... its highest ratings in nearly three years. Remember, though, in
2012 the first hurdles a rehabbed candidate Palin would face are her
own party's primaries, where diligent conservatives conscientiously
come out to play.
If she somehow mobilized Iowa's white evangelicals as Mike Huckabee
did to win the 2008 season-opening caucus, many bets would be off
about her unelectability. Right now, Palin holds 65% approval among
white evangelical Protestants, not a bad place to start, if she
decides to.
That same ABC poll finds Palin's GOP approval right around 76%, 45%
among independents and a surprisingly substantial 21% among Democrats.
Among self-described liberals she's seen favorably by a slightly
larger 22%, among moderates 38% and among conservatives 60%.
Anyway, Palin says 2012's not on her radar. Which is a good idea. The
year 2010 is much more important for both of these political
personalities.
No longer holding any office and personally set financially by the
book's runaway success, Palin can devote her SarahPac and the entire
year to collecting chits from local Republicans.
As Mitt Romney has already been quietly doing. Other Republicans will
no doubt nominate themselves to join along the way, especially if
Obama looks vulnerable after November 2010.
Although presidential incumbency has hardly kept Obama chained to the
Oval Office, he and Joe Biden now own the U.S. economy, where their
much-vaunted $787 billion economic stimulus package has so far
stimulated unemployment to grow by a quarter from 8% to more than 10%.
And then there's the growing deficit dread and the mounting costs --
both human and financial -- in the increasingly unpopular Afghan
conflict, where Obama is about to commit more U.S. troops at the end
of the eighth and worst casualty year of the war.
We'll all hear much next year about how jobs are the last thing to
improve in a sour economy, even in congressional districts that don't
actually exist. Which is too bad for Democrats because jobs are the
obvious first measure the public uses to measure the economy.
Historically, the White House party loses about 17 House seats in a
normal midterm election cycle. That wouldn't change control of the
House.
George W. Bush's GOP actually gained seats in 2002. Democrat Bill
Clinton's first midterm election was a political Katrina, producing
the Contract with America and so-called Republican Revolution that saw
the GOP take control of both houses of Congress after years of
minority status.
Much of that turnaround was attributed to Clinton having run in 1992
as a centrist and then immediately pushed a more liberal agenda
involving something called healthcare reform.
But that couldn't possibly happen again because of the popularity of
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi whose current favorable poll
ratings are -- let's see here -- OMG, only about half of Palin's.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/not-that-it-matters-politically-because-shes-a-republican-idiot-and-hes-a-democrat-geniusbut-sarah-palins-poll-numbers-are-c.html
-----
How 'bout that.
heh heh
tsk, tsk
yup
Lovely
Beautiful
Love it
Palin/Beck 2012!
Who needs ideas when you've got ideology.