Mike Huckabee/Tim Pawlenty vs. Clinton/Obama

[auburntiger]

Let's suppose that the Fred Thompson campaign loses supporters to Mike Huckabee who portrays himself as the more conservative. Let's suppose the Rudy campaign really takes a nose dive between now and February and March as the right mounts a campaign against his social liberalism. Let's suppose that Romney also takes a nose dive for his being a Mormon, leaving Huckabee as the front runner by mid February early March. He picks Governor Tim Pawlenty as his running mate as the RNC will be in Minneapolis. Both are Washington outsiders and have nothing to do with the Bush administration.

Let's just go ahead and assume that Hillary Clinton takes the Dem nomination and in taking a big risk chooses Barack Obama as her VP, leaving Bayh to his senate seat in IN, and Richardson in turn runs for the open GOP seat in NM, as they try to get 60 senators next fall, which unfortunately is not out of the question.

Let's also assume that no third party enters the race.


What would the national turnout be?, Who would win?, and use maps.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

*sigh*
Clinton/Obama 338
Huckabee/Pawlenty 200

[auburntiger]

*sigh*
Clinton/Obama 338
Huckabee/Pawlenty 200

Well, that's a bit more pessimistic than I was thinking. I'd give Huckabee VA; I don't think any Democrat will actually carry VA in '08, least of all Hillary. Bill didn't win it either time. However, I think WV would be more likely to go Dem, but hey that's 5 more EV in the red column so I'm not complaining

I also think Huckabee can win CO and FL. Hillary's universal health care and other liberal spending programs won't go over so well out there. And FL, well...I'd just like to think we could keep all of Dixie in the Red column.

I agree that Ohio will most likely be in the Blue column giving her the election.

However, a few things that need to be considered:
1. As of very recently, Hillary polled around 46% that said they wouldn't vote for her no matter what.
2. Huckabee is likeable with the base and could help social conservatives turn out in droves a la 2004 style which could help in places like CO, OH, FL
3. Republicans still have the upper hand when it comes to "keeping the country safe."

[Lief 🗽]

People nationwide are actually huge fans of Hillary's universal health care, and trust Democrats the same as Republicans on securing the fatherhomeland.

[HardRCafé]

Bush is too centrist and secular.  Huckabee is just what the country is crying out for:  a populist Baptist minister.  Republicans win when they run on bigger, more intrusive government.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

People nationwide are actually huge fans of Hillary's universal health care, and trust Democrats the same as Republicans on securing the fatherhomeland.

If by "huge fans," you mean evenly split 50-50, you'd be right.

[auburntiger]

Maybe Hill would take all the barely Bush states form 2004 in this order: NM, IA, NV, OH, CO...wouldn't that be ironic as 298-240 is what this website has as the 2008 prediction

[Verily]

People nationwide are actually huge fans of Hillary's universal health care, and trust Democrats the same as Republicans on securing the fatherhomeland.

If by "huge fans," you mean evenly split 50-50, you'd be right.

It's closer to 60-40 in favor of universal health care, though it drops to about 55-45 if you attach Clinton's name to it.

[MODU]

In all seriousness, I have no idea.  With Huckabee surging here in the past month or two, he could be seen by independents as the "outsider" or "bringer of change" that they seem to be after.  Could that be enough to defeat the Killary war chest?  I don't know.  I don't see him losing any of the Southern, Midwest, or Mid-Atlantic states that Bush carried, but how would he do around the Great Lakes?

[auburntiger]

In all seriousness, I have no idea.  With Huckabee surging here in the past month or two, he could be seen by independents as the "outsider" or "bringer of change" that they seem to be after.  Could that be enough to defeat the Killary war chest?  I don't know.  I don't see him losing any of the Southern, Midwest, or Mid-Atlantic states that Bush carried, but how would he do around the Great Lakes?

I think what we are seeing right now is a Clinton surge in the general election polls at the moment that will slowly dwindle down to nothing by election day 2008, and normal red/blue states will take sides, leaving it all down to a few true swing states like NM, IA, OH, WI, NV.
While she may win the general, it will not be the proposterous(sp) victory Dems are coveting next year.

All of this is a mirror image of 2000... Republican leading solidly in polls that dwindled to nothing by election day 2000.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

[HappyWarrior]

I think Huckabee takes Arkansas in this matchup sadly

[auburntiger]

I think Huckabee takes Arkansas in this matchup sadly

Of course he would win Arkansas against Hillary . He'd also take WV and VA, but probably lose NV. At least on the presidential level, NV is trending Dem faster than VA.

He would have a shot at winning Florida too.

[Rob]

All of this is a mirror image of 2000

No, it isn't. The idea that every election mirrors the previous cycle or two is, well, wrong.

[Lief 🗽]

[Verily]

I think Huckabee takes Arkansas in this matchup sadly

The only poll of Arkansas of this match-up had Clinton leading Huckabee handsomely.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I think a Huckabee/Pawlenty ticket would probably energize the Republicans a bit just because both are pretty well liked governors from the flyover zone.

But the Democrats are just too energized and independents too upset with the current administration that it would go to Clinton/Obama.  Hillary has the women and Obama has the minorities... it's an unstoppable combination.