Posted on 06/06/2011 10:21:51 AM PDT by Hojczyk
Mitt Romney is the only Republican 2012 hopeful that a sizable number of voters considers qualified to be president. Sarah Palin is the one they view as least qualified, but, at this early stage, many voters are still in the dark about all the possible candidates.
However, voters feel strongest that Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2008, is not qualified. Twenty-three percent (23%) say the former Alaska governor is qualified to serve as the nation’s chief executive, but 63% say she is not qualified. Palin is the best-known of the Republicans with just 15% undecided about her.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
I just don’t believe the polling. I have not heard one favorable Romney supporter from the people that I know. Perhaps, the % is from the media and GOP who wants this guy so bad that it hurts. Just a thought.
Call BS - he is probably polling the Hamptons, Austin and San Francisco.
...this is such bullshiite that's its almost embarrassing.
Who are these people who believe that no Republican except Romney is "qualified"...
AAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGG....it drives me nuts.
There, fixed it for you.
What Scott Rasmussen is full of rhymes with Mitt.
It is a national poll
Why would Rasmussen do this? Can you give a coherent non-conspiratorial reason why Rasmussen would risk his polling company’s reputation by only polling the Hamptons, Austin and San Francisco?
This is BS Sarah Palin is probaly more qualified than most of the people running. Ro
How can Romney get any real grassroots support from most Republicans when he supports Romneycare, ethanol and global warming? He might get the moderates, but although those people do vote, they do not generally do the grassroots campaign work.
It isn't about who is qualified, but voter perceptions. An electorate who thought 0 was qualified doesn't have much of a record of making good choices does it?
I read that mittens raised $10 million in one day. It sure wasn't from conservatives.
And we need to go after the EPA to revise the organization before they send us back to the dark ages.
I remember seeing a t.v. interview with Romney and his wife. They interviewed them in this huge barn (I hate to call it a barn but it is a luxury barn). Anyways, there were all these race horses behind them and Mrs. Romney was talking about horse this, horse that. I remember thinking, “what a bunch of elitist boobs”. It isn’t that horses were on display with them. It was the whole “I’m so rich and cultured” stuff that went along with it. (not sure I am describing it exactly).
Professional polling pricks can supply the numbers skewed in any direction the client desires. It’s all about detailed demographics, polling whom you know you will get the desired result from. Zogbyscum is the prime example. But you have got to admit, Luntz makes great theater, even if he does stack the audience for the result he wants in advance. Of all the popular pollsters, Rasmussen seems to be the most honest, yet even he probably keeps very detailed demographic records, just in case.
Did you not see the "probably" in his post? It's called being facetious, which is a humorous device often used on FReep.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Crappy poll results from a crappy poll taken by a crappy polling company that polled only crappy people in the crappy big cities, which accidentally polled a few real Americans, but by far and large polled crappy leftists.
Could it be that (wrongly), the masses have been brain washed enough about her that they en mass will never vote for her and nothing will change that?
Oh, I get the picture, quite well and I'm sure millions of others do too.
So exactly how is your "reverse elitism" any different?
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.