WSJ poll: Romney 30, Palin 14, Cain 12, Perry 8

posted at 8:25 pm on June 15, 2011 by Allahpundit

A bad poll for everyone involved, including Mitt. Granted, he’s gained nine points since the last time the Journal surveyed the race (Huckabee was still in play at the time), but only 45 percent of Republicans say they’re happy with the field as is. Four years ago at this time, that number was 73 percent. Just 24 percent say they’re confident in Romney’s ability to be president; in 2007, even John Edwards hit 31 percent. Clearly the base wants more options and the Palin/Cain/Perry constituencies aren’t natural defectors to Romney, so one of those three is bound to start consolidating the anti-Mitt faction as we get closer to the primaries. Bachmann, meanwhile, finishes with just three percent if Palin/Cain/Perry are in the race and at 11 percent if they aren’t. Disappointing, but since the polling ended on Monday, her star turn at the debate hasn’t been priced in yet. The big loser is Pawlenty at just six percent, two points behind Gingrich(!) and tied for seventh with … Rick Santorum. And if you pull Palin, Perry, and Cain out of the field, T-Paw finishes dead last. I know, I know — “it’s still early” — but read Mike Murphy’s post from yesterday. It’s not as early as you think, especially with Perry poised to jump in and become the “not Romney” in the race. Pawlenty needs to show donors that he’s worth investing in, but polling behind Ron Paul and Newt shows them the opposite.

It’s not all sunshine and candy canes for Perry either. Behold:

We like to goof on The One for blaming Bush for his problems, but the reason he does that is because it works. People remember who was president when the financial crisis struck, they remember having utterly lost confidence in that guy for various reasons during his second term, and they’re prepared to cut O a wide, wide berth on the economy because of it. That’s Perry’s misfortune, of course, because not only does he hold Bush’s old job, but superficially he sounds a bit like him when he talks and even has some biographical overlap (they were both military pilots). We’d all like to think his record of job creation in Texas will immunize him from Bush comparisons, but don’t underestimate the ability of the low-information voter to draw the wrong conclusion from a simple, endlessly repeated set of facts. More:

Those numbers will move as we get closer to the election — note how the number who say he inherited the economy plunged as the midterms approached — but after two and a half years of dreariness, they’re remarkably resilient in his favor.

But wait, it gets worse:

Turning to Republicans’ proposal to overhaul Medicare — transforming the government-run health program into a system where future seniors receive a subsidy or voucher to help them purchase private insurance — 31 percent say it’s a bad idea, which is up nine points since April.

Just 22 percent say it’s a good idea, which is virtually unchanged from last month. And 45 percent say they have no opinion.

That number’s not quite kosher insofar as the poll question describes Ryan’s plan as a voucher system even though it isn’t exactly. The sample favors Democrats by eight points too so the hard numbers here aren’t quite as bad as they look, but the trend is worrisome if nothing else. The Journal described Ryan’s plan as a voucher system last time too and opposition was nine points lower, which suggests the GOP really is losing the messaging war. Also this:

In other words, not only does O have a viable back-up campaign narrative with “blame Bush for the economy,” he may have a very viable lead narrative in Mediscaring. See what I mean about it being a bad poll? Exit question: How can Tim Pawlenty still be trailing a guy whose favorable rating dropped 18 points in two months?

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 4 5 6 7 8

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 1:25 AM

I’ll elaborate here a little bit. I think that a lot of the impetus driving electoral decisions, at least at this stage in the game, are driven by fear. Primarily fear of Obama’s possible re-election. As much as I want to save our grand republic, it’s not fear that drives me. Fear is the path to the dark side…or something. ;-)

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 1:27 AM

If you are reacting to your enemy, then the odds are stacked against you from the beginning.

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 1:25 AM

Then what does that say about the PDSers?

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 1:28 AM

Then what does that say about the PDSers?

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 1:28 AM

That says this blog is going to get mighty loud if Palin wins the nomination, and mighty quiet if she goes all the way.

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 1:29 AM

Is it really that bad? Everyone is so irritated about everything these days. We have a really sucky economy. It is hard to be overjoyed with anything.

I think these numbers reflect our times more than any candidates.

petunia on June 16, 2011 at 1:37 AM

Is it really that bad? Everyone is so irritated about everything these days. We have a really sucky economy. It is hard to be overjoyed with anything.

I think these numbers reflect our times more than any candidates.

petunia on June 16, 2011 at 1:37 AM

Yeah. I think you’re right. But you know what, Petunia? My choice of candidate reflects our times more than my personal feelings towards anyone candidate does. ;-) Cheers!

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 1:39 AM

I know you Palin nuts hate Krauthammer, but that doesn’t give you the right to misrepresent what he said. He never intimated that Palin hadn’t “gone to the right schools,” he said she “wasn’t schooled.” Meaning she had a chance to make herself into a serious candidate by studying up on the issues after 2008, and instead she’s spent her time putting out books, doing a reality show, earning big fees for speaking to her worshipful supporters and, in general, becoming a patently unserious celebrity.

Once someone glances sideways at St. Sarah, they really become irredeemable pond scum to you Palinistas, don’t they? Why are you such nasty, intolerant and vengeful people? Despite what Monica Crowley says about the base turning out for the eventual Republican nominee, I now see that the Nobody But Palin crowd will indeed take their ball and go home if she isn’t The One (and she won’t be).

Yeah, you think Obama is a disaster and is destroying our way of life.

And you also care more about the half-term Governor from Alaska than you do about the future of your own country.

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

you forget you meds again?

sometimes the rants by you palinhaters are very funny but sometimes they are just sad.

I don’t think i could carry around that hate for long how do you do it? doesn’t it burn you up

unseen on June 16, 2011 at 1:52 AM

And you also care more about the half-term Governor from Alaska than you do about the future of your own country.

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

You’ll need some Dramamine after all that spinning, Mer.

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 1:55 AM

I know you Palin nuts hate Krauthammer, but that doesn’t give you the right to misrepresent what he said. He never intimated that Palin hadn’t “gone to the right schools,” he said she “wasn’t schooled.” Meaning she had a chance to make herself into a serious candidate by studying up on the issues after 2008, and instead she’s spent her time putting out books, doing a reality show, earning big fees for speaking to her worshipful supporters and, in general, becoming a patently unserious celebrity.

How, exactly, would you have proposed she “school” herself? Not by researching and writing two books that focused heavily on policy? Not by delivery numerous speeches, which also focused heavily on policy? I guess as far as you are concerned, the mere act of daring to express herself, whether in the written or spoken word, is intolerable and forever tarnishes her as a “patently unserious celebrity.” Good to know.

Once someone glances sideways at St. Sarah, they really become irredeemable pond scum to you Palinistas, don’t they? Why are you such nasty, intolerant and vengeful people?

Projection, much?

Despite what Monica Crowley says about the base turning out for the eventual Republican nominee, I now see that the Nobody But Palin crowd will indeed take their ball and go home if she isn’t The One (and she won’t be).

Yeah, you think Obama is a disaster and is destroying our way of life.

And you also care more about the half-term Governor from Alaska than you do about the future of your own country.

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

What patently absurd assertions you make. How can you be so sure Sarah Palin won’t be the nominee? And how can you also be so sure that her supporters would stay on the sidelines during the election if she isn’t the eventual nominee? And how can you question the devotion of her supporters to this country and its future? That seems quite “nasty, intolerant and vengeful” to me.

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 2:01 AM

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

You sound very bitter.

“Palin Nuts”
“worshipful supporters”
“St. Sarah”
“Palinistas”
“nasty, intolerant, vengeful people”
“half-term governor”
“unserious celebrity”

You sound very much like a PMSing Keith Olbermann with a yeast infection. You know Olbermann coined the “half-term” governor line. Keep using lefty talking points. Bathtub-Girl!!!

Makes you appear very small minded. My liberal friends don’t use such foul forms of debate as you.

I don’t think its possible to have a political discussion with you on any kind of intellectual level; You have perfected that shrill code-pink style of debate with near absolute parrot-like mimicry.

Geochelone on June 16, 2011 at 2:03 AM

I’m going to be charitable here and assume that the raging ABP’s don’t fear Sarah Palin. If they do fear Obama so much so that they’ll gladly nominate Obama-lite to get The Won out of office…well, not like I can stop those ABO nuts from helping to bring this country to ruin anyway. But I will try my best.

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 2:09 AM

the Nobody But Palin crowd will indeed take their ball and go home if she isn’t The One

Rebels are we
Born to be free
Just like the fish in the sea!

–old Palinista song

Emperor Norton on June 16, 2011 at 2:10 AM

Despite what Monica Crowley says about the base turning out for the eventual Republican nominee, I now see that the Nobody But Palin crowd will indeed take their ball and go home if she isn’t The One (and she won’t be).

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

I’m glad you know just what I’m going to do, Mer. In fact, we should get together sometime over coffee and dish about what a lousy Republican field it is (even though it hasn’t solidified yet)./

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 2:13 AM

Interesting. I like PPP, but they happen to be Kos’s pollster. And any time I’ve posted one of their polls in the past showing bad numbers for Palin, I’m instantly harangued on Twitter by Palin fans about how no poll by Kos’s pollster can be trusted. Now that they have a poll showing her doing okay, are they trustworthy again?

Incidentally, the most common criticism I get from SP fans is that polls are generally meaningless and are better off ignored. The only poll that matters is taken on election day. Fair enough, but in that case, what’s with the people pushing that Economist poll? Is that the one exception to the general rule?

Allahpundit on June 15, 2011 at 9:18 PM

So sez the anonymous blogger. You have a real problem with passive aggressiveness.

long_cat on June 16, 2011 at 2:20 AM

Despite what Monica Crowley says about the base turning out for the eventual Republican nominee, I now see that the Nobody But Palin crowd will indeed take their ball and go home if she isn’t The One (and she won’t be).

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Meredith, I know you never hang out to defend your asinine statements, but if you read this later, ask yourself this question: how many people do you honestly think are going to stay home if Palin isn’t the nominee? The only way there is any danger of more than a handful of people doing that is if it somehow comes to light that the eventual nominee worked hand-in-hand with the Beltway GOP to torpedo ONLY Palin’s candidacy and no one else’s. So if I were you, I would spend my time worrying about whether or not the party you feel such allegience to is resorting to Obamaesque tactics to protect their little fiefdoms. It’s a better use of your time than melting down on blogs.

Kataklysmic on June 16, 2011 at 2:21 AM

wow it looks like merideth did a drive by.

unseen on June 16, 2011 at 2:23 AM

Incidentally, the most common criticism I get from SP fans is that polls are generally meaningless and are better off ignored. The only poll that matters is taken on election day. Fair enough, but in that case, what’s with the people pushing that Economist poll? Is that the one exception to the general rule?

Allahpundit on June 15, 2011 at 9:18 PM

You’re barking up the wrong tree with me. If I’ve ever cited a poll as proof of Palin’s electability, you of all people should be able to bring your power as a moderator/author on this blog to bear in order to find it. But I’ll give you a little clue: It’s a fool’s errand. I would no more vote for Sarah Palin because of a favorable poll than I would vote against her because of a negative one. My only use for that Economist poll is as a tool to point out that polls can indeed say anything you want them to if you cloak it under the banner of “scientific.”

gryphon202 on June 16, 2011 at 2:25 AM

Who brings the greater measure of unchained rage; Petunia or Meredith? They seem to be chronically miserable women. I am sure it must carry over into their personal lives and make ruin of their household. Unless its compartmentalized, in which case, they have a mental illness riddle with inner conflicts not easily resolved.

This completes my diagnosis of their state of affairs using the interwebs. Maybe my comment will incite them to scream louder. That be the case, I would consider my task a smashing success.

Geochelone on June 16, 2011 at 2:33 AM

Apparantly the new ABP meme in the wake of her smelling like a rose in her emails is that the Palin who wrote those was Palin v. 1.0 (the good Palin) but now she has morphed into Palin v. 2.0 (the bad Palin).

Damn these people are desperate.

Kataklysmic on June 16, 2011 at 2:33 AM

wow it looks like merideth did a drive by.

unseen on June 16, 2011 at 2:23 AM

It was a fly-by; on a broom!

Geochelone on June 16, 2011 at 2:35 AM

Geochelone on June 16, 2011 at 2:33 AM

I don’t know who has the worse case of PDS between the two of them, but I have to admit lately I find Petunia’s posts much more entertaining. Meredith is a one-note-Johnny who basically says the same thing in every post. With Petunia, sometimes you actually see a semi reasonable argument. Other times she is saying Palin is like bloody Mary, or the media props her up, or her supporters are worse than Marxists or something. I appreciate never knowing what I’m going to get. It’s like Forest Gump with a box of (bitter) chocolates.

Kataklysmic on June 16, 2011 at 2:40 AM

Incidentally, the most common criticism I get from SP fans is that polls are generally meaningless and are better off ignored. The only poll that matters is taken on election day. Fair enough, but in that case, what’s with the people pushing that Economist poll? Is that the one exception to the general rule?

Allahpundit on June 15, 2011 at 9:18 PM

Not that we ascribe all that much significance to polls at this stage of the game, but if others are going to demand consistency from us, shouldn’t we also expect it in kind?

Do you have any criteria for selecting which polls you choose to highlight? Do you feel that some are more important than others? Does the NBC/WSJ poll, taken at a slightly earlier date (June 9 – 13), warrant more attention than the Economist poll (taken June 11 – 14)?

Just wondering…

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 2:44 AM

Kataklysmic on June 16, 2011 at 2:40 AM

Petunia is more loopy and entertaining if you are amused by the harmlessly insane. Mer seems like she would claw someones eyes out in a fit of rage. What a world.

Geochelone on June 16, 2011 at 2:48 AM

With Petunia, sometimes you actually see a semi reasonable argument. Other times she is saying Palin is like bloody Mary, or the media props her up, or her supporters are worse than Marxists or something. I appreciate never knowing what I’m going to get. It’s like Forest Gump with a box of (bitter) chocolates.

Kataklysmic on June 16, 2011 at 2:40 AM

That thread the other night really exhibited petunia at her best. Not only did we get the Palin-as-Bloody Mary rant, but also the tirade against disgruntled, Walmart-employed divorcées who support Palin because of their blood lust for revenge and free goodies.

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 2:51 AM

All of this fighting over a poll that questioned only 290 voters. You have got to be kidding me.

Q11If there were a presidential primary election in your state, would you vote in the Republican primary, the Democratic primary, or would you wait to vote in the general election?If there were a presidential primary election in your state, would you vote in the Republican primary, the Democratic primary, or would you wait to vote in the general election?
6/11+ …..4/11+
Vote in the Republican primary ……………………………….. 29………. 28

Well, at least this time they polled 290 instead of the 280 in April.

chief on June 16, 2011 at 2:58 AM

That thread the other night really exhibited petunia at her best. Not only did we get the Palin-as-Bloody Mary rant, but also the tirade against disgruntled, Walmart-employed divorcées who support Palin because of their blood lust for revenge and free goodies.

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 2:51 AM

Heh! That was a classic from petunia.

chief on June 16, 2011 at 3:01 AM

After easing there way up Sarah’s colon, looks like the Palin kooks have negotiated the maze of Sarah’s the small intestine and are now securely lodged in her large intestine.

rickyricardo on June 16, 2011 at 3:07 AM

That thread the other night really exhibited petunia at her best. Not only did we get the Palin-as-Bloody Mary rant, but also the tirade against disgruntled, Walmart-employed divorcées who support Palin because of their blood lust for revenge and free goodies.

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 2:51 AM

Heh! That was a classic from petunia.

chief on June 16, 2011 at 3:01 AM

Unintentional comedy is always the best kind. I’m almost a fan at this point.

Kataklysmic on June 16, 2011 at 3:09 AM

After easing there way up Sarah’s colon, looks like the Palin kooks have negotiated the maze of Sarah’s the small intestine and are now securely lodged in her large intestine.

rickyricardo on June 16, 2011 at 3:07 AM

Please tell us what Lucy has lodged up your ass ricky?

chief on June 16, 2011 at 3:11 AM

Geo, do you have anything special saved up for our new friend here?

Kataklysmic on June 16, 2011 at 3:12 AM

Great, another meaningless early poll so our side can tear each other to pieces over it, creating animosities which will make eventual unity more difficult. Thanks!

The truth is that history tells us you CANNOT predict the “out party” nominee a year ahead of time.

In 1951, the smart money was on Taft. And no one predicted the Democratic nominee would be anyone other than the sitting President Truman who was running for reelection. Conventional wisdom: 0-2.

In 1955, it wasn’t clear Stevenson would even try again, the expected nominee was Estes Kefauver.

In 1959, no one had a clue who would be the Democratic nominee, and there was significant support for a third Stevenson run.

In 1963, Goldwater was just a conservative Senator, and the smart money was on Rockefeller.

In 1967, George Romney was the favorite, Nixon was thought to be ancient history.

In 1971 it was supposed that if Ted Kennedy didn’t run, Ed Muskie had the nomination in the bag.

In 1975 nobody outside Georgia had even heard of Jimmy Carter.

In 1979 Reagan was regarded as a contender, but not necessarily the frontrunner.

In 1983 Democrats dreamed of Mario Cuomo.

In 1987 no one outside Massachusetts had any idea who Dukakis was.

In 1991, Clinton was thought derailed by his 1988 convention speech, and Gore or Cuomo were the early favorites.

In 1995, Phil Gramm had raised an unprecedented $25 million and was the early frontrunner.

In 1999, the speculation was that the Bush candidacy would be the favorite, but it was thought to be Jeb.

In 2003, the Howard Dean phenomenon was the early favorite.

In 2007, Hillary was the predestined candidate.

17 months before the election, it’s all just speculation, isn’t it?

Adjoran on June 16, 2011 at 4:16 AM

Who brings the greater measure of unchained rage; Petunia or Meredith? They seem to be chronically miserable women. I am sure it must carry over into their personal lives and make ruin of their household. Unless its compartmentalized, in which case, they have a mental illness riddle with inner conflicts not easily resolved.

This completes my diagnosis of their state of affairs using the interwebs. Maybe my comment will incite them to scream louder. That be the case, I would consider my task a smashing success.

Geochelone on June 16, 2011 at 2:33 AM

I think part of the reason some people just climb out of their skin at the mere mention of Palin, is because Sarah Palin is always so CHEERFUL!!!!

She is almost always smiling, she has a very friendly demeanor, all of this after the ferocious, vicious public beat down she experienced by the state run media and the political elite of both parties. The fact that this woman is still standing, let alone on offense, drives them nuts, but what makes them truly deranged is the fact that she is still SMILING, happy and cheerful.

Liberals are always so sour, pessimistic and angry.

karenhasfreedom on June 16, 2011 at 4:48 AM

Hey Omaha, about time for you to check in now. Meanwhile, shall I go read the 500+ comments, or finally try to get some shut eye? Hmmmmm

karenhasfreedom on June 16, 2011 at 4:50 AM

I just finished watching the prime time shows and I forget which one interviewed Newt, Hannity or Greta, but one of them asked Newt what he would get done in the first 90 days.

Newt mentioned repealing that new dodd/frank law, SOX (good law to repeal), and a bunch of other things. All good things actually. What was appalling was the fact that repealing Obamacare was almost an after thought after he listed all these other things. I don’t know if it is because he takes that for granted, or it isn’t a priority for him. Something we need to watch him for.

karenhasfreedom on June 16, 2011 at 4:53 AM

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Can’t much blame Meredith for being annoyed. After 3 years of hiding under a table and/or trying on skinny jeans, her candidate comes out swinging for the fences with his continued support for ethanol subsidies, his continued support for Romneycare and letting us know that he believes in Man made global warming. Toss in an Afghan fighting for independence or 2 and she’s had a bad couple of weeks…

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 5:03 AM

By the way, the Cable Guy was on Hannity tonite, making fun of Romney for believing in man made global warming. He was actually pretty funny. He was wondering if dinosaurs were driving cars back in the ice age to get the ice melted.

karenhasfreedom on June 16, 2011 at 5:09 AM

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Meredith is right. If anyone refuses to vote for the eventual Republican nominee, they are part of the problem.

I will certainly vote for Palin if she wins, but will you vote for Romney, Pawlenty, Bachman, or even Huntsman if they win?

scotash on June 16, 2011 at 5:11 AM

Mittson Romneyfeller

HalJordan on June 16, 2011 at 5:19 AM

scotash on June 16, 2011 at 5:11 AM

Someone forgot to tell: baby Buckley, Brooks, Frum, Noonan, Colin Powell and, our other “thought leaders” that they were supposed to vote FOR McCain instead of FOR the obamanation…Conservatives supported both Bushes and McCain. Will our “thought leaders” write supporting articles and pontificate FOR a Palin if a she were to win the nomination or would we see a repeat of ’08…The ball isn’t in on the Conservative’s side of the court, we’ve held serve…

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 5:20 AM

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 5:20 AM

Good Point.

scotash on June 16, 2011 at 5:11 AM

You cherry picked one idea out of her rant to agree with and left off the most spew-laden parts of her screed. No wonder people build up such animosity and threaten to stay home.

Put a leash and a muzzle on her why don’t you; and then come back. We might then be a bit more reasonable and have a discussion about how strenuously we will campaign for an alternative candidate.

Geochelone on June 16, 2011 at 5:37 AM

If Mitt is the nominee, he won’t face the all out assault from the LSM that Palin has had to deal with these past 3 yrs. And, why should he? Many of his stated policy positions don’t differ much from their puppet masters, the dems. Oh, the MSM will do what they can to diminish Mitt but they won’t use Man made global warming, ethanol subsidies or Romneycare against him. How can they?…

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 5:48 AM

Oh, the MSM will do what they can to diminish Mitt but they won’t use Man made global warming, ethanol subsidies or Romneycare against him. How can they?…

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 5:48 AM

I disagree. They will use every card in the deck, valid or not, coherent or not, consistent or not. Irony will be totally lost on them. They will exist for one purpose; to save their progressive messiah. I don’t even think Romney cares all that much that he will be destined to lose (other than the power, prestige and perks of office), since all his goals are the same as Obama’s, just more long-term.

SKYFOX on June 16, 2011 at 7:00 AM

but will you vote for Romney, Pawlenty, Bachman, or even Huntsman if they win?

scotash on June 16, 2011 at 5:11 AM

Will vote for Bachmann, no problem, because she’s a conservative.
I might vote for T-Paw, but Mitt or Huntsman? No way.

Jenfidel on June 16, 2011 at 7:00 AM

Will vote for Bachmann, no problem, because she’s a conservative.
I might vote for T-Paw, but Mitt or Huntsman? No way.

Jenfidel on June 16, 2011 at 7:00 AM

Just curious. Does being an Obama supporter really make you feel warm and fuzzy inside like liberals say.

swamp_yankee on June 16, 2011 at 7:20 AM

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

To quote Aretha Franklin in the Blues Brothers, “Don’t you blaspheme in heah! Don’t you blaspheme in heah!”

Good post and the expected backlash is pure reflex at this point. I don’t agree with you that the Palians will stay home. The fact is that they will come out to vote for the eventual nominee (and no SP is not running and will not be the nominee). They’ll kvetch and complain that the vast left wing conspiracy chose him/her for us, &c, but they will go out and vote against PBHO.

And that is why it is dumb for a candidate to do nothing but campaign on red meat. The fact is that with PBHO in the WH, we can take the base for granted. Political butchers will attract the same group of feral curs, but won’t bring in any new converts. The only way to succeed is to enlarge the tent.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:25 AM

It’s amazing all the wish-casting that goes on around here. I really don’t know if Palin is going to run or not, but I do pray that God will put it in her heart to do so. Those of you who express “knowledge” you don’t have just make yourselves look silly.
As for continuing to castigate those for whom Mitt is not an option…consider that they may recognize the destruction of our free society is likely with Obama in the short term or Romney in the long term. Do they want the record of that destruction to have an (R) or a (D) by it? It matters to the future reconstruction of the nation and who will be trusted at the helm.

SKYFOX on June 16, 2011 at 7:41 AM

SKYFOX on June 16, 2011 at 7:41 AM

The conclusion that SP is not running is simply deductive reasoning. She is making no effort to form a campaign or to broaden her appeal. As has been noted, first by CK, she has not schooled herself and remains unable to discuss a great many important issues with any depth, fluency or insight.

As for castigation, that is evidenced almost exclusively by the Palians rather than by others. As Meredith noted, they are the vicious, rude, insular, close-minded and intolerant ones.

The fact is that those who say Mitt is not an option are kidding themselves. Just about every one of them will vote for him if he is the nominee, despite all the protestations to the contrary. And that is why we don’t need a candidate who is going to spend all of his time pandering for votes that are already in his(her) pocket.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

As for castigation, that is evidenced almost exclusively by the Palians rather than by others. As Meredith noted, they are the vicious, rude, insular, close-minded and intolerant ones.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

That’s ironic. Have you seen Meredith’s usual fare?

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 7:57 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

Mitt isn’t an option: he’s the white Mormon 0bama.

Everything you say about Palin isn’t true about her but could be said with some certainty about Romney.

Jenfidel on June 16, 2011 at 7:58 AM

Why are you such nasty, intolerant and vengeful people?

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Uh huh.

I CAN’T WAIT for the day when Palin announces she’s not running. My heart will leap with joy. If only for the fact that so many of you will be so crushed.

Can’t wait.

nickj116 on June 15, 2011 at 4:36 PM

Next…

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:00 AM

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 7:57 AM

No I haven’t. But I have seen yours and that puts me squarely on her side. I doubt that she could possibly sink to your level on her worst day.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:03 AM

Incidentally, the most common criticism I get from SP fans is that polls are generally meaningless and are better off ignored. The only poll that matters is taken on election day. Fair enough, but in that case, what’s with the people pushing that Economist poll? Is that the one exception to the general rule?

Allahpundit on June 15, 2011 at 9:18 PM

is MJBrutus a SP fan, AP?

Polls are worth bupkiss at this point.

MJBrutus on June 9, 2011 at 12:16 PM

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:05 AM

No I haven’t.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:03 AM

Thanks for confirming my point. I stopped reading right there.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:05 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:03 AM

Good to know that you side with this hateful, vengeful person.

you Palin nuts

Meredith on June 16, 2011 at 1:42 AM

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:07 AM

As has been noted, first by CK, she has not schooled herself and remains unable to discuss a great many important issues with any depth, fluency or insight.

MJB, have you read any of her op-eds? Watched any of her speeches? If not, it may be you that hasn’t “schooled” himself…

As for the screeching Palin supporters, for every “Palin screecher” I can probably name a counter weight screeching bloody Mary or some sort of rant…

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 8:08 AM

Just about every one of them will vote for him if he is the nominee, despite all the protestations to the contrary.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

Once again you claim to know something you can’t possibly know.

SKYFOX on June 16, 2011 at 8:09 AM

As has been noted, first by CK, she has not schooled herself and remains unable to discuss a great many important issues with any depth, fluency or insight.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

First, shortly after CK made that statement, historians came out and confirmed that Sarah was correct in her statements about Paul Revere… and proved CK wrong.

Second, she has written numerous policy pieces through social media (Facebook). Have you read them? Does a tree falling in the forest make a sound? If you refuse to read them do they not exist? It is very apparent from listening to CK that he also does not read them.

dominigan on June 16, 2011 at 8:11 AM

Just about every one of them will vote for him if he is the nominee, despite all the protestations to the contrary.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

If Republicans want my vote in the general, they need to nominate a strong conservative in the primaries. Mitt isn’t that, and yes, I will stay home instead of vote for another RINO, and no that isn’t a vote for Obama.

dominigan on June 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM

As has been noted, first by CK, she has not schooled herself and remains unable to discuss a great many important issues with any depth, fluency or insight.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

That’s an ignorant statement.

I’ll bet you never listen to Rush but assert that he’s a racist hatemonger too.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM

I will stay home instead of vote for another RINO, and no that isn’t a vote for Obama.

dominigan on June 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM

Fortunately you are in a small subset of pinheads. “Not my pick WAHHHH – I won’t vote so there!”

This kind of sentiment used to worry me a little but not anymore. And by the way… it is a vote for Obama.

I’ll bet you never listen to Rush but assert that he’s a racist hatemonger too.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM

I haven’t listened to him in years. He is no more a racist hatemonger than Beck is raving looneytoons.
They both are very good at targeting their market and playing to it very well and profit greatly from it.
I generally form my own opinion based on reading and deliberation. The “Rush Said” crowd strike me as less diligent and more dependent on some well crafted spoon feeding.

Bradky on June 16, 2011 at 8:21 AM

The fact is that those who say Mitt is not an option are kidding themselves. Just about every one of them will vote for him if he is the nominee, despite all the protestations to the contrary. And that is why we don’t need a candidate who is going to spend all of his time pandering for votes that are already in his(her) pocket.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM

Oh, ask John McCain what that thinking leads to.

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:21 AM

dominigan on June 16, 2011 at 8:11 AM

CK was not speaking about the Paul Revere thing. He was speaking about her failure to come up to speed on issues.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:23 AM

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:21 AM

The base held their collective nose and came out for him. He didn’t win the indies.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:25 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:25 AM

Since when are baby Buckley, Brooks, Frum, Noonan and, Colin Powell indies???

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 8:26 AM

I’ll bet you never listen to Rush but assert that he’s a racist hatemonger too.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM

I rarely listen to Rush. But I have listened often enough to know that he is no such thing. He is a provocateur, who likes to flirt with racially-tinged language, often originating on the left to provoke a rise out of them. He’s brilliant at it.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:27 AM

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 8:26 AM

Since when are they “the base?”

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:27 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:27 AM

Aside, that is from the Late WFB. I don’t why you put him on that list.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:28 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:28 AM

I’m sorry, you said “baby Buckley.”

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:31 AM

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:21 AM

The base held their collective nose and came out for him. He didn’t win the indies.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:25 AM

Do you have any data to back that up?

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:31 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:27 AM

Aren’t they supposed to be Republicans? Isn’t baby Buckley the son of Wm Buckley? Didn’t they write articles supporting the obamanation? Didn’t they then follow that with actually voting FOR the obamanation?

Keep moving the goalposts, you won’t get too tired..

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 8:31 AM

CK was not speaking about the Paul Revere thing. He was speaking about her failure to come up to speed on issues.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:23 AM

Show me how she’s any less up to speed on the issues that Romney and Pawlenty.

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:32 AM

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 8:31 AM

And to some extent they need to be appealed to. They are not the base, who can be taken for granted. McCain lost them, he did not lose the base.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:33 AM

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:31 AM

Do your own homework. I won’t dance for you.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:34 AM

Do your own homework. I won’t dance for you.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:34 AM

Yep, you and nickj116 are two peas in a pod – full of assertions, empty of evidence.

Keep it up, you amuse me.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

McCain lost them, he did not lose the base.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:33 AM

McCain lost everybody!
If he got *some* of the base, it was because of Palin!

Jenfidel on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:32 AM

I have many times. Whether it was her contradictions and dumb remarks on Libya to her silly “doctrine” on the use of force to her insane ideas on immigration.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:33 AM

I’ll agree with part of that. McCain did NOT lose the base in ’08. He lost those that claimed to be Republicans, pundits most and a former Secty of State who voted FOR the obamanation. Not only voted FOR the obamanation, they also publicly supported the obamanation over McCain during the General in articles, speeches and TV appearances…Now, many of those same people are back to talking about Party unity…

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 8:37 AM

The base held their collective nose and came out for him. He didn’t win the indies.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:25 AM

RINOS never do.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:37 AM

And to some extent they need to be appealed to. They are not the base, who can be taken for granted. McCain lost them, he did not lose the base.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:33 AM

Think again.

So if there wasn’t this vaunted through-the-roof turnout, what do the numbers say about McCain’s supporters? I’ll have to look at this more closely, but if 2004 was, as everyone says, a base election, and Bush got 62 million votes, my guess is that McCain didn’t do as well with the Republican base as Bush did.

It appears that finally, on election night, McCain’s long-time problems with the GOP base caught up with him. He did a lot to alienate that base back in 2000, and he began this race knowing that he would have to patch things up. He accomplished some of that, but not all of it. I can’t tell you how many Republicans I met out on the campaign trail who expressed a marked lack of enthusiasm for McCain’s candidacy. Just last week, I met a very loyal Republican in Chillicothe, Ohio who said he felt a “Carter malaise” after McCain won the GOP nomination — and he wasn’t re-energized until McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. So from Super Tuesday through the Republican convention, this normally active Republican sat on his hands.

Romney would be McCain II.

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:37 AM

to her silly “doctrine” on the use of force to her insane ideas on immigration.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

Her “silly” doctrine and her “insane ideas” are pretty much embraced by Romney and Pawlenty as well. Subjective opinions on issues that she has apprarently studied. So you don’t prove your point by applying your own labels to them, and I’d bet you’ve never even read her “silly doctrine” and couldn’t tell me what it is to save your life.

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:41 AM

I have many times. Whether it was her contradictions and dumb remarks on Libya to her silly “doctrine” on the use of force to her insane ideas on immigration.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

Unlike Mittens, she doesn’t think only the Afghanis can win Afghanistan’s independence from the Taliban.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 8:42 AM

her insane ideas on immigration.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

You’re still going to dishonestly insist that she advocates mass deportation as the only solution?

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 8:45 AM

her contradictions and dumb remarks on Libya

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

What contradictions?

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 8:46 AM

her silly “doctrine” on the use of force

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:36 AM

What specifically about her “doctrine” (which she never referred to it as) was silly?

steebo77 on June 16, 2011 at 8:47 AM

Meredith is right unhinged. If anyone refuses to vote for the eventual Republican nominee, they are part of the problem.

scotash on June 16, 2011 at 5:11 AM

Funny, the way we see it, you media/establishment marionettes are the problem…if you guys are so snazzy and smart, you may wind up owning the GOP and we’ll go third party. The writing is on the wall, so curb it.

RepubChica on June 16, 2011 at 8:47 AM

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:37 AM

Nonsense, an NRO opinion piece does not make your argument. The numbers show that indies overwhelmingly voted for Obama.

Her “silly” doctrine and her “insane ideas” are pretty much embraced by Romney and Pawlenty as well. Subjective opinions on issues that she has apprarently studied. So you don’t prove your point by applying your own labels to them, and I’d bet you’ve never even read her “silly doctrine” and couldn’t tell me what it is to save your life.

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:41 AM

I commented her silly doctrine extensively at H/A. And you’re the one making false assertions WRT Romney and T-Paw on immigration. Neither of them have advocated mass deportations. They were all wrong on going in to Libya.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:50 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:50 AM

Wait, are you saying that Palin advocates mass deportations of illegals? Someone better tell Rightwingyahoo to revise his one issue scorecard!!!

Gohawgs on June 16, 2011 at 8:54 AM

Do your own homework. I won’t dance for you.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:34 AM

Instant loss of argument. “No I won’t present my evidence. YOU go find it.”

Aitch748 on June 16, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Nonsense, an NRO opinion piece does not make your argument. The numbers show that indies overwhelmingly voted for Obama.

The numbers also show that McCain didn’t have the support of the base that Bush had in 2004. Byron York wasn’t giving his opinion, he was looking at vote totals. Republican turnout in 2008 declined from 2004 levels. So how’s Romney going to do this? By winning over indies that Obama won’t? LOL Good luck with that.

I commented her silly doctrine extensively at H/A. And you’re the one making false assertions WRT Romney and T-Paw on immigration. Neither of them have advocated mass deportations. They were all wrong on going in to Libya.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:50 AM

So Pawlenty, who claims to have been the first to suggest a NFZ zone, is even more out of touch and unschooled than Palin is. And I’m not aware that she ever advocated mass deportations. One PDSer says she’s for amnesty, then next says she’s for mass deportations. One says she’s an extreme right-winger, the other says she’s a socialist. You folks are unhinged.

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:57 AM

I commented her silly doctrine extensively at H/A. And you’re the one making false assertions WRT Romney and T-Paw on immigration. Neither of them have advocated mass deportations. They were all wrong on going in to Libya.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 8:50 AM

Fascinating. You don’t mind repeating the idea that Palin has crazy ideas on immigration, but you DO mind having to explain what you mean, on the grounds that you’ve already explained it.

Aitch748 on June 16, 2011 at 8:59 AM

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:37 AM

Here, the data shows that 44% of the electorate identified as being “moderate” and 60% of them went with Obama in 2008.

I’m no big Romney fan, but he would at least have a good chance of winning. Assume he would be McCain Part Deux. In 2008 the public didn’t know how bad PBHO would be. Now that we’ve had 2.5 years and counting of misery if McCain ran again he would win.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 9:00 AM

I’m no big Romney fan, but he would at least have a good chance of winning. Assume he would be McCain Part Deux. In 2008 the public didn’t know how bad PBHO would be. Now that we’ve had 2.5 years and counting of misery if McCain ran again he would win.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 9:00 AM

Oh indeed? :) And if Palin was on the ticket, would McCain still win? Or is she so radioactive that two-thirds of the country would be tempted to stay home?

Aitch748 on June 16, 2011 at 9:02 AM

If the Palin haters want respect from other posters,
I would suggest that you start “schooling yourselves”
on Palin’s record, 18 years in government. You might
also want to take a math refresher course; Palin served
more than 1/2 term as governor. It has been said that
she achieved more for Alaska in her shortened term than
other governors accomplish in two.

The issue we have is that you don’t post positives about your favored candidate; you just post lies and distortions about Palin.

I suspect the Palin haters don’t even have a candidate
they like. They are on this site for one purpose only;
to bash Palin. That is why we call you names and will continue to do so no matter how much hating and whining you do.

Amjean on June 16, 2011 at 9:04 AM

I’m no big Romney fan, but he would at least have a good chance of winning. Assume he would be McCain Part Deux. In 2008 the public didn’t know how bad PBHO would be. Now that we’ve had 2.5 years and counting of misery if McCain ran again he would win.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 9:00 AM

Under this logic, any of the GOP candidates can win.

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 9:06 AM

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 8:57 AM

BoR interview

O’Reilly interrupted again. “So no amnesty. But what do you do with these folks? Do you make them register with the federal government? Do you tell ‘em they have 60 days to get out of here before we put you in jail? What do you do with them?”

Now Palin had an answer. “Do we make them register with the federal government? Yes, we do.”

“And if they don’t register with the federal (government)? Say you give them 60 days to register with the federal government… Say they didn’t do it.”

“You deport ‘em,” Palin said.

So O’Reilly asked what she would do with those who do register. “Then what? Do you give them green cards to work right away? What do you do with them?”

Palin obviously had no idea. “You know, there has to be that expectation that they will work and that they will contribute.” Then, she changed the subject by saying, “Bill, it makes me uncomfortable that we’re even going down that path…”

O’Reilly shot back, “You have to go down the path because it’s gonna come up.”

Palin, in her condescending, schoolmarm tone, lectured, “American citizens who are here lawfully, they need to be the ones with the first shot at getting these jobs. We cannot make it easy on those who have chosen to be illegally here.”

But O’Reilly was not going to be lectured by her. “They’re here and we can’t starve ‘em to death… This is where it gets very complicated, Governor.”

Palin pursed her lips even tighter. Don’t tell me she wasn’t piqued. “Then we won’t complicate it any more. Let’s keep it simple and let’s say no. If you are here illegally and if you don’t follow the steps… to somehow allow you to work, if you’re not gonna do that, you’re gonna be deported.”

O’Reilly got the last word, underscoring her poor command of policy. He reiterated, “Whoever the next president is, is going to have to deal with 12 million people and that’s going to be very, very difficult.”

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 9:07 AM

I suspect the Palin haters don’t even have a candidate
they like. They are on this site for one purpose only;
to bash Palin.

Amjean on June 16, 2011 at 9:04 AM

I CAN’T WAIT for the day when Palin announces she’s not running. My heart will leap with joy. If only for the fact that so many of you will be so crushed.

Can’t wait.

nickj116 on June 15, 2011 at 4:36 PM

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 9:08 AM

Good grief, I don’t know why these posts aren’t showing up. Anyway, here’s the homework you should’ve done before making your idiotic “take the base for granted” assertion:

“A downturn in the number and percentage of Republican voters going to the polls seemed to be the primary explanation for the lower than predicted turnout,” the report said. Compared to 2004, Republican turnout declined by 1.3 percentage points to 28.7 percent, while Democratic turnout increased by 2.6 points from 28.7 percent in 2004 to 31.3 percent in 2008.

pseudoforce on June 16, 2011 at 9:09 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 9:07 AM

Citing a biased, hater op-ed from a known douchebag website is hardly ‘evidence.’

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 9:09 AM

fossten on June 16, 2011 at 9:06 AM

No. A candidate must be at least as acceptable as McCain under that logic. SP is not. Neither are many others who are actually in the field such as Santorum, Cain or Paul.

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 9:09 AM

MJBrutus on June 16, 2011 at 9:07 AM

Dude … you’re giving us a link from crooksandliars?

You are so busted.

darwin on June 16, 2011 at 9:10 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6 7 8