« Twitter roundup | Main | The zombie myth of presidents "not connecting" »

September 21, 2010


What we really need is poll numbers among partisan identifiers or some other way to capture the opinions of those in the primary electorate. It is plausible that the first graph could be produced by much worse out party evaluations for Palin than Clinton.

Unless they're in Nexis, you would have to analyze the raw data from Gallup -- you can get it in Roper (will blog it if you do it). I would expect that they are relatively symmetrical, but of course there's no way to be sure without checking. Also, the general numbers are an indicator of (a) how elites within the party will perceive electability in deciding who to support and (b) how opposing candidates will use the electability argument in a primary campaign.

The question that proves Palin's unelectibility IMHO is from that Polling Report link:

"Do you think Sarah Palin would have the ability to be an effective president, or not?"

63% Would Not..........23% Would

Unfortunately, there's a good chance that Palin will get the nomination if she goes after it. She's very popular among likely Republican primary voters, and no other Republican has high enthusiasm among this group.

Will she decide not to run? Running for President has a powerful effect on people. Bob Dole ran when everyone except Dole himself saw that he had no chance. Harold Stassen, who originally ran as a serious candidate, continued running every four years through many more elections.

You mention "elite support." But as we saw in Delaware, there are two groups of elites influencing the Republican Party, and their interests do not necessarily match. Are the talk radio / DeMint / tea party "elites" now more important to Republican primary voters than the traditional Republican elites? Goldwater won the nomination once, remember?

Palin is not built to lead a political campaign. If she attempts to, she will quickly implode from her own stunning incompetence, emotional fragility, arrogance and stupidity, to name but a few of her well-known flaws. Palin only plays in rigged games. She would have to join other GOP primary candidates for debates where she would have have to compete intellectually in public. Na ga happen.

Why is the "possibility" of her running even a subject of discussion?

"I'd put the odds of her running at less than the current Intrade estimate of 69%."

Interested to know if you put your money on the odds, Brendan. After all, that's what In-Trade is about. :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.