PPP (D) 2012 Presidential Survey
- Barack Obama 47% (48%)
- Mike Huckabee 44% (42%)
- Barack Obama 47% (49%)
- Mitt Romney 40% (40%)
- Barack Obama 49% (50%)
- Newt Gingrich 41% (42%)
- Barack Obama 52% (51%)
- Sarah Palin 38% (43%)
Among Independents
- Barack Obama 42% (44%)
- Mike Huckabee 41% (43%)
- Mitt Romney 41% (43%)
- Barack Obama 41% (42%)
- Barack Obama 45% (46%)
- Newt Gingrich 38% (39%)
- Barack Obama 50% (47%)
- Sarah Palin 34% (41%)
Among Republicans
- Mike Huckabee 80% (76%)
- Barack Obama 11% (12%)
- Newt Gingrich 76% (80%)
- Barack Obama 13% (11%)
- Mitt Romney 74% (71%)
- Barack Obama 11% (18%)
- Sarah Palin 74% (79%)
- Barack Obama 15% (14%)
- Mike Huckabee 63%
- Barack Obama 24%
- Sarah Palin 57%
- Barack Obama 32%
Among Moderates
- Barack Obama 56% (58%)
- Mike Huckabee 32% (32%)
- Barack Obama 57% (56%)
- Mitt Romney 30% (32%)
- Barack Obama 60% (61%)
- Newt Gingrich 28% (30%)
- Barack Obama 63% (62%)
- Sarah Palin 25% (31%)
Among Men
- Mike Huckabee 49% (49%)
- Barack Obama 43% (43%)
- Newt Gingrich 46% (49%)
- Barack Obama 45% (44%)
- Mitt Romney 44% (46%)
- Barack Obama 44% (46%)
- Barack Obama 48% (47%)
- Sarah Palin 41% (47%)
Among Women
- Barack Obama 50% (53%)
- Mike Huckabee 39% (36%)
- Barack Obama 53% (54%)
- Newt Gingrich 35% (35%)
- Barack Obama 50% (51%)
- Mitt Romney 36% (35%)
- Barack Obama 56% (54%)
- Sarah Palin 35% (40%)
Among Voters with Bachelor’s Degree
- Mike Huckabee 47%
- Barack Obama 47%
- Barack Obama 49%
- Newt Gingrich 47%
- Barack Obama 49%
- Mitt Romney 45%
- Barack Obama 53%
- Sarah Palin 43%
Among Voters Age 18-29
- Barack Obama 51% (54%)
- Mike Huckabee 40% (40%)
- Barack Obama 53% (54%)
- Newt Gingrich 40% (40%)
- Barack Obama 58% (57%)
- Mitt Romney 28% (37%)
- Barack Obama 60% (60%)
- Sarah Palin 28% (40%)
Favorable / Unfavorable [Net]
- Mike Huckabee 45% (42%) / 28% (33%) [+17%]
- Mitt Romney 37% (37%) / 34% (37%) [+3%]
- Newt Gingrich 33% (36%) / 42% (42%) [-9%]
- Sarah Palin 40% (47%) / 49% (45%) [-9%]
Among Independents
- Mike Huckabee 48% (44%) / 24% (30%) [+24%]
- Mitt Romney 40% (45%) / 31% (28%) [+9%]
- Newt Gingrich 34% (31%) / 45% (44%) [-11%]
- Sarah Palin 37% (45%) / 49% (43%) [-12%]
Among Republicans
- Sarah Palin 72% (76%) / 16% (19%) [+56%]
- Mike Huckabee 66% (66%) / 13% (19%) [+53%]
- Newt Gingrich 56% (65%) / 21% (17%) [+35%]
- Mitt Romney 52% (54%) / 18% (25%) [+34%]
Among Moderate Republicans
- Mike Huckabee 54% / 17% [+37%]
- Mitt Romney at 45% / 20% [+25%]
- Sarah Palin at 53% / 30% [+23%]
- Newt Gingrich 44% / 29% [+15%]
Among Republicans who think Barack Obama was born in the United States
- Mike Huckabee 60% / 17% [+43%]
- Mitt Romney 57% / 17% [+40%]
- Newt Gingrich 52% / 22% [+30%]
- Sarah Palin 58% / 31% [+27%]
Among Conservatives
- Mike Huckabee 61% (65%) / 13% (16%) [+48%]
- Sarah Palin 68% (73%) / 20% (18%) [+48%]
- Newt Gingrich 52% (59%) / 20% (18%) [+32%]
- Mitt Romney 49% (53%) / 22% (20%) [+27%]
Among Moderates
- Mike Huckabee 40% (34%) / 30% (36%) [+10%]
- Mitt Romney 34% (33%) / 36% (39%) [-2%]
- Newt Gingrich 24% (24%) / 49% (52%) [-25%]
- Sarah Palin 29% (33%) / 58% (58%) [-29%]
Among Voters Age 18-29
- Mike Huckabee 45% (34%) / 19% (36%) [+26%]
- Mitt Romney 32% (33%) / 34% (39%) [-2%]
- Newt Gingrich 30% (24%) / 32% (52%) [-2%]
- Sarah Palin 30% (33%) / 53% (58%) [-23%]
Obama Job Approval
- Approve 52% (50%)
- Disapprove 42% (43%)
Among Independents
- Approve 48% (46%)
- Disapprove 42% (42%)
Among Republicans
- Approve 16% (12%)
- Disapprove 79% (82%)
Among Moderates
- Approve 62% (61%)
- Disapprove 32% (32%)
Among Birthers
- Approve 16%
- Disapprove 75%
Survey of 909 voters was conducted August 14-17. The margin of error is +/- 3.3 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 41% (D); 35% (R); 24% (I). Results from the poll conducted July 15-16 are in parentheses.
Inside the numbers:
The birthers love them some Sarah Palin. She’s the most popular politician in the mix with them at 66% favorability. Next is Mike Huckabee at 58%, followed by Newt Gingrich at 46%, and Mitt Romney at 43%.
Looking at the numbers from another angle – 63% of all Americans with a favorable opinion of Sarah Palin are birthers. Same thing with 53% of those who like Gingrich, 50% who view Huckabee positively, and 44% for Romney.
So there is a definite divide between what the birther wing of the party and the non-birther wing of the party think about Palin and Romney.
This is no surprise but the ideology breakdown among GOP birthers is 69% conservatives and 30% moderates, while it’s 53% moderates and just 46% conservatives among non-birthers.
The fact that none of the GOP candidates exceeds a 60% popularity level with Republican voters who think Obama was born in the United States may speak to the need for ‘none of the above’ to be the party’s nominee in 2012 if they’re going to get the moderate votes they need to win the Presidency back. I continue to think the best hope for them to win is to go outside the quartet of early favorites we’ve been polling on a month to month basis.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Yea baby! Very encouraging news for Huckabee.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Post-graduates seem oddly oversampled.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:22 am
So it turns out that my initial assessment of Huckabee trailing Obama by 4 was pretty close.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:23 am
More proof that Huckabee is the frontrunner — he is effectively tied with Obama. His favorables are astronomical. I’m not a supporter of his at all, but you have to give the man his due.
Romney underperforms once again — so much for the “electability” argument. His favorables are unimpressive at best — I’m guessing they’re particularly bad among Republicans. He does just about as well as Gingrich in the general. If I had to choose between Romney and Gingrich, it would be no contest.
Guess Romney will ask Rasmussen to put out another poll placing him in the lead.
Next time, put Pawlenty in the poll and see how he does.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Thomas,
That would hurt one person the most since Huckabee and Romney do ok with favorables among this group but still lose overwhelmingly among them to Obama.
Heck, Huckabee could be leading this poll if the post-grads were 17% of the respondents as they were on November 4th.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Here’s the analysis from the pollster:
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/08/huckabee-continues-to-come-closest-for.html
Our fifth monthly national survey matching up Barack Obama against some possible 2012 opponents comes to the same two primary conclusions as the other four:
1) Obama leads all comers
2) Mike Huckabee, at least at this early stage, is the strongest GOP candidate
In this particular iteration of the poll, Huckabee comes the closest to Obama that he has yet, trailing just 47-44. That’s tightened since the President led 48-42 a month ago.
Huckabee also has the best overall favorability rating of the Republican quartet we tested, at 45/28.
Huckabee is not the most popular candidate among GOP voters though. While 66% of them have a favorable opinion of him, 72% have a favorable opinion of Sarah Palin.
Palin’s overall numbers have seen a pretty steep decline in the last month though. Two July surveys we conducted actually showed her numbers slightly improving from pre-resignation announcement levels, to a 47/45 spread. That’s now dropped to 40/49. Among Democrats she’s gone from 25% with a favorable opinion of her to 15%, and among independents she’s gone from 45% to 37%.
In her head to head contest with Obama, Palin is down 52-38 after her 51-43 deficit a month ago had been the closest we have measured for her to date.
After Huckabee Mitt Romney polls the closest to Obama and also has the second best net favorability rating, at 37/34. He trails 47-40 in a head to head. There continues to be one pretty bad piece of news for him in these polls though, which is that he’s the least popular of this quartet with GOP voters. Only 52% have a favorable opinion of him, and that lagging popularity with the overall Republican electorate has become a continuous theme in our 2012 surveys.
Newt Gingrich, seemingly the least likely nominee of the bunch, trails Obama 49-41 and has a 33/42 negative favorability rating.
It’s good news for Obama that even as he navigates a difficult period of his Presidency he’s still preferred to any of his Republican alternatives. The margins definitely aren’t what they were earlier this year though.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Romney down by only 7 with Obama’s polls falling daily. Looking good.
Huckabee’s benefitting from a one-way open mike with the American people at the moment. But I think we all know a Jesus-first candidate who once suggested sending AIDS patients to concentration camps would be destroyed in a general election.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Flip, if Gov Romney’s weaker performance in this is due to Republicans, he probably is the strongest candidate at this time. Republicans will come home, or face another 4 years of a truly incompetent leader.
Anyone else find it somewhat odd that Pres Obama decreased against each opponent EXCEPT Gov Palin? You can say “margin of error” all you want, but the fact is, among the same people polled, that Gov Palin went against the flow and lost support, while every other Republican gained or stayed even. I guess it’s part of actually being involved in the debate, and not just sitting on the sidelines looking in.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:33 am
I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I feel pretty safe in saying that we can’t afford to have Sarah Palin as the nominee.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:36 am
If Palin even runs I’d be surprised at this point.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Richard,
Mitt’s favorables/unfavorables among Republicans is weak but his actual performance among Republicans against Obama isn’t that different from the others.
Huckabee just owns this poll.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Favorables/Ufavorables amoung Moderates
Huckabee 40/30 [+10]
Romney 34/36 [-2]
Palin 29/58 [-29]
Gingrich 28/60 [-32]
August 20th, 2009 at 10:49 am
Which Republican led the polls against the potential Democrats in 2007? That would be McCain. His lead in that poll masked the fact that he was destined to be a horrible and incompitant candidate. Much like Huckabee is likely to be. Huckabee might be strong on the stump, but his organization skills and record make him very weak when placed in the context of a full 8 month run for the presidency. He’s absolutely ripe for (in his case) justifiable scare tactics that will take the focus off of Obama’s poor performance and make Huckabee’s many minuses the central theme of the campaign. We’d be facing another landslide loss.
Romney remains much more electable than Huckabee despite this poll. Fading charges of flip-flopping aside (by the time 2012 comes around he will have been a consistant conservative voice for a full decade) Romney will have almost no flaws as a candidate. He comes from central casting as a prototypical chief executive. His record strong. His organizational skills the equal of Obama’s. His ability to stay on message as good as anyone’s. His debating skills superior.
Romney is the most electable candidate. He’s also the best potential president. Double win. Easy choice.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Go Huckabee!
August 20th, 2009 at 10:54 am
“Which Republican led the polls against the potential Democrats in 2007? That would be McCain. His lead in that poll masked the fact that he was destined to be a horrible and incompitant candidate. Much like Huckabee is likely to be. Huckabee might be strong on the stump, but his organization skills and record make him very weak when placed in the context of a full 8 month run for the presidency. He’s absolutely ripe for (in his case) justifiable scare tactics that will take the focus off of Obama’s poor performance and make Huckabee’s many minuses the central theme of the campaign. We’d be facing another landslide loss.”
Let me see if I follow this Rombot line of reasoning: we should take polls into consideration if you are inclined to vote on the basis of electability and are evaluating Sarah Palin’s candidacy but we should not take polls into consideration if you are evaluating Mike Huckabee’s candidacy?
August 20th, 2009 at 10:56 am
My analysis of Palin not entering the race had nothing to do with this poll. I’ve said that since she resigned as governor.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Romney lost in 2008 despite spending $40 million of his own money and facing a relatively weak field. Even Huckabee beat Romney, and Huckabee had a campaign budget of about fifty bucks.
Is Romney the best we can do in 2012? With his middling favorables, failed health care plan, and history of flip-flops? Please.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:56 am
My analysis of Palin not entering the race had nothing to do with this poll. I’ve said that since she resigned as governor.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:58 am
OUr country is truly in trouble is Huckster is the best we can offer up.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:59 am
13. I think you to be quite wrong. How is Huckabee loosing his large lead amound independents and moderates.
Besides it seems to me, some of the Talk show types have switched over to
T-paw the new candiidate of choice, of which Romney benefitted greatly from.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:01 am
I love it, Thomas Alan says Romney’s record is strong, but says Huckabee’s is weak, however, both will have the same “records they had last time around. Neither have been governors since and both have only been able to speak about things, and both have been speaking a conservative message. Well except that Romney is still defending his healthcare stuff. I love how every poll with Romney behind is a great sign for him and every poll with Huckabee leading is just an indication that he will lose. And every poll with Romney leading is proof he is the best candidate and ones with Huckabee behind show that he is done. It really cracks me up. The spin has no limits here.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Or:
Romney came an eyelash from winning in 2008 despite being an asterisk as late as 2006, facing much more known candiates such as Giuliani and McCain, and being attacked by all the other candidates relentlessly.
I was an early Mitt supporter back in those asterisk days. At the time I barely dared to dream that we would come as close as we did to putting the man in the White House (and I do think he would have won had he been the nominee). Mitt’s 2008 run was a triumph in my eyes. The ending may not have been what I’d hoped for, but he has absolutely nothing to be ashamed of in falling just short in that race.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Romney placed second, Flip. He quite the race after doing the math. Something Huckabee did not do, as he just wanted ‘one more’ than rommey. He got his ‘one more’ by staying in the race a full six weeks longer. to me, that’s not second place. That’s just self-serving.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:07 am
One other thing to point out is that Huckabee picked up support among indy’s and Romney lost support with that group. Interesting that Romney is in a better place to win, considering that Repubs will “come Home” and indy’s are moving away from Romney. From you logic, both Huck and Mitt will get the Republican vote and Romney who is losing ground on independents will somehow be better postiion to win a general than the guy (Huckabee) who is gaining ground on them. I am not quite sure I get the math, but you must be right because you support Mitt.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:07 am
One thing is clear from this poll is that Palin doesn’t have a prayer for the nominaion. 50% unfavorables from all incomes earners except <25k (but its not like they are likely voters either)
August 20th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Independents and moderates are easily persuadable to who the best speaker of the moment is when they are not being challenged. And I’ll grant you Huckabee is the better speaker than Romney (though not as good a debator). However, once a candidate relying on populist themes gets attacked by an opposing candidate, those numbers become illusionary and fall through the floor. Obama will successfully paint Huckabee as a theocrat and the election will be over.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:10 am
I respect your opinion, #22.
But if Romney had Huckabee’s campaign budget, he wouldn’t have gotten past Iowa.
Romney spent $1.16 million per delegate.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Here we go with the Mitt was second crap again.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:12 am
“Let me see if I follow this Rombot line of reasoning: we should take polls into consideration if you are inclined to vote on the basis of electability and are evaluating Sarah Palin’s candidacy but we should not take polls into consideration if you are evaluating Mike Huckabee’s candidacy?”
Shhhhhh, yes the Romney camp might want to watch what they say in terms of electability. This is only one poll, but Mr. Huckabee has an edge in the M&M contest when we look at the demographics. Mr. Huckabee’s numbers are consistent among all income groups, age groups and so forth. While Mr. Romney’s overall numbers are almost as good as Mr. Huckabee, he is hurting among the and the young. One could argue that Mr. Romney could even the score among the the voters who are not are natural base, but Mr. Huckabee could close the gap at the other end. Both men need to change their political personna some what. What must be frustrating for Mr. Romney is that Mr. Romney has actually done a better job at changing his personna, but his camp did not get the memo and that might be reflected in this poll.
The bright side for Mr. Romney is that he could still convince those who have a neutral opinion of him to come on his side so to speak. What Mr. Romney needs to do is do more great interviews like yesterday to build up trust among certain elements in society. He needs to tell all regions of the country, all income groups, both genders that he will fight for them against Socialism. He did that on the Sean Hannity Show, hopefully for his sake, his camp members will start to sing from the same book.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:13 am
How is Romney a better debator when in virtually every debate the pundits (not paid by a compaign) and the focus groups all gave the wins to Huckabee.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:13 am
This is great news for huck, mitt and gingrich. To be honest, i’ve believed that Huckabee is the one candidate we can offer that resonates with the public at large. He is not our best candidate however. Our best candidates aren’t even known at this point. For those who talk about huck’s “organization”. You are on crack. Huck had no money, and yet his debate performances pushed him to the top tier. Had mccain lost new hampshire to mitt….it would’ve been a dog fight between mitt and huckabee. Guliani probably would’ve got into it for real down in florida, and we would’ve had guiliani and mitt split the northeast and west coast. While huckabee took the south, and a fight between mitt and huck for the plain states, mountiain west, and a fight between mitt and guiliani for the midwest. I honestly think that it would’ve been a deadlock last time had mccain not got the nod. Don’t doubt mike’s organization. He’s much better than you give him credit. Pawlenty won’t be seen at large as a factor until 2010. He’ll poll low singles until then. And not even be polled against obama until then as well.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:14 am
I don’t think we should be arguing for our picks, but rather marveling that they’re all only this far behind, this far out, with a president supposedly unable to do wrong.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:15 am
It always amuses me that whenever a Romney supporter makes a point, it’s the “Rombot Line”. Really, Flip “neo-Sampo” Dixon, aren’t you concerned that all your negative Romney talking points that you have hotkeyed are going to overstress your keyboard? Hrm, perhaps I should invest in some computer hardware.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Romney needs to connect to women, buy more cologne? Maybe a video of him washing dishes? Find a special needs baby to hold on stage? There must me something.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:16 am
FiscalCon,
You don’t agree that Republican voters, who comprise 80% of the primary electorate, will vote for who they like but rather based on what polling against Barack Obama says? Look at the numbers among the most relevant group and that is Republicans.
Context needs to be taken into consideration as well. 2/3 of the party is unwilling to tell a pollster that Barack Obama was born here and likely the same amount believes Obamacare will lead to death panels. How these folks vote is probably going to determine who’s the nominee rather than the votes of those who are willing to tell a pollster that Obama was born here in the United States.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:17 am
“Independents and moderates are easily persuadable to who the best speaker of the moment is when they are not being challenged. And I’ll grant you Huckabee is the better speaker than Romney (though not as good a debator). ” That is why Mr. Romney must go on more shows with people like Mr. Hannity and talk directly to the people instead of just writting article.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:18 am
However, I will say if the election in 2012 is about the economy, and it most certainly will be, we have to have Romney. No one can take exceedingly complex things, completely understand them, and boil them down to voter-accessible concepts on the economy better than Mitt Romney.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:20 am
@ james boulder … it’s funny, but I have a 180 degree different recollection of those same debates, pundits and focus groups. I suppose it depends on where your perspective begins.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:21 am
30. Case in point was the last debate at the Reagan Library, Huckabee clearly won that debate, though he had less time to make his points.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:22 am
“However, I will say if the election in 2012 is about the economy, and it most certainly will be, we have to have Romney.” It depends how bad the economy is, if the economy is really really bad, Mr. Romney is going to have to figure out faster how to close the charisma gap with Mr. Huckabee and learn how to speak directly to the people. In short, more Hannity type interviews and get his camp under control. Unemployed people have short tempers.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:24 am
#4, Flip,
I am curious to know how credible PPP polling is. Why? No, not cause Romney isn’t at the top, like he is in every other poll, but because Huckabee is winning in 2 areas that are way too far fetched for his appeal, which is among Moderates and is actually tied with Independents. It appears, by virtue of all other polls out there, that this is a bias poll.
See other polls at the bottom of this post: http://thecompetentconservative.com/2009/08/18/marist-2012-presidential-poll-mitt-romney-in-the-lead-again/
August 20th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Who cares? Why anti-Romney folks keep bringing this up is beyond me. It doesn’t even make sense. Huckabee’s lousy ability to fundraise is not a mark in his favor. He had to sell his soul to the sales tax folks (another reason why he’s unelectable) to get any organization at all for his campaign. That just means that he’ll be a terrible organizer in a general election and lose tons of votes because he’s incompetant.
Romney may have self-funded. But he was also easily the best fundraiser in the GOP primaries and built a strong organization which helped him weather difficult defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire. That’s a GOOD thing in a candidate.
Because they didn’t. What analysis were you watching?
August 20th, 2009 at 11:27 am
27, had it not been for preachers telling their flocks they would go to hell for voting for a Mormon, Romney would have won. Nate G has some insight on that. He was there, I believe.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Palin is done.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:28 am
42. see 39
August 20th, 2009 at 11:29 am
30. Huh? Were you watching on CBN the debates? The ones I saw on Fox had Romney as the clear winner. Britt Hume on several occassions called it for Romney.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:30 am
43. And I am sure Huckabee provided them the memo on that. Sheesh. That may be an inditement on some of Huckabee’s supporters but certainly not Huckabee.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:31 am
46. No, I was watching CNN. Read Bill Schnieders review.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:32 am
“Palin is done.” Probably so, she took herself out of the race to fight against Socialist medicine and to promote Energy Independence as a private citizen and so far she has one round under her belt. Sometimes, clouds eventually have silver linings.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:34 am
47. Will Huckabee sign a pledge that he will NOT use religion at all in this election? That he will NOT use his preacher status? That he will publicly CONDEM any group that goes after Mitt for his faith? This would include no ‘guest preaching’ in any churches in the 6 months leading up to the primary’s and during the primary’s.
I doubt it. Religious Bigotory works in Huckabees favor.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:35 am
46. I’ll help you.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/31/schneider-the-nights-big-winner-huckabee-2/
Huckabee, I think, stood out in this debate as the one who made sense, talked as ordinary people do, and rose above politics. They may have scored. He connected. And that’s a problem for Romney, who would like to become the alternative to John McCain among conservatives who oppose the Arizona senator. But he has very tough competition from Huckabee, who’s forcing people to re-think his run at a time when he was supposed to be out of the game.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:35 am
45:
Your own view of a single forgotten debate amongst about 20 of them isn’t a very persuasive.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Competent Conservatism,
Why is it unreasonable that Huckabee appeals to moderates? In the primary, he was the Republican attacking big business and Wall Street, tactics moderates love. In fact, there was a lot of fuss pre-December about Huckabee’s appeal as a “different kind of Republican” and early polls in states like Michigan saw him drawing in conservative Dems and independents. It was only when the media started pushing the “hey, this guy is kind of a religious loon, isn’t he…?” that some of that appeal started to fade. It’s no surprise it’s coming back when he’s on Fox every week mostly discussing bread and butter, pocketbook issues.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Among Republicans
Sarah Palin 72% (76%) / 16% (19%) [+56%]
Mike Huckabee 66% (66%) / 13% (19%) [+53%]
Newt Gingrich 56% (65%) / 21% (17%) [+35%]
Mitt Romney 52% (54%) / 18% (25%) [+34%]
August 20th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Huckabee will not win Utah. The most GOP of all states, and he’ll tank in Utah. Without Utah, Obama landslides into second term
August 20th, 2009 at 11:41 am
#55 – are you saying that with a straight face?
“Without Utah, Obama landslides into second term”
August 20th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Ohio, my husband is unemployed (Obamatized, we call it around here). And he would never, never, never cast a vote for Huckabee.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:41 am
I don’t believe in polls. Just like I have said before Romney won’t get the nominee in 2012. He lost the 2008 primary election. The Republicans didn’t for vote him because he isn’t conservative. It is the mainstream news media are taken the polls. Romney lost the 2008 primary election in my home state of NC. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee won the NC primary election last year. Hope to see Sarah Palin run for President in 2012.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Did they give Utah an extra 75 ECV’s?
August 20th, 2009 at 11:43 am
50. Hasn’t Huckabee already publically condemned any group that attacks any religion.
Last I checked the christain evangelical vote is a huge voter block and it would behoove any candidate to speak to a large group of them at any sunday service.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:43 am
53:
The problem isn’t that his populist economic message doesn’t appeal to moderates/independents. It’s more that the boost is fleeting. You noted that it went away when the media started saying he’s a religious loon. There’s no reason that can’t be done again.
Beyond which. No Republican is going to outdo Obama on attack big business.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Anon. Gee… I thought Romney was a conservative, and governed as one. Thanks for opening up my eyes! (ha ha ha ).
August 20th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Kristofer, thanks for pointing out that despite everything else, our camp is the most popular among the base. And yes Chris’ comment on Utah is entertaining.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:44 am
KL. Actually, I am. The country is split close to 50/50. To win, you need every vote you can get. Without Utah, the election is LOST. Utah will never vote for Huckabee.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Fiscal. Any church that has a politican preaching who is running for president is no longer unbiased. Period.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Thomas,
Obama is pals with “ig business”in case you haven’t noticed. I’m amazed that many people still believe “big business” is an adversary of Obama’s.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:47 am
Chris, I heard that about McCain last year. Total B.S.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:47 am
I find it interesting that in the last Primary poll posted here, Romney beat Huck among men, but in the general election in this poll, Huck does much better among men.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:48 am
#65, Evangelicals are not Catholics. There is not a central Hierarchy/leadership.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:48 am
66:
Doesn’t mean he won’t attack them with relish. Just ask the insurance companies.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Thomas Alan,
You’re kidding me, right? Obama who was copacetic with the bank bailout and has pissed off liberals by becoming, in their language, a “corporatist”. About the only moderate/conservative aspect of Obama’s economic policy has been the kid gloves he’s used to handle big business. Huckabee’s well to the left (or right, depending on how you see these things) of Obama, rhetorically, on big business. Obama is the least populist Democratic President in a century.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:50 am
65. Well than don’t vote if Huckabee is the frontrunner in 2012, you have that right.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:51 am
“Ohio, my husband is unemployed (Obamatized, we call it around here). And he would never, never, never cast a vote for Huckabee.” Oh sure, there are exception, but many turn to quasi-populist during major recessions. Anti-Populism on steroids would not fly. The gap is going to have to be bridged somehow at some point.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:52 am
Liberal” generally means that you favor a larger government that provides a strong social safety net for its citizens. At least in American, it generally implies you want abortion to remain legal, are in favor of gay rights, support using military force as a last resort, and otherwise generally align yourself with the Democratic party.
“Populist” means that you take a “power to the people” philosophy, and that generally means the “common” people, the lower and middle classes, etc, as opposed to the wealthy elites. There’s a general mistrust of anything that concentrates power in the hands of a few people.
A “liberal populist” probably supports things like higher taxes on the wealthy.
If you’re familiar with Jim Hightower or the late Molly Ivins, they are great examples of liberal populists (and darn funny, too.)
“Liberal” and “populist” are not identical; there are also conservative populists, Pat Buchanan being a good current example. There aren’t many in the current conservative movement, though.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:52 am
“Fiscal. Any church that has a politican preaching who is running for president is no longer unbiased. Period.
” Well then tell this to Mr. Gore as well. It is a two way street.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:52 am
71:
Have you heard Obama talk? His socialist agenda might run counter to his anti-big business rhetoric in many ways. But that doesn’t mean he won’t yell at the top of his lungs about the evils of Big _____.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:53 am
Just read this
“In the first half of ’09, Romney has done the best of all the 2012 prospects,” said former Bush White House aide Pete Wehner. “He hasn’t made any errors, he’s smart, solid, and reliable – and conservatives have grown to like him.”
And to think, Romney does not even have a weekly TV show.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:54 am
I noticed too in this poll’s favorabilities, that Huckabee wins every economic class (there are 5 of them) with each of the other 3, except one (>100K) against Romney.
Huckabee is clearly running away with this poll.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:54 am
“Obama is the least populist Democratic President in a century.” That is certainly true when is comes to TARP.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Matt,
“Obama is the least populist Democratic President in a century.”
I would agree and disagree. I think part of the reason why is because “big business” has been willing to surrender their economic principles in exchange for financial help, which Obama has been perfectly willing to provide.
Where Obama is a total populist is on issues dealing with minorities and lower-income folks. I’d say he’s the most populist president we’ve had on those issues. Big business has been willing to capitulate to Obama’s style on those issues.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:55 am
God I hope the Palinites do not destroy our chances in 2012. Listen, I love Palin, but let’s get real, she cannot win in 2012. Maybe 2016 or 2020 after she does more good for herself than she did when she resigned. I talk to these Palin people are they are BLINDED by these polls. They really think she can beat Obama, think again, she can’t!
Romney 2012.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Wehner supported Romney.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/23/AR2007122302071.html
August 20th, 2009 at 11:55 am
75. I agree that it is a two way street. I disagreed with Gore when he did it, I diagreed with Huckabee when he did it, I disagreed with Obama if he did it. Church is where we worship God, not worship idols like Huck.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:57 am
But, Tommy Boy, if Mr. Obama was a real Populist, he would defend the people from Socialized Medicine, instead, he is shoving it down our throats.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Thomas Alan,
Yes, I’ve heard Obama talk. Obama is terrible at, as you say, “yelling at the top of his lungs about big business”. He’s failed miserably every time he tried. He just doesn’t do populism well, because his high oratory is uniformly self-reverential. When he’s not somehow casting an issue as an ode to his own greatness he’s a boring bureacrat and that’s never been clearer then in the health care debate. Go over to 538 or talkleft. They CAN’T UNDERSTAND why Obama isn’t talking more about moral case for this, why he isn’t doing more attacking, why he isn’t making things personal like Clinton used to do so brilliantly. And the answer is obvious; he can’t. That has always been Obama’s greatest political weakness. He’s too measured, calm, robotic, outside of a script written by him and about him. Had we run someone like Huckabee or Thompson or even a more prepared Palin, instead of McCain, that would have come out easily in the debates. He can. Not. Do. That. Sort. Of. Thing. Successfully. And thank God for small favors.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Bill O’Reilly has a pretty strong populist streak as well. It’s why I always shake my head when a liberal tells me that he’s just a shill for the GOP.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:59 am
I cannot disagree with #85…Obama has been presenting himself as a far-left pragmatist.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Miller,
I actually think Obama is a very strong populist on healthcare but we’ve been able toss up so many red flags (death panels, abortion, illegal immigrants) that the guy cannot find his footing.
Obama is at his best when he can set the media narrative and his “storytelling” about his grandmother and mother is quite effective when he’s in charge in my opinion.
However, Obama is at his weakest when he cannot dictate what the media covers and the narrative changes.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Another point that emphasizes Obama’s weakness; plenty of folks have pointed to his weakness at retail politics. He’s too opaque. His smile is just a little too glazed over. If we had a Presidential election that consisted of, you know, the candidates meeting every single voter, Obama would lose to Palin, Huckabee, Pawlenty, Newt, and almost anyone other than Romney (who has a similar weakness) and I’d wager he’d lose badly. It’s not his game and it frustrates me when we get into a situation like this, where this exact weakness accounts for Obama’s failure to sell a crucial agenda item, and we’re still somehow projecting “the Obama Way” as kind of the be-all-end-all of politicking.
“Do you see that guy with those great speeches? How can we compete with that with dull Pawlenty, or folksy Huckabee? He’s bound to demagogue big business brilliantly”. But, of course the two have nothing to do with each other and we can’t, of course, compete with Obama if we’re going to play on his territory.
That’s why I think Romney is a particularly bad match for Obama. Because Romney competes on Obama’s territory and is better at the things that matter less (debating) and much worse at the things that matter more (speechifying). Romney can’t out-populist even Obama, and he surely can’t out soar him…so where are we?
August 20th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
81 – If Palin is unlikely to win the nomination or beat Obama then we really need some new candidates because I do not see how any of the current candidates could do any better…and please do not cite this poll or any other poll this far from 2012. Romney will never be President. Huckabee will never be President. I personally hope for Giuliani to run and Jeb Bush. I like Palin a lot and right now I am one of her biggest supporters but it is way too early to tell…except for Huckabee and Romney. Neither one of them will be President and most likely not the nominee either. Maybe Pawlenty?
August 20th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
#89, belongs on the front page.
“plenty of folks have pointed to his weakness at retail politics. He’s too opaque. His smile is just a little too glazed over.”
Yes, we nominated a politician in 2000, who’s strength was retail politics, to defeat a similar candidate as Obama.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
http://race42008.com/2008/10/25/can-obama-break-50/#comment-372114
August 20th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Tommy,
I disagree. For a guy who launches into such rhetorical frenzies, these extremely tepid attacks on “insurance companies” are weak tea. A day or so ago someone played a soundbyte from a Hillary speech, from the campaign, on health care and it was absolutely electrifying. Hillary WOULD be able to sell this. She’d be turning that kind of green tea which numbs your taste buds for hours.
Obama’s just putting around lazily when he’s trying to be the populist, and the rest of the time his gift for opacity just dissolves whatever kind of substantive message he’s trying to convey. Remember that interview they dug up, at the very end of the campaign, from like 96 or whatever? Obama’s more or less endorsing an extremely radical view of the constitution, but the attack didn’t get much traction because everything he said was shrouded in layers of caution. It didn’t make good copy.
That’s where we are now: with a President who, outside of speeches celebrating himself, has honed an extraordinary gift for opacity. That helped him the election when he wanted to obscure all sorts of things. It’s killing him now.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
I’ve been pretty much a neutral observer on this website but for now feel the need to step in against some of the anti- Romney folk who continously are misinformed concerning Mass-care, and who write things about it that are factually wrong. The real truth is that under Gov. Romney [according to the Mass. Taxpayers Association], Mass-care got everyone insured, with less cost to the taxpayers, by only spending 380 million which they point out was only 1 and a half percent of the states total budget. It would have been even less than that, had not the legislature overriden some of the cost cutting provisions Romney had originally put in.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Or, to sum it up, he’s a distant guy. This kind of sell requires closeness.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Matt,
I agree that Romney is a particularly bad matchup for Obama but I think you overstate the case for Huck. Huck’s populism seems to be to religiously based, which I don’t consider a good contrast with a guy, who for a dem, is as nearly as religious in his rhetoric as Jimmy Carter.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
#92, amazing how we agree on so much.
btw, do you have time to assist me with the questions (email)?
August 20th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Matt, write a book on him!
August 20th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Chris,
I have never seen a political analyst suggest that a Presidential race could hinge on Utah.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
89:
There are more ways to win a campaign than with populism and soaring rhetoric. Romney’s strengths ARE where Obama’s weak.
-As someone mentioned here earlier, Romney’s got a brilliant mind for grasping the complex and bringing it down to a level that voters can understand it. He’s been called a human power-point presentation and it’s an apt description. Obama sucks at specifics.
-Romney’s very good at maintaining his composure in a scrap and dishing it out with a smile. If Obama can’t weasel his way out with a condescending quip, he gets into quick trouble (often because of the condescending quip).
-Romney has the track record to fight on economic grounds as a turnaround artist. Obama is remarkably illiterate economically.
Simply trying to find a candidate that fits against Obama’s weaknesses won’t work. Huckabee simply has too many faults to be electable. Sure he has some skills that I wish could be transplanted onto Romney, but that doesn’t change that he would be soundly whipped and we’d be wasting our chance to take back the White House in 2012 if we nominated him.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Holy smokes. This was unexpected.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Utah would never be THE swing state that would cost an election. But if a republican did lose Utah then you can be sure they lost the election. If Utah went blue, then they would be only one of several, perhaps many, red states that flipped.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Matthew,
“About the only moderate/conservative aspect of Obama’s economic policy has been the kid gloves he’s used to handle big business.”
Remember, though, that Big Business and Big Government run hand in glove. Our 2012 Populist needs to run AGAINST the marriage of Big Business- with its love of competition killing bureaucracy and ability to buy favors- AND run against big government. It’s the people versus those who use illegitimate power and influence.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Well Romney is going to have to raise his likeability with conservatives to even get a chance to go against Obama…but there is still plenty of time.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
“He’s been called a human power-point presentation and it’s an apt description.”
And what better way to tap all that anti-Washington anger than with a Powerpoint presentation?
August 20th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
I think we need a populist candidate for 2012, and Romney is the anti-populist.
He can’t connect with people, and he has the lowest favorables of any of the top-tier candidates in the GOP. He has support from the pro-bailout business establishment, and his own personal wealth, but that’s not going to be enough.
Romney is also seen as a relatively liberal Republican by the base, with his past social liberalism and RomneyCare. In a GOP primary, this will be fatal, unless the conservative vote gets split.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Matthew
#93
Brilliant.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Another problem with a Romney nomination is that it gives the Democrats a convenient (though dishonest) scapegoat. They will raise the populist banner and run against Big Business and the Rich, and unless things are horribly bad, it might well get Obama a second term. I guarantee they will try to make Romney the poster child of greed, malfeasance, and a screw-the-little-guy investment banks. If they succeed at this (and I think there is a reasonable chance they could) then the economic malaise is turned back on the GOP and all their rich “friends.”
August 20th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Republican populists are too easily branded as “stupid”. It’s helpful sometimes, but I don’t think Bush’s shadow will be far enough behind us by 2012 to be a winning formula.
2012 will be a year where the Bush 41/Nixon formula will be a better bet.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
These polls mean nothing.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
108:
I think that strategy would backfire. All Romney would need to do is mention how many jobs he helped create in the private sector. Hell, make a chart with the number of employees at Staples and put it side-by-side with the millions of jobs we’ll lose by the time Obama’s done with us.
I’m telling you guys, populism is a dumb strategy. It usually doesn’t even work for Democrats.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Alaska Ear
The divine appendage
http://www.adn.com/ear/v-printer/story/899972.html
Rumor has it that Palin’s moving to Rhode Island
http://www.projo.com/news/content/PALIN_RHODE_ISLAND_08-20-09_E5FF0HR_v23.3c1d727.html
August 20th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Thomas,
“2012 will be a year where the Bush 41/Nixon formula will be a better bet.”
I don’t see how that would even apply to 2012. Bush 41 was a sitting Vice President of a popular incumbent party. Nixon was a former Vice President. So how is that formula played out in 2012? Running Cheney, Quayle, or Biden?
August 20th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Yes these numbers are not good for Sarah Palin.
But here’s the dope. 35% of the 909 voters surveyed were post-grads (318 voters). In the Nov. 2008 election 17% of the voters were actually post-grads; thus PPP oversampled postgrads by a whopping 18% (164 voters).
Now the poll also shows that Palin’s favorables/unfavorables with post grads is 32/57 while Obama’s is 60/33. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that with the oversampling of postgrads that in a head to head matchup between Obama and Palin that Obama’s vote percent is too high and Palin’s is too low.
With regards to Romney the poll clearly shows that Mitt ranks the lowest among conservatives and Republicans in favorables, and not gaining any traction with the base of the GOP which is definitely worrisome.
Obviously this poll is not good for Sarah Palin but having said that she still leads the potential GOP contenders among conservatives and Republicans and for those of you obsessed with how she will do in a one-on-one matchup against the Messiah let me throw a football analogy into the mix-Bill Belichick of the AFC NE Patriots couldn’t care less how the NFC is doing and likewise Sarah Palin should not concern herself with Obama now; instead her focus if she decides to run should be on the 2012 GOP primaries, and with her standing among conservatives and Republicans still significant and with 80% of all GOP primary voters being Republican Sarah still stands a decent chance to walk away with the nomination in 2012.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
93. To piggyback what you said, his opacity was created when he changed many of his positions to appear to bge like McCain’s. Its how he won the tax debate. In doing so, voters were left with choosing the more “likeable” candidate and clearly that was the hip Obama. Unfortunately, that what it boiled down too.
August 20th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Thomas,
“All Romney would need to do is mention how many jobs he helped create in the private sector.”
And the Democrats would talk about how many people he laid off. They will also talk about how all of Romney’s “friends” on Wall Street bought the dynamite that blew up the economy. They will point to Romney and say “It was people JUST LIKE HIM that said ‘”Trust me, I know how to make a ton of money’ and destroyed the economy.”
August 20th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
“I think we need a populist candidate for 2012, and Romney is the anti-populist.” True to a point, Mr. Romney does not have to be a Populist, but to be titled the anti-Populist is almost deadly. The best way for Mr. Romney to wiggle away from that title is to have some of his extreme members in his camp calm down and let the camp leader do the talking.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
“I don’t see how that would even apply to 2012. Bush 41 was a sitting Vice President of a popular incumbent party. Nixon was a former Vice President. So how is that formula played out in 2012? Running Cheney, Quayle, or Biden?”
BINGO!
On another note, if the economy is bad in 2012, TARP will hang around Mr. Romney’s neck. Who wants to replace one Northeastern banker with another. If one read between the lines on the Hannity Show, Mr. Romney carefully backed away from TARP (indirectly.) Brilliant move.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Republicans should not be counting on populism to help them win long term. Populist anger dissapates over time, it is hard to keep reasonable people mad and angry through several election cycles. That being said, Huckabee is very good at connecting with people on a “gut” level. Romney connects more on a cerebral level. I’m not saying one is stupid or the other smart, but that is how it is.
To win, Huckabee needs to act a little more intellectually (somber, serious addresses on national issues, jokes to a minimum). Romney by contrast, needs to roll up his sleeves and get more “down-to-earth” (more enthusiasm, more red-meat, more jokes).
August 20th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Won’t work in 2012. We’re going to need a person who knows how to fix things. Just railing against people who know what they’re doing won’t cut it as a political strategy. Romney can say that he knows how to create jobs. After Obama’s failed economic policies, the American people will be receptive to answers from an adult.
I’m sure you’re right in that the Democrats will try to do that to Romney. It just won’t work and will backfire on them.
Please don’t be purposely dense. I’m sure you know that there’s more to those candidates than being VPs.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Lincoln’s Prophecy for the GOP
By Harold Meyerson
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/19/AR2009081902901_pf.html
The GOP Has Become a Party of Nihilists
by Joe Klein
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1917525,00.html
August 20th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Well said Jonathan, we cannot win with an extreme version of either Mr. Romney or Mr. Huckabee, each must change their personna to be a bit like the other one.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Not to mention the fact that this polling was done
Aug. 14-17, before Huckabee made this remark – Then, this week, Huckabee inexplicably announced during a tour of Israel that a two-state solution would never work in the Middle East because all that land belongs rightfully to Israel.
“The question is should the Palestinians have a place to call their own?” Huckabee said. “Yes, I have no problem with that. Should it be in the middle of the Jewish homeland? That’s what I think has to be assessed as virtually unrealistic.”
This odd remark — I mean, who asked his opinion in the first place? — put The Huck at odds with Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, along with the expressly stated policy of the United States and every other civilized nation in the world. (The uncivilized nations also don’t believe in a two-state solution: They want Israel destroyed.) More to the point, this particular off-the-cuff diplomacy probably ended Huckabee’s hopes, however faint, for his party’s future presidential nomination. “What the hell is he going for — the Manhattan vote?” asked former Bush and McCain adviser Mark McKinnon. “Bizarre.”
August 20th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
“Won’t work in 2012. We’re going to need a person who knows how to fix things.” Yes, but that is half the battle. One cannot get elected just be fixing things, one must convince the people that one can fix things.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
119. “To win, Huckabee needs to act a little more intellectually (somber, serious addresses on national issues, jokes to a minimum). ”
A fair criticism of which I don’t disagree.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
123. Whats bizarre about his comment? It would be like us giving part of Texas and NM to Mexico be they think are entitled it. Going against common thought can cut both ways, but in this case, I call it leadership.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
#124:
That is where perception comes in. If Romney appears to people like Mike Huckabee said, as the “guy who laid them off”, it will be very hard for him to win. If instead, he comes across as the great businessman who saved companies and jobs, than he has a shot. Romney is the one who has to create the perception he wants, otherwise his opponents will do it for him.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Romney’s very good with managing his image. That shouldn’t be a problem.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
“Romney’s very good with managing his image. That shouldn’t be a problem.” I freaking bloody well hope so in 2012, in did not work well for him in 2007-08.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
His personal image wasn’t a problem in 2008. It was the Boston Globe distorting his political record.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
I reeeaaalllly hope Palin gets the nomination. She doesn’t stand a chance at winning. She’s very dangerous to the GOP right now – very popular among the base and in the party, horribly unpopular and unelectable outside of the party.
Romney is the strongest candidate still, IMO. Huck’s numbers would fall quickly if he actually became the nominee.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Thomas,
“Please don’t be purposely dense. I’m sure you know that there’s more to those candidates than being VPs.”
I guess I am dense. What is the connection between Nixon ’68, Bush ’88, and Romney ’12?
Bush was a blue blood New Englander, like Romney, but Nixon wasn’t. Nixon was out of office for a long time, like Romney, but not like Bush.
So what did you mean?
August 20th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
#130:
You think the voters in IA, SC, FL, or the other states give a damn about what the Boston Globe says?
Romney had an image problem in 2007-2008. He came across as an out-of-touch eastern elite millionaire. I’m not saying it is fair or unfair, but that is what happened. He needs to fix that if he wants to appeal to Republican voters in the heartland. He shouldn’t change who he is, but give people a fresh or different view of himself.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
“She’s very dangerous to the GOP right now” And she is even more dangerous to the Dems, she put the death panels on life support.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Lori,
“More to the point, this particular off-the-cuff diplomacy probably ended Huckabee’s hopes, however faint, for his party’s future presidential nomination.”
LOL!!! You sound like Pruce, who also tries to give every utterance, appearance, or gesture some kind of comsic significance, when 99.99999% of the country either wasn’t paying attention or will forget about it before tomorrow’s breakfast.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
130. It was a problem with high income earners as they found a natural connection with Romney as low income earners found a natural connection with Huckabee. It depends on the perspective you are looking through.
It was seen in the primary results. Romney (and McCain) won predominately urban/suburban votes while Huckabee was unstopable with the rural vote. I would garner from that that urban/suburban voter had a problem with Huckabee’s image and the rural voter had a problem with Romney’s image.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Lori,
“More to the point, this particular off-the-cuff diplomacy probably ended Huckabee’s hopes, however faint, for his party’s future presidential nomination.”
LOL!!! You sound like Pruce, who also tries to give every utterance, appearance, or gesture some kind of cosmic significance, when 99.99999% of the country either wasn’t paying attention or will forget about it before tomorrow’s breakfast.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
sorry for the repeat post.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
I mean running a serious politician with a long records of accomplishments. Find someone presidential who the country will believe in.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
#131:
Just wondering Kevin, but what do you think of our 2nd-tier? Would Democrats and liberals be worried if a Tim Pawlenty or Mitch Daniels or John Thune got the nomination?
August 20th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Thomas,
“Romney’s very good with managing his image.”
So how come he couldn’t shake the flip flopper label?
August 20th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
“Romney had an image problem in 2007-2008. He came across as an out-of-touch eastern elite millionaire. I’m not saying it is fair or unfair.” What is unfair to Mr. Romney is that his extreme supporters fail to see this and they just add to the image problem. Heads in the sand in not a winning formula, fortunately, there are a few years left to change this.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
136. Meant to say, “It was NOT a problem with high income earners….”
August 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
141:
I was talking about someone else as I already stated. Personal image and political records are two different things.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Thomas,
“I mean running a serious politician with a long records of accomplishments. Find someone presidential who the country will believe in.”
Would could argue that ALL major party nominees fit that description, to a greater or lesser degree. Certainly they were all nominated with the hopes that they were “someone presidential who the country could believe in.” I don’t know of a single nominee who his party consider UNpresidential and someone the country COULDN’T believe in. I also can’t think of a major party nominee in a very long time who didn’t have at least a somewhat impressive resume (except Obama).
August 20th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
#144:
I don’t disagree. I thought Romney did as well as one could being a Republican Governor of Massachusetts. But unfortunetly, the American people don’t vote on the political record alone. If they did, Obama would never have been elected President. People do vote on personality though, and that is where Romney’s image could use some work.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
142:
I don’t think that was an image problem at all. I think that was more inside-the-beltway wishfull thinking.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
#140, I think Pawlenty has a good shot. I’d rate him second strongest in a GE. I’d be somewhat concerned with Pawlenty as the nominee.
Thune, I’m not sure. I don’t know that much about him.
Finally, I think Mitch Daniels would be an extremely strong candidate in a general election. Possibly the strongest of any. However, I don’t think he would be able to win the primary, and I don’t think he’s going to run. He’s said time and time again that he is not going to run for another office ever again, and I’m going to take him on his word.
Pawlenty and Daniels would be excellent VP candidates, and probably Thune too.
August 20th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Oh no no, this is from Outside the Beltway.
August 20th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
145:
You’re being purposely dense again. If we nominate Huckibee or Palin we will most certainly not be nominating a classic presidential figure.
146:
Romney’s personal image is fine. At most he’s has a too perfect family life.
August 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
“Romney’s personal image is fine. At most he’s has a too perfect family life.” Oh my goodness, you really do not get it Thomas.
August 20th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
#148:
Thanks for the insight. Daniels is my man if he’ll run. He’s been a great Governor of Indiana. Balancing the budget (IN actually has a surplus now due to his fiscal policies), standardizing the state’s time-zones, privatizing the DMV (which has made it much more efficient).
I think Daniels could do well in both IA and NH. As a Hoosier, he knows agriculture pretty well, and his fiscal conservatism would play well amongst those flinty Granite State voters.
If only he’ll run…
August 20th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
I just voted for my favorite notsosure.org video. What’s yours? http://bit.ly/10gm6m
August 20th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
151. No he doesn’t.
August 20th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Huckabee/Pawlenty 2012
August 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Huckabee and Alf Landon. What a pair
August 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
#126 – no, it would be if Mexico came here and told us we should give part of Texas and New Mexico to them. When doing comparisons – compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges
August 20th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Thomas,
“If we nominate Huckibee or Palin we will most certainly not be nominating a classic presidential figure.”
…..like Kerry, Gore, Dole, and Mondale.
You’re right, best to steer clear of candidates with popular appeal like Obama and Clinton. Those guys always lose.
August 20th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
If these numbers hold, and they should as long as Huckabee has his Fox show, then Huck will run. Don’t know if he will win the primary or the general but he will run.
August 20th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
157. Ok, whatever. Thought that is what I said. It still wouldn’t make any sense as with what has been asked of Isreal to do with it’s homeland.
August 20th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
I just saw this posted here and skipped over all the comments.
Just had to say way to go Huckabee!!!!
August 20th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Horrifying.
August 20th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
#136 – FiscalConservative “Romney (and McCain) won predominately urban/suburban votes while Huckabee was unstopable with the rural vote”
take yourself out of the South and try to prove that statement with exit polls.
August 20th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
151:
Actually I do get it. I just don’t accept what you believe is true. There’s a broad gap between reality, and what’s reguritated on a message board.
158:
Hence why I said that the popular figures are worth it sometimes. In 2000 a Bush or Paline was a better candidate than McCain or Romney. Not in 2012.
August 20th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Man, couldn’t even spell Palin right. Must be time for bed.
August 20th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Ex gov Palin is gone. The dream is over guys.
August 20th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
#16 Fiscalconservative – I just checked Illinois for an example:
All candidates were still in at that point:
Overall numbers: Mitt 257,265 Huckabee 129745
Take away Cook County Mitt 206,477 Huckabee 129,745
Take away Cook, and Winnebago (Rockford) and McLean (Bloomington-Normal) and CHampaign (Champaign/Urbana) and Sangamon (Springfield), and you have Mitt 180,133 Huckabee 114,773
It doesn’t get anymore country than taking away all of the big cities. Mitt has absolutely no special connections to Illinois. The southern part of the state touches Arkansas, and is pretty darned southern, and all those counties are included in this. So, you don’t get much more country than this folks, and Mitt kicked his rear. I’ll be glad to do other non-southern states to prove you wrong as well!
As far as this poll, I think Mitt is doing quite will considering Huckabee has his own tv gig and can self promote all the time, which he takes full advantage of. Mitt will be fine. Some of you make good points about things he can do differently this time around, but one thing I notice is that no none is criticizing anything he has been doing in the last year and a half sense he dropped out. He’ll be just fine, and he will beat Obama. Of that, I have no doubt whatsoever.
August 20th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Oops, original number for Huckabee for all of Illinois is 148,053.
August 20th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
NH basically doesn’t have any big cities, and Mitt beat Huckabee by almost 3 to one statewide.
I didn’t find a single ‘rural’ county in California that Huckabee beat Mitt in the primary.
Mitt beat Huckabee badly in every single Arizona county as well…..Need I go on?
So, you need to revise your statement to say Huckabee was unstoppable in many of the southern state rural countries.
If you recall Mitt was not in during the Texas primary, but in the last polls Mitt lead McCain by a small amount and your man Huckabee by 10%.
August 20th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Aren’t we all making too much of Huckabee’s Fox show? It’s once a week and watched by 1.5 million people from the numbers I’ve seen.
I wouldn’t really attribute too much to the show. Richard Murray’s post comes the closest in my opinion.
August 20th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
#170 Doesn’t he have a radio show as well and also appears as a regular Fox special contributor to other more watched host’s shows?
August 20th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
What ever the poll is right now but it will depend on how the economy is in 2011. If American people have learned the lesson from the change we can believe in that nothing prove his record,good talker,say every thing by his moral,is not talk by the track record,can say any thing to get elect,but can’t do what you want to do,so American people will rally with the best record,the one who has best resume as America ever done and make America the best country in the world.The top company just hired the most experience engineer and America will elect the most experience leader to lead America 2012 to come to clean the socialism mess that America people have never thought about in their life time by the secret change America nightmare from Mr.Obama,that man is Mitt,he can’t say the word America need but he can do the thing America want,he can’t talk the way America hope but he can build the economy America dream,he can’t speech the way America crazy but he can turn around the country to the direction America need, Mitt is the America dream or you will repeat your own mistake and let the country go to hell again.
August 20th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
TB, it may as well be every night; he’s on other shows constantly day and night.
August 20th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Rubio Rising
Florida governor Charlie Crist is running for the Senate, and he isn’t supposed to lose. Standing in his way, however, is 38-year-old Marco Rubio, one of the brightest young stars on the right. By John J. Miller
http://blogs.tampabay.com/.a/6a00d83451b05569e20120a508618b970b-popup
http://nrd.nationalreview.com/?q=MjAwOTA5MDc=
August 20th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Hannity pimps for Huck all the time.
August 20th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Palin is the one candidate who can successfully unite the base, and split the party. These general election numbers for her are lousy.
August 20th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Hannity just gave Mitt a softball interview on his radio show. No hard questions about his MA healthcare plan. Even though there was a caller on 15 minutes before Romney asking about Romney and the healthcare plan. Hannity let Romney talk about whatever he wanted to about the plan.
For those of you who listen to talk radio. It does seem that the support for Romney from the talkshow hosts went to Palin. And for those who it did not go to, it is now going to Pawlenty. So Romney has lost many of the cheerleaders he had in 2008. Will he be able to get them back?
August 20th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Texas, I agree that many radio hosts have been slobbering over Palin. Then again, most of them were passionately opposed to McCain. Didn’t stop him from getting the nomination did it?
August 20th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Bold prediction for the day – Mitt will win California in the primary AND the general.
August 20th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
“Hannity pimps for Huck all the time.” You must know a different Mr. Hannity.
August 20th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Ya know, you people are in a complete rut…Huckabee was not a Christian acting preacher….in 2008..He was a bigot. He lied about W. Virginia win. He whined and cried about no money, jealous of Mitt to no end. Lies of omission are lies non the less. Practical distasteful jokes damaging candidates. Just not Presidential. He and Clinton should start a band…What we need is a President not a show off…Serious, business experience would be an asset..ESP. after this disaster..We need the best of the best…..Mitt was second to John McCain at suspension. Huckabee was not a team player and really folks …..Not the friend he portrayed to be to John McCain, just another political stunt to hurt Mitt…I don’t respect Huckabee…period…
August 20th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
There are lots of interesting cross tabs that haven’t been talked about at al this time. For example, even though Palin shows the highest favorables amongst Republicans and Mitt shows the lowest, in a run against Obama, Mitt does a little better than Sarah with Republicans. This shows once again that when people have a favorable opinion of someone, that does not necessarily translate into it being favorable in terms of them running for president in 2012.
Sarah only had one group income wise that she showed a positive favorable, and that was for the under 25K group. But when it came to the election Obama gets these voters by a huge margin….so it’s wiped out.
August 20th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
There are lots of interesting cross tabs that haven’t been talked about at all this time. For example, even though Palin shows the highest favorables amongst Republicans and Mitt shows the lowest, in a run against Obama, Mitt does a little better than Sarah with Republicans. This shows once again that when people have a favorable opinion of someone, that does not necessarily translate into it being favorable in terms of them running for president in 2012.
Sarah only had one group income wise that she showed a positive favorable, and that was for the under 25K group. But when it came to the election Obama gets these voters by a huge margin….so it’s wiped out.
August 20th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Palinmania is slowly wearing off as people realize her drawbacks.
Huck is unelectable, I don’t care what this polls says. When 2012 rolls around, people are going to get serious, and they aren’t going to go for the Huckster. Just ain’t happenin folks.
There’s one obvious choice. I think anyone – even flavor of the month Pawlenty, would have an extremely difficult time proving he is more ready to be POTUS than Romney.
August 20th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Amen sister Martha! Romney!!! Romney!!! only rap video ever worth watching!! Romney!! ROmney!!! nothing rhymes with Romney!!! so I’ll just say Romney!! Romney!!!
August 20th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
I would be worried about the steady, continuing rise of Huck’s numbers over the last few months in the polls except for a) he can’t stay on Fox forever b) he can’t raise money to save his life c) his pac is full of incompetent nitwits.
August 20th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
fiscalsconservative – I’m assuming by your silence you couldn’t find a state outside of the south that Huckabee beat Mitt with the rural vote, other than Iowa, of course, and we all know how that happened.
August 20th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
163. Go to CNN election page and check the results on thier election map for the primaries and you will see what I mean. I plainly shows Huckabee owned the rural vote.
August 20th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
“151:
Actually I do get it. I just don’t accept what you believe is true. There’s a broad gap between reality, and what’s reguritated on a message board.” Well, this poll shows that Mr. Romney is relatively weak among certain demographic groups like the poor and middle class. Claiming that Mr. Romney has a perfect family does does address this. That is all fine and well that Mr. Romney has a perfect family, but many in both the poor and middle classes also have perfect families. The poor and middle classes are not jealous of Mr. Romney’s perfect family, that is where you miss the point. Failing to address that does not change reality.
August 20th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
That’s where I’ve been getting all of my information my friend fiscalconservative……I still challenge you to produce evidence of what I asked. I showed you several states already……I’ve since then checked Florida, and he didn’t beat Mitt in rural counties there either. You haven’t produced anything I asked….and yes, its from where you said….
August 20th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
187. Sorry been away from the computer since work today, but Ok you got me. I should of clarified most southern states on Super Tuesday, but you can add VA to that list and I believe he did pretty well in WA too, but that was then.
My main point above was that one’s perception of candidate X is relative to one position. I was acknowledging the Romney and Huckabee were both percieved unlikable based on one’s position whether wealthy or not.
August 20th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
Mitt wasn’t in the race for those, sorry! Don’t think I want to count those!
August 20th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
Illinoisguy
I think you need therapy. You have two and a half years to go until Romney MAY announce. You have to start focusing on helping some local or state official where you can really put your energies for the next couple of years. Even Romney would tell you to take a break, take a breathe, get back to your life.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
I’ll take your therapy in the meantime Texas; I’ll look for a Conservative GOP candidate to beat our freaking Blue Dog and I shall help my state party in 2010.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
What are you talking about texas?????? I’ve been talking about these polls in the exact same way as everybody else. ANd throwing in a little jest while I’m at it. Just like lots of other people on here, when someone says something patently false, I help set the record straight. I don’t know what your problem is today, but it’s not like you to attack me (or anyone else for that matter)……guess you’re just having a bad day… I’ve done nothing wrong my friend.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
To my Palin supporting friends, I’m sorry but yall might just have to throw in the towel for 2012. She can’t win in 2012. The former Alaska Governor needs some time out of the spotlight to study and reflect. Does she really want to put her family through this crap again? Does she think she can win the nomination and the general election against an incumbent President (which is hard no matter who the President is)? Does she believe that she is well versed enough to be President of the United States? Or does she simply want to take some time off to make money and speak out on the issues without running for President?
This doesn’t mean that Palin’s political career is over, but perhaps it is time to try something else for a couple of years.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
ILguy, is there any statewide official you can get behind in 2010 and focus on to distract from Romney? Cos Romney won’t officially announce until January 2011, so there’s time to help out someone else. Perhaps Kirk for Senate, so that Romney as PResident has more breathing room in the Senate?
August 20th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
192:
And don’t forget that most of Romney’s victories came in largely rural states.
189:
I’m sorry, but I’ve no clue what you were trying to say there.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
#198:
Romney’s victories came mostly from caucus states. Places where his organization and his opponent’s lack thereof really helped him. The reason Huckabee didn’t do really well in places like North Dakota is because he didn’t have to organization to match Romney’s. Huckabee also didn’t have the resources that Romney had. If Huckabee had the same amount of resources that Romney had, he might have taken states like MO and OK on Super Tuesday.
Huckabee in 2008 ran a shoe-string campaign basically the entire way through. That won’t happen again in 2012. He will, presumably, be much better funded and be able to build a strong organization. A well-funded Huckabee could give Romney a run for his money in places we don’t expect.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
#193
Texasconserv:
Your DISLIKE for Romney and his supporters are obvious.
Your like intelligent Flip Dixon.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
The 2012 Presidential election is going to start a lot sooner than January 2011. In fact, it’s already started, haven’t you been listening to Pawlenty and Huckabee?
But if Huckabee runs, it will be because he’s not quite finished trying to destroy Romney on a personal level.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Sorry Illinoisguy, I didn’t mean it in a mean way. I meant it in a friendly way. Just like my kids used to tell me that I was obsessed with Huckabee. Now I am interesting in attending the teaparties and am going to a healthcare townhall meeting next week.
I myself have looked into the Perry vs Hutchison matchup and have thought if I should volunteer. Problem is that I dislike Perry as a politician although I like his policies. And I like Hutchison as a politician but I do not like how she has voted on some key issues. So I may have to sit that one out. But I did help a local county commissioner out by making GOTV calls for him.
lkv, I don’t DISLIKE Romney. I have a lot of respect for him as a family man, faithful person, good citizen, good businessman. I just don’t like him as a politician. But if he wins the nomination in 2012, I will vote for him.
August 20th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Jaype – why in the heck is that little democratic pea brain of your telling you to pipe into this conversation?
This is a thread that surveyed the GOP against each other favorables and against Obama 2012, right? WHy would you, or anyone else be questioning the fact that I am talking about 2012 like everybody else on this posting? Get a life!
August 20th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
lkv
Huckabee was not trying to destroy Romney on a personal level. He did get into a rough and tumble primary battle with him. My guess for 2012 is that Huckabee does not bring up religion at all, tells his website staff to watch carefully and remove any nasty post before it is posted and tells all pundits who only ask him religious questions that he has been there done that with those kind of questions and he turns and talks about policy. Romney, on the other hand, will not come out with his half truth negative ads against his opponents. Instead he will have much better ads telling voters why they should vote for him. Maybe even a humorous one that brings in the hispanic vote ala chuck norris style.
See I can admit where my guy needs to improve.
August 20th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
201. & 203. Get over your anger and you will feel much better about politics.
August 20th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
99. Fine. Just don’t count Utah’s votes. The race will be close. Sorry you don’t see it our way, but without EVERY vote, including Utah’s, you lose. Want to try my theory?
I can’t in all good conscience, vote for Huckabee.
August 20th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Anger? I’m the one who has been joking tonight….and you still didn’t produce a state, nor admit you were wrong.
August 20th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
DanL is right. It does not totally hinge. But if Utah went Democrate (and this past election, they got the higest vote for a democrate, ever) than you can bet other states went democrate as well. Utah is the most GOP of all states. And yet, we get tossed aside. Heck, Huck never even came her during the primary’s. So, only about 2 percent voted for him. Most folks said ‘that high?”
You can’t win without Utah. To win this election, you need ever vote.
August 20th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
#208:
Sorry, but that last statement is incorrect. To win an election, you don’t need every vote. You just need 271 electoral votes.
August 20th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Texas. I disagree. It sure seemed personal to me.
August 20th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
Oh, and for the record Oklahoma was the most Republican state in 2008. McCain won the Sooner State with 65.65% of the vote. Wyoming was second with 64.78% and Utah was third with 62.25% of the vote.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
189. I don’t think we should call any family perfect. None are. We all have problems. The Romney’s appear to have fewer problems, but no one knows.
Texas, you said that you think Huck’s going to play it straight this time and call off his anti-Mormon dogs. I hope he does, but it’s going to be hard. He started the whole thing last time, and that’s one big reason why he got traction.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
I can’t believe 16% of Republicans approve of Obama!! Congrats to Huckabee for coming out on top.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
IG,
First of all, Jaype is not a dem as far as I know. He’s a Crist guy
Secondly, Fiscalcon did concede defeat to your argument in post 191.
Third, and this is to lkv, I think if Huckabee runs, it’ll be because he’s within 3 of Obama in a poll showing 35% of the respondents to be post-graduates (meaning that Huckabee could be ahead if the poll found the electorate to be comprised of 17% post-graduates, the actual number on November 4th….by the way, the fewer post-graduates helps all Republican candidates) rather than any personal desire to destroy Romney.
August 20th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
TB, no, he kinda conceited, but then offered Virginia and Washington….and I reminded him Mitt was out already for both of them.
Jaype always seems to me to be a Democrat? Is there really any different between a Crist guy and a Democrat?
August 20th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Chris,
“But if Utah went Democrate (and this past election, they got the higest vote for a democrate, ever)”
Ummmm….. Roosevelt and Johnson both won Utah, just off the top my head. There were probably other Democrats too, not off the top of my head. So, no, Obama didn’t have the best showing for a Democrat “ever.”
August 20th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
“But if Huckabee runs, it will be because he’s not quite finished trying to destroy Romney on a personal level.”
What total nonsense. This may come as a shocking news flash to some of the Rombots here, but the entire universe does not revolve around Mitt Romney. Some people make decisions- even life altering decisions- without reference to Mitt Romney.
I know that is hard for some of you to believe.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:12 pm
IG, in Va he did win most of the rural counties against McCain, but to clarify, as long as thier wasn’t a mililtary base than McCain took those. To be honest, I don’t know why you are taking this so personal.
I forgot to add WV too. Hehehehe.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
MWS,
Also, Clinton won more of the two-party vote in Utah than Barack Obama.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Tommy.
William Jennings Bryan and Harry Truman also won Utah. FDR won it 4 times.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
Fiscal,
For Illinoisguy, EVERYTHING about Romney is personal.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
#214; Tommy Boy….
Huckabee should be higher in the polls. He appears on FOX as a guest beginning on Thursday and that carries over to his show that runs and re-runs at least 4 times over the weekend.
Romney has been on vacation and comes in a close second.
Having a trusted Pastor and Christian drag Romney’s name through the mud while lying about him is bound to do some personal and political damage, how can you deny that. They know what they say is repeated on cable.
It’s people like Huckabee and Pawlenty who are willing to go against Romney like this plus all the stuff happening on the radio with Rush and the others, that is turning me against Republicans, and I’ve been a republican since I was 18 years old.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:13 am
222 – What Pawlenty said wasn’t so bad in the first place and he’s backtracked a bit as well. As for Huckabee, I’m not going to pile on him on this topic but I’m not going to put in a good word for him either.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:15 am
MWS,
We’ve never had a religion-baiting, anti-Mormon exploiting nominee before, so we’d be breaking new ground as far as Utah and some other soldily western states with heavy Mormon populations go.
I’d rather not find out how strong the sentiment against Huck is among Mormons. We can’t afford to.
Were you a Huck guy last time? Sure hope not.
Sheesh, I could never vote for a race or a religion baiter.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:17 am
Ever notice how Romney and Palin don’t go after other republicans? Ever notice how Huck does? And now Pawlenty. It’s unnecessary at this point.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:18 am
223. Yes, I’m glad Pawlenty has backtracked a little. He’s still wrong about the cost, though – and I’m sure he knows it by now.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:31 am
Zogby just came out with a poll tonight that shows the Messiah’s approval number down to 45.3% and with independents 37.5%. If only this could be true.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:53 am
224. I meant solidly red western states.
August 21st, 2009 at 3:57 am
“189. I don’t think we should call any family perfect” If you read earlier post Martha, you would know that I was not the one who invented that phase ‘perfect family.’ I cannot help you if you missed the original point. Obviously, the man who made the original point also forgot what he was trying say so I cannot help you there either.
August 21st, 2009 at 4:28 am
“To my Palin supporting friends, I’m sorry but yall might just have to throw in the towel for 2012. She can’t win in 2012.” I get it Jonathan, but as a Palinite a) I will continue to support Palinism (with or without her) and b) I will fight back against the misinformation of the liberal anti-Palinites. While I will vote in the 2012 primary and I might even donate to another party’s camp, I do not intend to officially change camps so because of a) loyalty and b) I have no current favorite of the other three. As of now (in part because of his great Hannity interview) Mr. Romney appears to be the second best thing to Mrs. Palin ideologically, Mr. Huckabee as of now is the overall strongest candidate and my fellow midesterner, Mr. Pawlenty understands my region of the country best, so I’ll have to give him a fair shake for now. Things can also change.
August 21st, 2009 at 6:04 am
OJ, don’t you ever sleep?
Martha, yes MWS was a strong Huckabee guy last time around, and will probably move back to him if Pawlenty fails to catch fire.
August 21st, 2009 at 6:35 am
Haha, Illinoisguy, not as much as I’d like to, but yes I sleep. BTW, you are up early for being in the Central Time Zone.
August 21st, 2009 at 6:36 am
Now if Martha is up on the west coast, I’d really be impressed.
August 21st, 2009 at 8:11 am
It’s kind of funny that the Romney folks keep complaining about how bad Huckabee treated Romney during the primaries but if a Palin supporter mentions how bad the MSM treated Palin we are just a bunch of cry babies. Which is it guys? This poll shows one thing and one thing only…actually 2 things. As of now, Huckabee is the closest to Obama in a head to head matchup. Sarah Palin is the most likeable figure by Republicans and Conservatives.
Some people have said that because of this poll, Palin does not have a chance in 2012. Well if that’s the case, then neither does Romney…
August 21st, 2009 at 8:20 am
“Sarah Palin is the most likeable figure by Republicans and Conservatives.”
Until it comes to voting for her for President. Romney beats her against Obama amongst Republicans.
August 21st, 2009 at 8:32 am
235 – Illinois, how is that the case, they both have 74%? I’m assuming you are referring to Obama’s higher numbers against Palin than Romney but if that’s the number you’re relying on to help your cause for Romney…then have a field day but they are pretty damn close to the margin of error. Where did that extra 4% come from anyway?
August 21st, 2009 at 8:49 am
“Romney beats her against Obama amongst Republicans.” Well, only half right, Mrs. Palin does receive the same 74% as Mr. Romney, Mr. Romney just get a few less people to commit to Mr. Obama, he does not win any more Republicans than Mrs. Palin. Furthmore, Mr. Romney does not do as well among Republicans and either Mr. Huckabee and Mr. Gingrich. This kind of reminds me how Mr. Romney spent all his time in Iowa driving Mr. Brownback out of the race, meanwhile, Mr. Huckabee came from behind. Now the Romney camp is spending too much time saying it is ahead of Mrs. Palin while a few other candidates are by-passing both.
Yes Jersey, I may be biased, by it is both funny and sad how Romneyites cry about being mistreated by Huckabeeites while Mrs. Palin has put up with worse. Also, it is funny how Romneyites and their sympathizers yell than Mrs. Palin is not electable when Mr. Romney is not electable either (at least as of now, he is not in the margin of error, Mr. Huckabee is.) Yes, Mr. Romney has room to catch up. He is after all only 2 or 4 points behind Mr. Huckabee, but the internal spell a worse picture when one looks at demographics and favorability ratings. The electablity arguement is not exactly on Mr. Romney’s side. Can he change that? Yes, but he is going to have to do more interviews like he did with Mr. Hannity and he is going to have to close the charisma gap a least a tad.
August 21st, 2009 at 8:51 am
“Where did that extra 4% come from anyway?” These 4 % are willing to give to give Mr. Romney a second chance if he is willing to take. It will be interesting to see.
August 21st, 2009 at 8:55 am
Yes, of course, you have to look at what Obama gets as well as what the Republican gets. How else could one tell the complete picture. You guys were the ones trying to present half the picture, not me.
August 21st, 2009 at 9:00 am
Fine Illinoisguy, but Mr. Romney cannot yet beat Mrs. Palin, he has a chance to convert those 4% to his side, but he has failed to do so, the best he can do is put those 4% in the neutral camp. He has failed to excite them enough to close the deal. So your bragging right over those 4% are rather limited.
August 21st, 2009 at 9:09 am
I don’t think Illinoisgouy has any argument, they both have 74% against Obama and Palin has a near 20% likeabilty gap between herself and Romney. If you combine those numbers then this poll was better for Palin…especially in a primary race. One thing I will concede is that Romney’s numbers have risen since last month where Palin’s have fallen, so if that trend continues over the next 24 to 30 months then Romney will have around 200% of Republican voters on his side…that was a joke.
August 21st, 2009 at 11:40 am
Jersey and OJ, What, what, what?
What does the media treatment of Palin have to do with Huckabee’s (a GOP candidate) actions against Romney (another GOP candidate)?
Nothing as far as I can tell. 2 entirely different things. Besides, I’m not okay with the MSM media treatment of Palin at all. It was obviously terrible.
August 21st, 2009 at 11:42 am
Glad to hear it Martha, to be clear I for one was not blaming Mr. Romney himself for the poor treatment that Mrs. Palin received, but there does seem to be a double standard in some quarters.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Nice spin Martha! I wasn’t talking about similarities in the type of mistreatment. I was talking about the way the supporters handle it and the way they are told by other camps to handle it. Romney people get so upset over the way Huckabee mocked Romney and it wasn’t fair. Yet when Palin people say that she wasn’t treated fairly then the Romney supporters say that that is just the way politics go and to stop whining about it. You do not see a double standard here?
August 21st, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Good point Jersey, it also would not be the first time that a Romneyite took a shot (maybe not the worst shot) at Mrs. Palin’s religion.
August 21st, 2009 at 12:32 pm
That’s true, Ohio. Like I said way earlier though…it is way too early to tell! Ron Paul could be ahead of everybody in 12 months or Jeb Bush. What if Giuliani looks like he will run…then the dynamic will change even more. It’s not worth getting upset over this far out. I wish the Romney supporters would feel the same way.
August 21st, 2009 at 2:19 pm
244 – I don’t know about other people, but mostly I’ve seen some Romney supporters saying Palin herself should stop whining about it, not her supporters. When is the last time you saw Romney complain about how Huckabee acted towards him? I’ve never seen him do that.
August 21st, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Republican have never learned but American people have learned a lot since Obama took office,because they can’t stand for starve,for hungry,for stay home,they need jobs,they need some thing to eat,they need to live with happy,they need the country go prosperity,so America will stand with the right man,the track record leader,the dream of American people,that man is Mr.fixer Mitt Romney,they will never go with the inactive recorder.They have just learned from Mr. Obama good agenda but no ideas to do it,good talking but no experience,loud sound but no starting point,just can talk,easy talk,laughing talk,but can’t do and apologies,flip-flop,throw the problems for other.Mike is a good guy but he is kind of weak leader like John kerry,look when he is talking and some body ask or some thing not good for him, he show the weak immediately in his face,that is not the leadership style,Palin is not a national leader yet,she has not a patient leader,she can’t handle serious problems,she can’t finish just only one term gov,how can she handle the government,no way,too heavy for her,sorry. Just look at Mrs.Clinton,when she lose in IOWA,she was cried.Mitt is the strongest,smartest,integrity,and look presidential,he is the perfect hair,perfect record,perfect resume,perfect family,perfect business,perfect economy,and perfect man for the country,just look at the personal attitude,the way he walk,he talk,he stand,and he seat.Number 211,how can Mike was second in Wyoming by 64.78%? so how much the first one got? is it 100-64.78=35.22 the first got? and how can Mike got 62.25% in second place when Mitt had already got 95%? what is it 100-95=.005% in second place in Utah?
August 21st, 2009 at 4:06 pm
244. Jersey, you know I don’t spin anything. You always say that when you have no come-back.
The problem is the way Huckabee tried to divide the GOP using religion. Romney never whined once. Palin whines all the time. She has had a lot of crap thrown at her, but so did Bush, and he never complained once in 8 years. She does have a victim mentality, and Romney just isn’t built that way.
August 21st, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Sorry #211,I want to clear my word I said about you said Mike is second in Utah,you said in 3rd at Utah with 62.25% by Mike,is not second.
August 21st, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Martha, you are still ignoring my point…that is what I mean by spin. I’m not disagreeing with you about Mitt or Huck or even Sarah…even though I don’t think she whines, but whatever. You are so insufferable. If we ever met I would either hate you or, knowing my track record, fall for you…argh, you are so frustrating!!!
August 21st, 2009 at 5:13 pm
I know you say she has a victim mentality but I have to disagree. I think she realizes that a lot of her fans and the public could see that the MSM mistreated her, so she figured she’d ride that wave. In the long run it may work in her favor. If I was advising her I would tell her to back off now and let the media mistreat her. She is smart to bypass the MSM right now and take her message to her ever building fans on FACEBOOK. The media has to acknowledge her but she doesn’t have to play their games. Do you realize she got more friends, on FACEBOOK, this past week than Romney and Huckabee have combined…that’s total.
August 21st, 2009 at 7:28 pm
FACEBOOK eh? So she’s taking the “Ron Paul Road to Victory(tm)”?
Don’t get me wrong, its impressive that she has so many subscribers, but it hasn’t meant much for other candidates when it comes to votes on election day.
August 21st, 2009 at 8:28 pm
GetReal, I think it helped Obama. He had 2.5 million on election day and Sarah Palin is nearing a million.
August 21st, 2009 at 8:55 pm
254 – Yeah, but lets be honest here. Obama was riding a wave with or without Facebook.
August 21st, 2009 at 10:10 pm
255 – that’s true but you have to wonder the effect he had by being the first real candidate to utilize the web. It obviously wasn’t just FACEBOOK that brought him to victory but it did bring him into everybody’s living room and office and laptop. If that’s not a powerful tool then I do not know what is. Now I am not saying that Palin and FACEBOOK will have the same effect but it definitely cannot hurt her and in this time when she is in between roles it is a good place to keep relevant and get her message out without the venomous filters of the MSM.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:32 am
251. I’ll try not to be insufferable anymore.
August 22nd, 2009 at 2:12 am
256 – I think using FACEBOOK is a good idea for her and can be an effective tool, I just think its a bit silly to be bragging that she has more FACEBOOK friends than her opponents. Then again, I’m sure a couple of my fellow Romney supporters would brag if the situation were reversed but it would still be silly to me.
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:40 am
a few points:
Huckabee is the worst fundraiser in the party, making him the weakest candidate against obama regardless of polls. you simply cannot beat a billion dollar obama machine on the shoe string budget that huckabee can draw.
Huck is also the least vetted of the also-rans. he was the mccain 2000 of the 2008 cycle. the media liked him, thought he was funny and charming, and also thought he had no chance, so they largely ignored his long career as governor, his ethics problems, his huge increases in government and taxes, etc. this time around huck would get the full treatment, and after that, would be lucky to finish in the top 5 or 6 in iowa.
September 24th, 2009 at 10:35 am
[...] 40% [41%] Democrat; 35% [35%] Republican; 25% [24%] Independent. Results from the poll conducted August 14-17 are in brackets. Results from the poll conducted July 15-16 are in parentheses. by Aron Goldman [...]