| A recently released CNN/Opinion research poll has been used to tease out the story that Mike Huckabee would get slammed in general-election match-ups against the top tier of Democratic candidates. It's a muddle-headed conclusion to draw from the poll, IMHO, because it's just too early to say. After all, no political junkie really knew much about Huckabee before he shot up in the Iowa polls, how could Joe and Jane Six-Pack in Alabama , Ohio , or California be expected to know the Arkansas Governor?
The headlines, naturally, miss the "real" story: John McCain and John Edwards are the two candidates for their respective parties that poll the best in head-to-head match-ups:
Clinton 51 Giuliani 45
Clinton 54 Romney 43
Clinton 48 McCain 50
Clinton 54 Huckabee 44
Obama 52 Giuliani 45
Obama 54 Romney 41
Obama 48 McCain 48
Obama 55 Huckabee 40
Edwards 53 Giuliani 44
Edwards 59 Romney 37
Edwards 52 McCain 44
Edwards 60 Huckabee 35
John Edwards is, by far, the most acceptable candidate in these national polls. And it's been that way since the beginning of the race.
Righties and DC insiders, naturally, are befuddled. And why not? Edwards' poll results tip the inside-the-Beltway narrative of the conservative heartland on its head. Ross Douthat even goes so far as to speculate that the reason people like Edwards is that they think he's more conservative than his Democratic peers. Still Edwards has always been to the left of the Republicans, and yet he thrashes them all.
And on some issues Edwards is more conservative, notably those important to the gay/lesbian community, which may explain his place in the Democratic polls. Or perhaps Democratic primary voters ascribe to the insider rhetoric that liberal = unelectable.
Instead of overanalyzing these and other poll results and turning them inside-out, maybe it's time for the DC punditocracy to accept the simple fact that populist progressive anti-corporatism is a powerful and appealing force in national politics. |
