In the last 12 months, I didn’t realize there were this many stupid citizens in this country. I guess I’d better start stocking more ammo....
its Palin or BUST
Obama have a -24 unfavorable rating yet the author still he have a chance over Palin’s -14 unfavorable rating. Author is cherry picking poll data
Here’s a good response from a couple of months ago:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2514217/posts
If you take out the killings, Washington DC actually has a very very low crime rate. ___ Marion Berry
Daniel Larison??? Is this guy another Romney faggot?
She is unelectable at a national level. 40% is a tad bit short of a majority, no?
In a head-to-head of Palin v. Obama I think this puke would give it to Obama.
Maybe it's Larry Sinclair with a nom de plume.
When it comes to Sarah PAlin and the Left (even if that left has an R by their name) watch what they do......not what they say.
I know it's tantamount ot "hating" to even ask this question, but have their been polls that disprove this one? Have their been polls that show Palin is popular outside of hardcore conservatives?
I don't think such evidence is necessary for someone to run, but it is a helpful indicator.
Are polls suspect because we don't like the results? If the WSJ starts publishing polls that show Palin doing well, will we start praising them?
In addition, the poll shows that 52% have problems with a candidate who has been endorsed by Palin
Now, for the other side of what I wrote above...
This indicates the problems with general polling. By this specific result, one could say "Ah, look, it's a bad thing that she backs a candidate!" (52% "have problems"? That's hardly damning. 48% don't? That can easily go the other way depending on the day of the week.)
Yet look at RESULTS. Palin backs a candidate, and he or she does well, at least in the primaries.
In November, it'll be hard to see what is the result of a Palin endorsement and what is just someone being sick and tired of what we have now. I think if Palin's candidates win, her supporters will say it's a win for Palin, but it may only be that anyone supporting the opposition to the Dems would look like they backed a winner.
The difference with Palin's numbers this far out from 2012 and Obama's, of course, is that Obama had nothing but positive celebrity-loving press from the MSM--his book resulted in completely uncritical love, and that was the initial tone of what casual observers got. One was primed to be positive about him, and most people do go with their gut.
Palin is a known quantity, and most of that is a result of MSM bashing, whether of the "There are no 'Death Panels'!" sort (no, there aren't things CALLED Death Panels, but in practice, she is 100% correct) that the MSM loves because they can toss it out and not have to explain, or some of Palin's own comments which folks decide all on their own they don't care for (I was shocked yesterday when a Palin fan who watches her appearances, read her book and thinks she's great said she doesn't think she has the knowledge to be president--she's not alone, and whether it's because of Couric or other propaganda, that's not going to help).
Polls are nice but they shouldn't impact someone's choice to run. A candidate can grow IN the campaign, and alter perceptions. But at the same time, we have to deal with reality--if the reality is that Palin can overcome these tremendously unfair slams against her, she deserves to win. If the reality is that she's so damaged by the unfair press that she can't win, what then?
Just nobody out there willing to take on the right people and say the right things like Sarah Palin. Until that changes she’s got my complete support.
It’s just hard to believe she hasn’t won more people over with her right on point attacks on the liberal agenda.
Palin hasn’t run for any national office except VP, and that was in McCain’s shadow so there was a limit on how bright she could shine. If she grabbed for the brass ring in earnest, her positive numbers would shoot up like a rocket.