He and Ron Paul are the only two GOP candidates that non right-wing extremists seem able to tolerate. Therefore, Huckabee seems like he could give a Dem a run for their money. Am I wrong?
2007-12-03 05:56:00 · 18 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
After the humiliation of the last 7 years, no Republican that has any 'hard-right' scent on him... has a chance of winning. All the candidates, except Giuliani, have campaigned as though they're afraid of alienating their base... but their base has moved to the left. They've moved enough to the left that Giuliani has a real shot... if the hard-right support him. If they don't support him, there is absolutely no way that the Republicans can take the next election. They're dead in the water.
Maybe Pat Robertson isn't so out of touch after all.
As for Paul... he has a credibility problem that I don't think he can overcome. He's a good man, though.
2007-12-03 06:07:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I always thought from the beginning of the 2008 speculation that Huckabee would be a good if not the best candidate for the GOP in 2008. I mean, even though Bush is much less popular now, and people talk about the Democrats have the advantage in the election, in many ways the Republicans have the advantage, I really wonder what states that Hillary could win that Kerry and Gore didn't, and Huckabee would conceivably hold all those states that Bush won in 2004. He's probably has more crossover appeal than any other candidate as conservative as he is, he has the support of the Christian Right, and the media loves him. So he would be formidible.
2007-12-03 06:02:04 · answer #2 · answered by Coats 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You don't think Huckabee is an extremist? You need to do more research. I would have agreed with you on his chances of doing well a month or so ago but then I did some research and, frankly I don't think I want any more combined church and state. Ron Paul is just plain off the wall. While not necessarily Right Wing extremests both of these candidates can appeal to the extreme elements in our population.
2007-12-03 06:13:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think you're right. I'm an avid Ron Paul supporter, but I could tolerate the Huckster more than any other GOP candidate.
However, he is a tax and spend, large government and pro-war candidate. I don't think he'll win the general election being pro-war. Ron Paul is the GOP's ONLY shot at the general election. I wish the GOP wasn't so determined in getting a pro-war candidate nominated.
2007-12-03 06:09:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think Huckabee could easily win the GOP nomination.
Ron Paul has enough $$$ to make his own run under an independent Republican/Libertarian ticket.
Paul will pull enough Republican votes away from Huckabee to hand the White House to Hillary or Obama.
Just my $0.02
2007-12-03 06:06:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He is very principled but he really is essentially the same old right wing propaganda recycled all over again. That's why I'm voting for Ron Paul, he is different and by the way he has all the other candidates in both parties shivering in their boots!
2007-12-03 06:06:52 · answer #6 · answered by noituloeve maerd 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The GOP has a great chance of winning no matter who wins the nom. That is thanks to the dems for putting forth buffoons for their nom.
Although I do like Huckabee a lot.
2007-12-03 06:23:32 · answer #7 · answered by DesignDiva1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Huckabee would be far better than Ron Paul any day.
2007-12-03 06:04:25 · answer #8 · answered by ♥ Mel 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Huckabee is definitely my pick for president. He's surged in recent weeks and is in the lead in iowa. I wouldn't count him out of the race.
2007-12-03 06:03:15 · answer #9 · answered by hockeyfan7602001 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that those 2 are the only republicans that can win this election, although I would tend to side with Ron Paul.
2007-12-03 06:01:36 · answer #10 · answered by benni 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋