So What About Huckabee?

Ken McCracken  •  November 22, 2007

The big news everyone is talking about is Mike Huckabee’s surge in the polls in Iowa. There’s all sorts of black slapping and proclamations about this or that candidate being dead in the water, but let’s be honest with ourselves. This is one state, and the only reason this one state has so much influence is because there’s all these straw polls of a couple of thousand people that give the media something to talk about.
Which isn’t how it should be, but that’s how it is I guess. Personally, I don’t think the primaries in a couple of states should have this much influence over who the candidate is.
But keep in mind that these predictions of doom for the other campaigns are greatly exaggerated, and are mostly being pushed by the people who support those doing well in the polls now. Remember that if the person who was the “front runner” at this point in the Presidential campaigns last year won every time, Howard Dean would have been the Democrat candidate in 2004 and not John Kerry.
So the Huckabee partisans will be crowing, I’m sure, but this race is far from over.

Tags: ,


«
»
  • http://Array Neiman

    I would rather Huckabee not get the nomination, I don’t like his love of taxes for one thing; but, I seriously think his common, old bull dog, well worn slipper image and his folsky style along with some conservative credentials might surprise everyone as people will see him more as a common man, more like they are, a Washingtton outsider. The question is, how would he do against Hillary or Obama.

    Parenthetically: I hope and pray Hillary gets the nomination, I believe she can be beaten, if nothing else by the fear of her factor – one scary bitch; but Obama could rise up like the a black savior, a phoenix rising up from Hillary’s ashes to save the world, after all he is not one of them, he tells us, minorities will love him, women will find him compassionate and handsome, and I think he would be very, very hard to beat. Better to go after the devil we know than face an unknown devil with a mass appeal.

  • postaldog

    Today’s Rasmussen poll shows Huckabee tied with Mitt and Fred nationally for second behind Rudy.

    So can we believe that? Or do we only believe the polls when they show Mitt with a commanding lead?

    It should be noted that Mitt has spent millions on winning Iowa, yet cannot distance himself from a candidate who has spent little money, but a great deal of personal time there. Romney bussed in hundreds of voters so that he would win the straw poll. In the Values Voters straw poll, Huckabee pasted Mitt and everyone else drawing more votes of people actually at the event than all others combined.

    Don’t count Huck out.

  • http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

    Iowa is about organization, not media.

    Guiliani’s downfall in Iowa started when he tried to substitute commercials for appearances.

    Huckabee was on the ground in June of 2006, Romney was throwing cash around from a distance at the time.

    I don’t like the guy’s policies at all, but he’s been putting his time in and in Iowa that pays off.

  • Bat One

    Bil Mitchell,

    Your observations about a media agenda certainly seem to be spot on. Where else will you find a bunch of bored and jaded liberals enthused about the exploits of a born-again Christian? Much less, an ordained minister.

    Still, it probably wouldn’t hurt for you to tone down your manic enthusiasm for Mitt Romney just a bit. If Mike Huckabee’s “success” is a bit suspicious, your proseletyzing on Romeny’s behalf is more than a bit tedious. Disparaging other Republicans is not only imprudent, but it breaks Ronald Reagan’s immortal 11th Commandment. Look it up if you can’t remember back that far.

  • Bill Mitchell

    When Rasmussen says Romney is in trouble in Iowa, then I’ll believe it.

  • Bill Mitchell

    Huckabee is doing great in Iowa. That is, of course, if you cherry-pick your polls as the MSM and many in the RWM like to do.

    Here’s the way it goes down. Any polls that show Romney ahead by large double digits will get no airtime at all. They will be treated as if they do not exist. Any poll showing Huckabee close will be treated as if it came from the lips of God himself, and NOT sponsored by those bastions of liberal truth (the NYTimes and WaPo) who NEVER have an agenda and ALWAYS poll honestly.

    If you think I’m making this up, let me give you some facts:

    In the last 15 days, Romney has polled as follows in Iowa:

    Rasmussen – Romney +13 (ZERO press coverage)
    Strategic Vision – Romney +11 (ZERO press coverage)
    Research 2000 – Romney +9 (ZERO press coverage)
    -
    NYTimes – Romney +6 (front page news!)
    ARG – Romney +2 (Fox ran an entire piece on this one! – PS, ARG polls are ALWAYS out in left field)
    WaPo – Romney +4 (Top Drudge headline all day!)

    So the polls by all the respected pollsters show Romney way ahead and the polls by the MSM and (crazy ARG) show it close.

    Hmmm, I think I smell an agenda.

    The MSM doesn’t want Romney to win the nomination. They know he can beat Hillary. They pay for polls to give the results they want.

    Bottom line, if you want to know what reality is, look to Rasmussen. He has been the most accurate pollster in America for a decade.

  • postaldog

    Bill,

    “Bottom line, if you want to know what reality is, look to Rasmussen. He has been the most accurate pollster in America for a decade.”

    “When Rasmussen says Romney is in trouble in Iowa, then I’ll believe it.”

    Your words, not mine.

    Rasmussen says as of 11/22 that Mitt and Huck are tied. That’s all I’m pointing out here.

  • Toddk

    black slapping?!?!

    Oh boy wait till Sharpton hears about this.

  • http://www.kenmccracken.blogspot.com/ Ken McCracken

    NATIONAL POLLS ARE MEANINGLESS IN PRIMARY ELECTIONS.

    Hell, they’re meaningless in national elections until just a few weeks before the election.

    Never put too much stock into polls.

  • Bill Mitchell

    Ok, do I really have to say this again?

    NATIONAL POLLS ARE MEANINGLESS IN PRIMARY ELECTIONS.

    Meaningless as in “having no meaning”.

    Bat One,

    You mention that I am disparaging other Republicans in my commentary. I don’t see where I said anything negative about Huckabee at all. Perhaps you can look if you can remember that far back my condescending friend.

    Huckabee is a nice enough guy and far more qualified that Thompson since he has actually governed, but as Fred says, “Huckabee is a pro-life liberal”.

    HERE IS MY PREDICTION:
    Romney will carry Iowa by at atleast 12 points and probably 15 or more. He will carry NH by the same.

  • Bill Mitchell

    Here’s something else that the Iowa Polls don’t tell us. Winning in Iowa is all about having the best organization – who can get those delegates out to the Caucuses?

    Without a doubt, Romney has a massive organization in Iowa. Mike Huckabee? Not even on same planet.

    So yes, Huckabee might be improving slightly (in REAL polls), but when it comes to actually votes, Romney wins Iowa by 15 to 20 points due to his organization.

  • WOOFX

    Huckabuck is
    running against GW:

    Huckabee called Scott McClellan’s revelation that “the President himself” was involved in the Valerie Plame scandal “stunning.” “They deserve to be thoroughly examined, investigated, and the truth brought to the American people,” he said, adding that President Bush should personally respond to the charges.

    Innoculating Himself Against Bushism

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus