Huckabee's poll support

[ecoli]

For someone not raising that much money, he's certainly getting a lot of support in the polls. I, personally, would never support him, but I'm not interested in personal politics in this thread.

 

I just want to know why you guys think he'll polling so high and where this support is coming from. He's grassroots support is pretty big (second to probably only Ron Paul). He got an impressive endorsement from Chuck Norris. Maybe that made him attention on the net (Where he's an internet meme )

He's an ordained minister, so he probably has some evangelical support (he's endorsed by Falwell's son). Also he's got a pretty voice, so maybe people like that too.

 

I, personally, don't think he'll be able to beat the democratic nominee... too socially conservative. But maybe more people are in support of that than I think.

 

[iNow]

He articulates himself quite well, and seems to know how to bring people together ideologically. As I referenced in another thread regarding Barrack Obama, that is what the country (and the world) needs right now. Somebody who can bring people together. Since Obama has been playing so well, I presume that Huckabee is the only Republican who can even begin to compete with that. I too dislike many of his positions, but he forms a much better consensus than any other Republican candidate I've seen.

 

 

He is also has the most executive experience of any candidate. That can't hurt.

[CDarwin]

He's charismatic, he's eloquent, and he's socially conservative enough to appeal to enough "value voters" without actively turning off moderates. Really, it's surprising that Huckabee hasn't gotten more buzz hitherto. That's probably his biggest disadvantage even now. Republican presidential races don't tend to feature surges from the lower tiers. Huckabee has a chance to poll in the top three in Iowa. If he does that, he's a contender. The onus is on him right now.

[ecoli]

He's charismatic, he's eloquent,

But perhaps his charismatic in a negative way... meaning, anyone that honest sounding has to be hiding something.

 

and he's socially conservative enough to appeal to enough "value voters" without actively turning off moderates.

And, as a, at least until now, as a second tier candidate a vote for Huckabee is a vote again the 'establishment' without really voting for anything that's against the status quo.

[john5746]

I just want to know why you guys think he'll polling so high and where this support is coming from.

 

The evangelicals are leaving Guiliani and Thompson. He gets good soundbites in the debates and doesn't believe in evolution. He isn't Mormon, which is a plus for the crowd that only counts all those 'cults' - like Mormons and Catholics when they make resolutions naming how many Christians there are in the world.

[Pangloss]

Incidentally, Huckabee easily has the king of celebrity endorsements on the Republican side:

 

Chuck Norris!

 

 

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/the-chuck-norris-factor/

 

(Edit: Sorry Ecoli, I missed the Chuck Norris reference in the OP!)

[PhDP]

It's easy to forget that Bush was elected in 2000 in part because he was seen as a guy capable of working with democrats & republicans. He was the compassionate conservative, a republican from the corporate world. Even with the rise of the christian right, I'm sceptical about the chance of any candidate openly aligned with the christian right. How can Huckabee appeals to moderates ?

[DrDNA]

Huckabee or Hillary.

We all live together in perfect harmony.

Side by side with Rudy and Freddie oh Lord why don't we........

 

....just go ahead and nuke ourselves.

 

Argghhhh!

 

Please God no!

If my choice is going to be any of the above, I'd rather spend the next 4 years buck necked in a Tyson chicken coop.

[bascule]

I have a hard time accepting the idea of Huckabee as some sort of all-embracing candidate.

 

Between his rampant homophobia, dismissal of evolution (coupled with a literal interpretation of the Bible) and his desire to completely reform the tax system, he seems like, well, not exactly someone who'd be appealing to the political mainstream.

 

Not to mention lying about his theology degree and pardoning a rapist he thought had been newborn in Jesus.

[Pangloss]

Even with the rise of the christian right, I'm sceptical about the chance of any candidate openly aligned with the christian right. How can Huckabee appeals to moderates ?

 

So you can't be a Christian and a Republican and appeal to moderates?

 

Given that every single presidential candidate, Democrat and Republican alike, has professed a belief in the Christian god, is the problem really the fact that they're a Christian, or the fact that they're a Republican?

[CDarwin]

I have a hard time accepting the idea of Huckabee as some sort of all-embracing candidate.

 

Between his rampant homophobia, dismissal of evolution (coupled with a literal interpretation of the Bible) and his desire to completely reform the tax system, he seems like, well, not exactly someone who'd be appealing to the political mainstream.

 

Not to mention lying about his theology degree and pardoning a rapist he thought had been newborn in Jesus.

 

But he does it all in such a darn nice way (I'm not being facetious, either). That's his edge. He's not a rhetorician, or at least he doesn't appear to be. He allows everyone to convince themselves that he's a moderate, even if he decidedly isn't.

 

And it's "reborn," not "newborn." That's my Baptist upbringing, right there.

[DrDNA]

I have a hard time accepting the idea of Huckabee as some sort of all-embracing candidate.

 

Between his rampant homophobia, dismissal of evolution (coupled with a literal interpretation of the Bible) and his desire to completely reform the tax system, he seems like, well, not exactly someone who'd be appealing to the political mainstream.

 

Not to mention lying about his theology degree and pardoning a rapist he thought had been newborn in Jesus.

 

I agree. I knew all embracing republican candidates. All embracing republican candidates were my good friend. And Huckabee is no all embracing republican candidate.

I think we have to admit to ourselves that if the Mittster wasn't a member if a wacko cult religion, he would be the man to take on the wicked witch of Arkansas or Osama Obama.

But he (the Mittster), he wears funny underwear, apparantly believes that satan was Jesus' brother and that he himself is in the holy bloodline and gonna evolve to a god or a god-like being and get his own planet which he will propagate with his own seed and a bunch of wives (sounds a lot like gettin twenty-some-odd dancing virgins, don't it?), among other oddities in the mormon faith.....so he probably ain't...because the middle of the country is gonna have a real problem with that kind of underwear.....hell, I have to admit that I might have a little bit of a problem with it (not the underwear though, it looks quite comfortable)............but who knows.

 

This is the biggest mess I've seen since......uhmmmm.....the last election......and the one before that....

 

The only thing for certain is, we're all going to hell in a hand basket.....no matter who wins which primary and the general elect.

 

 

And it's "reborn," not "newborn." That's my Baptist upbringing, right there.

 

 

???

 

You mean reborneded ?

 

So you can't be a Christian and a Republican and appeal to moderates?

 

Given that every single presidential candidate, Democrat and Republican alike, has professed a belief in the Christian god, is the problem really the fact that they're a Christian, or the fact that they're a Republican?

 

Yeah! Even Hillary claims to be a Christian......uhmmmm....when she's around a bunch of Christians.......

[john5746]

So you can't be a Christian and a Republican and appeal to moderates?

 

Given that every single presidential candidate, Democrat and Republican alike, has professed a belief in the Christian god, is the problem really the fact that they're a Christian, or the fact that they're a Republican?

 

It is harder for the "True - Christian" whatever that means. To be against abortion, against homosexual marriage, not believe in evolution, act as if they are going to personally bring back morality. That is hard to swallow for moderates.

 

I think we have to admit to ourselves that if the Mittster wasn't a member if a wacko cult religion, he would be the man to take on the wicked witch of Arkansas or Osama Obama.

But he (the Mittster), he wears funny underwear, apparantly believes that satan was Jesus' brother and that he himself is in the holy bloodline and gonna evolve to a god or a god-like being and get his own planet which he will propagate with his own seed and a bunch of wives (sounds a lot like gettin twenty-some-odd dancing virgins, don't it?), among other oddities in the mormon faith.....so he probably ain't...because the middle of the country is gonna have a real problem with that kind of underwear.....hell, I have to admit that I might have a little bit of a problem with it (not the underwear though, it looks quite comfortable)............but who knows.

 

My best friend in high school was a Mormon, in the middle of Baptist country. I let him and some of his missionary friends do their marketing presentation and found it very underwhelming. It is strange that the more recent the claims, the less believable they are with religion. The Jehovah's witnesses were more compelling, they seemed to know what they were talking about. But, I found the opposite with respect to their behaviour. The Jehovah's seemed more cold and secluded. The Mormons were very much like me, but they had a few more rules to follow. It is hard for me to think they actually believe all the stuff you mentioned. Just as it is hard for me to think that Christians actually believe in a literal bible. Most of them don't, so that may be the case with Mormons as well. Especially the ones who seem to do well in the real world.

 

Both groups seemed more religious than Baptists, some of who think Catholics are members of a cult!

 

Yeah, it sucks to have the leader of your country have a weird belief system. Since they all make that claim, you look for signs that maybe they really don't let it interfere with their thinking(moderate).

[CDarwin]

Just as it is hard for me to think that Christians actually believe in a literal bible. Most of them don't, so that may be the case with Mormons as well. Especially the ones who seem to do well in the real world.

 

As for Mormon literalism: The LDS Church takes no official position on evolution. Brigham Young has a strait-up evolutionary biology department, so the establishment isn't inherently in opposition to it.

[DrDNA]

The bookies still have him in 5th place overall just ahead of Paul:

U S Presidential Election Winning Candidate Bet Until : 17:00 - 31st December 2007

Competitor Price Unit Stake

Hillary Clinton 4/6

 

Barack Obama 4/1

 

Rudolph Giuliani 5/1

 

Mitt Romney 7/1

 

Mike Huckabee 14/1

 

Ron Paul 20/1

 

Fred Thompson 25/1

 

John Edwards 25/1

 

John Mc Cain 33/1

 

http://www.willhill.com/iibs/EN/buildcoupon.asp?couponchoice=PO407741

[Pangloss]

It is harder for the "True - Christian" whatever that means. To be against abortion, against homosexual marriage, not believe in evolution, act as if they are going to personally bring back morality. That is hard to swallow for moderates.

 

It sure is. But I think it's interesting that for many moderates the religious statements of Democratic presidential statements are more acceptable because they are believed to be inaccurate and/or exaggerated to get votes! It's as if they're saying "Well we know they're lying, but they're lying to idiots so it's okay."

 

[ecoli]

The bookies still have him in 5th place overall just ahead of Paul:

He has to win the republican nomination first...

 

Sportsbook gives Paul better chances there:

http://www.sportsbook.com/betting/sports-2008-republican-party-presidential-nomination-odds-to-win-(all-bets-action)-betting-odds-753.html

[john5746]

It sure is. But I think it's interesting that for many moderates the religious statements of Democratic presidential statements are more acceptable because they are believed to be inaccurate and/or exaggerated to get votes! It's as if they're saying "Well we know they're lying, but they're lying to idiots so it's okay."

 

 

There are some who feel that way, but I think more accurately, they assume Democrats are more moderate with their religion. And in regard to the issues I mentioned, it is hard to find Democrats who will make abortion illegal, shit on science, and are against homosexual marriage. I think John Edwards mentioned his religious beliefs compelled him to disagree with homosexuality, but he said he would not act upon that belief.

[Pangloss]

Wups, I meant that to say "... the religious statements of Democratic presidential candidates...".

 

Sure that's what they say, John, but why are they believed?

 

BTW, if I'm not mistaken, all of the Democratic presidential candidates are opposed to gay marriage, including John Edwards.