PPP: Palin now leading in Texas, Maine, Wisconsin, West Virginia

posted at 6:40 pm on November 11, 2010 by Allahpundit

I touched on this in the RomneyCare post, but I know Palin fans would be angry if we didn’t devote a separate post to the results. So here you go. Just proving our fair-and-balanced bona fides ahead of the inevitable Townhall/Hot Air presidential debate next year.

The most important state to the nomination process on this list is Florida and there Romney’s ahead with 28% to 22% for Palin and 15% for Newt Gingrich and Mike Huckabee. It should be noted that although Romney does have the lead, it’s a much less lofty one than what he posted in a March PPP poll of the state when he had 44%. The only other candidates included in that poll were Palin and Huckabee and we’re finding more and more as we do these polls that when new folks are added into the mix it tends to hurt Romney more than anyone else. His support is less solid than Palin’s and Huckabee’s so even though he looks like a very nominal front runner at this point, he’s also the candidate most likely to see his support collapse as things heat up

Palin holds small leads in the remaining states. Most noteworthy is her strength in Texas and West Virginia, which suggests a bid from her could really hurt Mike Huckabee in the South. In Texas she gets 22% to 20% for Huckabee and 15% for both Gingrich and Romney. In West Virginia she’s at 25% to 22% for Huckabee and again 15% for both Gingrich and Romney. These margins are obviously very close but they nevertheless pose trouble for Huckabee and perhaps even more so Gingrich if she ends up making a bad because strength in the South would be vital to either of their prospects.

Romney may not have a complete strangle hold on New England- Palin gets 23% in Maine to 18% for Romney, 16% for Huckabee, and 14% for Gingrich. Those numbers should give folks who think there’s no chance Maine Republicans would nominate someone far right against Olympia Snowe in 2012 second thoughts. And finally Palin gets 18% in Wisconsin to 15% for Huckabee, 14% for Gingrich, and 12% for Romney. Pawlenty has his best non-Minnesota performance so far at 8%, not surprising given that it’s right next door. And Pawlenty’s unusually strong Wisconsin number helps to explain Romney’s unusually weak Wisconsin number.

The numbers in West Virginia and Texas aren’t surprising; obviously she and Huck will compete for southern and rural voters, and her name recognition’s higher than his at the moment. Wisconsin’s a surprise, though, and Maine is a big surprise. As happy as Sarahcuda must be to see these numbers, Romney must be utterly deflated. Down five points already in his own backyard? And note the boldfaced bit, please — that’s exactly the point Frum was making in the column I linked earlier about Mitt’s support being momentarily broad but potentially only an inch deep. If, as he and I have speculated, much of Romney’s support comes from centrists who are simply looking for an alternative to Palin, then he’s at risk of flaming out as soon as a more attractive centrist alternative to him emerges. Which raises a question that’s been asked before: Does Mitt actually need Palin to run in order to maximize his chances? Right now he’s the Great Centrist Hope, the guy who can potentially head her off because of his fundraising and organizational skills. If she decides not to run, then he’s just the guy responsible for RomneyCare, who needs to sell himself as somehow superior to Daniels and Thune. And of course, without Palin in the race, Huckabee would stand to clean up among social cons, which would in itself present a challenge to Romney. Then again, given how much contempt most of our commenters seem to have for Huck, maybe having him pose a serious threat for the nomination would actually restore Romney as the Great Centrist Hope and unite people behind him. I’m giving myself a migraine here.

Just breaking as I write this: Palin’s announced the itinerary for her new book tour, and of 16 scheduled stops, two of them are in Iowa. Hmmmm. Exit question: Is super-genius Nancy Pelosi right that the odds against The One being reelected are now long and he’ll have to run a simply perfect campaign to pull it off? Exit answer from Larry Sabato: No, dummy.


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

Allah posted that poll already. The takeaway is that Palin’s ratings are going up and her unfavorables are going down. They aren’t set in stone, despite the number of people who say they have an opinion. Most people still think of Palin as she was portrayed in the 2008 election. She only had 2 months to make an impression. She will have much more time to win people over in 2012 and it’s probably going to work. Let’s look at her favorables after SPAK.

alwaysfiredup on November 11, 2010 at 11:25 PM

I don’t see it happening. The Democrats are salivating at the idea of Palin at the top of the GOP ticket in 2012, and for good reason. Time will prove one of us wrong. I hope it’s me, but I’m not counting on it.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:34 PM

We’ll see, Brian. A majority of the US has formed a negative opinion of her. It’s going to be very difficult to change those opinions.

Jimbo3 on November 11, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Crazier things have happened. Quite often.

Brian1972 on November 11, 2010 at 10:43 PM

That’s a real confidence builder.

churchill995 on November 11, 2010 at 11:33 PM

Just reality. Polls and perceptions are subject to change. A year and a half ago everyone was talking about Palin’s single-digit approval numbers, it seems.

ddrintn on November 11, 2010 at 11:36 PM

I don’t see it happening. The Democrats are salivating at the idea of Palin at the top of the GOP ticket in 2012, and for good reason.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:34 PM

I don’t think so, really. I think they’d rather see Romney. What Democrats fear more than anything in the world is fired-up conservative voters.

ddrintn on November 11, 2010 at 11:37 PM

Oh, yes it is. Ask John McCain how easy it is to win without the base. And McCain was just the guy to win over those precious independents. Remember? If the GOP gets stuck in this garbage of trying to choose candidates based on how independents and moderates think of them, they’re not going to win another presidential election for quite some time to come.

Also, independents aren’t a monolithic group. I’m an independent.

ddrintn on November 11, 2010 at 11:30 PM

I agree to an extent. I’m not advocating for a moderate. I’m advocating for a strong conservative that can appeal to independents. Palin is a strong conservative, and I would vote for her, but she can’t appeal to independents. McCain, on the other hand, appealed to independents, but he wasn’t a strong conservative (he may be now!). My fear is that a Palin v. Obama race will end like the Angle v. Reid race. Reid is loathed in Nevada, 55% disapproval rating, and he still managed to win. Angle was a strong conservative, but could not appeal to the independents nor the moderate Democrats.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:43 PM

I don’t see it happening. The Democrats are salivating at the idea of Palin at the top of the GOP ticket in 2012, and for good reason. Time will prove one of us wrong. I hope it’s me, but I’m not counting on it.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:34 PM

Yes salivating so much that they attack her constantly and pay losers like you to come troll… try again… you aren’t spouting a meme that the most laid back Palin supporter here can’t swat away in a hot second…

We know about the trolling. We know that you are paid by Soros through one of his orgs. We know that you have shifts and that you have to be on for a certain amount of time. We know you have lots of conservative sounding names in reserve and that if one of you isn’t being effective another gets trotted out. We know about the astroturfing and all it does is make us real people better at honing our facts.

CCRWM on November 11, 2010 at 11:45 PM

Reid is loathed in Nevada, 55% disapproval rating, and he still managed to win. Angle was a strong conservative, but could not appeal to the independents nor the moderate Democrats.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:43 PM

Appealing to moderates isn’t going to beat corruption.

ddrintn on November 11, 2010 at 11:45 PM

Appealing to moderates isn’t going to beat corruption.

ddrintn on November 11, 2010 at 11:45 PM

But the opportunity to reform will not even present itself if you can’t appeal to independents. McDonnell and Christie owe their victories to a fired up base and independents. They are both cleaning house in there states. Time will tell if voters reward Christie with a second term, but as of right now he has a good approval rating. McDonnell cut spending back to ’06 levels and still came out with an approval rating over 60% (not sure what it is now). The independents understand what’s at stake. We just need a candidate that can appeal to them.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:54 PM

Losing VP candidates’ track record in modern history:

Mondale, 1984 (Carter): LOST in General Election
Quayle, 1992 (Bush 41): Bowed out during Primaries
Lieberman, 2004 (Gore): Bowed out in Primaries
Edwards, 2008 (Kerry): Bowed out in Primaries

Not one subsequent Winner there.

Just sayin’…

churchill995 on November 11, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Yes salivating so much that they attack her constantly and pay losers like you to come troll… try again… you aren’t spouting a meme that the most laid back Palin supporter here can’t swat away in a hot second…

We know about the trolling. We know that you are paid by Soros through one of his orgs. We know that you have shifts and that you have to be on for a certain amount of time. We know you have lots of conservative sounding names in reserve and that if one of you isn’t being effective another gets trotted out. We know about the astroturfing and all it does is make us real people better at honing our facts.

CCRWM on November 11, 2010 at 11:45 PM

Oh man, you got me. I confess, I’m nothing but a troll bought and paid for by George Soros. I just finished talking to him. I let him know that I’ve been uncovered and will be forced to resign my post. Dang!

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM

Quayle should read 1996 there*

churchill995 on November 11, 2010 at 11:58 PM

I’m advocating for a strong conservative that can appeal to independents. Palin is a strong conservative, and I would vote for her, but she can’t appeal to independents. McCain, on the other hand, appealed to independents, but he wasn’t a strong conservative (he may be now!).

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:43 PM

You say, can’t win independents, as if it’s set in stone forever. You don’t know what will happen over the next several months. Who would have guessed that the very same independents who delivered Obama to the White House in 2008 would completely smash his Congressional Majority two years later. Who was predicting this in Jan 2009? Nobody.

This is my point. It is a fluid process, and if trends continue as they have, Sarah Palin will get a chance to make her case to America on her own terms.

Do not underestimate her ability to connect with people when she is given an opportunity.

To say right now that she can’t, ever, win indies is simply unsupportable. Her favorables among indies have been pretty good in some polls I have seen, especially among likely voters. If you go by the media sponsored, heavily Democrat sampled random adult polls, they are worse. Which is to be expected.

I want to see her go for it, and all these questions will be answered once and for all.

If anyone else is so much better, then let them suit up, hit the field and beat her fair and square.

Brian1972 on November 11, 2010 at 11:59 PM

Just sayin’…

churchill995 on November 11, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Number of those losing VP candidates remotely comparable to Palin in lasting excitement and support: ZERO.

Just sayin’.

Brian1972 on November 12, 2010 at 12:00 AM

I gotta run and throw some darts and drink some beers.

You guys have a good night.

I know I will, you betcha.

Brian1972 on November 12, 2010 at 12:02 AM

Number of those losing VP candidates remotely comparable to Palin in lasting excitement and support: ZERO.

Just sayin’.

Brian1972 on November 12, 2010 at 12:00 AM

I can think of some other areas where they aren’t so comparable, but they don’t help your case.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 12:15 AM

Your entire premise is wrong. The 2012 election will be a referendum of Obama and not the challenger.

Here is what the question will be in 2012? Do you want to keep Obama as your POTUS or do you want to fire him and replace him with the GOP nominee?

technopeasant on November 12, 2010 at 12:22 AM

Your entire premise is wrong. The 2012 election will be a referendum of Obama and not the challenger.

Here is what the question will be in 2012? Do you want to keep Obama as your POTUS or do you want to fire him and replace him with the GOP nominee?

technopeasant on November 12, 2010 at 12:22 AM

Rather, your premise is too simple and assuming. And even were it not, not all of us are willing to sign on as Sarah being the strongest available.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 12:28 AM

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:34 PM

BS. I only see them in fear of her. And if nothing else she exposes Obama for what he is during the campaign. Let America vote the marxist in for another term. So be it. At least the other side put up a true conservative. Liberty. It lives or dies in the next election.

long_cat on November 12, 2010 at 12:52 AM

technopeasant on November 12, 2010 at 12:22 AM

Well ok, but if that GOP nominee is Sarah Palin then it is going to be about her too. With her it’s always personal. She will have to wage the battle on those terms.

Anybody else, it’s going to get real racial, real ugly, real fast. Count it.

alwaysfiredup on November 12, 2010 at 1:05 AM

nd even were it not, not all of us are willing to sign on as Sarah being the strongest available.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 12:28 AM

Sounds to me like you aren’t trying to be convinced, either. Who’s your candidate?

alwaysfiredup on November 12, 2010 at 1:06 AM

…not all of us are willing to sign on as Sarah being the strongest available.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 12:28 AM

If Sarah wins the nom, you either vote for her, or vote for Imam Obama…and staying home is a vote for The Won. As long_cat says, if he wins, so be it…good luck to him pushing his agenda with a Republican Congress and Senate. His power will be neutered, and TOTUS will have 4 more years of speeches, delivered by an empty soulless suit.

ornery_independent on November 12, 2010 at 1:09 AM

Very predictable.
Except for the Maine part.

Just imagine what will happen when people see and hear more of her nationally.

Only the political junkies pay attention to her now for the most part.

B Man on November 12, 2010 at 2:29 AM

Do not make the mistake of writing her off as having no chance.

She has no chance. A Palin nomination is about the only shot Obummer has at getting re-elected.

xblade on November 12, 2010 at 4:09 AM

Palin understands what Reagan also knew – ignore the leftos and the RINOs and take your case directly to the people. The MSM already threw the kitchen sink at her and their house is now devoid of items to throw at her, plus their credibility is now zero. The RINOs can make all the plans to destroy her they want in the back room, but that hasn’t worked out real well for them so far and they have only hurt themselves. In the end, the voters decide and over the past two years she has met more of them than any other potential candidate.

Done That on November 12, 2010 at 5:48 AM

Losing VP candidates’ track record in modern history:

Mondale, 1984 (Carter): LOST in General Election
Quayle, 1992 (Bush 41): Bowed out during Primaries
Lieberman, 2004 (Gore): Bowed out in Primaries
Edwards, 2008 (Kerry): Bowed out in Primaries

Not one subsequent Winner there.

Just sayin’…

churchill995 on November 11, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Heh?? Are you actually comparing Palin to THIS bunch??? Did any of them get out and continue to support conservatives or liberals in any meaningful way? Did any make ANY impact on politics after their defeats?? I mean.. I don’t even know where to begin with this list.

Here is another list of people who never became president that helps me support the notion that Palin won’t get elected:

Martha Stewart
Oprah
Mr. Rogers
My mailman
Mickey Mouse

Not a winner among them. I’m just saying. WTF?

Dan Pet on November 12, 2010 at 6:22 AM

Appealing to moderates isn’t going to beat corruption.

ddrintn on November 11, 2010 at 11:45 PM

But the opportunity to reform will not even present itself if you can’t appeal to independents.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:54 PM

No, I’m saying that Reid was going to win no matter what opponent ran against him.

ddrintn on November 12, 2010 at 6:27 AM

She has no chance. A Palin nomination is about the only shot Obummer has at getting re-elected.

xblade on November 12, 2010 at 4:09 AM

Then you would think the media and democrats would be pushing for her, instead of trying to tear her down … no?

darwin on November 12, 2010 at 7:11 AM

We need to have the Texas primary earlier in the election season. We’ve had too many instances where the good candidates have already been wiped out by Iowa and other primaries. McCain would not have won the nomination had Texas run their primary earlier in the year. As it was, he’d already all but wrapped up the nomination before we had our primary…I did not vote for McCain in the presidential election, but I did vote for Palin…Had she not been on the ballot, I probably would have voted for a Republican as a write-in candidate…

golfer1 on November 12, 2010 at 7:20 AM

No, I’m saying that Reid was going to win no matter what opponent ran against him.

ddrintn on November 12, 2010 at 6:27 AM

Gotcha. Good point.

ncconservative on November 12, 2010 at 7:51 AM

Brian1972 on November 11, 2010 at 11:59 PM

I see what you’re saying. I’m just not as confident. Only time will tell.

ncconservative on November 12, 2010 at 7:56 AM

I still think these top names just flip flop around, depending on the poll and the day.

Way too soon.

AnninCA on November 12, 2010 at 8:19 AM

What happens when Ron Paul endorses Palin, I think he will.

wheelgun on November 12, 2010 at 8:23 AM

What happens when Ron Paul endorses Palin, I think he will.

wheelgun on November 12, 2010 at 8:23 AM

I dunno. What happened when Castro and Chavez endorsed Obama?

darwin on November 12, 2010 at 8:32 AM

What happens when Ron Paul endorses Palin, I think he will.

wheelgun on November 12, 2010 at 8:23 AM

I think you are ABSOLUTELY right. I have been sure that this would happen and I think that that has been in the works for a long time (probably since Palin first endorsed the Senator-elect in Kentucky)!! And Darwin, I wouldn’t take it lightly or make a joke of it. His supporters are extremely loyal and YOUNG!! I think it will give Palin a good boost.

Dan Pet on November 12, 2010 at 9:58 AM

And Darwin, I wouldn’t take it lightly or make a joke of it. His supporters are extremely loyal and YOUNG!! I think it will give Palin a good boost.

Dan Pet on November 12, 2010 at 9:58 AM

Good point

darwin on November 12, 2010 at 10:04 AM

When Perry throws his hat into the race, we’ll see who leads in Texas polls.

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 10:07 AM

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 10:07 AM

Perry was adamant that he’s not running.

darwin on November 12, 2010 at 10:11 AM

Let’s let the media select the GOP Presidential candidate again in 2012. It worked so well in 2008.

bw222 on November 12, 2010 at 10:36 AM

When Perry throws his hat into the race, we’ll see who leads in Texas polls.

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 10:07 AM

Maverick, Perry and Palin are good friends. I have to say that I am sure the two of them have worked out an arrangement already regarding this issue. Just like that Paul thing, Perry is probably already on board to endorse Palin. I would bet on it. There is a reason that so many say don’t underestimate Palin. I think there is more going on behind the scenes than we know.

Dan Pet on November 12, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Let’s let the media select the GOP Presidential candidate again in 2012. It worked so well in 2008.

bw222

EXCELLENT point, bw222. Using your idea, we could bypass an election all together and they can just decide amongst themselves on Journo-list.

Dan Pet on November 12, 2010 at 11:51 AM

And more about Perry. Remember, she came in and helped him in his primary against KBH. I don’t think he is likely to go against her when I am sure he would be one of the first to get a post in a Palin administration.

Dan Pet on November 12, 2010 at 11:52 AM

She’s a real person………not all prim and proper and doing it the way the “boys” do it. Of course, she’s just a doofus and not as smart as the Lame Duck and his VP. But still……

http://tlc.discovery.com/tv/sarah-palin-alaska/sneak-peek-photos/sneak-peek-photos-10.html

PappyD61 on November 12, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Perry was adamant that he’s not running.

darwin on November 12, 2010 at 10:11 AM

I’ve heard that before from others, as well.

As if Hillary didn’t swear to stay NY Senator for that re-election campaign prior to the ’08 potus campaign.

No, Perry WILL campaign for potus, despite his protestations to the contrary. And he has the Republican establishment machine behind him when he does, along with a lot of gullible new to the Tea Party voters.

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 1:26 PM

Losing VP candidates’ track record in modern history:

Mondale, 1984 (Carter): LOST in General Election
Quayle, 1992 (Bush 41): Bowed out during Primaries
Lieberman, 2004 (Gore): Bowed out in Primaries
Edwards, 2008 (Kerry): Bowed out in Primaries

Not one subsequent Winner there.

Just sayin’…

churchill995 on November 11, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Interesting that you conveniently stopped at Carter’s VP. Nixon lost as a VP candidate, then won 2 terms as president.

Regardless, these historical analogies are meaningless. Has any previously losing VP candidate had the political power that Palin has today? I doubt it.

It’s a brave new world, and Palin is head and shoulders above the other midgets in the GOP.

Norwegian on November 12, 2010 at 1:28 PM

Dan Pet on November 12, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Hutchison never had a prayer of a chance to win her gubernatorial campaign against Perry. Neither did Carole Keeton Rylander whatever-her-last-name-or-party-is-today.

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 1:28 PM

My fear is that a Palin v. Obama race will end like the Angle v. Reid race. Reid is loathed in Nevada, 55% disapproval rating, and he still managed to win. Angle was a strong conservative, but could not appeal to the independents nor the moderate Democrats.

ncconservative on November 11, 2010 at 11:43 PM

Unfortunately, I think you may be right. I love Sarah but i expect that the eventual nominee will be a Conservative who the MSM and Lefties find very difficult to demonize and parody. I agree that Sarah would win strong support from conservative voters, but would not attract enough indies to get over the top.

Red State State of Mind on November 12, 2010 at 1:33 PM

Just read more of the comments and someone mentioned Rick Perry. He might have a chance. I have thought for a while that it will be a very qualified executive like a Mitch Daniels. had not considered Perry until I heard him on the radio being interviewed for his book.

Red State State of Mind on November 12, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Here’s another possible scenario. There may end up with 4 or 5 Republicans with modest # s and no clear front runner. Then will there be a groundswell “Draft Christie” movement? I don’t consider Christie a Conservative, but would he appeal to conservatives ‘enough’ to attract them and independents?

Red State State of Mind on November 12, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Perry and Palin are good friends. I have to say that I am sure the two of them have worked out an arrangement already regarding this issue.

They are friends, that’s no secret. As per “arrangement”, pay note that Palin said that if no other conservative steps up, then she’ll run; otherwise, she’ll be the ticket’s biggest cheerleader.

Being chided to “never underestimate Palin” has grown stale. I never did underestimate her fan base, having been one of her most ardent supporters while she was under MSM fire and under nasty scrutiny by Allahpundit and even Ed Morrissey here at HotAir during/after ’08 campaign. That doesn’t mean that she’s ready to SUCCESSFULLY butt heads with Russia, Red China, N.Korea, Marxists in S.America, and particularly with Islamic nations.

And I never insinuated that I supported perpetuating Rick Perry’s never-ending governorship in Texas. He was by no means the Tea Party candidate, leaving Palin’s endorsement a far cry from the Tea Party movement here in Texas. Perry smeared the Tea Party Republican primary candidate, and HotAir editors jumped on that hate speech bandwagon.

After Gov.Perry used the CPS to kidnap every child under age 21 from their homes outside of Eldorado for over a year, with some children lost in that system, I’d NEVER support his potus aspirations. He played Clinton’s authoritarian game, and got away with it. Palin endorsed THAT, exemplifying a lack of adherence to common sense constitutional governance that eschews the abuses from overreaching powers.

Don’t tell me, “no one’s perfect”.

I’ll support Fred Thompson’s next potus campaign if it happens, glad to get away from getting burnt by the “fire in the belly” demanded by ’08 GOP propagandists, and exemplified by Obama’s initial ’08 campaign.

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 1:51 PM

had not considered Perry until I heard him on the radio being interviewed for his book.

Red State State of Mind

…the book meant to excoriate Washingtonians in order for him to play the Republican elitists’ ’12 Tea Party false prophet.

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 1:55 PM

a strong conservative, but could not appeal to the independents nor the moderate Democrats.

ncconservative

Any conservative candidate’s self-identity with an opinionated Christian sect will not attract the portion of the public sector offended by organized religion. Some people would rather bite off their own nose to spite their face than elect a conservative and overtly religious candidate representing perhaps too much of a good thing.

Again, Fred Thompson “Christian” upbringing didn’t encourage him to be a political Bible Thumper or speaking abusively towards various faiths whether or not his own. He speaks his opinions as an America according to Constitutional Law, and is the strictest fiscal conservative you’ll find in the Republican Party. While in the Senate, he worked to enforce government employee competence on the job. He is staunchly opposed to corruption, having served 30 years ago as a young Senate lawyer helping to lead the investigation of the Watergate scandal and President Richard Nixon.

maverick muse on November 12, 2010 at 2:09 PM

OT: This is not a story from The Onion.

“Last week, Nicaraguan troops crossed the border, took down a Costa Rican flag and defiantly raised their own flag on Costa Rican turf. But the troops’ commander, Eden Pastora, told a Costa Rican newspaper, Google Maps mistakenly said the territory belonged to Nicaragua. Government officials in Nicaragua have also blamed a “bug in Google” for the error.

Now, the Organization of American States and UN Security Council are being called in to mediate the dispute, and find a solution to the problem caused by Google. “Costa Rica is seeing its dignity smeared and there is a sense of great national urgency,” said Costa Rica’s excellently-named President Laura Chinchilla.

Google has since apologized for the error (which can be traced back to bad information from the State Department) and is working to correct its erroneous borders. Most embarrassing, notes Wired, is that Google’s competitor, Microsoft, uses correctly drawn maps.”

http://www.good.is/post/nicaragua-mistakenly-invades-of-costa-rica-blames-google-maps/

Jimbo3 on November 12, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Losing VP candidates’ track record in modern history:

Mondale, 1984 (Carter): LOST in General Election
Quayle, 1992 (Bush 41): Bowed out during Primaries
Lieberman, 2004 (Gore): Bowed out in Primaries
Edwards, 2008 (Kerry): Bowed out in Primaries

Not one subsequent Winner there.

Just sayin’…

churchill995 on November 11, 2010 at 11:55 PM
Interesting that you conveniently stopped at Carter’s VP. Nixon lost as a VP candidate, then won 2 terms as president.

Regardless, these historical analogies are meaningless. Has any previously losing VP candidate had the political power that Palin has today? I doubt it.

It’s a brave new world, and Palin is head and shoulders above the other midgets in the GOP.

Norwegian on November 12, 2010 at 1:28 PM

Nixon was 2 for 2 as Ike’s running mate; he lost the General Election in 1960 running for President against Kennedy. Try getting your history straight.

A brave new world indeed. Other midgets in the GOP? Classy. All the evidence necessary for why single-minded people like you scare many of us.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 6:10 PM

nd even were it not, not all of us are willing to sign on as Sarah being the strongest available.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 12:28 AM
Sounds to me like you aren’t trying to be convinced, either. Who’s your candidate?

alwaysfiredup on November 12, 2010 at 1:06 AM

…not all of us are willing to sign on as Sarah being the strongest available.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 12:28 AM
If Sarah wins the nom, you either vote for her, or vote for Imam Obama…and staying home is a vote for The Won. As long_cat says, if he wins, so be it…good luck to him pushing his agenda with a Republican Congress and Senate. His power will be neutered, and TOTUS will have 4 more years of speeches, delivered by an empty soulless suit.

ornery_independent on November 12, 2010 at 1:09 AM

Haven’t settled on a candidate yet, and the point is, neither should you and a lot of others here until the primary season is sufficiently mature. If Sarah wins me over by the time my state’s primary is held, I’ll vote for her in that, notwithstanding she has to dig herself out from where she is now given what I have seen since McCain selected her as his running mate.

Of course if Sarah wins you vote for her over Obama; the point again is so many have already signed in blood to her candidacy, and sorry, just because she is a better alternative to Obama is not sufficient. She has to be the best, and that remains to be seen.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 6:23 PM

ornery_independent on November 12, 2010: One last point, picking someone other than the strongest candidate, either settling for a stalemate with a re-elected Obama, or winning the election with someone other than the strongest Republican running in the primaries, would be bone-headed.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 6:27 PM

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 6:27 PM

I’m totally convinced Mr. mission poster. Thanks for the endless persuasive argument.

Inanemergencydial on November 13, 2010 at 9:52 AM

or winning the election with someone other than the strongest Republican running in the primaries candidate of which I approve, would be bone-headed.

churchill995 on November 12, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Edited for accuracy. If the GOP nominee wins it all, he/she was most likely the strongest Republican running in the primaries, I’d say.

ddrintn on November 13, 2010 at 1:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4