Poll: Who leads the Republican Party?

posted at 1:40 pm on March 9, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

According to Rasmussen, most Republicans answer with a shrug. Over two-thirds of Republicans say “no one”, while only two percent agree with the Operation Rushbo attack operation out of the White House:

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Republican voters say their party has no clear leader, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Another 17% are undecided.

Just five percent (5%) view either John McCain, the GOP’s unsuccessful 2008 presidential candidate, or new party chairman Michael Steele as the party’s leader.

Two percent (2%) see conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh in that role, and one percent (1%) name McCain’s running mate, Alaska Govenror Sarah Palin. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader John Boehner are each seen as GOP leader by less than one-half of one percent.

Democrats don’t have any trouble identifying their party leader — two-thirds say Barack Obama, and no one else gets 5%. That’s traditional for parties that have the White House. The president is always at least the symbolic leader of the party. I’m actually curious as to why Obama only got 66%. Jon Stewart actually scores 1%.

So far, Operation Rushbo looks like a failure, even among Democrats. Only 7% of Democrats think of Rush as the party leader. Eighty-six percent perceive no national leader in the opposing party at all. Maybe the media is among the 7%.

All this shows thefallacy Rahm Emanuel has tried to employ in Operation Rushbo. Rush is a conservative commentator, not a Republican activist. He scorns Republicans as well as Democrats who do not hew to the conservative model. Maybe if the White House tried painting him as a conservative leader, they would get more traction as well as displaying some intellectual honesty — but that doesn’t win elections or make for successful smear campaigns, I guess.

Who would Hot Air readers say is the Republican Party leader? Take our poll to make your voice heard. I’ll talk about the results on tomorrow’s TEMS show with Mary Katharine Ham.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

highhopes on March 9, 2009 at 5:41 PM

I would argue the reason McCain was chosen in the primaries was to match up with Hillary Clinton, who was favored to get the Democrat nomination. The strategy was sound, except Hillary didn’t win. McCain vs Obama was a very poor matchup for the GOP for a host of reasons.

However in 2012 there will be one main diffference. The GOP will know who they are going to face in 2012. It’s like a very good football team knowing who their opponent will be in the Super Bowl before the season starts. That would give any team a tremendous advantage.

And Sarah Palin matches up extremely well against the Messiah. She is definitely his nemesis and has the ability to take the Messiah off his game. Look at how she cut him down to size during her Convention speech, her debate with Biden, and her campaign stops. If you forget how successful she was, don’t believe me–go to you Tube and you’ll see her ability to compete on full display.

The GOP did not lose the WH because of Sarah Palin but because of the financial meltdown and the inadequacy of McCain, his handlers and his message.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 5:56 PM

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 5:56 PM

Yeah, what you said.

itzWicks on March 9, 2009 at 6:02 PM

now aunty is confused.
First McCain, then Palin,then Sleele was the gop “mesiah”, then on to Jindal, and now Rush. No, wait….back to Palin, what?…..who?Newt? oboy, gonna be a long four years
YOU DEMS ARE IN TROUBLE…..(enter a name here) for President in 2012!!!

What about Sammuel Worzelbaucher? is he available?

greataunty on March 9, 2009 at 6:08 PM

Who wants the job? Anyone who gets on top is pounced on by pundits, media, Democrats and other Republicans like vultures on road kill.

Terrye on March 9, 2009 at 6:11 PM

I think they all have expressed a certain facet of the “party other than Democrat,” but there’s no clear direction or sense right now.

No doubt, one will emerge.

AnninCA on March 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM

I think the question is all wrong. Michael Steele IS the leader of the Republican Party, whether in name only or not, and whether we like it or not. Now, if he is acting like a leader is a whole other question.

Vigilante on March 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM

And Sarah Palin matches up extremely well against the Messiah. She is definitely his nemesis and has the ability to take the Messiah off his game. Look at how she cut him down to size during her Convention speech, her debate with Biden, and her campaign stops. If you forget how successful she was, don’t believe me–go to you Tube and you’ll see her ability to compete on full display.

Past success is no indicator of future performance. The landscape of 2012 will be vastly different than 2008. I’m not anti-Palin but she was only brought in because McCain belatedly figured out that pissing off the GOP base wasn’t the best way to get them out there doing the legwork for his campaign.

At this point, less than two months into the filthy liar’s regime of socialism and bad stewardship, it is hard to figure out what issues will be important the next time around. I’m so pessimistic about the filthy liar’s performance that I believe the GOP will win in a walk if they don’t make the mistake of 2008 and put up a divisive candidate from the McCain wing of the party. The McCain era of “go along to get along” is past. I want a scorched earth conservative to take on the filthy liar’s agenda. Palin be that person but I think new blood is required.

highhopes on March 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM

I think the question is all wrong. Michael Steele IS the leader of the Republican Party, whether in name only or not, and whether we like it or not. Now, if he is acting like a leader is a whole other question.

Vigilante on March 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM

Michael Steele is the party’s chief administrator and (in theory) the guy who is working with the party hierarchy to craft a strategy for the 2010 elections. Traditionally the leader of the GOP would be John McCain but I don’t think that is any more true than calling John Kerry the leader of the Democrat party after 2004.

IMO, there really is a civil war of sorts going on within the GOP. The two factions are the McCain/RINO wing that are really frustrated Democrats and only want to tinker around the edges of the filthy liar’s socialist agenda. And hard-core social and fiscal conservatives that are fed up with the McCain wing of the party. As a point of reference, GWB was elected by the latter wing but governed more like part of the former.

highhopes on March 9, 2009 at 6:20 PM

rush

getalife on Mar 9,2009 at 2:02PM.

getalife:Since you didn’t use a capitol’R’,obviously
you don’t mean Rush Limbaugh!

Maybe you mean rush the band,that sings Tom
Sawyer,and the other tune ditty,’Fly by Night!

canopfor on March 9, 2009 at 2:25 PM

buyavowel was reacting to his most recent bong hit.

As for Geddy Lee, he and the boys are Canadian, eh?

Del Dolemonte on March 9, 2009 at 6:21 PM

highhopes on March 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM

Sarah Palin is ‘the new blood is required’, Hey, in 2012 she will only be 48. Sure issues change, but I get back to my original premise–Obama will be the Dems Presidential candidate in 2012.

And if you don’t think that the Left is scared of Sarah why is there no let up in the MSM trying to marginalize her and take her out and why is she currently getting more votes than any individual for who the leader of the party is and why did CNN say that she led in their poll who Republicans wanted their 2012 candidate to be.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 6:21 PM

I want a scorched earth conservative to take on the filthy liar’s agenda. Palin be that person but I think new blood is required.

highhopes on March 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM

Amen. I love the smell of scorched Liberals in the morning.

portlandon on March 9, 2009 at 6:25 PM

highhopes on March 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM

Ask Frank Murkowski or Tony Knowles if Sarah is a lightweight; I think they would both admit she is a formidable force. What are the odds of anybody beating 2 former governors in election contests in the same election cycle. It may have never happened before and it may never happen again.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Before Obama’s nomination who was the leader of the Democrat party?
Howard Dean. And he did a damn good job.

capitulus on March 9, 2009 at 4:11 PM

Yeah, Howie was a laugh riot.

“I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks.”

“We’ve gotten rid of (Saddam Hussein), and I suppose that’s a good thing.”

“The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong.”

“This president is not interested in being a good president. He’s interested in some complicated psychological situation that he has with his father.”

“Now that we’re on dog pee, we can have an interesting conversation about that. I do not recommend drinking urine…but if you drink water straight from the river, you have a greater chance of getting an infection than you do if you drink urine.”

“You think the RNC could get this many people of color into a single room?”…”Maybe if they got the hotel staff in there.”

“I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for.”

“I don’t know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I’ve heard so far, which is nothing more than a theory, I can’t—think it can’t be proved, is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now, who knows what the real situation is, but the trouble is that by suppressing that kind of information, you lead to those kinds of theories, whether they have any truth to them or not, and then eventually they get repeated as fact. So I think the president is taking a great risk by suppressing the clear, the key information that needs to go to the Kean commission.”

“The Republicans are all about suppressing votes.”

“My view is FOX News is a propaganda outlet for the Republican Party and I don’t comment on FOX News.”

And my personal fave:

“I don’t mind being called a liberal. I just don’t really think it’s true.

“Yeeeeeaaaaaargh!”

By the way, here is what Barry had to say about Howie in 2005:

As somebody who is a Christian myself, I don’t like it when people use religion to divide, whether that is Republican or Democrat. […] I think in terms of his role as party spokesman, [Dean] probably needs to be a little more careful and I suspect that is a message he is going to be getting from a number of us. […] We are at a time in our country’s history that inclusive language is better than exclusive language.” –Barack Obama, June 8, 2005

Del Dolemonte on March 9, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Maybe you mean rush the band,that sings Tom
Sawyer,and the other tune ditty,’Fly by Night!

canopfor on March 9, 2009 at 2:25 PM

Communists don’t like or understand Rush (either the person or the band). Getty Lee writes the lyrics of objectivism:

You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice.
If you choose not to decide, you still haven’t made a choice.
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill;
I will choose a path that’s clear-
I will choose Free Will.

Rush – Free Will

Live for yourself, there’s no one else
More worth living for
Begging hands and bleeding hearts will
Only cry out for more

Rush – Anthem

Does the GOP need a single person as a leader; al la Cult of Personality, or does it need as that 14 year old prodigy suggests, to Define Conservatism. The rising tide of discontent will wash a leader to our shores, and for now our many voices are better than Teh One.

batterup on March 9, 2009 at 6:50 PM

A Republican leadership or Ed Morrissey, Ron Paul, and Pat Buchanan would be a fantastic step towards making our party relevant again.

The Dean on March 9, 2009 at 6:59 PM

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 5:45 PM

If you think I’m putting Rush down you’ve misinterpreted my comments. I’m talking about weak kneed elitists, like even Newt did, coming off to disassociate themselves with a person who is espousing the VERY THING that the base wants to hear from those so-called leadership at the RNC. Like why Steele is having so much trouble now is because he attacked the wrong thing. These so-called leaders do the same thing as the Democrats, make it all about Rush. But the problem is, the base KNOWS it’s not about RUSH, the person, BUT the ideology he expresses with so much vigor that none of our OWN POLITICAL LEADERS WILL DO, and the more they attack them the more we realize they aren’t one of us. They have lost the reigns of the party and they STILL attack Rush. They’re so used to telling us the “Compassionate Conservativism” or Big Tent, Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay Marriage advocacy is what will win elections. Now that we’ve listened to our own detriment, the base isn’t listening to them anymore. They’re waiting for a True Conservative leader and they don’t see any.

That’s what I’m saying these polls are all about.

Sultry Beauty on March 9, 2009 at 7:09 PM

Now I wish Sarah was the leader of the party but she isn’t right now. I sure hope she runs because there aren’t many authentic conservatives out there. I would vote for my Dr. Tom Coburn or James Inhofe for President but I am afraid most republican’s have no idea who they are. But Palin has face value and experience. We would be crazy not to vote for her in 2012.

Everyone here is answering the question, “Who will you vote for in 2012” which has almost nothing to do with the question.

Micheal Steele is the unlikeliest candidate for president because he is in charge of the party at this time.

Rush, also, is an unlikely candidate for president. However, in may ways, he is the voice of conservatives and that is why O’mommy is striking out at him.

recklessprocess on March 9, 2009 at 7:13 PM

I think the Republicans should stop answering some of the goofy questions from the media. It’s a no-win spin zone about the party, etc. And it’s irrelevant.

The election is over. The Republicans are successfully exercising minority power where they can in the House and Senate, and they should focus on sharpening the message on upcoming battles.

Leave the leadership stuff to people later when it matters.

AnninCA on March 9, 2009 at 7:14 PM

Until we decide who our nominee is for the 2012 election, we have no actual leader. As usual, a group of leaders will develop following the 2010 election cycle. By 2011, we will have choices. In 2012 we will choose a leader. In the mean while, I’m pretty sure we all have a few we are watching closely.

Keemo on March 9, 2009 at 7:27 PM

From Mike Morgan (J.D., RIA – providing services to portfolio managers, REITs, builders, pension funds, anlaysts and high net worth individuals):

Bankruptcy for Vallejo, Phoenix, Dallas, Philadelphia – Vallejo, California has already submitted to bankruptcy. Phoenix is facing a $250M deficit. Dallas $100M. Philadelphia $300M. And New York could be facing a $900M-1.2B deficit next year. Ask yourself this question. If they are facing these deficits now, how bad does it get as tax receipts plunge due to the crushing unemployment numbers? And then ask what happens when receipts plunge, but services to the unemployed in the form of police, fire, medical, food, schools, etc. . . . skyrocket out of control? Instead of going to the doctor, the unemployed/uninsured will go to Emergency Rooms. Instead of going to the grocery store, the unemployed will go to food banks and soup kitchens . . . or worse, they will loot grocery stores. And that, my dear friends, is just the beginning of something too dark to write about.

Banks Rationing Withdrawals – It happened last week in the Ukraine, when banks not only limited withdrawals, but closed their doors altogether. But it can’t happen here, right? Wrong.
$2 Trillion to AIG – We’ve already given them $180 billion with a big B. We received an 80% stake in the company for the first $85B, but we got zippity-doo-da for the next $95B. Moreover, we have no idea what they did with the money, but I hear Goldman Sachs got billions of it from AIG, as well as JP Morgan and other banks that seem to understand the rules on sucking cash out of the system and pumping to guys like King Henry, Lord Blankfein and Prince Jamie. But the real kicker is what AIG is not telling us. As the financial crisis deepens, so does the money AIG needs to pay out. My low estimate is $2T. Unfortunately, if we continue to allow things to melt down, AIG will be on the hook for more than $5T. Strike that. WE, the taxpayers, will be on the hook for $5 trillion . . . or more.

Chinese and Saudi Ties – Last week Chas Freeman was appointed to head the National Intelligence Council. This is a guy that not only has some very strange ties to the Chinese and Saudi’s, but he still has family members and close friends on the payrolls of these countries. If not directly, indirectly. But really now, what’s the difference. Here’s a guy that worked for companies owned by the People’s Republic of China that was investing in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Even though Republicans asked for an investigation into Freeman’s ties to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, China and Iran . . . the Obama Administration ignored the warning signals. As if this was not enough, Freeman has been a supporter of how Hamas has handled things, while denouncing Israel for protecting herself. If you think Obama to the Rescue . . . you’d better start looking at the people he is surrounding himself with.

Obama’s Making It Worse – Maria Bartiromo interviewed Jim Rogers, and when she asked, “What do you think of the government’s response to the economic crisis?” he said . . . “Terrible. They’re making it worse. It’s pretty embarrassing for President Obama, who doesn’t seem to have a clue what’s going on – which would make sense from his background.”

Jim classically continued . . . “And he had hired people who are part of the problem. Geithner was head of the New York Fed, which was supposedly in charge of Wall Street and the banks more than anybody else. And as you remember, Summers helped bail out Long Term Capital Management years ago. These are people who think the solution si to save their friends on Wall street rather than to save 300 million Americans.

I will close with this quote from Jim Rogers . . . “We’re going to have social unrest in much of the world. America won’t be immune.

KentAllard on March 9, 2009 at 7:35 PM

And Sarah Palin matches up extremely well against the Messiah. She is definitely his nemesis and has the ability to take the Messiah off his game. Look at how she cut him down to size during her Convention speech, her debate with Biden, and her campaign stops. If you forget how successful she was, don’t believe me–go to you Tube and you’ll see her ability to compete on full display.

The GOP did not lose the WH because of Sarah Palin but because of the financial meltdown and the inadequacy of McCain, his handlers and his message.
technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 5:56 PM

I couldn’t agree more. If you remember, after her convention speech, Palin was (for a short period) more popular than Obama and had him totally out of sinc.

Then MSM made the dcecision it had to destroy Sarah Palin before she destroyed Obama.

If you know anything about Sarah Palin, you know she will be ready if she decides to run in 2012.

bw222 on March 9, 2009 at 7:45 PM

If you understand conservative thought and are satisfied with your definition – you are a leader.

If you question conservative thought and want to sit around and debate it – you are not a leader.

The time is now for a pragmatic shift in the leaders tactics…

Ed Graef on March 9, 2009 at 7:52 PM

bw222 on March 9, 2009 at 7:45 PM

The MSM and pundits are making it appear that Sarah Palin has withdrawn from the battlefield for good and is not a major player. Of course, they neglect to mention her 2 weekly internet radio programs, Team Sarah with a membership of 70,000, Sarah’s Facebook page with a membership of 515,000, the emergence of conservatives4palin.com and other web sites dedicated to electing Sarah in 2012 and of course SarahPAC, which if you read various blogs, many conservatives have vowed only to donate to SarahPAC and not to the RNC because of Steele’s lackluster performance, the 3 RINO’s voting for Porkulus and the overall weak leadership shown by the GOP in Congress.

Wait for April when Sarah reveals how much she has raised sinece January 27, 2009. I Think tha number will be astounding.

And of course I shouldn’t neglect the recent CNN poll that had her ahead and of course this poll where she leads all individual GOP members by a wide margin on who the leader of the Republican Party is now.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 8:01 PM

Please run Palin in 2012, that way Tina Fey can do her spot-on impersonation again. Besides Palin is a Russian expert, knows which parts of the country are patriotic versus the non-patriotic. You should start a clothing fund for her though, she’s got expensive tastes. Yeah Sarah, not a polarizing figure? right?

athensboy on March 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM

athensboy on March 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM

We have an ace up our sleeve. It’s called Media Malpractice. We know your playbook; by 2011 we will be as expert in Alinsky tactics as you are now.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. Take my word for it. There are thousands of Palin supporters who would take a bullet for her or walk over broken glass to ensure it never happens again.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM

In the simplest of terms. We are the leaders of the republican party. We don’t elect a ‘head’.

Lord knows what got the dems in trouble was electing a ‘head’ that cannot speak without an invisible earpiece and a teleprompter.

In case we have forgotten our history, it was We The People that started the first revolution.

We will not be silent.

Impeach the Head.

/hah. That’d be a really cool bumper sticker.

Key West Reader on March 9, 2009 at 8:22 PM

If you understand conservative thought and are satisfied with your definition – you are a leader.

If you question conservative thought and want to sit around and debate it – you are not a leader.

The time is now for a pragmatic shift in the leaders tactics…

Ed Graef on March 9, 2009 at 7:52 PM

Well said.

Key West Reader on March 9, 2009 at 8:24 PM

I found out why Obama hates the British!
Seriously, read this article. The says a lot! This is why he did what he did last week. This is also why he gave the bust of Churchill back. It hast to be.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article5276010.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=2015164

I would send this in to Hotair, but anytime I send something in, they never list it so I dont bother anymore.

bucsox79 on March 9, 2009 at 8:24 PM

But in the final analysis one does not lead from the rear but from the front. Sure Rush Limbaugh has stepped into the breach for now, but eventually we will need a politician to step up and take up the baton. But thank God for Rush Limbaugh and his speech at CPAC. Obama, with a 43% disapproval number (Rasmussen)would not have happened otherwise; but of course the tanking of the stock market has helped this fall as well.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 8:29 PM

In the simplest of terms. We are the leaders of the republican party. We don’t elect a ‘head’.

Lord knows what got the dems in trouble was electing a ‘head’ that cannot speak without an invisible earpiece and a teleprompter.

In case we have forgotten our history, it was We The People that started the first revolution.

We will not be silent.

Impeach the Head.

/hah. That’d be a really cool bumper sticker.

Key West Reader on March 9, 2009 at 8:22 PM

Point well taken, but all that individualism won’t get you far in a collectivist society. The various groups that comprise the Democrat party are defined by their solidarity; if labor unions didn’t compel 90% obedience from their members, or black leaders couldn’t deliver 80% of the black vote, they wouldn’t have the influence they do. We completed a long degeneration into collectivism with this last election, and only big constituencies with loud leadership are going to get any attention from Obama and his cronies. There’s a good reason Dear Leader is cheerfully preparing to toss 300,000 construction jobs to illegal aliens, even as unemployment approaches double digits.

Collectivist constituent groups are chowing down on the lions’ share of that trillion dollar pork bill, and when Social Security detonates in a few years, one of the most aggressive collectives in American politics – the seniors’ lobby – will swing into action. They’re extremely well organized, they know how to flex their political muscle, and they have a lot of votes to use as a club. They will not care one whit about the overall fate of the economy, or any other group in the country, in their drive to collect the Social Security and Medicare benefits they feel they are entitled to, and they are congenitally suspicious of any attempts to reform the system.

None of this is to say the conservative movement should emulate the top-down conformity of the totalitarian Left, but it does mean we will need organization, and we will need articulate, determined leadership to put in front of it. A hundred million conservatives fulminating on blogs and yelling at the radio on their drive home from work will not make much of an impact on the collectivist political culture, but candidates with the support of a hundred million motivated conservatives can start knocking some of the Democrat dead wood out of Congress, and make them nervous enough to start pumping the brakes before they take the economy too far over that cliff.

Doctor Zero on March 9, 2009 at 8:51 PM

I agree with Rush:

“The American people may not all vote the way we wish them to, but more Americans than you know live their lives as conservatives in one degree or another. And they are waiting for leadership. We need CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP. WE CAN TAKE THIS COUNTRY BACK. ALL WE NEED IS TO NOMINATE THE RIGHT CANDIDATE. IT’S NO MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT.”

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 9:00 PM

bucsox79 on March 9, 2009 at 8:24 PM

This has been discussed, in many threads already.

OmahaConservative on March 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM

athensboy on March 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM

Wow. If that post doesn’t define dumb, vacuous “liberalism” to a T, don’t know what else would do.

Anyway, I’m watching the GOP playing field very, very carefully–like the rest of the country. I’ve got my faves, but think I’ll play my hand closely and wait another year to see what happens with the economy, etc.

RepubChica on March 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM

The problem with Palin is that her life is TOO perfect. Democrat women only like voting for ugly candidates. Makes them feel better.

Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 9:26 PM

Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 9:26 PM

Roger Simon wrote “It is easier to study up and get smarter than it is to not have a personality and to try to get one.

In the same vein I would add it is easier for a pretty woman to look dowdy and unattractive than a plain woman to transformed into a gorgeous model.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 9:35 PM

Whew- I could not get the poll to pop up at first. I thought I was being disenfranchised! I just reloaded the page and it works now.

Quite frankly, with all of the names on this list, my thought is that we need all of these guys to be leaders.

2010 is coming and we got to get some of these liberals destroying our country out of the power.

We need to start chipping away.

We need McCain to lead the Senate and make them hold firm to his conservative spending principles. Some of his other principles, well… He needs to keep fighting the spending.

We need Steele to lead the RNC and keep the grassroots motivated and believing that we can win in 2010. He is great at motivating.

We need Rush to continue to be the bad guy and keep verbally kicking the stuffing out the big O and his sidekicks.

We need Boehner to do the best he can to hold the House together and keep them voting in a block like they did on the stimulus.

Sarah Palin is the only governor in the US that has her state operating in the black. Continue to be frugal Sarah! She is really good at organizing a strong team and she will need that team. Show these other governor’s how it is done.

We need Bobby Jindal to somehow get the ship righted in Louisiana, a tough task. He is good at prioritizing. He is setting a new and improved standard in LA and it will take a monumental effort, but he is up to the task.

Mitch McConnell, well…Keep shooting Harry Reid dirty looks. Reid really hates that.

Each one of us needs to find a few friends and start building a team around us to help us fight in 2010.

We will all need to be leaders.

Let’s learn something from Obama, it takes an army.

kcarpenter on March 9, 2009 at 9:47 PM

I would have to agree with Techo,Dave etc. Tech made some good points; for instance, the funds SarahPAC is raising if the amount is multi-millions then people will notice and ask for assistance. Therefore money is power or if you like influence and Gov. Palin will have alot of that. The other point is the 2010 elections and the influence Gov. Palin can have on the out come. If the out come is favorable then Gov. Palin would be the undisputed leader of the GOP. 2010 is the test and I think Gov. Palin will pass it with flying colors and reap massive political capital form the results and anyone in the GOP who is foolish enough to stand in her way do so at there own peril. Now with the above being said I trust Gov. Palin to decide whatever she thinks is right with her political future.

Clyde5445 on March 9, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Like it or not Palin was discredited by the MSM and ruined as a serious politican. It is unfair, it is wrong. But it is reality. And if she runs in 2012 it will be an endless string of late night jokes about moose, Alaska and Chanel suits. And she will lose badly.

angryed on March 9, 2009 at 3:14 PM

This. Does anyone really think that Palin will get any MSM respect for being governor of a small population state for 6 years instead of 2? Of course not. She could be governor for 60 years and they would still be mesmorized by Odumbo’s “great” experience in campaigning for jobs.

Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 9:56 PM

This has been discussed, in many threads already.

OmahaConservative on March 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM

Ok. I didnt know. But I only mentioned it because it seems the few people who have mentioned this in the media dont seem to know the reason. I heard Glenn Beck, Rush, OReilly, and someone else mention the Britian PM stuff but they had no clue about the article I liked. They have no idea that Obama most likely does in fact, have a deep rooted distain for the British.
I think something needs to be made of this publicly. Because we cant have a President who has a “secret” hate toward our biggest allie. This needs to be made public. I guarantee if Beck and the others I mentioned dont know about it, than you know most of the public doesnt.

bucsox79 on March 9, 2009 at 9:56 PM

Like it or not Palin was discredited by the MSM and ruined as a serious politican. It is unfair, it is wrong. But it is reality. And if she runs in 2012 it will be an endless string of late night jokes about moose, Alaska and Chanel suits. And she will lose badly.

angryed on March 9, 2009 at 3:14 PM

Agreed, Palin wont have a chance in hell. She got pulverized by the media too much and the public will not change their view of her. Not to mention, Obama has made some big mistakes and the media still makes him look good.
To be perfectly honest, there isnt much we can do. The liberal media is TOO POWERFUL. Them and Obama together are an unstoppable force. We can not win unless something majorly bad happens and its clearly his fault and nothing can cover it up.

bucsox79 on March 9, 2009 at 9:58 PM

Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 9:56 PM

Two words: “Media Malpractice’

It will NOT happen again!

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 9:58 PM

The grassroots is the leader.

SouthernGent on March 9, 2009 at 9:59 PM

This has been discussed, in many threads already.

OmahaConservative on March 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM

Ok. I didnt know. But I only mentioned it because it seems the few people who have mentioned this in the media dont seem to know the reason. I heard Glenn Beck, Rush, OReilly, and someone else mention the Britian PM stuff but they had no clue about the article I LINKED. They have no idea that Obama most likely does in fact, have a deep rooted distain for the British.
I think something needs to be made of this publicly. Because we cant have a President who has a “secret” hate toward our biggest allie. This needs to be made public. I guarantee if Beck and the others I mentioned dont know about it, than you know most of the public doesnt.

bucsox79 on March 9, 2009 at 10:00 PM

It’s Romney, who bizarrely is not on the list in your poll.

haner on March 9, 2009 at 10:01 PM

haner on March 9, 2009 at 10:01 PM

Yes, he is under OTHER.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 10:02 PM

Yes, he is under OTHER.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 10:02 PM

And so are you and me. Any survey maker can tell you that people don’t generally pick other when a given a list of existing names. It’s called manipulation.

haner on March 9, 2009 at 10:04 PM

SouthernGent on March 9, 2009 at 9:59 PM

I agree with you, but reread Rush’s quote from his CPAC speech that I made note of at 9:00 PM.

Eventually someone has to step up to the plate. Clyde5445 gets it-follow the money. Money leads to power. And as he said, “Anyone who stands in her (Sarah Palin) way does it at their own peril.”

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 10:07 PM

athensboy on March 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM

Right now Tina Fey is saying to herself, “What the he!! did I do? Now we’re all screwed.”

Besides, Tina doesn’t age as well as Sarah. By 2012 Tina will likely be playing the role of Sarah’s mom.

Now run along. Someone at KOS misses you.

bw222 on March 9, 2009 at 10:07 PM

It’s like athensboy and all the trolls think we’re idiots. Once millions of conservatives watch Media Malpractice by John Ziegler, the element of surprise will be gone. In addition we’ll be boning up on Alinsky and Goebbels-like propaganda techniques. You won’t catch us with our pants down in 2012. And finally we won’t have McCain around legitimizing the Messiah and running interference for him but not for Sarah.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 10:13 PM

She’s some kinda wonderful.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izn63SHXPMw

There is still hope for America when we can produce such extraordinary women.

Sarah/other dude 2012

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:27 PM

angryed on March 9, 2009 at 3:14 PM

No she won’t. Her image is slowly coming back. More people will get disillusioned with Obama due to his pulling hard to the left. Facts are slowly getting out there.

Sarah is a great campaigner and retail politician. She’ll be back. However, it could be 2012 OR 2016.

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:32 PM

Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 9:56 PM

She doesn’t need the respect of the MSM.

No matter which GOP candidate runs, the MSM will try to savage them. That is like the sun rising.

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:34 PM

None of this is to say the conservative movement should emulate the top-down conformity of the totalitarian Left, but it does mean we will need organization, and we will need articulate, determined leadership to put in front of it. A hundred million conservatives fulminating on blogs and yelling at the radio on their drive home from work will not make much of an impact on the collectivist political culture, but candidates with the support of a hundred million motivated conservatives can start knocking some of the Democrat dead wood out of Congress, and make them nervous enough to start pumping the brakes before they take the economy too far over that cliff.

Doctor Zero on March 9, 2009 at 8:51 PM

Let’s hope we don’t need guns and a secession movement.

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:32 PM

So many people focus just on the first 30 days of the campaign and forget that she caught fire starting with her debate performance which I am firmly convinced sold millions of conservatives on Sarah. Her introductory speech,beginner’s luck, her convention speech, she had a good speechwriter but after her debate performance-that pushed a lot over the edge. Then for the last month of the campaign, where she appeared mainly solo, she tore a strip off Obama and Biden (remember the 5 fingers and Obama has to worry how to shut Biden up-classic), exposed Obama’s socialism and his seedy associations and his massive spending agenda. Sarah did everything to expose Obama but just when you would think she was breaking through McCain would have to step up and say something nutty like, “He’s a fine fellow, a good family man, and you have NOTHING TO FEAR under an Obama Presidency.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 10:41 PM

People,

There is a reason why Sarah is so systematically attacked. She is FEARED.

Obama and his people are like a nervous village at night, while the Cuda stalks the darkness, hungry but patient. Her sensitive nose picking up the smell of fear, the shortness of breath, the quickened pulse, the salt of sweat.

Ah, the feel of the coming route. The terror, the screams, the adrenalin takes hold…….

VICTORY!

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:44 PM

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 10:41 PM

McCain spiked up in the polls after Sarah was announced, after her speech at the convention, and again after her debate.

She will do fine if she runs the campaign as a retail politician and connects with US, the middle class which she is a member of: some of us may file Schedule C this tax season AND unlike certain cabinet members, pay our friggin Socail Security Tax.

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:47 PM

most Republicans answer with a shrug. Over two-thirds of Republicans say “no one”

Other – not named 5% (178

Poll: Who leads the Republican Party?

Howard Dean.

Speakup on March 9, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Sapwolf on March 9, 2009 at 10:44 PM

…relentless in pursuit of her quarry, always in the vanguard, with a nose for danger but the moxie of a quarterback, to know when to strike and hit paydirt.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 10:55 PM

The one that does not cower to a radio entertainer.

Newt.

getalife on March 9, 2009 at 11:34 PM

The definition of leadership: one in front of all others; one who guides, directs or is in charge of others

In politics:

front of others: ‘the pioneers take the arrows’

guides others: the ability to persuade or convert

directs others: establishing priorities and organization

charge of others: motivate others to action

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 11:40 PM

There are thousands of Palin supporters who would take a bullet for her or walk over broken glass to ensure it never happens again.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM

Huh? Did someone call my name?

Sapwolf on March 10, 2009 at 12:30 AM

So there are really people who think the head of the RNC is the leader of the Republican party?

Brains on March 10, 2009 at 12:38 AM

getalife

True on the Newt part. But what do you mean by him not cowering to radio entertainers?

Brains on March 10, 2009 at 1:01 AM

For those who need ammunition to debunk Sarah Palin’s chance to become the GOP standardbearer in 2012, here is golden nugget you can feast on: since the emergence of the 2 party system (Democrats and Republicans) no person who has been defeated in his or her first bid to become VP has ever run as a Presidential candidate in the next election cycle, let alone won. The last time any losing VP candidate ever became President was FDR who was the losing VP candidate in 1920 and became President in 1932.

And for the GOP the only losing VP candidate ever to run for President was Bob Dole who lost in 1976 and ran for POTUS in 1996 and the Democrats have never had this happen before or since FDR.

So to even make it to the standardbearer of either party under these circumstances would be extraordinary.

So why am I touting Sarah Palin. As far as I know in the history of America she is the only losing VP candidate still being vilified 4 months after she lost. By the same token via Rasmussen polls, the recent CNN poll and this poll Sarah Palin appears to be the most popular GOP politician currently. Again historically this is not supposed to go this way.

And finally what are the chances that an African-American would now be POTUS?

So for those who support Romney, Huckabee, Jindal or others console yourself with this historical fact. And if you are Obama have your advisors tell you each morning that Sarah Palin would make history even being the GOP Presidential candidate.

So why are Sarah’s supporters gung-ho. We’re just daft enough to believe that this is such a crazy mixed-up world that an Alaskan Governor, who was hardly known 6 months ago does have the ability to climb the mountain and reach the top.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 2:33 AM

I think that the Republican party is leaderless. It is mired in a struggle where the moderates in the party are struggling mightily to minimize the conservatives. Because of this rift, no Republican has been able to emerge as a recognized leader for the party. The moderates reject the conservative leaders and vice versa.

I feel that the biggest problem that the moderate Republicans have is being able to articulate anything they stand for. They are mainly concerned with not offending people as opposed to making people understand what they do stand for. I guess it is hard to explain when you don’t really have much that you stand for but gaining power.

Hawthorne on March 10, 2009 at 3:22 AM

Not offending people= white guilt

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 3:38 AM

Rush doesn’t lead the Republican party. He leads the Conservative movement. Has anyone who voted for Rush even listened to his show?

Ronnie on March 10, 2009 at 3:39 AM

Remember the Messiah or his minions have anointed Rush through interviews and ads the leader of the Republican Party. Those who voted for Rush (I voted for Sarah Palin) are just acknowledging this fact. Rush was my second choice.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 3:50 AM

The Republican party is pretty much leaderless because too many of us keep taking the RINOs that the socialist media keep coughing up seriously.

darktood on March 10, 2009 at 3:54 AM

MSNBC conducted a poll to rate Obama’s performance as President: 69% gave him a D or F.

Unbelievable!

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 4:32 AM

Seems to me that Rush has declined the honor. He IS, however, the only Republican I’ve heard declare what is is FOR more than what he is AGAINST.
 

He provides a direction. And I mostly agree with it. But he leads Conservatives not Republicans.
 

Is there a Republican Party to lead? I dunno. All I know is that it left me behind when it started embracing “not quite as big as the Democrats huge government”, corruption, earmarks, pandering to Muslim extremist organizations, having religion “inform” government without running government, and so forth.
 

Until Republicans turn around and start getting their brains in order and clearly enunciating this to the media I see no point in voting for the assholes in either party.
 

If Ron Paul would recognize the threat from international Muslim extremists as a function of its origin in the Qur’an I’d vote for him with no qualms at all next election. He has most of the rest of it down pat.
 

{^_^}

herself on March 10, 2009 at 7:45 AM

Don’t know who does, but among a pool (10 to 15 key leaders) who should be stepping forward in unison is Paul Ryan. On Morning Joe this morning soon.

BuckeyeSam on March 10, 2009 at 8:21 AM

Government is a necessary evil. The two major parties involved are a necessary evil. As long as we understand those two points, we can understand this:

The people of the parties are the leaders of the party. The established leader is only the mechanism by which we get things done and I have serious doubts about whether that is even needed.

Why so much hand-wringing over who the party leader is? If the people are informed, and are driven by justice and not greed, the best candidates will win elections regardless of party or party leadership.

People will vote their conscience. We just need to make sure they have one.

pugwriter on March 10, 2009 at 8:36 AM

MSNBC conducted a poll to rate Obama’s performance as President: 69% gave him a D or F.

Unbelievable!

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 4:32 AM

Those that gave him a D were probably concerned about his self-esteem.

Saltysam on March 10, 2009 at 8:57 AM

Based on your own poll results I can see why the Obama Administration and Media is taking advantage of the discord they are generating. The question you asked is who is the leader of the Republican Party. Well the Republican Party is the GOP, so that means Mr. Steele, yet in your poll he gets only 7%. This tells me a few things. Either people don’t know who Mr. Steele or who the GOP is.

Then is the fact that people are picking Rush, a media personality, or Gov. Palin, who is a state Gov and possible future candidate tells me the GOP has a serious problem. Now personally I think Rush is hurting the GOP right now with some of his comments and hype he is trying to generate, which is playing right into the Obama Administrations hands and game plan. How people can pick Gov. Palin as the supposed leader of the GOP is beyond me, when she is going to be spending the news few years dedicating herself to the state of Alaska.

JeffinSac on March 10, 2009 at 10:13 AM

It’s Romney, who bizarrely is not on the list in your poll.

haner on March 9, 2009 at 10:01 PM

Oh please. Romney is listed under ‘other – not named’ together with Huckabee, Sanford and other GOP has-beens. The fact that they get 3% combined speaks volumes to their unelectability.

Listen, I voted for Romney in the last primary, but I will not do so again. If the guy couldn’t beat McCain, he certaintly won’t beat Obama. Same thing goes for the Huckster. THey had their chance in 2008 and blew it.

2012 will be a race between Sarah, Jindal and possibly Newt. Judging from this poll, Sarah has 10 x times more enthusiasm and support than Jindal at this point.

Norwegian on March 10, 2009 at 10:50 AM

I voted for “no one”. Steele is the RNC Chairman, responsible for the organization and machinery in DC and the State Parties. That does not make him the national leader of the party, from our perspective. He is the leader of the technocrats, but not the voters.

I badly want Sarah Palin to be the leader of the party, because she has the right view on what the party ought to be doing. However, at this point in time Sarah is not the leader and that is because she chose not to be, yet. I agree with others above that she wisely put her focus back on the job she has. Don’t you think she would be taking all the heat that Rush is taking now if she prematurely put herself in the bullseye? Sarah knew better, it’s too early to make yourself vulnerable to these sorts of propaganda campaigns. She will get the legislative agenda through in her state, and she will participate in the 2010 midterms as needed. Right now there is no leader.

Many of you looked at the choices on the poll, and then changed the question you are answering. You just wanted to vote for what should be, rather than what is. That’s ok, but that wasn’t what was asked. It is understandable that some of you see Sarah’s name on a poll and want her to smoke the others and send a message to the DC GOPers. I get that, but that was not the question, was it? That battle is yet to come. When it gets here, then we’ll see who gets the GOP voters the most fired up. My money is on Sarah in that scenario, but we aren’t there just yet.

Brian1972 on March 10, 2009 at 11:26 AM

athensboy on March 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM

We have an ace up our sleeve. It’s called Media Malpractice. We know your playbook; by 2011 we will be as expert in Alinsky tactics as you are now.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. Take my word for it. There are thousands of Palin supporters who would take a bullet for her or walk over broken glass to ensure it never happens again.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM

just a few minor corrections…

1st i think there are millions of Sarah supporters
2nd since we all own the guns…i think we will be sending the bullets before we receive them…
3rd well i agree with you on everything else…the blatant evidence of media bullsh*t presented in Media Malpractice will NOT be tolerated in 2011-12

alexraye on March 10, 2009 at 11:45 AM

John McCain has 39 votes!! He’s gained supporters since the election I see!!

DanaSmiles on March 10, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Folks, for those of you you have followed the poll results since the beginning-what a turnaround not only for Sarah but for ElRushbo. For most of the day Rush was at around 9-10%-now at 28%-it couldn’t happen to a better non-politician. But Sarah is in the lead; to all those trolls who try to assert that Sarah has been ‘damaged beyond repair’, yesterday’s news, not a player in Presidential politics, this is your wake-up call. As alexraye above corrected me there are millions of Sarah supporters. And we are not going away. Unlike the mind-numbed Obamatrons we use our brains to think rationally and that is the basis that forms the basis for the greater majority who support Sarah-we know what we saw on the campaign trail, notwithstanding MSM’s attempts to distort its significance. However, having said that many of us are now EMOTIONALLY invested in Sarah. If Sarah decides not to run for the Presidency in 2012 so be it, but until millions of us here otherwise for the next 3 years and 8 months we are putting the GOP leadership, the MSM, and Obama on notice. We are on full speed ahead and overdrive, the bandwagon is taking off and if your not helping our cause, get out of the way or you’re going to get trampled.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 1:12 PM

I have to admit Rasmussen’s results are puzzling (only 1% say that Sarah Palin is the leader of the Republican Party) vs 34% here (so far.)

First let me say that HA has elicited a far bigger sample. And second, I truly believe the arguments that we all made in the comments section may have swayed some or convinced many to declare themselves for somebody rather than being on the fence and voting ‘No One’.

By the way with Rush at 27% and Jindal at 2% that’s 63% for conservatism or Reagan conservatism. To the RNC leadership wake up and smell the coffee-the people have spoken to which direction they want the party to go in.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Let me repeat what I wrote at 9PM yesterday:

I agree with Rush (CPAC speech):

“The American people may not all vote the way we wish them to, but more Americans than you know live their lives as conservatives in one degree or another. And they are waiting for leadership. We need CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP. WE CAN TAKE THIS COUNTRY BACK. ALL WE NEED IS TO NOMINATE THE RIGHT CANDIDATE. IT’S NO MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT.”

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 1:42 PM

According to john Hawkins of RightWingNews.com (informal) poll of 55 right wing bloggers of who they would want to be the GOP presidential nominee in 2012:

Sarah Palin

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 1:49 PM

Sorry, something screwed up:

According to John Hawkins of RightWingNews.com (informal) poll of 55 right wing bloggers of who they would want to be the GOP Presidential nominee in 2012:

Sarah Palin (35%) 19

Mark Sanford (20%) 11

Mitt Romney (19%) 10

Bobby Jindal (17%) 9

Ron Paul (4%) 2

Tim Pawlenty (4%) 2

Mike Huckabee (2%) 1

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 1:54 PM

According to John Hawkins of RightWingNews.com (informal) poll of 55 right wing bloggers of who they would want to be the GOP Presidential nominee in 2012:

Sarah Palin (35%) 19

Mark Sanford (20%) 11

Mitt Romney (19%) 10

Bobby Jindal (17%) 9

Ron Paul (4%) 2

Tim Pawlenty (4%) 2

Mike Huckabee (2%) 1

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 1:54 PM

LOL, Mark Sanford? They must have included people like Allahpundit in this sample of “right wing” bloggers.

Not surprising that Sarah won this one too though. Of course, when it comes to the real conservative grassroots, she blows everyone else out the water.

Norwegian on March 10, 2009 at 2:00 PM

Wonder what Ed Morrissey is going to say about these results on his web cast at 3 PM EST. it will be very interesting.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 2:10 PM

Besides, Tina doesn’t age as well as Sarah. By 2012 Tina will likely be playing the role of Sarah’s mom.

Now run along. Someone at KOS misses you.

bw222 on March 9, 2009 at 10:07 PM

We have an ace up our sleeve. It’s called Media Malpractice. We know your playbook; by 2011 we will be as expert in Alinsky tactics as you are now.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. Take my word for it. There are thousands of Palin supporters who would take a bullet for her or walk over broken glass to ensure it never happens again.

technopeasant on March 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM

+1000

sarahpalinfan99 on March 10, 2009 at 2:21 PM

Sarah isn’t in this silly race to the microphone stage. We’ll see what’s what. She is exhibiting far more personal discipline than some of the others right now in pulling back. Smart.

But then I always thought the outrage against her was due to her extreme competence in campaigning. Who’d thunk a gal from Alaska could know how to campaign that effectively? She surprised everyone.

AnninCA on March 10, 2009 at 2:26 PM

Anyone concerned with Conservatives winning in 2010, 2012 and further, not only should you bone up Alinsky, but also on the Delphi Technique.

It is the Hegelian Dialectic of developing ‘group-think.’

The Hegelian Dialectic / Delphi Technique is the toolbox used to apply Alinsky‘s principles.

During the 08 election, it was on full display over at FreeRepublic.com and was quite tangible in it’s execution.

Frustration is palpable to those that are caught unawares
by it’s insidious application.

The democratic machine is employing extremely underhanded methods of influencing debate by Astro-turfing through unethical tactics.

This is the same methodology utilized in government schools, college campi, and city governments in order to limit dissent and ultimately short-circuit our Representative Republic.

It was recently employed by Obama in his Health-Care “Break-Out Sessions.”

Cloward-Piven is just part of the strategy.

These methods can be defeated, once discovered, but it takes a keen eye, a sharp ear and quick mind.

Take their motto to heart:

——- Dare to Cheat; Dare to Win ——–

These are not politics as usual and should not be viewed as such.

Extreme skepticism will be your most valued asset.

Palin / Sanford or Jindal in 2012

thaDeetz on March 10, 2009 at 3:05 PM

How much do you want to bet that the results of this poll will not be reported in the MSM? They dare not.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 3:07 PM

Ed is starting to sound like Obama and his trolls dismissing the results of the poll. He fails to admit that Sarah was running at about 25% all through the day yesterday before the spike to the high 30’s. You can tell that Sarah is not Ed’s first choice and that he is unhappy at the results of the poll.

And finally Ed can’t bring himself to perhaps admit that once the word got out on the Internet and through word of mouth about the existence of the poll that supporters of Sarah went online and voted and that it was not troll-driven at all.

People who support Sarah let us realize this: there are not only powerful forces against us on the Left but there are equally insidious forces supposedly on our side who want to take Sarah out as well. We must be vigilant of a 24/7 basis; not only do we have to look to who is in front of us but unfortunately we have to look over our shoulder quite frequently as well.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM

And to Ed’s theory on the trolls wanting Sarah or Rush to win: get real: Rush and Sarah are thorns in Obama’s side. There is no way that Obama would want to enhance Rush’s status any further (doubling his listening audience) and cause SarahPAC coffers to burgeon from contributions from those who perceive Sarah to be a winner.

This doesn’t compute, Ed!

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Rush is now at 28%. Boy, watching this poll over the last few days has been amazing.

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 4:03 PM

shotsonthehouse.com is now conducting a poll:

Who are your 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices for the Republican Nod in 2012?

Current results (it’s still early):

Sarah Palin (52%) 252 votes

Bobby Jindal (38%) 185

Mitt Romney (36%) 174

Newt Gingrich (21%) 101

Mike Huckabee (19%) 91

David Petraeus (12%)61

Rush Limbaugh (12%) 60

Mark Sanford (11%) 56

Haley Barbour (10%) 47

I think this poll that the results of the CNN poll, this poll and now strong indications of the abovementioned third poll should indicate to anybody with half a brain that Sarah Palin is a formidable force of nature and is a major player whenever she wants to re-enter the national political stage (as i mmentioned before the Tiger Woods effect).

technopeasant on March 10, 2009 at 4:50 PM

Just so you know, this poll was highhacked by the fine folks at SadlyNo!

SouthernDem on March 11, 2009 at 12:15 PM

SouthernDem on March 11, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Prove it!

technopeasant on March 11, 2009 at 1:03 PM