Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Who will be the 2012 Republican presidential nominee?

Update, 9:45 pm: With nearly 2,100 votes cast, Sarah Palin is lengthening her lead over Mitt Romney. She currently takes 45 percent to 23 percent for the former Massachusetts governor.

Update, 6:45 pm: As of right now, Palin is the clear leader with nearly 1,500 votes cast. So much for this post.

Original Post

With so much talk about the identity of the next Republican presidential nominee, we thought we'd give Fixistas a chance to offer their opinion.

We'll be doing this poll every few months -- and archiving them so we can look back and laugh at how wrong we all were.

Get to it!

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 11, 2010; 3:30 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2012 , Fix Poll  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Sarah Palin Surge (and why it's overblown)
Next: Patrick Kennedy won't run for re-election

Comments

Sarah Palin is winning this poll the same way Ron Paul won all the internet polls. It is NOT from fair voting. It is from manipulating the internet. Her supporters are, like Paul's, rabid but not realistic.

Posted by: nrobyar | February 15, 2010 11:04 PM | Report abuse

Governor Huckabee is brilliant, articulate and all inclusive. He reminds me so much of Ronald Reagan. Everyone loves the guy. He is so far above the others you can't even see them in the smoke ....I have waited 4 yrs. for that Huckabee/Obama dabate and I KNOW that Huck will not disappoint!!!!

Posted by: nrobyar | February 14, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

I think Romney has too much baggage--plus he's been around so long he's had other chances, but couldn't pull the trigger.

Palin's an exposure machine, but that's both good and bad, depending on whether you really listen to her.

I don't think Huckabee has the stomach for another campaign, nor could he attract enough funding.

Paul Ryan is today's Gingrich, but without the sales ability. Good ideas, gravitas, but he was missing when they passed out charisma. Congress is his best milieu. By the way, Newt's personal history will keep him on the sidelines.

Don't know enough about Mitch Daniels, which, in itself, says a lot. Much the same for John Thune. However, peaking too early could be a disadvantage for some, but not these two. They have yet to be really introduced to the public.

I thought Pawlenty and Jindal were rising stars for the Rs. Tim has dimmed and Bobby's speech last year is about all we remember about him. Eric Cantor and Jeb (I can't believe his last name) Bush may be replacing TPaw and Jindal as the risers for the Rs.

Posted by: bulldog6 | February 13, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

If there are any serious Republicans thinking about running in 2012...Better get out in the public now. As much as I like Sarah Palin's message, I feel it is then Democrats hope that she runs for President....This is because they will tear her apart and basically insure another four more years of our current government.

Posted by: Intuition1010 | February 13, 2010 3:02 AM | Report abuse

Barack Obama Sr. had kids with (allegedly) Kezia Aoko, Ann Dunham, Ruth Nidesand, and
Jael Otieno before he finally died.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama allegedly has plenty of half-brothers.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Another article about "paving the way for a Palin presidency in 2013."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=a4hIeftRVyvE
Posted by: JakeD2
------------------------------------------
Jake – The article mentions the “second coming of Jimmy Carter”. In order for that to happen Obama needs a brew, something like Billy (Carter) Beer. Since O doesn’t have a brother (besides Rev. Wright) maybe there could be a Rodaxle Red Lager or Rham Bock.

Posted by: leapin | February 12, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Another article about "paving the way for a Palin presidency in 2013."

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=a4hIeftRVyvE

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

It's not just a vote, it's a one question IQ test.

Would you vote for Sarah Palin?
Yes = 50
No = 120
Not sure = 100
Not if she were the only one running = 180

Posted by: JimZ1 | February 12, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

The only serious contender who can mount a serious challenge to the President is John Thune. He might not get the nomination, but if he doesn't, you can forget about replacing Obama in 2012.

Posted by: elijah24 | February 12, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

your projections are unconvincing. Everyone here knows who the Ped is.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

the paucity of ped has ended.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Peeeeddddd!!!

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

While the poll is interesting, clearly it says more about the participants than it does about the candidates.

Posted by: fulrich | February 12, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Zouk's preoccupation with pedophilia is getting old. The guy is simply fascinated with having sex with children. WaPo better do something about this before this blog gets a subpoena.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

drivl:

Just ignore him.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Norfolk Academy here.

Posted by: Noacoler


hahahahah

Ped, do you get a lolly pop with that "degree". spent most of your time in the showers, stalking didn't you?

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Also, likely VP's:

Scott Brown - .33%
Paul Ryan - .33%
Kay Bailey Hutchinson - .33%
Bobby Jindal - 99%

Posted by: acronon | February 12, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

On second thought, make that:

1. Mitch Daniels
2. Mitt Romney
3. Rick Perry
4. Sarah Palin
5. Mike Huckabee


Republicans tend to reward loyalty and steadiness, and Romney has paid his dues. Nevertheless, Mitch Daniels gets the edge. Its easy to see Daniels stealing Iowa away from Huck/Palin and using the momentum from that to march to the nomination...

Posted by: acronon | February 12, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

I hope fro the Dems sake that Palin is the nominee. I predict it will be Romney because the GOP will look to him as an authority on the economy even though most Americans know he is a corporatist politician that will continue the status quo.
http://dropdeadpolitics.com/

Posted by: dropdeadpolitics | February 12, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Ranked in order of likelihood:

1. Mitch Daniels
2. Rick Perry
3. Mitt Romney
4. Sarah Palin
5. Mike Huckabee

Posted by: acronon | February 12, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse


In fairness to the poll I voted not for who I want the Republican nominee to be, but who I thought was the candidate I was most likely to vote for to be president (Romney). A majority of the people voting, voted for the candidate Obama is most likely to trounce in a general election. I think the demise of the Democratic party is greatly exaggerated as long as the right wing of the Republican party keeps dominating the party and nominates people like Palin.

Posted by: bradcpa | February 12, 2010 8:54 AM | Report abuse

JakedD2, I could see where Palin might want to eliminate the Federal Reserve... it would save her from having to figure out just what the heck it does. Recall that she and Glenn Beck want to TAX the Federal Reserve bank's "income" from last year. You can't make stuff as funny as that up.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | February 12, 2010 8:12 AM | Report abuse

I WILL believe there is a God in heaven, if He allows Simple Sarah to be the republican nominee for president....
The ONLY thing that frightens me is, if President Obama uses only half of his brain to debate her, he'll crush her so badly, it may make some independent voters feel sorry for her....
On second thought, no one in their right mind, will feel sorry for Simple Sarah Barracuda...
Not with all of the sarcasm she displays whenever she opens up her pie-hole...!!!
LOL...!!!

Posted by: butch1227 | February 12, 2010 4:54 AM | Report abuse

UVA: as recently as eight years ago I would have agreed with you. The people who deserved the benefit of that doubt are the ones who left the party already. Those who remain are on board with torture, with bigotry, with vicious partisan obstructionism, and with hate as a political imperative.

It's been years since I've met a Republican who wasn't a sarcastic racist jerk. Not a *single bloody one*. Color me disgusted with the whole filthy lot of them.

Most of my high school class went to UVA. Norfolk Academy here.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 2:50 AM | Report abuse

To Noacoler:

Despite what you may think of Sarah Palin, or any candidate from either party, calling the Republican electorate "filthy" is completely unacceptable. When you start labeling a portion of the electorate with such offensive terms, I believe you sound like an autocrat who believes our country would be a better place if people who differ from you ideologically could be stifled. You, and anyone like you from any party, are one of the greatest threats to our republic because your disdain of those who see the world differently shows arrogance which destroys any chance of joint progress. The last thing our country needs is another leftist demagog, so please save the party line for your next Socialist Party USA chapter meeting at your local Holiday Inn.

Posted by: UVApolitics87 | February 12, 2010 2:36 AM | Report abuse

Get real, Jake.  If she somehow got into office she'd be even more easily manipulated than Bush.  Putin put on a crucifix and had Bush eating out of his hand; the wealthy would be able to get whatever they wanted from Palin by appealing to her vanity.  Bush thought anyone who recognized his "genius" was a genius, Palin would think anyone that recognized her as talented and smart was on her side.  She'd be following the establishment GOP playbook just as certainly as any of those dwarves vying for the job, cutting taxes on the wealthy and on corporations, and they wouldn't even need to wear a cross.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 2:06 AM | Report abuse

She may actually embrace some rather unconventional tax cuts. She should also push for the gradual elimination of the Federal Reserve System. We don't have to go back completely to the gold standard, but at least legitimize gold and silver as legal tender again and remove the sales tax on them.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 1:47 AM | Report abuse

25 million votes, no way she could get 30.

She doesn't have a lock on evangelicals. Her rabid anti-environmentalism will turn off a majority of under-50 evangelicals. She gets the white hair in the south and that's all.

Slice and dice however you like, once people have decided she's unfit there's no way they'll vote for her. And it's not like she's going to give them any reason to change their minds. We've already seen the whole act, not enough left for even an encore, much less an Act II. Deal with reality, Jake, she's just a product. One you buy.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 1:37 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee won't run either, so Palin will get the biggest bloc of evangelical Christians all to herself.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 1:29 AM | Report abuse

If Goofy John McCain had chosen Romney instead of the Tundra Tramp he might have won.

The GOP won't nominate a moderate, though, their filthy electorate wouldn't allow that.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 1:25 AM | Report abuse

douglaslbarber:

Romney's credentials as a businessman didn't get him the nomination for either President or Vice President last time around.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 1:17 AM | Report abuse

How much gold do you think there is in the world, Jake? Jesus but you're ignorant.

She has a chance at the *nomination* if the GOP has already twigged that 2012 ain't their year. But the election? About as much chance as leaning on a wall and quantum tunneling to the other side.

Over 70% say UNFIT FOR THE JOB.

Hell, not even W had that much against him. Likemotet of her fans, you're coasting on an emotional jag and nit thinking sensibly. Smitten with her?

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 1:13 AM | Report abuse

Cheney, Quayle, and Bush are all former GOP vice presidents hanging around too.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 1:08 AM | Report abuse

douglaslbarber:

How is Romney the "runner up" if Huckabee got more delegates than he did?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 1:05 AM | Report abuse

What if Gov. Palin put the U.S. back on the gold standard and reduced the influence of the Federal Reserve?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 1:03 AM | Report abuse

Mitt Romney has at least two things going for him. First, he actually has credentials as a businessman, though from an electoral standpoint, they may be vitiated by the fact that he's the son of a wealthy businessman. Second, he was runner-up last time round in the GOP, and when there's no current or former GOP vice president hanging around, that translates into "The anointed one", which counts more heavily with Republicans than with Democrats.

The $2 question: Can a Mormon be nominated in today's GOP?

I wouldn't want to venture a guess on that one.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | February 12, 2010 1:01 AM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter if Republican or Democrat are president. The Federal Reserve controls every aspect of our economy, government because they conrol our money. The Fed is not a branch of our government. America Wake Up!!!
www.AmericaWakeUpNow.net

Posted by: AMERICAWAKEUPNOW | February 12, 2010 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Regardless of the instant poll, a variety of non-Palin supporters from Nate Silver to David Broader know that she has a chance.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Her Fox gig is then end. Every time she opens that mouth the Democrats have another effective attack ad. Every time she throws red meat to the filth us another piece of videotape that will cost her what little support she has.

Too bad you couldn't hitch your wagon to a brighter star, Jake.

Someone like Hillary Clinton. Or Barack Hussein Obama.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Pretty hard to overcome a judgment of unfit for the job, Jake. And that's what over 70% have concluded. Not a one of that group will vote for her.

You cherish your daydreams, though.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 12:38 AM | Report abuse

Plenty of people who know politics and are not Palin supporters think that she has a chance. The Palin haters are the ones SURE that she doesn't.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 12:26 AM | Report abuse

One can learn all one needs to know—all there is to know—about Sarah Palin just from reading these comments. Her supporters are all of a type: nasty, angry, snide, snarky, emotional, and lousy at spelling and grammar (we won't even mention logic). With confident defiance they smugly assert she'll be the next President of the United States. You just wait. You just wait.

Reality check: Almost 3/4 of the voting population has taken her measure and found her wanting. Even among those in her ideological camp a substantial majority has decided she's not fit to be President. Not based on any character assassination, she's been spared that, treated with kid gloves by a press deathly afraid of being labeled condescending or (*gasp*) liberal, but by her own presentation of herself.
It's worth pointing out that her peak of approval came when people knew nothing about her, and the more they've seen of her, and (*shudder*) heard of her, the less they like her. There have been no exceptions to this trend, and there are not likely to be. Nobody is going to wake up one day and decide, y'know, she's not so bad after all, because she is bad. Nobody is going to wake up one day and decide, y'know, she's not so dumb after all, because she's dumb as a bag of hair.

Nobody is unopinionated on her; a small minority likes her and wants her in office, mostly hoping for the discomfiture and despair of people they don't like; most everyone else dislikes or despises her.

As well they should, Palin is a nasty piece of work, the most divisive figure in memory, next to whom W seems like a conciliatory compromiser. She has split America asymmetrically into two parts. Just what we needed. As a leader she's below the left pin; she will never inspire America to be great, or to do great things, only to hate. She lacks every imaginable quality we need in a president, from her ability to handle details to her ability to deliver an inspirational speech. Even her voice, which many of mentioned, which doesn't even seem to have a lower register, just the irritating gurgle of a spoiled little girl.

The best thing that could happen to America in the Palin department would be if she would just shut the hell up and go back to Wasilla.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 12:20 AM | Report abuse

One can learn all one needs to know—all there is to know—about Sarah Palin just from reading these comments. Her supporters are all of a type: nasty, angry, snide, snarky, emotional, and lousy at spelling and grammar (we won't even mention logic). With confident defiance they smugly assert she'll be the next President of the United States. You just wait. You just wait.

Reality check: Almost 3/4 of the voting population has taken her measure and found her wanting. Even among those in her ideological camp a substantial majority has decided she's not fit to be President. Not based on any character assassination, she's been spared that, treated with kid gloves by a press deathly afraid of being labeled condescending or (*gasp*) liberal, but by her own presentation of herself.
It's worth pointing out that her peak of approval came when people knew nothing about her, and the more they've seen of her, and (*shudder*) heard of her, the less they like her. There have been no exceptions to this trend, and there are not likely to be. Nobody is going to wake up one day and decide, y'know, she's not so bad after all, because she is bad. Nobody is going to wake up one day and decide, y'know, she's not so dumb after all, because she's dumb as a bag of hair.

Nobody is unopinionated on her; a small minority likes her and wants her in office, mostly hoping for the discomfiture and despair of people they don't like; most everyone else dislikes or despises her.

As well they should, Palin is a nasty piece of work, the most divisive figure in memory, next to whom W seems like a conciliatory compromiser. She has split America asymmetrically into two parts. Just what we needed. As a leader she's below the left pin; she will never inspire America to be great, or to do great things, only to hate. She lacks every imaginable quality we need in a president, from her ability to handle details to her ability to deliver an inspirational speech. Even her voice, which many of mentioned, which doesn't even seem to have a lower register, just the irritating gurgle of a spoiled little girl.

The best thing that could happen to America in the Palin department would be if she would just shut the hell up and go back to Wasilla.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 12:20 AM | Report abuse

Aprogressiveindependent:

If she gets the GOP nomination, she has a chance.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 12, 2010 12:06 AM | Report abuse

She's not fit to be President
-- America

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 11:36 PM | Report abuse

Romney is the only one of the group who would have a chance of winning against Obama. One has to wonder if some people selecting Palin are Obama partisans hoping she will win the nomination.

Obama would easily win reelection against Palin or Huckabee, no matter how high the unemployment or inflation rate, no matter how many troops were in Afghanistan, no matter whether any health care bill is passed during his presidency.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | February 11, 2010 11:33 PM | Report abuse

She's not fit to be President
-- America

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 11:30 PM | Report abuse

Patrick Kennedy moving into rehab full time.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 10:16 PM | Report abuse

"With so much talk about the identity of the next Republican presidential nominee, we thought we'd give Fixistas a chance to offer their opinion.
We'll be doing this poll every few months ..."

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 10:08 PM | Report abuse

I only voted once.

==

lying as usual

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 10:03 PM | Report abuse

"Update, 9:45 pm: With nearly 2,100 votes cast, Sarah Palin is lengthening her lead over Mitt Romney. She currently takes 45 percent to 23 percent for the former Massachusetts governor."

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

I only voted once.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 9:51 PM


Didn't Clinton inhale only once? (or something like that)

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 11, 2010 9:53 PM | Report abuse

I only voted once.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

As of right now, Palin is the clear leader with nearly 2,100 votes cast.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 9:40 PM


I'd rather not see her run. I want Romney to put her on the Supreme Court.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 11, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Yeah and 1500 of them are you, logging on and off to vote for her. What a pathetic mooncalf you are, worshiping the ground that idiot woman walks on.

IT'S AN ONLINE POLL YOU DOLT

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 9:43 PM | Report abuse

As of right now, Palin is the clear leader with nearly 2,100 votes cast.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Another all night session with the Ped?

But I'm out of peroxide.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Yeah Clinton got a BJ.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 9:29 PM


BJ?? He got broadwayjoe??

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 11, 2010 9:33 PM | Report abuse

The way Obama is going, we may not have a country left by 2012.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 11, 2010 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Yeah Clinton got a BJ.

He also left office with 70% approval after eight years of prosperity and left us a surplus. Nobody in the GOP could do that. Just a lot of big talk but no follow-through. Hard to manage the economy when one can't do arithmetic and when one believes a lot of religious BS about "the marketplace" and thinking money.

Republican economics is a really low bar that any Democrat can do better than.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 9:29 PM | Report abuse

If the rest of the country had elected Strom Thurmond in 1948, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either.

==

if your this starved for attention why don't you just tell mom you feel sick?

You might get the thermometer. You know you just love that.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse

Why did Mr Cillizza leave out Mark Sanford? I like Mark. Besides, it's more fun when you have a cheating president. It worked for Clinton.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 11, 2010 9:22 PM | Report abuse

The more people hear from her
the less they like her
some people think this will be reversed
don't see that happening

the teabagger speech, that was probably her peak

After all is said and done....

SHE'S DUMB!!!

Posted by: Noacoler | February 11, 2010 9:12 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, it will be Romney. But it doesn't matter. A Gallup poll shows that Obama is virtually tied with a generic Republican nominee. That's hilarious!

When an incumbent can't poll well against a nobody, he's in deep trouble.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 11, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade:

Huckabee was the previous runner-up, getting more delegates than Romney.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/11/AR2010021104715.html?hpid=topnews

3 House retirements spur debate on whether Republicans are losing momentum

By Chris Cillizza and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 12, 2010

Posted by: DDAWD | February 11, 2010 9:05 PM | Report abuse

"I am guessing that KOZ has a better handle on this..."

You are a funny guy.
Humor dry as toast.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 11, 2010 8:54 PM | Report abuse

I think we've had a Palin bombing of the poll. My recollection was that Mitt was ahead in mid-afternoon voting. I voted for Mitt on the basis that the default Republican nominee is the previous runner-up. That goes for 4 of the last 5 nominees: McCain, Dole, Bush 41, Reagan.

There was a great line in today's politics chat from Paul Kane. I quote him below:

Paul Kane: My coworker Ben Pershing and I have a long-running joke about how Palin is the ultimate Web figure. You write her name, you get web traffic. So, we're just going to invent a story with the headline: Palin John Edwards Acorn Sex Tape
Just to see what the google traffic would be. We're kidding. We are.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 11, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: DDAWD | February 11, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Did "Gregory Charles Royal" vote yet?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 11, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

This is EXACTLY what's wrong with bloggers, Washington, and the political state of the country. Who cares who is going to be the 2012 GOP nominee 2 1/2 years out? By having this non-stop discussion, we minimize the importance of the process of actually selecting a nominee who, more likely than not, will rely on soundbites and focus groups in order to win, without having a clue on how to actually govern. Sound familiar?

Posted by: apb_29 | February 11, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

F=Fantastic
D=Dynamic

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 11, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Bj. I think you have rightly earned the open position as third stooge.

You are suggesting the third string high school team is on par with the world champs?

And Joe Klein and David broder are not known for their conservative leanings. You libs are in retreat on every front.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

It occurs to me that Barry is simply in another four year degree.


Year one. Health care. F
year two. Jobs. F.
Year three. Living with the minority. D
year four. Reelection. F

probably the same as his other transcripts we never saw.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 8:14 PM | Report abuse

If the rest of the country had elected Strom Thurmond in 1948, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 8:11 PM | Report abuse

WashPo's Broder's again the laughingstock of U.S. journalism for his cheerleading piece today on Palin. From the Seatlle Post-Intelligencer:

"Curiously, the negative poll findings about Palin came on a day when venerable Washington Post political columnist David Broder sang praises for the former governor's speech at last Saturday's National Team Party convention in Nashville.

Nowadays, however, receiving praise from Broder is becoming a bit of a jinx for politicians, the equivalent of an athlete finding himself or herself on the cover of Sports Illustrated."

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/archives/194193.asp?from=blog_last3

Does Broder even bother to read the Washington Post?
And what's this about politicians' shunning Broder's endorsement?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 11, 2010 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Moonbat:

Well, maybe admitting Hawaii into the Union was a bigger mistake ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Bj. It ain't gonna matter who runs against obimbo at this rate. Jimmy Carter looks like a stunning wonder in retrospect.

There has been no worse mistake in American history.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Careful counting your cakewalks before they are baked.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 11, 2010 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Question to Palin: What's a debate?
Answer: What you use to catch da fish.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 11, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president

the correction is underway. A few years of liberal governance is quite instructive. All the suffering and melencholy will be a good lesson. Average repubs are still preferable to any dim.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Blow-der is getting slammed for his ridiculous Palin cheerleading piece in the Washington Post today (over 2000 comments). From HuffPo:

"Lord. I've got to let David Broder in on a little secret here: The people who want to "stop" Sarah Palin are other Republican hopefuls. You can see this in the way that every time a top GOP official appears on a Sunday morning political show and is asked, "DO you think Sarah Palin will be your Presidential nominee?" they all immediately start hemming and hawing and saying things like, "Sarah Palin has good energy," or "Sarah Palin is an exciting figure," and then immediately pivot to promoting the presidential aspirations of people like Haley Barbour.

By contrast, Democrats...they aren't worried about Sarah Palin at all. They would dearly, deeply, love her to win the GOP nomination for President. In fact, if there's one thing that the "lady" is "good" at, it's boosting President Obama's re-election fortunes."

Note: the Marist poll indicates Palin would lose to BHO by 23 points if the election were held today. Go Sarah-cuda.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 11, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Where's Al Gore?

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 7:43 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline, perhaps, but I just don't remember the Republicans ever nominating anyone completely insane. Even Dole had some moderate cred if I remember.

But who knows? Obviously if Palin wins, it's a cakewalk for Obama, so it's not all bad. But I don't have a horse in the race. Obviously I'm not voting Republican in 2012, so it doesn't matter for me.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 11, 2010 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Question to Palin: How much is 2 + 2?
Answer: Yes.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 11, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD: Go look at the primary results from 2008. McCain never got all that many votes, just more than any single other candidate. SP can probably count on most of McCain's voters to back her in the early rounds, when eight or nine republicans will court the rightmost ten percent of the party. SARAH will easily win that ten percent, and the rest of the republicans who bother to turn out will hold their noses and vote for someones at random. At random Sarah will draw as many votes as any one else, and her randomone ninth of ninety percent of voting Republicans will be enough.

Of course, after she has the nomination locked up, all of the other eight dwarfs like Romney and Huckabee and Noah'v daBove will be sadly compelled to kowtow to the Dowager Empress, and her boxer's will show her that Democratic Bullets can't hurt them, and the Boxers of 2012 will get slaughtered like the Boxers of 1909.

Especially if we are lucky and there is justice.

Posted by: ceflynline | February 11, 2010 7:21 PM | Report abuse

In a swamp of ignorance occasiony a sliver of truth emerges.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD, With all your bloviating, you should just stop at"

"Honestly, I don't think."

It's amazing how easily liberal and immoral aggitators throw around and apparently understand the term "tea baggers" -- you really should stop projecting.

=======================================
Words of wisdom. Author unknown.

"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."

No truer words have ever been spoken!!!

Posted by: flszyq48 | February 11, 2010 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Honestly, I don't think the CFG and teabaggers will have as much sway over this as everyone thinks they do. There are two major bottlenecks in Republican primary voting. The first is the early voting period I think someone like Romney will appeal to the educated Iowa and New Hampshire voters far more than Ryan or Palin. Not to denigrate SC and NV, but IA and NH have been doing this for a looong time and seem to sway in the direction of the establishment. This is a bottleneck because it pares down the field. The second bottleneck is Super Tuesday since that's when you have the big states voting. With the winner-take-all system of the Republicans, if a candidate can win Cali and NY, then he wins the whole thing. That's what happened with McCain. And remember that Cali and NY Republicans are going to be different from your rank and file Republicans. Obviously Bush was no moderate, but he played the part well during his 2000 campaign. McCain didn't play the role of moderate in 2008, but he had the rep.

I think the same thing will happen in 2012. Romney won't act as a moderate, but he does have a moderate record as Mass gov. and I think the businessman cred will serve him well. I don't know if his Mormonism will hurt him in primary season. I think it will be more of a hindrance in the general when he has to turn out the base.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 11, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

FReeper told others that you can vote 8 times - therefore, one of the reasons for the lead for Palin

Posted by: graybeard_58 | February 11, 2010 6:31 PM | Report abuse

I am guessing that KOZ has a better handle on this than ddawd, Andy, ceflynline, sliowa, Jonah, and shrink.

If he was serious in naming Ryan then my guess is he is closer to what Rs want than you non-Rs. It is also true that KOZ was for Romney when I was pushing hard for McC and sending McC donations, as I recall. But if I remember correctly, it is even more of an indicator of where Rs with CFG leanings and the big bucks will go that he named Ryan over Romney.

Do I remember correctly?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 11, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't that be something?
What if Palin were to run against Obama again, a rematch? Can you imagine the debate?

I can't. Republicans must think she is like Reagan. She is not. He was an actor and he was very well schooled in role play and political hard ball for years in the Screen Actors Guild and then California's mini-America.

Palin is not an actress, she can not be scripted, she will not learn.

Could she win? Sure! Maybe the Olympics will have lot of snow, maybe anything.

Well maybe the Rs know they can't win in '12 anyway so they might as well send in the clowns. They will save their real money for 2016.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 11, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

"I think NOW distinguished themselves as non-thinkers in their protests over the Tebow Super Bowl commercial"


Waaaah! Why do people assume bigots will act bigoted? I just don't get it!

Posted by: DDAWD | February 11, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

The economy is going to have to stay in the doldrums for some time before Obama is run out of office. Obama has a great presence, demeanor, and intelligence that few leaders for either party display. If I was a R hopeful, I would stay in the trenches until after Obama leaves. Of course I would have suggested the same thing to all D challenging the first George Bush after the first Gulf War so you can see what my advice is worth.

Posted by: sliowa1 | February 11, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Obvious from the results that the Palin crowd is clicking away like mad...

Big difference from who will be the nominee and who GOPers want the nominee to be. Palin is till the fave because of media attention, big following. But she will get destroyed in a general...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | February 11, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

AndyR3,

“Gingrich is too intelligent sounding for the pro-life crazies that only watch fox news and American Idol.”

Andy your IQ is not in the stratosphere either. If I can remember all your pervious picks in NJ, VA, and MA were way off and your analysis of voting and economy has been less than stellar as well. As someone who is pro-life, I do take offense at your statement. While I will admit there are single issue voters who are pro-life there are just as many pro-choice single issue voters as well. I think NOW distinguished themselves as non-thinkers in their protests over the Tebow Super Bowl commercial (as a Gator alumni I am doubly offended with their outrage), while turning a blind eye to other commercials that degraded women. I personally loath Gingrich for his lack of character not because he is too intelligent sounding.

Posted by: sliowa1 | February 11, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown - the democrats can't really complain that he has no experience.


However, Romney helped him in Massachusetts and it is unlikely he will run against Romney

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 11, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich is a non-starter; he's been in Washington too long for the "we need new blood" crowd that's going to be driving the Republican primary. Tim Pawlenty doesn't have the charisma to distract voters from Minnesotans' distaste for him. Mitt Romney will have a good shot if the economy is still in the crapper in 2012, but it's going to have to be really, really bad, otherwise he's not going to be able to overcome the Mormon thing.

I can't read whether Sarah Palin is actually going to run in 2012, but even if she does, voters are too scared of her to nominate her. If she does run, even if it's just for the first few primaries, her candidacy will sink Mike Huckabee because she'll take away too many of his voters. That leaves John Thune, who I could see making a serious run for it.

But I still copped out and went with "None of the Above" because -- let's face it -- Republican voters love "None of the Above." Like any brand trying to break out of a downswing in its business, they're forever looking for the next big thing; in their case, the next Reagan. The nominee will have to be someone relatively new to the political scene; after John McCain's loss in 2008, the GOP won't go with a safe choice. It will probably be someone whose name hasn't even been seriously mentioned in presidential discussions.

Unless the country pulls far enough away from the recession that Obama looks unbeatable, in which case I could see a retread like Huckabee getting the nod to lose to Obama so the GOP can focus on 2016.

Posted by: GJonahJameson | February 11, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Paul Ryan.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 11, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

It will be Palin if she accepts the aid of her 'Palin for President" not yet a committee.

The Republicans haven't made any changes in their Primary rules or schedule, which is engineered so that the choice of select conservatives gets the nomination. (See and number of my explanations). Since the RNC honchos who matter are sold body and soul to the T-Party, whom they want, Sarah, is whom gets the 25% of each early primary vote needed to win all the delegates. Its a stacked deck and this round that comes back to bight the RNC and maul the party big time.

Posted by: ceflynline | February 11, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I think you may see either Demint, Haley Barbour, or (dare I say it) Jeb Bush as the nominee. All the people above have some major flaw that I see blocking there path to the nomination.
-Romney is a Mormon and the evangilicals will never go for that period.
-Huckabee can't raise the money and is too nice on the surface, plus he strikes me as so last tuesday.
-Palin is just too stupid and everyone knows it
-Pawlenty is just too boring
-Thune looks too much like the crip keeper and just doesn't grab me as having the gravitas.
-Gingrich is too intelligent sounding for the pro-life crazies that only watch fox news and American Idol. Plus he will never put in the time in places like Iowa or New Hampshire that you have to do to get the votes to win.

If Jeb Bush can convince his wife to let him to run then he would have a good chance of clearing the field. Also watch for Eric Cantor or even Bob McDonnell to jump in if they think they can win.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 11, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Romney, together with a 2010 winner (one of the none of the aboves).

Posted by: shrink2 | February 11, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Mitch Daniels (If he runs, of course)

Posted by: michaelstubel1 | February 11, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Gotta be Romney, right? Probably the only one with real gravitas, I think. Gingrich is probably too unpopular to have much electability and I'm sure teabaggers don't like him much.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 11, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company