[Polybius]

It’s well known that when they do these multi candidates vs incumbent. The results get severely skewed. That is why Palin does so bad. .... The bottomline, whoever emerges as the GOP nominee will start out with about 47-48% of vote and then go on to trounce Obama.

The bottom line is that Sarah Palin's poll numbers are so extremely toxic that her endorsed GOP candidate in her own State of Alaska lost a U.S. Senate election to a WRITE-IN candidate with a hard to spell name.

In politics, you simply can't do any worse than that.

Some candidates are far more toxic than others and Sarah Palin, outside of her adoring 8% of all voters, has devastatingly toxic poll numbers.

The GOP needs a conservative candidate with poll numbers that are not in the Donald Trump "joke candidate" range.

[GonzoII]

"Some candidates are far more toxic than others and Sarah Palin, outside of her adoring 8% of all voters, has devastatingly toxic poll numbers."

Source? You've used the poll numbers to discredit Palin, can you now use it to back your "8%"?

[faucetman]

“Sarah Palin’s poll numbers are so extremely toxic that her endorsed GOP candidate in her own State of Alaska lost a U.S. Senate election to a WRITE-IN candidate with a hard to spell name”

Does this accurately describe the Alaska race? Me thinks not, when the hard to spell name is Murkowski (which they allowed various spellings of), the “Kennedy” name of Alaska. Joe Miller, was a flawed candidate with corruption baggage that Alaskans had had enough of. To blame this loss on Palin is ridiculous and you know it. (see my tag line, you should try it).

[RockinRight]

Herman Cain *could* be that guy.