Friday, October 30, 2015

UPDATE#3: 3rd Post Debate Poll & 8th In A Row Post CBS Poll Has Trump Leads


Ipsos/Reuters poll to October 30th

New Rasmussen post debate poll
Confirms trend of IBD post debate poll;

"Trump earns 26 percent support among GOP voters, followed closely by retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 21 percent. Rubio is in a distant third at 10 percent support, showing that Rubio's solid performance hasn't translated into significantly higher numbers, at least not yet.
Rubio is just one percentage point ahead of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush." 

IBD Polling which produced the ridiculous poll "Trump is in second place at 17%" weeks ago has redeemed itself with the first post debate non-online poll.Fox's Megyn Kelly pushed the last IBD poll let's see if she does so with the latest.

Saturday, October 31
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort)PollResultsSpread
2016 Republican Presidential NominationIBD/TIPP

Trump 28, Carson 23, Rubio 11, Cruz 6, Bush 6, Fiorina 3, Huckabee 1, Paul 2, Kasich 1, Christie 1, Graham 0, Jindal 2, Santorum 1, Pataki 0  Trump +5

For all the Rubio hoopla he is at 11% and when he is subject to the media blowtorch scrutiny is will be interesting to see if he doesn't join previous media (Fox) GOP Establishment favorite Fiorina who has descended to 3%-back where she started before she became the great Anti-Trump hope

The IBD Poll is the 6th in a row to show Trump well ahead after the also ridiculous CBS poll with it's 7 point margin of error which was, like the previous IBD poll used to try and beat up on Trump

That's four plus the Gravis poll is five and now IBD is six.

"Overall, the poll found Trump still leading nationwide, with 32.7 percent of voters saying they would vote for him today, with Carson still a solid second at 22.6 percent."

Fox touted IBD with gusto -let's see if Megyn Kelly does so now.

Here's the Huffington Post "Poll of Polls" aggregate which includes all polls

And the similar Real Clear Politics aggregate which includes selected,non-online polls-not much between them and the best guide to accuracy as aggregation smooths out outliers like CBS.

Jeb's Only Chance "Go Rogue" And Book A Flight To Wasilla?

If I may say so the articles below; 

("Bush/Palin 2016: the GOP's Only Chance?" and "Bush and  Palin 2016 A Historic Compromise/"

are quite prescient. What I did not foresee, and I daresay neither did anyone else, was the rise of Donald Trump and the decline, perhaps irrevocably, of Jeb Bush.

The only major change I would make would be my then avowed determination not to vote, again, if Palin was not on the ticket or did not, enthusiastically, (i.e. unlike "anyone but Obama in 2012) endorse a candidate. I will now happily vote for Donald Trump, who has indicted he would "love to have Governor Palin in his cabinet" if he is elected president, which statement will do in lieu of her being his VP if that were the case.

As for Jeb if he is at the "McCain point" in his campaign then he doesn't have the fall back support of being a recognized candidate of quality and campaign experience that McCain had get him into the lead at his low point. What he does have open to him is the other McCain option.

When McCain was polling well behind Senator Obama in a time of massively anti-President Bush feeling, and when Obama's Democratic convention coronation seemed to seal the deal was the brilliant "rogue tactic of calling then Governor Sarah palin in Wasilla and offering her the vice-presidential slot.The rest is history, Palin's roof raising speech, the stunned media and Democratic party and, within days McCain taking the lead over Obama in a huge poll leap.
That the economy collapsed a few weeks later and McCain, oddly, suspended his campaign (Steve Schmidt take a bow) saw him go straight behind Obama in the polls from which position he never was ahead again. The Palin haters, not least from McCain's "team" perpetuated the myth that "Palin cost McCain the presidency." This idiocy has been refuted by at least four major academic studies and poll analysis.

Newt Gingrich in his struggling campaign in 2012 stated "I would consider Governor Palin as my vice-president. This immediately galvanized his campaign (Palin voted for him in the Alaska primary) and her supporters got behind him. That Gingrich's campaign collapsed had nothing to do with Palin  and everything to do with Gingrich blowing his massive momentum out of South Carolina with a dreadful effort in Florida from which he never recovered.

The point is that for both campaigns Palin lit a spark and in the case of the McCain campaign as Biden said to him "you would have been elected John if it were not for the crash."

Does Jeb have it in him to contact Governor Palin? It is now past the point where a simple "I could work with Palin or some such" would carry any weight. A strong reaching out with a definite commitment to her would stand the campaign on its ear,give the media a massive amount to chew on and suck all the air out of the other candidates rooms and would, in one moment, destroy the "Tired, beaten down Jeb"meme.

Would Palin respond with an endorsement? It really would not matter as if she simply was polite and open with Jeb, as she was in her OAN interview with him then she could see how things played out. The ball is in Jeb's court if he continues on as he has recently he is, surely, done.

I can't think of any other game changer for him and others are leapfrogging ahead of him. A Trump and Palin team has extraordinary benefits as set out below (once the dust cleared) will Jeb go for it or will he be the next out the door-it is that black and white.

I wrote at American Thinker in June 2013

Bush/Palin 2016: the GOP's Only Chance?

Let's talk political reality first. To the question "can the GOP win in 2016?" The answer is "yes, but only if they win Florida." If by 9 pm on election night 2016 the early results indicate Florida has gone to the Democrat, then Republicans of all stripes could simply turn off their televisions, as there would be no path to victory in the Electoral College.

Would Jeb Bush have as good a chance, or better, than any other prospective GOP candidate? Most certainly he might. As a popular Governor of Florida, married to a Hispanic, and who garnered a good proportion of the Hispanic vote, Bush would be in a strong position to carry the state.
Electoral College reality shows that Florida is an essential beginning, with North Carolina/Virginia also having to be in the GOP's column as the evening wears on. Bush, as a former Governor of a Southern state, would not, at least, be at a disadvantage to any other prospective Republican candidates chances in those two states.

Even with those three states in the bag, the GOP would still not be in a winning position without Ohio and one from New Hampshire/Iowa/Colorado/Nevada, at which point they would squeak through by only two electoral votes. It is possible to win without Virginia, but extremely challenging. Again, on the face of it, Jeb Bush would not be at a disadvantage compared to any other prospective Republican candidate in these states, and might have an advantage over some in Iowa appealing to Evangelicals, and in New Hampshire appealing to centrists.
Thus, looking at the 2016 election purely in Electoral College terms, Jeb Bush would appear to be in a position to do no worse than any other prospective candidate and, in crucial states, he might do better.

The Electoral College would be of a secondary consideration should President Obama be as unpopular as G.W. Bush was in 2008, and the economy still in a suboptimal situation as regards the unemployment figures after eight years of a Democrat president. Under those circumstances it would not necessarily matter who the GOP candidate was, as electoral victory would be more or less a given. At that point the GOP establishments call for an "electable" candidate would have no resonance and a genuine conservative, a Palin for example, would have every chance for the nomination and subsequent election as president.

If however the economy has improved, or is seen to be improving, and especially if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat's candidate, then the "electability" and Electoral College arguments would have some substantial force and credibility. But it would be of no avail to have an "electable" centrist if the Palinite, conservative forces didn't vote. Although Evangelicals turned out for Romney in 2012, two million Perotite White voters stayed home. Running another centrist in the Dole/McCain/Romney line is no formula for ensuring a maximized conservative turnout. Neither is running a perceived conservative like Paul Ryan for VP a guarantee, as the Romney/Ryan ticket proved.

In the scenario outlined above, i.e. a Clinton candidacy during a relatively non-negative economic and political environment, a centrist presidential candidate with a charismatic conservative VP running mate may be the GOP's only best hope. A Jeb Bush/president - Sarah Palin/vice-president ticket covers all the Electoral College, Evangelical, pro-life, centrist-conservative, experienced governorships, male/female bases.
Both are strongly vetted and most certainly there is nothing in Palin's life that has not be diced and sliced, disproved and shown to be a product of leftist hate. Even in liberal circles there has been grudging acceptance that Jeb Bush ran a successful administration in Florida and that he is "Not George W."

Palin is not the media neophyte she was in 2008, and never again would be the subject of the astonishing MSM/Blogosphere hate and ambush that she was then. A Bush/Palin team would be a candidacy of ideas, from experienced campaigners, which would have to be addressed by the opposition media and Dem's without the distraction of lurid media "scandals."

A Hillary Clinton candidacy would require a woman on the GOP's ticket to negate the "it's time for a woman in the White House" meme. With the balanced ticket, Bush's appeal to Hispanics and, according to Real Clear Politics, the even more important possibility of a dropoff in Black turnout allied to an increase in White voters to the polls, even a Clinton candidacy can be overcome.
The GOP establishment shunning Palin to the point of, once again, not even inviting her to speak to the nominating convention, would be the height of stupidity and a guarantee of a suboptimal conservative turnout. Having Palin on the ticket would, bring in a massive energy, enthusiasm and commitment from her great mass of supporters, as she did for McCain in the most hopeless of circumstances.
Objections to the Bush/Palin team concept would include "the country wouldn't want another Bush." That argument had force up until this year, but as the Obama administration sinks in popularity and credibility, G.W. Bush rises in both, and by 2016 his administration would be a memory which many might see through rose-colored glasses. Certainly "it's all Bush's fault" would be a ludicrous battle cry after eight years of Obama.

As for Palin, again, everything possible has been thrown at her and the "she's dumb and thinks Africa is a country" nonsense is tired and silly, and would be lampooned if trotted out again. The "heartbeat away from the presidency" loses its force with Bush being much younger than McCain, and Palin having been a commentator with authority on all and sundry during her Fox consultancy years. She would of course be more than a capable debater as she proved with Biden in 2008.

Would Palin accept the VP slot again? Only she could answer that, but given her dedication to America, but if she was given the freedom to campaign as was denied to her by the McCain team, it is of course a possibility. It would hold out to her the chance of a run of her own after eight years, when she would still be relativity young, and would of course be vastly experienced. Running with a pro-life Catholic would not be a barrier to Palin's views it could fairly be stated.
Would Palin's supporters accept her being VP? Speaking for myself if Palin accepted the role then I would, as an uncompromising Palin supporter, support the ticket wholeheartedly (after a wistful consideration of the ticket being the other way around). Some Palin supporters might insist that "Palin would never accept being the VP candidate again" and raise many valid objections. But none of them can speak for Palin herself, and time, place, and realistic assessments can make seemingly impossible pairings e.g. Reagan/Bush possible.
mmigration and establishment ties would appear to be the main divide for conservatives. The seemingly impossible Bush/Palin pairing would not be affected by the current immigration controversy which saw Bush plead for more immigrants at the Faith and Freedom Conference. That Palin made a seeming dig at Bush for his "fertile" comment is nothing compared to G.W.H's "voodoo economics" attack on Reagan. Bush self-described himself to Christian Broadcasting News CBN as pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and pro-tax cuts.

By 2016 the immigration issue will have been addressed, and legislation will have passed, despite conservative objections and be under implementation, or it will have failed to pass. If the former, then the internal GOP divide on the issue could only be patched over with a Bush/Palin pairing (or Cruz if she does not wish to run). If the proposed "gang of eight" legislation fails then the pairing might be the only hope of keeping the GOP establishment on board for the election.
A sure sign that the establishment sees Jeb Bush as a possible candidate is Time Magazine running a major feature: "Has Jeb's time come." What the article doesn't address is how to effect "Jeb's time" without the support of the Palinite rank and file.

The Palin/Bush pairing (which works either way) would see the rifts in the GOP healed over, a united team with massive resources in finance, manpower and credibility, and a very real path to Electoral College victory -- an historic compromise for the restoration of a conservative America. All this is moot of course if the immigration crisis splits the GOP asunder -- which might well lead be a Bush versus Palin primary campaign.

And then did an update in December 2014

Bush And Palin 2016 A Historic Compromise? (And Three Questions For Jeb)

I wrote the article "Bush-Palin 2016 The GOP's Only Chance? which appeared,with much controversy, at American Thinker" in June 2013. With Jeb Bush all but certain to be a candidate. With his announcement of "actively" exploring a 2016 run the article becomes not only prescient, but the questions raised are of some major import in my opinion.

Nothing has changed in respect of the, to use the most moderate word I can, "caution" among conservatives about Bush and other Establishment figures e.g Christie and Romney. One thing has also not changed, if Governor Palin took an antipathetic attitude to Jeb to the point of advising her millions of followers not to vote for him (by name) or, even worse for his prospects went 3rd party, his chances would be diminished to say the least. 

On the other hand, if Palin did not run there is nothing Bush could do to affect her or her following so she holds a significant hand in the matter.

With that in mind there are three significant questions that could be raised with Governor Bush;

1."If Governor Palin does not run for president would you invite her to be a major guest speaker at the 2016 GOP convention?

    2.Would you see a major role-perhaps Energy Secretary- role for Governor Palin in your cabinet if elected?

    3. Would you put Governor Palin high on your list of possible running mates If she is not a candidate for president?

    Of course, if Governor Palin does mount a presidential campaign these questions would go on the back burner, but if Jeb won the nomination, then there is no escaping them, unless he wishes not to have her endorsement and her followers votes (and how did that work out for Romney?) 

    As a well known Palin supporter right from the start I stand by my call for a historic compromise. 
    But if Governor Palin is not on the ticket, and it is not iron clad certain that points 1/2/3 would be implemented, or she doesn't endorse the nominee early (unlike her late Romney “endorsement” of “anyone but Obama") I will sit out 2016 and am certain I would not be alone.

    On the other hand if  the 2016 ticket is any combination of Bush/Palin, or  Governor Bush answers questions 1-3 positively and Governor Palin doesn't run endorses him wholeheartedly, then I will vote for Bush (or whomever she may alternatively endorse) unhesitatingly.

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

From The Camp Of The Saints" Sarah Palin: America’s St. Sebastian Martyr

Originally published at Bob Belvedere's highly regarded site "The Camp Of The Saints"

Sarah Palin: America’s St. Sebastian Martyr

Saint Sebastian was martyred during the reign of the Roman Emperor Diocletian:
“Sebastian had prudently concealed his faith, but in 286 was detected. Diocletian reproached him for his supposed betrayal, and he commanded him to be led to a field and there to be bound to a stake so that certain archers from Mauritania would shoot arrows at him. “And the archers shot at him till he was as full of arrows as an urchin
The purest metaphors are contained in abundance in this brief description of the martyred Saint and Governor Palin with the addition of Governor Palin undergoing her trials without the protective benefit of  having “prudently concealed her faith.” In fact both his real and her metaphorical martyrdom’s are, in his case totally, and in her case largely, the result of a deeply abiding Christianity.
Whilst Sebastian’s arrows were real (and not terminal as it happens) so too have been Palin’s in the Shakespearean “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” sense, and whilst his were physically painful Palin’s must have been mentally torturing to a level that only a near saint could bear.
That the foregoing might be considered by some as hyperbole is ludicrous to the nth degree. If anyone, who is not a monster, holds to that mindset let them consider this partial outline of what Palin has had to endure these last seven years. The benighted saint, in the Andrea Mantegna depiction, has at least 17 arrows piercing him, Palin’s “arrows” those made of specific and attacks on her and those representing forces in American society total at least seven, a martyrs quiver full too.
What great service Palin has done through all this is to expose to the scorching light of day the sick madness that underlies so much of the “progressive” movement. That this happened because, in the main, she dared to take on their idol Barack Obama in 2008 has a special piquancy now that the same progressive forces declare Obama to be a “centrist sell-out.”
Here are just some examples:
1. “Her ‘son’ Trig is not hers. It is her Daughter Bristol’s and Sarah pretended to have it”
This insanity was created at the execrable Kos Mouitsas’s “Daily Kos” (“Mission accomplished Sarah Palin” over Gifford’s) website and has run and run. The far fringes of “progressivism” at such sites as “Immoral Minority” have made it a staple with such variants as “The Palin’s have a number of ‘Trigs’ with different “ruffled ears” to identify them, which they wave around like a flag to get money.” They got these “Trigs” by taking in pregnant drifter teenagers and murdering them-subsequently burying the unwanted “Trig’s” under their airport hanger’s concrete slab.
2. Palin brought to light the utter hatred of conservatives from leftist elements of the homosexual movement. This descended into the pit of Hell with Andrew Sullivan picking up the “Trig Truther” madness as declaring it was “a legitimate question” as to whether Trig was Sarah’s and whether the Wasilla hospital staff had been “paid off.” Readers at Gay sites like “Joe My God” and “Towleroad” still go into spasms of foaming rage whenever a Palin-hate article is run even today.
3. The “progressive feminist” movement en mass left Palin hanging in the wind when she was under the most vicious, misogynistic attacks ever seen on a woman in public life. These same alleged humans go berserk at the slightest perceived attack on Hillary Clinton.
4. The leftist media gave away any pretensions of even-handedness when dealing with Palin who was the subject of the Ezra Klein “JournOlist” conspiracy. Even though Obama is safe they still deal with Palin in the most arrogant elitist manner with Politico’s Roger Simon leading the charge.
5. In the Blogosphere such luminaries as Taylor Marsh and Doug Mataconis seem to lose touch with reality and humanity when they address Palin. Permanent hate sites like “Sarah Palin Has a Serpents Heart” and various clearly troubled people like Malia Litman still slither across the social media whilst pure venomous hate sites like Wonkette use Palin for click bait and grifting whilst letting their alleged human readers call her every filthy name they can come up with.
6. Palin, through her mere existence exposed the irrationality, narcissism and ignorance of Hollywood and TV. Actors, to whom society gives some level of credence spout any sort of stupidity and or crudity about her which gets massive coverage.
7. Seven years later, at a time when Palin holds no office, is not politically active, the left, in the guise of former White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley, does a long hit piece on her in the Washington Post blaming the supposed state of the GOP on her. This is of course a back handed compliment to her as the left ascribes to her some sort of almost mystical power to change the course of history.
What it does signal in reality is the frustration of Daley and the administration at their near powerlessness in a Republican dominated Congress and country. That some of that is indeed Palin’s doing with her endorsements is, again, a compliment to her.
This small slim woman, holding no office, having no great wealth coming from a state as far away from the elitist Beltway centers of power as can be imagined.Yet she has been subject to a seven year long reign of error, hate, madness, insanity unseen before in American history and at a level so out of all proportion to the person who it is directed at. That it, the hate, and not the subject, has been exposed as a major problem in American life is a among her lasting legacies.
That Palin has born all these slings and arrows, these calumnies, on her narrow shoulders proves that if she is not a Saint, she has the patience, perseverance and faith of one. America is in her debt and history will look back at the campaigns against her with wonder and with the clear knowledge that some sort of collective madness affected a part of the American community.
It is a consummation devoutly to be wished that at some point sanity will return to the left and they can look inwards and start to cure the madness that has perverted their collective souls.

Four Of Five New Polls Have Trump In Lead Between 25% & 36%

The CBS poll is obviously an outlier or distorted.It has a margin of error of 7% which is ludicrous

Sunday, October 25, 2015

Trump Soars 8 Points To Tie Carson In Iowa Massive leads In New Hampshire & South Carolina

After two consecutive polls showing Donald trump trailing Ben Carson in Iowa a new CBS poll shows them tied at 27% each which ruins the media "Trump declines" nonsense.

Iowa Republican Presidential CaucusCBS/YouGov

Carson 27, Trump 27, Cruz 12, Rubio 9, Bush 6, Paul 3, Fiorina 3, Huckabee 2, Jindal 2, Kasich 2, Santorum 2, Christie 1, Pataki 0, Graham 0
Quinnipiac had Carson 8 points ahead Oct 22nd
Iowa Republican Presidential CaucusQuinnipiac

Carson 28, Trump 20, Cruz 10, Rubio 13, Bush 5, Paul 6, Fiorina 5, Huckabee 2, Jindal 3, Kasich 3, Santorum 1, Christie 1, Pataki 0, Graham 0 Carson +8

And Bloomberg had Carson 9 points ahead October 23rd
Iowa Republican Presidential CaucusDMR/Bloomberg

Carson 28, Trump 19, Cruz 10, Rubio 9, Bush 5, Paul 5, Fiorina 4, Huckabee 3, Jindal 2, Kasich 2, Santorum 2, Christie 1, Pataki 0, Graham 0

CBS New Hampshire ranking:
  1. Donald Trump – 38 percent
  2. Ben Carson – 12 percent
  3. Jeb Bush – 8 percent
  4. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
     – 7 percent
  5. Carly Fiorina – 7 percent
  6. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
     – 5 percent
  7. John Kasich – 5 percent
  8. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
     – 4 percent
  9. Chris Christie – 2 percent
  10. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
     – 1 percent
  11. Rick Santorum – 1 percent
Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal and George Pataki are all at zero percent in New Hampshire.

The last Bloomberg poll had Trump on 24% so the CBS poll shows a massive increase of 14 points
40% is trump's highest polling too date in South Carolina

South Carolina results:
  1. Donald Trump – 40 percent
  2. Ben Carson – 23 percent
  3. Ted Cruz – 8 percent
  4. Marco Rubio – 7 percent
  5. Jeb Bush – 6 percent
  6. Carly Fiorina – 3 percent
  7. Mike Huckabee, John Kasich, Lindsey Graham – 2 percent
  8. Rick Santorum, Chris Christie, Rand Paul – 1 percent
  9. Jim Gilmore, Bobby Jindal, George Pataki – 0 percent

Saturday, October 24, 2015

Trump Huge Leads In 3 New Hampshire Polls. Leads in 8 Of 10 States Recently Polled

Despite media obsession with Iowa, which has special Evangelical differences from other states Trump marches on in 8 of 10 recent state polls included a massive 34 point lead in Massachusetts at 47.8%.

Here are the three latest polls from New Hampshire

PPP Polling (D) October 20th

"On the Republican side Donald Trump continues to reign supreme. 

He leads the pack with 28% 

12% for Marco Rubio, 
11% for Ben Carson, 
10% for John Kasich, 
9% for Jeb Bush, 
8% for Ted Cruz, 
7% for Carly Fiorina, 
4% for Rand Paul,  
3% for Chris Christie. 

Rounding out the field for the Republicans are

Rick Santorum at 2%, Lindsey Graham, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, and George Pataki all at 1%, and Jim Gilmore at less than 1%.

Boston Herald October 21st

Trump 28, Carson 16, Bush 9, Rubio 6, Fiorina 10, Kasich 6, Cruz 5, Paul 5, Christie 3, Huckabee 2, Santorum 0, Graham 0, Jindal 1, Pataki 0    Trump +12

Bloomberg October 21st

Trump +7
Trump 24, Carson 17, Bush 10, Rubio 8, Fiorina 7, Kasich 7, Cruz 4, Paul 4, Christie 5, Huckabee 1, Santorum 1, Graham 1, Jindal 0, Pataki 0

Friday, October 23, 2015

Two New Ipsos/Reuters Poll's Trump at 31.0-31.8% Confirms ABC Poll 10/23/15

Donald Trump continues about 31% in two new Ipsos/Reuters polls. 

The Ipsos/Reuters standard poll of 806 Republicans has Donald Trump on 31% which matches the non-online poll from ABC taken a few days prior as within the average of the last 10 polls. It appears Hrump has stabilized around this figure. 

The Ipsos/Reuters 5 day tracking poll of 650 Republicans to October 22nd shows Trump at 31.8% with a slight uptick.This is where he has been,with various ups and downs since August 22nd

Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Poll: Trump Open To VP "Outside Current Presidential Candidates" Who Might It Be?

UPDATE May 1st 2016. With Donald trump near certainty to be the nominee and Newt Gingrich confirming he would be happy to run for vie-president I am presenting the poll to see how the various possibilities are viewed. Thank you for your interest.
Original post;
In his interview on "Hannity' when asked if had any "one of three possible vice-presidential running mates in mind Donald Trump replied that he had given it "some thought. He went to say that it was to early to go further than that as he, of course, had to secure the nomination first.

He did say however that there were fine people running for president but that there were also those who were not currently candidates "who could really help and unify the party."

There are two ways of looking at that. Firstly is a VP needed who is centrist who could unify the party if it were perceived that Trump was too far to the right? Secondly is a party unifier required who was a well known and respected conservative to balance out a Trump perceived as being "not a true conservative" as his opponents e.g. in the Club For Growth are apparently soon to do?

Here is a poll that includes a number of possible VP choices for Donald Trump from across the Republican (and outside) spectrum and who are currently not candidates. It might well be that those who have not participated in the to and fro of the campaign might be best suited as a unifying VP and that Trump's choice may well come from these, or other outsiders.

I have set out the case for Governor Palin and Governor Martinez and Governor Sandoval of course a case can be made for all the others and those not listed.

Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Updated:Donald Trump's Really Incredible 2 Day Poll Run; 25%/27% 28% And Now 40% ! Leads By 26%

New Massachusetts Poll:Trump with astounding 34 point lead at 47.8%

Maybe Donald Trump's admiration for New England Patriots star Tom Brady is paying off.
Nearly half of the likely GOP presidential primary voters in Massachusetts want Trump as their presidential nominee in 2016, a new poll says.
Trump leads his closest competition in the Bay State by 34 points, according to the latest Emerson College Polling Society survey.
The poll, released on Wednesday, found that 47.8 percent support Trump becoming the Republican presidential nominee next year.
Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson ranks second with 13.9 percent, while Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) earns 11.8 percent.
No other GOP White House hopeful receives double-digit voter support in Massachusetts.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush places fourth with 6.5 percent. He is trailed by former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina at 6.5 percent and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) at 5.1 percent.
Govs. John Kasich (R-Ohio) and Chris Christie (R-N.J.) then take 2.8 percent and 2.3 percent, respectively, making them the last Republican contenders above 1 percent in Massachusetts.
Wednesday’s poll also found that 43.1 percent of GOP voters surveyed plan on voting in their state’s presidential primary in March.
The Emerson College Polling Society conducted its latest sampling of 271 likely Republican primary voters from Oct. 16 to Oct. 18. It has a 5.9 percent margin of error.
Trump has repeatedly touted his admiration for Brady.
Brady even displayed a cap bearing the billionaire’s “Make America Great Again” slogan in his locker during a home game in Foxborough, Mass.
Trump’s lead over Carson is much closer nationally, only 5 points separating the two contenders for next year’s GOP presidential coronation.
He edges out Carson with 26.2 percent to the retired neurosurgeon’s 21.2 percent, according to the latest RealClearPolitics average of samplings.
Massachusetts is a solidly Democratic state, but its voters will go to the polls on March 1 as part of Super Tuesday.

First in New Hampshire Trump has a massive lead 17 point lead

New Hampshire Republican Presidential PrimaryPPP (D)Trump 28, Carson 11, Fiorina 7, Rubio 12, Bush 9, Kasich 10, Cruz 8, Christie 3, Paul 4, Santorum 2, Graham 1, Huckabee 1, Jindal 1, Pataki 1

New Ipsos Reuters 5 day tracking poll Trump 32.6. Further indication of Carson slowing if not commencing a decline. Peaked at 19.7% now 16.4%

Nationwide up to 26 points in Morning Consult

And here is the polling aggregate trendline

Now the ridiculous IBD poll has dropped out from the more restrictive Real Clear Politics averages a clearer position for Trump emerges as does the trend line

Monday, October 19, 2015

Sanders Supporters "Toothless Tigers" As Bernie Gets "Palin Treatment"

In Hillary Clinton's 2000 campaign for senator from New York State the left made a huge fuss about the Republican candidate Rick Lazio "invading Hillary's space during the debate"

"many debate viewers thought he (Lazio) had invaded her personal space and as a result Clinton's support among women voters solidified"

Here's how the far left "progressive site "Mother Jones" described it

"The next day, media outlets began to embrace Wolfson's portrayal of Lazio as a sexist bully. "In Your Face," proclaimed a headline in the Daily News. Jon Stewart titled his segment on the debate "Rodham 'N Creep." Eventually, the Clinton campaign's depiction became the dominant assessment. Lazio was "Darth Vader with dimples,"

Fast forward to the first Democratic debate where Hillary not only invaded progressive darling Bernie Sanders space but she took hold of him to congratulate him when he helped her (oddly) over the "emails" problem. (Exaggerated, tellingly in the SNL version) Has there been a word about this from the various leftist sites like 'Daily Kos' or Wonkette or indeed Mother Jones? Not a peep.

In fact these sites, which are so quick to rage about "sexism" and suchlike don't see the irony of what happened in the debate. What is also ironic is their utter failure to recognize that Sanders is being given the "Palin treatment" by the media.

SNL brought in Larry David to portray Sanders and he presented him as a befuddled, slightly dotty archetypal New York Jew. The same "progressives" who reveled in Tina Fey's ridiculous characterization of Palin (some still believe it was Palin who said "I can see Russia from my window" to this day) as a rural rube, are blind to what SNL are doing to Sanders.

In fact Daily Kos ran the SNL episode with the headline injunction "Enjoy!" It is hard to believe they are so blind that they can't understand that Hilary was treated with kid gloves and that a continuous series of such portrayals of Sanders will create a false persona which will become the "real person" in many voters minds.

The video of the SNL episode on YouTube has a few comments from leftists upset with the Sanders portrayal, but they are the prescient, and so far unheeded, minority

Who would have thought that such leftists activists who were so violent in their attacks on Lazio and then Palin would turn out to be such toothless wimpy "tigers' when one of their own is so obviously under attack.