Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: 2012 Pres Primary (Kos 1/20-31)

Topics: poll

DailyKos.com (D) / Research 2000
1/20-31/10; 2003 Republicans, 2% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Kos release)

National

2012 President: Republican Primary
16% Palin, 11% Romney, 10% Cheney, 7% Gingrich, 7% Huckabee, 3% Pawlenty, 2% Paul, 2% Thune

 

Comments
libertybrewcity:

Ron Paul at 2%? Yeah right...he is most definitely at 10 or more I am willing to bet everything! Google Ron Paul!

____________________

bigfoot9p6:

Would you look at that. The hypocritical adulterer (Newt) and the seven intellectual dwarves.

____________________

ndirish11:

A good way to look at it is that Paul is only 14 points behind the leader. More and more Liberty candidates are running and some actually are likely to win.

Palin endorsed Ron Paul's son, Rand for senate. He shares no views with her. She is crazy, maybe she will just endorse Ron while she's at it. I mean Palin is a neo-con John McCain Republican while the Pauls are true small government anti-war libertarian Republicans. They share none of the same views on social issues.

If Palin is moving to an ideology closer to Rand and Ron Paul then I would be happy to vote for her. However, I feel like she just runs around to Tea Parties saying she is an outsider when she really stands for War, the Patriot Act and no real defense of civil liberties. Those are all things the Tea Party hates. I don't get her.

____________________

bigfoot9p6:

ndirish11. It is really a lot simpler than any "shes a fire breathing nutjub" or "shes a real american." The simple truth is that she is an opportunist. Right now she thinks she would be best served embracing the Tea party movement. If she thought that she would improve her lot in life by endorsing Dennis Kucinich for president, she would do that as well.

____________________

Stillow:

Palin is a politican like the others.....by default ALL politicans are opportunists, from Obama to Palin.....she won't run for prez.

____________________

Xenobion:

A line-up of failure. Obama will be lucky if any of these people are picked.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

As a progressive, the two candidates I wouldn't want, and obama wouldn't want is anyone from a blue state. Pawlenty and Romney would be the toughest candidates to beat, but I am sure they are not always as conservative as the party base wants them to be. The more conservative of a candidate like Huckabee, the more fear the left will be able to use.

____________________

bigfoot9p6:

Stillow, We agree on something! with a caveat. I agree that all politicians are opportunistic to some degree, but I think that there is also a question of to what degree. For example I think that say Blagoiavich (sp.) and the Bush administration (utilizing corruption to attempt to get a reality show gig, and utilizing a terrorist attack to start a war long desired by neocons, respectively) are on a different level than Obama (using overwhelming disgust with republicans to become the first black president). The former are defined by their opportunism, and I think that Palin is in this category.

____________________

Stillow:

bigfoot9p6

Hmmm, I disagre on O, its all the same. Obama is trying to pass ultra left wing legislation and g'ment take over of entire industries by using a cris....even Rhambo said they couldn't waste that crisis......they are all acting in there own self intrest....the only difference is what they are into for that week.

____________________

ChicagoKid:

Interesting list. I do not like Palin so I hope that changes. Ron Paul's support should continue to grow and he is under represented in this poll. Romney is a tough sell for me, Thune is too small of a state, Gingrich has to much baggage, and I don't think Huck will run. Leaves me with Paul and Pawlenty of this list, like Paul and Pawlenty is ok. I think some governors will run Huntsman, Daniels, McDonnell, or Barbour or Jindal. But well see. This primary will list will change a lot.

____________________

Xenobion:

Please have it be Romney. I want this guy out of politics forever after his loss.

____________________

bigfoot9p6:

Stillow: I have a question... You constantly hear from the right about "the far left" which is pretty much right of center from a global point of view. The question is, for you right wingers is there any such thing as far right, or even too far right?

____________________

Kevin Viveiros:

I doubt Palin runs and I think Romney has to be the favorite. All though it would be funny to see the Republicans select Huckabee and fight to win 10 states.

____________________

Stillow:

bigfoot9p6

Uhhh, ya. try some of the relgiious nuts i nthis country like robertson who claim 9/11 was because American doesn't execute its gays.

____________________

bigfoot9p6:

Well, thank goodness for that. Sometimes I get the sense from the right that one can never be too conservative.

____________________

ChicagoKid:

There are plenty of nuts who associate with the "far right". Religious nuts, racists, and other nuts like people who just hate gays and go with hate crimes.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

There are also radical libertarians. I'd say Ron Paul is pretty radical in the sense that he wants to dismantle institutions that have been around for a century. It's not very conservative to want to upend the status quo completely. In reality, reducing the government by any significant amount would be a radical change, and I doubt any politician has the guts to really do it. Any drastic reduction in services would probably result in extreme unpopularity.

Of course all anyone really has to do to halve the budget deficit is pull out of both wars and unnecessary bases here and overseas, combined with some modest restructuring of existing entitlements. Of course, no one has the guts to do that either. Just look at the crying that goes on when the military closes a base or tries to reduce a program like medicare advantage.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

As for this poll, Palin, Gingrich, and Cheney are not running, and probably neither is Huckabee, so it's not very valid. What it does show is that Romney is going to have a few problems winning over the republican primary electorate. The Christian conservatives will easily rally to a decent opponent.

Just the fact that Palin leads this poll shows republicans are still too disorganized at this point to mount an effective challenger to Obama, even though they can take advantage of an anti-democratic mood to make gains in congress.

Obama may be the next Clinton yet...

____________________

Stillow:

Modest restructuring of entitlements....I love it when its comedy hour on this site!

How about instead of gutting our defense and national security you do away with half the entitlements, ban all earmarks, ablish useless federal departments,cut congressional pay and operating budgets i nhalf, get rid of fedeeral pensions and replace with a 401k and simply live within your means....like we all havve to do.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

If the GOP wins as many seats as people are speculating they will, history will likely repeat. The GOP will be portrayed as the party trying to bully Obama, and I am certain they will not work with him. They will try to intimidate him. Perhaps Obama will be under their thumb enough to cut on wasteful spending, but on the same token, we can cut back on our troops overseas. Obama can hopefully use a cutback in defense spending for tax cuts to small businesses.

By 2012, our country will see the mistake they made in electing Republicans, and most independents will be more grateful for having a leader like Obama.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"gutting our defense and national security"

San Antonio has 4 military bases. Does it really need all of those? Do we really need permanent bases in Germany, Japan, or Italy?

Has the 1 trillion dollars that's been spent in Iraq done anything at all to increase our security in the USA? (for the record, General Petreus said he didn't know).

Or Afghanistan? Last I checked, increasing troops in Afghanistan mainly led to Afghanistan being more dangerous for.....wait for it....American troops!

I've been in the military and worked in the higher echelons where a lot of funding decisions are made. Believe me, they waste more than we could ever spend on food stamps.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

I should have said funding allocations...funding decisions for the military are up to congress.

____________________

Stillow:

I won't argue with you on the iraq war. I did not support it, it was one of the many many reasons I could not bring myself to vote for W again in 2004.

I'd compromise and close some bases here and there that are outdates, but i'd like to see the departments of education, energy, transportation, etc closed. Federal pension reform, entitlements cut in half. People who are younger should have every right to opt out of social security and put that money into a private account that is self managed.

somethin has to be done, we cannot run trillion dollar deficits for the next decade, that will not work.

All these boomers are going to start retiring this year, drawing money out of the market as they sell stocks to live off...the feds and state g'ments will start paying out huge pension paymnets, etc. Costs need to be cut in half, the federal budget is waaaaaaay to large.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR