Think “man/woman of the people” and personal attacks on family by political enemies, emphasis on individual liberty, fiscal discipline, etc.

Her fans don’t love her because she’s a social con, they love her because they see her as a Jacksonian.

Yeah those moose chili commercials really made me think of a war hero that hates central banks.

*looks at Republican favorites*

*shrugs shoulders at Republicans repeated stupidity*

*walks back into wilderness*

With Palin or Huck the party will continue to be a joke. With Romney we will just lose because there are too many mormomhaters, the same reason why Flake will never go as far as he deserves.

thats it.

If the conservatives don’t get behind Romney,and get behind him EARLY– then they/we deserve everything we get.

I answered you, but forgot about the links policy. If my comment doesn’t show up, I provided 3 links to polls that Huckabee didn’t win.

Huckabee would be better than Obama. I don’t like him because he comes off as insincere. The Mormon-bashing and “floating cross” ads, showing a campaign ad to reporters that he’d decided not to air, etc. demonstrates (IMO) his inability to connect with people in a genuine and sincere fashion.

But, I’m only one vote. See you in the primaries!

It’s not good to be noticed.

Sarah Palin: 50% 625 votes

Mitt Romney: 18% 222

Bobby Jindal: 9% 112

Mark Sanford: 7% 87

Newt Gingrich: 7% 85

Tim Pawlenty: 6% 69

Eric Cantor: 3% 40

Mike Huckabee: <1% 11

final votes cast: 1251

NB: among conservatives (Ace of Spades is a conservative blog) I believe there is a growing realization that Sarah Palin is a viable Presidential candidate in 2012 if she runs.

Mitt’s business sense will not be very pertinent by the time Ogabe has nationalized everything…

sven10077 on June 2, 2009 at 6:42 PM

You may be right about that but, at this juncture, Romney would be my pick, for the reasons I cited earlier.

The United States of America requires an “adult” President, and one who was raised with and shares the values, standards, morals and principles, of most Americans.

In is my belief that the next president must completely understand the economics of Capitalism and one who can think and speak, on his feet, and one who is a bona fide Constitutionalist. The last thing the United States needs is a contrarian president with questionable reasoning abilities and dubious roots. Romney fits that bill.

I think Huck’s reputation for being a big-government conservative, fairly or not, will haunt him going forward.

Oh, it’s fair.

Huckamania at 22%? Hardly! The best thing that Huckabee could do in politics right now would be to run against Mark Pryor for the Arkansas Senate seat–he could probably win it, since he’s popular in Arkansas.

I have advocated the same, although I thought he might run against Lincoln. But given her term is up next year and he hasn’t made a sound about running, I guess he isn’t interested, at least not in taking HER on. She is pretty popular with the voters here, although Pryor has the whole family dynasty thing in his favor.

In any event, I tend to agree that Huck’s exposure on TV and radio gives him greater name recognition and therefore is probably more responsible for his higher numbers in these polls than any real understanding of his record or his position on the issues. The same would be said for Mitt and Sarah, who get the lion’s share of the exposure in the MSM as potential 2012 GOP candidates tho. The fact that Mitt’s coverage is largely neutral and Sarah’s is overwhelmingly negative, yet she maintains her competitiveness with other Republicans who aren’t subject to even a fraction of the trashing that she has to endure kind of tells me she’s a stronger candidate than these polls would seem to indicate.

I could have gotten on board with a Mitt/Sarah ticket if it weren’t so probable that Mitt’s camp was responsible for much of the negative coverage of her immediately after the election. I’m not sure I’d like to see her running with someone who could so easily turn on her if it were expedient to do so. She needs to start surrounding herself with people whose first loyalty is to HER.

After Obama’s Muslim love affair, being a Morman, would be be the least of our worries, as we dig our way out of this.

Romney was pilloried in 2008 for his Mormonism, as being part of a “cult” and not being able to win Evangelical votes, but that shouldn’t be a problem in 2012, which is going to be an “it’s the economy, stupid” election. Romney is probably the most articulate and knowlegeable candidate we have on economic issues, and he has been more and more outspoken lately against the Obama Administration’s reckless spending. As the son of the former Governor of Michigan, he can also speak knowledgeably about what needs to be done to revive the auto industry, as opposed to Obama’s caving to the UAW.

In 2008, Romney was also questioned about his conservative credentials after his “moderate” stances as Governor of Massachusetts, but he still has time to solidify his credentials before 2012.

Regarding Sarah Palin, in the long run it’s a GOOD thing for this Levi Johnston / Bristol Palin circus to play itself out NOW, rather than in 2012. Levi Johnston has made a total @$$ of himself on TV, and it’s a sure bet that he will soon be banished from the Palin family, and that Bristol Palin will fall in line behind her mother, and this will be long-since forgotten by 2012. Meanwhile, Palin should get herself re-elected as Governor in 2010, bone up on foreign-policy issues, and be an outspoken advocate for domestic energy development, which is bound to re-surface as an issue, especially if Obama imposes cap-and-trade on CO2.

It’s still VERY early, and another leader could emerge between now and 2012, but Romney does look like a good bet right now. He would probably need to look for a running mate with solid foreign-policy experience.

WHAT HE DID TO ROMNEY IS INEXCUSABLE.

F HIM AND THE HORSE HE RODE IN ON.

I will not vote for any ticket that has even a whiff of Huck.

No way, no how.

If that means 4 more years of BO, so be it.

Sinner on June 3, 2009 at 8:36 AM

AS much as I can not stand Huck or his supporters anti-mormon bigotry I would vote for him over BO.
He does have some good points about him.
He can debate and handle the media and give a good speech.
He will go soft on some issues no doubt but on many he will do fine.

You may refer to his stent on tv and radio as just messing around, but I’m sure that’s what Reagan’s critics also said about his media popularity between 1976 and 1980.

I will not vote for any ticket that has even a whiff of Huck.

No way, no how.

If that means 4 more years of BO, so be it.