feh...
Posted on 06/16/2011 2:20:48 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Rasmussen released the second part of its GOP primary polling this morning, this time concerning those potential candidates not in the race. The survey of likely Republican primary voters does not indicate a massive desire for more candidates to jump into the race, but support for bids by Rick Perry and Rudy Giuliani exceeds opposition. That isn’t true for Sarah Palin:
A plurality of Republican primary voters think it would be good for Texas Governor Rick Perry to jump into the party’s presidential race and bad for the party if former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin joined the field. They are evenly divided about former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 36% of Likely GOP Primary Voters think it would be good for Republicans if Palin enters the race, but 45% believe it would be bad for the party. Just 11% say it would have no impact. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Thirty-six percent (36%) also feel it would be good for the GOP if Perry enters the race. Only 21% say it would be bad for the party, while 26% think it would have no impact. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure.
As for Giuliani, best known for his leadership in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, 38% of likely primary voters believe it would be good for their party if he joins the presidential race. Nearly as many (35%), however, see his candidacy as bad for the GOP. Nineteen percent (19%) say it would have no impact.
Earlier, commenters on the first Rasmussen release wondered why the pollster didn’t include potential candidates in the survey, and this answers the question. None of the three got above 36% in demand for a run. Given the lack of any other potential candidates, this appears to bolster the argument that likely primary voters see the current field as sufficient.
The internals don’t look good for Palin in this instance. In almost all demographics, opposition to a primary bid outstrips support. Among men, it’s a 42/42 tie, but among women, it’s a double-digit deficit at 28/49. Palin trails in every age demographic and loses a majority among 40-49YOs, 34/51; she also loses a majority among independents planning to vote in the GOP primaries, 34/53. Black voters (53/26), those unsure of their ideology (70/27), and Tea Party members (49/33) support the idea of a Palin candidacy. Evangelicals are the only religious denomination to support a Palin run, but at a surprisingly low 44/38 mark. Palin also picks up support from lower-income levels below $40K and the $60-75K demo, but loses the other income demos.
The numbers for Perry and Giuliani aren’t bad, but they’re not “draft”-level figures, either. A Perry run would be seen positively across the board, but not terribly enthusiastically. He actually gets a majority of Tea Party voters (53/17), scoring better among them than Palin, and a majority among black voters, as does Giuliani, who also gets a majority of 30-39YOs. Otherwise, support for any of the three is rather tepid, at least at this point.
One interesting point: Black voters are enthusiastic about all three potential bids, by a majority in each case. They don’t appear to be satisfied with the current field.
RE: I don’t pay a whole lot of attention to the Moron Wing of the Republican party.
If true, that’s a lot of morons out there :)
Unfortunately :-(
Actually, if you trace the conversation back, I asked a poster who claimed the survey was unfair/slanted/I can’t remember the actual wording if they could help me find where the problems were.
I took your remarks as defending the poll as though it were beyond question that it was legitimate, i.e. no special sauce was added in the sampling.
Don't know for sure if there is, but given how Romney did last time, I don't see how any of his behaviour since the last run would have kicked his numbers up very much.
Cheers!
Sarah doesn’t pay any attention to polls, does she?
Maybe the poll meant Palin does represent what people want but they don't think she can beat Obama. Like it or not Perry/Bachmann or Palin as of now looks like the best bet. I think Bachmann has a better chance of appealing to more Independent voters than Palin could muster. A lot of people outside of the religious conservative base became impressed with Bachmann at the debate. If and when Palin debates she will make or break this disconnect of moderates.
Simple, her election to POTUS would be better for the country than it would be for the GOP.
feh...
“No conclusion necessary. Just look at what she is doing day by day.”
Exactly......even Ray Charles could see she is running.....
and he is.....
1) Blind
2) Dead
“No conclusion necessary. Just look at what she is doing day by day.”
Exactly......even Ray Charles could see she is running.....
and he is.....
1) Blind
2) Dead
“No conclusion necessary. Just look at what she is doing day by day.”
Exactly......even Ray Charles could see she is running.....
and he is.....
1) Blind
2) Dead
There’s a lot of truth in your comments, but some of that would be understandable if we didn’t have an inexperienced incompetent in office right now. At age 71, I’ve been against having women in certain jobs, too - such as fireman, which I think should be fireMAN (as my 6’5”, 240 lb son pointed out to me in the context of himself on the second floor of a burning building, overcome with smoke, and a 120 lb female firefighter on a ladder to get him. Some things are literally simple.) So yes, women are second to men (real men, anyway) in some ways pertaining to physical strength. We women know that, whether we admit it or not. I felt nearly the same about a female CIC, until we got the military-hating pantywaist in office. Senator first? We got one. “More experience”? As opposed to what, a professional community agitator? Excuses, excuses - I don’t accept ANY. Sarah shouldn’t be a fireman, but she can durn sure be a president.
But about her looks - Yes, she is a beauty, and I don’t like her any less because she looks better than I do. Even better than my daughter, who is her age. (Tho my daughter is lovely, too!) Beauty is a disadvantage for a woman in politics. I hate to accept that, but it is. And if that’s the problem that these Republican women can’t handle, I’m ashamed of them. Yet the problem is there.
I dunno, maybe I’m wrong. I’d like to hope so.
There’s a lot of truth in your comments, but some of that would be understandable if we didn’t have an inexperienced incompetent in office right now. At age 71, I’ve been against having women in certain jobs, too - such as fireman, which I think should be fireMAN (as my 6’5”, 240 lb son pointed out to me in the context of himself on the second floor of a burning building, overcome with smoke, and a 120 lb female firefighter on a ladder to get him. Some things are literally simple.) So yes, women are second to men (real men, anyway) in some ways pertaining to physical strength. We women know that, whether we admit it or not. I felt nearly the same about a female CIC, until we got the military-hating pantywaist in office. Senator first? We got one. “More experience”? As opposed to what, a professional community agitator? Excuses, excuses - I don’t accept ANY. Sarah shouldn’t be a fireman, but she can durn sure be a president.
But about her looks - Yes, she is a beauty, and I don’t like her any less because she looks better than I do. Even better than my daughter, who is her age. (Tho my daughter is lovely, too!) Beauty is a disadvantage for a woman in politics. I hate to accept that, but it is. And if that’s the problem that these Republican women can’t handle, I’m ashamed of them. Yet the problem is there.
I dunno, maybe I’m wrong. I’d like to hope so.
Such conservatives as you mention undoubtedly consider her unelectable. And I don’t think she could win a Senate seat in AZ either. She will be the “Quayle” of 2012.
One of the few positive things about a Perry nomination is that the outraged Bushes might endorse Obama! Some possibly for the second time
Scott is as honest-—and accurate-—as they come.
He isn’t “reading tea leaves” or trying to either hurt or help any candidates or potential candidates. He simply reads the results of his automated calling system and reports accordingly.
I have been following his surveys since the 2000 campaign and have yet to notice a shred of bias in any of his work.
I just heard a news report saying Perry is worse than Bush.SO the MSM will try to paint him as Bush. The were WMD (they wanted to Impeach Bush over this) and history will show dubya to be a damned fine President.This aside
I don’t think WE HAVE a choice anymore.Paul just won the straw poll because people are sick of it all and all the BS politics.Do you think they would allow him the nomination?
Can anyone reading this now see anyone win that wants to dismantle the IRS EPA DOE AND UN? I think they have crowned Perry and all of the crap will continue on to a level we can all just barely get jobs and pay for gas at.
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.