PPP poll: Romney voters a risk to switch to Obama if he loses nomination?

posted at 8:26 pm on November 30, 2010 by Allahpundit

I could have gone two ways with the headline here. One was to note that Palin’s now leading the field, albeit narrowly — 21 percent to Gingrich’s 19, Romney’s 18, and Huckabee’s 16. The other was to note that those darned RINOs in Mitt’s base just might be ready to bolt, Delaware-style, if their man’s not the pick in 2012.

I went with my gut that you guys might just be in the mood for an ol’ fashioned RINO stomp.

-Huckabee voters give Palin a 64/27 favorability, Gingrich a 53/23 one, and Romney a 59/26 one. That makes the net favorability for the other candidates an average +33.

-Palin voters give Huckabee a 52/19 favorability, Gingrich a 42/38 one, and Romney a 40/35 one. That makes the net favorability for the other candidates an average +14…

-Romney voters give Huckabee a 46/25 favorability, Palin a 46/36 one, and Gingrich a 41/42 one. That makes the net favorability for the other candidates an average +10.

The Gingrich and Huckabee voters are going to be fine if someone else gets nominated. They’re pretty happy with all the other candidates. The Romney folks perhaps are a greater concern for Republicans because some of them might actually vote for Obama if a Gingrich or Palin gets nominated. The Palin folks aren’t all that big on the other candidates either- the chances of them voting for Obama seem quite slim but might they sit home or throw some of their votes to a conservative third party candidate if Romney wins the nomination?

Yeah, that’s an interesting parallel in Romney fans and Palin fans, although for completely different reasons. Mitt’s probably cleaning up among Republican centrists who might otherwise consider voting for a strong Democrat. (Let’s call them “Kathleen Parker conservatives.”) Palin, on the other hand, commands a bunch of conservatives who would never vote Democrat and whose devotion to her might lead some to stay home if she’s not the pick. Although, contrary to the endless invective aimed at Huckabee among the Hot Air commentariat, Huck does darned well among her supporters. Consider that proof that social conservatism is more important to her base than some of us might have thought. In fact, Huckabee scores the highest favorable rating among Palin’s, Romney’s, and Gingrich’s supporters (aside from Palin, Romney, and Gingrich themselves, respectively). I wonder if that’s inducement enough to get him to consider running. If any one of them bows out early or chooses not to run at all, he’s primed to pick up a bunch of their supporters and, with them, a whole lot of momentum. (Although do note: Romney supporters marginally prefer Palin to Huckabee as a second choice, possibly because Mitt’s Mormon base skews conservative.) Are you ready for Huckabee/Christie 2012?

On the other hand, if Huck doesn’t run, Palin’s the big winner. She takes 34 percent of his supporters as a second choice compared to just 19 percent for Gingrich and 17 percent for Romney. That’s a considerable spread, to the point where I wonder if there aren’t some establishment anti-Palin Republicans out there suddenly getting very nervous at the thought that Huck might not run and that social conservatives will unite behind Palin. They’re going to need a stalking horse to bleed some of those votes away from her. But who, if not Huck? Santorum? C’mon.


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

It seems like these Romney/RINO supporters might have a litmus test for their candidates. And if we learned anything from the Main Stream Media ever since the Tea Party started it’s that a litmus test for candidates is just horrible.

I predict a slew of articles on how these people dangerous because they aren’t being inclusive and welcoming the more conservative wing of their party. Joe Scarborough will write a strongly worded opinion piece.

Ampersand on November 30, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Who are these Romney people who’d vote for Obama if Romney’s not the nominee? Maybe in 2008, when people still thought Obama was the Messiah, but now? What’s wrong with these people?

And voting for the other guy is, mathematically, twice as bad as staying home and not voting.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 30, 2010 at 9:15 PM

If they switch, it shows the value of Romney as a conservative.

Valiant on November 30, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Now that’s the True Conservative™!

Vyce on November 30, 2010 at 8:33 PM

So Vyce, are you going to lie and say you’d actually vote for Palin? Yeah, like anyone believes that….

Good Solid B-Plus on November 30, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Less people voted in the ’08 election than voted in the ’04 election, while the Democrats increased their turnout.

Where was the difference? How did Obama flip those red states blue?

Conservatives pissed at McCain not showing up.

Your info is wrong. Turnout was way, way, way up in 2008 compared to 2004.
2004: 123,535,883
2008: 132,645,504

Obama won by appealing to the middle. He was faking it, but it was the middle that won him the election.

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:16 PM

Ah, here are all the teabaggers, safely ensconced in their teabagger forum — the few — the brave — the softbellied keyboard brain trust carrying the torch for traditional values. It’s nice to know what passes now for conservative philosophy:

So the scumbags would rather vote for a scumbag if their guy doesn’t win. Big shock!

Africanus on November 30, 2010 at 8:30 PM

And William F. must be rolling over in his lonely, unvisited grave.

‘Course, I can hardly blame ye when you have a cheerleader going folksy with his “gut” (I’d like to see proof that Allah actually possesses one of these) for an “ol’ fashioned RINO stomp,” which is about as politically brave as Kossacks kicking Blue Dogs in the head.

How do you say it? “It’s come to this.”

bifidis on November 30, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Yeah, that seems like a winning strategy!

[therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 9:13 PM]

Oh, and yours is?

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Their speculation that Romney voters might vote for Obama doesn’t appear to be grounded in any data.

“Norfolk and way” they’d vote for Obama.

Y-not on November 30, 2010 at 9:19 PM

I got a poll question for you all. In your opinion, of the candidates named in this article, if elected to be president, who would be most likely to sign legislation creating a new federal agency or creating a new entitlement for the citizens.

bindare on November 30, 2010 at 9:21 PM

how much clearer does it have to get??

Romney = RomneyCare = NObamaCare = LOSER

Gingrich = Scozzafava = RINO = LOSER

Huckabee = Vilified Religious Right = Soft on Crime = Loser

Sarah Palin = Tea Party = 2nd American Revolution = Winner

mathewsjw on November 30, 2010 at 9:21 PM

Oh, and yours is?

Nominating the most electable Republican. Who can win the highest % of the vote, and win the most states.

Someone who has good favorable ratings with moderates.

therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 9:22 PM

bifidis on November 30, 2010 at 9:17 PM

What is the temp of the fever swamp today, champ?

Inanemergencydial on November 30, 2010 at 9:22 PM

The Republican Party is in the process of getting liquidated by the Tea Party from the bottom, upwards. What stands as the party as it was in 2010 will not be the party it will be in 2012, and those changes at the precinct level matter as they send the delegates to State conventions (for those that have them).

Find the candidate who will stop the spending, repeal Obamacare, and work to start cutting government back and you will find a potential nominee. A candidate must have those as things they will pledge to do. And that will cut out much of the current prospects as few can meet those terms.

ajacksonian on November 30, 2010 at 9:22 PM

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Well said.

I honestly haven’t decided on a candidate yet. I love Mike Pence, Bobby Jindal, Col. West, Bolton, Pawlenty, etc. But who knows, two years out, who among my favs will even run. There are plenty of arguments for and against each of them vis a vis their viability.

I don’t need Rove or any other pundit to tell me who is electable, and I don’t need my fellow Republicans to bully me into accepting their choice either. I will decide for myself, just as you and millions of other Americans will.

When the primaries are over, we’ll have a candidate. He or she may be moderate or true conservative. We may adore him or her or we may feel gypped. Either way, even if it means holding my nose for days in advance, I’m voting for the person with an R after his or her name. I could never in good conscience for for Barry.

anXdem on November 30, 2010 at 9:23 PM

mathewsjw on November 30, 2010 at 9:21 PM

Sarah Palin = No experience = Barack Obama = LOSER

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Further proof that the 2008 election was not “conservatives staying home.”

Ideology of voters
2004: Mod 45%, Con 34%, Lib 21%
2008: Mod 44%, Con 34%, Lib 22%

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Who are these Romney people who’d vote for Obama if Romney’s not the nominee?
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 30, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Good question. Go through the poll, item by item, and I’ll give you a prize if you can find these people.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

If they switch, it shows the value of Romney as a conservative.

Valiant on November 30, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Yeah, I don’t think we need to wait for them to switch to see that; this poll points that out pretty well in advance. Between this and Romneycare, is anyone seriously going to try to make a case that Romney’s conservative?

Midas on November 30, 2010 at 9:26 PM

Angus … so you think GW thrilled Cons in 04?

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 9:26 PM

Their speculation that Romney voters might vote for Obama doesn’t appear to be grounded in any data.
Y-not on November 30, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Ding. Ding. Ding. I wish I was Andrew Breitbart so I could offer a $100,000 reward to find the non-existent data.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 9:27 PM

Too bad the Republican Party can’t pull Libertarian presidential candidate Wayne Allen Root and run him with John Bolton. Root wrote “Conscience of a Libertarian” which is the ultimate view on how to fix America. He is obviously a Barry Goldwater “Republican”(as am I)borrowing the title from Goldwater’s “Conscience of a Conservative”. Barry(Goldwater, not the messiah)is more relevent today than ever. He’s the sane center between Commies on the left(pretty much ALL the Dems), and the Bible Thumping Fundamentalists who would love the opportunity to use Big Government to implement Social Laws on the right. I’d love to have a choice between Communists and Witch burning social conservative theocrats…One can only hope for sanity……

adamsmith on November 30, 2010 at 9:29 PM

I could have gone two ways with the headline here. One was to note that Palin’s now leading the field…

LOL

Time to watch tivo’d Glee with daughter and point out all the extreme family values…

Fallon on November 30, 2010 at 9:29 PM

Angus … so you think GW thrilled Cons in 04?

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 9:26 PM

No. But he attracted more moderate and liberal voters than McCain did in 2008. For all the talk about focusing on the base, Rove and Bush realized that cross-party and cross-ideology votes are important. Palin isn’t going to get those votes.

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:30 PM

[therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 9:22 PM]

I’m just saying no R will win if you keep pulling the conservative base’s chain the way you’ve been, not to mention you having no freakin’ clue what/who wins elections for the R’s (go reread Rove’s strategy for Bush 2000 and 2004.). No way at all. So remember that and learn to keep a civil tongue in your mouth or your strategy will be as big a joke as you think the Palin folks’ strategy is.

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 9:30 PM

Who are these Romney people who’d vote for Obama if Romney’s not the nominee?
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 30, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Good question. Go through the poll, item by item, and I’ll give you a prize if you can find these people.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Exactly. PPP is speculating about something that is not even asked about in the poll, and AP is using this pure speculation to stir up some sh!t. But page views are what counts I guess.

Mark1971 on November 30, 2010 at 9:30 PM

Either way, even if it means holding my nose for days in advance, I’m voting for the person with an R after his or her name.
anXdem on November 30, 2010 at 9:23 PM

Superb commentary. And for those whose ideal candidate doesn’t get the nod in the end, I’d suggest reading the 2000 plus page bill that is Obamacare. Perhaps the thought of a 1/6 takeover of the economy and an instinctual love for your country will be enough to pull that R lever.

TxAnn56 on November 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

Their speculation that Romney voters might vote for Obama doesn’t appear to be grounded in any data.
Y-not on November 30, 2010 at 9:19 PM

If there are such voters I suspect those same people have several screws loose.

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

Palin, on the other hand, commands a bunch of conservatives who would never vote Democrat and whose devotion to her might lead some to stay home if she’s not the pick.

I have children so I won’t stay home…but I’ll not be happy and I won’t give my money or time…just my vote…

CCRWM on November 30, 2010 at 9:32 PM

No. But he attracted more moderate and liberal voters than McCain did in 2008. For all the talk about focusing on the base, Rove and Bush realized that cross-party and cross-ideology votes are important. Palin isn’t going to get those votes.

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:30 PM

The point is that your post does NOT prove that Cons did not stay home.

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 9:33 PM

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

Or they could be liberal republicans or conservative Democrats . . . .

You know, they are allowed to vote for a republican too.

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM

The Romney folks perhaps are a greater concern for Republicans because some of them might actually vote for Obama if a Gingrich or Palin gets nominated.

Doesn’t this kind of reinforce the impression that Romney is Democrat Lite…I don’think this getting out helps him at all with the conservatives and solid Republicans… I don’t think he can win the nomination if this is true… but,I don’t trust polls…

CCRWM on November 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM

CCRWM on November 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM

Nomination? No way.

Presidency? Would be easy.

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:36 PM

The point is that your post does NOT prove that Cons did not stay home.

Actually, I offered data that showed that among voters, self-identified conservatives were the same % in 2008 as in 2004. Someone earlier claimed that the difference between Bush winning in 2004 and McCain losing in 2008 is that conservatives stayed home in 2008.

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:37 PM

lol gurlfriend, PLZ.

No one is that passionate about Mittbot. Unless Peggy Noonan was polled through her 2,601 OK Cupid! accounts.

lansing quaker on November 30, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Once again, the democrat party is trying to pick the republican nominee.

lonestar1 on November 30, 2010 at 9:39 PM

BTW, via OK Cupid!, she’ll find herself a nice Luxembourgan Count someday. KEEP IT UP PEGGY!

lansing quaker on November 30, 2010 at 9:39 PM

Romney, Daniels, Jindal are the best of the pick.

Gingrich and Palin are garbage.

Huckabee…I don’t know, I guess I’d hold my nose and vote for hm.

therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 8:38 PM

Jindal really? He is pro-life and anti-gay rights.

Sounds like an “extremist”./

He wants in your bedroom and to raise your kids!!! /

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 9:40 PM

Or they could be liberal republicans or conservative Democrats . . . .

You know, they are allowed to vote for a republican too.

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM

Did I say they were not allowed? You really need to work on your comprehension.

Try again.

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 9:41 PM

The Romney folks perhaps are a greater concern for Republicans because some of them might actually vote for Obama if a Gingrich or Palin gets nominated.

Doesn’t this kind of reinforce the impression that Romney is Democrat Lite…I don’think this getting out helps him at all with the conservatives and solid Republicans… I don’t think he can win the nomination if this is true… but,I don’t trust polls…

CCRWM on November 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM

Actually it reinforces the impression that PPP is making stuff up out of whole cloth since there is not a single question about Obama in the entire poll.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 9:42 PM

The Romney folks perhaps are a greater concern for Republicans because some of them might actually vote for Obama if a Gingrich or Palin gets nominated.

Well, Brooksie, the Frumster, NOONAN!, baby Buckley and Colon Powell have already voted for the obamanation once. What’s so hard to believe that they wouldn’t again?

Gohawgs on November 30, 2010 at 9:44 PM

Jindal really? He is pro-life and anti-gay rights.

Sounds like an “extremist”./

He wants in your bedroom and to raise your kids!!! /

I’m pro life. Gay people can do whatever they want.

therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 9:48 PM

Well, Brooksie, the Frumster, NOONAN!, baby Buckley and Colon Powell have already voted for the obamanation once. What’s so hard to believe that they wouldn’t again?
Gohawgs on November 30, 2010 at 9:44 PM

Anyhoo, I thought this poll with zero data was about Romney voters moving to Obama not the other way around. Let me know when they have the poll you’re dreaming of.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 9:49 PM

The D.C. Gop Ruling class already has the fix in for the GOP Nomination in 2012 (please people just relax and let the smarter Beltway people pick who is in charge).

Romney will get the nod he’ll pick Rubio for the VP spot and that will pacify the Conservative “slave” base (and they’ll come home to their RINO masters in GOP leadership like they always do).

Rubio will be hailed as a “REAL CONSERVATIVE” by all the talking heads (Parker/Noonan/Krauthammer/Rove/Will/etc.). He’ll be the telegenic/Charismatic boy wonder of the GOP, The Darling of K Street and Main Street.

Then of course Romney will lose to Obama and it will set the stage for JEB Bush to run in 2016 (most likely against Hillary Clinton).

There all figured out for you. Now you hicks and hayseeds can all go back to your NASCAR races, NFL games and your Christmas parties. We’ll call you when we need your campaign contributions.

Sincerely,
GOP Ruling class.

PappyD61 on November 30, 2010 at 9:50 PM

Stop with the “moderate crap”

The American political landscape has fundamentally shifted:

From Gallup in summer 2010 % of the electorate:

LIBERALS: 20% MODERATES: 35% CONSERVATIVES 42%

EXIT POLLS 2010:

LIBERALS 20% MODERATES: 38% CONSERVATIVES: 42%

(IN 2006 It WAS L: 20 M: 47 C: 32)

Republicans that are conservative: 70%
Republicans that are lib/moder: 28%

Independents that are conservative: 36%

(was 28% in 2006)

Independents that are moderate: 43%

Democrats that are conservative 21%

In other words we don’t need the moderates like we used to.

technopeasant on November 30, 2010 at 9:50 PM

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 9:49 PM

You must’ve been out getting coffee, and missed those R’s I listed, actually voted FOR obama in ’08, the same R’s that are now talking up Romney…

Gohawgs on November 30, 2010 at 9:53 PM

Just one question for Joe Scarborough……

…..did Mika give you your testicas back so YOU could man up to Palin?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45687.html

PappyD61 on November 30, 2010 at 9:55 PM

Yeap and Huck hates mitt enough not to run if he was sure him not running would defeat Mitt.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 9:55 PM

Sarah Palin = No experience = Barack Obama = LOSER

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

thphilli + BOLD LETTERS= Soggy Kleenex

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 9:55 PM

Only Allah could get that headline out of this poll! But all that aside, republicans and conservatives have to think about this: What does it say about Mitt if his followers would vote for OBAMA instead of any other republican??

Dan Pet on November 30, 2010 at 9:56 PM

Brian 1972 You are more on than you even know. RW, stop and look at the long haul. Sarah has the ethics we all wish we could master, while ego’s abound in the rest you list. Newt is exceptionally gifted in understanding and expression and developed one of the conservative’s greatest gifts to America in modern times. “Contract with America.” The premise was that of accountability. Problem: He opposed one of the best con artist that ever lived” Bill Clinton” and a media that was even more effective(complicit) than todays, without the modern day internet, and it’s warriors of exposure. Romney’s biggest mistake is failure to openly own Romneycare and expose it for what it was. Failing to do so either is denial that he made mistakes while trying or failure to understand how bad it is. The rest are not horrible, and remember, they had to tackle DC before the Tea Party movement. No one had their back. I say, give them all a chance over the next 2 years with them now understanding that there are new rules and let’s see it play out. Get your ego’s out of the way people because you answer to a new power now. One that has been sidelined for a while and that is the people of the United States. The Tea Party. There are many capable of leading this Country as long as it is about this Country and not about who is leading.

texriot on November 30, 2010 at 9:56 PM

Only Allah could get that headline out of this poll! But all that aside, republicans and conservatives have to think about this: What does it say about Mitt if his followers would vote for OBAMA instead of any other republican??

Dan Pet on November 30, 2010 at 9:56 PM

To be fair most of the Mormons would vote conservative. Its his other supporters who are most likely to vote Democrat.

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 10:01 PM

The American political landscape has fundamentally shifted:

From Gallup in summer 2010 % of the electorate:

LIBERALS: 20% MODERATES: 35% CONSERVATIVES 42%

EXIT POLLS 2010:

LIBERALS 20% MODERATES: 38% CONSERVATIVES: 42%

(IN 2006 It WAS L: 20 M: 47 C: 32)

Republicans that are conservative: 70%
Republicans that are lib/moder: 28%

Independents that are conservative: 36%

(was 28% in 2006)

Independents that are moderate: 43%

Democrats that are conservative 21%

In other words we don’t need the moderates like we used to.

technopeasant on November 30, 2010 at 9:50 PM

In 2006 it was C 38, M 37, L 21 and in 2008 it was C and M 37 and L 22.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141032/2010-Conservatives-Outnumber-Moderates-Liberals.aspx

And you do need moderates to get to 50%. Remember 2008?

Jimbo3 on November 30, 2010 at 10:05 PM

Today in the coffee shop and police headquarters in Lakewood they put up memorials to mark the one year anniversary of the deaths of the four police officers that Huckabee killed.

He gets nominated, I stay home.

29Victor on November 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM

BTW – I helped elect Kirk as well. “None of the above” was not an option.

Fallon on November 30, 2010 at 9:14 PM

hey when you see Kirk thank him for voting yes on S 510 so the federal government can take over the entire USA food production….

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM

Really wish Jindal would run. Rs will likely snatch defeat from the jaws of victory with this lineup.

Chazz on November 30, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Everybody is running. The GOP Ruling class in D.C. is going to throw ANYONE AND EVERYONE out there to try and defeat Palin (if she even runs).

They must defeat any threat to BUSINESS AS USUAL for BigGovers in D.C.

STOP PALIN NOW BOARD MEMBERS:
Romney………………check.
Jindal………………check.
Barbour……………..check.
Bolton………………check.
Huckleberry………….check.
Pence……………….check.
Daniels……………..check.
Demint………………check.
Christie…………….check.
heck Thompson………..check.
Guiliani…………….check.
Rubio……………….check.
Bush 45……………..check.
Santorum…………….check.
Boehner……………..check.
Cantor………………check.
Thune……………….check.
Noem………………..check.
Issa………………..check.
Gingrich…………….check.
Trump……………….check.

Did I miss any?

PappyD61 on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 PM

i have to laugh. No one knows anything about Huck nor mitt. Palin they know what nail polish she uses. The poll numbers do not relfect reality. Palin’s will go up as people tune in and see Mitt and huck for who they are. If Palin is at 21% at this stage after 2 years of wall to wall attacks. Mitt and huck at their numbers with positive coverage and hiding under their desks Palin already has the race locked up and the establishment knows it. Thus the STOP PALIN movement.

this is Mitt and hucks hig water mark and Palin’s low water mark.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:09 PM

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 9:55 PM

Do people really not even attempt to look at context for anything. How stupid.

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 10:10 PM

Did I miss any?

PappyD61 on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 PM

Rove, George Bush 1, barbara bush,Castle, Lisa Madcow, McConnell,

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:11 PM

i will say the conservative dems that vote for Palin will outnumber the GOP liberals that vote for Obama

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Sarah Palin = No experience = Barack Obama = LOSER

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Sorry idiot, Palin has 20 years of experience.

Palin=Reagan.

gary4205 on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 PM

Further proof that the 2008 election was not “conservatives staying home.”

Ideology of voters
2004: Mod 45%, Con 34%, Lib 21%
2008: Mod 44%, Con 34%, Lib 22%

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

hmmm they stayed home in 2004 also. they stayed home in 2006 and 2008.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 PM

Sarah Palin’s fortunes are improving on TLC.

Ratings for the politican’s Alaska-based reality show grew for her third episode, reversing course after dropping sharply last week.

Sarah Palin’s Alaska delivered 3.5 million viewers Sunday night, rising 17% at the conclusion of the holiday weekend.

Normally when ratings go down double digits for a second episode, the third outing generally falls at least a little, but not in this case. Palin may also have benefited from some weaker competition (ABC had the Country Music Awards the previous week). Even so, this is great news for TLC.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:18 PM

i will say the conservative dems that vote for Palin will outnumber the GOP liberals that vote for Obama

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

We used to call em Reagan democrats. Now they are Palin democrats.

Seriously, all someone has to do is just read halfway through the forward of her new book to realize she gets it! That’s all it takes.

gary4205 on November 30, 2010 at 10:18 PM

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 PM

Sarah Palin’s fortunes are improving on TLC.

Ratings for the politican’s Alaska-based reality show grew for her third episode, reversing course after dropping sharply last week.

Sarah Palin’s Alaska delivered 3.5 million viewers Sunday night, rising 17% at the conclusion of the holiday weekend.

Normally when ratings go down double digits for a second episode, the third outing generally falls at least a little, but not in this case. Palin may also have benefited from some weaker competition (ABC had the Country Music Awards the previous week). Even so, this is great news for TLC.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Link?

gary4205 on November 30, 2010 at 10:19 PM

You must’ve been out getting coffee, and missed those R’s I listed, actually voted FOR obama in ’08…
Gohawgs on November 30, 2010 at 9:53 PM

I got that.

Only Allah could get that headline out of this poll! But all that aside, republicans and conservatives have to think about this: What does it say about Mitt if his followers would vote for OBAMA instead of any other republican??
Dan Pet on November 30, 2010 at 9:56 PM

Huh? You started off getting it right since the headline does not match the poll (which contains not a single question about Obama), but then you end up believing the completely unsubstantiated claim that Mitt’s followers would vote for Obama.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 10:25 PM

Link?

gary4205 on November 30, 2010 at 10:19 PM

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/live-feed/surprise-sarah-palins-ratings-rise-54830

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:25 PM

Ah so the Romney voters are back stabbing lying scum just like Mitt!!

sonnyspats1 on November 30, 2010 at 10:25 PM

Seriously, all someone has to do is just read halfway through the forward of her new book to realize she gets it! That’s all it takes.

gary4205 on November 30, 2010 at 10:18 PM

So true she was Reagan when reagan wasn’t cool.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:26 PM

That headline is enough to tell me Romney should NOT be the candidate. If his supporters find Obama a reasonable alternative to Romney, Romney is not my guy.

ramrants on November 30, 2010 at 10:27 PM

so unless we nominatee a liberal/pretend moderate the liberals in the GOP will vote for the marxists. Ok as one blog said yesterday. I think it’s time we had this knock-down drag out fight. either the GOp is the party of conservative/moderates or the party of liberals. and if the GOp liberals should happen to win. then its time to make the GOP the whigs of the new century.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:28 PM

The irony is that Sarah Palin is actually punished for being a good communicator. She likely does mess up more in public than Obama, because she talks to the public unscripted more often than Obama. Rhetorically, Palin works without a net, or, at the least, without teleprompters. She usually speaks off the cuff. She writes her own Tweets. She’s frank, earnest and open, qualities the American people desire in a leader, but ones unrewarded in a time where every word can be recorded, dissected and repeated ad nauseam.”

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=40266

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:30 PM

That headline is enough to tell me Romney should NOT be the candidate. If his supporters find Obama a reasonable alternative to Romney, Romney is not my guy.
ramrants on November 30, 2010 at 10:27 PM

Argghh! That headline is B.S. -

Go to the poll questions. Read the details. Tell me where it has a single question about Obama.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Palin supporters are expected to remain chained in the bottom of boat and row the Republican Party to victory.

Romney supporters who are up on the top of the boat can vote for Obama, and still be Republicans because they are “principled”.

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 PM

hey when you see Kirk thank him for voting yes on S 510 so the federal government can take over the entire USA food production….

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM

Sux, I know, but do you think Giannoulias (or Burris) would have voted no? We are going to lose some with Kirk but we’d lose every single one with Giannoulias.

I did NOT vote for Kirk in the primary but how would not voting for Kirk in the general have changed this result?

Fallon on November 30, 2010 at 10:36 PM

Go to the poll questions. Read the details. Tell me where it has a single question about Obama.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 PM

You know I would be more inclined to support you on this if Mitt and his buddies have not done the same thing for every poll in the last 2 years IRT to Palin.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:37 PM

I did NOT vote for Kirk in the primary but how would not voting for Kirk in the general have changed this result?

Fallon on November 30, 2010 at 10:36 PM

yeah I know burr in Nc did the same thing and No i did not vote for him in the primary either. they think 6 year sis a long time but I will remember and I will make sure others remember in 2018 if god grants me the time.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:38 PM

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:30 PM

When you stop swooning, check out this BREAKING NEWS from PPP’s latest, up to the minute, b.s. polling data which is just crossing the internets!:

Palin voters a risk to switch to Obama if he loses nomination!/

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 10:39 PM

It can’t be either Romney or Palin. Both represent different wings of the party and both turn the other wing off mightily. I’d vote for Romney, but no way in hell will I ever for Palin. I won’t vote Obama, but I’ll either go third party or skip the race.

There’s got to be a compromise candidate like Mitch Daniels or Tim Pawlenty. Both are boring as hell, so not them precisely, but someone like them that has the potential to unite Republicans.

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:13 PM

That explains why Reagan lost every time he ran, and Bush 41 was a two-term president.

Oh, wait.

tom on November 30, 2010 at 10:39 PM

Meanwhile, Palin puts up a new FB post quoting Thomas Sowell on tax rates and job creation:

The Case for Extending All the Tax Cuts
by Sarah Palin on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 at 9:16pm

In “America By Heart” folks will get a feel for some of my favorite writers and thinkers. One of them is the great economist Thomas Sowell. Some of you may recall that in “Going Rogue” I mentioned Sowell’s famous book “A Conflict of Visions” to explain the way the liberal or “progressive” world view and philosophy differs from the conservative view. Sowell’s articles are always worth reading, and his most recent column is no exception. He reminds us where our attention needs to be during this lame-duck session of Congress. He notes that the Democrats have articulated their tired class warfare argument about “tax cuts for the rich,” but conservatives have still not articulated our proven time-tested argument that tax cuts spur economic growth, which in turn helps everyone from all income levels and increases tax revenue as the economy grows. Sowell reminds us:

“These are not new arguments on either side. They go back more than 80 years. Over that long span of time, there have been many sharp cuts in tax rates under presidents Calvin Coolidge, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush. So we don’t need to argue in a vacuum. There is a track record.

“What does that record say? It says, loud and clear, that cuts in tax rates do not mean cuts in tax revenues. In all four of these administrations, of both parties, so-called “tax cuts for the rich” led to increased tax revenues — with people earning high incomes paying not only a larger sum total of tax revenues, but even a higher proportion of all tax revenues.

“Most important of all, these tax-rate reductions spurred economic activity, which we definitely need today.”

But as Sowell later points out, having a proven time-tested policy isn’t enough if we don’t articulate it. We need to remind people that tax cuts help everyone. And we should also remind the Democrats that many of the so-called “rich” they’re dismissing are our small business owners who account for 70% of all job creation in this country. At a time when we need job growth, we should not target job creators with tax hikes. Closing our deficit gap requires us to cut spending, but we also need to spur economic growth. With that in mind, the last thing we should do is hamper our economic innovators and entrepreneurs with excessive taxes, overly burdensome regulation, and more uncertainty. This is not a difficult argument to make. It’s common sense.

- Sarah Palin

Where is Mittens on this?

VidOmnia on November 30, 2010 at 10:40 PM

Pretty presumptuous too try to predict whose voters stay home or whose percentages are what!

There are lots of debates, interviews, facebook posts, tweets, TV shows, Fox News appearances for the candidates!
Lots of taking on the opposition and offering sane and common sense solutions by the potential candidates.
Of course if only one candidate were doing those things especially the last one I could see where they might draw support and fire.

There is a lot of time for Presidenth Pinnochioth to screw up, drive us further left, diminish us in the eyes of the world, and usurp our freedoms of speech, life, liberty and property!

If one were doing not a thing but hiding under ones desk and having surrogates attack his opponents he might have relatively stable numbers ,but once he throws his hat in the ring he is fair game to the far left unless HE is their preferred candidate as Juan McCain was!

dhunter on November 30, 2010 at 10:41 PM

Boy, this headline really does not help Romney. It solidifies what everyone has already suspected – he’s a RINO. If the PPP thought that this headline would scare people off of supporting Palin, it surely backfired.

KickandSwimMom on November 30, 2010 at 10:41 PM

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 PM

The really funny thing is that that was the best pro-mitt slant that Allah, MR anti-palin himself, could come up with. Which tells you how bad this poll is for Mitt. He is bleeding support to Newt.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:41 PM

Sarah Palin = No experience = Barack Obama = LOSER

thphilli on November 30, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Absurd. Not to mention ignorant, given what we know (and have known for quite some time) of what Sarah Palin has actually DONE as commissioner AND mayor AND governor.

Aitch748 on November 30, 2010 at 10:42 PM

Palin voters a risk to switch to Obama if he loses nomination!/

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 10:39 PM

I feel for you I really do. I know it makes you mad, and upset for the unfairness of it all. Believe me I have been there more times than I wish to remember with Allahs anti-palin headlines. And I hope you know I’m just rubbing it in. Nothing serious you know. Just a bit of fun….

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:43 PM

Huckabee, no. Gingrich, no. Romney, no unless he owns and admits he was wrong on Romney-care and explicitly renounces his former support of the so-called “assault weapons ban”. Palin, maybe, but while I generally like a lot of things about her I doubt she can win the general.

Things are so screwed up at this point I’m inclined to just vote for a third party rather than hold my nose again for a bad GOP pick.

deepdiver on November 30, 2010 at 10:46 PM

Where is Mittens on this?

VidOmnia on November 30, 2010 at 10:40 PM

admiring the crease in Obama’s slacks?

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:46 PM

So basically the Public Policy Polling is basing their Romney claim on pure speculation.

WTF do they base this on?

It would be like saying an atheist might actually take communion if they were hungry enough.

Stupid.

The Ugly American on November 30, 2010 at 10:47 PM

It can’t be either Romney or Palin. Both represent different wings of the party and both turn the other wing off mightily. I’d vote for Romney, but no way in hell will I ever for Palin. I won’t vote Obama, but I’ll either go third party or skip the race.

There’s got to be a compromise candidate like Mitch Daniels or Tim Pawlenty. Both are boring as hell, so not them precisely, but someone like them that has the potential to unite Republicans.

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:13 PM

Reagan/Bush ’80 = Palin/Romney ’12

The Unity ticket worked in ’80, and could work in ’12.

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 10:47 PM

Meh. I don’t care. I’m a Republican. I’ll vote for Romney or Palin. I just hope my fellow Republicans don’t throw a hissy fit if their guy or girl doesn’t win :)

terryannonline on November 30, 2010 at 10:48 PM

The Unity ticket worked in ’80, and could work in ’12.

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 10:47 PM

I’m ok with that as long as Palin dumps him in 2016

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:49 PM

Great Job Sarah! Your the one, the only one, unafraid to take on the left, to articulate the conservative position, to do it around the Lamestream Media, effectively, articulately, concisely, with common sense and time tested and proven solutions!

Pay no mind to the RINO’s, the Establishment, the Good Old Boys desperately seeking to preserve the status quo, the business as usual in D.C.

We need ya Sarah to tear their playhouse down, to drive the money changers from the Peoples House, to return the govt to We The People and harvest the natural resources of this great country to bring us back from the brink where both corrupt parties have driven us!

dhunter on November 30, 2010 at 10:50 PM

No. But he attracted more moderate and liberal voters than McCain did in 2008. For all the talk about focusing on the base, Rove and Bush realized that cross-party and cross-ideology votes are important. Palin isn’t going to get those votes.

AngusMc on November 30, 2010 at 9:30 PM

Amazing how you can make such a claim 2 years out. Palin is not an extremist, so she has tons of room to pick up moderate votes.

Bear in mind, all those moderates who believed Obama got a nasty shock when they saw how leftist he really is.

Obama is an extremist. Palin is not. Advantage: Palin

tom on November 30, 2010 at 10:51 PM

Yeah, ok.

We better nominate McCain again. Just so we have a fighting chance.

Screw these polls and the idiots that think they even matter.

Our 2012 nominee will not be a 2008 retread.

David2.0 on November 30, 2010 at 10:52 PM

Dark Horse, please.

AshleyTKing on November 30, 2010 at 10:55 PM

PappyD61 on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 PM

Silly me, thinking a brilliant young conservative governor would be anything other than another RINO against Palin. Guy is wasting time governing when he should be posting on Facebook.

Chazz on November 30, 2010 at 10:55 PM

You know I would be more inclined to support you on this if Mitt and his buddies have not done the same thing for every poll in the last 2 years IRT to Palin.
unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:37 PM

Twilight Zone your favorite show?

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:41 PM

I care about the truth. Meanwhile, how you can speculate that this helps Mitt is beyond me. Look at all the commenters run for this hills because they think Mitt’s supporters are the most RINOy RINO Marxists who would ditch Palin/Huck/Gingrich/any R for Obama.

This is not part of Karl Rove’s Magnificent Bastard legacy.

Believe me I have been there more times than I wish to remember with Allahs anti-palin headlines. And I hope you know I’m just rubbing it in. Nothing serious you know. Just a bit of fun….
unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:43 PM

The headline is based on what the PPP poll says but never substantiates, so it’s only Allah’s fault to the extent that he appears to have taken them at their word. Which is weird cause he knows how to read polls.

Buy Danish on November 30, 2010 at 10:58 PM

hissy fit

If you mean would I vote for another gutless, arrogant Republican jerk like Romney, Daniels or Pawlenty instead of Palin? Hell NO!

I’d vote for Jindal in a heartbeat. He’s obviously the Mozart of the GOP, he’s a natural. He’s always had the resume now he’s gaining his voice.

But after today more than ever I want to see the GOP leadership purged. The old guard must die.

rcl on November 30, 2010 at 11:01 PM

At least I’m not making a joke out of my party and myself in front of the whole nation. I win.

therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 8:54 PM

The GOP was a joke long before Palin. In fact, the GOP is an unbelievable feckless joke without Palin and the Tea Party. How many seats would that awesome Romney-Daniels-Jindal wing have picked up all on their own?

I win.

ddrintn on November 30, 2010 at 11:02 PM

Palin, maybe, but while I generally like a lot of things about her I doubt she can win the general.

deepdiver on November 30, 2010 at 10:46 PM

If you generally like a lot of things about her and so do others, many others by the look of it. Why is she not electable? What will it come down to in the end for people, the person that you most agree with right?

bluemarlin on November 30, 2010 at 11:02 PM

rcl on November 30, 2010 at 11:01 PM

Fine don’t for Romney in the general election (if he wins the primary). I just hope you are happy with four more years of Obama.

terryannonline on November 30, 2010 at 11:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4