CNN has just come out with its first set of general election head-to-head polls involving Mike Huckabee, taken from December 6-9. Huckabee's numbers are pretty low, but don't get too excited. As CNN polling director Keating Holland says in his best Serious Pollster Understatement Voice, "it's possible Huckabee's numbers are low in these hypothetical matchups because he is still not very well known nationally." Name recognition disadvantages are fleeting in a general election -- by November, everybody will know who the nominees are. Here are the results, with Democratic victory in blue and Republican victory in red:
| Clinton | Obama | Edwards | |
| Giuliani | 51-45 | 52-45 | 53-44 |
| Romney | 54-43 | 54-41 | 59-37 |
| McCain | 48-50 | 48-48 | 52-44 |
| Huckabee | 54-44 | 54-40 | 60-35 |
Holland continues: "Edwards is the only Democrat who beats all four Republicans, and McCain is the only Republican who beats any of the three Democrats... Some might argue this shows that they are the most electable candidates in their respective parties. But Edwards is in third place among Democrats, and McCain is in fourth place on the GOP side. Maybe electability is not as important as it was in 2004."
The poll also asked: "In general, would you prefer the presidential candidates to talk openly about their religious views or would you prefer them to keep their religious views as a private matter?" I found it heartening that a 57-41 majority of Americans preferred candidates to keep their religious views a private matter. It's probably the kind of thing where the 41% really cares about the candidates' religious views, while the 57% just shrugs and puts up with all the God talk.
You can find the full pdf of the polling results here.
I find people's religious views to be boring, for the most part.
Posted by: Sara | December 11, 2007 at 01:10 PM
I think that's especially true for most politicians. There are a few commonly held religious views that I find very exciting -- transubstantiation, for example -- but politicians don't usually talk about those very much.
Posted by: Neil Sinhababu | December 11, 2007 at 01:21 PM
I mean, it depends. The Mormon church taught that African-Americans were cursed until very recently. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask Romney - a lifelong Mormon - what he thinks about that, especially since he's so willing to talk about religious belief.
Posted by: Jamelle | December 11, 2007 at 02:38 PM
LOVE transubstantiation!
Posted by: Lisa Simeone | December 11, 2007 at 03:15 PM
Same here. Catholics get to eat their God! How awesome is that?
Posted by: Neil Sinhababu | December 11, 2007 at 03:49 PM
As a Catholic (not a practicing/believing one, but you're always a Catholic the way you're always a Jew) I hate to tell you this, but I'm not sure transubstantiation is exactly a "commonly held" belief. The only people I knew who endorsed it were priests, and even then there was something about the way they said it that made me think even they knew it was bullshit.
Probably most of the old ladies who showed up for 6:00 AM mass EVERY FRICKIN DAY believed it, though. Maybe that's why they always came to mass: hungry for more Jesus.
Posted by: Jason C. | December 11, 2007 at 08:27 PM
I've never been too enthused with transubstantiation except as a nice big word to beat people with. It's exciting in practice, but Catholicism is where exciting goes to confess its sins and flog itself like that guy in the Da Vinci code.
For that matter, if Jesus was really the most awesome guy ever, he would have transubstantiated himself into meat and bourbon. Eating matzo and crap-ass wine makes me feel like I'm in a hospice.
Posted by: Glenn Fayard | December 11, 2007 at 11:29 PM
Or at least Pop Rocks! Now THAT would be exciting!
Posted by: Glenn Fayard | December 11, 2007 at 11:46 PM
Catholicism indeed rocks. If I were ever to switch to another silly Abrahamic religion from the one I was born into, I'd definitely go Catholic.
Transubstantiation rocks. All the red and sex in the ritual rocks. All they need is a liberal reforming Pope, and they'd seriously be good to go.
-----
BTW, I see you folks started a blog. Congrats.
Posted by: Petey | December 13, 2007 at 01:09 AM
Catholicism indeed rocks. If I were ever to switch to another silly Abrahamic religion from the one I was born into, I'd definitely go Catholic.
Transubstantiation rocks. All the red and sex in the ritual rocks. All they need is a liberal reforming Pope, and they'd seriously be good to go.
-----
BTW, I see you folks started a blog. Congrats.
Posted by: Petey | December 13, 2007 at 01:10 AM
Catholicism indeed rocks. If I were ever to switch to another silly Abrahamic religion from the one I was born into, I'd definitely go Catholic.
Transubstantiation rocks. All the red and sex in the ritual rocks. All they need is a liberal reforming Pope, and they'd seriously be good to go.
-----
BTW, I see you folks started a blog. Congrats.
Posted by: Petey | December 13, 2007 at 01:11 AM
Catholicism indeed rocks. If I were ever to switch to another silly Abrahamic religion from the one I was born into, I'd definitely go Catholic.
Transubstantiation rocks. All the red and sex in the ritual rocks. All they need is a liberal reforming Pope, and they'd seriously be good to go.
-----
BTW, I see you folks started a blog. Congrats.
Posted by: Petey | December 13, 2007 at 01:13 AM