Palin in Comparison

Alaska's Sarah Palin, by RR

Image by NineInchNachosIV via Flickr

Update 8:45AM PST

Quinnipiac has a new poll out today. There are a few results that intrigued me:

  • Sarah Palin is the most popular of Republican candidates for President, among Republicans polled.
  • Less-educated are more Palin-prone; more-educated people would rather have Romney.
  • Palin is the runaway favorite of evangelicals.
  • And yet, she would likely lose to Obama, unlike some other Republican candidates. 
  • Republicans would vote for pretty much anyone as long as it’s not Obama.
  • Democrats would far prefer to keep Obama than to have another Democratic candidate for President in 2012.
  • Self-described moderates far prefer Obama to Palin.
  • Who are Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Mitch Daniels, and Haley Barbour? Most of those polled have no idea who these people are. Not a surprise.
  • Republicans have a favorable view of the Republican Party, and Democrats have a favorable view of the Democratic Party. And each has unfavorable views of the other.
  • The more educated people are, the less they like either party.
  • Republicans like the Tea Party, Democrat’s don’t, and Independents are split.
  • Only 25% of Republicans consider themselves to be Teapers. 13% of Democrats do as well. Those numbers have been relatively steady since the spring.

Those are my observations. What are yours?

Update: Young Real Politiks has a related post that’s worth reading.


About Michael Weiss

Michael is now located at http://www.logarchism.com, along with Monotreme, filistro, and dcpetterson. Please make note of the new location.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Palin in Comparison

  1. Mr. Universe says:

    Chalk drawing kind of…ummm…creepy.

  2. Mr. Universe says:

    BTW: Palin beat out all the Republican potentials for 2012 in a poll earlier today.

    Palin 18%
    Romney 17%
    Huckabee 16%
    Gingrich 15%
    Pawlenty 6%

    But she lags behind Obama 48% to 42%

    How ’bout them apples?

  3. dcpetterson says:

    People with opinions this early on tend to be more involved in politics, and more ideological. Tendencies only, not universally true. I suspect Palin is likely to do better in caucus states, Romney in primary states. When the primaries get going, if Huckabee also runs, he’s split the evangelical vote with Palin, and Romney is most likely to get the Republican nod. The second tier (Pawlenty, Thune, Daniels, Barbour, etc.) are all long shots, but it’s impossible to count any of them out, with Palin and Romney both having such baggage. Gingrich is a wild card, and likely to be a bomb thrower with the possibility of crippling anyone he decides to target. At this point, I can’t see any of them beating Obama.

  4. Bart DePalma says:

    If Obama is way underwater with Indis and can’t break 50% in horserace polls among Registered and not likely voters, Obama would currently lose reelection, even to Palin.

    On a related note, the Fed is revising their unemployment projections north of 8% for 2012.

  5. GROG says:

    I don’t see any of those 5 being the nominee.

  6. shortchain says:

    GROG,

    Well, don’t hold us in suspense. If none of those will be the nominee, who’s it going to be? McCain again?

    Oh, and Bart? How do you feel about the House GOP indicating that it’s going to gut the ethics office? Taken in with the way they elected the “sleeping with lobbyists” old guard as leadership, this sure looks like the teapers are going to make a difference. Just not the one they thought.

    After two more years of corruption, cronyism, and high unemployment, who do you suppose the electorate is going to be looking to throw out?

  7. Bart DePalma says:

    Shortchain:

    Did you get past your propaganda link to the ABC report? This story is based on an email from a CA republican to the ethics committee asking it to justify its existence as part of comprehensive effort to reform the House rules.

    In any case, apart from providing congressional wrongdoing with a figleaf of accountability, what has the ethics committee done? Rangel is going to get off with a scolding. Waters’ trial has been put off yet again.

  8. Bart DePalma says:

    It will be interesting to see how our President handles the North Korean artillery attack on South Korea which killed two. Bad juju.

  9. shortchain says:

    Bart,

    Something is better than nothing. Oh, and BTW, which other committees got emails asking them to justify their existence? If it were all, we could accept your “reform” theory. But since it’s just, apparently, this one, we are forced to ask why this committee was singled out.

    I’m sure Charlie Rangel is deliriously happy about receiving a public scolding, in the national spotlight, for his activities. Calling public attention to wrongdoing may not be the auto de fe you would really like, but it’s better than nothing — and it does more to dissuade future wrongdoing than doing nothing, as the late, lamented GOP Congress did during their long stint.

    As for Korea, there’s precious little that can be done on top of what’s already been done. That’s a sore that will not heal until there’s fundamental change inside either N. Korea (unlikely) or China (highly unlikely).

  10. Bart DePalma says:

    In a related poll, the Dem group Third Way surveyed folks who voted Obama in 2008 and either went GOP or stayed home in 2010.

    http://www.thirdway.org/publications/352#

    Once you wipe away the heavy spin, the poll indicates that the folks who voted GOP were rejecting the Democrat government and the folks who stayed home were not the theorized Dem left base disgruntled that Obama did not go far enough. The dropouts are all over the place ideologically with 1/3 self identifying conservative. Looks like generally non-motivated voters who went Obama out of novelty or post crash fear the first time around.

    It really doesn’t matter if the dropouts both came back to vote and cast their ballots for Obama in 2012. If the switchers stay switched to the GOP, Obama 2012 will look alot like McCain 2008.

  11. Bart DePalma says:

    shortchain says: Something is better than nothing

    That is what voters thought when they voted for undefined “change” in 2008 only to be appalled with what that change actually entailed in 2009 and 2010.

    You always ask to read the fine print.

  12. shortchain says:

    Bart,

    Hardly. What the voters voted for in the 2010 election was also change. It’s hilarious that you say “ask to read the fine print” when you’re a teaper, one of the numbskulls who voted a whole slew of supposed “change” candidates into office (although not so much in Colorado, sorry) — who are even now being fitted with their brainstem implants to become part of the GOP Borg collective, in support of big business, big money, and against the interests of those who voted for them.

    (Oh, and the reason they’re “brainstem” implants is because it would be pointless to try for an implant into something as tiny as the brains of those folks.)

    Speaking of which, do tell me what impresses you the most about, say, John Thune? What have been his successes as a senator? Anything troubling about him, like his past lobbying for a RR/coal company? Is it his relentless unintelligence and opaque idiocy that attracts you?

    Be positive, Bart, tell us what attracts you about Tiny Tim Pawlenty. Is it the way he’s drained the Mn rainy day fund, spent the tobacco settlement fund, allowed the state infrastructure to collapse, produced double-digit increases in property taxes for the towns and cities (reversing the “Minnesota miracle” that produced a thriving economy under previous administrations)?

    Or is this whole thing nothing but a game for you, where, independent of the actual results, you feel good about “your team” winning (or, in your case, more probably feeling good about the “other team” losing)?

  13. Bart DePalma says:

    Shortchain:

    Someone is still sore after being hit repeatedly on the head with a 2×4 on election day.

    If I cared only about what team won, I would not be counseling to read the fine print. Even though the Dems are sitting in the corner after being paddled by the dean, the GOP is still on probation. If they do not do what they promised, we can fire them as well and get another group of candidates.

  14. filistro says:

    The issue is not a Palin run… it’s the POSSIBILITY of her run, and what that does to the entire primary process for the GOP. Nate pointed this out a few days ago. Palin doesn’t need to announce early. She certainly gets enough exposure and money without formally announcing, and the longer she holds off and teases, the more she damages everybody else since they have to strategize around both scenarios… a campaign with her, and one without her.

    Whatever she deiceds, the final decision once made will overhang the process for months. If she doesn’t run her followers will be passionately disappointed and vent their anger on the nominee, who will be forced to show Palin constant deference that will weaken him. The scenario is almsot identical if she DOES run… she can’t be treated as a normal contender, she must alwys be handled with kid gloves for fear of angering her base.

    She is so divisive, you simply can’t imagine. I’ve been watching the Freepers for years, and Palin is like a hand grenade tossed into the Republican tent. They are all at each other’s throats over this woman, and the Palinites HATE the “establishment” who express reservations about her. An example is the Bush family for whom, even during Dubya’s lowest ebb, the Freepers maintained a dogged loyalty. (They were the 30% who always approved of him.) Until a few months ago there were still lengthy prayer threads posted every few weeks for the welfare and safety of the Bush family. Now look what’s happened. Barabra Bush dares to say Sarah Plain should stay in Alaska and the level of vitriol is simply horrific. She is called a “bitter old hag”.

    When you read thse comments, remember THESE ARE NOT DEMOCRATS. These are the most extreme portion of the Republican base, who until recetly would never allow a word against any memebr of the Bush family, and for whom Barbara Bush was the beloved matriarch of the nation.

    This is what Sarah Palin has done… and she’s just getting started.

    Bart thinks this fractured party can unite around an eventual nominee with enough unity to defeat a well-liked incumbent president whose approval ratings still hover near 50%. I think that’s absolutely nuts. Without Sarah Plain in the picture, somebody might possibly have an outside shot. With her, whether she runs or nut, it has become simply impossible. They might just as well all save their time and money.

  15. Bart DePalma says:

    Fili:

    Whatever she deiceds, the final decision once made will overhang the process for months. If she doesn’t run her followers will be passionately disappointed and vent their anger on the nominee, who will be forced to show Palin constant deference that will weaken him.

    1) If Palin decides not to run, why on Earth would the conservative base take her decision out on the eventual GOP nominee? The only way a candidate becomes the GOP nominee is because the conservative base chose him or her.

    2) Palin’s conservative positions are not her problem. She is a solid Reagan conservative and that sells damn well in this environment as 2010 showed. Thus, any deference the GOP nominee (including Palin herself) gives to these positions can only help in the general election. 2000 and more particularly 2008 is what the GOP gets when it runs a candidate campaigning as Dem-lite.

    3) Palin’s problems are two fold: (1) Her inexperience after the complete clusterf_ck her inexperienced predecessor delivered; and (2) The Dem media’s successful personal demonization of Palin with the Indis. While Sarah may be a sentimental favorite, I think she has a high hill to climb. I like Palin and, if the choice was between her and someone like Romney, I would cast my vote for her. However, Obama is a badly wounded incumbent and there will be plenty of GOP talent to choose from, many with far more experience. I doubt I am the only one feeling this way.

  16. shortchain says:

    Bart,

    I see you’re still believing that the results of the last election mean that the electorate agrees with your pseudo-intellectual hodge-podge of right-wing authoritarian pretending to be libertarian politics.

  17. Bart DePalma says:

    Shortchain:

    Libertarians and Conservatives make up a plurality of the electorate.

    The electoral center is center-right and will go to the party it feels is closest to its positions.

    A GOP candidate president can win on a conservative platform because it secures a plurality base and then the candidate only needs less than 10% of the middle to win a majority. This is not difficult if the Dem is either running from the left (which no one has done since Dukakis) or is an incumbent with a leftist record because the middle will feel the GOP is closer to its views even if they think the GOP is more conservative than they are.

    Seriously, go check out the excellent Third Way poll to which I linked above. They asked most of the correct questions to determine why Obama and the Dems lost the middle massively in 2010.

  18. shortchain says:

    Bart,

    “Libertarians and Conservatives make up a plurality of the electorate.” — oddly, I see no actual, you know, evidence for this remarkable claim. Oh, there are polls which say that people want less government — but they also want all kinds of things that only government provides. 80 percent of the population supports being x-rayed or groped, for heaven’s sake, in order to fly! That’s just about the definition of anti-libertarian.

    And this is, I believe, the millionth plus one time you’ve asserted, in the face of being repeatedly and invariable contradicted with evidence the “center-right” BS.

    So I’m supposed to read something because, in your opinion, it’s “correct”? With its ex-post facto explanations? No, thanks. I’ll click on a link you provide only if I’m ready to waste my time on another wild goose chase — and right now I’ve got a couple of classes to go teach. So sorry, but … no.

  19. Bart DePalma says:

    shortchain says:

    BD: “Libertarians and Conservatives make up a plurality of the electorate.”

    oddly, I see no actual, you know, evidence for this remarkable claim.

    You mean you have not bothered to check the evidence. This morning, Jay Cost offered a good analysis on this very subject:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/electorate-moving-right_518538.html

    sc, polling consistently shows majorities or pluralities favor receiving government goodies that they do not have to pay for. However, put a price tag in the polling and support craters to the left base.

  20. drfunguy says:

    Bart,
    Libertarian positions include legalization of drugs, including marijuana, legalization of prostitution, and many other socially liberal positions. Are you claiming a plurality of support for these? Or are you only interested in shrinking government small enough t ofit in our living rooms?

  21. Bart DePalma says:

    This is a fun poll day. From Gallup:

    In a survey taken Friday through Sunday, 28% say Obama should have the most influence on government policy next year while 27% say the Tea Party standard-bearers should. GOP congressional leaders are chosen by 23%, Democratic congressional leaders by 16%.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-11-22-poll-usa-divided_N.htm

    In sum, a majority of adults (!) want either the Tea Party or GOP leaders setting the agenda. Imagine, if this were polling of likely voters.

  22. drfunguy says:

    p.s. The referenced ‘analysis’ is about as superficial as it gets. A good analysis would go beyond polling on self-identification of liberal vs. conservative to looking at actual preferences on particular issues. Cost doesn’t do this because it doesn’t support his position. As is pointed out every time this comes up, and as you continue to ignore, pluralities of Americans favor abortion rights, non-discrimination based on sexual orientation, and universal single payer healthcare… When conservatives support these values then they’ll be in the majority.

  23. Bart DePalma says:

    drfunguy says:

    Libertarian positions include legalization of drugs, including marijuana, legalization of prostitution, and many other socially liberal positions. Are you claiming a plurality of support for these? Or are you only interested in shrinking government small enough t ofit in our living rooms?

    The political conservative/libertarian alliance is based upon common ground on limiting government encroachment on free markets. As you correctly note, the groups part on social issues. Because the economy is generally the overwhelming issue in most presidential elections, this social issue schism is generally not a problem.

    As is pointed out every time this comes up, and as you continue to ignore, pluralities of Americans favor abortion rights [no longer], non-discrimination based on sexual orientation [not when it comes to marriage], and universal single payer healthcare [not in any real world poll of actual voters.… When conservatives support these values then they’ll be in the majority.

    These values of the left base alang with your economic socialism are why only about a fifth of Americans self identify as liberal. Thanks, but no thanks.

  24. drfunguy says:

    Ironic, insn’t it that the Teapers don’t embrace “All Men are Created Equal”.
    I have no doubt that even America will eventually be dragged into the 21st Century in granting Civil Rights to all of its citizens.

  25. GROG says:

    Ironic, insn’t it that the Teapers don’t embrace “All Men are Created Equal”.

    Neither does President Obama.

  26. Bart DePalma says:

    drfunguy says:

    Ironic, insn’t it that the Teapers don’t embrace “All Men are Created Equal”.

    How do you figure?

    Most of us believe that all children are created equal – born and unborn alike. You think their is a right to kill the latter at will.

    Most of us believe that anyone can get married. You seek to redefine marriage.

    Most of us believe that everyone should be judged by what they do and not the color of their skin or sexual plumbing. You support government preferences based on race or sex.

    The left holds an Animal Farm concept of equal – progressive pigs are more equal than others.

  27. Realist says:

    In sum, a majority of adults (!) want either the Tea Party or GOP leaders setting the agenda. Imagine, if this were polling of likely voters.

    And an even bigger majority of adults want either the Tea Party or Obama setting the agenda. Imagine getting those two together to set policy!

  28. Realist says:

    Bart,
    Most of us believe that anyone can get married. You seek to redefine marriage.

    Oh, brother. Let me see if I get this straight (no pun intended…on second thought, pun intended). People on the left want to allow more people to get married than people on the right do. So how does this jibe with your statement that you believe that “anyone” can get married?

  29. shortchain says:

    Actually, Bart, it seems that those like you believe all children are equal only so long as somebody else is responsible for them, such as when they reside in someone else’s body.

    Once they’re born and need an equal opportunity for education or for health care, then — they don’t seem to deserve it, in your view.

  30. Mr. Universe says:

    Palin’s like that pretty girl you asked to Prom in high school that took you agonizing days to get the nerve up to ask. She says she’ll think about it right up until the day before. Then she goes to Prom with the quarterback.

    She’s having too much fun milking the possibility of running.

  31. drfunguy says:

    Barted: “You support government preferences based on race or sex.”
    What are you smoking?
    When have I ever taken such a position?
    When has the Government?
    This is a right-wing fairytale.

  32. Mr. Universe says:

    drfunguy said;

    Ironic, insn’t it that the Teapers don’t embrace “All Men are Created Equal”.

    To which GROG replied;

    Neither does President Obama.

    And my response is;

    WTF?

  33. GROG says:

    @Mr. Universe,

    WTF do you mean WTF? Obama is against gay marriage. Therefore, according to drfunguy’s logic, he does not embrace “All Men are created Equal”.

  34. drfunguy says:

    @Grog,
    Thanks for pointing out the Obama is actually conservative. 🙂

  35. GROG says:

    Well, Mr. U has trouble keeping up so I had to be a little more clear for him.

  36. Mr. Universe says:

    I missed funguy’s original post so the context of GROG’s comment was missing.

  37. Monotreme says:

    Barted:

    The electoral center is center-right

    No matter how many times I point how wrong this is, you keep saying it.

    In the immortal words of Inigo Montoya: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

    Or, to put it another way, try out these phrases:

    North is north-west.

    Hot is medium cool.

    Up is almost down.

    or, what I suspect you are really going for,

    Black is white with a lot fewer photons.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s