CBS: 71% don’t want Palin to run for president

posted at 9:44 pm on January 18, 2010 by Allahpundit

C’mon. You know I had to.

Besides, tomorrow’s going to be wall-to-wall Scotty B. If not now, when?

When the results are split out by party, 56 percent of Republicans say they do not want her to seek the office and 30 percent do. Meanwhile, 88 percent of Democrats do not want her to run. Among independents, 65 percent do not want her to run and 25 percent do…

Now, 26 percent of people view Palin favorably, compared with 23 percent in November and July of last year. Forty-one percent now view her unfavorably, compared with 38 percent in November and 37 percent in July (both in CBS News polls). Nineteen percent of people in the current poll are undecided about Palin.

Forty-three percent of Republicans have a favorable opinion of her. Independents are divided, with 30 percent holding favorable views and 35 percent unfavorable…

But while favorable toward her, most conservatives say they do not want to see Palin run in 2012 – 58 percent of conservatives say she should not run.

Does anyone seriously believe that only 43 percent of Republicans have a favorable view of Sarahcuda? Gallup polled that question in July, less than two weeks after she resigned as governor — probably the nadir of her popularity — and found 72 percent favorables among Republicans. A CNN poll last month found her favorables at 46 percent overall without offering a partisan breakdown, but given intense Democratic opposition to her, Republican support must be in the vicinity of 75-80 percent. At Thanksgiving, she was pulling 68 percent favorables among Iowa Republicans. After the Fox gig and the book tour, we’re supposed to believe that she’s not even at 50 percent among Republicans nationwide? Please.

That said, if 44 percent of Republicans do want her to run, that’s … a fairly sizable chunk of primary voters, no? Virtually every primary poll taken thus far shows her, Huck, and Mitt bunched up in the low 20s, which means in all likelihood that the threshold for victory will be exceedingly low if the 2012 primaries have as many candidates running as the 2008 primaries did. (That’s how McCain won, after all.) That’s why I think if she jumps in, Beltway Republicans will try to head her off by uniting behind a single anti-Palin candidate: They simply can’t afford to see the vote split three or four ways or else her devoted supporters will carry her to victory, especially with evangelical-heavy states like Iowa and social-con strongholds like South Carolina early in the primary schedule. (And don’t forget, vis-a-vis Florida, that she likely has a strong campaigner on her behalf there in Rubio.) Those independent numbers, if they hold would be horrible for the general, but are these numbers really so bad for the primaries?

Update: Confirming my suspicions, Conservatives 4 Palin e-mails to point out that Palin’s favorables were actually near 80 percent among Republicans — 79 to be exact — in December’s Gallup poll. Why the discrepancy? Quote:

The reason why NY Times/CBS News shows a lower Republican rating is it gives four options as opposed to three (favorable, unfavorable, undecided, haven’t heard enough from as opposed to favorable, unfavorable, undecided). Some Republicans who would answer favorable to the polls with three options would move to one of the two options in the CBS poll.

They also note that her favorables among indies were at near-majority in the Tarrance battleground poll last month, with a plurality of 49 percent giving her thumbs up.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6

As Brown supported “RomneyCare” in Mass. and is Pro-Choice, how do you folks square wanting to see him win today???

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Let’s see, his election can help sink Obama’s worst ideas and his opponent supports “RomneyCare” and is Pro-Choice, too. What am I missing?

littleguy on January 19, 2010 at 1:20 PM

As an addendum to my comments to kingsjester: Some people forget that he wasn’t a puppet. He lead us to the waters and we willing and happily drank and the sparkle covered the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. He knew exactly how good America could be and continually convinced us all. It wasn’t the GOP convincing him.

Sultry Beauty on January 19, 2010 at 1:21 PM

As Brown supported “RomneyCare” in Mass. and is Pro-Choice, how do you folks square wanting to see him win today???

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 12:53 PM

He’s fine for the people of MA. But on a national level, no – he is a moderate.

He serves our immediate purpose: defeat Obamacare and demoralize the Donks.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:22 PM

Sultry Beauty on January 19, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Ah, I’ve actually been on here for a couple of years, but whatever. Your naivety comes from this belief that “the Man” (RINO’s in leadership positions) are blocking conservative candidates from running. Sarah Palin was a Republican mayor who later became a Republican governor (although she chose to bail on the job after only 2 1/2 years in the job). She could have (and should) have pushed to replace Ted Stevens as the Republican candidate for his senate seat, but didn’t. Then she was picked to be the VP candidate on the Republican ticket in 2008. And if she chose to do so, she could start her candidacy for 2012 – something she has not done as of now. Sure doesn’t look like any “RINO’S” have stopped her from pursuing office.

So answer my question: Are you hoping for a Scott Brown win today even though by your definition he’d be one of those awful RINO’S that you seem to despise so much?

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:33 PM

She could have (and should) have pushed to replace Ted Stevens as the Republican candidate for his senate seat, but didn’t.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:33 PM

Replace with whom? And are you saying she should meddle with the Alaskan senate while serving as governor?

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:34 PM

littleguy on January 19, 2010 at 1:20 PM
atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:22 PM

I guess that’s the point I was trying to make with some of the more diehard conservatives on this site: Real-world politics is about trade-offs. You start with the understanding that you’re not going to get everything you want. You then decide what’s of real importance to you. You then decide which things you are willing to give on for the bigger picture. Some people call this being a RINO. I call it being a pragmatist. It would seem that we share the same view.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Replace with whom? And are you saying she should meddle with the Alaskan senate while serving as governor?

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Palin could have ran for Ted Steven’s senate seat. If she was that wildly popular in Alaska, she would have won it hands down. But she chose not to run. The was part of a larger argument that nobody was stopping Palin from pursuing political offices.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:49 PM

Meanwhile, 88 percent of Democrats do not want her to run. Among independents, 65 percent do not want her to run and 25 percent do

65 percent of independents hating her means she can’t win dogcatcher. They should want her to run against their guys

That’s why I think if she jumps in, Beltway Republicans will try to head her off by uniting behind a single anti-Palin candidate: They simply can’t afford to see the vote split three or four ways

They will play the primaries like last election, running their shills to split the vote. It worked for McCain.

Unless they can overcome their visceral dislike for Romney. He isn’t stupid and would go for a real job or no job

Huck is there to compete for evangelicals, and he has been positioned at FOX to schmooze his crowd

Last time, Huck held out his delegates for last, and they let him think he was in the running. Everyone else handed in their chips on the way to the convention like good doggies.

Both parties are trying like crazy to take her down. Meanwhile, she is still, cleverly, a cipher on the details. The McCain machine did her a favor, keeping her from opening her mouth except for cheerleading. Palin has become the Obama of the right, folk looking at her for hope and change, and filling in the blanks according to their needs. On taxes and smaller gov she is pretty certain. She made some liberal moves as Governor (gay partnership benefits) and has a non opinion on amnesty.

Palin would be a fool to spill the beans early. She will hold out until the last, if she does run. She will be given a re evaluation by the public when she surprises them with details.

Meanwhile, the GOP is trying to take down a cipher. They will have to invent her, to destroy her, and she can make them look like fools

entagor on January 19, 2010 at 1:51 PM

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Pragmatic, yes. But, I’m beginning to see mounting evidence that the party brass believe the rank and file are there to serve them. I stand ready to help educate them on the falsity of that notion by choosing for myself and punishing their choice, if needs be.

littleguy on January 19, 2010 at 2:10 PM

Palin could have ran for Ted Steven’s senate seat. If she was that wildly popular in Alaska, she would have won it hands down. But she chose not to run. The was part of a larger argument that nobody was stopping Palin from pursuing political offices.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:49 PM

But legislation is not her thing. She is an executive. They are separate branches.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 2:11 PM

Some people call this being a RINO. I call it being a pragmatist. It would seem that we share the same view.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:44 PM

You’re blurring the line between state and national elections. You’ve done the same with the branches of government.

I think you need to develop a sense of discrimination.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 2:12 PM

RINO’S that you seem to despise so much?

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 1:33 PM

I see your problem, you don’t understand what a RINO is…
You think a RINO is just a liberal, or left leaning Republican, or a Republican that supports a couple of more liberal ideas.
A RINO is a Republican that runs on conservative values, ideas, but doesn’t support them in the voting.
Brown, and others like him, are up front, you know where he stands, liberal on a couple of ideas, conservative on others…and he votes that way, he doesn’t say one thing, then does another.
He is a left leaning Republican, but not a RINO…a name, like racist, that has been applied to anyone who isn’t “pure”…

right2bright on January 19, 2010 at 2:23 PM

If Brown is Romney’s man, then Rubio is Huck’s.

ceruleanblue on January 18, 2010 at 10:54 PM

Which do you think Rubio would rather have campaign and raise funds for him?

ddrintn on January 18, 2010 at 10:57 PM

Who do you think Scott Brown would rather have to campaign and raise funds for him: Romney, Huckabee or Palin?

Oh wait, Romney’s been supporting Brown from the very beginning.

If Brown wins, he has Mitt Romney to thank for it.

Lets not forget that Romney also helped the Republican win the NJ and VA governorships.

Did you notice that Romney didn’t even bother to comment on the Brown race? I find that bizarre.

AnninCA on January 19, 2010 at 7:17 AM

Are you aware of how much assistance Scott has received from Mitt Romney!?

Romney is a behind the scenes kind of guy. He’s working in the background getting people to donate to Brown or make phone calls for Scott brown. He’s also given his best political advisors to Scott Brown.

Has Huckabee or Palin lent Brown their political advisors? Have either one of them campaigned for Scott Brown? Has either one of them convinced their supporters to donate to Brown or make phone calls for Brown?

Again, if Scott Brown wins, he has Mitt Romney to thank for his victory.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Romney is a behind the scenes kind of guy. He’s working in the background getting people to donate to Brown or make phone calls for Scott brown.
Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Who’s thunk the guys at Hillbuzz were Romney bots? /

katiejane on January 19, 2010 at 2:45 PM

I stand ready to help educate them on the falsity of that notion by choosing for myself and punishing their choice, if needs be.

littleguy on January 19, 2010 at 2:10 PM

As do I. That’s why I didn’t vote for McCain in the last election.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 2:53 PM

Real-world politics is about trade-offs. You start with the understanding that you’re not going to get everything you want. You then decide what’s of real importance to you. You then decide which things you are willing to give on for the bigger picture.

What are the Center-Right offering to give up? Apart from conservatism.

We’ve already done the shortening of our list to essentials. What’s happening for half this decade has been an argument that our essentials are really unecessary and/or offensive.

Chris_Balsz on January 19, 2010 at 2:56 PM

But legislation is not her thing. She is an executive. They are separate branches.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 2:11 PM

I understand that they are separate branches. Again (because you seemed to miss this the first time I said it), the initial point way back in my first posting was that Palin has had opportunities to run for offices if she chooses to – no evil “RINO’s” are preventing from doing so.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 2:57 PM

You’re blurring the line between state and national elections. You’ve done the same with the branches of government.

I think you need to develop a sense of discrimination.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 2:12 PM

RINO candidates for national elections come from local/state offices. If Scott Brown wins today, he will be working in the Federal government, not the Mass. state one. That means he’ll have say over what bills get passed which can directly affect you even if you live in another state other than Mass. And as an FYI, Ted Stevens was a “US’ senator, not an Alaska state senator.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 3:04 PM

He is a left leaning Republican, but not a RINO…a name, like racist, that has been applied to anyone who isn’t “pure”…

right2bright on January 19, 2010 at 2:23 PM

I agree. Right now, I’m being called a “RINO” even though I’m being upfront about my beliefs. My problems is with the conservative purists on this site who are jumping on the Scott Brown bandwagon. I think they should stick to their convictions.

Dagnar on January 19, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Mitt Romney was on television this morning and last night talking about Scott Brown.

I’ve yet to hear anything from Huckabee or Palin in supporting Scott Brown.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 3:17 PM

So sorry I missed this. Impolite to nit respond to a direct question.

OK, Irritable Pundit – but what happens when Palin supporters or tea partiers decide it is time to return the favor? Are you really giving approval to creating an environment for Republican on Republican attacks?
How is this going to help the party?
Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

or Michelle’s kids?

No one is talking about “creating an environment for Republican on Republican attacks”. This is HA, it is already here. It is a place some well spoken conservatives and their less conservatives foils, friends, and family gather.

That’s about it. You can go somewhere else that has less snark or you can get used to AP. He is not persecuting Sarah, I promise. Just being Eyore, and pickling on the flavor of the month for grins and page views. And no I’m not picking on you, just telling you to relax maybe a tiny bit? :)

FYI, I adore Sarah.

Irritable Pundit on January 19, 2010 at 3:56 PM

Who made up the population sample for this poll…high school students? Coffee house denizens? Cabaret performers?

WTF?

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 19, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Of course, that figure is down from the 100% of the CBS newsroom who don’t want her to run.

Hucklebuck on January 19, 2010 at 4:39 PM

The way Obama is tracking, he would have trouble beating Elmer Fudd in 2012. Unless someone better comes along, Sarah has my vote.

mike_NC9 on January 19, 2010 at 4:44 PM

PPP is a Democratic pollster who has polled Palin, Huckabee and Romney every month since March 2009 had this to say about Sarah Palin’s future political prospects:

a)a comparison between favorables between July and November:
JULY NOV
CONSERVATIVE DEMS 47% 52%
CONSERVATIVE INDIES 65 84
MODERATE INDIES 32 19
CONSERVATIVE REPUB 81 87
MODERATES DEMS 21 11
MODERATE REPUB 64 57

Dec.1

“Bottom line on Palin continues to be: well positioned to win a GOP nomination but not the general.”

b)end of Dec. 2009

In March 2009 among favorables Palin was only 72-18 over Obama and now in December she is now 92-4 over the Messiah, that clearly shows the “reticence to her being POTUS is no longer present.”

And finally here are the polls for Palin among other pollsters in Dec showing overall, GOP and indie F/UF:

BATTLEGROUND GALLUP PPP CNN
OVERALL 45/46 44/47 41/50 46/46
GOP 76/16 79/– 73/18 80/–
INDIES 49/49 40/– 39/54 ——

CONCLUSION:

Clearly the CBS/NYT poll is an “outlier” (26F overall and 43% among the GOP and 30% among indies).

In addition in a Rasmussen poll released on Nov 25th, in a head to head matchup against Obama, Palin was only 3 points behind him (46-43).

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Palin is a major player and that if so many folks didn’t want her to run for POTUS these stats and interpretations would not have been forthcoming, especially by PPP.

technopeasant on January 19, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Who watches CBS? I hope Palin DOES run.

zoyclem on January 19, 2010 at 4:52 PM

If Brown wins, he has Mitt Romney to thank for it.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 2:39 PM

It’s great that Romney helped Brown, but that line is pure b.s. If Brown wins, he can thank Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

ddrintn on January 19, 2010 at 5:00 PM

LOL! Is anybody (besides Palin haters) really going to trust a poll from the same people who gave you the “fake, but accurate” Bush National Guard Memos?

The real question is, why would anyone even poll this question, unless they had an agenda? Just like CBS had an agenda of preventing Bush winning re-election (hence, MemoGate); they have an agenda of preventing Sarah Palin from even seeking the GOP nomination. I wonder why….

Norwegian on January 19, 2010 at 5:11 PM

Sarah Palin will on Greta’s program tonight on Fox News at 10 PM EST to analyze the results of the Massachusetts election. Karl Rove will also be on Greta’s program tonight.

technopeasant on January 19, 2010 at 5:24 PM

It’s great that Romney helped Brown, but that line is pure b.s. If Brown wins, he can thank Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

ddrintn on January 19, 2010 at 5:00 PM

To be sure, Brown is running on an anti-Democrat wave of resentment against Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

But the political money, political operatives and political support has mostly been Romney’s doing. Nobody else has helped Brown out except Romney. Not Huckabee or Palin.

Romney’s fingerprints are all over Brown’s campaign.

Like I said, If Brown wins, he has Romney to thank for it.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 5:30 PM

Romney to thank for it.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 5:30 PM

I’ll take your word for it. I just hope Mitt stays in Massachusetts where he can do some good. I doubt he would be in a position to take Kennedy’s senate seat himself. He’s still a non-starter for CIC.

mike_NC9 on January 19, 2010 at 5:36 PM

Like I said, If Brown wins, he has Romney to thank for it.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 5:30 PM

Well, and loads of small donors who didn’t need or maybe even know of Romney’s urging.

ddrintn on January 19, 2010 at 5:53 PM

Some would call him a RINO and chase him out of the party.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 8:01 AM

Really? Name one, douchebag. “Some” makes you sound like Couric.

Jaibones on January 19, 2010 at 8:26 AM

Easily done, douchebag.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/12/dem-press-release-scott-brown-made-a-deal-with-the-devil-with-radical-tea-party-groups/

Scott Brown is not the tea party candidate. Joe Kennedy is.

Scott Brown is just another big government RINO that the tea partiers have, up until now, been railing against.

Rae on January 13, 2010 at 2:25 PM

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 6:50 PM

He is stirring the pot, that’s how he makes money, and keeps HA interesting…I dig it, it is predictable, but I like the challenging posts that he does.
The plus is, he allows all of us to take pot shots at him, and he is cool with it…he gets it, nothing personal…
I dig Allahpundit, he knows how to get the troops marching…

right2bright on January 19, 2010 at 9:46 AM

I can accept that he has that style – but he has singled Palin out. There is nobody else who has endured these constant and sustained ‘hit pieces’.

I’m not accusing him of promoting some of the BS smears – but he has intentionally targeted Palin in a sort of ‘piling on’ of the left wing smear campaign against her.

He is more than willing to peddle the leftist MSM message that Palin is somehow divisive and so extreme she should not be taken seriously.

That message, along with the leftist message that the Tea Party crowd are also ‘extreme’ needs to be quashed in GOP circles.

Today should be an emphatic moment trumpeting the Tea Party message and those standing up to Obama. Palin has been more effective than everyone but Rove and Cheney in attacking Obama’s policies. She is a leader in speaking to the people and getting a common sense conservative message out that is directly opposed to much of what is happening in DC.

Instead, the timid GOP will spend it’s time dancing around the 2 best things the party has going for it – Tea Party people and Sarah Palin.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 7:07 PM

no, most Americans aren’t brainwashed sheeple who convince themselves that quitting office midway is an honorable thing a competent person would do. We’ll always remember Sarah as the person who quit her state to work as a pundit.

Palin Steele on January 19, 2010 at 10:19 AM

…but of course she DIDN’T step down to become a pundit.

She stepped down because she was no longer willing to waste taxpayer arguments to refute bogus ethics complaints, and she felt she could have a larger voice by stepping down. Nothing more, nothing less.

I consider it an admirable decision that she likely agonized over.

I am appalled that an elected official would even be put in the position that Sarah Palin was placed in.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 7:13 PM

So sorry I missed this. Impolite to nit respond to a direct question.

OK, Irritable Pundit – but what happens when Palin supporters or tea partiers decide it is time to return the favor? Are you really giving approval to creating an environment for Republican on Republican attacks?
How is this going to help the party?
Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

or Michelle’s kids?

No one is talking about “creating an environment for Republican on Republican attacks”. This is HA, it is already here. It is a place some well spoken conservatives and their less conservatives foils, friends, and family gather.

That’s about it. You can go somewhere else that has less snark or you can get used to AP. He is not persecuting Sarah, I promise. Just being Eyore, and pickling on the flavor of the month for grins and page views. And no I’m not picking on you, just telling you to relax maybe a tiny bit? :)

FYI, I adore Sarah.

Irritable Pundit on January 19, 2010 at 3:56 PM

HA existed before Palin – and it was not a site where Allah targeted a single person over and over and over again. The Palin bashing is a new twist. I’ve been a HA visitor since day 1 and haven’t seen this disgusting of a display until Palin arrived.

…and you forget to mention that I can continue to visit, express my displeasure, write to Michelle about my displeasure of Allah’s sexist attacks against Palin, encourage others on Facebook and C4P to join me in protesting Allah’s targeted attacks and encourage them to also write to Ms Malkin.

All of which I am more than willing to do. I figured I would address the issue first and see if a reasonable solution could be achieved before I embarked on some cause.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 7:22 PM

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 7:22 PM

I would add in a letter writing campaign to Hot Air’s sponsor’s as well.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 7:23 PM

I’ll take your word for it. I just hope Mitt stays in Massachusetts where he can do some good. I doubt he would be in a position to take Kennedy’s senate seat himself. He’s still a non-starter for CIC.

mike_NC9 on January 19, 2010 at 5:36 PM

Do the research your self.

Where has Palin and Huckabee been for Brown?

Romney is the ONLY politician who is hosting a live elections results update and chat on the Brown v. Coakley election.

Romney is shrewed and innovative in getting people to support a candidate to win. Having a live elections result page and inviting people to chat about the elections as it progresses is pretty clever.

Do you see Palin or Huckabee doing anything remotely close to what Romney’s been doing for helping Scott Brown win?

As for Romney not being a non-starter for CIC, I disagree.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 7:33 PM

Romney and Huckabee are non-starters for 2012. The issue of the trainwreck known as RomneyCare takes him out, and the cop-killer whose sentence was commuted by Huckabee finishes him off.

It’s time for the GOP to move in a new direction rather than offer up warmed-over retreads like those two.

pdigaudio on January 19, 2010 at 7:42 PM

It’s time for the GOP to move in a new direction rather than offer up warmed-over retreads like those two.

pdigaudio on January 19, 2010 at 7:42 PM

With that kind of logic, Ronald Reagan shouldn’t have run a second time in 1980 after losing in the 1976 Presidential election.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 7:51 PM

Romney is shrewed and innovative in getting people to support a candidate to win.

Conservative Samizdat on January 19, 2010 at 7:33 PM

Except himself in 2008.

I won’t be supporting Huckabee, but I’ll keep an open mind about Romney.

ddrintn on January 19, 2010 at 8:11 PM

Sarah Palin…Commander-in-Chief:

http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/sarah-palin-commander-in-chief/

gary4205 on January 19, 2010 at 10:38 PM

With that kind of logic, Ronald Reagan shouldn’t have run a second time in 1980 after losing in the 1976 Presidential election.

Nope. Reagan had a future and a vision. Plus, it’s hard to topple a sitting president in a primary.

Romney has the albatross of RomneyCare, plus he’s just changed too many positions on too many issues. Huckabee? He’s a progressive with evangelical leanings. As governor of Arkansas, he was to the left of Bill Clinton. He’s consumed the global warming Kool-Aid, is a Lifestyle Nazi (supports food taxes and regulations and bans among other things). Let’s not forget about the thug whose sentence he commuted that killed those police officers. Why? Because the thug said he found Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus.

Keep the Huckster on TV where he belongs. Romney? He’d make a better RNC chairman than the Man of Steele.

pdigaudio on January 20, 2010 at 9:01 AM

She doesn’t need to run. She’s already influential. Besides you have to sell your soul…

MestizoMaverick on January 20, 2010 at 10:42 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6