Posted on 09/20/2010 10:34:17 AM PDT by RobinMasters
And it’s not even particularly close. In a revealing portrait of likely voters in this midterm cycle, a majority of respondents to Rasmussen’s survey say that Sarah Palin more closely represents their point of view than does Barack Obama. The man who won the 2008 presidential election, on the other hand, only resonates with four in ten likely voters:
Fifty-two percent (52%) of Likely U.S. Voters say their own views are closer to Sarah Palin’s than they are to President Obama’s, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
Just 40% say their views are closer to the president’s than to those of the former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate.
Among the Political Class, however, 68% say their views are more like Obama’s, while 63% of Mainstream voters describe their views as more like Palin’s.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
The second thing you need is a really unpopular president. Clinton was too popular to impeach. This guy will be toast.
The media, having made Hussein, will revel in destroying him.
Personally, I think he will resign in disgrace, under threat of impeachment.
Personally, i think the sooner he is gone, the better for all of us.
Oh my, I had a brain fart on that one. I did not mean DeMint I was thinking of Rove. It sucks to get old.
I got into a discussion today at work about Palin’s “qualifications”.
I think what most people miss is that no one person has ever been qualified. It’s about the people they bring in with them, the vision they have, and their ability to communicate a message.
Palin has a proven track record of delegating but clearing the path to get things done. She maybe more of a populist, but she’s well fit to for the job.
These idiots hear the name Palin and think instantly the POTUS act more of a king, queen, or dictator.
Anybody who thought that Obama was qualified has no ground to complain about Palin's qualifications.
I guess this means Michelle is no longer proud of her country.
Winston Churchill.
That 14% of LIBERALS picked Palin is telling.
And that 61% of “moderates” said Obama. Which means that “moderates” are generally either liberals who won’t admit it, or, just idiots who have little true ideology at all and just follow the media.
Females come in two types:
Women, and “womyn.”
Actually the Dems have more at risks Senate seats to defend in 2012 then the GOP has. This is not their best shot if they use this year to build on. It all depends on if they do what they say or go RINO after Nov. Same way 2006 was not the Dems best shot but they merely a stepping stone they used to build on for 2008.
That’s largely true.
Also - most “independents” lean more conservative than liberal - which explains why Republicans win often in places where a lot more voters are registered Dems than Republicans.
Other times, moderates are just people who are too clueless to really have any sort of ideology - it’s just “star power” for them.
“And that 61% of “moderates” said Obama. Which means that “moderates” are generally either liberals who won’t admit it, or, just idiots who have little true ideology at all and just follow the media.”
I have had the same thought about moderates...when you see that Obama has “lost” the moderates, and thus this adds to the huge swing towards the GOP in the fall elections, you have to ask your self: What the hell were these moderates thinking? Did they really not know what and who Obama was and is?
2012 will not be a redo of 1996 no matter how hard the Democrat spinmisters try to say it will be.
Here is why.
In 1996 talk radio, the Internet and Fox News were all in their infancy. The anti Establishment vote was split between a 3rd party guy named Perot and the GOP guy. The Tea Party movement, with it focus on picking off RINOs in primaries did not exist.
Bill Clinton got elected because there were few Conservative voices out there, except Rush Limbaugh, so the Democrat Party media was allowed to spin he myth that the recovering economy was all Clinton's doing. Then on top of all that, the GOP shot itself in the foot with a weak old RINO candidate.
None of those factors are going to work in 2012 for 0.
I completely agree. Take CA as a prime example.
We should have let Gray-Out Davis serve his term and run a proper election. It might have saved us from Ah-nold.....a Davis twin!
Actually 1995 was a key year in determining 1996. The Democrats went on an all out PR assault after the loss (as with 2005) leading to the aborted government shutdown.
We won't have a feel for how 2012 will go until early next year. Obama will benefit from a Republican win this year, but given he is in a lose-lose situation now that doesn't tell us much HOW he will benefit.
FNC and talk radio did not save Republicans in 2006 and 2008, and they certainly tried. There are limits. The past two years were what I call the rosy scenario for Republicans, as with 1994. They win just by sticking together and saying ‘No’.
I hope you are right. BO will lose if voters regain their sanity.
But didn't you predict McCain was going to win in 2008?
LOL, you make me smile.
That view was popular here in 2008. I remember the Monday the day before the election Hannity telling listeners that the polls were turning in McCain's favor (he said the same thing in 2006) and Ann Coulter and some other guest on his show told Hannity that he had made the difference by educating voters on Bill Ayers.
On the other hand, in the Spring of 2008 I was warning Republicans (and even Democrats here) that the Democrats would win 2008, you could see the way that the Republican primaries were going Romney/McCain and voters were really mad at Republicans then. By late September 2008 it was clear McCain had little chance of winning,
Bailouts and stimulus-es in a election year are poison for the president's party politically, It's an admission that things are bad, not to mention counter-productive in the long run.
I hope BO loses in 2012, but there is a political pendulum in effect, as voters forget what they hated about the party they threw out only a few years ago. Whether that phenomenon is enough to counter the current rise of the GOP will be influenced be whether the GOP members are honest, smart, and care abut the USA instead of pork and business as usual.
I will approach 2012 with great reservation. Too many things can happen between now and then.
I remember how giddy I was over GWB in 2003, by 2004 I was becoming skeptical. Then Republicans won big in 2004 and I thought we were on to something, and every year after that was worse than the last. By 2008 I was praying that Bush would just be gone, but McCain getting the nomination ruined even that hope. There was nothing to hope for in 2008 for me, so I looked forward to after Mccain lost knowing Democrats would self destruct and it would be fun to watch , I definitely got that one right.(watching a president McCain self destruct would have been more just more pain)
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.