Could Palin turn Huckabee into frontrunner?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm one of those people who doesn't think that Palin is going to run. Everything she has done since quitting as gov has been focused on being a pundit and not a politician. Running means losing out on money without much chance of winning. Plus splitting the conservative vote with Gingrich and Huck could lead to Romney nomination, and he is not her kind of Republican.

So could she instead play kingmaker and put her weight and fundraising ability behind Huckabee, early on? She showed how she is willing to make primary bets in the 2010 season.

It seems to me that Huckabee with Palin at his side could be unstoppable. And with her guy being the nominee, she emerges as a bigger power in the party.

Which is why Santorum and DeMint are secretly most wanted in the race by Mitt Romney.


Plus, I don't know that Palin would endorse Huckabee. Who did she endorse in the 2008 primaries? Romney won Alaska's caucus in 2008 and would likely dominate there again considering how much she has collapsed their.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is no front runner this time in the traditional sense of what it means to be a front runner. There are quasi-front runners which is about as good as one could expect from the last people standing in 2008.


Huckabee has as much claim to the frontrunner label as Romney does. They each can claim second place in 2008 (one in popular votes, the other in delegates and only because Romney got out sooner which could be a plus in a primary). They each lead in some of the early states. And they trade leads nationally depending on the poll. It is ridiculous to say Huckabee is already the front runner. It would be just as ridiculous for a Romney apologist to say "Romney is already the frontrunner".

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Huckabee is already the frontrunner.

Romney leads in 2 early states: NH and NV and is not dead in SC and FL.

That hardly makes Huckabee the front-runner.

And Huckabee leads in Iowa, South Carolina and other early states as well as states later in the contest plus national polls.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's nice but totally irrelevant to the question.

Actually only ABC and PPP have Huck up. ABC by 1 and PPP by 10. Rasmussen, NBC, Gallup, McClatch, and Clarus all have Romney up by 1 to 5 points.

And Romney still leads narrowly on the RCP average: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

And what happens if the next PPP poll gives Huck less then a 10 point lead or doesn't have him in the lead at all. Romney then leads by several points.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

And what happens if the next PPP poll gives Huck less then a 10 point lead or doesn't have him in the lead at all. Romney then leads by several points.

That's a big what if.

Its a side show related only to the current RCP tie nationally. Hucks position in the RCP average is largely dependent on local homeboys Politically Populist Polling.

 My point is and has been that neither of these two flawed chaps can claim an advantage, contrary to your earlier point.

The polls do not show any frontrunner, Romney and Huckabee seem to be likely to split the early primaries (Huck in IA+NC, Romney in SC+NV). But the Cook rating and the Intrade betting has Romney as frontrunner because he has more mainstream appeal and more importantly Romney has shown a much greater ability at fund-raising (and lending his own campaign tens of millions).  And even if both can equally share the current title of front runner, my point stands that it is Palin who can tip the balance in favor of Huckabee by freeing up her supporters and by helping Huck with fund-raising.

Palin is faced with three options:
1. Run and probably lose nomination (certainly general)
2. Not run and stay out of primary (where nominee could end up with a more moderate like Romney, Daniels, Huntsman, etc)
3. Not run and play kingmaker with Huckabee

It seems to me that the third option is more in line with her track record. The first option means a lot of work (and loss of income) with little chance of success and possible humiliation. Option 2 means that she would become less of a player in the process (and people would pay less attention to her...which she cant want). The entire primary process will elevate all the candidates to leading voices in the party, will she really stay out of it and cede that? By anointing and campaigning for Huckabee in the primaries she remains a player and potentially gets her the ear of the next POTUS.

Romney in SC? NC as an early state? No NH? I think your assesment of the early states has issues.