Gallup – Obama Approval Slips Amongst Women – What are the Odds? Clinton, Bachmann, Palin. Polling on the Street from Dallas to Miami

Any on of these women is the preference in 2012 among a broad Demographic - non-scientific blogger poll - image political news now


From :CNS News, comes an article regarding the Presidents approval among women, slipping as he round out 2012. The Polling data from Gallup shows that Obama among Women has slipped 4 points since July of this year, to a low of 41%. The old adage, the “buck stops here”, applies, both in terms of the President’s poll numbers and the working women’s pocketbook. As costs rise across the board on food, housing and clothing, one can anticipate that those numbers will decrease, especially with more than one woman in the race for the Presidency. As of this moment, Michelle Bachmann, is the only woman who has formally announced her candidacy - and a recent Quinnipiac poll suggests that, although Rick Perry and Mitt Romney lead the “pack” for the Republican primary vote, both Sarah Palin (unannounced) and Bachmann, come in third and fourth..

However, is it truly a boy’s club situation, when the nomination of the next GOP presidential candidate, along with a possible run by Hillary Clinton against the incumbent, Obama, rests with the nation’s largest “silent majority”?
Palin, has yet to announce her intent, (Washington Post)although the most recognized “candidate” in most polls, she has a ways to go as far as her favorability amongst core Republicans and Republican leaning Independents. According to a Washington Post article today, Palin will be in Iowa and New Hampshire to address Tea Party groups, yet will not formally announce until end of September. (This is plenty of time, al la Ronald Reagan). Although her polling to date, shows her in the field, lagging behind front runners, that may be due to the fact that she has not announced, rather than any other factor.

Rumors of Hillary Clinton getting back into the Presidential political fray and challenging Barack Obama have resurfaced. With Democrats growing increasingly skeptical of Obama’s chances of reelection (fading), looking for the candidate who a)should have won in 2008, and b) would have done a better job with the economy, etc., makes Hilary the obvious choice. So much so that a Facebook Pace of Clinton Supporters has emerged, and they are taking donations - $20.12. The page fan site is currently low at 1400, however, it goes without saying that Clinton remains extremely popular among Democrats, especially women, and has cross-over potential among both Independents, and some Republicans. She has, however, continually denied any ambition to challenge Obama in 2012 – that said, with pressure mounting, and her party and the nation is a shambles, one might have to ask, would she stand on the sidelines?

Is the United States ready for a woman to lead? According to a recent Rasmussen Poll 73% of the participant would see a women elected within the next 10 years: missing from the questions – would one vote for a women in 2012?

As the President’s polling numbers show, across multiple pollsters, that he is most likely unelectable in 2012, the field of potential GOP becomes one for scrutiny across all party lines, as one will most likely be the next President. At the moment, Rick Perry, Governor of Texas leads the field, with Mitt Romney, a close second, and as noted both Bachmann and Palin (unannounced) in the mix. A recent survey (unscientific) on this bloggers part, took place over the past few days, traveling from Massachusetts to Dallas Texas, to Miami and back. In the process, asking preference for 2012 and specifically questions regarding the Governor of Texas while in Dallas, this is the general consensus. A good percentage of the queried in Texas find their current Governor to be a “career politician”, and indicated that their preference would lay elsewhere, although with no clear signal as to which candidate in cases where the respondent was a male.

However, among women, especially Latinos, there was a common theme – it is time for a woman to take the helm. It was not a question of which woman, at this point, and these women queried, focused heavily on the economy, giving poor grades to both Presidents’ Bush and Obama, prior to noting that Bachmann seemed competent, a few who knew of Sarah Palin, would give her the grade, and several hoped for a Clinton return to the ring. The most comprehensive interview given, brought up the fact that women were leading, and moving the economy in the right direction Latin American. The choice was, any women that has governed, would be the preference for this Latina, who spoke of the rising costs of goods, the fact that she and others were working and paying taxes while there was a huge percentage of Americans who did not, and that it was time to give someone else a chance. The idea that giving a chance to a woman was most appealing, and that this individual was expected only to try and fix the problem, was interesting in the pragmatic manner in which this particular respondent viewed the political fortunes of the current and future Presidents. What was particularly astounding (given the Media reports and Demographics) is several of the Latino’s queried, sounded more “Tea Party” than independent, and that the focus on fiscal responsibility, entitlements and job growth, was in step with those asked in Massachusetts in recent months. (Tea Party)

Again, although spot polling of men and women, virtually on the street, gives one a sense of what people may be thinking in one part of the nation or another, and is, again, non-scientific, those queried do belie the prevalent media think –additionally, one finds that those queried, specifically of Hispanic/Latino decent are extremely patriotic, are not interested in seeing Obama get a “second chance” and are interested in looking at which women are running (this also crosses gender demographics.)

One would hope that those women who are announced, or yet to be announced, make good use of internal polling, specifically the growing Hispanic/Latino bloc, as well as a general poll, similar to Rasmussen. Finally, regardless of who receives the Republican nomination, that individual, in 100% of those queried, will receive the vote. Finally, do not ignore Massachusetts, although thought to be a strong “blue state” and “Safe Democrat”, it is not a winner take all state, and goes towards delegates at the national Republican convention. There are two specific reasons: one to pick up extra delegates (needing only 15% of the primary vote to qualify for delegates), and 2) should the primary produce significant numbers for Massachusetts it would broadcast a strong signal to the balance of the nation that a Reagan tip election is at hand.

Palin Tours New England: Politico Whines, the Globe Has No Sense of History, the Press Compares her to Royalty.

If one can make it through the 2 page “bitch fest”Poltico Produced vis a vis the Palin Tour, entitled “Palin's Rolling Menace”, one can begin to understand how truly petty the press has become and conflicted and well, generally worth glancing at more on entertainment than face value. Apparently, Suffolk Polling uncovered an inconvenient truth – no one trusts the press, especially print and braodcast. In fact a recent polls suggests a full 15% of respondents do not trust anyone whose delivering the so called news, and worse, 21% don’t’ know who to trust! (Suffolk.edu marginal’s). Therefore, it’s ok, if say Politico has a bad day trying to catch up to Sarah Palin, especially if not specifically invited, and having to compare themselves to Paparazzi (which they really should not as most Paparazzi one knows are not vicious, hate filled, politically motivated, individuals, out to destroy anyone’s reputation, they are more looking for the perfect shot of this or that starlet) –

So, what’s a group of reporters with no chance of getting near the subject to do? – follow – apparently at speeds which exceed the standard state limit and then the write about how horrid Palin’s tour is for speeding, not for a moment thinking that perhaps, just perhaps, the fact that the tour was speeding away (pivotal word here) from these so called reporters, was in order to avoid them and the surely half backed story they would provide (see half baked case in point).

On the flip side in Boston – working for the Globe, yet another trustworthy source, one finds a usual English Major making fun of Palin’s inability to “parse the language” – and her take on Paul Revere and his erroneous reference to of all things, the poem by Longworth “The Midnight Rise of Paul Revere”, which was written a decade after the fact. So much for education – Palin in this instance, correct from the historical point of view, is basically blasted for straying from a myth that all 3rd graders knows..Unfortunately Globe reporters apparently are either too arrogant or too (dare one say) limited) to research – one quick Google search points out the young Globe reporter’s error and vindicates Ms. Palin. (A Fairly decent bit on Paul Revere, his family and yes a reference to that ride :< a href="http://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/paul-reveres-ride.html"> here.

They continue (the press) to ponder how anyone can take the likes of Palin or Trump seriously – seriously – they do – while those that actually read, and research, (which by the way, history, is a science and subject to some chances, specifically due to overzealous biographers – which explains Jimmy Carter), know just a bit more, which makes these “reporters” just a little less credible and a little less relevant every day.

It is not whether or not Palin or Trump, (who are both “fun” and “functional” candidates) actually run, it is the hissy fit they are giving the press, allowing those who sit and pontificate on what the masses would or should not know (while knowing not quite as much), to experience the inconvenience of the bus tour or display their total ignorance of historical context that makes both Palin and Trump invaluable contributors to Americana. Imagine if they ran on the same ticket, regardless of who was the VP (would it truly matter?) – How much fun would it be to watch the media implode? – stutter, spew hate-filled mindless rhetoric that no one would obviously believe and more to the point, isn’t’ even watching? Of course, they could drag out the old keyword “racist “and attach it yet again to Trump and Palin, but would it work? Maybe in Hollywood, but do they even vote?

The above: from a hobbyist!

2012 Update: Gallup Sees No Front Runner, Boston Globe on Romney in New Hampshire

Gallup Dismayed - GOP Field is Tied! Huckabee, Palin Romney - photo credit: freedomslighthouse.net

Gallup, in a study of GOP Frontrunners from 1952 forward, finds that the 2012 “potential candidates” offer no clear frontrunner, in what Gallup terms as an “anomaly” this late in the game. However, in 2008, McCain was paired with Rudy Giuliani, who bested McCain at this stage of the “campaign”, with McCain emerging after Giuliani dropped out of the race, and the New Hampshire and Iowa contests were past. It was the South Carolina primary that gave McCain the green light he needed in order to emerge as a front-runner in the eventual field that included both Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee.

As of the last Gallup Survey taken in February, Huckabee led both Romney and Palin by 2 points, in other words, a statistical tie. Herein lies the conundrum faced by pollsters, there are three strong contenders for the 2012 GOP nomination, none of which have formally announced. Palin has hinted at running, and has made a staff change to her PAC that indicates she may most likely run. Huckabee, with the release of a book and subsequent book tour across early caucus states, as well as the South Carolina battleground, will decide late (in terms of an actual announcement), in June or July of 2011. Romney is declared in all but making the statement official, the former MA Govenor came out this past week with the declaration that he was the most qualified GOP candidate. Although some politico’s may find this to be a negative for the GOP, the fact of the matter is, that overall, a healthy field of strong candidates (and that does not take into account those who have not yet emerged and maybe just as strong as the current well-known three), offers Conservative and Conservative leaning voters the more options than in previous contests, and delaying a formal announcement while laying groundwork for a campaign, is akin to having money in the bank. What will break or make the eventual nominee (which said person will not necessarily emerge until after the South Carolina primary or later for that matter) will be a cohesive effort on the part of all conservative wings of the GOP party to coalesce behind that person – something that may or may not happen, similar in scope to the 2008, doomed from the get-go, GOP nominee.

In 2008, with the taint of the Republican Brand, it was unlikely that whoever ran on the ticket would win the election. However, since the tide has turned, and it is the Democrat brand that is in that position, there will be little difference in who eventually takes the nominee, even if the matter is not settled until the GOP convention.

Strategically, it makes sense that the nominee be delayed over time, giving President Obama no clear rival until the 11th hour – in this scenario, Obama would have to contrast his policy against three or four (unnamed GOP), which would further waste resources. Additionally, if the President’s approval ratings for 2011 do not improve over 2012, it will not matter which front-runner emerges, that individual will most probably be the next U.S. President. Although, it will be a battle, the Gallup favorability ratings for 2010, show few states that will not fall to the GOP, should those numbers hold (currently 10). Gallup, it should be noted is a conservative polling firm, and by conservative, one is not referring to political ideology rather methodology – taking pains to go neither to the right nor the left.

The Boston Globe’s article on Mitt Romney in New Hampshire declares Govenor Romney a “novice no more”, by virtue of his previous run, and offers that he is in a better position to define himself more so than in 2008, as the issues then were less to his abilities (war in Iraq) than now, where the issue is the economy. That said, the article goes on to describe him as more comfortable, rather than “stiff”, as in 2008, but rightly suggests that his greatest hurdle will be his institution of mandated health care (Commonwealth Care) that was morphed into Obama Care on the national level.

There are, of course, differences, however, should Romney emerge as the nominee, it would take the debate over Mandated Health Care off the table, so to speak. Lastly, the subject of Romney’s religion comes into play – the Globe sees his Mormon faith as a deterrent in early states such as Iowa and South Carolina – that said, a quick review of recent (less than 50 years), proves that when the opposition is viewed as not desirable for the nation, and the frontrunner is a Mormon, that faith has little or nothing to do with electability. In 1972, one Richard Nixon, Mormon was elected to the Presidency taking every state with the exception of Massachusetts.

The aforementioned belies the Globes perception that the candidates electability may hinge on religion, whereby, history proves otherwise. In addition, as this nations laws demands a separation of church and state, with freedom of religion the root of the of the formation of the colonies which eventually became these United States, one must understand that, try and the opposition might, regardless of a Presidential Candidates personal choice of religion is concerned, it is that persons perceived ability of governing, that will rule the day. In this opinion, when one has a defined religion, it bodes well for the candidate, rather than detracts, going to personal character and conviction of a named faith. Those that would put labels on Catholics (Kennedy), Mormons (Nixon), and George W. Bush) (Methodist), may have done so but to little avail. ( source adherents.com)

In 2011 (to date), we have Obama (Christian), Romney (Mormon), Huckabee (Baptist), and Palin (Non-Declared Christian – (lack of sources offering a clear definition). In the end run, it will not be a candidate’s religious preference, it will be based on the state of the national electorate and the candidates perceived ability to govern effectively.