Gallup poll of Republicans: Romney 26, Palin 21, Huckabee 19
posted at 4:30 pm on July 16, 2009 by Allahpundit
Within the margin of error, as these early polls of Republican frontrunners always are. Interestingly, while Sarahcuda’s favorable rating among Republicans remains dramatically higher than either Mitt’s or Huck’s (partly due to the fact that she’s much better known), she can’t put any daylight between herself and them as a choice for the nomination. And then there’s this:
On the plus side, she hasn’t really lost — or gained — any ground with Americans since last fall. On the minus side, you can imagine the Huckabee attack ad already: She’s unelectable.
Question: If both Romney and Palin announce that they’re running, does Huck drop out and play kingmaker instead? He’d have an outside shot to win a head-to-head race with Romney on the strength of the “anyone but Mitt” vote from evangelicals and “true conservatives.” He’d have an outside shot to win a head-to-head race with Palin on the strength of the “anyone but Sarah” vote from centrists. But what shot does he have to win a three-way race when the “anyone but Mitts” will probably break for Palin and the “anyone but Sarahs” will probably break for Romney? The smart move, I’d think, would be to stay out and sell his endorsement to one of the other two candidates, possibly in exchange for the VP slot. He can do more for Mitt than he can for Palin by giving him the Christian seal of approval, but maybe that prospect is reason enough for the ‘Cuda to recruit him and keep him on her side. Could he suppress his disdain for Romney even in return for a spot on the ticket, though? And could Mitt tolerate the idea of working with him for four years in return for winning the nomination? Magic eightball says: Unlikely.
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 Next »
The cool thing about Palin right now is that she isn’t telling anyone what she has in mind. She just said that she would help Conservatives for the 2010 elections. It’s pure speculation that she is going to run.
The only reason she is out there is because she loves her state, country, and family. She is doing this for all of them. She hates what Obama is doing and will be fighting him and his policies. So far, she is the only politian doing this. So far, she is the only politian that the Obots are trashing.
BetseyRoss on July 16, 2009 at 4:57 PM
How any conservative could support Mitt “MittCare” Romney is beyond me.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/16/us/16hospital.html
ihasurnominashun on July 16, 2009 at 4:57 PM
She’s not inevitable; however, she is super awesome.
jimmy2shoes on July 16, 2009 at 4:57 PM
What does that mean to the general election? You’ll vote for Obama? Stay home? Then you deserve to pay 59% tax.
Ronnie on July 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Isn’t mitt the flip flopper divisive with the grassroots?
TimeTraveler on July 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM
RuPaul exists to provide hilarity.
Period.
bluelightbrigade on July 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Why is he fantastic again? Is it because he has so much “conservative” cred with the boondoggle that is RomneyCare (now known as ObamaCare)? Or was it the economic prowess he showed when he and the rest of the chuckleheads on the GOP primary debate stages (save one) didn’t see the impending economic crash coming?
If the GOP is stupid enough to nominate RINO beltway hack Mitt Romney, we deserve two terms of Obamanation.
Rae on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Well, her favorability rating is higher than Romney’s, among Republicans. Romney’s obviously too divisive.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Isn’t that the real point of this post/thread?
bluelightbrigade on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Palin has the stench of failure now.
Barring a major personal or family medical issue, I can see no excuse for her quitting the governorship.
Frankly, I find it troublesome how most conservatives have been so quick to give her a free pass.
I certainly won’t be supporting any campaigns that would make her the front-runner for the GOP nomination.
The Ugly American on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Palin’s fiscal instincts will be all the rage in about 6 months.
Amadeus on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
I really hate Huckabee, his anti-LDS stances have really turned me off. About the only “R” I hate more than Huck is Ron Paul.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
I know Huck has an issue with the mormon thing, but were there that many evangelicals who wouldn’t vote for Romney because of it?
If so, perhaps they’d change their minds after four years of
the devilObamathevastlane on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Time for the GOP Version of Hillary vs Obama
BRING IT ON.
TimeTraveler on July 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Just what I said when McCain sealed the nomination. All the whining by GOPers about “Shamnesty” and “I won’t vote” and “I’m staying home”….even the “I’ll hold my nose and vote McCain”.
And that’s all after he picked the darling Sarah Palin.
The GOP needs a lot of work.
JetBoy on July 16, 2009 at 5:00 PM
He’s got my vote. He saved my soul, tackling the nation wouldn’t challenge him at all.
jimmy2shoes on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
RUDY!!!!
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
I’d rather have my nuts cut off, fried up and fed to me than vote for either Ron Paul or Huck.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
These kinds of responses don’t surprise me since you are obviously a devil worshiper.
TimeTraveler on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
For the last time, we are not the Democrats. Name one nominee from our party in the last 50 years who has not been a known national figure. From Nixon to Bush II, all of our candidates were somehow involved in national elections, prior to being our nominee.
The Dems are a different story. People like Carter, Clinton and Obama can emerge from nowhere to capture the nomination in their process, but it’s not likely to happen in ours.
Like it or not, it will be one of these 3 figures that will be our nominee.
yogi41 on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
In 2012, that will look like a massive step in the right direction.
Ronnie on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Not in the least. You confuse having the actual balls to stand up against Obama and the media as divisive.
Can you name anything she’s done or said that you view as divisive?
darwin on July 16, 2009 at 4:57 PM
I’m saying that there are way too many republicans and independents that would not vote for her and there is no way in h-ll a democrat would so do the math.
I like her but she couldn’t win. At least, not as she stands today.
txag92 on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
As with most critisism of Palin, there’s always a “but” attached. Mitt ran for President, so did Huckabee and has a show on FoxNews. Palin was in the campaign at the latest stages, but on the national stage for a shorter time than Huck or Mitt.
I don’t say that to tear down Mitt or Huck, eating our own is not my gig. But why is there always an excuse when it comes to the truth when Palin is concerned. If Mitt had the highest favorable ratings, I doubt there would be a “but” attached. Because there shouldn’t be.
Hog Wild on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
So which of those winners will you be supporting? Mitt, Huck or Newt? ROFL
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Not anymore I don’t.
Anyone who doesn’t yet get it by now isn’t going to regardless of what anyone says.
Hollowpoint on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
I like Ron Paul.
I hate Huck.
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
A few weeks ago wasn’t Alluh touting Sanford? Great call!!!
I am sure Mitt will be in the final 3 somewhere.
Daniels or someone like him also in the final 3.
Palin is she wants it, in the final 3.
This notion that Christians will split between Palin and Huckabee is… well idiotic. But Alluh is an atheist so what would he know about the Christian vote?
jmell7 on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Mitt doesn’t need to worry about the Mormon issue this time around. By the time Obama gets done ruining the economy, voters will seek Mitt’s economic expertise, and Obama’s kowtowing to Muslims will make Mormonism seem tame by comparison.
The Gallup poll has an interesting comparison between now and February 2008:
Romney:
Feb. 2008: 34% Fav / 46% Unfav / 20% No Opinion
July 2009: 37% Fav / 29% Unfav / 34% No Opinion
Huckabee:
Feb. 2008: 41% Fav / 38% Unfav / 21% No Opinion
July 2009: 42% Fav / 23% Unfav / 34% No Opinion
For both Romney and Huckabee, their negatives have dropped sharply, with most of the shift going to neutrality, without a significant uptick in favorable opinions.
It’s still very early, but if the shift from negative to neutrality continues, voters rebelling against Obama’s overspending will probably shift toward Romney more than either Huckabee or Palin, who remains a polarizing figure (people either love her or hate her).
I totally agree. Huckabee would be more useful as a conservative voice in the Senate than on Fox News, and this is a winnable seat for him. He can be rather erratic as a Presidential candidate, and he siphons off Evangelical votes from possible winning candidates. The Evangelical voters need to shift toward a coalition of fiscal conservatives and foreign-policy hawks that can win an election a la Ronald Reagan.
Huckabee should not be a king-maker, but let Romney, Palin, and any other potential candidates (Jindal, Gingrich, Jeb Bush?) win on the issues.
Steve Z on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Maybe in the party , but not among the voters..
the_nile on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Nice. I like seeing two people I could happily vote for out front while the Huckster languishes in third place.
thecountofincognito on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
T Paw 2012?
Has a nice ring to it.
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Romney’s economic background (head of Bain & Co.) and record of governing (Olympics, Mass.) fit very nicely with what America is really looking for. A responsible, level-headed individual who understands economics and can get things done without turning the world upside down.
I’m surprised no one is mentioning a Romney/Palin ticket. I do not believe Palin is electable for POTUS, but after Biden, VP is a slamdunk. So, if Romney were smart, he would reach out to Palin ASAP and promise her the VP slot – and shore up the strong conservatives / evangelicals. Romney brings in the moderates and RINOs and Palin brings in the conservative base. I’ll take it.
bigdubs on July 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Isn’t mitt the flip flopper divisive with the grassroots?
TimeTraveler on July 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM
If you’d read my previous posts, I said none of the above.
txag92 on July 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Hail Satan.
*tugs magic underwear*
The Ugly American on July 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM
I’d support Newt anytime. I’m all for “Contract With America 2″. The current group of losers in congress need to be sent home with their tales between their legs.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Ahh Shucksabee’s poll numbers are better than Mitt Retread and the Thrilla from Wasilla in that his favorable/unfavorable is the best in the lineup with so far to go.
CMonster on July 16, 2009 at 5:04 PM
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM
I doubt Newt’s running though. He always says maybe and then when its time to enter the race…
thecountofincognito on July 16, 2009 at 5:04 PM
It’s 3.5 years away, these polls mean NOTHING now and except for Palin, I hope we can find better to run than Mitt or Huck.
Jeff from WI on July 16, 2009 at 5:04 PM
+1 hahaha
gatorboy on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Jeb Bush 2012!!!!
The one thing that would make Dems puke more than Palin is seeing another Bush in the White House. That’s why I like it.
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Harry C Alford
Chris_Balsz on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Only a charismatic, polarizing figure has any chance of winning in 2012. That ain’t Mitt. If he’s the nominee (and I wouldn’t be surprised if he is), he’ll be creeeeaaaaaamed.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Mitt Romney.
Thanks for asking.
The Ugly American on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Oh Dear God No!!!! Not another BUSH!
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Nice
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Thaddeus McCotter 2012!
modifiedcontent on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Now, don’t go bringing Obama into this.
jimmy2shoes on July 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Yes!!!
Bush 3!!!
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:06 PM
Anyone but Powell or Meghan McCain!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WhatsRight on July 16, 2009 at 5:06 PM
CMonster on July 16, 2009 at 5:04 PM
He’s a tv show host on a popular network now, lots of people like him. When it comes down to who would you vote for, though, he’s in third.
thecountofincognito on July 16, 2009 at 5:06 PM
More like eighth for me
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM
It’s gonna be Sarah if she wants it. She’s gonna hit the ground running for conservative candidates across the country, at all levels of gubment and will cash in all those IOU’s. Question is…will it be 2012 or 2016. Hope to see her in Ohio supporting John Kasich for governor!
ohiorebel on July 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Not a Paulite (or whatever the term is), but when it comes to domestic issues, which current politician has a more classic liberal positions? What is wrong with his positions here (sans foreign policy)?
WashJeff on July 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Agree
Nelsen on July 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM
The only difference between Meghan McCain and Paris Hilton is that Paris actually has had sex. Meghan is still looking for someone with a video camera to date.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Minus: Voted for GM bailout.
PLus: Likes the Pogues and Shane Macgowan.
WashJeff on July 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM
The GOP has this knack of nominating the ‘next person in line’ which would mean Romney….but maybe they will prove me wrong in 2012?
cmsinaz on July 16, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Hear, Hear!
:]
Its going to take more than policy to defeat Obama in 2012. It’s going to take someone with charisma as well (although not just charisma…this IS the GOP, mind you…).
Pawlenty, Mitt, Huck, et al. just don’t have it. Rather, they have a really nice “Meh…I don’t give a damn” factor among the base.
bluelightbrigade on July 16, 2009 at 5:08 PM
My father said the same thing last election cycle, and McCain came from behind to get nominated. /sigh
Please, not again…
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Loser to John McCain, for crying out loud. Don’t talk to me about “stench of failure”.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM
I’m with you there…yikes!
cmsinaz on July 16, 2009 at 5:10 PM
THey really aren’t Republicans anyhow, they’re er ah..rectal orafices
Jeff from WI on July 16, 2009 at 5:10 PM
Right now, I’d say Romney has a good chance of being Bob Dole v. 2.0.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Nothing. It’s just, lets be honest about him: He’s largely relegated to “boob” status, and so are his supporters/cult.
&& it’s probably because of his OTHER ideas, and his “get out of Iraq now” stance…which made him a useful idiot to the press.
He’s an anti-semite, and I resent that in any human being…especially in a politician.
A lot of people agree w/ him on Dom Pol, but that’s just not good enough.
bluelightbrigade on July 16, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Mitt can be on her economic team (only). Huckabee can be press secretary.
SouthernGent on July 16, 2009 at 5:13 PM
What does that have to do with anything. Bush lost an election. Reagan lost an election. No one normal puts winning streaks at the top of their issues list.
Ronnie on July 16, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Huckabee has been defending Palin on almost every Fox show.
Sue on July 16, 2009 at 5:13 PM
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM
McCain was next in line, and unfortunately that’s usually how it goes. Palin certainly has a decent shot but I hope you can bring yourself to vote for Romney should he manage to cinch the nomination because four more years of Obama is too much to ask of anyone.
thecountofincognito on July 16, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Ronald Reagan….”loser” to Gerald Ford.
And we all know what a big failure The Gipper turned out to be.
The Ugly American on July 16, 2009 at 5:14 PM
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Would Palin play the part of Ross Perot in your scenario?
thecountofincognito on July 16, 2009 at 5:14 PM
How can you “Sans Foreign Policy” on him? That guy would be a foreign policy nightmare. Even bumbling Biden is better than Ron Paul on Foreign Policy. He could be the golden boy on domestic issues, but he’s still unelectable due to his rank ignorance on world issues.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:14 PM
Isn’t Palin done? I thought I heard that somewhere.
jmell7 on July 16, 2009 at 5:14 PM
SARAHCUDA FAVORABLE RATING AMONG REPUBLICANS REMAIN DRAMATICALLY HIGHER THAN EITHER MITT’S OR HUCK’S (PARTLY DUE TO THE FACT THAT SHE IS BETTER KNOWN)SHE CAN’T PUT ANY DAYLIGHT BETWEEN HERSELF AND THEM AS A CHOICE FOR THE NOMINATION:
Here is why I reject this entire premise:
1)This poll was of Republicans and Republican independents who by their attachment to the GOP would know the major players in the party. These people are NOT Obamatrons, drones or clueless people that Jay Leno used to interview on the street
2)Both Mitt and Huck ran active lengthy campaigns during the 2008 primary season while Sarah Palin did not. Yes, Sarah ran as VP in a two month window but to claim that Mitt and Huck are not known as well as Palin is imply disingenuous. Perhaps they are known too well.
3)Huck has his own TV program on Fox News while the GOP establishment is touting Romney as the ‘next in line’ and the candidate of choice. In addition Romney frequently appears on TV cable programs and Sunday morning news shows while Palin has made hardly any voluntary appearances in the media in the last 7-8 months. Among the GOP Romney is as well known as Palin. If Palin is better known that Huck the gap is marginal at best.
4)Sarah has been virtually on hiatus from national politics for the last 7 and 1/2 months except for a two week excurstion into NY state in the middle of June.
5)And on July 3rd Palin resigned which was predicted by many pundits and commentators would send her favorables plunging among Republicans. The concern from the Romney and Huckabee camps is not that they are not as well known as Palin is but that THEIR MESSAGE IS NOT GETTING THROUGH TO THE PRIMARY VOTERS AS HER MESSAGE IS APPARENTLY DOING RIGHT NOW and despite the hubbub surrounding the resignation Palin appears to be as popular as evern among members of her own party.
technopeasant on July 16, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Bucking to be her VP already?
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:15 PM
At the risk of being scorched beyond all recognition, I just have to ask of my fellow Hot Airians: Really? Do you really want to nominate Sarah Palin to run for President against Barry O in 2012?
I don’t.
Jaibones on July 16, 2009 at 5:15 PM
In a nutshell, no pun intended, it is the messenger, not the message (sans foreign policy).
WashJeff on July 16, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Hey, look! A shark!
Jaibones on July 16, 2009 at 5:16 PM
“Stench of failure” wasn’t my term. It was Ugly American’s; take it up with him/her.
Of course I would; but like last time that won’t be enough to elect another cardboard candidate.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:16 PM
@WashJeff (about Thad McCotter) “Minus: Voted for GM bailout.”
He’s from Michigan, so he did not have much choice. He’s consistently voted against every other bailout.
His “vote for GM bailout” is actually a plus; it proves he’s responsive to the voters he represents, but more importantly, McCotter understands the importance of a manufacturing base to the economy. Listen how he frames the issues and his arguments around things like GM! The guy’s a genius and exactly what the Republican party needs now.
modifiedcontent on July 16, 2009 at 5:16 PM
No.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Got room for one more?
*jumps into pyre*
The Ugly American on July 16, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Given the the Presidents primary responsibility is to defend the nation, you are quite right. I wish there were more presentable politicians that had sensible foreign policy ideas\positions, but had the balls to discuss, for example, getting rid of the department of education.
WashJeff on July 16, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Why not? Because you’re afraid of what Maureen Dowd might say?
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:19 PM
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:16 PM
At least, unlike McCain, Romney wouldn’t be running with one hand tied behind his back. He’d hit Obama with everything he had. So would Palin, of course. I think either has a better shot than McCain, especially since Obama can’t run on fairy dust and golden dreams after four years of screwing up.
thecountofincognito on July 16, 2009 at 5:19 PM
I haven’t been particuarly impressed with Palin. Anyone can look conservative next to McVain. I haven’t seen her walk the walk as much as I would have liked.
Fred let me down, Newt keeps to the sidelines. Where is John Wayne when you need him?
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on July 16, 2009 at 5:20 PM
LOL If we’re going to rate candidates based on how much the media like them — and, let’s face it, that’s partly why Palin’s gotten so many negatives — we’re not going to have any candidates who have a snowball’s chance of winning, ever.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Palin is a quitter. She’ll never get the nomination until well beyond 2012.
csdeven on July 16, 2009 at 5:21 PM
No doubt he was in a tight spot. Have not seen Thad McCotter in the news much since that vote. He seemed to show about once a month, but not sense then
WashJeff on July 16, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Where’s Mitt right now in the fight against ObamaCare?
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:22 PM
I think that would be a good ticket also.
But who knows. We’re still years away.
One thing that would be interesting would be to bring up McCain vs Romney/Huckabee/Brownback/Thompson numbers a year before the elections and see where McCain stood poll-wise.
I’m pretty damn sure he wasn’t the one we all wanted to be the nominee, but somehow, someway he got in there.
We can’t let the media and the moderates choose our candidate this time. Don’t know how to prevent that, but it has to be done.
RedbonePro on July 16, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Good read
Amadeus on July 16, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Could be, but we’ll probably not have another Republican president until well beyond 2012 either.
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Thaddeus McCotter:
McCotter Floor Speech Opposing Bailout Legislation
McCotter On House Floor Following His ‘No’ Vote on the Stimulus
McCotter Fights for Automotive Industry and Workers
modifiedcontent on July 16, 2009 at 5:24 PM
That is to say, when he’s not busy doing photo ops alongside Al Sharpton ; )
The Ugly American on July 16, 2009 at 5:25 PM
In 2012, that will look like a massive step in the right direction.
Ronnie on July 16, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Maybe…but it won’t be and it won’t earn Mitt any credibility.
ihasurnominashun on July 16, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Anyone who hates Palin is a sexist…
TimeTraveler on July 16, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Whaaaa? Better known by whom? Yemeni goatherders?
Republicans pay attention to things, AP. There is no way Palin has higher name recognition than Mitt or Huck.
Sure, that may hold true among the Cheetos and Oprah set, but they don’t register Republican.
guntotinglibertarian on July 16, 2009 at 5:26 PM
WRONG
SHE WILL GET IT
TimeTraveler on July 16, 2009 at 5:26 PM
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Romney started early on that. http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=DE7F01D9-AFCD-0FF1-A5681A3CD489087C
thecountofincognito on July 16, 2009 at 5:28 PM
ROFL…unlike the eminently electable Huckabee?
ddrintn on July 16, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »