Posted on 12/11/2007 6:23:28 AM PST by tlb
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- While presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee is surging in new polls of GOP candidates, a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Tuesday shows he would lose to all three leading Democratic candidates by double digits in hypothetical contests.
In head-to-head matchups -- the first to include Huckabee -- the former Arkansas governor loses to Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York by 10 percentage points (54 percent to 44 percent), to Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois by 15 points (55 percent to 40 percent) and to former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina by 25 points (60 percent to 35 percent).
The poll comes on the heels of a CNN/Opinion Research poll released Monday that showed Huckabee doubled his support nationally among likely Republican voters in the last month and is in a statistical dead heat with former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
But Huckabee's double-digit deficits with the leading Democrats likely suggest that the Arkansas Republican still lacks widespread name recognition.
The poll also shows that Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona would do best against leading Democrats. He beats Clinton (50 percent to 48 percent), ties Obama (48 percent to 48 percent) and loses to Edwards by a smaller margin (8 points) than the other Republican candidates do.
In addition to Huckabee, Giuliani and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney lose to all three top Democrats in the survey.
On the Democratic side, Edwards performs best against each of the leading Republicans. In addition to beating Huckabee by 25 percent and McCain by 8 percent, the North Carolina Democrat beats Romney by 22 percentage points (59 percent to 37 percent).
While the survey shows McCain and Edwards performing best in their respective fields, both candidates continue to significantly trail their parties' front-runners significantly.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
The Pubs have a much better qualified field of candidates to choose from, the Rats got nothing.
BINGO! For the same reason the media is ignoring Fred Thompson. Even conservative radio pundits that we listen to everyday have followed the MSM lead and are talking about only Rudy, Mitt, and Huckabee.
I think he is slick enough to handle anyone in a debate. That’s not the problem, the problem is he doesn’t have a degree from liberal Harvard or Yale and he is a Protestant. Same goes for Hunter.
..yet if it showed Huck winning you would be cheering..
Didn’t we just have a poll showing that Huckabee and the other Republicans would beat all the Democrats in the general election?
Polls lie, apparently, or people are fickle.
So you agree with the MSM that those who favor him (apparently Evangelicals) are uneducated and easily manipulated?
“This is a SET-UP, and the MSM won’t attack him until they get him on the ticket....then, he’s toast.”
If this is a set-up then why is the Clinton News Network reporting now that he’d get clobbered in the election? Seems that news might make it a tad harder for him to be the nominee.
Personally, I think he would do quite well against Hillary in the debates. He’s excellent on his feet and gives the appearance of being a straight shooter. He’s a lot more personable. I’m not supporting him, unless he wins the primary, but I don’t worry about his performance against Hillary. He’s more talented in that kind of thing than she is.
I'm talking of course about Fred and Hunter. I know Hunter hasn't been able to gain much traction, but it ain't over til it's over.
They need our money and our support.--or we can just sit around and whine that we don't have a chance.
Yes, I think you’re right there. This recent dumping on all Republican candidates (and not democrats) leads me to think that the MSM is worried about the general election, so they’re sowing their gloom and doom now and plan to continue to beat this drum until the election. They want the electorate to forget about Pelosi and what she and Reid are doing to Congress.
I’ve been a Hunter supporter from the first and still am.
I can.
I'm not a Huckster fan but he is a smooth operator on the stump and on TV, and I believe that in a debate he would be such a contrast to Hillary's harsh tone and combative nature that more people would be attracted to him than to the Beast.
Anyway, this poll is BS unless all the other polls are dead wrong. The candidates who trail their intra-party rivals badly in the usual polls are leading in this poll when pitted against the opposite party's leader in the usual polls. To illustrate, in this poll Edwards is said to be ahead of every other Democrat candidate when paired against the leading Pubs, but in normal polls he trails both Hillary and Obama by double digits. Likewise, in the usual polls McCain trails Rooty, Huck, and Mitt in his own party but is the top man against all the Dems in this poll.
Maybe I'm not getting something here, but I know that although figures don't lie liars do figure, and hired gun polltakers can get any result the customer wants to pay for.
I hear that Huckabee would lose by 23% or 30%, depending on how you did the math.
Keep attacking, I’m voting for Huckabee so “el wasto el cobbo” ...
Oh pleeeeaaaase, no more Bush!
There’s a simple reason.
We all know at this point what Bush’s strong points are and what his weak points are, for better or worse.
Huckabee has all of Bush’s weak points, few of his strong ones, and makes Bush look like Tancredo on immigration, to paraphrase Ann Coulter.
Considering that Bush barely won, why would Huckabee, who is a less appealing version of Bush, with a little Gomer Pyle and Jimmah Carter thrown in, win?
Bush is behind Romney...He is a Harvard grad.
Huckabee would be a disaster for the party.
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.