PPP: Obama, Palin tied 46/46 in 2012 polling

Hot Air ^ | July 15, 2010 | Ed Morrissey

[counterpunch]

No, this is not coming from Rasmussen or an internal GOP poll, but from the normally Democrat-sympathetic Public Policy Polling...

With his approval numbers hitting new lows it’s no surprise that Barack Obama’s numbers in our monthly look ahead to the 2012 Presidential race are their worst ever this month. 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.

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.

There are two things driving these strong poll numbers for the Republican candidates. The first is a lead with independents in every match up. 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.
 

[Notary Sojac]

Amen to that. Let's just wait for the primaries OK?

I would vote for Christie or Daniels or Barbour in the primary, but I would absolutely vote for Palin in the general.

[conservativebabe]

Christie is great but he has said in no uncertain terms that he isn’t running. He said he was elected by the people to be governor of NJ and that’s what he intended to be.

Maybe sometime after 2012 though.

I just really really hope we have a viable FRESH candidate.

[American Dream 246]

Here we go again. The MSM and democrat polls are choosing our candidate and you all are falling for it...we are so so screwed. The only one who has the GUTS to stand in front of Obama and tell things like they are - co0mminism, racism and all is Sarah. Period. All the others without ANY exception are right now silent - are afraid that the MSM will not like them and will NEVER dare to attack Obama upfront. If you don’t understand that now, we are screwed again in 2012. And newt and NY23...right...good choice indeed!!! Same old cowards, all of them BUT Sarah and Bachmann.

[TexasFreeper2009]

depends on who she is running against... if it’s Romney or McCain she would CRUSH them.

[TexasFreeper2009]

Well this “joke” is now polling even with Obama.

[JerseyDvl]

Quite succinct and right on point.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” And do we really need another stuck on himself, serial book writer, establishment intelligentsia, global warming cultist who’s McCainesque bi partisanship with Pelosi makes even McCain look sane? “

That was a hot dang good sentence!

[cookcounty]

I would pick Newt, then Romney, then Huck...I am not sure what to do with Sarah. She sure is a lot of fun, though.

[jeltz25]

Just for kicks, in a Gallup Poll in July 1978, the equivalent time period, Pres Carter was ahead of Fmr CA Governor Ronald Reagan by 52-43, a 5 pt gain from his 50-46 lead in May 1978. So Palin is already 9 pts ahead of where Reagan was at this point.

Also, PPP polls always have these results that don’t really make sense. For example, in favorability Huckabee is 33-33 among Hispanics, Palin is 21-67. Among blacks Huckabee is 21-25, Palin is 8-92. Obama is 63-30 among hispanics and 88-13 among blacks. Yet, when it comes to a matchup vs Obama among hispanics Huckabee loses 24-68 while Palin loses 25-63 and among blacks Huckabee loses 4-92 while Palin loses 13-83, which would be the best performance by a Republican among the black vote since 1980. Doesn’t make sense that Huckabee would be much more favorable among blacks yet do far worse vs Obama. They have Gingrich getting 17% of the black vote! Highly suspect results. If any Republican even tops 5% of the black vote against Obama I’d be shocked.

BTW, I would not be surprised if PPP fudged the numbers a bit to give Obama the tie with Palin. Although, if they did have her ahead they would probably get more media attention so maybe they didn’t fudge them. Still, I wouldn’t put it past them.

[reasonisfaith]

You’re the same guy who came out against Fred Thompson.

Now you show up again with this.

Funny how you always come out against the one true conservative with the best chance of winning the nomination.

[stephenjohnbanker]

;-)

[presently no screen name]

I agree but some never learn.

[paudio]

If you were to ask ten FReepers what "true and genuine conservative" candidate they would like to see you would probably get three to five different names. Worse than that everyone of those ten FReepers would say the others are really "RINOs".

You are right. Conservatives some times forget this, and just assume everybody has a same definition of conservatism, or that they put different weights on various elements of conservatism. Some prefer the social conservatism, others economic conservatism, and so on.

[counterpunch]

Still pushing AlGore’s global warming disciple, huh? Laughable.

Hmmm. Gingrich debated Al Gore, and won.
Newt recognized that in a political system based on the Hegelian Dialectic, if the opposing side offers no antithesis, then there is no synthesis, and the original thesis passes as is. The best way to head off the Left's destructive "green" policies is to present an alternative to it. Simply saying "no" isn't going to sway those who believe something needs to be done. Newt is aiming at engaging those people in thinking about economically neutral alternatives.

It is a two-prong defense. Yes, we disspell the Global Warming™ myth where ever we can, but we also need to attack the progressives' "solutions" at the same time, point out how they are economically destructive, how they are actually aimed at free enterprise, not the environment, and present ideas that would solve what the progressives claim to be the problem, without damaging the economy.

What Newt has succeeding in doing through this approach is to expose the progressives' true agenda of wealth and market access redistribution, by giving them the opportunity to embrace economically neutral alternatives, which they systematically reject.

When people on the side of free markets refuse to engage the Left's proposed "green solutions", then the Left gets to control the dialogue completely. Instead, we need to talk about it, and turn the discussion from one about simply "we need to do something" to one that looks more critically at just what that "something" the Left is proposing.

Newt is playing Chess, while people like you are playing Checkers.
 

[presently no screen name]

I would pick Newt

Mr. "Reagan Era is Over" Newt, Mr. Global Warming Newt, Mr. 'Dede' Newt

Oh the brilliance!

[JoeA]

Wrong: Gibson is a natural born citizen:

Mel Columcille Gerard Gibson was born on January 3, 1956, in Peekskill, New York, US (Wikipedia)
. You're confused about his family moving to Australia.

[JoeA]

Worse than Dole? I don’t know, it’s toss up.

[Tennessean4Bush]

The GOP candidate for President should be the GOP Governor of New Jersey: Chris Christie

[counterpunch]

You’re the same guy who came out against Fred Thompson.

Now you show up again with this.

Funny how you always come out against the one true conservative with the best chance of winning the nomination.

I was a very big supporter of Fred's, even after he dropped out.
At some point, I realized that we had wasted a lot of time, energy, and money on a dog that just wouldn't hunt, while McCain snuck up on us. It became apparent that Romney was the only one who could have stopped McCain, and thus he could have stopped 0bama. But that was 2008. We're talking 2012 now, and that's a whole new ballgame.

I am, always have been, and will continue to be concerned with defeating 0bama, above all. If you don't win, then nothing you stand for matters. We need to beat 0bama at the polls, which means running a candidate who is smart enough, and knowledgeable enough to defeat him in the debates. Right now at this point, I think Newt is that person. But we have to pick one of the choices we're presented with. If he doesn't run, then obviously we'll have to choose someone else. Newt would have been my top choice in 2008, too, and I was excited by the prospect of him running. He decided against running when Fred entered the race, because he felt that Fred represented a clear conservative choice. That is when I started supporting Thompson.

I have said plenty of things about many candidates, and potential candidates, both good and bad. Perhaps you have been mislead by a disturbed internet stalker I had here some time back who was posting things I had said out of context all over FR. Unfortunately, there are some sick individuals out there and this is a public forum.

And believe me, if I thought Sarah Palin had "the best chance of winning", or anything better than a snowball's chance in hell of winning, even, I would be all for her. But she doesn't. You have to live in a seriously oxygen deprived bubble to believe she does. She has only a slightly better shot than Dan Quayle.
 

[SallyH]

oh yea...Newt has such high character. He dumps not 1 but 2 wives just as they’ve been diagnosed with life-threatening illnesses. Wife #1 dumped on her hospital bed as she’s undergoing cancer treatment. Wife #2 dumped on Mother’s Day just 4 days after being diagnosed with MS. Just wait until women voters are reminded of this. The schmuck’s no better than John Edwards. Both wives were dumped for much younger “models.” I’d vote for my dog before Newt.