(2).png)
Republican Party logo (public domain)
Click here for: Part 1 Part 2 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6
But, words are words, and talk is cheap. The proof is in the pudding, as its said, and the downright frightening poll results speak volumes simply standing on their own. When reading through the poll results, please keep in mind that it is February of 2010, not February of 1910.
With that, the following are the results from the most recent Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll of “self-identified” Republicans.
In the 2010 Congressional elections will you definitely vote, vote, not likely vote, or definitely will not vote?
83% of all respondents said that they would either “vote” or “definitely vote”.
If the 2012 Primary for President were held today, which of the following would you vote for?
From the entire sample, 16% said they would vote for Fmr. Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), 11% for Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA), 10% for Fmr. VP Dick Cheney (R-WY), 7% for Fmr. Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), 7% for Fmr. Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR), 3% for Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-MN), 2% for Rep. Dr. Ron Paul (R-TX), and 2% for Sen. John Thune (R-SD).
Other prospective candidates, such as Sen-Elect Scott Brown (R-MA), Fmr. Rep. Joe Scarborough (R-FL) and Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), were not identified as options. 42% of respondents said they were undecided.
So, the plurality of people with a preference decided that a less-than-half-term Governor of Alaska, who has, time after time, proven that she has little-to-no knowledge of any policy that exists in American Government today; can't list source she actually reads other than Worldnet Daily for her information (ironically, the website which also purchased multiple hundreds of thousands of copies of her book); and believes that Man walked with the dinosaurs; believes that she would be the best choice for President of the United States.
These aren't “attacks on character”, these are facts in the public record.
Following that is someone who ran for President in 2008 far to the right of where he governed in Massachusetts, and a Vice President who not only truly believes Saddam Hussein masterminded the 9/11 terrorist plot (or lies about it), believes the Vice Presidency is its own branch of government, and who's Chief of Staff was convicted of four felonies.
Should Barack Obama be impeached, or not?
Across all respondents, 39% said “yes”, 32% said “no”, and 29% were “not sure”. This means that 68% of “self-identified” Republicans didn't immediately say “no” when asked if the President should be put on trial for high crimes and/or misdemeanors that haven't been committed. Disagreeing with your point of view is neither a high crime nor a misdemeanor. People are supposed to disagree.
This is, at the very least, extremely disturbing. It was bad enough that an overzealous, hyper-partisan Special Prosecutor brought bogus articles of impeachment to Congress for Fmr. President Clinton. His crime, of course, was essentially “receiving oral sex from someone who wasn't his wife”. Were this an actual crime or misdemeanor, there would be several embarrassed members of Congress; including Republicans.
In this case, President Obama has done nothing even close to approaching the criteria for impeachment. Having an opposing viewpoint is not a crime, not in this country. The hypocrisy in squaring this fact with the venom spewed forth from “tea partiers” who claim their liberty and free speech is being somehow infringed upon is staggering.
Click here for: Part 1 Part 2 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6
Comments
"and believes that Man walked with the dinosaurs...these are facts in the public record" Best do some more fact checking. There is nothing in the public record that indicates that SP is a young-earth creationist.
Thank you for reading gengwall!
I can't post links in the comments section, but if you can cut and paste this link into your browser, you'll see that what I wrote is indeed in the public record.
articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/28/nation/na-palinreligion28
This is one of the worst articles I've ever read. Anyone who believes that a Daily Kos poll of what republicans believe is going to be accurate is either a hard line partisan or extremely ignorant. In this case, it's obvious that Mr. Deusser is both. He can claim he doesn't belong to a party, but his rantings betray him. Why in the world would you trust one of the most liberal websites to produce accurate information on their opposition? It's like looking at Redstate.com to find out what democrats believe. It will obviously be skewed. Finally, Mr. Deusser's lack of integrity shows with this line, "President Clinton. His crime, of course, was essentially “receiving oral sex." What a blatant lie. Pres. Clinton was being sued for using a position of authority over Paula Jones to get sex, and he lied while under oath. That was the crime, perjury. Can you imagine if Bush had been accused of that? I'm sure Mr. Deusser would be there for the lynching.
Yeah, Deusser, he's right. Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Everything else you said was accurate so you don't have to be a Republican about it. Anyway, I'm not sure you mentioned that the actual poll was done by a recognized non-partisan research group (Research 2000). It's easier to understand the results of this poll if you figure in the fact that only about 20% of RV's consider themselves Republicans. We're talking about the uneducated nut-jobs here.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!