Huckabee ahead of the pack

POLITICO
The Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey released Wednesday night showed Huckabee winning 25 percent of likely Republican voters, followed closely by Mitt Romney at 21 percent. Newt Gingrich garners 13 percent of the vote and Sarah Palin 12 percent, according to the poll, but no other GOP hopeful tops single-digits.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/50561.html

Huckabee has no chance of winning in the end. Neither does Romney. We need someone that can put up the big fight and beat Odumbo. Someone like Chris Christie.

I like Huckabee but I don't really see him as presidential material. Romney has it, Chris Christie needs a little bit more seasoning.

I personally can't see Romney winning it because of the Mass. Health Care system, after the uproar over ObamaCare.

Nmysys wrote: I personally can't see Romney winning it because of the Mass. Health Care system, after the uproar over ObamaCare.

lol You don't believe Mitt's explanation that what works for MA doesn't mean it will work for the whole US.

The results of selecting Romney or Huckabee to run against the incumbent makes no difference with regards to the outcome. What is needed is a clear choice. The populace has shown it is not interested in electing a moderate Republican. What is needed is a clear conservative. One who is more libertarian than federalist. We need someone with the convictions of Jefferson and Reagan to run against Obama. The compromises can take place when the sausage is made after the election, but the candidate that the Republicans put forth can't be a compromise candidate. The people won't elect a compromise candidate, that is what the history of the elections shows. Candidates that are pure in their adherence to ideology are the ones that win elections.

I actually believe that Paul would stand a much better chance against Obama than either Huckabee or Romney would. Those that think otherwise are failing to see the historical results of elections. When the populace is angry with one party, that is the time to run the candidate that contrasts the most with the party that the voters are angry with. When the voters were angry with Ford, the Democrats ran Carter. When they were angry at Carter, the Republicans countered with Reagan. When they were angry at Bush, the Democrats ran Obama. Coming off the popularity of Clinton after his shift to the center, the Republicans needed a moderate and even then it was a close race, just as it was when Kennedy and Nixon squared off after Eisenhower had served two terms.

No, this time around we need a clear choice. Trying to run the next moderate down the line after McCain doesn't stand a chance. I wouldn't expect that a purist would either, but it would get the people the voting booth on election day and thus provide a better opportunity to control both houses of Congress. Obama, like Clinton and Reagan before him, should be facing a Congress where both houses are controlled by the other party, and with 22 of 33 seats in the Senate seats facing election being held by Democrats, and only needing to pick up 4 of them to have a majority, I think the Republican party would be much better off concentrating their efforts on winning Senate seats instead of the Oval Office in 2012.

SS109 wrote:

Nmysys wrote: I personally can't see Romney winning it because of the Mass. Health Care system, after the uproar over ObamaCare.

lol You don't believe Mitt's explanation that what works for MA doesn't mean it will work for the whole US.

Not when it's not even working in MA.

The problem is, Huckabee hasn't decided if he'll run for the nomination again. If he doesn't, it's a shame.

kresspin wrote: The problem is, Huckabee hasn't decided if he'll run for the nomination again. If he doesn't, it's a shame.

The problem is, Republicans don't have much to offer.

DaffyDick wrote:

kresspin wrote: The problem is, Huckabee hasn't decided if he'll run for the nomination again. If he doesn't, it's a shame.

The problem is, Republicans don't have much to offer.

Even though I am a Republican, you are 100% right on this one. Between Gingrich, Paulin, Rommeny, we might get 10% of the vote. Huck is our best but don't think he has what it takes either.