Huckabee surges to second in AP national poll, mostly at Fred’s expense

posted at 11:46 am on December 7, 2007 by Allahpundit

That would be the fourth national poll in a row where he has at least sole possession of second. In Rasmussen, he’s first, of course. Mitt still looks like a lock in New Hampshire, though, which would blunt the effect of a Huck upset in Iowa (where they’re neck and neck) and make South Carolina the scene of a showdown for the social conservative. Things aren’t trending Mitt’s way there but we’ll see next week if the speech changed that.

Where does all this leave Fred, though? If he finishes third among social cons behind Huck and Mitt in Iowa, which seems almost certain to be the case, and then Mitt takes New Hampshire, they both roll into South Carolina with a win and momentum under their belt and Fred with … what? Thanks to Huck, he doesn’t have the southern advantage anymore.

Is this … Appomattox?

Mike Huckabee has vaulted from nowhere into second place in the Republican presidential race, riding a burst of support from evangelicals, Southerners and conservatives, a poll showed Friday.

The upsurge by the former Arkansas governor has come largely at the expense of Fred Thompson, according to the national survey by the Associated Press and Ipsos. Thompson has dropped after failing to galvanize the party’s right-wing core as much as some had expected…

The poll showed Giuliani at 26% among Republican and GOP-leaning voters, about where he has been since spring. Huckabee has 18%, 8 percentage points more than in an AP-Ipsos survey a month ago.

Just a month ago in the GOP race, Thompson was in second place with 19%. Along with his 8 percentage point drop in total support since then, his backing from conservatives also has fallen, though his support from evangelicals and Southerners has stayed roughly the same. In all three categories, he now trails Huckabee.

He’s now down to single digits in the new Rasmussen daily national poll, too, and his informal advisor seems warm to the prospect of a Huckabee victory. Says Huck, “I meet all the criteria. I’m conservative, but I think I appeal to a broader set of voters. And I think that people are also looking for someone with whom they can identify.” Exit question: What does he mean by that last line? Identify with as blue collar? Or something else?

Update: Awesome.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Fred or Bust, baby.

I’d rather a democrat win than somebody like Huckabee.

amish on December 7, 2007 at 11:53 AM

Fred’s son has his eye on those campaign contributions. Funnel a few mil to a PAC. Get hired by dad as a, err, “consultant.” Cha-Ching $$$

tommylotto on December 7, 2007 at 11:55 AM

It’s like some horror movie where the monster gets inexorably closer and closer, and the scary music gets louder and louder.

Clark1 on December 7, 2007 at 11:55 AM

Krykee.

Is it Nov. 2008, yet?

locomotivebreath1901 on December 7, 2007 at 11:55 AM

I’d rather a democrat win than somebody like Huckabee.

amish on December 7, 2007 at 11:53 AM

At this point, would anyone notice a difference?

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 11:56 AM

I’d rather a democrat win than somebody like Huckabee.

Dude?

Allahpundit on December 7, 2007 at 11:56 AM

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 11:56 AM

Did I just say that out loud? What’s wrong with me?

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 11:57 AM

Go Fred. Go Dammit Go.

I think Huckabee will have a wipeout as spectacular as his rise as his record gets out. And I think Fred will be the big winner if/when that happens.

TexasDan on December 7, 2007 at 11:58 AM

I’m conservative, but I think I appeal to a broader set of voters.

In other words, he’s a conservative, and he’s a liberal.

C’mon Fred…one more month…bring out the nuke.

MadisonConservative on December 7, 2007 at 11:58 AM

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, TODAY IS PEARL HARBOR DAY. ISN’T THAT A TAD MORE RELEVANT THAN SHMUCKABEE IS? WE NEED TO REMEMBER AND HONOR THE DEAD AND THINK BACK TO THE DAYS WHEN EVEN A SOCIALIST DEMOCRAT LIKE F.D.R. HAD BALLS.

Joey1974 on December 7, 2007 at 11:59 AM

Says Huck, “I meet all the criteria. I’m conservative, but I think I appeal to a broader set of voters. And I think that people are also looking for someone with whom they can identify.” Exit question: What does he mean by that last line? Identify with as blue collar? Or something else?

Bigots?

ReubenJCogburn on December 7, 2007 at 12:00 PM

I take it back Fredheads.

Seriously, Huck is like Fred on steroids when it comes to negatives, especially in the corruption department.

Come on Fred, why are you letting that Bush-league (in so many ways) Arkansas governor steamroll you?

BKennedy on December 7, 2007 at 12:00 PM

I think Huckabee will have a wipeout as spectacular as his rise as his record gets out. And I think Fred will be the big winner if/when that happens.

I wonder who’s going to start pointing out his record in ads first? My guess is Romney, if the speech doesn’t give him a big bump.

Slublog on December 7, 2007 at 12:01 PM

I’d rather a democrat win than somebody like Huckabee.

amish on December 7, 2007 at 11:53 AM

I fully agree. If Huck wins, the GOP will think it doesn’t need a real conservative to win the White House, and move further left. If a Dem wins, the GOP will reminded how much it misses conservatism, as will the Republican voter base. It’s best to suffer for a few years and remember why a lot of us are sick of Bush. We don’t want amnesty shills, bailers, Dubai dealers, etc.

MadisonConservative on December 7, 2007 at 12:01 PM

Joey1974 on December 7, 2007 at 11:59 AM

A day that will live in infamy.

I fear we have done nothing more than waken a sleeping giant, and filled it with a terrible resolve.

When this war is over, the Japanese language will only be spoken in hell.

Hey, Pearl Harbour didn’t work ,so we got you with VCRs!

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 12:02 PM

Joey1974 on December 7, 2007 at 11:59 AM

Being obnoxious doesn’t help.

MadisonConservative on December 7, 2007 at 12:02 PM

http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/nvrep8-703.html
Huck is second in nevada up 21% from the last poll.

What does he mean by that last line? Identify with as blue collar? Or something else?

It could be a number of things, maybe they can identify with someone who has been consistently pro life, unlike Giuliani and Romney, or it could be more nefarious, they can identify with someone who is not morman like Mitt Romney. But I’m betting its the former.

Complete7 on December 7, 2007 at 12:02 PM

I wonder who’s going to start pointing out his record in ads first?

What record? Why are they going to hit him on besides Dumond? He’s already tacked right on immigration; if he’s challenged on that, he simply says that Mitt had his awakening on abortion and now it’s his turn. He’s already adopted the Fair Tax as a way of insulating himself against his big government policies.

I think a lot of evangelicals are looking for reasons to like Huckabee. As long as he gives them something semi-plausible, they’re good to go.

Allahpundit on December 7, 2007 at 12:03 PM

I think a lot of evangelicals are looking for reasons to like Huckabee. As long as he gives them something semi-plausible, they’re good to go.

Allahpundit on December 7, 2007 at 12:03 PM

I’m evangelical, and I don’t like him.

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 12:04 PM

I think a lot of evangelicals are looking for reasons to like Huckabee. As long as he gives them something semi-plausible, they’re good to go.

I don’t know. I’ve talked to people in my church who were inclined to support Huckabee, but had second thoughts once they heard about the high taxes and the Dumond thing.

Slublog on December 7, 2007 at 12:06 PM

amish on December 7, 2007 at 11:53 AM

Heck, if Huck gets it I might become a Dem. There have gotta be some conservatives in the Dem ranks, and if we are gonna push a liberal to the top of the Republican party, then count me out.

But, as I’ve noted before, Fred is inevitable, so no worries.

VolMagic on December 7, 2007 at 12:07 PM

Different take…..the atheists think the evangelicals are a movement, me, a not-Christian enough Christian, think they are noise. When the majority of voters pull the curtain, and stares at the ballot, it won’t be divine intervention that guides the pencil.

Limerick on December 7, 2007 at 12:09 PM

But, as I’ve noted before, Fred is inevitable, so no worries.

VolMagic on December 7, 2007 at 12:07 PM

If only.

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 12:10 PM

We have a long way to go, folks. For us Fred Heads, that’s a good thing. The mud and dug-up skeletons haven’t begun to be flung.

Just a month ago, Huck looked like a perennial second-tier candidate. Now look at him. I just don’t understand how, if it’s true, that former Fred supporters would ever jump ship to Huckabee’s side. The only thing I can think of is the Evangelical leader’s support of Huck sways many supporters.

meh…I have to remember, the leader in the polls has the most to lose.

JetBoy on December 7, 2007 at 12:11 PM

I heard this a long time ago and it sure fits now. PARTY TRUMPS PERSON, That fits for President as well as for Congress.

KBird on December 7, 2007 at 12:11 PM

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 12:10 PM

AP and other newsjunkies live and die by daily polling.
Fact: Most people decide who they will vote for less than a week before they vote.
Fact: Huckabee, while a likeable guy, is a (modern)liberal
Fact: I have said a bunch that Fred is inevitable
Fact: You say something enough times and it becomes true

Trust me friend. No worries.

VolMagic on December 7, 2007 at 12:16 PM

Anyone else predicting a small uptick for Rudy and McCain driven by people sick of this faith-based campaigning?

sublime on December 7, 2007 at 12:18 PM

sublime on December 7, 2007 at 12:18 PM

amen

Limerick on December 7, 2007 at 12:19 PM

PARTY TRUMPS PERSON

And anything trumps Hillary.

saint kansas on December 7, 2007 at 12:23 PM

Trust me friend. No worries.

VolMagic on December 7, 2007 at 12:16 PM

Excellent; I feel better already!

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 12:26 PM

MadisonConservative on December 7, 2007 at 12:01 PM

I agree. I am a conservative first, a Republican second. As I am not a social con I can tolerate Rudy who is at least good on defense and taxes. I can live with Mitt who is at least willing to please and I’d love Fred to get with.

What I can’t stand for is a guy like Huck narrowing the conservative movement down to one or two issues and moving the country’s center of political gravity to the left on everything else.

It’s the worst of all worlds. At least with a Dem, we’d have something to fight and unify us around as we rebuild and rearm.

Drew on December 7, 2007 at 12:27 PM

Bryan gets in the quip of the day: “I liked Romney’s speech quite a bit, but Hugh is making out like it was the St. Crispin’s Day speech as delivered by Winston Churchill in the Sistine Chapel on the first Christmas with Nazi bombers overhead.”

Good one Bryan.

peski on December 7, 2007 at 12:31 PM

Of course, a power that is not human is powering Huck’s rise, so we’d all better get in line behind God’s Anointed Candidate. As if.

ReubenJCogburn on December 7, 2007 at 12:33 PM

Who is most likely to give Nancy Pelosi nightmares?

That’s who I want.

saint kansas on December 7, 2007 at 12:36 PM

If Huck wins, the GOP will think it doesn’t need a real conservative to win the White House, and move further left. If a Dem wins, the GOP will reminded how much it misses conservatism, as will the Republican voter base. It’s best to suffer for a few years and remember why a lot of us are sick of Bush. We don’t want amnesty shills, bailers, Dubai dealers, etc.

And Hillary wont give us this? I understand that a lot you people do not care for Huck, but given the choice between the two, I would chose Huck. Sorry, the two are not the same. Hillary is far worse. Also the damage of a Hillary campaign will last for much longer than a few years. What kind of judges do you think she will put on the bench with a rubber stamp of a Democrat controlled house?

If you don’t want to make this choice on election day, everyone needs to get off their but and vote in the primary elections.

jman on December 7, 2007 at 12:38 PM

Sigh. Please, please, evangelical friends–we hear you, we get it. You’ve made your point and you got our attention. You’re still a force to be reckoned with, and we need you. Now PLEASE pick someone other than Huckabee, and maybe we can work together again! I’m even ready to take John McCain if he’s the only one we can all accept to some degree. Just don’t throw the economy and national security under the church bus.

aero on December 7, 2007 at 12:38 PM

What kind of judges do you think she will put on the bench

But what kind of judges will Huck’s soul allow him to put on the bench?

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 12:39 PM

Who is most likely to give Nancy Pelosi nightmares?

He-Man?

amish on December 7, 2007 at 12:43 PM

We’ve got to stop Huckabee.

Bad Candy on December 7, 2007 at 12:55 PM

Whoever we nominate, he better be good, because I’m starting to get the feeling that we might be up against this. I disagree with him on most issues, but he’s damn good at this.

Big S on December 7, 2007 at 12:59 PM

And Hillary wont give us this?

jman on December 7, 2007 at 12:38 PM

Yes, she will. We expect that from the Democrats. We don’t expect it from the Republicans, and we should never have to expect it from them.

MadisonConservative on December 7, 2007 at 1:05 PM

One thing I’ve learned from Huckabee is that Republican candidates I thought there was no way I could accept suddenly look a whole lot more acceptable by comparison.

aero on December 7, 2007 at 1:05 PM

Of course, a power that is not human is powering Huck’s rise, so we’d all better get in line behind God’s Anointed Candidate. As if.

ReubenJCogburn on December 7, 2007 at 12:33 PM

Vote for Huck or go to Hell!

FloatingRock on December 7, 2007 at 1:07 PM

One thing I’ve learned from Huckabee is that Republican candidates I thought there was no way I could accept suddenly look a whole lot more acceptable by comparison.

aero on December 7, 2007 at 1:05 PM

New campaign slogan for (insert GOP candidate name here):

At least I’m not Huckabee!

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 1:08 PM

I just wish South Park would give us their input on the Rep candidates. Then we would all know how to vote.

Limerick on December 7, 2007 at 1:10 PM

I fully agree. If Huck wins, the GOP will think it doesn’t need a real conservative to win the White House, and move further left. If a Dem wins, the GOP will reminded how much it misses conservatism, as will the Republican voter base. It’s best to suffer for a few years and remember why a lot of us are sick of Bush. We don’t want amnesty shills, bailers, Dubai dealers, etc.

MadisonConservative on December 7, 2007 at 12:01 PM

What happened to all of the rhetoric that we ought to all support “moderate conservatives” over democrats because they will keep people like Hillary from holding power? I don’t mean to attribute that argument to you, madison, but that’s all I heard when refusing to support Rudy two months ago. “Who’d you rather have, Rudy or Hillary?”

What makes great sense, is a congress that actually fights with the president to prevent spending, unlike we had under Bush until recently. What we have had is president signing massive spending bills, and a congress writing them because they were both in the same party and couldn’t argue with each other.

samuelrylander on December 7, 2007 at 1:13 PM

I blame Chuck Norris for all of this.

Maybe Fred! sees how the front runner gets the pile on, and he’s using his “strategery” to pull a rabbit out of the hat at the last second to avoid it.

Yeah, I know. Probably not.

matd on December 7, 2007 at 1:14 PM

On a day like this, we would look back and Obama would say…I didn’t vote for it.
Murtha would say we attacked first
Dean would say, we brought it on ourselves
Hillary would wait for the polls before commenting on CNN
Pelosi would say, don’t engage we’ll just lose
Reid would be closing some land deal in Hawaii, closing just before the bombing
And someone, somewhere would be upset that FDR didn’t mention atheists.
*
This is a day that will live in infamy, and all the more so because what our men so gallantly and brutally gave their life for, is being taken apart, ripped apart from within.
*
A day in infamy, because FDR would never be selected or allowed to represent the Democrats of today.
*
A day in infamy, because we are reminded that there is a common enemy, but the Democrats refuse to help us defend ourselves.

right2bright on December 7, 2007 at 1:27 PM

A day in infamy, because FDR would never be selected or allowed to represent the Democrats of today.

right2bright on December 7, 2007 at 1:27 PM

Sure he would! I think Dems today would gladly overlook FDR’s hawkishness in order to have more of his glorious, glorious socialism. I mean, FDR is STILL managing to spend taxpayer dollars, and he’s been dead for over 60 years! His programs are still redistributing income and growing exponentially every year, and will continue to do so after all of us are dead and gone. What power that man had! He’s the liberals’/socialists’ perfect hero. Nobody even realized he was a socialist at the time because he was freaking brilliant. Yeah, they’d vote for him.

aero on December 7, 2007 at 1:35 PM

And Hillary wont give us this?

jman on December 7, 2007 at 12:38 PM

Yes, she will, and as a result it should re-unite the conservative movement.

If Huck wins the presidency we may wind up with two liberal parties, (one of them evangelical), and real conservatives will be left to create or adopt a new conservative party. A Huck presidency, (or a Rudy, IMO), may be the catalyst that leads to a multi-party system in America. If evangelicals take over the Republican Party the disaffected members of the coalition will simply have to go elsewhere. I think that the same holds true in reverse with a Rudy presidency. We might end up with two liberal parties, one of them authoritarian, and the religious right will have to find an alternative party.

That’s why I support Fred even though he has some faults, and to a lesser extent Romney. Both of them are doing their level best to appeal to all of the Republican constituencies, unlike Rudy and Huck. I mean, I realize that Rudy and Huck have been pandering, but I don’t think people trust them. Mitt’s been pandering as well, but speaking for myself, I find him much more trustworthy than Rudy and Huck.

Not that it matter. I don’t think any of this will ever be more than theory because I don’t think that the appeal of either Rudy or Huck is broad enough that either can win the White House. I think the conservative movement may survive even if they get the nomination because conservatives will reunite against a Democrat in the White House.

If Rudy/Huck or Huck/Rudy is the ticket in ’08 I have no idea what will happen. In my opinion it will basically be the worst possible combination and I will vote against it. An authoritarian candidate and God’s candidate, banning guns and cigarettes and fatty foods and maybe alcohol and God knows what else. No thanks.

FloatingRock on December 7, 2007 at 1:38 PM

Huckatithe is scary as any Pastor should be for office of the Presidency.

His goodness and mercy has to much of a Robin Hood flare for me.

Speakup on December 7, 2007 at 1:49 PM

His goodness and mercy has to much of a Robin Hood flare for me.

Speakup on December 7, 2007 at 1:49 PM

Actually, I’d like an Errol Flynn-style Robin hood as president… He’d stand over our enemies, laugh at them, then swing down, kick their @sses, then laugh at them some more. Then have a big feast with lots of ale.

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 1:59 PM

Vote for Huck or go to Hell!
FloatingRock on December 7, 2007 at 1:07 PM

Be positive:

Vote for Huck, and go to Heaven !!!

tommylotto on December 7, 2007 at 2:01 PM

tommylotto on December 7, 2007 at 2:01 PM

: )

FloatingRock on December 7, 2007 at 2:05 PM

Be positive:

Vote for Huck, and go to Heaven !!!

tommylotto on December 7, 2007 at 2:01 PM

Sorry, Huck’s God-given clemency powers only work on rapists/murderers. They get to go to Heaven, because he can feel their innocence in his soul. His soul.

ReubenJCogburn on December 7, 2007 at 2:27 PM

Being obnoxious doesn’t help.

MadisonConservative on December 7, 2007 at 12:02 PM

Squeaky wheel gets the grease

Joey1974 on December 7, 2007 at 2:29 PM

An authoritarian candidate and God’s candidate, banning guns and cigarettes and fatty foods and maybe alcohol and God knows what else. No thanks.

FloatingRock on December 7, 2007 at 1:38 PM

A little paranoid now, aren’t we?

Big S on December 7, 2007 at 3:04 PM

Actually, I’d like an Errol Flynn-style Robin hood as president… He’d stand over our enemies, laugh at them, then swing down, kick their @sses, then laugh at them some more. Then have a big feast with lots of ale.

Frozen Tex on December 7, 2007 at 1:59 PM

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of Robin Hood, Men in Tights kind of movie analogy.
More like a true Democrat.

Speakup on December 7, 2007 at 3:09 PM

A little paranoid now, aren’t we?

Big S on December 7, 2007 at 3:04 PM

Ah, good insult. You just shot my entire argument all to pieces with that one. /sarc

FloatingRock on December 7, 2007 at 3:10 PM

I’d prefer Hillary or Obama over Huckabee.

At least we would have no illusions nor be deceived about their goals, motivations, and methods.

Besides, shouldn’t Bill Clinton have been reason enough not to elect another President from Arkansas for 100 years?

Harpazo on December 7, 2007 at 3:17 PM

Don’t worry, Huck is a huckster that will get called out. His position on illegals and pardoned criminals will catch up to him.

Mitt is the best man in the hunt. Rudy wants my guns, McCain wants amnesty, and Tanc & Hunter are a little too angry. Ron Paul would be a hoot, but the hangover would be a downer. Fred has a good line, but he never ran anything big or had to make a payroll. He needs a little more executive experience.

Mitt is the only one left.

saiga on December 7, 2007 at 3:29 PM

Who ARE these people answering these polls?

Over half of the Republicans I’ve talked to are for Fred Thompson.

spacemonkey on December 7, 2007 at 3:40 PM

Sorry, but I just do not heart Huckabee.

It’s strange, because in my travels around the blogosphere I’m just not seeing anywhere near the level of support for Huck that the polls indicate. Not even close.

He’s gonna fall.

techno_barbarian on December 7, 2007 at 3:43 PM

Ron Paul will get more votes than Fred Thompson.

SoulGlo on December 7, 2007 at 4:51 PM

I seriously wish we could all unite around Ron Paul, would make everything so much easier. Maybe we could work on the foreign policy thing a little, but seriously, he is the most conservative candidate by far.

muyoso on December 7, 2007 at 6:57 PM

SoulGlo on December 7, 2007 at 4:51 PM
muyoso on December 7, 2007 at 6:57 PM

All your Ron Paul are belong to us.

VolMagic on December 7, 2007 at 7:24 PM

VolMagic on December 7, 2007 at 7:24 PM

I have a list too. ;)

Connie on December 7, 2007 at 8:42 PM