, they drive nonconformists deep underground, like those Reagan voters. I say keep it up liberals, keep slamming Sarah, and you’ll drive normal patriots deeper underground, and into the Tea Party. Their arrogance will, in the end, defeat them.
As much as I like her she is....un-electable.
Her voice alone drives me nuts. That “hopey changy” crap does not sound presidential...flame on.
Each state Central committee makes that call isn’t that right? They might be able to do it in some but not others. When some of the Candidates she has backed win governorships and Senate seats, she is going to be able to prevent them from jiggering the rules. I think it is pretty hard for a National Party to do this when they don’t have a President. Palin has not taken any cheap shots at Steele and he has shown himself pretty deferential to the Tea Party.
The GOP Establishment knows that is it cheats and the cheating deprives her of the nomination, it will adversely affect turnout and might even generate a third Party which probably means 4 more years of O. Like you , I don’t see them getting away with it. Heck. Mitt Romney couldn’t even save Bennett’s bacon in Utah at the state convention! Such a massive rule change would require a lot more organization and support than they have. And it could bite them in states where Palin does not win, but would get delegates under proportional representation rules.
Yet she is the most coveted, and attended speaker in America, something does not add up. (your opinion fails)
-—”Her voice alone drives me nuts. That hopey changy crap does not sound presidential...flame on.
Yet she is the most coveted, and attended speaker in America, something does not add up. (your opinion fails)”
I love that when you finally get these folks to answer the question: who is electable, then? It’s always some local Congressman, one-percenter, or Mitt Romney/Rudy Giuliani, etc.
I don’t like the sound of her voice either but I do like, almost always, what she says, and I support her. I supported Fred Thompson too but I couldn’t stand to hear him speak because of all the umms and uhhhs. Every politician I support has something about him or her I don’t like.
I did, however, thoroughly enjoy the recent vid of Christie ripping that newsgerbil a new one, what a joy to hear! It was off the cuff, totally and completely honest, no weighing of consequences, no hesitation, just balls out statesmenship ala Churchill. The young man has a great future!
The stuff I read didn't address that, but I'll look into it. I know the RNC plans to push back the first primaries (IA, NH, SC, NV) to the March timeframe.
The GOP Establishment knows that is it cheats and the cheating deprives her of the nomination, it will adversely affect turnout and might even generate a third Party which probably means 4 more years of O.<
The establishment also clearly remembers when the Reaganites took over the party. The key question is whether they will risk party suicide to keep it from happening again. My own personal opinion is that I think they will. We'll see.
If she runs it will be amazing to watch because it will be a political death struggle between the establishment and the grassroots.
I agree with this statement, except that in my view, Palin is in MUCH better shape versus Obama, than Reagan was at this point against Carter.
Carter was a bumbling, feel-good, doofus sort of idealistic liberal, but Obama is a committed, doctrinaire Marxist, who has already managed to do damage to our constitutional republican foundations that the liberals of Carter's era could only dream of.
The threat that Obama holds to the continued existence of our nation is real, and has alarmed the population so badly, that an unprecedented popular movement of opposition has sprung up, in the form of the Tea Parties, 9/12 groups, and the Oath Keepers.
Nothing like this occurred during Carter's presidency. The divisions between left and right in America are nearly on a war footing, and the animosity and anger is only just barely being contained. It's an explosive atmosphere, more akin to the tension present just prior to a civil war.
Sarah Palin has the wind of the Tea Party rebellion at her back - something that Reagan didn't have, although he did profit immensely from the public's dissatisfaction with Carter.
At a time when virtually all vocal republicans had renounced their spines, souls and testicles in favor of progressive Political Corruptness and the demonrat way, Sarah Palin stands up and reminds them and us what an American believes.
And she does it with grace despite the withering fire laid down by both sides of the political aisle. God Bless her and her family!
You still stuck on that debunked meme? Sheesh, friend, you really need to catch up.
“As much as I like her she is....un-electable.
Her voice alone drives me nuts.”
Nation: But Can Reagan Be Elected?
In the fall of 1979, California pollster Mervin Field felt the same about Reagan as did nearly all the pros. As late as March 1980, after he clinched the nomination, he was about 25 points behind Carter. People were acknowledging that he had a chance, but it was a long shot:
“But to say that Reagan can be elected is by no means to say that he will be. On the contrary, he looks very much the underdog. Some party operatives are plainly unhappy with his selection. In Massachusetts, where both Bush and Anderson defeated Reagan, party leaders are not yet reconciled to the Reagan candidacy. Says one: “There’s a vacuum of leadership at the national level; and what appears to be the Republican Party’s response? A 69-year-old man who has done virtually nothing for years. We’re at the same stage the Whigs were. There’s no choice.”
Reagan has a history of committing rhetorical blunders that drive away voters. His quest in 1976 was damaged when he suggested vaguely, without proper research and consideration, that $90 billion in federal programs should be turned back to the states. He then spent months explaining that the affected programs would not be eliminated, only transferred. As Governor, Reagan was outraged by student unrest and once proclaimed: “The state of California has no business subsidizing intellectual curiosity.”
Worse perhaps than the verbal gaffe is Reagan’s relentlessly simple-minded discussion of complex problems. He is aware that he is charged with this failing, and in his 1967 inaugural address on becoming Governor of California, he asserted: “We have been told there are no simple answers to complex problems. Well, the truth is there are simple answers, just not easy ones.”
Reagan was seen as an “amiable dunce”, “too old”, “too ill informed and too simplistic” and he was a dangerous lunatic who couldn’t wait to start a nuclear war with the Russians. And he was 25 points behind just seven months before the election. From that vantage point, he looked so completely unelectable.
BTW, you may not like her voice, and you may not like “hopey changey.” That is a matter of taste. I doubt that you want to have socialism served for the next 6 years with Obama’s soothing baritone.
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.