Vote here.
Walker's proportion has gone from 43% over the course of the day to 47%, which I assume is partly because of the promotion of Drudge saying he is the frontrunner. That last 4% is (I'm guessing) the combined effect of: 1. increased name recognition, and 2. you just want to be on the side that's winning.
ADDED: Of course, Drudge's poll is not scientific! No need to tell me that. Here. I'll do a poll too. Have at it:
२ फेब्रुवारी, २०१५
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४२ टिप्पण्या:
Walker/Paul 2016.
only in a republican primary does something so unscientific carry so much meaning
Walker is basically for open borders. Literally. He thinks the solution to illegal immigration is to make it so easy to immigrate legally that no one will need to come illegally.
Most GOP primary voters- who like most Americans, overwhelmingly oppose any increase in immigration- don't know that yet, but it's beginning to get some attention in the conservative blogosphere, as in this thread today by Allahpundit at Hot Air:
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/02/02/scott-walker-im-not-for-amnesty/
There is no other candidate who can bridge the divisions in the party the way that Walker can.
Rubio turns off immigration hawks. Paul turns off hawk hawks. Bush turns off anti-establishment types. Cruz turns off the establishment types. Huckabee turns off many of the non-social conservatives.
Only Walker is generally acceptable to all. The main concern was whether he was ready for prime time, and this past weekend showed that he is.
All guns will be now trained on him in the early debates. Get ready for his views to be hyper scrutinized by supporters of the others.
Walker/Jindal
Not Paul. Keep him in the Senate.
"only in a republican primary does something so unscientific carry so much meaning"
What is the scientific basis for your assessment of the amount of meaning being attributed to this, hmmm?
(Gotcha!!!)
No Cruz in your poll ?
I picked Cruz in the Drudge poll.
For some reason Althouse wants to pretend he doesn't exist. Prolly because he pulls from Walker more than anyone else.
IMHO Walker is getting traction way too early. I have the bad feeling that he'll succumb to "front runner-itis" before the end of the year.
Too bad. Anyone that our old friend garage mahal hates that much is bound to be a really good man.
I voted for Trump. At least he is delivering on his Celebrity Apprentice.
Big Mike said...
"IMHO Walker is getting traction way too early. I have the bad feeling that he'll succumb to "front runner-itis" before the end of the year."
Walker's early breakout does have a Michele Bachmann feel to it.
No Ted Cruz?
What's up with that.
Walker has way more experience than other early breakouts and has been vetted in Wisconsin over and over and over. And if Pelosi and Co. want to run down to Mexico (which is what legislators do when Walker comes to town) I say Run, Nancy, Run.
It should be Walker and Rubio or Walker and Cruz. Ted Cruz was not born in this country so I don't know whether that means he can't be vice president - I listened to his filibuster and found him impressive
Sorry. Tried to copy the Drudge list. Didn't mean to omit Ted.
Realizing that this is statistically meaningless...
I didn't vote because my choice, Ted Cruz, wasn't listed.
Good to see Palin and Bush neck and neck.
I voted Walker, but only b/c My Man Mitch refuses to leave Purdue.
I would have voted for Cruz, except that he wasn't on the list. Walker is a close second, with Paul perhaps just behind that.
What Walker has going for him is independent appeal. He is the only one on that list I would consider voting for.
I STAND WITH RAND.
I followed Walker through all the protests and recall, coming to like and respect him more and more. I'm a little worried that he's getting so much attention this early -- but every election is different, and has its own twists and turns. We'll see what happens.
Rand, Cruz, Walker are all acceptable at this point. They have all shown they will fight.
Of them Walker has proved he can win repeatedly.
I fully expect the donor class and the Republicans and democrats that suck off the big government tit to team up on all 3 of them.
I don't know how close Walker and I are in policy, but as Lincoln explained about why he kept Grant, "...he fights."
Perry/Walker. Executive experience counts.
The GOP is doubling down on stupid and permanent exile from the Presidency. Go ahead wingnuts, nominate Walker. I double dog dare ye.
Of course, it is a self-selecting poll, and, no surprise, it shows the home town boy as the big favorite. Still, I was struck by how big his margin is in Ann's poll. Still, Drudge is showing him doing very well too.
I like the guy, and would vote for him, but would probably vote for any of the people running, or maybe running, besides maybe Huckleberry. I really would prefer a governor, or former governor, over a Senator any day, and esp. this time around. We have seen over the last six years how bad a former Senator, without any management experience whatsoever, can do running the country. For most of us, Obama is probably the worst President of our lifetimes - and being worse than Carter took some doing.
So, I like the Walker. We shall see though how well he lasts.
Likes Walker and what he has done in Wisc but hey, running for prez is a whole other thing. He will need hundreds of millions of dollars just to win the nomination, can he raise it? Then there is the popularity contest, i know he did well in Iowa but how will that play down south, out west? In 2012, it seemed like there was a frontrunner every week and a flame out every other week, let's see where Walker is this fall.
Alex said...
"The GOP is doubling down on stupid and permanent exile from the Presidency. Go ahead wingnuts, nominate Walker. I double dog dare ye."
They always show you who they are scared of.
The only thing we know for sure is Hillary will not be the next president.
I seriously doubt she runs. Libya and Benghazi are waiting for her. Her voice will be played on some tapes of her starting the Libyan war and giving weapons to the Al Qaeda rebels there.
Professor, you really need a period of critical self-examination regarding Ted Cruz. You have othered him both wittingly and unwittingly. He is a real and serious candidate, who has opposed Obama, Obamaism, and the Republican Establishment. If he is in the race through the Texas Primary, he is going to have delegates.
This poll is signalling by the Establishment that Walker is a safe alternative to Bush.
C'mon now, Ann, you know I can't vote in your poll or Drudge's.
Voting in a Republican primary would kill eligibility to vote in the Libertarian primary.
Besides, Walker is the only Republican I might actually vote for in the General Election. He needs to keep his head down till at least September of 2016.
In less than two weeks the MSM can have half the country believing he's alternately Bozo the Clown and Freddy Krueger.
Well, I take that back. Ben Carson or Rand Paul would work, but I don't think Dr. Carson is seriously interested and the crucifixion of Rand Paul is already well underway.
Rubio is not a natural born Citizen, since he was born to US legal residents and not US Citizens.
Ted Cruz is not eligible, since he was born in CANADA to a Cuban citizen father.
Achilles said...
Alex said...
"The GOP is doubling down on stupid and permanent exile from the Presidency. Go ahead wingnuts, nominate Walker. I double dog dare ye."
They always show you who they are scared of.
Not in this case. Alex's only ideology is to stir things up. That's it. This time he's a "lefty", next time he'll be a "conservative." Most people just ignore him.
After the primary contestants have been well bloodied/old face new face John Kasich will enter the fray as the shining knight in armor. He has all of the requisite tickets and a proven track record. End of story.
Walker/Martinez 2016. I'll vote Libertarian again instead of voting for Jeb. If the GOP can't carry KS without my vote, it will be a Hilary landslide of epic proportions.
Republican UW Professor has sharp words for Walker, seems UW professors need to word "harder" disn't sit well with him.
I live in Wisconsin so maybe I'm just suffering from Walker-fatigue, but I don't see it... at all.
Walker has won in Wisconsin in part because the Dems have put forward terrible, and I mean "You have GOT to be kidding me" terrible, candidates.
Also, the charisma thing, or in Walker's case the lack thereof, is a problem for him in national politics at the retail level.
Why did you leave Cruz out of the list of options?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा