So say the two latest polls out of the State of Alaska:
With the latest poll showing her approval rating at 89 percent, Gov. Sarah Palin may now be the most popular governor in the nation.
A recent public opinion poll taken by Ivan Moore Research showed both Republicans and Democrats in favor of the state’s first female governor. The poll comes just two weeks after a separate poll taken by Dittman Research gave Palin a 93 percent approval rating.
While political polling numbers can fluctuate week to week, Palin’s numbers have consistently been extremely high, putting her near or at the top among the nation’s governors, according to Jennifer Duffy, an analyst at the Cook Political Report, a Washington, D.C.-based research group that closely follows state politics.
“She is only the 14th person in the nation to take out an incumbent governor in a primary. That’s about the hardest thing you can do in politics, so she was starting from a good point,” Duffy said.
Palin beat then-Gov. Frank Murkowski in last August’s Republican primary before winning the general election in November.
“In a lot of ways that was the race, so she started in a good position,” Duffy said.
The Ivan Moore poll surveyed 500 people throughout the state on the governor’s performance as well as her Alaska Gasline Inducement Act. Fifty percent of those asked said they thought Palin’s gas line law would increase the chances of a North Slope pipeline getting built to transport natural gas to the Lower 48. Twenty-one percent of respondents said the gas line law was flawed.
Only 5 percent of those asked said they thought negatively about Palin’s work in her six months as governor.
Alaska’s Sarah Palin and Minnesota’s Tim Pawlenty remain the two greatest GOP success stories of 2006. Both were able to run as conservatives and win in the west and the north — regions that largely abandoned the GOP last fall — despite a national tectonic shift against Republicans due to the trio of incompetence, corruption, and unpopular positions on key issues, such as Iraq and stem cell research. And now Palin is the nation’s most popular governor. She’s young, effective, and nearly as sexy as Dick Cheney, if that were possible. If anyone should be on the eventual nominee’s shortlist in 2008, it’s her.
May 30th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
I object to the gushing over Pawlenty, who actually is what hardcore conservatives like to *think* McCain is.
I’ll have to look more into Palin.
May 30th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Alaska would bring nothing to the ticket – you need a VP candidate where there are people that vote – at least one person on the ticket should be from the south.
May 30th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
But could the GOP win with a Veep candidate who often looks like a librarian in a porn film?
I, for one, say we should find out.
May 30th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
I absolutely agree that Gov. Palin would make a great VP candidate. Considering republicans tend to nominate governors and democrats tend to nominate senators, then she’d serve as a great counterbalance to Hillary Clinton and she’d balance out the GOP ticket very well if a senator is nominated. She’s pretty, young, VERY conservative (100% pro-life (no compromise on exceptions)), and very popular. I’d rather her run against Ted Stevens in ‘08 for US Senate, but being VP would be great too.
May 30th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
LOL. Me too, Sean. Me too.
May 30th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
DanielW, I, too, would prefer she run against Ted Stevens.
VP candidates are chosen to balance out the perceived weakness of a candidate — with Bush, he chose Cheney to add experience and depth to the ticket (certainly not to deliver Wyoming!); Gore chose Lieberman to offset the Clinton legacy; Kerry chose Edwards because he was seen as some Liberal From Massachusetts and he wanted to balance that with a so-called “moderate” Southerner.
Palin, therefore, would make a good VP candidate…FOR RUDY. For Romney, McCain, Thompson, or Gingrich, she’d be a fantastic waste of ticket space. Romney would do best to consider someone like Pawlenty, if Romney keeps up this pure-conservative thing. Thompson would do well to pick Pawlenty, too. Gingrich would need someone more socially moderate, like…grr, this just reminds me of how mad I am that Governor Ehrlich (MD) lost in 2006…I can’t even think about it, it makes me so mad…anyway, and McCain would benefit from someone like Sanford.
Look at all of the tickets of even just the 2000’s so far and you’ll see only VP candidates added for balance. That’s the key to picking a VP.
May 30th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Yeah, the more I find out about this Palin lady, the less I like her. Check out her Wikipedia article. She’s a populist/communitarian. Not a small-government type lady.
Perfect for a Rudy VP!
However, thinking down the road…she’d be the frontrunner for the Presidential nomination if Rudy had 2 terms…but she’d lose, because after 16 years of GOP rule, the public would want a Democrat.
No worries! Palin would work for Giuliani.
May 30th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Where’s PalinforVP ????? You’d think he’d be all over this.
May 30th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Likewise…I thought this whole post was singly dedicated to him.
May 30th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
I third that, where is PalinforVP?
May 30th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Its hard to do VP watch before the POTUS candidate is chosen. Its very unlikely for instance that Romney would pick Palin, cos then there would be just 6 years of governor experience between them.
Good tickets are generally Governor at the top (preferably 6-8 years experience) & experienced Senator at the bottom (preferably with a re-election under their belt).
However, if an experienced Senator makes the ticket, they’ll pick a young candidate to provide something new to balance with the tried and true. But I think they’ll pick someone to try and carry a state (e.g. Kerry tried to get NC). So Palin wouldn’t bring anythign to McCain/Thompson/Brownback…
May 30th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Incidentally, I’ve been doing some research on all POTUS candidates since 1900.
Alaska has never had a representative on the ticket, while New York & Massachussetts have punched well above their weight (14 & 6 respectively, note counting system meansFDR only counts once).
Looking at just VP’s, Indiana is the surprise with 5 nominations (Quayle Fairbanks & Marshall were successful, Fairbanks in ‘16 & Kern were unsuccessful) although Indiana has never had a rep at the top of the ticket. Bayh probably fancies his chances on the Dem side, what about Lugar for the R’s?
May 30th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
The only other state with 5 or more VP nominations is New York, with 6. Of those 6, 2 were successful (Rockefeller – not in an election, and Sherman) while 4 were unsuccessful (Kemp, Ferraro, Miller, and FDR in ‘20).
But somehow I can’t see Giuliani or Hillary getting a VP nod. Spitzer will gun for the top in 4/8 years, while Pataki is DOA.
May 30th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
I was kind of wondering where PalinforVP was, too, but I didn’t bother mentioning it. Haha.
And JayPe — I agree. I can in no way, shape or form see Giuliani or Clinton as VP. I also agree about Spitzer. And, as I said in Post 6, I too believe that Palin brings nothing to a McCain or Thompson ticket.
We’re in sync today!
May 30th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
TLG, our synch-ness is impressive. Shall we tackle world peace next? Whoops, sorry, the new Miss Universe is doubtless arguing for that right now…
May 30th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
So, lets adjust this discussion.
Lets assume a Governor/executive wins the POTUS nod (Romney or Giuliani or Huckabee) who is the experienced Senator they’d add to the ticket?
And, If a Senator wins the top slot (McCain or Brownback or Thompson) who’s the rising star Governor who they would pick to inject life & carry a state?
May 30th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Rudy or Romney picks Thompson or Sanford or Barbour
Thompson or McCain picks Pawlenty or Romney or Palin
May 30th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
In 2004, Bush lost to Kerry by just three percent in Minnesota (the margin just 98,000 votes in a state where over 2.8 million were cast). Governor Pawlenty, as host of the GOP convention, will be well-positioned to fill that role for McCain or Thompson should Giuliani or Romney falter.
The other ‘rising star’ governor who could secure a swing state for McCain (but not Thompson for geographical reasons) is Florida Governor Charlie Crist, who is currently in Israel building his foreign policy credentials.
Crist’s trip to Israel could pay off now and on the trail
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/state/epaper/2007/05/27/m1a_CRIST_ISRAEL_0527.html
May 30th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
I can’t see Romney being VP. He doesn’t bring Massachussetts (or any state in the NE, unless you count NH) into play at all. He doesn’t have foreign policy experience either, so doesn’t fill that need.
Unless he’s there as a rising star, which maybe is fair. Although from now if he fails to secure the nomination his star may be tarnished a little…
May 30th, 2007 at 9:01 pm
Crist is interesting, as (goign back to my earlier analysis) did you know a Florida rep has never been on a ticket for P/VP? For such a large swing state its pretty incredible…
He’d only have 2 years governing experience though. Bush would be better, if he wasn’t Bush.
May 30th, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Rudy’s VP Top 10
1. Fred Thompson
2. Newt Gingrich
3. Haley Barbour
4. Jeb Bush
5. Condoleezza Rice
6. Mike Huckabee
7. David Petraeus
8. Mark Sanford
9. Tommy Thompson
10. Duncan Hunter
* Wild-card alternate….John Bolton
Another name on McCain’s short list…Tom Ridge.
May 30th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
There’s a reason I think, that it often makes sense to go with defeated rivals in the VP slot. They’ve played the game, and recently. They’re fairly well versed on all the issues of national significance. They’re, in short, polished. It’s possible of course to find other possibilities who are well versed on the issues of the day. Prominent senators or congressmen for instance. But, I think, there’s no good reason to expect that a person’s who’s only been governor of a state for one year, and a state often pretty disconnected from national politics, would be able to handle the spotlight that the VP slot inevitably brings. I think even this would have some exceptions.
I think for instance that Bobby Jindal, when he’s elected governor later this year, would be a fine VP pick despite his age (37 on election day), and minimal experience in elective politics, because he’s known as dynamo policy wonk, who’s had significant government experience outside of office. He’d be well versed on the issues of the day because, 1.) He’s been dealing with them more directly as a congressman, and 2.) Because he’s the type of person who’s versed on ALL issues.
But, even with someone like him, there’s a risk that the rust will show. I’m just not sure that we ought to be picking candidates, as VP, who not only lack significant experience, but haven’t dealt with national issues deeply.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
Alaska is the least populous state in the nation. That should be considered along with any approval rating.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:31 pm
North Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming all have fewer people than Alaska, but point taken. Any approval rating is appropriately more volatile given the population size.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:37 pm
I don’t know, Argo, I still say that the wild-card choices are George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole!
Jeb Bush and Condi Rice, though — No way! The GOP candidate will HAVE to distance himself from Bush. “Giuliani-Bush” sounds pretty craptastic in that sense.
But yeah, Fred Thompson — definitely Rudy’s #1 pick. I didn’t even think of him for some reason.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Matt, #22, I see your point re defeated rivals. I think Jindal should have a little while to start governing before being thrown in the national spotlight
I think the problem with picking defeated rivals is that you then get 12 people running for the nomination, of which maybe 5 have a shot – with the other 7 in there trying to position themselves for VP (yes, Mr Tancredo & Paul, you can run just to make a point).
I prefer the likes of Warner or Bayh on the Dem side, who dropped out because they didn’t have a shot (I reckon Warner did, but anyway). They should be rewarded for accepting reality & not distracting people. I’m trying to think of an equivalent on the Repub side but its hard (Frist? I don’t think so)
May 30th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
cwpete,
You better give us Wyomingites our due – we don’t get noticed for much out here, but we are the least populous state in this great nation.
We even have one of the largest total land areas to go along with that… what else could you ask for?
May 30th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
I don’t understand this whole “Alaska is the least populous state in the nation” bit. Percentages are ratios. The ratio of support:opposition has nothing to do with the number of people comprising a state.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
TLG, it does make it more volatile though.
Plus, the electoral college isn’t very generous with low population states
May 30th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
HeavyM, #27, gotta love that small large Wyoming. Is there any other politicians there who could do better than the current VP?
May 30th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
I think Thompson is a great choice for VP for anyone, but only if he would be a one-term VP. He is old enough that he won’t be able to run for President after 8 years, which would leave us in a similar position to the one we are currently in.
I would rather see Rudy or Romney nominate Sanford, Barbour or Bush (assuming focus groups say he doesn’t kill the ticket). I especially like Bush because his wife is Mexican, and he speaks spanish which would help with the Hispanic vote, which regardless of immigration will increasingly more important.
With regard to Bush, the ticket could be Rudy/Jeb or Mitt/Jeb, which would perhaps minimize the problems associated with the last name. Those first names are all three distinct enough that that type of bumper sticker is better than any pair of last names.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
I meant to say that regardless of how the amnesty bill goes, the Hispanic vote will be increasingly more important because Hispanics are already the largest minority and they are growing (not including illegals) at a faster rate than the rest of society.
May 30th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Is Bush a chance to return in 4-8 years after a Dem President has stuffed something up? Its tricky for him to stay on the national stage though: Can’t run for Governor for 8 years (Crist is probably expecting the nomination in 4 years time) nor Senate (Nelson isn’t up until 2012 – strange Jeb didn’t take him on in 2006). I don’t theink the House would cut it, although he could try… I suppose he can come back from the wilderness in a few years straight to a national ticket a la Nixon?
What do people think?
May 30th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
JayPe, why does it make it more volatile..?
May 30th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
JayPe, yeah! I was always wondering why Jeb didn’t go for that Senate seat in 2006! He probably would have won!
May 30th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
I think Jeb could remain enough in the spotlight simply by running around speaking to CPAC, Club for Growth and other conservative groups along with conservative radio and TV shows. Also writing the almost obligatory book would help as well.
If we lose in ‘08, it also means we won’t have control of the House or the Senate, so we won’t have any clear GOP leader. He can easily step in and run in 2012 in that scenario. However, if he isn’t on the ticket he wouldn’t be able to run in 8 years after two terms of with Thompson as the VP.
May 30th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
Approval rating is: # in sample who Approve/Total Sample.
If the population is small, the sample size is small – just like the samples of national head to heads are smaller than the actual poll on Election Day (which is much larger). This provides more volatility.
A good example is to toss a coin. You reckon it’ll be heads 50% of the time. Try tossing it 10 times – heads will be probably 20-80% of the time. But toss it 20,000 times – heads will probably be 48-52%. i.e. less volatile as the sample size increases.
May 30th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
Total, utter mathematical fallacy. You’re comparing a random event with equal chances to arbitrarily defined preferences among individuals. Opinion tracking isn’t like flipping a coin. People base their decisions on the actions of the governor. If your logic held true, then approval ratings would be all over the place in each different poll in the small states, and would virtually always hold steady at 50% or so in the large states.
May 30th, 2007 at 11:37 pm
I meant, by the way, that the rationale for approval was arbitrary, not the polling options.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:10 am
“Where’s PalinforVP ????? You’d think he’d be all over this.”
I’m right here…gee the one day my FAVORITE topic gets mentioned, I don’t read R408 untill late…oh well.
SHAMELESS PLUG: For more wonderful reasons why Sarah Palin would make a GREAT Vice-President, feel free to check out my website at palinforvp.blogspot.com.
ThatLibertarianGuy:
“Check out her Wikipedia article. She’s a populist/communitarian”
Wikipedia has a decent, but far from complete bio of Palin, who is generally thought to be a LIBERTARIAN-leaning conservative. You may want to check out her policies on guns (lifetime NRA member), hunting, school choice, and the “subsistence lifestyle” (which is a big issue in Alaska). Her positions on the issues are very well lined out on her gubernatorial campaign website – palinforgovernor.com.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:21 am
Welcome to the post of your life, far too late! Still, better late than never…
:p
May 31st, 2007 at 12:55 am
Didn’t Rudy say he’d put a Democrat on his cabinet? Why not VP? How ’bout Giuliani/Kerry; you know, then Rudy’d have a running mate who was more socially conservative than himself to balance out the ticket… :]
May 31st, 2007 at 12:58 am
JB,
No, that was McCain. Rudy said he’d put his wife on his cabinet.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:59 am
Rudy did not say he’d put a Democrat in his cabinet. That was McCain.
Very typical of McCain. Would be very untypical of Rudy.
May 31st, 2007 at 1:01 am
my bad
May 31st, 2007 at 1:02 am
McCain makes more sense…sorry. Wasn’t being serious anyway.
May 31st, 2007 at 1:03 am
Don’t be so quick to throw away the Kerry VP idea, JB…all hope for social conservatism ain’t lost.
May 31st, 2007 at 1:05 am
Right…mistake noted, I stand by the second part of my post #42.
May 31st, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Romney/Palin = hottest presidential ticket ever.
June 4th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
[...] palin and Minnesota&8217s Tim Pawlenty remain the two greatest GOP success stories of 2006. …http://race42008.com/2007/05/30/veep-watch-gov-sarah-palin-sports-90-approval-rating/Washington Post Columnist – Washington PostSarah palin instead of deciding a priori that we just [...]