Poll: Toughest match-up for Obama in 2012 is … Huckabee
posted at 8:07 pm on April 23, 2009 by Allahpundit
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?
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 2 3 4 5 Next »
I’m fairly certain that by 2012 Meghan’s personal nominee will be… Bono. Oh, wait, he’s English, right? Does that matter? Oh my goodness, ‘The View’ is on, gotta go!
CaptFlood on April 23, 2009 at 10:35 PM
WTF? I leave for two minutes and someone’s tagteaming?
HornetSting on April 23, 2009 at 10:36 PM
If it’s Obama v. Palin, I’m voting for Obama.
Look, I like Obama and I don’t think he’s doing that bad of a job all things considered. I voted for him and I don’t regret it. I think Romney could be a better president, but I don’t know that for certain.
I’d never pull the lever for Palin. Or McCain, for that matter.
It may seem mental to you. I don’t vote for people just because they have a (D) or an (R) next to their name. Isn’t that crazy?
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 10:36 PM
I’m very pro-life and a life member of the NRA. I’d vote Romney. Besides just liking him better, it’s also a numbers game. I think Palin would turn off more women than Mitt would anti-Mormon bigots.
davenp35 on April 23, 2009 at 10:36 PM
DavenP, where is your proof that she doesn’t have the intellectual capability of Gingrich and Romney? And who wants a bunch of intellectuals anyway.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 9:47 PM
Please don’t insult my intelligence with that statement. Palin doesn’t come close to having the intellect that Newt or Mitt has.
I’m sorry to say it, but after reading some of the pro Palin comments here tonight, you guys are starting to sound like the KoolAid drinkers and fawning idiots who drool all over the Boy King with your closed minded remarks.
The election is 4 years off people, get a grip and keep an open mind for God’s sake.
Knucklehead on April 23, 2009 at 10:33 PM
——————————————–
I still want to know what proof you have? Examples, examples, examples.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 10:39 PM
When Israel gets nuked or America gets bombed, you can glory in your bipartisanship.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 10:40 PM
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 10:36 PM
Why do you think Obama is doing a good job?
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 10:40 PM
Ha! On that note, I’m off to bed.
Buy Danish on April 23, 2009 at 10:42 PM
Right, because the terrorists are too afraid to attack when a Republican is President.
Hey, who was President on 9/11?
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 10:43 PM
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Exits polls showed that 20% of self-proclaimed conservatives voted for Obama in Nov. 2008 and basically threw the election to Obama despite the rise in African-American voters and the youth vote.
People like Proud Rino cannot be dismissed.
Ronald Reagan faced the same problem. That was why he had to choose Daddy Bush for his VP. I think if Sarah gets that far she will have to do the same thing and I think a lot of that 20% may come back home like it did with Reagan-Bush.
technopeasant on April 23, 2009 at 10:45 PM
SECOND LOOK AT HUCKABEE.
Allahpundit on April 23, 2009 at 8:11 PM
Did that already don’t bother offering a third just a waste of time.
heshtesh on April 23, 2009 at 10:47 PM
If terrorists attack America when a Republican is president, they get chased off, punished and obliterated.
If terrorists attack America when Obama is president, they’ll get an apology letter saying how America is a bad country and how it deserves this fate and how sorry he is that the terrorist had to put themselves in this position.
When a Republican is president, Israel won’t get nuked, that’s for sure.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 10:48 PM
I don’t understand why you don’t like the Governor but like the narcissistic twat we have in office. This is the same man who did everything the Chicago establishment wanted him to do. He never burned any bridges because he didn’t care. He was a good old boy…….
Governor Palin on the other hand risked her livelihood to report unethical behavior because she thought it was the right thing to do…
Don’t confuse them… Governor Palin joined politics for the right reasons….. Obama joined politics for his own ambitions.
TimeTraveler on April 23, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Why are the Republicans again? They look like the worst specimens, even worse then the rabid left.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 10:49 PM
They would have attacked regardless of who the President was back then. Now, because of what Bush has done, they just might think twice about attacking here. Europe is a much more likely target. Also, who do you think so many radical Middle Eastern groups favored Obama over McCain. Modern Dems have been dangerously weak when it comes to national security. 9-11 probably happened because of Clinton’s decision to weaken our HUMINT and military capabilities.
davenp35 on April 23, 2009 at 10:49 PM
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Exits polls showed that 20% of self-proclaimed conservatives voted for Obama in Nov. 2008 and basically threw the election to Obama despite the rise in African-American voters and the youth vote.
People like Proud Rino cannot be dismissed.
Ronald Reagan faced the same problem. That was why he had to choose Daddy Bush for his VP. I think if Sarah gets that far she will have to do the same thing and I think a lot of that 20% may come back home like it did with Reagan-Bush.
technopeasant on April 23, 2009 at 10:45 PM
=========================================
I completely agree. What was the reason for the 20% self-proclaimed’s vote for Obama instead of McCain? I think because the choice was the pretty much the same and I also think the self-proclaimed were actually independents.
I also think that McCain had a terrible campaign staff and the RNC underestimated the Obama political machine and community agitators (ACORN). ACORN is our biggest threat and needs to be dismantled from every level.
The RNC needs to start fighting ACORN now at every level and make them spend all that government money on legal fees.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Oh puhleeeze give it a rest with your proof and your examples that you desperately need. Have you ever read anything that Newt has written? Any of his books? The man has a better grasp on history and foreign policy than Palin will ever have.
No offense, but you’re really kidding yourself if you think Sarah Palin can overcome the baggage she’s carrying right now. The average American is not thinking about pro-life issues and they more than likely won’t in 2012. They’re too busy watching their 401k’s disappear, hoping they’re still employed, etc, etc. etc.
Knucklehead on April 23, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Just ideologically inconsistent. You like the job Obama is doing (debt as far as the eye can see) but think Romney could do a better job. I guess it’s either a hair/smile issue or another resume-lover.
My mind is open. The “Anyone But Palin!!!!” crowd has the closed minds.
As for intellect, Bush I had a much more impressive pedigree and educational and governmental service background than did Reagan. Pffffffffffffft.
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 10:53 PM
Precisement. That is why they’ll identify more with a middle-class person who’s facing the same issues they are, not some investment bankers. Like it or not, people will spit on investment bankers.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 10:55 PM
No, Palin certainly entered politics because of her own ambition, and Obama certainly had some selfless reasons to enter politics.
In both cases, there was probably a little bit of both.
I don’t dislike Palin as a person, either. I like her, and I like Obama. I think they’re both good people who believe in very different things.
I just see the world differently from Governor Palin. I respect her but I don’t think she should be President.
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 10:56 PM
2012 looms ever closer. If I had to pick from the available candidates right this minute, I’d go with a ‘Romney/Palin’ ticket. Romney brings some serious executive and business chops to the party, plus he’s got the ‘Presidential Hair’ thing nailed down pat. Palin also has executive skills (despite the elite’s dismissal of same,) and her inclusion might sway the 40% of southern evangelicals who when polled indicated that they would not vote for a Mormon.
Plus the woman is smokin’ hot and apparently can shoot like Annie-Bleeping-Oakley. Me like-ee!
CaptFlood on April 23, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Selfless reasons? Obama? I just snorted into my cup. He’s the biggest narcissist the world has ever seen.
Of course, Sarah has ambitions. Ambition doesn’t preclude good purpose. The thing is she has fought every step of the way and made her career on those principles. He on the other hand made some powerful friends, used them when he needed them and threw them under the bus. That’s his MO.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Not only NO, but HELL NO! If it’s Romney, then I would hope his running mate will be someone that can NOT be blamed for his defeat. I would prefer a Romney/Pawlenty ticket. We’re told those socons/evangelicals/pro-lifers don’t matter anyway. I want to see the GOP win without them.
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:01 PM
Well if one ideology was ‘right,’ then it’d be easy, wouldn’t it? If the solution was always, “CUT TAXES,” then we’d have zero taxes and everything would be perfect. If different solutions require different answers – and maybe the same principles don’t always work for every problem – then it’s much, much harder.
I have no idea what the right solutions for the future will be, so I look for judgment and temperament. For me, it’s about the right person, not the right ideology. But I will freely admit that I am idiosyncratic in terms of my voting.
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 11:03 PM
I am very aware of Newt’s intelligence and think he has some very valid ideas, but his time has passed. He also has his own baggage that will be brought out by the MSM if he would get the nomination, which he won’t.
Why do you think Sarah isn’t smart or intelligent? Because of what you saw in the MSM or because she hasn’t published a book or written a dissertation for an upper crust magazine. She has written editorials for the WSJ on energy and reviews and writes legislation as the Governor of Alaska. Have you read any of those? Have you also noticed how much America is beginning to distrust intellectuals and elitists like Newt and Romney? The “good old boy network” in both parties.
This economy hasn’t even hit bottom yet and the people are getting more and more disenfranchised and distrustful. Strategically and historically, this is the perfect time for the “anti-establishment” candidate.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Oh you snorted into your cup? Well, now I’ve changed my mind.
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 11:04 PM
The problem with this theory is that Fred didn’t go after Romney. He went after Huckabee, and probably stopped him from getting the nomination. So the theory that Romney lost because Fred “tag teamed” with McCain is unsupportable.
Romney had a lot of advantages, but Huckabee was a far better campaigner. Romney lost in 2008, and he’s a lock to lose in 2012 if he tries again.
But by all means let him try. It’s early still. Just don’t be surprised at the outcome.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on April 23, 2009 at 11:05 PM
Oh, you have a mind to change?
Don’t bother. keep it glued to the hope and change stuff.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Not only NO, but HELL NO! If it’s Romney, then I would hope his running mate will be someone that can NOT be blamed for his defeat. I would prefer a Romney/Pawlenty ticket. We’re told those socons/evangelicals/pro-lifers don’t matter anyway. I want to see the GOP win without them.
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:01 PM
———————————————————-
They can’t. If you don’t want the socons, the evangelicals and the pro-lifers then you are going to need to start your own party. And you are going to have to be aware that the MSM paints us all as evangelicals and racists, even when most of us aren’t.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:06 PM
So you don’t like her for the presidency because you don’t think she’s experienced or qualified to be president…
I respect your reasonable opinion, however don’t you think you should wait until the 2012 primaries to see if Palin actually does have the gravitas to be president?
TimeTraveler on April 23, 2009 at 11:07 PM
What is the actual proof that will make the RINO’s believe that she is Presidential material. What would she have to do?
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Knucklehead on April 23, 2009 at 10:52 PM
If truth be told McCain was forced to choose Sarah Palin not because he preferred her company but because he did not want to have to look over his shoulder every day of the fall campaign.
The decision was probably decided on this conversation:
McCain: “I know the base won’t let me have Joe (Lieberman).”
Advisor: John, quite honestly they’re not in your corner and I can’t guarantee they ever will in the GOTV; sure they’ll show up to vote but you need much more than that John to win; John, it’s not going to happen unless you get the base on your side and then you’ve got the Hillary vote who are really ticked off at Obama. Sure some of them will return to the fold but not all. It sure would be nice if we could get some of them, especially the ones who really loathe Obama.”
McCain: “What do you think I should do?”
Advisor: “John, you’ll have to make the final decision, but you’ve got to address the base issue-that’s imperative.”
McCain: “I didn’t want to seriously consider her but it looks like I might have to go with Palin. AB (Culverhouse) told me she was high-risk but also had a tremendous upside. But she does get me what I need-the support of the base, volunteers to GOTV and hopefuilly more money, and maybe a Hillary voter or two.
Advisor: “I wish I could point you in a different direction John, but at this late date you have to go with whom we vetted.
McCain: “I know.”
Now Knucklehead if you think that the base is irrelevant you have another thing coming. The reason why Sarah Palin is so attractive as a candidate because you don’t have to worry about the base voting for her, volunteering for her and raising boatloads of coin for her. Sarah will never have to look over her shoudler like McCain had to do. And Knucklehead that is a big deal.
technopeasant on April 23, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Give up conservative philosophy and adopt wishy-washy me- too-ism.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 11:11 PM
I know. I’m being sarcastic toward the calls for “moderation”. I think though it’s time to put the final nail in that “moderate” crap’s coffin. Two fairly centrist candidates on the GOP ticket in 2012 will do the trick.
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Proud Rino is an Obama voter. If the inexperienced, unqualified Obama had enough gravitas in 2008, he’ll have even more in 2012.
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:13 PM
No friggin way. The guy reeks too much of RINO perfume. Will not associate.
Coronagold on April 23, 2009 at 11:14 PM
I would think that the two would go hand in hand. I like some Democrats, at least their public selves, but I could never vote for them for anything.
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Become a Democrat, and start criticizing Republicans for being out of touch. She would instantly become reasonable and intellectual.
Of course, then she wouldn’t be worth having….
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on April 23, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Give up conservative philosophy and adopt wishy-washy me- too-ism.
promachus on April 23, 2009 at 11:11 PM
—————————————————–
Exactly! It’s I want my cake and I want to eat it too. You can’t have values and principles if you live a life of self-centeredness. Doesn’t work that way. I think we can all live within a party that believes in small government and yet will defend this nation with honor and go to bat for her people when necessary. Sarah Palin is a centrist when looking at her legislative record in Alaska, people just don’t want to spend the time doing their research.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:18 PM
I could be convinced. I’m not saying it’s impossible. But she’s got a long way to go in my eyes. The experience/qualification issues aren’t hugely important to me.
It’s hard to say. It doesn’t have to be bipartisanship, but I’d like to see her more respectful of the opposition’s views. Or at least show some understanding of those views.
I’d like to see her not make so many excuses for things that happen. Has she ever said anything was her fault in the campaign? Why not?
I’d like her to not get into snits with a 19 yr old high school drop out. I’d like her to be the kind of person that can take a personal slight and just let it go.
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 11:19 PM
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:11 PM
sorry for not getting the sarcasm, I had to leave the thread for a bit.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Fair enough. I respectfully disagree. I think we needed FDR when we had him and I think we needed Reagan when we had him, and I don’t think those views are incompatible.
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 11:21 PM
If the Democrats, MSM, GOP Establishment and the Hatefilled Left didn’t believe Sarah Palin is presidential material we would not have heard another thing about her after November 5th… She is the real deal and if she runs I’m 99% sure she’ll get my vote!
CCRWM on April 23, 2009 at 11:22 PM
I have one.
The women I’ve talked to are mostly conservative, middle aged business owners and voted for Repubs the last several elections, except this one.
They said they decided to vote for BHO when SP winked ;) during the VP debate. Oh, and they didn’t like her accent!
OkieDoc on April 23, 2009 at 11:23 PM
OkieDoc on April 23, 2009 at 11:23 PM
And don’t forget white guilt especially among older females who came up during the civil rights struggles and still remember how badly blacks were discriminated against.
technopeasant on April 23, 2009 at 11:25 PM
LOL…I get tickled sometimes at the warm affection for the late Ronald Reagan now. I am old enough to remember how utterly despised the man was by so many. Almost as despised as Sarah Palin, and for many of the same reasons.
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:27 PM
Way to go Huckabee. Must be that he is able to define himself on his show rather than having the media and his opponents define him.
Keep up the good work Huck.
texasconserv on April 23, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Older white females who grew up during the civil rights struggles are the most sexist of all. A lot of them are envy-ridden, too. They worked and protested for to get my generation to burn our bras and grow beta-males, and a lot of us realized that we like our boys to be alpha’s and we want to wear Victoria’s Secret.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Proud Rino on April 23, 2009 at 11:19 PM
“more respectful of the oppositions views.”
You mean like the “I Won” POTUS, who does invite the GOP to dinner at the White House, “listens,” then accepts no input into actual governance?
What’s the last time she brought up the Trig Truther nonsense?
It doesn’t get much more personal of a slight than being accused of lying about the birth of your son. I think she’s let that go pretty quickly, if you ask me.
cs89 on April 23, 2009 at 11:33 PM
She has always reacted with grace to all of the crap slung at her. I would have lost it by now if I were her.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:34 PM
ddrintn on April 23, 2009 at 11:27 PM
Exactly.
I’m not saying Palin is Reagan, but it does help to take the long view and do things for the right reason. “Oh no, the polls are slipping!” is not a governing philosophy.
The long view will be kind to W, also, IMO.
cs89 on April 23, 2009 at 11:35 PM
And herein lies your problem. I posted something negative against Palin, so that automatically makes me a moron in your eyes because I’m not going to sit here and agree with you. I voted for McCain/Palin and I donated the max that I could when McCain chose her, the first time in my life I’ve ever given money to anyones campaign.
And if you didn’t see what I posted before, I’ll say it again. Four years is a long way off and I’m keeping an open mind and I think you should too. God only knows what happens to any of these Republicans in that amount of time.
Get a grip for petes sake and quit beating up everyone who doesn’t toe the line when it comes to Sarah Palin.
Knucklehead on April 23, 2009 at 11:36 PM
Start a new paty with this leader:
Long-shot PA Senate candidate Larry Murphy (R) on Rush: “Rush Limbaugh is a racist, he’s a cancer to the Republican Party and he should be excised.”
LOL.
getalife on April 23, 2009 at 9:34 PM
Would that be in the same vain you are a cancer on this site.
heshtesh on April 23, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Knuckehead on April 23, 2009 at 11:36 PM
I was only responding to that one post not your others, about the average American not concerned about pro-life issues and only being concerned about the 401K…
The point I was trying to make: before you worry about branching out and expanding your appeal you have to make sure of your base. I was talking in terms of political philosophy and not in terms of insulting your perspective of what might happen in 2012.
I don’t see people, including you, as morons; I see you as an intelligent poster or you wouldn’t be at HA.
technopeasant on April 23, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Well I’m that older while female you’re talking about, and your entire statement is BS.
Knucklehead on April 23, 2009 at 11:44 PM
John Ziegler answers those questions in his film, “Media Malpractice: How Obama was Elected and Palin was Targeted.” It is highly recommended viewing for anyone interested in learning the truth about the 2008 election.
It is only 2009 and Sarah has been keeping a low profile up in Alaska for the most part. Once the SarahPac monies start rolling in, Sarah will be able to mount an effective PR campaign and change the hearts and minds of many who were manipulated by the MSM. Most Americans only know the MSM’s negative narrative about Sarah at present.
In Alaska where the citizens know her best, Sarah continues to have high approval ratings in spite of the MSM and non-stop attacks by her enemies (Democrats & Republicans alike).
sarahpalinfan99 on April 23, 2009 at 11:52 PM
Okay so you are one of those women….I was having a little fun, but honestly, you don’t know anyone in your generation that is like that? I have been verbally taken to task by women 10 to 20 years older than me because I am “not a feminist”. Mainly because I am pro-life and believe in traditional values.
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:53 PM
A ‘Romney/Palin’ ticket would bring the oft-sparring Mormon/Evangelical camps together, then Romney could appoint a big, handsome Agnostic as Secretary of State to round out the bill and further display the inclusionary nature of our administration.
I grudgingly accept…
The whole team would support secure borders, small government, a strong military, and an eventual abolishment of the welfare state, PLUS I’d probably have to spend long hours advising Ms. Palin on, you know, statecraft and such…
CaptFlood on April 23, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Say, wasn’t McCain hypothetically the toughest match-up for Democrats prior to last year’s election?
How do you know he wasn’t?
Patterico on April 23, 2009 at 11:58 PM
shomegirl on April 23, 2009 at 11:53 PM
The white guilt that I was referring to was the kind my mother had. She voted mostly conservative but I know she probably would have voted for Obama.
White guilt is a phenomenon that few want to admit but according to Shelby Steele, the author of White Guilt, is highly relevant in the votes of intellectuals and elitists and people that went through the civil rights struggles.
shomegirl I wish it weren’t true but I learned a long time ago you cannot deny reality.
But one of the reasons I am such a strong supporter of Sarah Palin is that she does not subscribe to white guilt and never would.
Any RINO who does is an instant loser in 2012 as far as I’m concerned.
technopeasant on April 23, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Ironic isn’t it the preacher versus the Messiah.
Any guesses on who wins that contest?
Tim Pancoast on April 24, 2009 at 12:00 AM
Have you been totally blinded by the politically correct view of the sexes? She’s beautiful and sexy and most conservative men with a pulse melt when she talks and winks. And she’s less popular with women than men? Well, duh.
Daggett on April 24, 2009 at 12:03 AM
I am 44 years old and I know the importance of the civil rights movement. I was taught in school (not at home) that skin color didn’t make a difference and so for me it doesn’t. I waged many battles with my parents over their racist views.
As for the guilt, I understand who you are talking about. My son’s teachers in private school, who are in the civil rights generation closed down school studies and watched the inauguration and wept in front of their students. I understand the emotion and don’t belittle it, but I don’t think leftover guilt has any room in this time. We need to move on and judge people for who they are, not their skin color.
shomegirl on April 24, 2009 at 12:11 AM
shomegirl on April 24, 2009 at 12:11 AM
A prime example of white guilt happened on October 13th, 2008 in Minnesota that ended all hope that the McCain-Palin ticket could win.
Here is how it happened. A man in a townhall meeting expressed concern about Obama and was suspicious of his intentions.
John McCain piped up and said: “Senator Obama is a good family man and citizen; you have nothing to be scared of if Senator Obama becomes President.”
Obama didn’t have to spend the miillions he did trying to legitimize himself with the American people if he only knew that McCain would do that for him.
Don’t tell me that white guilt doesn’t have any impact on fortunes. McCain basically gave away the election out of a deep feeling of white guilt.
technopeasant on April 24, 2009 at 12:19 AM
You may have posted this with a chuckle, but it’s alot closer to the truth than most will admit.
Those beta-males have been producing the Perez’s of the world.
For me, I’d much rather picturing my CIC wearing a VS thong than Hilly in granny panties….
And it is
IronicProphetic isn’t it the preacher versus theMessiahfalse Christ.FIFY
OkieDoc on April 24, 2009 at 12:21 AM
Seriously?!?
SECOND LOOK AT MASOCHISM!
SkinnerVic on April 24, 2009 at 12:45 AM
Antici-pointment.
juanito on April 24, 2009 at 12:45 AM
technopeasant on April 24, 2009 at 12:19 AM
it wasn’t so much white quilt as John is as progressive as Obama
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 12:55 AM
Seeing Huckabee, I’m reminded of prot saying, “I’m from K-PAX!”.
Kralizec on April 24, 2009 at 1:45 AM
In what universe? Certainly not this one.
docdave on April 24, 2009 at 2:21 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
Do Not Want.
j0 on April 24, 2009 at 3:21 AM
The polls predicting Hillary vs. Guiliani would agree with this.
(…..I mean, honestly, folks.
Three more years here…)
Hawkins1701 on April 24, 2009 at 4:11 AM
Second verse.. same as the first.
CC
CapedConservative on April 24, 2009 at 5:24 AM
Not Crazy, just weak. You have no idea what you believe, you stand for nothing. Obama and McCain have clearly different visions on how government should be run and you went for the euro-socialist.
Daemonocracy on April 24, 2009 at 6:59 AM
Huckabee?? ugh
I prefer Romney or Gingrich and feel Palin could be VP material. She has too many who hate her to be the Presidential nominee. I dont think she can overcome the negative press.
becki51758 on April 24, 2009 at 7:27 AM
FALSE. In the NH debates Fred tag teamed with McCain against Mitt, not Huck.
Meanwhile Huck never stopped whining about how Mitt was born with a silver spoon while he was just a po boy who didn’t even have a spoon. And that’s a fact, Jack.
Buy Danish on April 24, 2009 at 8:00 AM
So we get socialism either way. Great.
rightwingprof on April 24, 2009 at 8:11 AM
Hate to say I told you so. Wait till the non-fox watchers see him in a debate. Bye Bye Barry. Tick Tick Tick
marklmail on April 24, 2009 at 8:40 AM
If Huck is the “best” against Obama, the MSM will start pounding him. I don’t hear any incoming yet.
littleguy on April 24, 2009 at 8:46 AM
mitt in 2012! the only thing the open minded msm can rag on him about is his religion which should be a non-issue.
anna on April 24, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Sarah’s getting hurt by women’s issues, I would imagine.
AnninCA on April 24, 2009 at 9:15 AM
More importantly, you have a liberal polling firm like PPP coming up with a 53% job approval rating for the One? Holy crap.
besser tot als rot on April 24, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Sarah isn’t getting hurt by anything. Only the people that say they won’t vote for her. It is still a secret ballot. Who knows what goes on in that voting booth. We still have four long years, but Sarah is getting all the money.
The feminist movement has long fizzled out to an angry bunch of women that just want everyone else to abort their own children. That’s all they have to offer. They aren’t relevant anymore.
BetseyRoss on April 24, 2009 at 9:53 AM
How about his implementation of ObamaCare, his raising of taxes (“fees”), and his attacks on the Boy Scouts?
besser tot als rot on April 24, 2009 at 9:54 AM
Huck?
Nope. Won’t happen.
John Boehner ’12!
JetBoy on April 24, 2009 at 9:56 AM
Absolutely, the revisionist history with regard to Reagan is really distasteful. His approval ratings were not exactly high during his second term, and there was serious talk of impeachment. In fact, a book just came out discussing right wing criticism of Reagan with regard to the USSR. He’s had a tremendous historical makeover.
But that’s not new. Truman and Eisenhower were both despised leaving office, and now they’re both (correctly) considered among our finest presidents.
Well, I was responding to the person who said I was crazy. In response to you, who called me weak – I don’t think it’s weak to believe that different policy goals work at different times. If you’d rather stick to your principles blindly even when they’re clearly not working, that’s not strength. That’s fundamentalism.
Proud Rino on April 24, 2009 at 9:57 AM
“Gonna build me a mountain” out of this mole hill.
Allahpundit reminds readers how to interpret whilst feigning himself above propagandizing techniques that affect his own style.
PERCEPTION
maverick muse on April 24, 2009 at 9:59 AM
I wish it was legal to take bets between HotAir users. I would give you odds and CLEAN UP when Huck crushes Barry.
marklmail on April 24, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Gov. Palin’s defense fund is up and running. This is the official fund. I hope we can help one of our own.
http://www.thealaskafundtrust.com/
Clyde5445 on April 24, 2009 at 10:07 AM
I known that as a consistent protestant I can easily say…
I don’t like Huck.
I might be leaning Constitution party now.
shick on April 24, 2009 at 10:10 AM
You’ll have plenty of opportunities on InTrade. Right now you can get better than 2-1 odds for any GOP candidate in 2012. Picking Huck for the nomination before Iowa should provide even better returns.
dedalus on April 24, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Women don’t like Palin because GENERALLY women don’t like PRETTY successful women. It’s a jealousy thing and it’s definitely not a new phenomenon. I’ve seen it in the workplace for decades. I can say this because I AM a woman and I’ve seen it first hand.
This country things it’s come so far to elect a black man as POTUS, but yet people are still too scared to have a woman as POTUS or even VPOTUS.
As for me, I will support the GOP candidate (whomever it shall be) whole-heartedly. For those who are say they’re going to dig in their heels and only vote for a “TRUE” conservative – look how 2008 turned out. I’ll do my moaning and complaining about any McCain-types well in advance of the primaries.
Oink on April 24, 2009 at 10:12 AM
I will give you that. Huck is very articulate, quick and off-the-cuff. He’s the anti-Obama in that regard.
Oink on April 24, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Very true. That’s why so many women like Hillary. She’s kind of a hosebeast.
But Palin is pretty, feminine, and very successful (at a relatively young age), consequently, a lot of women assume she’s an idiot and they don’t like her.
Proud Rino on April 24, 2009 at 10:16 AM
You might as well say you like Obama more than Huckabee because we all better be “for” the GOP nominee or else it will be POTUS Obama again in 2012. PROMISE.
Oink on April 24, 2009 at 10:16 AM
The problem with Huckabee as a Presidential candidate is that social conservative issues don’t have the same pull they used to have, and his flirtation with the “fair tax” nonsense puts him in the same company as Ron Paul as a economic nutcase. Huckabee does have time to get back to his real roots as a conservative populist though, and he still could be the best of the bunch in 2012.
starfleet_dude on April 24, 2009 at 10:27 AM
So name one Republican you voted for and why ?
Every time I hear someone say this I think ‘stupid’ or ‘liar’
i.e if a person had that even tempermant and respected other peoples view but was still pro life pro gun anti gay mariage etc etc
straight down the line conservative, my guess is you wouldn’t vote for him/her no matter who ran against him/her.
kangjie on April 24, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Sexist assumptions like this don’t help Republicans, really, they don’t.
starfleet_dude on April 24, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Why is everyone allowing the press to pick our next candidate – AGAIN?
vapig on April 24, 2009 at 10:35 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »