Obama, Palin tied 46/46 in 2012 polling shows
Options
jennifer.bush*
Members Posts: 551
No, this is not coming from Rasmussen or an internal GOP poll, but from the normally Democrat-sympathetic Public Policy Polling. PPP pitted Barack Obama against five potential Republican challengers for the 2012 presidential campaign, and the only one Obama beat was … Jan Brewer. Even that, PPP admitted, resulted from Brewer’s lack of name recognition. The headline, though, is Sarah Palin’s dead heat with the President:
With his approval numbers hitting new lows it’s no surprise that Barack Obama’s numbers in our monthly look ahead to the 2012 Presidential race are their worst ever this month. He trails Mitt Romney 46-43, Mike Huckabee 47-45, Newt Gingrich 46-45, and is even tied with Sarah Palin at 46. The only person tested he leads is Jan Brewer, who doesn’t have particularly high name recognition on the national level at this point.
It’s not that any of the Republican candidates are particularly well liked. Only Huckabee has positive favorability numbers at 37/28. Romney’s at 32/33, Gingrich at 32/42, Palin at 37/52, and Brewer at 17/20. But with a majority of Americans now disapproving of Obama it’s no surprise that a large chunk of them would replace him as President if they had that choice today.
There are two things driving these strong poll numbers for the Republican candidates. The first is a lead with independents in every match up. Romney leads 48-35 with them, Gingrich is up 50-39, Huckabee has a 46-40 advantage, Palin’s up 47-42, and even Brewer has a 38-37 edge.
In case one wonders whether PPP’s sample is to blame, the partisan split favors Democrats by five points, 39/34. That’s probably overstating the actual size of the gap and the percentage of Democrats in the general population, which means that the independents got short shrift as well. Also note that this poll surveyed registered voters, not likely voters — a sampling technique that would tend to favor Democrats and Obama a little more.
The news is almost uniformly bad for Obama in the poll. His approval rating is now seriously underwater at 45/52. That gets even worse among independents, 40/56. He doesn’t get above 46% in any matchup with Republicans, not even Jan Brewer, whom he beats 44/36, with 20% undecided.
For Palin, the numbers show she can play against Obama. She pulls 8% of those who voted for Obama in 2008 and 35% of those who “don’t remember” (?!?), which puts her on par for outreach with Gingrich (9%, 40%), Romney (9%, 32%), and slightly better than Huckabee (6%, 32%). If that’s not vindication for those who argued that Palin couldn’t do as well with unaffiliated voters, it’s cetainly something close to it.
Update: There seems to be some confusion in the comments over the number of people who claimed not to remember how they voted in 2008. That was 9% of the respondents in the survey (combined with those who voted third party). Since Obama won the 2008 popular vote by seven points (53/46) and this Dem +5 poll shows only 46% of respondents acknowledging their vote for Obama, I’d say it’s a healthy probability that most of that 9% voted for Obama and don’t want to acknowledge it now. Of that 9%, Palin wins 35%, Gingrich wins 40%, and so on.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/15/ppp-obama-palin-tied-4646-in-2012-polling/
i;m sure hearts are broken with this post hahhah
With his approval numbers hitting new lows it’s no surprise that Barack Obama’s numbers in our monthly look ahead to the 2012 Presidential race are their worst ever this month. He trails Mitt Romney 46-43, Mike Huckabee 47-45, Newt Gingrich 46-45, and is even tied with Sarah Palin at 46. The only person tested he leads is Jan Brewer, who doesn’t have particularly high name recognition on the national level at this point.
It’s not that any of the Republican candidates are particularly well liked. Only Huckabee has positive favorability numbers at 37/28. Romney’s at 32/33, Gingrich at 32/42, Palin at 37/52, and Brewer at 17/20. But with a majority of Americans now disapproving of Obama it’s no surprise that a large chunk of them would replace him as President if they had that choice today.
There are two things driving these strong poll numbers for the Republican candidates. The first is a lead with independents in every match up. Romney leads 48-35 with them, Gingrich is up 50-39, Huckabee has a 46-40 advantage, Palin’s up 47-42, and even Brewer has a 38-37 edge.
In case one wonders whether PPP’s sample is to blame, the partisan split favors Democrats by five points, 39/34. That’s probably overstating the actual size of the gap and the percentage of Democrats in the general population, which means that the independents got short shrift as well. Also note that this poll surveyed registered voters, not likely voters — a sampling technique that would tend to favor Democrats and Obama a little more.
The news is almost uniformly bad for Obama in the poll. His approval rating is now seriously underwater at 45/52. That gets even worse among independents, 40/56. He doesn’t get above 46% in any matchup with Republicans, not even Jan Brewer, whom he beats 44/36, with 20% undecided.
For Palin, the numbers show she can play against Obama. She pulls 8% of those who voted for Obama in 2008 and 35% of those who “don’t remember” (?!?), which puts her on par for outreach with Gingrich (9%, 40%), Romney (9%, 32%), and slightly better than Huckabee (6%, 32%). If that’s not vindication for those who argued that Palin couldn’t do as well with unaffiliated voters, it’s cetainly something close to it.
Update: There seems to be some confusion in the comments over the number of people who claimed not to remember how they voted in 2008. That was 9% of the respondents in the survey (combined with those who voted third party). Since Obama won the 2008 popular vote by seven points (53/46) and this Dem +5 poll shows only 46% of respondents acknowledging their vote for Obama, I’d say it’s a healthy probability that most of that 9% voted for Obama and don’t want to acknowledge it now. Of that 9%, Palin wins 35%, Gingrich wins 40%, and so on.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/15/ppp-obama-palin-tied-4646-in-2012-polling/
i;m sure hearts are broken with this post hahhah
Comments
-
Good luck with your false hope.
Public Policy polls use Robo-calls for polling. Who sits at home answering Robocalls questions? You guessed Old-bitter white people that watch fox news. -
polls tell a story sir
@ lolllllllllll at the new comment, u mad huh -
jennifer.bush* wrote: »polls tell a story sir
@ lolllllllllll at the new comment, u mad huh
No, just telling you the method of the survey. I think your mad. You know nothing about statistics and furthermore doing research. -
jennifer.bush* wrote: »polls tell a story sir
polls, smolls. man looka here, obama win still win the election. point blank. let's leave the democrats out for a sec, do u REALLY think the republican party wud nominate THAT hefa as their canidate?? umm, u do realize that hefa is dumb as hell and reckless rite. that's politacl suicide for the republican party. hefa cud care less about politics. all she cares about hoodwickin these dumb azzz white folks into thinkin she really care about the country. how the hell u gonna call sumbody unexperienced, when yo azzz QUIT ur governor office? really -
As someone who studies politics this is actually bad for sarah palin. Obamas polls numbers have dropped, because of
political gravity and the unemployment rate he is at his weakest point Bill Clinton and Ronald regan had worse approval ratings
18 months into their 1st terms as obama does now. which why both their parties lost seats in the midterm election. If sarah palin can only tie with obama in the worst recession ever. how is she going to beat him when the economy recovers in 2012. this is his weakest point, and those numbers are her strongest points. -
oh my is there a tide coming in?
Palin's 76% Favorable Among Republicans Tops Others in GOP
http://www.gallup.com/poll/141341/Palin-Favorable-Among-Republicans-Tops-Others-GOP.aspx?utm_source=tagrss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_term=Politics
PRINCETON, NJ -- Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is the best known and most positively rated of five possible contenders for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. Her 76% favorable rating among Republicans is higher than those for Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and Bobby Jindal.
Images of Possible 2012 Republican Presidential Contenders, Among Republicans
Huckabee and Gingrich have similar 64% to 65% favorable ratings among Republicans, Romney has a lower 54% rating, and Jindal, less well known even to Republicans, has the lowest positive rating of the five.
None of these politicians has officially announced a bid for the 2012 Republican nomination, although Gingrich has recently indicated that he is thinking seriously about it. Still, the other four have maintained visible public profiles: Palin, Huckabee, and Romney, through media appearances and endorsing 2010 GOP candidates for Congress; and Jindal, in managing his state's response to the Gulf oil spill. All but Jindal have political action committees that have been actively raising money in recent months. At this point, Palin, Romney, and Gingrich have similar unfavorable ratings among Republicans, while Huckabee's and Jindal's are slightly lower.
Among All Americans, a Slightly Different Picture
Palin is the best known of the five to all Americans, but with a decidedly mixed image: 44% rate her favorably and 47% unfavorably. Her image is similar to that of former Speaker Gingrich, who has lower name recognition, but similar closely divided favorable and unfavorable ratings. The other three Republicans are not as well known, but are viewed more positively than negatively.
Images of Possible 2012 Republican Presidential Contenders, Among All Americans
Palin was catapulted into national prominence as the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2008, and has been highly visible since -- with her visibility fueled by a best-selling memoir, continuing appearances on television, and speculation about her political future. Her image was generally more positive than negative during most of the 2008 campaign, but has tilted more negative last year and this year.
Gingrich is less well known to the average American now than he was in the 1990s, when at some points his name identification reached about 90%. Today, 74% of Americans have an opinion of him. Those opinions -- although mixed -- are relatively more positive than the generally negative ratings he received throughout the 1990s and, in particular, in 2007, when he was considered a possible contender for the Republican Party's 2008 presidential nomination.
Romney's current image is somewhat more positive than negative, but ranks among his most positive since 2007. Huckabee's image is also more positive than negative.
Bottom Line
Potential candidates for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination are crisscrossing the nation, making speeches, appearing on television, raising money for their PACs, and in general doing everything short of formally announcing their candidacies as they test the 2012 waters.
Palin has the strongest name identification and positives among Republicans at this juncture. Only 4% say they don't know enough about her to have an opinion, and, by more than 3-to-1, those opinions are positive rather than negative.
At the same time, the other four potential candidates measured also have positive images among Republicans, even if their name recognition is lower. Huckabee and Jindal have the least baggage among Republicans, with lower unfavorables than the other three, but the differences in these negatives are relatively small.
One consideration in any party's choice of a candidate is how well he or she would do in the general election. At the moment, three of these Republicans -- Jindal, Huckabee, and Romney -- have net positive images among all Americans. Palin and Gingrich are saddled with more mixed reactions from the public. As history shows, however, images can change. Romney, for example, had a net negative national image at some points in 2007 as he campaigned for the GOP nomination, significantly different from his more positive image today.
Survey Methods
Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted July 8-11, 2010, with a random sample of 1,020 adults, aged 18 and older, living in the continental U.S., selected using random-digit-dial sampling.
For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones (for respondents with a landline telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell phone-only). Each sample includes a minimum quota of 150 cell phone-only respondents and 850 landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas among landline respondents for gender within region. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.
Samples are weighted by gender, age, race, education, region, and phone lines. Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2009 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older non-institutionalized population living in continental U.S. telephone households. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
View methodology, full question results, and trend data. -
while I think Palin would make a bad president, I think it would be mad entertaining just to watch how many people would be ? off by her winning lol. You know there would be people threatening to leave America if she wins, and once she wins those same people wont do a damn thing lol
-
guys see the gallup poll plz, there is a chart with the numbers it didn't show up when i copy and paste it
-
i think palin would be a disaster, but sadly, she's riding the same kind of celebrity wave that obama rode into the white house. people on the right love her, and people on the left can't stand her and they get mad that she's still being considered. this only makes the right even happier to keep pushing her. I think they'll continue to use her to draw big time money to their party (she gets 100k+ per speech nowadays) and let the left scream and cry about it for a while, and then, closer to 2012, she'll fall back and someone else (a male) will run with sarah's blessing and she will take michael steele's job.
my .02 -
the difference with palin and obama is that she was a leader. her moves affected directly the lives of people as Gov, obama didn't do that until he became prez
and i disagree that the left are mad that she is being considered as a nom, all i heard is that they want her to run so they can win. -
politicalthug202 wrote: »As someone who studies politics this is actually bad for sarah palin. Obamas polls numbers have dropped, because of
political gravity and the unemployment rate he is at his weakest point Bill Clinton and Ronald regan had worse approval ratings
18 months into their 1st terms as obama does now. which why both their parties lost seats in the midterm election. If sarah palin can only tie with obama in the worst recession ever. how is she going to beat him when the economy recovers in 2012. this is his weakest point, and those numbers are her strongest points.
you my good man have single-handedly shut this thread down.. *raises champagne glass -
this is actually quite realistic. especially the steele part.BethlehemBill wrote: »i think palin would be a disaster, but sadly, she's riding the same kind of celebrity wave that obama rode into the white house. people on the right love her, and people on the left can't stand her and they get mad that she's still being considered. this only makes the right even happier to keep pushing her. I think they'll continue to use her to draw big time money to their party (she gets 100k+ per speech nowadays) and let the left scream and cry about it for a while, and then, closer to 2012, she'll fall back and someone else (a male) will run with sarah's blessing and she will take michael steele's job.
my .02 -
1) Reagan's approvals were in the 30s after the mid-terms.
2) lol @ even this poll showing Palin's favorability rating to be ass
3) Q12 Who did you vote for President last year?
45% John McCain
46% Barack Obama
4) It's July 16th, 2010. -
5) it doesnt matter anyway, the agenda will still move foward
-
Last Of My Kind wrote: »5) it doesnt matter anyway, the agenda will still move foward
^^^^^idiot -
Damn America If yall get a woman president yall would be in some deep ? .
-
shootemwon wrote: »^^^^^idiot
^^^^^smart dumb ? -
*cue cliche scratchy movie announcer voice*
in a world where sarah palin is president...
lololol
foh -
darkone360 wrote: »polls, smolls. man looka here, obama win still win the election. point blank. let's leave the democrats out for a sec, do u REALLY think the republican party wud nominate THAT hefa as their canidate?? umm, u do realize that hefa is dumb as hell and reckless rite. that's politacl suicide for the republican party. hefa cud care less about politics. all she cares about hoodwickin these dumb azzz white folks into thinkin she really care about the country. how the hell u gonna call sumbody unexperienced, when yo azzz QUIT ur governor office? really
The only thing that needs to be said to your post is BUSH WON TWICE.....I'll repeat that.....after the war in Iraq turned into a disaster and the world realized there were NO weapons of mass destruction there, America RE-ELECTED BUSH AGAIN.
Sarah Palin has an EXCELLENT chance of being elected in this country.....never underestimate the power of dumb crackas with the ability to vote. -
elliott_argon wrote: »*cue cliche scratchy movie announcer voice*
in a world where sarah palin is president...
lololol
foh
I'm shocked so many people here are UNDERESTIMATING the huge amount of dumb people in America. BUSH WON TWICE.....and Obama's approval ratings are not the main reason he could lose, it's the economy. If the economy doesn't improve, than Sarah Palin has an excellent chance of winning in 2012.
Bush won twice.....Bush won twice.....Bush won twice.......America LOVES DUMB politicians. Sarah has good, solid hopes for becoming America's dumbest prez ever.....she makes Bush seem like a rocket scientist. -
The fact that she's even being considered is just........wow
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm shocked so many people here are UNDERESTIMATING the huge amount of dumb people in America. BUSH WON TWICE.....and Obama's approval ratings are not the main reason he could lose, it's the economy. If the economy doesn't improve, than Sarah Palin has an excellent chance of winning in 2012.
Bush won twice.....Bush won twice.....Bush won twice.......America LOVES DUMB politicians. Sarah has good, solid hopes for becoming America's dumbest prez ever.....she makes Bush seem like a rocket scientist.
I'm not.... -
DarcSkies777 wrote: »I'm not....
People should never underestimate just how many dumb ? we have in this nation. Sarah Palin has a lot of energy from the Republican and Tea Party movement. She sucks on Israel's ? , like most other Americans, and she loves Bush's tax cuts for the rich, something most Americans foolishly support. Americans are too dumb to realize the deficits we have are largely due to the massive tax cuts Bush gave to the top 1% of Americans, revenue that could have lowered the deficit by at least a little by now. Of course, Americans are also dumb enough to blame Obama for the recession, despite the fact the recession started under Bush since ? 2007, lol.
Sarah Palin, run!!!!!!!!! Your chances of winning have never been better!!!! Dumb this country down just a little bit more, why don't cha? -
is that REALLY what the situation in Iraq was in 2004?kingblaze84 wrote: »...after the war in Iraq turned into a disaster and the world realized there were NO weapons of mass destruction there, America RE-ELECTED BUSH AGAIN.
wait, how is it that the deficits are "largely due" to something that could lower the deficit "at least a little." this sounds... contradictorykingblaze84 wrote: »Americans are too dumb to realize the deficits we have are largely due to the massive tax cuts Bush gave to the top 1% of Americans, revenue that could have lowered the deficit by at least a little by now. -
a republican has a chance of winning 2012, however, sarah palin does not. bush stole the first election, but also, he knew enough about politics to keep his stupidity to a minimum. there aren't enough pr firms in the world to cover up palin's exposed stupidity during the last election. furthermore, palin has a fringe base, there aren't enough republicans that find her qualified to lead.
