.png)
[Click to Enlarge]
On to Mike Huckabee.
How does the former Arkansas governor and 2008 presidential candidate fare against Obama? We are far removed from concerns over gubernatorial commutations of late 2009, but less distance is between those following the prospective 2012 race and talk of Huckabee sitting it out. Indeed, Huckabee has recently reminded those following the 2012 frivolities from this great distance that he does quite well in polls against the president in those hypothetical match ups. There is truth to that notion. The 2008 GOP nomination runner up has consistently been the best positioned Republican in most polls that survey him alongside Palin and Romney (and less frequently Gingrich) against Obama, yet one doesn't get the feeling that the elites within the Republican Party are all that enamored of Huckabee much less his chances for the nomination in 2012 or the general election against Obama. [In fact, Romney, among those named as 2012 possibilities, most strongly holds that distinction.]
Here, though, is Huckabee very closely matched against Obama in polls in 2009 and 2010. If you scroll below to the time series regression, it is evidence of a trend toward parity among the two men in a future race. Still, very much like Obama in 2006-2007, Huckabee is in the position of needing early primary/caucus wins in 2012 to legitimately enter the discussion. The establishment is not behind him like Romney, nor is there as much grassroots passion behind him as Palin commands. That is not a good combination despite good numbers. Unlike Romney, Huckabee cannot lean on the "I'm the better general election candidate" if it is a Palin-Huckabee argument. He doesn't have either of the establishment or grassroots pieces of the nomination puzzle. The former governor has to hope to catch lightning in a bottle again and win Iowa to force the issue.
| 2012 Presidential Trial Heat Polling (Obama v. Huckabee) | ||||||
| Poll | Date | Margin of Error | Sample | Obama | Huckabee | Undecided |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Politico [Internet] | July 9-14, 2010 | +/- 3.1% | 1011 likely voters | 39 | 35 | 25 |
| Public Policy Polling | July 9-12, 2010 | +/- 3.8% | 667 likely voters | 45 | 47 | 8 |
| Public Policy Polling | June 4-7, 2010 | +/- 3.8% | 650 likely voters | 46 | 44 | 10 |
| Public Policy Polling | May 7-9, 2010 | +/- % | 707 likely voters | 46 | 45 | 8 |
| Public Policy Polling | April 9-11, 2010 | +/- 3.9% | 622 likely voters | 45 | 47 | 9 |
| CNN | April 9-11, 2010 | +/- 3.5% | 907 reg. voters | 54 | 45 | -- |
| Clarus Research | March 17-20, 2010 | +/- 3% | 1050 reg. voters | 47 | 39 | 14 |
| Public Policy Polling | March 12-14, 2010 | +/- 2.6% | 1403 likely voters | 46 | 44 | 10 |
| Public Policy Polling | Feb. 13-15, 2010 | +/- 3.5% | 743 likely voters | 46 | 43 | 11 |
| Public Policy Polling | Jan. 18-19, 2010 | +/- 2.8% | 1151 likely voters | 44 | 45 | 11 |
| Public Policy Polling | Dec. 4-7, 2009 | +/- 2.8% | 1253 likely voters | 50 | 44 | 6 |
| Rasmussen | Nov. 24, 2009 | +/- 3.5% | 800 likely voters | 45 | 41 | 8 |
| Public Policy Polling | Nov. 13-15, 2009 | +/- 3% | 1066 likely voters | 49 | 44 | 7 |
| Public Policy Polling | Oct. 16-19, 2009 | +/- 3.5% | 766 likely voters | 47 | 43 | 10 |
| Public Policy Polling | Sept. 18-21, 2009 | +/- 3.9% | 621 likely voters | 48 | 41 | 11 |
| Clarus Research | Aug. 14-18, 2009 | +/- 3.1% | 1003 voters | 48 | 38 | 15 |
| Public Policy Polling | Aug. 14-17, 2009 | +/- 3.3% | 909 likely voters | 47 | 44 | 10 |
| Public Policy Polling | July 15-16, 2009 | +/- 4.1% | 577 likely voters | 48 | 42 | 10 |
| Public Policy Polling | June 12-16, 2009 | +/- 3.9% | 638 likely voters | 50 | 43 | 8 |
| Public Policy Polling | May 14-18, 2009 | +/- 3.1% | 1000 likely voters | 52 | 39 | 9 |
| Public Policy Polling | April 17-19, 2009 | +/- 3.7% | 686 likely voters | 49 | 42 | 9 |
| Average | 46.88 | 42.5 | -- | |||
| Regression Average | 43.91 | 43.46 | -- | |||
3 comments:
Not quite sure how you judge "grass votes" and "passion" -- but trust me -- from one of many HuckPac grassvotes fanatics -- Huckabee has plenty of them. Huckabee will win IA by 9 to 10 points, leaving the fiction of Palin way behind -- and close to follow the Romney republican establishment. Just look back to where he started from as an astersik in 2008 to where he is today.
We won't need to catch "lighting in a bottle" -- just easily illuminate Huckaboom II -- with so many unable to follow the logical paths, it will be a cinch. Just follow your charts to the wizard of Oz -- you will get to the answers very quickly.
Romney obviously needed to win early primaries also in 2008 -- he didn't and he lost, with or without the establishment
Palin is done before she begins: Doesn't stand a chance in either IA (that goes directly to Huckabee) or NH (directly to Romney) or NV (Romney) or SC (Huckabee). It quickly becomes a two-man raise -- and the establishment only has one vote per person, just like everyone else. The rest of us constitute a lot more votes.
Anon1244,
I don't doubt that Huckabee has grassroots support, but if we think of it in terms of NBA draft choices, for instance, I see Palin as having a higher ceiling in terms of what she could possibly (and that is a big if) do there. By the same analogy, Huckabee is a good draft choice; a reliable choice but not the potential all star Palin is.
The battle with Romney is different. That is a game of money and support among the party elite. The key there will be to watch how the endorsements come in after the November elections and after the candidates begin announcing for 2012 early next year. Romney has a head start there on some level, but all of these candidates have been making endorsements this year with 2012 in mind and that difference could be marginal very quickly.
In other words, it is early.
Anon1248,
Yes, the elite has but one vote just like everyone else, but they cast their "votes" earlier and often serve as a cue to the larger group of voters you indicate outnumber the establishment.
Post a Comment