Well, Mike Huckabee isn’t backing away from his 1992 comments about homosexuality being a "sinful lifestyle" and that AIDS patients should be isolated. I thought this would have been spun and buried already, but it seems that the story has some legs. It’s clear now that Huckabee is going after the religious right, and I think his comments about AIDS in particular will cost him the support of moderate Republicans.
Therefore I’m withdrawing my earlier prediction that Huckabee would become our next president. In fact, a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Tuesday shows he would lose to all three leading Democratic candidates by double digits in hypothetical contests. So while I’m not sure that he will become the Republican candidate, I’m kind of hoping he will be because it appears he’s beatable.
The poll also confirms what I said the other day: John Edwards is our best bet to win against a Republican.
On the Democratic side, Edwards performs best against each of the leading Republicans. In addition to beating Huckabee by 25 percent and McCain by 8 percent, the North Carolina Democrat beats Romney by 22 percentage points (59 percent to 37 percent).
What really surprised me is how well John McCain did in polling.
The poll also shows that Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona would do best against leading Democrats. He beats Clinton by 2 percentage points (50 percent to 48 percent), ties Obama (48 percent to 48 percent) and loses to Edwards by a smaller margin (8 points) than the other Republican candidates do.
I thought he had more or less fizzled out, but now I’m left wondering if there might be some sort of McCain resurgence during the primaries. All I know is that if I was a McCain supporter (which I’m not), I would want to know who he plans to choose as his running mate before voting for him in the primaries. I’m not an ageist, but in a position as important as our President, I think you have to consider that McCain would be the oldest President ever elected.
Before every one starts leaving me comments about how you can’t trust polls, I want to stress that I know and agree with that sentiment. You can see trends in polls however, and this is at least the fourth poll I’ve seen showing Edwards doing best against Republicans. We have to take that into account.
I’ve always liked John Edwards; it’s just that in this election there are a couple of candidates I thought I liked better (Kucinich, Biden). I think though that I’m ready to throw my support behind Edwards exclusively. Sure, in a perfect world we could vote for whatever candidate we wanted with no ramifications, but I’m afraid that supporting a different candidate will allow Hillary to slip in, and I don’t think she can win.
As Democrats, I think it’s time that we get real about this. If we really want to take back the White House, then we need to start getting smart.
And I think that starts with John Edwards.
Scott, John Edwards is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He was a personal injury attorney who made tens of millions. He knows how to work the system at a legal level which will fly right above the public’s level of understanding until its too late. Having delt with major law firms around the country all of my life, I can tell you that 99% of lawyers are cut from the same cloth. People see right through Edwards which is why he is trailing the Democratic pack. Obama is self destructing. For him to get up on the stage with Oprah and say that she has so much power that his wife would kill him if she told her to shows that he is an idiot and incapable of thinking on his feet! This goes right along with his statement that he is qualified to be President because he lived overseas when he was ten years old. Musings from the mind of a teenager. Hillary will get the nomination and she will be the next President. Of all the candidates from both parties, she is the only one who brings substance and real experience to the table. I would be very satisfied to have a Presidency run as well as Bill Clinton’s administration.
Hm. I’m kind of surprised that you came out supporting John Edwards. Not that he’s a bad choice. I do like him a lot. And his wife ROCKS. But I think the other candidates seem a bit more gay positive. As for me, I’m going to vote democratic in the election anyway so I’m not particularly concerned about who the nominee will be: he/she has my vote already.
vuboq’s last blog post..StickSteven 2008 Year in Review Preview
I cannot vote for the Tom Cruise -jump-up-and-down-on-the-couch-coz-im-such-a-swell-guy- candidate because I want to reach level ZENDROID on my Scientology quest and the real Mr Crusie prohibits it…
Truth – I’m not behind anyone now. But then again – I am also not behind the put the Christ back into Christ-mas campaign either.
xox
I think it should go to the woman… Hillary
Madame President has a nice ring to it…
Jeremy
Huckabee is a dead man.
jeremy’s last blog post..Many Lives Many Masters
Johnny-
Your view of Edwards seems tainted simply because he is a lawyer. I’m actually comforted by that fact because 1) he’s knowledgeable of the law, and 2) he fought for the little guy and victims. If he had been a corporate lawyer, then I’d have some doubts, but he’s wasn’t.
Also, he built his wealth and didn’t inherit it from daddy unlike some Presidents (cough… W… cough). He didn’t start out rich. The right-wing is trying to portray his wealth as an issue, but is it? I still think he’s a good person.
Does it not concern you at all that Hillary is accepting money from people like Rupert Murdoch?
vuboq-
I’m supporting Edwards because I want to win the election. They way I see things:
Hillary: too devisive- can’t win
Obama: Inexperience and race will (unfortunately) be a factor- can’t win
Richardson: Lack of charisma/ not enough support – can’t win
Biden: Could possibly win, but very unlikely he will get the nomination; not enough name recognition
Kucinich: Although I like his views, the right has been successful in portraying him as a liberal kook. He’s nerdy-looking and therefore won’t win.
Edwards: Charismatic, good name recognition- can win
I would rather put up Edwards than one of the other candidates only because I think he can go the distance. He’s got a JFK/ Bill Clinton-type charisma and that will play well with voters.
I may not see eye-to-eye with Edwards about everything, but I do agree with him on most things. That’s enough for me to support him.
Also, I think the husband-wife split on gay issues is tactic. It allows him to appeal to “values” voters while his wife courts the GLBT community. I think he will come out more gay-friendly once elected. Besides, he’s not anti-gay. He has said he will end “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and support a lot of other gay rights initiatives.
Jeremy-
It does have a nice ring, but Hillary’s not the one.
Is no one else concerned that she is accepting large amounts of money from right-wingers like Rupert Murdoch? I really don’t think she will be the change we’re looking for.
I don’t know how any Republicans can (a) remain in the party after the last 7 years and (b) get excited about ANY of the thuggish buffoons they have running for prez. It’s a very sad–if not unexpected–commentary on our country and the levels to which it has sunk.
That said, I’m torn between really WANTING to vote for Kucinich (who speaks for me on so many levels) in the primaries and voting for Edwards (who I still believe is electable). I’m not excited about Obama, and the only way in hell I’ll vote for Hillary is if she somehow manages to get the nomination (ANY Democrat is better than than any of the creeps the GOP is offering). NO MORE FAMILY DYNASTIES!
Huckabee stinks like old socks.
And Bossy predicted McCain’s comeback even when her friends said, “Who -that crazy guy?” Because remember back when George W was making his first appearance in the Republican primaries and everyone was all, “Who? That stupid guy?”
The Kevbear is still hoping for Gore to show up… Remember just when things look there darkest the Lone Ranger rides up to SAVE THE DAY!
Kevin’s last blog post..It’s Beginning To Look…
The idea that Hillary can’t win has been around for so long that a lot of people, especially liberal Democrats, have accepted it as gospel. But I don’t think it’s true. Polls differ, but I’ve seen a lot of polls where she beats all of the Republicans in battleground states. I think that the longer she’s out there, the more people will come to accept her very moderate views. She’s not really all that divisive. There’s a group on the right that really, really hates her, but that wouldn’t keep her from winning Ohio and Florida.
I like her because she’s very smart and because she is moderate. I’m considerably more liberal than she is, but a leftist won’t be able to unite the country any more than Bush did. I think she has the best chance of building a bipartisan center that gets a lot of things done.
TED’s last blog post..Perky
Actually I was going to post this to your earlier blog on Huckabee becoming the Repug nominee for president but I will post this here. Read the below link on the Huckabee pardon and then tell me this guy is going to be the next President. If his fellow nominees haven’t started using it yet to damage him I sure as hell hope someone does and SOON!
Huckabee is going to start stinking up the room and SOON.
http://www.arktimes.com/Articles/ArticleViewer.aspx?ArticleID=154e1aad-fd18-4efd-8d80-b5dab8559419
Scott – You have, particularly as it relates to the democratic candidates, summed up my feelings on the Presidential race more succinctly and eloquently than I could have ever hoped to.
I think the Hillary supporters above highlight how divisive she is: the people that support her are often very strong supporters, but those who don’t care for her … well, they REALLY dislike her. And it’s not because she’s a woman, it’s because she’s Hillary. She not only carries all of her own baggage (strong, threatening female; failed healthcare initiative–and all of the drama that went along with her perceived political missteps in this situation), but by association, she carries all of Bill’s baggage.
While Hillary may be able to win an election (and I hope to hell that if she’s the nominee that she can pull it off), I’m just not very confident about that.
Edwards, on the other hand … yeah, he has some issues too (really, does the public expect someone who is perfect?), but I agree that overall he’s a great candidate. And his perceived ability to conquer Republican candidates is H-U-G-E.
Plus, I had the opportunity to meet him (very briefly) during the 2004 elections and in the 30 seconds I got to talk to him, he honestly seemed as genuine and warm as I could expect a politician to be. Hey, it was 30 seconds, but I’ve not gotten that impression from any other candidate in a long time.
TP’s last blog post..Spotted in the Castro
Scott, I saw the same poll as you did..and I have always said that Edwards was the most electable..plus there is a sociology thing that says when there are three people to choose, the less popular of the three will get the nod because the individual can’t make up his mind between the ‘top two’..
Or some crap like that..its early on the left coast
Dusty’s last blog post..Jesus the King? Or Filter Kings?
Scott,
I just found your site (from Towelroad), and am pleased to see what you’re doing.
Your analysis of Huckabee was of great interest to me because I’ve been following Huckabee ever since his January 2007 appearance on Jon Stewart, where he literally shocked me with his charismatic personality. I haven’t seen the likes of that since Reagan, and it scares the hell out of me. The long and short of it is that I thought then, 10 or 11 months ago, that this guy was gonna be the Rs candidate. He was polling in the low singles, but I knew it as though some Baptist angel had delivered the news.
Here’s the reasons: 1.) McCain was just then in the process of imploding, as many observers had been expecting – he had no support from the social conservatives – the Base – who hadn’t forgotten his “straight talk” about Falwell and Robertson; 2.) I knew that Giuliani would founder as soon as Rs realized the depth of his “depravity” and just how much his other shenanigans would impact on his electability; and 3.) I had a feeling that Romney’s flip/flopping wouldn’t fly with the Rs. Funny, though, I didn’t expect his religion to be THAT much of a problem, and I’m still not sure which of those is the cause of his downfall.
With Huckabee it was immediately obvious that he either was sincerely sincere, or that he’d gone to the Ronald Reagan School for Politicians, where he’d majored in acting, and did his dissertation on the Reagan dictum, “If you cannot be sincere, at least act that way.” I mean there hasn’t been as likable a politician in years! Even I felt the charismatic pull, and I’m one of those Dems who believes that all Republicans hate America. Plus, he’s got the humor, and the folksy personal touch down pat. His answers were usually direct (or seemed to be) and honest (or seemed to be). He was, in short, believable and, even more important, likable, at least for those of The Credulous among us. And don’t forget, folks, The Credulous are the people who have (mostly) elected presidents for the past three decades.
I began then to worry about him, and despite Scott’s excellent analysis of the problems Huck faces, and the current polls that show him losing to any of the Dem field, I think he is a formidable opponent, and should be treated as such. So far in the race, you must remember that the vast majority of Americans haven’t been involved – it’s only us Political Junkies who’ve been following it. But when Huck raps up Iowa, NH, and South Carolina and, probably, Florida (where he’s polling ahead of Giuliani in the polls out 12/15), the Rs and The Credulous who’ve not been paying attention will begin do so, and will flock to him. I expect a steam roller of support that will present a huge challenge to whomever the Dem candidate is. He will bring excitement, and the shining possibility of winning back to the Rs.
This is partly because of Huck’s personality.
(BTW, you can count on his campaign using either his first name, as in “I Like Mike”, or using the above abreviation, “Huck”, in their ads and promo. It’s easier than the full name, and less “red-necky”, and it also has some charm easily borrowed from Mark Twain. My only worry, if I were in his camp, would be that some smart-ass Dem (Like Me, For Instance) will do a “Fuck Huck” button – and yes, I’ve already copy-written that!
And there’s another aspect of the coming Huck/R steamroller: As mentioned above, until now the Rs have been dispirited, very unhappy with the field of possible candidates, and certain that they were going to lose both the White House, and have further erosions in their House/Senate seats. They’ve been living in the hope of Saviour, and you watch now: when they discover that Huck is EVERYTHING they could have wanted, they will be overjoyed, and re-invigorated. And that terrifies me. I am not only certain that Huck will be their nominee, but that he will give whomever the Ds nominate a very strong run for the vote.
OK, he has problems. And Yes, he has baggage. But think about it: none of it is stuff that the social conservatives would really have a problem with, and only Ds find objectionable, such as his problems with AIDS, where it’s a big concern to us, but doesn’t even register on the social conservatives screen. So I don’t believe he will have any problem solidifying the base – and for a Republican candidate, that’s the most crucial thing. He may have some tap dancing to do with big donors following on his populist positions in the primary, but R’s aren’t stupid. They’ll give him a pass, I’m certain.
And the other stuff (like his failure on the N.I.E.) can be mostly written off as inexperience – in this probable way: “aw shucks, we were a shoestring, grass-roots, long-shot, primary campaign, and didn’t have the money to operate like the better funded and more experienced ones did. But we’re up to speed now, so there won’t be any more of those problems”. And they’ll buy that, too.
So trust me, please, Huck is a shoe-in for the nomination, and an extremely dangerous challenger for whomever the Dems nominate. Underestimate him at your own peril.
With best regards from,
sofa-ist,
“practicing Sophist philosophy – from the comfort of my couch”
i really like ‘SOFA-IST’ reasoning! how bright – how cutesy!