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

4/17/2010 | Brices Crossroads

[SmokingJoe]

You still can't run a presidential campaign without strong organization, internet or no internet, but of course, you need a good candidate in addition to good organization.

[Brices Crossroads]

thanks, Al. I almost pinged you on that reply becasue i know you can give us chapter and verse on the Reagan campaign and the big falacy (that is so often repeated) that organization is sooo necessary. Reagan was sold a bill of goods on this, and the vaunted organization(read: John Sears) very nearly cost him the Presidency in 1980.

Palin is wise to the dangers of such an “organization” (read: Steve Schmitt) based on her 2008 experience. BTW, have you noticed her having any trouble generating crowds for her rallies? The word must be leaking out somehow. LOL

[Polybius]

If she was going for the sidelines, she would be accepting every speaking fee, which she is not by a long shot.

Palin wouldn't even speak for free for GOP sure-fire caucus-goers in the crucial early caucus state of Iowa. Serious Presidential candidates trip all over themselves for every opportunity they can get to influence Iowa and New Hampshire voters

Iowa Republicans wince at Sarah Palin's $100K speaking fee ...... " Iowa-based political advocacy groups said they would never consider shelling out money for what many politicians see as a privilege: the opportunity to speak to a room full of sure-fire caucus-goers who often serve as precinct captains and can be instrumental to a presidential candidate’s success."

If she left any money on the table, it wasn't much.

Sarah Palin Has Earned an Estimated $12 Million Since July

She even charged the Tea Party movement and, only after there was an outcry, did she decide to "donate the money to the cause".

If she wanted to make money, she could have had her own television show like Huckabee .....

That is for FOX to decide and, as far as FOX knows, when FOX put Palin in the same time slot, AS A DEBUT, (mere curiosity should have brought viewers flooding in as even Katie Couric brought viewers flooding when she debuted) Palin's rating numbers were markedly decreased from Greta Van Susteren's rating numbers for that month in that very same time slot ..

While coming in first in its time perid — beating the Total Viewer average of the 10pm programs on MSNBC, CNN and HLN combined — FNC’s “Real American Stories with Sarah Palin” was down substantially versus the performance of “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” last Thursday as well as that program’s Thursday average for the month of March. “Real American Stories” delivered 2.073 million Total Viewers and 472k A25-54 viewers, down 10% versus last Thursday among Total Viewers and down 28% in A25-54. For all Thursdays in March 2010, the “Stories” premiere was down 10% among Total Viewers and down 19% in A25-54.

Why would FOX give a permanent show to a personality that is markedly less popular with regular FOX viewers than ..... yaaaaaawn ..... Greta Van Susteren?

"When even I can beat her like a red-headed stepchild in the ratings among FOX viewers, that's pretty darn bad."

Sarah Palin has an extremely loyal following that is a mile deep and a foot wide. ...... even among FOX viewers.

[SmokingJoe]

I don’t think they are right. It is 22 months until the primaries. PPP is a total Dem operation . And Rasmussen would probably admit that his poll is essentially worthless at this stage as well.

Of course the polls are as at today, not in 2012. I said as much in my post. The point is, as at today, every single poll I have seen, has Romney and Huckabee ahead of Sarah Palin, including Rasmussen polls, which are the best in the business.
What Sarah Palin needs to do, is work on convincing the waverers, like any other politician has to do. Good news is, she has nearly three years in which to do it.

“You notice that PPP and Rasmussen never poll it one on One. That is because they know what they will get”

They have.

“They are not ahead of her, and I don’t really care what the polls say. “

That is an entirely different matter then. You might as well stop posting in any thread that has polls for November's elections then, because you don't believe any of them, not even Rasmussen's polls, which have been proved to be unbiased and accurate in all these recent elections since 2008 at least.

“If the election were held tomorrow, she would slaughter both of them”

You are basing that on what exactly?

[freespirited]

Palin’s choice will be as, it always has been: Country first.

I think she will put her family first, then country. She will make the decision in conjunction with them, when the time is right.

I have no idea at the moment what it will be. Doesn't bother me. She'll decide what's right in due time.

[Brices Crossroads]

It took 42 posts for a troll to show up. He/she/it is gonna get in trouble with its master, whoever that is.

[Brices Crossroads]

“If the election were held tomorrow, she would slaughter both of them”

You are basing that on what exactly?”

On the empirical evidence in the post. The facebook connections and her crowds which dwarf anything the other two have ever drawn.

Listen, Joe. We have a difference of opinion. Polls this far out are worthless. Rudy Giuliani was way ahead in the polls in 2007 and he wound up with one delegate. They just don’t mean anything. It is hard to poll primary election s onthe eve of the primary. Two years before, it has no basis at all in reality. BTW, if the primary had been held in 2007, Rudy would have done just as poorly.

But crowd size and facebook following is a measure of both support and intensity, which is crucial in a primary. It is real and not subject to manipulation.

Sorry. I just don’t agree with your view on polls two years out and organization. I think genuihne empirical facts are more reliable, especially at this stage.

[truthfreedom]

Although I tend to agree with you, why isn’t she kicking butt at the straw polls? I would think that with 1.5 million facebook fans or friends, she could get 500 supporters to SRLC in New Orleans. I think she could do that easily, and I’d like to see her do that. She didn’t at SRLC, came in 3d.

[onyx]

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.”

[Lakeshark]

“you betcha” she will have WOMEN!

Sexist pig.......

[marron]

I think the PPP and Rasmussen polls are right actually.

My opinion is that the polls are telling us that a generic Repub will poll strongly against Obama.

Which is a good thing. But due to the internal dynamics of the GOP (the fact that so many Repubs hate Huck and Romney) they won't be able to translate this poll into actual numbers in an election. Similar to McCain, he would poll well because of name recognition but weak support in the party (antipathy, really) was enough to give it to the O.

I'm not sure Sarah is my favorite for a variety of reasons. And its early yet, I don't have to have a favorite. But I am sure that neither Romney or Huck will be able to turn this country around. They are both statists, they are both wired to be bipartisan and will inevitably help the Dems enact their agenda, but on a "conservative" budget.

[nolongerademocrat]

She’s a total juggernaut and we can thank the hysterical pro-abortion feminazis for vetting her completely. hahahaha! I love the law of unintended consequences. And just think, Tina Fey will have to continue to impersonate Sarah for several more years hahaha.

[Brices Crossroads]

“why isn’t she kicking butt at the straw polls?”

Paul purchased the one at CPAC which she did not attend.

At SRLC, Evangelicals for Mitt Bbought 400 tickets. Romney got 439 votes. 39 votes, net.

At SRLC, Paul bought 800 tickets, received 438 votes. Net -362.

Palin received the most unpurchased votes, (240) paid for none herself. That looks like a win to me.

[onyx]

LOL. She’ll have you too.
So there!

[Clyde5445]

Ckeck you FRpeer mail.

[SmokingJoe]

But due to the internal dynamics of the GOP (the fact that so many Repubs hate Huck and Romney) they won't be able to translate this poll into actual numbers in an election.

What the heck are you talking about?
Care to share this “internal dynamics” of yours with us by any chance? And tell us how they have worked in the past whereby actual elections results were totally different from say Rasmussen's polls because of “internal dynamics”?

” Similar to McCain, he would poll well because of name recognition but weak support in the party (antipathy, really) was enough to give it to the O.”

Heck no!
0bama was polling ahead of McCain. It wasn't until Sarah Palin joined McCain's campaign that McCain took the lead. That lead was in turn killed when the stock market crashed in the middle of September 2008. After that, McCain never even got close to 0bama again.

[Brices Crossroads]

Interesting thought, Clyde. No way to know for sure

[truthfreedom]

It might look like a win to you, but it goes into the record book as a 3d. Your arguments are valid, sure. But I don’t care exactly how the Romney/Paul tie happened, and the Palin 3d happened, I’m just saying Palin should get a win somewhere. 1.5 on Facebook shouldn’t be ignored - Palin need to turn those numbers into straw poll wins. Not excuses. Even if your arguments have merit (and they do), it’s still a loss for Palin.

[kitchen]

These “professional” organizations are smoke and mirrors.

I submit that these professionals, especially the ones that migrated from Romney to McCain, were greatly responsible for the less than successful campaign. So many missteps, it defies logic to attribute them to random chance.

[Kimberly GG]

It just makes me ILL that we would even consider ANY OF THE SAME OLD LOSERS...AGAIN. We’ve learned nothing.