RR: 46% of GOP Primary Voters Who Favor Palin Might Back Third-Party Option If She Isn’t Nominated

Rasmussen Reports ^ | January 30, 2011 | Rasmussen Reports

[parksstp]

Nearly half of the Republican Primary voters who support Sarah Palin say they are at least somewhat likely to vote for a third-party candidate if she does not win the GOP presidential nomination.

[ReneeLynn]

I’m responding because this is turning into a fight of Palin supporters vs non-Palin supporters and it’s all begun from a stupid poll that doesn’t make any sense.

Scott there has NOT polled 100% of GOP Primary voters to arrive at his 40-something percent conclusion. Therefor it is null, void and just plain stupid.

Why even bother to continue discussing it, let alone turn it into a Palin supporter bash?

Hmm, your response sounds as if you’ve got some bee in your bonnet about me. I can’t imagine why.

[OldDeckHand]

"How about speaking out in her defense when the MSM decided to butcher her and blame her for the murders in Tucson?"

I see, so because the Republican party doesn't leap to their feet to defend a private citizen (Palin, clearly is no longer a sitting Republican governor), then you take that as some kind of slight, is that right?

Really, you should call the WHAAAAmubulance. Palin, just like Romney or Huckabee or anyone else not in office, can speak up for themselves, if they must.

Should the party have "spoken up" for Huckabee when the man that he pardoned killed those four cops in WA, or should they have just kept their mouths shut? Gingrich puts his foot in his mouth almost every week, should the Party do something about that, too?

[BunnySlippers]

Sarah will publicly back the GOP.

[WilliamHouston]

If Jeb Bush or Newt Gingrich win the nomination, I am voting third party.

[dragnet2]

That, of course, will be the unfortunate consequence of any conservative third party

Wrong.

The consequences of following the Republican party over the cliff are no longer an option for those still capable of critical thought.

It has become a party of lies, open borders and compromise...Even those drooling in cups now understand this.

[pissant]

Only gov Palin has been on the attack defending conservative vaules (sic) everyday

That is one of the false premises that the cultists toss around constantly. And it's patently false.

[Big Horn]

I will prefer anyone I can think of over Obama.

[Crim]

All your base are belong to TEA PARTY.

[imfrmdixie]

Simply by the lack of recognizing her fruition...and what are you...a Rhodes scholar that thinks no one else knows anything? YOU are exactly why I love Sarah Palin...she is NOT A “YOU”!

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

and where have these “fine” conservatives been for the last 2 years as Obmaa and the socialists have had a free hand in making policy and destroying our country. Only gov Palin has been on the attack defending conservative vaules everyday. She stands up and takes the stones thrown at her by the MSM and the DNC everyday for the last 2 years. these fine conservatives you talk about have been in hdiing since Obama won. gutless wonders no thank you. If West had some more experience I would include him. I want a fighter not a coward. So far the only fighter on the field is gov Palin.

Sorry, but I don't see it that way. Palin has really not done a whole lot, aside from withdrawing from her elected position once the pressure got to be too much for her, and then writing (or having ghost-written) a book, and made some speeches. Big deal. Oh, well, she DID support a lot of conservative candidates (but a few not-so-muchs as well) and funnel money to them - but then again, so did Jim DeMint, so it's not as if she really stands out on that score.

Where have these other conservatives been? Well, where do you think? They've been doing their jobs - which until January 2011 were much more difficult, considering the GOP had minorities in both houses of Congress. Personally, I think it's pretty foolish to expect that they'd be able to stop the Democrat legislative juggernaut when they didn't have anywhere near enough votes to actually do it. You can make all the fiery speeches and televised arguments you want, but if you have 195 votes and the other guys have 240, well, that's that.

And need we point out that it's not as if all of Mrs. Palin's genyooowinely fine speechifyin' did all that much to even slowdown Obamacare, etc., either?

[Bigtigermike]

This Rassmusen poll is ambiguous, no one knows exactly what these folks who might vote third-party if Sarah isn’t the nominee are concluding - one scenario is that the GOP Establishment marshal all of their power to push a certain candidate, let’s say Mitt Romney along while they try to sabotage or are unfair to Sarah in some way, and the truth is that many supporters understand that the GOP has a strong distaste for Sarah and they fear that the “powers that be” would do something like that.....I’m not saying that’s going to happen but many conservatives feel that the GOP inside the beltway crowds needs to stop meddling into the process and let it play out

[org.whodat]

No I said the story was BS, the poll is a stretch to get someone to read it, if you math the numbers it drops to about 15 to 20% of her supporters, that say that, my post of the negatives, is the number that say they would never vote for her. A no win situation.

[TomGuy]

While a popular argument, this doesn't really stand close scrutiny.

It does more than you may remember.

Shortly (2 weeks) after his loss, GHWB gave an interview, wherein the interviewer asked him why he didn't really campaign much until just before the election.

GHWB replied that he was the incumbent and thought he would win anyway -- until just before the election when his poll numbers were dreadful.

[truth_seeker]

Palin could thusly join the elite group of Perot, Buchanan, Nader, Barr, Keyes, Wallace, Anderson, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_party_(United_States)

[x]

I have read a number of academic studies by political scientists over the years, and all the ones that I can remember reached that very conclusion - absent Perot, it's likely Bush gets reelected, although it would have been very close.

According to exit polling based on second choices, Bush would have won Ohio if Perot hadn't been in the race.

But Bush could have carried Ohio, Wisconsin, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Nevada, Montana, Kentucky, Georgia and Colorado with a total of 87 electoral votes and still have lost the election by 283 electoral votes to 255.

1992 wasn't 2000 or 2004. Economic troubles meant that Clinton would probably have carried large Middle Western states and would have broken the Republican lock on the South and West even if Perot hadn't been in the race.

Because of the economy, Bush just wasn't that popular in 1992. His approval rating fell to the 40 and 30 percent range. A lot of voters who based on regional or ethnic or religious data would usually vote Republican just wanted him out. Plus, Perot and Clinton brought a lot of new voters into the election, which made it that much harder for Bush to make a comeback.

[TomGuy]

And that ‘read my lips, no new taxes’ pledge that GHWB broke didn’t help him one bit.

[pallis]

There is nothing the left would like better than another Perot ordeal to split conservatives. It’s the only way Barry can win again. It would be interesting to watch the left become Palin’s biggest supporters, like Clinton and troops were Perot’s supporters, not at the ballot, but allies in the fight.

[who knows what evil?]

Some say NC went for Obama in the last election. WRONG. Obama won NC by less than 25,000 votes. Just over 25,0000 NC voters voted for Barr. So the Barr voters gave NC to Obama.

I wouldn't assume those 25,000 would have voted for McCain...NC college students, single white women and fellow blacks put Obama over the top.

[OldDeckHand]

"Simply by the lack of recognizing her fruition..."

Honestly, I have no idea what that means, and I make my living by communicating with people.

Are you saying that because the Republican party hasn't acknowledge the inevitability of the "Sarah Palin Phenomenon", then they must be against her? What, are you expecting them just to cancel the 2012 primaries and coronate Sarah because she's so super?

"and what are you...a Rhodes scholar..."

I can promise you that it doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to understand our very straightforward two-party political system and nominating process. Most Americans learn about it in an 8th grade government class.

[johnthebaptistmoore]

Mega Dittos!