Skip to comments.
Can Mike Huckabee win back his Iowa flock?
KSPR-TV / CNN ^
| May 7, 2015
| Sara Murray
Posted on 05/07/2015 10:41:08 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
OSKALOOSA, Iowa (CNN) - If Mike Huckabee hopes to be anointed victor of the Iowa caucuses once again, he better prepare to retread a lot of familiar ground.
"Luck is good. Voters are better," Huckabee quipped as Nathan Johnson wished luck upon the newly official presidential candidate as he stopped by a local coffee shop Wednesday.
Huckabee had Johnson's vote when he won the 2008 Iowa caucuses. This time around, the 33-year-old from Oskaloosa is eyeing a top tier: Huckabee, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. He's biding his time to see how the candidates perform as the race carries on.
"I think a lot of times they make mistakes down the road," Johnson said. "It's a long way to the caucuses."(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at kspr.com ...
TOPICS: Iowa; Campaign News; Parties
KEYWORDS: 2016election; arkansas; election2016; huckabee; iowa; jindal; mikehuckabee; tedcruz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
To: Jack Black; FreeReign
I'm pretty much trusting the polls that all the people under 5% will not be finishing in the top 3 in any of them, so it's only a matter of time till they drop out - or they may not get in.
Probably shouldn't do that this early Jack.
Cruz started at 3% when he was running for Senator and after getting the GOP Nomination, Reagan was down by 30% to Carter.
Polls are unreliable.
41
posted on
05/07/2015 12:17:15 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: SoConPubbie
Tell me how anything you posted matters one little bit?
All the Republicans want big government and have weird comments and elite-media lies following them around; just like you follow Gov Huckabee around.
42
posted on
05/07/2015 12:17:24 PM PDT
by
donna
(I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth. - Barack Hussein Obama)
To: gov_bean_ counter
Why are you answering other Freepers replies?
43
posted on
05/07/2015 12:20:34 PM PDT
by
donna
(I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth. - Barack Hussein Obama)
To: donna
Tell me how anything you posted matters one little bit?
All the Republicans want big government and have weird comments and elite-media lies following them around; just like you follow Gov Huckabee around.
It matters, Donna, because it is the record he refuses to talk about. It goes both to Honesty, and how Huckabee looks at the fiscal issues.
He is not a fiscal conservative, he is a Christian Socialist when it comes to fiscal issues and his record bears out this characterization.
This is extremely important.
We have at least two candidates who are both Social Conservatives and Fiscal conservatives in this race who will be strong on Illegal Immigration.
Huckabee is a sure-fired loser, whose sole purpose is to make sure that any candidate to the right of Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are knocked out of the race.
We need a full-spectrum conservative, not a half-baked conservative like Huckabee.
44
posted on
05/07/2015 12:21:15 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: donna
45
posted on
05/07/2015 12:22:11 PM PDT
by
gov_bean_ counter
(Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools)
To: donna
Nope, just those supporting people like BO and Huckleberry who put more faith in nanny government and the personality cult which delivers it more than Jesus Christ.
46
posted on
05/07/2015 12:28:25 PM PDT
by
Vigilanteman
(Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
To: SoConPubbie
Then use his current statements to reveal the truth, not just elite-media reporting. I'll turn on him if necessary, but only with current issues.
It may be necessary to use him as VP because Christians stayed home for McCain and the last Bush votes were very close.
Those Huckabee loyalists may be the Republicans' only friends, unless those voters are insulted into staying home again.
47
posted on
05/07/2015 12:29:42 PM PDT
by
donna
(I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth. - Barack Hussein Obama)
To: SoConPubbie
Polls are unreliable. I must respectfully disagree. In the last several elections we've been treated to a number of analysts, notably Nate Silver, who used polls, and specifically poll averaging to predict results and their predictions have been very accurate.
Any one poll can be off, but averages tend to make the data more accurate.
It's still a long way till the first vote, but I believe the rough outlines of the race are very clear. We do know that successful candidates are always near the top of the polls, not stuck under 5% perennially.
Nate Silver has another article on his site explaining that Christie is not going to be the nominee. It's based on favorabilty and familiarity polling. Most people know Christie, and most don't like him. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
I will bet you that none of the under 5% candidates will finish in the top three places in the first three contests: Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Specifically that's Perry, Kasich, Santorum, Graham, Jindal & Fiorina. The only one who might give me some worries is Graham, as a favorite son in South Carolina. But even if he got lucky there, it's the end of it for him.
48
posted on
05/07/2015 12:29:52 PM PDT
by
Jack Black
( Disarmament of a targeted group is one of the surest early warning signs of future genocide.)
To: Jack Black
I must respectfully disagree. In the last several elections we've been treated to a number of analysts, notably Nate Silver, who used polls, and specifically poll averaging to predict results and their predictions have been very accurate.
Jack, re-read what I posted to you.
List far out, polls are historically inaccurate.
Want more proof?
How about all the polls that stated that Rudy would win, 1+ years out from the primaries?
How about the polls that had Romney winning the election a couple months out from the election.
Polls are more accurate in the time frame of a month before the event.
49
posted on
05/07/2015 12:32:24 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: donna
Donna,
How many times do we have to tell you that he is only a PARTIAL conservative??
He is not POTUS material from a conservative perspective.
Now, if all you care about is the social issues, than vote for Huckabee.
If you want to seriously, and from a constitutional perspective, deal with the fiscal issues, you’ll have to vote for someone like Ted Cruz, or to a lessor degree, Scott Walker because Huckabee ain’t the man.
If you want to seriously deal with border issues, you will need someone like Ted Cruz or Scott Walker (though I do not trust his election year conversion on this issue) because Huckabee has shown he cannot be trusted on this issue either.
Huckabee simply is not presidential material.
50
posted on
05/07/2015 12:35:18 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: SoConPubbie
How many times do we have to tell you that he is only a PARTIAL conservative?? Prove it with his current positions on issues without using the gotcha CNN anti-Christian spin.
51
posted on
05/07/2015 12:47:29 PM PDT
by
donna
(I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth. - Barack Hussein Obama)
To: donna
Prove it with his current positions on issues without using the gotcha CNN anti-Christian spin.
Sorry, but until Huckabee is honest about his past record, how am I supposed to believe any policy positions that might conflict with his actual record?
52
posted on
05/07/2015 12:52:33 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: donna
Leaving aside the fact that this is NOT an anti-Huckabee article... are you suggesting that if such an article is posted, you are somehow censored from replying, and therefore silenced?
I just don’t get the silencing part of your earlier post.
53
posted on
05/07/2015 12:54:33 PM PDT
by
Nervous Tick
(There is no "allah" but satan, and mohammed was his demon-possessed tool.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Hard to believe anyone would actually vote for this con artist.
54
posted on
05/07/2015 1:07:54 PM PDT
by
rrrod
(at home in Medellin Colombia)
To: rrrod
Hard to believe people send money to The Bakkers, Creflo Dollar or Jimmy Swaggert.
55
posted on
05/07/2015 1:10:09 PM PDT
by
2ndDivisionVet
(You can help: https://donate.tedcruz.org/c/FBTX0095/)
To: donna
FR refutes false elite-media attacks on conservatives. Yes, we do. But since Mike Huckabee isn't a conservative, very few here, if any, are interested in what you are selling.
To: SoConPubbie; Jack Black
Added to which, at this point in the last two contests, the eventual winner of Iowa (Huckabee and then Santorum) was polling in the range that Jack claims won't finish in the top 3.
To: SoConPubbie
Nate Silver *never* had Romney winning the election. Neither did Dr. Wong.
But I agree, you can't accurately predict winners this far out, but you can accurately show who is totally failing to gain momentum.
For any of these laggards to remain in the race their numbers will need to start picking up significantly. I just don't see that, there are too many more qualified candidates in the top tier (including Cruz) who they will migrate to. When you (Mr. Average Voter) decide that your devotion to Candidate 2% is futile, you aren't going to go to candidate 3%, you'll go to a Jeb, Walker or someone else who looks viable.
Bachman, Huntsman, Perry were in this category last time.
58
posted on
05/07/2015 2:46:18 PM PDT
by
Jack Black
( Disarmament of a targeted group is one of the surest early warning signs of future genocide.)
To: Jack Black; SoConPubbie
I must respectfully disagree. In the last several elections we've been treated to a number of analysts, notably Nate Silver, who used polls, and specifically poll averaging to predict results and their predictions have been very accurate.A year before the primary elections, there is no way to prove that the polls are correct. So potentially they could be corrupt.
And if the polls are anything like the folks who pay for them, which is the dominant media, then they are corrupt, across the board.
To: kosciusko51
-— Im not saying they are doing it intentionally -—
Rove appeared at Huck’s announcement. He hasn’t appeared at any other Republican presidential candidate’s announcement.
I can read between the lines.
60
posted on
05/07/2015 3:21:55 PM PDT
by
St_Thomas_Aquinas
( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson