Poll: Plurality prefers Christie to Palin or Jeb Bush as dark-horse nominee

posted at 5:05 pm on February 22, 2012 by Allahpundit

Worth blogging for two reasons. One: I need to make a correction. Contra my earlier posts, Palin vs. Bush at the convention would not in fact be the greatest blog story ever. Palin vs. Christie, which would be ten times as nasty, would be the greatest blog story ever. Forget the delegate count and backroom maneuvering; just imagine the war of words between them and their supporters. Traffic apocalypse.

Two: My sense is that Daniels is the likeliest of all potential candidates to jump in if we do end up deadlocked at the convention. One of his top advisors said a few days ago that people are practically pounding down his door demanding that he run and his pal Haley Barbour told National Review just yesterday that it’s “highly unlikely but it could happen,” a sentiment with which Jim DeMint agrees. Which brings us to the poll: According to Quinnipiac, Daniels is … the least desired of the four would-be nominees they asked about.

Daniels finishes fourth out of four in every demographic except tea partiers and Republicans who earn between $50,000 and $100,000 per year, where he finishes a few points ahead of Jeb Bush. That’ll weigh heavily on party brokers if/when the time comes to nudge a consensus candidate into the race. The only way to overcome the chaos of a brokered convention and the disorganization of the eventual nominee is to find someone who can instantly energize the base while exciting independents. Daniels would probably do fine with the latter but he’s fourth on the depth chart with the former, and might have been fifth had Paul Ryan’s name been included here. Christie, who leads among conservatives and leads big among moderates, would be the obvious first choice, especially since he’s likely to scoop up plenty of Romney delegates due to his affiliation with the campaign. The question is, if the convention did deadlock, would a deal be struck behind the scenes so that only one candidate (i.e. Christie) stepped forward as a consensus choice, with his/her nomination a fait accompli, or would it be a free-for-all where two or more candidates suddenly offered themselves for consideration after the first ballot went nowhere? That’s the party’s true nightmare, I think — a contentious primary battle between three candidates ends in a stalemate, whereupon a batch of new candidates emerge and … end up in a stalemate themselves. But then, that’s why party brokers are looking for someone who can appeal to the right and to the center from the word go. If it’s Daniels, who really can’t do that, the temptation for a tea-party dark horse like Palin to jump in will be greater since there’s room to his right and then you end up with another melee.

All of this assumes, of course, that the GOP will still have some chance of winning in September. If not, then the dreaded “who do you want to lose with?” strategy goes into effect and all bets are off. Via Mediaite, here’s Palin on Hannity last night sounding A-OK with the idea of an unsettled convention. Exit question via Zombie: Is it time to put Operation Equilibrium into effect?


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

Chris Christie?
Jeb?
NEVER!

Jindal?
Palin?
Certainly!

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Please allow me this moment to agree with you whole heartily.

heshtesh on February 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22,2012 at 6:10 PM

I knew there was something I liked about you. I’m a former fat boy myself, until I almost got killed by a gall stone avalanche.

teacherman on February 22, 2012 at 6:21 PM

She’s not “sounding the siren”, she’s driving the damn ambulance at 100 MPH, knocking down the other candidates scratch that – allow me to quote Madison Conservative – “working to undermine them”, one by one. Behold the humble patriot with a servant’s heart in action.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:08 PM

As opposed to Romney’s overweening ego? Yeah. Humility is driving SuperMitt. He is even so humble he’s going to dip into his own money just so that WE poor folks can enjoy his inimitable leadership.

B-b-b-b-but nobody listens to Palin! Right?? If these all-stars in the field can be undermined by someone we’ve been assured is an illiterate, irrelevant joke, then we’re going to get the wrong nominee anyway. You’ve got nothing but weak tea on the ticket either way.

ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

I am not a Romney fan, but I’d prefer him to Christie. I trust the Fat Man even less than Mittens.

bw222 on February 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Poll: Plurality prefers Christie to Palin or Jeb Bush as dark-horse nominee
…without total cluelessness and ignorance there would be NO RINOs. How many of those participating know that christy out-RINOs RINO romney(care), out-RINOs AMNESTY-JOHN mccain and is PRO-AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS, PRO-ABORTION, PRO-MAN-MADE GLOBULL WARMING HOAX, PRO-GUN-CONTROL, DOESN’T WORRY ABOUT SHARIA LAW … and has other positions too despicable to mention?

TeaPartyNation on February 22, 2012 at 5:15 PM

I never got what all the fuss was about Christie in the first place. Yeah, his yelling at the teachers’ unions was pretty entertaining, but I’ve also read lots of troubling reports about his much-less-than-conservative views that pretty much convince me he shouldn’t be anywhere near the Oval Office.

PatriotGal2257 on February 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Fat chance for Christie. It’s fun watching him bully libtards and unions, but he’s just as happy to bully anyone against the ground zero mosque, climate skeptics, crap n trade nay sayers as well as ObamneyCare haters.

AH_C on February 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

She’s not “sounding the siren”, she’s driving the damn ambulance at 100 MPH, knocking down the other candidates scratch that – allow me to quote Madison Conservative – “working to undermine them”, one by one. Behold the humble patriot with a servant’s heart in action.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:08 PM

And Romney spending $30 million per month carpet bombing his GOP opponents is not undermining the effort to get rid of Obama?

karenhasfreedom on February 22, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Have fun, guys, searching for your “purer than snow” conservative. You’re gonna lose – and lose big in November. Then, all the rest of us will be stuck with Obama – vastly, dramatically more to the left than any conceivable Republican nominee you can imagine.

You’re going for the whole loaf instead of 3/4 or 2/3 – and you’re gonna end up with the Obama granola bar when it’s all over.

I’d love Christie. Daniels would be super. Either one would have a chance at beating Obama – as would Romney.

Santorum? Happy to have him preach at anyone’s church. But America does not have a state religion and too many of you seem to think that it does.

Our nation does not. And if you nominate someone who seems to behave as if it does, we’ll lose – and lose big.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Me too! Me too!

nicktjacob on February 22, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Have fun, guys, searching for your “purer than snow” conservative. You’re gonna lose – and lose big in November.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

It’s the moderate losers who are the purists. Can’t have anyone less than purely squishy…even though their track record in national elections sucks out loud. Nope, can’t have anyone that has so much as a whiff of religiosity about them.

And what’s this about “us” losing big? You’re going to get your Moderate Demigod in Mitt, and we’ll see how he does, won’t we?

ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM

So predicable, PruneDanish loses her fudge again over Palin.

Happens every time.

SparkPlug on February 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:08 PM

And Romney spending $30 million per month carpet bombing his GOP opponents is not undermining the effort to get rid of Obama?

karenhasfreedom on February 22, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Nope. Mitt does no wrong in the mind of a MittBot with rabid zealotry burned into their sanctimonious hide.

SparkPlug on February 22, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Nothing good starts until the idea is sold.

Speakup on February 22, 2012 at 6:34 PM

teacherman on February 22, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Since we’re both short, we look like a short version(size-wise) of Laurel and Hardy. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Christie and ol Jebbers have had about .0000001% of the vetting Palin has had, she`d generate far and away the most enthusiasm, just the way it is.

NY Conservative on February 22, 2012 at 6:35 PM

I’m a petite woman married to a fat guy.
Don’t knock it-until you’ve tried it.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Exactly. Don’t women know about comfort?

katy the mean old lady on February 22, 2012 at 6:36 PM

The RINOs apparently think that Willard is toast, so they’re suggesting moderates like Daniels, Christie and Jeb Bush. They don’t have the decency to accept the people’s choice in the Republican primaries, so they’re conniving in the back room.

The spectacle of Haley Barbour–one of Washington’s biggest (and fattest) lobbyists–pimping for Mitch Daniels should make every Republican recoil in horror. All this “brokered convention” is about is the RINOs want a moderate they can do business with. If Gingrich, Paul or Santorum cut Federal spending to the bone, the lobbyists will have nothing to give their clients.

The GOP should look at the demise of the RINO Progressive Conservative party in Canada, now extinct, to see where they are headed.

Emperor Norton on February 22, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Fat is where it’s at.

On to Tampa…

Bruno Strozek on February 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM

…searching for your “purer than snow” conservative. You’re gonna lose – …

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Nice strawman, idiot. Many would like to have a conservative to vote for, not a POS RINO. We’ve heard that irritating strawman of yours since 2007 ad nauseum. Fact: An Obama-lite RINO will lose, just as McCain did, even with a “conservative” running mate slobbering over them speech after speech. Get it through your head.

nottakingsides on February 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM

and too many of you seem to think that it does.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Really? Many? Names please. It should be easy but I will not hold my breath.

CW on February 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Meh. Two ends of the spectrum for me, Paul and Christie. I’ll park my fatbehind. Gah-head, beat me with the ‘then I’m voting for Barry’ stick.

Limerick on February 22, 2012 at 6:40 PM

If not for the SCOTUS appointments I would be much more inclined towards voting my actual conscience instead of for one of the actual candidates. But the fact that the next president will almost certainly replace 1-3 Justices pushes me to vote for the eventual GOP candidate no matter how squishy or horrible.

That being said, I would object furiously to Christie being that nominee. Like many others have said in various ways, he is only conservative in relation to the deep, deep blue of other NJ politicians. On 2A matters, an issue quite important to me although I am far from a single issue voter, it appears that he may be as anti-gun as Obama. I think that once vetted he would prove to make even moderate-conservatives cringe at his multitude of liberal leanings.

deepdiver on February 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

As opposed to Romney’s overweening ego? Yeah. Humility is driving SuperMitt. He is even so humble he’s going to dip into his own money just so that WE poor folks can enjoy his inimitable leadership.

B-b-b-b-but nobody listens to Palin! Right?? If these all-stars in the field can be undermined by someone we’ve been assured is an illiterate, irrelevant joke, then we’re going to get the wrong nominee anyway. You’ve got nothing but weak tea on the ticket either way.
ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Bitter Clinger, what the hell does this have to do with Romney? Is he calling for a brokered convention?

As for my quote, MadCon is proud that Palin is doing what I’ve said she’s been doing since Iowa (undermining our candidates), something I was attacked for saying by people like….. you. I was right all along, the only difference being that I think it would be disastrous for the GOP while you all luvvvvvvv the idea because you have some fantasy of exacting revenge on the “establishment” or something.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Danish, I can’t believe you’re still pimping that graverobber from Massachusetts.

Mittcare should be a disqualifier for any serious Reagan Conservative. I mean, his staffers sat down with the Obama people and coached them on what to do with mandates.

Then there’s the thing with the dog, but let’s not go there.

Sorry, Danish. There’s no insult you can come up with to demean Palin enough to sell Romney to the Reagan Wing of the Party. Obama Lite is Obama Lite.

Nevertheless, if he IS the nominee, I’ll vote for him. After all, Obama Lite is better than Obama.

victor82 on February 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM

What do you recommend for a 60+ old, fat balding guy?

marinetbryant on February 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

And Romney spending $30 million per month carpet bombing his GOP opponents is not undermining the effort to get rid of Obama?
karenhasfreedom on February 22, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Not if he wins, dear. You know, I love how you all conveniently neglect to mention Newt’s PAC with its disgraceful attacks on Romney/Bain, Perry’s Vulture Capitalism attacks, Newt’s starving Holocaust victims Robocalls, Santorum’s own negative ads and endless whining, and so forth. They are hardly innocents here, and pardon me if I don’t feel sorry for them for not having raised as much money or gotten their names on ballots.

Moreover, as I asked your comrade, Bitter Clinger, what the hell does this have to do with Palin doing everything in her power to get to a brokered convention?

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:47 PM

victor82 on February 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Vicky, I’m not interested in your idiotic opinions. Let’s deal with the cold hard facts: Do you deny Palin is encouraging a brokered convention (and offering herself up as the chosen one)?

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Moreover, as I asked your comrade, Bitter Clinger, what the hell does this have to do with Palin doing everything in her power to get to a brokered convention?

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Behold the power of Palin..:)

idesign on February 22, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Fat chance for Christie. It’s fun watching him bully libtards and unions, but he’s just as happy to bully anyone against the ground zero mosque, climate skeptics, crap n trade nay sayers as well as ObamneyCare haters.

AH_C on February 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

This.

Connie on February 22, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Note the the Elites, Establishment or whatever you call yoursleves these days:

You made us swallow McCain.

Now you’ll Gulp on live TV.

You’ll swallow who WE tell you to swallow, digest and embrace.

/And they said the Tea Party was dead. Bet me, buckwheat.

Key West Reader on February 22, 2012 at 6:53 PM

CC: SparkPlug on February 22, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Why don’t you all just embrace Palin’s coy game instead of shooting the messenger (me)?

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:53 PM

I prefer all of Christie, Palin, J. Bush, Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney to Obama.

I don’t think a single one of them is The Savior Of America And The One Candidate Who Can Bring Us All Together Because He Or She Is Not A Stupid Moronic Fill-In-Your-Antipathy-Of-Choice ‘Tard/Bot Like All The Rest Of Them.

Not even one.

J.E. Dyer on February 22, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Bummer.

Posts are getting lost in cyberspace.

America? Vote with your heart and your soul. That’s always a winner, no matter where you are.

Key West Reader on February 22, 2012 at 6:58 PM

J.E. Dyer on February 22, 2012 at 6:56 PM

There’s only one person on your list who is actively advocating a brokered convention.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:59 PM

There’s only one person on your list who is actively advocating a brokered convention.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:59 PM

A non sequitur. Perhaps you can provide the unstated premise that led you to make this point.

J.E. Dyer on February 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Not a Mitt fan here, but I somewhat agree with Buy Danish. I do not think that Palin has helped any of the conservative candidates, especially several months ago. I don’t know that I believe this is a conspiracy to get her the nomination, but I do know I have been disappointed in her remarks from the sidelines. Kinda like the Dixie Chicks “shut up and sing,” she should have “shut up or run.”

jazzuscounty on February 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Have fun, guys, searching for your “purer than snow” conservative. You’re gonna lose – and lose big in November.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

It’s the moderate losers who are the purists. Can’t have anyone less than purely squishy…even though their track record in national elections sucks out loud. Nope, can’t have anyone that has so much as a whiff of religiosity about them.

And what’s this about “us” losing big? You’re going to get your Moderate Demigod in Mitt, and we’ll see how he does, won’t we?

ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Mitt is not my first choice; not by a long shot. But I’m a realist. A national vote is not made up of primarily Republican voters. There’s a sea of liberal Democrats, of people who will vote for Obama come what may because of race, libertarians, fiscal conservatives w/social liberalism… not to mention an electoral college which will deliver large numbers of votes to Obama from the start.

If many of you think that Santorum can win enough electoral votes across the nation with the type of electorate we have and the system that we have – more power to you. I sure do not. And, while we have the chance, I’d far prefer to select a moderate Republican as a candidate that has a good chance to defeat Obama, than a staunch conservative (who hasn’t always seemed that fiscally conservative, b.t.w.) who will lose.

I’m still hoping that the nominee will not be Santorum. It would give me no pleasure to say “I told you so.”

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 7:03 PM

I would suggest that the people who think that Chris Christie is the answer read this series we did over a year ago on just what a RINO Christie really is:

Chris Christie: A Conservative Myth – Intro

Learn something about what you wish for, you will have less of a hangover the next day.

RZuendt on February 22, 2012 at 7:03 PM

prefer all of Christie, Palin, J. Bush, Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney to Obama.

I don’t think a single one of them is The Savior Of America And The One Candidate Who Can Bring Us All Together Because He Or She Is Not A Stupid Moronic Fill-In-Your-Antipathy-Of-Choice ‘Tard/Bot Like All The Rest Of Them.

Not even one.

J.E. Dyer on February 22, 2012 at 6:56

My husband tried to feed me this meme; that whatshisface can’t be defeated.

We are going to be alright. No matter what, America will defeat communism, marxism and statissm.

We all agree, these theologies are not who We Are. Therefore they will be defeated. The MSM will do their best.

Let’s focus on laughing at them. For the next 9 months. I have lots of laughter personally.

Key West Reader on February 22, 2012 at 7:04 PM

marinetbryant on February 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM
Dunno.
I’m early 40′s married to a 50+ short, fat, balding former USMC.
Get a younger-but no too much younger-woman? *I’m joking btw*
Cats are good too.
My tabby(we have a few cats) prefers to perch on my husband rather than me because my husband…has room to perch. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Plurality?

Of them all, only Christie takes up enough real estate to be a plurality all bu himself.

Oh, and I agree with J.J. on this one:

“Stay out da bushes”

LegendHasIt on February 22, 2012 at 7:04 PM

I think Christie is a good-lookin’ man-and more importantly-is good for NJ-but let’s not pretend that he’s some conservative knight in shining armor. He’s not.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 7:08 PM

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 7:03 PM

+ 100..You are using the Buckley Rule..:)

Dire Straits on February 22, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Christie seems to be mostly appealing to men, and to men who find his “tough guy talk” appealing — Christie is ‘liked’ of sorts because there’s an expectation that he’d over-bombast Obama and so many of us on the Right really want to see Obama sent packing (so that “tough guy talk” Christie would talk tough to him, so it’s anticipated, or, perhaps, imagined).

Other than that, he fails to suit me as a voter on the issues…

How many of those participating know that christy out-RINOs RINO romney(care), out-RINOs AMNESTY-JOHN mccain and is PRO-AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS, PRO-ABORTION, PRO-MAN-MADE GLOBULL WARMING HOAX, PRO-GUN-CONTROL, DOESN’T WORRY ABOUT SHARIA LAW…and has other positions too despicable to mention?

Christie’s appealing on a street level. The same seems to apply to Gingrich, the expectation that they’d show Obama up in some “Talk Competition” or something.

Jeb Bush is too Left for my liking and despite all the criticism about my views about Palin, I can’t see her capable to the Office of the Presidency == we’ve already got one entertainer in the White House and that hasn’t worked out well at all, so I can’t see promoting another one (from ANY party, regardless).

If there are alternatives to current candidates, I’d hope for Paul Ryan.

Lourdes on February 22, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Santorum is going to whipe the floor with Established Plastic Rhino.

I see Gingrich supporting him.

I’m still thinking about Condi Rice (Sec State) When Santorum decides to declare.

Interesting.

Key West Reader on February 22, 2012 at 7:18 PM

She better get her message straight for her devoted fans. There will be some holding their breath up until Monday, Nov. 5th waiting for a surprise announcement.

If she’s all about defeating Obama and restoring some semblance to this country, then act like it rather than playing coy. This is very confusing for some.

This election isn’t about her.

salem on February 22, 2012 at 7:18 PM

I’m beginning to consider Operation Extreme: vote for the most small government guy, Ron Paul, even though you think he’d probably lose, since at this point party infighting has probably lost the election anyway and we may as well define our limited government principles on a grand stage.

netster007x on February 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM

J.E. Dyer on February 22, 2012 at 6:56

Key West Reader on February 22, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Demagoguery is the biggest liability.

Obama is the product of such a campaign and the media continues to try to create or recreate Obama as demagogue and to use others as possible or even “competitor” demagogues.

It’s a failure on the Right to try to create similar on the Right — no one will ever fulfill such delusions as the Left has hoisted with the media doing all that work to accomplish.

I think this is why it’s irritating when one candidate on the Right is pushed and any criticism of that candidate is condemned (and the critic harassed) — because the Right doesn’t pervasively “do” demagoguery and recognizes it as a Leftwing, personality-cult type mislead.

So I favor the people who stick to issues and who others don’t go nuts over on a personality basis and try to limit affections for entertainers to the figures in the entertainment industry.

Lourdes on February 22, 2012 at 7:23 PM

I’m still thinking about Condi Rice (Sec State)…

Key West Reader on February 22, 2012 at 7:18 PM

She’s pro-abortion (“prochoice”) so right there she’s got a big liability.

Lourdes on February 22, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I somewhat agree with Buy Danish. I do not think that Palin has helped any of the conservative candidates, especially several months ago. I don’t know that I believe this is a conspiracy to get her the nomination, but I do know I have been disappointed in her remarks from the sidelines. Kinda like the Dixie Chicks “shut up and sing,” she should have “shut up or run.”

jazzuscounty on February 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Yes, agreed. It’s encouraged her lack of credibility, in my view.

Lourdes on February 22, 2012 at 7:27 PM

netster007x on February 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM

vote for the Ronulan?
I rather be force-fed hornets while having snails shoved up my nose and being set on fire.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I’m still thinking about Condi Rice (Sec State) When Santorum decides to declare.

Key West Reader on February 22, 2012 at 7:18 PM

I liked Condi until she inserted herself into the Israeli-Lebanon conflict.

John the Libertarian on February 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

It all comes down to: getting Obama out of the White House.

Lourdes on February 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

A non sequitur. Perhaps you can provide the unstated premise that led you to make this point.
J.E. Dyer on February 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Isn’t this thread about who voters would like to see in the event we reach this (nightmarish) stage?

How is that a non sequitur? As a reminder, you once said:

But in the process, the voters have been changing. That’s what Palin saw before others did. Do I think she is counting the days to a brokered convention? No. There is no one who could reasonably adopt that as a “plan.” She won’t run this year; that’s my rational assessment as well as my gut feeling. (I could of course be wrong, although I think some big conditions will have to change more for that to be the case.)

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 7:31 PM

This is a nightmare of a thread,.. I don’t want a brokered convention, but wish we had been allowed better choices. The fact is, we can’t even agree to disagree anymore..

mark81150 on February 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

No, it is not demagoguery it is conviction, the other candidates have none, Christie ‘threw a much better man’ in Bret Schundler in order to curry favor, with the Jersey unions, sucked up to Imam Rauf,
counted on the RGGI to support the state budget. Bush was a decent governor, but he seems very eager in purging any notion of the Tea Party out of the system, Daniels doesn’t even inspire enough notion
to oppose,

narciso on February 22, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Christie is a great choice.

He’s an uber-RINO par excellence. Sure to energize an already depressed base.

And I don’t care if we’re the most obese nation on earth, there’s no way in hell the US will elect a brash 400lb whale. Baroque was a stretch, but Keiko’s cousin is a no-go.

It’s shallow and it’s true.

(Apologies to Hot Gassers who weigh more than my ZX-10R).

CorporatePiggy on February 22, 2012 at 7:35 PM

No, it is not demagoguery it is conviction, the other candidates have none, Christie ‘threw a much better man’ in Bret Schundler in order to curry favor, with the Jersey unions, sucked up to Imam Rauf,
counted on the RGGI to support the state budget. Bush was a decent governor, but he seems very eager in purging any notion of the Tea Party out of the system, Daniels doesn’t even inspire enough notion
to oppose,

narciso on February 22, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Emotional fervor to such an extent about a politician that results in maligning and denigration of any and all who “dare to” differ in their degree of fervor (or, suggest lack of fervor) IS an indication of demagoguery.

It’s mass hysteria, idol worship, political irrationality, whatever: demagoguery.

Conviction, on the other hand, is issue oriented. Not personality oriented. You don’t need or “must have” one lone figurehead politician to accomplish issue resolution or achievement, and recognize, when issue-oriented, that there are many who can work to achieve satisfactory goals if not “perfect” ones.

The demand for some perfection or “the only one” figure is what gets populations dictators. It’s never a good idea.

Lourdes on February 22, 2012 at 7:40 PM

It’s the moderate losers who are the purists. Can’t have anyone less than purely squishy…even though their track record in national elections sucks out loud. Nope, can’t have anyone that has so much as a whiff of religiosity about them.

ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Hit the nail on the head once again, ddrintn. Squishes are generally confused about why Tea Party members have come over in droves to support Santorum. It’s not because he’s a “pure conservative.” It’s not because he’s a socon. It’s because they judge him most inclined of the candidates still standing to roll back the government if elected. Most Mitt supporters don’t get this simple truth because they are more comfortable living in a bubble, and those that do get it won’t own up to it because they’d rather make cheap points than be honest.

Burke on February 22, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Geez. Can’t they leave Daniels alone? He chose his family. After everything we’ve seen can you just imagine what they’ll do to his wife and, by extension, his family.

He made a decision and it’s too bad some people can’t respect it.

kim roy on February 22, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Sarah Palin is almost universally disliked. Republicans of all persuasions can’t stand this joke of a woman.

Incompetent, unqualified Sarah Palin was chosen as McCain’s VP running mate because she is a woman. Palin was the biggest affirmative action candidate in presidential political history, bigger even than our affirmative action president Barack Obama.

A man with her lack of experience, lack knowledge and lack of competence would never have been chosen to run with McCain.

There are still some deluded Sarah Palin groupies out there who worship former Alaska governor who QUIT before even finishing one term, but their numbers continue to decline.

bluegill on February 22, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Presidential election IS important, but not as important as getting a Conservative/Tea Party majority in Congress.

This is completely false. They might be equally important. But here’s something that’s not being brought up enough:

Antonin Scalia is 76, Anthony Kennedy is 75, Ginsburg is 78. The next president is likely to get to replace at least one (Ginsburg) and possibly 2 or 3 justices. If Ginsburg is replaced by a Republican appointee it will dramatically shape how the court will be for decades. The same goes for if Obama gets to replace Kennedy or Scalia.

This presidential election is a turning point in our history. The SCOTUS appointments alone make it as important if not more important than winning the Senate and keeping the House in conservative hands, let alone the fact that an Obama victory validates everything he’s done.

cpaulus on February 22, 2012 at 5:59 PM

This cannot be said nearly enough. Do you want another Kagan or “wise Latina”? How about two? You up for three?

*shudder*

kim roy on February 22, 2012 at 7:47 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 5:18 PM

I can agree on Christie, not because of his weight (I’m not svelte but He definitely beats me by at least 10 stone) but i do question his support on things like gun control.

I will take him at his word that he won’t run because New Jersey needs his kind of stewardship more…and if you’ve ever been to New Jersey, you’ll agree. :o)

I give him credit for sticking it to the NJ Legislators during his time..Romney could have definitely used a few pointers in handling the Massachusetts crowd like that.

Jeb? Unlike some of the more vocal I’m hoping he wont run because it’ll seem too much like a Dynasty of holding high office…and we already had enough of the crud with the Kennedy’s and their poorer cousins, the Clintons.

Maybe a new rule: a 2 Generation limit on holding office?

BlaxPac on February 22, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Not a Mitt fan here, but I somewhat agree with Buy Danish. I do not think that Palin has helped any of the conservative candidates, especially several months ago. I don’t know that I believe this is a conspiracy to get her the nomination, but I do know I have been disappointed in her remarks from the sidelines. Kinda like the Dixie Chicks “shut up and sing,” she should have “shut up or run.”
jazzuscounty on February 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

I don’t believe it’s a “conspiracy” per se, but I’ve been saying since her Iowa speech in September that she has been undermining our GOP candidates (while at the same time making laughable statements that we shouldn’t engage in “friendly fire”). I’ve said she can’t be trusted. I’ve said there is a conflict of interest with her working at Fox- offering her biased (and often factually incorrect) analysis vis a vis our candidates and the state of the race, while simultaneously engaging in blatant self-promotion as the White Horse Candidate. Today I had the pleasure of having Madison Conservative tell me:

The candidates that are left, apart from Paul, ARE establishment. So yes, she’s working to undermine them, because she’s anti-establishment. Where’s the hypocrisy?…
MadisonConservative on February 22, 2012 at 12:05 PM

It’s one of my favorite exchanges ever. I had much to say at the thread.

There’s much that delights me about all of this, but having been attacked by her fans for stating the obvious is probably the most chuckleworthy. And gosh, if they don’t continue to attack…

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Right, give me an example of a sterling judge he has selected, now mind you, Weld and Cellucci were probably worse, but that’s not exactly a recommendation,

narciso on February 22, 2012 at 7:50 PM

With the traffic and ad revenue a Palin vs. Christie fight would bring I would think the conservative blogs could get together, pool their resources, bribe Newt, Mitt, Santorum and Paul to all quit and even after that they would still have enough left over to finance both the Palin and Christie campaigns and still turn a tidy profit. You’ve got to spend money to make money, Allah!

alchemist19 on February 22, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Sarah Palin is almost universally disliked by Mittwits.

bluegill on February 22, 2012 at 7:46 PM

fify..:)

idesign on February 22, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Oops. Link to the thread

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Contested elections are in her nature, she challenged the sitting governor, Duke Murkowski of the Kenai, and another insipid RINO
hack, Andrew Halcro, and then two time governor Tony Knowles,

narciso on February 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Sarah Palin is almost universally disliked. Republicans of all persuasions can’t stand this joke of a woman.

Lemme see; I’m a Republican/Conservative…I’d vote for her…in a NY minute over Ron Paul…AND I’d send her more money than I would Romney. And I’m not even a Palinista, nor did i contribute to her financially.

Incompetent, unqualified Sarah Palin was chosen as McCain’s VP running mate because she is a woman.

So you have a definitive inside scoop that shows that McCain (a political fan of his which i am not, but he gets my respect for serving) picked her just because shes a female? Please share this, I’d like to know!

Palin was the biggest affirmative action candidate in presidential political history, bigger even than our affirmative action president Barack Obama.

Insulting, but that aside. IIRC, up until the Democratic primaries, there were 2 candidates that would fall under that rubric (Obama & Clinton)…by the time the General election, it would have been one (Obama), because Palin wasn’t running as President.

Now, if you want to say the ticket was, it’ll still been AA all the way..you had Race, ethnicity, gender and Military service all represented. So what? I still would have voted against Barrack, had he’d been albino white…

It aint the group he could be pigeonholed in…it was his IDEAS that stank on ice.

A man with her lack of experience, lack knowledge and lack of competence would never have been chosen to run with McCain.

Maybe. But then again, Obama had the least amount of experience in the entire field…yet he’s the one that has the title President right now…your point?

There are still some deluded Sarah Palin groupies out there who worship former Alaska governor who QUIT before even finishing one term, but their numbers continue to decline.

bluegill on February 22, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Ah, but now Bluegill, we can see your no SP fan…pray tell, in this field of candidates, who do YOU support that will wrest the WH away from the Dems?

If you say Ron Paul…I won’t be surprised, but I will be snickering…a lot.

BlaxPac on February 22, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Poll: Plurality prefers Christie to Palin or Jeb Bush as dark-horse nominee

Yes, just what the Republican and Conservative base voters are screaming for, a liberal northeastern Republican like Christie.
/Sarcasm off

RJL on February 22, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Plurality prefers Christie to Palin or Jeb Bush as dark-horse nominee

Well, sorry to say, count me in on that. He’s far from the conservative I’d like, but he’d mop the floor with Øbama. And that’s the next step to saving this country from him. The next step is make sure we get him out of the WH, and also hold the House and take back the Senate. After that, MARCO RUBIO prez!

petefrt on February 22, 2012 at 8:11 PM

No way. The only reasons some of the other “candidates” may look more appealing now is because they’ve not been through the tough primary contest.

True, Santorum and Romney both look bruised at the moment. But they have a chance to rebound in the general. On the other hand, nominating someone who’s not been fully vetted is just asking for trouble. Much as I like Sarah Palin, the media killed her just in time for the election, when she was a surprise late entry into the race. The same could very well happen to Bush or Daniels, and even more so to Ryan, Jindal, Rubio etc.

Captain Obvious on February 22, 2012 at 8:13 PM

As for my quote, MadCon is proud that Palin is doing what I’ve said she’s been doing since Iowa (undermining our candidates), something I was attacked for saying by people like….. you. I was right all along, the only difference being that I think it would be disastrous for the GOP…

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Uh, snookums, if we get to a brokered convention, you’d have to say that weak-ass candidate ROMNEY who’s been sold as just a notch below Jesus for the past three years has been the disaster. He couldn’t close the deal. Palin’s not been undermining anyone. She’s just said we need to get a good long swig of Romney aside from all the “he’s the new god of electability and the only one who can beat Obama” crap. If she’s undermining anything it’s the idiotic notion that Romney should be crowned right away so that he doesn’t have to go through what, you know, PALIN has gone through.

ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Well, sorry to say, count me in on that. He’s far from the conservative I’d like, but he’d mop the floor with Øbama.

petefrt on February 22, 2012 at 8:11 PM

Yeah, right. If the campaign consists only of YouTube clips. If Christie had to stay under the spotlight for a while and had to talk about something other than greedy unions, he’d wilt in a hurry.

ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 8:20 PM

I’d far prefer to select a moderate Republican as a candidate that has a good chance to defeat Obama, than a staunch conservative (who hasn’t always seemed that fiscally conservative, b.t.w.) who will lose.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 7:03 PM

That’s exactly what we got last time around. How well did that work out for ya?

chewmeister on February 22, 2012 at 8:25 PM

As for my quote, MadCon is proud that Palin is doing what I’ve said she’s been doing since Iowa (undermining our candidates), something I was attacked for saying by people like….. you. I was right all along, the only difference being that I think it would be disastrous for the GOP…

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Danish, shouldn’t we vet any candidate that wants our vote? Doubly so if the conventional wisdom shouts that we “shouldn’t even debate, this is the guy/gal”?

The only thing i’ve heard her do, is the same as well…as what we’re all doing here. Difference is she has a different medium to reach the Party members with…instead of a blog, she’s able to get some modest press time.

Only time will tell if she’s able to be (or even is trying to be) a “kingmaker”. At best right now, shes a visible commentator…and not a bad lookin one at that.

/yeah its sexist, but I’m a knuckle-dragger, so sue me. lol

BlaxPac on February 22, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Captain Obvious on February 22, 2012 at 8:13 P

You know as well as I, that no matter who the GOP picks, the MSM will do whatever they can to destroy them.

chewmeister on February 22, 2012 at 8:29 PM

I’d far prefer to select a moderate Republican as a candidate that has a good chance to defeat Obama, than a staunch conservative (who hasn’t always seemed that fiscally conservative, b.t.w.) who will lose.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 7:03 PM
That’s exactly what we got last time around. How well did that work out for ya?

chewmeister on February 22, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Exactly, chewmeister. We heard this BS ad nauseum from the pbundy’s for months and months and months, droning on and on about it, all through the 2008 season. They couldn’t have been happier than with McCain. He was supposedly a “shoe-in” and the moderates/liberals/media/hispanics supposedly “loved” them some McCain. Then when the inevitable happens, including the horrid RINO vs. Democrat debates, the pbundy’s disappear until the 2012 season, repeating the same nonsense. Hell, even the hispanics didn’t vote for McCain.

And what is a “staunch” conservative anyway? A really, really, really conservative conservative? One that actually believes in the philosophy, and doesn’t mix in a little Marxism here and there? One that didn’t think that cap/trade was a really good idea? One that didn’t think that socialized medicine/insurance was a good idea? What examples do the pbundy’s have for “staunch” conservatives losing to Marxists in presidential elections, due to them being “staunch”?

nottakingsides on February 22, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Admit it, all of you Palin or Christie haters would be happier with either in the white house than Romney/Santorum/Newt.

jhffmn on February 22, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Christie’s major accomplishments in office is taking a state helicopter to see his kids little league game, lowering the state flag for a singer, endorsing liberals like Mitt romney, meg whitman, mike castle etc.. Christie was manufactured by Fox news, without them he would just be obese.

Gov. Palin is the only candidate who is authentic and would take the fight to obama and when she won would actually try to clean that cesspool in washington up!

Danielvito on February 22, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Gov. Palin is the only candidate who is authentic and would take the fight to obama and when she won would actually try to clean that cesspool in washington up!

Danielvito on February 22, 2012 at 8:56 PM

+1,000

idesign on February 22, 2012 at 9:01 PM

How any poll could show that Tea Party people would split evenly between Christie and Palin is a bull crap poll. You have to be kidding me. How many Tea Party appearances has Christie had? How well has he supported the Tea Party? Do Tea Party people actually know what he stands for since he hasn’t had to say anything yet or go thru a vetting process? I just can’t wait for that one. So far he has been able to hide away in New Jersey with his little kingdom there…. once he would be in the sunlight, the scabs would be visible.

30% each? Bull.

I would bet anyone $100 that if Sarah Palin and Chris Christie had to fight for the Tea Party support and Christie finally had to be vetted and all the stances he has were to come out, then the split would change dramatically..Why? Because Christie has not been outed for the ideas he has on many important issues for the Tea Party and if it came down to the nitty gritty, all that would come out. Palin has been vetted and proven to be all in for Tea Party principles. Christie would be about 40% Tea Party and 60% kiss the butt that supports you.
.
Palin would wipe that big butt 90% to 10% if it really came down to it.

PhilipJames on February 22, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Traffic apocalypse.

Allahpundit on Feb 22, 2012 5:05 PM

Thank u my friend…salute!!! I am the best at what I do and that can’t be debated… there is no Hotair commenter that pulls in the numbers I do

apocalypse on February 22, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Christie is just a fat loudmouth with slogans.

Palin couldn’t even complete a single term in one of the easiest to run and least populated states.

Daniels is short, really short. And insecure about it. And he’s dominated by his controlling harpy wife. Who else do we know who is insecure and pushed around by his nasty Chewbacca-like wife?

Jeb Bush. Bush the 3rd. Dynastic politics are DISGUSTING.

Too bad all these Boss Hawg Barbour Republican heavyweight types weren’t going around “pressuring/encourging” him to run.

Nice job, Republican Party.

Daikokuco on February 22, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Too bad all these Boss Hawg Barbour Republican heavyweight types weren’t going around “pressuring/encourging” him to run.

Oops, Him being Bob Jindal. As if it weren’t obvious…

Daikokuco on February 22, 2012 at 9:32 PM

If you’re a cocktail-party RINO Zombie…don’t message me!!!

apocalypse on February 22, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Heh…the social cons who want a brokered convention might want to take a hint from this survey. There’s no guarantee you’re gonna like the result!

camaraderie on February 22, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Palin’s not been undermining anyone. She’s just said we need to get a good long swig of Romney aside from all the “he’s the new god of electability and the only one who can beat Obama” crap. If she’s undermining anything it’s the idiotic notion that Romney should be crowned right away so that he doesn’t have to go through what, you know, PALIN has gone through.
ddrintn on February 22, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Of course Palin has been undermining our candidates! Not only that, she is actively promoting a brokered convention and volunteering her services. She makes all sorts of specious arguments about needing to RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE, “vet” the candidates, fight the establishment, blah blah blah, but this is not some altruistic endeavor on her part. She chose not to run, to be in the arena. Now she’s purposefully agitating to get a second chance, like a marathon runner who joins the race for the last mile, where some committee meets to decide the winner.

Meanwhile, ‘m not asking for a coronation, bitter one. Because of how the GOP restructured the rules, from the beginning it was mathematically impossible for any candidate to win until late in April. The race was going to unfold naturally, but all this brokered convention nonsense does is promote Sarah Palin and the ratings of news organizations and related businesses.

As for what Palin has “gone through”, what do you want me to say? She’s a victim and deserves to be, er, coronated as a martyr?

Danish, shouldn’t we vet any candidate that wants our vote? Doubly so if the conventional wisdom shouts that we “shouldn’t even debate, this is the guy/gal”?
BlaxPac on February 22, 2012 at 8:27 PM

As I said^^^, this race was never going to be decided until April. Surely that is enough time to “vet” our candidates. There has been no shortage of debates. But we have a non-candidate who is pushing a brokered convention, not so we have more time to vet the candidates (this is preposterous) but because she is hoping there is no clear winner, and presto- magico, she is chosen. Moreover, she is actively working to make this more likely to happen. I defy anyone here to provide evidence to the contrary. Now, I don’t happen to think this is going to happen, but it is disingenuous as hell for Palin to be on Fox day in and day out pretending to be an objective analyst when she is smack dab in the middle of it.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Palin said that if she ran, it would be an unconventional campaign…

hehe

ChuckTX on February 22, 2012 at 9:56 PM

As opposed to Morris, Rove, Coulter, Perino, et al, yes that’s an objective group.

narciso on February 22, 2012 at 10:02 PM

I really want to see the battle between Palin and Christie more than the 4 losers fighting right now. Palin is the Conservative that Conservatives Want and Christie is the RINO that the Establishment Wants. Palin could beat Christie no question about. Q has always been a bad poll. In a battle with straight up primary voters Palin would win.

CoolChange80 on February 22, 2012 at 10:23 PM

You know as well as I, that no matter who the GOP picks, the MSM will do whatever they can to destroy them.

chewmeister on February 22, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Exactly Palin’s point. She wants to make sure that our current crop of pretenders are hardened by the fire they will face, like she is all too aware of. To see if they can stand the heat and not wither away. So far that’s what has happened to all of them and now it’s Santorum’s turn to take the heat. Note the sudden frequent mischaracterizations of his positions, portraying him as an religious nut, and anti-woman kook. This is what happens to anyone who the left thinks may be a threat.

The only one who has already been through all of this and survived is Palin and she is unafraid, and will give it back to them in spades and they are desperately trying to prevent her from assuming the mantel of the nomination. Because she eviscerates Obama at every opportunity.

Buy Danish is so biased he/she must be shilling for Romney or Paul or one of the others but is ashamed to come out and reveal his/her personal choice lest the rest of us make jolly fun of their fav.

shmendrick on February 22, 2012 at 10:23 PM

shmendrick on February 22, 2012 at 10:23 PM

LOL LOL LOL as your comrades say. Anyone who knows me knows I have supported Romney since 2007, and Ron Paul is my last choice. As for Palin’s noble motives (just wanting to help them prepare for the general) you forget the part where she is advocating a brokered convention and has offered herself up as a candidate.

After tonight though, it should be evident to her (and others) her fantasy will not come to pass, that it’s very likely Mitt is going to win Michigan and Arizona, and will be in great shape on Super Tuesday.

I welcome her help on the campaign trail as we focus on the task of defeating Obama, not fracturing the GOP.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I’d far prefer to select a moderate Republican as a candidate that has a good chance to defeat Obama, than a staunch conservative (who hasn’t always seemed that fiscally conservative, b.t.w.) who will lose.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 7:03 PM

That’s exactly what we got last time around. How well did that work out for ya?

chewmeister on February 22, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Last election, we had a president who had become terrifically unpopular, running against a charismatic young nominee who was going to rid the country of its guilt for racism. Likely no one could have beaten Obama with that scenario.

Now, much of The One’s glow has diminished, due to many factors. Nevertheless, Obama still has high enough ratings so that if the Republicans nominate someone not only exceptionally far to the right on social issues, combined with a “preachy” style – he can still win.

I’m hoping the “Santorum had a bad night” reviews are correct. A bad night for him is a good night for Republican chances.

pbundy on February 22, 2012 at 11:23 PM

I really want to see the battle between Palin and Christie

CoolChange80 on February 22, 2012 at 10:23 PM

And when/how would this “battle” take place, genius? You looking forward to a Facebook post battle?

nottakingsides on February 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Do you deny Palin is encouraging a brokered convention

No.

(and offering herself up as the chosen one)?

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Yes. You’re reading too much into it; she’s not going to be the nominee in 2012. She has a chance at being VP again if she wants it, but I doubt she will.

alwaysfiredup on February 23, 2012 at 12:09 AM

Buy Danish on February 22, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Just another variation of “everybody get in line behind Romney!” Not just no, but Hell. No.

It’s not enough to just have Mittens’ guys in charge instead of Barry’s. I want something different.

alwaysfiredup on February 23, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Jindal and/or Palin in some combination…I believe either would make a fine president.

But the reality, of course, is to see what we end up with and go from there against Dear Leader.

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 23, 2012 at 1:06 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3