PPP: Obama, Palin tied 46/46 in 2012 polling
posted at 12:55 pm on July 15, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
No, this is not coming from Rasmussen or an internal GOP poll, but from the normally Democrat-sympathetic Public Policy Polling. PPP pitted Barack Obama against five potential Republican challengers for the 2012 presidential campaign, and the only one Obama beat was … Jan Brewer. Even that, PPP admitted, resulted from Brewer’s lack of name recognition. The headline, though, is Sarah Palin’s dead heat with the President:
With his approval numbers hitting new lows it’s no surprise that Barack Obama’s numbers in our monthly look ahead to the 2012 Presidential race are their worst ever this month. He trails Mitt Romney 46-43, Mike Huckabee 47-45, Newt Gingrich 46-45, and is even tied with Sarah Palin at 46. The only person tested he leads is Jan Brewer, who doesn’t have particularly high name recognition on the national level at this point.
It’s not that any of the Republican candidates are particularly well liked. Only Huckabee has positive favorability numbers at 37/28. Romney’s at 32/33, Gingrich at 32/42, Palin at 37/52, and Brewer at 17/20. But with a majority of Americans now disapproving of Obama it’s no surprise that a large chunk of them would replace him as President if they had that choice today.
There are two things driving these strong poll numbers for the Republican candidates. The first is a lead with independents in every match up. Romney leads 48-35 with them, Gingrich is up 50-39, Huckabee has a 46-40 advantage, Palin’s up 47-42, and even Brewer has a 38-37 edge.
In case one wonders whether PPP’s sample is to blame, the partisan split favors Democrats by five points, 39/34. That’s probably overstating the actual size of the gap and the percentage of Democrats in the general population, which means that the independents got short shrift as well. Also note that this poll surveyed registered voters, not likely voters — a sampling technique that would tend to favor Democrats and Obama a little more.
The news is almost uniformly bad for Obama in the poll. His approval rating is now seriously underwater at 45/52. That gets even worse among independents, 40/56. He doesn’t get above 46% in any matchup with Republicans, not even Jan Brewer, whom he beats 44/36, with 20% undecided.
For Palin, the numbers show she can play against Obama. She pulls 8% of those who voted for Obama in 2008 and 35% of those who “don’t remember” (?!?), which puts her on par for outreach with Gingrich (9%, 40%), Romney (9%, 32%), and slightly better than Huckabee (6%, 32%). If that’s not vindication for those who argued that Palin couldn’t do as well with unaffiliated voters, it’s cetainly something close to it.
Update: There seems to be some confusion in the comments over the number of people who claimed not to remember how they voted in 2008. That was 9% of the respondents in the survey (combined with those who voted third party). Since Obama won the 2008 popular vote by seven points (53/46) and this Dem +5 poll shows only 46% of respondents acknowledging their vote for Obama, I’d say it’s a healthy probability that most of that 9% voted for Obama and don’t want to acknowledge it now. Of that 9%, Palin wins 35%, Gingrich wins 40%, and so on.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Sigh: Indiana man faces possible jail time for nursing bald eagle back to health

GOP: Yeah, about that “relatively minor” and completely underhanded carbon-rule change…








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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
If it has been a category before, it’s news to me. Do they have a dumb a$$ category or would that be redundant?
Cindy Munford on July 15, 2010 at 1:56 PM
WTF?
Willard was one of the crappiest governors in the nation
Mitt Romney plays the jobs card
Commentary: Looking at his record, it’s a losing argument
Is Mitt Romney for real?
This is BEFORE you throw in WillardCare. Ooops.
Past that Romney is a friggin’ COWARD.
Where is this loser on the economy? National security? Energy? Illegal immigration? Racism by radical democrats?
Sarah Palin has been out there every single day. EVERYONE knows where she stands. Willard? Not so much.
As for Newt, he shot his wad when he was canoodling with Nancy Pelosi and shilling for Al Gore. Then you have Sozzafava. Newt’s a nonstarter.
People wonder why Willard and Newt poll higher. It’s because they aren’t doing a damned thing. They are AWOL from the national debate. They are basically empty vessels for everyone’s “hopes and dreams” just like Obama was.
Once these two nimrods actually have to take a stand, it will all be over. Their numbers can only go down.
On the other hand, Sarah has been out there for two years hammering Obama on an almost daily basis, and has NOT been shy about taking a firm stand on every issue.
Her numbers can only go up. She’s the only one in that position.
gary4205 on July 15, 2010 at 1:58 PM
at the rate that DOTUS is going (assuming we have elections in Nov 2010 or in 2012) a pile of my neighbors dog bleeeeeep could beat him.
MAINSTREAM MEDIA NARRATIVE SINCE NOV 2008…..SHE CAN’T WIN!!!!! please reference dog comment above.
PappyD61 on July 15, 2010 at 2:02 PM
the stage is already being set for that…..
This means a primary challenge for Obama.
zmdavid on July 15, 2010 at 1:02 PM
That’s why the Progressives have saved Hillary, and given her another resume enhancing position to run against the HILLBILLY FROM WASILLY.
PappyD61 on July 15, 2010 at 2:05 PM
What would be useful to me would be to compare Reagan’s numbers in August 1978, George W. Bush’s numbers in 1998, vs Palin’s in 2010. How much have things changed in the electorate since those contests, aside from the rise of the New Media, the post 9-11 world, the rank OTT partisanship of the MSM, and the visible desperation of the Aging Left, clearly seeing their mortality as well as their last gasp of naked total power in their lifetime.
I don’t know why people are so eager to put her in a race that she may not want to enter at this time, if at all. And even if she decided to do so, why play the expectation game, the “end of the GOP brand as we know it” game, or the “this is how Obama got re-elected” game. If she wants to run, let her, and let the chips fall where they may.
The fight isn’t going to be determined necessarily by independents (that’s a fickle bunch who don’t even know what they are going to have for lunch yet at the hour of 2:30pm), but by the partisans who have distinct visions for the United States, and are willing to do what it takes to get us there.
The last time I checked, the declared conservatives outnumber the declared liberals. I’m liking Palin’s chances more and more every day.
There will always be freak shows and distractions. But I am more worried about getting rid of Spock from the Oval Office, and installing Wonder Woman instead.
If there is a better analogy for Palin, I am all ears. ;-)
itzWicks on July 15, 2010 at 2:05 PM
But at least Romney has a brain and his speeches don’t rank in YouTube’s comedy channel because he’s unable to intelligently answer interview questions.
Our founding fathers were among the most well-educated and intelligent people ever born on the earth. The men who wrote our Constitution held degrees from future elite American universities and could quote great philosophers and orators of the Western experience in the original Latin or Greek. Sarah is just about as far on the other end of the spectrum as you can go.
bayam on July 15, 2010 at 2:05 PM
This post cannot make Allahpundit happy.
fossten on July 15, 2010 at 2:06 PM
Palin has no ability to put together a coherent answer to a question on the fly.
She doesn’t have the goods to be a national candidate. She needs WAY too much work to even consider 2012.
We need someone who can think on their feet.
rickyricardo on July 15, 2010 at 2:06 PM
I wonder how Mr. President is going to blame the previous administration for this?
I take this poll to mean people think the President is failing. It doesn’t say to me that Palin could get elected. I don’t think she can. She’s a wonderful person, and she’s great at rallying up the people, but in the end, if she were to win the nomination I still don’t think she could get elected and then where does that leave us.
scalleywag on July 15, 2010 at 2:06 PM
How elitist of you.
Ronald Reagan was probably the greatest president ever, and he was an actor – B movie at that.
Go figure.
fossten on July 15, 2010 at 2:07 PM
B-b-b-b-but, how can this be?
*gnashing teeth & rending clothes*
Bar-racko Bama is the post-racial president,
and
Sarah Palin is a teabaggin’ racist
(See what I did there?)
franksalterego on July 15, 2010 at 2:09 PM
NinjaPirate just pulled out his last 3 clumps of hair.
portlandon on July 15, 2010 at 2:09 PM
Do you honestly believe that the education people receive today is comparable to what the founders received?
Cindy Munford on July 15, 2010 at 2:11 PM
Here ya go:
The parallels between Sarah and Ronnie, 1980 and 2012 are almost scary. I think Sarah will win bigger than Reagan did in 1980.
gary4205 on July 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM
FIFY
fossten on July 15, 2010 at 2:22 PM
Romney ran Bain Capitol and understands capitalism. the economy will be the only issue, (God willing no natl attacks). What happens in MASS stays in MASS, it is too blue to blame him IMO., and mod Dems will vote for him. Newt? no.
Romney 12 / Hillary 16.
ginaswo on July 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM
LOL, because, unlike Sarah Palin, he went to a “good school”, right?
LOL! “future elite universities” means absolutely nothing, except on your world.
James Wilson, one of the major writers of the Constitution, attended a number of universities in Scotland without attaining a degree. He later moved to America and studied in Philly, and petitioned the The Academy and College of Philadelphia for a degree and was awarded an honorary Master of Arts several months later.
You’re dismissed.
Del Dolemonte on July 15, 2010 at 2:25 PM
Google “Mitt Romney” and “Idiot” or “Mitt Romney” and “moron” plenty of great You Tube videos out there on this loser. Frankly, having someone poke fun of you on You Tube does not make or break anyone. It’s a silly argument.
Of course, since Willard is not a serious human being, I can see why his cultist backers would come up with silly arguments.
As far as our Founders, I can guarantee you who they would choose on the presidential ballot between Willard and Sarah, and it would NOT be Willard!
No way in hell would they vote for someone who championed RomneyCare, and destroyed their state. No way they’d even talk to someone whose unholy plan was used as the blueprint to destroy the entire nation’s health care. They would spit on this worthless loser.
Romney is a COWARD and a JOKE. He’s not for real. he’s a plastic Ken doll who has absolutely NO CORE VALUES. He’s a political opportunist who doesn’t give a damned about our nation, just himself.
He’s a COWARD who, instead of helping defeat Obama and his Marxist regime, is only interested in feathering his own bed, and scheming on how he can be POTUS.
Mitt Romney represents the absolute worst American politics has to offer. He is as shameless loser.
gary4205 on July 15, 2010 at 2:28 PM
What is so interesting about this poll is not the Palin angle, but that O’Kickass is losing to so many others as well.
Del Dolemonte on July 15, 2010 at 2:29 PM
I think Mitt’s a decent candidate.
Not such a great record as governor in MA, but look what he had to deal with. Great record with Salt Lake City ’02, and with his business career. Great that he wants to serve.
But I just like Sarah more — that’s all. She fights.
tigerinexile on July 15, 2010 at 2:33 PM
Mitt Romney was one of THE WORST governors in the country.
Palin, on the other hand, was one of the absolute best.
My God, Willard was as bad, OR WORSE than Barry is NOW.
Yeah, he’s a economic genius.
Ask those poor bastards who live in the Bay State how they love their RomneyCare!
gary4205 on July 15, 2010 at 2:34 PM
Heck, I can beat Obama with a coin toss. Even “heads” will net me at the very least 50%….
ted c on July 15, 2010 at 2:41 PM
Romney would make a great Czar for Sarah. Czar in charge of eliminating 1/2 of the Federal Gov’t. In charge of restructuring the total income tax system to flat, fair or my favorite National Sales tax on every transaction including stock trades and inventory buys.
dhunter on July 15, 2010 at 2:45 PM
Woot! Woot! Woot!
Thank you, I feel even better unleashing my inner Palin 2012 :-)
DaMav on July 15, 2010 at 2:49 PM
Both they and she know this. The day she says “I’m running” then the firing begins—unless, she delays the declaration until the last possible minute, then the firing (already has) commences ahead of any declaration.
ted c on July 15, 2010 at 1:16 PM
were have YOU been for the last 18 months all the guns of the MSM and the GOP establishment has been aimed and fired non stop at Palin for ALL those months. she has taken more negative attacks than ANY politican in history and yet she is tied with Obama who has been given nothing but glowing press. the take away for this poll is that Palin is tied with all that negative media coverage and Mitt, Newt and the others are barely ahead with no negative coverage.
Taken in context of that fact of the barrage of negative press Palin has had to go through this poll should send terror into all the anti-palin people across the country. It is no wonder that Mitt rose from under his desk to attack Palin today.
Mitt, Newt, huck ectc will lose 5-10% pts once the MSM starts to go negative on them. Palin has lost all those points already and is still tied. as long as Palin does not commit any gaffes, handles herself well in the debates, and forms a national network the POTUS is hers to lose
unseen on July 15, 2010 at 2:53 PM
They need to include Governor Jindal in this polling.
Not trying to specifically pick on Gov. Huckabee, but, to highlight my point, exactly what has he done that anyone knows about except be a darling of the Christian right and have a TV show where he played bass guitar?
Only said that as an example. If Huckabee is being compared to Obama, then they should put Jindal in there, specifically to test how people feel about pitting an “action” politician against Obama who is taking (or trying to take) action now. Huckabee is not in government and is not takingany action that affects any of us. (Ditto for Romney. I think including Palin is appropriate because she’s taking lots of action.)
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 2:57 PM
The only reason Gingrich is even germane to 2012 is as a political wonk. Yes, he may help shape debate. But there’s no sane way anyone would put him up against Obama. Obama would win his 52% again against Gingrich, plus a couple.
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 2:59 PM
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 2:59 PM
the establishment is keeping Newt in the game incase Mitt fades. they need an anti-palin candidate in the primaries oor they are toast.
unseen on July 15, 2010 at 3:02 PM
Just to put out my personal view on viable presidential candidates who could beat Obama – in order:
1. Bobby Jindal
2. Sarah Palin
3. Rudy Giuliani.
I cannot include Mitt Romney UNLESS one writes off the evangelical Christian vote. In the south, there are enough EvanChristians who see Mormonism as hellfire heresy that they would, on principle, STAY HOME. They would not vote for Obama – they would stay home.
Someone who’s good at polls – run the numbers with 5% of evangelicals going for Obama, 40% for Romney, and 60% staying home.
Does that give Romney a win?
That’s my earnest question.
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:03 PM
Oops, those Romney numbers should be:
5% -Obama
35%- Romney
60& Stay-at-home
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:04 PM
I put Jindal ahead of Palin because he has more experience (yes, he does, and I won’t bother arguing that with anyone – go look it up if you disagree)
and he has not been submitted to the slime machine like Palin.
Yes, sure they’ll try to slime Bobby, but Bobby just doesn’t have the (unfair, media-inculcated) baggage that Palin does:
(beauty queen, seeing Russia from her house, Bristolmania, Couric interview, youbetcha, first female president, evangelical darling, etc. etc., etc.)
We have to face it. The media put such a hurt on Palin’s image that I do not believe she can overcome it.
Many of you do believe this. I hope you are right, but I think you are overly optimistic.
Jindal/Giuliani ticket wins in 2012.
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM
Hey what no link to an oil in the gulf story? /
CWforFreedom on July 15, 2010 at 3:13 PM
CW for Freedom:
What’s the use? There’s a news blackout at HotAir.
There’s nothing wrong with the Gulf.
For any insane fools who believe otherwise,
http://www.rallyforeconomicsurvival.com
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:16 PM
“Momma, I didn’t do it, HE did!” (pointing at CWforFreedom)
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:17 PM
I’d take Jindal for Director of Homeland Security in the Palin administration.
debg on July 15, 2010 at 3:20 PM
How about Jindal as VP?
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:30 PM
Actually, if you want Palin at the top of the ticket, I want Giuliani as VP.
Rudy’s name is still money with those who follow politicas casually.
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 3:31 PM
How the mighty have fallen.
Terrye on July 15, 2010 at 3:39 PM
Palin/Giuliani has been my preference from the get go for the clean up that has to occur.
debg on July 15, 2010 at 3:41 PM
Gingrich? Sozzafava
Romney? RomneyCare = NObamaCare
Huckabee? Felon Release and Religious Litmus tests
Sarah Palin? NObama Bitch Slapper and Leader of the GOP, you betcha
mathewsjw on July 15, 2010 at 3:43 PM
I like Palin as much as any of you, but we will have a wide and deep slate of candidates to choose from, and I can’t see her doing that well in debates against folks like Pawlenty, Christie, Ryan, DeMint, Brewer, etc. She’s just not a policy wonk. I see her as the perennial Republican VP pick.
NO to anyone that ran for President in 2008. We want a new slate, and let’s consider how our choice will do against Hillary, because she is our likely opponent.
slickwillie2001 on July 15, 2010 at 3:47 PM
Yet Andrew Jackson broke the magnificent mold of expectations traditionally established and held maintaining an American POTUS that you reference. Subsequently others who were self educated, self made candidates won the presidency. That list includes Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, and Harry Truman. In that regard, there’s nothing new except that Palin is female and her experience is from Alaska.
The real fraud remains Obama whose life’s documentation from birth through transcripts and graduate writings remain as nonexistent, hidden awaiting destruction rather than allow exposure to the public.
maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 3:53 PM
Del Dolemonte on July 15, 2010 at 2:25 PM
Bravo!
I’ve considered that our founding American Virginians Washington, Madison and Jefferson would not have had the time to devote towards academia, philosophy and politics had it not been for their working-CEO plantation aristocratic lives.
Also, the Ivy League education today pales in comparison to and negates the understanding of the world and meaning valued by the American Renaissance Men. Our nation’s founders were anything but the smugly self satisfied elitist politicians, attorneys, businessmen and Marxist progeny today corrupting American Constitutional Governance while holding Princeton Wilson School, Harvard or Yale degrees today–as if an Ivy League education entitles a person to destroy this country.
maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 4:14 PM
Not to mention Lincoln, who was self-taught and “read” for the Bar exam. Ivy League degrees may confer somethings, but leadership is not one of them.
txmomof6 on July 15, 2010 at 4:15 PM
–Isn’t there also the chance that they didn’t vote in 2008 but were too embarassed to say that to the interviewer?
Jimbo3 on July 15, 2010 at 4:17 PM
That number is much higher- 33% of those old enough to vote stayed home from the polls in 2008.
Del Dolemonte on July 15, 2010 at 4:26 PM
Oh, but you see, the baggage comes after the sliming. And you’d better believe that Jindal is as susceptible to that as any GOP candidate.
If Republicans start choosing their standard-bearers based on what the media think of them and how unlikely it is that they will be slimed with the resultant “baggage”, settle in for a loooooong line of Dem presidential victories.
No, you need someone who will motivate and mobilize conservative. “Hey he’s not Obama! The knuckle-draggers will vote for him!” ain’t going to cut it.
ddrintn on July 15, 2010 at 4:35 PM
What this poll tells me is Palin can win as for the others i don,t think so.
thmcbb on July 15, 2010 at 4:36 PM
Yes, Romney was successful at Bain Capital. But, it’s not about selling half the states off to other countries (although that’s not a bad idea).
The decisions are not complicated. As Palin would say, there are common sense solutions – reducing spending.
This requires reeling in government employees pay and benefits, reducing waste by goring a lot of sacred cows (public broadcasting, subsidies, etc.). That takes courage. Mitt is hardly a man of courage; in fact, I am not aware of any courageous thing he has ever done in his life. Mitt holds his finger in the air and trying to guage which way the wind is blowing.
bw222 on July 15, 2010 at 4:37 PM
Bobby Jindal is one of the most competent governors in the nation. He is a solid CEO, just like Sarah.
Two problems with your thinking though, which I like otherwise. One, he’s not running. Past that, if you think they won’t attack him unmercifully, holy crap.
The left already uses his given name instead of Bobby, every chance they get. They’re racists, so one would expect no less.
Then there is the supposed exorcism he performed. And on and on.
I LIKE Bobby, and honestly think he’d be a fine POTUS, at some point I think he will be, but this isn’t his time, and he won’t be immune from the hate when it is.
The left exists solely on it’s ability to hate. It’s their oxygen, their nourishment. Without it, they’d die.
This isn’t a slight on Bobby, but in order to win in 2012, you need a battle tested pro. That’s Sarah Palin.
Not only has she weathered the most intense, vile attacks in American political history, she has THRIVED. Sarah not only fights, she ENJOYS the fight. The harder you fight her, the better she likes it, and the more effective she becomes.
There are only a handful of people like her anywhere doing anything.
No one else could have survived what she has already been through. This will be a breeze for her.
We all know she will do the best job as President, but people shouldn’t dismiss the fact that she is one tough broad, and WILL NOT back down from any fight, EVER.
As the saying goes, Alaska is littered with the bodies of those who have tried to stop her.
gary4205 on July 15, 2010 at 4:39 PM
This pretty much confirms what I was saying yesterday: Palin can have a 35% national approval rating and still beat Obama, just because they don’t like what Obama’s done and care more about removing him than liking her.
alwaysfiredup on July 15, 2010 at 4:39 PM
When you have had the most savage press in history and you are tied with the guy who has had the friendliest press in history, it is quite something.
Exit question for Ninjapirate: if the pollsters want Palin to run and skewed the data to those ends, why did they list several other repubs doing better against Obama than her?
Kataklysmic on July 15, 2010 at 4:41 PM
Yeah, I’m a little tired of Bain Capital being waved around as some sort of irrefutable evidence of presidential potential. Bill Gates was even more of a success with Microsoft, and started out with less. But I do not want a President Bill Gates.
ddrintn on July 15, 2010 at 4:48 PM
Rudy is awesome, but not as VP. Attorney General in the Palin administration, hell yes.
You need Rudy as AG.
John Bolton as Secretary of State.
John McCain as Secretary of Defense (gets his arse out of the Senate too)
Steve Forbes or Art Laffer as Treasury Secretary
Liz Cheney at Homeland Security
Oh, and while we are at it, who do we need to see about making Michelle Bachmann Speaker of the House in the next Congress?
gary4205 on July 15, 2010 at 4:51 PM
^
Megyn Kelly as Press Secretary
LurkerDood on July 15, 2010 at 4:58 PM
What legitimate polling organization would even include this group? What kind of person would even say they can’t remember who they voted for 2 years ago?
What f’ing planet am I living on? It’s the f’ing Twilight Zone. Arrgghh!
garry on July 15, 2010 at 4:59 PM
Dearest Ed,
I have enjoyed your commentary and insightfulness as a conservative blogger for many post, way back in the Captains Quarters’ days.
However, today you crossed the line. Putting a photo of Jugears next to Cuda is a capital offense.
Soiler!
BobMbx on July 15, 2010 at 5:02 PM
How does a Palin/Brewer ticket sound? Or, if publicity on the Arizona immigration law continues to grow, Brewer/Palin. After the victory, Guiliani as Attorney General, John Bolton as Secretary of State (if he’ll take the job) and … have to think of SecTreas and SecDef.
But the top of the ticket is SWEET!
njcommuter on July 15, 2010 at 5:16 PM
Maybe they’d just rather forget. LOL
ddrintn on July 15, 2010 at 5:23 PM
I nominate Jeri Thompson for WH Press Secretary.
I like Kelly where she is.
Jeri Thompson would be awesome at the podium every day.
Awesome.
Brian1972 on July 15, 2010 at 6:00 PM
How long before Obama begins talking to the paintings of past presidents on the walls.
right2bright on July 15, 2010 at 6:05 PM
Can’t do that, remember he has removed most of them and replaced them with pictures of himself. Visitors to the WH have heen quite shocked by the level of narcissism shown.
slickwillie2001 on July 15, 2010 at 6:29 PM
But wait..wait…wait…WAIT!!!! I thought she was washed up, stupid, untested…blah, blah, blah…
winston on July 15, 2010 at 6:30 PM
From reading some of his speeches, it would seem he thinks some of them are mirrors rather than paintings of greater men than himself.
cs89 on July 15, 2010 at 6:33 PM
Have you watched her debates when she ran for governor?
She most certainly IS a wonk. She gets into the nitty gritty when it’s her role to do so.
powerpro on July 15, 2010 at 6:34 PM
They would say “I don’t remember” before they would say “in retrospect, I voted for the wrong person”. I know I am grasping at straws but it’s the little things about people that crack me up.
Cindy Munford on July 15, 2010 at 6:35 PM
Let me first begin my discussion of this month’s PPP monthly poll of GOP contenders with the findings of today’s Rasmussen daily tracking poll, the Gallup daily tracking poll, and the CBS poll released a couple of days ago that all show Obama’s job approval either at 44% or 45%. This confirms PPP’s findings yesterday that Obama’s job approval is currently at 45%. Disapproval with PPP is at 52%.
I would also like to call attention to the ideological breakdown of the poll L: 19 M: 38 C: 43 which pretty well conforms to what Gallup found in mid-June after sampling over 10,000 respondents that the current ideological breakdown in America is L: 20 M: 35 C: 42 and thus the normal skewing that normally takes place in PPP monthly polls to portray Obama as doing better than he really is (vastly oversampling moderates and undersampling conservatives)is not present here and thus I believe July’s poll does present a fairly accurate depiction of the current national political landscape.
But let me say that I would encourage you not to dwell at all at the favorables/unfavorables (F/UF) of the GOP contenders because frankly they make no sense at all across the board. Here are 3 categories that illustrate my point:
1)Does anyone on our side really believe that of the 4 GOP contenders (I did not include Jan Brewer in my analysis as she is not running for POTUS imho)that Sarah Palin leads CONSERVATIVES with only a 65% F and despite that low number still leads Mitt Romney by 17 points. There is no way that Palin is below 75% among conservatives and the other GOP contenders are as low as they are either. Even the Econ/youguv polls on Sarah Palin which show her F/UF not to be very good always report her CONSERVATIVE numbers above 75%.
2)And those familiar with the GOP do you really believe that Palin with only a 68% F with the GOP party members leads the other contenders. In this political climate there are at least 30% of Republicans not willing give any GOP presidential contender the thumbs up or still remain undecided. C’mon man. We didn’t just get off the bus.
3) And with the 65+ category Palin is at 36 F, Gingrich at 32 F and Romney at 39 F whereas it was only last week’s poll by Econ/youguv that showed all the GOP contenders (Huck was not polled) in the mid 50′s with seniors. PPP consistently inflates Obama’s approval with seniors and low-ball the favorables of the GOP contenders. This month he was given a 50 approval whereas with Econ/youguv each week he is lucky to garner 35% thumbs up with the over 65 crowd. And to further prove my point the most recent Gallup weekly poll showed Obama’s approval with seniors at 39%.
Let’s get to the meat of the poll which are the results provided by PPP in head to head (h/h)matchups of Obama vs the 4 GOP presidential contenders.
First let me say that the political landscape has indeed shifted with the results that PPP will have a much more difficult time asserting or rationalizing in the future that Sarah Palin is unelectable or too polarizing of a figure based on this month’s h/h results against Obama.
Let’s start with the h/h overall category:
OBAMA GOP CONTENDER
PALIN 46 46
HUCK 45 47
MITT 43 46
NEWT 45 46
I will agree a bit with PPP’s premise that Obama’s downfall in the h/h matchups are due to his falling poll numbers but in a two party system it is a zero-sum game where one party loses the other party gains. I have not changed my mind at all that Obama’s re-election bid will be referendum on the Messiah and his job performance in office. It is what it is. The GOP is the opposition party.
Now regarding Sarah Palin, despite the unbelievable and unprecedented propaganda campaign launched against her by the Left on a daily basis for the last 23 months and virtually ignoring Mitt, Huck or Newt with its venom, Sarah has not been marginalized or diminished in importance and certainly not destroyed and in fact far from being unelectable as the anti-Palin forces like to claim, she is just as viable as any of the GOP contenders at the moment according to PPP, which happens by the way as Ed noted to be a Democratic pollster, which if you reads its blogs on Palin for the last 18 months or so has set out on its own search and destroy mission to send Palin to the sidelines.
Here from PPP on March 18, 2009 is a sample of their attitude towards Palin running for POTUS:
“…a new national PPP poll finds that nominating Palin could be a DEATH WISH for the party, with Barack Obama leading Palin 55-35 in a hypothetical contest.”
“It’s a long way until 2012, but it appears the Republicans nominating Palin would lead to the BIGGEST LANDSLIDE in a generation.”
I wonder how PPP feels about that blog post today.
But it gets better for Sarah Palin. Palin is only shown getting 81% of the GOP vote against Obama, Huck 85%, Newt 83% and Mitt 82%. In the 2008 election McCain, not hardly a favorite of the base of the GOP got 89% of the GOP vote. Does anybody really believe that with the pent-up anger, hostility and resentment shown to the Messiah by 2012 by our side that any one of these 4 GOP candidates could not command close to 90% of the GOP vote, no matter who the GOP nominee is. Thus I believe the GOP contenders are actually doing better h/h than PPP is revealing today.
And does anyone really believe that Sarah Palin, a Reagan conservative would only get 79% of the conservative vote against Obama in 2012? Right now Survey USA has Carly Fiorina getting 86% of the conservative vote against Boxer in her Senate contest and that’s in California.
Now all GOP contenders believe it or not defeat Obama in a h/h contest with FEMALE voters, with Sarah Palin actually beating Obama 47% to 44% with women. Isn’t one major part of the unelectable meme is that Palin’s high unfavorabilities among WOMEN that Obama would trounce Palin because of the huge gender gap that a Palin vs Obama contest would generate. I think there are many unhappy politicos and pundits getting drunk tonight with the release of this one tidbit from PPP.
And another long-standing narrative by the anti-Palin forces is that Palin doesn’t “play well with INDEPENDENT voters but only to the hardcore conservative or Republican base, that indies have bought into the notion that Palin is not qualified to be POTUS and have bought into the 2008 campaign narrative that she is a clueless, unsophisticated idiot. For the first time Palin leads Obama among INDEPENDENT voters 47% to 42%. Another meme bites the dust.
But the piece de resistance of the poll is Palin’s performance against Obama among WHITE voters. In PPP’s April h/h poll Palin trounced the Messiah 55% to 38%. How many of you remember that? I don’t think any of the MSM covered that. Well three months later with the same type of accurate ideological sample taken Palin now defeats Obama among WHITE voters 55% to 36%, a 19 point gap. And to confirm Obama’s low approval numbers among WHITE voters yesterday PPP found that his approval/disapproval numbers were now 35/62. Refer to Jay Cost’s piece over at Real Clear Politics on WHITE voters from a couple of months back where he asserts that if Obama falls to lets say 38% with WHITE voters, it is not inconceivable that the GOP nominee could receive in a zero-sum game as much as 60% of that vote and win the election and that is even if Obama still gets 95% of the Black vote and 2/3 of the Hispanic vote. And again Palin is currently leading Obama by 19 points among WHITE voters. You wanna bet the MSM will bury this nugget as they did in April.
Now let me turn to the age category. Here are the h/h results of all 4 GOP contenders (Obama’s total first):
PALIN HUCK NEWT MITT
18-29 55/38 64/32 57/39 58/31
30-45 43/49 43/45 41/49 41/45
46-65 44/46 41/51 42/48 39/50
65+ 48/44 44/46 50/45 45/48
Despite who the GOP contender is Obama loses the middle class and the folks who pay the most taxes (30-64).
What is also worrisome to Obama and the Left is that Palin is able to keep Obama’s share of the 18-29 vote down to 55%. In 2008 he got 66% of it.
Having said that one can see why Palin trails slightly versus her male opponents in the h/h findings-simple she doesn’t play as well to seniors. It is always the older folks who are the hardest to convert to your way of thinking, who are the hardest to budge from their traditional ideas of what a GOP presidential nominee should look like or how he should present himself and regretfully most of the occupational misogyny that still simmers in America rests with these folks over 65 who just can’t wrap themselves around the idea of a female president or a female being CIC. Now I am not saying there is a huge percentage of folks over 65 who feel this way (my own mother actually felt this way about all female candidates)but there may be enough of these folks who could tip the GOP primary to one of Palin’s male opponents in close contest or perhaps not vote for Palin if she is the nominee by voting 3rd party or staying home or heaven forbid Obama and therefore tip the balance to the Messiah in 2012. Thank God Palin still has another 18 months to turn this kind of sentiment around. Frankly with Palin’s impeccable Reagan conservative and Tea Party credentials compared to those of Mitt, Huck or Newt there is no way that Palin should be constantly behind with GOP or conservative seniors imho except for the fact she came out of her mother’s womb as a female.
In conclusion, let me say there is no way in hell that the anti-Palin forces on either the Left or the Right wanted to see this day come to pass. Instead they felt if Palin’s make competitors could strike out and stake their claim to the nomination (especially Romney) with Palin in turn self-destructing politically because of her perceived instability and rogue behavior or being marginalized with the aid of Obama’s MSM propaganda machine of journalists, pundits and the entertainment community, thereby causing her supporters and swing or undecided voters to become permanently estranged from her and her message, that could send Palin to the sidelines forever.
Well neither scenario has materialized. Huck is sinking fast on Intrade, only raised 1/4m dollars in the last quarter and may become the male version of Oprah, Mitt’s state poll numbers have plunged by double-digits over the last two months since Newt entered the race, and Newt is still playing catch-up to Palin despite his recent surge.
And as for Palin despite the daily onslaught of lies, mockery, verbal abuse and condemnation by her enemies on both sides of the aisle she remains undaunted and unflappable as she pursues a political course of re-introducing the United States to Reagan conservatism and strives to help Americans to take back their country from the socialist hordes.
However,Sarah Palin has not yet attained full-blown LEGITIMACY. There are still many skeptics and doubting Thomases on our side who believe the MSM meme that she is unelectable or unqualified. I predicted that over a year ago that full-blown LEGITIMACY would not come until after the midterms depending on her success of getting her endorsees across the finish line in November and her influence and leverage to help the GOP win back at least one house of Congress. Thank God, Sarah still has 18 months to close the sale. Some GOP primary voters can be mighty stubborn at times.
technopeasant on July 15, 2010 at 6:37 PM
Repeat after me:
“We will not allow the MSM/SRM/MFM to pick the Republican candidate for POTUS in 2012. We learned our lesson in 2008 when the MSM/SRM/MFM chose McCain”.
Keep saying that. It is far too early to be falling into the liberal trap that’s being set.
Key West Reader on July 15, 2010 at 6:39 PM
LOL. It’s like someone accidentally blew up their car by tinkering with the wrong parts and a blow torch. When the cops and the fire department come out, the owner says, “Duuuude… I don’t remember. I don’t know what happened”. “Duuuude”.
Key West Reader on July 15, 2010 at 6:42 PM
McCain chose Sarah. MSM would love to have Palin as the pick.
PrezHussein on July 15, 2010 at 6:54 PM
Somebody get this guy a key to the Greenroom already!
Brian1972 on July 15, 2010 at 6:57 PM
But she’s not electable!
/Concern Trolling Mittbot
NoLeftTurn on July 15, 2010 at 7:08 PM
If that was true then they’d be heaping praise and flattery upon her … instead they’ve done everything they can to destroy her and her family.
They’ll let us know soon who they think we should vote for. It won’t be Palin.
darwin on July 15, 2010 at 7:25 PM
Mega-dittos to that!
technopeasant, An meticulously awesome analysis!
You must go to the Green Room and/or start a (Palin-Election 2012) blog!
Jenfidel on July 15, 2010 at 7:59 PM
Palin is great for them she makes the election about her. It will no longer be about Obama’s record.
PrezHussein on July 15, 2010 at 7:59 PM
Really? I didn’t know that…
right2bright on July 15, 2010 at 8:15 PM
I’m for Romney. He’s the best at jobs and the economy.
scotash on July 15, 2010 at 8:19 PM
I know I giving one vote a lot of credit but at least the person with car kept the damage to a minimum instead of nation wide. Or from what I am reading, world wide dissatisfaction.
Cindy Munford on July 15, 2010 at 8:19 PM
Checked his record as Governor of MA?
He’s not even close to the best at jobs and the economy.
The guy was born into money and has rich Mormon friends who’ll invest in his company.
That’s it.
Jenfidel on July 15, 2010 at 8:25 PM
I made myself a promise when I voted for McCain that I would never vote for a RINO, MSM candidate again.
Romney, Huckabee and Gingrich will keep me home. I don’t know enough abot Pawlenty yet. RomneyCare? Really? Global Warming? Really? The “Huckster”? Really?
I’ve swallowed it and gone along more than enough. No more. It’s my way or the highway. I’m a “Palinista” but it doesn’t have to be her. I’ll settle for any true conservative.
And Prez, I’m sorry, but the MSM will NEVER make it about Obama. No matter who is chosen as his opponent, it will be about them, their kindergarten grades, their driving record and on and on. If you say “Not Palin because it will be about her and not Obama”, well, you live in some other world than the one I inhabit.
CC
CapedConservative on July 15, 2010 at 8:32 PM
No, you don’t want either of those jackasses anywhere near the government. The guy you want for Treasury is (gasp!) Ron Paul.
Emperor Norton on July 15, 2010 at 8:37 PM
I haven’t heard about this.
Could you source it please?
powerpro on July 15, 2010 at 8:45 PM
That’s from back in February: “Ed Schultz on Visiting White House: ‘Almost a Shrine’ – to Obama”
Ed Schultz…
This is a guy that gave a video collection of his own speeches to the Queen of England.
slickwillie2001 on July 15, 2010 at 9:01 PM
I know I’ve been cranky lately. My state is suffering an unfair portion of the Zero’s inadequacy and it’s the places I love being destroyed.
But damn, I just keep imagining a presidential debate that may or may not ever happen:
29 minutes into Bobby’s complete analysis of Barry’s f-up in the Gulf, including the depreciation impact on Barry’s twelfth-cousin’s 12-foot boat, President Barack H. Obama bursts into tears.
He just starts blubbering as Bobby buries him under a fusillade of facts, delivered sans notes.
The second question never gets asked, and the debate is over.
cane_loader on July 15, 2010 at 9:12 PM
Gasp is right.
No, I don’t want Ron Paul.
Paul wants the U.S. to go back on the gold standard-something we haven’t been on since at least 1933.
There isn’t enough gold in the world to make that happen.
Nor are any other currencies linked to any kind of standard except each other’s money.
Just a few months ago, when gold was up to $1200/ounce, they were having trouble mining enough gold for Wall Street investors.
Now imagine if that were the U.S. government…
Uh, no.
In addition, Paul wants this because he’s invested in a gold trading company personally.
The laundry list of his pork projects and earmarks show he’s no fiscal conservative, either.
Jenfidel on July 15, 2010 at 9:20 PM
I knew about the ipod with his speeches given to her Majesty… I didn’t know about the O Shrine.
Ick.
powerpro on July 15, 2010 at 9:20 PM
technopeasant on July 15, 2010 at 6:37 PM
–Good analysis. One big question, though: With the other three GOP contenders beating Obama (within the margin of error) and with Palin being tied with Obama (within the margin of error), why would the GOP (or anyone in their right mind) go with the weakest GOP candidate?
Jimbo3 on July 15, 2010 at 9:32 PM
You’re making a huge assumption here…that apparently people’s positions are firm and not fluid.
That’s the entire point of a campaign…show off your goods and make the case as to why you’re the best person for the job.
Some people come out of a primary looking much better than they did beforehand and some do worse.
powerpro on July 15, 2010 at 9:36 PM
First of all, we don’t let PPP or the MSM define who’s “weakest.”
Secondly, if you’ll look at the numbers again, Palin’s rival aren’t all that very much stronger than her, usually one or 2 points stronger.
Thirdly, did you read the Time piece about Reagan running against Carter cited above?
Time had Reagan as the “weakest” candidate, too.
Where the GOP has gotten into trouble, as with McCain in 2008, is running a candidate who is “stronger” or “electable” and asking the electorate to put up with that person no matter how weak their conservative bona fides are.
To this day, I couldn’t tell you where McCain actually stands on almost every issue.
Sarah, like Reagan, makes a definitive stand on the important issues and then says, “If I die (politically), I die.”
Both Mittens and Newt have flip-flopped horribly on key issues already and cannot be trusted.
Jenfidel on July 15, 2010 at 9:40 PM
Palin has polled worse than other GOP candidates for roughly a year. You have a good point, but you’re also making the assumption that she can change peoples’ opinions. That’st tough to do once they’ve formed an initial impression.
Jimbo3 on July 15, 2010 at 9:41 PM
Were you also someone (like Manly Rash) who believed that Obama would lose despite no polling results to the contrary for roughly thirty days before November 2008? At some point, you have to acknowledge and accept the situation before you.
Jimbo3 on July 15, 2010 at 9:44 PM
No, she hasn’t.
Her numbers have been climbing steadily across the board with voters and as time goes on.
Read technopeasant’s analysis above.
Then read the 1979 Time Magazine piece about Reagan v. Carter.
Research before you post, why don’t you? (for once!)
Lastly, you do realize we’re 28 months away from this election and staring at Congressional mid-terms?
Do you remember the MSM’s shock at the magnitude of Sarah’s influence in the latest GOP primaries?
Halperin, is that you?
Jenfidel on July 15, 2010 at 9:45 PM
Well, again, that’s what a Primary is for.
That being said, I don’t take polls at face value like I used to. A lot of times, polls are jerry-rigged to create or reinforce a meme rather than reflect the actual sentiments of the people.
And if they are legit? Then she has a couple of years to change their minds.
powerpro on July 15, 2010 at 9:47 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »