I triple dog dare LA Times' Andrew Malcolm to blog Palin's latest dreadful polling numbers
I realize serving as Sarah Palin's de facto online flak means never having to acknowledge bad news  for the half-term governor. And let's face it, nobody lavishly praises Palin like Malcolm. (He had good practice; he once worked as Laura Bush's flak.)
And I also realize that Malcolm and polling data don't mix. (He botches them  all the time .) Still, I'm willing to challenge Malcolm to write up the latest ABC/Washington Post polling numbers that show Palin, even after her Tea Party speech (on which Malcolm seemed to hang on every word), is --ready?-- now more unpopular than ever.
Behold  [emphasis added]:
Although Palin is a tea party favorite, her potential as a presidential hopeful takes a severe hit in the survey. Fifty-five percent of Americans have unfavorable views of her, while the percentage holding favorable views has dipped to 37, a new low in Post-ABC polling.
There is a growing sense that the former Alaska governor is not qualified to serve as president, with more than seven in 10 Americans now saying she is unqualified, up from 60 percent in a November survey. Even among Republicans, a majority now say Palin lacks the qualifications necessary for the White House.
Palin has lost ground among conservative Republicans, who would be crucial to her hopes if she seeks the party's presidential nomination in 2012. Forty-five percent of conservatives now consider her as qualified for the presidency, down sharply from 66 percent who said so last fall.
How is Malcolm going to solider on? But more importantly, is Malcolm a journalist, which means he'll focus on Palin's awful polling numbers. Or is he an unpaid flak, which means he'll play dumb? Again.
UPDATED: Perhaps the only Beltway media statesman more embarrassed by Palin's polling plunge today is the Washington Post's David Broder who had the supreme misfortune of publishing a "gushing love letter" to Palin, as Glenn Greenwald puts it , on the same day his own newspaper is reporting that Palin's polling numbers are heading even further south.
UPDATED: Malcolm has been hard at work blogging this morning but (shock!) not a peep about Palin's plunging poll numbers. We'll keep you posted in case he works up the nerve later in the day.
UPDATED: If Malcolm won't/can't write about Palin's dreadful polling numbers, can't his colleague Johanna Neuman do it? Or is there some sort of understanding that the Los Angeles Times' D.C. political blog only writes positive things about Sarah Palin? (Even if it has to be fabricated .) And if so, does that really pass as journalism?