Hot Air Approval Survey: June Results

posted at 8:45 am on June 17, 2011 by Patrick Ishmael

Lots here. I’ll start off with the head-to-head matchups and work backwards, since this probably produced the most interesting results. 6056 total votes.

 

Now the overall vote. Sarah Palin takes the top spot decisively. Rick Perry holds on to second. Michele Bachmann bounces into third, followed by Herman Cain and Mitt Romney. Compare the disparity between Palin’s vote and the votes of Bachmann and Perry, though, and consider that in those head-to-head matchups… the undecideds swing to both of Palin’s challengers in huge numbers. Versus Bachmann, Palin +20 of the remaining vote, Bachmann +33. Versus Perry, Palin +18 of the remaining vote, Perry +32.

Something to watch.

 

The graph over time:

Paul Ryan receives high, high approvals. Tops overall, in fact, for those that didn’t vote for him for President. Unfortunately for him… that includes a lot of people.

The individual breakdowns:

And the overall breakdown by ideology:

Questions? Tweet me.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.

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 3 4 5

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 6:40 PM

We do our candidates no favors by ignoring their weaknesses. We want their weaknesses to be widely discussed so that there is no new meme that can take hold between August and November 2012. I don’t think we need to get personally nasty, but we can and should be viewing their qualifications and ideological positions with a critical eye.

alwaysfiredup on June 17, 2011 at 6:48 PM

And we/you/whoever does ourselves/yourself/whomever’s self any good by shredding every possible candidate from a range of candidates from among the same party that is attempting to reaffirm Capitalism, faith and fidelity to our Constitution and so much more, from the Executive Branch, and therefore, the Judiciary, and from Congress.

What we have today is what I’d call an emergency of abusive mismanagement of our nation by a limping Democrat majority in the Senate and certainly by highly irrational, or badly misleading, people in the Executive Branch.

It’s not a simple election next year. It’s not “simply” party politics of personalities for the most media time or other vanity needs by various individuals. What we have today is an emergency of this nation’s present and future and it’s demonstratively hooked into and has been constructed by people who seek the nation’s “replacement” with something else (and who are going about doing that very thing).

I can find fault in EVERY candidate, in EVERY individual, in all possible offerings for the Presidency. But THE FOCUS in terms of voter awareness needs to be on what I’d call a tourniquet on a bleeding artery, not a facial at a salon.

We can devote time and public discourse to trying to ruin one another, or, we can pause and find constructive points to praise about individuals despite their failings. The goal should be not on destroying peer-reputations and potential successes but on working together to represent the best of us.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 6:59 PM

I will vote Obama, happily, if the person on the R side of the ballot is Romney or some other progressive candidate.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Well, when you shoot holes in the bottom of your boat when you see a bit of water sloshing under your feet as you row, please don’t demand others come help you out of your dire state of sinking.

Voting for the worst possible because the bettermeant possible is flawed is a suicidal method: “the soup is too salty so I will starve by not eating it.”

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:04 PM

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM

You should not harbor any idea that I’m here to argue you out of your destructive cycle downward, because I’m not. I shared my point of view — wasn’t directed to or about you — and that you’re going on about that is something you might want to think about or whatever, do what you want.

By placing one’s focus on all that could be or what you perceive to be is negative about possible nominees for the GOP Presidency and not on, instead, what works to assist resolving the current terrible conditions, you/anyone with that strategy self-defeats.

The problem with self-defeating strategies such as yours/that is that when it comes to the Presidency or to other public office, electing the opposite of what you hope might be means you’re supporting and contributing to failure.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Winning at any cost, is not winning….

idesign on June 17, 2011 at 7:13 PM

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM

I know no one among Republicans who wants to elect or who supports Progressives.

However, we (GOP voters) went through this in 2008 with McCain, a self-defining Progressive among the GOP. The McCain camp, his campaigners as also his campaign, hurled mighty heaps of bad gas on everyone, mostly targeting other Republicans. Their damnation of GOP voters and ideals was so profound as to see them do more of that than most on the Left were doing.

I see and read a lot of that carried-forward now by people who claim to be “Conservative” (so did McCain, when he wasn’t touting Teddy Roosevelt, his favorite President, for his Progressive beliefs and Presidency) who create more arguments than they solve.

It’s one thing to support one favored candidate but not all voters are Personality or Icon-Driven (or even obsessed as some can be said to be every election with various politicians). When the heavy-hitting is so intense as it has been from this bunch for so long, it works against what they want: their Icon or Must-Have-Politician takes on their contrary reputation, and all those naysayers-of-others lose what they claim they wanted: their Must-Have then loses face.

And, presto, you elect or re-elect the worst possible candidate for the Office, and that’d be Obama.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:15 PM

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Winning at any cost, is not winning….

idesign on June 17, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Turn off Oprah and tune out the Soap Opera Digest because I never wrote — not today, not ever — that we should “win at any cost.”

Losing is still losing. Throwing yourself away because the hem on your garment is not sewn to your liking is still throwing yourself away.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:17 PM

And we/you/whoever does ourselves/yourself/whomever’s self any good by shredding every possible candidate from a range of candidates from among the same party that is attempting to reaffirm Capitalism, faith and fidelity to our Constitution and so much more, from the Executive Branch, and therefore, the Judiciary, and from Congress.

You assume that they have these values and would do these things. Many of the choices we have right now will do no such thing. Thus it is in our best interest to get them off the field and make room for more people who have these attributes to join in the debate. Having Obama run on the Republican ticket is not a benefit to the Republicans.

What we have today is what I’d call an emergency of abusive mismanagement of our nation by a limping Democrat majority in the Senate and certainly by highly irrational, or badly misleading, people in the Executive Branch.

We had the same problem with Bush for 8 years. Remember those years when we got Medicare part D prescription medication coverage passed? Remember the TARP bailout? Remember the exuberant economy pushed into an economic bubble by a president too focused on looking like he cared? No child left behind and other added unconstitutional power grabs all occurring under the careful watchful eyes of “generic” R. I do.

It’s not a simple election next year. It’s not “simply” party politics of personalities for the most media time or other vanity needs by various individuals. What we have today is an emergency of this nation’s present and future and it’s demonstratively hooked into and has been constructed by people who seek the nation’s “replacement” with something else (and who are going about doing that very thing).

Yeah, well, they got the ball rolling. It has momentum. It is headed for that end result. The problem is that you are so ignorant or malevolent to think that just replacing D with R is enough to prevent the ball from reaching its goal. It is not. We need someone first and foremost with personality that can talk directly to the people and convince them of their conservative policy goals. It does not matter if you have perfect conservative if they convince no one we need to change course, and it does not matter if you are mega persuasive if your policy goals are bad. That leaves a very small group people to choose from to elect to office that can accomplish the goal we both seem to want, and that is returning America to the road of prosperity and shared opportunity instead of the current road of impoverishment and shared sacrifice. Thus, not just any old R will do, and if you think it will, you are wrong.

I can find fault in EVERY candidate, in EVERY individual, in all possible offerings for the Presidency. But THE FOCUS in terms of voter awareness needs to be on what I’d call a tourniquet on a bleeding artery, not a facial at a salon.

I can find all those flaws as well. We are just on opposite sides of the coin. Your side of the coin is that any R is better, so vote any R, no matter how progressive they are. My side of the coin is, we are heading in the wrong direction on the wrong road and we have are heavily loaded with no brakes and a cliff is not far away, and not just any old person is going to have the ability to get us slowed down, turned around, and put on the right road. Only someone with a strong personal character will slow us down, only someone with a strong personality will get us turned around and only someone with the right road map will get us on the right path.

We can devote time and public discourse to trying to ruin one another, or, we can pause and find constructive points to praise about individuals despite their failings. The goal should be not on destroying peer-reputations and potential successes but on working together to represent the best of us.

Some people need to be ruined. It is called responsibility. Instead of abstaining from your responsibility of electing people who are beneficial for our nation, you are only concerned with electing people who happen to have the same letter designation as you carry. I am sorry, but you are acting like “R” is a too big to fail corporation. No it is not. If the Republican party does not want to provide us with the goods we are looking for, then they deserve to fail. Put up or shut up is the general theme here. Many of the people with Rs next to their name just are not putting up something that will benefit the nation.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:17 PM

Principals before Party….

idesign on June 17, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Some people need to be ruined. It is called responsibility. Instead of abstaining from your responsibility of electing people who are beneficial for our nation, you are only concerned with electing people who happen to have the same letter designation as you carry. I am sorry, but you are acting like “R” is a too big to fail corporation. No it is not. If the Republican party does not want to provide us with the goods we are looking for, then they deserve to fail. Put up or shut up is the general theme here. Many of the people with Rs next to their name just are not putting up something that will benefit the nation.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 7:21 PM

You have far too much time on your hands. I doubt there are many candidates keen on your vote, by the way.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Your side of the coin is that any R is better, so vote any R, no matter how progressive they are. astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 7:21 PM

No, that isn’t my side of your hypothetical coin.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 7:23 PM

I know no one among Republicans who wants to elect or who supports Progressives.

Romney, Newt. No one support progressives? Is that so. I guess the idea of what a progressive is seems to evade you.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 7:24 PM

Every individual has a responsibility to their own conscience.

If you vote in any other way than as directed by your conscience you are in error.

If there is a candidate with whose principles you agree, and you vote instead for a candidate with whose principles you do not, you are in error. Making that choice because of polls, because of news reports regarding “electability”, “gravitas”, or any other outside input, defines you as a sheep, easily led to slaughter.

If you select a perceived lesser of two evils while a choice exists which you would not define as evil, you are in error.

Vote your conscience, every time you vote.

Let me put it this way. If it is true that a majority of this nation has identified as more conservative than liberal, and if every single voter followed their conscience, the outcome would be fairly obvious. Well, the overlords cannot have it that way. Instead, they guide the voters into selecting a McCain to be beaten. And the voters fell for it because too many of them believed the lie about who was “electable”.

Vote your conscience, tell everyone you know to do the same, and let the chips fall where they may.

Freelancer on June 17, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Freelancer on June 17, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Part of the reason I will vote Obama if the general populace decides to pick the “electable” candidate. Without my vote, and maybe hundreds of thousands of others, and having those same votes turn up in Obama’s pool, doubling the value of the protest, I aim to make certain that “electable” is not so.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 8:00 PM

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 7:21 PM

I like the cut of your jib.

miConsevative on June 17, 2011 at 8:12 PM

Anyone not think ROMNEY would be better than Obama?

CW on June 17, 2011 at 8:19 PM

I will vote Obama
astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 8:00 PM

If you will only vote for someone that is not “electable” isn’t that the same as voting for Obama? Same result either way. Though you’re reasoning is weird as hell, you get to vote for whoever you please.

mike_NC9 on June 17, 2011 at 8:27 PM

CW on June 17, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Depends on the timeline you look at.

January, 2013 to January 2017 he would be better than Obama. January, 2017 to January 2021 he would be worse than Obama. If he win re-election, his continued progressive policies would keep America on the wrong track, albeit a bit slower. If he loses re-election, it means we turn over the government to another even more progressive than Romney for those four years. From January, 2021 onward, he would continue to be worse than leaving Obama in office, as he will have further deteriorated the value of the Republican brand. That is, unless his election brings about a third party that quickly replaces the Republican party and sends the RINOs to the democratic party for protection from unemployment.

Anyone thinking electing a progressive Republican to office over Obama in 2012 is better for the country has a 4 year plan. I think we should be looking at 20 year plans. What is going to leave our children a better life.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 8:29 PM

If you will only vote for someone that is not “electable” isn’t that the same as voting for Obama? Same result either way. Though you’re reasoning is weird as hell, you get to vote for whoever you please.

mike_NC9 on June 17, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Then it does not matter, because if the people who can save the nation are unelectable, it no longer matters what we vote. So, we might as well end the charade sooner rather than later, and fight it out. Those who win the civil war will make the new rules for society, just as happened in 1776 and 1860.

Romney will not prevent the collapse of the nation, he is a progressive. He will simply delay it 4 years or so. Same with Newt Gingrich, same with Huntsman, likely the same with Pawlenty, although his failure would be more due to him being a wimp that is unable to make changes he wants implemented.

So, your argument fails on that level. The second level it fails on is the term “electable”. Do you really think that there is such a thing as an unelectable candidate? Even McCain was electable in 2008. He just was a failure of his own blind racism (yes, giving benefits to people of other races than your own counts as racist) and progressive ideals (too big to fail). Bush was unelectable in 2004, but he made it through just fine. Bush was also unelectable in 2000, but he made it through. Reagan was unelectable, we all know how that worked out for the Republican party and conservatives more specific. Another failure on your argument.

And the idea I get to vote for whoever I please is a worthless argument.
In order of value.
1) I could suck it up and vote for the brand name, but to me, if they are not going to fix the country, but simply prolong the demise, I am worse off. Until you reach the bottom of a recession, you cannot start the recovery.
2) I could just not vote, again, no value.
3) I can throw my vote away by writing in a name, but it is thrown away with the only value being of the quality of a vanity plate.
4) I can vote for Obama. This gives the most value. I am young enough to fight in a civil war today and a decade or so more, thus if I vote Obama, and he can bring the collapse of the American dollar and our economy faster than the R, my vote for him gives me value.
5) I can vote for a conservative that is on the ballot under the brand of R that has a high likely hood of winning due to the situation the country is in. Massive value.

According to my chart, voting Obama if the primary voters decide to pick a progressive is my next best option.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 8:47 PM

I respectfully disagree. Palin is still the main draw for me.

Hey, are you still in TX? Thanks for deserting us in Illinois, lol, more taxes for me to pay.

I just saw the IL redistricting maps last night. The Dems went for the freshmen Republicans’ jugulars. It’s a bloodbath. The map looks like creepy outstretched fingers reaching out from Chicago to strangle the more conservative collar counties. Un-fricken-believable.

Fallon on June 17, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Heh heh. Illinois republicans got soooo scr*wed.
tom cross and Pat Brady should have been toast loooong ago.
Come to Lubbock-where we are.
Lubbock doesn’t have all the cool stuff that Chi has…except for being the most conservative county in TX.
Freedom smells wonderful!

annoyinglittletwerp on June 18, 2011 at 12:23 AM

Yeah, me, too. With eyes open, however.

It’s very important for people to stop trying to condemn Republicans and start focusing with intensity on condemning the current disaster in office.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 6:03 PM

No question.
Obama’s the enemy-not ANY GOP presidential hopeful…except Ron Paul.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 18, 2011 at 12:30 AM

And we/you/whoever does ourselves/yourself/whomever’s self any good by shredding every possible candidate from a range of candidates from among the same party that is attempting to reaffirm Capitalism, faith and fidelity to our Constitution and so much more, from the Executive Branch, and therefore, the Judiciary, and from Congress.

What we have today is what I’d call an emergency of abusive mismanagement of our nation by a limping Democrat majority in the Senate and certainly by highly irrational, or badly misleading, people in the Executive Branch.

It’s not a simple election next year. It’s not “simply” party politics of personalities for the most media time or other vanity needs by various individuals. What we have today is an emergency of this nation’s present and future and it’s demonstratively hooked into and has been constructed by people who seek the nation’s “replacement” with something else (and who are going about doing that very thing).

I can find fault in EVERY candidate, in EVERY individual, in all possible offerings for the Presidency. But THE FOCUS in terms of voter awareness needs to be on what I’d call a tourniquet on a bleeding artery, not a facial at a salon.

We can devote time and public discourse to trying to ruin one another, or, we can pause and find constructive points to praise about individuals despite their failings. The goal should be not on destroying peer-reputations and potential successes but on working together to represent the best of us.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 6:59 PM

One of the best posts I’ve read here in weeks.

Too bad this can’t be copied and permanently pasted to the top of Hot Air for the whole primary season.

Especially the parts I bolded.

Thanks so much.

I disagree with a lot of things with Romney. Way too moderate for me. And I personally think he is not as electable as some other conservative candidates this year. Because I don’t think he has it in him to really attack Obama where it will count and that will be necessary. And I think Romneycare takes Obamacare off the table for criticism, no matter what Romney says. And Obamacare will be big in defeating Obama with Independents this year. They are ready for a conservative.

But Romney would be head and shoulders above Obama and this year is unlike any election of my life. I don’t think this country (as we know it) will survive 4 more years of Obama. We can talk about conservative purity and rehash the 2008 primary season 4 years from now.

We need to compare issues and who is more electable (all can be elected, but some more easily and more assuredly than others). But we shouldn’t trash our candidates and we shouldn’t come up with talking points to hand over to the Democrats in the general election.

Name calling our candidates and saying they are just like Obama or would make a terrible President is ridiculous and dangerous this year.

Yes, I want a real conservative and I think they are more electable this year than moderates. But I would vote for Hillary Clinton if she was running against Obama. And I never thought I would hate a politician more than either of the Clintons.

but at least the Clintons liked this country and were not actively trying to destroy it and were practical when faced with a Republican congress that reined him in.

Elisa on June 18, 2011 at 12:46 AM

And we/you/whoever does ourselves/yourself/whomever’s self any good by shredding every possible candidate from a range of candidates from among the same party that is attempting to reaffirm Capitalism, faith and fidelity to our Constitution and so much more, from the Executive Branch, and therefore, the Judiciary, and from Congress.

What we have today is what I’d call an emergency of abusive mismanagement of our nation by a limping Democrat majority in the Senate and certainly by highly irrational, or badly misleading, people in the Executive Branch.

It’s not a simple election next year. It’s not “simply” party politics of personalities for the most media time or other vanity needs by various individuals. What we have today is an emergency of this nation’s present and future and it’s demonstratively hooked into and has been constructed by people who seek the nation’s “replacement” with something else (and who are going about doing that very thing).

I can find fault in EVERY candidate, in EVERY individual, in all possible offerings for the Presidency. But THE FOCUS in terms of voter awareness needs to be on what I’d call a tourniquet on a bleeding artery, not a facial at a salon.

We can devote time and public discourse to trying to ruin one another, or, we can pause and find constructive points to praise about individuals despite their failings. The goal should be not on destroying peer-reputations and potential successes but on working together to represent the best of us.

Lourdes on June 17, 2011 at 6:59 PM

Sanity decides to visit HA…at last.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 18, 2011 at 1:09 AM

Sanity decides to visit HA…at last.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 18, 2011 at 1:09 AM

Aw, don’t be like that, Twerp. This is the way I’ve always felt! I’m just not so good at articulating. :-/

gryphon202 on June 18, 2011 at 1:43 AM

My comments have been directed toward the R primary, after that I will vote FOR the R nominee. I hope that will be someone conservative for it’s imperative that we not only slow the headlong rush towards socialism but also actually start to turn America back. A Republican that believes (or once did before running for elected office) in Man made global warming, Cap & Tax schemes, bigger government, etc. won’t be the person turn America. The task of turning America back will then fall to Congress where I hope we can elect more conservatives who will hopefully craft and send to the new R POTUS legislation to not only slow America but turn the wheel starboard…

Gohawgs on June 18, 2011 at 3:36 AM

Aw, don’t be like that, Twerp. This is the way I’ve always felt! I’m just not so good at articulating. :-/

gryphon202 on June 18, 2011 at 1:43 AM
*sends over cookies in peace offering.*

annoyinglittletwerp on June 18, 2011 at 7:46 AM

Anyone thinking electing a progressive Republican to office over Obama in 2012 is better for the country has a 4 year plan. I think we should be looking at 20 year plans. What is going to leave our children a better life.

astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 8:29 PM

One more SCOTUS appointment by obaka, and you can kiss this country good-bye for your children.

ladyingray on June 18, 2011 at 8:08 AM

One more SCOTUS appointment by obaka, and you can kiss this country good-bye for your children.

ladyingray on June 18, 2011 at 8:08 AM

One SCOTUS appointment by Romney could be just as bad given Romney’s progressive policy leanings. Maybe you’d better worry about actually helping to nominate a candidate in the primaries before you sh!t yourself over the general.

gryphon202 on June 18, 2011 at 9:42 AM

One SCOTUS appointment by Romney could be just as bad given Romney’s progressive policy leanings. Maybe you’d better worry about actually helping to nominate a candidate in the primaries before you sh!t yourself over the general.

gryphon202 on June 18, 2011 at 9:42 AM

You’re the one sh!tting yourself.

ladyingray on June 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM

ladyingray on June 18, 2011 at 8:08 AM

4 year plan. Glad to see you admit that you are a short term thinker. What ever makes life better just for you for a short while. It is the same mindset that has this nation driving towards the abyss. If we just spend a bit more money, we can be better off today, and we will “gladly pay” for it Tuesday pass the debt onto our children as burdens of slavery. I suppose if you have children, you plan to have hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt you leave them, because every time it is between sacrificing a small bit on yourself and borrowing another 10,000 to feed your selfish wants sacrifice takes the back seat.

Any old retard with a R next to their name is going to keep this country headed for the abyss. Play it any way you want, but in 20 years, it is not going to make a difference if the person in the drivers seat is (D) or (R) if the (R) is remotely progressive big government. The only way we avoid this ending is with a conservative in office with a commanding personality that can actually accomplish things that no one else can.

So, if the person on the stage does not have the ability to accomplish the changes required to turn this nation around, what is the point in promoting them? To buy a couple more years of living on credit? It is like the poor terminal patient who wants to have special care taken at extraordinary costs to extend their life a few more days who then leave a mountain of debt to their children or as a burden society has to absorb.

I will not support the candidate offering a slow ride over the edge of the abyss. It is very simple. Either pick someone who will turn the whole thing around and return prosperity, or just let the thing get over with so we can start picking up the pieces sooner. Stop being a bunch of selfish short sighted immoral whiners. You are pathetic.

astonerii on June 18, 2011 at 10:34 AM

just let the thing get over with so we can start picking up the pieces sooner. Stop being a bunch of selfish short sighted immoral whiners. You are pathetic.

astonerii on June 18, 2011 at 10:34 AM

The two Justices that Obama put on the supreme court will be legislating their progressive agenda for the next 30 years. I have a responsibility to the future to prevent them from being saddled with justices that will strip them of their freedoms. Slow decline or no, the GOP candidate will be better than Obama.

csdeven on June 18, 2011 at 11:40 AM

csdeven on June 18, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Look at the chart of values. I. do. not. care. if the progressive (R) is going to give me a more comfortable ride to the abyss.

astonerii on June 18, 2011 at 12:04 PM

The abyss is staring at us and is eating us at 1.7 trillion a year. It’s called debt and cares nothing for politics or people.

Anyone who feeds the beast is a willing accomplice in their own distruction.

itsspideyman on June 19, 2011 at 10:44 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5