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 2 3 4 5 6

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:23 AM

There you go again painting with your broad brush of smears and name-calling. You want to engage in dialogue? Lose the insults, diversions, bigotry, and rage.

conservative pilgrim on January 19, 2010 at 12:32 AM

Seriously, AP. Why is Palin singled out by CBS Polls?

When will Romney’s “numbers” be posted on?

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 12:33 AM

I am an observer here, a mother of a single daughter, salutatorian of her class, now a sophomore in college, and recently a reader here too. Palin wouldn’t even be in your wheelbase if she looked like Janet Reno, and my girl and I have the good fortune of knowing this.

Cornhusker on January 19, 2010 at 12:24 AM

I know you believe you have pointed out some edgy and biting discovery concerning Palin, but I doubt you have followed politics very long.

There was this amazing woman named Margaret Thatcher, and just to poke a hole in your assertion I can promise you I never rubbed one out to her picture…ok…maybe once.

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:33 AM

vindictive, vicious person who uses calumny…

No mirror in your house, Atheling?

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 12:35 AM

Indeed. All conservatives are just dreaming that a true conservative will get elected in 21st Century.

Let’s start pumping up for Romney.

RomneyCare is the best in the world, better than Obamacare!

Dude!

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 12:29 AM

Everyone should have your sense of humor.

Americannodash on January 19, 2010 at 12:36 AM

I’m a Palin supporter (if Fred won’t run in 2012) and I say YES.

HA is MSNBC, always going MSNBC against Palin.

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 12:31 AM

I was a Fred supporter in the primaries, and would be again…but I don’t think he will. He didn’t seem to want it enough last time, although I think it’s exactly that quality that most qualifies him for the job.

But yeah…admitting that you plan to smear other candidates for your own? I thought that was the modus operandi of such as Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, et al. It’s revolting to see a splinter faction of conservatives that are barely distinguishable in their attitude from the HopeyChangers.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 12:36 AM

*smack* Tag fail.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 12:37 AM

I know you believe you have pointed out some edgy and biting discovery concerning Palin, but I doubt you have followed politics very long.
There was this amazing woman named Margaret Thatcher, and just to poke a hole in your assertion I can promise you I never rubbed one out to her picture…ok…maybe once.

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:33 AM

Hey, how dare you discriminate against age? Be careful or conservative pilgrim/MadCon’s mother will slam you for that! Your bigotry is disgusting!

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:37 AM

anything but straight atheling. But you’re pissy and you come off with your big vocab ‘words of the day’ precisely as the kind annoying intellectual you and dear Sarah rail against.Don’t dislike Palin and as I said I am only an observer here, you don’t do yourself any favors with your hostile, argumentative tone. Just saying.

Cornhusker on January 19, 2010 at 12:39 AM

Hey, how dare you discriminate against age? Be careful or conservative pilgrim/MadCon’s mother will slam you for that! Your bigotry is disgusting!

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:37 AM

But I am a bigot, and a viscous, hateful, dirty motherfvcker. So no skin off my hairy back. I am all for repealing women’s suffrage

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:40 AM

The other 29% most be posting here and at Free Republic.

Speedwagon82 on January 19, 2010 at 12:40 AM

But I am a bigot, and a viscous, hateful, dirty motherfvcker. So no skin off my hairy back. I am all for repealing women’s suffrage

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:40 AM

And let’s bring back slavery! I’m only half white, but hey, that’s enough to make me a disgusting bigoted racist!

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:42 AM

And let’s bring back slavery! I’m only half white, but hey, that’s enough to make me a disgusting bigoted racist!

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:42 AM

I am not sure what I am, serious raunchy ancestors in my past. Slavery would just be too much overhead, maybe just the women?

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:44 AM

I am not sure what I am, serious raunchy ancestors in my past. Slavery would just be too much overhead, maybe just the women?

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:44 AM

You mean just women slaves? *hears politically correct heads exploding*

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:46 AM

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:46 AM

You trying to back up an anti-suffrage position while supporting Palin is pure irony ambrosia. Please, keep it up.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 12:48 AM

You mean just women slaves? *hears politically correct heads exploding*

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:46 AM

Wait, what I missed what you were saying. I was busy rolling up the sleeves on my stained Fruit-Of-The-Loom t shirt.

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:49 AM

Wait, what I missed what you were saying. I was busy rolling up the sleeves on my stained Fruit-Of-The-Loom t shirt.

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:49 AM

*hands him a pack of Camels to stash in the sleeve of stained t shirt*

Better hide that from the PC police. Being a smoker is worse than being a serial rapist.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:51 AM

I give up. This is why I only read and observe. I suppose next I’ll have to hear about the ladies’ underwear pages of the old Montgomery Ward catalogs and how much they meant to you ClassicCon. Is it always about your junk isn’t it. Of course I loved and respected Lady Thatcher. And sorry, but yes Sarah’s looks are definately a big part of this.

Cornhusker on January 19, 2010 at 12:52 AM

Some people should speak for themselves.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:53 AM

Is it always about your junk isn’t it.
Cornhusker on January 19, 2010 at 12:52 AM

Ouch…someone has penis envy.

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:55 AM

This is why I only read and observe
Cornhusker on January 19, 2010 at 12:52 AM

Don’t give up. If you cede the ground to these fools HA will turn into the right’s equivalent of LGF.

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 12:57 AM

I hereby say that this is going to called “the tangent thread.” Now where were we? Oh yea, now everybody continue to go off on a tangent.

Americannodash on January 19, 2010 at 12:57 AM

I give up. This is why I only read and observe. I suppose next I’ll have to hear about the ladies’ underwear pages of the old Montgomery Ward catalogs and how much they meant to you ClassicCon. Is it always about your junk isn’t it. Of course I loved and respected Lady Thatcher. And sorry, but yes Sarah’s looks are definately a big part of this.

Cornhusker on January 19, 2010 at 12:52 AM

HELLO? I am just a few clicks away from porn paradise sweety? Why would I need Montgomery Wards catalog? Besides didn’t they go out of business. My junk certainly deserves better.

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:58 AM

Classic Con: No politician is going to fix the real problems we suffer from.

I think that’s a Palin quote.

gocatholic on January 19, 2010 at 1:01 AM

I think that’s a Palin quote.

gocatholic on January 19, 2010 at 1:01 AM

You think wrong.

Keep cheering for that team…RA RA RA!

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 1:04 AM

HELLO? I am just a few clicks away from porn paradise sweety? Why would I need Montgomery Wards catalog? Besides didn’t they go out of business. My junk certainly deserves better.

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 12:58 AM

Don’t you see? She’s discriminating against your age. She’s a disgusting bigot, according to “conservative” pilgrim.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:04 AM

ClassicCon on January 19, 2010 at 1:04 AM

It is a Palin quote. It’s in her book.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:05 AM

I seriously wish she’d go away.

Let it go, people.

stoj on January 19, 2010 at 1:06 AM

1. I hate to break it to you, but “discriminating” against age is not wrong. As a matter of fact, I rarely consult teens or twenties on political matters because I don’t think they have the life experience (not to mention having a crappy education from our public schools) to offer up anything of value. Discrimination is not evil. It is a faculty of the intellect and necessary for survival. Sheesh you PC-nuts are pathetic.

I see. So you are not only a bigot, but so proud and vain that someone younger than yourself could never provide insight or teach you.

Do you always insult and disparage people who disagree with you?

2. When did I discriminate against gender? As a woman, I have a right to criticize other women. We are not above reproach as a sex. Again, I’m not hiring anyone here, I’m debating them.

Saying that you’d like to go back to the days when women couldn’t vote because of how they vote now in presidential elections is gender discrimination. You singled out one group of people and said they shouldn’t have the right to vote because they vote the wrong way in your eyes. Sorry, that’s called democracy. If you don’t like it, move to Saudi Arabia.

3. Why haven’t you or MadCon gone after anyone else who criticized leilani whatserface here? I saw others had rebuttals to her, but MadCon the Liar went only after me. He, like a petty high school girl, has a grudge against me and seeks to start trouble every chance he gets. He is a vindictive, vicious person who uses calumny, much like the drive by media does.

I didn’t read the other posts. I read the comments between you and Madison Conservative in this thread.

Again, if you want your arguments to be taken seriously, don’t call people names (PC police), use misogynist language (“like a petty high school girl“), slander (“liar,” vindictive, vicious person”).

4. WTF are you talking about “educational choices”? You PC police are really warped. I support Sarah, and you tell me I’m “bigoted” against “educational choices” when she has been lambasted for attending several colleges? Are you nuts?

Thanks for taking what I said out of context and using strawmen to support it. Here’s what I’m referring to:

I wonder at what this country will be like when the likes of you and your pathetic generation run it. You are no different from a libturd, except you have a tight wallet.

atheling on January 18, 2010 at 11:02 PM

I misread this quote of yours as a dig at our educational system. My apologies for misinterpreting your intent.

5. Or are your MadCon’s mother?

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 12:23 AM

For someone who claims to be old and wise, your “calumny” directed at me is rather childish.

conservative pilgrim on January 19, 2010 at 1:06 AM

I misread this quote of yours as a dig at our educational system. My apologies for misinterpreting your intent.

conservative pilgrim on January 19, 2010 at 1:06 AM

It was a dig at our educational system. Are you saying that our educational system is good?

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:09 AM

The time is late for me and I work tomorrow–Good night!

atheling–I am really trying to engage you in a conversation and dialogue, not to fight. Insults and name calling won’t achieve that. I hope you have a good evening.

conservative pilgrim on January 19, 2010 at 1:10 AM

For someone who claims to be old and wise, your “calumny” directed at me is rather childish.

conservative pilgrim on January 19, 2010 at 1:06 AM

I never made such a claim. But you are definitely young and foolish.

And you should consult a dictionary before you use a new, unfamiliar word.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:11 AM

conservative pilgrim on January 19, 2010 at 1:10 AM

Running away?

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:11 AM

I never made such a claim. But you are definitely young and foolish.

And you should consult a dictionary before you use a new, unfamiliar word.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:11 AM

And so you get the last word. Good night.

conservative pilgrim on January 19, 2010 at 1:12 AM

Palin is divisive by virtue of the fact that everyone says she is.

spmat on January 19, 2010 at 1:18 AM

But you are definitely young and foolish.

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:11 AM

But all Democrats as old or older than you are wise.

Lovely measuring stick.

Hell, Obama is in his 40s. Paul Ryan is a young doofus compared to him, right? Jason Mattera is a clueless punk when sized up next to the oracle known as Al Gore. Steven Crowder should mind his elders like Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal, right?

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 1:19 AM

C’mon. You know I had to.

You’re a sick man, Allahpundit. You nauseate me more than Bruce Springsteen and Michelle Obama combined.

chunderroad on January 19, 2010 at 1:19 AM

I have a very favorable opinion of Palin, especially the way she has handled press coverage, of which Obama couldn’t handle even 5% of; however, I don’t think she is presidential material. She is a strong leader, but I think she is wasting her talent and energy on an office she is not suited for. It’s analogous to a talented inorganic chemist trying to run a molecular biology lab.

Dilophos on January 19, 2010 at 1:24 AM

Is this Hot Air or MSNBC?

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 12:27 AM

Hard to tell the difference sometimes. I’m simply saying there is no need to smear our own – but if Republicans choose to smear my Republican candidate I have no problem with smearing theirs right back.

I am not a ‘turn the other cheek’ Republican. I am more than happy to exchange tit for tat.

I would rather point out the pitfall that Allah is leading Hot Air and hopefully he will realize he should not be using this site to inspire conservatives to bash other conservatives.

That is definitely the tone he is setting, however.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM

She is a strong leader, but I think she is wasting her talent and energy on an office she is not suited for. It’s analogous to a talented inorganic chemist trying to run a molecular biology lab.

Dilophos on January 19, 2010 at 1:24 AM

Huh? “She is a strong leader”, but she is not “suited” for a leadership position? She has been an executive but is not “suited” for the executive office?

atheling on January 19, 2010 at 1:35 AM

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM

Huh? You have no problem engaging in red-on-red, but it’s AP’s fault for inspiring it?

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 1:39 AM

I’m simply saying there is no need to smear our own – but if Republicans choose to smear my Republican candidate I have no problem with smearing theirs right back.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM

If you’re talking about Republicans claiming that Palin didn’t know Africa was a continent, or that she said she could see Russia from her house, or claiming she racked up 150K in clothes bills, I understand your frustration. However, I still wouldn’t smear any good candidate. All candidates have their bad points.

Now, if you’re talking about questioning her decision to attend the tea party convention, or questioning her quitting as governor, or being dissatisfied with her responses in the Glenn Beck interview, these are not smears. These are legitimate concerns, and they WILL affect voters, should she ever run for office again.

In either case, some intensely fanatical zealots, like atheling, refer to the latter type of criticism as “smears” because they have invested so much faith in Sarah Palin, after a horrible 2008 election, that they fear if she turns out to be flawed and/or unelectable, they won’t know where to turn. Romney, Huckabee, McCain…they were all weak on a number of points. It was tough for conservatives this last time around.

Regardless, it’s no reason to idolize a woman who, so far, has proven most successful at selling a book. She’s a good woman, and she’s better than the others I just listed. Most importantly, if she really is fit for the job of the presidency, she doesn’t need a bunch of starry-eyed acolytes jumping on people who question some of her decisions or words.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 1:42 AM

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM

Huh? You have no problem engaging in red-on-red, but it’s AP’s fault for inspiring it?

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 1:39 AM

Correct. I also have no problem using Democrat smears against them. Bush stole the election = Obama is an usurper to me. Fair game – and game that must be pursued.

Since Allah feels obligated to repost these Palin smears I will have no problem returning smears of other non-Palin candidates who Allah does not feel obligated to smear.

I’m not smearing other Republicans currently – but if Allah and others continue to use this site to tear down Palin with stupid non-issue based smears then maybe it’s time Palin supporters return the favor.

Do you get it now? You hit me, I’m going to hit you back. That doesn’t mean I am going to hit you first – I’m just willing to exchange blows if someone starts.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:45 AM

Correct. I also have no problem using Democrat smears against them. Bush stole the election = Obama is an usurper to me. Fair game – and game that must be pursued.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:45 AM

Using the same tactics you despise will put people in office that will use the same sort of tactics to pursue whatever their agenda is. The problem we suffer from right now is a dearth of non-representatives who do not think the rules apply to them. Your attitude will keep that same bulls**t right on going.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 1:50 AM

Conservatives don’t really want any living person to run. We all are kind of hoping that 1980 Ronald Reagan is going to pop in from his time machine and take the nomination. Thats the only way to explain the dismal 2008 primaries.

Speedwagon82 on January 19, 2010 at 1:52 AM

If Allah and others continue to use this site…

Not a big fan of AP, as he enjoys belittling religion. But it’s a bit much to come into somebody’s house and tell them how it needs to be run. Maybe you could start up your own site, and run it like LGF, where anyone who says anything you don’t like gets banned.

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Not a big fan of AP, as he enjoys belittling religion. But it’s a bit much to come into somebody’s house and tell them how it needs to be run. Maybe you could start up your own site, and run it like LGF, where anyone who says anything you don’t like gets banned.

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Perish the thought! Since when do conservatives care about private property and property rights?

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 1:55 AM

I really like the woman. But she is not ready. I can’t help but wonder if a Scott Brown win makes him the defacto front-runner to unseat Dumbo.

JCred on January 18, 2010 at 9:49 PM

I don’t know about 2012, but if we lose, the Governor of Virginia will be the front runner for 2016. Assuming he doesn’t have an Appalachian Trail occurence.

Speedwagon82 on January 19, 2010 at 1:57 AM

Now, if you’re talking about questioning her decision to attend the tea party convention, or questioning her quitting as governor, or being dissatisfied with her responses in the Glenn Beck interview, these are not smears. These are legitimate concerns, and they WILL affect voters, should she ever run for office again.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 1:42 AM

I would applaud her or any candidates decision to attend a ‘tea party’ convention. That is another group that gets smeared all too often by the left and we DON’T need to hear it from the right. The tea party movement is the most positive and inspiring grassroots government movement I have seen in my lifetime. I am proud to support it.

I believe her quitting as Governor has given her a larger voice and has made her an even more influential and important figure. She quit because she was being hit with ridiculous amounts of frivolous ethics complaints and it was costing a fortune to defend herself from them.

That such a litany of frivolous complaints could even be used to force a politician office out is appalling. The continued eagerness of others to criticize and belittle her for being put in such a position to make the choice to step down is equally appalling. You know why she stepped down – and it is downright disgusting it 2was allowed to happen.

I don’t see such constant discussion about Huckabee or Romney discussing their interviews and whether they got a personal stamp of approval from every Republican. Those appearnces come and go and nobody much cares about them. Sarah makes an appearnce and the smears start flying.

I am also no ‘starry eyed Palinite’. I knew who she was before McCain named her and was already a big supporter of hers for her accomplishments on the Energy Board, as Mayor, and as Governor.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:58 AM

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 1:53 AM

I didn’t make any demands – I simply said if this is the path we are going to walk down then it is going to get ugly in here.

At that point Allah might start banning people – but I have made no demands. I have simply stated a logical result of his continued smears directed at Palin. He knows he is doing this. He admits it. He gets off on it.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:00 AM

I would applaud her or any candidates decision to attend a ‘tea party’ convention. That is another group that gets smeared all too often by the left and we DON’T need to hear it from the right. The tea party movement is the most positive and inspiring grassroots government movement I have seen in my lifetime. I am proud to support it.

I didn’t say anything about the tea party movement. I was talking about the convention. I’ve attended tea parties myself, and blogged about them in the Green Room. You’re venturing into a straw man.

People have plenty of legitimate beefs about her speaking there. They are valid, even if you don’t agree with them.

I believe her quitting as Governor has given her a larger voice and has made her an even more influential and important figure. She quit because she was being hit with ridiculous amounts of frivolous ethics complaints and it was costing a fortune to defend herself from them.

That’s your opinion. People having a different opinion is not an attack on her, nor are people’s opinions invalid because they disagree.

I don’t see such constant discussion about Huckabee or Romney discussing their interviews and whether they got a personal stamp of approval from every Republican. Those appearnces come and go and nobody much cares about them. Sarah makes an appearnce and the smears start flying.

There was a TON of that discussion during the primaries, and either you weren’t paying attention, or you have selective amnesia.

I am also no ’starry eyed Palinite’. I knew who she was before McCain named her and was already a big supporter of hers for her accomplishments on the Energy Board, as Mayor, and as Governor.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 1:58 AM

Maybe, maybe not. Being willing to invoke Alinsky for her is frightening, disturbing, and disheartening to know that there are creeps on the right who would gladly commit the same atrocities that those on the left did last time.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:04 AM

Using the same tactics you despise will put people in office that will use the same sort of tactics to pursue whatever their agenda is. The problem we suffer from right now is a dearth of non-representatives who do not think the rules apply to them. Your attitude will keep that same bulls**t right on going.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 1:50 AM

Well the tactics of smearing Palin will have the same result.

You are saying it is fine to smear Palin – but other candidates should not be smeared.

I agree the tactics of smearing our own will lead to Democrat gains (or diminished losses). My question is why is Allah leading this charge using this tactic?

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:04 AM

Mr. P, don’t you get how this site works? The more eyeballs, the more revenue. AP is controversial precisely because it starts wars. The more back and forth, the more money in the bank. The more he yanks your chain, the better he gets paid. You act like this site is supposed to be about ideological purity.

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 2:08 AM

You are saying it is fine to smear Palin…

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:04 AM

Are you unable to read what I said?

I listed crap like the Africa smear and said I am against it.

I pointed out that valid criticism is NOT smearing(the tea party convention, her resignation, etc).

If you can’t tell the difference, and are willing to smear other good candidates just to pursue loyalty to a person, rather than a set of ideals, then you are as much a brainwashed robot as any Obama cultist.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:12 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 1:42 AM

And you have absolutely no clue how you just insulted her.

Do you do much of this against any other GOP prospect?

Sapwolf on January 19, 2010 at 2:14 AM

I didn’t say anything about the tea party movement. I was talking about the convention. I’ve attended tea parties myself, and blogged about them in the Green Room. You’re venturing into a straw man.

People have plenty of legitimate beefs about her speaking there. They are valid, even if you don’t agree with them.

I didn’t read your blog in the ‘greenroom’ Sorry – I don’t follow your viewpoints religiously. You mentioned the Tea Party convention like it was something to be criticized for. I do not agree – and would further say the entire tea party movement should not be mocked by conservatives as it is by liberals.

Sorry, I can’t Google ‘plenty of people believe Palin shouldn’t speak at Tea party convention and address any reason you give (because you didn’t give any).’

That’s your opinion. People having a different opinion is not an attack on her, nor are people’s opinions invalid because they disagree.

Well if those people don’t first comment on the lawsuits that forced her resignation I would say they aren’t being real fair – and they probably have their priorities out of order. It was discussed – and it was a fair topic. I have no problem with discussing the decision when you address all the factors.

There was a TON of that discussion during the primaries, and either you weren’t paying attention, or you have selective amnesia.

During the primaries. Sure – when they were news because they were running for President. Straw Man. We aren’t talking about the primaries – I guess you aren’t paying attention.

I don’t see constant Huckabee smears now. I’d have to dig deep to find 10 Huckabee topics. Allah smears Palin 10 times in 2 weeks.

Maybe, maybe not. Being willing to invoke Alinsky for her is frightening, disturbing, and disheartening to know that there are creeps on the right who would gladly commit the same atrocities that those on the left did last time.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:04 AM

What _ i should ignore that Alinsky is being used against her and refrain like a good little God fearing Republican? Sorry – I don’t do that. I will return Alinsky tactics. Not a problem.

The fact that you think Republicans should use Alinsky tactics on other Republicans and the supporters of the Republicans being smeared should just sit there and take it.

That is scary. You don’t even want a fair fight? I guess if you can’t win without stacking the deck maybe your candidates aren’t electable.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:16 AM

And you have absolutely no clue how you just insulted her.

Do you do much of this against any other GOP prospect?

Sapwolf on January 19, 2010 at 2:14 AM

Wipe the foam from your lips and enlighten my heathen ass.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:17 AM

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:16 AM

So you only accept criticism once they have made your arguments for you, the fact that you don’t see attacks on other candidates now means they didn’t exist/weren’t as bad, and you openly admit you would think like Obama and use Alinsky tactics.

You’re a fanatic, and you are worshiping a political figure. You are a Palinbot. You epitomize the worst kind of political activist. You’re indistinguishable from the Obamabots.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:20 AM

Not a big fan of AP, as he enjoys belittling religion. But it’s a bit much to come into somebody’s house and tell them how it needs to be run. Maybe you could start up your own site, and run it like LGF, where anyone who says anything you don’t like gets banned.
entropent on January 19, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Yeah, it takes awhile to get AP, once you do though it works out fine. He is Eyore, and sure he lives to tweak fans of Palin or Fred! or whomever but that’s him having fun. That and driving up page views. ;)

Your point about this being his house is spot-on. Well said my friend. You win the thread, and are entitled to your very own internets!

Seriously, I hope the new folks get that point soon, it is tiring to listen to the constant kvetching.

Irritable Pundit on January 19, 2010 at 2:22 AM

Are you unable to read what I said?

I listed crap like the Africa smear and said I am against it.

I pointed out that valid criticism is NOT smearing(the tea party convention, her resignation, etc).

If you can’t tell the difference, and are willing to smear other good candidates just to pursue loyalty to a person, rather than a set of ideals, then you are as much a brainwashed robot as any Obama cultist.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:12 AM

Since I didn’t address ANY of the ‘Africa smear’ crap you listed and I replied to nearly EVERY (if not all) ‘legitimate’ reason you posted, a reasonably intelligent person would have concluded I did know the difference – and that is why I addressed one set of smears and not the other.

I am just saying I am willing to return the smears being thrown at Palin – or the Tea Party movement for that matter.

That’s not unreasonable at all. That is a logical conclusion to what is taking place now with Palin.

Republicans should be standing up to and exposing these smears from the left – not joining in on them. If you do join in on them then expect others to follow suit.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:24 AM

Well if those people don’t first comment on the lawsuits that forced her resignation I would say they aren’t being real fair – and they probably have their priorities out of order. It was discussed – and it was a fair topic. I have no problem with discussing the decision when you address all the factors.

She was not “forced” to resign. She chose to quit.

The Race Card on January 19, 2010 at 2:27 AM

Wipe the foam from your lips and enlighten my heathen ass.
MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:17 AM

I cracked up and woke my wife. The lovely Mrs Irritable Pundit is cross. Totally worth it. You have a way with words MC. :)

Goodnight all!

Irritable Pundit on January 19, 2010 at 2:28 AM

So you only accept criticism once they have made your arguments for you, the fact that you don’t see attacks on other candidates now means they didn’t exist/weren’t as bad, and you openly admit you would think like Obama and use Alinsky tactics.

You’re a fanatic, and you are worshiping a political figure. You are a Palinbot. You epitomize the worst kind of political activist. You’re indistinguishable from the Obamabots.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:20 AM

Madison – look at what Allah writes:

C’mon. You know I had to.

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

He knows exactly what he is doing when he posts these anti-Palin posts. Don’t pretend like Sarah isn’t a target for Allah.

A few others on the right don’t get it either. They want the pat on the back by the establishment for smearing Palin and the nods of approval from the Zombie’s brainwashed by the media.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:29 AM

I’m 100% sure that Sarah Palin gives somewhere between 0% and a rat’s ass what ABC or it’s poll say about her.

Even if the poll was worth the smoke it’s made of.

IndieDogg on January 19, 2010 at 2:31 AM

Irritable Pundit on January 19, 2010 at 2:22 AM

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

He knows exactly what he is doing when he posts these anti-Palin posts. Don’t pretend like Sarah isn’t a target for Allah.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:29 AM

Allah is a political pundit. He posts a political poll from one of the primary media networks. He knows exactly what he is doing: baiting fanatics like you to hulk out.

You are the evidence of his success. Congratulations.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

Madison – look at what Allah writes:

hook, line and sinker

The Race Card on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

How is this going to help the party?

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

How is attacking other candidates in retaliation helping the party?

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

Mr. P, don’t you get how this site works? The more eyeballs, the more revenue. AP is controversial precisely because it starts wars. The more back and forth, the more money in the bank. The more he yanks your chain, the better he gets paid. You act like this site is supposed to be about ideological purity.

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 2:08 AM

This is not the Popular Peoples Front of Judea, it’s the Peoples Front of Judea. Damn I thought somebody with a nom de plume like entropent ideologically knew that, geez.

Americannodash on January 19, 2010 at 2:34 AM

Allah is a political pundit. He posts a political poll from one of the primary media networks. He knows exactly what he is doing: baiting fanatics like you to hulk out.

You are the evidence of his success. Congratulations.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

Straw man. Allah is a political pundit? Really? Thanks for the tip. I’ll keep it in mind.

I guess that means you can no longer defend the attacks on Palin. Congrats on losing another debate tonight!

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:38 AM

I can’t believe people are so conditioned that they have a hissy fit if someone dares to say something that is perhaps unpopular or difficult.

atheling on January 18, 2010 at 11:40 PM

Then please explain your actions.

JCred on January 19, 2010 at 2:38 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 12:36 AM

Only Fred Thompson can save me from this disastrous and evil Sarah Palin, as proven by CBS poll.

Go, Fred! Run in 2012! Save me from Palin!

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 2:40 AM

I guess that means you can no longer defend the attacks on Palin. Congrats on losing another debate tonight!

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:38 AM

I respond to you whining about Allah posting something you eat up…and that means you win some debate about Palin?

Nope, no alcohol in this drink. Can someone explain what the hell just happened?

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:40 AM

Only Fred Thompson can save me from this disastrous and evil Sarah Palin, as proven by CBS poll.

Go, Fred! Run in 2012! Save me from Palin!

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 2:40 AM

The ultimate irony of being pegged as a Palin hater and defender of Allah…Allah gave Fred plenty of crap a couple years ago, and I never went this wacky.

Maybe it’s because I didn’t pledge my eternal soul to the dude. Can I be saved by the Church of She Who Must Not Be Doubted?

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:43 AM

Mr. P, don’t you get how this site works? The more eyeballs, the more revenue. AP is controversial precisely because it starts wars. The more back and forth, the more money in the bank. The more he yanks your chain, the better he gets paid. You act like this site is supposed to be about ideological purity.

entropent on January 19, 2010 at 2:08 AM

Oh, OK. It is perfectly acceptable to smear Sarah for revenue and website hits.

Sorry – that isn’t a good enough excuse for me. I am not one to hold ‘purity’ or ‘litmus’ tests. I’m not a ‘RINO’ hunter and I think it is a silly notion. Yes, there are some Republicans I would like to replace (Lindsey Graham) but I am no ‘holier than thou’ RINO hunter.

We are talking about targeted attacks towards a Republican on a Republican website. If she had a scandal or something that deserved some critical analysis then fine – that is par for the course.

That is not what is happening with Sarah Palin. These attacks are too often patently unfair and it is getting a little ridiculous.

Look how upset other people get for merely mentioning that Palin supporters may do the same thing to other Republican candidates. OMG! HOW DARE YOU!

I say screw you. You get what you give.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:44 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:43 AM

How can you support Fred Thompson? The man espouses the views of Hitler and reads ‘Mein Kampf’.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:45 AM

Oh, OK. It is perfectly acceptable to smear Sarah for revenue and website hits.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:44 AM

Where’s the smear?

The poll is a poll. I don’t see Allah telling any lies about Palin. Back up your bulls**t, or else you’re the only one doing any smearing here.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:47 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:47 AM

You seem to be one of the few you refuses to see that Allah posts these topics to belittle Palin. Most others see it. If you are blind I can’t make you see.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:52 AM

You seem to be one of the few you refuses to see that Allah posts these topics to belittle Palin. Most others see it. If you are blind I can’t make you see.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 2:52 AM

Smear merchant. Come back when you can clearly point out where Allah smeared Palin. Until then, take your slander elsewhere.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:54 AM

Palin is running in 2012. But right now, she looks like she is trying to run right over Huckabee. First, she moves up her booktour right behind Huckabee’s. She even goes to the same exact cities one or two days after him. Then, she gets a Foxnews commentator gig-trying to follow in Huckabee’s successful footsteps. Next, she is doing a republican fundraiser in Arkansas. So it looks like her first plan of action is to take out Huckabee.

I am sure that Romney will be next. Problem is after that, she will be coming up against Pence, Demint, Thune etc… and while Palin can draw in the crowds, she cannot match their experience.

texasconserv on January 18, 2010 at 10:25 PM

What utter BS……

“Following Huckabee.” I’m ashamed you are a Texan. Must be a foreigner who moved here. Come from up north?

If Sarah is following anyone, it’s Ronald Reagan.

Sarah doesn’t have to “out maneuver” any of these lightweights. Besides, that’s not her style. She punches people out, straight up. No screwing around, she takes ‘em head on, and just whips their asses.

As they say…Alaska is littered with the political corpses of those who dared fool with her.

As far as experience, are you stupid, or what.

The woman has two decades of EXECUTIVE experience. She has more experience than Romney and Huckabee. (and it’s successful experience.)

Those guys in the Senate are literally nothing. They are the members of a debate club.

We elect Governors to POTUS for a reason. It’s the same job. If she can be Governor, she can be President. The same thing can’t be said of any Senator. You have to have a totally different skill set to be a Governor vs a Senator.

Governors lead. Senators sit around and talk it to death.

If Sarah runs, she wins. It’s just that simple.

gary4205 on January 19, 2010 at 3:05 AM

I doubt anyone will remember or care very much about her Glenn Beck interview or her TPC speech in 2012 or 2016 or whenever it might become relevant. These are pretty insignificant blips on the radar screen IMO. She will have to address the quitter meme, but by building a name for herself as a pundit and speaker, and/or working in the next GOP administration in some capacity (if it’s not her administration), that also will become a distant memory in time. We all have holes in our resume. At some point, enough time has passed where we can drop it off the page and not have to address it with potential employers anymore. The same will be true for Palin. At what point people will be willing to no longer view her resignation as a negative remains to be seen, and a lot will depend on how Obama does going forward.

All of that said, I think many have ridiculously high standards for Palin that they do not have for other politicians. She is scrutinized in a way that no other pol is or has been. Just by way of example, BOR had Glenn on on his Friday show so they could dissect her first week at Fox. Was this really necessary? Now even her supposed allies are analyzing her every word, intonation, blink and breath in painstaking detail? It would be impossible not to disappoint at times when you’re being studied under a microscope 24/7 and even the tiniest flub or misstep is magnified by 100.

NoLeftTurn on January 19, 2010 at 3:10 AM

Help us Sarah Palin, you’re our only hope.

long_cat on January 19, 2010 at 3:22 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:54 AM

OK, Allow to heal the blind and let them see.

This post, 71% don’t want Palin to run. Surely not positive.

His previous Palin Post Jan 15 ‘Palin to critics: Leave Steele alone’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/15/palin-to-critics-leave-steele-alone/

Allah goes on to criticize Palin, as usual.

Post before that? Jan 14 ‘Red State editor: Gee, some of Palin’s fans are awfully quick to attack critics’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/14/red-state-editor-gee-some-of-palins-fans-are-awfully-quick-to-attack-critics/

Allah goes on to whine that Palin supporters hit BACK!

On Jan 12th she is the ‘cover girl’ for Quote of the day.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/12/quotes-of-the-day-244/

The quotes complain about a $500 ticket to see Sarah at the Tea Party convention. Oh – she’s such an elitist! I bet she doesn’t even gut her own moose!

On Jan 12 we also have ‘Palin’s debut as Fox News contributor: Steve Schmidt’s a liar’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/12/palins-debut-as-fox-news-contributor-steve-schmidts-a-liar/

Not so much negative tone in that one – but a snarky exit question. It was also a Palin Fox debut so fair game, I could see discussing that.

…but it’s a regular Palinpalooza on Jan 12th since we also have ‘Sad: Desperate Dems trying to Palinize Massachusetts race’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/12/sad-desperate-dems-trying-to-palinize-massachusetts-race/

Fretting over attempts to tie Scott Brown to Palin! Oh – the horror! The horror!

Jan 11th we hear the news ‘Palin signs “multi-year” deal to become Fox analyst’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/11/palin-signs-multi-year-deal-to-become-fox-analyst/

Allah hopes: Looking past 2012?

Again – newsworthy. But by now at least you see a frequency with the Palin posts – and most of them tend to be negative.

That’s Jan 11-15 and 6 Palin topics? That’s a trend. A busy week for Sarah perhaps?

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:24 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:54 AM

OK, Allow to heal the blind and let them see.

This post, 71% don’t want Palin to run. Surely not positive.

His previous Palin Post Jan 15 ‘Palin to critics: Leave Steele alone’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/15/palin-to-critics-leave-steele-alone/

Allah goes on to criticize Palin, as usual.

Post before that? Jan 14 ‘Red State editor: Gee, some of Palin’s fans are awfully quick to attack critics’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/14/red-state-editor-gee-some-of-palins-fans-are-awfully-quick-to-attack-critics/

Allah goes on to whine that Palin supporters hit BACK!

On Jan 12th she is the ‘cover girl’ for Quote of the day.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/12/quotes-of-the-day-244/

The quotes complain about a $500 ticket to see Sarah at the Tea Party convention. Oh – she’s such an elitist! I bet she doesn’t even gut her own moose!

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:25 AM

On Jan 12 we also have ‘Palin’s debut as Fox News contributor: Steve Schmidt’s a liar’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/12/palins-debut-as-fox-news-contributor-steve-schmidts-a-liar/

Not so much negative tone in that one – but a snarky exit question. It was also a Palin Fox debut so fair game, I could see discussing that.

…but it’s a regular Palinpalooza on Jan 12th since we also have ‘Sad: Desperate Dems trying to Palinize Massachusetts race’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/12/sad-desperate-dems-trying-to-palinize-massachusetts-race/

Fretting over attempts to tie Scott Brown to Palin! Oh – the horror! The horror!

Jan 11th we hear the news ‘Palin signs “multi-year” deal to become Fox analyst’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/11/palin-signs-multi-year-deal-to-become-fox-analyst/

Allah hopes: Looking past 2012?

Again – newsworthy. But by now at least you see a frequency with the Palin posts – and most of them tend to be negative.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:25 AM

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:25 AM
Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:25 AM

Which of those contained smears about Palin? Criticism does not equal smearing, you fanatic. What was said about her that was untrue in your links?

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 3:30 AM

Ok, so now we have Palin’s FOX News week over. Now we can get a look at the typical Palin posts. (and it was Ed who posted the ‘Palin signs multi year pact’ thread. That probably explains the relative lack of Palin snarkiness. We”ll leave Ed’s posts out of the discussion (missed he was the author earlier).

Jan 8 ‘Should Palin skip CPAC?’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/08/should-palin-skip-cpac/

The base loves her too much to hold her participation in the cooptation of the tea-party movement against her, but for what little it’s worth, when I tweeted about the ticket prices last night there was plenty of grumbling in response and some complaints (echoed in Politico’s story) that the convention isn’t a “true” bottom-up leaderless tea-party event.

I don’t see any other candidate’s decision making being questioned. Once again Sarah is isolated. Isolate the target. Gee…where have I heard that before …Alinsky?

Jan 7th she is back in ‘quotes of the day’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/07/quotes-of-the-day-242/

Palin! Palin! Palin! All 3 quotes are Palin or talk about Palin. He’s not a supporter – why the obsession?

Jan 7th – more Palin! ‘Confirmed: Palin to keynote first national tea-party convention’

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/07/confirmed-palin-to-keynote-first-national-tea-party-convention/

Digs at the ticket price, digs at why they chose her and not someone else (boohoo!)

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:36 AM

…why the obsession?

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:36 AM

You tell me.

I leave it there.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 3:38 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 3:30 AM

Dude…he is clearly not a supporter. He admits that. He admits to wanting to incite her supporters by posting all this negative commentary about Sarah Palin.

You seem to be the one who is blind to Allah’s tactics.

But then when I say I will use them right back at other candidates you get all upset about it.

I’m just saying it isn’t wise to incite Republicans to attack other Republicans.

The pattern is clear. Allah knows it, others know – you sometimes admit it and then scurry away from it and claim ignorance.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:39 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 3:38 AM

I do not know what his obsession with attacking Sarah is. I don’t really care what his motivation is.

All I’m saying is these tactics can and will be used both ways.

Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:40 AM

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 3:38 AM
Mr Purple on January 19, 2010 at 3:40 AM

In my humble opinion, AP should not be posting on Presidentiability of the Candidates until 2011. I mean any candidate including Palin.

Let the Dems and the MSM do it. Let them go nuts on guessing who will be our next Nominee in 2012.

These poli-pundit garbages are just a distraction.

We must focus on November elections.

As such, I want all Rs and Cs and especially the Indies to unite and have a single theme:

ELECT ONLY THOSE WHO RESPECT CONSTITUTION, SEPARATION OF FED AND STATE POWERS, FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND FISCAL CONSERVATISM IN THE CONGRESS.

Our Congressional candidates are the STARS OF 2010.

I really like many of AP’s posts. But his obsession about Palin (good or bad) seems uncontrollable.

It would be best for AP to report more on local races and candidates.

I hope that I will get my wish to AP after Brown’s election tomorrow [oops today!]

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 5:37 AM

It’s CBS.. Who watches that network anyway?

shar61 on January 19, 2010 at 5:50 AM

Geez, You Americans are stupid.

Who is the real enemy?

Palin or Obama?

Crux Australis on January 19, 2010 at 5:56 AM

Who believes CBS?

nraendowment on January 19, 2010 at 6:04 AM

I really like many of AP’s posts. But his obsession about Palin (good or bad) seems uncontrollable.

It would be best for AP to report more on local races and candidates.

I hope that I will get my wish to AP after Brown’s election tomorrow [oops today!]

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 5:37 AM

Just one problem with that: This isn’t your blog. It’s AP’s and Ed’s and especially its founder’s, Michelle Malkin.

AP does an outstanding job of playing the Devil’s Advocate, and smartly so. He puts out an alternative perspective on most issues, and forces the readers to think things through, if they have any intellectual honesty at all.

Between his perspective, Ed’s perspective, and Michelle’s as well, we get the best of the best here, which is why they are so very successful as a team. My vote is that AP should not curtain is activities in any way, as I really do appreciate being involved in the thought processes which keep me an informed voter. :)

KendraWilder on January 19, 2010 at 6:06 AM

Palin is great for motivating the base, bringing in the crowds and maybe money, but a Presidential candidate in 2012?
Wellll….Nah.

We will see how much help she is to Republicans in 2010 elections. If she is avoided and not used (did Brown use her in Mass.?), then she will fade away.
If it wasn`t for the liberal MSM press using her as a punching bag, would we even hear about Palin?

albill on January 19, 2010 at 6:37 AM

Gee, 88% of Democrats don’t want her too run?

Maybe the GOP ought to listen real hard to these denigrats, for they really want what’s best for Amerika -one that Chavez, Castro and Putin would approve of, not to mention their friends in the middle east, that Obama bows down to.

That statistic alone puts her in front of the usual Washington out of touch BS artists in both parties that have so harmed this nation with their ruling class games and arrogance!

Don L on January 19, 2010 at 6:40 AM

We will see how much help she is to Republicans in 2010 elections. If she is avoided and not used (did Brown use her in Mass.?), then she will fade away.
If it wasn`t for the liberal MSM press using her as a punching bag, would we even hear about Palin?

albill on January 19, 2010 at 6:37 AM

Albill, are you sure? Did you really follow Brown’s campaign?

Brown’s brilliant move in late 2009 was to side himself with Palin. That was on TV. By that, he attracted the interest of the Tea Party people. Look what happened.

Nope, Albill. The toxicity of Palin is fading away even to some democrats. She’s the only Republican with highest support and appeal from Indies (except this new CBS weird poll.)

The truth is this:

MA Universal Health Care is 20% higher than the rest of the Country and is expected to RISE up much much higher.

Obamacare, just like the MA Health Care, which is COMPULSORY, is toxic to MA people.

Exit Question: Who signed that state law, again?

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 6:56 AM

Allah is a political pundit. He posts a political poll from one of the primary media networks. He knows exactly what he is doing: baiting fanatics like you to hulk out.

You are the evidence of his success. Congratulations.

MadisonConservative on January 19, 2010 at 2:32 AM

Wrong, AP isn’t baiting the fanatics, he is baiting everyone, that is his job. His ability to provoke discussion is the reason MM hired him. Intellectual discourse isnt always civil or polite, but in order to be discourse it must be robust, and on that AP always delivers.

doriangrey on January 19, 2010 at 6:59 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6