Paul and Johnson? They were never included to begin with.

One just for registered Red Staters.
Then we could find out how “we” feel.
And with my Palin post, it was just for info.
Nothing more.

..is defined in part as: “an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers; a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal.” Under that definition, any group of people believing in the same “anything” could be defined as a cult.

A more common definition would include an irrational belief in perfection (which Ms. Palin’s supporters don’t suffer from. the majority realize that, like any candidate, she has her pluses and minuses.) and a devotion which is obviously fanatical. That definition, as you pointed out, can easily be applied to a segment of 08 Obama supporters. The fainting, the almost messianic fervor, the accusations that anyone not agreeing with him was racist, etc.

Are Ms. Palin’s supporters vocal and adamant? Certainly. She, at least at the moment, is one of the very few high profile Republicans that seems to encapsulate the anti-incumbent sentiment. She’s young, conservative, articulate, attractive (it shouldn’t matter, but it does) and not afraid to go head to head with the “old guard.” She engenders vocal and passionate response from supporters and detractors. Not unlike another unabashed conservative from about 35-40 years ago. No, she’s not Reagan. Just an example people responding fervently to someone.

There’s no cult. Just a group of people that see in her, perhaps, a glimpse of something they can be proud to stand up for, instead of holding their nose and swallowing.

So, people who are Palin supporters who read Red State are not supposed to vote. Interesting.

Look you dolt, Scope… here are the facts. When Eric ran the first poll, people were dropped off as the poll went along. And guess what, Cain urged his Facebook and Twitter people to vote for him. In addition, all the LOSERS – the supporters of the losing candidates – started to vote for “anyone but Palin” and the final vote total was a little over 16,000 votes with Cain getting a bit more than Palin.
Then, logic appeared and Eric decided to do a second poll that was going to be more reflective off the support for all the candidates. And guess what… Sarah is smoking everyone and has more than 2 times the next person. WITHOUT asking her 2.5 million Facebook fans or 350,000 Twitter followers to vote for her.
So, quit your whining. She is not winning because of any campaign… if she was noticing this poll and wanted to, she could generate 100,000 votes by just asking for them.
SImple.
It amazes me that the strongest and most capable candidate to change Washington for the better is right in front of all of you and you insist on looking for some other dolt candidate who will not win. Who is the most vetted candidate in the political world right now – Palin. Do you think there are any skeletons in the other potential candidates closets that have not been exposed simple because no one has really looked yet? You betcha. Do you think there are any in Sarah Palin’s that have not been found out by now after two years of intense digging and scrutiny? Remember the ambush on Bush about that DUI just before the election that led to the close vote? And that is just one thing to consider for the next Republican candidate for President.
Smarten up and yes, lets have a hard fought primary as Palin says, but to dismiss Palin as being unelectable by some on the right is sheer idiocy and a sign of being a liberal pawn.

I don’t want this to get into a flamewar. But this is getting extremely tired. There are a number of comments to this diary that flat out say Palin is stupid. That’s okay but a few words of defense make one a ‘bot?

Palin has fans. Period. You’re not going to change that by complaining about them.. And I don’t see how it benefits RedState to alienate them. either.

I am one of Palin’ fans. I am not a cultist. I do not appreciate the rant. That’s all.

When the poll was launched the first 2 thousand votes had Pence and Palin within an Arms reach of each other. As the night went on and into the next morning the percentage of Palin and Cain voters shot through the roof which tells you that it was votes coming from different sites. Well it turns out that we discover that was actually occurring.

I should have screen shot the first couple thousand votes it was pretty telling. Realistic estimates for Redstate(not elsewhere) are approximately 23-25% for Palin and Cain is pretty close to Daniels in %. Otherwise, everybody else appears to have held pretty close to the same proportion since the start of the poll.

To have Gary Johnson in the poll too. If Romney or Thune or Huckabee or any other of these big government neoconservative career politicians receive the nomination, I’ll be voting third party or not at all. Probably the only acceptable choice to me on that list is Mitch Daniels.

I really don’t see much difference between the huge majority of this list and Obama. Can we get a nominee who actually cares about defending our liberties rather than taking them away??

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

Give 1, 2, or 3 to each candidate.

Palin certainly satisfies a “stick it to them” urge for some of us, but she also represents a lot of what’s wrong (or perceived to be wrong, which in politics is the same thing) with Flyover America: emotion and “gut” over critical thinking and education. Not that Sarah’s dumb, far from it. But people simply don’t want their “outspoken next door neighbor” to be POTUS.

But the poll is of those that actually have signaled they may be running. Rubio and Ryan garner enough support that it would skew the results of the poll and make it useless. Polls with significant % of votes going to folks that aren’t going to be entering the primaries is useless in regards to any information.

Jeb hasn’t exactly given really any signal of running. Maybe he should be taken off of any future polls.

Christie is absolutely not getting into the race. And to be quite honest I think he is getting a bit ticked being asked all the time. Giuliani, I have no idea haven’t heard anything.

It’s tough at this point to put together a list of potential candidates.

I’m starting to think, for the first time in a while, that Mitch Daniels is going to take a pass.

He’s said that he’ll make a decision in the April timeframe. But most of his recent commentary seems to lean against it (such as answering “Maybe” to a question about whether his relative lack of political activity should be taken as a signal).

You just turned off a dozen people from Gary Johnson with your idiotic ranting, moron.

You and your terrorist-enabling ilk make me sick. You are a blight on the site.

Get out of here. Get out of the party of Reagan, Goldwater, and Lincon before you start smearing them as”war mongers” too.

We don’t like your kind.

We love America instead. We actually read and respect the Constitution, unlike you Paultards.

It’s not a “full slate” without Gary Johnson.

And, moreover, I don’t really understand why Neil Steves, etal, below do.

That said, just as I seriously doubt that Sarah Palin will ever be elected president, I even more seriously doubt that Gary Johnson would. And I say that as somebody who, in many ways, thinks highly of Gov. Johnson.

But it certainly seems possible that he’ll be throwing his hat into the ring — which means he’ll be there for the debates and such. And it wouldn’t be fair to call somebody who sat in a governor’s office longer than Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin combined a “fringe candidate”.

Sure, it seems apparent that some people here don’t care for some of his views. But that’s immature, IMO.

It’s not my poll, it’s Erick’s. So he can include and exclude anybody he wants. But I don’t see any good reason why Johnson ought to be excluded from questions about the Republican Party’s nomination.

…but who?

Also, nice link to a vacant site…

Seriously, if you want to promote someone for President, you should probably have more than a broken link, some buzzwords and a puglic figure whose wikipedia article looks like something put together by semi-literate staffers trying to hide things they think could harm his candidacy.

He might actually be a good candidate. I don’t know because he’s not well known outside of his region and there’s little useful information available.

It’s way too early to be predicting who *will* win the nomination.

But, on the other hand, the first debates are already being scheduled for next spring. That’s not that far away.

No rest for the weary, I guess.

I have no problem whatsoever with Newt being on the list. He’s talking about running and, obviously, a former SOTH should be regarded as a serious candidate.

But can we drop the whole “more then (sic) Sarah” schtick? Sarah Palin clearly belongs on any list of potential GOP nominees. While I don’t think she stands much chance of being elected, I don’t see why we should say “Newt should be there before Sarah!!”

Why not put them both on there? And Gary Johnson. And anybody else notable who is at all flirting with the idea of seeking the Republican nomination.

And then we can just let the votes go where they will….without having to form a circular firing squad over who even merits consideration.

Couldn’t the same arguement against Sarah, be made against Newt?

Newt did quit his House seat and Speakership just days for the 1998 eelction. Also Newt’s favorables/unfavorables according to Public Policy Polling (KOS Pollster) are just as bad as Palin. I guess the case can be made that Palin & Newt are poor general election candidates. Yet, the Establishment wants to keep Newt around and sandbag Palin.