A Public Policy Polling survey came out this week indicating that Mike Huckabee would fare best against Barack Obama (Trailing by only 7) when compared to double digits for Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, and Newt Gingrich. One poll doesn’t tell you a lot. Three polls, even if there are flaws in them, can indicate a pattern. So, let’s analyze the results of this poll and look at the CNN Poll from December as well as that from February. All 3 polls included Huckabee, Romney, and Palin. What do we learn?
1) Mike Huckabee: Huckabee comes in trailing a President who’s been in office less than 100 days by seven points nearly 3 years before the election in the PPP poll. His numbers among the Conservatives show a 56-18% approval to disapproval ratio. This is after being pilloried by Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and National Review. He has survived an impressive barrage of verbal vitriol. Huckabee’s strong poll numbers in this poll go along with his December showing of 65% likely to support him as the Republican nominee (vs. 67% for Palin and 61% for Romney.) and a strong second behind Sarah Palin in February, 2009.
2) Mitt Romney: Romney’s weakness and strength really shows in all 3 polls. All three polls indicate Romney as a strong Republican leader, head and shoulders above 80% of the potential candidates. Unfortunately, even with a media advantage among mainstream conservatives, he’s not leading in any poll. He finishes 2nd best against Obama., but 3rd in the GOP trial heat in February, and has the 3rd most level of enthusiasm for a bid. Romney is widely being painted as a frontrunner, and frontrunning establishment campaigns always lose steam.
In 1996, Bob Dole was the frontrunner far and away. He won Iowa by 2 points and lost New Hampshire. George W. Bush lost New Hampshire, and Rudy Giuliani fell into oblivion. These early polls also seem to be hurting Romney’s case on electability. The difference between Huckabee and Romney on favorability among moderates is minuscule. In essence, he’s only a frontrunner in name only with his only advantage being cash. That’s a bad position to be in if you’re the establishment frontrunner.
3) Sarah Palin: Actually came out of this poll with a slight 49-42% Negative rating and trailed President Obama 53-41%. What’s noticeable in the poll is that Palin has a huge gender gap of 13 points, as well as an extremely strong rating from Conservatives with a 67% favorable rating. Palin ended up at the top of both the December and February CNN polls.
The data suggests two things. First of all, I think we have to say the love for Sarah Palin among conservatives is sustained and I haven’t seen any data that suggests otherwise. I would go as far as to say that if she commits early to a campaign, there’s simply no stopping her in getting the GOP nomination provided that she understands she has to earn victories in early primaries. She won’t win on adulation at a nationwide level in Iowa and New Hampshire.
She has two related problems. First, is that her life has become a soap opera and the media focus has been on some salacious details which makes it harder for her to be taken seriously.
The second thing we have to acknowledge is the role of female sexism against women. I think men have a higher opinion of Palin because they’re less likely to make judgments about her parenting. Women, on the other hand, would seem to be looking at various circumstances such as her having five children and working (even though by the time she runs again, she’ll only have 3 children at home with one of those three being 17 years old).
The question that must be begged is whether this makes Palin unelectable. I think under the right circumstances she could win. She has the heart of the Republican base, so I think she can win the nomination and if, in a general election, the conditions of the nation dictate a change in power, she will win. If the circumstances dictate a change at the top, voters are not likely to look at peripheral issues.
The one comparison I can make is to Hillary Clinton who was very unlikable and had a lot of people who didn’t want her to be President came around. She was a very polarizing figure who nearly won the Presidency and may have done better than Obama in the fall. If you doubt that political figures can change their image, look no further than Hillary Clinton who became viewed publicly as the champion of traditional values and gun rights.
Three and a half years is a long time, and I think Palin still has plenty of room to right the ship.
4) Newt Gingrich: The best number for him in this poll was the 20% who couldn’t form an opinion on him which means a lot of people have forgotten the Gingrich Speakership. That’s both good and bad for Gingrich as many people dont remember his mis-steps. Unfortunately, a great many people just plain don’t remember Gingrich. Gingrich has high favorables among conservatives, but whether those favorables will translate into Presidential victory remains iffy given his lack of legislative experience and charisma.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Adam,
Surely, you know three things:
1. To commit early, Palin would have to essentially walk away from her current job as Governor and certainly not campaign for re-election.
2. Many, perhaps most of the GOP primaries are open, allowing cross over voting and Independents. This works both ways for Palin. Many Dems would love Palin as a nominee, as she and Huckabee would be the easiest to beat, as they both rest on a fairly narrow Conservative base. It also allows Independent to vote in the GOP primaries, many of whom are not particularly enamored of Palin or Huckabee
3. Palin and Gingrich and Huckabee will split the conservative vote in the primaries
The problem with all this is that it will be VERY difficult to find a candidate to nominate who has a prayer, running against an uncontested, standing President. Unless the GOP , by some miracle, could actually rally around a single nominee, after a divisive and blistering Primary season, it will be another non starter.
Just as an aside, I see Huckabee is interviewing ” Losers” tonight. What a topic for his show
April 26th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Huckabee has always been a likeable guy. His jokes and wit has always drawn people to him. So it is no surprise to see him continue to do well in polls.
I see his biggest struggle will be securing votes throughout the whole country which is required to win a presidential nomination. He has three years to find a way to get Ohio, New Hampshire, Michigan, etc. to show enough interest in him to get their independants and moderates to vote for him instead of Obama. Until then, I don’t see a clear path for him beating an incumbent Obama.
April 26th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Regardless of what you say (and want), Adam, Mitt is becoming the front-runner because he’s making himself the most visible and responding the loudest and strongest to Obama’s actions. He’s been doing very well about not being too critical, but still being tough. Huckabee never had and never will have a shot at the presidency.
April 26th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Here’s the problem- these polls aren’t all asking the same thing. You point to Huckabee doing the best of all three against Obama, but that’s one poll- something that you admit doesn’t mean anything. If you had another (especially more recent) nomination poll, then you’d have the three that you need to form a connection. I don’t think that your analyses is based off of cohesive or current data, with all due respect.
April 26th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Huckabee is not a stronger candidate than Mitt Romney. Huckabee could never win states like Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Colorado, Minnesota or even Florida, states that Romney in a head to head election could beat Obama. Plus, Huckabee is too southern, too religious-right. The GOP needs to win electoral votes against Obama, not conservative primaries. Huckabee turns off the moderate and independent voters the GOP needs to win in ’12. Meanwhile, polls in blue Massachusetts show they would rather have Mitt back than another term of mini-Obama (Deval Patrick). That is a good sign for Mitt that voters in Mass recognize he ran the state better. The base would turn out for Romney to defeat Obama, and the southern base is the only political spectrum Huckabee could hope to GOTV. Romney, especially with a southern VP could easily dominate there. The key is winning back the center of the country in purple states. Those voters are winnable for Romney. The polls show Palin on the ticket would drive Republican voters to Obama. The Party’s not going to want to take a risk like that in an already tough election. Not only is she the most polarizing figure, she was on the ticket that lost the last election. She would be a dream for the Democrats. Comparing Hillary and Sarah is silly. I don’t like Hillary’s politics, but she’s a heck of a lot smarter than Sarah is in verbalizing ideas. Sarah can turn out a crowd, flirt with the talk radio hosts, but clearly that was not enough to pull a victory in the election. There is no depth to her. She’s nothing but a bunch of talking points. She can give a decent speech – gee, who does that sound like? Um, Obama. What has she even done as a Governor or leader to prove she should win such a special opportunity as be President of the United States? Romney, on the other hand, has a proven, successful record in the private sector and in government. He’s a turnaround agent. How lucky for the GOP to have someone like Mitt even willing to run.
April 26th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Thanks for your comic relief J.
April 26th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Do you think it is too early to put out my Mitt Romney 4 President yard signs?
April 26th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
I don’t think there is any question that Huckabee is very likeable. I am sure Mike has a great future in television and entertaining crowds. Obama is where he is because of that likeability factor. So Mike will always have a strong showing in polls. On the otherhand, Mitt will never wrap the masses around his finger with his pragmatism and experience. He will though offer in 3 years a consistency that people might be looking for after seeing a likeable candidate (Obama) struggle. Mitt’s turnaround ability and analytical ability may become a strength if Obama continues splattering his shotgun approach and odd decision making. We will have to wait and see.
April 26th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Adam G. makes a fetish out of propping up Huckabee. Everyone knows he’s not going to be the nominee.
April 26th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Too funny. When polls come out in Romney’s favor Adam and other Hucknuts talk about how foolish such polls are at this time and now we get one that shows in most respects a statistically insignificant difference and Graham goes crazy and talks about the “pattern.” Too funny.
You would think that Graham might at least understand how the republican primary works. As the years go by, go through the exercise of awarding states to Romney and Huckabee. When you do, I find it difficult–but not impossible–to come up with scenarios where The Huckster actually wins the nomination. Remember, Huckabee got 10% or below of the republican vote in last year’s primary in 12 states! He got 15% or less in 24 states. I take great pleasure in looking at his numbers in many of the battleground states and realyze that Huckabee will NEVER be POTUS.
I would also help lead the charge in one very important battleground state where I live in leading a rebublican revolt against him. There is no way Romney supporters in Arizona, Nevada and many other western battelground states are going to vote for Huckabee. Huckabee is unqualified for public office and there is NO ONE who I would not for rather than Huckabee.
Democrats would have a field day with the candidate who wants to amend the Constitution to reflect God’s law (as would be announced on high by preacher Huckabee himself no less), who would ignore supreme court decisions if he had a “fundamental” disagreement with, etc.
April 26th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
#1
1. Palin would have to leave being Governor of Alaska at the end of her current number. It’s not like she’ll need the money and trying to Govern Alaska Romotely for 18 monthis is absurd.
2. I think the influence of the Sabotagocrats is overstated. Those who cross over to sabotage are usually limited in numbers and make impacts in Bathing-suit tight primaries.
3. I don’t think Palin and Huckabee will both run, and I don’t think Gingrich will either.
I think that the 13 keys will tell the tale of who will win the Presidency. If the Country’s situation is bad enough, any Republican can beat Obama, if it’s not, no Republican will be able to:
http://race42008.com/2008/11/13/13keys/
April 26th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
“Just as an aside, I see Huckabee is interviewing ” Losers” tonight. What a topic for his show”
Actually, the most important part of his show was talking about the upcoming ratification of the CRC Treaty. Pretty important topic which has elicted a big response to Huckabee for alerting them to another opportunity for the slipping away of our great country.
“Mitt is becoming the front-runner because he’s making himself the most visible and responding the loudest and strongest to Obama’s actions.”
Actually, Huckabee started doing this on his show when it started in September. Huckabee came out first, clearly and loudly against TARP, auto-bailouts, Geithner, stimulus. Plus Huckabee gives the American people direction on how to handle these problems by listing email addresses/phone numbers/ and government people to support.
“Huckabee could never win states like Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Colorado, Minnesota or even Florida, states that Romney in a head to head election could beat Obama.”
Actually, Obama won all of those states you mentioned. Romney may have money next time, but he won’t have Obama’s treasure chest. Romney is going to need a lot more than money. Romney lacks the likeability factor. So let’s stop acting like Romney is the ONE AND ONLY candidate who can win it all.
“The base would turn out for Romney to defeat Obama, and the southern base is the only political spectrum Huckabee could hope to GOTV.”
Actually, Huckabee has huge support amongst those who support the Fair Tax.
“He will though offer in 3 years a consistency”
Mitt’s reputation is not exactly known as consistent, so let’s hope he works on that for the next three years. And also hope that he comes out strong on a topic right away, rather than waiting to see which political direction the topic is going.
“Adam G. makes a fetish out of propping up Huckabee. Everyone knows he’s not going to be the nominee.”
Actually, Adam G is just trying to show y’all that Huckabee has just as good a chance as Romney. But the Romney folks continue to say that Huck is a no go and that Romney is the ONLY ONE to win.
Once again the Romney supporters think their guy is the ONLY GUY and all else should not even think about running.
“The key is winning back the center of the country in purple states. Those voters are winnable for Romney.”
After Obama turns the country into something we don’t even recognize, it seems like the country will want someone from the heartland. Huckabee appeals to the heartland, not just southern, white, religious fanatics.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
#4:
I know the polls are not all about the same thing, but there are many indicators in each poll:
1) Huckabee with high favorable ratings among Republicans, high support for his candidacy, and better numbers against Obama than anyone else.
2) Palin has high favorable among conservatives, but struggles among moderates.
3) Romney is not doing as well among conservatives as he is moderates, and doesn’t have the same level of intraparty support as Huckabee or Palin.
I’ll second Ohio Joe and point out that other than the disastrous Devall in MA, there’s nothing factual in your statements.
#8:
Oh yes, Mitt will win in 2012 because America will say they need a plastic Good old Boy. Huckabee’s government executive experience, as well as Palin’s dwarf’s Mitt’s in size.
#10:
I would also help lead the charge in one very important battleground state where I live in leading a rebublican revolt against him. There is no way Romney supporters in Arizona, Nevada and many other western battelground states are going to vote for Huckabee. Huckabee is unqualified for public office and there is NO ONE who I would not for rather than Huckabee.
Yeah, a lot of people said similar things about McCain and ended up voting for him.
Actually, in the time I’ve been here, there hasn’t been a single public poll that showed Mitt leading so I don’t know what you’re talking about. Mitt should be leading in some public poll, but you can’t find a poll that shows him by even a point.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
#4:
I know the polls are not all about the same thing, but there are many indicators in each poll:
1) Huckabee with high favorable ratings among Republicans, high support for his candidacy, and better numbers against Obama than anyone else.
2) Palin has high favorable among conservatives, but struggles among moderates.
3) Romney is not doing as well among conservatives as he is moderates, and doesn’t have the same level of intraparty support as Huckabee or Palin.
I’ll second Ohio Joe and point out that other than the disastrous Devall in MA, there’s nothing factual in your statements.
#8:
Oh yes, Mitt will win in 2012 because America will say they need a plastic Good old Boy. Huckabee’s government executive experience, as well as Palin’s dwarf’s Mitt’s in size.
#10:
I would also help lead the charge in one very important battleground state where I live in leading a rebublican revolt against him. There is no way Romney supporters in Arizona, Nevada and many other western battelground states are going to vote for Huckabee. Huckabee is unqualified for public office and there is NO ONE who I would not for rather than Huckabee.
Yeah, a lot of people said similar things about McCain and ended up voting for him.
Actually, in the time I’ve been here, there hasn’t been a single public poll that showed Mitt leading so I don’t know what you’re talking about. Mitt should be leading in some public poll, but you can’t find a poll that shows him by even a point.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Oh, I forgot, and wait until people really look at huckster’s 30% sales tax plan the “fair” tax. And think about buying that new home being built when the economy turns around!
April 26th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Adam,
I can’t believe you just typed this:
“Oh yes, Mitt will win in 2012 because America will say they need a plastic Good old Boy. Huckabee’s government executive experience, as well as Palin’s dwarf’s Mitt’s in size.”
I would recommend if you are trying to become a respectable reporter of information that you at least 1) keep it professional 2) be somewhat believable in what you said.
Even the Mitt haters will not say that Huck and Sarah’s executive experience dwarfs Mitt’s.
I will state more clearly: Huckabee has a strong future in television and entertainment. Mitt has a strong future as an executive in a business or a cause. Odds are in 3 years neither one will be President.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
I will find a few polls that have had Romney leading but why should Romney be leading? Romney is the one term governor who has spent his life in business except for his one term. Huckabee, on the other hand, has been a pig at the public trough his whole life.
With the notable exception of McCain, it was the Huckster who was the long time politician. Good grief. Huckabee had been a sitting Governor for 10 years! He had been in office longer than Romney/Juliani/Thompson. And didn’t he finish second in the primary as huckabee supporters always point out?? It is Huckabee, of course, all the BS notwithstanding, who has really been the establishmnet candidate in terms of length in office and love affair with big government as evidenced by his 10 YEARS IN OFFICE during which he did nothing to reform Government. All the Huckster did was get in constant Ethics problems while trying to finally make himself some money at public expense.
The reason Huckabee has always gotten a pass on this is that, despite being in office longer than most of the others, Huckabee couldn’t get anyone to support him until he decided to appeal to voters on the basis of religion.
If Huckabee won the nomination, I don’t know that I would even call your home state of Idaho as a lock. I would love to see those polls if it happens.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
By the way Graham, in a few years when the economy gets running again and I want to purchase a new house for my young family, nothing too expensive, say $330,000. What amount is Huckabee going to try and add for taxes under the “fair tax” ??
April 26th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
#16:
Saying he’s got a strong future in Television is an attempt to diminish Huckabee. There’s simply no evidence that American has EVER looked for the type of “leadership” Mitt provides.
Huckabee: 10 1/2 years as Governor
Palin: 6 years as Mayor, soon to be 4 years as Governor
Romney: 4 years as Governor
April 26th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
#17:
Establishmentarianism is not defined by the number of years in Congress. By that measure, Ron Paul is a bigger member of the establishment than either Huckabee or Romney as his 10 terms in Congress.
Romney is part of the estabishment because of the clubs he belongs to, the schools he went to, and the people he surrounds himself with.
In addition, I’d point out that until he was 38, Huckabee didn’t hold public office. And even then, it was in the relatively low wage jobs of Lieutenant Governor and Governor of Arkansas.
While Huckabee was Governor of Arkansas, he signed landmark Charter School Legislation, he made it easier to fire bad teachers, and passed the first broad-based tax cut in State History. He also rebuilt the state’s dilipidated road system. He passed pro-life bills and bills recognizing the sanctity of marriage. He achieved the success he did with a legislator that was between 70-90% Democratic every years of his Administration and go override his veto with a simple majority. I’d suggest those are pretty broad reforms.
I’d suggest that the Ethics issues, as we’re learning in Alaska, are sadly abused by political opponents. What Huckabee had been admonished for were paperwork issues, not taking bribes or anything else.
#18:
Under the Fair Tax, you would have access to 100% of your income. You’d be able to save, give to charity, and invest with 100 percent tax free money and you’d be making your payment with 100% of your paycheck. You’d be free of regulation and the cost of complying with the IRS tax code. If the base price of the House were $330,000, the tax would be $99,000 on the purchase of the brand new house. However, considering the type of income you’d have to make that type of house payment, with your prebate and the fact that you’re not paying income taxes, you’ll do fine.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
“‘I would also help lead the charge in one very important battleground state where I live in leading a rebublican revolt against him. There is no way Romney supporters in Arizona, Nevada and many other western battelground states are going to vote for Huckabee. Huckabee is unqualified for public office and there is NO ONE who I would not for rather than Huckabee.’
Yeah, a lot of people said similar things about McCain and ended up voting for him.”
And McCain lost didn’t he? Maybe some of those disaffected voters did indeed vote for Obama or just stayed home. Lesson learned… guess not.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
19 Adam,
Saying Huckabee’s got a strong future in television is a fact and not diminishing anything. Huckabee’s got strengths that are right in line with being a popular figure in the media, in church, etc. Don’t be so defensive that you miss the intention’s of a comment.
It is true that Mitt, a strong executive leader from the private sector is not the normal choice for President. Neither is a preacher from Arkansas.
It really isn’t worth the time to try and compare the value of an executive leader from the private sector vs. a 10 year governor of Arkansas. I am a business executive myself so I do have an idea of what a CEO does, and I have a baseline knowledge of what governors do. They are both executives that procure skills necessary for being an executive in the white house. Your effort to paint Huckabee’s 10 years as dwarfing Mitt’s 20+ years of executive accumen just falls on deaf ears for most.
April 26th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
“Actually, Huckabee has huge support amongst those who support the Fair Tax.”
All 20 of you huh.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Thats right folks, Huckabee is going to try and tax you $100,000 on a $333,000 house. While I realyze many Huck supporters are not employed, that is really not a high price for a home in many areas of the country. No way people are going to accept that amount of a tax. And that “prebate” is simply ridiculous.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
#23:
I’d suggest you watch the thousands marching in Columbia, SC. The Fair Tax has more support than you’d think and has the widest support in Congress of any tax reform proposal.
#24:
The tax only hits you IF you buy a new house. There are plenty of previously lived in houses that wouldn’t be subject to the tax. I’d much rather have a tax that discourages consumption rather than one that discourages earning money.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Yes I used hyperbole in describing the support for the fair tax. But you live in a dream world if you think that any candidate will win supporting that plan.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
#22:
It does diminish him as a Presidential candidate while not trying to be insulting. It says, “This guy doesn’t have the substance to be president, but he sure is entertaining.” Now if you don’t mean it that way, I’m sorry, but that’s what’s meant usually.
If you want to count Mitt Romney’s private sector experience, you should count Huckabee’s as well. Huckabee served for 2 years as President of his State’s Baptist Convention. In addition, pastors have executive responsibility as well. In medium-to-larger churches they’re charged with overseeing a staff, making security arrangement, payroll, and the like. In addition, Huckabee headed up Community TV stations. Just because you’ve been an Executive and you understand in business, you get Executive Experience and you’ve never been a pastor doesn’t mean that pastors don’t have executive experience.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
#26:
I have a confidence in the ideas I believe in which is something the Good Old Boys don’t have.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
#20 Adam
Note: I am an independant and not a Rombot, I am just having too much fun minimizing your points that you should just let be. If someone were advising you, they would tell you to stop with the weak pointless aspects that are irrelevant to the debate.
You said, “In addition, I’d point out that until he was 38, Huckabee didn’t hold public office. And even then, it was in the relatively low wage jobs of Lieutenant Governor and Governor of Arkansas.”
Why diminish that Huckabee did anything of value before 38 years of age? You make it sound like it’s a lowely thing to be anything but a Governor? Also, trying to label a person based on their upbringing is just what the liberal media would love for you to go after. Harvard bad, Ouachita Baptist University good. Leave the Identity politics out if you want credibility.
If I wanted to play a silly varient of your game I could always say:
Mitt Romney didn’t gain executive experience until he was governor at the age of 55 even though he was a Vice President of a company at 31, a CEO by 37, and an Olympic CEO at 51.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
The Fair Tax is a fantasy, and so is a Huckabee nomination.
I don’t care what a couple of silly polls say 3 years out, the undeniable facts are that Huck cannot attract enough broad support to win the nomination. If by some miracle he did, he would get utterly clobbered in the general because his credibility on fiscal and national security matters is practically non-existent.
Adam, you can have your own opinion, but you can’t change what happened to Huck in 08. Bags was exactly right when he said Huckabee couldn’t get anyone to support him until he decided to appeal to voters on the basis of religion. THAT is the crucial bottom line with Huck, and it’s not going to change in 2012.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
#27 Adam,:
You said “Now if you don’t mean it that way, I’m sorry, but that’s what’s meant usually.”
Which is where your credibility as a blogger should be assessed. Why would you assume that just because I said something it is what you think it is. Instead, analyze it from the perspective of the person stating it, and not from your point of view.
You said “If you want to count Mitt Romney’s private sector experience, you should count Huckabee’s as well. Huckabee served for 2 years as President of his State’s Baptist Convention. In addition, pastors have executive responsibility as well. In medium-to-larger churches they’re charged with overseeing a staff, making security arrangement, payroll, and the like. In addition, Huckabee headed up Community TV stations. Just because you’ve been an Executive and you understand in business, you get Executive Experience and you’ve never been a pastor doesn’t mean that pastors don’t have executive experience.”
I didn’t ask you nor require you to prove to me Mike’s prior experience. I was only demonstrating your folly in stating that Mike’s 10 years dwarfs Mitt’s executive experience. I stated “They are both executives that procure skills necessary for being an executive in the white house.” I know Mike has plenty of executive experience. You are the one on the defense trying to out think yourself.
We both have our opinions and as I first stated in #16 “Odds are in 3 years neither one will be President.”
April 26th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Who are the Huck supporters on this blog? There are very few for a reason. Most everyone knows Huck is not a serious candidate. He never was in 08, and he will not be in 2012.
Personally, I hope he runs because he’s the easiest person for Romney to beat. Ditto for Palin. Sanford is one person who could make things difficult for Romney.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Adam G. Huck is an entertainer. He is a golly gee/shucks kind of guy. It does make it more difficult to take him seriously.
He goes around sticking his foot in his mouth quite regularly. He doesn’t bother to think before he opens his mouth. He tells us that he has national security cred because he slept in a Holiday Inn. He jokes about the assassination of the first black presidential nominee. He threatens Romney by firing a gun over reporters heads saying it was a message for Romney “don’t get in my way”, he tells us that he ate fried squirrel from a popcorn popper, he makes jokes about sticking the confederate flag somewhere unmentionable. He tells us that God is the reason he was gaining traction – in other words, he’s God’s choice. Come on, Adam, wake up.
How can anyone take him seriously as a presidential candidate? We don’t need a yuk yuk funny boy. We need someone with enough real credibility to take on the mess Obama is in the process of making. That, more than anything else, disqualifies Huckabee. He’s going to get much less support than he got in 08.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Huck’s going nowhere. He can’t win any primaries outside of the Bible Belt. You need to win blue states, even in the GOP primary, to have a chance of winning the nomination. Huck will not win CA, OR, WA (I’m not talking about the caucus but the PRIMARY), IL, OH, FL, PA, NJ, NY, MA, VT, CT, RI, NH, MI, ME, VT, CO, NV, ID, or UT under any circumstances.
He will not be the nominee.
Romney’s in the catbird seat. He only has to worry about Sanford or potentially someone like Rick Perry.
April 26th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Romney was the conservative choice in 08, exit polls showed. So I think it’s not correct to assume that Palin, Huck and Gingrich will split the conservative vote.
April 26th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
What about the Rassumssen poll showing Mitt to be the fav amoung REPBULICANS.
Guess that one is not worth it’s salt, as it has Mitt ahead now, is it?
April 26th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Maybe a Romney/Sandford ticket?
April 26th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
I don’t care about Romney either way. If I had to guess I think Romney in 2012 will have a similar dynamic as Rudy in 2008.
I’d be mildly surprised if he’s nominated. If we’re going to lose by a landslide anyway I’d not mind putting Romney up to placate his supporters.
After he lost they could calm down a bit and stop deifying him.
April 26th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
38. That’s the thing. After the Obama presidency, someone with creds such as Mitt, would win in a landslide. Folks like Palin and Huck, would guarentee a loss – again.
April 26th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Bags, my home in Utah is valued just slightly higher than your quoted figure. No flipping way can my family afford to pay those kind of taxes. With so many kiddies, we are NOT rich by any means.
April 26th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Just a thought. If the fair tax was only on new homes, what would be the repurcussions on the construction industry and new home builds? and imagine how high the prices of existing homes would go as the demand on existing homes skyrocketed.
April 26th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
I don’t deify Romney. I think he would have about a 30-40% chance in a general if it were right now. There are plenty of other republicans that I would be happy to vote for and a few that I could get excited about. The revulsion that I feel for Huckabee isn’t due to my support of Romney, it is due to the sleaziness and ineptitude of Huckabee. I’ve said negative things about Palin in the past, but I could vote for her in the general. But there is no way I will vote for Huck.
April 26th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
“I don’t care about Romney either way. If I had to guess I think Romney in 2012 will have a similar dynamic as Rudy in 2008.
I’d be mildly surprised if he’s nominated. If we’re going to lose by a landslide anyway I’d not mind putting Romney up to placate his supporters.
After he lost they could calm down a bit and stop deifying him.”
Well said Doug, well said.
April 26th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
“If we’re going to lose by a landslide anyway I’d not mind putting Romney up to placate his supporters.” Haha, yes, in a way it would be nice to see the TARP way of the party lose and have them learn a good lesson in reality, but we have a reasonable shot to win no matter who our nominee is. As a Palinite, I hope that Mr. Romney is not the nominee, but if Mr. Romney is the nominee, I intend to back him at that point. I would rather one of the wings of our party beats Mr. Obama than not. Also, as a Palinite, it is not my affair anymore, what happens between Mr. Romney and Mr. Huckabee, but I have half an eye on what is going on just in case, Mrs. Palin is out of the game. Other than the fact that I am de Facto not welcome back in the Huckabee camp, I have not make up my mind who I would back next. On the one hand Mr. Huckabee is more likable and I prefer his wing of the party over the Romney wing. On the other hand, Mr. Romney is much more likable than he was and he seems a little more willing to reach out the other wing.
BTW, while I do not agree with everything you stated, good analysis, Adam Graham.
April 26th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Ohio, with all due respect how can you prefer the Huckabee wing over any wing? He was a big government governor, he is in favor of cap and trade which would dramatically increase the size of government, he is a populist just like Obama. Who cares if Huck spoke out against Tarp, he took that stance from the safety of not being in office. Other than in social issues, how is he any different from Obama?
April 26th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
I’m looking to buy a home as my family is growing. In my area I can buy a nice home (4-5 bedroom) for $150,000 – 200,000.
I suppose some of you live in expensive real estate markets.
I’m ambivalent about the Fair Tax but the effect on housing would probably be minimal.
Housing prices would probably fall as investment and speculation in homes end. Many families would shift to modest homes of their parents and not the larger ones of this generation. In static terms the Fair Tax ought to bring mortgage interest rates to extremely low stable levels.
In some areas the Fair Tax may have problems but I doubt housing would be strongly effected.
April 26th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
For 2012, we need a candidate not associated with 2008. Think about it, we got clobbered in 08, why try to replay a battle we lost? Candidates like Mark Sanford, TIm Pawlenty, Judd Gregg, John Thune, John Ensign, Bobby Jindal and the like are much better for us to present as a new face for the GOP rather then someone who ran in 08.
April 26th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Jonathan, the problem with your idea is that all of the people you mentioned are less ready to be POTUS than Romney. Why choose someone different just for the sake of choosing someone different? Especially if they are less qualified.
I don’t think Romney supporters deify him, they just think he’s more qualified than others, which he clearly is.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
How would the Fair tax avoid the law of unintended consequences? It’s silly to even talk about it because it has NO SHOT of ever becoming reality, and it would create a bigger mess than it could ever solve. It is not the answer.
For Huck, it was and is nothing more than cover for his horrible record on taxes.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
OHIO – who is the Huckabee wing, and who is the Romney wing?
As far as I can tell the Huck wing are those who want him because he is the “right” religion. The Palin wing are those who follow her based on her persona, and the Romney wing are those who vote on competence and ideology.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
#32:
Who are the Huck supporters on this blog? There are very few for a reason.
That would be because most don’t want to put up with the hateful Romney supporters. One might as well ask why there aren’t a whole lot of Bush supporters hanging around DKos.
Congratulations, intolerance is why there aren’t more Huckabee supporters here.
#49:
To the defender of the status quo, it is enough to simply warn of “Unintended Consequences” if the Fair Taxes passes.
Well, I know this is verbotem, but I’ll use a Bible story as an illustration, because the story illustrates a point. The city of Samaria was under siege, and there were four lepers outside the city, starving to death.
One of them said, “If we stay out here, we’ll die. If we go into the city, we’ll die because there’s death in the city. However, if we go to the camp of the Syrians, maybe they’ll have mercy on us. If not, we die.”
If we keep the current tax code, we will die. It is unsustainable, we are driving busineses out of the country, and you can not tinker with the tax code to fix it. It is broken hopelessly beyond repair.
We spend $350 billion in this country for nothin’ but compliance with this monstrosity. There’s no solution. Jobs are being driven out of the country and there’s no real solution, offered. Just fair of what might happen if we abolish this precious income tax code.
It’s time for it to go and it will happen when people get involved and fed up and they say enough.
It will not happen from Romney people because they’re satisfied with the Status Quo even if the Status Quo will kill us and quickly
April 26th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
#29:
Harvard is an Institution that is an establishment where they send their kids to learn to profit off this country. And I think the Blue Bloods in the Republican Party are fundamentally invested in the idea of a government that favors them, not small government, but government that will help them in a pinch.
That’s not conservatism, that’s Corporatism. Mitt Romney is this voice of the Good Old Boy soulless Status Quo that ultimately stands for nothing than its own power and he needs to be defeated because of that.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
“‘Who are the Huck supporters on this blog? There are very few for a reason.’
That would be because most don’t want to put up with the hateful Romney supporters.”
Projecting there Mr. Pot?
“If we keep the current tax code, we will die. It is unsustainable, we are driving busineses out of the country…”
And yet you support Big Government Huck who wants Cap and Trade. Great, kill off even more businesses with unsustainable legislation.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
The Fair Tax is a gimmick that Mr. Huckabee doesn’t believe in. If he did he would have begged the Arkansas legislature to replace their tax code with it. But he didn’t, he just begged them to pass any tax, as long as they passed some tax.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
#52 Adam,
Once again, identity politics doesn’t work. Let me play the same game using your written paragraph using Huckabee’s school:
“Ouachita Baptist University is an Institution that is the establishment where they send their kids to learn to be a preacher that focuses the masses towards Christianity so they can profit off the people to increase the profits of their church. And I think the people of the churches of the trained preachers are fundamentally invested in the idea of a preacher that is fundamentally invested in a position that favors them, not a part time preacher, but a preacher that will help them when in a pinch.
Mike Huckabee is the voice as God’s Candidate that ultimately stands for God and His power and he needs to be defeated because he is Christian.”
As you can see your whole explanation is a generalization lumping every Harvard graduate as if a herd of sheep following the same path, and some could say my silly example is a generalization of lumping every Baptist as a herd of sheep following the same path. It’s just not true.
Once again, I question your credibility as you justify and rationalize your opinion at the expense of other opinions to fit your situation. Mitt Romney is no more a Good Old Boy Soulless Status Quo than Huckabee is the Christian God’s Candidate.
Huckabee is a likeable guy that happens to be a former preacher that has been successful at what he has done and wants the good of the country, and Romney is an intelligent guy that happens to be a former CEO that has been successful at what he has done and wants the good of the country. I am not going to lump Huckabee into the above identity politics and tell you he can’t win because he went to a Baptist University, so I would hope you would not say Romney has to be stopped because he went to Harvard.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
#54:
Huckabee wrote about this in his book, he wasn’t even aware of the Fair Tax until 2007 when Fair Tax approached him with it. In addition, he was Governor not King of Arkansas. You can’t get that done in 70-90% Democratic Static.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
#55:
I wouldn’t lump every Harvard Graduate, I’d say Harvard Graduates from big rich families are all pretty much the same. Bushes, Romneys. They never change the world, they just sit there and defend the status quo while the country breaks down around them. No more legacy candidates. These people have no inventiveness in terms of policy, in terms of moving the country forward.
Romney can’t right the American ship because he’s got no personal courage and wants to tell everybody what they want to hear. That’s how he ran his campaign for the White House, that’s how he ran for Governor of Massachusetts.
The statement about the church is silly because it’s contrived and has no relationship to reality. I think the statement about what corporatism does is accurate, because that’s what they’ve done. Romney was pushing for TARP, calling members of Congress up and telling them to back this $700 billion bailout that’s been wasted taxpayer money from which Washington won’t even let big banks out.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Don’t forget that Romney was for Geithner as well. Said that as long as he was sincere about not paying his taxes that the congress should vote him in. So much for standing on principle.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
Adam G.
Huck can never be the fiscal conservative candidate because he raised 500 million in new taxes and is on record as begging the legislature for a new tax, any new tax, saying they would have his “profound gratitude.”
DanL is right, Huck is for cap and trade and for more government regulation. He is a populist, along with Palin, and they both like to rail on Wall Street greed. Its the same game the dems play, never acknowledging that business is what drives prosperity.
I can’t believe they way you revile Romney for his family and education. What a poor snob you are.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
#57 Adam:
Sure my statement was contrived, just as I believe your generalization of harvard graduates from big rich families was contrived and not based on fact. I am rather offended that you would do take a group of people and put them down in that fashion. I guess that makes you an official populist, eh? If they are rich, and went to harvard, they are fair game to slander.
Ask the people at the Salt Lake Olympics if Mitt changed a part of their world? Ask the people whose lives were changed while Mitt was in France? Ask the people in San Diego if he changed part of their world by helping after the devastating fires (http://www.vincentfam.net/2007-11-14_Mitt_Romneys_stump/). Ask the people whose lives were changed that saw their company grow and expand due to his “inventiveness”.
Tell me about personal courage as Mitt turned down billions of dollars to leave his job and take over the Olympics with no guarantee of anything in the future. I am sure there are plenty of situations all the rombots can come up with to completly shatter your comment, I just don’t know Mitt that well.
Obviously this is just my opinion, but ultimately, your identity politics and desire to continue to bring up pointess aspects has made you an irrelevant front page poster unless I want a biased opinion of Huckabee.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Adam, you’re blind to Romneys abilities. He is widely acknowledged as one of the best businessmen in America. He didn’t get there by having “no inventiveness”, “defending the status quo”, by “having no personal courage”, etc. That’s just laughable, and it’s why you don’t get much respect around here. You make up your own reality about Romney that has no relationship with the truth. You’re not fooling anyone, and you just embarrass yourself when you choose to mis-characterize Romney so transparently.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Adam reviles Romney for his family and his education because he can’t find a legitimate reason to criticize him.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
People can point fingers at every candidate with something they did or didn’t do. No one can escape that and if someone says their candidate doesn’t have some negatives then I am really scared of their candidate.
Nothing personal, but if it comes to just the economy, I will take Mitt as a president. No matter how one wants to link him to TARP. If it comes to just foreign policy, I won’t take Mitt as president, I would look elsewhere. If it comes to just likeability, I would consider Huckabee. It comes down to what one finds important, and their personal opinion. Good thing I live in a Democracy where I can speak up for what I care about.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Adam, how could Huckabee serve for 10 years as governor and not be aware of the Fair Tax movement? Is he really that incompetent? I don’t think he is. I find it completely disingenuous of him to claim, after he is out of office and safe from any responsibility, that he didn’t know about it.
April 26th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Graham talking about hateful Romney supporters! Thats a laugh. You want to see hateful–go visit hucksarmy sometime and see their discussion on possible running mates for the The Huckster. They are mostly clones of the huckster himself–petty, mean-spirited and vindictive. Their view of everyone is dependent on any perceived slight to Huckabee: Gov. Perry/Toomey/the right wing media/McCain/etc. And lets say their comments on Palin/Pawlenty/Sanford/etc. are less than charitable. But then Huckabee represents the hard core evangelical fringe that is not exactly prone to, lets say, reaching out and being “inclusive.”
The funny thing is when you ask them what Romney did to Huckabee they claim that Romney when discussing Huckabee’s record as governor, mis-represented a few facts. Imagine that, they think a few of the facts about huckabee’s record didin’t paint the complete picture. On the other hand, Huckabee attempted to highlight Romney’s faith for political advantage. Huckabee is simply unfit for elected office.
By the way Graham, are you still sure these “hateful” Romney supporters (who have the gall to take issue with huckabee using another candidate’s faith for political advantage) are going to rally around The Huckster and vote in many of the key states like Arizona and Nevavda and a host of others?
From Adam Graham: My response since R42012 is eating my comments. I’ll append them:
#65:
This is making excuses for your losses. Huckabee did not raise Mormonism against Romney as an issue. I’ve been through this a thousand times. I posted some responses to other comments by R42012 ate the comments, so I’m not going to bother to re-type them. ‘
I would say this is the most counterproductive thing Romney supporters do because if Romney lost because of Religious Bigotry, there’s no point for him to run again because religious bigotry doesn’t disappear in 4 years. If you care about winning, why would you nominate someone who is going to automatically lose big parts of the base and not be able to be nominated because of his faith?
Romney supporters are hurting him when they play this sore loser game because it undermines his future campaigns.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
“I would say this is the most counterproductive thing Romney supporters do because if Romney lost because of Religious Bigotry, there’s no point for him to run again because religious bigotry doesn’t disappear in 4 years. If you care about winning, why would you nominate someone who is going to automatically lose big parts of the base and not be able to be nominated because of his faith?”
You have a good point here. And this is a reason why I could easily get excited over Gregg, Sanford, Jindal… They don’t have to face the bigotry of many of Huck’s followers. But the dismissal we keep hearing from the Huck camp of the bigotry that they employed through his surrogates is one of many sure reasons why I would never vote for Huck.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
People can have their opinions and if some want bigotry to be a part of their opinion, then it is their opinion. Hopefully there are enough people out there that will not play identity politics and study all the candidates like I did for 2008 and make a solid decision based off of the whole candidate and not just one angle or one aspect.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
65. Adam Graham. Lies. Huck did indeed raise Mormonism as an issue and everyone knows it but Adam. Not only did he raise it, he kept it alive even after the primary, through his many proxies who did things like send McCain threatening letters to not select Romney for VP, and placed Anti-Mitt ads full of lies.
Adam, the bigot card isn’t going to work again because enough people have seen Huck for what he is (vindictive religion-baiter), and have also seen Romney for what he is (true conservative, articulate defender of American values and one of the most competent potential candidates). Since the election, Huck has not helped himself, while Romney has.
Response:
enough people have seen Huck for what he is (vindictive religion-baiter),
This is based on nothing more than wishful. You’ve got no data that suggests anyone thinks that other than you and the anti-Huck Cadre which polls show as about 5% of Republicans.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
#65. Not making excusues at all. Those are simply the fatcs that everyone (except hucksters) recognized occurred. Huckabee plainly highlighted Romeny’s faith for politcal purposes to what most, like Charles Krauthammer, recognized was simply “Un-American” on Huckabee’s part.
Now, simply recognizing what Huckabee tried to do does not meana that it was “the reason” Romney lost. Of course, many could argue that until then it looked like Romney had the winning strategy for 2008 (unlike Thompson, Gulianai and even McCain and that but for what happened in Iowa Romney may well have won). I, however, don’t think what Huckabee tried to do was “the” reason Romney lost.
Now, plainly there are Huckabee supporters like “Kingdom Advancer” (lol) who have clearly stated they could not vote for a member of the LDS faith regardless of any other consideration (they had to ban that particular discussion at hucksarmy because of how it was going-lol). But Romney supporters do not believe that it would be enough to defeata 2012 candidacy–particularly given how well Romney did/is doing after the primary concluded.
Huckabee’s despicable actions during the primary in appealing to religious bigotry was not the cause of Romney’s loss and will not be enough to defeat a 2012 run. It does, of course, establish that Huckabee is simply unfit to ever again be elected to any public office and serves as a reason that many Romney supporters, and others, will never vote for Huckabee. It would be best for Huckabee supporters to reccognize that while Huckabee has a solid base, he has too many negatives to ever be elected POTUS and your time would be bets served supporting other candidates.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Adam,
It’s not a sore-loser game at all. It’s called acknowledging recent GOP history and learning from it. I hope the GOP does come to reject religious bigotry. It’s past time for all the anti-Mormon bigots to grow up and do what is best for America. I have faith that 2012 will be very different from 08. Like I’ve said before, I don’t think Huck has much else in his quiver, and it just isn’t going to have the same impact the 2nd time around.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Martha,
It certainly doesn’t help your candidate by calling another person a liar. Just present your facts and let the readers come to their own conclusions. Instead of telling them where they are wrong, just state that you disagree and share your opinion.
Adam put together this post to show how the polls have Huckabee doing well. This has nothing to do with Mitt’s faith. I agree that Huckabee will have high poll numbers just from the fact he is a likeable person. It does not mean Huckabee is in any way shape of form going to be President in 3 years.
April 26th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
71. Adam Graham knows very well that Huck is a religion-baiter and that he did raise the Mormonism issue. Not only was the question to the NYT reporter not an “innocent” question, it was the specific and pointed action of a candidate who had nothing to lose. Yes, sorry, Adam Graham is being less than truthful when he fails to acknowledge his candidate’s one and only strategy.
Adam is the one who brought up religion by calling Romney supporters sore losers. The fact is that anti-Mormon bigotry, instigated by Huckabee, influenced Iowa, which influenced the entire primary. Adam does not want to admit that Romney was in a position to win the primary as the strongest candidate up until bigotry became an issue.
BTW – Huck has high poll numbers because the MSM gave/give him extraordinarily positive press, and the DNC never opposed Huckabee. They put out a total of 4 press releases against Huckabee, while Romney got over 100. It’s nothing more than that. Romney is the real threat to them.
April 26th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
72 your statements may be the case, but I don’t see what you typed influencing anyone that is on the fence with Romney. I do see your statements making people think of you equal to what you are saying about Huckabee supporters, and that is someone ripping on another candidate. I am sure Mitt doesn’t stay awake at night worrying about Huckabee supporters and what they say.
April 26th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
I should add that there are lots of other reasons I could never support Huckabee including his 10 year reign of big government “give me more taxes” governorship; unethical behavior that put Huckabee as one of the few republicans to make the independent Judicial Watch’s TOP 10 MOST CORRUPT POLITICIANS LIST; releasing Wayne Dumond, helping to hide his son’s criminal behavior invloving animal cruelty; his ridiculous support of the populist but impractable Fair Tax, immigration; theocratic government;disregard of supreme court opinions he disagrees with; etc.
Huckabee is simply a divisive, mean-spirited and vindictive candidate who is unfit to be POTUS.
April 26th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Adam Graham choose not to acknowledge the things posted in 74. He is an intellectually dishonest poster, and that’s why he gets no respect around here.
Response
Martha, no I’m not the anti-Romney’s people Monkeyboy who will dance for you on command. I have other things to do and once you get to this point in the comments, it’s a waste of time to respond because few people are reading and very few people care. The post was not about the Romney Folks distortions, it was actually about what polls meant for the Presidential candidates.
April 26th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
I see Rassmussen has a new poll highly favorable to Romney with an 82 % favorable among republicans with only 12 percent unfavorable. 1000 voter survey (much greater than the poll Graham is all excited about). The numbers for Romeny are VERY GOOD especially with the imporatnt female and independent voters!!
Of course, this poll would never make it to this site.
Response
This poll isn’t being cited because it only addresses one likely candidates. Besides that 82% favorable only includes 43% very Favorable, which is actually down slightly from the survey in November showing Romney with 45% very Favorable ratings. Though that and the increase in Favorable Rating of 1% is statistically insignificant.
April 27th, 2009 at 12:21 am
Adam, to my knowledge you’ve never addressed Huck’s weak spots here at race – which are many. You’ve tried to spin his tax record and the pardons, and you’ve flat ignored the rest. That makes you intellectually dishonest. Kind of like your candidate.
Basically all you have is to call Romney a rich spoiled good old boy. But no one is buying it.
April 27th, 2009 at 1:56 am
The further Huckabee gets from his not-so-wonderful record as Arkansas governor, and the more people get used to him as a folksy talk show host on a very popular network, the higher his numbers will go. Of course, that will probably change during the next primary when people are paying more attention, and this time he likely won’t get a free pass from the MSM on his record. Bill O’Reilly isn’t going to be president, Glenn Beck isn’t going to be president, and I doubt Mike Huckabee is either.
April 27th, 2009 at 4:23 am
For those those who believe that the Fair Tax is either just a gimmick or that Mr. Huckabee is not serious, of course they are not going to support him and of course they probably think he is a little like what we already have. Well, I do not know how sincere Mr. Huckabee is compared to the other candidates, but I am willing to give him the same benefit of the doubt. Yes, the Fair Tax is unlikely to pass, but since it is better than the current system, I see benefit in promoting it because it will get people thinking and it will at least promote a Fairer system even if this particular tax does not go anywhere. Of course, Mr. Huckabee does have a few other economic short-comings in his record like others, but the Fair Tax is not one of them.
Martha, I for one do not believe that you are a hateful person and perhaps Adam Graham crossed the line by saying otherwise, but at the same, I disagree with you that Mr. Graham is dishonest. Yes, he is a hard on your candidate, (you are on his) and yes I can see where you do not agree with him, but I really fail to see his dishonesty. He writes many well written posts. You and I do not have to agree with him 100% of the time or even at all, but I think it is not right to call him dishonest. It is thus more difficult to expect him to take your candidate seriously when you tell this to him.
April 27th, 2009 at 8:41 am
For me, the FEC reports filed by Palin, Huckabee, and Romney will be the poll that counts. Despite both Romney and Huckabee having their PAC’s firmly established, and taking donations since January 1, 2009, Palin’s PAC wasn’t formed until late January and processed its first donations in February. Since then SarahPAC hasn’t done much in the way of an actual fundraising effort. My bet is that she will have raised twice what Romney and Huckabee combined has raised. Her donor base will be much bigger than both Romney and Huckabee as well.
April 27th, 2009 at 9:40 am
Yes Greg, unless the other camps are hiding their team members, at this point in the game, officially, the Palin camp has about 70,000 official members and I would guess that this is more than all other camps combined.
April 27th, 2009 at 9:42 am
OHIO – Ha ha! I don’t expect, and I don’t care whether Adam Grahm takes Romney seriously. He has an irrational contempt for Romney that rears it’s ugly head in every post. It’s the reason that he is the worst FFP on Race, along with his intellectual dishonesty.
And to re-iterate: Yes, I think Graham is lying when he says Huck didn’t play the anti-Mormon card against Romney.
Let’s keep it real here at race.
April 27th, 2009 at 9:45 am
OHIO- I am a member of TEAMSARAH! And I don’t support her. Don’t assume that the numbers on TeamSarah mean that all of them will vote for her in 2012. A lot of people who really like her personally will come to their senses when the race starts.
April 27th, 2009 at 9:48 am
I think Palin probably is pulling in some serious cash. But I also think that Palinmania is dying down because the real Sarah is being exposed and it’s not matching the hype. In 2 years, I doubt she will have the support she now enjoys, and money will start going to the more serious candidates. The last 5 months have shown that Palin is not all that she was cracked up to be. She’s struggling right now as gov, to say the least.
April 27th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Ohio Joe, that 70,000 number is just for Team Sarah. Palin also has 542,000 on her Facebook page. I’m sure her speech at the Right to Life event and her appearance at the Down Syndrome event, both in Evansville a week ago, has generated a flow of donations as well. In mid May she’ll be attending an NRA event where she is going to be presented with a modified AR15 in .50 cal dubbed the “Alaska Hunter,” this was announced in the NRA magazine which goes out to close to 4 million members. Undoubtedly, that will also result in donations to SarahPAC since she is a life member of the NRA.
April 27th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Haha, now that you are a member of Team Sarah, Martha, I do not feel so bad that I still get e-mails occationally from Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton.
Good point greg, although, I am a member of Team Sarah and SarahPAC, I have not donated directly to TeamSarah or to SarahPAC yet, just her legal fund. Back to Facebook, I am not a member of Facebook, so assuming that all 542,000 are camp members, make that at least 542,001 fans for Mrs. Palin.
April 27th, 2009 at 11:05 am
Naturally, as in any group, not all on Team Sarah or her Facebook are supporters, just like not all those who signed up for 0bama campaign updates were supporters either. As for Martha’s charge that Palin hasn’t lived up to expectations in the last 5 months, that’s pretty bogus. She’s cut her state budget, actual cuts, not just reduction in increases, she’s turned down at $25,000 a year raise, she’s signed a $500 million deal with the Canadians to get a natural gas pipeline going. True, she is having quite a time with the legislature in Alaska since it is composed largely of those taking their marching orders from 0bama, and many others are bitter Murkowski supporters. Despite the round the clock attacks on her she consistantly has a 60-65 percent approval rating. The last polls show that if she runs for reelection she’ll bin hands down.
Check out http://www.conservatives4palin.com/
for all the latest indepth analysis of Palin.
Personally, I’ve donated $2,000 to SarahPAC and the max of $150 to her defense fund.
April 27th, 2009 at 11:13 am
Thanks Greg. If Tommy Boy ever goes on vacation, you can fill in nicely.
April 27th, 2009 at 11:29 am
I say let Romney and Huckabee supporters go for the jugular. Governor Palin will remain the only one of the three that will have governed during the economic downturn and has made strident moves with energy. When her book comes out and she outlines her vision of America on both domestic and foreign fronts and tells her version of the 2008 story, she will be the hands down front runner. It’s amazing what 50 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list will do for her.
April 27th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Ha, Jersey. When her book comes out and she outlines her vision for America on both domestic policy and foreign fronts? That’s going to be some pretty serious ghost-writing.
April 27th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Well, when Romney, Huckabee, Sanford, Gingrich or anyone else in the GOP can get tens of thousands of people to stand in temps in the 30′s for hours just waiting to see them, let me know. When a speaking engagement by any of them requires streets to be blocked off due to heavy press traffic, and crowds forming just to watch them enter the building, let me know.
When people start adding their names into articles that have nothing to do with them just to attract hits on their websites, let me know.
Right now Palin is pretty well positioned. The Rasmussen poll in late January found her overall favorability rating is at 52 percent, 3.5 years out from the election. You have to remember that 0bama’s favorability rating never got over 53 percent, and that was after campaiging full time for almost 2 years, $750 million, and thousands of media cheerleaders.
Once Palin starts attending more events in the lower 48 in the coming moths, everyone of them will be wildly successful like the Right to Life event in Evansville. There she drew over 3,000 to an event that usually draws about 2,000. The cops had to block off the streets due to all the press traffic, and the crowds that formed outside the building just to catch a glimpse of her entering the building.
Look for a very similar response at the NRA event she is attending in mid May, and the event she’s attending in Auburn NY in early June.
If she continues making speeches as effective as the one she gave in Evansville, she’ll leave all the other contenders in the dust.
Once SarahPAC ramps up the fundraising effort, she’ll rake in lots of money to spread around in 2010, collecting lots of political IOU’s.
April 27th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
I forgot Martha, Romney is the only Republican candidate, that ever lived, who writes his own speeches and his own book…probably the only one who can form a sentence. The real question is this…why didn’t Mitt Romney, the saviour of all mankind, get a book deal after the 2008 elections…everybody else did? I even think Bristol Palin may be getting a book deal, but not Mitt.
April 28th, 2009 at 12:20 am
Jersey, yes, Romney does write his own speeches, books, and op eds on policy. I can’t help that. Oh yeah, he can also form his own sentences, unlike someone else we know.
Book deals? Yea, Huck wrote a book, and Palin is about to. Huck’s book was about himself and his petty greivances from the campaign. I think Palin will do the same thing and make it all about herself. Her support is persona-based and that’s what her fans want. There just isn’t any way Palin can write a book about her vision for America, or policy. No one believes that – and I can’t help that, either.
Romney is writing a book, as well. And his is going to be about where America goes from here. Should be good, and straight from his heart and mind. He’s not going to need anyone telling him what his vision is.
April 28th, 2009 at 3:46 am
As an independent who usually votes Dem (but has voted for a few Republicans) and follows politics pretty closely, let me suggest the answer is: none of the above.
Romney, Palin and Huckabee are all terrible candidates, for different reasons. I think with Palin it’s pretty obvious what the reasons are. Huckabee stands a much better chance but his kooky past positions i.e. the fair tax and overall lack of seriousness will sink him once he gets to the general election. Don’t forget that there will also be a whole new wave of young voters at the polls by 2012 and they will be even less inclined to vote for a cultural conservative.
Maybe less obvious to most people is that Mitt Romney is unelectable as well. Assuming we are through the worst of the financial crisis by 2011, are Americans really going to go from calling for the heads of the AIG execs, to electing a guy who ran an investment firm for most of his career? And that’s before you get into the fact that the guy has a serious charisma problem, has flip flopped on pretty much every position he’s ever held, and will face resistance from conservative Christians because of his religion.
Honestly the best candidate the Republicans had, in terms of appealing to moderates and independents, was the one they ran last time – John McCain.