Quantcast
Connect with us

Obama would destroy Palin in hypothetical race, poll finds

Published

on

WASHINGTON — Sarah Palin predicted Sunday that Barack Obama would lose the presidency if he was currently facing re-election. But apparently that’s far from true if she’s the Republican challenging him, a new poll finds.

“I think if the election were today, I do not think Obama would be re-elected,” Palin said on Fox News.

While studies find the president’s job approval ratings on a downward curve, a just-released poll by the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion finds that Obama would decisively defeat Palin in a hypothetical race between the two and independent New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg.

ADVERTISEMENT

Marist found that Obama would win such a match-up by 15 points, garnering 44 percent of the vote to Palin’s 29. Bloomberg was behind with 15 percent.

The race may well turn out to be a reality as polls show Palin is a leading contender for the Republican nomination in 2012. She also strongly suggested this weekend she may enter the race, telling Fox’s Chris Wallace it would be “absurd not to consider” running.

Palin offered Obama some advice on how he might boost his popularity rating, suggesting it would help him to “declare war on Iran” or “play the war card.”

Democratic strategists have expressed their hope that Palin will be challenging Obama as the GOP nominee in 2012, believing the president is virtually guaranteed victory if that’s the case.

ADVERTISEMENT

Republicans are divided on the question of Palin’s potential candidacy. As popular as she is with the core conservative base, many GOP strategists are skeptical as to whether she can pose a serious challenge to Obama in a general election.

The Marist poll also found some potentially troubling news for Obama as his disapproval rating, 47 percent, was higher than his approval rating, 44 percent. The strongest drop in support was among independents, 57 percent of whom held a negative view of his performance.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Facebook

Zuckerberg: new Facebook panel can overrule him

Published

on

Facebook said Tuesday it has finalized its charter for its "independent oversight board," giving the panel the authority to overrule chief executive Mark Zuckerberg on questions of appropriate content.

The new entity, based on Zuckerberg's call for a "supreme court" that would make difficult calls on what is suitable content for Facebook, is moving closer to reality with the charter released by the social network.

Zuckerberg said in a statement the independent panel would have the final say on these matters of what belongs on the social platform.

"If someone disagrees with a decision we've made, they can appeal to us first, and soon they will be able to further appeal to this independent board," he said.

Continue Reading

Facebook

Human Rights Watch accuses Brazil’s Bolsonaro of giving a ‘green light’ to illegal loggers to destroy the Amazon

Published

on

Human Rights Watch on Tuesday accused Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro of giving a "green light" to illegal loggers to destroy the Amazon and failing to protect those defending the world's largest rain forest.

Bolsonaro, whose anti-environment rhetoric and policies have been widely blamed for a spike in fires and land clearing in the Amazon this year, has promised to open up the remote region to more development even as he faces growing international criticism.

Official figures show Amazon deforestation nearly doubled in the first eight months of this year, compared with the same period in 2018, to 6,404 square kilometers (2,472 square miles) -- more than twice the size of Luxembourg.

Continue Reading
 

Facebook

So-called ‘limited’ nuclear war would actually be very bad and kill tens of millions, warns new report

Published

on

"We urgently need sensible action to reduce and eliminate nuclear risk."

Even a limited nuclear war would be catastrophic and kill millions, a new study finds, despite the belief of the Pentagon that the U.S. military could effectively and safely use nuclear weapons in a conflict.

The report, which Princeton University's Science and Global Security Lab presents in video form, affirms the position of anti-nuclear war activists that no use of nuclear weapons is sensible—or safe.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image