Poll: Toughest match-up for Obama in 2012 is … Huckabee
posted at 8:07 pm on April 23, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Seems logical. Who better to champion the small-government vogue that’s sweeping the right than a guy who once supported a federal ban on smoking in the workplace?
Say, wasn’t McCain hypothetically the toughest match-up for Democrats prior to last year’s election?
Huckabee fares the best of the top Republican contenders at this point in time, trailing Obama 49-42.
That margin is basically the same as what Obama won by against John McCain in November. Huckabee also has the best favorability numbers of the Republican quartet at 42/34. Even after running for President last year a quarter of the country doesn’t have an opinion about him one way or the other.
Sarah Palin’s numbers are an interesting conundrum. She easily has the best favorability among Republicans voters, with 76% saying they have a positive opinion of her. The other three range from 60-67 with the party base. But she also has the largest percentage of GOP voters- 21%- who say they would vote for Obama if she ended up being the party nominee. So for the folks in the party who don’t like her that feeling is strong enough they’d rather vote for a Democrat. It adds up to a 12 point deficit for her, 53-41. Overall the electorate has a negative opinion of Palin, 42/49.
Crosstabs here. Interestingly, of the four Republicans included in the poll — Huckabee, Palin, Romney, and Gingrich — the first three pull fully 18 percent of the black vote head-to-head with Obama. (Newt pulls nine.) As for Sarahcuda:
It’s women who are killing her, not men. In fact, only Gingrich does worse among women against The One than she does. As for this:
Not only are her numbers among young voters the worst of the four, but Mitt, Huck, and even Newt are actually net favorable among that group. I don’t know how to explain that except to blame it on Tina Fey for turning her into such a joke among SNL’s target audience. Any other theories?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5
Oh good Lord please no! Huck vs. O in 2012.
A SECOND LOOK AT JUST SHOOTING MYSELF RIGHT NOW.
Ars Moriendi on April 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Please. No more pundits telling us who would be best against O’Bama.
That screwed us up the last time.
We can think for ourselves, thank you very much.
Starlink on April 24, 2009 at 10:38 AM
I don’t understand the women who don’t like Sarah thing. Maybe that’s what she needs to work on this year. It would be nice to see that Levi kid stay home too. As for Huck, the first time I saw him speak all I could think of was Gomer Pyle, Golly!
Kissmygrits on April 24, 2009 at 10:40 AM
Toughest opponent for Obama, as I have said many times before, is a Paul/Buchanan ticket.
Or Meghan McCain! Joking on this second count.
The Dean on April 24, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Women are catty. Plus, the whole abortion position thing. Palin’s negatives are too high, plus all of the bashing from the MSM. Ain’t gonna happen.
marklmail on April 24, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Huckabee is a GAME SHOW HOST.
A joke.
A nitwit.
A mental midget.
Huckabee? Fuc-amee!
jake-the-goose on April 24, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Huckabigot is the only candidate who could lose to Barry by 2012.
Vashta.Nerada on April 24, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Check out the new article in World Magazine on Huckabee. I especially liked the answers he gave on foreign policy:
WORLD: What would you do about Iran right now?
HUCKABEE: We need to remember that the Iranian people are not our enemies; the Iranian leadership is not at all indicative of the total attitude. You may have forgotten this, but on the night of Sept. 11, 2001, when there was dancing in the streets in Arab capitals all around the world, in Tehran they lit candles. The Iranian people do not inherently hate Americans. In fact, there is a deep sense of angst within many Iranians because they had a long-time relationship with the American people. With the takeover of radical Islamic factions, the leadership makes Americans think that that is who they are. I have nothing but contempt for Ahmadinejad—and he’s the puppet, he’s not the power, it’s the ayatollah behind him—but there are a lot of Iranians who would like to see something other than what they live under now.
WORLD: How does that translate into policy?
HUCKABEE: We need to be tough with the leadership and make it clear that they are not going to have nuclear capacity. They’ve made enough threats against Israel and the rest of the free world that that’s not an option. It’s not a matter of playing chicken with them; it’s just a harsh military reality: They’re not going to have nuclear power.
WORLD: If you were president, would you authorize a strike against Iran?
HUCKABEE: It would be a little presumptuous on my part to announce what I would do. I would look at all the options, but I would make sure they didn’t have nuclear capacity.
WORLD: What about Israel and the Palestinians? Any hope there?
HUCKABEE: I’ve been to Israel 10 times; I’ve also been to virtually every other country in the area. This may put me in such a small minority, but I think this two-state solution is nonsense. If we’re trying to get these two warring factions to occupy the same piece of real estate with two political entities layering over each other, that’s absurd. We wouldn’t tolerate it and they’re not going to tolerate it. We shouldn’t try to prolong the sense of that happening. [Israelis] not only have a right to existence, which is a fundamental agreement dating back to the early 1900s in the Balfour Declaration, but a right to a secure homeland. The tiny sliver of real estate they occupy, surrounded by people who are hostile to them, is really a very vulnerable place for them. Hoping for this two-state solution is simply not practical.
WORLD: Any thoughts on Pakistan?
HUCKABEE: I got pilloried by some of the secular press and particularly the “harrumph” crowd in D.C. because in the fall of 2007 I did an article for Foreign Policy and gave a speech in D.C. saying that the real threat was not Iraq but Pakistan, and the next terrorist attack would be conceived and launched there. I was considered an idiot lacking any knowledge of foreign affairs, and now everyone says, “Of course, we all knew this.” If we were to get a package today from Osama bin Laden, it would be postmarked Pakistan.
http://www.worldmag.com/articles/15329
texasconserv on April 24, 2009 at 11:07 AM
After the MM obsessive thread posting of one AP, this is hilarious in a twisted sort of way! Way to get the masses worked up AP! LOL!
First, this is B.S. of the highest. I do not care what it says there is no way this could possibly be true and I refuse to believe it. Something tells me Mitt, Palin, Newt, DeMint, Sandford, or my cat could be the biggest threat.
The man is a socialist. He has more skeletons in his closet than most others that might toss their hats in the ring.
I campaigned for the man during his first term as AR governor. He is soooo not the man I thought he was, and I would campaign like mad to make sure he NEVER got remotely close to POTUS! And those who follow this man like Obama zombies need to take off the rose colored glasses and wise up to all that is Mike! Not to mention his wife!
And if you did not have enough reasons to dislike this man, reflect back to the moves made in West Virginia against Romney. One could assert if Huckahu Akbar had either gotten out of the race, or at least not interfered in W.V., Romney may have been able to take on McCain and we may have not ended up on the verge of certain destruction with Obama as President. Many of us knew Huckahu Akbar needed to get out of the race in order to let Fred, Mitt, or Rudy take on the U.S.S. McCain. Many movers and shakers begged Mike to get out of the race so we would not end up with McCain, but the ego maniac would not remove himself. That is not love of country, or love of those that reside in it! That is love of self and political power tripping!
He is a liar and snake in the grass. And St. Olaf and all those in the past that loved this guy are seriously DERANGED!
freeus on April 24, 2009 at 11:08 AM
I actually think the SNL skits on Palin did not do as much damage as the constant MSM drumbeat aganist her.
Grafted on April 24, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Huckabee talks a lot like a conservative, but he’s soft on illegal aliens and other social issues. He’s a classic RINO.
Gingrich is brilliant and the most conservative, and experienced, of them all. Only a small portion of the population are smart enough to support him. Duncan Hunter has the same problem.
The best chance for conservatives against Obama next time are Jindal, Sanford and Paulenty. It’s strange that none of them are on the list.
orlandocajun on April 24, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Meghan McCain would do better in a Presidential election against Obama than Sarah Palin, because McCain’s views more accurately reflect those of women voters in our country and the centrist nature of our current electorate. I know the Palin groupies will say, “Hsss,” “get lost,” “drop dead,” but nyaaa nyaaa it’s true.
Mister Ghost on April 24, 2009 at 11:22 AM
I can’t stand Huckabee…like his ideas on taxes though.
LtE126 on April 24, 2009 at 11:24 AM
The same 21% that would vote for Obama over anyone else…idiots.
kirkill on April 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Mister Ghost on April 24, 2009 at 11:22 AM
You severely underestimate the intelligence of the Average American Woman.
You severly overestimate the intelligence and depth of Meghan McCain.
kingsjester on April 24, 2009 at 11:29 AM
GREAT! Another Moderate.
PappaMac on April 24, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Translation: She will easily win the GOP nomination if she seeks it.
Anything else in this poll is meaningless. If the economy still sucks in 2012, any Republican will win easily.
Norwegian on April 24, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Screw it. I’m writing in John Bolton’s mustache.
TheUnrepentantGeek on April 24, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Young people are just stupid, is all. They watch Jon Stewart and are dazzled by the journalistic antics over at MSNBC.
joe_doufu on April 24, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Huckabee as President? Gag!!!
GFW on April 24, 2009 at 12:00 PM
It’s a long way until 2012, and nobody should put too much trust in 2012 polls right now–who would have bet on Obama in 2005?
Lots of things could happen between now and 2012. If Obama’s Porkulus doesn’t create enough jobs but brings us high inflation, fiscal-conservative Republicans could take over the House in 2010, and somebody like Gingrich or Romney or Jim DeMint might look good against a lame-duck Obama.
If Obama bungles a foreign-policy crisis (such as the Taliban taking over
PakistanPockeeston), voters might turn toward a national security stalwart, possibly even an outsider like John Bolton or David Petraeus.If there’s a general sense of corruption among Democrats in Congress or the Administration, a Republican with a clean record will look good, including Sarah Palin.
If Obama succeeds in imposing Cap and Trade on carbon emissions, and energy prices go sky-high and cripple the economy, Sarah Palin could campaign on “drill, baby, drill” and repealing Cap and Trade, and win on that issue alone.
Sarah Palin is hurt right NOW by the negative fallout from her bungled interview with Katie Couric, and Levi Johnston selling his soul to the MSM for money. But the election is not now, and Levi Johnston will be long forgotten by 2012, while Sarah Palin will be a second-term Governor with a stronger record than in 2008, and whatever is wrong in 2012 will be blamed on Obama, not Bush.
It’s not clear whether Sarah Palin will be our best candidate in 2012–that will depend on the issues at that time. But we shouldn’t count her out.
McCain won the 2008 primary mostly because of his support for the “surge” in Iraq, and chose Palin because oil prices were sky-high in August, then suddenly banks started failing, and neither Bush nor McCain had a good answer to this issue, and Romney would have been a stronger candidate.
Romney might be a stronger candidate in 2012 than in 2008, because problems with the economy will be blamed on Obama, and Romney will no longer be saddled with the “moderate” positions he took as Governor of Massachusetts.
Who can beat Obama in 2012? Whoever can best address the major issues of that year, and blame it on Obama.
Steve Z on April 24, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Chuck-a-bee would be my least favorite candidate, but I think the poll was correct in the Palin assessment. Women hate her. I don’t know why, they just do. Nothing will stir up a group faster than to mention her name. It’s mind boggeling actually- I think I’m a pretty critical judge of character, and I think she’s great, she has some drawbacks, but so does every politician.
anniekc on April 24, 2009 at 12:25 PM
With the exception of Palin, no candidate involved in the epic failure that was the Republican Presidential selection, nomination, and campaign process will be allowed near the next one. And I would like to inform the GOP gurus in the beltway that if Huckabee is selected, my time and energy and monies will be going to the nominee of the Modern Whig Party.
You betcha!
Mutnodjmet on April 24, 2009 at 12:41 PM
It was bad enough when the last Presidential Election cycle started two years out, but now we have the media driving the next one into public discourse from the get-go. And, as with the last once, the MSM is attempting to pick the GOP’s prime contenders in advance.
But politics turns on a dime, and by the time the 2012 elections are revving up into full high gear, half the contenders the MSM is zooming in on now won’t even be a passing thought. So much can and will happen in just the run up to the mid-terms in 2010 that the only thing once can conclude from this type of polling and news coverage is that the MSM is running out of things to keep their coverage alive and cutting edge, so much so that they have to keep manufacturing news via polling.
KendraWilder on April 24, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Dont want Huckey the used car salesman.
Sultanofsham on April 24, 2009 at 2:35 PM
Okay, so T4P says the PPP poll is not believable. In this poll Palin’s negatives are higher than positives, which isn’t like the results of any other poll I’ve seen. I also have a hard time believing that 21% of real Republicans would choose Obama over any Republican. Perhaps these were Democrats who changed their registration to help nominate McCain.
littleguy on April 24, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Whatever.
No way would I support that guy in the primary.
Sign of the Dollar on April 24, 2009 at 3:27 PM
So, the previous PPP poll also had Palin’s neg higher than her pos, but check this out — in that poll Obama was at 55/35 against Palin. The headlines at that time were of a blowout of epic proportion should the election take place at that time (3/18). Now this latest poll has it Obama 53/41 against Palin!! That means Palin has closed the gap from 20 points to 12 points since the March poll! Hmmmmm, not so “epic” anymore.
littleguy on April 24, 2009 at 3:42 PM
Palin has had no input creating her current image.
McCain sent her on one and only one major interview which was pre recorded and edited by the enemy
Since then, McCain has pretended Palin does not exist, which counts as a negative, and his chihuahua, the junior McCain, has had carte blanche to any MSM venues to take Palin down and redefine the party left
Currently, Palin will gain little favorable publicity because she is not running and the MSM will work like sled dogs to negate her before the next election
If Palin ran again, she would get ad time, and MSM live spots controlled by Palin and not McCain. She is still the strongest contender with the greatest possibility of make or break
Romney is excellent one on one. He cleaned up in Michigan in the primaries. I am still impressed with the comments I heard from blue collars and union workers in favor of Romney
Romney still lives, unlike Rudi, Fred, and McCain because he was the muggee, not mugger during the primaries. Huck lives because he was too dumb to know he was being used to siphon votes from Romney by stoking anti Mormon fears.Huck has been overexposed and documented on FOX but he will be there to trash Romney if nothing else
The MSM fears Palin the most because she is a blank slate. Yes. She will be able to re create her image. Whether she makes the right moves is a guess
Jindal has captured no one. I don’t see a connect but he has four years to think of something.
entagor on April 24, 2009 at 4:02 PM
… and that’s why the pollsters and the media will push for him to be the nominee. Just as they did with McCain.
popularpeoplesfront on April 24, 2009 at 4:48 PM
They don’t assume she’s an idiot. She has to be an idiot to fit the template and keep them feeling heaping helpings of self-worth.
ddrintn on April 24, 2009 at 4:48 PM
No Huckleberry. Period.
old trooper2 on April 24, 2009 at 6:07 PM
I find Huckabee charming……on radio.
That’s it.
AnninCA on April 24, 2009 at 6:56 PM
Gee. Another day. The sun rose in the east. Water is wet. Dogs bark. AllahPundit posts a thread designed to make Sarah Palin look bad. Yawn! Life can be very boring.
bw222 on April 24, 2009 at 9:28 PM
I think you’re letting your preference for Mitt color your perceptions. I don’t buy the whole “stalking horse” theory to begin with. Running for president is too stressful for people to do without hope of a reward. And Fred is not known for working harder than he has to, but was following a bruising schedule towards the end.
And Fred destroyed Huckabee, much worse than Mitt.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on April 24, 2009 at 9:43 PM
Huckabee = 8 years of Obama.
Bluehanky on April 24, 2009 at 9:47 PM
I’m no Huckabee fan, because I saw him pushing the same social populism that the Democrats love. I was glad to see Fred take the wind out of his sails
And the fact that he failed last time will present a considerable obstacle to getting the nomination this time.
That said, I wouldn’t be too quick to dismiss him. He started the last primary as a second-or-third-tier candidate, and nearly walked away with the win. He’s a very good campaigner.
Mitt, for all his other advantages, isn’t.
Regardless, I’m keeping an open mind, but Sarah looks the best so far.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on April 24, 2009 at 9:50 PM
I’ve slammed Huckabee repeatedly on the forum and I live in Arkansas. He is soft on immigration and a little to quick to jump on Hardball with Chris Mathews. He has flaws and I did not and do not appreciate what him and his followers did to Romney
But lest be serious, he is far far away from Obama.
He is very good on on some issue and is the best debater we have. He has serious media skills.
He and he can’t out capaign Mcain(not much of a chore there)
He is good on terror
He is good on Israel
He is pro life
He said the right things about the bailouts
No enviro statism, no national health care
Some of these point might be moot by 2012 but if he is the last guy standing I will vote for him and I’m guessing the hot air crowd will to after beating on him in the primarys.
We should be good and desparate by nov 2012, just look at us now after 100 days
kangjie on April 24, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Sarah failed as part of her team in November. That may present an obstacle as well.
No you have been in the tank for awhile. the polls seem to show how far off you are from other voters re Sarah. This must be a very bitter pill for the HA Palinista faction.
Bradky on April 24, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Obama will decimate her in a debate. Think 40 state win for re-election in a Palin-Obama matchup.
Bradky on April 24, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Are you effing kidding? This is a joke, right? Obama humming and hawing without a teleprompter?? Hell I could debate him.
long_cat on April 25, 2009 at 12:11 AM
Obama is a terrible debater and so was mcain
Did you actually liste to the debates ?
He says absoultey nothing and it takes him 15 minutes to do it.
kangjie on April 25, 2009 at 12:22 AM
You’re not paying attention. She picked up 8 points on Obama in one month in the PPP poll! She is also far and away the most popular with Republicans. There is a long time until 2012 to see what may happen.
littleguy on April 25, 2009 at 12:58 AM
Obviously… we’ll run whomever the Democrats pick for us in the primaries. Just like last time. Wake up people!
Griz on April 25, 2009 at 3:28 AM
Huckabee in 2012? Looks like I’ll be holding my nose again in the voting booth.
This is the best arguement for closed primaries I’ve ever seen.
Texas Nick 77 on April 25, 2009 at 6:10 AM
Actually, when you look at the numbers the poll has a 3.7% plus/minus margin of error. Romney was studiously avoided in the article above, but he does nearly as well. Certainly within the margin of error when compared to Huckabee.
By the time we get to the election though, Huckabee will be unable to run because he will be too easily attacked. He is on TV too much now and saying a lot that can come back to haunt him. The tapes would be sifted through by any opponent who will find plenty to attack him with.
Hawthorne on April 25, 2009 at 9:14 AM
“Choose one:
A) Romney/Pawlenty
B) Romney/Sanford
C) Romney/Jindal
D) Romney/Steele
E) Romney/Petraeus
joncoltonis on April 24, 2009 at 3:06 AM”
————————————
My dream team:
Mitt Romney/Jim DeMint
It is fine to be idealistic and to pick the very best person possible in the primary, but if that person then is not electable with the other half of the country, well, we still LOSE. I LOVE Sarah Palin, but I fear too many lies have been told that the other half will not see through (Besides, she’d make a fabulous Secy of Energy). Jim DeMint, on the other hand, will likely win over the Evangelicals almost as well as she would, because he as a leader is the closest thing we have to the Founding Fathers.
I would also love for DeMint to run with some other wonderful conservative as his VP pick, like Jindal or whomever. But we cannot throw tantrums and stay home like last time, even a few of us make a difference, especially when the Acorns caused a falsely bloated margin already. We’ve got to overcome that Acorn, et al, inflated aspect of the percentage, so we cannot afford to lose a single vote.
The key here must be LIBERTY, which presumes small government. We’ve got to stop trying to push too hard for our social issues (though they are important), if we want to maintain the most important thing, our freedom!
Most of all, we can’t let anyone, not even AP, keep us bickering at each other over religon. As Edmund Burke said, “When evil combines, the good must associate.”
We must put aside our petty differences and look at what matters, and work to put into power those who will preserve our Country, not destroy it, as the left is doing now….
Peggy Snow Cahill on April 25, 2009 at 11:54 AM
If this were any poll other than PPP, I might get worked up but considering it is — nothing to worry about. ;o) However, I would say if my only options in 2012 were Huckabee or Obama, I’d have to vote for moving to Costa Rica.
I think we’ve parsed out before why Palin appears to perform poorly among women. She’s smart, she’s successful, she’s beautiful, she has a wonderful family. This brings out the natural competitive streak in women. We are quite experienced at cannibalizing our own. Sad but true. It doesn’t surprise me that she fares so poorly among blacks either. A woman presents the biggest threat to their historic president, seeing as it’s likely that a woman will be the next “minority” to break that barrier. Further to which, look at Oprah. She had the opportunity to back a woman in the primaries last year, one who I dare say would be doing a MUCH better job than this clown (which is saying quite a lot), and instead she chose The One. If Oprah is at all a yardstick for the black community (and I think it’s safe to say she is), then race trumps gender for a huge majority of black women.
All of that said, I doubt the governor fares as poorly among voters as this poll would seem to indicate. She does have some work to do on the P.R. front in order to persuade lazy voters who rely on sound bytes from the MSM to inform their decisions about candidates, but once she’s done that, I think she will be fine.
NoLeftTurn on April 25, 2009 at 12:31 PM
You want the toughest match against Obama, try me.
mixplix on April 25, 2009 at 9:24 PM
I don’t know about Huckabee being able to beat out Obama, he wasn’t able to beat that other liberal, McCain.
DanaSmiles on April 26, 2009 at 8:59 AM
My you people have short memories. For those who said we need Romney, guess what, it was Romney on McCain’s financial team who told McCain to vote ‘YES’ for the original $750B bailout. Yes, folks, your financial guru wanted that bailout!!! Mike Huckabee has been against every bailout. He doesn’t flipflop like Romney.
I will list for you what qualities we need to beat Obama in 2012:
A good debater
Great communicator (gives good speeches)
Likeable
Conservative
Able to talk about issues that most people understand
Relates to middle and poor income people
Washington outsider
All of this criteria is only met by one person: MIKE HUCKABEE!!! He was the best debater of the Republican candidates, he would hold his own against Obama giving speeches, the young people loved him, he got 48% of the black vote in Arkansas when he ran for Gov….the Blacks love him because he has stood up for them, and not just during an election cycle, and they know it.
For those who say he is soft on illegal immigration…he did not want the children of the illegals to be penalize for what their parents did. He wanted them to be able to compete for college scholarships, BUT they would have to be going through the process to be a citizen first. That’s the part you are not being told. If any other candidate would have been given the circumstances he had in Arkansas, they would have raised taxes too because the state had no money. The Supreme Court of Arkansas mandated him to improve the schools (they were at 49th in the U.S.) He not only improved them, but they were rated in 2007 as 8th in the U.S. The roads were in terrible shape when he took office, and he improved the infrastructure because it was needed badly. He cared more about helping the citizens of Arkansas than worrying about what the other Republican would say about him. That’s the kind of man we want to be our President. A man who cares about all the people in the U.S. A man who won’t worry about the polls to make a decision. He started with a $200M deficit when he took office, and left with a $850M surplus. If you call that being a RINO, I would rather have a RINO than a person like Romney who had liberal healthcare installed in Mass. during his tenure, the first state to accept gay marriage, one of the poorest unemployment statistics compared to all other states, lots of fees (which is just like taxes only another name, and left his roads in pitiful condition. We need a man who lives by his morals and principles…that’s MIKE HUCKABEE!!! Because he has his show, the Republican Party will not be able to lie to the American people about what Mike Huckabee is all about. He didn’t have the money to put out lots of ads explaining the half-truths in the last election. Now people are beginning to know him and they like what they see. His show is the highest rated show on cable every weekend. He beats Beck and Hannity most of the time. If you want to hear the other side in defense of what Huckabee thinks about issues, go on HucksArmy.com. Click on Discussions. Scroll down to the end of the page, and click on Mike Huckabee and the issues. You will hear what really happened during his term as Gov. of Arkansas. Then you make up your mind. Don’t let the elitist Republicans in Wash. D.C. or any of you who cannot imagine this “Hick” becoming President of the U.S. determine what Mike Huckabee did in Arkansas and why. Somebody on this post said he was there in Arkansas when Mike Huckabee was the Gov. Well, all I have to say is if you believe that guy, then you MUST believe the people from Alaska who have put down Sarah Palin too. You see you will always have some people who won’t like the Gov., so can you believe everything they say. No Way!!!
BTW, in 2008, a poll was taken in Arkansas, and Mike Huckabee even then had a 65% approval rating in Arkansas. This is a very Democratic state. Mitt Romney when he left office had a 77% disapproval rating from Mass. Take your pick!!!
VFT on April 26, 2009 at 6:03 PM
After Ache(H)? Even Hucksterbee would be an improvement.
H is continuing the W ‘08 legacy.
I’ve had enough of the HW plan. Even religious bigot Huckabee has to be better.
BKennedy on April 26, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Mike Huckabee never pushed his religion on the citizens of Arkansas and would not do that as President either. He is not a bigot!!! He accepts all religions, but he chooses to be a Christian. He never rejected the Mormon religion, he rejected the flipflopping Romney who is not a trustworthy person because he will change his principles at the drop of a hat or should I say at the drop of a vote!!!
VFT on April 26, 2009 at 8:17 PM
VFT, you must live in a different Arkansas from the one I live in. What infrastructure improvements? You can’t get anywhere in this state in less than two hours. The legislature sat on their asses for so long on the school equality issue that a special session had to be called to address it, at great cost to the taxpayers of this state. Where was Huckabee the great leader then? Shouldn’t he have been leading the charge? And the solution to “fixing the schools”? Consolidating school districts, thereby making it even MORE of a hardship for kids in outlying rural areas to get to school, all those “great new roads” notwithstanding. It’s not unheard of for these kids to spend over two hours a day on the bus. A great number of Arkansans, many of them in education, would get a huge laugh out of your assertion that Huckabee fixed the schools.
Not to put too fine a point on it but Huckster supported scholarships for illegals who signed a letter of intent to become a US citizen, not that they actually had to become citizens before attending college here. The distinction is an important one.
As to taxes, Huckabee raised them over 100 times and left the state with a surplus which to a fiscal conservative is nearly as bad as overspending. They had the opportunity to return it to taxpayers and it never happened. Again, where was Huckabee’s leadership? Why didn’t he pressure the legislature to issue refunds? We are one of the poorest states in the nation and also one of the most highly taxed, and a good number of those taxes saw their origins in the Huckabee administration.
Huckabee doesn’t push his faith or beliefs on others? What about the covenant marriage amendment? What about the law requiring schools to measure the BMI of students? For someone who is supposedly so accepting, he certainly had his nose in the private business of a lot of Arkansans.
NoLeftTurn on April 26, 2009 at 11:41 PM
It is my understanding that Gov. Huckabee told them to give the money back to the people, but he was out of office and had no authority to make that happen. Why don’t you tell the whole truth, NoLeftTurn?
The truckers said Arkansas had some of the worst roads in the U.S. After Gov. Huckabee improved those roads, the truckers rated them some of the best roads in the U.S. Why don’t you tell the whole truth? It isn’t Mike Huckabee’s fault that it takes two hrs to get anywhere.
Yes, Gov. Huckabee took radical action by consolidating the school districts. That wasn’t a popular thing for the people to take, and Bill Clinton said he wouldn’t even have had the courage to do that. But because he did that, the schools and the district was better off. How else do you think that the grades improved so dramatically. I’m sure a lot of parents weren’t happy, but for the benefit of the whole state sometimes changes have to be made.
How did the “marriage amendment” get passed? Didn’t the people or the legislature approve that? I guess the people wanted it or they wouldn’t have overwhelmingly voted for Gov. Huckabee a 2nd term, right?
I’m not sure Mike Huckabee was the Gov. when the legislature was sitting on their a…! I heard that Gov. Clinton left the roads and schools in terrible shape. HE was too concerned about running for President…not about the people in Arkansas! It doesn’t sound like you are a Christian.
Yes, there were a lot of taxes, some of those in answer to the peoples choice about how to pay for infrastructure and good schools. How would you have paid for these obvious needs in your state? Would you just let them continue to get worse like the poor Democrats did before Gov. Huckabee? He had to make hard decisions to help your state. He had to work with a Democratic legislature who would override his veto at every turn. What would you have done better in those circumstances? Not all other Governors had the same situations as Gov. Huckabee. They didn’t have Democrats who nailed his office door shut so he couldn’t work in his office as Gov. Remember the Gov. was arrested and Lt. Gov. Huckabee took over and the Dems were angry about him being a Republican. Remember how he saved the taxpayers lots of money living in a double-wide trailer while the Gov. mansion was being repaired. How many Gov. would have done that? They would have chosen an expensive alternative that would cost the taxpayers much more. Looks like there was a lot of jealousy in your state and apparently not just by some Democrats!!!
VFT on April 27, 2009 at 1:03 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5