Poll of eight states: Romney trails other major presidential contenders among conservatives

posted at 6:51 pm on December 20, 2010 by Allahpundit

Actually, that’s overstating it slightly: He does okay in his pop’s home state of Michigan, and he manages to eke past Gingrich for third place in some metrics in Wisconsin, but in the other six — including bellwethers like Ohio, Missouri, and North Carolina — he’s fourth out of four. By a country mile, in some cases.

We’ve polled eight states, not including Massachusetts, since the 2010 election ended. Romney has the lowest favorability rating of the Republican top 4 with conservatives in every single one of those states except Michigan, where he probably benefits from his dad having been the Governor. And it’s not like Romney is just slightly less well liked than the others with conservatives- it’s a large gap, particularly when you compare him with Palin or Huckabee. Romney’s average favorability is 58%. Gingrich is next worst at 64%, followed by Huckabee at 73%, and Palin does best at 77%…

And because conservatives make up the lion’s share of Republican primary voters, it should come as no surprise that his issues with them are now leading to poor numbers for him overall in these early snapshots. Of the last eight states we’ve polled Romney has led in only one- Michigan- and even there he could only salvage a tie with Huckabee. Huckabee has led in four states overall with Palin ahead in three and Tim Pawlenty ahead in his home state. Romney’s average performance has been 15% with Gingrich at 16%, Palin at 20%, and Huckabee at 21%.

Palin leads the field among conservatives in all eight states, 22/21 over Huckabee, with Gingrich third at 15 percent and Romney fourth at 14 percent. Check out his numbers in Ohio, Virginia, and North Carolina, especially — bearing in mind that as Palin, Huck, and/or Newt start to fade earlier in the primaries, their conservative supporters are likely to consolidate behind whoever’s left in that group of three, making Romney’s task even more difficult.

He’ll look at those numbers and murmur to himself “McCain, McCain, McCain” as a reminder of how powerless grassroots conservatives can be to stop RINOs in a primary, but that analogy doesn’t hold. Partly because of his immigration stance and partly because of his media-friendly sanctimony towards the right, Maverick was even more widely despised by the base than Mitt is, I think, notwithstanding the latter’s health-care apostasy. But he was (more or less) acceptable anyway as a nominee given that (a) there were no conservative rock stars in the field to provide a clear contrast and (b) with Bush’s approval so low and Republicans in such disfavor, a centrist nominee could be sold as the last, best chance to hold the middle and keep the White House. In 2012, by contrast, you’ll have Palin running and (maybe) Pence and a Mike Huckabee who’s much more widely known and who’s spent two years framing himself as a hardline fiscal conservative. And you’ll have a Republican base that’s fresh off a midterm landslide and anxious to go on offense against a weakened Obama, which means they’ll be less willing to settle for a moderate deemed untrustworthy even by some centrists who might otherwise sympathize with him. The GOP hasn’t nominated a “true conservative” since Reagan (Dubya, avatar of “compassionate conservatism,” hardly qualifies despite the left’s demonization of him); many grassroots believers will be thinking, “if not now, when”? Why settle for Bob Dole when you might have a shot to nominate Goldwater?

All Mitt can do, I guess, is (a) hope that Palin’s negatives stay high and scare off GOP fencesitters on the electability question, (b) quietly lobby for GOP primaries in blue states to be winner-take-all instead of proportional, and (c) do whatever he can to make sure that states run closed primaries instead of open ones. I know that last part is counterintuitive — wouldn’t Romney benefit from centrist independents being able to vote for him? — but Democrats are so eager to face Palin in the general that I think PPP’s right about them perpetrating a little “Operation Chaos” of their own. There won’t be any Democratic contest to vote in, so if you’re a liberal who thinks Obama will walk all over Sarahcuda, why not cross over and vote for her in the GOP primary if you’re allowed?


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 6

I totally disagree with anyone who says Palin CANNOT win against Obama.

Palin has more to fear from RINOs and entrenched “strategists” like Rove than she has to fear from Democrats. She will definitely have support from conservatives, independents, and even Democrats.

The question a la O’Donnell is: will enough RINOs support her or will they vote en masse for Obama in order to assuage their peevishness and their hatred for “that woman”?

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM

I think the “unserious” label would fall away pretty quickly if (for example) Palin came in first in half the Super Tuesday primaries.

cs89 on December 20, 2010 at 8:03 PM

That brings us a good point. During the McCain/Palin campaign, McCain lost his fire, whereas Palin hasn’t stopped. Other candidates lost in 2010 because they ran a poor campaign, I don’t think Palin would be that lazy.

No, Palin is calculating and deliberate. She thinks outside the box and the establishment protocols. I think she could win against Obama. She’s not afraid to point out Obama’s flaws, the untruths, and his narcissism.

To quote Patton, “You make the other bastard die for his country”.

Kini on December 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM

As far as retreads go. . .

Romney – retread, running from his past record on Obamacare
Huck – retread, running from his past record on taxes

Palin – not a retread, but could become one if she changes her past policies to become “electable”. NOTE: Supporting the Top Slot when you’re in the Veep slot is not changing your policies, it’s supporting your candidate.

Reagan – definitely not a retread, never changed his Presidential politics to make himself electable.

Nixon – the retread of retreads. I still like the guy tho’.

The front-runners are definitely Palin and Romney right now, so we’ll have to watch that, but don’t rule out a Pence or a Jindal sweeping in and taking some early primaries and jumping out in front, a Palin primary loss to either of these guys would probably see her bow out and support them, Romney would dig in against them. Bad move.

As for Palin’s “electability”, compare her polling to Obama’s at this point out. . . she’s running better than Obama did at this point by a wide margin, and Romney doesn’t hold as much power in his base than Hillary did her’s. It’s also doubtful that Romney or Palin will play the caucus games that Obama did (the press would never let them get away with it. . . I’m sorry, was that racist?).

Jason Coleman on December 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM

Slowburn on December 20, 2010 at 8:03 PM

Honey I’m just telling you the truth. If you’re dreaming for Prince Charming to sweep you off your feet you’re going to be disappointed. These are your choices: Mittens, Huckster, Gingrich and Sarah.

Ted Torgerson on December 20, 2010 at 8:22 PM

Romney is NOT A CONSERVATIVE!!!

He is a proven RINO and has a history of being ‘rolled’ by leftists: exactly what we DONT NEED!!!

He does have nice hair.

landlines on December 20, 2010 at 8:24 PM

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:04 PM
Of course he was a retread. He lost in 1980. That was probably before you were born.

Ted Torgerson on December 20, 2010 at 8:15 PM

Wrong on two counts, sport. #1, it’s foolish to characterize someone as a retread when they are the sitting VP, particularly in the context I started this with. #2,you demonstrate not knowing everything you think you do. I voted for him. Before you start raising hell about that, would you have preferred Dukakis? I didn’t think so.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:24 PM

The question a la O’Donnell is: will enough RINOs support her or will they vote en masse for Obama in order to assuage their peevishness and their hatred for “that woman”?

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM

They will stay home and not vote at all. Count on it.

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 8:24 PM

What country will be left for Palin to be President of?

PappyD61 on December 20, 2010 at 8:27 PM

We simply cannot afford to have Obama for another for years. SCOTUS alone is enough scare me. Ginsberg will probably leave before 2012 guaranteeing another Communist on the bench. We’ve been lucky with our five, but anything could happen with another four years.

TxAnn56 on December 20, 2010 at 8:20 PM

I’m sure we could count on Huck or Mitt to nominate someone like Stevens or Souter (i.e., Justices nominated by the other great RINO presidents). Although, I must say that one of the few things that GWB did right was his SCOTUS nominations (at least it appears that way so far).

besser tot als rot on December 20, 2010 at 8:33 PM

About the only thing of interest is Palin so close to the Schmuckster in MO, NC and VA, and in a dead heat in MT. Schmucky is trying to get known in the West but Palin is getting traction in the South and Mid-Atlantic…

Other than that, just where was Obama in the polls in DEC 2006, anyways?

There is a long, long, long road ahead.

ajacksonian on December 20, 2010 at 8:35 PM

Herman Cain!

Dandapani on December 20, 2010 at 8:35 PM

They will stay home and not vote at all. Count on it.

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 8:24 PM

I wish I could share in your “optimism” :). Nope, they will definitely show up to vote for Obam to teach those “icky conservatives” a lesson and their proper place.

Again look to the Delaware exit polls – Coons enjoyed more support from RINOs than he could even count on from independents. RINOs, in a year when blue states were turning red in droves, preferred to teach conservatives a lesson by voting for an admitted Marxist.

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 8:35 PM

TxAnn56 on December 20, 2010 at 8:20 PM

You’re right on about the Court, which is really the big issue of all. Ginsberg though has said she wants to stay on for a while. Two judges already in the first time is a lot, and I think she knows this.

TimTebowSavesAmerica on December 20, 2010 at 8:39 PM

They will stay home and not vote at all. Count on it.

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 8:24 PM

I wish I could share in your “optimism” :). Nope, they will definitely show up to vote for Obam to teach those “icky conservatives” a lesson and their proper place.

Again look to the Delaware exit polls – Coons enjoyed more support from RINOs than he could even count on from independents. RINOs, in a year when blue states were turning red in droves, preferred to teach conservatives a lesson by voting for an admitted Marxist.

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 8:35 PM

All very true, and not often enough said. You could make a very good case that RINOs are more dangerous for the country than Democrats, and only slightly behind progressives. At least, the RINOs seem to help the progressives to undermine conservatives , even if for totally different reasons.

tom on December 20, 2010 at 8:40 PM

To believe only Palin would repeal Obamacare is delusional. Characterizing everyone else as a RINO is delusional.
churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:09 PM

I didn’t say only Palin would repeal Obamacare. i said only a conservative would. Now if another conservative enters the race he/she would repeal it. Until then the only chance you have at a full repeal is the only conservativ ein the race. And if you think huck, newt or Mitt are conservatives you are delusional.

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:40 PM

Under your definition, notwithstanding she was out front and center.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:10 PM
I think you are beating a dead horse here. If you go back and see most of the posts about retreads, the people are generally talking the top of the ticket. At least that is always what I have said. End of day, you will not get Palin classified as a retread, hence, beating the dead horse.

bluemarlin on December 20, 2010 at 8:14 PM

If you go back, you will see that is was me who started the retread theme here. Thanks for the lecture. /

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:42 PM

I didn’t say only Palin would repeal Obamacare. i said only a conservative would. Now if another conservative enters the race he/she would repeal it. Until then the only chance you have at a full repeal is the only conservativ ein the race. And if you think huck, newt or Mitt are conservatives you are delusional.

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:40 PM

True. But I think we’d have to admit that Palin is the conservative most likely to actually repeal Obamacare. I’ve seen very few others that wouldn’t try to compromise halfway, leaving the husk behind for the next liberal to use to create the public option.

tom on December 20, 2010 at 8:43 PM

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM

No the real question is will enough reagan democrates vote for her to offset the liberal RINOs voting for Obama. Aka reagan/John anderson/Carter.

I think Palin picks up more conservative dems then she loses liberal RINOs in the end.

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Although, I must say that one of the few things that GWB did right was his SCOTUS nominations (at least it appears that way so far).

besser tot als rot on December 20, 2010 at 8:33 PM

But not before the conservative outcry over the Harriet Miers fiasco. I just know that I’ll back and vote for anyone who goes up against Obama. Carrottop could run against him and I’d vote for him.

TxAnn56 on December 20, 2010 at 8:45 PM

I bet if they polled flip-floppers Romney would come out on top.

bw222 on December 20, 2010 at 8:46 PM

And if you think huck, newt or Mitt are conservatives you are delusional.

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:40 PM

Putting aside Huckabee, or Romney, you can’t be serious saying Newt is not a conservative, let alone he would not repeal Obamacare. I wouldn’t want him to be the nominee, but what universe are you living in to dispute him being a conservative, and that he would not overturn Obamacare?

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:46 PM

I’ve seen very few others that wouldn’t try to compromise halfway, leaving the husk behind for the next liberal to use to create the public option.

tom on December 20, 2010 at 8:43 PM

agreed. those see how they can use Obamacare to increase their power they are loath to lose that type of power esp if they can blame it all on Obama and the dems. then you hav emedicare and the funding problems that are coming down the pike. the death panels promise to control costs which a lot of Rinos love they simply don’t want to see all the old people die under their name. So if are able to blame it on the dems and Obama they will keep the husk of Obamacare.

Palin like all conservatives sees it as evil not a power building program like the RINOs see it as.

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:48 PM

Why isn’t Mike Pence on that list?

crosspatch on December 20, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Wasn’t Reagan 30 points behind Carter in the summer of 1980? Then he went on to win big. Obama will be polling worse than Carter in the summer of 2012. Sarah WILL beat him In fact she will smash him in the debates.

karenhasfreedom on December 20, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Putting aside Huckabee, or Romney, you can’t be serious saying Newt is not a conservative, let alone he would not repeal Obamacare. I wouldn’t want him to be the nominee, but what universe are you living in to dispute him being a conservative, and that he would not overturn Obamacare?

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:46 PM

I wouldn’t go so far as to say he’s not a conservative, but based on past history of compromise, I seriously doubt he would try to overturn Obamacare. He strikes me as the kind of guy who would “mend it, not end it.” That is, I think he’d try to make it workable.

Gingrich is too much of a compromise, middle-ground politician. His willingness to make nice with Nancy Pelosi over global warming establishes that.

tom on December 20, 2010 at 8:54 PM

It’s not suprising. Mitt’s a mod. As for Palin, while I like her, I still don’t think she’s quite ready, and that she’s so “polarizing” that she’d have a tough time getting elected. Just my opinion. Who knows two years from now.

As for Huckabee, he’ll go down like McCain. America is NOT going to take a preacher Prez of Huck’s ilk. Whatever negatives Palin has, Huckabee has more. Imagine the wailing from the MSM/left about imposing a theocracy if he’s the nominee. Just to name one thing they’ll seize on. They’ll also nail him on his big spending as gov and his flip-flop-flip on C&T. Face it Huck supporters, if he’s the nominee it’s Obamageddon in 2012. Will Mormons vote for Huck? Will conservatives such as I vote for Huck? Will independent & moderate types vote for Huck? I see mega millions sitting it out or voting third party if it’s Huck.

Recall that two years out from ’08 it was Rudy and Hillary with locks on the noms. Anything can happen between now and 2012.

JimP on December 20, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Putting aside Huckabee, or Romney, you can’t be serious saying Newt is not a conservative, let alone he would not repeal Obamacare. I wouldn’t want him to be the nominee, but what universe are you living in to dispute him being a conservative, and that he would not overturn Obamacare?
churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:46 PM

Did you miss his endorsement of Dede in Ny 23rd? His embrace of Pelosi on global warming? To name just 2 non conservative positions he has taken. His three marriages. His sleeping around.

Newt embraced Colin Powell after Powell endorsed Obama. should I go on?

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:58 PM

she’d have a tough time getting elected.
JimP on December 20, 2010 at 8:56 PM

it’s the tough victories that are the ones that are worth the fight…

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 9:00 PM

you can’t be serious saying Newt is not a conservative, let alone he would not repeal Obamacare.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 8:46 PM

I think that Newt is a conservative, but he does sometimes have crazy non-conservative outburst: making a commercial with Pelosi? Backing AGW? Dede Scazaflava?

besser tot als rot on December 20, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Why isn’t Mike Pence on that list?

crosspatch on December 20, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Because they don’t bother listing candidates whose polling is within the M/E of 0%.

james23 on December 20, 2010 at 9:03 PM

What country will be left for Palin to be President of?

PappyD61 on December 20, 2010 at 8:27 PM

If Palin doesn’t get elected, then the only country left will be:

The United Socialist States of America

Kini on December 20, 2010 at 9:03 PM

To me, Mitt is Ahnold with natural born citizenship.

besser tot als rot on December 20, 2010 at 9:03 PM

Wasn’t Reagan 30 points behind Carter in the summer of 1980? Then he went on to win big. Obama will be polling worse than Carter in the summer of 2012. Sarah WILL beat him In fact she will smash him in the debates.

Insane Palinista post of the night.

Anyone comparing the thin resume and the intellectual gruel Palin serves up to the decades of Reagan’s involvement in politics is nothing short of delusional.

Reagan’s multiple decades long intellectual journey from his Democratic roots to his conservatism, his commentaries, writings and his actual governing experience is so far beyond comparison to the half term Alaskan governor, as to be a joke.

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Did you miss his endorsement of Dede in Ny 23rd? His embrace of Pelosi on global warming? To name just 2 non conservative positions he has taken. His three marriages. His sleeping around.

Newt embraced Colin Powell after Powell endorsed Obama. should I go on?

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:58 PM

Wow. I can understand having a problem with the first two. But you are just naming two, not doing a fair assessment of the total picture. You obviously have not looked at his entire record while in the House, or a relatively small number of “sins” qualifies one for conservative Hell. As for your comments on his personal life, while I don’t endorse those, that’s more than a little over the top, and not really on point, unless one is a strict Puritan. Should he have flipped off Powell, regardless of his prior relationship? Sounds a little too “pure”, for lack of a better word.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:07 PM

As for Palin, while I like her,. . . she’s so “polarizing” that she’d have a tough time getting elected

The country is badly divided right now between the big government types and the small, consitutional government types. Assuming you are in the latter camp, why would you want someone who was “polarizing” for small, constitutional government?

james23 on December 20, 2010 at 9:09 PM

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM

No the real question is will enough reagan democrates vote for her to offset the liberal RINOs voting for Obama. Aka reagan/John anderson/Carter.

I think Palin picks up more conservative dems then she loses liberal RINOs in the end.

unseen on December 20, 2010 at 8:44 PM

I hope so too, unseen, I surely do.

However, the media/Dem alliance did such a good hatchet job on Palin – painting her as uninformed and any other name you can think of – that she has been given a real uphill task to win over sufficient numbers of conservative Dems/independents to offset the RINOs as you pointed out. This is despite the fact that she was the most popular governor at the time McCain nominated her to be the VP.

Truth be told, I believe this is the primary reason why Palin has been hesitant to announce a run so far. She is still hoping against all hope that another solid conservative, who is ready to fight for conservative values and yet would not be an easy target for the media/Dems, will jump in and take the nomination.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen so Palin might as well run. Besides, the media/Dems will run a scorched earth campaign in 2012 against anyone running against their Messiah, so our only hope might be running somebody who has already gone through the “palinization.”

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 9:11 PM

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

I think the point being made was that at one point in time RWR was behind Carter by 30 points in polling before the election, and Palin, at this point in time, is 10 points behind the obamanation. Both mean, squat…

Gohawgs on December 20, 2010 at 9:12 PM

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Reagan was not an intellectual. He was a big picture guy who took on the Establishment and was ripped mercilessly by frauds like you.

james23 on December 20, 2010 at 9:12 PM

It’s not just RomneyCare, he’s weak on abortion and guns as well.

Romney? No Thanks.

RJL on December 20, 2010 at 9:12 PM

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Your mistake is that you are applying logic; you would have more success talking to the wall than the already convinced, no matter the details.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:13 PM

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:13 PM

ricky’s post changed the subject from what he quoted…

Gohawgs on December 20, 2010 at 9:16 PM

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

And yet:

Michael Reagan has written supportively of Governor Palin.
Her former debate opponents speak well of her prowess.

No one suggests the equation Palin=(the entirety of experience of) Reagan.

Rather, that she will acquit herself well in debate against him; that she has energized opposition to his policies, and that she has as good a chance as any current contender to defeat him.

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 9:19 PM

The fact he at any time thought Romneycare was a good idea disqualifies him. I will not vote for Romney, even to oust Obama. I have not gotten to vote for a candidate I really liked since Reagan.

I want a hard ass fiscal conservative that will tell the States and the public unions to get lost, someone who can look at multibillion dollar projects and say “no”, someone who knows we are out of money, someone a little overweight…

Over50 on December 20, 2010 at 9:22 PM

For all the people that think that giving in and letting the culture stop us from saying “MERRY CHRISTMAS” was enough to pacify the God-Hating Left……now the pressure begins to get rid of CHRISTMAS TREES.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/christmas/8214222/Christmas-trees-make-non-Christians-feel-excluded.html

PappyD61 on December 20, 2010 at 9:23 PM

Your mistake is that you are applying logic; you would have more success talking to the wall than the already convinced, no matter the details.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:13 PM

Please show the logic of pro-Palin comment = insane.

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 9:25 PM

Wasn’t Reagan 30 points behind Carter in the summer of 1980? Then he went on to win big. Obama will be polling worse than Carter in the summer of 2012. Sarah WILL beat him In fact she will smash him in the debates.

karenhasfreedom on December 20, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Rubio was that far back and more, against a RINO, so it can happen easily!

bluemarlin on December 20, 2010 at 9:34 PM

Your mistake is that you are applying logic; you would have more success talking to the wall than the already convinced, no matter the details.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:13 PM
Please show the logic of pro-Palin comment = insane.

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 9:25 PM

You are taking this out of context, although you probably know that. Here is what he said, that I was referencing:

Anyone comparing the thin resume and the intellectual gruel Palin serves up to the decades of Reagan’s involvement in politics is nothing short of delusional.

Reagan’s multiple decades long intellectual journey from his Democratic roots to his conservatism, his commentaries, writings and his actual governing experience is so far beyond comparison to the half term Alaskan governor, as to be a joke.

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Now, I wouldn’t have been as strong in tone, but Sarah, for all her plusses, is still very green. My saying that does not equate with saying a pro-Palin comment = insane.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Reagan was not an intellectual. He was a big picture guy who took on the Establishment and was ripped mercilessly by frauds like you.

Reagan had an intellectual journey. Read his bio; study his journey from a Democratic family, Union leader to conservative icon.

It was an intellectual journey that required thought, self analysis and courage.

Palin can hide behind a Facebook page and schuck and jive her way to riches by smiling for the cameras and spouting talking points.

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:46 PM

PappyD61 on December 20, 2010 at 9:23 PM

Reminds me of THIS oldie but goody.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 20, 2010 at 9:49 PM

North Carolina, WHYYYYY!? First, like a bunch of morons, you elected Obama in 2008 and now you prefer Schmuckabee to Palin by 6%???

I gotta gets to educating these so-called conservative voters in this state!

citrus on December 20, 2010 at 9:57 PM

Palin can hide behind a Facebook page and schuck and jive her way to riches by smiling for the cameras and spouting talking points.

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:46 PM

What is it with liberals like yourself and the Palin derangement syndrome (PDS)?

Look, I am not fooled by your come-to-Jesus sudden “love” for Reagan – sure, long after he is dead. Liberals always seem to love conservatives – but only when they are either out of power or dead.

But your hatred for Palin shows more than you realize. It means you never loved Reagan nor knew what he stood for. He went through everything that Palin is going through, was surprisingly called the same names, and yet went on to become a truly great President.

After your ilk voted Obama into power, and I know you can’t wait till 2012 to vote for him again, there is nobody that can be called unqualified for the Presidency aside other liberal buffoons. So spare me the fake concern for the Presidency.

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 9:58 PM

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:42 PM

My comment was aimed at this part of rickyricardos post:

Insane Palinista post of the night.

Anyone comparing the thin resume and the intellectual gruel Palin serves up to the decades of Reagan’s involvement in politics is nothing short of delusional.

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Your response indicated that rr had used logic; I was just hoping you’d explain how a pro-Palin comment automatically escalated to insane.

This is karenhasfreedoms’ original post, to which ricky objected:

Wasn’t Reagan 30 points behind Carter in the summer of 1980? Then he went on to win big. Obama will be polling worse than Carter in the summer of 2012. Sarah WILL beat him In fact she will smash him in the debates.

karenhasfreedom on December 20, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Still not seeing the insane. And Ricky jumped right to mischaracterization; I’m still not seeing that as essentially logical.

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:01 PM

bad format – no preview – my bad:

Wasn’t Reagan 30 points behind Carter in the summer of 1980? Then he went on to win big. Obama will be polling worse than Carter in the summer of 2012. Sarah WILL beat him In fact she will smash him in the debates.

karenhasfreedom on December 20, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Still not seeing the insane. And Ricky jumped right to mischaracterization; I’m still not seeing that as essentially logical.

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:02 PM

After your ilk voted Obama into power, and I know you can’t wait till 2012 to vote for him again, there is nobody that can be called unqualified for the Presidency aside other liberal buffoons. So spare me the fake concern for the Presidency.

Yeah, I am sure he is liberal and an Obama voter. No one who voted for a Republican could be less than overwhelmed by Sarah. / Knee-jerk, less-than-thoughtful, deceitful responses like this don’t help win anyone over.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 10:12 PM

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 9:58 PM

Rickyricardo is not a liberal, has been here longer than me and from everything I’ve seen over the years, he/she is a true conservative.

Serious question. Why is it that whenever someone says anything that doesn’t follow the “Sara Palin is great” theme, gets accused of being an Obama supporter, a liberal, a troll, just to name a few?

And where exactly did rickyricardo say anything about “hating” Sara Palin?

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 10:14 PM

After your ilk voted Obama into power, and I know you can’t wait till 2012 to vote for him again, there is nobody that can be called unqualified for the Presidency aside other liberal buffoons. So spare me the fake concern for the Presidency.

TheRightMan on December 20, 2010 at 9:58 PM

I voted for Obama?

You’re a classic Palinista true believing clown who assumes anyone who doesn’t buy into the now packaged populism of Saint Sarah is a liberal.

I voted for McCain/Palin. Would do so again if they ran against Obumbles, but I can say without a doubt, that they would lose again. I would vote for Palin if she was the nominee, but again, she will be destroyed – no questions asked.

What I will not do is actively promote a candidate for the nomination who is not capable of garnering more than 35 per cent of the national vote.

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 10:19 PM

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Your question has merit: I’d also like to know why some jump directly to labeling anyone who says anything pro-Palin a palinista, zealot, or worse.

We need to disagree within a reasonable framework, else we degenerate into flame-warrior loons.

(Sorry, unlike last nights work on the Reid thread, this one doesn’t rhyme.)

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:19 PM

It’s time once again for Allahpundit to trash Mitt Romney.

I just wonder if it’s possible for him to say something positive about Romney. Just once, and actually mean it as well.

Eichendorff on December 20, 2010 at 10:19 PM

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:02 PM

Last time. The part of his message that I referenced was logical, in my judgement, and that was the narrow scope I made my comments toward. It was in a general vein; I had no intention of saying someone else’s initial comment some messages ago was illogical, nor referring to it at all. My mistake for commenting on one message without looking at the entire series.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 10:19 PM

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 10:19 PM

I may have snarked when I shouldn’t; hope no offense was taken.

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:21 PM

I wish I had a dollar for every post following a column allah puts up with even the remotest relationship to Sarah Palin.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 10:23 PM

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:21 PM

None taken. Good night, and God Bless All.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 10:24 PM

FIFY. Can’t specify who at this point, but no retreads, please.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 7:41 PM

..this is no snark! I agree with you 182% You wanna know why the MSM like NBC and the RINO orgs are pushing the early GOP debates? Simple, they wanna lock in their RINO candidates so they can help the biggest RINO Retard like they did in 2008.

“These are the time that try men’s souls..”

The War Planner on December 20, 2010 at 10:26 PM

Mitt is unelectable.

Sarah Palin is ineluctable.

Emperor Norton on December 20, 2010 at 10:28 PM

Your question has merit: I’d also like to know why some jump directly to labeling anyone who says anything pro-Palin a palinista, zealot, or worse.

We need to disagree within a reasonable framework, else we degenerate into flame-warrior loons.

(Sorry, unlike last nights work on the Reid thread, this one doesn’t rhyme.)

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:19 PM

I have no idea and can’t speak for those folks. And to the best of my knowledge, I’ve never used those words you’re talking about up there.

However, I’ve made the simple statement “I don’t think Sara Palin is ready for a run for the White House” and I’ve been called every name under the sun i.e. troll, nimrod, idiot, stupid, dirtbag. And I’m not the only one here who’s been attacked for making that type of statement. Some of us were even compared to the “hater’s” that set fire to Palin’s church on Saturday.

Why is that? Do you think that type of behavior is going to endear those of us on the fence into Sara Palin’s court?

And I want your answer to rhyme this time :0

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 10:33 PM

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 10:33 PM

You asked:

Why is that? Do you think that type of behavior is going to endear those of us on the fence into Sara Palin’s court?

I’ve not been one of the flame-throwers, either on the pro- or anti-Palin sides.

and:

“no, I don’t think it helps us out –
and I don’t think it pays to shout –
attacks and bile fill me with dread;
I hope we’re past that, Knucklehead!”

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:39 PM

“Assuming you are in the latter camp, why would you want someone who was “polarizing” for small, constitutional government?
james23 on December 20, 2010 at 9:09 PM”

Huh? Sorry I don’t understand your question. Maybe you didn’t understand my comment.

JimP on December 20, 2010 at 10:46 PM

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:39 PM

You. Are. Good!!!

And I know that you’re not one of the bomb throwers around here, but you know who the usual suspect are. I’m surprised they haven’t showed up yet.

You need to go into the jingle writing business………for the politician of your choice. You’d make a bundle.

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 10:48 PM

I was a Fan of Mitt’s in 2008, but I don’t think he is electable. I don’t think he is intellectually curious, and needs to study up on policy positions. Also, his voice is grating in the higher octaves, but I like him SO much. Really. I really like Mitt but he shouldn’t run.

portlandon on December 20, 2010 at 10:51 PM

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 10:48 PM

Thanks!

And, I was on the thread in the headlines that went way out there the other night.

I’ll say again; being that far gone, on either side of the argument, does nothing to move the argument.

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM

Sarah Palin is ineluctable.

Emperor Norton on December 20, 2010 at 10:28 PM

I bet you play a lot of scrabble.

CWforFreedom on December 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM

With that, I need to finish up some work, and go home.

Goodnight, and Merry Christmas!

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM

Maybe all the non-Palinistas go to another conservative site to comment on Palin threads. The same people supporting her here probably thought Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell were good candidates. I honestly don’t even think she wants to run.

Speedwagon82 on December 20, 2010 at 10:55 PM

And who does this help? Herman Cain, obviously.

The Other McCain on December 20, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Come on Stacy, you’re smarter than that.

This guy ain’t ready for prime time.

BTW, after being called out for the polling “championship” Red State decided to have an honest to God straight up straw poll (one that couldn’t be jobbed or robovoted) Just a list of names.

Palin ran away with that one.

Of course, that just wouldn’t do so now we are at RS Straw poll version 3.0, so everyone who isn’t for Sarah can pick one guy to get behind.

How childish of them.

It was smart to do a poll that can’t be jobbed, and it was also smart not to pollute it with names of people we know aren’t running, or have no shot [Ron Paul] but it seems they are desperate to create a false meme.

Desperate enough to keep going till they get the answer they want, rather than the answer they keep getting.

How pathetic.

gary4205 on December 20, 2010 at 10:58 PM

Mitt is unelectable.
Sarah Palin is
ineluctable.

Emperor Norton on December 20, 2010 at 10:28 PM

Good word, Emperor.

ornery_independent on December 20, 2010 at 10:58 PM

Palin can hide behind a Facebook page and schuck and jive her way to riches by smiling for the cameras and spouting talking points.

rickyricardo on December 20, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Which is what Reagan’s detractors pretty much said about him, minus the Facebook reference. Give me a friggin’ break. I’m tired of this revisionism that makes Reagan some intellectual giant next to the opportunistic bumpkin Palin. Journeys are in the eyes of the beholder. What would Reagan think about Palin? You know the answer.

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:00 PM

massrighty on December 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM

Drive safe and Merry Christmas to you too.

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 11:00 PM

Mitt will wait for everyone to clobber each other, then step in, pick up the banner and say, “Yoink!”

Dongemaharu on December 20, 2010 at 11:01 PM

Mitt will wait for everyone to clobber each other, then step in, pick up the banner and say, “Yoink!”

Dongemaharu on December 20, 2010 at 11:01 PM

Either way, it’s McCain II.

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM

Romneycare, how dare it help get health insurance for the working poor. Federal Government just wants the non-working to get care.

PrezHussein on December 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM

Romneycare, how dare it help get health insurance for the working poor.

PrezHussein on December 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM

I thought that’s what Medicaid is for.

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:05 PM

Romneycare, how dare it help get health insurance for the working poor. Federal Government just wants the non-working to get care.

PrezHussein on December 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM

You FAIL, because you are ignorant.

RomneyCare has bankrupt the State, and is now needing the Federal Government to subsidize their loss. Insurance companies have pulled out of MASS, and hospitals are hurting as well.

Federal controlled Healthcare will destroy the Health system, and leave us all suffering, and settling for mediocre, outdated, subsidized personal healthcare with no choice.

portlandon on December 20, 2010 at 11:09 PM

However, I’ve made the simple statement “I don’t think Sara Palin is ready for a run for the White House”

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 10:33 PM

Agreed. Thing is, I’m not that confident about Mittens or Huck either. Like another commenter stated, why wasn’t Pence named in the poll?

Here’s where I stand on the whole electability issue-

From all estimates, Independents comprise approximately 36% to 40% of the electorate. When it comes to winning Presidential elections in a center-right nation, the emphasis, for better or for worse, is placed on the center. Many of us conservatives bristle at the thought of holding our collective noses for Mittens or Huckster, and we shouldn’t have to settle. Still, the fact remains that a presidential candidate has to be electable—To appeal to voters in his or her respective base, Independents, and ideally, some voters from the opposition party. Even Palin pointed this out in her interview with ABC last week.

From the standpoint of electability, Palin probably won’t win the general against Barry. She may win the Republican nomination, but it’s unlikely she’ll ever win the general. Whether one can take stock in polls or not is up for debate, but the vast majority of them indicate Palin has not won Indies over. Even with all her exposure from FB, FOX and her TV show, Independents still view her negatively. From Gallup to CNN, and from NBC/WSJ to WaPo/ABC, Palin’s unfavorable ratings are high among Indies. Her supporters dismiss these polls and snipe at anyone who mentions anything about electability, but her numbers are bad across the board. This is not just a hackneyed talking point or some tidbit of old news, it’s a widespread and ominous indication of what will probably happen if she becomes our nominee. Fairly or unfairly, the impression of Palin as unqualified, polarizing, thin-skinned and unintelligent has not shifted with Indies or even some Republicans. This view isn’t likely to change either when the primary battles begin. At least a few of the other Repub contenders will hit her with negative ads, and there’s plenty of material for them to work with. Much of the impending negative spin will be regurgitated, but some will be fresh from her knee-jerk reactions to criticism. Any negative coverage will only provide reinforcement which supports how unelectable many Indies and Dems think she is.

Many of the Independents, conservative Dems and even some Republicans who voted for Barry have major misgivings about placing their trust in another super-star candidate. Some voted at the advice of their children and know they made a huge mistake in 2008, and they’re probably not going to make what they’ll view as the same mistake twice.

The Daily Caller had an interesting piece a couple of days ago about candidates that are characterized as either populists or managers. The populist pols are apparently making a cultural statement and their big personalities appeal to voters on a personal level. The managers, on the other hand, have agendas, positions, and ideas that appeal to voters more than their personality or celebrity.

I like charismatic people as much as anyone else, but when it comes to solving our complex economic, foreign policy, and wartime problems, I want the most electable candidate who also has the best agenda. While I really like Mike Pence, I’m still unsure about who the best and most electable candidate will be to beat Barry, but I’m fairly certain who it isn’t.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Now, I wouldn’t have been as strong in tone, but Sarah, for all her plusses, is still very green. My saying that does not equate with saying a pro-Palin comment = insane.

churchill995 on December 20, 2010 at 9:42 PM

What in the hell are you talking about?

The woman has been a political powerhouse for 20 years.

This sort of stupidity reminds me of people who get excited about a “new” rock star or group. They call them an “overnight success” even thought they have been making kick ass rock and roll locally forever.

This is the same thing.

Palin was recruited by a group of people to run for her city council, to shake things up, twenty years ago. She became a star locally in short order. Before long she was a star statewide.

Now she’s a world wide sensation. An “overnight sensation” If you call 20 years “overnight”

There is nobody running for President that has her record of achievement, or her level of EXECUTIVE experience.

Nobody.

The important thing though is her record of success. Her ability to get things done others deem impossible.

So stop with the “she’s still green” or is “inexperienced” nonsense.

It makes you look silly and uninformed.

gary4205 on December 20, 2010 at 11:15 PM

The managers, on the other hand, have agendas, positions, and ideas that appeal to voters more than their personality or celebrity.

I like charismatic people as much as anyone else, but when it comes to solving our complex economic, foreign policy, and wartime problems, I want the most electable candidate who also has the best agenda. While I really like Mike Pence, I’m still unsure about who the best and most electable candidate will be to beat Barry, but I’m fairly certain who it isn’t.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Uh, yeah. Let’s see you run your non-charismatic vanilla CEO managerial type and let’s see how far he/she gets.

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM

Substance over form is more likely to win when the electorate has form fatigue.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:22 PM

Substance over form is more likely to win when the electorate has form fatigue.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:22 PM

That is what primaries are for. They determine what people want, and sort out who has substance, and who is the empty suit.

It will all get settled in the primaries.

portlandon on December 20, 2010 at 11:24 PM

The managers, on the other hand, have agendas, positions, and ideas that appeal to voters more than their personality or celebrity.

I like charismatic people as much as anyone else, but when it comes to solving our complex economic, foreign policy, and wartime problems, I want the most electable candidate who also has the best agenda. While I really like Mike Pence, I’m still unsure about who the best and most electable candidate will be to beat Barry, but I’m fairly certain who it isn’t.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:14 PM

I like Pence as well.
Actually my first choice is Jindal-but he’s not running.
Pence is a close second.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM

Substance over form is more likely to win when the electorate has form fatigue.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:22 PM

Who says the electorate has “form fatigue”? Like I say, run your managerial type tailored to meet the needs of the non-polarized independents, and let’s see how far he/she goes.

Not very far, I promise you.

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Uh, yeah. Let’s see you run your non-charismatic vanilla CEO managerial type and let’s see how far he/she gets.

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM

What that one’s problem is, it’s over-thinking tings. Two smart by half.

You don’t win by calculating who’s “electable” or who the media will take it easy on. You win by backing someone who shares your values and has solid principles, and a knack for taking the fight straight to the enemy.

Those types come about once a generation. That’s why they are such treasures.

Palin is the only one like that we have. She is the real deal. A real leader.

The rest are quite ordinary by comparison.

gary4205 on December 20, 2010 at 11:28 PM

I guess this means Romney will once again be pandering to the right. He will once again try to out conservative every other republican running.

texasconserv on December 20, 2010 at 11:28 PM

FCC is going forward with net neutrality at this moment.

Here’s Reason TV.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTshrURtcjU

Spathi on December 20, 2010 at 11:29 PM

@palin 2012 portlandon

Its funny to get so worked up over Romneycare bankrupting and getting federal money when every state is bankrupt from handing out free care and gets federal money to handout free care.
If you are so concerned about federal gov healthcare dictating stuff than Romney is your federalist man. Palin wants tax credits for healthcare which the feds would quickly use as a means to takeover the health system again.

PrezHussein on December 20, 2010 at 11:29 PM

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Well said. Be prepared to be ripped to shreds for stating your case, as I see the usual suspects have arrived.

BTW, Pence said today, he’s going to make decision in January. Sounds like he may be running for governor which would give him more potential for 2016 run.

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 11:30 PM

Of course, this is why the GOP elites are hitting Palin so hard.Their only case is the electability argument, all the stupid stuff they are spewing out will have no effect on GOP primary voters but will work on the general electorate. Hence, they are destroying her to keep this simp alive.

promachus on December 20, 2010 at 11:31 PM

I like Pence as well.
Actually my first choice is Jindal-but he’s not running.
Pence is a close second.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM

Jindal is good people.

Looks like Pence is going to run for Governor, a very smart move. No doubt he will do a good job, and learn the position well. Might be POTUS someday.

gary4205 on December 20, 2010 at 11:32 PM

texasconserv on December 20, 2010 at 11:28 PM

It funny to see you pandering to the leftist Allahpundits agenda.

PrezHussein on December 20, 2010 at 11:32 PM

Who says the electorate has “form fatigue”?

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM

Barry has done a dandy job at putting the electorate into a veritable coma when it comes to style and form over substance.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:33 PM

I like Pence as well.
Actually my first choice is Jindal-but he’s not running.
Pence is a close second.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM

I love Jindal as well. Smart, tough, and very conservative. I just wish he was running.

anXdem on December 20, 2010 at 11:35 PM

Well said. Be prepared to be ripped to shreds for stating your case, as I see the usual suspects have arrived.

Knucklehead on December 20, 2010 at 11:30 PM

It’s not really difficult to rip the same old tired “electability” arguments to shreds. Who’s that non-polarizing manager that the independents are going to love? Pence? Before the media’s through with him, he’ll be a Fundamentalist mullah. Don’t believe me? LOL

This waiting for some fantasy candidate that the MSM and the independents and the moderates and “conservative Democrats” will go gaga over is lunacy. It’s just another recipe for defeat. You start with the base and work from there.

ddrintn on December 20, 2010 at 11:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 6