Posted on 03/23/2011 8:01:22 PM PDT by Hojczyk
It’s weird to think of him pulling votes from anyone, but … Palin? The candidate with the single most devoted base in the entire field?
Draw me a Venn diagram of their respective constituencies, please.
Ten percent of Republicans and independents who lean Republican say they would most likely support Trump for the GOP’s 2012 presidential nomination.
That would place him fifth on the list behind former Arkansas Gov. and 2008 Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee at 19 percent, former Massachusetts Gov. and 2008 White House hopeful Mitt Romney at 18 percent, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 14 percent, and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin at 12 percent…
“Removing Trump’s name from the list and allocating his voters to their second choice gives Huckabee 21 percent and Romney 19 percent – essentially unchanged from January. In a Trump-less field, Gingrich gets 15 percent, up from 10 percent in January, and Paul goes from 7 percent to 11 percent. Palin is the big loser, dropping from 19 percent in a no-Trump round in January to just 13 percent now,” adds Holland.
That’s the fun part of the poll. The less fun part is that Democratic enthusiasm has jumped to 56 percent, trimming a 22-point Republican advantage to … just six. I’m trying hard not to attribute that to a backlash on the left against Wisconsin, but it’s the most compelling explanation I can think of.
As for the Trump/Palin overlap, maybe there’s a portion of disengaged Republican voters who tilt towards the candidate with the highest name recognition. Normally that’s Sarah, but That Guy From “The Apprentice” out-celebrities even her. Similarly, could be that some righties are looking to liven up the debates for fear of a Romney/Pawlenty/Gingrich/Daniels soporific nightmare. Palin and Trump would both achieve that. Or maybe some of Palin’s support right now is as a protest vote by people disaffected with the establishment GOP. I’m skeptical of that, though, since protest votes don’t normally go to candidates like her who can actually win.
If the Trump vote is coming from people who are simply looking to spoil a ballot as a kiss-off to the top contenders in the field, I would think he’d be pulling more from someone like Ron Paul (who actually finished two points behind Trump) than from her.
All theories welcome. Via JWF, here he is
She did support Israel and appeared informed about that, but she just left there. It was fresh on her mind and she probably learned something while there. I’ll give you that ONE. I’d love to see her do well. I’m not sure she even plans to run. She is light in the knowledge department.
I would NEVER vote for Obama and I would NEVER vote for "The Donald"!
Why do you need that all spelled out for you?
Give it up. You are debating with an idiot who tried to explain in an earlier post a scenario in which he/she could cast a vote for Obama.
U.S. Constitution. Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. Look it up.
As compared to which potential Republican candidate or candidates?
Because that is NOT what she said.
“The birth certificate is not a required document for the verification of age?”
Believe it or not, there is no proof required to become president of the United States. NONE. A statement by the head of the party stating that the candidate is eligible is what has been accepted. Even though the party head could lie, or have no real knowledge of the candidates eligibility. Age or otherwise. Crazy no?
I bet you believe that she actually said :"I CAN SEE RUSSIA FROM MY HOUSE", too.
All you do is parrot liberal talking points.
This wasn't a debate, this wasn't a two hour speech given oh policy matters, nor was it a dissertation for a Master's degree. No, this was Greta's show where Greta tries to get a whole bunch of questions asked and answered in a brief period of time. And what Palin said was spot on, she was cogent, said only one very brief "um" in 30 minutes, and answered each question without veering off into some foggy noman's land.
Name me someone who is or might be running who could have done a better job and don't bother saying Newt, because that isn't true.
It most assuredly IS what “he” said...if only you read between the lines/with a modicum of rational thought.
Wrong. She said if the choice was between Obama and Trump she’d chose Obama.
Well, what is the ever-so-brilliant Newt’s weighty opinion on Israel or the Libya no-fly zone? I do know that he agreed with Palin, and then changed his mind regarding the no-fly zone. Israel? Has he chimed in of late?
I doubt that anyone here would ever even contemplate voting for Obama.
Good grief.................................
It's late....sorry for the typos and mucked up words.
Insider fascist govt. controller “traders”, are looking for the most gullible “candidates” they can manipulate.
As in the elections after Reagan, by propaganda through the bailed out media, they plan to place/select two selected candidates forward, defining “what’s important” (for them) by controlling the debate questions.
But hey...........who knows what Mittens, the Huckster, TPaw, or any of the others "think" about Libya, Japan, oil prices, Iran, Israel, or the price of eggs in England ( which is now quite high, due to inflation) ?
Newt, Trump, Rudy David Petraeus, Jim DeMint, John Bolton, to name a few
“Hell, I’ll vote for Obama before I ever vote for Trump. I can’t believe people are taking his threats to run seriously. He is Perot 2012 version.”
Just in case you lost your train of thought, tatown, this is the original post.
I, personally, would vote for Obama the same amount of times I would vote for Trump.
That amount would be zero for both...just as upsdriver says.
Get real..........why not just throw in Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld; Reagan's corpse, for that matter?
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.