Poll of Alabama Republicans: Huckabee 33, Palin 23, Romney 12
posted at 5:31 pm on February 9, 2010 by Allahpundit
Yeah, granted, it’s practically home-field advantage for a former governor of Arkansas, but it’s also evidence of Huck’s abiding strength in the south even as Palin’s national profile expands. How’s this for a three-way race: Mitt captures the northeast, Huck takes dixie, and Sarahcuda uses her Jacksonian cred to grab the plains states. And then everything comes down to … California.
I shiver at the traffic possibilities.
If Huckabee chooses to run again in 2012, something that is far from a sure thing, he will again be formidable in early states such as Iowa and South Carolina, where much of the Republican base consists of social conservatives.
“Huckabee has a good regional appeal due to his Southern status and residual support,” said Mike Baselice, the Texas-based GOP pollster who conducted the survey. “People vote for who they know and like.”
According to the poll, Huckabee also leads Palin by 10 points among Republicans who describe themselves as “very conservative.” His lead grows to 16 points among Republicans who say they’re “somewhat conservative.”
“I’m a little surprised about Palin’s numbers, but Alabama has a strong tea party movement, with which she has strong appeal,” said Brent Buchanan, whose Alabama-based firm, Public Strategy Associates, commissioned the poll.
“You don’t need to be a winger to like Huckabee, in other words,” says Matt Continetti of that boldfaced bit, but I wonder if the six-point bump among moderates has more to do with Huck’s alleged centrist appeal or with anti-Palin sentiment among moderate conservatives. Remember, a Fox News poll last month showed that 17 percent of Republicans would cross over to vote for Obama if she’s the nominee compared to just nine percent if the nominee is Romney. Which means, as her star rises, we may start seeing an intramural version within the GOP of the Palin polarization that affects Democrats and Republicans, with centrist conservatives taking an “anyone but Sarah” approach to counter the tea-party movement’s “no one but Sarah” sentiment.
Exit quotation via Continetti: “A primary that pits the powers-that-be against social conservatives and Tea Party nation will be nasty (but fun!).” Er, yeah. Wouldn’t it also tear the GOP apart, suppress turnout in the general election, and all but guarantee Obama’s reelection?
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 Next »
Didn’t look the first time.
Nope.
HornetSting on February 9, 2010 at 6:13 PM
Why would they not? They vote in GOP Govs all the time.
But regardless, I’m talking primaries. Romney will never win a southern primary. Will he defeat Obama in those same states? Damn right.
uknowmorethanme on February 9, 2010 at 6:13 PM
Well, you know what they say, “As Alabama goes, so goes…..”
Huckabee/Gantry ’12!
portlandon on February 9, 2010 at 6:14 PM
“Second look at Huckabee?”
Hey, it’s Alabama.
You know what they say … as goes Alabama, so goes …. uhm … Alabama!
crosspatch on February 9, 2010 at 6:15 PM
Jim DeMint is still awesome!
uknowmorethanme on February 9, 2010 at 6:15 PM
Whose going to be the Democrat nominee in 3 years Einstein?
Think people might be motivated to vote against him no matter who our nominee is? Or did you believe Scott Brown won in a vacuum?
Your turn, smartass.
jjshaka on February 9, 2010 at 6:16 PM
A public affairs company? Who paid for it? Apparently they just released the headlines, the internal data is not available. Cute. Garner headlines first, fill in the blanks later. And this poll was barely 1000 people which puts it at what, plus or minus five points? Was it of registered voters? Likely voters? Any voters? Again, who paid for it?
entropent on February 9, 2010 at 6:18 PM
The last PPP poll showed Huckabee beating Obama. Huckabee not only wins in the South but also the Midwest. He has great crossover appeal, as we have seen many dems, indies and repubs who support him.
Ramussen also had a poll with Huckabee doing the best against Obama.
Huckabee has shown through his show, that he is an optimistic, commonsense, America loving conservative.
Just what we need to beat Obama in 2012.
texasconserv on February 9, 2010 at 6:18 PM
Wow. Who could we lose bigger with, Huckabee or Crist? I mean, neither of them alone is as spectacularly sucktastic as Backdoor John McCain was; I mean, Huckabee is a religious bigot and has occaisional Biden-itis, the uncontrollable saying of sub-moronic statements, but he is somewhat personable. Crist is just a Democratic waiting to spread his ‘f*ck you’ wings to his base once he hits Washington, but he’s so bland it’s easier to dismiss him than actually dislike him.
Maybe we should run them together to make sure that we will have absolutely no f*cking chance of winning against Obama whatsoever. Because I’m assuming this is the new GOP model; we don’t actually try to win, we just try to find even more horrible candidates than the Democrats do to make sure we lose in the most humiliating fashion possible.
You don’t beat a sh*tty President by nominating sh*ttier candidates. Find some real candidates. A buffoon who acted as a spoiler for Backdoor John McCain is not a real candidate. If this is our choice, just tell Barrack he can be President for 4 more years because doing anything with Huckabee, even if Obama drops to 10% approval, is a waste of time.
austinnelly on February 9, 2010 at 6:22 PM
I’m glad that these polls doesn’t amount to a hill of beans now.
You know full well that Jim DeMint is going to throw his hat into the ring if given the nudge. He’s certainly positioning himself. But though he represents “conservatism” he belongs within the bought and paid for Washingtonian inbred political machine.
An interesting full blooded conservative STRONG name to bounce around is the mustache, John R. Bolton.
maverick muse on February 9, 2010 at 6:24 PM
“Second look at Huckabee?”
Okay………Nope. Still the same Huck. He would be the Republican Jimmah Carter.
Please…Please…Please…stay on T.V.
Oxrock on February 9, 2010 at 6:26 PM
Alright smartass, it would take a crash of epic proportions for Obama to not be the Dem nominee in 3 years unless he decides not to run. So you can basically throw that theory out the window.
If Mittens is the nominee (God forbid) I’d vote for him, in fact, he was my hold my nose choice in the 2008 primary. But to make the argument that he’d be more competitive than a more RINO McCain (who BTW Scott Brown models himself after) in blue leaning states against Obama is nuts. Your turn…
davek70 on February 9, 2010 at 6:26 PM
A guy who supports a national ban on smoking is not a conservative.
A guy who confuses personal Christian compassion with his role as Governor in relation to paroles and pardons is not a conservative.
I could go on for days about his non-conservative creds, but I know I can get rather obsessed in my anti-Huckabee tirades, and I don’t want to become the Huckster’s “happyfeet.”
So I’ll stop.
But I’ll leave with a simple: We don’t need a big-government, legislate morality “conservative” (and I ain’t talking abortion, here.)
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 6:26 PM
Allah…….would you PLEASE tell us what the hell the significance of this poll is supposed to show?
That Huckabee can ‘win’ (by a razor-thin margin) in a 3 way race – in HIS OWN STATE????
Allah, if you’re not on medication, you should be.
alwyr on February 9, 2010 at 6:27 PM
I’m one Alabamian who doesn’t need a second look at the Huckster, I saw all I needed to see during the primaries….and the view wasn’t good. Still isn’t.
beachgirlusa on February 9, 2010 at 6:28 PM
Huckabee wouldn’t be the worst president in the world, but getting him there would be an uphill battle. The MSM would make a huge issue out of his pardons.
The Republicans need to find new blood to run 2012. Someone with conservative principles who can lead and has no skeletons. They don’t need to worry over their candidate being perceived as inexperienced or too new.
tflst5 on February 9, 2010 at 6:28 PM
He’s from Arkansas. That’s a couple of states away from Alabama.
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 6:29 PM
Second look?
OK
…….
Um, still looks like Elmer Gantry.
I’ll pass.
Aviator on February 9, 2010 at 6:29 PM
AP, if you say “Second look at Huckabee?” just one more time, we’re gonna throw down!
Jim-Rose on February 9, 2010 at 6:29 PM
You betcha!
beachgirlusa on February 9, 2010 at 6:30 PM
Oh Good Lord! Alabama is the only place I’ve lived where somebody yelled at me for my liberal views (really). It is small wonder that the faux evangelical does better than the Mormon but it is hardly a bellweather state. The Alabama GOP will ultimately support the nominee.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 6:30 PM
Let’s see Huckabee’s #’s vs Obama after the press beats the living s*** out of him like they did to Palin…
Huckabee is a loser
LurkerDood on February 9, 2010 at 6:30 PM
Good. Somebody needs to.
beachgirlusa on February 9, 2010 at 6:32 PM
Second look at Huck? Not just no, hell no!
ORconservative on February 9, 2010 at 6:34 PM
Huckabee has bigger problems than his pardons. His record on social issues is way too liberal to be taken as a serious candidate in the first election since the GOP trotted out a Dem-lite candidate like McCain. The GOP base and independents want a fiscal conservative who is also a national security hawk. Huckabee is none of that. He was actually out there lauding Obama for that photo-op stunt of showing up and interfering with the returning war dead at Dover AFB.
The GOP can and must do better than a faux evangelical liberal with a populist facade.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 6:35 PM
Perhaps you didn’t understand my post. I’m about as conservative as you can get and still I was too liberal for Alabama. We are talking about issues like my suggestion that it isn’t the end of the world if the womenfolk take a job outside the home.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 6:39 PM
I don’t care anymore, I’ll take Huck if I have to, just get rid of Obama!
Daemonocracy on February 9, 2010 at 6:42 PM
Nooooooooooo……
2012 is going to be 2008 all over again; clueless conservatives pushing a mushy candidate on the Republican party, going for social conservatism, ceding the coasts and cities to the Dems, playing almost exclusively to the geriatric small town vote.
modifiedcontent on February 9, 2010 at 6:45 PM
If the Republicans nominate a Fiscal Liberal-Social Conservative like Huckabee I will not vote for him and they will lose the election, as they will deserve to.
The winning combination is Fiscal Conservative-Social Libertarian.
Rocket-Man on February 9, 2010 at 6:54 PM
He’s from Arkansas. That’s a couple of states away from Alabama.
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 6:29 PM
_______________________________________
alwyr responds: Ooops! Sorry ’bout that; my bad! Although the underlying principle still holds: Why put any credence in this type of poll where Huckabee is the “home town boy” going up against “outsiders”?
alwyr on February 9, 2010 at 6:54 PM
HIGHHOPES: fill us in on what happened that someone in Alabama yelled at you for being liberal. Also, if you’re a lib, why are you here? RSVP
JimP on February 9, 2010 at 6:58 PM
This is only one state and in the Deep South, Huckabee’s stronghold. You act like this is unexpected. It’s like the axiom that if a reporter comes across an incident where dog bites man that he would decide to not to submit that story for publication but if man bites dog that would be a different kettle of fish.
And if Huckabee were leading in NY state or California now that would be a story.
technopeasant on February 9, 2010 at 7:01 PM
The winning combination is Fiscal Conservative, tough on terrorists, and no one cares what your “social” views are, because you’ve got waaay too much on your plate just trying to save us from financial collapse and Islamofascist attacks to worry about other crap.
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 7:02 PM
Ummmm, no!
These southern evangelicals are almost incestuous in their narrow devotion to candidates who look just like them.
It really screws us up every time.
David2.0 on February 9, 2010 at 7:02 PM
I was trying to be funny, in my lame way. I should’ve put a :) on my message.
beachgirlusa on February 9, 2010 at 7:02 PM
Well, according to crr6, Alabama is just some backwoods ghetto state with no electricity or running water, so therefore I’m not sure we can put much stock in how Huckabee polls with these rubes.
/s, of course.
Having said that . . .
Yes. +1000!
NoLeftTurn on February 9, 2010 at 7:05 PM
Had the second look….stick to your show Mike.
yoda on February 9, 2010 at 7:08 PM
LOL!
I’m frequently attacked here for calling Obama the filthy lying coward in the White House. And now, others are taking the fact that some people in Alabama called me a liberal as proof positive that I’m an Obama supporter.
I’m mentally tired after four days of hanging out in Texas waiting for a flight back to DC just in time for the next major snow event. My point was (and is) that Alabama Republicans are even more conservative than mainstream conservatives like me. I was living there at the time of “Roy’s rock” where groups were showing up in Montgomery to pray that the Ten Commandments would stay on display in the AL Supreme Court building. If it were up to me, there would be more people like Jeff Sessions in the Congress but nationally, his constituency is far far far more conservative than the norm.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 7:12 PM
That’s okay. Half the time I don’t get those add-ons anyway! There’s more than a little irony in the fact that written communication among the human race evolved from hieroglyphics and is quickly going back to that with the advent of a generation who is monosyllabic but can text with flying fingers.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 7:17 PM
This poll makes no sense.
Huckleberry is a complete dolt, and you think Palin has been pulled over the coals of the media? Romney comes across as a elitist Wall Street type and WILL NOT be able to connect to the Joe Sixpack crowd. You think Huckster is a rock star that excites the base? Check out the crowds that turn out to see him, and compare them to other potential 2012 GOP candidates.
HA…..Huckleberry would look like Arkansas one-topping Roadkill if he ever got the nomination.
PappyD61 on February 9, 2010 at 7:19 PM
People do care about social views. Social Conservationism as exemplified by people like Huckabee turns off a lot of people.
Rocket-Man on February 9, 2010 at 7:20 PM
Romney can carry the South. He would have carried West Virgina had John McCain and Huckabee made their back room deal to shut Mitt out from winning that state.
He also had Florida in the bag too until McCain convinced people to endorse him at the last minute.
Romney can carry the South.
By the way, the President isn’t the Pastor in Chief. And people really ought to stop judging a candidate based on their faith.
I’ve seen to many people make an issue out of Mitt’s, Huckabee and Palin’s faith and its juvenile to do so.
I think the Golden Rule should apply here. If you want people to be respectful towards a candidate that represents YOUR faith, then be respectful to candidates who are of other faiths.
Anyways, I don’t care if the GOP Presidential 2012 candidate is Buddhist, Christian, Jewish, Mormon, or hell even… Atheist!
I don’t give damn what faith the GOP Presidential candidate is…all I want the President to do is lower taxes, defend the Constitution, reduce the size of government, be hawkish on defense and fight for religious values that used to be a pillar of our country. That’s it.
I don’t give a damn about a president’s religion and neither should you.
Conservative Samizdat on February 9, 2010 at 7:20 PM
I second everyone who said this poll was taken by those affiliated with the political loons who fear Palin.
I very much am offended by anyone suggesting the South “sucks” because of this singular poll. Speaking as a Southerner, Huckahu Ackbar is not a favorite of many, many Southerners. I ought to know, I once campaigned for the Huckster years ago. He has burned a ton of bridges, and the whole WV not getting out of the race deal WILL come back to bite him and hard. You know the saying about those that assume? I would not assume anything based on this poll, and in particular do not assume Huckaliar would win the South.
And just for an FYI, I would not assume Huckster is as big of a social conservative as HE would like most to think. It could be those who voted in this poll have yet to realize this rather large fact.
The key to a “HELL NO!” to Huckaschmuck is that he wanted to break the law by declaring AR a haven for illegals, raised taxes, and is a political weasel. I firmly believe the Conservative Base of the GOP knows much of this and will militarize against him IF he runs. At least those who have seen him up close and personal in action know this, and they will be greatly motivated to stop him in the primaries.
Plus, the man has some serious trouble lurking in his closets IF he chose to run. The MSM would LOVE to air them.
He will not win POTUS. Period.
freeus on February 9, 2010 at 7:21 PM
And “social libertarianism” turns off the entire Christian conservative base. And guarantees an Obama victory.
The stakes are far too high to be fighting social issues right now.
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 7:24 PM
a second look?
uh…..NOT
smuckabee never deserved a first look let alone a second
the clemency governer has gallon of blood on his hands and he’s an amnesty lover
sidewinder22 on February 9, 2010 at 7:24 PM
I would expect Huck to poll strong in his home region. I guess you could argue that maybe he should even be doing better, but who knows. I personally would love to know who his voters preferred as a second choice.
Shotgun Messiah on February 9, 2010 at 7:27 PM
Just out of curiosity, has Huckabee even given any indication that he plans to run again (e.g. giving speeches in Iowa, or attending “conferences” in New Hampshire, like, for example, Newt Gingrich has been doing)?
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 7:30 PM
I’m from AL and am a social con. I voted for Romney in the last primary because Huck is slimy. I won’t be voting for him this time around, either. I love my fellow social cons down here but many are often blinded by those who cloak themselves in religion. See Roy Moore… (sigh)
tdau1997 on February 9, 2010 at 7:30 PM
smuckabee is the exact type of rino loser we’re trying to cleanse from the party.
it (he) will never happen
sidewinder22 on February 9, 2010 at 7:30 PM
I agree completely. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a factor in the South.
How does a candidate like Romney get beyond the issue of faith (which I suspect will be less a factor if the alternative is another four years of the filthy lying coward in the White House)? My solution is to emphasize that one’s religious affiliation is less important than being morally grounded in traditional American values.
Obama claims to be a Christian but has only darkened the door of a church four times in the last year. That doesn’t matter so much as the values he espouses and Romney wins that contest hands down.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 7:35 PM
Huckafraud.
paulsur on February 9, 2010 at 7:37 PM
I’ll issue a clarification, since I made the Pastor-in-Chief crack. I do not vote for or against any candidate on the basis of their religion. But I do think it is a dicey proposition to elect an ordained minister to the Presidency of these United States.
entropent on February 9, 2010 at 7:38 PM
I’m worried about that too. :(
It’ll be a sad state of affairs indeed if the GOP hasn’t learned anything after the last two years.
Is it too much to ask a Republican candidate to make his/her stand for the U.S. Constitution? It’s clear that Democrats don’t give a crap about it. One need look no further than their lousy legislative agenda to see that. But if we can’t field a Republican candidate who does… what’s the point of showing up to the polls.
All I needed to know about Huckabee was in his answer to whether he’d go for a federal smoking ban.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/15/pandermania-huckabee-no-longer-supports-federal-smoking-ban/
So, he might be a nice guy and all that… but if he doesn’t have a ready, definitive answer, supportable by ACTION regarding the 10th Amendment, then he’s just another part of the problem, not the solution.
Murf76 on February 9, 2010 at 7:40 PM
That was the same point I was making when I mentioned that I was actually yelled at for being a liberal when I lived in Al. Roy’s Rock was a very touchy issue. In spirit, I was with those who supported it but I also knew it was legally a losing case.
My biggest gripe about Alabama- The Southern Poverty Law Center which should be shut down or converted into a PAC because of their agenda. There is little about that organization that deals with the south or with poverty.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 7:41 PM
I think what turns people off about religious conservatives is that, generally speaking, they tend to be a very exclusive group. As in NOT very inclusive.
And in extreme cases, certain religious conservatives display a form of religious bigotry.
If the Presidential candidate not of a particular religious faith…they won’t support that person regardless of how qualified that person is for the job.
Its an absolute rejection without any thought, consideration or rationality to why the won’t vote for anyone but of one who is of their particular faith.
Its as if certain voters just leave their brains at the pew of whatever Church they left it at.
That is a major turn off for a lot of people.
Conservative Samizdat on February 9, 2010 at 7:45 PM
Preach on. Roy’s just a grandstanding opportunist or so it seems with less regard for the law than his ego or conservative Christian votes.
The SPLC just needs to go away. Now.
tdau1997 on February 9, 2010 at 7:50 PM
Even though the press can no longer spin or hide President Obama’s miserable and very Carter-like performance as chief executive, it will still take an enormous amount of money and work to limit the damage to one term. So what we’re looking for is either a charismatic candidate capable of galvanizing both independents and base or a candidate running a near-flawless political organization able to accumulate advantages like Kasparov playing the Sicilian.
Palin or Romney would be the best bet, I think. Gingrich is a loser out of the gate for any number of reasons–I just wish whoever his advisers are would summon the courage to tell him. Jindal needs more national exposure. And Huckabee? Please. I don’t know what he’s saying or doing to please the South so much, but I just don’t see the appeal.
troyriser_gopftw on February 9, 2010 at 7:53 PM
I agree with you a 100%. Religious affiliation isn’t the issue. It is being morally grounded in traditional American values.
I like how you use Obama as an example. He claims he’s a Christian but if you look at how he governs…they’re not morally grounded in traditional American values.
The same with Huckabee. He’s not morally grounded in traditional American values. Period.
He can talk the talk about traditional American values but he betrays himself with how he presents himself, how he acts towards other people and how smarmy he is.
His actions tell me he doesn’t believe it. And the most damning evidence for that was how he ran against Romney by being passive-aggressive in attacking Mitt’s faith.
Most people could see right through Huck’s act.
Conservative Samizdat on February 9, 2010 at 7:57 PM
What about Rick Perry for a darkhorse candidate? Any Texans on here to give an opinion of him? Paul Burka, political writer at Texas Monthly, hints in this month’s issue that he may run if he wins the governorship. The Texas economy leads the country. He has a strong conservative record that included a tough tort reform bill that has reduced litigation in the malpractice area, had a tax cut for small businesses, cut taxes, and limited spending. He’s strong on immigration, endorsed by William Bennett, and Sarah Palin is campaigning for him. I’m a native Texan in Oklahoma, and all I know is what I read in Texas Monthly. If they don’t like him, I think I might, and doesn’t seem like they do.
silvernana on February 9, 2010 at 7:57 PM
If Palin runs (a big if), the South is hers, with the possible exception of VA.
ddrintn on February 9, 2010 at 8:09 PM
That showdown is going to happen sooner or later. Conservatives are tired of having to hold their noses when they vote.
ddrintn on February 9, 2010 at 8:11 PM
You’d be surprised how many of us are personally anti-abortion and against gay marriage, yet do not support legislation to achieve those goals. For example, given my druthers I’d strike down Roe v. Wade and let the states decide, but in my state I would not fight hard for legislation to outlaw abortion – I would continue to put most of my volunteer time and donations into Access Pregnancy centers which provide free ultrasounds, adoption counseling, and provide mothers who choose to keep their babies with supplies, job training and other practical things. Let better alternatives than killing the baby and moral suasion be what ends abortion, not the law. For gay marriage – I’d set it up like France – civil marriage is how you get married, and if you want your church to bless the union, that’s between you and your church. I have no idea how many there are like me in terms of statistics, but I can tell you we are nowhere near as loud as the AFA hysteria-of-the-week types.
Laura on February 9, 2010 at 8:16 PM
I’ve been saying this for some time. Sarah will pick Rick for her VP. Sarah has a LOT of ties to Texas, has family here. She and Perry are friends. They work well together.
I don’t think Rick could win POTUS, but he would indeed make a good one.
At this point though, anyone who doesn’t think Sarah Palin is going to be the next President just ain’t paying attention to what is going on.
Sarah is solidly leading the nation right now. She is the only one who can beat Obama and beat him soundly.
Since the day Sarah showed up, as a VP candidate, she has been seen as Obama’s “equal.” They quit campaigning against McCain and started campaigning against her the day she was introduced, and it’s been that way ever since.
She’s still looked at as his equal.
No one else in the nation rates the attention she rates. No one on the democrats side worries about anyone else. No one else really matters.
Besides that, Sarah is a SOLID fiscal conservative, and is right on national security. People see her as a social conservative too, but there she is very libertarian.
Sarah Palin: Lightning In A Bottle:
http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/sarah-palin-lightning-in-a-bottle/
gary4205 on February 9, 2010 at 8:22 PM
It’s good to know I can count your vote :-)
I’m with you. However, I do not think that most Americans would vote for somebody who supports or even says they believe Creationism. Quite frankly, I would have a hard time voting for someone like Jindal for that very reason. Sure, I would take him over Obambi, but the fact is that most Americans (myself included) consider such a person to be ignorant of science and science is a critical basis for many of the decisions that the office requires.
MJBrutus on February 9, 2010 at 8:25 PM
gary4205 on February 9, 2010 at 8:22 PM
Sorry, but Sarah for all her virtues is not electable. Like it or not, that’s just the way it is. She’s been Quayle’d to the nth degree. That sucks, but there is no way that she could acquire the respect of a large enough portion of the electorate to have a shot.
Personally I like Sarah, but I would not vote for her. Her heart is in the right place and she stands up for the right things, generally. But, she lacks the intellect to govern the nation. No, I’m not saying she’s dumb. But I would not, for example, want to count on her to understand economics at a deep enough level to devise and carry out a plan or even to choose among plans presented to her. Same goes with foreign policy. She has the right ideas, but I do not see her being able to carry out the kinds of negotiations or making the diplomatic decisions that we need.
MJBrutus on February 9, 2010 at 8:31 PM
So like Huck could become the President of Alabama or something.
Geochelone on February 9, 2010 at 8:32 PM
I don’t think he can. He could win VA and maybe FL, but the latter is a big maybe.
True enough.
ddrintn on February 9, 2010 at 8:33 PM
Seriously, after having experienced four years of Obama, you think that Southerners are so anti-Mormon that they’d vote for Obama over someone who shares pretty much all of their social, economic, and foreign policy views?
I’m just asking, but I haven’t seen that level of Mormon hatred outside of Utah (Utahans will know what I mean….)
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 8:41 PM
I’m talking about the primaries. In 2012, I don’t see Obama carrying ANY southern states. Yeah, Romney would carry the South in the general election, no doubt about it.
ddrintn on February 9, 2010 at 8:43 PM
HIGHHOPES said:”I’m frequently attacked here for calling Obama the filthy lying coward in the White House. And now, others are taking the fact that some people in Alabama called me a liberal as proof positive that I’m an Obama supporter.”
Now, you know that is not an accurate reflection of my question and it was you who referred to yourself as liberal. Not everyone knows you as an uberconservative.
JimP on February 9, 2010 at 8:43 PM
OK, then you may well be right.
notropis on February 9, 2010 at 8:46 PM
If we were dumb enough to elect Huckabee as we were Obama, the country would deserve it’s fate even more.
scotash on February 9, 2010 at 9:05 PM
Might get a different result if polled Alabama Independents or Alabama Conservatives.
Christian Conservative on February 9, 2010 at 9:20 PM
Really? You really want to go there? I never referred to myself as a liberal only that I was liberal in AL.
Please get a life.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 9:29 PM
AMEN! Your post sums up my feelings exactly.
highhopes on February 9, 2010 at 9:33 PM
I was a county GOP rep in AL (in a wildly Democratic county)… this I know about AL… social issues are very important… Huck is great fit there on first glance.
It would change if there was a tremendous groundswell in the direction of a reasonably social conservative who they believed could beat Obama… but Huck suits Alabama conservatives.
+1
Nobody out there I feel strongly about… yet.
mankai on February 9, 2010 at 9:38 PM
He’d carry Alabama over Obama… easy.
mankai on February 9, 2010 at 9:40 PM
If it was between Romney or Obama in a southern state, you really believe people would pull the lever for Obama? Yeah right. Romney would carry the South against Obama. But they do love their evangelicals down there and Huckabee fits that bill. Say a few amens Mr. Huck and you have them eating out of your hands.
WyoMike on February 9, 2010 at 9:45 PM
I think Romney would probably carry the south, but I don’t think he could overcome the fact that a lot of people just wouldn’t come out to vote. Romney vs Obama, I think Obama wins a squeaker. Obama’s support in the NE and West Coast would be a lot more solid than Romney’s support elsewhere. Counting on an anti-Obama turnout is just asking for defeat. And that’s exactly what the GOP will be counting on.
Great. Then all that has to happen in the future is a relentless “Quaylization” of any potential GOP winner in order to insure Dem rule forever. Don’t think it can happen to Romney? Sit back and watch. And then you can bail on him too.
ddrintn on February 9, 2010 at 10:05 PM
But you wouldn’t say the same thing applies to Hucakbee, I’ll bet. Interesting. Huck doesn’t strike me as a Nobel-level economist, either. Nor does Romney, for that matter, for all his vaunted brilliance.
ddrintn on February 9, 2010 at 10:20 PM
I’ve got an idea. Let’s win big this November before we start ripping out the windpipes of our 2010 allies over 2012.
DaMav on February 9, 2010 at 10:29 PM
We’re on our way, baby. We are on our way!
apacalyps on February 9, 2010 at 11:15 PM
I’m willing to concede that Romney might not be able to carry the South given two factors: (1) Evangelical vote and (2) The African American vote.
However, if Obama’s popularity keeps sinking and remains very low throughout his term, Romney could both the evangelical vote and the African American vote if they get sick and tired of Obama enough.
Do yout think I’m spot on or off in my thinking here?
Conservative Samizdat on February 10, 2010 at 12:14 AM
Voting for Huckabee would be like voting for Ross Perot. Guaranteed to put Obama back in office. He can’t win. Moderates and independents won’t vote for him. I know I wouldn’t.
G. on February 10, 2010 at 12:28 AM
None of the above. It’s a darn long way in political cycles till we get to 2012. Huckabee hasn’t changed. He’s still a huckster who tries too hard to be the down homey religious choice. Romney’s Mass Health Care will have had a chance to implode big time, with hugely greater problems than its beginning to experience now. And Palin will be affecting the country in much the same way that happened with GW Bush by the end of his presidency. People were so darn tired of the negative drumbeat moment-by-moment from the MSM and the Dems that they’ll be glad just to get her out of the spotlight for a change. Plus, what with the fiasco of the Cult of Personality surrounding Obama, people are equating the equal and opposite similar effect on Palin as being too negative.
And a great many people are simply too fed up with politics as usual to look seriously at anyone who had entered politics prior to 2010. This year should be a shakeout year, though, with just enough time between now and 2012 for any new candidate’s voting history and performance to provide sufficient info to make an informed choice. Plus, the war on terror will, over the next two years, probably reassert itself, unfortunately, as one of the primary focuses of American concern. That and the economy and unemployment will probably define any 2012 candidates.
KendraWilder on February 10, 2010 at 12:29 AM
Abortion and Gay Marriage aren’t the issues to beat Obama with. It is all about the economy and security. You gain nothing by picking someone on social issues b/c those people aren’t going to vote for Obama but picking a pure social conservative will lose the election.
keep in mind that statement is coming from a social conservative.
lavell12 on February 10, 2010 at 12:36 AM
Picking someone who can just win back the south is stupid. Any Republican candidate that could win the MW and NE would easily win the south.
lavell12 on February 10, 2010 at 12:39 AM
I don’t know about that. People in Mass like Romney’s plan…despite all the flaws created by the Democratic controlled legislature.
Conservative Samizdat on February 10, 2010 at 12:43 AM
You hit it on the head perfectly.
Like it or not, people care more about where their next paycheck will come from than about social issues.
And given the fact that medicare, social security and other government programs will go bankrupt soon, the very survival of America is at stake.
Hence, the economy has to get fixed first.
Conservative Samizdat on February 10, 2010 at 12:50 AM
I am pretty much of the same mindset. Turn the abortion issue back over to the states, but get the state out of the marriage business altogether. Personal partnerships for any two consenting adults who want one, but marriage should remain a religious and social construct and it should be up to individual churches whether they want to marry a couple or not.
NoLeftTurn on February 10, 2010 at 1:36 AM
It certainly applies to Huck. Romney is a proven business leader. He has plenty of experience running private sector businesses effectively. His turn around of the Olympics is just one small example. I would be very comfortable with Romney in charge of the economy. I would also be comfortable with him on foreign affairs, given his history of business negotiations.
MJBrutus on February 10, 2010 at 5:36 AM
Excuse me, but I live in Alabama and am very active in politics here. This is a bunch of crap. Huckabee? don’t make me laugh.
suzyk on February 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM
Where was this poll taken: Huntsville?? Please. Palin gets my vote over Huckabee the backstabber.
AubieJon on February 10, 2010 at 9:15 AM
Huckabee 2012!
Decider on February 10, 2010 at 9:19 AM
That shows why here in Georgia we make jokes about stupidity in Alabama. Stupidity is supporting a RINO like Huckaphoney pardon boy.
bill30097 on February 10, 2010 at 9:56 AM
please no
rcw on February 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM
You don’t have to be a “winger” to like Sarah Palin either, but apparently some people will need to overlook her persona and effectively desexualize her before they can take her seriously. The girlish qualities that endear her to many obviously repel others. I see no other explanation for her uniquely polarizing effect since she is a moderately conservative Republican. She will have to try extra hard to show policy smarts once she consolidates her Tea Party links (if not before) or half the electorate will default to “Sarah the space cadet” mode. I can’t believe she doesn’t understand this since no one with her record and experiences could possibly be that dumb, including Sarah Palin. But it is possible that she resents having to go the extra mile, in which case she needs a Branch Rickey to set her straight.
Seth Halpern on February 10, 2010 at 10:19 AM
DeMint 2012
Done That on February 10, 2010 at 10:24 AM
–Only an idiot would vote for Rick Perry.
Jimbo3 on February 10, 2010 at 10:27 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »