PPP (D) 2012 Presidential Survey
- Barack Obama 49% (47%) {48%} [47%] (48%)
- Mike Huckabee 44% (43%) {41%} [44%] (42%)
- Barack Obama 48% (48%) {48%} [47%] (49%)
- Mitt Romney 43% (40%) {39%} [40%] (40%)
- Barack Obama 51% (52%) {53%} [52%] (51%)
- Sarah Palin 43% (40%) {38%} [38%] (43%)
- Barack Obama 46%
- Ron Paul 38%
Among Independents
- Barack Obama 44% (41%) {46%} [41%] (42%)
- Mitt Romney 42% (40%) {35%} [41%] (43%)
- Barack Obama 49% (43%) {46%} [42%] (44%)
- Mike Huckabee 42% (40%) {33%} [41%] (43%)
- Barack Obama 43%
- Ron Paul 35%
- Barack Obama 51% (47%) {52%} [50%] (47%)
- Sarah Palin 42% (35%) {35%} [34%] (41%)
Note: In 2008, John McCain received 44% of the Independent vote (29% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 48% of the Independent vote.
Among Republicans
- Mike Huckabee 87% (79%) {77%} [80%] (76%)
- Barack Obama 5% (10%) {13%} [11%] (12%)
- Mitt Romney 83% (77%) {72%} [74%] (71%)
- Barack Obama 6% (10%) {14%} [11%] (18%)
- Sarah Palin 84% (77%) {70%} [74%] (79%)
- Barack Obama 7% (15%) {18%} [15%] (14%)
- Ron Paul 74%
- Barack Obama 5%
Note: In 2008, John McCain received 90% of the Republican vote (32% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 93% of the Republican vote.
Among Moderates
- Barack Obama 59% (60%) {57%} [57%] (56%)
- Mitt Romney 31% (28%) {30%} [30%] (32%)
- Barack Obama 57%
- Ron Paul 26%
- Barack Obama 62% (61%) {58%} [56%] (58%)
- Mike Huckabee 30% (29%) {31%} [32%] (32%)
- Barack Obama 65% (66%) {68%} [63%] (62%)
- Sarah Palin 28% (25%) {23%} [25%] (31%)
Note: In 2008, John McCain received 39% of the Moderate vote (44% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 45% of the Moderate vote.
Among Men
- Barack Obama 43%
- Ron Paul 39%
- Barack Obama 49% (43%) {44%} [43%] (43%)
- Mike Huckabee 44% (47%) {47%} [49%] (49%)
- Barack Obama 48% (46%) {44%} [44%] (46%)
- Mitt Romney 42% (46%) {46%} [44%] (46%)
- Barack Obama 52% (50%) {50%} [48%] (47%)
- Sarah Palin 42% (42%) {41%} [41%] (47%)
Note: In 2008, John McCain received 48% of the Male vote (47% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 55% of the Male vote.
Among Women
- Barack Obama 47% (50%) {52%} [50%] (51%)
- Mitt Romney 44% (36%) {34%} [36%] (35%)
- Barack Obama 49% (51%) {50%} [50%] (53%)
- Mike Huckabee 45% (39%) {36%} [39%] (36%)
- Barack Obama 51% (54%) {55%} [56%] (54%)
- Sarah Palin 45% (37%) {36%} [35%] (40%)
- Barack Obama 48%
- Ron Paul 37%
Note: In 2008, John McCain received 43% of the Female vote (53% of the electorate). In 2004, George W. Bush received 48% of the Female vote.
Northeast
- Barack Obama 53% (50%)
- Mitt Romney 41% (38%)
- Barack Obama 55% (52%)
- Mike Huckabee 42% (39%)
- Barack Obama 57% (54%)
- Sarah Palin 39% (38%)
South
- Barack Obama 47% (37%)
- Mike Huckabee 45% (48%)
- Barack Obama 48% (41%)
- Mitt Romney 43% (47%)
- Barack Obama 51% (45%)
- Sarah Palin 42% (46%)
Midwest
- Mike Huckabee 53% (44%)
- Barack Obama 41% (47%)
- Sarah Palin 50% (38%)
- Barack Obama 44% (55%)
- Mitt Romney 46% (38%)
- Barack Obama 41% (47%)
West
- Barack Obama 53% (56%)
- Mitt Romney 40% (38%)
- Barack Obama 57% (58%)
- Sarah Palin 38% (35%)
- Barack Obama 59% (57%)
- Mike Huckabee 30% (37%)
Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}
- Mike Huckabee 36% (33%) {38%} [45%] (42%) / 37% (29%) {36%} [28%] (33%) {-1%}
- Mitt Romney 30% (34%) {33%} [37%] (37%) / 39% (34%) {38%} [34%] (37%) {-9%}
- Sarah Palin 40% (36%) {37%} [40%] (47%) / 49% (51%) {55%} [49%] (45%) {-9%}
- Ron Paul 23% / 34% {-11%}
Among Independents
- Mitt Romney 31% (38%) {38%} [40%] (45%) / 37% (28%) {33%} [31%] (28%) {-6%}
- Mike Huckabee 32% (34%) {32%} [48%] (44%) / 41% (27%) {38%} [24%] (30%) {-9%}
- Ron Paul 29% / 38% {-9%}
- Sarah Palin 36% (34%) {33%} [37%] (45%) / 49% (48%) {59%} [49%] (43%) {-13%}
Among Republicans
- Sarah Palin 75% (72%) {69%} [72%] (76%) / 15% (18%) {22%} [16%] (19%) {+60%}
- Mike Huckabee 65% (56%) {70%} [66%] (66%) / 11% (13%) {12%} [13%] (19%) {+54%}
- Mitt Romney 48% (54%) {50%} [52%] (54%) / 19% (20%) {21%} [18%] (25%) {+29%}
- Ron Paul 26% / 25% {+1%}
Among Conservatives
- Sarah Palin 80% (65%) {69%} [68%] (73%) / 12% (19%) {22%} [20%] (18%) {+68%}
- Mike Huckabee 66% (53%) {59%} [61%] (65%) / 8% (12%) {15%} [13%] (16%) {+58%}
- Mitt Romney 46% (49%) {46%} [49%] (53%) / 22% (16%) {20%} [22%] (20%) {+24%}
- Ron Paul 31% / 20% {+11%}
Among Moderates
- Mitt Romney 26% (29%) {32%} [34%] (33%) / 37% (37%) {41%} [36%] (39%) {-11%}
- Mike Huckabee 25% (24%) {29%} [40%] (34%) / 45% (34%) {43%} [30%] (36%) {-20%}
- Ron Paul 20% / 37% {-17%}
- Sarah Palin 23% (22%) {20%} [29%] (33%) / 62% (66%) {71%} [58%] (58%) {-39%}
Northeast
- Mike Huckabee 31% (27%) / 45% (29%) {-14%}
- Mitt Romney 25% (32%) / 44% (38%) {-19%}
- Sarah Palin 34% (33%) / 55% (53%) {-21%}
South
- Mike Huckabee 31% (40%) / 37% (29%) {-6%}
- Sarah Palin 39% (44%) / 48% (43%) {-9%}
- Mitt Romney 29% (37%) / 40% (31%) {-11%}
Midwest
- Mike Huckabee 45% (36%) / 30% (27%) {+15%}
- Sarah Palin 47% (34%) / 41% (52%) {+6%}
- Mitt Romney 33% (32%) / 34% (31%) {-1%}
West
- Mitt Romney 35% (35%) / 35% (34%) {0%}
- Mike Huckabee 31% (27%) / 40% (30%) {-9%}
- Sarah Palin 37% (31%) / 59% (58%) {-22%}
Survey of 1,066 registered voters was conducted November 13-15. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 41% Democrat; 33% Republican; 26% Independent. Results from the poll conducted October 16-19 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted September 18-21 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted August 14-17 are in brackets. Results from the poll conducted July 15-16 are in parentheses.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Palin is doing descent. I would’ve thought this poll was taken sometime after the Oprah interview but it was taken over last weekend. I wonder what the general public’s take is on her now – after the media blitz coverage. Do they like her more – or are they tired of hearing about her? We shall see.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Commence the spin!
November 20th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
#1 Fox News/Opinon Dynamics released a poll that was conducted between the 17th and the 18th. And no, that pollster does not have a history of producing right-leaning results on favorable/approval numbers.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
I saw that over at c4p but I already forget some of the numbers. I remember being pretty okay with the resukts though. I think if she can get through this week and still have poll numbers like this or the FoxNews/OpDynamics poll, then I would say she is in a really good place to be.
Of course like I said before, it is really early so Republicans and Conservatives could start thinking more favorably of the other potential candidates in a couple years.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Let’s just say that the Republican/conservative/McCain voters favorables/unfavorables are not good signs for Romney for the purposes of a GOP primary.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I’m not trying to start a war here or anything but they’re pretty atrocious. But, there is still time.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
What are you talking about, McCain and Conservatives have never been one and the same. McCain is known as a Moderate, where Romney does very well.
My big question, when did Conservatives stop being Conservatives. Ronald Reagan must be turning over his graves over what so called conservatives think these days.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
More meaningless 3 1/2 years out polls. I think by 2012 Daniels and Thune will be polling better against Obama then these people.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
He’s doing descent in a head-to-head with Obama amongst Independents though. So not all bad news.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
More like 2 years out, the nomination process starts in late 2011. Second, Senators rarely do well running for President, especially those who have so little backing by now.
You can pretty well figure its going to come down to Romney, Huckabee, Palin, and Pawlenty, in that order. Maybe someone else sneaks in, but it going to take someone with name recognition who can knock down one of those 4, and I don’t see it.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
I like the “National Favorable Rating” charts they have available at their site
Huckabee: http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/fav-huckabee.php
Palin: http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/fav-palin.php
Romney: http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/fav-romney.php
November 20th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
9 – I keep writing descent instead of decent – major brainflatulence on that one and probably other things as well…
November 20th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
The most striking thing to me is how little difference there is in the head-to-head among the Republicans.
For instance, Huck is viewed much more favorably than Romney among Republicans, but only does a little better than Romney among Republicans in the head to head.
Ron Paul, for goodness sake, is at +1 favorable among Republicans, but only does about a dozen points worse than Huck in the head to head.
This tells me that the GOP is unifying around Anyone-But-Barrack. Once that attitude spreads to more independents, he’s toast, and it won’t matter who we run against him (from an electability standpoint).
November 20th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Looking good for our team. Two of the big three bring Obama under 50%. The other one, just over.
How Paul fits into all this, I have no idea.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Thunder,
“My big question, when did Conservatives stop being Conservatives. Ronald Reagan must be turning over his graves over what so called conservatives think these days.”
Yes. If conservatives reject Romney, it’s time to purge to party of its voters!!!
November 20th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
MWS,
It is like I keep saying. Favorablities are about as useful as a bucket of warm spit. Who is the person going to vote for in the booth is the only number that really matters.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
13 – I think PPP said they want to cycle in an out different candidates so they don’t let any lower tier possibilties go unnoticed.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
marK,
“How Paul fits into all this, I have no idea.”
He’s a baseline for Republicans. See how a relatively unpopular and controversial Republican fares.
With all due respect to Paul (who I admire in many ways) he is being used as the “three-legged dog vs. Obama” in this poll.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
MWS,
You may be right about Paul.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
marK,
“It is like I keep saying. Favorablities are about as useful as a bucket of warm spit. Who is the person going to vote for in the booth is the only number that really matters.”
Sure. But sometimes favorables are tightly correlated to performance. Right now, Obama is so unpopular among Republicans, they aren’t. Notice how Palin tightened up with Romney and Huck, after trailing badly in head-to-heads earlier this year.
Sometimes favorables matter more than others. Right now, for the purpose of the general election they don’t matter a whole lot among Republicans.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
jersey,
You seem to be having spelling difficulties today.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
No it won’t. Romney, Palin, and Huckabee each have significant problems with a big portion of the party. Romney is not trusted by social cons and Romneycare is a burden. Huckabee is loathed by business and fiscal conservatives. Palin is hated by moderates and independents. Pawlenty has a good chance to be a consensus candidate, bringing all sides together, but Thune, Perry and Daniels could also rally the party in the same way. Pawlenty has gotten a lot of hype because he is building this team for his PAC, but Thune already has a top notch team in place for his senate reelection, a PAC, and a solid fundraising network. He also has no announce opponent, so why does he have all these things in place? For a presidential run. Rick Perry is also running for president. His primary against Hutchinson is a tryout for an Iowa fight against Romney/Pawlenty. Perry has been attacking the president non-stop, attending Tea Party rallies, and bashing Washington. He has solid grassroots support and big Texas donors behind him. He is also running for president. Daniels is the question mark, he has been against a run publicly, but has been meeting top advisers to discuss the possibility behind the scenes. He is a tossup, but would become a frontrunner he if entered dude to his experience, the establishment adoring him, and his backround as strategist and campaign manager for Dick Luger. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if Thune, Pawlenty, Daniels, and Perry blow past the also-rans from 2008.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
PPP conducted an online poll to see who should be added to their 2012 survey, and the Paultards predictably bombarded their site, accounting for over 60% of the responses. The other options to choose from were Thune (15%), Giuliani (10%), Pataki (5%) and yes, Rush Limbaugh (7%).
November 20th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Max,
“It wouldn’t surprise me at all if Thune, Pawlenty, Daniels, and Perry blow past the also-rans from 2008.”
Bold statement, but I could see it happening.
I would be surprised if at least one of the also-rans from ‘08 didn’t dissolve in the summer and fall of ‘11.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
How are Palin and Romney more popular with women than they are with men if you look at overall favorables?
November 20th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
marK,
“How Paul fits into all this, I have no idea.”
My initial reaction was too clever by half. See Aron in #22.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
MWS,
I think GOP and conservative favorables matter for the purposes of the primary but not so much the general election. What they tell you for the purposes of the primary is how many of them are open to voting for you against other Republicans and conservatives.
Most of the Republicans who have an unfavorable opinion of one of our candidates will vote for that candidate anyway in a general election against Obama.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Romney’s favorables are down among conservatives, mostly due to Romneycare being attacked. Mitt hasn’t really fought back much, so its no surprise. I’d like to see a poll among GOP leaders. Mitt has been working hard to get many of these people elected. I can’t think that they are going to forget that just because Sarah Palin makes the GOP’s pants go crazy.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Obama Job Approval Down to 49%
President becomes fourth fastest to slip below the majority approval level
http://www.gallup.com/poll/122627/Obama-Job-Approval-Down-49.aspx?version=print
November 20th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Oh, I realized something from these numbers. We now have two candidates, Huckabee and Romney, who are within five points of Obama.
Lookin’ good, me hearties. Lookin’ good.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Also, polls tend to lean more democrat than republican, so that 5 points may actually be a tie.
(This is due to the fact that republicans are not home as much as democrats as we are more active crowed overall).
November 20th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Huckabee Slams ‘Shameful’ Treatment of Obama
[Yet has no problem continue to slam Romney!!?]
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/huckabee_obama_defend/2009/11/20/289112.html
November 20th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
I am not a Paultard, but I voted for Ron Paul in the ppp poll. I wanted to see the affects with him and the tea party votes. He will either run again, or he will help someone else like himself.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Hey Thunder, did you listen to the 45 minute speech or did you just read the gossip on the speech?
November 20th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Tommy,
#26. Makes sense to me.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
First, it wasn’t a speech, it was an interview with Newsmax. So right of the bat, your off base.
But I wouldn’t give Huckabee the time of day, let alone give him 45 minutes of my life. Doesn’t change the facts. But if you have facts to present, feel free to do so.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Thunder, why so petty that you won’t even listen to what Huck says?
Seems a bit unfair that you want to comment on rumours only. ; )
Anyway, another good polling for Mike and not too bad for Mitt either.
Not so much for Obama . . .
November 20th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Sarah Palin and the Rapture
by Jeffrey Goldberg
http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/11/sarah_palin_and_the_rapture.php
Sarah Palin Talks McCain Campaign, Katie Couric & Media with Bill O’Reilly
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/11/20/sarah_palin_talks_mccain_campaign_katie_couric__media.html
The Nation’s Focus is on Obama, Not Palin
By Stuart Rothenberg
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/19/the_nations_focus_is_on_obama_not_palin_99219.html
The Sarah Palin show
Veep candidate may have a future in talk shows
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118011680.html?categoryId=1682&cs=1
Organizing for America Targets Sarah Palin
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/11/organizing-for-america-targets-sarah-palin-.html
Who’s Palin Backing In FL-Sen? Dems Want To Know
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/whos-palin-backing-in-fl-sen-dems-want-to-know.php
Matthews: Palin Crowds Think In Terms Of “White Vs. Other People”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/11/19/matthews_palin_crowds_think_in_terms_of_white_vs_other_people.html
George Lopez Rips on Sarah Palin
http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/entertainment/2009/11/20/george_lopez_rips_on_sarah_palin.htm
Palin links nonbinding mammogram guidelines to “death panels”
On Laura Ingraham’s radio show, Sarah Palin linked a task force’s recent recommendations on breast cancer screenings to the widely debunked smear — propagated by Palin — that health care reform will include “death panels.”
http://mediamatters.org/research/200911200029
What Sarah Palin Is ‘Absorbing’ From Newsmax
http://www.mediaite.com/online/what-sarah-palin-is-absorbing-from-newsmax/
Yes, Palin Backed the Bailouts
http://washingtonindependent.com/68578/yes-palin-backed-the-bailouts
A Tilt Away From Social Issues
Republican Governors See Victory Through Pocketbook Issues
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/us/politics/20memo.html?_r=2&ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=print
November 20th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I’ve said all along that Huckabee’s personal vendetta against Romney last year was a stupid thing for him to do. The man even went so far as to fill page after page of his book “Doing the Right Thing” with it. I could never understand it from a strategic standpoint. These sorts of things nearly always come back and bite you.
Well now it is making him appear a hypocrite. The ironic thing is I agree with him about Obama. He is absolutely right. Just nit-picking every little thing is counter-productive. Which is exactly what I said last year when he was doing the exact same thing against Romney, and Huck was foolish enough to put it into his book for all to read. So it makes him less effective getting that important message across and a hypocrite to boot.
And he brought on himself.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Thunder has a very good point. All throughout the last campaign, all we heard from Huck was snide remarks about Romney’s wealth, and endless accusations that you could not trust Romney. It was a clear assault on Romney’s character.
Now he’s out there lying about MassCare in order to continue to attack Romney.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
7 Thunder,
The conservative movement has changed, my friend. There’s no Evil Empire of tyranny and repression anymore. Conservatives have had to find new mortal enemies of America, and since there aren’t any, they are largely made up. Liberals, elites, Wall Street, Mexicans, etc.
I want Russia back
and 31 Thunder,
Romney and Huckabee are actually sounding mostly the same notes nowadays. They realize the idiocy of the mob, one that both of them did their best to be the leader of last year. It’s a refreshing change, for sure. Now that the “Death to RINO’s!” crowd is lead by Palin they are toast.
“Mitt has been working hard to get many of these people elected”
McCain saved us from defeat in Iraq, but conservatives have yet to thank him either
November 20th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Are Pawlenty, Rush, Beck, Huck and countless others in Congress all out to get Mitt…
just because they oppose RomneyCare?
November 20th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
42,
Heck, Romney himself opposes RomneyCare
Hence my wondering why the Romney folks are always trying to defend it.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
It is hard to believe that all GOP candidates do better in the Midwest than the South, but using the regional numbers, here are the electoral points:
Mr. Huckabee 221
Mr. Romney 199 (209 with toss up state)
Dr. Paul 194 (209 with toss up state)
Mrs. Palin 151 (172 with toss up states)
November 20th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
I can’t understand what people see in Huckabee. I could no support him under any circunstance, not now, not ever.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
45. You would not support him vs. Obama???
You may have just posted on the wrong site…
November 20th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Wait, I thought Huckabee could only win in the south. Looks like he did pretty darn good in the midwest.;)
November 20th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Harris Poll Shows Kratovil Down 13
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/eyeon2010/2009/11/harris-poll-shows-kratovil-dow.html
November 20th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
“Looks like he did pretty darn good in the midwest.”
Yes, Mr. Huckabee would lose only one midwest state, Dr. Paul would lose 3 and Mrs. Palin and Mr. Romney would lose 2 or 3 depending on Wisconsin which is tied.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
46…I have more time than you in this site, so I didn’t posted in the wrong site. And by the way, no I would not support him against Obama because one of the main reason we’re stuck with Obama is because of Mike Huckabee.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Some good news for Giuliani should he pursue the GOP nomination again in 2012…
NARAL Rips Rudy
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2009/11/naral-pro-choice-ny-rips-rudy.html
Is Rudy Picking on a Weakling?
http://www.observer.com/2009/politics/rudy-picking-weakling
Giuliani back in spotlight — but what’s the show?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-Af1qn3JHnIDNXlu8y-_ID2nINAD9C3FHRO0
November 20th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Any people still bitter with Huckabee from the last election and what was interpreted as a religious slight really need to learn to let it go and to move on. It’s a petty feud that will cause far more damage than it’s ever worth, especially since the man already apologized quite thoroughly for any impression of mean sentiment.
And those regional numbers are actually not good for us. Seems like the South is simply lagging the Midwest by withholding judgment on Obama for now generally, but if we can only win in the most rural regions of America, we’re in trouble. Of course, I think there’s a big difference between how Republicans do on a local scale ie VA and NJ this year when our candidates stand tall on the issues, and how we do nationally where we seem to just be cultural conservatism (which doesn’t seem to work well outside of the Midwest)
November 20th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
#50 “And by the way, no I would not support him against Obama because one of the main reason we’re stuck with Obama is because of Mike Huckabee.”
No, THE pre-eminent reason (singular) we have Pres Obama is the tanked economy. Gov Romney, as the nominee, would have suffered the same (or worse) loss as Sen McCain. Pres Obama would play the wealth envy card, and in the environment we were in at that time, it would have sunk ANY GOP candidate. I’d say a secondary reason would be Pres Bush. Gov Huckabee doesn’t make the top ten.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
50
What??? What on earth makes you think Huck is the reason Obama won?
November 20th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
#50 That doesn’t make sense as you would allow (not vote against) Obama a second term if the ticket were to be Huck/Romney in ‘12?
November 20th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Also, RP’s numbers are pretty dismal…
November 20th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Richard, I disagree, Romney or Giuliani or even Thompson would not had made the mistakes that McCain did as suspend his campaign, having a completely disastrous performance in the debates.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
It’s a classic Romney backer argument. Huckabee let McCain win the nomination by torpedoing Romney, and Romney being a demi-god of politics would have been able to beat Obama despite all the reasoning Richard posted above.
He’d have lost by worse than McCain, no doubt about it. It’s just a bitter “he looked at me the wrong way!” sort of slight.
McCain easily outperformed Bush in the debates and in the primaries held his own with any of the others. The environment sunk him, and it would have sunk Romney the former CEO far, far worse.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
57
That still doesn’t address why you think Obama is in office because of Huckabee.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
… and that’s all Huckabee’s fault?
November 20th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Someone should explain how Romney’s negative favorables among the general electorate would put him over, or even beat McCain’s performance, in a terrible year for Republicans.
McCain on the other hand was beating Obama in that area for most of the race and like Obama always had strong favorables.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
58 – I doubt Romney could have pulled off a miracle, but I hardly think he would have done any worse, if not slightly better. Romney wouldn’t have pulled any punches going after Obama, and any gaffes he made would have paled compared to confessing ignorance about the economy.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Interesting Regional Numbers. In four regions against Obama, Huckabee is down 36 % total, Palin and Paul are down 40 % total and Romney is down 25 % total. Romney and Huckabee are ” reasonably ” competitive in Northeast, South and Midwest. Only Romney is still within shouting distance in West.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
63. Give it up on winning California…
Either Mitt or Mike can turn Colorado, etc. back to red in the west.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
#57 Falz, Sen McCain didn’t lose just because he didn’t go after Pres Obama’s connection to Rev Wright. We can debate whether someone else would have done better or worse, but the bottom line is the GOP was going to lose ‘08, and the no candidate was going to change that. The GOP had spent six years in control of DC doing the very things they had railed against and promised to fight when the voters turned things over to them. Continue to cling to the notion that ‘08 was winnable “only if,” but if the GOP fails to move on and grow up from ‘08, we’ll see it come back and bite them again in ‘12.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
MPC.#58:“He’d have lost by worse than McCain, no doubt about it.”
And your proof of that is…? Since you cannot rewind history and try again with different parameters, you cannot say “no doubt about it”. It is just your opinion and your opinion alone. The same goes to those who say we would have won if not for Huckabee.
“It’s just a bitter “he looked at me the wrong way!” sort of slight.”
I think you are confusing Huckabee with Romney. Huckabee spent nearly all last year whining and complaining about every possible slight real or imagined that Romney supposedly did to him. Even long after the primaries were over and the party was trying to come together to promote John McCain, there was Huckabee crying and whimpering every chance he got. Then just to make sure, he filled page after page of his book “Doing the Right Thing” slamming Romney. Frankly, it was embarrassing to watch a supposedly grown man behave like a petulant three year old.
I defy you to point to one instance where Romney stooped to Huckabee’s level. Just one. It never happened. Certainly a number of his outraged supporters did. But Romney always was a class act, never returning evil for evil.
Well, Huckabee had his moment (closer to nine months, actually) of self-indulgence. Now he has to live with it and hope it all goes away somehow. Good luck with that.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
RE: Romney
I wonder how bad the economy would have to be for the “can fix” qualifications to trump the “wealth card” slight?
November 20th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
I’ve been pretty hard on Huckabee. But the truth is, I think that either Huckabee or Romney would likely have done better than McCain.
Why? Because I cannot imagine either one of them (Mike or Mitt) essentially giving up with six weeks to go. McCain and his staff all admit to the fact that from about the beginning of October on, they were only going through the motions. They bowed to the “enviable Obama”.
I just cannot imagine either Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee doing that. They would have fought to the end.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Any republican candidate would get at least 45% of the vote. Romney or Giuliani would have done better in Colorado, Nevada, Michigan and Florida. McCain lost because he ran a terrible campaign, he was an awful candidate and he mismanage the only asset he had: Sarah Palin.
As for why Huckabee is the reason why Obama won, well he enable McCain to win the nomination. Yes there was a crisis but Obama didn’t have any answer to that crisis except not to be the ignorant candidate on economics.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
“Only Romney is still within shouting distance in West.” Yes, but it does not translate into electoral votes. In does not do Mr. Romney much good that he only loses New Mexico for example by 14 points instead of 30.
November 20th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
The most important four numbers of the week:
From the Fox News poll:
Among independent voters:
Obama’s F/UF: 34/51
Palin’s F/UF: 49/38
November 20th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Mike and Marco,
And Whitman is tied with Brown now. Why give up on California? Sounds like Steve Schmidt and Michigan.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Ron Paul lol!
Much too early for head to head polls.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
69
It could also be said that Fred Thompson enabled McCain to win, due to SC, Romney enabled McCain to win, etcetera.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
I can’t wait to get back to South Carolina!
November 20th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
I think many of you are sort of whistling past the graveyard here. Many Americans are disillusioned after eight years of George Bush and the election of Barack Obama a year ago. Republicans had a majority in congress and the presidency, yet achieved little for Middle America. They betrayed voters by inflating the deficit and growing government, sending men and women into nation-building wars whose purposes are still unknown, and created a culture of moral and ethical corruption in Washington D.C. It was under lax and pathetic regulatory oversight that a Republican president and Republican congress allowed corporations to betray shareholders with questionable and highly leveraged credit default swaps, only to be followed by a $700 billion taxpayer bailout created by the Bush administration—so much for limited government. Republicans are a party without a message and without a messenger.
The election results in Virginia and New Jersey say more about the public’s rejection of Obama’s big government solutions and less about Republicans articulating a message to help Middle America. If Republicans think the public is embracing the party again,they are drunk on their own greed and out of touch with the needs of Middle America.
It is time for the Republican party to stop blindly whoring for the business community and begin addressing the issues that impact Middle America—job creation, affordable healthcare, and quality public education for our children. Republicans are a one-trick-pony, where “tax cuts” are the solution for all of Middle America’s problems.
Take healthcare for instance; the Republican solution has been health savings accounts (HSAs). Are you kidding me? We can’t get people to save money in IRAs, never mind HSAs. That’s the best we’ve got? Why don’t Republicans push to allow consumers to shop for healthcare across state lines, require everyone to have healthcare, and deny insurers from rejecting consumers with pre-existing conditions? The party is out of touch, unfortunately.
A. Muser
http://americanmuser.wordpress.com
http://twitter.com/AmericanMuser
November 20th, 2009 at 11:50 pm
Sources: Former NY Mayor Giuliani Eyes Senate Seat, White House
Senate Seat Was Held By Hillary Clinton
http://wcbstv.com/cbs2crew/giuliani.senate.run.2.1323989.html
Sen. Giuliani? Quite Possible.
http://wjz.com/video/?id=135073@wcbs.dayport.com
Is Giuliani Seeking the Path of Least Resistance?
He would rather be Senator Giuliani than Governor Giuliani, that’s what sources are telling CBS 2 about the former mayor’s political plans.
http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=135091@wcbs.dayport.com
November 21st, 2009 at 12:52 am
#1
I think the release of her book has given her a boost.
November 21st, 2009 at 12:53 am
I was surprised and pleased to see that Mitt is doing very well in the South. Didn’t expect that.
November 21st, 2009 at 1:55 am
#47: Wait, I thought Huckabee could only win in the south. Looks like he did pretty darn good in the midwest.;)
Yeah, and I thought Palin could only win the South too.
Interesting that the Midwest looks like the GOP’s strongest region.
Regarding Obama’s win somehow being the fault of Mike Huckabee, I agree with Richard in #53. Furthermore, if you look at CNN exit polls from the Florida primary, the second choice of Huckabee voters was actually McCain, rather than Romney, by a margin of 55% to 32%. I think Florida was the only state in which this question was asked, so I don’t know about other states. Also according to this Pew poll, McCain had a favorability rating of +36 among Huckabee voters, while Romney was at -4 among the same voters. So it looks like Huckabee may have taken more votes away from McCain than Romney.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:38 am
[Yet has no problem continue to slam Romney!!?]
Poor, poor, Mitt (followers). If you take time to read the article, it is personal attacks that he is criticizing, not ones of substance. For example, the over-hyped Obama message to school children, etc.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:44 am
” lying about MassCare”
Notice the deflection, it is not RomneyCare, but MassCare. What’s next? It is not ObamaCare, but USACare?
There was no reason to cover the murder of unborn children, and no reason to take the route of the tyrant and require people, under the threat of the gun, to buy health insurance, if they don’t want it. Those aren’t lies.
November 21st, 2009 at 9:08 am
78 – her book wasn’t released until the 17th, she was on Oprah the 16th and this poll was conducted the 13th – 15th. Maybe it was due to anticipation of but hat wasn’t really shown in the PPP polls of New York, Louisville and LA.