Rasmussen: Huckabee 29, Romney 24, Palin 18
posted at 4:29 pm on October 16, 2009 by Allahpundit
In July it was Romney 25, Palin 24, Huck 22.
Then again, Rudy Giuliani once pulled something like 45 percent before last year’s primaries. Perspective.
These numbers reflect an improvement for Huckabee since July when the three candidates were virtually even. Huckabee’s gain appears to be Palin’s loss as Romney’s support has barely changed.
The numbers for Huckabee and Romney look even stronger when GOP voters were asked which candidate they would least like to see get the nomination. Pawlenty came on top in that category with 28%. Palin was second at 21% while 20% named Gingrich. Romney and Huckabee were in the single digits with 9% and 8% respectively…
Romney leads all prospects among voters who attend church once a month or less. Huckabee leads among more frequent churchgoers. Huckabee holds a huge lead among Evangelical Christians with Palin in second and Romney a distant third.
The person Republicans would least like to see win the nomination is … Tim Pawlenty? I thought the rap on T-Paw, at least for the moment, is that he didn’t inspire strong feelings one way or another. As for Sarahcuda, on the same day that he took the July poll, Rasmussen ran another one asking if her decision to resign would help or hurt her presidential ambitions. The split was 24/40 — and yet she was still ahead of Huckabee at the time. If it’s not her resignation that’s hurting her now, as I speculated this morning, what is? Too much Levi Johnston freak show collateral damage, maybe? I don’t think most people even know who he is.
Not to worry, says Matt Latimer. Authenticity shall triumph in the end:
Palin isn’t going away (at least not yet) because in her own way she represents what Barack Obama represented for many Democrats: someone who stands apart from the corrupt and cynical Washington system that has let true believers down. Republicans remember that Palin stood up against the crooked Republican establishment in Alaska—while out-of touch GOP senators in Washington actually applauded Alaska’s crony-in-chief, Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens, after he was booted out of office amid scandal. (The charges against Stevens were eventually dropped.)
The rank-and-file are tired of the bland phonies running the GOP. They are tired of Republican compromises that bloated spending and expanded the federal government. And they feel helpless against a team of buddies running each campaign more cynically than the last. GOP voters just might be ready to burn their village down in order to save it. You can almost hear the line now. What’s the difference between a hockey mom and Robespierre? Lipstick.
If the grand pooh-bahs of the GOP think they can find someone to push her aside, their pickings seem drearily slim. Version 2.0 of the governor affectionately known in some circles as “Mitt Rom-bot” is currently under construction. It will probably function just as lamely as the last. Poor Governor Romney. Every move the Mittster makes looks like it has first been diagrammed in a PowerPoint presentation. When commentators noted that even his hair looked too perfect, his aides mussed it up. It ended up looking perfectly disheveled. We’ve had enough inauthenticity for a while.
We’ve had enough ideological inauthenticity, but using the degree of dishevelment of Mitt Romney’s hair to measure that isn’t really a game I want to play. Palin and Huckabee might be the most personally authentic, salt-of-the-earth candidates of the bunch, but does that necessarily mean they’re less likely to get rolled by Democrats if elected? Because that’s all I care about. If Mitt can get jobs growing again between trips to the country club, good enough. Personal authenticity can be useful as a proxy for ideological authenticity, but ultimately it’s only the latter that’s important. Sometimes it feels like that’s a minority position these days.
Let’s poll this one. I’m curious to see, just for a goof, how La Liz does in the mix.
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 6 Next »
This continued talk about Romney’s inauthenticity should stop too. Only those who do not know his actual record can continue that old, stale diatribe — especially when he is out best hope in beating Obama. Heaven help us to think what 4 more years of Obama would look like….
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 2:45 PM
I’ll take any of them over a second Obama term. Who in their right mind (cough) wouldn’t? I’d strongly prefer Palin of the three, or Liz Cheney, but it’s not worth arguing about at this point in the game.
DaMav on October 17, 2009 at 2:50 PM
On Romney’s sincerity and authenticity:
We could argue that he may have been pro-choice for political expediency reasons in one of the bluest states in the nation when running for governor, but he governed as a social conservative while governor (http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#abortion) and held those beliefs for decades before that and continues to hold those views until today.
–He won’t be emphasizing social issues this time around and he doesn’t need to. As they said before, “it’s the economy stupid.”
–In any event, even if he needed to highlight his social conservatism – he’d be fine. You can see review this flyer from Romney’s 1994 run against Kennedy for the US Senate here where he held the conservative position on 23 oout of 24 positions – including social issues: http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#mittnolib
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 2:52 PM
Romney held the conservative position on 23 out of 24 positions way back in 1994 (including most social issues). He continued to hold those positions throughout his governorship and was lauded by social conservative and family values advocates while governor for his efforts on their behalf. See their letter of support here: http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/massleaders/massleaders.pdf <<<—–This letter is a MUST READ for the naysayers.
—Frankly, Romney is the perfect antidote to Obama’s naivete and inexperience. He is seen as worldly, competent, experienced and confident. He also ran Massachusetts as a fiscal conservative and has real world experience in the business world which will be paramount in voters’ minds after this failed Obama experiment.
—Social conservatives who do their homework will see that they can trust Romney if they review his actual governing record. He doesn’t need to prove anything to them. While. on the other hand, independents and conservative democrats will not be turned off by Romney, but instead will be attracted to his gravitas, proven record of succcess and demonstrated competence in economic matters. It will be about jobs and who has the track record and vision to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Nobody even comes close to Romney in that regard.
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 2:53 PM
For Mike Huckabee to make one statement about Mormons which he immediately apologized for both to Mitt Romney and to the Mormons in the U.S. is reaching a lot to justify bigotry. When he came to Utah, DURING HIS TIME AS GOV, he came in the capacity of President of the Southern Baptists. That is what they believe. Did you expect him to talk on things the Southern Baptists don’t believe. As for the Southern Baptists going door to door to convert the Mormons, what’s the difference when the Mormons do that all the time in all the states to convert the Christians? You have your Mormon beliefs and Huckabee has his Christian beliefs. I have heard many Rombots who have actually sounded like Christian bigots. That’s the way they believe in their faith. So what, I am a Christian and I don’t believe the way you do, but we all live in America with freedom of religion and Mike Huckabee has said MANY TIMES (NOT JUST ONCE) that he accepts all religions (based on freedom of religion) but that doesn’t mean he has to believe the way they do, just like you don’t have to believe the way Christians do. As Pres. of the Southern Baptists in Utah he was doing his job at that conference in saying what the Southern Baptists believe. If the Mormons had a conference in my state, they would do the same…I wouldn’t consider them bigots because they said things I don’t believe…it’s just what they believe. Get it? Many times on his TV show, Mike Huckabee praised the Mormons for what they did in CA..he didn’t have to do that. This man is not a bigot!!!
He doesn’t like Mitt Romney because he has no principles and changes his mind about things based on how he can get the voters to vote for him. We don’t need a man like that as President because if he thought the public wanted abortion on demand (and he would win a second term) he would change his mind again. He is not trustworthy in any way. Another reason I don’t like him is because he and his surrogates “donated” over $500,000 in the last primary season to Club for Growth. You know the CFG that paid for millions of dollars of ads against Mike Huckabee before and after the Iowa vote. Do you think that was a coincidence? I don’t!!!
When Mike Huckabee governed in Arkansas he never pushed his religious beliefs on the people of Arkansas and promised not to do that as our next President.
I have explained his “gifts” in Arkansas because he bought a house and his friends wanted to give housewarming presents. Whoa that was so bad…we shouldn’t vote for someone who has friends that like him. Give me a break, stop being so petty!!!
Mike Huckabee signed the pledge to not give amnesty to illegals (no other candidate signed it). Yes, even Mitt Romney was for the illegals in his state..he even hired one and didn’t check to see if the person was legal. Mike Huckabee did change his mind on illegals,but for all of you people who justify Mitt Romney’s many, many flipflops,how can you not support Mike Huckabee with this one?
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 2:58 PM
BTW the poll on this site or any internet poll is a joke. People can vote many times which makes it not authentic. We read posts online in Romney’s and Ron Paul’s websites on how to cheat and vote many times. That makes any poll where a person can vote more than once just a poll where somebody’s followers cheat!! Only the professional pollsters like Rasmussen, Gallup and PPP where they ask people randomly across the country and they can only vote once are what the people in the U.S. actually feel at the time of the poll. So what that Sarah Palin wins in this poll, dah, this is a Sarah Palin website. In other online polls, it matters who’s supporters not only find the poll but how they figure out how to vote often..that’s why the internet polls cannot be taken seriously.
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 3:07 PM
He knows how to use his veto pen. In the four balanced budgets he signed into law, Governor Romney used the line-item veto or program reduction power to cut spending by nearly $1 Billion. Over the course of four budgets, Governor Romney made over 300 line-item reductions, 350 line-item eliminations and struck language 150 times. In total, Gov. Romney issued 844 vetoes during his administration. http://myclob.pbworks.com/06-25-2004
Wish Presidents had the line-item veto….
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 3:16 PM
I’d maybe vote for Bachmann over that set, but hopefully it doesn’t come to any of those choices.
The Dean on October 17, 2009 at 3:18 PM
That is not true. Romney was tough on illegals before it was popular – way back in 2003. And he didn’t hire an illegal. The legal company he hired employed an illegal — a little different.
Governor Romney opposed efforts to give driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. “Those who are here illegally should not receive tacit support from our government that gives an indication of legitimacy,” the governor said, echoing arguments that opponents have voiced in the Commonwealth and in other states considering similar license measures. “If they are here illegally, they should not get driver’s licenses,” he said.
(Scott S. Greenberger, “Romney Stand Dims Chances Of License For Undocumented,” The Boston Globe, 10/28/2003)
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Governor Romney vetoed an outside section of the 2005 state budget that would have permitted illegal aliens to pay the same in-state tuition rate paid by Massachusetts citizens at state public colleges and universities.
(Office Of The Governor, “Romney Signs $22.402B Fiscal Year 2005 ‘No New Tax’ Budget,” Press Release, 6/25/2004)
— Governor Romney: In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants “Would Be A Mistake” Conflicting With Federal Law. “Mr. Romney said he was not prepared to provide ‘special benefits’ to illegal immigrants in the state. ‘Our desire is to help legal immigrants,’ he said. ‘I do not believe that, out of respect for the law, that we can provide special benefits to illegal immigrants. We have a responsibility to uphold the law, and providing special benefits to those who are here in contravention of the national law, in my view, would be a mistake.’”
(John J. Monahan, “Immigrant Tuition Bill Defeated,” Telegram & Gazette, 1/12/2006)
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Mitt Romney…yeah, look at that great Massachusetts Health Care Reform he’s so proud of, it’s made health care so fast and inexpensive…whoops, sorry about that, I meant slow and expensive.
kagai on October 17, 2009 at 3:23 PM
No, Mitt’s era has come and gone.
It’s over.
AnninCA on October 17, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Why do you lie about things so easily proved false? Do you not consider the covenant marriage act an attempt at forcing his religious beliefs on us? Because a lot of Arkansans did. Not to mention his other religion: weight loss. That was forced on us repeatedly, first by taking all the vending machines out of the schools and then by forcing students to have their BMI measured every year and reported to their parents — yet another initiative Arkansans opposed.
Stop making excuses for this asshat. Those of us who lived with him for 10 years know him for what he really is.
NoLeftTurn on October 17, 2009 at 3:33 PM
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Bambi on October 17, 2009 at 3:34 PM
Sorry the above should not be in quotes.
Bambi on October 17, 2009 at 3:35 PM
The problem isn’t what Mike Huckabee believes as a Baptist. Huckabee is free to affirm and promote his faith.
This is the essential issue: Was Huckabee really being really truthful when he says he didn’t know much about the LDS faith or not?
The essential problem is that Huckabee was clearly LYING when he claimed he didn’t know much about the Mormon faith but he betrays his own “ignorance” of LDS faith when he goes on to raise a question about a minor LDS doctrine in the next breath.
Clearly this wasn’t the only time that the Huckabee Campaign raised the “Jesus/Satan Brothers doctrine” issue.
Other evidence of Huckabee’s religous bigotry is when he ran television ads in Iowa during the 2008 primaries where he was the right man to vote for because he was (in capital letters), a “CHRISTIAN LEADER.” With the strong anti-LDS sentiment among many evangelical voters in the Hawkeye State, the spot was the equivalent of proclaiming, “NOT A MORMON.”
Lets not forget the television ad where a bookshelf reflecting the stage lights…seems to form a Cross. Once again, that’s an indirect way of the spot was the equivalent of proclaiming, “NOT A MORMON.”
So, Huckabee is free to proclaim his faith as a Baptist. But he was clearly LYING about his ignorance of the Mormon faith and clearly engaged in religious bigotry by getting people to vote against Mitt due to the fact that he’s Mormon.
Conservative Samizdat on October 17, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Exactly! I remember that it was at that time in the campaign that Mitt was getting wide support from evangelical leaders. Huck was desperate and went right back to his bigoted roots.
csdeven on October 17, 2009 at 3:41 PM
If any of you had to govern in the State of Arkansas when the Dems. left the state in horrible condition, what would you have done to govern Conservatively? He had a huge deficit which means no money, the Arkansas Supreme Court mandated that he improve the schools which were ranked at 49th in the country and the roads were terrible. He had an overwhelming Democratic legislature (BTW, more controlled by the Dems than Mass. was at the same time with Romney). He wanted to ban smoking in public places (like we all want now), and what was reported by the MSM and our wonderful Republican pundits, that he wanted to ban smoking everywhere across the U.S. Half truths, but people like you Huckabee haters believed it and still do because you want to believe the worst about him.
I live in Indiana and the Washington Establishment thinks Mitch Daniels, our Republ. Gov,, would make a great U.S. President. He isn’t interested BTW. Yet, Gov. Daniels had to make the property taxes lower for the people in Ind. so he raised the Sales Tax and the Cigarette Tax. Nobody thinks a thing about this by our Gov….he is still touted as somebody who would be a great President. What’s the difference? He had to help our state, so he raised these taxes. Gov. Huckabee had to help his state, so he raised some taxes. Big deal!!! You have to do what your state requires you to do based on the condition of the state when you govern. You can’t compare how he had to govern with say Sarah Palin and all the oil money that came in from her Republican State. That isn’t fair, and it’s not fair to say he is a liberal when he had the conditions he was given. Yes, he had a $850M surplus when he left office and wanted to give it back to the people,but the Dem. legislature didn’t let him while he was in office and didn’t do that when he left. He isn’t responsible for what they did or did not do with this surplus,so he shouldn’t be blamed for this.
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Yeah, very funny, kagai. It’s not perfect and Mitt admits that. However, the final version was quite different than the one crafted by Mitt together with the VERY conservative Heritage Foundation (as I am sure you know the lib legislature overrode 8 of Mitt’s vetoes).
Also, while the costs are within budget according to the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundaton, how many of the problems associated with it are due to the overall crisis in the economy which all states are suffering? Probably not a true indicator of what might be if things were somewhat normal, don’t you think?
Further, nobody can deny that it is far better than what the dems would have come up with on their own — some sort of single payer system run by the government like the one Obama is trying to have us ALL end up with. Had Mitt remained as governor, additional cost containing measures would have been implemented, no doubt. Tort reform and competition across state lines were two of the most important parts of his health care reform plan.
The people over at the Heritage Foundation said this about Mitt’s plan:
“But that should not overshadow the significance of Massachusetts’ achievement in enacting a bipartisan health care reform bill that fundamentally shifts the state’s health care system in the direction of greater patient and consumer empowerment and control. The Governor and legislature have provided their citizens with the tools to achieve what the public really wants: a health system with all the familiar comforts of existing employer group coverage but with the added benefits of portability, choice, and control. Other governors and legislators would be well advised to consider this basic model as a framework for health care reform in their own states.”~Edmund F. Haislmaier Research Fellow in the Center for Health Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation
http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm1035.cfm
PollyTix101 on October 17, 2009 at 4:10 PM
The Palin Liz Cheney ticket sounds great to me. The other guys not so much but any of them is better than Nobama.
MCGIRV on October 17, 2009 at 4:36 PM
I’d prefer almost anyone other than Huck. I think people want someone who will cut spending.
JohnJ on October 17, 2009 at 4:45 PM
A two woman Republican ticket would surely bring out the best of the misogynist, sexist democrat party.
darwin on October 17, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Conservative Samizdat,
If Mike Huckabee lied about not knowing much about the Mormon religion, don’t you think he was trying to get around all the questions the reporter was asking him about Mitt Romney and the Mormon religion? Yes,he shouldn’t have lied, but about all the lies Mitt Romney told and probably all the other candidates too. This was a pretty small lie too.
Guess what, Mike Huckabee was trying to get the Evangelical votes in Iowa, so he put out an ad that said he was a Christian leader, which was true. For you Rombots to read any more into this is plain stretching on your part. As for the cross in his Christmas ad, there was no cross, it was the bookcase. Some people put out a lie that said that MH’s campaign manager admitted it was a cross sometime during the General Election, that was not true. That was a plain old lie, Mike Huckabee checked with his campaign manager and he said his statement was nothing like they reported it to be…you remember like you said MH lied!!! Even if it was, which it wasn’t a cross, Mike Huckabee is a Christian and it would have been very appropriate for him to have a cross in his Christmas ad. It had nothing to do with the Mormon religion. Do you see how all of the Mormons have made him to be a bigot when he wasn’t and isn’t one? You all have ASSUMED many things about what he did and what they ASSUMED was and is wrong. But to push their LIE about Mike Huckabee being a bigot, they stretched the truth themselves. I have been on Mike Huckabee websites for over 1 1/2 yrs. and I have never heard anybody be against Mitt Romney because of his religion. It’s always because of how rotten he treated Mike Huckabee with his lies in ads, his “donations” to Club for Growth who unmercifully attacked Mike Huckabee during the 2008 primary season and for his lies about being a pro-life candidate. We don’t trust him to tell the truth, he just panders to whoever he is talking to. So for the Mormons to say we MH supporters are bigots against the Mormon religion, that’s a lie.
Guess I proved you people have lied more about Mike Huckabee than he ever did!
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 4:51 PM
The Heritage Foundation helped to write the RomneyCare what do you think they would say? No matter what, this is a very liberal policy for mandated healthcare in Mass or in any state. That’s why I couldn’t figure out why people like the Heritage Foundation and the radio and TV pundits that constantly pushed Mitt Romney in the last election as our “Conservative” candidate were crazy. There is nothing conservative about “mandated” by the government, period!!!
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 4:56 PM
I will not support anyone from the state that gave us Al Franken and Jesse Ventura.
I will not support anyone from the state that kept re-electing Ted Kennedy for 40 years.
I will not support anyone from the state that gave us Bill Clinton.
Percy_Peabody on October 17, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Polly, that article’s 3 years old, before the inevitable negative effects of MittCare had started kicking in…
MA’s plenty sorry they passed it now.Sorry, but no amount of salesmanship can sell Mittens to me!I won’t vote for him unless it’s a repeat of the McCain situation.
And Huck’s a nice man, but he was kind of a lousy governor and he’s not presidential material.
Go Palin/L. Cheney or Palin/Bachmann 2012!
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Pawlenty is not conservative. Neither is Huckabee – he is a marble mouth guitar player with a wife that looks like Ma Kettle (google the pic). I was a Mitt Girl last time. But, I love Sarah. Sarah can win and I would like to see her team up with Mitt. Who’s on top? (clean it up people…) Sarah on the top.
suzyk on October 17, 2009 at 5:20 PM
You really do have an anger problem, Gary. But, let me ask you, and be honest. If I could provide evidence that Mr. Huckabee was a true conservative and is consistently taking conservative positions on the issues. Would that change your mind about him?
When was the last time you read your Bible? Jesus had zero tolerance for liars and phonies Himself, and His language reflected that. He turned over the tables of the money changers in the temple, and He called religious leaders ‘hypocrites’ and ‘vipers’ to their faces. How about Stephen’s words in Acts before they stoned him to death. You wanna stone me to death, Gary? I take that as a compliment, lol.
I can just imagine you lecturing the 12 Disciples. Gary, you’re like so many other scoffers. They can’t see past the truth to see that I’m actually trying to help them. Look, I’m sorry if I offended you. That is certainly not my intention. But, the Bible says “A false witness (liar) shall not be unpunished” (Proverbs 19:5). This warning against lying is repeated throughout Scripture. OK. Every word that comes out of your mouth you are going to have to give an account of in the day of Judgment. Thanks.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Hmmmmm…just voted, I did. Lookee who\’s in the lead.
HAnthonyWayne on October 17, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Oy vey!
You guys who keep letting Romney off the hook for RomneyCare’s inevitable implosion need to get real.
And blaming the inevitable implosion on the democrat/communists certainly doesn’t fly!!
The very fact that Romney couldn’t foresee that his stupid RomneyCare would turn into a boondoggle is all you need to know about Romney. This guy is the Governor of the most liberal state in the union, with absolutely insane Big Government Nanny Staters everywhere, and he couldn’t foresee this was going to happen?
This is the problem with RINOs, and why they are actually more dangerous than democrat/communists. RINOs like Romney do not understand that ANY growth in government is an opening for democrat/communists to roll through and do their mischief!
Romney should have been smart enough to see this epic failure coming. The fact that he didn’t understand one of the most basic facts of life makes him unfit to serve as POTUS.
Sorry, I like the guy, and I’m sure he has some role to play somewhere, but not as POTUS.
There is only one person out there that understands the caution that must be used in growing government, and we all know who SHE is!
Anyone think for one second Sarah Palin would even consider something as ridiculous as RomneyCare?
In case you are not sure, here is her thoughts on ObamaCare: “Not no, but HELL NO!”
She called ObamaCare “downright evil.”
gary4205 on October 17, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Not even worth quoting your whole rant.
At this point, you bore me. And you certainly don’t impress me that you can drag out the bible. Maybe instead of trying to play God, and be a scold, you should try reading the Good Book yourself, and reflect on it’s lessons.
The fact that Huckabee is a lying, cheating, liberals who calls himself a conservative is irrelevant. You have serous issues my friend, serious issues.
We are all having a debate here. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. I don’t take it personal when they don’t.
But for you, there is something seriously wrong. Seek help.
Most folks here cannot stand Huckabee. You like the guy, fine. Make your points and stop trying to use God as a shield.
If you can “prove” that idiot is conservative, do it!
Put up or shut up, but spare me, and everyone else, the sermon on the mound! You just ain’t all of that!
gary4205 on October 17, 2009 at 5:40 PM
If you could do that, you wouldn’t be describing Huck!
(He isn’t a true Conservative, nor did he consistently take Conservative positions on the issues!)
As I said before, Huck’s a nice Christian man, but he’s not presidential material and underneath his socially Conservative views is another Nanny State Liberal.
Then, there’s always the fried squirrel in the corn popper and the Deliverance type sons who kill dogs…
Sorry!
(I do think
Ma KettleJanet is a sweet, godly woman, though!)LOL!
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Huckabee steals Palin’s votes so Allahpundit screams about Romney’s hair. Classic.
Dr B on October 17, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Condi versus Hillary!
I guarantee it!
Giuliani vs. Condi will dominate the Republican primaries. McCain camp in disarray, He’ll be gone by Christmas.
Oh wait… that was from 2007… but how could the polls be so far off so close to the primaries?
mankai on October 17, 2009 at 5:52 PM
AP gets completely wee-weed up over the idea that Huckaboo might be our next President!
We’ve told him about a hundred times it’s not going to happen, but he won’t believe us!
Smell the fear…ROFL
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 5:54 PM
mankai, if only our candidate had been Condi…(sigh).
That would’ve been wonderful!
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 5:55 PM
Suzyk,
What difference does it make what the President’s wife looks like??? Come on – that sounds very petty to me.
Jenfidel,
The people of Arkansas didn’t think he was a lousy Governor, he actually accomplished a lot while he was in office. He got 65% favorability rating in July, 2008, when he left office in Jan, 2007, When Mitt Romney left office, he had a 77% disapproval rating.
Percy_Peabody,
If you are going to base your vote on who else comes from the same state, you might as well forget everybody. Look at Sarah Palin. She came from Alaska where Stevens came from. That’s a ridiculous litmus test for any candidate. They aren’t responsible for who else comes from their state…not even Mitt Romney.
For those of you who think Mike Huckabee can’t win,I want you to realize what the Republicans have to have to run against Obama:
We need a charismatic candidate – that only leaves Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin. None of the other candidates can compete with them.
We need a good debater – Mike Huckabee has proven to be a better debater than anybody including Sarah Palin. But Sarah comes in 2nd.
We need somebody who can handle the questions from the press: Mike Huckabee has excellent communication skills and he is good on his feet at making a comeback to their questions. Sarah has had lots of problems in this area (ot that she couldn’t improve) but the liberal media has already pegged her for the American voters (unfortunately).
We need somebody likeable – no matter what any of you say Mike Huckabee has always been likeable by both parties. Mitt Romney comes across as Mr. Plastic Man and a phony. Sarah Palin is also likeable, but not by the Dems. or Independents which we have to have to win.
We need somebody who relates to the middle class – Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin both do this. This is important because people would rather vote for somebody who relates to them than somebody who is a Wall Street type.
You need somebody with a sense of humor – remember how much this helped Ronald Reagan get elected and govern. Mike Huckabee is known for his sense of humor.
If Mike Huckabee was given the Republican nomination, I think Petraeus would be an excellent VP or Rubio because he would bring in the Latino voters. If Sarah Palin was the Republican nominee, she need a man on the VP ticket, Petraeus would be good for her too. You would get the Soc. Conservatives and the foreign experience. But, Ryan might be good as VP because he has the Economic background. Yes, Mitt Romney would be a good VP, but Mike Huckabee probably wouldn’t be able to trust his back to Mitt after what he has been through with him. Something like Obama with Hillary being his VP.
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 5:56 PM
The people of Arkansas have very low expectations!
(They elected Bill Clinton, twice, too!)
99% of the folks I’ve met from Arkansas are insane… and not in a good way.
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 6:01 PM
Petraeus hasn’t said which political party he favors yet.
Rubio has yet to win the GOP nomination for Florida Senator.
Why???
NObama didn’t have foreign policy experience, nor did GWB nor did Clinton before him.
Who?
Neither Mitt nor Huck will be major contenders by 2012.
Hide and watch!
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 6:05 PM
Of course you can be a Christian and not vote for Mike Huckabee. I’ve answered that before.
Mike Huckabee is a wicked, vile, sinner. Just like you and me. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Romans 3:23
See part 2 below:
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 6:05 PM
Well, your sense is dead wrong. “…the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him” (Deuteronomy 4:35). I love and worship Jesus Christ ONLY. The God of the Holy Bible. Nobody else. Nothing else. Period. And I support Bible believing Politicians who use the Bible to guide their public and private lives. Do they line up with the Word, not just on the topic at hand, that is my measuring stick. In my opinion, the only candidate who could beat President Obama would be Mike Huckabee, the former Governor of Arkansas. He’s an excellent speaker. He’s an excellent debater. He’s pro-life. He’s an ordained Baptist Minister. He is very comical. He makes a lot of witty remarks and can be very funny. Uh, so he has the qualities of a winning candidate.
No problem. But, people who dishonestly criticize Huckabee, distort what he says, believes, his record, positions, I have a problem with, because America, Israel, and Western civilization are worth saving. And we need the right leaders to lead us. I think Mike Huckabee is one of them. Thank you.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 6:06 PM
I know what you mean. I did the same thing — nodded off reading your post.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 6:13 PM
A Baptist minister isn’t the only one who can “save” America, Israel andf Western Civilization.
And Huckabee was no saint as Governor–he was fined numerous times for ethics violations like setting up a “wedding registry” where grateful constituents could buy he and Janet “love gifts” of furniture, etc.
I am a strong Christian, but America was not set up to be a theocracy and too often, Huckabee threatens to run the goverment as the Pastor-in-Chief and not the Commander-in-Chief.
He’s a sweet, funny man, but honestly, I don’t think he’s all that bright or honest and not nearly strong enough a leader to be POTUS.
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 6:15 PM
Fair enough. My sense of things has been wrong before. (for example, personally, I thought Obama was a flash-in-the-pan thing and Hillary would win the Democratic primary. Shows what I know.) So then, let me put it this way: if someone were to ask you what you didn’t like about Huckabee, how would you respond? Is there anything he’s said that you don’t agree with?
TheQuestion on October 17, 2009 at 6:22 PM
And Arkansas has totally shitty roads.
I do not get your Huckabee worship one bit, but in my opinion he is another big spender who calls himself a Republican. I can not see him getting the nomination and he would never win POTUS. Your worship might be better directed elsewhere, apacalps.
ORconservative on October 17, 2009 at 6:22 PM
I’d like a Palin/Giuliani ticket. Both have a history of corruption clean-up and both are fighters.
debg on October 17, 2009 at 6:23 PM
I believe Huckabee supporters carry much of the blame for McCain getting the Republican nomination, and therefore carry no small measure of guilt for Obama’s election.
VerbumSap on October 17, 2009 at 6:49 PM
This is all irrelevant…Palin/Cheney 2012
Redefining what is Politically Correct…What side of History will you be on…
jerrytbg on October 17, 2009 at 6:49 PM
See. This is what I mean about total hypocrisy. Mitt Romney is a Mormon, OK. Now, he can believe whatever he wants. Believe whatever you want. OK. I don’t care. But, anybody who knows anything about Christianity and Mormonism knows that Mormons have a different god than Christians do. Just because somebody says the word “god” does not mean they are talking about the same person that is the God of the Bible. You might be talking about god like Osama Bin Laden talks about god, but that’s not the God of the Bible. He’s got a different god than I do, OK. Mormons have a different god than I do.
Now Mitt Romney goes all over the country claiming in media interviews to be a Christian. He did this to appeal to the Evangelicals. Mormons understand this tactic as “milk before meat”. In their minds it’s not lying if such misrepresentation improves the appearance of the Mormon church to the outsider.
How do YOU respond? You don’t say a word. Not a peep out of you! But, oh, you’re are all over Huckabee for promoting himself as a “Christian Leader” in a commercial (which by the way, he didn’t do. Huck is open about his faith, that’s all).You’re all over him as a phony when the real phony is Mitt Romney! Disgusting. I still can’t get over that.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 6:51 PM
Huckabeeeee = Benny Hind… Their both Christians and have TV shows…
What’s not to like :)
jerrytbg on October 17, 2009 at 6:57 PM
they’re oops
jerrytbg on October 17, 2009 at 7:07 PM
I would too.
ddrintn on October 17, 2009 at 7:10 PM
You know what is really stupid…that because you like Sarah Palin, you have to put down Mike Huckabee. They are so close on so many, many issues that it doesn’t make sense to be so antagonistic towards Huckabee and supporting Sarah so strongly.
BTW, I have heard that in this poll it showed Mike Huckabee going agains Sarah Palin and winning by 20 points. Romney beat her by 15 points one on one. Get used to it people, the voters in this country LIKE Mike Huckabee too. Get used to it, Mike Huckabee is very much a candidate who can win the nomination. No amount of you saying he doesn’t have a chance makes it so…look at the real polls..they are showing a very different story. He had to govern the way he did in Arkansas because they had nothing and needed so much more than other states (like rich Mass.). It isn’t fair to MH to say because he had to raise some taxes (and was the first Gov. to lower them 99 times), that he isn’t a conservative. What would you have done differently? Are you going to be a armchair quarterack when you didn’t have to walk in MH’s shoes as Gov.
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 7:14 PM
Me three!
With teh Fred! thrown in as AG!
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM
I could vote for Palin/Giuliani.
That just might win. Palin needs an “alpha” male to balance her out. I only use that term because it was used here today elsewhere. She needs a strong male on the ticket with her. I’m not saying that she needs a man, by any stretch, but a strong male would appeal to male voters who do not quite trust Palin…………..the ones not quite secure in their masculinity or the seniors, like my dad, who no matter how hard he tried could not vote for a woman president.
ORconservative on October 17, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Betcha $1,000 Huckabee doesn’t run or even want to run next time.
Put a fork in his political career, he’s done.
Just enjoy his TV show.
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Liking Palin has nothing to do with Huckabee. He can not win.
We do not need a pastor in chief, and anyone who spends like Huckebee will not get votes after Obama has gone through every penny we can print. Huckabee has shown that he works with Dems, we need someone to stand up to them.
You Huckabee supporters are taking this so personal, it is amazing to me.
ORconservative on October 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM
VFT- You’re wrong in stating that Palin and Huck are close on so many issues. Palin is small government, individual freedom; Huck is big government, nanny state.
debg on October 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM
I’d like a Palin/Giuliani ticket.
debg on October 17, 2009 at 6:23 PM
I would too.
ddrintn on October 17, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Me three!
With teh Fred! thrown in as AG!
Jenfidel on October 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM
And Liz Cheney as Secretary of State!
debg on October 17, 2009 at 7:29 PM
You can thank the moron Huckabee for our current president or whatever he is. If he hadn’t screwed Romney in the primaries I believe there would have been a different outcome in the election. He’s entertaining but we already have an entertainer in the White House.
Dr Bob on October 17, 2009 at 7:36 PM
Palin is poison. i like her, but she needs some serious PR.
Romney is wishy-washy. he sounds good, but salesman-like.
i would vote for huckabee.
simply a down-to-earth rational guy in an insane world. he may be a little this or that, but i haven’t heard him say anything i whole-heartedly disagree with.
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Good God.
65% Palin?
Yeah, like that is ever going to work in the general.
Anders on October 17, 2009 at 7:42 PM
You still don’t get it, do you!? Huckabee is a LIAR for claiming he didn’t know about the LDS faith when he clearly does. He blew is “innocent” cover when he asked about the Jesus/Satan brother doctrine.
Romney isn’t lying when he says he’s “Christian.” He sincerely believes that he is. All LDS members consider themselves Christians.
If a Catholic, Baptist, Seventh Day Adventist, Jehovah’s Witness, Evangelical or anyone else wants to call themselves, Christians…they are. They’re not lying. They’re asserting their own belief about their own religious identity. Who are you to say that they’re not what they believe themselves to be!?
So…Huckabee clearly lied. He claimed he didn’t know about the LDS faith but he clearly does. Mitt Romney is asserting his own belief about his religious identification and THAT IS NOT LYING. It doesn’t matter if others disagree with Mitt’s assertion because it doesn’t change the validity or sincerity of Mitt’s claim…that he is a Christian who belongs to the LDS sect of Christianity.
Can you understand the difference between a lie and asserting a belief!?
Conservative Samizdat on October 17, 2009 at 7:51 PM
No worries, TheQuestion. I appreciate your politeness. I confess that I have very little patience with the some of the people in here with Huck-hating neurosis. I think I have a little bit of Elijah’s personality in me that wants to mock them like in 1 Kings 18:27. I am trying to be kind and be nice though.
To answer your question, Yeah, there are a couple things that concern me about Huck. A few times he has spoken off the cuff and its got him into a little trouble as a result. For example the “inflammatory and race-baiting” comment. When he was governor of Arkansas, there was some legislation set before the state legislature to crack down on illegal immigration. Huck was quoted as saying it was “inflammatory and race-baiting.” Really, he was talking about not being mean spirit toward other human beings, but it sounded like he was soft on immigration. To this day, there are pundits on the right who have not forgiven him. He’s explained himself and introduced a plan to secure the border without amnesty, and they still won’t give him a break. He’s got the best plan out of all of the candidates to secure the border using American products within 18 months of his taking office, but they won’t let it go. Bitterness like that says more about them then anything else. That’s my opinion. It says more about them than it says about him. He’s said a couple things about Palin too that I don’t think he should have. He may be right about Palin, but he should just let her be. Other than that, he has taken good stands on many issues. Energy independant completely in less than a decade. Pro-Israel. I think he could win. Hope that helps.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 7:55 PM
why is this so much about religion? we need some clear-cut, level-headed conservative values without BS… mormon, christian or otherwise.
OMG – he lied! about… stuff. agh!
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Must make a memo,and have it fired off to increase
the SarahCuda Army,who are actually willing to fight!!
(Snark).
canopfor on October 17, 2009 at 7:59 PM
I am an Independent, Tempermental, Fundamental, Right-wing, Radical, Baptist. Thanks.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 8:01 PM
Join me in watching “Huckabee” on 8:00 p.m. EST (right now) on Sat. or Sun. The show will be information about Cap and Trade. Watch and learn something!!!
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 8:02 PM
mccain, conservative? would you vote for him over obama?
huckabee? better than obama? hell yes.
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 8:04 PM
I could care less about these polls at this time . It means nothing……… don’t we have more serious things to consider?… Like how the vaunted tandem of Weber/Decker of the Gophers sucked against my Nittany Lions? Seriously, I know the media must report anything and everything , but Presidential polls in October of 2009?….. are you serious?
MNDavenotPC on October 17, 2009 at 8:08 PM
that ticket might win, but like i said, they need some serious PR… what’s in their favor is time. it’s possible, but at this point only speculative.
if the vote was today, palin would not win…
romney isn’t in-touch, yet… which may be timed for a future run, but he always struck me as salesman-like. we have enough teleprompter-sounds-good-fluffiness for now.
huckabee would be the best candidate today…
that says nothing about 2012…
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 8:11 PM
This ticket would be on the losing side. Obama would defy the odds and win reelection with 12% unemployment and a huge deficit. Talk about a gift – go ahead with this lineup.
Sara is not the chosen one – people just need to take of the rose colored glasses.
Bradky on October 17, 2009 at 8:11 PM
good point…
but hey, it’s fodder on a saturday
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 8:12 PM
What percentage of people do you think is Christian?
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 8:16 PM
Welcome aboard, Joseph. Glad to have you!
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 8:25 PM
Aw, come on. Not everyone here is insane. ;o) Actually, this is probably the most libertarian-minded place I’ve ever lived. I don’t know where VFT gets these alleged poll numbers, but I live in one of the more conservative parts of the state and in my anecdotal experience, I don’t see a lot of support for Huckabee. Arkansans don’t like getting their pockets picked by greedy politicians, and Huck did that plenty; not for nothing our tax burden became one of the highest in the country under Huckabee. The state actually enjoyed less of a tax burden under Clinton than it did under Huckabee.
Arkansans also don’t like their personal liberties being abridged, or having to support the illegal immigrant community, or seeing convicted murderers granted clemency so they can run out and rape and kill some more people inside of a week’s time. Huckster is guilty of all of these things.
All of Huck’s shortcomings have been enumerated here many times but his astroturfers just ignore them and keep peddling their own fantasies about the guy. The rest of us know his record well enough to know the truth. The bottom line is — and this will probably get me flamed by some but I will say it anyway — this country will never elect a preacher. Yes we are a Christian nation, yes our Constitution was divinely inspired. But we also have a long tradition of rejecting anything that even remotely smacks of theocracy.
But not to worry: Part of Huckabee’s appeal in these polls is that people don’t know his record like some of us political junkies do. After the colonoscopy she’s received at the hands of the MSM, there’s nothing people don’t know about Sarah Palin, and her hands are clean. She has some damage control to do of course, thanks to their baseless smears against her. But she has three years to do it. There’s pretty much nothing left to be uncovered about her. Huckabee remains an unknown quantity for most Americans. All they know is he’s this affable guy with a show on Fox News who happens to be from Arkansas and plays an instrument … like some other dude from Arkansas who once became president. Just the mere fact that Huck tries to market himself as the next Bill Clinton ought to give folks PLENTY of pause. Now I don’t know if the MSM can be counted on to give Huck the same treatment they gave Gov. Palin; probably not, since they clearly want him to be the candidate knowing full well Obama would make mincemeat of him in a general election. But one hopes that people will do their own research, or that the other Republican candidates can be counted on to point out how NOT a conservative he really is, and then maybe folks will buy a clue.
This is a vast understatement. And completely true.
NoLeftTurn on October 17, 2009 at 8:33 PM
Other than the fact that they both have “R”s after their names and attend church on Sundays, they are nothing alike. Sarah Palin is a strong fiscal conservative who governs according to the Constitution as opposed to her personal beliefs and Huckabee . . . is not.
NoLeftTurn on October 17, 2009 at 8:40 PM
cap and trade – miniscule effect on CO2 which is having a miniscule effect on the climate, warming or otherwise, yet it would drastically impact/cripple the economy… it’s absolute, pure insanity…
btw, here’s the 35 errors found in al gore’s inconvenient rant -
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/press_releases/monckton-response-to-gore-errors.pdf
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 8:41 PM
What world are you living in? Iron Mike understands the threat extremely well.
“There’s no peaceful co-existence, there’s no accommodation, there’s no naïve nonsense that if we leave them alone they leave us alone. This is a war someone will win and someone will lose.” — Mike Huckabee on Terror
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Who do they think they are kidding with this phony poll?
RON PAUL is the leading presidential candidate and the ONLY candidate who can defeat the dems!
MaximusConfessor on October 17, 2009 at 8:51 PM
Typical reprobate type mentality.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 8:55 PM
teeeheeeheeeee, sure.
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 8:56 PM
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 8:01 PM
You most certainly are a Baptist.
ORconservative on October 17, 2009 at 9:01 PM
in the end, doesn’t the media have one helluva say over who gets the nomination???
not only that, but cross-over primary voters influence the outcome anyway…
to all of you out there —
how do we get the right candidate without the media’s influence and the dishonest voters in the primaries?
thedude on October 17, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Bigot is your favorite word, csdevil. And you are a real threat to free speech.
apacalyps on October 17, 2009 at 9:11 PM
I think you have me confused with another commenter. I never said one word about Huckabee on commercials, or being a phony. I called him a skunk.
I’m an agnostic who was raised Catholic. When I was in elementary school I lived a few years in rural Utah, so I’m somewhat familiar with the Mormon faith, for a non-Mormon, anyway. I believe Mormons are Christians, just as I believe Catholics are Christians. Maybe they’re not the same type of Christian you are, but they are Christians.
You are free to think whatever you like. Romney is free to think whatever he likes. I don’t care.
I couldn’t care less whether my president is Christian or not. I do care whether or not my president will govern as a small-government, fiscal conservative. I do care whether or not my president will try to improperly impose his religious beliefs while governing.
vermillionsky on October 17, 2009 at 9:16 PM
Unless this is a list of people running for 2010 Congressional seats, this poll is pretty much a worthless exercise.
Romney: Looks like a movie/TV President, and that’s about all he’s got going for him. He reminds me of one of those posters from a barber shop that displays 1950′s haircuts with those whitewalls of his.
Huckabee: Two words – Squirrel Czar.
Palin: Love her energy, enthusiasm and her unashamed love for our country. Given that, I haven’t seen her brushing up on her 2008 weakness of foreign policy. Lots of fences are going to need mending after Obama has torn them down (Great Britain, Israel, Poland (and most of eastern Europe for that matter) and counting). Plus, leaving her governorship mid-term will continue to hurt her (the MSM will be sure to continue to pummel that deceased equine without mercy), no matter how altruistic her motives might have been.
As for the also rans:
Pawlenty: Don’t know much about him, but he seems half decent – half squish. So, basically McCain without the experience or military heroism. If this is indeed the case, I’ll pass.
Cheney: Again, it’s an experience issue with her. Plus, her last name will be a negative for her amongst those who still get their news from the likes of ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, LAT, NYT, etc.
But again, it’s way too early to tell. Might be somebody out there waiting in the wings that isn’t even being considered right now. One thing is for sure though, if the current trend continues, Obama will be weak (especially if he loses his super majorities in Congress next year). Any opposition party candidate is going to have to show a clear distinction from Obama, point out how Obama is failing, why he’s failing and what needs to be done to recover from Obama’s failures.
And as a Californian, I’ll just show my bias and toss out Duncan Hunter’s name.
Left Coast Right Mind on October 17, 2009 at 9:19 PM
He’s the only candidate to comment about his perceptions of another candidate’s beliefs. I don’t remember Palin ever speculating about what another candidate did or did not believe. That was wrong.
vermillionsky on October 17, 2009 at 9:32 PM
Must I list how Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin are alike?
Both Republicans
Both Social Conservatives
Both support the 2nd Amendment
Both have had bogus ethics violations aganst them by the Dems
Both are good speakers
Both are good debaters -Mike Huckabee is better,but Sarah does alright.
Both relate to the middle class
Both have been excluded by the Washington Establishment – Washington outsiders – the voters will want somebody who is a Wash outsider in the 2012 election.
Both have taken the road like Ronald Reagan. If you remember Ronald Reagan spoke on the radio and got his message out just like Mike Huckabee has had to do so people would know him, not just hear the untrue statements about his record.
Both have been put down because they are Christians
Both have been demoniZed by the Dems in their states
Both have been demonized by the media – Huckabee by the newspapers in Arkansas, Sarah by the MSM.
Both are likeable
Both are charismatic people
Both are against the mandated Obama health care plan
Both are very supportive of Israel as our ally
Both are speaking against Obama, but not on everything. They pick and choose when to criticize Obama and don’t critize Obama just to be part of the crowd against Obama.
Both are leaders.
Both are against Gay Marriage
Both are populists – which during the general election will be a BIG plus.
There are many more simularities with Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee. When Sarah Palin was picked to be VP,the Mike Huckabee supporters were thrilled because we thought she was so much like MH. Unlike the Mitt Romney supporters who put her down ever since she was nominated VP on every website they could.
But when they were Governors,Mike Huckabee had a much tougher time in a state that had next to nothing and he had to spend money to help the people in that state. He had to govern in a very Democratic state and work with the Democratic Legislature who would go over his veto. Sarah had a well-to-do state (compared to Arkansas) and a very Republican state. She got lots of cash from the oil companies that she could pass on to her constituents. Mike had to work hard for every penney he could get for the people of Arkansas. There is no comparison in what they had to do in their perspective states to govern. So, for all of you Huckabee haters who call him a liberal, would it have been better if he didn’t help those people just so he could claim he didn’t raise taxes? Would you want a President who cared more about the polls and being so anti-Government that he turned the other way to the needs of his state? I don’t think so. Give him a break!
VFT on October 17, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Question, though. You justify Mr. Huckabee’s actions in Arkansas because he was governing in “a very Democratic state” and working with a “Democratic Legislature.” Suppose Huckabee runs for President in 2012 and wins. It’s entirely possible that he would be working with a Democrat Congress, and be leading a country that is about equally divided between Democrats and Republicans. What assurance is there that he wouldn’t do the same thing as President that he evidently did in Arkansas?
TheQuestion on October 17, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Go Huck!
Decider on October 17, 2009 at 9:39 PM
keep plucking that chicken.
vermillionsky on October 17, 2009 at 9:40 PM
History has shown that America elects Presidents based on what they need at the time…
-Nixon was corruption and dishonesty so 1976 saw Carter elected to restore faith and honesty in Gov’t.
-Carter proved to be inept and weak, so America turned to a strong, America loving, cowboy in Reagan.
-Reagan turned out to be great and Bush Sr. got elected on his coattails in 1988.
-1992, America turned to someone younger, hipper and reflective of their feelings so Clinton got in.
-1996, America was fat and happy and saw no need to change, so with all Clinton’s faults, they kept the gravy train going.
2000- America turned to a family oriented, straight talking, strong Texan.
2004 – America at war, don’t change horses in the middle of a war.
2008- America turned to a historic figure who could speak well and promised a change on the political fights of the past 8 years.
2012 – America will have learned that they voted with their hearts and not their heads. America is weaker in the world and the economy is also weak.
America will turn to a strong, experienced manager to make sound decisions and return freedom to our people and earn fear/respect to those around the world.
Who will that be? Palin’s got the strong, America first agenda down, but I fear she lacks the experience needed and will not garner the respect around the world.
I want to know more about Gen. Petraeus. He is the wildcard is the mix.
tatersalad on October 17, 2009 at 9:42 PM
You’ve used this insult quite a lot. Do you really think this is a valid counter-argument?
vermillionsky on October 17, 2009 at 9:53 PM
Check this out!
SNL-Tina Fey PARODY at San Diego TEA PARTY EVENT
Great lines include:
* “I can see relevance from my house”.
* “I always park my Jag next to a Prius”.
* “I will accept this award on behalf of all my future achievements.”
* “When history calls, history calls”.
Mutnodjmet on October 17, 2009 at 10:00 PM
By this logic, you would not have voted for Ronald Reagan because he was a governor from a liberal state which typically elects liberal governors and Senators.
Oathkeeper216 on October 17, 2009 at 10:05 PM
from a NH native….
mitt romney is NOT the solution.
how many conservatives are “gun voters”?
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them,” he said. “I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”
gun laws do not “protect” anyone. it is a liberal myth.
mitt romney = gun voters stay home = LOSER
huckabee on guns? no clue.
palin on guns? saw grizzly. killed same.
I can picture a repeat of the reagan “bear in the woods” ad…ending with palin, a rifle, and a dead bear “problem solved”
warhorse_03826 on October 17, 2009 at 10:19 PM
The #1 Gary Cherone fan.
ScottMcC on October 17, 2009 at 10:30 PM
This far out, ‘name recognition’ is KING. In the Summer of 1999 Bush had a 20 point lead over AlGore because of the Bush name. ( those of you reading this know who the Veep is but a fourth of Americans do not; watch Jaywalking if you don’t believe me ).
in 1983, John Glenn had a huge lead over Mondale and other Demos: name recognition. The list goes on………
Huckabee is a TV talk show host. When people don’t know who people are and what they want, they give pollsters a safe fallback name they recognize
in late 1971 and early 1972, hardly any Dems even knew who McGovern was….
Janos Hunyadi on October 17, 2009 at 10:34 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »