With the exception of a major melt down, I don't see the voters that switched from Fred to Huck (remember in the beginning his surge coincided with Freds decline) switching back to him without him making some major change in his campaign. I don't think Fred can sit around and hope that people realize Hucks nanny state tendencies.
I could be very wrong, but when I saw Huck the other night at the debate, I said WOW, and this is coming from someone that knows his shortcomings, and has no plans to vote for him in the primary. I still say likability trumps almost everything, and Huckabee has that, Fred just doesn't.
I like Fred, but his style is one that some people just don’t care for.
Yeah, Huck did well at the debate.
One thing Fred could do is expose him and that might gain him back at least some of the Huckabee defectors.
Wrong - Huck is a trumped-up MSM “distraction of the month”. Fred’s patience will pay off big-time, as Rudy, Mitt, and Huck slowly self-destruct.
Actually, I don’t believe Huckabee’s rise coincides with Thompson’s decline. I believe there was a month of separation.
My interpretation is the undecided evangelicals and others jumped on Thompson, but then were turned off. They wandered for a while, before they jumped to Huckabee.
Still, I think any candidate sitting at 14% is better off if they’ve always been at 14% or less. It’s easier to win support you’ve never had, than to get back support you’ve lost.
Anybody have a history showing which candidates, if any, went from 30% to 14% in polling and then came back to win?
Really, you said wow?
He didn’t answer the questions in depth. He had a bunch of canned one-liners designed to get sound bites on the news. But, then again, I expect nothing less of a AR Governor. Put he and Romney together and the ‘eww’ factor goes through the roof.
I don’t want slick, dammit. I want substance!