Another Reason To Support Edwards

A CNN poll released yesterday shows up-and-coming Republican candidate Mike Huckabee would lose to the top three Democratic candidates by double digits. The part that interested me is how well Edwards fared in this hypothetical contest.

Huckabee vs. Clinton: Clinton wins by 10%
Huckabee vs. Obama: Obama wins by 15%
Huckabee vs. Edwards: Edwards wins by 25 %

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).

Perhaps I’m reading too much into this, but it seems that Edwards usually performs much better in these polls than Clinton and Obama. That broad level of support leads me to believe that he is the most electable candidate seeking the Democratic nomination.

4 Comments

  1. Posted December 11, 2007 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    Yes, you’re right. Edwards is the only candidate that beats every single Republican candidate in the polls. I really, really, really hope that Edwards gets the nomination–I seriously cannot handle another 4 years of a Republican administration.

  2. Posted December 11, 2007 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

    @ Ashley: Me, either. The very thought makes me shudder.

  3. ih2005
    Posted December 12, 2007 at 12:49 am | Permalink

    It’s early. Huckabee is about substance, with style. And I believe that his FairTax plan ( http://snipr.com/fthuckabeeonirs ) is expanding greatly albeit under the radar, as those who learn about it, like it! just like they like Mike.

    Romney’s recent WEAK response to FairTax questioning on “This Week with Geo. Stephanopoulos ( http://snipurl.com/stephanopoulosdebate )” drew a sharp contrast between Huckabee and all other Republican presidential front-runners who will not embrace it.

    The only Democrat who understands the profound necessity of the FairTax is Mike Gravel ( http://snipr.com/gravelpart2 ).

    Huckabee understands that what’s wrong with the income tax can’t be fixed with “a tap of the hammer, nor a twist of the screwdriver.” That his opponents - and top Dem contenders - cling to the destructive Tax Code, the IRS, preserving political power of granting tax favors at continued cost to - and misery of - American families, invigorates his campaign’’s raison d’etre. “Main Street” will have to demand ( http://snipr.com/scrapthecode ) that their legislators deliver the bill to Huckabee, if elected.

  4. Posted December 12, 2007 at 11:07 am | Permalink

    @ ih2005: Yep, you could say Mike knows a thing or two about taxes - raising them. Here’s the latest from the Republican channel, Fox News:

    If you liked George W. Bush’s brand of big-spending, big-government conservatism, you’ll love Mike Huckabee.

    Most of the leading Republicans running for president show some support for Bush’s ideology, but no other candidate so completely embodies it.

    As governor of Arkansas, Huckabee dramatically increased state spending. During his two-term tenure, spending increased by more than 65 percent — at three times the rate of inflation.

    The number of government workers increased by 20 percent, and the state’s debt services increased by nearly $1 billion. Huckabee financed his spending binge with higher taxes. Under his leadership, the average Arkansan’s tax burden increased 47 percent, according to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, including increases in the state’s gas, sales, income, and cigarette taxes. He raised taxes on everything from groceries to nursing home beds.

    Huckabee answers these complaints by pointing out that he “cut taxes 94 times” while governor. True. But most of those tax cuts were tiny, like exempting residential lawn care from the sales tax. Some cuts reduced overall state revenues by as little as $15,000. On net, Huckabee increased state taxes by more than $500 million. In fact, Huckabee increased taxes in the state by more than Bill Clinton did.

    Source

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*