Another poll with Huck leading FL
From Datamar, 12/9-13 (656 Rs): Huckabee 25%, Giuliani 21%, Romney 19%; McCain 10%; Thompson 9%; Paul 5%. Among 600 Ds: Clinton 44%; Obama 20%; Edwards 14% Richardson 4%.
We don't vouch for all these polls, we just blog em

Congratulations to our next President, Mike Huckabee
Posted by: | December 15, 2007 at 06:10 PM
What the hell is Datamar?
Posted by: | December 15, 2007 at 06:23 PM
I'm hoping for floor fight at the convention in New York.
Posted by: UF Alumni | December 15, 2007 at 06:23 PM
Hey 6:10: I also believe that it makes a lot of sense to make predictions from polls a month or two before the first ballot is cast.
Posted by: President Howard Dean | December 15, 2007 at 06:48 PM
Who's convention is in NY? The new Tony Perkins party?
Posted by: | December 15, 2007 at 06:50 PM
6:10 - I want some of what your smoking.
Even IF (and it's a helluva an "if" Huckabee were to catch lightning in a bottle, run the table in the early states and somehow fend off Rudy in the Feb. 5 states, make no mistake about it: he will get absolutely CRUSHED in November.
A vote for Huckabee (other than an angry protest vote by small-minded members of our party) is simply a vote to make Hillary our next president. Truly frightening.
Posted by: Mike | December 15, 2007 at 07:32 PM
Huckabee wins in a 40 state landslide... Best communicator from either party, honest and authentic, historic inroads with african americans, more executive experience than anyone running for president, fresh face, etc
Posted by: | December 15, 2007 at 08:35 PM
Romney, Giuliani, and Fred offer us sure losses in November.
Romney: Flip-flopped on every critical issue of our time, with the exception of terrorism. (guns, campaign finance, abortion, gays, bush tax cuts, immigration, etc). Also has spent tens of millions on his campaign and achieved modest results at best. He has had an opportunity to get his message out and proven it is difficult for him to connect with voters.
Thompson: Accurately describe by Dan Bartlett as a dud. Running an unorganized, horribly ineffective campaign. Also very mean-spirited.
Giuliani: Loses the general because the 20% - 33% of conservatives who view abortion as the new holocaust don't vote for him. He loses states like Arkansas (where Romney trails Hillary 48-24), West Virginia, Tennessee, and maybe even south carolina. Although he closes the gap in California, New York, and Pennsylvania, he doesn't win them and receives none of their votes in the electoral college.
Huckabee at least gives the GOP a chance at victory.
Posted by: | December 15, 2007 at 08:46 PM
Just what we need. He can start letting out all the convicted r a p i s t here too just as he did when he was governor.
Posted by: stephen | December 15, 2007 at 10:24 PM
A vote for Huckabee is a vote for the Democrats.
Posted by: | December 15, 2007 at 10:48 PM
It's amazing that in a race with three incredibly accomplished leaders (McCain, Romney, Rudy) that this Huckabee goof has risen like he has. Here's the bottom line: If you support Huckabee, you are an ignorant goober. It's that simple.
Posted by: | December 15, 2007 at 10:52 PM
Huckabee/Chuck Norris '08...karate chopping across America!!!
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 12:05 AM
The problem with Romney is that he will not know when to quit. He'll squander his sons' inheritance. Dividing by 5 makes it smaller and smaller each and every day.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 12:16 AM
Join the surge in Florida...
www.FloridaforHuckabee.com
Posted by: Florida for Huckabee | December 16, 2007 at 01:23 AM
Mike Huckabee = Ronald Reagan
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 02:26 AM
2:26 has apparently had a lot to drink tonight. And probably a little to smoke also, right 2:26? I mean you'd have to be high on something to make such a ridiculous comment.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 02:59 AM
Actually, no... Ed Rollins who was one of the people who knew the old Reagan well is Huckabee's Chairman.
Michael Reagan is also supporting Mike Huckabee.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 04:33 AM
4:33 if by "supporting" you mean working on the Huckster's campaign, I guess you're right. Otherwise, the comparison IS ridiculous.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 07:10 AM
Gomer Huckabee is the flavor of the month. The closer people look at his record in Arkansas, the less they like him. He'll fade, just like Rudy.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 07:50 AM
Is it true that Huackabee doesn't have a four year degree. Not that I am an elitist, but shouldn't we have some sort of litmus test for basic qualifications to be the leader of our country???
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 08:25 AM
No college degree - he is a Minister. He thinks the world was created in 6 days and that women should "submit gracefully to their husbands". Does that sound like someone with the slightest chance of getting elected President? NOT!!
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 09:13 AM
The only thing the right wing wackos care about is whether he believes in abortion. If you are against it, they'll vote for you. No matter if you are Huckabee or a bumblebee
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 09:15 AM
I'm no supporter of Gomer but he does have a BA and done 40+ hours of work toward a Masters.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 10:04 AM
Huckabee is but a flash in the pan.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Senior advisor Ed Rollins and senior advisor Dick Morris are going to clash big time. Will all you Hucktards still sing about how great Rollins is once he's dismissed and then trashes your boy to the media?
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 01:26 PM
Rollins isn't the problem. It's the substandard merchandise he's trying to move.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 01:59 PM
I think we've become unmoored from reality when we think the main criterion for selecting a president is that he precisely reflects our personal religious convictions. Do we care about the religious preferences of the CEO of General Motors? We're picking someone to run our country at a time of tremendous peril. We're not on the pulpit committee to select our next minister. It simply baffles me that being a "Christian Leader" is relevant when we select a president. If it is, we'll end up with what you would expect: a president who can give a good sermon but couldn't run the country if our lives depended on it. And unfortunately, they do.
Posted by: | December 16, 2007 at 07:59 PM
It's the Bible-thumpers and the fake televangelistas who are going to drive the GOP off a cliff this cycle. They're managed to convince people that being a Christian is the cure for everyone's character flaws and personality defects, and as a consequence there is a large (but not majority) swath of voters who think being a Christian can make someone a good leader no matter how sleazy and dishonest they've proven to be in the past. Case In Point - George W Bush. Further Case In Point - Mike Huckabee.
I guess I've got a streak of latent Puritanism - I could never convince myself that there was a "free lunch" of any kind, and if I have character flaws and human weaknesses it's up to me to work on them and not start waving my hands waiting to be transformed by someone else. Being a (nominal) Christian doesn't make you a moral person; morality is manifested through a thousand small decisions each and every day. Humility is knowing that you will screw up more than a few of those decisions and thus not thinking you're moral enough to tell anyone else how they ought to live their lives.
*Religion* is useful only as far as it gives you a guideline for making those moral decisions. *Faith* is most helpful for giving you the fortitude to keep trying, knowing all the while you'll make mistakes.
Posted by: Mencken Jr | December 16, 2007 at 11:59 PM
It is obvious that Rudy is not going to win. Now maybe some of these follow-the-winner people will finally get off the liberal bandwagon.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 09:34 AM
Christian theocracy is historically just as vicious and violent as others. Huckabee seems to be an "ideologue." Jr. Bush warned us that's a bad thing. Or is that only for folks who disagree with their own fanaticism?
Posted by: Rose | December 17, 2007 at 01:37 PM
A great new ad by Huckabee>
link
http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=920
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 06:01 PM
I really wanted to support Huckabee. I liked him early on... Problem is, the more I learn about him, the less I can support him. From my vantage point, Romney's the only guy who can match character AND substance. Unless something changes dramatically, he has my vote.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 06:52 PM