Posted on 02/04/2011 9:37:32 AM PST by LesDowrey
Herman Cain isn't a widely known figure, but he's long had a radio show on the conservative talk station WSB in Atlanta, and a new Georgia poll of 379 likely GOP primary voters pops up a surprising result:
Huckabee: 19% Gingrich: 18% Romney: 14% Cain: 14% Palin: 11% Pawlenty: 3% Barbour: 2% Daniels: 1% Some other candidate: 3%
Polling such as this is a farce, beauty contest and isn’t worth spit in the wind.
To really understand any one wanting to “run’ for the office of POTUS should be required to post who he/she would place in his/her Cabinet. If elected then they should be required to use that Cabinet for at least 12 months.
Even though we elect a person for that position shouldn’t we have knowledge of the people he/she will utilize in serving US!.
Just maybe we should vote for a POTUS W/Cabinet????
My bad......... disregard my post about you having the number wrong for Palin. I was reading the info wrong based upon the :
The MOE is over 5 for this sample size.
Cindie,
I certainly wasn’t directly posting to you or saying that you even claimed that. It was definitely generalization.
Sincerely,
Bob
How does one then explain Newt, Huck, and Romney?
So, according to all of you, Palin is a great candidate ! Can anyone show one poll that shows pain leading obama? If not, when will she run ahead of obama? How will she change all her negatives?
We need to surprise dems by going out of all these candidates. Paul Ryan can easily beat Obama and he is a conservative. A candidate we can all agree. I am tired of people posting negative comments about not working for any other candidate other than their favorite candidate. C’mon guys, we can allow obama
I mean, we cannot allow Obama !
Sample size of 379? Even for Democrat pollsters, that’s bogus.
- JP
I've never heard of him. This Georgia boy will vote for Palin.
I've never heard of him. This Georgia boy will vote for Palin.
In GA I would call this poll the Boortz Effect. Boortz pounds the fairtax, and Cain and Huckleberry are express supporters of the fairtax. Additionally, Boortz regularly rips Palin on his show, based upon the Katie couric interview and his belief that she is an intellectual lightweight.
Of course, this is the same Boortz who promised he would stay on the air till at least 2008 because Hillary Clinton was going to be elected president.
Other than pissant on these boards, I have yet to see any substantive disagreement with Palin’s issue positions. Further, there is only one person mentioned in the running who has actually carried out the types of actions needed to correct and rein in the federal government to it’s constitutional limits while in office. That person is Sarah Palin.
If you want your government to be your church, vote for Huckleberry. He was a pastor after all.
Mitt Romney has proven to be a proponent of govt expansion as governor, and is a global capitalist. I would be interested to know what dealing his private equity firm had with any soros affiliates. Not saying they had any, but haven’t seen that question asked.
Cain is an good conservative, but his electoral experiences have been bad results.
Gingrich is knowledgable, but his policy positions in many areas have shifted with the winds.
Pawlenty allowed the theft of a senate and gubernatorial race under his watch and made no effort to stop either. That theft by the way, was the 60th vote for Obamacare.
Daniels doesn’t believe that the fact that 40 million Americans being killed before birth has an effect on the nation that we should talk about. Where would we be today if we had those people working voting and paying taxes? What cures for disease did we miss because those minds were never allowed to grow and thrive?
Haley Barbour is big political money man. He’s not going to be committed to throwing his corrupt bag men lobbyist friends behind bars.
Once again, one person has proven they can take an entrenched bureaucratic, corrupt regime, clean it out, send the criminally corrupt to jail or pasture, and completely change the way a government works, functions, and views it’s responsibilities to it’s citizens. Sarah Palin
I don't know how old you are, but I'm guessing you aren't old enough to remember the 1972 election. If you were, you might be able to answer your own question.
McGovern was the leftist, grass roots candidate. The Democrat establishment loathed the guy. They feared that if somehow McGovern could capture the nomination, he would go onto get annihilated by Nixon. Why? Because the Dem establishment recognized that the middle of America perceived McGovern to be so far left and out of the mainstream, that he was radical.
At the start of the '72 primary season, there were some favorites, but no decisively clear leader. Wallace and Muskie enjoyed double-digit support but McGovern (and several others) trailed significantly. As events unfolded, like the assassination attempt on Wallace (ending with his partial-paralyzation), McGovern, started to pick up steam primarily because of his unfailing grass-roots support.
Professional politicos - in the media and on the left and on the right - remember the lesson of McGovern - In a crowded field, grass root's support can propel an otherwise wholly unelectable general election candidate to their party's nomination. People who want to win general elections are rightfully fearful of the grass roots candidacy of people who are toxic to the middle. That's Palin.
“Even for Democrat pollsters, that’s bogus.”
Hey! I had nothin’ to do with this poll! They never called me!
Bogie
Cain supporters are voters who think for themselves. The GA establishment has not been too keen on him. I wish Cain could get more national exposure. The rest of the country has no clue what they are missing.
“Other than pissant on these boards, I have yet to see any substantive disagreement with Palin’s issue positions.”
I’m your huckleberry. Why would there be substantive disagreement with her? Especially when we don’t know what her issue positions ARE on some of the more important issues of the day, including:
Gonzales v. Raich and the intergalactic reach of the commerce clause
Kelo v. City of New London and the takings clause for private-to-government-to-private use
Roe v. Wade and her opinion on the use of embryonic cell lines currently under study
Building a border wall, birthright citizenship, and immigration pathways for illegals
The federal Departments of Education, Energy, and all the other constitutionally fictitious federal departments and agencies
Someone who endorses a RINO like John McQueeg when she could instead have stood silent.
I only know the last one, because that’s the only thing she’s done that shows where she REALLY stands on the issues. She’s not a proven constitutionalist conservative, just a tough talker. And lots of candidates have talked tough. She hasn’t talked at all on some damn important issues. When she does, let the rest of us know, Fletch. ‘Cause I don’t like many of the other nominees you ran down, either, but I got no time to vote for someone who won’t speak to the issues. That doesn’t work any more. Every time we fall for that b.s., we get sold out by a Scott Brown,
or an Orrin Hatch,
or a John McCain,
or a Lindsey Graham,
or a Mel Martinez,
or a Richard Lugar,
or a...or do you want me to fill up the rest of the page?
No more. Whoever gets the nomination can address ALL the questions above, or I’ll pull the lever for Herman Cain, or a Constitution or Libertarian Party candidate. At least I’ll be voting for someone who doesn’t stand for government.
Precicely. Have a listen to the interview with Herman by Erik Erikson at the following.
http://feeds.wsbradio.com/~r/TheNewHermanCainShow/~5/X_vgTQnhF04/erick_erickson_and_100974321.mp3
http://feeds.wsbradio.com/~r/TheNewHermanCainShow/~5/Dx8wfbEohZk/erick_erickson_and_100974331.mp3
Precisely that is.
That is a fear that I have about her as well; That she's an intellectual lightweight. Ignoring the Couric interview entirely, I have seen nothing from her in the last two years to assuage those fears.
When she (if she) starts sitting for lengthier interviews with potentially hostile journalists, and can answer detailed policy questions in an effective and compelling manner, then I'll give her a second look. But like Boortz (apparently), I'm not nearly convinced that she has the intellectual wherewithal to manage an incredibly complicated country, in an incredibly complicated world.
Yes, I have problems with almost all the others, and several - like Romney - are all non-starters for me. But, even though I have political differences with them, I think most are intellectually capable of filling the position. Palin, I'm not so sure. Managing a state with the population of an Austin, TX-sized city, does not ready one to be President, especially when you only did for barely 30-months, and you have no other state-wide political experience, federal political experience, or corporate management experience or military experience.
I think her policy statements have spoken to many of her positions on the higher profile issues, such as energy independence, privitization of federal lands (which speaks to where she’d be on kelo), stopping federal interference in health care, a pro life nation, serious controls on federal spending and entitltement reform (she endorsed the Ryan roadmap).
By my read of bush’s book, embryonic stem cells is going to be an issue that falls by the wayside as the science is going toward stem cell harvesting from our own bodies for therapies with good success. The only part the Feds can control is the use of federal funds for that research anyway. Private funding can explore embryonic, but it hasn’t done so because the private money is going to the areas that show success or promise.
Your citation of court cases is informative. I share your frustration with court overreach, and it is critical that the federal courts are filled with Scalia’s, thomas’s, and alito’s. We definitely need to hold the candidates accountable for that.
On the McCain endorsement, it was damned if you do, damned if you don’t. The only thing in political life I will ever give McCain credit for is bringing Palin to the national scene sooner. She would have arrived eventually anyway, but probably not in time to save the republic from bankruptcy or civil war. The rest of his career politically is a pile of shit. He has continually taken the worst of all worlds, meshed it together, and called it compromise.
Obviously if she went through the primary process, debates, etc with no deepening of her positions, she would lose by a wide margin. I recall in the run up to the 2000 campaign, alot of the same criticism was leveled at bush, because he spent a year giving the identical speech everywhere. GRAVITAS anyone?
I think in the places it mattered most (the war) Bush had balls the size of Texas. On the budget, not so much.
Once the primary process started, things got more in depth, and McCain nearly beat him because he was a little late getting the policy side in gear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.