Image 01 Image 03

Dem Pollster – Palin Down 10% To Obama, Romney Even

Dem Pollster – Palin Down 10% To Obama, Romney Even

To read some of the reviews telling Sarah Palin it’s over as to any hope of winning a general election, you would think she would be down in the polls versus Obama by an enormous margin, particularly if a poll were taken in the days after the Tucson shooting when the media was in full blame mode tying Palin’s electoral map to the shooting.

But if this poll conducted January 9-12 by Greenberg Quinlin Rosner, a Democratic polling firm, for Democracy Corps is accurate, Palin is down 10% among voters and 6% among people who vote in 2010:

This is a significant margin, but hardly the end of times predicted by many.  Much of Obama’s strongest support comes from “drop off voters,” i.e., those who didn’t vote in mid-year elections.  (I get this definition from another Greenberg survey using such definition.)  Motivating the base and getting out people who didn’t vote in 2010 would seem to be a key for Obama in 2012.

Mitt Romney, the only other candidate tested versus Obama, did better, basically coming out even:

I don’t know about the accuracy of this polling firm, but the poll is being touted by Democrats because of other findings supposedly showing that the public is not as against Obamacare as generally thought.

Considering the beating Palin took in the media during the days in which the poll was being conducted, being down 10% is much better than would have been expected.

How about we let the primary process work, instead of throwing candidates overboard based on perceptions which may or may not be accurate, and which in any event are premature.

Update 1-20-2011:  PPP has released a poll showing Obama much stronger than in the Greenberg poll, up 17 points over Palin and 5 points over Romney.  I am generally skeptical of PPP, a Democratic polling firm which does the polling for DailyKos, for reasons I hope to articulate in a post in the future.  I don’t so much question its polling as such, but the way the polling seems to be formulated to push Democratic messaging.  It’s hard to find a PPP poll since the November election which is not spun as deep trouble for Republicans.

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
Bookmark and Share


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I still remember McCain, while polling at about 8-9% during the primaries and having fired most of his campaign staff, carrying his bags at the airport. I wonder what ever happened to that loser?

I also remember the polls that showed that Giuliani was "the only one" who could beat Hillary. And there were polls that showed that Romney was "the only one" who could beat Hillary. Well those polls were wrong. Obama beat Hillary, the GOP elected McCain who couldn't beat anybody.

So much for polls this far out.

I'll tell you who Republicans should be fearing right now: Donald Trump. He is sounding like the Democrats answer to Ryan/Rubio/Cristie. Plain talk with spine. Of all the potential GOP candidates now on the horizon, only Palin is talking with as much clarity and spine.

Just thinking out loud while considering a Trump candidacy. He would be running against lame government in general and Obama specifically. He would be making a much more credible case against Obama than any Republican running so far and were he to choose to run independent, he could draw much of the independent vote. The way the GOP seems able to find resolve only when fighting Palin and the Tea Party, I could very well end up voting for him. especially if he ran 3rd party and the Tea Party candidates demured to the GOP rather than break away with their own 3rd party candidate.

We'll see.

@Phil: Trump is loaded with baggage. He personifies the "evil rich".

The GOP candidate isn't even on the Radar. TEA party activists will NEVER go for Romney. The GOP is as afraid of Palin as the Democrats ("she's unelectable"). The poll is ridiculous on it's face.

On Hannity the other day, Trump said he would run as a Republican, that he's a conservative.

I'm waiting for the Rasmussen poll, but ick! Why are we even contemplating progressive RINO Romney? He's being force-fed to us by the fringe media and the establishment GOP, fgs.

Please, professor, enough with the polls. They mean nothing. The vast majority are constructed in perverted ways to bring about results sought – and paid for. The main people interested in polls are campaign advisers – because poll results impact their bread and butter – and media types because polls write themselves and require little effort to fill space around ads.

Agree with you., Fuzzy……….none of us Tea Party folks want any part of Romney and his Masscare.

Polls are to Democrats what peer group pressure is to teenagers. The Obama campaign was the ultimate display of the exertion of peer pressure in the history of this country. You too can be a part of the "In Crowd", all you have to do is conform.

1) There are a lot of pivotal events which will take place between now and the 2012 election, many of which may be very unhelpful to the Democrat party and it's candidate.

2) Palin has only fired off two shots after her virtual rape by the MSM. Who said "Don't retreat, reload?" We haven't heard the last from her.

3) Even now, I expect, the nomination is hers for the asking because of the way the primary process works and her strategic and tactical advantages.

3) She puts the fear of god in many Republicans and Democrats with close ties to rentseeking, privilege, social democracy, false environmental narratives, Chomskyism, anti-capitalism, corporatism, multi-culturalism, dhimmism, Constitutionphobia, carbonphobia – a whole lot of powerful people who have gotten us to where we are now – for better or for worse. On the other hand there are many people who are beginning to realize that many of the above conditions may prove fatal to their livelihoods, families, and their strongly held beliefs. Her narrative (it's hers – who else is helping her?) is showing surprising strength under continual unprecedented attacks. Is she Dan Quayle, don't be so sure.

4) What we are seeing from Palin right now is her kitchen campaign which even her enemies will admit is pretty damn mind boggling. What might we see if she actually mobilized to a well funded campaign with her chosen staff, allies and a call to her troops?

5) Unless the GOP wants to commit seppuku, which can be their tendency, they will have to coalesce behind their nominee even it's Palin.

6) Palin doesn't lie. Many people hate that about her. She would rather say nothing than lie. An odd thing to see in a politician and it drives people crazy. We will see if the eternal lure of the Sirens of lies triumph or whether people are hungry for some plain talk.

7) She is not garden variety politician and these are not normal times. We may be surprised by a lot of tings.

We may be surprised by a lot of tings.

The Chinese are coming.

(I know it was a typo – I just couldn't help myself.)

I agree with you viator. I'm a Palinista. BTW my attraction to her is that she has a Hard Corps libertarian husband whispering in her ear. Besides the woman herself.

Prof. Jacobson, I have no idea why you continue to support Palin. Her numbers among independents and moderates are too low for us to consider her a viable candidate. Not only that, but she embodies the same cult of personality that you (and I) criticize in Obama adoration.

I was a strong supporter of your website during the Brown election in MA. While we were concerned that Brown might not win, his poll numbers were at least close–close enough to win, especially among independents. We had realistic expectations. Like it or not, Palin is toxic, radioactive even, among the same groups that Brown was able to capture.

I have to ask: instead of spending time on Palin, why not spend time on a candidate who can win? You did this to great effect with Scott Brown, and I think it could work again… just not with Palin. Seriously, she can't win, and it doesn't matter if it's because the media is running smear campaigns on her or not, it's just the quantitative reality of her polling with independents.

@Viator: surely you're joking on number 4, the more exposure Paling gets–multimillion dollar exposure on TV, Facebook, and otherwise–the more independents dislike her.

I apologize for my typos. The powers that be ordain that we compose text on the internet in a meager 1 1/2" X 4 1/2" window in small type. Between that and the rapid nature of discourse my typos occur far to often. My apologies.

@Viator, the biggest typo you made was that you think Palin has any chance at all!

You blame the web for your own mistakes… it seems you have trouble accepting reality. Like it or not, Palin is a toxic candidate. She will lose, and the logical conclusion is that if she loses, Obama will win. Do you really want that?

Notice I'm not attacking or criticizing Palin, I'm just looking at her chances of winning a general election, and seeing no chance, I'm trying to move to a realistic candidate… unless you want a Castle/O'Donnell redux… that worked really well!

sincrinon you have a point. On the other hand, independents liked her fine when she was Governor of Alaska. They voted for her and gave her 85% approval rating. What independents think RIGHT NOW reflects MSM premeditated character destruction. It also reflects gamed polls. Can she overcome that, that is the question. It might be useful to pay some attention the ongoing dynamics of the Palin meme throughout the zeitgeist. My take is it is improving. Her impact on conventional wisdom would be many times greater if she was the nominee and in full campaign mode. The election is not tomorrow, people's perceptions wax and wane. As the professor said after a week of unprecedented malicious drubbing she is still surprisingly in the game. She said she is all for a competitive primary. Hey, attack her, count her out, if you want. I'm not.

PS: "Chip Saltsman, Huckabee campaign manager in 2008 and one of his closest confidantes, has accepted a job as Chief of Staff for freshman Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-Tenn.)."

"Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has tasked her aides with quietly gauging her level of support for a potential presidential campaign by making inquiries to a select pool of likely allies and grassroots activists in Iowa, RealClearPolitics has learned."

"Former Govs. Mike Huckabee (Ark.), Sarah Palin (Alaska) and Mitt Romney (Mass.) make up the top tier of the 2012 Republican presidential field, according to a NEW poll from the Washington Post and ABC News.

Huckabee took 21 percent of the vote while Palin received 19 percent and Romney 17 percent among Republicans and GOP-leaning independents. No other potential candidate made it into double digits, although former House Speaker Newt Gingrich received 9 percent and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took 8 percent. The rest of the field received 3 percent or less support."

That after this:

"From January 8 through January 16, CNN ran 80 stories that included the name of the former Alaska governor. That's roughly nine pieces per day, during which her name was mentioned approximately 664 times or over 70 times every 24 hours!"

"During the same time period (chosen to coincide with CNN's polling period ending January 16), MSNBC ran 25 reports on Palin mentioning her name a staggering 474 times during those segments.

Those figures are even more astounding when you consider that MSNBC only transcribes weekday prime time programs. Just imagine the kind of pounding Palin was taking from these shills during the weekends and outside of prime time."

MSNBC's sister network NBC also was involved in the attacks logging 23 reports with 126 mentions of Palin.

NPR did 20 stories with 100 mentions; ABC 17 and 62; CBS 14 and 59."

"few if any of these mentions were positive"

So after a week of unprecedented relentless pounding Palin polls just behind Huckabee (who just had a long time trusted adviser leave. If Huckabee is out Palin's path is easier) among Republicans and GOP-leaning INDEPENDENTS.

So the question is how well can she do with the rest of the independents?

I think the GOP needs to start looking at how the primaries are run in each state. They should be closed primaries where you have to be a registered Republican for 30 days prior to the primary. We should be saying no to crossover voters.

I am also skeptical about any selection that is not based on the privacy of the ballot box.


I think the GOP needs to start looking at how the primaries are run in each state. They should be closed primaries where you have to be a registered Republican for 30 days prior to the primary. We should be saying no to crossover voters.

I am also skeptical about any selection that is not based on the privacy of the ballot box.


sincrinon is on the one hand honestly making a classical blunder by either being too heavily influenced with gamed opinion polls or relying too much on twisted news from the lame-brained media; or on the other hand dishonestly assuming the on-line persona of a conservative troll. If it is an "honest" error, sincrinon needs to understand neither source has America's best interest at heart.

But I suspect it is the the alternative. IMO sincrinon"s over-reliance on the term "toxic" is the giveaway. Using that term supports the left's frantic talking points too much to be accidental. As if any pundit worth the title is qualified to make such an assessment this early in the game. Absurd.

My vote, sincrinon is a troll. If he's not he should go to the top and listen to Rush.