Tuesday, January 19, 2010

New Poll Shows Most Do Not Favor A Palin Presidential Run



A new CBS poll finds that most would not support Sarah Palin in a run for the presidency. An overwhelming majority said they would not like to see her run for president.


Seventy one percent said they do not want her to run for president while only a mere twenty sic percent said they did.


Split out by party affiliation the results are; fifty six percent of Republicans do not favor a run by Palin while only thirty percent do.


A whopping eighty eight percent of Democrats say they do not want her to run. Sixty five percent of  do not want her to run while twenty five percent say they do.


These numbers certainly are not  favorable for a person who seems, at least to this observer has been positioning herself for a possible future run.



On another front, that of favorable versus unfavorable , she fares no better. 


Twenty six percent of those polled view Palin favorably while forty one percent view her in an unfavorable light. 


Republicans as a group have a higher favorable view of her at forty three percent, and  Independents have a thirty percent favorable opinion while thirty five hold a negative opinion.


Conservatives are the only group that view Palin in a net positive light. Just under fifty percent view positively while twenty five percent see her unfavorably and twenty five percent remain undecided.


Even though conservatives tend to see Palin in a favorable light fifty eight percent say she should not run in 2012.


Sarah Palin, as entertaining and warm as she can sometimes be, has a lot of ground to cover should she decide to run in 2012. It is possible, in fact quite likely, that a large majority of the American electorate view her as lacking the gravitas to hold the highest office in the land.


However, if the last two presidential elections are any indicator, perhaps gravitas is not the issue.


Complete Poll Here.


Via: CBS News

11 comments:

  1. it is far too early to give any weight to opinion polls in regards to this issue. too many things can happen or be said between now and then that would influence opinion.

    and history has shown that the opinion of the people can be swayed very easily and they have shown themselves to be very fickle in regards to their opinions.

    there are times like this that i have to wonder if there is any such thing as community values anymore. and if there are, what are they?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I see this only as a baseline. You are right about public opinion. I guess the real point being is she carries enough negatives she will need to consider how to reverse those should she seriously consider national office.

    ReplyDelete
  3. another thing that influenced the findings. they included dems in the poll. and they'd say no just because she is a threat to their chances of winning.

    ReplyDelete
  4. RN,
    Someone made a good point about her.Incurious, I think was the word they used.Not everyone is a bookworm but certainly those who seek public office need to be informed.General knowledge about the economy,history,world events.certainly she isn't stupid, but she suffers from an abysmal lack of knowledge for one whom people actually visualize as presidential material.
    I'm not saying everyone needs to be Ron Paul.I am saying there is a certain level of understanding needed to make use of ones advisers in an executive position.Even someone with mediocre knowledge,like a Joe Biden, (a guy who's no rocket scientist and intellectually may be her inferior) can take advice and make an informed decision. A person lacking basic knowledge needed for the job can't do that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oso: What I found surprising, as of the election, was that out of the 4 of them (Biden, McCain, Obama and Palin) Palin was the only one who had any executive experience. She had employees and she met payrolls. Biden had the foreign policy experience; McCain had Military and Obama…well…from what I could tell, he had none. That’s what totally baffled me!

    ReplyDelete
  6. She had middle manager type of experience.but she couldn't discuss the issues.an example would be Biden,a guy with a room temperature IQ knew that Ahmadinejad had no control over the Iranian military.That type of thing.Names of world leaders.fiscal vs monetary policy.The type of thing people who keep up on world events can discuss.She's intelligent enough to have worked her way up to governor of a state yet she still cannot discuss world events. That tells me there is no interest.No way to make informed decisions when you lack a basic framework of knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oso: I agree that she does need more "foreign policy" knowledge. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not one who would vote for her in 2012! I like her, but I'm not one of those ga-ga fans. And I think her quitting as Governor was a bad move.

    Truthfully, I didn't think we had great candidates in 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  8. hey this is a start! We got Massachusetts..one step at a time !!:)

    ReplyDelete
  9. "We got Massachusetts...."

    Only if you are a RINO....

    Funny how fast principles and values go out the window when one can claim a WIN!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Pam,
    I know where you're coming from.Other than Ron Paul there are very few people with a national presence that I like and would want to vote for.

    ReplyDelete
  11. WHT & TAO - I'll stick my neck out here. Brown is likely to be a short timer.

    As my son said, "Brown will serve the useful purpose at this point in time in perhaps stopping a horrible health care reform bill from becoming law."

    We will have to wait and watch.

    Brown made the very valid point of correcting Coakley when she reffered to the vacant seat as Ted Kennedy's. Brown responded; with all due respect it is the peoples' seat.

    Such is the truth. If Brown fails to remember this when on the floor of the senate and when he casts his votes he does so at the risk of being replaced next time at the races.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.