Can Palin be Stopped by the Backbenchers? (The facts as we now know them)

4/17/2010 | Brices Crossroads

[onyx]

Hey, you’re doing great work! We can hardly contain our excitement!

[section9]

Hmmm. I wouldn’t be surprised if others are asked Palin and she’s deliberately underpolled.

Trust me. The media is trying to demoralize her fans.

Best,

Chris

[Polybius]

Polybius would rather lose with one term governor Mitt Romeny of the famed Romney care, than to win with Sarah Palin whom Polybius loves to describe as “another unqualified Affirmative Action candidate.”

If you check out my posts prior to the 2008 election, you will find that I slammed Romney on a regular basis.

I do not know for sure if Romney would lose to Obama but I would bet my life against yours that Sarah Palin would guarantee an Obama victory.

BOTH Obama and Palin are pathetically under-qualified Affirmative Action candidates that, with their qualifications, would have been laughed off the national stage if they had been white males in 2008.

"Hello. My name is Samuel Palin. I have been Governor of a State half the size of San Diego, CA for less than two years. Before that, I was Mayor of a town of less than 6,000. So, vote for me to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency of the United States of America."

Even Greta Van Susteren wipes the floor with Sarah Palin in the ratings on FOX, a network with right-of-center viewers, in the same month and in the same time slot. Short of being beaten in the ratings by Geraldo Rivera, that's as bad as it gets on FOX.

How do you expect the same Sarah Palin to win a Presidential election when she has to be judged, not just by right-of-center Americans, but also by the other half of America?

Among all voters Sarah Palin already has a 57% UNFAVORABLE rating.

In terms of a Presidential election, such numbers signify a chance of electability that is lower than whale scat at the bottom of the ocean.

[DryFly]

Agree completely, but you can’t argue with moonbats.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

I think SP speaks in Biblical code for those of us who really like her. These biblical allusions are not meant to be understood by the modern day Herods or Pontius Pilates or Caiphases (ie-the Establishment and the MSM and militant atheists) but by those who have ears to hear.

She absolutely does!

And as we well know there are countless detractors and critics, particularly on THIS forum, who either just do not get it or refuse to listen to what she is saying.

Instead, we see these snarky little wishful thinking comments that "I don't think she is running" when she is clearly telegraphing that she is, beginning with the various "running" metaphors she used in Going Rogue and continuing with the references to Esther.

Whenever you challenge her detractors, you invariably learn that they have never even bothered to read her book and try to understand her.

[unseen1]

what folks fail to mention and why all these polls with Mitt, Huck and Palin are skewed is that out of the three only Palin has been targeted with nonstop negative media attacks. Of course Mitt and Huck are going to be up, they get good press at the moment. Considering that Palin has had nonstop negative attacks on her since Aug 28th 2008 and she is only 2 pts lower than Mitt and Huck who have little to no negative attacks on them shows you who really is leading.

If Mitt or Huck won the nomination the press will go negative just like they did with McCain after he won the nomination. Which means Mitt's and Huck favs will fall their negs will rise and Obama’s poll numbers in relationship to theirs will most likely go up.

the only poll that comes close to giving you the real picture of what is going on is the 47-45 Obama-Palin poll. since both have had extensive exposure and extensive negative views.

I would imagine that when Mitt is portrayed as a “fat cat banker” and friend of “greedy wall street” by the media he will lose 5-10% when Huck is portrayed as a soft on crime tax raising christianist by the MSM his numbers will drop by the same.

The media is powerless to impact Palin’s numbers anymore. they have thrown everything at her. Mitt and Huck the press hasn't even begun on yet.

[unseen1]

There was this thing called “holy week” which depressed all TV ratings for the week. But don’t let context get in the way of your stupidity.

[SmokingJoe]

the only poll that comes close to giving you the real picture of what is going on is the 47-45 Obama-Palin poll. since both have had extensive exposure and extensive negative views

0bama has never had negative views from the lamestream media. They keep throwing their panties at him instead.

“The media is powerless to impact Palin’s numbers anymore. they have thrown everything at her. Mitt and Huck the press hasn't even begun on yet.”

You are right.
The ability of the media to further affect Sarah Plain’s numbers is very limited. They have thrown everything at her already and she is still stronger than ever. The law of diminishing returns for the media attacks on Sarah Palin is starting to set in

[mad_as_he$$]

So the reported $1 million per episode of “Palin’s Alaska” is going for the sidelines? Huckabee doesn't make near that and works every weekend.

[mad_as_he$$]

So the reported $1 million per episode of “Palin’s Alaska” is going for the sidelines? Huckabee doesn't make near that and works every weekend.

[unseen1]

Agreed that the MSM has not gone negative on Obama however the new media certainly has. Rush, Glen, blogs Hannity, etc. ,while they do not have as big a microphone yet, the negative attacks have made Obama’s polls numbers drop to the present low Bush level support. If the MSM ever goes neg on Obama he is looking at 20% approval ratings.

Be that as it may, my point was that each side has fairly or unfairly painted Obama and Palin negative and neither side has started in on Mitt or Huck. Therefore until Mitt and Huck get the same type of treatment their numbers in national polls are meaningless and will continue to match up with the “generic” GOP candidate numbers vs Obama.

Whereas Palin’s will always be a little bit lower then that “generic number” because of the negative attacks. In the same vein a generic democrat will poll better against Mitt or Huck than Obama will.

[SmokingJoe]

BOTH Obama and Palin are pathetically under-qualified Affirmative Action candidates that, with their qualifications, would have been laughed off the national stage if they had been white males in 2008

As it turns out, Sarah Palin had to fight very hard for everything she has in her life, starting with fighting against the corrupt GOP establishment in Alaska who did everything they could to stop her. No affirmative action here.
You on the other hand, are pathetically unqualified to give any commentary or analysis on anything political. You don't have a clue what the heck you are talking abut.

Even Greta Van Susteren wipes the floor with Sarah Palin in the ratings on FOX, a network with right-of-center viewers, in the same month and in the same time slot.

Ummmm..no she doesn't.
Read this..and weep!

"Sarah Palin drives up Fox News ratings

Sarah Palin was a smart hire for Fox News Channel, judging by the ratings for her debut on “The O’Reilly Factor” on Tuesday. The former Alaska governor's first appearance as an analyst drew 3.954 million viewers — more than everything else on other cable new shows combined in the 8 p.m. hour. CNN’s “Campbell Brown” placed second with 999,000 total viewers, MSNBC’s “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” placed third with 906,000 total viewers and HLN’s “Nancy Grace” brought up the rear with 704,000. Compared to host Bill O’Reilly’s ratings the night before, the Palin push was worth a 22 percent rise in ratings, or more than 1 million more viewers including the repeat of O’Reilly’s show at 11 p.m"

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/sarah_gangbusters_start_WG13HFC7Qcpq1RXlfLHuKI#ixzz0lSqmqfTD

” Short of being beaten in the ratings by Geraldo Rivera, that's as bad as it gets on FOX”

Geraldo’s ratings are not even on the same planet as Greta's or Sarah Palin’s ratings. I doubt if he even gets a million viewers in his weekend program

“Among all voters Sarah Palin already has a 57% UNFAVORABLE rating.”

Umm..the latest PPP poll has Sarah Palin’s Unfavourable at only 52%, with Plain trailing 0bama by just 2 points.

Obama 47%
Plain 45%.
Not sure 7%
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_415.pdf

That is a heck of a lot better than Reagan was trailing Carter back in March 1980, when Reagan was trailing Carter by a massive 25% with only 7 months to go to the elections. Reagan still ended up slaughtering Carter in the November elections that year.

[rintense]

Stop posting facts!!! :)

[Brices Crossroads]

“There was this thing called “holy week” which depressed all TV ratings for the week. But don’t let context get in the way of your stupidity.”

He knows that. And he knows that I know it too. I don’t post back to people like him. They are here to distract and to disrupt. I ignore them.

[9YearLurker]

Yep, and if Haley Barbour decides he doesn’t have to decide whether to run until after November, than surely Palin, with her multi-million avid supporters and increasing family coffers can’t be too far behind already?

[unseen1]

I understand but I refuse to allow palinhaters is get away with their falsehoods and skewed “facts”