USA Today/Gallup 2012 Presidential Survey
I’m going to read you a list of possible Republican candidates in the 2012 presidential election. Please tell me whether you would, or would not, seriously consider supporting each for president.
Mike Huckabee
- Yes, would 40%
- No, would not 51%
Mitt Romney
- Yes, would 39%
- No, would not 51%
Sarah Palin
- Yes, would 33%
- No, would not 63%
Newt Gingrich
- Yes, would 29%
- No, would not 63%
Tim Pawlenty
- Yes, would 18%
- No, would not 60%
Haley Barbour
- Yes, would 15%
- No, would not 65%
Among Republicans
Mike Huckabee
- Yes, would 71%
- No, would not 25%
Mitt Romney
- Yes, would 65%
- No, would not 31%
Sarah Palin
- Yes, would 65%
- No, would not 33%
Newt Gingrich
- Yes, would 60%
- No, would not 35%
Tim Pawlenty
- Yes, would 32%
- No, would not 48%
Haley Barbour
- Yes, would 26%
- No, would not 52%
Please tell me whether you think each of the following people is or is not qualified to be president.
Mike Huckabee
- Yes, qualified 50%
- No, not qualified 36%
Mitt Romney
- Yes, qualified 49%
- No, not qualified 39%
Newt Gingrich
- Yes, qualified 44%
- No, not qualified 46%
Sarah Palin
- Yes, qualified 31%
- No, not qualified 62%
Tim Pawlenty
- Yes, qualified 25%
- No, not qualified 51%
Haley Barbour
- Yes, qualified 18%
- No, not qualified 57%
Survey of 1,021 adults, including 301 Republicans was conducted October 31 – November 1. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points overall; +/ 7 points among Republicans.
Inside the numbers:
The overall numbers are depressed in part because no more than 20% of Democrats say they would consider voting for any of the candidates (Romney 20%, Huckabee 18%, Pawlenty 11%, and Palin 10%). Those low figures are understandable given that typically about 10% of party identifiers wind up voting for the opposition’s candidate in presidential elections.
Additionally, no more than 40% of independents support any of the Republicans. Huckabee (40%) and Romney (40%) tie for the lead in potential support among independents, followed by Palin (32%) and Gingrich (28%).
In poll responses on whether the prospects are “qualified to be president,” only Huckabee reaches the 50% watermark; Romney is just behind, at 49%. Palin is seen as unqualified by a 2-1 ratio, 62%-31% — including a negative rating by a third of Republicans, two-thirds of independents and eight in 10 Democrats. In fact, Republicans are more likely to say they would seriously consider voting for Palin for president (65%) than to say she is qualified for the job (58%).
November 5th, 2009 at 2:55 am
Anyone want to see a repeat of Virginia with the R and the D reversed?
Palin is seen as unqualified by a 2-1 ratio, 62%-31% — including a negative rating by a third of Republicans, two-thirds of independents and eight in 10 Democrats
Run that.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:08 am
Manchester’s New GOP Mayor Hears from 2012 Hopefuls
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/11/manchesters-new-gop-mayor-hears-from-2012-hopefuls.html
November 5th, 2009 at 3:16 am
If we put aside likeability and simply look at pure qualifications I would have thought that both would have been higher, especially romney.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:22 am
Can this poll even be considered a 2012 poll? Why didn’t it just ask “who do you support” for the nomination between X, X, and X?
The 65% of Republicans that could strongly support Romney and Palin, Huckabee, can only vote for one of them.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:04 am
Mike Huckabee won’t get the nominee in 2012. He can’t beat Obama. Huckabee is not conservative. When he was the Governor of Arkansas, Huckabee raised high taxes. I don’t want to see a minister run for the White House in 2012. He is done! Romney won’t get the nominee in 2012. He is done! Romney is not conservative. He supported the Obama Health Care plan and he wanted the government control the health care. The Romneycare is just like the Obamacare. Romney doesn’t deserved to be a President. He is liar and another Rino’s. I don’t believe in polls. It is just too early to tell. It is the liberal mainstream news media are taken the polls.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:03 am
While I am no fan of Huckabee’s, I do agree with his statement.
That said, its looking more and more like it might be Huckabee vs Romney for the nomination and I am okay with that. Given the fact that Huckabee has his own TV and Radio show, it should be surprising that Romney his keeping up with him. When the Debates happen, things will change. Also, its not how many supporters you have but where are they and what will independents do in open primaries.
The other big question, will Huckabee be willing to give up his TV and Radio show for a shot at the Presidency. Many may think this is an easy decision since the Presidency is the most desirable job. But, the down side is, if Huckabee gives up his shows during the most political time, will he ever get them back.
I thought in 2008 the ticket should have been Romney/Huckabee, and I still think that is true, even though I can’t stand Huckabee, Politics make strange bedfellows, and I am interested in a united Republican party in 2012, and I for one could not support Huckabee on top of the ticket, not after what happened in 2008.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:46 am
anonymous,
I hope you’re not a native English speaker.
November 5th, 2009 at 7:41 am
#7,
Yeah we are all praying that isn’t the case.
November 5th, 2009 at 7:55 am
#7 He can’t be. I am not a native English speaker. I can tell (at least i hope so).
November 5th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Another poll, another win. ; )
November 5th, 2009 at 8:26 am
A Simple Christmas: Twelve Stories That Celebrate the True Holiday Spirit, Mike’s newest book – out Tuesday. : )
November 5th, 2009 at 8:31 am
According to this specific poll, Palin is pretty much damaged goods for the presidency. However how ironic it is that she’s considered the most unqualified, but yet seems the only one able to put Obama on the ropes. Still very popular among Republicans, she could get the nomination through the back door should Romney and Huckabee blow each other up in the primaries,a scenario though thats unlikely to happen.Having said that I would put my money on Romney.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Huckabee calls his new book non-political. It is an attempt, he says, to encourage readers to connect with their families and the holidays by focusing on such fundamental values as patience, hope and faith.
He says it’s too early for polls to mean much but calls his standing “flattering.”
The 2012 election won’t be easy for the GOP, he says. Since the late 19th century, he notes, only once has a political party failed to hold the White House for at least eight years at a stretch.
(…breakfast Wednesday with reporters hosted by The Christian Science Monitor and an interview with USA TODAY.)
November 5th, 2009 at 8:36 am
cont… -
Huckabee cheers GOP victories Tuesday in gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia but says Republicans have only themselves to blame for losing the contest in New York’s 23rd Congressional District — an area represented in Congress by Republicans for more than a century. After intraparty warfare pushed the GOP nominee from the race, the Democrat won.
“The Republicans fumbled the ball, and the Democrats jumped on it in the end zone,” he says.
Simply brilliant
November 5th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Huckabee is really the best to go up against Obama. As Michael Medved said, we need a conservative who speaks in a moderate tone. That would be Huckabee. He won’t have to emphasize his strong social convictions because everyone already knows that about him. Instead he can focus on the economy, jobs, defense, education, and the constitution. And he can do all of that by speaking in a moderate tone that welcomes the independents and right leaning democrats.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:40 am
To put these numbers in a different context, if you calculate a net differential for each candidate by combining expressions of positive support by Republican voters (would seriously consider supporting + is qualified) and then subtracting expressions of negative support (would not seriously consider + is not qualified), here is how the field shakes out:
Huckabee +60
Romney +44
Gingrich +23
Palin +1
Pawlenty -42
Barbour -65
—
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2009/11/05/usatgallup-huckabee-has-most-gop-support-for-2012/
November 5th, 2009 at 8:42 am
reply to 15: The only problem is, Huckabee has turned off more conservatives
than McCain did, and we see where that got us.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:46 am
OK so Huck forgot Eisenhower already, that was only 50 years ago. Or Johnson, 1960-1968,or Nixon/Ford 1968-1976. What was the point of issuing a talking point that was not only wrong but misleading.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:47 am
17. Simply false.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:47 am
Recent polls withstanding, can Palin knock Huck out? Of course she can, and probably will. They are fighting for the same votes, and she’s a heck of a lot more appealing than Huck. I don’t think her numbers really matter that much right now. She’s still in the top 3.
If Huck were a better qualified candidate, she might not be able to beat him. But let’s face it, Huck isn’t the deepest thinker, himself. He struggled throughout 08 to sound like he knew the issues. He uses little quips and jokes to cover his lack of a deeper grasp of the issues.
He jumped on the Fair tax before he could even explain it, and he plagiarized a 2005 NR plan for immigration reform in his late flip-flop on amnesty. Who can forget his naive comments about arrogant bunker mentality, and wing-tips in Iran.
I don’t think Palin has very much doubt she can beat Huck. She’s pretty good at quips herself.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:48 am
19. Why do you think fiscal and defense cons hated Huck so much in 08? Just review his record on taxes, and his statements on defense, including the ones in #20.
He cannot win either block.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:49 am
20. Did I mean notwithstanding? Oh well.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:50 am
18. Reread, my friend.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:50 am
Martha, LOL LOL LOL
November 5th, 2009 at 8:52 am
24. Well then, explain how Huck is going to get fiscal and defense cons.
It’s going to take more than some populist clap-trap to overcome his record on taxes and big government.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Romney and Huckabee both have a problem according to Gallup by reading between the results
Qualified to be President/support for president
Huckabee 50/40
Romney 49/39
Am I to believe that 20% of the Huckabee respondents he is not electable and 25% of Romney respondents believe he isn’t either?
November 5th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Correctioin: well actually they would both be @ 20% viewed unelectable.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Right on Martha! Palin could knock Huckabee out of the race in Iowa.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
See Martha’s comments, you are in denial. His record is abysmal except for
prolife issues. Even in social issues, he has a mixed record, as when
he support that ruling in Texas.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Martha, WhY??? You can’t handle the truth with all that bitterness in your heart.
But, someday you will be forced to.
Sorry.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:59 am
29. See 30.
Applies to you as well, Thunder Road
…Now I’m off to work, folks!
Suggest that you both do the same…
November 5th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Having recently lived in Florida, there is no way that Huckabee will even
close to winning that State. He barely registered in 2008. In fact it was so
bad he skiped florida altogether.
Talk about someone who has bitterness in their heart, look in the mirrow
To support Huckabee is to be bitter after what he did in 2008.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:13 am
Oh, for crying out loud! What the hell does this even mean?
So little time, so much meaningless playground drivel to endure…
November 5th, 2009 at 9:13 am
Of the last 50 years, there has been only one President, who wasn’t reelected after his first term, that was Carter. Obama might
be the next, it seems a non sequitor
November 5th, 2009 at 9:14 am
I am happy where Palin is. People only know one thing about Palin…what the MSM has told them. Now she is telling the story and her numbers will only get better. Can’t wait for her book and subsequent tour.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:15 am
What about Bush 41?
November 5th, 2009 at 9:21 am
“Recent polls withstanding, can Palin knock Huck out? Of course she can, and probably will. They are fighting for the same votes,” Ha, not right now Martha!
November 5th, 2009 at 9:27 am
#35 Just asking,How can Palinites be happy where she is with 2:1 unfavorables/favorables?
November 5th, 2009 at 9:28 am
37. OJ, Yes, they are. You have created a scenario in your own mind about RINO’s, elites, Romney voters, etc. But it doesn’t exist.
Huck and Palin’s support comes mainly from religious conservatives. The good thing for Romney is that religious conservatives still voted for him in fairly stong numbers in 08 – they don’t hate him, generally.
Both Huck and Palin are ‘one of us’ candidates fighting for the same type of voters. I think it’s a mistake to stick Huck into the party establishment category over NY23.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:28 am
I mean, republicans may generally like her, tied for 2nd in this poll,but democrats dispise her.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:36 am
“I think it’s a mistake to stick Huck into the party establishment category over NY23.” Well I do not agree.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Jersey 36: The point was about the White House going to the same party for two or more consecutive terms. GHW Bush would have been the third GOP term.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:40 am
I actually do not like the phrase Palinite but I will answer the question with this…it’s still more than 2 years away before the primaries! If Palin is going to run, which I think she is, she is running on one of the most non-traditional paths…on her terms. When her book comes out and she does her book tour and appears on Sunday morning, political talk shows the people will get to know who Palin is, not who the MSM wants people to believe she is, not the Palin that the Democrat Party wants the people to believe she is…not even the Palin the McCain Camp wanted her to be. If you consider how polarizing she is, it’s amazing she is even doing this good. So some people do like her. When the rest get to know her…I believe they will like her as well. If in one year, after the 2010 elections, she is still geting these numbers then I guess I’ll have to start looking for another candidate but in the political climate in which she rests, I am fine with these numbers. In fact, with all of the dubious claims and misrepresented facts, the commenters on this microcosm shovel about her and the MSM…why is she still so close to Romney and Huckabee?
November 5th, 2009 at 9:43 am
MarkG 42, oh I see what you’re saying. I was only skimming the posts…damn you context clues.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:46 am
Breakdown of support amoungst idelogy, Huckabee best still. So Martha, to add credence to OJ’s statement in 37, maybe you should change your thoughts on whether Palin and Huck share the same electorate.
Views as whether qualified to be president. Rep/Ind/Dem
Mike Huckabee 72/48/38
Mitt Romney 71/45/37
Newt Gingrich 68/39/32
Sarah Palin 58/28/14
Tim Pawlenty 33/23/21
Haley Barbour 27/15/12
So by all 3 groups Huckabee comes out ahead on this important question. That’s very strong.
I would think we would all agree that one MUST be viewed as qualified to be president before one votes for a candidate. With that in mind and Palin’s high national name recognition, these numbers our quite devasting. I therefore can not see how Huckabee and Palin would be competing for the same votes and I can not see how Palin beats Huckabee in Iowa.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:47 am
Just like Nixon, Humphrey, Ford, would have been the third term for each. He cast that fact as a negative against the GOP, to curry
favor with the CSM, or because he didn’t know the answer
November 5th, 2009 at 9:49 am
So what do y’all like better: Huckabee- Rubio or Huckabee-McDonnell?
November 5th, 2009 at 9:52 am
#47 I liked the premise of your question,but you have to acknowledge Huckabee and Romney are vertually tied.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Although I’m a Romney supporter and believes he’s the most able of the candidates, I do have a question for the Palin haters: How stupid can she be? She accurately called Obama out on the campaign trail[higher taxes, his socialistic policies, character, weakness on foreign policy, and etc,]which have now come to fruition. And furthermore she’s the only one thus far thats been able to exploit his weaknesess, [health care just to name one.]So I ask the question again: How is she so stupid? Anyone?
November 5th, 2009 at 9:59 am
It’s Romney vs Huckabee, with outside chances by Pawlenty, Thune, Gingrich, Barbour, and Daniels.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Romney/Rubio has a great ring to it. Romney has been raked over by the dems and media, huck has been untouched. a quick pass through his record and huck could be destroyed worse then palin.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:02 am
romney and huckabee are within the margin of error of eachother, but given mitt’s big organizational advantage in the biggest, delegate rich states, he is the frontrunner.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:02 am
#49 I am not sure if anyone here has questioned her intellegence. I was just pointing out the numbers which indicate that she is much more likely to be beat in the general than Huckabee or Romney.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:02 am
#48, Sorry.
I’m a 20 year old Virginia resident and loyal supporter of both Bob and Huck. After interning with Bob this summer I know that he is the real deal and I want desperatley to put him on a national ticket. But I think a Romney-McDonnell ticket would not be viable because it may very well come off as looking plastic a la Kerry-Edwards. Huckabee and McDonnell are both great on social issues and economic ones. Bob’s service in the Army would greatly please defense conservatives.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:08 am
51. Good point, Huck has faced very little MSM criticism, whereas Palin has had everything, including the kitchen thrown at her.
45. You cannot see how Palin beats Huck in Iowa? Try reminding yourself of the Palin crowds. I know that her ability to draw a crowd is not necessarily tied to presidential support, but let’s face it. She is miles ahead of Huck in the likeability dept.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:08 am
#52 It should not be underestimated that evangelicals will coalesce around Huckabee the next time around like they did for Bush in 2000 and 2004. Huckabee was able match Romney with Huckabee’s limited funds too. When Huckabee becomes better organized, you would have to believe the money will follow too.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:10 am
54. Huck is not good on economic issues. You cannot divorce him from his record simply because he now talks against TARP and the Stimulus. Unfotunately, his record is more substantial than his rhetoric.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:11 am
56. When Huckabee becomes better organized? Well, I’m not holding my breath.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:12 am
That is the thing, isn’ it, she was more right than wrong on the campaign trail. Hence the Wasilla project carried out in part by Pete Rouse, in the White House, in order to counteract what Anita
Dunn, already knew about her. Now
the media is the problem, but rest assured any candidate will be torn apart summarily if they
prove effective, and facts rarely
have anything to do with it
November 5th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Let’s talk tickets. Who would you Mitt supporters like to see on the ticket? I think as a Huckabee supporter I lean towards Rubio and McDonnell. Your turn.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:14 am
#54 I am on your side supporting Huckabee. Outside of the intangibles,the numbers speak for themselves though.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:14 am
I don’t think it’s any secret that I believe Palin is woefully unprepared/unqualified/fit for national office. Yet, she is so much better than Huck that’s it’s not even debateable for me. I think if it ever came down to Palin vs Huck only, there’s just no way Huck would pull it off. He may be leading slightly in the polls, but he has some fundamental issues that are insurrmountable. Palin has fewer of those, I think.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Hey guys,
Let’s wait until March and then compare ideas from Palin, Huckabee and Romney, reflected in their ( then ) published books. Let’s see who has real solutions for real problems, rather then eye candy for the MSM or bed time stories
November 5th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Thunder,
“The only problem is, Huckabee has turned off more conservatives
than McCain did, and we see where that got us.”
So why has Huck posted MUCH higher favorables among conservatives than Romney in every poll this year? I mean, it’s not even close.
This goes to rule #2 in the Rombot handbook:
“Everyone thinks just like me and my friends. I don’t need no stinking polls.”
November 5th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Martha,
“He may be leading slightly in the polls, but he has some fundamental issues that are insurrmountable. Palin has fewer of those, I think.”
Palin is considered unqualified by a 2-1 margin. What “insurrmountable fundamental issues” does Huck have that top that?
And please, refer to something that would keep enough people awake at night that it would actually make a difference in the election, instead of simply invoking Rombot Rule #2 and projecting your own opinions on the rest of the country. Show me polls that expose those issues you are reffering to.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:22 am
Huckabee and McDonnell have a lot in common – they both come out of the evangelical/social conservative world but get across with moderate voters with a pleasant, he’s-on-my-side demeanor. that’d be an interesting national ticket.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:24 am
65. Just remember 08, MWS. Fiscal cons and defense cons were scared to death of Huck because of his fiscal record and naive statements on defense/FP. You don’t need a poll for that.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:25 am
66. I don’t want a populist national ticket in 2012. That won’t solve one problem.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:27 am
#66,
Could not agree more. With Bob’s military service and Huck’s time as Reverend, they’d be two of the greatest public servants on one national ticket.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:27 am
There is no scrutiny on anyone but Palin right now. As 2012 nears, the spotlight will be on Huck. I don’t see him being able to withstand serious scrutiny – which he never had to do in 08. The MSM and the DNC left him alone.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Martha,
“Fiscal cons and defense cons were scared to death of Huck…… You don’t need a poll for that.”
Actually, you do. If you want to claim that some group large enough to deny a candidate the nomination is “scared to death” of that candidate, it needs to show up in a poll. The histrionics of a handful of bloggers bantering back and forth in an echo chamber is not a large enough sample. Huck is way ahead of Romney among conservatives right now, both in favorables, and in head to head matchups with Obama. So either FiCons and DefCons aren’t a big enough group to bring Huck down to Romney’s favorables among conservatives, or the data simply doesn’t support your claim.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Palin didn’t do too well on the polls because she quit as the Governor of Alaska in July and didn’t finished her term. Romney and Huckabee won’t get the nominee in 2012. They are done!
November 5th, 2009 at 10:54 am
71. I think it’s pretty well known that fiscal and defense cons were ABH in 08. You’re asking me to believe they’ve changed. I don’t need a poll to know that it’s highly unlikely. Huck’s done pretty much nothing to ease their fears, beyond soundbites against TARP and the Stimulus. His record still stands.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:56 am
I agree with 72 the nominee in 2012 will not be Romney or Huckabee
They’ve had their shot. It will be a new face with a different conservative message that will appeal to many new voters.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Ok so if it won’t be Romney or Huckabee (I could not disagree more by the way), then who will it be? TPaw, Palin? lol
November 5th, 2009 at 11:04 am
#53, Good point!72, Please say something intelligent for once!Also I too along with some others here believe Bob McDonnell is a good man and the real thing, but perhaps to soon to put him on a national ticket, though hes definitely presidential material.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:15 am
Bottom line, the Dems and MSM are hoping and praying the GOP tags Huckabee for ‘12!
They’ll (including USA Today) will promote Huck’s front-runner status –
and conversely they’ll do everything to depress their real #1 threat, Palin.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:18 am
The numbers for Pawlenty and Barbour adre meaningless since almost no one outside of their states, us political junkies, and people in D.C. know who they are. I think Barbour actually increased his stock since Tuesday. The base has been infuriated at every arm of the GOP; the RNC for existing, the NRCC for NY-23, and the NRSC for the Crist-Rubio race, but not the RGA. The RGA actually has their crap together and helped both Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie in their races. Governor Barbour is one of the sharpest strategists in the Party in addition to being a very successful Governor. I wouldn’t underestimate him in anything.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:22 am
#53 Just curious and want to know how you describe yourself a fiscal conservative and a Huck supporter? I could be totally off base here, but the two seem like a contradiction in terms given Huck’s record in Arkansas of raising taxes. I don’t mean to be scarcastic, but just want your explanation.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Jack, you’re livin’ in a dream world of your own making. lol lol lol
Good luck with that, my friend.
WAKE UP!
Polls are polls. Trends are trends. Facts are facts.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Martha,
“I think it’s pretty well known…”
There you go again. You postulating that “it’s pretty well known” doesn’t trump scientific polls, and in those polls, Huck is currently much stronger than Romney among conservatives. You can speculate all you want about what should be, could be, might be, or will be, but there’s currently nothing to support your assertion.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Len,
Huck raised taxes in a low tax state that needed roads and schools. Romney raised fees in a high tax state.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:25 am
I agree. Governor Barbour is a powerful friend to have. : )
November 5th, 2009 at 11:26 am
A follow-up from 76.Should we all be so unfortunate as to have Obama win re-election, I see McDonnell as the frontrunner in 2016.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:27 am
I have to agree that Huckabee is going to recieve enourmous benefit from his talk show…Not that his guitar skills will get him very far once he HAS to talk about the dark side of his record, but in the short term, its going to be a huge boost.
And I do think Romney has to come up with some way to increase his visibility – appearing for five minute segments once every couple weeks on a different channel isn’t going to attract the masses. At this point, everyone knows where and when to see Huckabee for an hour a week, not so for Mitt.
He’s going to have to fix that before Huck gets too far ahead.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:27 am
74. Didn’t McCain have his chance before getting the nomination?
November 5th, 2009 at 11:32 am
86. Good point, Micah. : )
November 5th, 2009 at 11:33 am
WSU,
That raises an interesting question that I don’t know we can really answer now.
Will candidates get traction in ‘12 attacking the records of former governors who ran in ‘08? Will those attacks stick, because they certainly won’t be new (since they haven’t been in office since the last time out). Will we be hearing again about Huck’s clemencies, tax increases, etc…. Will we be hearing again about Romney’s pro-abortion past, disowning Reagan, etc….
I’m sure someone will try, if either of these two are leading, but I wonder if it would have the same affect as in ‘08, or if voters will say, “We’ve heard that song before, I’m more interested in what they’ve said/done since.”
November 5th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Huckabee was against the bailouts and the stimulus and is a vehement supporter of the Tea Party movement and a strong supporter of the Fair Tax.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:37 am
#85:
Huckabee may have more face time on TV than Romney, but there are still questions that he needs to answer before he gets the nomination. (every candidate has them, but I’ll focus on Huckabee for this post)
1.) How fiscally conservative is he? His record in Arkansas isn’t that great. Why should we expect him to do better in D.C.?
2.) What are his views on foreign policy? Aside from strong support of Israel, what does Huckabee feel about our role in the world?
3.)Can he beat Obama in the general election? Yes, he does pretty decently in head-to-head matchups, but can Mike Huckabee get the 271 electoral votes to win? Where would he get them from?
4.) Can he win the nomination? Iowa was great to Huckabee last time and Super Tuesday wasn’t bad either. Every other day, not so much. How does Huckabee get the nomination? Can he compete in more urban, blue states?
November 5th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Hey guys let’s all respect one another’s opinions, since we all here share the same goal.MSW- I’m not so sure Romney raised fees as you say. It’s been documented by the Mass. Taxpayers Foundation several times already that under Romney the state was always well within its budget, and that MassCare as I think you are referring to just took up 1% of that budget which saved the state millions more.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Interesting comments on here about Huckabee. those against him still talking the same ol’ incorrect talking points.
First, that the MSM didn’t hit Huckabee, except that Hannity, Rush, Inghram and all the talking heads that were behind the establishment candidate of Romney beat Huckabee up every chance they got.
Second, that Huckabee skipped Florida, he was there everyday between SC and the FL primaries, but again Hannity and others continued to say he was skipping FL so he wouldn’t get any traction there.
Third, that he was big government high tax Governor in AR, which he was not. If you look at the facts and not at the talking points from the Club for Growth (who supported Romney).
Bottom line is Huckabee is able to connect with people and the best speaker in the lot.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Let me suggest Paul Ryan in 2012 a social and economic conservative with the same common sense midwestern appeal that Reagan had. He wins re election by large margins in a district handily carried by Feingold, Kohl & Obama. He is someone whose ideas could have broad appeal in a general election.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Huck-Iowa etc.:–
This site laughed at me last year when I, from very early-on, repeatedly reiterated that McCain should and would pick Sarah Palin as his VP.
The same things is happening now, polls or no polls, the fact remains, Sarah Palin WILL be GOP’s POTUS nominee in ‘12 (and all this Huckabee and Romney talk is just that, talk, going no where; Huck can never be the pick and Romney, aside from the fact that the Conservative base does not trust his change-in-the-wind politics, is hampered by his own Massachusetts Health Care failure; Pawlenty boring — whereas Palin, aside from everything else, will be the go-to energy person as that issue heats up for ‘12).
November 5th, 2009 at 11:47 am
“Huckabee was against the bailouts and the stimulus and is a vehement supporter of the Tea Party movement and a strong supporter of the Fair Tax.” Largely true except, I question his commitment to the Tea Party movement. At least he is not really anti-tea party.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Jonathan,
Good points in #90. On the campaign side, I think the biggest question marks for Huck revolve around money and organization.
Following that theme, I think these are some questions Romney must answer:
1. Can he shed the flip-flopper image, or will he still be dogged by the perception that he matches his positions to fit his electorate?
2. Will his policy analysis and proposed solutions go beyond checking the right boxes on a questionairre?
3. Can he connect with the “common man?” Right or wrong, “understands and cares about people like me” in the polls is also a big mover.
4. Can HE win some blue states? He is polling well among moderates who will vote in the Primaries, but will that translate into moderates supporting him in Nov.?
And then on the campaign side, can he make better decisions about picking his battles, both in terms of states, and which candidates to go after. I think two of the biggest mistakes Romney ‘08 made was picking a fight with ALL the top contenders (which resulted in what many Rombots characterize as Romney getting “ganged up” on), and chosing to try to be competitive everywhere, until dropping out of SC at the last minute.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:51 am
“3.)Can he beat Obama in the general election? Yes, he does pretty decently in head-to-head matchups, but can Mike Huckabee get the 271 electoral votes to win? Where would he get them from?” Good point, 270 would be enough, he would get a little over 250 by getting Ohio, Indiana, NC, Florida, VA and perhaps a few others. As of now, he’d get more points than the rest.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:52 am
Questions for T-Paw:
1. Can he ignite the base and make people feel passionate about him? I think this is the biggest. Lots of people like him without being enthusiastic about him (yet).
2. Regarding the Primaries, can he win in the South?
3. Regarding the General, can he pick off MN, IA, and WI? That would be huge, and go a long way toward winning the election.
4. Will he choose sides in the budding “establishment” vs. “movement” rift, or will he run as a conciliator, appeal to both sides, and risk losing both?
On the campaign side, a bevy of questions that pertain to all first time POTUS candidates…. can he raise money, handle the media, attract good strategists, avoid big gaffes, and act Presidential?
November 5th, 2009 at 11:53 am
Unfortunately MWS, I do not think Mr. Romney can do too well with your 4 questions, but I guess we will see how the cookie crumbles.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Questions for Sarah Palin:
1.) Is she a serious? As a candidate, a potential nominee, and as a potential President, or is she just going to be fodder for the comedians?
2.) Can she win the nomination? There are certainly lots of passionate Palinites, but will they translate into votes? After all, Howard Dean’s supporters were the most passionate in 2004, and he did quite poorly when the votes actually began to be cast.
3.) What does she believe? Is Sarah Palin a neocon? A paleo-con? A closet libertarian? A strong social con? Which of these is the real Sarah Palin. Not as the ticket mate of John McCain, but as her own person.
4.) How will she handle everything that is going to be thrown at her? Her supporters say she is tougher-than-nails, her detractors say she runs when the heat gets too much. Which is it?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
IF Mike runs, he has the support, whih all data shows, to compete with Obama.
Will it be close, Electorally wise?
Of course, it will.
Is Obama electorally safe in 2012?
No way… if the economy is bad.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
whih = which
November 5th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Jonathan,
I would add what I think is the biggest for Palin:
5. Is she up to the job? The perception that she isn’t has got to be the biggest thing holding her back. A lot more people like her and what she stands for than think she’s POTUS material. If she can change that perception, she a big league contender. If she can’t, she’s not.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
#103:
Absolutely. That is kind of what my number #1 was asking. People honestly ask themselves “can you see Sarah Palin as President of the United States?” For lots of people the answer is “no”, which she will need to deal with long before the primaries.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Sarah Palin for Secretary of Energy ‘12-’20
Her responsibility would be to develop and produce energy under the next Republican administration.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
#103.MWS: “5. Is she up to the job?”
Aye, there’s the rub. I like her personally, and I think she has great ideas, but I have seen nothing to indicate that she is really up to the Oval Office. I think Huckabee has greater executive chops than she, and you all know my feelings about him.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
#105
I don’t think so. She would likely lose interest and quit.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Mark, such the jokester! ; )
November 5th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Sarah Palin is her best when she is “speaking truth to power”, to use a much over-used phrase. She doesn’t seem to be able to handle the power herself that well. And I believe she knows it.
This is starting to dawn on more and more people.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Jonathan,
I think even a lot of Primary voters who think she is up to the job will be asking themselves, “Does everyone else think she is up to the job?” Clearly, the answer is no, right now, and everyone knows it. Electability will be a HUGE factor for GOP voters, I think. Republicans will be desperate to beat Obama, even if they have to cut other considerations a little shorter. So ANY candidate who has some electability issue that voters are aware of, will have to overcome it to get the nomination.
To my mind Palin has by far the biggest electability problem, with the perception that she is a loose cannon (an image she is playing up) and a lightweight (an image she is having trouble dispelling). Romney is probably second, with the perception that he doesn’t understand or care about “common” people. That perception is incredibly damaging in a recession.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
“Sarah Palin is her best”.
Sheesh. When do we get an edit feature?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
#79 Glad you asked as I very strongly support Huckabee. People seemed to forget that the majority of his tax increases were for court mandated school expenditures and for improved roads in Arkansas which was approved by its citizens. If I was of the “purist” mindset I might call him tax and spender as many have stupulated.
However, they fail to point out that Huckabee also cut taxes over 90 times during his 10 years as governor of Arkansas to counteract these tax increases. Fiscal conservatives are also concerned about balance budgets and in arkansas, with a heavily democratic legislature, in fact the most lop-sided in the country, somehow Huckabee was able to pass these tax cuts to keep his budget balanced.
For proof, if you look at the tenure of his governorship according to http://www.taxfoundation.org you find that from the year before he took office to the last year he served, Arkansas’s tax burden went from 10.1% to 11.1%. Net increase of only 1.0%. I am not sure what the national average was during that time but I’d guess Huckabee did better.
Now if you are going to spend money on something, one would hope to see a good return and consequently the education standards significantly increased under Gov. Huckabee which inturn placed more qualified workers in the work force and the improved roads brought new commerce to the state which inturn increased revenue without increasing taxes.
And on top of that, Huckabee was able to turn his state more republican. Remember during the Clinton years, Arkansas voted democratic. Well now, thanks to the governorship of Huckabee its one of the few states trending more republican. Thats somethng I’d think we could all agree on is a good thing. Now its legitiment to argue whether he can do it on a national scale, but so far he has done a good job of it according almost every recent poll and is positioned very well for a run at 2012.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
“I don’t think so. She would likely lose interest and quit.” And why?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
marK and Huck-Iowa:
With all due respect, you guys are politically naive and/or can’t see the forest for the trees!
November 5th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Actually, I was being quite serious, Iowa. She seems to be at her best outside the system.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
marK,
A couple question, since you are one of the more objective Rombots:
1. Do you see Romney as having an image problem regarding his connection to the “common man?” If so, how much impact do you think that will have in the Primary and/or General Election? If not, do you perceive Romney as having any other electability issues?
2. Do you see Huck as having a major electability issue? If so, what?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
marK,
“(Palin) seems to be at her best outside the system.”
I completely agree. I think she could be a major asset to the Republican party, just not as a Presidential candidate.
I give her huge props for leading the charge against ObamaCare. In large part because of her celebrity status, I think she has been the single most important individual on our side regarding this issue. She should stick to that sort of “rallying the troops” and shedding light on issues thing. She’s very good at it.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
#110:
Huckabee got in a great line in 08 before Iowa about how he was “like the guy you work with, not like the guy who laid you off”. That quote is Romney’s problem in a nutshell. If Romney is our nominee, the Democrats will relentlessly go after him in that vein. Romney needs a 15 second soundbite to counter that.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
I don’t think now is the time to have a billionaire Investment Banker heading our ticket. Their not exactly held in the highest esteem.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Jonathan,
The first time I heard Huck use that line, I knew it was devastating. As further evidence, the Romney campaign (and the Rombots here) absolutely howled. That one cut deep.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Besides the TARP bill which wasn’t
of her doing, and was against her
own instincts, any policy point you disagree on . Supporting the troops, promoting energy development, opposing cap n trade, at least this iteration of the health care bill, fighting the stimulus, despite her state’s porkhungry legislature
November 5th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
MWS et al:
You guys are dreaming, thinking Palin will just be a “major asset”; if she’s the “major asset” you now admit, she’ll be POTUS nominee!
(“more comfortable” out of office bla bla bla — you guys, with all due respect, are politically naive or can’t see the forest for the trees!)
November 5th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
“The first time I heard Huck use that line, I knew it was devastating. As further evidence, the Romney campaign (and the Rombots here) absolutely howled. That one cut deep.”
With respect, (for a couple of reasons) the line is going to be 3 times as devasting if things do not change.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Jonathan,
“Romney needs a 15 second soundbite to counter that.”
He does, and I don’t know what it would be. “No, I’m the guy who hired you,” would just reinforce the elitist, better-than-you perception. And a lot of people don’t like the guy who hired them either.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Well said narciso.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
#122:
Repeating talking points you pull out of your moose hat doesn’t make you right, just annoying.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Jack,
Rush Limbaugh is a major asset, but I don’t see the electorate considering him Presidential timber. Not every type of asset is the same, and not every time can/will/should get the nomination.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Your Palin-Limbaugh analogy is downright silly.
What do you think Sarahpac is all about???
November 5th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
MWS—I agree she could be a huge asset outside the system, and preventing Obama from a second term, which I believe is her main goal. I can see her as a defacto Vice President to the nominee drawing huge crowds and getting them to rally behind him.She has already proven herself to be a big nemesis to the Obama team both from a campaigning standpoint and legislative standpoint.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
MWS. Good questions.
#1. Romney Image problem. Romney does have that image problem, but I think it is more perception than reality. It all depends upon the mood of the public in 2012. Will we be wanting a competent executive capable of cleaning up after Obama, or will we want somebody we would go bar-hopping with. The public is interesting that way.
#2. Huck’s major electability issue. I see two:
(a) His playing the religion card. This comes down to identity politics pure and simple. This is seldom good for Republicans.
(b) His ability to make gaffes. He has improved here. Probably having his own TV show and his radio spots help here.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Jack,
“Your Palin-Limbaugh analogy is downright silly.”
How so? Both have a rabidly devoted audience. Both are lightning rods. Neither is considered Presidential material by a large majority of Americans. Both drive the other side notes, and make independents a little queesy.
I could go on and on……
November 5th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Len Sacks:–
What do you think Sarahpac is all about???
Sarah baracuda is gonna go for, and get, the prize!
Again, what do you think Sarahpac is all about???
November 5th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
#124:
He could say something about working in the private sector and creating jobs versus the government and killing jobs. But he needs to come across as authentic and not as a rich snob from Massachusetts.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Jack, What makes you so sure Sarah even wants “the prize”, as you call it?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
MWS, you really don’t see difference between Limbaugh and Palin???
Palin, a savvy politician, is running for President. Do you really think Palin is that dumb as not to know the subtleties and dynamics and strategerie of running for office, that being Presdient?
Limbaugh is not running for anything!
November 5th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
You really want the guy you work with to be president?
. You haven’t seen the guys that i work with.
I would also suggest if the economy is in bad shape then we probably want the guy who can start up, or clean up, a business and hire people.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
marK, what makes mt think Sarah wants to run for and be President?
Is that a real question?
Come on, get real — Sarahpac for one; Meg Stapleton for two…..
November 5th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
“Limbaugh is not running for anything!”
And Sarah is? What makes you so sure?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
So everyone that has a leadership PAC is running for President?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
marK, you are (again with all due respect) being silly or naive.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
“Jack,
“Your Palin-Limbaugh analogy is downright silly.”
How so? Both have a rabidly devoted audience. Both are lightning rods. Neither is considered Presidential material by a large majority of Americans. Both drive the other side notes, and make independents a little queesy.
I could go on and on……”
With respect MWS, Mr. Limbaugh has never been a mayor or a governor. So it is an apples and oranges comparison, but I’ll concede that apples and oranges are both fruit.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
marK, OK, have it your way, Sarah is not planning on running for President. Feel better?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
#142. Do I feel better? Not particularly. Why should I?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
“marK, you are (again with all due respect) being silly or naive.” With respect Jack, it may seem slightly silly to us, but I do not think he is being silly, MarK did bring up a valid point.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
what point was that?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
#136:
It isn’t what MWS or I want (I’m still neutral in the race), it’s just the perception of candidates by the public. Huckabee tries (and succeeds) at coming across as the funny guy at the office who you could go have a beer and watch a game with. People like that. They think a person like that understands them and their problems better. Whether Romney or Huckabee would be a better President is not the issue; it’s what people look for in choosing a candidate for President, that is what it’s about.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
marK,
Romney: I think he’s in a tough spot here. The CEOs, Fed Charimen, Corporate Bigwigs, and sundry other money men, etc…. are seen by many as the CAUSE of the problem. Even among those who think these guys know what they’re doing, there is a trust issue. “Sure they know what they’re doing, they’re using their knowledge to screw us!” If somebody did a poll, and had another (pre-recession) to compare it too, I bet the image and credibility of CEO-types in general has taken a HUGE hit. How could it not? I honestly think this explains (in large part) why Romney is trailing Huck in favorables and head-to-heads right now. Romney hasn’t really done anything wrong since he dropped out, so I think it’s an image problem.
Huck: I would agree with those two. I don’t think Huck will be playing the religion card much, if at all, in 2012. He won’t start the campaign at <1% with a gaping hole for a SoCon to run through, like last time. I do think we can do a soft play on identity politics and make it work though. The People vs. the Elites. Flyover Country vs. The Beltway, etc… That is often effective, if done deftly.
Gaffes definitely hurt him in '08. He tried to make too many jokes about serious issues. That was probably the biggest cause of his gaffes. His sense of humor helped drive him up the polls, but he overplayed that hand. I think he's learned from that, and is much better at being straight serious through a whole interview now.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Jonathan, to many many people, Huck is a complete turn-off; he’s never gonna get the GOP nod (probably he’s the only one of the main contenders, the only one, the Dems could beat in ‘12)
November 5th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
“what point was that?” Well MarK’s point is (I kind of hope he is wrong of course) is that just because Mrs. Palin has a PAC, does not mean she will run for President. There are a few prominent Republicans that have PAC which I doubt will run for President.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
#147:
Quite drinking the kool-aid, it’s bad for the brain. We have a sophisticated readership here at Race40212; mindless cheerleading isn’t going to cut it. Sorry to disappoint you.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Research, read-up, on all the stuff and discussion (on the internet) on Palin and her Sarahpac. This is the real thing; she wants it, that’s a forsure from someone reporting I know from the inside.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
CalState,
“You really want the guy you work with to be president”
My gosh! Romney can’t say that! Why not just put a big ol’ button on him that says, “I’m #1″
November 5th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
marK,
Can you (or anyone else) do anything about a comment of mine that got “eaten?”
November 5th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Yes. That is a valid point and it’s the nuances of politics. It’s probably why many people, who are qualified to be president and would do a good job, would never get elected. Unfortunate.
I would prefer not only someone who could understand my problems but someone who I thought had the capability to solve them or at least minimize them.
Ah the dilemma…
November 5th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
136 – my exact thoughts when I first heard Huck say that. “Why would I want the guy I work with to be president?” Same thing on the “who would you rather have a drink with” question. Always have the guy around who doesn’t drink that you can depend on to get you home.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Jonathan, they called it “mindless cheerleading” when they threw me off the site in 2008 for stating, from early on, Palin was surely gonna get the McCain VP nod.
It’s not “mindless” to analyze all the facts and circumstances and conclude it’s gonna be and gotta be Palin (barring some unforseen circumstance in her life or in USA).
Palin is unique in modern day politics; wherever she sits at the table, that’s the head of the table. No other candidate has that capacity.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
MWS, I restored it.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
It will be interesting to see who Palin endorses in Iowa. Will she go for the true fiscal and social conservative Bob Vander Plaats (Huck’s former Iowa chair), or the more moderate and former Iowa governor Terry Branstad? All the 2012 contenders have alot at stake in Iowa’s gubernatorial race for 2010.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Kavon,
Thanks. I hate it when your readership is deprived of my brilliance.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
mark,
The restored comment is now #147. Didn’t want you to miss it.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
As a Romney supporter, the ‘guy you work with vs the guy who hired you’ didn’t cut at all. I thought it was just one of the many stupid things Huck said in 08. (I’ll take my chances with the boss- since he must have done something to get there, rather than the guy who needed to be cut lose.
How well did the line work for Huck, anyway? He did came in 3rd, (mostly because he stayed in far past the point of viability), but the 2 men who appeared more like the guy who hired you easily beat him.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
147. Whoa Nelly! MWS just admitted that Huck played the religion card?
Good for you, I knew you could do it.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
MWS, I agree re Romney is out, plus, his Mass Health care failure is a major downer for him as well.
But as to Huckabee, to a sufficient number of voters, he is simply a turn off; his style, his religiosity, his Arkansas, and his meanness that sometimes comes through. The only reason Huck is as high in the polls he is now is because his TV show on Fox.
One reason Palin left the goversnorship of AK is come down to the lower 48 and compete with the Huckabee’s and Romney’s on TV, as Huck and Romney have no other political jobs and readily available.
Palin’s got a TV journalism background — she’ll play it just right, and time her appearances just right. (Look at all she’s already accomplished from her Wasilla kitchen table laptop computer — she’s a “mover” and “shaker” — and no one else of the GOP contenders is currently in her league.)
November 5th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
163. Jack,
“But as to Huckabee, to a sufficient number of voters, he is simply a turn off; his style, his religiosity, his Arkansas, and his meanness that sometimes comes through. The only reason Huck is as high in the polls he is now is because his TV show on Fox.”
MWS is going to need a poll for that.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
MWS. Good comments at #147.
Huck’s religion card problem is just part and parcel to his larger problem, a tenancy to rely upon identity politics. Populism is at its core identity politics.
That is why I took it as a good sign when he declined to endorse Hoffman until after she left the race. It shows that he is learning to be more circumspect.
Romney needs to build trust that he is the man to handle the cleanup of Obama’s mess. If he can’t, he won’t win. It is as simple as that.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
“his Arkansas,” I get Martha, we cannot have a President that comes from a state that starts with the letter A. Notice how you do not want a President from Alaska either? Haha.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Romney got raw deal – http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/11/03/pagliuca_says_romney_got_raw_deal_in_94/?rss_id=Boston.com+–+Local+news
November 5th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Martha, precisely, these MSM driven polls are gonna do everything they can to play-up Huckabee (who they want on the GOP ticket) and down-play Palin (who they fear on the GOP ticket).
November 5th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Huckabee is not a conservative – http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/mike-huckabees-open-borders-record/
November 5th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
and the MSM polls will play-up Romney as well, ANYBODY but Palin!
November 5th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
huckabee is done…and likely knows it…just watch his reaction to a reporter shortly after he made his sick gaffe about someone pointing a gun at Obama:
http://www.tmz.com/2008/05/18/huckabee-caught-in-tmzs-crosshairs/
November 5th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Martha,
“MWS just admitted that Huck played the religion card?”
Of course he did. ***NOT*** in the sense of running an “anti-Mormon” campaign, as you constantly allege, but in the sense that he made his faith an issue, and made no bones about his Christianity and the way that faith affects his outlook and governance.
In that sense, I think Huck would also say he “played the religion card.” While “playing the X card” is usually meant pejoratively, I was using it as short hand for “making an issue of his own faith, and the way it influences him, and seeking to attract like minded people.”
November 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
“That was Barack Obama. He just tripped off a chair. He’s getting ready to speak and somebody aimed a gun at him and he — he dove for the floor.” – Mike Huckabee after his speech to the National Rifle Association was interrupted by a loud noise
http://www.tmz.com/2008/05/17/huckabee-jokes-about-obama-assassination/
November 5th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Huck’s religiosity (or perceived religiosity, doesn’t matter fact or fiction, perceptions already set) kill off enough of the voters THAT HE’S NEVER GONNA GET THE NOD, never!
November 5th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
http://capitolstreet.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/huckabee-tasteless-joke-to-nra-convention-of-obama-avoiding-gun-shot/
Huckabee Tasteless Joke to NRA Convention of Obama Avoiding Gun Shot
May 19, 2008
“Former Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee was interrupted by a loud crash off stage last Friday as he addressed the National Rifle Association in Kentucky, commenting that the noise was Democratic candidate Barack Obama falling off a chair as he dodged a gun aimed at him.
“That was Barack Obama. He just tripped off a chair. He was getting ready to speak and somebody aimed a gun at him, and he dove for the floor,” Huckabee told the NRA convention.
Are you kidding me?
Exactly how racist and overtly callous are the Republicans? I mean, its one thing for conservatives to laugh about Obama getting off-ed around the dinner table, its quite another to do it while speaking at one of the largest annual conventions in the country as it airs on CNN.
Obama, who if elected in November would be the first black U.S. president, was campaigning in South Dakota on Friday when Huckabee made the comment. This type of violence potentially leveled at Obama has been a concern of many voters during this presidential campaign. Realizing this, Obama requested the U.S. Secret Service to protect him beginning in May 2007, the earliest a presidential candidate has ever received protection.
Huckabee later issued a statement saying he did not intend his “offhand remark” to offend the Illinois senator. “I apologize that my comments were offensive, that was never my intention,” he said.
Right.
A remark made about the only serious black presidential contender in the history of this Republic, getting greased at an NRA convention was offhanded? Call me kooky, but I’m guessing it was a remark that Huckabee was just itching to make in front of a friendly racist-conservative crowd. Its no mystery that white conservative Republicans basically yearn for the days of lynching at the hands of the Klan, so why is anyone surprised that Southern whitebred baptist, good-ole-boy, Arkansas’s favorite redneck son, Mike Huckabee made this comment?
I had a grain of respect for this guy at one time regarding his political skill and tact on the trail – not now. He crossed the line.
Obama should demand a public apology from Huckabee, and if he doesn’t get it, the progressive blogs and the Democratic party should make this statement from Huckabee a centerpiece of the Fall ad campaign.
No breaks on this.
I say beat Huckabee and McCain over the head with this at every turn, just like the Republicans did to Obama with the Wright controversy. If these jackasses want to play hardball, I say lets play.
None of this can go unchecked. None of it.
This comment was outrageous and made by a man who obviously is willing to tow the Republican, closet racist agenda, in a bid to be vice president.
His comment was disgusting and reprehensible, and I for one, expect a higher standard of public conduct from a minister.
Huckabee should be ashamed of himself.”
November 5th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
“I don’t think now is the time to have a billionaire Investment Banker heading our ticket. Their not exactly held in the highest esteem.”
This is true – except that, after four years of someone with absolutely no business experience, who did more to hurt the economy than help it, I think an experienced successful-executive type person is going to have a VERY strong appeal.
All Romney has to do is raise the issue of experience in the private sector. He has it, the others, not so much.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Shelby,
Are you still hammering the 2012-will-be-decided-by-a-single-stupid-comment-nobody-cares-about-anymore theme?
Goodness sake. It would be like be saying Romney will never win because he said “Who let the dogs out?” and asked a little black kid if he likes “bling bling.”
Get a grip.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
If it comes down to Romney, Huckabee, and Palin as the leading candidates, I think Palin and Huckabee battle it out in Iowa with whoever loses there being a real long shot to win the nomination. Romney should win in New Hampshire. Palin and Huckabee are really competing for a lot of the same voters. I think DaveG’s comments the other day are spot on. People don’t vote for who they agree with the most on the issues. They vote for who they feel a connection with the most. I know people who read sites like this don’t vote that way, but you are an extreme minority of voters. Most people don’t think like you.
Huckabee and Palin resemble (culturally, demographically) the Republican base better than Romney does. Romney can surely win the nomination, but I think he needs Huckabee and Palin to split the vote between themselves to allow him to win, similar to how McCain split the vote between Huckabee and Romney. In a 3-way race Huckabee-Romney-Palin, I think Romney wins. In a 2-way race of Huckabee vs. Romney or Palin vs. Romney, I think Romney loses. I know this site is mostly Romney supporters, but that’s how I see it this far out from anyone actually voting.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
“Goodness sake. It would be like be saying Romney will never win because he said “Who let the dogs out?””
Having seen that video – its not nearly as bad as some make it out to be.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
#168 and #170
Jack,
As I mentioned on another thread yesterday, sometimes it seems that a prerequisite to being a Palin supporter is that you have to blame everyone else for any difficulties she might have. Not that other camps don’t have their own contingents of conspiracy theorists, it’s just that Sarah seems to attract more than her fair share of them.
To their credit, OHIO and a couple of Palinites here do their best to avoid that trap, but I fear they too will eventually succumb to that prevailing siren song that seems to waif through their camp.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
WSU,
“I think an experienced successful-executive type person is going to have a VERY strong appeal.”
I’m not so sure. I’m just speculating here (with a touch of hyperbole) but I think a poll ranking voters’ trust would put CEOs just below pedophiles right now.
I’m not saying it’s right, but it is what it is. Popular perception is that CEOs in large part made this mess, and are profiting off of it, at taxpayer expense. That perception robs Romney of what would otherwise be a strong narrative.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
“Romney can surely win the nomination, but I think he needs Huckabee and Palin to split the vote between themselves to allow him to win, similar to how McCain split the vote between Huckabee and Romney.”
You know, I used to think the same thing, but I’m not sure if I believe that anymore. Even without Palin in the race, once we really get going, Romney should hold most of his prior support, and suck up the majority of the McCain fans. Add in an influx of additional independents frustrated with Obama, and since there is no competetive primary on the left, I think it shapes up to favor Romney – once again, after Huck has to talk about his record, rather than his band.
Actually, I could see (although I have no evidence to back this up) how Palin could take a chunk of McCain supports away from Romney.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
#181:
A good test case for Romney in 2012 is out in California in 2010. If Meg Whitman wins the GOP nomination and the general election to be Governor, than it would seem that the CEO card will lose some of it’s toxic nature.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
#177.MWS,
I agree. We have just turned the page on another year’s election. We are now in the second year AFTER the 2008 election. Time to move on from yesteryear’s gaffes.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
MWS, initally, I think you’re right.
BUT, its a very easy argument to counter. As soon as it gets brought up, Mitt can easily, honestly, and simultaneously make two arguments:
1) we need an experienced private-sector leader to run the government and help fix our economic and monetary problems.
2) Romney is not like the CEOs of the banks which went under, he earned his money, provided a good return to investors, and avoided the other examples of fraud, etc. that consumed many other.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
“A good test case for Romney in 2012 is out in California in 2010. If Meg Whitman wins the GOP nomination and the general election to be Governor, than it would seem that the CEO card will lose some of it’s toxic nature.”
We’re going to have to see how that works out. Ahnold hasn’t done us any favors out there.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
#177,
Au contraire…this would be a HUGE deal if huck was trying to run against the person who’s assassination he joked about! Duh! In heated elections, even a thesis from 20 years prior can and are used as ammunition. You make a fool of yourself when you try to minimize the damage huck did to himself among the general electorate. The Iowans will not make him the nominee…they will be looking for a VIABLE candidate.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Jonathan,
” If Meg Whitman wins the GOP nomination and the general election to be Governor, than it would seem that the CEO card will lose some of it’s toxic nature.”
Excellent point. Of course, it will be hard to isolate a single variable (Republican year, Deep blue state, Good candidate or bad), but I think we will get a sense. The Democrats will hammer her on that, I’m sure. We’ll see if it works.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
WSU,
#185. Maybe so. I think as Jonathan points out, Meg Whitman will be the canary in the mineshaft.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Shelby,
“In heated elections, even a thesis from 20 years prior can and are used as ammunition. You make a fool of yourself when you try to minimize the damage huck did to himself among the general electorate.”
…….except…….. that guy just WON BY EIGHTEEN POINTS. You make a fool of yourself when you offer evidence that contradicts the point you think you’re making.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Its the type of gaffe that matters. Romney’s gaffes are bad – but tend to be more comical or culturally embarrasing than offensive. On the other hand, Huckabee’s gaffes tend to be downright hostile and even discriminatory (ie Jesus and Satan are brothers, Obama getting shot). Palin’s gaffes fall somewhere in the middle, tending to showcase a lack of policy knowledge or political nuance than anything else.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Eric, so you’re saying Huckabee can be the spolier in 2012 vis a vis knocking off Palin, as Huck was the spolier in 2008 knocking off Romney — giving us a President Obama?
Huckabee’s been nothing but a disaster for the GOP and this country.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Shelby.#187,
That is a concern. However, we will have our own store of Obama gaffes to exploit.
It’s like MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). If one side start shooting with their store of gaffes, the other side will let fly their own.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
#188:
Not only is Whitman a CEO, but she is using it as the basis of her campaign. She talks about running the state like a business and bringing her business skills to the Governor’s office. If in 2010 she can pull it off, Romney could breath a sigh of relief (for the record, Romney is strongly supprting Whitman in the primary).
I have to go now, it’s been fun.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Jack,
No one knows what Sarah Pac is about because they only have the front page and the contribution page.
I am a Huckabee guy, but at least Romney’s PAC has some stuff going on. Huckabee’s Pac sets the example for what a PAC should do and that is organize to help others. They do it well and with little money.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
“To their credit, OHIO and a couple of Palinites here do their best to avoid that trap, but I fear they too will eventually succumb to that prevailing siren song that seems to waif through their camp.” Haha, I get the memo that we Palinites are a bunch of complainers. I realize that such is not a compliment. However, being an explainer is not always better than a complainer. Although at this point, I’ll keep my powder dry.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Jonathan,
#194. Then it will be an excellent test case, as CA is facing basically all the problems the country is facing- bad economy, huge deficits, housing downturn, etc…..
If Whitman wins, that will be Romney’s blueprint. If she loses badly, he’ll have to look for a plan B, and figure out someway to overcome the CEO image problem.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
I think that Romney’s biggest problem going into 2012 is all the money he spent to try and win in 2008. Look at what just happened with Corzine and Bloomberg. Do we really want to be voting for a candidate who is paying people to like him?
Now the Romney supporters will say that Romney will not need to self-finance in 2012 because he is now well known. That is true, but Romney will be using his money to buy chits/endorsements for his campaign.
The teaparty crowd is angry-and they have plenty of reasons. They will be looking for someone who is not connected to wall street, special interests, or other governors. They will be looking for someone who is their own man. Who can go it alone and show that they are not bought and paid for. And that someone is definitely not Romney.
Romney has this reputation for having the money and organization. Great-that is important. But with all of that money and organization comes connections, favors, quid pro quo, and the teapartiers and independents will be staying far away from that in 2012.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Maybe.
But I’m still not sure you’ll be able to project any kind of lessons from a Gov. race in a blue state with a GOP incumbent onto the American Presidential election (much less the GOP primary) in 2012.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Sarah will hopefully support, as well as, campaign for Bob Vander Plaats (Huck’s former Iowa chair).
November 5th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Corzine and Bloomberg vs. Romney?
Well, Corzine wasn’t liked to begin with, and he was a Democrat, and he was pushing a liberal agenda, etc. Bloomberg had problems because of the term limit situation.
Once again, I think we have to be careful about using local races as a guide for the national party.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
#193,
Waaay before running against obama, in the primaries…huck’s contenders will make sure the GOP’s primary voters are aware of huck’s sick “joke” to avoid choosing another unviable candidate. I seriously can’t even believe anyone seriously believes huckabee could win after this colossal gaffe.
If Repubs are dumb enough to give huck the nomination, huck will give the election to obama AGAIN just as he did in 2008. No instant replay next time around…it’s time to learn lessons from the last election! Voters will be looking for a candidate whom is competent AND LOOKS AND ACTS PRESIDENTIAL. That eliminates huck and palin.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
WSU,
As I mentioned, it is hard to isolate a single variable, but since Whitman is running as a CEO, the Democrats will definitely try to turn that against her (they’d be morons if they didn’t). Since it will be a major issue in a big state, I’m sure we will see polling specifically targeting whether that issue is helping or hurting her.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Following are excerpts from an article written last August by Marie Jon, a political / religious-based writer, regarding huckabee and his rabid followers. She couldn’t have been more on target.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/jon/080820
“Evangelical Christians have been aware of the dirge sung by those who, for whatever reason, wish to exclude Romney from consideration for the VP post on the Republican ticket. Very well-crafted words are being used to try to induce Evangelicals to withhold their votes from this very qualified man because of his (Mormon) faith.”
“Apparently some Evangelical pastors won’t cease their whisperings to the press. We get it. They are promoting Huckabee over Romney for the vice-presidency.”
“If President Bush was practically tarred and feathered by progressive Democrats for his Christian beliefs, how might an outspoken and often comical character like Michael Huckabee be perceived if he became the VP nominee? Only naivete would facilitate one believing that the media would allow Huckabee’s verbal blunders to go unnoticed. They embraced him once, but if he were to play a pivotal role as McCain’s running mate, the gloves would come off.”
“During a speech in Louisville, Kentucky, Huckabee joked about a loud bang that was heard off-stage “That was Barack Obama,” Huckabee quipped, “He Just tripped off a chair. He was getting ready to speak. Somebody aimed a gun at him…he dove for the floor.” Watch the Video
“Evidently, the sabotaging of a God-fearing Mormon is more important to the aforementioned Evangelical pastors than a win for the Republican Party in the fall. They overlook that there will be Supreme Court positions up for grabs during the next four years.”
“Opposition is particularly powerful among those who supported former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in the Republican presidential primaries earlier this year.”
“Other well-placed Christian conservatives say that although many evangelical leaders could accept and work for a McCain-Romney ticket, Mr. Huckabee’s supporters tend to be ‘rabid’ in their views against Mr. Romney because of his faith.”
Quotes within this article:
“Common sense almost dictates that “the candidate Republicans should be clamoring for is the one liberals are most feverishly denouncing. That is Mitt Romney by a landslide.” – Ann Coulter
“I’d Pick Romney as McCain’s Running Mate.” – Karl Rove
November 5th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Shelby, you’re trying TOO hard. God bless you, my friend. : )
November 5th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
“Sarah will hopefully support, as well as, campaign for Bob Vander Plaats (Huck’s former Iowa chair).” Yes he is the better candidate, but I trust Mrs. Palin’s judgement as to which horse she will or will not back.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Shelby,
Seriously. If you think a specific joke (that is now a year and a half old, and will be 3 years old when the campaigning starts) is such a HUUUUUUUUUUUUGE deal and on everyone’s minds, why do you keep relying on an article dated May 19, 2008 to make your point?
I think McDonnell’s deliberate and thought out thesis is potentially far more damaging than a bad, off-the-cuff remark, and McDonnell just pasted the Democrat. I can’t believe your obsession over this one remark, and how you think the Earth revolves around it.
Now, MAYBE you can make the case that a series of future gaffes will sink Huck, but not this one.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Huck Iowa,
This is Shelby’s single-minded obsession.
I’ve seen a lot of bizarre analysis on this site the past 2 years, but Shelby takes the cake.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
I don’t think I’d go as far to say that it would be the silver bullet, but all someone has to do is bring it up, and its going to leave pretty much everyone with a bad taste in their mouth. Enough to change the outcome of the election? Alone, probably not – but don’t underestimate the ability of one bad night to ruin a campaign.
Just ask Romney’s father, or Ted Kennedy, or Howard Dean.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
#190,
Sorry, but there is a huge and obvious difference in severity between an “anti”-woman thesis and joking about the assassination of the first black president, whom huck would be standing on stage with! Don’t you see the absurdity in this?!
November 5th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Shelby,
“Don’t you see the absurdity in this?!”
Yes, I think I do.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
#208.MWS:“I’ve seen a lot of bizarre analysis on this site the past 2 years, but Shelby takes the cake.”
Since we are dealing with Mike and Mitt, would that be Devil’s food or Angel food?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Do y’all like Ray Charles?
Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more, no more, no more, no more.
Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more.
What you say?
(Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more, no more, no more, no more.)
(Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more.)
Woah Woman, oh woman, don’t treat me so mean,
You’re the meanest old woman that I’ve ever seen.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Your comment, Shelby, wouldn’t be so bad, but we have all seen your name on most of the political blogs citing the same negative comments about Huckabee.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
#211,
Keep your head buried in the sand if it makes you feel better and have a nice day. I’m outta here…places to go..things to do.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
#214,
Yes, and it’s paid off…I’ve seen Dems now calling huck a racist and bringing up that assassination joke. But keep your head in the sand…
And to all, have a great day!
November 5th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
“Romney’s father, or Ted Kennedy, or Howard Dean.”
Not sure what the Ted Kennedy reference is, but George Romney’s ‘brainwashed’ comment and Howard Dean’s scream were things that happened in the campaigns they affected — they were new news. Huck’s dumb joke will be four years old.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
#216,Shelby:“And to all, have a great day!”
Thanks. You too!
Oh, by the way, which is worse — having your head buried in the sand, or in the manure pit?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Sure thing, Shelby, keep it up (or down, in Bizarro Shelby’s little world), all the polls & trends are proving you right.
NOT!
November 5th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Shelby,
Have a great day, and take your time running those errands!
November 5th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Only because Dean and Romney never ran for President again…when George Romney died, USA today ran the “brainwashed” comment as part of the obituary.
You can guarentee that if GR had run again, it would have come up.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
marK,
“Since we are dealing with Mike and Mitt, would that be Devil’s food or Angel food?”
Not going there. We’ve managed to avoid a flame war on this thread so far, even with Martha and I addressing each other on the question of Huck and religion……..
November 5th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Huch-Iowa etc.:–
Are you saying or implying you agree or disagree that Huckabee can be the spolier in 2012 vis a vis knocking off Palin, as Huck was the spolier in 2008 knocking off Romney — giving us a President Obama.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Huch-Iowa etc.:–
Are you saying or implying you agree or disagree that Huckabee can be the spolier in 2012 vis a vis knocking off Palin, as Huck was the spolier in 2008 knocking off Romney — giving us a President Obama.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Romney fanatics grasping at straws. LOL
Though, can you blame them?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Jack,
“Huck was the spolier in 2008 knocking off Romney — giving us a President Obama.”
Even though you are a Palinite, you exemplify Rule #3 in the Rombot handbook:
Wish fullfillment is the best basis for political analysis.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
More Sweet Ray…
Well baby, listen baby, don’t ya treat me this-a way
Cause I’ll be back on my feet some day.
(Don’t care if you do ’cause it’s understood
you ain’t got no money you just ain’t no good.)
Well, I guess if you say so
I’d have to pack my things and go.
…Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more, no more, no more, no more.
…Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more.
What you say?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
“Wish fullfillment is the best basis for political analysis.”
Not sure where you’re going there MWS, but I think its good point that Huckabee is the reason McCain, rather than Romney, won the nomination.
Also probably a good bet that Mitt would have done at least slightly better than McCain.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
I’m sure this has been said, but Huckabee has much more face time on FOX at least 4 interviews a week as FOX promotes his show, plus his show is shown at least 4 times as reruns on Sunday. Huckabee should be doing better.
Mitt is mentioned very seldom….and he’s still even with Huckabee. This is a fact, it is not spin. If Mitt and Huck are running neck and neck, just wait till Mitt gets things going!
November 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Evangelicals cultist vs hillbillies cultist
November 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Mitt is mentioned very seldom….and he’s still even with Huckabee. This is a fact, it is not spin.
…Indeed. The problem is that knowing WHY you’re losing isn’t much consolation for the actual loss.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
#225:“Romney fanatics grasping at straws. LOL”
Well, at this point there is very little substantive to grab a hold of. Everyone is grasping at straws — and straw men. We are still more than a year before the real race starts. All we are seeing now is the preliminary time trials to determine starting order.
So welcome to the land of straw, gentlemen.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
WSU,
“Not sure where you’re going there MWS, but I think its good point that Huckabee is the reason McCain, rather than Romney, won the nomination.
Also probably a good bet that Mitt would have done at least slightly better than McCain.”
I don’t think there is any reason to believe that Huck supporters would have flocked to Romney. Exit polls tended to show that Huck voters had a relatively negative opinion of Romney, and vice versa. There is absolutely no basis for definitively saying that Romney would have won a general election campaign he never ran. Both of those are “wish fulfillment as analysis.”
Would Romney have done better than McCain? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not. But I doubt he would have done 100-some electoral votes better.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
MWS, how am I wrong? (Huck split/knocked off Romney; Romney would have beaten Obama)
November 5th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Jack,
See #233.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
MWS, I’m talking about the primaries — Huck split/knocked out Romney.
Will you at least agree with me on that?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Jack,
No, the exit polls I was referring to were in the primaries.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
#233.MWS“Would Romney have done better than McCain? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.”
Exactly. You can’t rerun history with different parameters to check the different outcomes. I like to think Romney would have done better. I know he wouldn’t have run the last six weeks on auto-pilot like McCain did. And he certainly would have blown Obama out of the water on the economy.
Would that have been enough to counter the overwhelming anti-GOP wave last year? Who knows. Even if he HAD won, I doubt Congress would have been much better — but then compared to the extreme super Democratic majority in the Massachusetts Legislature he had to deal with, I think the current Congress would have been a welcome relief to him.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
MWS, bottom line, if Huck was not in the race, Romney would have won those primaries. Are you disagreeing with that?
November 5th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Jack,
Consider this exit poll from Florida. It’s a big, diverse state that everyone competed in and was decisive in Romney’s loss. When asked who their second choice was, 55% of Huck voters said McCain, and only 32% said Romney.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#FLREP
November 5th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
marK,
Right. It’s easy to point out McCain’s mistakes. They were actually made! Perhaps Preferred Candidate X would not have made those same mistakes, but they certainly would have made their own.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
I think Huckabee would have done better against Obama than McCain, but that is not to say he would have won just like you can’t say Romney would have won. I think it is Romney who split the vote and gave the election to McCain and therefore Obama. That argument goes both ways.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Well, Huckabee definitely throw a monkey wrench into Romney’s plans when he took Iowa. Was that what killed Mitt’s campaign? Who can say.
I can say this. Mitt has never publicly bemoaned anything. He has never put the blame of his loss on anyone or anything but himself. It is one of the traits I like about him.
I can guarantee if he runs again, he is not going to make the same mistakes. But who knows if his new mistakes will cost him the nomination again?
November 5th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Romney was a much stronger candidate than Huck.
In Florida, Romney came in second, right behind McCain, NOT Huckabee who was way behind.
(and Romney likely would have won in FL if Martinez and RINO-Crist did not sabotage Romney, by endorsing loser-McCain the weekend before the election)
November 5th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
“You can guarentee that if GR had run again, it would have come up.’
Come up? Sure. Have much effect? Probably not. And I agree that Huck’s comment will come up — and have little effect.
As for your mention that Romney never ran again — “brainwash’ happened in the ‘68 campaign. He could hardly have run again because in ‘72 and ‘76 there were incumbent Republican presidents (in ‘76, I realize Reagan ran against the Republican, but that was from the right — Romney had no room to run). By ‘80 he was far past his shelf date.
As for Dean, he couldn’t run (or it would have been very awkward) in ‘08 because he was DNC chair. Will he run in the future? Who knows — probably not, but ‘the scream’ won’t be the reason.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
marK,
Interesting clue in the Flordia poll as long as we’re “what iffing” the general:
When asked about economic conditions, 36% said “excellent/good”. Of those, Romney won 39-26 over McCain.
Among the 63% who rated economic conditions “not so good/poor,” McCain beat Romney 41-27.
That is a meaningful spread there in the type of voters each was attracting. Does that mean that when the economy really tanked in the fall that Romney would have been less able to attract those who saw the economy as bad? Who knows, but maybe it goes to that image problem we were discussing earlier, where the more economically vulnerable don’t like Romney as much.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Jack,
“In Florida, Romney came in second, right behind McCain, NOT Huckabee who was way behind.”
I think you completely missed my point. The exit poll I linked showed that if Huck were not in the race, MCCAIN WOULD HAVE WON FLORIDA BY A BIGGER MARGIN, as Huck voters preferred McCain over Romney nearly 2-1.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
#246.MWS,
Definitely food for thought.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
marK,
Romney has already made mucho mistakes; he let Sarah Palin take the lead in everything (Romney staying back hedging/playing it ’safe’)
Palin was out there beating back Obamacare, not Romney!
Palin is out there on domestic energy, not Romney!
Palin was out there supporting troop strength increase, not Romney!
Palin’s got the cajones!
November 5th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
MWS, how big was the economy issue in Florida? If memory serves, they didn’t really deal with it that much. So stereotypes could easily prevail. In the general when the economy was the #1 issue, I would think people would have focused on it more.
Sort like when people weren’t thinking that hard about the election, they had Giuliani with double digit leads over his nearest competitor. But when they actually got down to seriously considering whom to vote for in the primaries, poor Rudy only ended up with one measly delegate.
Who knows?
November 5th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Geez, I go have a life this morning and a 250 count thread springs into existence.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Jack,
Do you really wish to get into comparing mistakes between Romney and Palin? I don’t see any good coming from it. All we will accomplish is to dig up past dirt on each candidate, and make us mad at each other. I would just as soon leave past mistakes buried as much as possible.
Let’s concentrate on looking forward, shall we?
November 5th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
251. You haven’t missed much.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Martha!
How are you this fine and beautiful day?
November 5th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
252. Mark,
I admire your ‘can’t we all just get along’ look forward attitude, and obviously I would do well to emulate you here at race. But the candidates records and actions are relevant, and you can’t really have a serious conversation without them.
It would be friendly, but practically pointless.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
#231
WSU: I think FOX is walking a fine line saying they’re fair and balanced when Huckabee’s show is nothing but a political ad for him, he is very clever.
When Huckabee is asked if he’s running for President he never gives a definite answer as they all do, but nobody else has a show. Huck wouldn’t need to announce he’s running for President until the last few months as he uses his show as townhalls.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Sheesh,
I hate it when that happens!
November 5th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
254. Very well, thank you. I’ve been out raking leaves for the past hour with my daughter. It is a very fine day, indeed. We timed it just right, too. The sprinkles started right as we were scooping up the last bit of leaves.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
After all, without meanness and negativity about EVERYONE except her Romney Crush…
Martha’s go nothing except…
“Another b a d poll, darn it!!!”
November 5th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
marK,
Yes. The economy was a big issue. 45% rated it #1. Terrorism was #2 at 21%.
In fact, I recall a fair amount of debate during the debates of ‘07 about whether the economy was in trouble. Huck was basically ringing the bell before anyone else (other than Ron Paul of course). I recall him saying stuff like “A lot of folks think things are just fine, but ask a truckdriver in Duluth….” or something like that.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
go = got LOL
November 5th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Martha.#252,
Perhaps true. I do try to differentiate between the “Let’s dig up all the dirt we can find on Candidate X” with the “Candidate X has this problem.” A fine point, perhaps, but I like to think there is a difference. The former encourages mud fights. I dislike those intently. The later discusses the problem, perceived or otherwise. I love those.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Every candidates has problems.
The Huck has the least. (See each and every recent poll and trend…)
Btw, No rain here in Orange County!
November 5th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
…every candidate, that is. All sides.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
#258.Martha,
Ah the sensations and joys of fall. It is my favorite time of year. There is a certain crispness in the air that no other season has. It’s invigorating.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
262. Well, you’re pretty much right, as usual. Obviously, mud-slinging doesn’t bother me that much. I don’t think we should take ourselves that seriously in a political blog.
259. I usually don’t attack other posters,very much, though. Just Palin and Huck. (Unlike you, and a few others. You’ve had something negative to say about me in every post. Lighten up!)
November 5th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
I wouldn’t read too much into this poll. It’s way too early. People had McCain and Giuliani leading at this time 4 years ago. Romney was below 5% and Huckabee a little lower than that.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
259. This is not a bad poll for Romney. I’m perfectly happy with his numbers, and with everything he’s out there doing. He’s in fine position.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Yes, I think this is an excellent poll for Huckabee and Romney. Nothing to really complain about. As someone mentioned a little further back, Huckabee has his TV show and his radio spots. I was listening to him just this morning. He made a lot of sense.
What does Romney have? Money? Sure money can buy you commercials, but he ain’t runnin’ any. Yet he is less than the MOE behind Huck for first place.
And this is bad because…?
November 5th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
LOL Martha, you are a complete joke here to most – with all your continuous daily & hourly bitterness, pettiness and cruelty to others HERE
AND their Republican candidates.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
marK,
“And this is bad because….”
Well, one could say that the fact that Huck has a made-for-TV personality and Romney doesn’t is a plus for Huck.
But really, I think the TV thing is overblown. Based on ratings, what % of voters see Huck each week? I’m guessing 2-4%.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
A “bad poll” in that Mike is on top AGAIN.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
I little torn this year, I liked Romney last year, but I don’t know if I’ll support him in 2012. I like Palin, but she’s an idiot. Huckabee is a moron too. If I support Romney I want a pledge from Romney, maybe an oath from him stating that he will govern as a Real conservative.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Hey folks,
If asked in 2007 if they thought Obama was qualified to be President, how many woud have said yes-15-25%? So, Romney and Huck start with a far larger advantage.
Also, how many peolpe know these guys were govenors (Huck for 10 years)and that Romney saved the winter Olympics in Utah from finantial disaster?
Another statistic Huck misses: only ONE Democrat has been RE-elected President since 1948:Bill Clinton
November 5th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
274. All great points, too.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
“only ONE Democrat has been RE-elected President since 1948:Bill Clinton”
That’s true, but it overlooks the fact that JFK would have been re-elected, and that prior to 1948 Truman was re-elected and FDR was re-elected three times.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
#271.MWS:“But really, I think the TV thing is overblown. Based on ratings, what % of voters see Huck each week? I’m guessing 2-4%.”
And what is the margin of this poll of Huckabee over Romney?
*—-*
I sense a subtle difference in the different ways the two men give speeches. Romney sells himself by helping others. Huckabee sells himself while helping others.
Too subtle? Try this observation. I listened to Huck’s radio spot this morning. I loved it! He scored a number of good point off of Pelosi’s “We Won!” statement yesterday. But throughout his spot, he kept lacing it with references to himself, his PAC, his upcoming book and where you can buy it. It reminds me of those TV evangelists I occasionally watch who spend a great deal of time on-air asking for donations. “God is great! Support me.”
Now to this admittedly biased observer, it seems that Mitt tends to do less of that. When he stumps for somebody else, his speeches tend to be more about that somebody than Huckabee’s are.
Now, as I said, I am not the most unbiased person around, especially when it comes to Mike versus Mitt. However, it seems to me that Huckabee tends to say “So-and-so is great! Support me”. Romney says instead, “So-and-so is great!”, leaving the “Support me” part largely unsaid.
So what’s my point? Huckabee actively promotes himself. Mitt doesn’t, or is more subtle about it. So the fact that Huckabee only leads Romney by one or two points tells me that Mike and friends shouldn’t be popping any corks just yet.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Carrie Prejean Pockets Nothing From Pageant Lawsuit
Report: Prejean Backed Down From Million-Dollar Settlement Demand After Seeing Home-Made Sex Tape
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/carrie-prejean-miss-usa-pageant-lawsuit-sex-tape/story?id=9005288
Prejean Sex Tape Triggers Settlement
http://www.tmz.com/2009/11/04/carrie-prejean-sex-tape-settlement-miss-california-usa-pagneat/#ixzz0W1WVHDVi
Palin defends Carrie Prejean Miss California USA
http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/18483
Palin on Levi: those who ’sell their body…do anything for attention’
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/77933.html
November 5th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
AAAAAaaaaanyone but Huckabee. I don’t think I could take a back-to-back Obama/Huckabee administration. I would leave the country. Give us some hope, puh-leeeeze. That’s like hanging on by your fingertips and someone drops a Huckabee anvil on them. Ain’t nuthin’ left then, you gotta let goOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHH!!!!
Open the prison gates HuckaBEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
November 5th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Here in Indy it’s sunny and about 52. Any other weather reports from anybody as I read these postings?
November 5th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Wasn’t Barbara Streisand and her friends supposed to leave this country…
a few years back, due to a Presidential election. Perhaps they can go with you.
They NEVER carry through, though. Only talk. Why? ; )
November 5th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
#279 But if you had to choose between the two, Who would you vote for? Choose one!
November 5th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
MarK, YOU’re the one who brought up mistakes by Romney, not me.
“I can guarantee if he runs again, he is not going to make the same mistakes. But who knows if his new mistakes will cost him the nomination again.”
November 5th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
#283.Jack:“MarK, YOU’re the one who brought up mistakes by Romney, not me.”
True, very true. And you promptly replied with a list of supposed Romney mistakes.
Now, Jack, you are the one who likes to accuse people of being naive. Would it not be naive to assume that a Romney supporter would not then want to retaliate by making a list of supposed Palin mistakes?
And off we go in a flame war. What good would that do any of us?
November 5th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
“I want a pledge from Romney, maybe an oath from him stating that he will govern as a Real conservative.”
I don’t take pledges from politicians too seriously (this isn’t a slam on Romney). Do you remember, “Read my lips, no new taxes”? How many promises has Obama broken thus far?
Besides of course the question of what is a “real conservative” — any two of us on this site might differ in our definition.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
279.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
So the key point from this poll is that Huckabee is the front runner, and is in a strong position to capture the nomination. However, surely he needs to start building a politicl team before Romney & TPaw capture all the best talent? This is a point The Fix keeps stressing.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Bob, a real conservative is someone who says they’re a real conseravtive
November 5th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
#285.Bob Hovic,
An excellent comment, my friend, both parts of it.
The first, Mary Poppins said, “That’s a pie-crust promise. Easily made, easily broken”. That being said, Romney famously had his staff make up a list of all his campaign promises which he carried around with him. He managed to keep all the ones that depended upon him. He also managed to keep a majority of those that depended upon others.
The second, the term “Real Conservative” has about as much meaning as RINO. The former is anyone you agree with. The later is anyone you don’t.
Really precise there.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
The winners in 2010 and 2012 are going to be which ever party realizes that real America is being strangled to death by the ideological struggle that consumes Washington DC but is unknown anywhere else in the country.
Take the estate tax as an example. The right hates it because it destroys small businesses, destroys jobs, and takes wealth away from the individuals who have worked hard for it. The left likes it because the idea of the tax was to redistribute wealth to prevent the creation of an American aristocracy. The net effect however, has been to squash small businesses and line the pockets of the large insurance companies.
To see that I mean you can visit
http://estatetaxtruth.org/
The fact is that real America feels the results, and does not get hung up in the esoteric philosophical concerns that fuel the partisan divide in DC.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
#290 Right On!
November 5th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
The political ideological divide that exists in D.C. is impeding progress in anything getting done, and more and more Americans are getting sick of it.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Huckabee Iowa-Carolina-Florida Sweep,
Read your post #270 and then #272. Tell me who has the pettiness? Talk about a hypocrite!
November 5th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
#15
In actuality, it would be correct to conclude that Mitt is actually performing better than Huckabee as Huckabee should have a much stronger lead with all the media attention and especially his own talk show. This does not count for substance, only face and name recognition.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Micah, read this:
Huckabee: I’m especially grieved at what’s happening with the policy toward Israel. We are abandoning the only real ally and friend we have in the Middle East, and we’re doing it in order to court really a thug, rogue, terrorist government like the Palestinians who are led by a person who helped clear the finances for the Munich bombing.
This is completely inexplicable to me. And I’m very concerned that that’s going to create a further destabilization of a very delicate Middle East.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Huckabee Iowa-Carolina-Florida Sweep!,
Read this:
Micah: Why did you want me to read that?
November 5th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Hey Micah Jackson, don’t be a martha, too or you’ll have to…
Just beat it, beat it, beat it, beat it
No one wants to be defeated
Just beat it, beat it
Beat it, beat it, beat it -MJ
November 5th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
In other words… chill, dude.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
To put these numbers in a different context, if you calculate a net differential for each candidate by combining expressions of positive support by Republican voters (would seriously consider supporting + is qualified) and then subtracting expressions of negative support (would not seriously consider + is not qualified), here is how the field shakes out:
—
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2009/11/05/usatgallup-huckabee-has-most-gop-support-for-2012/
November 5th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Huckabee +60
Romney +44
Gingrich +23
Palin +1
Pawlenty -42
Barbour -65
November 5th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
See y’all when the NEXT POLL comes out… Play nice, Martha and the Vandellas
November 5th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Huckabee Iowa-Carolina-Florida Sweep!,
Isn’t Sponge Bob coming on soon? Give me a break. You ask like a total child contridicting yourself every other post. You are just as childish and petty as Huckabee is. Grow up.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Competent,
“This does not count for substance, only face and name recognition.”
$40 billion later and Mitt still needs the “lack of name recognition” crutch?
Was his campaign that incredibly ineffective?
November 6th, 2009 at 12:02 am
MWS
Comments like #303 call into question your integrity.
$40 billion??? Did you really go THERE?
November 6th, 2009 at 12:05 am
I am a Palin supporter but having said that if the primaries were to begin in January 2010 I would not hesitate to state that Palin would not win the contest, that Huckabee or Romney would be the victor.
But that is like saying that I don’t think the Dallas Cowboys at 5-2 would not win the NFC Championship game if it were held in two weeks.
What I am getting at is that what intervenes to change perceptions or outcomes in sports or politics is time, performance and improvement.
Sarah’s resignation on July 3rd was brilliant because it gives her ample time to hone her performance and allow the polls to improve.
One key variable that cannot be emphasized enough is that Huckabee’s and Romney’s numbers are based on both of them being omnipresent on TV while Palin has been completely absent from the medium since the interviews she gave when leaving the fishing boat shortly after she formally resigned on July 25th. In essence Palin has not hit the playing field yet. Can any rational person really believe her numbers will not improve once she hits the playing field running (her book tour)?
Over the next 12-24 months Palin will have every opportunity to make her case to the American people but until at least the 2010 midterms the jury will still be out. I admit that. It is my faith in Palin’s ability to “bridge the gap” that is a primary reason I support her wholeheartedly.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:26 am
The one thing that I learned in sports and politics is to be NEVER dismissive of one’s opponents.
You will never hear be disparage or belittle Huckabee or Romney or their chances to gain the GOP nomination in 2012. These gentlemen are both worthy of consideration.
And in turn those who are DISMISSIVE of Sarah Palin IMHO are basing their assertions on misinformation or prejudice and not on the reality that we have not even finished the first quarter of the game that started on September 2009 and that Palin has been consistently 1,2 or 3 in the polls.
November 6th, 2009 at 5:57 am
Lol Palin has had over 15 months to prove that she is not as clueless as she appears. And her ratings keep getting worse!
November 6th, 2009 at 7:10 am
ogre,
“Comments like #303 call into question your integrity.
$40 billion??? Did you really go THERE?”
Obviously, it was a bit of hyperbole to make a point. When you see me write something like “$40 billion” or “$13 trillion,” unless I’m talking about deficits or debt, just pretend that I wrote “lots and lots of money” if it makes you feel better.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:19 am
#305–To a degree I would say you are correct. However if her numbers don’t improve substantially after her book tour and TV appearences over the next few months, one would have to accept the fact that she’s pretty much damaged goods. I give her the benefit of the doubt in the meantime.
November 6th, 2009 at 10:14 am
Mark said in #243 “can say this. Mitt has never publicly bemoaned anything.”
But, did he do the honorable thing and call Huckabee to congratulate him and give a concession speech in Iowa? Or was he too busy crying over all that money spent for nothing? Hmmm I sure don’t remember hearing a single quote from that concession speech…do you?
November 6th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Regarding my post in #310…sure wish we had an edit or delete feature here. I took that tidbit of misinformation from someone else and am not to big to admit when I am truly mistaken. Sorry
November 7th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I can’t believe some of the ridiculous things I hear (although I readily acknowledge the many intelligent statements made by supporters of all candidates). This “spoiler” nonsense — and, by the way, why is always Huckabee doing the spoiling?? He spoiled it in 2008 by knocking down Romney and allowing McCain to come through (not the conventional wisdom that McCain was the natural candidate by republican historical analyses); now — do I hear it correctly — he is attempting to “spoil” it for Palin??? Is he going to spoil it for Pawlenty too?
Come on, some of you guys (and gals) — get with it. There is NO SUCH THING as a spoiler IN A PRIMARY — okay? Spoilers run in general elections and usually cause the candidate you least like to win. Primaries are the natural process of a party working its way through — to get to the candidate of majority — or most likely — plurality choice.
So, say it again — no such thing as a spoiler in a primary — got it? Come 2012, if a disillusioned Huckabee, Romney or Palin run as an independent in the general election — and throw the election to Obama — then he/she is a “spoiler” — and not until then.