July 15, 2010
— DrewM The only candidate he beats is AZ Governor Jan Brewer, which they attribute to her low name recognition. That won't be the case for long.
Romeny? Huckabee? Gingrich? Palin? Yep, Obama trails them all.
He trails Mitt Romney 46-43, Mike Huckabee 47-45, Newt Gingrich 46-45, and is even tied with Sarah Palin at 46. The only person tested he leads is Jan Brewer, who doesn't have particularly high name recognition on the national level at this point....
(With Independents) Romney leads 48-35 with them, Gingrich is up 50-39, Huckabee has a 46-40 advantage, Palin's up 47-42, and even Brewer has a 38-37 edge.
When it comes to Obama voters who now disapprove of their choice, Romney leads the field.
-Mitt Romney's favorability is 32/31 (+1)-Newt Gingrich's is 32/40 (-
![]()
-Mike Huckabee's is 20/39 (-19)
-Sarah Palin's is 33/63 (-30)
It's only one point, in one poll but I've been saying for awhile Romney is probably the best candidate from a strategic sense to run against Obama. It's just a shame he can't be the nominee.
As for PPP, Jim Geraghty has a good article running down their strengths and weaknesses.
Again, it's one poll and over two years out but it's still fun to see how quickly The One has gone from the Slayer of the Republican Party, to the guy who might not be able to win reelection as dog catcher.
There's obviously only reason for this sudden and drastic change of fortune...his middle name.
Posted by: DrewM at
01:32 PM
| Comments (260)
Post contains 272 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: Undecided Jewish Voter at July 15, 2010 01:36 PM (wcBRw)
Posted by: Keith Arnold at July 15, 2010 01:37 PM (Jdtsu)
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at July 15, 2010 01:37 PM (gLNLT)
Posted by: Washington Post at July 15, 2010 01:42 PM (fh5xr)
Posted by: tangonine at July 15, 2010 01:42 PM (C8Pcc)
Posted by: Ella at July 15, 2010 01:43 PM (DmnMk)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 01:43 PM (zcHB/)
Just two more years of Osama Obama destroying our economy (today, for example), selling national security down the river, opening borders, getting legions of fraudulent voters ready for action, targeting Americans for spiffs or punishment based on their race, hypocritically passing judgment on people who are more honest than he is, sitting on his Islamic ass when every crisis hits, playing golf and ensuring that, as was the case for the citizens of Oceania with Big Brother, we have to see his arrogant, supercilious mug on TV every day.
Screw polls. 2012 will be too late. Our last, best chance, absent a Declaration of Independence-style forced removal of our monarch for arbitrary and criminal acts, is an overwhelming victory in 2010 that bring patriotic Americans into elected offices throughout the land.
(Of course doing that would require finding a lot of honorable and trustworthy candidates who are not, as of now, showing any interest in elective office. Squishy, Ed Morrissey-type "Republicans" need not apply.)
If we could elect a majority of ordinary, stable, conscientious citizens to Congress, the impeachment trial would begin before all the new representatives and senators had their names on their office doors.
I guess the point is that I don't give a damn what the polls say. I no longer have much faith in their being an American-style election in 2012 unless the Traitor-in-Chief is escorted out of the White House in handcuffs.
Believe it or not, it makes me sad to see matters reduced to this.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 15, 2010 01:44 PM (Ulu3i)
The Charleston River Dogs minor league baseball team is giving out Alvin Greene bobbleheads.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 15, 2010 01:44 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 01:44 PM (p302b)
Posted by: Michele Obma at July 15, 2010 01:44 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat ( Nobel Prize winner ) at July 15, 2010 01:44 PM (NuAIL)
Posted by: Michele Obma at July 15, 2010 01:44 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: t-bird at July 15, 2010 01:44 PM (FcR7P)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 01:45 PM (zcHB/)
Posted by: arhooley at July 15, 2010 01:45 PM (6GjHP)
BHO: <furtive glance at teleprompter> I don't need to my explain myself to a lieutenant.
Posted by: Penfold at July 15, 2010 01:45 PM (1PeEC)
I've said before that the reason I have come to dislike Romney is that he likes to sic his underlings on Sarah Palin. I would respect a candidate who instead came publicly to her defense, and then specified that he disagreed with her on, say, windfall profits taxes.
Unfortunately, the most likely candidate to actually do this is Mike Huckabee, who would probably also be the worst GOP candidate for President.
Rick Perry? John Thune? Are you reading this?
Posted by: Ken at July 15, 2010 01:46 PM (fh5xr)
Are you daft? That is exactly what we did last time. We let the dhimms pick the (R?_depends on relative distance to reelection day) McShamenasty.
Never again.
Go SARAHCUDA.
Posted by: Blacksmith8 at July 15, 2010 01:46 PM (Xowz7)
THERE, not their.
The combination of rage and sorrow makes me illiterate.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 15, 2010 01:47 PM (Ulu3i)
Nice.
Posted by: Hey.Wheres.Barry
-----------------------
Didn't you notice the source?
Posted by: arhooley at July 15, 2010 01:47 PM (6GjHP)
Posted by: Dan at July 15, 2010 01:47 PM (1jzSs)
Heh! I could beat Obama in any race (5k through marathon).
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 01:48 PM (CfmlF)
New poll shows Brewer suffering over immigration stance
Let me take a stab: The polling sample was 95% Democrats, illegal aliens and community organizers.
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 01:49 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Truman North at July 15, 2010 01:50 PM (e8YaH)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 01:50 PM (zcHB/)
Posted by: WalrusRex at July 15, 2010 01:51 PM (xxgag)
maybe macdonald from virigina can run with christie from jersey....a dream team...
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 01:51 PM (p302b)
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 01:51 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Truman North at July 15, 2010 01:51 PM (e8YaH)
Hey Tom - Amazing what 2 years of the mainstream press spiting out GOP talking points can do. Seems like the Dems are lacking a strong political voice right now - e.g. party chair. On the bright side - didn't Obama come from behind against John and Sarah?
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 15, 2010 01:51 PM (c0A3e)
Obedient Romney: "Uh, well, Chris, what I dislike most about this country is . . ."
I imagine Sarah forfeiting with a delicate snort of contempt.
Posted by: arhooley at July 15, 2010 01:52 PM (6GjHP)
Posted by: Wm T Sherman at July 15, 2010 01:52 PM (w41GQ)
It's because he has an C after his name,Captain Kickass.
Posted by: ziptie at July 15, 2010 01:52 PM (ljAGw)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 01:53 PM (zcHB/)
Posted by: t-bird at July 15, 2010 01:53 PM (FcR7P)
Offer them some vodka, make it REALLY interesting.
Posted by: beerologist at July 15, 2010 01:53 PM (r2UKM)
Damn, that sucks. I think that if you don't play Risk and say that Ukranie is weak and a sitting duck and a road apple, you'll be fine.
Have a safe flight.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 15, 2010 01:54 PM (c0A3e)
Posted by: Blacksmith8 at July 15, 2010 05:46 PM
What I want to know is this: do you think Palin would run again in '16 after having her clock cleaned by Osama Obama in '12?
I wish Palin fans would realize that many Americans -- including many who don't really follow the righty blogs -- would like to see more experience on Palin's resume than mayor of Wasilla and an incomplete term as governor of Alaska. Plus, of course, a Facebook page....
Before you start rambling about how much more experience she has than the Traitor-in-Chief, that's not the point. One of the reasons the latter is tanking in the polls is that people are realizing that his lack of meaningful experience (in life as well as public office) is part of the reason he's screwing up so spectacularly.
We need someone better than the Chicago Jesus. I think Palin can be the one, but would really like to see her step up to the plate and deal with some serious problems first.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 15, 2010 01:54 PM (Ulu3i)
Posted by: WalrusRex
--------------------
I think he's just a crisis away. How severe can we make it in November and beyond?
Posted by: arhooley at July 15, 2010 01:54 PM (6GjHP)
Posted by: Y-not at July 15, 2010 01:54 PM (O627A)
Please?
Make Mitt want to open a pet spa or something. Hell I'd even send my dogs there.
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at July 15, 2010 01:55 PM (QnRro)
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 15, 2010 05:54 PM (c0A3e)
Ooh! Kratos is in teh house!
"So we gotta cut loose, footloose! Kick off your Ginger shoes!"
Posted by: rump rangeR at July 15, 2010 01:55 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Large Hadron CollideR at July 15, 2010 01:56 PM (3iVIW)
Drats! stinky sock!
I really should go back out and work in my yard, but this is so much more fun!
Posted by: runningrn at July 15, 2010 01:56 PM (CfmlF)
I don't get it. How is this a gift for the Dems? I'm assuming he'll forcefully defend his record.
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 01:56 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 05:50 PM
Y'all in some kind of Borat movie there, kiddo?
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 15, 2010 01:57 PM (Ulu3i)
Some of them are hairy enough. Next thing you know they will want to rassle nekkid. Ewwwwwwwww.
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 01:58 PM (zcHB/)
Posted by: ziptie at July 15, 2010 01:58 PM (ljAGw)
OT: I have to tell you morons that I am on US Air on my way back to San Diego and just my luck I am surrounded by nutjob Ukranians or something. What a fucking pain in the ass. 5 hours of this bullshit.
Offer them some vodka, make it REALLY interesting.
Then ask them to sing. The pilot will declare an emergency and you could be on the ground in no time!
Posted by: ErikW at July 15, 2010 01:58 PM (2GSTD)
Please don't make me explain the joke about Brewer and immigration. OK, fine, I will.
We have a great poll for the GOP, better than most of us even imagined, that basically says that we could win by digging up Michael Jackson's corpse and registering it as a Republican.
So naturally, the Washington Post, which has a long record of picking out insignificant pro-Dem pieces of generally very pro-GOP news, particularly polls, in my joke interprets the poll as a rejection of the one Republican who is behind Obama.
Of course, in reality, she is only "behind" him to the extent that nobody knows who she is--although they do know about the AZ law and support it, big-time. But, in the joke, the WP takes a poll that says, "Get this schmuck the #@^& out of here!" and interprets it instead to say "We 'heart' illegal immigration."
All right, my joke is officially no longer funny. Let's move on.
Posted by: Ken at July 15, 2010 01:58 PM (fh5xr)
I hate to say it, but after Palin who wins on conservative creds alone against the shitbags like Fuckface Fuckabee and Fuckface Romney, Pawlenty is the most qualified with just enough conservative moxie not to make me puke.
Posted by: Where's my FUCKING Cheese??? at July 15, 2010 01:58 PM (gLNLT)
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 05:56 PM (y4B2y)
I wondered that too. The only thing I could come up with is that the book by Bush would remind some people why they voted for the Dems. But even that is iffy. So...I got nuthin'.
Posted by: Tami at July 15, 2010 01:59 PM (VuLos)
Are you sure you don't mean "who's last name starts with the letter "R"? Cause you know who this helps--Mitt Romney! Buy my book, "Mormon in The Whitehouse".
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at July 15, 2010 01:59 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: t-bird at July 15, 2010 01:59 PM (FcR7P)
I'm not entirely sure her clock would be cleaned. Palin/??? Could she persuade Paul Ryan to run with her?
Whoever runs in 2012, they'll have to beat the Obama/Clinton ticket, because that's what it's going to be. I don't see that any Rs in the current field have a better or worse chance of beating that freight train than any other Rs. At least Sarah wouldn't be afraid of them.
Posted by: arhooley at July 15, 2010 02:00 PM (6GjHP)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 02:00 PM (zcHB/)
Posted by: BuddyPC at July 15, 2010 02:01 PM (nSkOL)
Posted by: t-bird at July 15, 2010 02:01 PM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Dog Catcher (R) at July 15, 2010 02:01 PM (swuwV)
Romney also took Chris Matthews's bait. "What do you dislike most about this country?"
Obedient Romney: "Uh, well, Chris, what I dislike most about this country is . . ."
I imagine Sarah forfeiting with a delicate snort of contempt.
Sarah: "I'm looking at it right now."
Posted by: Ken at July 15, 2010 02:01 PM (fh5xr)
Agreed.... Ive been saying for a while now that he's in over his head and hasn't a clue how to deal with the realities of the office... Whats worse is he's surrounded himself with advisors and staffers with even less experience and competence than he has. And the ONE guy, Rahm Immanuel, that has any clue of how things work and why things happen, is reportedly on his way out.
Messiah Man Meltdown..... coming to a White House near you soon.
Posted by: fixerupper at July 15, 2010 02:01 PM (J5Hcw)
Posted by: Dickless McCain at July 15, 2010 02:01 PM (VMcEw)
Death before footloose.
Kratos, I know you are secretly tapping your sword as the Footloose brainworm works its way through your little ginger skull!
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at July 15, 2010 02:02 PM (CfmlF)
And now Romney has Halperin trying to sabotage Palin. Yeah, the only one with testosterone in that whole list (Brewer doesn't count as a serious candidate at this point) is Ms. Palin.
BTW, if anyone feels the need to light into her about being a "quitter", then just remember who WORKED her way through college. Sometimes she had to quit back then because she ran out of money and didn't have enough to pay for the next semester. But everytime that she had saved up enough to go back, SHE WENT BACK.
I am TIRED of the Democrat Party - working in collusion with the MSM - manipulating people into "choosing" the candidate that they think they have a shot at beating. Do you think that Mitt, Newt, or Huck could withstand the kind of abuse that Palin has endured the past 2 years? Would they still be around, or would they be cowering in a corner, sucking their thumb, and crying for their mommy?
That's what I thought.
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at July 15, 2010 02:02 PM (Nr9jl)
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 15, 2010 05:54 PM (Ulu3i)
She's doing a pretty good job of punking the mfm, the main weapon in the Dem arsenal.
Posted by: davidt at July 15, 2010 02:02 PM (HtIec)
Posted by: Y-not at July 15, 2010 02:03 PM (O627A)
#74 Are her shoulders touching both the overhead bag bins at the same time when she walks down the isle? Have a nice flight!
Posted by: ziptie at July 15, 2010 02:03 PM (ljAGw)
I think Drudge means Bush is gonna give the Dems a shit sandwich and spill some damaging info.
Posted by: beerologist at July 15, 2010 02:03 PM (r2UKM)
Ir's not like he's going to say, "OK, I admit it. You boys were right. I suck ass. I'm an idiot--chimp evil-genius war-mongering baby-killing election-stealing psychopath."
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 02:03 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: Rodney at July 15, 2010 02:03 PM (XRIh6)
I'll vote for any of them, (yeah including Gomer Huck) if one of them should win the nomination.
My best to worst of the names included would be...
Palin...I think.
Gingrich..a retread with baggage and an inability to focus on one stategy for any length of time.
Romney..Romneycare, flip flopper
Brewer...nice lady, tough, has a backbone, but not presidential
Brewers pet goldfish...better than huck
Huckabee...compassionate conservatism on steroids
This list isn't knocking my socks off, that's for sure.
Ryan 2012
Posted by: Delta Smelt at July 15, 2010 02:03 PM (aLr/O)
Posted by: runningrn (R)ussian Spy at July 15, 2010 02:04 PM (CfmlF)
Sarah: "I'm looking at it right now."
Posted by: Ken-----------------
Whoa! Has that one been around a while? Or was that a spontaneous?
Posted by: arhooley at July 15, 2010 02:04 PM (6GjHP)
Posted by: Dick 'Warcock' Cheney at July 15, 2010 02:04 PM (/uHiJ)
I don't like your jerk-off name.
I don't like your jerk-off face.
I don't like your jerk-off behavior, and I don't like you, jerk-off!
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at July 15, 2010 02:04 PM (QnRro)
Posted by: Truman North at July 15, 2010 02:05 PM (e8YaH)
I don't get it. How is this a gift for the Dems? I'm assuming he'll forcefully defend his record.
I think that the Dems are thinking that it will remind people how hated Bush was and how everything bad happening is Bush's fault. They can run against Bush because he has a book out.
Posted by: runningrn (R)ussian Spy at July 15, 2010 02:05 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 02:05 PM (zcHB/)
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 02:06 PM (p302b)
Ombudsman at 61: Their strategy is to run against Bush. This puts Bush back in the news. For the whole. election. cycle.
Virtual Smooch to you, Tru North--we are in sympatico!
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:07 PM (CfmlF)
I was thinking of going on a romance tour in the Ukraine to score me some sweet Ukrainian babe who would love me forever and ever and bake me American pie, but your comments are making me rethink things.
Posted by: The Man with the Non Creased Pants at July 15, 2010 02:08 PM (gLNLT)
Posted by: Truman North at July 15, 2010 02:08 PM (e8YaH)
It's the remnants of one of the many biological warfare ships that the white westerners used to kill the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
Posted by: Proffesor Leftist at July 15, 2010 02:08 PM (QnRro)
Posted by: WalrusRex
That'd be a big f'ing deal...can't wait
Posted by: Joe Bite me at July 15, 2010 02:08 PM (XSD4n)
The abc news guy just said that found the hull of a 16th century ship while they were excavating the WTC site. That's weird.
Was it a Viking ship? If it's a Viking ship then the Kensington Runestone could be real! SUCK IT, COLUMBUS!
Posted by: Teh History Channel at July 15, 2010 02:08 PM (2GSTD)
Ruh Roh, I'm getting nervous for MPFS. As Ivar Haglund used to say "keep clam" (known for his famous chowder in Seattle).
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:09 PM (CfmlF)
There's obviously only one reason for this sudden and drastic change of fortune...his middle name.
Two reasons, actually. Sticks Downey Syndrome is the other. (Shh.)
Posted by: FireHorse at July 15, 2010 02:09 PM (cQyWA)
Truman nails it. Sticks the landing. 10.
Posted by: Y-not at July 15, 2010 02:10 PM (O627A)
Posted by: Truman North at July 15, 2010 06:08 PM (e8YaH)
Glad I could be of assistance! You and Lacey have an uncanny way of saying what I'm thinking. It's weird--like you're living in my head or something!
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:10 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: t-bird at July 15, 2010 02:11 PM (FcR7P)
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 06:06 PM (p302b)
You know what that means? SCANDINAVIANS!
Posted by: WalrusRex at July 15, 2010 02:11 PM (xxgag)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 06:05 PM
At least you know they're not Muslims, then.
Cheer up! You're not on Aeroflot!
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 15, 2010 02:11 PM (Ulu3i)
"Tonight, I'd like to talk about my vision for the country. But first, you will blow me."
Posted by: Ian S. at July 15, 2010 02:12 PM (p05LM)
Ombudsman at 61: Their strategy is to run against Bush. This puts Bush back in the news. For the whole. election. cycle.
I'm sure it is, but it's not like they weren't going to do it anyway, book or no book. At least Bush will be defending his record, which he maddeningly did not do while in the White House. I think there might be a little Bush nostalgia out there, after this c-fuck administration.
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 02:12 PM (y4B2y)
I want to know what's up with the people who can't remember who they voted for 2 years ago?
heh! If I had voted for Obama 2 years ago, I'd want to forget it too!
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:12 PM (CfmlF)
I'm sure it is, but it's not like they weren't going to do it anyway, book or no book. At least Bush will be defending his record, which he maddeningly did not do while in the White House. I think there might be a little Bush nostalgia out there, after this c-fuck administration.
Miss me yet?
Posted by: George W. Bush (R) at July 15, 2010 02:13 PM (CfmlF)
BINGO
Posted by: beerologist at July 15, 2010 02:13 PM (r2UKM)
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:14 PM (CfmlF)
The question is, would they want to?
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 15, 2010 02:15 PM (c0A3e)
Posted by: WalrusRex
That'd be a big f'ing deal...can't wait
Posted by: Joe Bite me
-----------------------
You do know who's gonna be blamed, don't you?
('Course, that's what doubles the anticipation for me.)
Posted by: arhooley at July 15, 2010 02:15 PM (6GjHP)
O'Spades/Malor 2012.
"Tonight, I'd like to talk about my vision for the country. But first, you will blow me."
Bwhahaha! Thread Winnah! (And they could show the pudding cups sitting on the desk/podium) Heh!
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:15 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: davidt at July 15, 2010 02:15 PM (HtIec)
Gosh, this is a fun thread! (I really need to get outside and finish weeding, though!)
Just hire some college kids, they'll weed for you.
oh, that kind of weeding.
Posted by: dudeinsantacruz at July 15, 2010 02:15 PM (/uHiJ)
The question is, would they want to? .
I don't know. It's empty and spacious at times and a little cluttered at times.
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:17 PM (CfmlF)
I mean, if those type of guys really did what they are being accused of and act the way they are being reported as acting--I want nothing to do with them or any candidate they support.
At this point, I'm tentatively moving Romney toward the "Huckabee, World's Biggest Fuckface" category.
Oh, and racism. Racism is the reason for his poll decline as well.
Posted by: jimmuy at July 15, 2010 02:17 PM (66ScL)
I expect that Obama is going to have a full scale Mel Gibson breakdown.
Posted by: WalrusRex
That'd be a big f'ing deal...can't wait
Posted by: Joe Bite me
-----------------------
You do know who's gonna be blamed, don't you?
Well, Booosh did break up the Gore's Love Story marriage.
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:18 PM (CfmlF)
It's a cover-up. We bought the island for $28 worth of shiny beads to hide the evidence of the ship. It was supposed to stay buried. Our own little Area 51 on Manhattan.
PS: if it's 16th-century, it ain't Vikings. The Mayflower was 15th-century, remember.
Posted by: Keith Arnold at July 15, 2010 02:19 PM (Jdtsu)
It's the selective leaks from Bush's book that the mfm 'report' on that will be the gift to the Dems.
Like what? Selectively quoting him to say "Republicans...are as...evil...as...Osama the terrorist. Also...RAAAAAACCCCIIIIIISSSSSTTTTTT!"
Posted by: dudeinsantacruz at July 15, 2010 02:19 PM (/uHiJ)
Posted by: Bob Dole at July 15, 2010 05:38 PM (IhHdM)
Bravo. Bra. Vo.
Posted by: reason at July 15, 2010 02:19 PM (F26eZ)
Just can't see Romney doing any better than he did in 2008..I agree with a previous poster.chances are it is gonna be someone that is not on any ones radar.
Posted by: beerologist at July 15, 2010 02:20 PM (r2UKM)
Posted by: Keith Arnold at July 15, 2010 02:21 PM (Jdtsu)
Oops. Can't count. Columbus was 15th century. The Mayflower was 17th. Blame my California-public-school edumacation.
Heh, and I was about to call you a dolt and say that the Mayflower came over in 1520.
Posted by: dudeinsantacruz at July 15, 2010 02:23 PM (/uHiJ)
Oops. Can't count. Columbus was 15th century. The Mayflower was 17th. Blame my California-public-school edumacation.
That's okay, you can work for us!
Posted by: Teh History Channel at July 15, 2010 02:24 PM (2GSTD)
Posted by: runningrn (R) at July 15, 2010 02:26 PM (CfmlF)
Sorry about my rant earlier; I'm just frustrated with everything that's going on right now (the Finance bill is the latest - WHERE was McConnell through this whole thing? Couldn't he have told the R Senators to hold fast?).
I guess I have a soft spot for Sarah Palin because she made the choice to keep her baby, even after she knew that he was going to be born with Down syndrome. It's easy for all of us to talk about being pro-life, but the fact of the matter is, I have a child with Down syndrome, and as much as I love her to pieces, the fact of the matter is that one of the reasons that I DIDN'T have any testing done ahead of time is because I was afraid that I wasn't noble enough to go through with a pregnancy if I knew that something might go wrong.
Do people not understand what kind of COURAGE it takes to make that decision? I mean, yeah, we all talk a good game, but unless you have BEEN there, you don't really know if you have what it takes. When Rebecca was born, a lot of the tears that were shed were because I didn't know if I had the strength that I was sure that it was going to take to be "that" kind of parent.
Trust me on this - ANYONE who sticks with a pregnancy, knowing what the Palins knew, has what it takes to be a leader. And every mom that I know who has a child with a disability has a servant's heart - every last one of them will go to the mat for their kid. And what this country needs right now is someone who will fight to the death for the good of this country and her people.
What this country needs right now is a leader with a servant's heart.
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at July 15, 2010 02:27 PM (Nr9jl)
I voted for Romney in the CA primary (Fred! and Giuliani had already dropped out by the), but I think the health care stuff kills him. At first (months ago) I thought his initial statements were just poorly worded or that there was some "nuance" (lol) that I was missing in his position. But it's clear that for whatever reason he's wedded to the universal healthcare thing. I'm sick of making excuses for him.
BUT I would not put any stock in the Hillbuzz guys. They are not on our side. They were convenient - but ineffective - temporary allies during the election season, but fundamentally they are Clinton fanboys and not our friends. Plus, their info has seemed suspect. No offense to our ghey friends, but my experience is that gay men are terrible gossips and drama... tists.
I'm not saying there's not dirty politics going on vis a vis Palin, but really the only candidate I've seen do it openly and consistently is Huckabee. The others at the least do it arms length through their staffers or may not even be aware of it happening.
Posted by: Y-not at July 15, 2010 02:28 PM (O627A)
Posted by: bob at July 15, 2010 02:28 PM (XSD4n)
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at July 15, 2010 02:29 PM (tUz0Y)
Posted by: Truman North at July 15, 2010 06:05 PM (e8YaH)
You mean that guy who was President when I had a job? Oh, I remember him!
Posted by: voter at July 15, 2010 02:29 PM (w9BEi)
I'll count my chickens when mr. mcwonderful is back to organizing the inner city Chicago.
* brown-nose press
Posted by: rockhead at July 15, 2010 02:30 PM (RykTt)
Posted by: Asscheeks of Saturn at July 15, 2010 02:31 PM (w9bVp)
Posted by: Cosmo Kramer at July 15, 2010 02:32 PM (O627A)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at July 15, 2010 02:32 PM (SB0V2)
We have a fundamental emergency with the Health Care bill. We have a big problem with many other issues. We need someone who is a bona fide believer in limited government who can take the insane hatred that would be directed at a 2013 GOP President who wants to slash spending and reform our federal government.
Some of these candidates can take the heat and stay the course. Mitt Romney is PRECISELY the sort of politician who cannot stay the course. This one factor explains he entire political career.
What's the point of winning if winning will entrench all these horrible policies as bipartisan? We need a fighter. Mitt can't even fight Palin in person.. has to send his underlings to do it. If it's Mitt vs Huckabee or Mccain or some completely terrible candidate, sure, I will pick Mitt.
Against Brewer, Palin, Christie, or any actual FIGHTER? No thanks, Mitt.
Mitt's a true political player, a very smart man, and he words hard. I want him to fix the party as Chair.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 02:32 PM (dUOK+)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at July 15, 2010 02:33 PM (SB0V2)
I am not going to repeat that phrase. I'm trapped up here with no Chuck Heston and his Skippy peanut butter to save my ginger ass.
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 02:34 PM (zcHB/)
Ooops - went into rant mode again.
Blame it on the caffeine and an inadequate amount of medication at the 12:00 hour.....
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at July 15, 2010 02:35 PM (Nr9jl)
.....sorry, kind of late on this thread. Long conference call.....I swear, I wasn't looking at midget pron.
Honest.
Posted by: In before the troll at July 15, 2010 02:36 PM (P9+0W)
PS: if it's 16th-century, it ain't Vikings. The Mayflower was 15th-century, remember.
Maybe the ship was Arabs trying to reach out to the Western world and engage much more with dominantly Christian nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science Â… and math and engineering.
Posted by: Dr. Varno at July 15, 2010 02:37 PM (3fiIy)
I don't think Palin is the smartest. I don't think she's the best spoken,. I know she's polarizing and would net fewer votes than Mitt.
But she is a serious human being. She is an actual courageous reformer. She is very smart and communicates well enough for me, but I mostly want her as President because I think I can count on her when the inevitable push back begins.
Either the next GOP president and GOP congress drastically reforms our spending, or we're pretty fucked as a country. We have to select a candidate who is compatible with this idea, or we aren't winning jack shit. Sure, the (R)s will have the White House in 2013 either way, but there's something right about Palin and Brewer and Christie. I say we pick whichever proven courageous limited government reformer we think has the best shot at beating Obama, and completely write off the Huckabees and Mitts.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 02:37 PM (dUOK+)
Posted by: kathysaysso at July 15, 2010 06:33 PM (ZtwUX)
Michael Moore in drag?
Posted by: Blackford Oakes at July 15, 2010 02:38 PM (w9BEi)
Posted by: mpfs on US Air at 32000 feet at July 15, 2010 02:38 PM (zcHB/)
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 02:39 PM (dUOK+)
If half the shit the Hillbuzz guys are saying about the Romney guys in Chicago is true; Romney is radioactive and we need to bury his ass (politically). And this from someone who was for Romney (the lesser of the evils).
I read the article, and it's some seriously evil shit. I don't trust Hillbuzz, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if it were true.
I've met "moderate" Republicans and I've met "right-wing extremists," including, oddly enough, Sharron Angle. It would probably surprise most people, but the "extremists" are almost always more likeable, more personally moral (and yet less judgmental), more tolerant of disagreements, more concerned about poor people and even criminals (remember how Sharron Angle got slammed over her agreement to at least look at the "massage treatment" for drug addictions?), and more willing to give credit to other.
"Moderate" Republicans, generally, have little in the way of morals or even pragmatic personal restraint, are arrogant and dismissive of opposing views, and are always trying to one-up their rivals with The Plan That Will Save The Republican Party. When the Plan inevitably fails, they never, ever take the blame for it, and will always blame the "Religious Right." See David Frum as an example.
A large part of the reason that conservative Republicans do better than moderates is the simple fact that they're better people.
If you Romney supporters do manage to somehow get your man elected, don't be surprised if we get a Lewinsky or Watergate--on top of a continued depression.
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at July 15, 2010 02:39 PM (fh5xr)
Be on the alert, those could be Russian spies...
BTW, nobody has yet explained how come the Russians had 4 live KGB traitors to trade to us for their spies. The life expectancy of a KGB turncoat is usuallt measured in minutes isn't it? My answer: this was a way to get the Russians out of the country before they could defect and spill the beans about what policy-makers (or law-makers) they had turned.
Second question: why didn't the MSM remind us about how all this shit about Russian spies is the over-wrought paranoia of conservative nutjobs, like they have been saying for years? My answer: see answer above.
Republicans fight the Dems for office. Conservatives need to fight the media for America.
Posted by: sherlock at July 15, 2010 02:40 PM (f/lPF)
Also on the boat they found at the WTC site. How was it not found when the towers were built? My understanding is they did some serious digging at the start of construction.
Posted by: sig at July 15, 2010 02:42 PM (2i+Vz)
Posted by: ace at July 15, 2010 02:44 PM (SsvUp)
Mitt would win. But guess what: not good enough.
We have a fundamental emergency with the Health Care bill. We have a big problem with many other issues. We need someone who is a bona fide believer in limited government who can take the insane hatred that would be directed at a 2013 GOP President who wants to slash spending and reform our federal government.
Some of these candidates can take the heat and stay the course. Mitt Romney is PRECISELY the sort of politician who cannot stay the course. This one factor explains he entire political career.
Ex-freakin'-zactly.
If Romney were to win, it would not make things better, it would make them worse, because we would have another failed GOP Presidency on top of a failing economy and collapsing presence on the world stage. We might not even have a 2012 election. We might have one, but have too much of our country controlled by foreign gangs to make a difference. (See Rome c. 450 AD). Most likely, we would have one, and the Dems would put up someone along the lines of Michael Moore--and he would win, and openly dismantle the USA.
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at July 15, 2010 02:45 PM (fh5xr)
Romney: obv. he's become the lead dog, but after being a supporter of his, i've become less enchanted w/ his refusal to repeal ObamaCare which polls show is a political plus and of course the Romneycare stuff, and hate to say it but yes some people won't vote for a mormon, that said he's a great candidate election wise and COULD (but not too likely) put MA in play
Gingrich: he'd obv. be a great debater, but he's pissed off the base lately (remember pissing off the base is why Obama is in office to begin with) and he has so many skeletons in his closet
Huckabee: he's been going down in primary polling and while he'll make some noise, he'll prob. lose...I pray
Brewer: i've argued before that she could be a good VP pick
Cristie: same as Brewer though it'd be awesome if he ran and NJ would be in play automatically
Ryan: I REALLY like this guy but if he won't run, he'd be a great VP pick and WI would be in play
Jindal: w/ the oil spill making him look like an effective leader he could run and be viable but he'd be a better VP pick
Palin: she has LOTS of things that go against her (babby daddy drama, weak interviews, horrible favorables) but if she keeps up polling like this against Obama i'm voting for her b/c if she can get in, we're talking possibly a great top 10 prez if she does to the country what she claims to believe in
Posted by: YRM (The Youngest Ace Reader) at July 15, 2010 02:46 PM (uLoHz)
Posted by: davidt at July 15, 2010 02:47 PM (HtIec)
Posted by: ace at July 15, 2010 02:48 PM (SsvUp)
Posted by: Methos at July 15, 2010 02:48 PM (DHgTW)
But other intriguing names for the ticket, as early as it is, would be (in no particular order) Gov. Christie (NJ), Rep. Bachmann (MN), Gov. Jindal (LA), Sen. DeMint (SC), Sen. Inhofe (OK), Rep. Ryan (WI), and Person To Be Named Later.
An experienced governor would be my top recruiting category, and some of the young guns who are earning stripes now (say Jindal, for example) are improving their stock. But any combination of the aforementioned people would be infinitely better than what we have now. Infinitely.
Romney, Gingrich, Huckabee? Fugettaboutit. They all have fatal flaws.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 15, 2010 02:49 PM (swuwV)
Posted by: An Obama Voter at July 15, 2010 02:49 PM (SsvUp)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 15, 2010 02:49 PM (WZFkG)
Jindal is a go-along-to-get-along pol and is not trustworthy. I do not want him on a national ticket.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 02:51 PM (vTB8H)
Why is Romney always ahead in the polls? I mean the guys like invisible, not much news coverage, a book that sold about 15 copies. I just don't get it.
Two reasons:
First, most Republicans like Palin, but don't think she can win. Therefore, they pick the only other candidate they've heard of, and that is usually either Romney or Huckabee.
Second, Romney, although he is awful at connecting with the electorate, is pretty good at making inside-ball connections. That's why you hear so many talking heads acting as if he's the Answer. Romney's followers had a talk with them along the lines of, "Now we know you don't want Palin or Huckabee, so we'd advise you to bring this up..."
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at July 15, 2010 02:52 PM (fh5xr)
Posted by: Asscheeks of Saturn at July 15, 2010 02:52 PM (w9bVp)
Posted by: Another Obama Voter at July 15, 2010 02:53 PM (2GSTD)
Why?
I really don't get the Brewer love.
She dithered around before finally signing a bill that she had no hand in writing and would not have signed had she known that La Raza and the Dems in D.C would have gone into full blown I am Legend zombie mode rather than the typical foaming at the mouth she was expecting.
Posted by: Deety at July 15, 2010 02:53 PM (aVzyR)
We have to assume that we don't have any. There are a number of conservative pipe-dream candidates, like Paul Ryan, but nobody knows who they are and they would be long shots.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 02:54 PM (vTB8H)
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 02:55 PM (p302b)
I'd go for Christie, although I suspect there are a number of issues where he'd disappoint, DeMint, or Inhofe (although I feel I don't know that much about him). My enthusiasm for Jindal has dampened. I actually think he looks kind of weak vis a vis the oil spill. He spent a long time waiting then whining for Fed help. He should've acted more quickly. Bachmann makes me nervous - maybe the smears against her have been effective in some way but she seems shrill to me.
The one I'm enthusiastic about is Ryan.
I also like Pence.
Posted by: Y-not at July 15, 2010 02:55 PM (O627A)
Posted by: YRM (The Youngest Ace Reader) at July 15, 2010 02:55 PM (uLoHz)
The question I have is, how long did the publisher sit on the manuscript to ensure that it would come out during the election season? Because if there's an industry that's even more leftist than the MFM, it's the publishing houses.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at July 15, 2010 02:56 PM (P9+0W)
You have Obamabot friends?
I'll shoot mine in the heads if they ever come near me again.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 02:56 PM (vTB8H)
Rant away, dear. You've earned it. Palin's my choice as well. All of those in this poll have serious baggage. Palin's is largely manufactured by the mfm. Palin has what's missing. Integrity. Balls of steel. Photographic memory. Anyone who thinks she can't win is knuckling under to the MFM, who have sold that meme over and over and over and over. Don't let them pick our candidate. She's got work to do with those independents, however.
Posted by: Derak at July 15, 2010 02:56 PM (RVru5)
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 02:57 PM (y4B2y)
We should call Mitt Romney the Gremlin candidate.
Both of them were made by George Romney, couldn't run for jack, were vaguely unpleasant to look at, had way more visibility than they should have based on quality, and lasted way longer than they should have. And, if Mitt is nominated, he, like the Gremlin, will drag his brand down for good.
Posted by: Ken at July 15, 2010 02:58 PM (fh5xr)
I think Palin will win the primary. She's setting it up well, and Mitt Romney is not as skilled at politics as Palin is. His machinations are too transparent and make him look ridiculous. Just one example is the 'Palin is not a serious human being' attack.
Palin has a lot of negatives, but the independents we need will pick her over Obama in swing states... today. They will to it after a real campaign that shows Palin's skill. They will do it after Obama shows them more of his special style of leadership.
But I'd happily pick someone with Palin's courage but more receptive with independents.
I do not think it makes any sense to go with Mitt Romney over Palin because his actual record proves he will not stand up to the enormous task of limiting our government and fighting Obamacare. I think he'll be destroyed in the primary on this basis, too. Not worried so much about that as I am in the beltway uniting to destroy Palin to keep the pork and graft going.
But Palin can beat Obama in the Electoral College, today, after the onslaught of attacks and without a campaign.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 02:58 PM (dUOK+)
Jindal is a wonk and a process guy. He will stab us in the back in a second, and has before, if he sees a "greater good" calculation in it.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 02:58 PM (vTB8H)
I live in a completely blue place, have to have some friends and some fun...we just try not to talk about our political thoughts...and things go fine...
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 02:58 PM (p302b)
Why is Romney always ahead in the polls? I mean the guys like invisible, not much news coverage, a book that sold about 15 copies. I just don't get it.
It's the hair.
That fabulous, fabulous hair.
Posted by: Warden at July 15, 2010 02:59 PM (QoR4a)
I really don't get the Brewer love."
It's because she is proving she can stand up to pressure. That's very damn important these days.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 03:00 PM (dUOK+)
What is the "get out of jail free" card that got Byrd, Biden, Clinton, Reid for their crossing-the-line racist comments? Answer pending...
Answer: 'Ive seen the passionate leadership [fill in blank] has shown on issues of social justice. As far as Im concerned, book is closed.'
'Social Justice' is mumbo jumbo for 'redistribution of wealth'. If you promote socialist principles you can have a lawn jockey on your lawn.
Posted by: Blackford Oakes at July 15, 2010 03:00 PM (w9BEi)
and apparently they are the ones deciding elections the "OMG my iphone 4 is dropping calls so it must be something i'm not doing right" crowd....
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 03:01 PM (p302b)
Posted by: andycanuck at July 15, 2010 03:01 PM (7b1Uc)
Well, good luck. All libs are backstabbing flakes sooner or later, especially if you make friends with them. I found that out the hard way.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 03:02 PM (vTB8H)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at July 15, 2010 03:03 PM (P9+0W)
Ken doll. Since he has kids, I'm assuming he's anatomically correct, unlike Barbie's beard.
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 03:04 PM (y4B2y)
Election-wise, he is clearly the best choice. But since he would cement the notion of intrusive government being bipartisan, it would be such a disaster. Perhaps almost as bad as Obama winning. Probably not that bad, but bad.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 03:04 PM (dUOK+)
I like Ryan - wish we could convince him to run.
Posted by: marinemom at July 15, 2010 03:04 PM (fTykc)
Posted by: YRM (The Youngest Ace Reader) at July 15, 2010 03:05 PM (uLoHz)
I don't believe this poll (as you know, I'm a Palin skeptic).
I keep thinking about what you wrote concerning her lack of wonkishness.
And I thought, "Yeah, yeah. All politicians speak in generalities."
But you're right. She hasn't convinced me she can bring that level of detail to the table. I can't imagine her giving the kind of fact-filled, policy speeches that Paul Ryan does.
I think that guy would wipe the floor with Obama in a debate. He's already made him look stupid more than once, including the time Obama shot him his faux tough guy death look during the health care meeting with the GOP.
That was a straight up teabagging.
Posted by: Warden at July 15, 2010 03:05 PM (QoR4a)
Posted by: curious at July 15, 2010 06:55 PM (p302b)
Write back and ask them exactly what it is they think they 'won'.
Posted by: Tami at July 15, 2010 03:06 PM (VuLos)
Hey, what about me?
Oh, wait...
Posted by: Warren Gamaliel Harding at July 15, 2010 03:06 PM (vTB8H)
52% of voters took a chance on a guy with zero executive experience. Captain Kickass had no track record, just a lot of talk, people believed it and many are now having buyer's remorse. As such, I believe that voters will reflexively look for someone with extensive experience the next time around and that's not Palin. Although I like her, I think her lack of experience is a negative. I guess it's possible that remaining in the public eye and keeping her ideas and opinions well known might mitigate that lack of experience as she will be a known quantity but I don't know how likely that would be. The rest of those guys are either statists or statist enablers and I don't care for any of them.
I hope that someone else comes along.
Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at July 15, 2010 03:06 PM (aEZOo)
So do I, but at this point there's no reason to believe HE can win either. So it's got to be somebody, and Palin is the only obvious candidate with the necessary combination of electability and leadership.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 03:08 PM (vTB8H)
Um, uh, we beat the teabaggers and stuff! Yeah! How's our asses taste conservatards?
Posted by: Obamaturds at July 15, 2010 03:10 PM (vTB8H)
I agree. We can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Palin can't win. She just can't. Independents hate her, as MM said, and Gingrich's negatives are in the stratosphere, damaged beyond repair. Besides, America will never elect a president named Newt. I know, Barack... well to the indie voter, Barack sounds cool and exotic. Newt sound like your Jr. High janitor who tried to get the girls to fish in his pockets for candy.
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 03:11 PM (y4B2y)
Marinemom: I see the problem you're talking about. However, the actual poll by PPP tells a different story. The people polled are real people, not hypothetical, and are more representative of the nation than your friends (since they were picked specifically to be representative).
So, while you can make arguments that Palin--or Gingrich, even though I've still got a grudge against him over his support for gun control as Speaker--can't win, the actual polls, based not on anecdote but fact, show that she can.
Posted by: Ken at July 15, 2010 03:12 PM (fh5xr)
That's the conventional wisdom. It's wrong. It's the Christian-socialist Huck-lovin' base of actual GOP primary voters that Palin can't get past.
She's the only potential GOP candidate with an offsetting match for Obama's death-lock on ~40% of the general electorate. I don't think she would beat him, but she could, because they start from the same spot. No one else has a chance.
And she shouldn't run. If she miraculously makes it through the primary, there's a 100% chance the election gets suicide-bombed by Bloomberg or some other New England Republican fake-independent, and the Party dies with her name on it.
Forget 2012, conservatives. It's a trap.
Posted by: oblig. at July 15, 2010 03:13 PM (x7Ao8)
And I thought, "Yeah, yeah. All politicians speak in generalities."
But you're right. She hasn't convinced me she can bring that level of detail to the table. I can't imagine her giving the kind of fact-filled, policy speeches that Paul Ryan does.
Posted by: Warden at July 15, 2010 07:05 PM (QoR4a)
I like her personality but I've come to a similar opinion the more I've listened to her. Disappointing. The posts on her Facebook page are usually detailed and well presented; I just wish that she would put that kind of detail into TV or radio appearances.
Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at July 15, 2010 03:20 PM (aEZOo)
Posted by: Methos at July 15, 2010 03:22 PM (DHgTW)
Personally, I prefer "wonky" politicians, but thinking about Reagan, I don't recall him sounding wonky.
Posted by: Y-not at July 15, 2010 03:23 PM (O627A)
It's true that some candidates are surer bets, but ANYTHING is possible. ANY candidate can win, because we have no idea what events will happen between now and the election. In March '08, Eliot Spitzer was on EVERYONE'S short list of future Dem presidential prospects. By the middle of that month, he was toast.
The dangerous version of the statement is believing that "Obama can't win". None of us should think that, not for a moment.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at July 15, 2010 03:24 PM (P9+0W)
Tout Palin's accomplishments, and I'm a fan, but the average independent voter thinks Alaska doesn't count. Alaska has approximately the population of Charlotte, NC. and has more moose and caribou than new york has people. The average suburban independent can't relate
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 15, 2010 03:24 PM (y4B2y)
well to the indie voter, Barack sounds cool and exotic.
It wasn't "Barack" that got him elected. It was "Hussein Obama."
Specifically, young men who were too cowardly to risk their worthless asses in battle voted Democrat out of fear of being drafted. They picked Hussein Obama, as opposed to Hillary, both because it made them feel like tough terrorists--it helped with this crowd that "Obama" sounds like "Osama"--and also because, Vichy-like, they wanted to signal to the terrorists that they were on their side.
These cowardly young men were the ones who formed the door-to-door campaigners that won Obama the nomination and the election.
Think I'm exaggerating? It was these vermin who backed Ward Churchill when he praised the 9/11 attacks.
Posted by: Ken at July 15, 2010 03:29 PM (fh5xr)
Not only that, but jumping ship in the middle of her term was the worst possible thing she could have done to her chances for the presidency. It created the perception of her as a quitter and a flake, one that is difficult to counter and that will be used against her in a national campaign.
I still think she's the best possible choice right now, but then the GOP field really is that bad.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 03:30 PM (vTB8H)
That shows she cared more for her state than her political career.We need more people like that in gov't damnit.
Posted by: KG at July 15, 2010 03:31 PM (S8TF5)
Posted by: sig at July 15, 2010 03:32 PM (2i+Vz)
Very well stated and a fine perspective.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 15, 2010 03:32 PM (swuwV)
That's one way to interpret it, but good luck selling that. 'Cause it can also be interpreted that she ran from a fight.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at July 15, 2010 03:33 PM (vTB8H)
Posted by: Ken at July 15, 2010 03:33 PM (fh5xr)
Anyone that claims to be an independent in 2012 needs a swift kick in the ass.
In times like these, being an "independent" is just another term for "too stupid to piss when your pants are on fire". Get off the fence, because the fence post is tired of your ass.
One hope we have regarding many Obama "independents" is that many of them have now had time to be arrested, tried, and incarcerated for the drugs they were taking and the other crimes they were committing in 2008. So we have that going for us, which is nice.
If Mitt Romney let a conservative make all the tough choices and then got to jump on the bandwagon two weeks later and take credit for it after focus groups and polls got finished analyzing it, he'd be a good President.
He's the Republican Bill Clinton. All pomade and parade.
Awwshucksabee should be in prison for pardoning that sick bastard and just for being a fake-country-preacher jowly pussy piece o' shit. His ideas suck too.
Newt Gingrich is Nancy Pelosi's pompous, over-educated bitch. He'd sell out conservative principles for thirty seconds of camera time and a car wash coupon. He needs to quit churning out ten books a year and learn how to change a fuckin' tire. Haven't we been complaining about eggheads running things? Let him and the other blue-blood Republican Professors spend their time in a dark cave making Bunsen burners out of coconuts while we fix the goddamn Minnow.
I gotta go change the boy's diaper and put on Toy Story 2.
Posted by: sifty at July 15, 2010 03:35 PM (BDP/V)
Well, that is not what I was talking about, but yes, the media will indeed pull out all the stops for the Dims, as usual. Thing is though, this will be true for any Republican candidate. Don't think that they will go any easier on a Pawlenty or a Daniels.
Posted by: KG at July 15, 2010 03:36 PM (S8TF5)
Trust me, dude, I hooked up with one and she changed my life.
Posted by: Mel Gibson at July 15, 2010 03:37 PM (okmLW)
Posted by: sifty at July 15, 2010 03:41 PM (BDP/V)
Posted by: sig at July 15, 2010 03:44 PM (2i+Vz)
Posted by: Dan at July 15, 2010 03:48 PM (1jzSs)
Unfortunately, this is looking like the truly viable option.
There's no telling what shape the country and its electoral system will be in by 2012. The Repubs could field the Second Coming of George Washington -- with a healthy dose of Jefferson and Roosevelt (Theodore, the good one) thrown in -- and still get trampled at the polls by Instant-citizen border-jumpers and the DoJ-protected thugs of Osama Obama and Eric Shabazz Holder.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 15, 2010 03:49 PM (Ulu3i)
Certainly wait until November, and take a look at what Obama the lame duck looks like. Probably wait until March of 2013 and note whether Obamacare has been repealed yet.
Posted by: Methos at July 15, 2010 03:50 PM (DHgTW)
First, we need a ten-year moratorium on Harvard. This administration is lousy with ivy and it stinks to the high heavens.
Secondly, I would like to see someone of rural background, at least someone who hasn't thoroughly embraced the communal-living tenets of urban life that lead us to Kelo and cap-and-trade and other such nonsense. And I don't mean someone who got rich as a Noo Yawk lawyer then bought himself a Montana ranch from which to spout environmental platitudes while zipping around in his turbine helicopter.
Finally, I'm not completely averse to lawyers but, given candidates otherwise equally suited, I'll take the one without the JD.
These are not absolutes, of course: I'd make an exception to some of the above points for someone like a Chris Christie.
Now I'm quite certain that if one of the creased-pants commentator contingent read this there'd be an involuntary wrinkling of the nose, snide remarks about anti-intellectualism, and a deep-seated unease about the quality of dinner parties one could expect from such an administration.
What I see when I look at my list, though, is 'Ronald Reagan'.
Posted by: mrkwong at July 15, 2010 03:52 PM (G8Eo0)
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at July 15, 2010 06:27 PM (Nr9jl)
Well said, Teresa, and well done. I'm with you.
Posted by: RushBabe at July 15, 2010 03:57 PM (W8m8i)
Fact is, the independents like Palin more than Obama.
that's proven by this poll. Most of the independents I know like Palin more than Obama, actually.
I keep hearing people say Palin can't beat Obama, even in this thread that ... um... kinda proves otherwise.
Palin Could Win. We'll have a better idea in a year, but people telling you she has no chance are simply mistaken. Reagan was polling worse than this versus Carter. We haven't even had all of Obama's dempression. It's going to be even more clear that Palin could win.
The question will then be, is Palin really the Republican we would want, vs other Republicans? Versus the likes of Mitt Romney, I think the answer is a resounding YES.
Versus Paul Ryan? Well, I prefer Ryan except that he has absolutely no executive experience yet. It's hard to say, but I would probably pick Ryan.
All I'm asking for is people to recognize the myth that Palin would get her ass kicked is born partly from fear, in Beltway republicans, all democrats, and the media, that she would actually follow through with real reform. They are scared to death of her. What she did in Alaska was powerful and no one else seemed to have the balls to get it done.
Anyone who says Alaska isn't a big enough state needs to remember that Bill Clinton hailed from Arkansas. And Obama wasn't even Mayor of Chicago...
Palin can win, so automatically we have good reason to completely ignore those who have less clarity and principles and leadership. We can write off the hucks and mitts and the other RINOs. We don't need to be so pragmatic we elect some republican who would make many disastrous policies into bipartisan policies.
Ideally, the Christies, Brewers, Ryans, Palins all run, the Mitts are ignored, and we let the good candidates fight it out.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 04:24 PM (dUOK+)
Posted by: Zombie Adolf Hitler at July 15, 2010 04:32 PM (ySNz/)
but his people are really, really, really stupid. they remind me so much of Mccain's touchy upper staff. Very gaffe prone.
Palin may get the brunt of attacks, but when you see her or her people say shit, they aren't royally pissing off everyone and their dog. Mitt's people recently said Palin isn't a serious human being. Why in the hell would someone savvy in politics and trying to win a GOP primary say some that? A lot of Palin fans are simply defensive as fucking hell. Mitt's an amateur who looks good but never showed much skill beyond fund raising. And yeah, everyone took up for him because that asshole huckabee is a bigot.
'not a serious human being'? are you fucking kidding me? She's so pro life she's raising a retard. She's so forgiving she's gracious to that asshole Levi. She's so devoted to her state that she resigned power and took on tremendous personal liability because that was the only way her state could be administrated.
She's serious, but I guess she looks kinda like a bimbo so that's the obvious attack for an amateur operation like Mitt's. you won't hear Palin's people say shit about Mitt being a weirdo Ken doll, because that wouldn't be a long term success.
If you have someone in mind who shows more commitment than Palin, and can put together a competent campaign, I am totally on board.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 04:33 PM (dUOK+)
If Obama were as effective leading as he is campaigning for office, this country would be in great shape. Unfortunately, all he knows how to do is campaign, but perhaps you learn nothing else as a community organizer.
Posted by: nohype at July 15, 2010 04:39 PM (m2ji+)
Romney or Huckabee and I vote for Obama so we can just put a merciful end to the Republic as quickly as possible. No one involved in destroying the health care system of a state or country is qualified to serve. That is the minimal threshold requirement.
Gingrich I would have to think about.
Also, don't assume Obama won't get a primary challenge or will not be impeached before the next election. He is one scandal away from oblivion and if it turns out Holder and company have given instructions not to prosecute black defendants when their victims are white as has been alleged then there is nothing that will save him. If the Pubbies get enough votes to launch investigations the whole rotten edifice will come tumbling down because Obama doesn't believe there are limits to his power. The abuses that will be uncovered will be staggering.
I wouldn't rule out the Democrats leading the charge to impeach him just so they can get a viable candidate for the next election. They will do anything to hold onto power and it doesn't look like their voter importation scam is going to work before the next election..
Posted by: Hmmmm at July 15, 2010 04:40 PM (sfNbl)
It would be hard to vote for Romney over Obama. and I'm not one of those purists... I just think it would be a real disaster to have Obamacare or other policies of Obama's not fought. Romney really does have a hard time taking a stand against pressure. This explains his entire career.
"If any of the others get the nomination, they will be Alinskyd and they may not survive it. You need to take this into account in evaluating this poll."
This is a great point, too. I don't think Palin can be attacked much more than she has. It's all out there, and she's overcome it to the point where she's tied with Obama... even though he has a 24/7 campaign and fawning coverage and she's running a stealth campaign at best.
I honestly would prefer Christie, Ryan, or a couple others OVER Palin, but wonder if they can survive the attacks. Even if they could do so just as Palin has, the timing of the attacks might disfavor them... taking months longer to overcome. With Palin, we've heard it all and accepted it.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 04:45 PM (dUOK+)
It's not that any of the Republican candidates are particularly well liked. Only Huckabee has positive favorability numbers at 37/28. Romney's at 32/33, Gingrich at 32/42, Palin at 37/52, and Brewer at 17/20. But with a majority of Americans now disapproving of Obama it's no surprise that a large chunk of them would replace him as President if they had that choice today.
You have one hell of bench.
You have to be real proud of that line up.
Posted by: Peter at July 15, 2010 04:52 PM (E9Jde)
With Palin, we've heard it all and accepted it.
Accepted what? Heard what? She hasn't said anything substantive from day one.
Posted by: Peter at July 15, 2010 04:59 PM (E9Jde)
My prediction for the 2012 election: a GOP resistable force meets The Messiah's movable object.
Whoever wins, we lose.
Posted by: Zombie Adolf Hitler at July 15, 2010 05:00 PM (ySNz/)
Posted by: Mel Gibson at July 15, 2010 05:04 PM (okmLW)
I love that Palin makes you so angry (and don't deny it, she makes you wet your panties).
I fucking love it. And so will the American people. Every nutcase that came out to say 'If Obama wins, the 'black' will take over' led to a million more Obama votes, and the same will be true for Palin. Americans love repudiating the dickwads.
You say Palin hasn't said anything substantive as if that's all it takes to erase all her work. Good luck with that, buddy.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 05:16 PM (dUOK+)
She's so pro life she's raising a retard. - Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 08:33 PM (dUOK+)
I don't usually go all-in for PC-Speak and all that, but that was WAY out of line. You had me up until that point.....
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at July 15, 2010 05:52 PM (Nr9jl)
Posted by: mim/ginaswo at July 15, 2010 06:29 PM (UeXIj)
Posted by: sig at July 15, 2010 07:44 PM (2i+Vz)
That is exactly how I feel. If it is Romney v. Obama, I'll vote third party or leave the president blank.
Posted by: gm at July 15, 2010 06:31 PM (ELiBu)
Posted by: poet laureate and 4th runnerup for a nobel prize at July 15, 2010 06:37 PM (nnNfA)
She's so pro life she's raising a retard. - Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 08:33 PM (dUOK+)
I don't usually go all-in for PC-Speak and all that, but that was WAY out of line. You had me up until that point.....
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at July 15, 2010 09:52 PM (Nr9jl)
Hey, what can I say. I'm not really a Palin like mind on many issues, to be honest.
I like her solely because I think she will follow through on limited government and some basic reforms. I actually find her annoying on a viceral level, but I would vote for her in a heartbeat anyway because, frankly, she can take the heat.
And anybody who is going to actually clean up this trainwreck is going to feel the burn of a thousand suns. Same reason I can't vote for Romney. He would probably make it much harder to actually reform the government, and he obviously just can't take the heat.
I'm thinking of Palin in the pragmatic sense rather than the purist. I would vote for a pro-choice candidate. I would vote for Romney if he hadn't shown his inability to stay the course on ... anything.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 06:44 PM (dUOK+)
I still think Romney can win the primaries if he forcefully, coherently clarifies where he stands; explains he had a veto to deal with as MA Governor; and explains that, while MA's healthcare may not have improved much, it's mandate amounts, essentially to an additional income tax that you can opt-out of by showing you have health insurance.
Posted by: ParisParamus at July 15, 2010 08:21 PM (qxV2+)
This 'Not a serious human being' gaffe hasn't been backed off of and Romney hasn't really come out to explain why his underlings are idiots. Makes me think he doesn't have the chops. He doesn't really make direct attacks, either. How is he going to beat Palin in a debate? I know I'm supposed to believe Palin isn't ready for that kind of thing, but her debate performance is stronger than Romneys (check youtube... just my opinion).
I hope we can find someone better than Palin... she does turn off some voters we could get. But let's be honest: Romney turns off voters too. One example if this attempt you're making to explain Romneycare. Obamacare needs to be opposed on a fundamental level, and Romney can't hope to do it when he's making mealy mouthed 'consistent and clear' excuses for his leadership of MA. We all know he won't do shit about Obamacare.
I also know, for a fact, that Palin will not pick Romney for her VP. I don't think Romney has a shot at being the nominee, but the way his people are talking about Palin has burned that bridge right away. People saying that Romney being the nominee and picking Palin as some kind of consolation sidekick come across as disingenuously trying to suck some of that Palin support into their favorite candidate. It's just not gonna happen. Romney has much worse executive experience and isn't a better as a politician... he's much better at raising funds than anyone I've ever seen other than Obama, but that's not really something I like about him.
Why Romney? What about this guy attracts people? He's so flip floppy and vague that he doesn't threaten Obama voters very much. Is that a good thing? Can be be counted on to fight the good fight when the going gets incredibly tough? If so, why has he always taken the positions that are most popular to the demographic he is trying to win support from? Where's the example of Romney making a hard choice? What's Romney going to do if he gets the attacks Palin has weathered successfully for so long? He's going to fold like a cheap table.
Oh we,, Paris, I'm glad you're coming around on Palin. Everyone does eventually. That's why she's going to beat Obama, and why the polls tell a completely different story than the Mitt fans claimed they would.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 08:43 PM (dUOK+)
Still... that's not high praise, is it? Romneycare is a disaster and romney admits he won't do what must be done with Obamacare.
Frankly, I think Romney is the enemy more than think Obama is. I think a lot of people on the right do. We know this isn't really fair. The democrats are spending so much more and being so much more ruinous than most flip flop RINOs would be. But this effective defense against liberalism, the GOP, has been overrun by these career politicians who crave power for power's sake and don't seem to have any core principles. Their failure just stings more, for whatever reason. We've always had this group of greedy populists on the left... I expect no more or less than that. I expect more from conservatives. It's on the right that you'll find the real sickness in this country... the real reason Obama won the presidency and was able to bring a lot of trouble to the nation's future.
Posted by: Chili Corn Chips at July 15, 2010 09:37 PM (dUOK+)
Mark my words: this is more intelligent than whatever Obama uses for his 2012 slogan.
"Dreams and Progress"
"Peace and Nature"
"Republicans are Racist".
Posted by: Legendary Former Rapist Kobe Bryant at July 15, 2010 11:59 PM (dUOK+)
Posted by: A proper perspective: Who do people dislike more, Obama or Palin? at July 16, 2010 02:51 AM (sYrWB)
If the 2010 or 2012 elections are stolen by the Democrats, self-preservation requires that we overturn those election results, whether by lawsuit, civil disobedience, secession, or revolution.
If the elections are fair, but the Democrats win anyway, self-preservation requires exactly the same thing. Our way of life is fatally endangered by the Democratic Party as it presently exists -- it's them or us.
Yes, the first case above has some basis in law -- you don't have to respect an illegal election -- and the second does not. So what? Would you rather be in compliance with the law, or live in a non-Communist country?
Posted by: Steve Johnson at July 16, 2010 05:20 AM (vtqjZ)
Peter, you are a nutcase. The fact is, if you approved of someone, it would mean they must be pretty fucking awful.
I love that Palin makes you so angry (and don't deny it, she makes you wet your panties).
I fucking love it. And so will the American people. Every nutcase that came out to say 'If Obama wins, the 'black' will take over' led to a million more Obama votes, and the same will be true for Palin. Americans love repudiating the dickwads.
You say Palin hasn't said anything substantive as if that's all it takes to erase all her work. Good luck with that, buddy.
At least you admit she hasn't said anything substantive, that's a start.
What work. Are you serious!! How long have you been living on this planet.
With her disapproval numbers I would love to see her run. She's a joke.
Posted by: Peter at July 16, 2010 05:22 AM (E9Jde)
If you really think she's never accomplished anything or said anything substantial, you're just a nutcase. I don't see why a Palin supporter would even mind. It's like saying the sky isn't blue... of course someone on the internet is just going to pretend, but the reality is well known on this.
Keep pretending... it will probably make our victory more sweet. Just imagine, someone you don't think has any accomplishments and can't even talk is tied with Obama. He must be the worst president in history.
Posted by: Legendary Former Rapist Kobe Bryant at July 16, 2010 08:01 AM (dUOK+)
Dear duOK+, Chili Corn Chips, Legendary Former blah, blah, blah.....
What I meant about the "Raising a retard" comment was that I happen to be the mother of a child with Down syndrome. While I am not into PC-speak and all of that crap, it is still highly insensitive to use that phrase. I don't mind the word "retarded" - it is a medically/scientifically accurate term.
If you knew my daughter - and others like her - I would hope that you have enough humanity within you to speak of her as a "child with Down syndrome", a "disabled child", or even a "retarded child", rather than a "retard". The phrase that you chose to use does hurt these kids whenever they hear it.
By using that particular phrase, you are doing yourself no favors in the credibility department.....
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at July 16, 2010 10:42 AM (Nr9jl)
Posted by: haomai at June 21, 2011 01:31 AM (fOq3O)
Posted by: Princess bridal gowns at June 21, 2011 10:56 PM (Eb0YQ)
Posted by: meizitang at July 05, 2011 07:37 PM (6wp1c)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2613 seconds, 388 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Zionist Agent at July 15, 2010 01:34 PM (VmtE9)