2012 Asked Another Way

the_invisible_hand

We have to draft this man if necessary.

graciegirl

jarrod21

Let me start off by saying I like Sarah Palin. I like a lot of her views on a lot of things. When she was running for VP, yeah, she was more qualified for the big job than Obama was. I’ve just never been able to get past the quitting thing. It *really* bugs me on a deep, foundational level, so much so I find it tough to articulate beyond saying it gives me a bad vibe.

Now, instead of keeping on running Alaska and getting some more of the desperately needed executive experience for what’s needed to be president, as evidenced by Obama’s incompetent floundering around, we have Sarah Palin, TV star. That bugs me, because we’re seeing right now how a person who has little to draw on besides their ideology does as president, and it’s not pretty. Just because it’s an ideology I happen to agree with doesn’t necessarily make it better.

It’s just a tough call. I like David Petraeus the man, but I don’t know much of his views on pretty much anything else, which means he’s an excellent military officer, not undermining the president. I don’t think there’s anybody more qualified on the military/foreign affairs front than him, but I don’t know his grasp on the economy and stuff, which is really what is most important right now. There’s also that war thing we’ve got going on, and I wouldn’t respect him quite so much if he just walked away from it.

I like Mitt Romney, the business exec. I’m not crazy about Massachusetts Romneycare, though. I love Huckabee the man, but I just see him as an extension of Bush’s compassionate conservatism. I don’t want a big-government social-con in there any more than I want a big-government liberal, either. (Although it’s definitely preferable and I would support him if he won the nomination).

I just wish there was someone with Paul Ryan’s economics, Petraeus’ leadership and foreign policy, and Huckabee’s social instincts (minus his economic ones). I don’t know if we’re going to get it.

I don’t know if another Bush will ever be elected to a national office, and I don’t know a whole lot about Pence, Barbour, Caine, or Daniels. I just don’t know.

(I voted Petraeus in the poll, because I think it’s easier to find economic smart guys than it is to find military and foreign policy smart guys)

jarrod21

This, despite having voted for Rick Perry every time he’s run for Lt. Governor or Gov.

I like having him run my state. Please don’t take him away.

E Pluribus Unum

Warms my heart. Even though I am a great big “no” on Palin, the movement conservatives are killing the establishment squishes, when you sum them all up.

linda01

I like Sarah Palin. I think she’s bright, knowledgeable, and articulate. She is well reasoned, and has a good deal of grace under fire, so to speak.

Having said that, do I think she should run? That’s entirely her call. She knows the ugly side of national politics.

Do I think she can win if she does run? No, she’s too polarizing. The MSM has made such a mockery of her, that I don’t think the general populace would bother to find out the truth. You tend to need to be connected to the web and social media, to get the facts, and the average non-politically active person probably isn’t going to invest the time and efforts to do so.

I think someone like Pence, Pawlenty, Barbour, or Thune would have a better chance. They’re all active in politics and are all making names for themselves.

graciegirl

and negatives. When I made precinct calls for him it was deadly. I think his margin of victory depended a LOT on White.

I am glad to have him as Governor and yesTexas is doing well compared to the rest of the country. I also like what I have heard of his book. BUT I just don’t see how he has demonstrated the intellect to run this country and fix all the problems the Dems are leaving. It seems like there are many better people!

wonkish1

That all of us are really just waiting for someone to really impress us in the primaries. And until then we are all largely reserving judgement until then because there is a decent list of a people that we find more than acceptable.

Scope

The last I heard is he was pretty adamantly no, and, that he feels he is best serving his country in his current role. Also, has Jeb Bush indicated any interest? If so I haven’t heard anything.

the_invisible_hand

Texas stands as a bastion of small government success on a large state scale. Everyone looking for a job and an opportunity to live their own life goes to Texas.

Rick Perry is a great governor. We need him as president.

AnnaD

While I love her, she would be the presidential loser because she has been made a joke by the left and they continue to press that image. She should do what she is doing; making her family rich and giving speeches to generate brilliant talking points (like death panels; how spot on) and “growing” new candidates.

E Pluribus Unum

I don’t get all the negatives you have for him. He’s not Einstein, but he is not remotely any kind of dumb stick like Biden. In a chess game with supposed intellectual giant Obama, he wipes the floor with Obama.

He’s in my top three because yes, his positives are off the charts — genuine conservative (if not perhaps a “movement” conservative), his highest priorities for running TX are the same as I would like a president’s highest priorities to be, in no particular order — economic pro-growth, pro-domestic energy, national security, border protection, and a society where it’s OK to have family values.

In addition to that, he’s got ground game, he’s got some moxie and charisma, he’s got a national stage, he’s politically savvy enough to “work” Congress, Best of all, he’s got 10 years of running TX on his resume.

Downsides? Sure. But nothing that kills him.. If he declares to run (and he has adamantly up to this point said otherwise) he instantly becomes the front-runner. And he would destroy Obama. And I mean, just a mule-beating.

E Pluribus Unum

in order for me, Herman Cain, Mike Pence, and Rick Perry. I don’t ask that anybody believe like me, that is just my choice.

Menlo

They are mostly figureheads, and they hold the least powerful office in the state having pretty much no influence over policy and certainly zero influence over the legislature.

wonkish1

She is doing that right.

jstjoan

“I just wish there was someone with Paul Ryan?s economics, Petraeus? leadership and foreign policy, and Huckabee?s social instincts”

Then I suggest you learn more about Pence. I think you’d like him.

wonkish1

He is one of the few that resembles that description the closest.

tomarmstrong

Add him to the list and I’ll vote in your poll. No Chirstie, no vote.

JSobieski

The media loved McCain until he won the nomination, when he then became an out of touch old guy who laughablly didn’t know how to use a web browser.

One the plusses about Palin is that the MSM attack dogs can’t really do any more general image damage than they have already done. Another plus is that we can see how Palin responds and how effective the response.

The second any R candidate looks like they might win the nomination, the MSM will do whatever it can to push the standard stupid/lack of gravitas/etc meme.

The left is irrelevant to the calculus of who we should nominate. Ability to draw independents matters, but not what leftists do.

JSobieski

The media loved McCain until he won the nomination, when he then became an out of touch old guy who laughablly didn’t know how to use a web browser.

One the plusses about Palin is that the MSM attack dogs can’t really do any more general image damage than they have already done. Another plus is that we can see how Palin responds and how effective the response.

The second any R candidate looks like they might win the nomination, the MSM will do whatever it can to push the standard stupid/lack of gravitas/etc meme.

The left is irrelevant to the calculus of who we should nominate. Ability to draw independents matters, but not what leftists do.

philipjames

I liked the previous poll, but it had a flaw. And the flaw was that when Mittens lost or Huckleberry lost or others, I would bet that in order to lessen the Power of Palin, those supporters went into a “anyone but Palin” voting mode.
Now, we will be able to see just who has the real support… not one strengthened by the sore losers of another candidate.

wonkish1

He has said, “What do I have to, short of suicide, to convince you guys I’m not running for president?”

I think that is a pretty strong statement that he isn’t running.

aesthete

What do you think about critiques that Perry was an “autopilot” Gov? Is there anything to it, and if not, what’s he pushed that has been beneficial for the state? (Mind you, I don’t have much of a problem with do-nothing types in states like TX, which are already pretty well-managed and generally know the appropriate scope of government, but the federal government is not at all well-managed or within proper confines.) Thanks in advance for the reply (other Texans can feel free to field this one, too).

aesthete

Have an approval voting system, where RSers check off all candidates that they would support as President. One could vote for as many people as one wishes, and refrain from voting for people they don’t like. As an example: one could vote for Palin, Daniels, Barbour, and Pence (because one likes those), and refrain from voting for Huck, Romney, etc. This would be interesting in two ways:

1) It would eliminate the problem of strategic voting in straw polls.

2) It would be interesting in showing who would be potential base consensus candidates in 2012.

Other suggestions: include Gary Johnson. He’s probably not going anywhere, but it’d be interesting to see how much support he (or someone like him) would get around these parts. And of course, include Mbeck’s DWC.

wonkish1

I don’t think it really matters whether you include Gary or not.

And then after that, do one more poll on using the same system, except who you will absolutely not vote for. Trust me there will be a spread between the two because the difference will be those that the individual A) doesn’t know much about, B) hasn’t made up their mind on, or C) is luke warm towards them.

chamberD

Jim DeMint was not among the names in your first paring.

And now he is not on this list. I’m getting very annoyed with this constant refusal of yours, Erick, to consider him as a contender.

JIM DEMINT. No one else in the field can hold a candle to him.

My absolute NOs:
Thune is a porker; Romney has RomneyCare around his neck; Sarah Palin rallies the base and has balls most men in the field lack, but she is NOT presidential material; Huckabee could NEVER capture enough votes outside his narrow constituency to prevail at the national level.

You can’t seriously be placing Jeb Bush on the list? He is establishment to the core, no matter how he tries to hide it.

Pawlenty. Daniels. Neither have done anything CONSISTENTLY that would lead me to consider them.

Perry I’d have to examine, but methinks I remember a thing or two that disqualifies him from MY list.

?Haley Barbour. I’ll study up on him.

Heck no to Petraeus. Or you kidding me? For all we know the first thing he’d do is make homosexual marriage the law of the land if his comments on repeal of DADT is any indication.

John Bolton would make a great VP to Jim DeMint, a good balance, but not JB at the top of the ticket.

I think Hermain Cain has not enough depth, as far as I can tell, regardless that he’s a fine speaker.

I might take a second look at Mike Pence; but he really disappointed me late summer when he sided with the leadership against one of the more conservative members in the House — TAS did a story on it, as I recall, and I chimed in, as a commenter, making my extreme disappointment known.

I think that covers it.

wonkish1

nt

aesthete

would be interesting.

Obligatory Wikipedia link

wonkish1

As a suggestion, not a challenge or anything you might want to look more at what some of the positive things people have done on the list instead of looking only at who has done the least things you disagree with.

Just a tip given in good faith, nothing more.

Scope

starts “vetting” our candidates. I hope the O doesn’t hire the soon to be unemployed Greyson to run his attack ads.

Another thought. For those that wait until spring, or as you said August to get in the race will have to take the loser leftover campaign managers and teams. You can bet the serious candidates are talking to the best and brightest already.

wonkish1

I was just thinking of the exact same structure in my head. Thanks for given it a label.

Agreed lets do one of those. Please!!!

wonkish1

1. Is that you have a preference towards that candidate
2. Is that you can live with, *or don’t know enough about to make a decision*
3. Is that you cannot live with

That’s the next poll we want right there. It gives a lot more information.

graciegirl

including Ryan, Jindal. Then we could see who really has a handle on all issues domestic and foreign.This is the primary reason I hate to see Palin run. I think many would drop out and we will never get to know them!

Imagine the discourse between all of these excellent candidates. The Dems say we have noone…not! We just need to see who has the smarts to really fix this this nation as well as the guts and tact to run foreign policy.

Jindal has so much experience, an encyclopedic mind…put him at VP, unleash him to ACTUALLY get rid of government waste, then see if you like him to go forward. In the meantime Mike Pence would be my first pick for reasons mentioned here and on the Pence thread. Cain was very impressive at the Gathering but would like to know more about how he would work in the public sector, foreign policy etc.

And EPU certainly respect your opinion but my view of Perry is like Menlo, a figurehead the wayTexas is set up. My calls to a red precinct found people incredibly angry over TTC, the vaccines for teen aged girls, most thought he was not tough enough on immigration. I think we need an unusually bright and talented person at this time and to me Perry falls way short. JMO

wonkish1

About when to enter the race. And is probably the single biggest driving factor for people to not want to wait to long.

Keep in mind though that for a high quality campaign staffer, entering into the race to soon is a substantial career risk. It can be safer to wait for the field to narrow a lot.

So I should point out that a lot of the best guys in the business actually wait a little bit, before they enter. It lowers their rate of advancement and potentially their ability to get the most top spots, but it also protects their careers a lot more by being apart of more winning campaigns.

So while top staff is the single biggest reason to make sure you don’t wait to long, it isn’t a perfect reason though either. Plus some candidates rely less on staffers to do a lot of things preferring to handle a lot of their messaging themselves.

wonkish1

In regards to the MSM.

If you’re words are capable of drawing people into your candidacy at a higher rate than the MSM is able to turn people off from your campaign then given enough time you win.

NeoKong

How did that work out…?

Palin controls her media exposure quite effectively and is neutralizing all her negative stereotypes. When she runs her own show she does pretty damn well.

She has written two best sellers, she is a Fox News contributor, she has her own reality show, her daughter was a big hit on DWTS and she was a much sought after endorsement in the last election.
She has her own PAC and successful blogsite and she can generate a media storm with a mere tweet.

Some people may have a problem with her stepping down in Alaska but since then she has been untouchable and a rising star.

She has built a powerful media organization in just two years and when she wants to speak directly to America millions hear her voice.
Not bad for a girl.

chamberD

Thank you, wonkish1.

I was making my comments as brief as possible while trying to share why I have disqualified them. I see red flags on some of these names, even though — obviously — they wouldn’t be on the list if they didn’t come with a modicum of conservative credentials.

Who do you think, on the list (incl DeMint) has the most POSITIVE marks; and briefly, what are they?

aesthete

applies in the case of legislators who want to run for Pres: DeMint is a wildly successful Senator from a conservative point of view, and will be crucial as a mentor to Tea Partiers, and an organizer/representative of conservative interests in the Senate. If he leaves, do we have anyone comparable who would be able to take his place? Unfortunately, the answer to that question is no. The flip side of that question is, does he have the ability to lead as an executive? He might, and I’m sure that he’d do his best to govern conservatively, but we really have no proof one way or another. The questions that should be asked are as follows: what can/would DeMint do as President that he cannot do as Senator? What can he not do as President that he would be able to do as a Senator? Would this trade-off be worth it, compared to trade-offs that we would get from other nominees? We have a handful of Govs who have shown a concrete ability to govern conservatively (Barbour and Daniels among them). IMO, it would be wiser to let one of those give it a whirl with DeMint as a powerful voice in the Senate, than to have the Tea Party coalition disintegrate for want of an effective leader in the Senate.

wonkish1

If you only looked at this list: Romney, Palin, Thune, Huckabee, Jeb, Pawlenty, Daniels, Barbour, Perry, Harbour, Petraeus, Bolton, Cain, and Pence I will tell you who I think has the most overlooked positive accomplishments that most on here don’t know about.

This is absolutely not an endorsement, but from an objective standpoint Daniels and Jeb have the *most underreported* accomplishments from both a policy standpoint and vocally in their respective states.

That aside Jeb is unelectable as can be. And Daniels(even if he decides to get in) has to improve on a lot of things needed to be able to get elected. But yes both of these need more credit for what they have done than they are currently getting.

Jeb: Very, very different from brother George. Jeb has a claim to fame of supercharging the movement of fiscal conservatism and limited government in Florida. Not only for being a voice of it, but inspiring many in and around Florida government about thinking creatively on how to shrink it. For us folks that want to see movement on education vouchers, other than maybe Tommy Thompson know person has done more to advance that in the US then Jeb Bush. And for that I am grateful.

Daniels: Indiana’s government was in very rough shape when Daniels took over. It was heavily in debt, and roads was a problem in the state. Here is a guy that came in and thought acted very creatively to produce a budget surplus by cutting things that nobody would miss. He also had a penchant for selling state assets that nobody ever really thought of selling. Example: He sells the main tollway in Indiana for several billion dollars to some Japanese investors, who completely lose their @** on the investment. And then takes the money and uses it on the most aggressive road building campaign in the states history. All without raising 1 cent of taxes. He has an ability to connect with his constituents that has never been seen before by any politician this side of Reagan. He has a done a lot to advance conservatism in Indiana and I thank him for the hard work.

Obviously, the 2 that bring a lot to the table that everybody knows about is Palin, and Pence. Some are just starting to read up on Pence, but for those of us that have been following his career for many years he definitely is deserving of his fame.

Again this entire post wasn’t to give an endorsement or anything. I am still undecided for 2012,but it is designed to give some thanks to a few folks for their hard work, and maybe inspire others to look more into some other candidates unknown accomplishments.

I also recommend that folks do some more research into
Perry: And things like the webcam border project that showed his ability to think outside of the box. His ability to use positive controversy for the advancement of conservatism.

Gingrich: And the work he has been doing to be the one man think tank of the Conservative movement, how much of a role he has played in killing particular liberal bills, taking the conservative cause into new markets, and the work he has done in campaign theory

Tim Pawlenty: And how much of a crusader he was for balanced budgets against very hostile Dem chambers

Every candidate has faults, drawbacks, etc. but we do need to make sure that we cover enough of the good things they have done as well.

RZ

then Thune, Huckabee, & Romney.

Half this list is unelectable, whether you like it or not.

wonkish1

Regardless of which candidate we are talking about here, unelectable vs. electable is still a function of how we think their campaign will be constructed based on historically they have been conducted. That isn’t necessarily a full proof way to judge electability.

Technically speaking, if someone that we conceived as unelectable ran a non traditional campaign(something that is a big gamble) and people became drawn to it then it is conceivable that what ever factors that led us to believe they were unelectable could not actually occur.

It is purely for this fact that we should all reserve judgement because you could be surprised by someone.

That said yes I very much dislike Huckabee and Romney and find it hard to believe that they could do anything that would surprise me enough to vote for them. But there are plenty of candidates that I may find as to far down the list that I like, and who knows maybe they pull a rabbit and make a serious run for it. Or maybe there is someone that I have misjudged that uses something creative like a contract or discovers a new way to win an issue(as examples) that allows me to see them in a more positive light.

aesthete

IMO, it is more important to find a candidate with a record of conservative accomplishment, and then to try to find ways to elect them, than to work backwards and only look for candidates with perceived “electability”.

wonkish1

I would say this.

There are currently a lot of attractive candidates.

We should reserve judgement and let them earn our confidence.
And make our choice at that time.

That is better than taking a look at who is electable and who is not and constricting the list to only a few choices.

And it is also better than picking our favorite candidate now and running around trying to win everybody over.

If we create a wide field, dare the candidates to take risks, and give all of them opportunities to make their case, a candidate will pop out that is conservative and they will earn the ability to win. If we attempt to clamp down on a few “electable” ones early or as supporters try to impose “electability” on some front runner then we do ourselves a disservice.

Let the earn it!

wonkish1

A candidate we like

wonkish1

I read “(incl) Demint” and thought excluding Demint.

Yes he is a very strong choice, and one that folks need to read up on. It was him that was willing to be the very conservative lone wolf in the Senate for many, many years and he deserves a lot of credit for that.

RZ

i worded that wrong. Their all great candidates, I just think we should focus on the pool who have a strong record of conservatism and stand a chance against Obama.

RZ

n/t

graciegirl

JadedByPolitics

..

http://www.2010blog.net jsanzone

And in a wide field Palin’s got the advantage of her 20% devotees…?

Might Iowa and South Carolina mirror the RedState poll?

Or is this speculation all way too soon?

dantrademark

To my fellow RedState readers, conservatives, TEA Party patriots, and all others concerned: please stop trying to push this whole “Palin for President” nonsense.

Personally, I like the woman and think she’s a valuable asset within the conservative movement; but she is absolutely unelectable and would never win in a national election. She has been too thoroughly stigmatized, mocked, ridiculed, scandalized and trivialized in the popular media.

If you continue to support this folly, know that you are all but guaranteeing an Obama victory in 2012.

When I read polls like this, I’m genuinely frightened about the future of our country. People, this Palin infatuation is insanity! Stop it!

nessa

‘Cuz it wouldn’t let me either.

gekster

You know, voting more than once. LOL

E Pluribus Unum

Let me first remind that I’m not firmly in the Perry camp. Now that said, when saying what Perry has done at the wheel, out doesn’t include a laundry list of programs and initiatives. In fact, the entire executive and legislative footprint in Texas is nigh invisible, which of how we like it here.

So the charge of “autopilot governor” might have some feet but I don’t think it’s a fair charge. In my opinion it takes alot more dedication and effort as a governor to just stay the frack out of peoples’ way than it takes to do the bull-in-china-closet thing we’ve gotten used to in DC.

In Texas we did not need a reformer as governor. New Jersey did. Out did not require a guy to come in here with a bunch of new ideas. Our legislature is full of conservatives and businessmen who know what it takes to manage a state. What Perry has done is relentlessly work to keep Texas pro-business, low taxes, low reg, anti-ambulance chasers, pro-doctor, pro-oil, pro jobs, pro border security, I could go on but you see my point.

The economic numbers speak for themselves. TX is not shedding doctors, which is a very interesting metric.

The man at the top didn’t do all that. But he sure kept out from getting undone. Does that make him the best guy, or one of them, to come to DC and just turn the place upside down? Maybe, maybe not. I would say, watch and see how his current play works out as RGA chair. If he is a stud at rallying a bunch of governors and states to defy federal government overreach, then I think he might be the right guy.

redneck_hippie

nt

Scope

He asked, “what do I have to do to convince you that I am not running for the presidency in 2012, commit suicide.” His words, not mine.

redneck_hippie

Christie may be persuadable. Kudlow thinks it is in the realm of possibility. If he isn’t considering it now, I sure hope he gives it some thought over the next few months.

wonkish1

I am an absolutely huge Christie fan, but at some point you just got to stop hounding the guy. He doesn’t want to do it. I keep on feeling like if we keep this up he’s going to start treating folks that ask him to run for president like how a movie star treats the paparazzi.

I think its time to just let him be. I think he has earned that.

Scope

If anyone has to beg anyone to run, and then beg them again and again, they are not the correct candidate. Wasn’t Fred Thompson seen to have no fire in the belly, from his reluctance to run, despite that he was drafted?

http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

Looks like Herman Cain isn’t so popular after all. That, or there is a very large anti-Palin voting block here.

cej

Including these people in the poll and not people like Chris Christie and Ron Paul and Gary Johnson basically discredits it from the beginning. At least you had the good sense to leave off Gingrich.

Scope

to believe that they really do mean no. Hounding is the correct descriptor.

redneck_hippie

I’d much rather support someone like Christie than the Romneys of the world. If Christie doesn’t think it over, he doesn’t. But I hope he does.

http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

While her TV show may help her reach audiences that normally don’t pay attention to more political shows, it doesn’t help much with the gravitas. She’ll have to execute a quick turnaround if she’s serious about running.

wonkish1

Feel at all bad that you are then fueling something he doesn’t want.

I mean I feel for the guy. Here he is doing amazing work in New Jersey, and everywhere he goes:

“Are you going to run for president.” “Are you going to run for president.” “Well when you officially make up you’re mind” “Aren’t you at least going to remain open to the idea.”

Over and over and over again. Everywhere you go. Every interview. Every time you talk to constituents. Man at sometime I would also feel like kicking someone in the teeth.

“NNOO!!, okay I’m not running for president and so can I please get back to doing my job without this constantly added into every single thing I do!!”

And as much as I love the guy and think he would make a great president, I tend to listen to the wishes of those that I like. And his wish is clearly to be left alone so that he can do his job. I respect that, and so I personally wont be apart of that because that it is us that want him to that is fueling every reporter, journalist, anchor, etc. asking him every time he talks.

warkarma

I’ve said it before, but I’ll wager a good prime rib that he ends up Veep on the 2012 ticket (and I think he’d make a great Veep).

A bunch of 5′s (whatever this means) for the folks supporting Rick Perry and Tim Pawlenty. Same for those not supporting Sarah Palin. I honestly think she should replace Michael Steele as head of GOP. I think she’d be great at it. For lack of a better description, she has the same emotional gusto as Howard Dean, and uses it well, but she’s not POTUS material by any stretch of the imagination.

I still support Romney, Pawlenty, Huckabee, Thune. I’m not accepting flack for my support of Romney . I like him as a candidate and so do a LOT of other conservatives on the East and West Coast. Most polls show Romney and Huckabee to be the most electable candidates right now, this one included:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/12/16/5659452-first-thoughts-as-bad-as-it-gets

I’m really warming up to the idea of Rick Perry. Prior to relocating, I lived in Texas for over 2 decades and he’s been a great governnor for the state.

I’m really surprised more people don’t know about John Thune. I hope the GOP puts forward a great candidate that will have a shot at defeating Obama in 2012.

wonkish1

In regards to any single of your statement.

wonkish1

They are the only ones other than Palin that are known. That isn’t saying much.

http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

Then I read comments from people like yours and I’m ready to work my but off for her, just to prove that A) she can win an election, B) she knows how to use the media, and C) in a contest between Obama and Palin, Palin would win hands down.

http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

Palin declined a run for party chair.

warkarma

Scope

Palin is a great fundraiser, and can surely rally some troops. She would have been a great, and needed asset in that position. She would have excelled at the RNC. We will have to find some other spot for her within the Republican party, other than the Presidency. As I said she is a true asset.

wonkish1

Has shown absolutely no likelihood of running. So we don’t want to skew the samples. I mean we could put Ronald Reagan on there and nobody could bring themselves to not vote for him. But its unlikely that the angel of Ronald Reagan is going to come down and run for president again.

You put on those that have actually shown willingness to run. Rubio like Christie would command high numbers, but since they are likely not running the poll would be useless.

aesthete

Cain was a lot of peoples’ second choice. There are a lot of strange outcomes that result from runoff and several-round voting systems that would not result in others. I don’t really think that the first set of 2012 posts really told us much of anything for that very reason: we were voting on a pair of arbitrarily-selected candidates pitted against each other, not the entire field.

Tbone

and the 12 Dwarfs.

fpete13527

….but I’m still keeping a stand for Bolton at this time.
http://bit.ly/iaaIdE Not many I know agree.

Bolton is strong and increasingly hungry for the job.

Also:

Pence
Cain
&
West (probably top choice next to DeMint but probably hardest to sell)

graciegirl

you had better be right!

philipjames

Well, now that we have a real poll, where all the losers can’t vote for “anyone but Palin”, isn’t it interesting that she is smoking everyone.

And, without asking her 2.5 million Facebook fans to vote for her… or any of her 330,000 Twitter followers…. like some others in that previous Cain victory result… “He garnered 8,900 votes to Governor Sarah Palin?s 8100 votes. Mighty impressive.” Yes, mightly impressive to spin a phony idea that he could beat Sarah Palin. Wow… what a weird bunch the right is… the strongest candidate is standing right in front of all of you and you just don’t believe it… would rather go with some weird, unkown, UNVETTED candidates who will get their butts whipped. Masochists.

And now, in this poll, he only gets 647 votes… What happened? Did all the other loser supporters now have to support their candidates? Did he not ask his Facebook and Twitter followers to vote.. again?

philipjames

Well, now that we have a real poll, where all the losers can?t vote for ?anyone but Palin?, isn?t it interesting that she is smoking everyone.

And, without asking her 2.5 million Facebook fans to vote for her? or any of her 330,000 Twitter followers?. like some others in that previous Cain victory result? ?He garnered 8,900 votes to Governor Sarah Palin?s 8100 votes. Mighty impressive.? Yes, mightly impressive to spin a phony idea that he could beat Sarah Palin. Wow? what a weird bunch the right is? the strongest candidate is standing right in front of all of you and you just don?t believe it? would rather go with some weird, unkown, UNVETTED candidates who will get their butts whipped. Masochists.

And now, in this poll, he only gets 647 votes? What happened? Did all the other loser supporters now have to support their candidates? Did he not ask his Facebook and Twitter followers to vote.. again?

philipjames

Is the gravitas you are talking about the ability to continue to speak while your head is up your butt? Then there are a lot of really good candidates with gravitas that will be there for you next year. Just look for the one that has their head the furthest up there… something like an ostrich with its head in the sand.
Good choice.
Four more years of the Democrat President… smart. Four more years of destroying the US… brilliant.

gekster

And made your point without the inuendoes.
Something make you mad today.

saintgeorgegentile

The boys over at hillbuzz.org are asking their readers to push for Sarah.

http://hillbuzz.org/2010/12/18/action-item-vote-in-redstates-2012-poll-to-put-governor-palin-over-the-top/

gekster

Every one gets an equal shot.

http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

I still have a hard time getting past Perry’s very anti-family-values MANDATE that all teenage girls get that darn Gardasil vaccination, which has a lousy health-benefit-to-possible-complications ratio. The mandate was an unconscionable infringement on parental rights, an invasion of privacy, and sent a horrible message to young girls that we have extremely low expectations for them.

Remember, children will live up to — OR DOWN TO — your expectations.

elizabeth bennet

What I think is funny is that Mitt Romney has 8% in the poll at this writing. And ditto the other milquetoasts. Geez Louise, I sure wish the GOP nominee would be somebody FANTASTIC in 2012. Because I have had it up to HERE with “It’s My Turn” bozos (Dole, McCain).

I don’t get the antipathy towards Sarah. People saying she’s not smart, she doesn’t have gravitas? OK, first using “gravitas” in a sentence should be outlawed, because it’s just WAY overdone. But that aside, she’s not smart? Really? Have folks never heard her speak on the issues? The girl is not a dork. Not EVEN.

http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

dantrademark–
Thank you for voicing what’s been on my mind. I’ve been a huge Palin supporter–even got to see her speak in person. She’s one of the sharpest knives in the drawer, did more than any other single individual to bring about the recent conservative electoral victories, and represents most of the values of most of us here.

But to be perfectly honest, even though, yes, she is an electrifying speaker, and a very engaging writer, she bombs in interviews and off-the-cuff situations. That is not good! When I hear people going on and on about how articulate she is, I feel like I’m the little boy in the emperor-has-no-clothes story. Which is exactly the way I felt 2 years ago when everyone was talking about how great Obama was. Sorry, but Sarah is NOT articulate off-the-cuff. And that famous debate with Biden? I don’t think she won it at all. Biden was lying through his teeth the whole time–but Palin just kept repeating “maverick” over and over.

I’m sorry to say all this negative about someone I hugely admire and appreciate–but it does seem like there’s a lot of herd mentality going on with Sarah fandom. Something to watch out for.

aesthete

Another quick question: he seems to be the only guy consistently making noise about federalism out there. Bush and other Texas govs, by contrast, were virtually invisible on the issue. If he leaves, what are the chances that the gov that replaces him keeps pushing that door (esp if a fellow Texan is at the helm of the federal government)/do you know who might end up becoming the next Texas Gov? From my vantage point, potential federalist movements from state govs are most likely to find traction and solace in Texas, and I fear that we might lose that if Perry goes to Washington.

http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

Guess I need to do some research, because I have no idea where Bolton is on issues other than national security. Betcha dollars to donuts he doesn’t get particularly exercised about the killing of babies before birth.

http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

Sarah is very, very smart. And her prepared speeches are fabulous. (I know, I was there for one) The problem is she’s not good off-the-cuff. We need someone who would never, evern, not even on their very worst day, totally unprepared, have a Katie Couric moment.

audax

I love Texas, and I got there as fast as I could when younger, but Texas has one issue that that needs addressing very soon, and that is some relief from high property taxes. High proprty taxes which are mostly used to fund the liberal Teachers Unions and “progressive” University “educators” and their leftist agendas instead of even better roads, water management and border protection.

sapwolf

I ain’t Palin’s fault if the boys in the GOP don’t run because they are afraid of a girl.

If Palin runs and another wuss like ..say..Thune doesn’t run, that just means he shouldn’t have run in the first place because he is…a…

WUSS.

Palin should run along with the others and see who wins. If she can find a common-sense constitution conservative to endorse she’d do it but the men are boys and will not step up their game and go medieval on the Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Soros Axis.

Until then, she is probably gonna run. And, the good thing is that she can beat Obama if the economy sucks in 2012 and we are still bogged down in TWO wars. Why? Do the electoral numbers and you can easily see why she is close to winning already. Heck, if the GOP in PA, who just took over the state, down two stiff drinks and change their electoral law for POTUS to proportional, Sarah has won the election already.

Blue states mean NOTHING. Focus on the following states and ignore the rest:

Close 5 sure to win: Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida

Other 6 battleground states: Iowa, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico

She wins the first five plus one of the six, she wins due to Census moves to red states plus the extra pickup in Nebraska.

THIS is why Axelrod & Co. are still asking the media to knock her out. She is VERY close to winning this thing out of the gate, especially if the anti-Obama forces unite behind her and say a Palin/West, Palin/Rubio, Palin/Ryan, or Palin/Jindal or even a Palin/Barbour ticket.

Tickets like that make you wanna dynamite cafes baby and the Dem powerbrokers including SpookyDude know it.

audax

…is by attempting to vote again…..

sapwolf

He is an admitted Rockefeller Republican.

Also, he basically took himself out of the running when he admitted his favorite music is Enya. That kills any man with two balls in a GOP Primary out of the gate.

audax

sapwolf

That’s the opinion you should hold towards the end of 2011 AFTER the primary has had a chance to get going.

If Palin comes on strong and Presidential, and is getting traction, then she will win and face the Messiah.

It’s too early to eliminate anybody. Sarah, just like the others, has every right to run and she has EARNED it.

audax

To my fellow RedState readers, conservatives, TEA Party patriots, and all others concerned: please stop trying to push this whole ?Reagan for President? nonsense.

Personally, I like the man and think he?s a valuable asset within the conservative movement; but he is absolutely unelectable and would never win in a national election. He has been too thoroughly stigmatized, mocked, ridiculed, scandalized and trivialized in the popular media.

If you continue to support this folly, know that you are all but guaranteeing an Obama victory in 2012.

When I read polls like this, I?m genuinely frightened about the future of our country. People, this Reagan infatuation is insanity! Stop it!

sapwolf

If Huck does not run, Palin would win it if the Primary campaign started today.

Let’s just see how it develops. If Sarah does not run, there may be other conservatives who get their courage up and appear to be good prospects.

If she does not run, the winner will HAVE to have her endorsement.

sapwolf

The LSM has nothing on Palin. No dirt. Vetted more than any other national politician in American history.

sapwolf

Jeb is for amnesty unfortunately. Even if he changed his last name, he would still have that stain on his record.

Otherwise, he would have been a great charismatic candidate.

avgjo

I will abstain if he runs.

Thankfully, I don’t think he has a chance or wants to run.

sapwolf

They all can run in the primary. Why should anybody be disqualified from running?

Let’em run including the Cuda. If she can’t hack it, don’t vote for her.

Believe me, if she doesn’t come across as presidential, she won’t get the votes. After what she has done for conservatism and fighting Obama, she has more right than any of the boys to run.

sapwolf

The GOP Establishment would 1) never vote for her to be the head of the RNC, and 2) even if she got the job, they’d cut the legs out from under her.

In fact, that suggestion that she should be the RNC Head is just another way to marginalize her.

If she does not run, the one she endorses will win the primary. If nobody steps up courageously and they keep doing the finger in the wind crap like T-Paw, Daniels and Romney, she’ll have to run.

sapwolf

Rombots would LOVE to push Sarah over to the RNC Chair, when in fact the BEST choice for the insider, country clubbin, east-coast, big-money raising with the deep pockets crowd is OBVIOUSLY…

Romney

Romney is the PERFECT RNC Chairman

JadedByPolitics

when I saw the comment about double voting, I tried to vote again and it gave me the message that I couldn’t Now if I can vote on Monday when I get to work, I will and it will be for Herman Cain AGAIN!

JadedByPolitics

weird unknown, unvetted candidate anymore then Sarah Palin was to a lot of us in 2008. There are political junkies like me who know all of the people and all of the things they stand for and they have a RIGHT just as Sarah has a RIGHT to be in the process to be chosen for the Republican candidate for President. I will tell you that coming here to smack anyone that another Redstater supports with hyperbolic commentary shows your ignorance not the sites or those commenting.

JadedByPolitics

“Please stop supporting Reagan?

To my fellow RedState readers, conservatives, TEA Party patriots, and all others concerned: please stop trying to push this whole ?Reagan for President? nonsense.

Personally, I like the man and think he?s a valuable asset within the conservative movement; but he is absolutely unelectable and would never win in a national election. He has been too thoroughly stigmatized, mocked, ridiculed, scandalized and trivialized in the popular media.

If you continue to support this folly, know that you are all but guaranteeing an Obama victory in 2012.

When I read polls like this, I?m genuinely frightened about the future of our country. People, this Reagan infatuation is insanity! Stop it!”

AMEN BROTHER!!!!!!!

Scope

The Hillbuzz people are totally in Palin’s camp now. They said they were not going back to Hillary, even is she runs again. I wondered why Palins numbers were so high, and now we know. It kinds skews the poll. I also wondered if Conservatives 4 Palin were coming over to vote, or any of the other Palin websites. Hey, it’s all just for fun, it isn’t the election.

wonkish1

It was skewed. I knew it before, you posted that. Sarah’s numbers sped up as time went on. At first, I just thought that a lot of the Pence, Cain, etc. numbers came in early. Nope they came in at roughly the same proportion throughout.

Then Sarah’s numbers just seemed to get juiced all of sudden. And then Cain’s made a late break for it to.

My guess is that as much as 10 of the 30% backing Palin right now could likely be manufactured by non Redstate Palin supporters flooding into the site.

My guess is take about 7ish% off of Palin and and about 2% off of Cain and you will get to pretty accurate numbers of what the Redstate community thinks.

That is just an objective view by watching results as they pored in.

Please lets do a quaker poll.

wonkish1

1. Is that you have a preference towards that candidate
2. Is that you can live with, *or don?t know enough about to make a decision*
3. Is that you cannot live with

Scope

The Paulites would put out the message, on their gazillions of message boards, and they would all run to the site and crank up the votes for Paul. If they could vote more than once, I think some just sat for hours voting again and again. Yet look at how he finished in the general. I find it very hard to believe that there are that many Palin supporters. Also, there are not so many that even know who Cain is at this time.

E Pluribus Unum

I’m not at all impressed with the couple of guys who would seem to be the logincal successor, which are (IMHO) Lt Gov Dewhurst or AG Abbott.

As for other governors grabbing the mantle of federalism and running with it? I don’t know who might be at the forefront, but I don;t know, this last year or so in the face of BambiCare, I thought it was pretty much all of them, yes? Perry may be the loudest, but the new guy in VA, O’Donnelll is another one. Barbour in MI, the lady in AZ, some others. Look at the BambiCare lawsuits, that seems to be where they are all congregating.

fpete13527

…..and is fully endorsed as Pro Life by multipe Pro-Life organizations to inlcude CWA

audax

acat

Remember, in 2006 and 2007 everyone – even here – thought it was going to be Hillary vs. McCain. (a fight, by the way, that I figure Johnny Mac had a chance of winning…)

Enter Obama… and suddenly Johnny Mac is the *wrong* candidate.

I do not expect Obama to be the Dem POTUS nominee in 2012… and while Sarah Palin lines up very well against Obama, we should consider how well she, and indeed *any* Repub potential nominee stacks up against any potential Dem nominee. Does Candidate Palin beat Clinton? What about against Deval Patrick or Ted Kulongoski or Bill Ritter, just to name a few potential challengers?

Just sayin’

Mew

acat

Remember, in 2006 and early 2007, it was supposed to be Hillary vs. McCain…

How well does Palin stack up to some of the other Dem potential candidates?

I’m not looking for a silver-bullet anti-Obama, I’m looking for a serious conservative-evangelist, who can inspire the Independents without losing the Tea Partiers and SoCons and FiCons and who the Libertarians and Establishment types can tolerate… and bluntly, that describes Pence and Cain and a couple others much better than Palin at this point.

I’m not knocking her – I voted for her in 2008. (I did NOT vote for McCain… he was just on the ticket) I don’t know, yet, that she’s the right candidate for 2012.

Mew

acat

all this post really does is to slam those who have concerns. Doesn’t address the concerns, doesn’t offer reasons to be pro-Palin, doesn’t reach out…

It’s funny, in a pointed way, but .. if you’re really trying to win supporters, it seems like the wrong approach….

Mew

acat

Because it’s not locked into just Red State, we don’t really know who Red State readers and diarists support.

Alas.

acat

TrueConservative

Where is the “none of the above” option?

Ron Paul and Rand Paul have my vote without question. You might not like it, but Ron paul has a significant following in the Republican grassroots (particularly among the younger crowd) and your attempts to margianlize him only tick off the base.

Jan Brewer also would have my vote.

The people on your list are nothing but elitists and RINOs with the lone exception of Palin, but we all know she isn’t electable thanks to the MSM that has attacked her relentlessly the same way the did to George Bush and Dan Quayle.

And Jeb Bush? Please. I will NEVER vote for another Bush as long as I live.

Republicans have to put up or shut up this time around. I’m not holding my nose and voting for Mccain again. Put up a decent candidate or I and millions of other pissed off conservatives are going third party. Better to crash and burn than to get stabbed in the back by a RINO.

TrueConservative

How about Sherriff Joe Arpaio? You want someone electable that everyone in American loves, who cuts straight through the liberal BS, this is your man. When the libs complained about his tent city, making prisoners wear pink, or enforcing immigration laws, he told them to pound sound.

But no, the elites would never let someone like that get the nomination.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

sapwolf

She earned the right to run and if she wants to be POTUS, she has to win the GOP Primary first just like any other.

If people don’t like it, then work hard for your choice.

But to DISCRIMINATE against anybody and tell them they can’t run is pure bullsh*t and UN-American.

You f’in pansies want to beat her or whoever the conservative ends up to be, you need to push a different candidate and get them to win.

BRING IT!

promise

Palin; she left her position in Alaska politics to save millions of dollars the state was having to pay because of law suits!! The one thing Palin did & always will do is protect her Alaska! Smarter about a wide range od topics than any other I’ve seen or heard, no bulls— in her!
Saying that my second choice is Herman Cain; if you have never had the privilege of seeing or hearing him I recommend you do so! Heck of a man!! Smart beyond belief! Can put anyone one the run! One black person at one of his speaches sais “don’t you know these white folks out there are the ones who killed your folks”. Mr. Cain responded “show me a 200 hundred yr. old white person who killed my folks & I’ll kill them!” A true conseraitive loves America, came up hard & made millions!!! Very christian!

Scope

you will see will be with your messiah Ron Paul if he tries to run again. Your significant following didn’t equal a blip on the radar last time, and it won’t this time either, that is, if he wants to waste his money, and yours again. He’s actually turning into the Ralph Nader of the Republican party, with the exception of his run as a libertarian the first time around.

sapwolf

Acat,

First of all, there is a national push by the LSM to portray Sarah as not electable. Understand that first.

Second, the electoral landscape is VERY favorable to Sarah along with any GOP winner of the primary.

Sarah will not lose any McCain states. (173 – 173)
Sarah will get the lone Dem Nebraska vote. (1 – 174)
Censue votes to red states. (6+ – 180)
Sarah will get the following two states easily, Indiana and North Carolina. (26 – 206)
As of now, Obama is polling favorable of 39-40% in Ohio. Tea Party is strong in Ohio. Ohio just flipped the entire state RED. They will NOT vote for the phony Obama again. (20 – 226).
Sarah puts Colonel West or Rubio and she gets Florida, another state that was close in 2008. (27 – 253).
Virginia? My two friends out there say the Indies have abandoned Obama in droves and O cannot win again. (13 – 266).

That leaves her basically four votes short, meaning she would need one more state. She will get one or more from the following:

Wisconsin – went WAY red and is a perfect state for the hunter, middle-class union gal.

Iowa – Not sure yet but she could take this state which has a lot of older people. Sarah is trustworthy and will protect their SS and Medicare from irresponsible fiscal policy of Obama.

New Hampshire – This state likes its libertarian freedom and Sarah is a libertarian 80% of the way already.

Colorado – If the GOP regroups and does a better job of uniting the various factions in their coalition, there is no reason why an outdoorsy, western Reaganite cannot flip this state back RED after the abysmal economy of O/Pel/Reid.

Nevada – Not sure of this state, but would be very tough to win back due to the Dem illegals voting machine they have running in the Las Vegas area.

NOTE: If Pennsylvania goes proportional electoral voting like Nebraska and Maine, then Sarah will defeat Obama as long as the anti-Obama forces all unite behind her campaign after the primary.

sapwolf

Acat,

You are falling for the media push to portray Sarah as not electable. Get out from behind the tree and look at the forest.

Their mission, although it could change, is to portray to GOP voters that Sarah is not electable.

She is because the electoral numbers and demographic mix is favorable.

Let her run. If she is not ready, she will not win the primary, and another conservative champion will surface somewhere down the road.

But to go in a panic mode over a woefully fixed ABC or NBC poll that shows Obama 22 points over Palin when all the other polls have her only behind by single digits or even is foolish.

Also, what they don’t mention is polling in the battleground states. In Ohio, Obama is around approval of 39-40%. Sarah will beat him here assuming the economy is still struggling by 2012.

Sarah, unlike the other GOP candidates, is ex-union and so is her husband. They understand how to reach the union voters. They will peal a slight amount of them over as Reagan Dems to help win. I can’t give you good info. on Virginia but ask others.

It is WAY too early to write-off any of the GOP prospects.

Look at the true numbers and honest analysis of leftist polling data before you go off the deep end foolishly.

sapwolf

And it will look like that for awhile until somebody with the XY chromosmes actually decides to step up and fight Obama and the Progressives 24/7 like Sarah.

If any of the …12…show they are men, it might convince Sarah to support them.

I wouldn’t hold your breath though.

sapwolf

Except for Romney. We can all agree to beat up on him.

gekster

You can say the same things with out the language.
My Grandkids read here.
Tone it back, will ya.

wonkish1

To say stop using the head to head polling data because up until pretty close to election time its virtually not all predictable, but what is a little more predictable is favorability vs. unfavorability of the two candidates you are comparing.

Political analysts have lots of data showing that polling data usually converges towards favorability and unfavorability. Also, approval indexes move a lot slower.

So, just coming in saying that if you actually intend on trying to determine who is electable and who isn’t this far out(which I don’t recommend), you might as well use the best tools out there and approval indexes are the most predictive.

That also doesn’t mean that approval indexes aren’t capable of changing a lot between now and 2 years from now(which they can) slowly, but they still will. And that also doesn’t mean that it is perfect either just very highly correlated.

redneck_hippie

Christie does over the next few months.

When I said “draft Christie” it was rhetorical for my wishful thinking. I’m not sold on any candidate. That said, he happens to be at this time someone I’d dearly love to see on the national stage, if he is interested.

As the pension fund unfundedness armageddon becomes more and more close range, Christie looks better and better as a spokesman and inspiration.

Scope

is useless. They are mostly polling using the names of what they are calling the frontrunners, because they don’t know who all will run. I’ll start looking at some polling numbers when the field has been populated. Before that it isn’t anything but hype.

aesthete

Hatred of a last name (regardless of differences), support of Jan Brewer, Ron Paul support, etc.

Then again, perhaps I err by making a distinction between Ron Paul supporters and the serially ignorant (the sole exception being SIConservative).

gekster

I don’t follow polls, unless the questions asked are posted with it,
along with the demographics of said poll.
If I asked 100 persons in a gheto in Chicago if you liked G Bush,
I would not get the same results if persons in Austin were asked.
So basically to me, I don’t follow polls.

Aside from that, I think your reply was to sap.

aesthete

wonkish1

Of people in like the last 20 posts. Sorry, if you thought it was just you.

wonkish1

I was just saying to the folks that are claiming that a particular person is electable or unelectable at this stage. Not only is that very hard to discern this early, but at least use the most predictive data of that.

And that is each person’s respective approval index. That is scientifically the most predictive form of determining electability at a very early stage. Even that isn’t very predictable this far out, but its better than a lot of the stuff being touted by many as signs of someone’s electability or unelectability.

wonkish1

There is a bunch of people in this long chunk of the thread that are making comments defending Palin’s ability to win and non ability to win. I chose instead of responding to each one individually to just put a post at what at the time was the end of much of that chunk.

The truth is that nobody knows if Palin can win or not. No one. You can sit and go back in forth on it as long as you want to, and I’m sure a lot of interesting things will come out of that discussion, but at the end of the day you still wont be able to definitively prove that she isn’t or is electable.

Now that said, I have heard a lot of political analysts(the Barone, Cook, etc. types) mention that when you are looking far out the most predictive metric you have is a candidate’s approval index. After hearing that back in like 07, I have largely found it true as well.

So I was merely mentioning that if you are absolutely so inclined to discuss whether or not Palin is capable of winning or not, that you probably want to use approval index instead of just standard polls or anecdotal evidence in your opinions. Its just a constructive tip.

Scope

is still useless when no one yet knows who all will be running. Palin, or Romney or Huckabee, may have great favoribility numbers right now, but a dark horse could come on the scene and change that almost over night. The same goes with unfavoribility numbers, they can swing wildly. Electable or not electable means you won, and the other guys didn’t. Or the other guy won and you didn’t. It’s really very simple.

gekster

Casting the first stone kinda thing.

wonkish1

I personally think that its to early to talk about who is electable vs. who isn’t.

The only thing I was pointing out was for those that are deciding to talk about it, at least be fair and use the best tools out there, not which ever ones support your case of “x is electable” “y isnt”.

I was coming in offering a minor point, nothing more.

http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

Ron Paul actually were to win the nomination, he would do nothing but guarantee Democrat majorities for the next decade. People would flock to their party.

http://www.buckforcolorado.com bjwilson83

No proposing presidential nominees who have never been governors, senators, or generals. It is unrealistic to think anyone else could win.

Scope

Oh, we’re back to that electable thing again, unfortunately. The above poll results are kinda suspicious, but, I say that Redstate not put anymore polls up including anyone that doesn’t look good in a Santa suit. Since we’re being silly, or far too serious for a just for fun poll, two years out from an election.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

she’s all yours. She read her lines well on SB1070, but on the things that really matter here in Arizona, she’s AWOL. Her budget, which was a combination of trimming some programs, raising taxes through Prop 100 and using $1.4B of “stimulus” funds to buy off the education lobby for a year is a disaster. When the legislature convenes, they will be facing a structural deficit of over $2B and a shortfall in THIS year of nearly $1B.

You can read more about it here.

We’ll be happy to duct tape her and ship via FedEx or UPS to wherever you might be.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

He’s probably been the biggest fiscal disaster in Arizona history, and has done effectively nothing about the crime rate in Maricopa County when compared to other counties in AZ.

wonkish1

You would be looking at Sheriff Bratton. Giuliani’s sheriff in New York City. First, statistics crime fighting was done in New York City under Giuliani and Bratton. New York City is now the safest large city in the country(per capita), and Bratton went to Los Angeles to be the Sherriff and now LA is the second safest large city(per capita).

Here is his book: http://www.amazon.com/Turnaround-Americas-Reversed-Crime-Epidemic/dp/0679452516

Haven’t read it, but I’ve heard its pretty dang good. I think if Bratton ever ran for higher political office he would be a Republican, and in California he could be pretty big force. We’ll see if he’s ever interested, though.

wonkish1

Ben Quayle, too. If I lived in Arizona, I just wouldn’t feel right with the state of the GOP. Its not even that they aren’t successful, its just that they are increasingly more and more weird.

pizzaguy

Can you imagine Obama trying to debate Christie? What a party that would be!

Tbone

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

and in Arizona he’d be ignored on that subject, than Joe’s lawsuits.

And, just for the record, it’s not the cost of defending “frivolous” lawsuits, it’s the cost of paying the judgments from the righteous lawsuits that he’s lost. To the tune of about $500MM so far.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

We’re pretty purplish. The metro parts of the South (Tucson) are very liberal, Maricopa County is a mix of conservatives and California transplants, with some liberals thrown in around ASU (Tempe). The northern reaches and most of the non-metro parts of the state are very libertarian.

Quayle won (my district) because there were six people in the primary, Shadegg didn’t support anybody and he had more money than god.

aesthete

We did well overall; unfortunately, we had a “conservative” idiot run a quixotic campaign against McCain in the primary to the tune of several mil, and there wasn’t enough money to support our remarkably good and very conservative candidates to sweep Tucson (Kelly’s loss was within 1-1.5%, and McClung’s run was very close for the district). Mostly the problem this midterm had to do with fratricidal and unproductive ventures on the part of conservatives, crowded primaries, and a lack of money. Had our Congressional seats gotten more funds, we would have had better GOTV efforts in Tucson, and a better candidate than Quayle for the House.

froster

But regardless of that point, Arapio will be 80 years old in 2012.

wonkish1

All, I know is that he has the best track record of any major Sheriff in the country. Again, I didn’t read his book.

We are talking about Sheriff’s here, not much is really known on any Sheriff in the country except maybe Sheriff Joe.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

His track record on what he actually gets paid for is just OK. He is, however, probably the best politician to ever set foot in Arizona.

He gets lots of high profile press on red meat subjects like immigration and his “crime sweeps”. He’s not particularly effective in terms of crime reduction with either. He’s very effective at getting lots of publicity and there’s nobody better at working the media than Joe.

He has created a political machine in Maricopa County that pretty much assures he’ll be Sheriff as long as he wants. He created a “Sheriff’s Posse” of volunteers and it’s enormous. It includes every wannabe cop in Maricopa County. They get uniforms, they do mall security at Christmas time, they ride in parades and they get to think they’re cops. And they vote for Joe.

His actual “anti-crime” work is OK but is more than offset by the cost of paying off lawsuits he’s lost.

acat

Because, to be blunt, you’re still arguing Sarah vs. Barry, and I’m asking you to argue Sarah vs. {generic Dem}.

Mew

acat

I’m not saying Palin doesn’t have the right to run. I’m asking you – since you seem to be her supporter, to tell me whether she’s the best all-around candidate, not just the perfect silver bullet for Obama.

I’m getting damn tired of Palin’s so-called supporters throwing hissy fits instead of citing her qualifications. If anything loses her the nomination, it’s going to be the inability of the true believers to operate outside an echo chamber.

Mew

acat

Seriously. You’re way over the line here.

I’m pointing out that audaxs’ piece, while funny, does nothing to draw in those who don’t already support Palin.

I’ve got no objection to her running.

If I think, by the time I actually get to vote (Illinois primary is late) that she’s the best candidate still in the race, I’ll vote for her.

If she wins the nomination, regardless of who I supported in the primary, I’ll back her to the hilt.

I do, however, have a problem with her supporters whose response to questions is to throw hissy fits like this is some 4th grade popularity contest.

Back it down, Wolfie. You’re not helping your candidate.

Mew

acat

I’m not a “numbers” guy, I’m more of a “patterns” guy. I spent too many years in college studying history, so historical parallels to current events come easily to me… (no profit in learning history, alas…)

Anyway, while I’m not a numbers guy, I do appreciate the insight that looking at candidate negatives offers. It makes sense as the negative perceptions would be harder to overcome than the neutral or no opinion ones would be…

Mew

audax

….I wasn’t “addressing concerns” or “reaching out”. Just reminding RS readers that the exact same things were said about Reagan, don’t see how that could be a ‘wrong” approach”, just revisiting history…….

acat

.. and I see your point. As I said. Sometimes, this kind of global-search-and-replace thing is very enlightening.

There is a problem with it, though.

With Reagan, we had a candidate with two complete terms in a large-population state, a candidate who had written extensively on his conservatism, laying out what the believed and why, and a candidate who could turn a phrase with a razor edge on it.

With Palin, we have a candidate who can turn a phrase with a razor edge on it.

The comparison is imprecise, even though you’re right about the complaints being the same.

Mew

acat

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

2012 Asked Another Way

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL

Who is your initial preferred pick for the GOP President Candidate
	Haley Barbour
	John Bolton
	Jeb Bush
	Herman Cain
	Mitch Daniels
	Mike Huckabee
	Sarah Palin
	Tim Pawlenty
	Mike Pence
	Rick Perry
	David Petraeus
	Mitt Romney
	John Thune

Free polls from Pollhost.com