Post User Polls

Who's your pick for the 2012 presidential election?

By Abha Bhattarai  |  September 16, 2010; 7:11 PM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: 'Boardwalk Empire': Will you watch? | Next: Which recent prohibition by the nation's schools has been the biggest mistake?

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Not asingle republican among the bunch suggested above is qualified to be aminstream American leader..no one..im sorry

Posted by: adego20041 | September 17, 2010 1:40 AM

So,why not a Arizona Gov Jan Brewer and former Alaska Gov Sarah Palin Ticket in
2012 that would also gain Tea Party support
and support of conservative and moderate
Republicans and Independents as well here?

Posted by: Ralphinphnx | September 17, 2010 2:01 AM

I really believe that the insurgency tea bag class movement will reach the straining point, once every American over 30 thinks about the loss of social security and medicare. Not gonna happen.

The old white tea bag movement is made up of old white tea bag republican right wing racist. They are dying off and have no depth in the ranks. The country is growing darker each day. The tea bag class are heading into into the minority.

Eight years of Bush spending and mismanagement of government never bothered them. Once the black family moved into the neighborhood (White House), they showed there real racist selves.

The tea bag class can be compared to the British at the battle of New Orleans in the song, there were fewer than there was a while ago. The white tea bagers are dying off into a minority status.

President Obama will be here for a long time.

Posted by: COWENS99 | September 17, 2010 2:04 AM

this may not be scientific but i think it is a barometer to work with.hard to beat a sitting president he doesnt have to do aprimary and thr republicans are the weakest in decades if not ever.daniels and thune are the only two without a truckload of luggage and i dont know much of either.

Posted by: donaldtucker | September 17, 2010 2:10 AM

Governor Bobby Jindal is doing an exceptional job as Louisiana's chief executive in very difficult times. Mitch Daniels is also very capable and Governor Perry is pretty good at his job, too. They would, from that list of names, be among my top choices. Governor, and soon to be Senator, John Hoeven would also be a good choice.
I will be interested, in the long term, to see how a business experienced leader like Nimrata Haley does as a governor. With a few terms of governor experience under her belt, by 2020 she might be a contender for first woman president of the U.S. A president who has run a private sector business before would be nice to have.

Posted by: SCOTSGUARDS | September 17, 2010 2:42 AM

Ha ha

Posted by: eaglehawkaroundsince1937 | September 17, 2010 3:20 AM

None of the listed are qualified to improve on what we have going. The republicans will offer nothing new. The Tea Baggers are so out to lunch that by 2012 it will become apparent how out of touch they actually are. Like the women in Delaware who is completely out of touch, they're a flash in the pan. I hope the voters that put Barak of Obama into office vote in large numbers and block these nonsense candidates from office. All of them are critics of this country with no solutions. My 2 yr. old cries less about life. The tea baggers would try to make interracial marriage illegal again.

Posted by: SoupLine | September 17, 2010 3:28 AM

C'mon, Wapo! Ron Paul is relegated to "other"? Sheesh.

Posted by: jdadson | September 17, 2010 4:09 AM

Not a single candidate among the bunch suggested above is qualified to be president.

Posted by: jdadson | September 17, 2010 4:12 AM

2012 is still Obama's election to lose.

I don't think he's looking at a 1984 Reagan style resurgence simply because the economic woes have different causes and different remedies. Reagan's recession was largely induced by Fed policy in order to tame inflation and it was largely alleviated by Fed policy once the inflationary pressures dissipated and the Fed started reducing rates. The recession that Obama inherited is more in line with the balance sheet recession that lead to Japan's lost decade and the 1930s Great Depression. Until the high levels of consumer debt have a chance to work their way through the economy, the recovery will be tepid at best and could very well take a double dip.

The president probably won't be able to pass a major stimulus bill over GOP opposition -- especially if the GOP continues to see political advantage in sabotaging the recovery. It's important politically though to make a fight out of it and to at least demonstrate clearly that he is doing everything possible to turn things around -- if the GOP doesn't want to contribute to that process it's important that he highlight their obstruction. It's important though to actually take "audacious" action.

If the economy continues to sputter it's likely to take a toll on the approval ratings of GOP Governors as well. So national party policy could very well destroy the credibility of future candidates within the GOP.

The economy will almost certainly continue to be an issue going into 2012. If the GOP actually takes back the House and repeats its worst excesses -- the endless Clinton investigations leading pretty much nowhere, the government shutdown, or the Terri Schiavo insanity of the 2000s -- I suspect voters patience will wear thin with them once again. It's amazing that there is even serious consideration of the party after the failures of the 2000s. The Dems might have fallen short in the face of massive challenges, but it's hard to point to any constructive measures that the GOP has actually advanced during that time. Their remedy for every ill economic or other pretty much remains "more tax cuts for the rich".

Posted by: JPRS | September 17, 2010 4:18 AM

H Fenty. consider moment today to make DC democratic Party viable, ACCEPT REPUBLICAN NOMINATION FOR MAYORAL RACE Vs Buddy. such cheap beat up of citizen voter, right now, end.

http://www.tbd.com/articles/2010/09/mayor-adrian-fenty-wins-unofficial-republican-nomination-11886.html

Stgned:PHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART von DRASHEK M.D.

Posted by: thomasxstewart1 | September 17, 2010 4:59 AM

Not scientific, but I would have thought that Obama would do much worse here given the posts I've read on WAPO website. This gives me hope actually.

Maybe if we stand against tax cuts for the rich, and for cuts for middle class we have a chance.

Posted by: sarlat | September 17, 2010 5:31 AM

You could hold a gun to my head and I wouldn't vote for a republican - at any level.

Posted by: notfooledbydistractions1 | September 17, 2010 5:43 AM

Your unscientific poll proves you readership is the far left.
Obama has an approval rating of about 44% overall and yet 65% 0F those taking your poll favor him.

Posted by: nychap44 | September 17, 2010 6:14 AM

Ron Paul. Michele Bachmann. Anyone who will slash the size of government.

Posted by: Bearbank | September 17, 2010 6:41 AM

I don't care if it's a tapeworm on the ballot.... I'll vote for it before I ever again vote for a socialist. Obama is a flaming stateist extremist and his narcissistic thirst for power must be stopped at all costs. Look what the liberal elites have done to the country....we are losing incentive to try and live the American dream after the Dem Party's assault on the middle class.

Posted by: Capitalist-1 | September 17, 2010 6:55 AM

Ralph Nader. He is the only one who advocates economic and political empowerment of individuals.

Posted by: Cosmo4 | September 17, 2010 6:59 AM

I promise you this -- any ticket with Sarah Palin will be a losing one. She's a "love her or hate her" type candidate, the worst sort for a party that is already fractured.

Posted by: microsoft | September 17, 2010 7:02 AM

Hillary 2012

Posted by: rloghouse1 | September 17, 2010 7:25 AM

I chose Obama, but in hindsight I wish Hilary would have won. Her agenda was more centrist than Obama's, but I think she would have not hesitated to ram it through w-style. We might have single payer, real banking reform.... Who knows?

But the dems idea of compromise (aka "do it the republican way") is crap.

Posted by: filfeit | September 17, 2010 7:28 AM

Hillary!!!

Posted by: duffdc | September 17, 2010 7:30 AM

obama only gets 7 years and then he is toast...

Posted by: DwightCollins | September 17, 2010 7:34 AM

Hillary Clinton

Posted by: Utahreb | September 17, 2010 7:35 AM

"Not scientific, but I would have thought that Obama would do much worse here given the posts I've read on WAPO website. This gives me hope actually.
Maybe if we stand against tax cuts for the rich, and for cuts for middle class we have a chance.
Posted by: sarlat | September 17, 2010 5:31 AM"

will you have a chance when your bosses don't get a tax cut and they fire you to make up the difference...
will you have a chance then?????
is your hope, the one you voted for, here yet...
or are you still waiting...

Posted by: DwightCollins | September 17, 2010 7:36 AM

"You could hold a gun to my head and I wouldn't vote for a republican - at any level.
Posted by: notfooledbydistractions1 | September 17, 2010 5:43 AM"

we don't need you, don't you know that...
we would never vote for a dem, we know that...
but the question is...
who will the independents vote for...
they decide the election...

Posted by: DwightCollins | September 17, 2010 7:39 AM

Stupid poll - Meaningless - The typical Post reader is very Liberal. Do one and run Palin, etc directly against the Bozo - see what happens. Typical WAPOST style.

Posted by: veritas7 | September 17, 2010 7:42 AM

Adding to, No matter what "poll" of this nature taken by the WAPO, the Libs will vote for the Bozo. Get real!

Posted by: veritas7 | September 17, 2010 7:48 AM

Anybody but Obama...or some other Democrat.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | September 17, 2010 7:53 AM

Someone wrote here; "Obama will be with us a long time". Many of us believe two more years is indeed a long time...

Posted by: Illinois4 | September 17, 2010 7:57 AM

J.C. Watts

Posted by: JKindred | September 17, 2010 7:59 AM

These results are interesting in that they reflect the readership of the Post. More than 50% of the nation says that they are unsatisfied with Obama. Post readers certainly do not reflect mainstream America.
This is a non political comment and is probably of more interest to advertisers who already know this.

Posted by: bridgebranch1 | September 17, 2010 8:12 AM

I think it will be Hillary. I believe Obama will decide to forgo another 4 years of the hatred and lies from the right and just become the elder statesman of the party and let her be the first woman president. Like Lydon, he will have had enough and will move on. But for the next 2 years he will push hard for his programs as she becomes the face of foreign affairs and a centrist.

Posted by: msjn1 | September 17, 2010 8:14 AM

Considering the pathetic alternatives, I'd say Obama is a shoe in for 2012

Posted by: bozhogg | September 17, 2010 8:23 AM

Anyone but Obama or Palin. These lightweights/extremists are not good for the country.

Posted by: jdub1 | September 17, 2010 8:25 AM

I would vote to reelect President Obama, but only on two conditions:

1. Republicans have to have control of the House and/or the Senate.

2. The Republicans have to have a ironclad filibuster in the Senate.


If either of those two conditions can't be met (highly unlikely) I would vote for a Republican for President.

Posted by: moebius22 | September 17, 2010 8:34 AM

Obama? You're joking, right? He may be intelligent, but this country needs a "leader", not an incompetent!

Posted by: SeniorVet | September 17, 2010 8:34 AM

I have come to realize that both the Republican party and the Democrat party are owned by corporate money/interests. I will be voting for the Green Party as I think they best represent my progressive views.

Posted by: ppease5 | September 17, 2010 8:39 AM

The TEA Party (NOT "Tea Party;" "TEA" is an acronym for "Taxed Enough Already" and should be capitalized) movement tops out at somewhere between 20% to 30% of the electorate. Because their views are unsophisticated, illogical, bizarre and offensive to most of the remainder of the electorate, this will never be enough to win in the general election anywhere.

However, because Republicans only represent about 35% to 40% of the electorate, it is enough to win Republican primaries.

Therefore, the rise of the TEA Party movement is the best thing that has happened to the Democratic Party since Barry Goldwater in 1964 (and fairly similar in nature).

Posted by: FergusonFoont | September 17, 2010 8:41 AM

Hillary! we can't wait and have money to donate.
Obummer and his failed HAMP program (motto- money for banks all the live long day homeowners mail them your keys!!) is getting worse.
every homeowner screwed by a bank that refused to deal with you - vote him out.
bub bye Obummer.
Hillary!!

Posted by: FloridaChick | September 17, 2010 8:48 AM

Obama is my pick. On the Republican side it would probably be Huckabee. At least he had sense enough to understand that the so-called mosque in NYC was not a threat to anyone. It was an expression of religious freedom.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | September 17, 2010 8:56 AM

Paul Ryan

Posted by: 5A1B7C1 | September 17, 2010 9:07 AM

Golly, Obama is hated just as much as was Ronald Reagan. That makes him a shoo-in :_>

Posted by: raschumacher | September 17, 2010 9:09 AM

I would like to see Hilary Clinton as President. She is the one Democrats should have put into office in the first place. Barack Obama was the Democrat version of a Tea Party candidate. Look where that got them.

Posted by: RichardStatenIsland | September 17, 2010 9:27 AM

Poor Sarah. Despite her great qualifications to be something like the RNC Chairperson, she is being pushed towards the Presidency.

Mitt Romney will hand her her cute Butt at any Debate! This time Mitt needs to REALLY knock out the lessor qualified Candidates like our Country's existence relies on it!

Because it DOES!

Posted by: SAINT---The | September 17, 2010 9:53 AM

Hillary can't run until 2016. We have an incumbent democratic president people. President Obama inherited a country in shambles. It is going to take him more than 2 years to get it back on track.

Posted by: nicolealex440 | September 17, 2010 9:59 AM

SAINT---THE, it the republicans pick Romney I'll vote him.

But they're not, are they? He's a Mormon, how many of these tea party evangelicals are going to vote for a heretic ... you know that's what they think of the Mormons.

But if the republicans pick Palin I'll swallow a whole bottle of ipecac and vote for Obama, you betcha. That's the only possible way the democrats would get this independent's vote.

Posted by: eezmamata | September 17, 2010 10:02 AM

I am a Dem who sees fear mongering on the right but must admit the dispondancy is real. Fox has done a splendid job of kicking a hornets nest on every issue from sharia law, muslims in America, Birthers,etc. That said, Obama does have a credibiltiy gap and has NOT taken an overt lead in the most crucial area affecting Americans - job security and economy. Luke warm, idiolistic Dems may fall to passionate Rep party zeolates who earnestly see an America they dislike, even if we do not agree with them. Dems MUST lead from the middle and pick up the independants.

Posted by: cadam72 | September 17, 2010 10:08 AM

If US politics in the 21st century is any indication, the USA is on a fast projectory to be a third world country - look at our potential candidates; on the Republican side, you have some candidates whose views are so whacko-ed out it's ridiculous; what's so scary is that they are winning some races, which doesn't say much about the electorate; some of the others have talked of secession from the country, which doesn't say much about their patriotism, in spite of what they say - on the Democratic side, most are still viewed as weak and wussified; they haven't had a strong leader since LBJ (whether you agree with his politics or not, he was no wuss)--I live in Georgia, where the GOP gubernatorial candidate was a congressman who had ethics charges leveled against him and information has now come forth that he is about to go bankrupt (although he says he is not) and now he failed to disclose some financial information of such magnitude on his required disclosure statement, which of course was just an oversight - and we as Americans are voting for these people -- it doesn't bode well for our future--

Posted by: southernbutnotstupid | September 17, 2010 10:33 AM

Posted by: SCOTSGUARDS | September 17, 2010 2:42 AM
“A president who has run a private sector business before would be nice to have.”


Aaahh … You had your MBA president, President of Harken oil …bush … he worked out really well didn’t he?

Posted by: moebius22 | September 17, 2010 8:34 AM
“I would vote to reelect President Obama, but only on two conditions:
1. Republicans have to have control of the House and/or the Senate.
2. The Republicans have to have a ironclad filibuster in the Senate.”
If either of those two conditions can't be met (highly unlikely) I would vote for a Republican for President.”


HUH! Did you live in the U.S. from January 20,2001 to January 20, 2009?

Republicans have been able to hose up the senate with what they have and I certainly don’t believe we need anymore obstructionism unless they have alternatives … which they do not, except for unfunded tax cuts for the top 2%, start over with a clean sheet of paper, take baby steps, reduce the size of government (WBTW GWB exploded in size), fewer regulations …more TARP, more unfunded war, privatize/eliminate Social Security, voucher-ize Medicare, government is too complicated …

Republicans are leaderless and do not have the temperament to govern much less lead.


Posted by: knjincvc | September 17, 2010 10:43 AM

I love the idea of a Sarah Palin/Jan Brewer ticket.

HALF-TERM GOVERNOR AND UNELECTED GOVERNOR 2012!

Posted by: JamesK1 | September 17, 2010 11:15 AM

Barack Obama? That's all you got?

But after reading these 8th-grade, ill-informed comments, Little Barry might just be what this country deserves.

BTW - Congrats on the new logo, lefties -- it's a game-changer!

Posted by: npsmith | September 17, 2010 11:16 AM

The Republicans, with Tea Party support, will win big this election cycle. They will misinterpret the results and give us a wacky, wing-nut Republican ticket in 2012. The results will be worse for the Republicans than the 1964 Goldwater debacle.

Posted by: maurban1 | September 17, 2010 11:28 AM

jdadson wrote:

Not a single candidate among the bunch suggested above is qualified to be president.
_________________
Hey man. Many said the same thing about Obama in 2008. And after two years in the White House, he's STILL unqualified.

Posted by: Paaa | September 17, 2010 11:43 AM

Dennis Kucinich! He turned out to be right about everything, and he's not in the pocket of Wall Street and the lobbyists. WAKE UP AMERICA!!!

Posted by: susanparker722 | September 17, 2010 11:48 AM

If Palin is running, then I'll have to vote for the anti-colonialist this time.

Posted by: steve1231 | September 17, 2010 11:48 AM

knjincvc wrote:

HUH! Did you live in the U.S. from January 20,2001 to January 20, 2009?

Republicans have been able to hose up the senate with what they have and I certainly don’t believe we need anymore obstructionism unless they have alternatives … which they do not, except for unfunded tax cuts for the top 2%, start over with a clean sheet of paper, take baby steps, reduce the size of government (WBTW GWB exploded in size), fewer regulations …more TARP, more unfunded war, privatize/eliminate Social Security, voucher-ize Medicare, government is too complicated …

Republicans are leaderless and do not have the temperament to govern much less lead.
===========

The opposition party always hoses up things in the Senate- that is how the Senate works. Despite this the Demcorats have passed major pieces of legislation.

I do agree we need leadership, but not the kind that Democrats or Republicans are giving us. Given the current reality, I prefer deadlock to more sweeping ill thought legislation, mindless spending, and no thought given to deficit reduction besides fighting over Bush era taxes (which both parties voted for in the first place).

Posted by: moebius22 | September 17, 2010 12:02 PM

Hey I really like the idea of the GOP ticket for 2012 being my Arizona Gov Jan Brewer for President and Sarah Palin for Vice President best one yet here! Yep you
betcha Any One But Barack Hussein Obama in
2012 and nope no to Mitt Romney the Nitwit,
No to Mike Huckabee the Huckster,and the rest of the Republican Has Beens,and yes Iam a Independent Voter that will never vote for a Democrat for the rest of my
life after the Democrats gave us Obama
and Joe big mouth Biden and Sec of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton the Democrat looney
toons has beens! Take Back America!

Posted by: carleen09 | September 17, 2010 12:07 PM

I'd happily vote for Hillary Clinton, but none of the people on your list.

Posted by: slck | September 17, 2010 12:07 PM

I'll vote for President Obama. I'll not vote "against" anyone. President Obama has withstood the arrows and slings of the opposition gallantly, with class, and with distinction. His original solutions for many of the problems were on target. Being a realist has hurt him in some quarters. He knows that some of the pie is better than none of the pie. Despite their best efforts, Republicans have not beaten his poll numbers to the bottom. In fact, Obama stands to start a steady gain soon.

I personally view Republicans as those who would not help to bail out the water in a sinking boat - even if they are sinking also - if they think that it helps the opposition. Since President Obama has been in office, Republicans have not lifted one finger to try to bail out the mess that they created. Let us watch them dance around fiscal responsibility while pushing for extending the tax cuts on even the wealthiest among us. What nerve!

Posted by: EarlC | September 17, 2010 12:07 PM

Well, the overwhelming support for a failed and crooked President and Administration pretty much sums up the mindless readership of the Post. The lemmings, here, apparently will abandon any pretense to morality or liberalism and march off the free trade cliff with this lying gas bag. Well, the rest of the country is going to crush Obama, and smash liberalism flat because of you fools. When someone repeatedly throws you under the bus YOU ABANDON THEM!

Posted by: mibrooks27 | September 17, 2010 12:08 PM

Gee, WAPO says that we are going to elect the Prophet, amazing. Better suck it up Hillary.

Posted by: peterroach | September 17, 2010 12:11 PM

The Republicans hate the government. They don't want to make it better, they want it to fail. The tea party is worse, they are anarchists dressed in patriotism. No one in their right mind would vote for a Republican to run a government they hate.

On the other hand, the Democrats don't know WHAT they believe in so they just do what their corporate sponsors tell them to do. Ugh!

Until we get money out of politics and the two parties grow up I'm voting third party from now on.

Posted by: Trakker | September 17, 2010 12:17 PM

Not a single one of the potential republicons is anywhere near presidential caliber. Heck, they are not worthy of running for local school board. No matter what the teahadists think, they are a very small minority.

Posted by: John1263 | September 17, 2010 12:22 PM

I don't care if it's a tapeworm on the ballot.... I'll vote for it before I ever again vote for a socialist. Obama is a flaming stateist extremist and his narcissistic thirst for power must be stopped at all costs. Look what the liberal elites have done to the country....we are losing incentive to try and live the American dream after the Dem Party's assault on the middle class.
Posted by: Capitalist-1 | September 17, 2010 6:55 AM

What an absolute jerk

Posted by: hersheyman | September 17, 2010 12:26 PM

Anybody but a Democrat.

Posted by: yipinjr | September 17, 2010 12:28 PM

Where's Hugo Chavez's and Hillary Clinton;s name? Tim Kaine forecast they would both challenge Obama in 12 and, I suspect, if Hugo's name was on this list, he would rank Number 1 among these voters.

Posted by: Patriot12 | September 17, 2010 12:40 PM

BILL RICHARDSON

i've been writing in candidates for many years. in 88,92, 96 and 2000 - i voted for bill bradley. i look for someone willing and ABLE to think outside the box, with the courage to stand up for what they believe in.

not perfect, but the best available at this moment in time.

Posted by: boblesch | September 17, 2010 12:42 PM

I would like to explore the possibility of our present ambassador to China, Mr. Obama sent him over there, and he could be a breath of fresh air for the growing independent sentiment. His name is Jon Huntsman.

Posted by: likovid | September 17, 2010 12:46 PM

Obama has never run a business or met a payroll and is totally unqualified to be president as he has increased debt $3 trillion in 20 months which is treasonous. He lies about his birthplace and his training by the Russian Academy of Sciences to be a communist and atheist sometime prior to 1993. Michelle says it is Hell to be in White House as she is living with a big liar and phony.

Posted by: mascmen7 | September 17, 2010 12:56 PM

Bunch of losers and Barack Obama - no contest...

Posted by: LABC | September 17, 2010 12:57 PM

Mitch Daniels -- Pres
Bobby Jindal -- VP

And there are a lot of great people on this list -- and not listed -- who could comprise a first-rate cabinet (Mitt Romney or Haley Barbour for Commerce, Tom Conurn for HHS come to mind.)

Posted by: mandog | September 17, 2010 1:08 PM

Even if I'm a bit disappointed in Obama, I'd choose "move to Canada" over any of his suggested opponents.

Posted by: AxelDC | September 17, 2010 1:23 PM


TO: LABC who wrote:
“Bunch of losers and Barack Obama - no contest...”

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You say that even in the face of the fact that Obama got 68% of the vote – and you got zero.
Bwaaaah hahahahahahahahahaha


Posted by: lindalovejones | September 17, 2010 1:25 PM

Why isn't Hillary listed as an option? She's my democrat of choice.

Posted by: hit4cycle | September 17, 2010 1:48 PM

This is very interesting as today's latest
Rasmussen Poll for Friday 9-17-2010 finds a
very different picture that shows Kenyan Muslim Inman Wannabe Barack Hussein Obama
Disapproval Rating up to 55% and a drop down to only a mere 45% Approval Rating,so
this can only mean this WAPO poll is a joke
or rigged and is definitely totally damn
well completely inaccurate as well. As the
last and latest Zogby Poll and NBC polls both reveal Barack Hussein Obama is below
50% and has higher and climbing disapproval
numbers as well. So as Congressman Joe
Wilson might well put it about this poll,
"WAPO Lies!" As does Barack Hussein Obama
who also Wilson says "Obama you lie!"

Posted by: sandy5274 | September 17, 2010 1:53 PM

Republicans are idiots.

Posted by: adrienne_najjar | September 17, 2010 2:05 PM

The GOP used to be the party of sound economic practice & strong foreign policy.

Then:
Reagan introduced his well-intentioned but disastrous "Economic Darwinism".
Followed with:
1994 - Newt & the Moral Imperative Vigilantes hijack the party.
Added:
Bush-Cheney...I'll say no more.
Now:
The inmates are running the asylum.

I'd love to have a choice rather than always voting Democrat, but the current state of the GOP leaves no intelligent alternative.

Posted by: nonsensical2001 | September 17, 2010 2:07 PM

SCOTSGUARDS @ September 17, 2010 2:42 AM wrote "Governor Bobby Jindal is doing an exceptional job as Louisiana's chief executive in very difficult times." Is this the same Jindal who,

1. Declares the federal government must get out of the way;
2. Complains that the federal government is not doing enough fast enough to suit his taste with the BP well that exploded?

A paragon of ideological consistency! And he gave that memorable speech that had everyone trying to stay awake!

Posted by: AMviennaVA | September 17, 2010 2:22 PM

Whoever the LP candidate is. I'd like to say Ron Paul, but he will be almost 77 when the election rolls around, and he deserves a nice retirement. So I'll vote for anyone who understands that liberty applies not only to gun-toting, G-d fearing Christians, but Birkenstock-wearing hippie vegetarian atheists as well. In other words, EVERY American. Not one of the yahoos on your list fits that description.

Nonsensical2001, want to join me? http://www.lp.org

Posted by: bucinka8 | September 17, 2010 2:27 PM

Other. Ralph Nader. The two parties that we have are a virtual crime syndicate. And the Tea Party? A lot of the same old politicians who couldn't get elected before have prettied themselves up with a new name and Sarah Palin's stamp of approval. Throw the bums out? And replace them with second-rate bums who know how to tell people what they want to hear, not what they need to hear.

Posted by: curtb | September 17, 2010 2:28 PM

When did the Abha Bhattarai's of this world get their opinions published? (Abba was bad enough.)

To my Democrat friends: go with Abha Bhattarai's poll. Take it to the bank. Believe it!

Ahba the way, let's talk again sometime next month.

Posted by: peterd | September 17, 2010 2:32 PM

"Republicans are idiots.
Posted by: adrienne_najjar | September 17, 2010 2:05 PM"

your mother says you are too...
why is that...

Posted by: DwightCollins | September 17, 2010 2:34 PM

Colin Powell is better than any listed but he will not run.

Posted by: jslivesay | September 17, 2010 2:35 PM

RON PAUL!

Posted by: emily04 | September 17, 2010 2:51 PM

The GOP should run Reagan again.

He was half-dead last time, right?

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | September 17, 2010 2:55 PM

WP runs a poll of their readers and "SHOCK" the commiecrat neo-marxist president comes in first. This is like Huffington running a poll and having the dems come out on top or TownHall running a poll and having the rep come out on top. This poll only shows how far left of sanity the average WP reader is. Cancel your subscriptions folks. Even their Sports section stinks now.

Posted by: whatup | September 17, 2010 2:59 PM

I would vote for none of the above.However,never,never would I vote for another Republican.After Bush/Cheney only a hopeless idiot would vote Republican.Madam Secretary Clinton is my only choice.The corrupt DNC robbed her of the primiary election and they got just what they deserve,an empty suit,Whimp who hasnt a clue,and wil cost them control of the house and possibly the Senate this year.They never learn.

Posted by: nannieturner | September 17, 2010 2:59 PM

It's very simple. My vote is for whoever is running against Obama. That is unless we finally are entitled to a "none of the above" option.

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | September 17, 2010 3:03 PM

this poll was rigged...
they gave obama points just so that he would be the winner...
no wonder he will lose big...

Posted by: DwightCollins | September 17, 2010 3:06 PM

All the Republicans on the list are has-beens. Mike Huckabee? Didn't he bomb in 2008? Romney? He won't even admit he supported his own health care bill in Massachusetts. Another Bush so soon? Wait for the grandchildren to grow up. Why does anyone think Republicans will do anything but save the wealthy? Where do they stand on anything other than No? For the Republicans to have any hope in 2012 they need someone not on the list and who is not a Teabagger.

Posted by: interactingdc | September 17, 2010 3:34 PM

Dumb ppl of america thought they voted for a magician who would use his magic wand and suddenly make all problems dissappear...Happy happy joy joy!!!!!! Let me say it the wayitis...the financial system collapsed, real estate down the toilet, auto manufacturer bye bye, two stinkin wars..should I keep going....and with all this sheet going on ppl are looking for miracle.. Are you ***** kidding me.

Posted by: thewayitis | September 17, 2010 3:39 PM

When George Bush was President I was upset almost everyday. I have noticed that for the last 6 months to a year I am much more calm about the man serving as President. I plan to vote for him again. He must listen to the will of the majority of Americans. After all, we are the ones who put him there. On the other side, Mike Huckaby is nice, but the other Republicans leave me cold.

Posted by: allset707 | September 17, 2010 3:48 PM

This is comparable to asking a death row inmate if he prefers lethal injection or the electric chair, what a dismal selection. Give me someone who will end the wars and take on the corporations. None of the above qualify.

Posted by: dfdougherty | September 17, 2010 4:31 PM

In my opinion, the only politician I respect and who makes sense on many levels and issues is Sen. Russ Feingold,Wisconsin.

Posted by: jp1943 | September 17, 2010 4:43 PM

No telling the amount of damage the Tea Baggers will do to the normal GOP (if such exist)before the 2012 election. I will vote for President Obama and I think all of the sane USA will too. It's un-fun watching the crazies, but crazies love crazies and I believe in the end we will see President have a second term.

Posted by: Royh1 | September 17, 2010 4:51 PM

Michael Bloomberg.

Posted by: pfuidear | September 17, 2010 5:10 PM

There's not a single qualified candidate on the list. Why did you ignore Green, Libertarian and Constitutional parties? I'd rather take Bob Barr than any of these jokers. I really hate when media's approach to politics is just to cover Democrats and Republicans and then act surprised that a strong third party hasn't emerged.

Posted by: DCProgressive | September 17, 2010 5:34 PM

Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: MarcMyWords | September 17, 2010 6:33 PM

None of the Right-Wing Establishment or Tea Party rags have said anything of substance about creating jobs for Americans or bringing down the deficit.

As a matter of fact, the longer I listen to all of them talk about repealing certain Constitutional Amendments, repealing HC Reform 2010, and impeaching the president for no reason, they sound just like folks used to sound at KKK meeting's.

I mean seriously, if you listen to all of those who are listed in this poll speak and you also had your eyes closed, I swear they sound like they are at a KKK rally or meeting with Palin, Bachmann, Gingrich as their Imperial Wizards.

Oh, let's not leave out Beck, even though he is not running for anything.

Yet?

Posted by: lcarter0311 | September 17, 2010 6:46 PM

Wow! 69% of the people taking this poll are cluless. Whoda thought!

Posted by: ariver31112 | September 17, 2010 7:06 PM

What a bunch of clueless dolts WP readers are! Out here in America we can't wait to send Barry packing.

Posted by: eoniii | September 17, 2010 7:50 PM

Gary Johnson for president 2012!!!

Posted by: augustiswest | September 17, 2010 8:41 PM

I vote for this as the funniest of the comments:

"I don't care if it's a tapeworm on the ballot.... I'll vote for it before I ever again vote for a socialist. Obama is a flaming stateist extremist and his narcissistic thirst for power must be stopped at all costs. Look what the liberal elites have done to the country....we are losing incentive to try and live the American dream after the Dem Party's assault on the middle class.

Posted by: Capitalist-1 | September 17, 2010 6:55 AM"

Um, it was Bush II whose narcissistic thirst for power has practically bankrupted this country with a) no oversight of Wall Street, which imploded by its own greed and took down thousands of homeowners with it; and b) started the multi-trillion-dollar war in Iraq using deliberately false reasons even to his own Secretary of State Colin Powell.

When President Obama took over the Dow was in the tank, hard-pressed to hover at 6,000. Now we're almost to 11,000. People's jobs have been saved, the economy is righting itself, and the world respects us again. Sounds pretty conservative to me.

Posted by: AdventurerVA | September 17, 2010 9:27 PM

Christie of NJ has the no nonsense approach needed in America. Whoever the Republicans select must agree to revise the tax code, repeal Obama care, and cut Government down to size.

The flat or fair tax could be a way to eliminate most of the IRS...then close all foreign military bases and bring troops home. Use them to seal our borders and assist with rounding up illegals and their offspring for deportation.

The savings from these actions along with repeal of Obama care will give us enough money to provide the same health care plan congress and the feds enjoy to every legal citizen of this country!

Posted by: bgPhil | September 18, 2010 12:04 AM

Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson.

Posted by: Pathfinder3 | September 18, 2010 12:07 AM

The mere fact that Sarah Palin is among this list is truly scary. What has this country sunk to? and Jeb Bush? Who would actually vote for a Bush again after the fiasco he created in every aspect of this country. Welcome to the reality tv mentality

Posted by: daygrrrrl | September 18, 2010 12:09 AM

After watching Huckabee today compare ill people trying to get health insurance to old cars and burned out houses (who don't need insurance), I felt rather disgusted at the man. Talk about a cold fish! HE would definitely bring the death panels to this country. No way, no how. Scratch him off the list!

Posted by: GenuineRisk | September 18, 2010 12:28 AM

I say Hillary in 2012! She was my first choice in 2008. I keep thinking she would at least be able to get out a coherent message in answer to the crazy, right-wing lunatics that have taken over the Republican party.

Posted by: georgiaguy | September 18, 2010 12:58 AM

"Other" is narrowly behind Crackhead Palin.

Not much of a contest here... a shrieking angry minority against a president elected with a clear mandate for change.

Posted by: Nymous | September 18, 2010 1:36 AM

I laugh and read all your misguided comments.
Glenn Beck and Sara Palin are playing the smartest campaign I've ever seen. Neither needs to run committees for election at this point. Name recognizably they already OWN Both will be chosen by popular demand.
He as President she as VP. take that to the bank!
geneWj

Posted by: genotworivers | September 18, 2010 4:27 AM

Well, well after reading all the above comments I just laugh. You are watching the finest, smartest campaign by anyone I've seen in my 73 years. Glenn Beck/Sara Palin.
They do not need to Campaign, Fox is doing it for them. They will be chosen by PUBLIC DEMAND. Not behind closed doors in some smokey back room.
genotworivers

Posted by: genotworivers | September 18, 2010 4:46 AM

The Republican Party (Party of "NO") is quickly becoming the Extremist Anti-Government Party!

An Independent

Posted by: aeaustin | September 18, 2010 7:39 AM

Every four years I write in Mickey Mouse, and he never seems to win.

Maybe it's time to switch my loyalty to Shrek.

Posted by: eezmamata | September 18, 2010 7:40 AM

The Party of "NO" is quickly becoming the Extremist Anti-Government Party, led by snake oil salesmen like Beck & Limbaugh!

An Independent

Posted by: aeaustin | September 18, 2010 7:45 AM

Ha ha Obama haters taking it in the chin.

Posted by: rryan007 | September 18, 2010 9:39 AM

Obama is dishonest and has no class. He has set us back decades.

Posted by: republicstomper | September 18, 2010 11:12 AM

"US census report reveals spike in poverty levels." Good going Obama and company. Ya, just what we need an additional four years of this!!

One word, DISASTER.

Posted by: republicstomper | September 18, 2010 11:26 AM

Republicans need to weed out all of the old has beens/losers; those who could not cut it during the 2008 primaries. They couldn't win then and will not be able to win in 2012, including Sarah Palin. I'd like to see some of the newer and younger group on your list/poll start being more public, outspoken and forthright on their policies. We've heard enough from Palin, Clinton, Romney, Gingrich, Huckabee, etc. and no one is all that impressed anymore with what they're still feeding us. Obama IMHO has not done a very good job, sad to say and I'd not vote for him again. I'm an Independent voter and I personally like what I've seen so far coming from:

Mike Pence (P)
Bobby Jindal (VP)

Time will tell, I guess.

Posted by: sterling24k | September 18, 2010 11:38 AM

REPUBLICSTOMPER , you nitwit. Do you think those figures on poverty levels were generated in the first two years of this President's administration??? You weren't paying attention, dimrod. The Prez and his admin inherited a colossal failure that will take years to undo...with no serious help from the other team.

Posted by: rockinrod | September 18, 2010 12:10 PM

The day the democrats took over was
>not January 22nd 2009 it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and
>the Senate, the start of the 110th Congress. The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers
>for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening
>to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault",
>think about this:
>
>January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:
>
>At the time:
>
>The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
>
>The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
>
>The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
>
>George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of
>JOB CREATION!
>
>Remember the day...
>January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial
>Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
>
>The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the
> economy?
>BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!!!
>
>THANK YOU DEMOCRATS for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment...
>to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic
>loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOS! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in
>2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy).
>
>And who took the THIRD highest pay-off
> from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac????
>
>OBAMA

And who fought against reform of
>Fannie and Freddie???
>
>OBAMA and the Democratic Congress
>
>So when some one tries to blame
> Bush...
>
>REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge
>of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving.

Set the record straight on Bush!


>"It's not that liberals aren't smart,
>it's just that so much of what they know isn't so" -Ronald Reagan

Posted by: Jimbo77 | September 18, 2010 12:32 PM

Use the smartest Bush this time-Jeb. He will surely not be George.

Posted by: qualquan | September 18, 2010 7:48 PM

Ron Paul or Jeb Bush.

Posted by: qualquan | September 18, 2010 7:50 PM

Abused wires go back to their idiot husbands, drunks continue to drink and destroy themselves, drug users continue to take their poison and smokers continue to destroy their lungs so why am I not surprised that cool aid drinkers continue to support the worst president in the history of this country.

Posted by: LETFREEDOMRING2 | September 18, 2010 9:03 PM

Not a single person listed will get my vote, I'm undecided..but it must be a person who was willing to serve in combat to protect our freedoms, those who had "other priorities" have no business deciding what deserving disabled veterans are provided, therefore they choose to ignore pleas for help. The Va "a world class health care system", yeah, a 3rd world or less healthcare system. If the VA is set on the pedestal as to what the new healthcare program should be, (as it is by both parties), then they should just try it. My opinion is that if they can't kill you, they will do everything in their power to push you out of the "system", this is MY opinion. Getting out of unwinnable wars would be a start on reducing the pressure on the VA system..but too much money for war machinery companies and lobbyists for that. INMHO

Posted by: bobbyjefcoat | September 19, 2010 12:14 AM

Duh, Hillary Clinton!!

Posted by: enchantress_ashley | September 19, 2010 2:07 AM

Glen Beck has been out in front of the Tea Party Movement,every place they will let him in...And He has been the most vocal supporter of the movement!

I didn't see His name on the list?

He is the perfect candidate for a group of people that is looking for a leader to follow...One that sounds like He knows where He's going,and how to get there!

The only trouble with Beck is,Where is There?...And how will you know if you made it There?....There, I said it!

Posted by: AmITheOnlyOne | September 19, 2010 3:31 AM

Excuse me, but I do not believe your poll results that reflect 60% of the American public would actually vote for Barack Obama for president in 2012. That doesn't pass the smell test, sorry.

Barack Obama has done more in two years to damage the country than all the wars combined. Mr. Obama may be a very nice person, but he sure is no president, unless you go way back to Woodrow Wilson, who attempted many of Mr. Obama's actions himself, but was interrupted in his damnation of America by another more patriotic individual.

Posted by: prossers7 | September 19, 2010 6:29 AM

Ron Paul flew under the national radar in 2008. Due to the Tea Party movement that won't happen again in 2012.

Freedom, learn to live with it!

Posted by: sosueme1 | September 19, 2010 9:00 AM

I wonder who would win if you just had Obama and Bozo in the poll. Texans would go for Bozo 2 to 1.

Posted by: pmzman999 | September 19, 2010 9:26 AM

Hillary Clinton for President.
David Petraeus for something - maybe Sec. of State or Defense

Posted by: mirrorgazer | September 19, 2010 10:01 PM

I think it will be Hillary. I believe Obama will decide to forgo another 4 years of the hatred and lies from the right and just become the elder statesman of the party and let her be the first woman president. Like Lydon, he will have had enough and will move on. But for the next 2 years he will push hard for his programs as she becomes the face of foreign affairs and a centrist.

POSTED BY: MSJN1 | SEPTEMBER 17, 2010 8:14 AM

-----

MSJN1 I like your thinking.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | September 19, 2010 11:54 PM

67 per cent of responders want Barack Obama as President?!?!?

That's absurd! Either your poster pool is 67 per cent liberal-left, or they are voting over and over and over. For 2/3 to prefer a President who doesn't even get a 40 per cent approval rating nationally is ridiculous.

Hell, you're a newspaper -- do you believe these numbers?

Posted by: JPMcC | September 20, 2010 12:37 AM

The drop in Obama's approval rating is due to progressives voted for him being ANGRY with him. That doesn't mean they will elect any of the bozos listed there. We want him to grow a backbone and expose Congressional obstructionists and tell the WS thieves to take a hike.

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | September 20, 2010 1:53 AM

"Texans would go for Bozo 2 to 1."


Hah, Texans always go for Bozo.

Posted by: eezmamata | September 20, 2010 5:47 AM

None of the above! Americans need a strong leader, maybe Hillary Clinton who I supported originally!!

Of course, the party of NO would treat her exactly the way they treat Obama, negatively and disrespectfully. They are against anything he thinks, says or does or tries to do.

Until the GOP regains control of the Oval Office, they will continue be the GRAND OBSTRUCTIONIST PARTY! It is so obvious, and so discouraging.

Posted by: cashmere1 | September 20, 2010 7:45 AM

Joe Arpaio is filing the paperwork for POTUS. So he's ahead of the rest of Republican hopefuls and he has at least the Arizona vote locked up.

Posted by: James10 | September 20, 2010 8:08 AM

Anybody but the repugnicans.

Posted by: adrienne_najjar | September 20, 2010 8:15 AM

Posted by: nychap44 | September 17, 2010 6:14 AM

Your unscientific poll proves you readership is the far left.
Obama has an approval rating of about 44% overall and yet 65% 0F those taking your poll favor him.

-------

You obviously know nothing about polling.

You can't compare apples to oranges, which is what you are attempting to do.

The question regarding Obama's 'approval' rating has nothing to do with 'of the names on this list, whom would you prefer to be president'

A majority of people may not approve of the job Obama is doing right at the moment, but given the choice between obama or one of these names on the list, what the poll is showing you is that people would rather have obama than any of the others on the list.

And as Harry Truman once said, 'even the worst democrat is a heck of a lot better than the best republican.'

At this time in Bill Clinton's first term, the people were saying that he was not going to be re-elected. Then the republicans took over congress and scared the bejesus out of the country with some of their policies and rhetoric.

I see history repeating itself given some of the wacky statements coming from republican and tea-bagger congressional candidates.

Come 2012 the electorate will be looking for someone to keep those wackos in check and in that case, they just might prefer obama over any of the republicans on this list.

Posted by: dlpetersdc | September 20, 2010 8:16 AM

I find it interesting that Hillary Clinton is not on the list. Go Hillary!!!!!!!

Posted by: Jimbo77 | September 20, 2010 8:28 AM

Colin Powell is the right man for the job. But would he take it?

Posted by: wolong | September 20, 2010 8:51 AM

The Tea Party will insure a win for Obama in 2012. Each one gets wackier and wackier. Some are even starting to make Palin look half sane. Repukes have no choice now but to move further and further to the right... far away from mainstream America.
Good. If anything insures an Obama win in 2012, it will be the whack Tea Party people.
We do NOT want religion shoved down our throats. We do not want to step BACK to 1957.

Posted by: bozhogg | September 20, 2010 9:05 AM

The Know Nothings,the Whig and the Republican Party, may they rest in peace. We need a new party. Maybe Susan Collins, Olympia Snow and Scott Brown can start the New England Conservative party bent on fiscal responsibility and social compassion?
Yea, I like Hilary, real hard nosed.

Posted by: stanassc | September 20, 2010 10:03 AM

Running this country is more than saying the cutest sound bites and name calling..it is serious business ..and the Republicans have demonstrated that they are willing to compromise and sell their souls to the wackos' in order to gain popularity and be perceived as being on the same page as the most fringed and extreme elements of the political rightwing. President Obama is the only serious and people oriented candidate on the list.. there is no other choice.

Posted by: sabrina2 | September 20, 2010 10:04 AM

You offer a can of trash and say "make your pick"?

No.

Posted by: veerle1 | September 20, 2010 10:11 AM

with so many people in need of a compassionate person in the White House ..why would there even be a consideration of anyone in the Republican or Tea Party..these people are determined to nullify any gains that the people have made under Obama and repeal Healthcare...what about the mother with a child with a pre-existing condition or anyone without healthcare..my goodness show some compassion.. what if it is really true that we have to answer for "all" of our behavior ..would you like to answer for being so evil that you denied a child the right to have healthcare... I think not..

Posted by: sabrina2 | September 20, 2010 10:16 AM

Any non-professional politician is preferable to any of our incumbents.

Throw the bums out!

Posted by: Over-n-Out | September 21, 2010 8:09 AM

This shows that while the right tears into Obama constantly without any voices within the media from the left, Obama's "popularity" can fall and fall...but when it comes time to chosing between him and any prominant Republican, Obama's vastly better.
Once we get into an actual election cycle and people have to choose between one set of ideas and another, Democrats will be chosen again, and as the GOP falls even further into the radical right, the gap will increase. That there are people here claiming that this moderate Democrat is a "Socialist", one wonders if the GOP can win even one state. McCarthyism is the best strategy you can dream up?

Posted by: columbiamocowboy | September 21, 2010 8:11 AM

Does the white house have a full time staff voting in these opinion polls? Will you still favor Obama even after the crack runs out?

Posted by: dgcx | September 21, 2010 8:16 AM

Paul Ryan should be the Republican nominee... and President.

Posted by: jts53 | September 21, 2010 8:45 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company