Romney leads

[BM]

Haha, a 2012 Republican primary poll.

35% Mitt Romney
26% Mike Huckabee
20% Sarah Palin
10% Other
9% Don't Know

Romney's momentum appears to be unstoppable.  No way can Huckabee make up that 9 point deficit in just three years.

Then again, perhaps if Huckabee were to increase his ad spending in Iowa from $0 to some non-zero number, he could make a strong enough showing there to at least be competitive with Romney by Super Tuesday.  The other question I have is, why hasn't Palin gone negative against Romney yet?  She hasn't even mentioned his name for as long as I can remember.  She's down by double digits, so she's got nothing to lose.  Oh well, maybe she should just start work on debate prep, as the first 2012 primary debate is coming up in just about two and a half years.

you're kidding right?

[Eraserhead]

Haha, a 2012 Republican primary poll.

35% Mitt Romney
26% Mike Huckabee
20% Sarah Palin
10% Other
9% Don't Know

Romney's momentum appears to be unstoppable.  No way can Huckabee make up that 9 point deficit in just three years.

Then again, perhaps if Huckabee were to increase his ad spending in Iowa from $0 to some non-zero number, he could make a strong enough showing there to at least be competitive with Romney by Super Tuesday.  The other question I have is, why hasn't Palin gone negative against Romney yet?  She hasn't even mentioned his name for as long as I can remember.  She's down by double digits, so she's got nothing to lose.  Oh well, maybe she should just start work on debate prep, as the first 2012 primary debate is coming up in just about two and a half years.

you're kidding right?

He is.

Anyway, Romney is my super early prediction.

[Reaganfan]

I am truly torn when thinking about 2012. I really like both Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney as potential prospects, and I love Sarah of course...but something about an Obama vs. Romney race seems very 1980-esque.

My Obama-voting 18 year old sister told me two days ago, "I would vote for Palin or Romney...but I don't like McCain."

We need to make sure we can solidify the red states and then try for blue ones. 2008 was not the year to do it...but Romney could well pull New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin and be strong in the west.

Republicans nominate people we already know. Unless some massive terrible event unfolds, it is pretty clear that the President of the United States on January 20, 2013 will be a re-elected Barack Obama or a name we all already know.

[paul718]

I mean, I could never support a dishonest man, but these are the only inconsistencies I know of.   

So I take it you aren't supporting McCain.

I am.  Why do you imply that he's dishonest?

Keating Five.

Plus stuff from the last 19 years.

John McCain and John Glenn were exonerated from any illegality in the Keating Five scandal.  Study up.

[auburntiger]

If Obama is a shoe-in for re-election, I will not mind Romney as the sacrficial lamb. I'd probably vote Obama.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If John McCain loses this election I doubt Sarah Palin will go anywhere beyond Alaska except maybe the Senate. The last failed Veep candidate to get the nomination was Bob Dole 20 years later and he had been around the political campfire awhile. Walter Mondale also got it but he was actually Veep for 4 years so his case is special. Even so both these people lost the General elections by wide margins.

Over the course of his career, Romney has shown that he will say anything, change any view, to get elected.

The only perceived flip-flops I know of is his views on abortion and embryonic stem-cell research.  But he does have a somewhat compelling argument, depending on whether you buy it or not.  I would like to know, I mean, I could never support a dishonest man, but these are the only inconsistencies I know of.  

Those are the only ones. Liberals and misguided Repubs like to bring up others like Gay Marriage and bring up false claims about his record on Taxes. 1st Romney never supported Gay Marriage and I challenge anyone who disagrees to find eveidence to the contrary. Marriage was not an issue till 1997 and in 94 the debate was over gay rights and Mitt was definately not going to allow people to be denied the same Medical and Economic rights granted to everyone else.

At the same time Huckabee was advocating Quarrantining Gays over the HIV scare, even though it was proven in the 80's that you can't spread HIV Aids through physical contact. Could you imagine the ads that would be run against him if he got the nomination.


Its good the Mitt is ahead and I am not surprised. After all he was much more competitive then Huck and Mitt had a broader appeal. Huck was and still is an unelectable candidate. He never showed any appeal outside of Heavy concentrations of Evangelicals and definately did not show any strength among Blue collar Reagan Democrats(among whom many media pundits claimed Huck would do well).

[Mr. Morden]

If John McCain loses this election I doubt Sarah Palin will go anywhere beyond Alaska except maybe the Senate. The last failed Veep candidate to get the nomination was Bob Dole 20 years later and he had been around the political campfire awhile. Walter Mondale also got it but he was actually Veep for 4 years so his case is special. Even so both these people lost the General elections by wide margins.

Meh, I really think using historical analogies like that is flawed.  So much so, that it actually inspired me to start a new thread on why I think arguments like this are bogus:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=2.0

[Хahar 🤔]

If John McCain loses this election I doubt Sarah Palin will go anywhere beyond Alaska except maybe the Senate. The last failed Veep candidate to get the nomination was Bob Dole 20 years later and he had been around the political campfire awhile. Walter Mondale also got it but he was actually Veep for 4 years so his case is special. Even so both these people lost the General elections by wide margins.

Meh, I really think using historical analogies like that is flawed.  So much so, that it actually inspired me to start a new thread on why I think arguments like this are bogus:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=2.0

Wrong link.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=86580.0

[Mr. Morden]

If John McCain loses this election I doubt Sarah Palin will go anywhere beyond Alaska except maybe the Senate. The last failed Veep candidate to get the nomination was Bob Dole 20 years later and he had been around the political campfire awhile. Walter Mondale also got it but he was actually Veep for 4 years so his case is special. Even so both these people lost the General elections by wide margins.

Meh, I really think using historical analogies like that is flawed.  So much so, that it actually inspired me to start a new thread on why I think arguments like this are bogus:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=2.0

Wrong link.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=86580.0

Oops, yeah.

[Meeker]

Please oh please pick Mitt!

This is nearly exactly where I would expect the race to be right now. If Jindal makes the jump (which it looks like he will) then I suspect he'll break into the top field as well.

I was really looking forward to a Huckabee v. Romney Battle Royale for the soul of the Republican Party, but now Sarah's gone and screwed it all up