This just shows how out of touch the Race42008 readership is with the rest of the country. Neither of these two will be McCain’s running mate, and for good reasons. Huck’s a joker, is not a very good team player, and is prone to saying crazy things that create controversy with no benefit to the campaign. Palin is very inexperienced. If you look her up on Wikipedia, one of her biggest accomplishments listed there is managing to sell an airplane on eBay. Seriously. That does not bode well for her chances.
I guarantee you that 98% of America has never heard of Sarah Palin, and 98% of R4?08 have. That goes for the rest of the Veep prospects as well.
I’d imagine that people like Joe Lieberman, Mitt Romney, Tom Ridge, Rudy Giuliani, Condi Rice, Rick Perry, and others have plenty of name recognition. There are also a lot of military types, and surely some governors and senators I am forgetting that do as well. Huckabee is also widely known . Since McCain is not likely to have a lot money to advertise, he’ll have to pick someone who is is somewhat of a known quantity, in order to prevent his running mate from being portrayed as some kind of whacko by the Obama campaign.
He’ll also have to pick someone with a lot of governing experience, in order to capitalize on one of his main advantages over Obama. I’d throw Pawlenty and Crist in the mix as well, since they’re so ideologically close to McCain.
Overall, even though the right wing of the Republican party wants a right winger as McCain’s VP pick, the running mate will have to be 1.) very charismatic/well known, and 2.) appealing to moderates. Too many of the people mentioned on boards like this fail both tests.
#6. . . While I agree that Palin is too inexperienced to be VP at this time, she has far bigger accomplishments in her short political career worth noting than selling an airplane on ebay. And about that plane. . . It was heap of wasteful spending purchased by former (GOP) Governor Frank Murkowski which became, during her campaign for governor in 2006, a symbol of corruption and ineffective politics among state legislators. She promised that it would be sold once she took office, and she followed through on that promise. The fact that it took so long to sell showed just how wasteful it was to buy in the first place. Elected due to her prior “maverick” style of politics (valuing Alaska over her party), Palin’s dedication to ending corruption and old-style Alaskan politics, particularly among the state’s GOP contingent, is the reason she still receives higher positive ratings than any other politician in the nation. I’d say it bodes quite well for her chances.
Looking at her Wikipedia page, I see the following accomplishments discussed:
-Selling the plane.
-Creating a committee to address global climate change.
-Getting a new natural gas pipeline going (this one’s pretty big).
-Singing a law to grant civil benefits to same sex couples, and vetoing a law that banned them.
-Canceling plan for an 11 mile dirt road.
-Vetoing some spending bills.
Aside from the pipeline, that’s pretty thin. I admit that she hasn’t been in office for too long, but still, if people are going to call someone a “rising star”, there needs to be a little more evidence. Give her some time.
Dear lord in heaven, I just don’t understand why so many are voting for Huckabee. I’m serious- I’ll have to consider not voting if he’s on the ticket. I just despise that man. Come on people! Put a uniter in the slot, not a divider!!!
Don’t get worked up over some meaningless contest. What we need is some inside information about who McCain is considering and why. I think we know two things about his pick. The person will be younger (almost by default) and the person will have a strong resume (so Palin, Jindahl are out).
We have no idea who McCain will actually pick. McCain has a track record of going with his gut instincts, whether the conservative base likes it or not. This has worked in the past for him and I think will work for him in picking a Veep.
I agree with #18, tho…I’d love to see some real insight instead of speculation that runs rampant here and everywhere on the internet. I think we should start touting random, outside the box Veep suggestions and see if people pick up on them…besides Lieberman, which the MSM has already picked up on.
Not to turn this thread into a Palin fan site, but. . .
Setting aside the fact that Wikipedia is not an official record of Palin’s time in office, the article touches briefly on just a few of the things she’s done. Even among the list you gave in #11, she’s done some pretty significant things. (Maybe it’s all in how you choose to read the article.) The plane was sympolic, as I mentioned, of her new way of governing: no more waste. That was a radical change from former Governor Murkowski. The 11 mile road was another one. Like the plane, and costing many millions of dollars, the road extention was signed by Murkowski in the waning hours of his term. It was a road built onto the existing system of roads near Juneau (which, by the way, has no road access from outside the city and can only be accessed by boat or plane). Cutting that project was an early sign of how things would be changing under Palin’s leadership.
The gas pipeline is a huge project for the state and the nation. Do some research on how the oil pipeline changed this country. The gas line will be equally significant, if not moreso with the energy crisis we now face. For Alaska, in the short term, it could bring in as many as 10,000 jobs (in a state with under a million people). In another example of her new style of governing, she rescinded last-minute plans signed by Murkowski which gave more to the oil companies and Canadian partners at the expense of Alaska, and revisited the project from the ground up. We’re still in the early stages, but no matter what results from new negotiations we’re guaranteed to be in a better position than before she took office.
Civil rights were granted to gay Alaskans and state workers after the courts, the voters and Palin’s attorney general all said it should be done. Still a conservative, Palin is staunchly pro-life (as evident by her recent choice not to abort her fifth pregnancy despite knowing the baby would have Down Syndrome).
Climate change, despite what most Republicans think, is real and is happening right now in Alaska, and we feel the affects of it before anyone else in the US does. Native Alaskans, who have lived on the coast for hundreds if not thousands of years, are now seeing their villages flooded out from melting ice, and in extreme cases are having to relocate entire villages inland. The polar bears and walruses are finding less sea ice on which to live and feed. Ask any longtime Alaskan if the weather is different now and they’ll tell you stories of how much colder and snowier it used to be. Climate change and global warming are two different things. Climate change is happening as we speak, and I’m glad Palin is smart enough to focus part of her time on it in a rational and intelligent way.
Regarding spending bills, Palin didn’t just cut “some” spending. She vetoed some of the largest amounts of wasteful spending in state history in last year’s budget, a monumental shift in priorities from the previous administration. Oil revenues brought in billions more to the state cauffers, yet she did the “radical” thing of actually saying “no” to those who wanted to spend it all, while placing billions in so-called “rainy day” funds for a future with less oil to pay for what we’ll need. Perhaps if more Republicans followed her lead we’d still control Congress.
Alaska is a very hands-off state when it comes to government. The legislature meets just 90 days a year, down from 120 days thanks to a voter-passed initiative in 2006, and most legislators have full-time jobs elsewhere. (And they meet only in winter when not much else can be done.) Unlike the federal govt and most states in the Lower 48, laws here don’t get passed simply for the sake of passing new laws. It’s one of the things I like about living in this state. Palin represents a complete change in the way Alaskans were used to seeing our state reps operate. She recognizes that the oil won’t be around forever, and she governs with one eye on the current year and another on the state’s future potentially less dependent on those revenues.
So there’s my brief defense of Palin. As I said, she’s not yet ready for the national stage, but she will be one day, and I’ll be on her campaign from the start.
wow, 58-41. Where did these huckbots come from. Is there an alternate universe on the web b/c this site doesn’t have very many huck supporters. Alaska Jake, I like your comment. (If you could spread the word in AK to vote for Sarah, that would be helpful). I think Sarah’s the perfect fit for McCain. I don’t agree with it, but her juxtaposition of ANWR drilling and anti-climate change would be attractive to the GOP. He two years of a chief executive, I think, is sufficient. She’s done more in her life than Snobama. And the post below this talk about feminists supporting McCain. That should highlight the need for a woman as VP.
BTW, the Star Tribune poll released today said that Pawlenty would not be a benefit for McCain in MN.
Can I just ask a simple question? Why so much hostility towards the Huck? Undoubtedly, the majority of it comes from former Romneybots who are miffed they got a thumpin’ when they outspent him a gazillion to one. But Mike Huckabee is a solid conservative, a 12 year Chief Executive, family man, small government leader.
I just don’t understand, for the life of me, why so many on this site try to demonize him as some “Big government liberal” who will raise taxes, take your house and replace every capitol dome with a cross. So the man believed in a “Fair Tax.” So what! He was wrong, he knew it would never pass Congress, or work for that matter, so get over it.
Truth be told, the GOP needs more voices like the Huckster. Over the past 8 years our party has been interested in two things and things only: taxes & terror. Terror & taxes, terror & taxes, terror & taxes. FOX NEWS ALERT: There is more to governing than just terror and taxes. While our party’s “leadership: has been doing such a stellar job of running our name brand into the ground, folks like Mike Huckabee were talking about issues that actually matter to people, like the sky-rocketing cost of health care, crumbling infrastructure and that really important thing all the soccer moms seem to care about EDUCATION.
The GOP is no longer the party of the middle class because over the past 8 years the GOP has repeatedly given middle class voters the finger by pandering to them every election cycle with “gay marriage & abortion” and then never addressing those issues again once they get to Washington. As a party we has seeded issues like education, health care and the environment to Dems and demonized people like Huckabee when they dare talk about them in public.
First, many poeple don’t believe Huckabee is a believer in small government. He has his own rhetoric to blame for this. By saying things like “main street not wall street” without clarifying what he really meant COMBINED with Romney highlighting liberal aspects of his economic record, Huckabee now has a brand of being an economic moderate to liberal.
Second, he uses RELIGION a lot in politics. A lot more then George W. Bush. Huck is basically George W. Bush squared on domestic policy and I think that’s too conservative on social issues and too liberal on fiscal issues for a lot of people.
Sure, she’s inexperienced. So were Lincoln, Kennedy, and a host of other people who held national offices with real consequences.
This is the VP. Not so much on real consequences.
Palin has the foresight, the intelligence, and the gravitas to do any job she wants. So, she probably won’t be the VP because most Americans want to see someone with experience in the office. But I wouldn’t say that she couldn’t handle the job.
I agree with you; Huck is not all that bad. (I don’t like him crushing Sarah, though). The GOP has become the party of the middle class, while the dems have become the party of the upper class and the lower class. The middle class is generally culturally conservative and economically pragmatic. The constant harping of 9/11 gets tiring, I agree with you. I would talk about a certain candidate now but a certain commenter does not want me to talk about HE WHOM I CANNOT TALK ABOUT.
“COMBINED with Romney highlighting liberal aspects of his economic record”
Could we have some open and honest discussion about this site’s hatred for Huck without Romneybots still holding primary grudges. Ajay, I don’t know if you’re a Romney supporter or not, but Romney calling ANYONE an economic liberal or tax raiser is definitely the pot calling the kettle black. Moreover, his “main street not wall street” is exactly the point I was making. Our party has abandoned the middle class and is now seen as a party of elitists.
“Huck is basically George W. Bush squared on domestic policy”
There is zero evidence to support that claim. It’s baloney and just a scare tactic.
#25 Reminded me of something interesting in McCain’s 2013 speech. He said something about people being able to file taxes using a flate rate, which automatically made me think of Huckabee. that part of his speech did not get a lot of attention given that elsewhere he called for a timetable for troop withdrawal. I wonder whether the mention of a flat tax was a nod to Huck.
I agree with #26 - Huckabee is not a small gov’t conservative, but neither is McCain. For all his talk of cutting spending, he has proposed a trillion in new spending during the campaign without a hint of how to pay for it.
#25 - I agree with you. SUSA has the first two of 17 polls with various candidates, including Huckabee and Romney, both of which have equal public identity. In both states Huckabee is doing better, for exactly the reasons you state. And neither of these states are considered to be “his” states — I would like to see polls in Virginia, Iowa, Missouri (where he has a huge evangelical and right to life following) and Michigan and Wisconson (with his populist views). It is exactly those characteristics that these posters on this site detest about Huckabee that makes him an excellent VP choice in this election. And, trust me, I am not a working class, southern evangelical. I am a Manhattan attorney making an excellent salary, so I too have fiscal concerns, but I am a realist. And I believe Huckabee has done some pretty good things in his time. I eager to give the Maverick and the populist a chance.
Huckabee may have had a mixed record as governor… but it was a mixed record, not a liberal one.
He speaks to and understands conservative principles of small government. He is perhaps the most articulate representative of conservative principles this election cycle. And he’s the one with the highest credibility on issues like the 2nd Amendment and abortion… which brings two highly motivated groups of voters to the ballot box.
As for his much maligned “populist” message… it’s conservative too. The little guy can get ahead by working hard IF the government stays out of the way. His life story accentuates this message.
Actually, after the Bear Stearns three billion dollar bailout, he wouldn’t a bad guy to have on the ticket even if you do interpret all of his “populist” rhetoric the wrong way.
Huckabee is only winning because an online community of Huck supporters were miffed by Palin’s early lead (http://forum.hucksarmy.com/viewtopic.php?f=151&t=12548&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=30). Looks like they’re leveling off (Huck gained roughly 5% in the last hour but has started to inch backward), and this is could be a tight race.
Virtually all polls that ask that question “would you be more likely, or less likely to support X with Y (favorite son) on the ticket?” turn out with more negative responses then positive. You’ll see early SurveyUSA polls from months ago, that showed SC voters saying, by something just over 2 to 1 margin, that they’d be less likely to vote for a ticket with Demint on it. Despite the fact that Demint had a positive approval rating. Sanford basically broke even. Someone posted that Connecicut poll yesterday, in the Lieberman thread, where twice as many people said they’d be less likely to vote for a McCain/Lieberman ticket. It’s the nature of the type of question it is. If you’re a strong partisan, you’re most likely to dislike a “favorite son” of the opposing party, more then you dislike almost any other member of that party. Native Minnesota liberals despise Pawlenty. Many native Connecticut Liberals despise Lieberman. They’re not likely to dislike McCain as much, yet anyway, because he’s a less immediate presence to them. It takes awhile and great familiarity for that sort of seething hatred to build. In contrast, many of the folks in Minnesota who are sold on Pawlenty, fairly strong Republicans, are voting for McCain regardless. So t-Paw’s presence doesn’t make them any more likely to vote for McCain. There are other reasons for the across the board negative responses, but those are the general ones; the way that pollsters frame this particular question is in error.
Anyway, I’ve seen alot of these types of polls, and 20% less likely and 16% more likely is quite respectable. It suggests to me that Pawlenty would likely be pretty seriously helpful in Minnesota.
Or to make a comparison the “are you more or less likely to vote for the ticket if X is on it?” question is a bit like the silly “if Y is the nominee, will you definitely vote for him, or definitely vote against him” question pollsters repeatedly ask. No matter who the candidate is, the poll always yields at minimum 10% more people in the “definitely vote against” column. Sometimes it’s upwards of 20%. It’s a result of inartful phrasing and the pecularities of the human mind. When you see 30% and 40% (respectively) in that poll, you’re quite happy.
I commend you on your faith in Minnesotans. I don’t have that faith. The Star Tribune poll, which you must’ve seen by now, has a lopsided figure for Snobama. McCain is topping out where Mark Kennedy topped out, around 38-40 percent (basically the solid GOP figure for the state). MN has a different psychology than some other states. People here have a penchant for higher taxes and generous (wasteful IMO) services. Ask Gary or Kavon, it seems the answer to most problems–according to Minnesotans–is more revenue in the form of higher taxes. Property taxes have gone through the roof (the one area where taxes were once lower) and if Pawlenty hadn’t survive in 06, every other tax would’ve gone up. What I’m saying–going back to your original analysis–don’t put faith in Pawlenty to deliver this state. Maybe WI/IA. But the people here are not rationale. They may personally like Pawlenty, but that’s it.
BTW, 63-36, Huckabee. This is pathetic. Where were these people during the primaries. Palinforvp, there must be a counter strategy that you can enact!
I’m pretty dubious about Huckabee’s appeal on a national level. I live in the Pacific Northwest - not exactly a hotbed of conservatism, so my context is skewed - but I don’t see Huck’s extreme emphasis of his religious beliefs as a winner in this election. I mean, does anyone remember his statement about changing the Constitution to bring it more in line with the word of God? That’s gonna scare the crap out of a lot of people (including me). He’s a great communicator and an inherently likeable guy, but he can only massage some of his positions to a certain extent. And at this point, these surveys are largely name recognition polls, and name recognition for people like Pawlenty or Palin can change pretty quickly. Romney, I guess, seems to be the exception. Not that I mind.
A Lieberman selection would make the Republicans a neo-con centered party, little emphasis on social issues, a big tent on economic issues, but universally hawkish. It would be interesting to see how that plays out.
I’ve said before that I don’t count on Pawlenty to deliver Minnesota. I consider it a possibility, but not necessarily a likelihood and certainly not a necessity. But, on the geographic question, the other day Karl Rove’s general election maps leaked. Based on polling and other factors, he had Minnesota at +10 for Obama, Wisconsin at +4 for McCain, and Iowa at +3 for Obama (I’m not sure I recall that one correctly). I noted about in a lengthy post a month ago, that evidence suggested that John Kerry did 4-6 points better then he otherwise would have in the states that seriously bordered North Carolina. And Edwards was a poor VP, who hadn’t built any sort of political base in North Carolina during the 6 years he was Senator. If Pawlenty even matched the help Edwards provided, Wisconsin and Iowa likely swing into McCain’s column. And on a very good day, Minnesota comes along with it. According to that poll, Pawlenty has a +17 approval rating. And this was before the budget crisis was resolved on Sunday; a resolution which, if my read on the Minnesota blogosphere is correct (both liberal and conservative) was a considerable victory for Pawlenty and conservatism and which is bound to at least temporarily improve his approval ratings. He could be looking at something like +30 by the time McCain makes a decision, and the inevitable honeymoon a VP candidate gets would boost it higher, in time for the convention, where Pawlenty would be the belle of the ball. These are all very good things.
What you said sounds good. The Edwards comparison is apt. Clearly, the stars are aligning for Pawlenty. But is he worth taking Pawlenty for the possibility he’ll deliver 15 EVs over Palin who could affect the election’s general dynamic. I still think it’s embarrassing when a VP can’t deliver his or her home state.
Ha… this reminds me of an online poll that a site put up in 2000 when Dubya was trying to pick his Veep… amazingly enough, Alan Keyes overwhelmingly won.
Online polls are completely meaningless. Neither Huckabee nor Palin will be McCain’s Veep… sorry to break it to all you Sarah/Mikey fans out there.
#46, 41, et al: yes, a Presidential ticket (top and bottom) defines a political party. Period.
That’s the overwhelming reason the the GOP brand became so ridiculously hated in America, because people think Bush and Cheney are a joke. It’s how the GOP, once the party of fiscal responsibility, now are the party of overspending and deficits - because Congress went along with Bush’s budget requests because he was a President of the same party and they didn’t want to fight against him.
The President is the leader and face of the party, like it or not. Which is why many of us are uncomfortable with McCain being the nominee and waiting with bated breath to see who he picks as his Veep to see how the GOP will be defined should they win.
#50… Yeah, and how many people participated in that Alan Keyes poll? 30?
This poll is definitely not scientific, but comparing anything online today to something online EIGHT YEARS AGO is like comparing the iPhone to the first Apple desktops.
The fact is that Huckabee is dominating in an online poll with thousands and thousands of participants — including all the anti-Huckabeebots and Romney-shills over here at Race42008.
May 20th, 2008 at 10:46 am
This one is tough, but I’m going to vote for Huckabee.
May 20th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Yikes. How many Democrats have been voting in this thing?
May 20th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Voted for Palin. I do not want Huckabee anywhere near this ticket come November.
May 20th, 2008 at 10:55 am
#3 agreed. But it looks like there are just too many Huckabee supporters left out there. I mean to be honest, he never really ended his campaign!
May 20th, 2008 at 11:06 am
its over for huck, he’s done with that NRA joke. palin has no chance, neither does sanford.
liberman, thune, pawlenty, and romney are the only viables. in that order.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:07 am
This just shows how out of touch the Race42008 readership is with the rest of the country. Neither of these two will be McCain’s running mate, and for good reasons. Huck’s a joker, is not a very good team player, and is prone to saying crazy things that create controversy with no benefit to the campaign. Palin is very inexperienced. If you look her up on Wikipedia, one of her biggest accomplishments listed there is managing to sell an airplane on eBay. Seriously. That does not bode well for her chances.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:09 am
I guarantee you that 98% of America has never heard of Sarah Palin, and 98% of R4′08 have. That goes for the rest of the Veep prospects as well.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Crist will be the veep….Crist Crist Crist Crist Crist…. get it yet?
May 20th, 2008 at 11:20 am
I guarantee you that 98% of America has never heard of Sarah Palin, and 98% of R4?08 have. That goes for the rest of the Veep prospects as well.
I’d imagine that people like Joe Lieberman, Mitt Romney, Tom Ridge, Rudy Giuliani, Condi Rice, Rick Perry, and others have plenty of name recognition. There are also a lot of military types, and surely some governors and senators I am forgetting that do as well. Huckabee is also widely known . Since McCain is not likely to have a lot money to advertise, he’ll have to pick someone who is is somewhat of a known quantity, in order to prevent his running mate from being portrayed as some kind of whacko by the Obama campaign.
He’ll also have to pick someone with a lot of governing experience, in order to capitalize on one of his main advantages over Obama. I’d throw Pawlenty and Crist in the mix as well, since they’re so ideologically close to McCain.
Overall, even though the right wing of the Republican party wants a right winger as McCain’s VP pick, the running mate will have to be 1.) very charismatic/well known, and 2.) appealing to moderates. Too many of the people mentioned on boards like this fail both tests.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:21 am
#6. . . While I agree that Palin is too inexperienced to be VP at this time, she has far bigger accomplishments in her short political career worth noting than selling an airplane on ebay. And about that plane. . . It was heap of wasteful spending purchased by former (GOP) Governor Frank Murkowski which became, during her campaign for governor in 2006, a symbol of corruption and ineffective politics among state legislators. She promised that it would be sold once she took office, and she followed through on that promise. The fact that it took so long to sell showed just how wasteful it was to buy in the first place. Elected due to her prior “maverick” style of politics (valuing Alaska over her party), Palin’s dedication to ending corruption and old-style Alaskan politics, particularly among the state’s GOP contingent, is the reason she still receives higher positive ratings than any other politician in the nation. I’d say it bodes quite well for her chances.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:31 am
#10
Looking at her Wikipedia page, I see the following accomplishments discussed:
-Selling the plane.
-Creating a committee to address global climate change.
-Getting a new natural gas pipeline going (this one’s pretty big).
-Singing a law to grant civil benefits to same sex couples, and vetoing a law that banned them.
-Canceling plan for an 11 mile dirt road.
-Vetoing some spending bills.
Aside from the pipeline, that’s pretty thin. I admit that she hasn’t been in office for too long, but still, if people are going to call someone a “rising star”, there needs to be a little more evidence. Give her some time.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:34 am
Big S, seems like about as many accomplishments as Obama.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:45 am
#12
That’s exactly my point.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Huckabee would further kill a ticket that already seems pretty lifeless.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:51 am
I just voted for Palin, but Huck is now up to 55 percent.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Wow, I would have thought DaveG would have voted for Huck!
May 20th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Dear lord in heaven, I just don’t understand why so many are voting for Huckabee. I’m serious- I’ll have to consider not voting if he’s on the ticket. I just despise that man. Come on people! Put a uniter in the slot, not a divider!!!
May 20th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Don’t get worked up over some meaningless contest. What we need is some inside information about who McCain is considering and why. I think we know two things about his pick. The person will be younger (almost by default) and the person will have a strong resume (so Palin, Jindahl are out).
May 20th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
We have no idea who McCain will actually pick. McCain has a track record of going with his gut instincts, whether the conservative base likes it or not. This has worked in the past for him and I think will work for him in picking a Veep.
I agree with #18, tho…I’d love to see some real insight instead of speculation that runs rampant here and everywhere on the internet. I think we should start touting random, outside the box Veep suggestions and see if people pick up on them…besides Lieberman, which the MSM has already picked up on.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
#19: Meg Whitman.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Not to turn this thread into a Palin fan site, but. . .
Setting aside the fact that Wikipedia is not an official record of Palin’s time in office, the article touches briefly on just a few of the things she’s done. Even among the list you gave in #11, she’s done some pretty significant things. (Maybe it’s all in how you choose to read the article.) The plane was sympolic, as I mentioned, of her new way of governing: no more waste. That was a radical change from former Governor Murkowski. The 11 mile road was another one. Like the plane, and costing many millions of dollars, the road extention was signed by Murkowski in the waning hours of his term. It was a road built onto the existing system of roads near Juneau (which, by the way, has no road access from outside the city and can only be accessed by boat or plane). Cutting that project was an early sign of how things would be changing under Palin’s leadership.
The gas pipeline is a huge project for the state and the nation. Do some research on how the oil pipeline changed this country. The gas line will be equally significant, if not moreso with the energy crisis we now face. For Alaska, in the short term, it could bring in as many as 10,000 jobs (in a state with under a million people). In another example of her new style of governing, she rescinded last-minute plans signed by Murkowski which gave more to the oil companies and Canadian partners at the expense of Alaska, and revisited the project from the ground up. We’re still in the early stages, but no matter what results from new negotiations we’re guaranteed to be in a better position than before she took office.
Civil rights were granted to gay Alaskans and state workers after the courts, the voters and Palin’s attorney general all said it should be done. Still a conservative, Palin is staunchly pro-life (as evident by her recent choice not to abort her fifth pregnancy despite knowing the baby would have Down Syndrome).
Climate change, despite what most Republicans think, is real and is happening right now in Alaska, and we feel the affects of it before anyone else in the US does. Native Alaskans, who have lived on the coast for hundreds if not thousands of years, are now seeing their villages flooded out from melting ice, and in extreme cases are having to relocate entire villages inland. The polar bears and walruses are finding less sea ice on which to live and feed. Ask any longtime Alaskan if the weather is different now and they’ll tell you stories of how much colder and snowier it used to be. Climate change and global warming are two different things. Climate change is happening as we speak, and I’m glad Palin is smart enough to focus part of her time on it in a rational and intelligent way.
Regarding spending bills, Palin didn’t just cut “some” spending. She vetoed some of the largest amounts of wasteful spending in state history in last year’s budget, a monumental shift in priorities from the previous administration. Oil revenues brought in billions more to the state cauffers, yet she did the “radical” thing of actually saying “no” to those who wanted to spend it all, while placing billions in so-called “rainy day” funds for a future with less oil to pay for what we’ll need. Perhaps if more Republicans followed her lead we’d still control Congress.
Alaska is a very hands-off state when it comes to government. The legislature meets just 90 days a year, down from 120 days thanks to a voter-passed initiative in 2006, and most legislators have full-time jobs elsewhere. (And they meet only in winter when not much else can be done.) Unlike the federal govt and most states in the Lower 48, laws here don’t get passed simply for the sake of passing new laws. It’s one of the things I like about living in this state. Palin represents a complete change in the way Alaskans were used to seeing our state reps operate. She recognizes that the oil won’t be around forever, and she governs with one eye on the current year and another on the state’s future potentially less dependent on those revenues.
So there’s my brief defense of Palin. As I said, she’s not yet ready for the national stage, but she will be one day, and I’ll be on her campaign from the start.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
#20. . . I’ve been hyping Meg Whitman for years. She’s be an awesome choice, especially for McCain.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
I’m just glad this poll doesn’t mean anything.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
wow, 58-41. Where did these huckbots come from. Is there an alternate universe on the web b/c this site doesn’t have very many huck supporters. Alaska Jake, I like your comment. (If you could spread the word in AK to vote for Sarah, that would be helpful). I think Sarah’s the perfect fit for McCain. I don’t agree with it, but her juxtaposition of ANWR drilling and anti-climate change would be attractive to the GOP. He two years of a chief executive, I think, is sufficient. She’s done more in her life than Snobama. And the post below this talk about feminists supporting McCain. That should highlight the need for a woman as VP.
BTW, the Star Tribune poll released today said that Pawlenty would not be a benefit for McCain in MN.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Can I just ask a simple question? Why so much hostility towards the Huck? Undoubtedly, the majority of it comes from former Romneybots who are miffed they got a thumpin’ when they outspent him a gazillion to one. But Mike Huckabee is a solid conservative, a 12 year Chief Executive, family man, small government leader.
I just don’t understand, for the life of me, why so many on this site try to demonize him as some “Big government liberal” who will raise taxes, take your house and replace every capitol dome with a cross. So the man believed in a “Fair Tax.” So what! He was wrong, he knew it would never pass Congress, or work for that matter, so get over it.
Truth be told, the GOP needs more voices like the Huckster. Over the past 8 years our party has been interested in two things and things only: taxes & terror. Terror & taxes, terror & taxes, terror & taxes. FOX NEWS ALERT: There is more to governing than just terror and taxes. While our party’s “leadership: has been doing such a stellar job of running our name brand into the ground, folks like Mike Huckabee were talking about issues that actually matter to people, like the sky-rocketing cost of health care, crumbling infrastructure and that really important thing all the soccer moms seem to care about EDUCATION.
The GOP is no longer the party of the middle class because over the past 8 years the GOP has repeatedly given middle class voters the finger by pandering to them every election cycle with “gay marriage & abortion” and then never addressing those issues again once they get to Washington. As a party we has seeded issues like education, health care and the environment to Dems and demonized people like Huckabee when they dare talk about them in public.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
On #25. I think there are two things.
First, many poeple don’t believe Huckabee is a believer in small government. He has his own rhetoric to blame for this. By saying things like “main street not wall street” without clarifying what he really meant COMBINED with Romney highlighting liberal aspects of his economic record, Huckabee now has a brand of being an economic moderate to liberal.
Second, he uses RELIGION a lot in politics. A lot more then George W. Bush. Huck is basically George W. Bush squared on domestic policy and I think that’s too conservative on social issues and too liberal on fiscal issues for a lot of people.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
I just voted…
Wow, Huckabee is up 60% to 39%!
I guess Race42008 is really bringing out the Huck vote…
May 20th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Well put, Alaska Jake.
Sure, she’s inexperienced. So were Lincoln, Kennedy, and a host of other people who held national offices with real consequences.
This is the VP. Not so much on real consequences.
Palin has the foresight, the intelligence, and the gravitas to do any job she wants. So, she probably won’t be the VP because most Americans want to see someone with experience in the office. But I wouldn’t say that she couldn’t handle the job.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Geoff,
I agree with you; Huck is not all that bad. (I don’t like him crushing Sarah, though). The GOP has become the party of the middle class, while the dems have become the party of the upper class and the lower class. The middle class is generally culturally conservative and economically pragmatic. The constant harping of 9/11 gets tiring, I agree with you. I would talk about a certain candidate now but a certain commenter does not want me to talk about HE WHOM I CANNOT TALK ABOUT.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Ajay,
“COMBINED with Romney highlighting liberal aspects of his economic record”
Could we have some open and honest discussion about this site’s hatred for Huck without Romneybots still holding primary grudges. Ajay, I don’t know if you’re a Romney supporter or not, but Romney calling ANYONE an economic liberal or tax raiser is definitely the pot calling the kettle black. Moreover, his “main street not wall street” is exactly the point I was making. Our party has abandoned the middle class and is now seen as a party of elitists.
“Huck is basically George W. Bush squared on domestic policy”
There is zero evidence to support that claim. It’s baloney and just a scare tactic.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
#25 Reminded me of something interesting in McCain’s 2013 speech. He said something about people being able to file taxes using a flate rate, which automatically made me think of Huckabee. that part of his speech did not get a lot of attention given that elsewhere he called for a timetable for troop withdrawal. I wonder whether the mention of a flat tax was a nod to Huck.
I agree with #26 - Huckabee is not a small gov’t conservative, but neither is McCain. For all his talk of cutting spending, he has proposed a trillion in new spending during the campaign without a hint of how to pay for it.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
#25 - I agree with you. SUSA has the first two of 17 polls with various candidates, including Huckabee and Romney, both of which have equal public identity. In both states Huckabee is doing better, for exactly the reasons you state. And neither of these states are considered to be “his” states — I would like to see polls in Virginia, Iowa, Missouri (where he has a huge evangelical and right to life following) and Michigan and Wisconson (with his populist views). It is exactly those characteristics that these posters on this site detest about Huckabee that makes him an excellent VP choice in this election. And, trust me, I am not a working class, southern evangelical. I am a Manhattan attorney making an excellent salary, so I too have fiscal concerns, but I am a realist. And I believe Huckabee has done some pretty good things in his time. I eager to give the Maverick and the populist a chance.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
I would rather endure 4 years of an Obama Presidency and its failures than let McCain+Huckabee define the future of the GOP.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Huckabee may have had a mixed record as governor… but it was a mixed record, not a liberal one.
He speaks to and understands conservative principles of small government. He is perhaps the most articulate representative of conservative principles this election cycle. And he’s the one with the highest credibility on issues like the 2nd Amendment and abortion… which brings two highly motivated groups of voters to the ballot box.
As for his much maligned “populist” message… it’s conservative too. The little guy can get ahead by working hard IF the government stays out of the way. His life story accentuates this message.
Actually, after the Bear Stearns three billion dollar bailout, he wouldn’t a bad guy to have on the ticket even if you do interpret all of his “populist” rhetoric the wrong way.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Huckabee is only winning because an online community of Huck supporters were miffed by Palin’s early lead (http://forum.hucksarmy.com/viewtopic.php?f=151&t=12548&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=30). Looks like they’re leveling off (Huck gained roughly 5% in the last hour but has started to inch backward), and this is could be a tight race.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
IR-MN,
Virtually all polls that ask that question “would you be more likely, or less likely to support X with Y (favorite son) on the ticket?” turn out with more negative responses then positive. You’ll see early SurveyUSA polls from months ago, that showed SC voters saying, by something just over 2 to 1 margin, that they’d be less likely to vote for a ticket with Demint on it. Despite the fact that Demint had a positive approval rating. Sanford basically broke even. Someone posted that Connecicut poll yesterday, in the Lieberman thread, where twice as many people said they’d be less likely to vote for a McCain/Lieberman ticket. It’s the nature of the type of question it is. If you’re a strong partisan, you’re most likely to dislike a “favorite son” of the opposing party, more then you dislike almost any other member of that party. Native Minnesota liberals despise Pawlenty. Many native Connecticut Liberals despise Lieberman. They’re not likely to dislike McCain as much, yet anyway, because he’s a less immediate presence to them. It takes awhile and great familiarity for that sort of seething hatred to build. In contrast, many of the folks in Minnesota who are sold on Pawlenty, fairly strong Republicans, are voting for McCain regardless. So t-Paw’s presence doesn’t make them any more likely to vote for McCain. There are other reasons for the across the board negative responses, but those are the general ones; the way that pollsters frame this particular question is in error.
Anyway, I’ve seen alot of these types of polls, and 20% less likely and 16% more likely is quite respectable. It suggests to me that Pawlenty would likely be pretty seriously helpful in Minnesota.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
#33, Metro, I feel the same way, I’d rather have an Obama Presidency than have McCain/Lieberman define the GOP.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
McCain/Huckabee would be fine though, as would McCain/Romney or McCain/Pawlenty.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Or to make a comparison the “are you more or less likely to vote for the ticket if X is on it?” question is a bit like the silly “if Y is the nominee, will you definitely vote for him, or definitely vote against him” question pollsters repeatedly ask. No matter who the candidate is, the poll always yields at minimum 10% more people in the “definitely vote against” column. Sometimes it’s upwards of 20%. It’s a result of inartful phrasing and the pecularities of the human mind. When you see 30% and 40% (respectively) in that poll, you’re quite happy.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Clarence, Lieberman cannot define the future of the GOP because he would never be the GOP nominee.
May 20th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Metro:
You state that Mr. Lieberman cannot define the future of the GOP, by the same token, neither Mr. Huckabee or anybody else do that.
May 20th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Matthew:
I commend you on your faith in Minnesotans. I don’t have that faith. The Star Tribune poll, which you must’ve seen by now, has a lopsided figure for Snobama. McCain is topping out where Mark Kennedy topped out, around 38-40 percent (basically the solid GOP figure for the state). MN has a different psychology than some other states. People here have a penchant for higher taxes and generous (wasteful IMO) services. Ask Gary or Kavon, it seems the answer to most problems–according to Minnesotans–is more revenue in the form of higher taxes. Property taxes have gone through the roof (the one area where taxes were once lower) and if Pawlenty hadn’t survive in 06, every other tax would’ve gone up. What I’m saying–going back to your original analysis–don’t put faith in Pawlenty to deliver this state. Maybe WI/IA. But the people here are not rationale. They may personally like Pawlenty, but that’s it.
BTW, 63-36, Huckabee. This is pathetic. Where were these people during the primaries. Palinforvp, there must be a counter strategy that you can enact!
May 20th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
I’m pretty dubious about Huckabee’s appeal on a national level. I live in the Pacific Northwest - not exactly a hotbed of conservatism, so my context is skewed - but I don’t see Huck’s extreme emphasis of his religious beliefs as a winner in this election. I mean, does anyone remember his statement about changing the Constitution to bring it more in line with the word of God? That’s gonna scare the crap out of a lot of people (including me). He’s a great communicator and an inherently likeable guy, but he can only massage some of his positions to a certain extent. And at this point, these surveys are largely name recognition polls, and name recognition for people like Pawlenty or Palin can change pretty quickly. Romney, I guess, seems to be the exception. Not that I mind.
May 20th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
A Lieberman selection would make the Republicans a neo-con centered party, little emphasis on social issues, a big tent on economic issues, but universally hawkish. It would be interesting to see how that plays out.
May 20th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
IR-MN,
I’ve said before that I don’t count on Pawlenty to deliver Minnesota. I consider it a possibility, but not necessarily a likelihood and certainly not a necessity. But, on the geographic question, the other day Karl Rove’s general election maps leaked. Based on polling and other factors, he had Minnesota at +10 for Obama, Wisconsin at +4 for McCain, and Iowa at +3 for Obama (I’m not sure I recall that one correctly). I noted about in a lengthy post a month ago, that evidence suggested that John Kerry did 4-6 points better then he otherwise would have in the states that seriously bordered North Carolina. And Edwards was a poor VP, who hadn’t built any sort of political base in North Carolina during the 6 years he was Senator. If Pawlenty even matched the help Edwards provided, Wisconsin and Iowa likely swing into McCain’s column. And on a very good day, Minnesota comes along with it. According to that poll, Pawlenty has a +17 approval rating. And this was before the budget crisis was resolved on Sunday; a resolution which, if my read on the Minnesota blogosphere is correct (both liberal and conservative) was a considerable victory for Pawlenty and conservatism and which is bound to at least temporarily improve his approval ratings. He could be looking at something like +30 by the time McCain makes a decision, and the inevitable honeymoon a VP candidate gets would boost it higher, in time for the convention, where Pawlenty would be the belle of the ball. These are all very good things.
May 20th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
#41: Oh yes he can. The nominee defines the party, radically if he is elected President.
May 20th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Matthew:
What you said sounds good. The Edwards comparison is apt. Clearly, the stars are aligning for Pawlenty. But is he worth taking Pawlenty for the possibility he’ll deliver 15 EVs over Palin who could affect the election’s general dynamic. I still think it’s embarrassing when a VP can’t deliver his or her home state.
May 20th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
It’s not even close. HUCKABEE DOMINATES ALL.
May 20th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
All I have to say is: If Mike Huckabee *actually* wins the VP nomination, I’m going actively campaign *against* McCain for President.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Ha… this reminds me of an online poll that a site put up in 2000 when Dubya was trying to pick his Veep… amazingly enough, Alan Keyes overwhelmingly won.
Online polls are completely meaningless. Neither Huckabee nor Palin will be McCain’s Veep… sorry to break it to all you Sarah/Mikey fans out there.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
#46, 41, et al: yes, a Presidential ticket (top and bottom) defines a political party. Period.
That’s the overwhelming reason the the GOP brand became so ridiculously hated in America, because people think Bush and Cheney are a joke. It’s how the GOP, once the party of fiscal responsibility, now are the party of overspending and deficits - because Congress went along with Bush’s budget requests because he was a President of the same party and they didn’t want to fight against him.
The President is the leader and face of the party, like it or not. Which is why many of us are uncomfortable with McCain being the nominee and waiting with bated breath to see who he picks as his Veep to see how the GOP will be defined should they win.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:04 am
#50… Yeah, and how many people participated in that Alan Keyes poll? 30?
This poll is definitely not scientific, but comparing anything online today to something online EIGHT YEARS AGO is like comparing the iPhone to the first Apple desktops.
The fact is that Huckabee is dominating in an online poll with thousands and thousands of participants — including all the anti-Huckabeebots and Romney-shills over here at Race42008.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:44 am
WOW…
Huckabee: 72%
Palin: 27%
I am able to confirm that participation is in the thousands. At least that’s more people than participated in some of the caucuses.