Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

New Palin Numbers

Here are some of the change numbers on Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's (R) behind today's Washington Post poll story about a new low in her favorability rating.

Palin favorability in Washington Post-ABC News polls

%favorable (% strongly favorable)

                   Post-Conv.*     Now      Change in pts. 
All                58% (35%)     40% (20%)   -18 (-15) 

Democrats          34  (12)      20  (11)    -14 ( -1)
Republicans        88  (66)      70  (41)    -18 (-24)
Independents       60  (35)      40  (17)    -20 (-18)

Liberals           27  ( 9)      18  ( 8)     -9 ( -1)
Moderates          58  (28)      30  (12)    -28 (-16)
Conservatives      77  (58)      61  (35)    -16 (-23)

Wh. evang. Prots.  77  (53)      62  (33)    -15 (-20)

*Post-convention poll was registered voters; July poll among all adults. 
Last September about eight in 10 Americans said they were registered to vote.

By Jon Cohen  |  July 24, 2009; 9:32 AM ET
Categories:  Post Polls  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Concealed Weapons an Ideological Showdown
Next: Biden's Watchdog Role May Have Bite

Comments

I have to wonder if any of the non-partisan (sarcasm dripping) reporters or bloggers at the Post, who were so fast to jump on the report by "an independent investigator" that Palin might have violated state laws with her legal fund will be as fast to rush to press with this:

"The independent investigator who has accused Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin of violating state ethics laws is a major donor to the Democratic Party as well as a partner in a law firm that represented Barack Obama's presidential campaign."

I'm not holding my breath waiting for the Post to publish the other side of this...or any...story. As usual, they won't let facts get in the way of a good Palin-bashing.

Posted by: dbw1 | July 24, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

to dbw1.

These are poll numbers - if you want to discuss another story, maybe you should respond in the appropriate place.

Of course, I'll be accused of being afraid of a truly minor individual. I've never understood why they think we're afraid of her. She can't get elected (because she's an idiot). If we thought she could be elected, that would be reason to be terrified. Imagine, a Republican president even dumber and lazier than the last one. Any intelligent individual is scared of religion-addled mental midgets running the show (see how that worked in Iran). Amazing how much the Republicans and the Iranian mullahs have in common.

Posted by: bflorhodes | July 24, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Palin does not deserve so much coverage.
She is an ignorant woman who thinks she is special because an inept McCain campaign
selected her out of desperation and then could not stand her. I would also venture to say that the Republican Party is desperate for someone to lead their party not understanding that there views are out of touch with the American people.
I suggest Palin just keeps standing and looking out in the direction of Russia until she spots Putin.

Posted by: fotoartiste | July 24, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"The independent investigator who has accused Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin of violating state ethics laws is a major donor to the Democratic Party as well as a partner in a law firm that represented Barack Obama's presidential campaign."

Who reported this and where? Why is this sentence in quotes without attribution? If you wish to influence people with facts you have to convince them of the veracity of those "facts". Was this published in the Anchorage Daily News? WSJ? NYT? Fox? CBS? CNN? Simply placing a statement in quotes does nothing to reinforce the credibility of the statement.

Posted by: kguy1 | July 24, 2009 3:17 PM | Report abuse

dbw1 - let me introduce you to the term "Ad Hominem". Feel free to look it up on any independent site you wish to - then I leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine why it applies perfectly to your comments above. You can use a prior example foolish liberal comments regarding Ken Starr.

Not that they are on-topic in any fashion in the first place...

Posted by: iamweaver | July 24, 2009 4:36 PM | Report abuse

The fact that these polls are being released now in a comparative fashion to her RNC speech polls is a deliberate attempt to make her look bad right before she leaves office before her big weekend at the Fairbanks picnic.

The complicity of the AP and the Washington Post in smearing her is symptomatic of the underlying reason as to why her poll numbers have dropped.

Now that she is free from the constraints of the Governor's office and will no longer be subject to frivolous ethics complaints will free her up to control her image, directly market her brand to the public and bypass the media bias in the future.

A similar incident happened to Reagan at this point in his career. His reaction was to accuse the media and his opponents of having an incestuous relationship. He then went forward from that point on and communicated directly with the people, bypassing the media filter.

Expect Palin to do the same. This is simply a snapshot in time. If you also recall, Bill Clinton was creamed in the polls after his first term as governor. He lost re-election and came back stronger after bonding directly with the people and adjusting his brand accordingly.

My advice to Palinistas is to come in off the ledge, this is not a big deal. My advice to Palin detractors is to remember the lessons of Reagan and don't underestimate her. You keep declaring her dead, and she keeps coming back.

The numbers still show she's viable, and with a strong base of support will have no problem organizing a strong campaign if she so chooses to run in 2012.

Posted by: ReaganTMan1 | July 24, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

to bflorhodes

nicely put
i cannot say it better

Posted by: GaiasChild | July 24, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Palin should fade away, anyone with a brain thinks she's a joke, but when you look at some of the other Republican wanna-bee's ... Cheney, Limbaugh, Gingrich .... you have to laugh, what a bad joke the Republican party has turned into. The party of family values .. Ha, Ha !!

Posted by: wasaUFO | July 24, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I am not a Democrat, I am an independent voter who has voted Republican, Democratic and 3rd party over the past 30 years, so I have no axe to grind about one party vs another. The Republican party is in crisis. If they are even considering people like Palin is shows the desparate position they are in. Palin probably didn't have any business running Wassilla, she certainly didn't have any business running Alaska (obviously even she now knows that) and it was only out of desparation and ineptitude (and not in Palin's best interest) that McCain asked her to be his VP. Palin's appeal was extremely short lived and what she will be left with when the dust settles is a small core group of fundimentalist Christians, who would vote for anyone who claims to have Christian values (I do not know what Christian values Palin has, but that doesn't seem to matter to these people).

If the Republicans want to become anything more than a fringe group of evangelical christians and extremely wealthy and selfish businessmen, they need to move away from the likes of Palin and Limbaugh and Beck, etc. and back to mainstream and intellectually qualified candidates.

Posted by: bjuhasz | July 24, 2009 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Where does Palin get her support? For Heaven's sake haven't any of these people listened to her news conferences? Interviews? She is virtually incomprehensible and shows absolutely no understanding of the issues that are important to this country. My opinion that she is not qualified for high office has nothing to do with her politics. It has to do because she is so obviously UNQUALIFIED for high office. This should be apparent to the most rightwing conservative on the planet. Don't conservatives care about this country? Are they so blind to Palin's obvious charisma that they just don't hear what comes out of her mouth? And to accuse those on the left or even in the center of Palin-bashing because we simply state the truth. Come on. There are so many important issues in this country and, yes, there are at least a few qualified Republicans that could be reasonably be considered for the presidency (I completely disagree with almost everything that Lindsay Grahm says but I would be reasonably comfortable with him as president, just to name once example). So let Palin write her books and appear on talk shows. Just do not nominate her for president. To do so, to quote a prominent politician, would be to act "stupidly".

Posted by: nyrunner101 | July 24, 2009 6:15 PM | Report abuse

bflorhodes: Please do not insult the Iranian mullahs (who are at this moment defending a youth movement for change) by comparing them to Gov. Palin.

For better or worse, I can't think of anyone outside America who is analogous to her.

Posted by: saldivar | July 24, 2009 7:07 PM | Report abuse

dbw1's quote is from FOXNews (see http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/23/palin-investigator-ties-democratic-party/ for entire story).

Accoding to this FOXNews article, the person investigating Palin is Thomas Daniel. He is also the same person who has dismissed five other ethics complaints against her that he has been investigating. Even Palin's spokesperson, Sharon Leighow, has said of Daniel that "I don't have any reason to believe he's unfair", so perhaps some people are reading something into this that not even Palin's people are?

But I do hope that she fades into the sunset and lets someone who is more articulate and able to answer a question with a comprehensible answer speak out.

Posted by: ReallyDeep | July 24, 2009 7:13 PM | Report abuse

"The fact that these polls are being released now in a comparative fashion to her RNC speech polls is a deliberate attempt to make her look bad right before she leaves office before her big weekend at the Fairbanks picnic."

The fact is she's news because she very recently was a candidate for the Vice Presidency, and because she' recently announced her sudden resignation. That's all the reason to find out what people think of her, and because she's talked about as a possible candidate for the presidency, it's all the more reason to find out what people think of her.

I seriously doubt that this poll or anything written about her would have any effect on "her big weekend at the Fairbanks picnic."

dungarees@gmail.com

Posted by: Dungarees | July 24, 2009 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Really...
Analyze the situation...
Sarah Palin
Just a few weeks after going
microphone to microphone
with David Letterman...
has enough media clout
to back Letterman down.

Letterman apologizes...
And Sarah suddenly chucks her day job
as governor of Alaska...
well ahead of the next election cycle...
Really...
This is as obvious as the Ruiz-Lopez
opening gambit in chess...
Sarah, sacrifice a pawn early in the game
and strengthen your overall position...

Sarah Palin can make a truck load of money
as a TV talk show host...
except there is this unfortunate day job as governor of Alaska in the way.
The pawn she sacrifices...
So she quits being governor...
with as much press
and drama as she can garner
--- all free publicity
--- all eyes on Sarah.
and becomes, a TV talk show host.

Sarah with much fanfare
accepts a 'surprise offer'
to host her own TV talk show --
Everyone understands, she's strapped
for cash, needs the money to pay her
bills... Thin, gaunt, but Camera Ready.

This gives the Republicans
a female daytime TV talk show host.
A media pipeline akin to Fox...
It gives Sarah Palin more than enough money to pay her bills,
pick her own entourage,
shop in any store she wants to,
grab gifts with both hands even...
and all without having to account
to anyone in the GOP.

Her degree as I understand it is in 'television'/communications.
With simple celebrity status,
she would no longer be required to provide the quality of content that a governor is expected to command.
No fact checkers on her staff...
none need to even apply.

It is her perfect niche market...
Hand her a script--
turn her toward a camera,
when the light comes on,
Sarah Palin will indeed be ready for her close up.

Come on folks,
lets not pretend that no one has thought of this... Really...
As they say on Saturday night live...
Really... TV's Lady Limbaugh...
has a ring to it..
CAH-ching

Posted by: 2BePeace | July 24, 2009 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Your polling is known to be near the bottom of the barrel in terms of accuracy.

http://electoralmap.net/pollsters/index.

Several recent polls showed her numbers a good bit higher, mid-40s each way, including more accurate polls than yours. I'll believe your little poll when it's confirmed by Rasmussen or Pew or other polls that have otherwise established their accuracy. Until then, it's horsepucky.

Posted by: KBowen7097 | July 24, 2009 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Dear Sarah...

Just
choose again...
start with the prayer in your heart...

We have had entertainers
who became politicians
but now...
we have politicians
who are making their lives
and the lives of their families
into entertainments on a national scale.

Your first vocation...
is that of a wife
and a mother --
without the national (I)/eye
as a partner in your marriage.

"You betcha", you can get back to
basics...
and being a national entertainment
living to generate a daily market share...
is not a basic.

Just step away from it...
Just find that prayer in your heart...
and choose ... peace.

Posted by: 2BePeace | July 25, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Palin is popular. So was Michael Jackson. So was Boy George. For that matter, so is Paris Hilton and Sasquatch. We don't want any of them running for national office. We love to read about ALL of them in the National Enquirer, though.

Posted by: beachykeen02 | July 26, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

to dbw1.

These are poll numbers - if you want to discuss another story, maybe you should respond in the appropriate place.

Of course, I'll be accused of being afraid of a truly minor individual. I've never understood why they think we're afraid of her. She can't get elected (because she's an idiot). If we thought she could be elected, that would be reason to be terrified. Imagine, a Republican president even dumber and lazier than the last one. Any intelligent individual is scared of religion-addled mental midgets running the show (see how that worked in Iran). Amazing how much the Republicans and the Iranian mullahs have in common.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Who died and left you in charge of these posts. You Lib's "Leg Tingler" media bashed and mashed Palin like they did Hillary. Are you so damn dumb you don't notice. Media men fawning over Obama like most men do over a beautiful woman. Seemed so strange to me. Are all male Obamabots that way?
It just kills ole Matthewa to hear any criticism of Obama. I watch just to see what new cover he gives his Baby. CNN and MSNBC have some weird men commentators. heh heh. Girley men?

Posted by: bnw173 | July 28, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Palin does not deserve so much coverage.
She is an ignorant woman who thinks she is special because an inept McCain campaign
selected her out of desperation and then could not stand her. I would also venture to say that the Republican Party is desperate for someone to lead their party not understanding that there views are out of touch with the American people.
I suggest Palin just keeps standing and looking out in the direction of Russia until she spots Putin.

Posted by: fotoartiste |
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

She really get's you Obamabot's drawers in a wad. Why?

If you think she is ignorant you should read all your Obambot posts without you bovine mentality. Now that is ignorance.
or
I don't think she would be dumb enough to make this statement: "I don't know any details about the arrest, but the Cambridge police acted stupidly".

Now that is ignorance, personified by an elected POTUS. Yours.

Not mine, I voted for the smarter dummy. heh heh.



Posted by: bnw173 | July 28, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

@dwbw1- seeing how the vast majority of ethics lawsuits against her have been filed by republicans (the most expensive one coming from herself) it is not out of line for a democrat to file one also.

Or do you believe that only republicans get to file ethics complaints?

Posted by: JRM2 | July 28, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Has Sen. Chrissy Dodd (D - CT) refinanced his Countrywide loan ?

Posted by: hclark1 | July 29, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company