Sunday, February 21, 2010

CPAC Straw Poll

Yesterday the denizens of CPUKE demonstrated their idiocy in fine form.   Here are the results of their straw poll.

GOP-hat …Results from the full field, and a link to the complete poll after the jump.

Haley Barbour: 1%

Mitch Daniels: 2%

Newt Gingrich: 4%

Mike Huckabee: 4%

Sarah Palin: 7%

Ron Paul: 31%

Tim Pawlenty: 6%

Mike Pence: 5%

Mitt Romney: 22%

Rick Santorum: 2%

John Thune: 2%

Read the full poll here. [PDF]

Inserted from <TPM>

This demonstrates that the GOP still has a complete leadership vacuum.  The winner’s chances of winning the presidency are sub-zero.  And despite all his campaigning, effort an expense, she second place winner could not even defeat the winner.

I have committed the unforgiveable sin and mentioned the unmentionable name.  If they crawl out of the woodwork, please do not feed the trolls.


Lisa G. said...

I actually like some of the things that Ron Paul says - I watched him on a vid with Chris Matthews and a hard core Repub and he made a lot of sense. Now, if he would just lose the R after his name and declare he was a Libertarian that he is, he could appeal to independents. One thing this does prove is that the more moderate candidates (Mittens and Paul) still hold some significant sway with the Repubs.

This is a good thing and a bad thing - good because it shows that they haven't all gone batshit crazy (i.e., supporting the Tundra Twat) and that either one of those might still appeal to independents. My vote would be for Ron Paul, but I think the Teabaggers would break off from him and split the party - which is also a good thing. You know things are not going well when even a moderate like Tim Pawlenty is advocating violence in order to get the teabaggers on his side.

Another bad thing is that Mittens and Paul could choose a teabagger running mate for vp just to please them. This would not be good at all because a) it would not split the party and b) they (Mittens and Paul) could appeal to independents and that would be trouble for us. However, having a teabagger as veep could totally turn off the independents (which I think it would) and that would again be good for us. I don't think that Paul would go for a teabagger on his ticket (he's much too Libertarian for that), but Mittens so would. So it's a toss up for us.

Oso said...

RP opposed the war and wants to bring home the troops.As CinC he could do that.

As to the all the crazy Austrian School stuff-abolish the Fed and go back to the gold standard-it would never get anywhere.

With the exception of Kucinich there was no Democrat who stood against the war. RP even had the balls to say we should cut off aid to Israel! NO other candidate has the balls to do anything but Kowtow to AIPAC.

TomCat said...

Lisa, I agree that several of Paul's positions on foreign policy are quite appealing, but he also stands for unrestrained corporatism, eliminitaing the safety net, outlawing a woman's right to choose, etc. Further, pigs will fly before Paul is nominated by a major party.

Oso, I'm shocked to hear you supporting him. He's trying to distance himself now, but he has a marked history of avowed racism.

Tom Harper said...

Another link to that poll showed "Other" and "Undecided" getting more votes than most of the actual candidates.

Those are my 2 favorite choices too.

TomCat said...

Thanks, Tom. They are indeed the best of the bunch.