Huckabee wins Values Voter's 2012 straw Poll

[Dr.House]

No need to MountainMan...I get frustrated with posters on a regular basis. If you are looking for a completely non-vulgar conversation, try nodoginafight, divecon or Si modo. My point about House is that at least I am discussing politics when I get out of hand. I have yet to see a SINGLE post from the Dr which contains any language having to do with poitics. This is the "POLITICS" board, yes?

Liar - Just one of the many faces of PudYank5150...

meh, i usually give what is deserved

I'm talking about his lie I bolded above...

 

[VaYank5150]

The Huckster?

He'd get the "Pat Buchanan" Treatment. Pat lost miserably in the 90s (both times). He tried again in 2000, which was after he got a spot on MSNBC, if I'm correct. He lost so horribly then...that losing miserably would have looked like a General Election Night wipeout.

Romney?

No chance...look at JFK in the 60s...and the general evangelical and some Catholic views of Mormonism. Also, the GOP is supposed to be anti-UHC. Putting a guy who created such a program for his state would spark cries of "HYPOCRISY!" from everyone, right, centre, and left. The Party doesn't need that now, IMO. He's a flip-flopper to boot as well


She's lucky if she gets a spot on FAUX News


The GOP is forever dead if they even entertained the thought of that

Jindal?

He says he wants to focus on LA...let's pray he does.

These people are either fucking crazy, snakeoil salesmen, or in the case of Gingrich, scumbags.

Heh...that's why they probably will overlook them.

At least I pray that's the case.

The GOP will not (in my humble opinion) put another previous loser on the ticket. So, for me that axes Palin, Romney and Huckabee. Who does that leave? Gingrich?

 

[DiveCon]

The Huckster?

He'd get the "Pat Buchanan" Treatment. Pat lost miserably in the 90s (both times). He tried again in 2000, which was after he got a spot on MSNBC, if I'm correct. He lost so horribly then...that losing miserably would have looked like a General Election Night wipeout.


No chance...look at JFK in the 60s...and the general evangelical and some Catholic views of Mormonism. Also, the GOP is supposed to be anti-UHC. Putting a guy who created such a program for his state would spark cries of "HYPOCRISY!" from everyone, right, centre, and left. The Party doesn't need that now, IMO. He's a flip-flopper to boot as well


She's lucky if she gets a spot on FAUX News


The GOP is forever dead if they even entertained the thought of that


He says he wants to focus on LA...let's pray he does.

These people are either fucking crazy, snakeoil salesmen, or in the case of Gingrich, scumbags.

Heh...that's why they probably will overlook them.

At least I pray that's the case.

The GOP will not (in my humble opinion) put another previous loser on the ticket. So, for me that axes Palin, Romney and Huckabee. Who does that leave? Gingrich?

uh, Reagan was a loser in 1976 for the GOP nomination
so you are WRONG again

 

[alan1]

I had to put the Dr on ignore because not a single piece of POLITICS has come from him since I joined these boards. Juvenile name calling and poster bashing seemed to be all he was about, so buh-bye...

I'm pretty sure this came from you

You fucking morons

Scroll up and look at your own posts to see it.

No need to MountainMan...I get frustrated with posters on a regular basis. If you are looking for a completely non-vulgar conversation, try nodoginafight, divecon or Si modo. My point about House is that at least I am discussing politics when I get out of hand. I have yet to see a SINGLE post from the Dr which contains any language having to do with poitics. This is the "POLITICS" board, yes?

I guess you haven't read much on this board. Perhaps it's because you have too many people on your ignore list.

 

[Oscar Wao]

He'd get the "Pat Buchanan" Treatment. Pat lost miserably in the 90s (both times). He tried again in 2000, which was after he got a spot on MSNBC, if I'm correct. He lost so horribly then...that losing miserably would have looked like a General Election Night wipeout.


No chance...look at JFK in the 60s...and the general evangelical and some Catholic views of Mormonism. Also, the GOP is supposed to be anti-UHC. Putting a guy who created such a program for his state would spark cries of "HYPOCRISY!" from everyone, right, centre, and left. The Party doesn't need that now, IMO. He's a flip-flopper to boot as well


She's lucky if she gets a spot on FAUX News


The GOP is forever dead if they even entertained the thought of that


He says he wants to focus on LA...let's pray he does.


Heh...that's why they probably will overlook them.

At least I pray that's the case.

The GOP will not (in my humble opinion) put another previous loser on the ticket. So, for me that axes Palin, Romney and Huckabee. Who does that leave? Gingrich?

uh, Reagan was a loser in 1976 for the GOP nomination
so you are WRONG again

I wouldn't call any of these peeps "Reagan Worthy," though.

 

[VaYank5150]

He'd get the "Pat Buchanan" Treatment. Pat lost miserably in the 90s (both times). He tried again in 2000, which was after he got a spot on MSNBC, if I'm correct. He lost so horribly then...that losing miserably would have looked like a General Election Night wipeout.


No chance...look at JFK in the 60s...and the general evangelical and some Catholic views of Mormonism. Also, the GOP is supposed to be anti-UHC. Putting a guy who created such a program for his state would spark cries of "HYPOCRISY!" from everyone, right, centre, and left. The Party doesn't need that now, IMO. He's a flip-flopper to boot as well


She's lucky if she gets a spot on FAUX News


The GOP is forever dead if they even entertained the thought of that


He says he wants to focus on LA...let's pray he does.


Heh...that's why they probably will overlook them.

At least I pray that's the case.

The GOP will not (in my humble opinion) put another previous loser on the ticket. So, for me that axes Palin, Romney and Huckabee. Who does that leave? Gingrich?

uh, Reagan was a loser in 1976 for the GOP nomination
so you are WRONG again

I guess you missed the "in my humble opinion" part?

 

[elvis]

He'd get the "Pat Buchanan" Treatment. Pat lost miserably in the 90s (both times). He tried again in 2000, which was after he got a spot on MSNBC, if I'm correct. He lost so horribly then...that losing miserably would have looked like a General Election Night wipeout.


No chance...look at JFK in the 60s...and the general evangelical and some Catholic views of Mormonism. Also, the GOP is supposed to be anti-UHC. Putting a guy who created such a program for his state would spark cries of "HYPOCRISY!" from everyone, right, centre, and left. The Party doesn't need that now, IMO. He's a flip-flopper to boot as well


She's lucky if she gets a spot on FAUX News


The GOP is forever dead if they even entertained the thought of that


He says he wants to focus on LA...let's pray he does.


Heh...that's why they probably will overlook them.

At least I pray that's the case.

The GOP will not (in my humble opinion) put another previous loser on the ticket. So, for me that axes Palin, Romney and Huckabee. Who does that leave? Gingrich?

uh, Reagan was a loser in 1976 for the GOP nomination
so you are WRONG again

that's true. Buchanan referenced that when watching Romney bow out of the primaries.

 

[VaYank5150]

I'm pretty sure this came from you



Scroll up and look at your own posts to see it.

No need to MountainMan...I get frustrated with posters on a regular basis. If you are looking for a completely non-vulgar conversation, try nodoginafight, divecon or Si modo. My point about House is that at least I am discussing politics when I get out of hand. I have yet to see a SINGLE post from the Dr which contains any language having to do with poitics. This is the "POLITICS" board, yes?

I guess you haven't read much on this board. Perhaps it's because you have too many people on your ignore list.

Not true. I only have one on my ignore list. It had gotten up to three, but I actually liked what two of them had to say, so I took them back off.

 

[Toro]

Palin / Huckabee 2012!

Most awesome ticket ever...For Obama.

I'm not particularly hopped up for Obama. Rather, I want to see the Rapture Crowd get their dream ticket so they can get taken out and beaten like a rented mule. That crowd dumbs down pretty much everything they get involved in.

 

[DiveCon]

Palin / Huckabee 2012!

Most awesome ticket ever...For Obama.

I'm not particularly hopped up for Obama. Rather, I want to see the Rapture Crowd get their dream ticket so they can get taken out and beaten like a rented mule. That crowd dumbs down pretty much everything they get involved in.

be careful what you hope for
a lot of Republicans looked the same way about Obama
figured they could run anyone and they would win

 

[Polk]

True, but starting early always helps...especially if you aren't the major party in DC.

Starting too early only makes people become tired of seeing your face and hearing your voice... Election seasons weren't meant to start right after the last guy won...

Too much can happen between now and 2011, when I'll start looking at what's out there...

There is always such a thing as "priming in secret." Y'know...what they like to call...Dark Horses?!

Look into people like Gary Johnson.

Gary Johnson's shot is about equal to that of my running shoes.

 

[Polk]

be careful what you hope for
a lot of Republicans looked the same way about Obama
figured they could run anyone and they would win

And those people were fools. It's remarkably hard for a party to win a third term even in good conditions. Add in a weak incumbent and an economy that was already shaky, and it was a long shot election for the GOP.

 

[DiveCon]

be careful what you hope for
a lot of Republicans looked the same way about Obama
figured they could run anyone and they would win

And those people were fools. It's remarkably hard for a party to win a third term even in good conditions. Add in a weak incumbent and an economy that was already shaky, and it was a long shot election for the GOP.

so why would you want to be as foolish?

 

[Polk]

be careful what you hope for
a lot of Republicans looked the same way about Obama
figured they could run anyone and they would win

And those people were fools. It's remarkably hard for a party to win a third term even in good conditions. Add in a weak incumbent and an economy that was already shaky, and it was a long shot election for the GOP.

so why would you want to be as foolish?

I'm not. Still a lot of ground left between now and 2012. Hell, it's still pretty premature to be discussing 2010 outcomes, in my opinion.

 

[Oscar Wao]

Starting too early only makes people become tired of seeing your face and hearing your voice... Election seasons weren't meant to start right after the last guy won...

Too much can happen between now and 2011, when I'll start looking at what's out there...

There is always such a thing as "priming in secret." Y'know...what they like to call...Dark Horses?!

Look into people like Gary Johnson.

Gary Johnson's shot is about equal to that of my running shoes.

Perhaps.

However...

It'd probably be better than RP's.

 

[Polk]

There is always such a thing as "priming in secret." Y'know...what they like to call...Dark Horses?!

Look into people like Gary Johnson.

Gary Johnson's shot is about equal to that of my running shoes.

Perhaps.

However...

It'd probably be better than RP's.

Sure, but Ron Paul doesn't have a snowballs' chance in hell of winning.

 

[Political Junky]

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Huckabee wins Values Voter’s 2012 straw poll « - Blogs from CNN.com

And the winner of the 2009 Voters Value Straw Poll is The Huckster!

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee won the Values Voter Summit's 2012 presidential straw poll Saturday, grabbing nearly 29 percent of the vote in a crowded field.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Indiana Rep. Mike Pence each won roughly 12 percent of the 597 votes cast.

Four of the top five candidates addressed religious conservatives at the three-day Values Voter conference in Washington this week — the kind of attendance seen as a significant gesture by activists here, especially in an off-election year. Palin did not make an appearance.

So between Huck and Palin, they get 41%. Oh that is quite delicious.

Mitt Romney only getting as much as Palin, Pawlenty, and Pence isn't that much of a surprise.

Wonderful news.