Sarah Palin Leads Mitt Romney

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

22% of Republicans now say they want Sarah Palin to be the nominee vs. 20% who say Mitt Romney.

www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56539.html

Republicans want Sarah Palin to be their nominee, but they like Mitt Romney’s chances better in a head-to-head match-up against Barack Obama, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Palin, the former Alaska governor and vice presidential nominee, has the support of 22 percent of Republicans surveyed, with Romney in second place, at 20 percent.

[cme1201]

If these are the only 2 serious choices Obama will win. One is completely polerizing the other is Liberal Light, neither represts the core of what the Republican party principels used to be.

[billisonboard]

Jun 9, 2011 9:43:10 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

22% of Republicans now say they want Sarah Palin to be the nominee vs. 20% who say Mitt Romney.

www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56539.html

Republicans want Sarah Palin to be their nominee, but they like Mitt Romney’s chances better in a head-to-head match-up against Barack Obama, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Palin, the former Alaska governor and vice presidential nominee, has the support of 22 percent of Republicans surveyed, with Romney in second place, at 20 percent.

An individual such as Palin will always be an attractive candidate to 10-15% of the American population. If she were to get the Republican nomination, she would likely get a larger share of the vote than that based solely on there being a "R" following her name.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 9, 2011 10:12:47 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 9, 2011 9:43:10 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

22% of Republicans now say they want Sarah Palin to be the nominee vs. 20% who say Mitt Romney.

www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56539.html

An individual such as Palin will always be an attractive candidate to 10-15% of the American population. If she were to get the Republican nomination, she would likely get a larger share of the vote than that based solely on there being a "R" following her name.

The actual number is 25%.

She does have her work cut out for her with the general voting population-- she has a 53% 'disapprove' rating. That's a mountain she has to climb with everything and everyone working against her.

[ugonow]

And if Trump decides to get back in,as he stated he might consider, her base will be split.

[Deleted]

I sense doom and disaster at this point....

[Deleted]

At least I will say Repubs are trying.. better than Obamatrons... there will be more.. NEWT is out!! Good grief-- who has their entire staff quit??
Go, Sarah, Mitt, whoever.. anyone but Obama..

Cain 2012

[zipity]

Personally I'm looking forward to another 4 years with Obama BUT in all honesty why is it that republicans think they have to continue going back to the same well to find candidates? Take the position that for just 4 years you're going to tone it down a bit. Don't make abortion the center issue in the campaign and 'maybe' go out on a limb and let the life of a woman (not health...life) and the rights of a rape victim be considered. A lot of independents don't like abortion but won't take a stance against it if it possibly means losing a wife or having to support the child of a rapist.

Take 4 years off from nominating an ultra right wing nut bag. Give a second look at candidates like Connecticut's x-gov Jodi Rell or Hawaii's x-gov Linda Lingle, two republican women who actually have brains. Lingle could possibly be the first American Jewish President. That kind of history has to be worth something to the republican party.

But nope, we'll probably end up with Palin whining about how the press hates that she's stupid OR Romney defending his faith and his signature on Romneycare. It's like republicans don't really want to win.

[privateinvestor]

22% of Republicans now say they want Sarah Palin to be the nominee vs. 20% who say Mitt Romney.

OK but 78% of Republicans now say NO to Sarah Palin, and 80% of Republicans now say NO to Mitt Romney.....how about Dems and Independents???

With these early Polls you can use the numbers for political discussions which mean absolutely nothing at all IMHO


BTW the Red Sox Vs Yankees may be rained out tonight so I am not too happy having it rain on my parade..which is much more important than this fluff..

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 17:33:14 GMT -5 zipity said:

Personally I'm looking forward to another 4 years with Obama BUT in all honesty why is it that republicans think they have to continue going back to the same well to find candidates? Take the position that for just 4 years you're going to tone it down a bit. Don't make abortion the center issue in the campaign and 'maybe' go out on a limb and let the life of a woman (not health...life) and the rights of a rape victim be considered. A lot of independents don't like abortion but won't take a stance against it if it possibly means losing a wife or having to support the child of a rapist.

Take 4 years off from nominating an ultra right wing nut bag. Give a second look at candidates like Connecticut's x-gov Jodi Rell or Hawaii's x-gov Linda Lingle, two republican women who actually have brains. Lingle could possibly be the first American Jewish President. That kind of history has to be worth something to the republican party.

But nope, we'll probably end up with Palin whining about how the press hates that she's stupid OR Romney defending his faith and his signature on Romneycare. It's like republicans don't really want to win.

We need a Republican candidate that is going to prioritize cutting all Federal spending first before anything else.

[Value Buy]

Jun 9, 2011 17:33:14 GMT -5 zipity said:

Personally I'm looking forward to another 4 years with Obama BUT in all honesty why is it that republicans think they have to continue going back to the same well to find candidates? Take the position that for just 4 years you're going to tone it down a bit. Don't make abortion the center issue in the campaign and 'maybe' go out on a limb and let the life of a woman (not health...life) and the rights of a rape victim be considered. A lot of independents don't like abortion but won't take a stance against it if it possibly means losing a wife or having to support the child of a rapist.

Take 4 years off from nominating an ultra right wing nut bag. Give a second look at candidates like Connecticut's x-gov Jodi Rell or Hawaii's x-gov Linda Lingle, two republican women who actually have brains. Lingle could possibly be the first American Jewish President. That kind of history has to be worth something to the republican party.

But nope, we'll probably end up with Palin whining about how the press hates that she's stupid OR Romney defending his faith and his signature on Romneycare. It's like republicans don't really want to win.

I was hoping Mitch Daniels from Indiana would run, but he has already said no way, Jose.
How about Perry from Texas? Anyone think he could be a keeper?

[NoMoreLunacy]

Romney is just another tax and spend politician.

www.ontheissues.org/2008/Mitt_Romney_Tax_Reform.htm

[Value Buy]

The way the economy is going (and housing,inflation,gasoline pricing)
"none of the above" could be on the Presidential ballot and win in2012.

It will be about the lessor of two evils, and guess what?
That will be a Republican.
Keep in mind we have the Congressional remapping going, and Obama will not carry near the number of states he did in 2008.

[NoMoreLunacy]

The more we keep electing tax and spend Republicans instead of authentic conservatives who would cut taxes and control spend to go to 20-30% of the 2006 Federal budget, the more we give room to charlatans who would talk social issues instead of fiscal issues.

[texasredneck]

Palin and Romney can not win. Look for another to get the nomination.

[lakhota]

I hope to see a cat fight between Bachmann and Palin, but I hope Sarah wins the GOP nomination!!!!!

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 19:57:44 GMT -5 @lakhota said:

I hope to see a cat fight between Bachmann and Palin, but I hope Sarah wins the GOP nomination!!!!!

You like pork, don't you?

[zipity]

Romney is just another tax and spend politician.

There's nothing wrong with tax and spend, it's in the Constitution. The trick is limiting the spend to programs that country needs or the citizens want. Examples, we need some level of defense and citizens overwhelmingly want Medicare. Once you establish the programs you need common sense would say you need to set a tax rate to cover the cost. The system breaks down when some politicians spend money to get elected and others cut taxes to get elected.

[Value Buy]

Sarah can win, but the problem is her runing mate.
Who would accept the 2nd position, other than another rather unknown person.
Certainly Romney or Newt would never do it.

[zipity]

but I hope Sarah wins the GOP nomination!!!!!

That would certainly make the comedy shows happy.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 20:01:28 GMT -5 zipity said:

Romney is just another tax and spend politician.

There's nothing wrong with tax and spend, it's in the Constitution. The trick is limiting the spend to programs that country needs or the citizens want. Examples, we need some level of defense and citizens overwhelmingly want Medicare. Once you establish the programs you need common sense would say you need to set a tax rate to cover the cost. The system breaks down when some politicians spend money to get elected and others cut taxes to get elected.

What the country needs is very, very little. What the citizens want is a lot. A good conservative President is supposed to ignore what the citizens want and do what the country needs, which is very, very low spending and very, very low taxes.

[zipity]

Sarah can win

Doubtful she could get the nomination but if she did there's no way she would win a general election. She would have to talk to the press and they'd ask more of those 'gotcha' questions like "why do you want to be president?" and "what's the first thing you'd do as president?".

[lakhota]

I'm sure Obama has his fingers crossed that Palin wins the GOP nomination. That would assure him a second term.

[zipity]

A good conservative President is supposed to ignore what the citizens want and do what the country needs, which is very, very low spending and very, very low taxes.

The problem with that is Presidents don't always know what the country needs, such as Iraq. Further a president can only ignore the citizens for so long before the citizens return the favor. As for very low taxes, according to the Brookings Institution, 1949 & 1950 taxes were as low as they are today, with the exception of those 2 years taxes now are lower than any other year going back as far as 1943. You want to get lower than 1943 you need to break apart the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 20:39:43 GMT -5 zipity said:

A good conservative President is supposed to ignore what the citizens want and do what the country needs, which is very, very low spending and very, very low taxes.

The problem with that is Presidents don't always know what the country needs, such as Iraq. Further a president can only ignore the citizens for so long before the citizens return the favor. As for very low taxes, according to the Brookings Institution, 1949 & 1950 taxes were as low as they are today, with the exception of those 2 years taxes now are lower than any other year going back as far as 1943. You want to get lower than 1943 you need to break apart the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

I am all for it.

[NoMoreLunacy]

It was not especially hard to know that the Iraq War was not something the country needed, as that would cost a lot of money.