July 26, 2008
Only Huckabee Can Save McCain
This article is reprinted with permission from Sunlit Uplands. Im pretty sure I know Metro’s response already.-BP
From what I have observed, John McCain only consults conservative voices in the Republican Party to ensure he is working against their interests. It may be the result of the drugs and brain washing that Soviet doctors applied during his imprisonment in Vietnam. Nevertheless, some conservative leaders are making one last attempt to salvage the 2008 presidential election. The following was reported by Right Wing Watch, published by People for the American Way.
A few weeks ago, we wrote several posts about the meeting in Colorado where a large group of right-wing leaders finally decided to support John McCain. At the time, all we had were second-hand accounts that those in attendance had decided that Barack Obama would “decimate [the] moral values” they hold dear and, as such, collectively decided to support McCain as the lesser of two evils.
Glossed over in the press coverage was the fact that their support for McCain seemed to rest heavily on his choice of candidate for Vice President, with those in attendance making their preference known that they really want him to pick Mike Huckabee:
Those in attendance also reached a consensus that they would send a letter to McCain, R-Ariz., encouraging him to consider former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee as his choice for vice president.
“It’s not a demand; it’s a request,” said [Mat] Staver, who couldn’t say when McCain would be contacted about Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist pastor who resonated with some evangelical voters during the Republican primaries.
Until now, the content and signatories of that letter remained unknown. But recently Clark Vandeventer, founder and CEO of World Changers, Inc, who reportedly attended the meeting and signed the letter, posted it on a blog called Veritas Rex and it seems clear that they were not so much “requesting” that McCain pick Huckabee as his Vice President as outright warning him that doing so is “necessary for [his] success”:
We believe that a pro-life, pro-family Vice Presidential running mate is critical to confirm to our constituents that you will take affirmative steps to protect these values. Your selection of a pro-life, pro-family running mate will be one of the first and most important opportunities to communicate your commitment to such values, since we believe that personnel is policy.
As citizens who love this country and as leaders who communicate collectively with millions of values voters, we met this week in Denver to discuss our shared moral values and the need to support your campaign. As a sincere expression of what we believe is necessary for your success, we strongly agreed to respectfully urge you to select former Governor Mike Huckabee as your running mate.We believe putting Gov. Huckabee on your ticket will immediately excite, mobilize, and activate a key grassroots constituency that is essential to your success and the advancement and defense of the values we share. We have heard this message so clearly and consistently from our constituencies that we believe it is our duty to respectfully share it with you — not as a demand or condition of our support — but as an honest communication of what we believe to be the surest way to immediately activate millions of social conservative voters and activists nationwide in support of your candidacy.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Phil Burress, President, Citizens for Community Values
Mathew Staver,Founder and Chairman, Liberty Counsel
Gary Glenn, President, American Family Association of Michigan
David Barton, Wall Builders
Bill and Deborah Owens
Clark Vandeventer, Chief Executive Officer, World Changers Inc.
Kelly Shackelford, Esq., President, Liberty Legal institute
John Stemberger, Florida Attorney and Pro Family Advocate
Dr. Beverly LaHaye, Concerned Women for America
Dr. Tim F. LaHaye, Tim LaHaye Ministries
Paul E. Rondeau
Rick Scarborough, President of Vision America Action
Johnnie Moore,? Campus Pastor, Liberty University
Jim Garlow, California Pastors Rapid Response Team
Steve Strang, publisher, Charisma magazine
Kenneth L. Connor, Wilkes & McHugh, P.A.
Clint Cline
Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman, American Family Association
Randy Thomasson, President?Campaign for Children and Families
Rebecca Kiessling
Joshua Straub, American Association of Christian Counselors
Sandy Rios, President of Culture Campaign
Deryl Edwards, President, Liberty Alliance
Linda Harvey, Mission America
Diane Gramley, President, American Family Association of Pennsylvania
David N. Cutchen
Micah Clark, Executive Director, American Family Association of Indiana
Don McClure
Alex Harris, Founder and Chairman, Huck’s Army and Director, The Rebelution
Brett Harris, Founder and Chairman, Huck’s Army and Director, The Rebelution
-Daniel J. Cassidy
http://race42008.com/2008/07/26/only-huckabee-can-save-mccain/trackback/
July 25th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Well, Brett, I’m not a betting man, but if I were, I would bet a lot of money that it will not be Huckabee. I’m pretty sure Mac knows he can’t do that. Its suicidal.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
I am pretty sure it wont be too. In fact I have been all but assured that it wont be.
I guess I wanted to get this letter posted so others can see the perspective from the evangelical wing of the party.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
If it is Huckabee, i’ll pass even though I share his social conservatism I can’t stand the guy plus I think he lacks the other two legs of the stool.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Waste of time Huck isn’t even being considered.
Funny thing is he wasted Feb/March trying to come “second” to be VP and/or be the FR for 2012 but it only served to alienate voters and put him far behind Mitt in both! If he conceded after SC who knows what may have happened. Whatever you say about Mitt he got out at the perfect time and in style.
MITT IS GOING TO CREAM HIM IN 2012 AND I DO HOPE THIS SITE RECORDS IT ALL!
July 25th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Thankfully it won’t be Huckabee, but if it were I’m here to tell you that I, for one, would actively campaign for Obama.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The principal reason why former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has climbed to the top of Sen. John McCain’s practical wish list for vice president is the possibility that he could bring Michigan’s 17 electoral votes to the Republicans for the first time since 1988.
Private polls show Romney could make all the difference in Michigan. A McCain-Romney ticket carries the state by a moderately comfortable margin. With any other running mate, McCain loses Michigan.
George Romney, Mitt’s father, was a Detroit auto executive and the popular three-term governor of Michigan. The younger Romney won the 2008 primary in Michigan over McCain, who had won there in 2000 against George W. Bush.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
Actually Heath, Race42012.com will at that point in time be a Democratic site, and we will be covering the epic battle between Sen. Clinton and Sen. Mark Warner for the Democratic nomination for the right to take on President John McCain.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
#7, you rock!
July 25th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Only Huckabee can neutralize Evan Bayh. Romney would be distant and out of touch.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
I have to admit it. Huckabee has alot of nice political qualities. I won’t enumerate them AND I am not going to harp on anything negative about him. I do think he gains McCain votes. There I complimented the man. Now I am going to shut up.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
I live in a swing state (CO) and I would most definitely campaign for Obama if McCain picks Huck. I would man the phone lines and promote the messiah. If McCain picks anybody besides Huck I’m with McCain.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
That’s if McCain decides to run again, maybe the war is won by then and he decides to step down because that was his main goal in the first place.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
#12, is in la-la land.
Remember when people were saying the same thing about Reagan because of his age, and that wierd co-Presidency with Gerald Ford.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
If Huckabee’s the VP (he won’t be), I walk. I’ll write in Rudy for the presidency. I’d still follow the race, because I’m interested in politics and issues, not just in supporting a candidate, but, well, I wouldn’t want to help march the party toward the economic left and social right, and away from prioritizing the war against jihadism.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
14: false dichotomy
July 25th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
That’s right Alex everything needs to be on the right, we don’t need two socially liberal parties.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
There’s absolutely no evidence that Huck doesn’t care very much about the war against jihadism. He had a great deal about it on his website and in his campaign. He was the one in that Sept. FNC N.H. debate that stood up for McCain’s position on the war against that idiot Ron Paul. He was just also very concerned that the GOP candidates weren’t talking enough about the economic problems facing America (the middle class in particular).
July 25th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
BTW…
I don’t really like this letter. It overshadows a big part of Huckabee’s appeal– not social conservatism, but his working-class background and populist tone (which is DIFFERENT than RHETORIC/POLICIES).
July 26th, 2008 at 12:04 am
“That’s right Alex everything needs to be on the right, we don’t need two socially liberal parties.”
I know too many friends who would be very tempted to leave the GOP if it became socially liberal. Sure, I agree that we sometimes emphasize social conservatism too much (dumb this election cycle because way more ppl are voting on economic issues and security issues than social issues) and sometimes flavor it too much in religious terms (note: I am a strong Christian conservative) that turns off a lot of people who share social conservative values, but are wary of the Republican Party cloaking those values in ways that only appeal to fundamentalist Christians. But downplaying and retooling the rhetoric of social conservatism is not the same as abandoning social conservatism in full.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:07 am
We don’t need to abandon social and cultural conservatism. It has a lot of merits, and it doesn’t have to be religious. The problem is how polarizing and alienating a particular brand of Evangelical Christian social conservatism that’s bizarrely obsessed with homosexuality and abortion is.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:08 am
There’s absolutely no evidence that Huck doesn’t care very much about the war against jihadism. He had a great deal about it on his website and in his campaign. He was the one in that Sept. FNC N.H. debate that stood up for McCain’s position on the war against that idiot Ron Paul. He was just also very concerned that the GOP candidates weren’t talking enough about the economic problems facing America (the middle class in particular).
Sure, whatever: Mr. George “arrogant bunker mentality” Bush, chastising him for thinking that we can “export democracy like KFC” (good grief), whose only major policy proposal for the war against jihadism was to shut down Guantanamo Bay.
Might wanna revisit Tommy Oliver’s pieces dissecting Huck’s article. It was priceless.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:08 am
Since Alex is on this site……on a wierd note, do you know who owns MCCAINGIULIANI.COM.
Bruno Maddox. ha!
July 26th, 2008 at 12:10 am
22 — wtf?
July 26th, 2008 at 12:12 am
#23, famous writer!
July 26th, 2008 at 12:15 am
24 — Yeah, I Googled him. Where’d you find that out? Why would he own it?
July 26th, 2008 at 12:18 am
Here. http://who.godaddy.com/WhoIsVerify.aspx?domain=mccaingiuliani.com&prog_id=godaddy
The number for his assistant is on there, you should call her and find out?
http://www.whois.net is a better search.
I have been watching web sites everyday to see if there is movement on potential VP sites.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:21 am
I have been watching web sites everyday to see if there is movement on potential VP sites.
All of our talk is so stupid. We’re going to find out who it is in a couple of weeks. This is getting ridiculous.
We really need something to do.
Any ideas?
No, me either.
Actually, I do: I could read. I’m 110 pages into The Case for Democracy by Natan Sharansky. It’s better than I was expecting it to be. Definitely worth a read, given what I’ve read so far. After this, I’ll be on to either “The Suicide of Reason” by Lee Harris or “The Crisis of Islam” by Bernard Lewis.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:23 am
“getting ridiculous”
Thanks…
July 26th, 2008 at 12:24 am
Well, you must admit that political junkies sitting around, spending hours a day talking about who McCain will choose as his VP is among the least productive things one could possibly do.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Hm, that was grammatically unsound. But you know what I mean.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:26 am
LOL it was alot more fun during the campaign leading up to and then including the primaries.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:26 am
LOL it was alot more fun during the campaign leading up to and then including the primaries.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:27 am
Whoops didn’t mean to double post that.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:27 am
#29, you could say that for blogging in general.
buy a Blackberry, most of my posts are from it.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:32 am
34 — Maybe. I want a career in this sort of field, though. In my life, I have two main career goals: to pen a New York Times-bestselling book (about politics, of course), and to become a known political personality — on television, especially, but also as a guest for talk radio or something.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:35 am
Portman seems to be the only safe choice everyone can live with.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:42 am
Alex, you’ll write for the Weekly Standard in 6 years.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:55 am
Brett, this year showed Republicans have not lost enough to realize the error of pushing irrelevant policies, incompetence, and country club rhetoric.
Huckabee is articulate but he’s probably not able to usher in a relevant version of Republicanism. MY fear is that Democrats will hold Congress for a few decades and hold the Presidency for most of the next few years until we learn our lesson.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:58 am
Wait, irrelevant policies?
Are we talking about the same person on this board that advocates pushing the Human Life Amendment and the Federal Marriage Amendment?
Talk about quixotic quests.
July 26th, 2008 at 1:03 am
I don’t think I have ever even written the words “Human Life Amendment” or “Federal Marriage Amendment” on this blog.
I’m not even sure the FMA is appropriate.
July 26th, 2008 at 1:07 am
Eh, my mistake, then.
Huckabee wants to press those issues, at any rate.
Come to think of it, what on Earth were his actual policy goals? He didn’t seem to have many.
July 26th, 2008 at 1:09 am
Ed Rollin’s convinced Huck to talk about the Flat tax.
July 26th, 2008 at 1:09 am
“Come to think of it, what on Earth were his actual policy goals? He didn’t seem to have many”
Other than the Fair Tax, he didn’t have much.
July 26th, 2008 at 1:19 am
Ah, right, the Fair Tax.
Pretty empty campaign.
July 26th, 2008 at 2:39 am
#29 - 30
Thank you for making an English major’s day.
July 26th, 2008 at 2:44 am
#44 — I know, such an empty campaign — that’s why he won the second-most delegates at the least dollar per vote ratio — Romney with his brilliant campaign spending the most dollars per vote ratio.
And then, of course, he only won the Evangelicals — that’s the only way he did it!!! — never appealed beyond the Evangelicals — except, now everyone on this site is saying that Romney took most of the Evangelical votes anyway.
And, of course, after Iowa (which he simply stole from Romney having the nerve to compete there at all), we all just realized what a one-state wonder he was; the only Super Tuesday state he won was Arkansas — except, he also won GA, TENN, W VA, ALA — almost won Missouri, close second in Okalahoma, went on to win LA and Kentucky; and in VA, with McCain the presumed nominee and Huckabee being laughed at in the press, they couldn’t call the state for almost two hours.
What a joke he is, right? Of course, Huckabee versus Romney — can’t even imagine how bad it’s going to be for Huckabee. With all his political savy and personality, spending the next four years reaching out to Americans — what is he kidding? Doesn’t he realize he’s going to get creamed in 2012? After all, no on on this site would vote for him, and that’s about — what?? — ten of you?
Wow, I don’t know, what a mystery man — no policy, no constituency, no brains, certainly no one on this site would vote for him (that constitutes about ten votes)
July 26th, 2008 at 2:54 am
Voter Huck is very much a contender for 2012. I’ve said all along it will be a *two horse race. But Mitt will get his revenge.
* Jindal/Palin/Pawlenty no way - you need name recognition these days.
July 26th, 2008 at 3:01 am
45 —
July 26th, 2008 at 4:04 am
It is quite funny to hear economic Conservatives all of a sudden treat the Flat Tax as if it were nothing. It is in and of itself a major policy whether one likes it or not. A Flat Tax or a VAT tax could promote an economic boom. While Mr. Huckabee is not as good on Foreign policy as Mr. McCain, he is no worse than Mr. Romney and while Mr. Huckabee is not an expert on the Middle East, he is quite knowledgeable about many other parts of the world.
He may not be the best or only person to represent SoCons, but he is more serious than Mr. Romney. I would be happy with many different VP candidates (some I agree with more than Mr. Huckabee on policy issues,) but few have the experience and the likable personality that Mr. Huckabee has. I know people on this site tend to hate him, but the general public does not hate him (even though he is not universally loved.)
While the EC system in a two way race against Mr. Obama put Mr. Huckabee in a political disadvantage because we won’t lose many if any Southern States anyway, he is not a political net drag. He is well liked among Southern and Conservative Democrats who are swing voters. He would help slightly in the swing states of Iowa, Ohio and Virgina (and MO for good measure) and he would not hurt us in WI and PA. Yes a few Republicans are turned off by him, but some of them are already turned off. He attracts as many Conservative Democrats as he turns off Liberal Republicans.
In the end, it will unfortunately be Mr. Romney on the ticket instead of Mr. Huckabee (or anyone else) so hopefully, the Romney camp can provide us the volunteers which we will need.
July 26th, 2008 at 4:39 am
If Huckabee is so likeable, then why is it that such a disproportionate number of us on this site do not like him? For some, its the fact that he was/is so anti-Mormon, but the vast majority of those on here that would bolt the party with him as VP are not LDS.
I’ve been thinking about what Huckabee’s real lot in life should be, but haven’t got it nailed yet. He is funny on the late night talk shows, but I don’t know if he could ever replace a Leno. He may be able to be a tv evangelist…and make the big bucks. He can certainly make money with his speeches, and probably author some pretty good books. As you can see, I do think the man has talent, I just want to keep him as far away from the Presidency as possible. I need to get back to bed!
July 26th, 2008 at 6:53 am
Talk about a recipe for disaster. Putting Huck on the ticket would hand the west, in particular Utah to the democrats.
Huckabee has no national future as his bigotry of LDS has disqualified him for Higher office. His only hope of ever being president if he were to run on a ticket as a future Romney VP. Otherwise, give it up.
July 26th, 2008 at 8:16 am
Vote McCain / Huckabee … unless you hate veterans and Jesus!
July 26th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Those who are bashiong Mike Huckabee are ant christian bigots!!! I would vote 3rd party if Huck is not on the ticket!!!
not on the ticket!!!
July 26th, 2008 at 8:55 am
By the way Mormanism is a pagan religian very simular to Islam they are not Christian any who cares about Utah what do they have 4 electoral votes? If Romney is pick you can say goodby to the south. Mitt Romney is a jerk and I’d vote for Baldwin or Barr if he is the VP.
July 26th, 2008 at 9:05 am
…and the intolerant j$%#@$$ has spoken…
July 26th, 2008 at 9:08 am
The only way I definitely vote for Obama is if Huckabee is on McCain’s ticket. I will happily vote for Obama in that case. I don’t want Huckabee within 3 miles of the White House.
July 26th, 2008 at 9:10 am
54, wow you sure show that you are an expert in Mormanism..er, Mormonsim. At least learn to spell it if you are going to trash it as if you actually know something about the religion.
July 26th, 2008 at 9:10 am
54, wow you sure show that you are an expert in Mormanism..er, Mormonism. At least learn to spell it if you are going to trash it as if you actually know something about the religion.
July 26th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Whatever You 57 and 58 and Mitt Romney you are all Chareltons and I hope Ali Obama beat you sick ticket if Moron is on it!!!
July 26th, 2008 at 9:40 am
You know, opinions are one thing, but bigotry is another - Kavon, perhaps this guy is setting himself up for a banning?
July 26th, 2008 at 9:45 am
If Mormans to don’t repent and leave that religion they will burn in Hell!!!
July 26th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Withrow grow up and join the rest of us civilized people in the year 2008.
July 26th, 2008 at 9:49 am
The anti-LDS argument sounds paranoid to me. Before I was a huge Huckabee fan, I was fascinated with Romney. There were stories online about how he was filling the conservative spot left open by the political misfortunes of a prominent Virginian. I heard he was a mormon. I liked that — Mormons are our allies in the culture war. Translation: “I can probably trust this guy to fight for the values that matter most.” But when I saw him speak, I felt disappointed. So stiff. So flat. I didn’t see conviction or candor.
Later on, I discovered things that still deeply concern me about his character.
After he said he was pro-life, he supported abortion services.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/10/15/romney_signs_bill_on_family_planning/
According to Romney, the law ensured that mandated that even catholic agencies had to administer.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/12/09/romney_says_no_hospitals_are_exempt_from_pill_law/
Here’s a timeline on same sex marriage:
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/timeline.html
Anyway…
July 26th, 2008 at 9:50 am
I would under no circumstance vote for Obama.
July 26th, 2008 at 9:51 am
#61 perfectly exemplifies the primary reason why Huckabee won in Iowa, using religious bigotry against Mormons to takes votes away from Romney. This is why is McCain chooses Huckabigot as VP, he will lose this Mormon’s vote, and probably tens of thousands as well.
Mormons have no problem supporting an Evangelical or Baptist, as history has shown, as Utah is the reddest state. But once a candidate starts attacking our faith, and for political gain to boot! — that person has lost our support. There’s NO WAY in hell I’d get ever support a ticket with the Huckabigot on it.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:02 am
A) I’m rolling my eyes. The last VP select we need is a pro-life liberal who is a religious bigot who has made a career of attacking Catholic and Mormon Christians, oh yes and letting thousands of criminals loose on the streets as long as they say they were saved.
B) I’d take Obama as President over having Huckabee as a VP, and will vote accordingly. In fact I won’t stop there… I’ll actually start campaigning for Obama if Huck is VP. The dividing identity politics Huck and many of his followers play is sickening to me, so I won’t stomach it.
I’m with you #56.
Re #53/#54: Mormons are Christian, and they are more accurately called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Don’t just get on here and make broad-brush false statements about what other people beleive. See http://jesuschrist.lds.org That doesn’t look pagan and non-Christian to me. I will also add there are tons of us GOP-ers in Michigan who are holding off on McCain unless he picks up Mitt, or maybe another conservative (and definitely not Huckabee). So its a lot more than 4 electoral votes… its Michigan, Colorado, the west, Mass, etc.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Any solid Conservative who supports traditional values will be acceptable to this Evangelical group.
McCain will pick a non controversial pick.
Huck envokes as many strong negatives as positives.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:20 am
I’m not a bigot!!!
I’m just telling the truth check out http://www.jsm.org he speeks about salvation it is the cross and him crucified. Look why all the Huckabee bashing I get very upset by it. I didn’t like the way Mitt backers bashed him. Mike is a solid Christian he is a Baptist miniter plus a solid conservative. Moral issues are the most important issues in this election if you support gay marrige and killing the unborn all the other economic issues along with national security will fall like a deck of cards. We need not say God bless America how about America bless God!!! Then there would be a blessing from God on us.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:29 am
“Moral issues are the most important issues in this election if you support gay marrige and killing the unborn all the other economic issues along with national security will fall like a deck of cards.”
Are you that dumb? Look who controls the House and Senate and will so even more after November, a socially conservative agenda will non existant even if McCain becomes President. Also a srong economy and solid economic policies which benefit working Americans builds strong families. Strong military, strong economy and strong families, gee where have I heard that before?
July 26th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Withrow makin’ me laugh.
I’m completely torn on Mike Huckabee. He would do nothing to enhance the socially progressive credentials of the GOP, and alienates pretty much the entire 18-24 yr old vote. He has a ridiculous penchant for saying the dumbest things that a presidential candidate could possibly say.
On the other hand, he’s an economic populist, but he didn’t run Arkansas to the left. He inherited a state that was full of corruption and had one of the strongest Democratic parties in the country, and he governed the state in an imperfect-yet-respectable manner. I have respect for the job he did as governor and fully believe that he is an honest man of conviction. He has a nearly unparalleled appeal with the average working American, a very important bloc that the Republican Party needs to yank into the fold if we intend on winning this election, a voting bloc that our competitors very much bank on picking off.
So there it is- I’m not sold either way on Huckabee. There’s a ton of good, and a ton of bad.
#65-
Where are the tons of Michiganders who will only vote for McCain with Mitt as VP? I’ve been there a lot recently, and I have yet to see this.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:38 am
I think the elusive “evangelical” voting bloc is one of the most over-hyped segments of the population when it comes to national politics.
First of all, not all politically conservative Christians are evangelicals. And not all evangelicals are politically conservative. Even if the GOP were to try and become more socially conservative (a move that would be anathema to a guy like me), it would probably be pro-life Catholics and other doctrinaire Protestants who such a move attracted as opposed to feel-good evangelicals of the Rick Warren variety.
Secondly, even if you use “evangelical” as a catch-all for basically culturally conservative Christians, the idea that every other voting bloc is set in stone and the “evangelicals” will determine the outcome of any and every election is just so silly that I don’t know where to start. Last week, a new Field Poll came out in California showing that the move to ban gay marriage in the state was failing by about 10 points. “Evangelicals” or “born-agains” or however the poll defined them were massively opposed to gay marriage. The problem that they faced was that everyone else was fairly comfortable with gay marriage in California. The evangelical vote is meaningless if everyone else is on the other side, see?
Third, only one presidential election probably in the history of the Republic was decided by evangelicals, and that was 2004. This idea that evangelicals are now somehow the sole decider of elections from here on out ignores the fact that every presidential election has its own narrative, and no two elections are decided by the same people. I can almost guarantee that evangelicals will not be the group that decides the election in November. More likely, it will be the angry independents who do. There is no universe in which John McCain beats Barack Obama because millions of latent evangelicals come to the polls for him, Huckabee or no Huckabee. If there is one story that will most assuredly NOT be the narrative of the 2008 election, it’s that one.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:41 am
#50 - Illinois, you seem like a really nice person, honest and fair, and I know you passionately support Romney. I respect that. But in answer to your question, that sounds like the reporter who said, “How did [candidate] win, no one I know voted for him.”
The answer is very simple. This board attracts a certain calibre of political thinkers (not good, bad or indifferent, just in the majority similar). Of course you have the few detracters, a split for and against Romney, but in the main a solid dislike of Huckabee. We don’t need to discuss the reasons. Like you, I am politically sophisticated. As you passionately support Romney, I passionately believe in Huckabee. I don’t visit this board expecting to find huge Huckabee support. It is only one of many sites I visit to get a cross sample of how people are thinking.
I will tell you this. Huckabee will not be selected. He knows it; he has known it for quite some time and has moved beyond to 2012. Romney is still caught up in this election’s cycle, but whether he is chosen or not as VP nominee, Obama will most likely win (history will I sure prevail as always). If McCain were to win by same small chance, both Romney and Huckabee can forget about 2012. There has never been 16 years of a republican president.
So I believe McCain will lose, and Huckabee and Romney will be the forefront contenders in the next cycle. I also think there is a strong possibility one of them will take the nomination and the other will be VP. (As an aside, I further very strongly believe that if Romney had taken the nomination this time, he would have chosen Huckabee as his VP to shore up the entire base - McCain doesn’t have that option).
So, in answer to your question, Huckabee is extremely liable, charasmatic and affable — very, very very politically savy. I started out hating him back in the Iowa days until I really discovered his potential. You cannot use this site as an example. If it gives you any peace, Huckabee is definitely not a contender this election. I believe McCain made a tremendous strategical blunder by keeping Huckabee’s name out of the picture. In May they floated his name as VP and the fiscal cons went crazy. I think McCain buckled and took Huck out of the picture then and there. But by showing that he was not even under serious consideration, he has angered Huckabee supporters (which are not few in number and are all located in strategical states).
By the way, McCain is scheduled to have a campaign stop in NW Arkansas on August 8th, and the GOP executive said it was clearly not a fundraiser. I don’t know why he would be in Arkansas, hardly a need to grab votes, but at this date, Mike is clearly moving on to 2012.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:45 am
#71 — the evangelicals are not the “sole” deciding factor, but neither are the fiscal cons. They are certainly a factor. I have put my money on it (betting on Intrade an Obama win).
July 26th, 2008 at 11:05 am
I don’t think McCain will pick Huckabee as VP. McCain might be announce his VP at the GOP Convention in September. I am just guessing.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
For those of you who think Mitt Romney will be the front runner in 2012…..Mitt was the front runner in 08 for about 1/2 of a second. He bought victories in Iowa and New Hampshire that turned out to be losses. Huckabee wasn’t supported by his own people to begin with, and now that he is a national name, he will get their money and backing in 2012. Mitt doesn’t have a chance, because he has no staying power against the authentic Huckabee, the ingenious Jindal, or any of the other great candidates in 2012. To tell you the truth, the only way Mitt gets the nod in 2012 is if he is VP.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
It’s going to be either the Indy’s or Women voters, and right now I’m leaning towards Women Voters. If they continue to support Obama by the margins they are now, the election is already over.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
If Huckabee is the candidate I will actively support and campaign for the ticket. If Romney is the VP candidate I will not vote for the ticket - he is a country club Republican and was a very liberal Governor of MASS, in fact he was rated by Human Events in 2005 as the 7th most liberal Republican in the Country. The rest are somewhere in between.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
This is absolute idiocy. Putting a bible-thumper on the ticket would drive away the very moderate Democrat and independent voters without whom McCain cannot win. While I like Gov. Huckabee, picking him for the vice presidential slot would be unbelievably stupid.
This article is proof positive that they don’t make IQ tests a requirement for starting a blog.
July 26th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
The history of American Presidential election has no parallel for a Dem nominee in the mold of Obama winning in November, no matter what circumstances our country faced at the time.
In the past 40 years, the Democratic Party has won a grand total of 3 presidential elections.
In all three victories, they needed a Southern Governor plus extenuating circumstances to win.
1976: Jimmy Carter (Born Again, Evangelical Southern Governor) + Watergate. Even then, Carter won a whopping 50.1% of the popular vote. If the Dem nominated any other candidate (such as Birch Bayh or Mo Udall) Gerald Ford would have survived.
1992: Once again, the Dems nominated a Southern Governor. Clinton won with a total of 43.01% of the popular vote with a Buchananite Third Party candidate winning 19% of the vote.
1996: Incumbent President who was a former Southern Governor. Third Party Buchananite candidate ciphons 9% of the popular vote. Clinton wins the election with 49% of the popular vote.
So looking back at the Dem’s electoral victories of the past 40 years, I am not sure just exactly what history you are looking it to lead you to the assumption that Obama is a sure thing…
July 26th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Who was with McCain yesterday holding hands with the Dali Lama? Who went with him to Iraq, Colombia and Mexico? Who is one of his most effective surrogates?
When you throw out conventional wisdom and rumors it is clear the one man McCain trusts and enjoys is Lindsey Graham.
July 26th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
#79 - Number one, you have an extremely unpopular president with one of the lowest approval ratings; (2) economy is frightening (whether realistically or hypothetically) and democrats “always” are perceived to be the champions of economy (just as the republican the champion of national security, which is not on the agenda these days); (3) it is not often that a party wins 12 years in the White House (the only time in recent history was Bush I and that was after an extraordinarily popular president (Reagan) - after that we need to go back to Roosevelt and World War II. That is the “history” — and I am not the only one saying it.
The only variance in this scenario was that McCain was supposed to be a “maverick” — not a Bush III term — an enlightenment in an otherwise unpopular republican party. But he is being forced to run the primary all over again, instead of the general election.
Is it impossible for McCain to win — of course not; is it practical — I repeat: “history will I am sure prevail as always.”
July 26th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Voter #81,
Please suggest a historical parallel for a Democract in the mold of Barack Obama winning a somewhat recent US Presidential election.
July 26th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
This is a big reason the voting age should be bumped up to 25 yaers of age and like our founding fathers in the constitution had it should be only land owners should be allowed to vote maybe we should get back to that 18 year olds are not mature enough to vote plus thay have no idea on what the issues and probles are plus the 18 - 24 year old generation is the most selfish and imoral generation in history of this nation. Make it 25 years old along with owning real estate can vote.
By the way the Bible says Gods ways never change despite anything that our corrupt culture tells us . We need to get back to Social Conservativism or we will parrish as a nation.
July 26th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Huck brings a lot of positives. He is very entertaining and has some good, conservative ideas. He is definitely good at attracting a following, as the above letter, signed by some pretty well known (and respected people). Now that I’ve said some good things about him…
I could sense the animosity coming out of him (Huckabee) towards Romney. Huckabee and McCain both seemed to take the “contrast” ads personally and the fact that they couldn’t/wouldn’t respond in kind, but chose to instead attack personally and venomously at debates or through the media really left a very, very, very sour taste in my mouth. I guess it goes back to the “smiles” post that someone put up a few days ago.
Romney could smile while hacking through a political opponent’s positions. Huckabee and McCain smiled while talking about Romney’s money or “candidate of change” or lack of intelligence or lack of Christianity or whatever else. Do we need two of these guys on the ticket?
July 26th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
I agree that Mike Huckabee is the best possible running mate for Senator McCain. The biggest problem facing Senator McCain is that people don’t believe the Republicans can win. I can tell you that Mike Huckabee has the charisma, connection with the people and the ability to make us believe that YES WE CAN WIN. I am one of those Huckabee supporters who made over 1,000 calls from SC into Texas that last week when all the pundits said it was over for Huckabee. I spent day after day making those callse because Hucakbee made me believe that I made a difference and that he COULD WIN. McCain needs that person with him more than he needs anything else because without it, voter turnout just won’t be there. I believe Hucakbee as vp is possibly the ONLY way to rally the base, make us BELIEVE YES WE CAN WIN, and make us want to WORK for voter turnout. I beieve choosing someone else will cost the election and Senator McCain will say “I should have followed my gut feeling and gone with Huckabee instead of letting Washington’s political machine pick a disastrous running mate for me. McCain has ALWAYS made his own decisions and I know he will pick Mike if he continues to be his own man.
July 26th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
#70 Robbie- most of my family (Catholics) who were totally offended by Huck for starters, which is a pretty big family, then about half of my friends, many who are Christians (including Catholic, Mormon, Protestant). None of us are excited about McCain and voted for Romney in the primaries, so we’re all either not voting for Pres, writing in Romney, or a few either are or might vote McCain… but the one thing that is certain is that almost all of us will be casting a vote for McCain if Romney is picked up, and maybe some of us will vote McCain if he picks another conservative…. but just about everyone around here I know doesn’t like Huck whether they’re Republican or Democrat. Of course there are tons of Democrats here too, but I don’t live in a democratic-heavy part of the state. Its pretty conservative here. So although there’s tons of Mittheads here in Michigan, there’s also tons of Democrats too. In some ways its good, but in other ways, its, ahem, Detroit. Point is from my perspective it seems there’s so many people here that like Romney and aren’t excited about McCain that a Romney pick for VP will do a lot to hand it over to Sen McCain.
July 26th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
McCain’s running mate will say much more about McCain himself and the direction he will take the country than it will anything else. Any governor with at least 4 yrs. experience would balance the ticket well because McCain has no domestic/executive experience and there is more at stake than the war in IRAQ. Health care is a major concern with folks as well as immigration, energy conservation and fixing the broken tax system. But, will Senator McCain pick someone who SHARES his ideology, has a proven record, like McCain of working across party lines to get things accomplished, ran a positive, issue-focused campaign, has been consistent in his stands and willing to stand strong for them, even if they sometimes didn’t meet with 100% approval. (I would much rather have Guiliani as vp than Romney because Guiliani at least stood up to say what he believes. I don’t agree with him on the issues but I respect his leadership ability because he stood for what he believed.) Huckabee is admirable in every way. He is a consistent conservative, with a heart. This is the way the republican party MUST head if we are to survive. Now, will McCain take Huckabee for a win or will we need to wait for 2012? Time will tell…..
July 26th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
I don’t know whether McCain will be smart enough to select Mike Huckabee for vp, but I do know that Hucakbee has a very bright political future. He proved that message and messenger are far more important than anyone ever knew and he got further than ANYONE ever thought he would with Washington political machine so disliking of him. To my way of thinkging, this ia a huge ADVANTAGE Huckabee has for 2012. We all said Washington is broken and we need to fix things there. What do we get??? Two Senators from Washington. The best thing possible for the people to do is take back our election and stop letting Washington and media bias pick our president and vp. Ronald Reagan was hated by the media and Washington yet he won in a landslide. Mike Huckabee has the same charisma, ability to make people believe in themselves, feel good about this country and unite as a people, not a party. He has talked vertical politics for years and we are now hearing it from other candidates. He is gutsy enough to present us with fixes that will take a little effort but will have longterm benefits (Fair Tax and his great health care plan). I have already started working towards Huckabee’s next run, informing and educating people about the man who should have been president in 2008!!
July 26th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Joe, I too am Catholic and I can tell you that catholic online fully supports Huckabee and I don’t know a Catholic who feels the way your group of friends do about Mike Huckabee. I don’t know what could possibly offend you about his stands on issues as he has always been a good consistent conservative on all social issues. If for sone reason, you have a personal dislike for Mike, (dont know anyone who could ever say that) but if you do, that is one thing, but to say Christians dislike him is just not right. If you don’t suppot him, you know what, that is OK. Everyone doesn’t have to. Just the majority and I intend to find those folks who DO support him and get them rallied behind Huckabee for his next run. He will have financial support and political backing in 2012! He certainly proved himself this year getting so far on just Mike Huckabee……
July 26th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Yes anyone with 16% of the Michigan vote, and 13% in Colorado, 8% in Nevada must have a Huck of a chance to win in 2012. Good gravy the southern baptist lost in South Carolina of all places. He is useless in a general election.
July 26th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I was for Huckabee in the primary (Thompson was close). He has a lot of executive experience and chrisma and he performed well in most debates.
HOWEVER, he was not the most organized candidate. Putting him with McCain, who also suffers from a lack of organization, could be a real mess. Which is why I think Romney is the guy. His campaign ran like a swiss train.
July 26th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
If Senator McCain loses in November, this is what the race for 2012 will likely shape up like:
1. Jeb Bush: The nomination is his if he wants it but he will most likely play the numbers and opt for a 2016 run as the restoration candidate.
2. Mitt Romney: If he is not on McCain’s ticket, he is the next most likely to win the nomination. He will model himself as the new Reagan and consolidate his strength in New Hampshire and Michigan where he will likely be unbeatable.
3. Mike Huckabee: 50/50 chance that he runs. If he does, he still has to be considered the favorite in Iowa but needs to build on these strengths. Could be hurt by another strong Southern candidate (see Mark Sanford).
4. Mark Sanford: Will run as the conservative favorite and will have S.C. sewn up but needs to compete with Huckabee for Evangelical vote.
5. Fred Thompson: If he runs he will get in earlier and learn from his mistakes in 08. He needs to compete in Iowa. Can build on success as Blogosphere favorite and stay relevant between now and 2012 through the radio medium.
6. Charlie Crist: Could employ the Rudy Firewall strategy and wait till Florida to make his move, but this strategy was largely ineffectual for Giuliani.
7. Bobby Jindal: Depending on how his tenure as Gov. could be seen as the next Gipper.
8. Jim Demint: One of several Senate “vanity” campaigns that might be waged.
9. Rudy: Probably will not run unless there is another terrorist attack.
10. George Allen: May mount comeback.
July 26th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
93. Any women ever get to run?
July 26th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
If Huckabee is the VP I vote for Obama. Huckabee would probably be the worst President in history. He would destroy the republican party as well.
July 26th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
I do find it interesting that while the Romney camp accuse Mr. Huckabee of being a Liberal, they at the same time accuse him of splitting the Conservative vote. Which is it? It is easy to blame another candidate for a loss when many factors are at play.
I believe that most us that chose Mr. Huckabee over Mr. Romney did not do so because of Mr. Romney’s. Yes there was a per centage of Huckabee (and other non-Romney) voters who are bigoted against Mormons, but I believe that per centage is small.
Bigotry is also a two way street. To be fair, most of the bigotry against Mr. Huckabee did not come from Mormons, but rather from other elements within the Romney camp. I still recent the fact that some Romney voters considered us to be a bunch of uncultured, uneducated stupid hicks from the South and Midwest. This stereotype is both inaccurate and unfair. Insulting the South and Midwest is not the best strategy. SoCons are an important part of the Conservative coalition.
July 26th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Why do all of you act as if Huck was a pastor a month before the primaries and decided to run for president? He was the most qualified than any other candidate. He governed Arkansas for 10.5 years!!!!!! He had a 68% approval rating and that is much better than Romney’s. In the Ark. primaries he beat John McCain (his nearest competitor) by 42% points while Romney beat McCain is Mass. by 10% points. Huck didn’t force his religion on anyone in Arkansas. They people liked him and he accomlished a lot. Did Mitt Romney ever get on Time Magazine’s best governor list? He created the first in the nation’s Kid’s heath insurance program, fixed the infrastructure and Ark. Schools improved from being 48th worst to 8th best. He had more gov. experience than Romney. If you all keep saying his is a bible thumper because he was a preacher than you should say that Mitt is a “Book of Mormon Thumper” since he was a Mormon Bishop and missionary. Be Fair!
July 26th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
#82 — I don’t know what the “mold” of Obama signifies. I am not being facitious; I am not an Obama supporter by any means (although I think he is going to win, so I am realistically attempting to find some comfort level with him). This is not a democrat/republican issue at all. It is a historical truism that Americans can only take so much of one political party and then they run to the other side. I recall in 2002 (very naively now I will admit) I thought the democrats were close to ruination, that they would never take back the Congress and certainly the White House. I think that is how democrats feel right now about republicans, but they are just as naive as I was.
I belive we will lose the White House in 2008, although not disgracefully. However, I believe the congressional races, while they will yield a net loss, will not be half as bad as 2006. By 2010, depending on how bad or good Obama performs, we will most likely start taking back congressional seats. Truth be told, either in 2012 (and, if not, certainly before 2016), the country will be “out of love” with democrats and hankering for home-grown republican-style politics — any kind of republican. Most Americans are not political wonks — they either love you or hate you. Right now, as I said on an earlier post, everybody loves democrats. It is inevitable that they must win sometimes, just as it is inevitable that we will win again.
July 26th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Huckabee would be an excellent choice for vice president. He did an outstanding job as governor of Arkansas. He’s smart, thinks fast on his feet, and is a great public speaker. I like the idea of a flat tax. I am not an evangelical christian and am liberal on many social issues but am definitely a fiscal conservative. Huckabee might give the Republican ticket a fighting chance.
July 27th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Why I like Gov. Mike Huckabee for Vice President:
– proven fiscal conservative
– as Governor of Arkansas for 10.5 years, he balanced the budget in Arkansas and kept it that way throughout his time in office
– he worked with an overwhelmingly Democrat legislature and was able to push through several broad tax cuts for the first time in AR history, while increasing the budgets for roads and schools
– re-elected twice!
– Huckabee “gets it” regarding the threat from militant Islam
– young and healthy; runs marathons
– able to connect authentically with working class voters, which will be essential in swing states like OH, MI, and PA
– can help pick up the states in the South, where McCain is weaker
– terrific campaigner and speaker, gifted communicator
– consistently wins almost EVERY on-line VP poll
– great debate ability
– connects well with voters and the media
– great sense of humor
– connects well with “MTV” generation
– totally trusted by the social conservatives and pro-life voters
– no awkward anti-McCain remarks to explain
– telegenic
– humble and honest when he makes a mistake (which is not often)
– fanatically loyal and hard-working volunteer / grassroots base
– compelling personal story; grew up poor
– highly intelligent– grad. from 4-yr college with honors in just 2.5 years
– already vetted; no skeletons in his closet
– married to his high school sweetheart, Janet, for 34 yrs
July 27th, 2008 at 11:43 am
#99. wow your creative, you must of spend hours coming up with reasons you like Huck.
July 27th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I do think it took Lynn, much time and creativity to come up with her list. It is mostly just common sense. Mr. Huckabee is well liked and respected in many parts of the country. To say otherwise is non-sense.
July 27th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Hi Mark, I have been following the election closely since early 2007. I researched all the candidate (from both parties). I watched almost all of the debates and visited each candidate’s websites. I’m absolutely convinced that Huckabee is the guy. So I do work hard on-line to introduce him to people who perhaps haven’t taken a real look at him… who have only read/listened to other people’s talking points.
Just in case anyone is wondering, I’m a small-business operator with a master’s degree. Not that it matters, but I’ve noticed a lot of people like to portray Huckabee fans as uneducated rubes or just easily-led evangelical sheep.
July 27th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
PS Oh, and yes — I did write the list myself, and no, I’m not employed or paid by the Huckabee campaign.
July 27th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Lynn thats great you like Huckabee. I don’t assume anyone who likes someone is paid by a campaign, Although I am not a fan of Huckabee I can agree with those points (mainly because there just fun facts). I think it would be interesting if we all went through in detail what we love and dislike about each candidtate.
July 27th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
By far, you are not the only Huckabee supporter that has a Masters, Lynn. I guess that is something that some of the non Huckabee supporter cannot seem to grasp.
July 27th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Moderator,
You can take out my comment or erase (#63). It’s just unnecessary and a bit mean.
Thanks!
Jonathan
July 27th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Mike Huckabee has the likeability factor, the charisma factor, the ability to CONNECT with people IN ADDITION to the most executive experience of any of these candidates, endorsed the FAIR TAX, the singlemost thing we can do in this country for a long-term fix on the ecomomy. Huckabee has a great health care plan focusing on preventive care, did great things for Arkansas, proved he could work well in a democratically dominated state and STILL make things happen there. Was voted for re-election by huge % twice til terms ended. Still has 65% positive approval there. Those who don’t like Huckabee are purely bigoted AGAINST the man because he was once a preacher some 20 years ago!! Get real people, Huckabee has been lt. gov 3 yrs. gov 10 1/2 yrs. was also a radio broadcaster, and pr person. He has done many things that make him the right peson for the job.
July 27th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Fredrick, #61 does not speak for Governor Huckabee. The governor NEVER attacked your religion. I don’t know why you want to keep saying this as it is just not true. He said over and over that a person’s religion should have no bearing on his ability to run for president. Huckabee has been targeted much more for his religion than Romney was. People don’t care less about what religion Romney is only that he is not being true about what he stands for keeps changing basic stands on everything, ran negative campaign attack ads against ALL the other candidates, including McCain, and was caught just telling lies that he later had to recant. The only thing that Governor Hucakbee EVER said concerning Mormonism is during a 12 page interview where he had an hours long conversation with a reporter he asked if Mormons believe that satan and Jesus are brothers? If you do, then why are you offended by the question? And, as I said0 NO ONE except a few irrational people like #61 care. Just as many irrational people hate Huck because he used to be a pastor. Truth be told there is NO candidate that everyone is going to like or vote for. Huckabee has a much higher likeability factor than Romney period. Romney comes off like a man who is run by a multi-million dollar PR team and even that can’t sell him to the American people. As far as someone above writing Huckabee didn’t have the orgainzation Romney had, Huckabee DID so much better on 15M$ than Romney did on 100M$ and he could have never done that if he didn’t have great organizational skills. He only had 30 to 35 staffers and Romney had hundreds….
July 27th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
For those that doubt Huckabee’s economic conservatism, read Dick Morris’ Nov. 2007 article, “Huckabee is a Fiscal Conservative.” Huckabee would be a great choice for so many reasons. Romney would be a disaster. If Mitt couldn’t win his own party’s nomination with all that money, how can anyone expect him to be appealing in the general election? Mitt comes off exactly as his critics charge: a phony….and with his eye-popping history of major flip-flops, one can see why.
July 27th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Why Mike Huckabee is not a good choice:
A) Huckabee has a problem with credibility:
Claimed to Pat Robertson’s CBN that “I’m the only guy on that stage with a theology degree,” but he doesn’t have a theology degree–he only attended Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary for a year, he’s a theology-school dropout.
B) Huckabee is unapologetically left leaning:
1) Calls for the 1999 release of convicted rapist Wayne Dumond, who was strongly defended by Baptist minister Jay Cole, a close friend of the Huckabee family. Some conservative activists apparently defended Dumond on the grounds that one of his rape victims was a distant cousin of Bill Clinton and the daughter of a major Clinton campaign contributor. Several victims wrote letters to Huckabee describing Dumond’s brutality, but Huckabee was quoted in a column by Steve Dunleavy titled “Clinton’s Biggest Crime–Left Innocent Man in Jail for 14 Years” saying that “There is grave doubt to the circumstances of this reported crime.” But as we know today, Dumond was guilty–he was released from prison in September 1999, apparently with help from Huckabee, and he raped and murdered two women. Huckabee has refused to release his administration’s records pertaining to Dumond on grounds that they contain sensitive law enforcement information.
2) He is also pro-illegal immigrants in that he supported free tuition to the illegals. What’s next Governor? Driver’s licenses? (until of course he flipped during his presidential run…while accusing Romney of being a flip-flopper. I guess this makes him a hypocrite too! It’s one thing for a politician to be a hypocrite, but it’s just distasteful and disgusting to see a ‘man of God’ tout his religiosity then turn around and dupe everyone by acting like a shameless politician. It’s probably worse actually.)
Huckabee makes stupid statements all the time:
In 1992, Huckabee called for AIDS victims to be quarantined, and refused to retract that position just recently, despite the fact that the disease is not spread through casual contact (which was also well known in 1992).
Huckabee is not the sharpest tool in the shed:
1) While governor of Arkansas, Canadian comedian Rick Mercer fooled Huckabee into congratulating Canadians on preserving their capitol building, the national igloo.
2) He is a proud disbeliever in evolution and has publicly supported creationism, though now he refuses to answer questions about it.
3) He thinks that women’s role in marriage should be to “submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband”.
4) And in the December 11 Republican debate, Huckabee pledged to repeal the laws of thermodynamics, stating that “We ought to declare that we will be free of energy consumption in this country within a decade, bold as that is.”
Bottom line:
F*ckabee is un-presidential seeming and unprofessional. He belongs on TV since most of his positive traits have to do with communication and marketing, not in the Oval Office. He was successful as a gov, but in ARKANSAS!
The best thing he did though was act as Romney’s foil and plot with McCain to take the Romster down in Iowa and especially South Carolina. Without Huck, Romney would be running an aggressive campaign against the Messiah, and possible be winning in key states. Yes, thank God for Huckabee, we’ll now have Obama.
July 27th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
#110 Sam Laslow, There are so many mistakes, lies, false rumors, and misquotes in your post, I hardly know where to start.
And speaking of unprofessional, your use of profanity only lowers the tone of the discourse on this blog. Let’s converse like adults.
After I put the kids to bed I’ll get to work on some of the other lies and liberal talking-points that you so proudly regurgitated. But for now, let’s start with the famous Wayne Dumond case.
Let’s go over it all again — this time with the TRUTH. You should learn the whole story about that before acting as Huckabee’s judge. Here are the facts, and you can look them up for yourself:
Wayne Dumond was arrested for the rape of one of Bill Clinton’s cousins. While awaiting trial, Dumond was attacked and had his testicles cut off. Not only did the Sheriff (a Clinton crony) NOT do any investigation, instead he proudly displayed Dumond’s testicles in a jar on his desk. The sheriff was later successfully sued for this behavior.
Dumond was sentenced to life in prison plus twenty years more, an excessive sentence for an assault.
After Dumond had served several years with good behavior, he applied for clemency. It was granted in 1992 by then-Lt. Governor JIM GUY TUCKER, a DEMOCRAT and Clinton crony. When Dumond’s clemency was granted by this Democrat, it made him immediately eligible for parole.
Dumond was a model prisoner, expressed remorse for his crime, lined up a job and a sponsor, and applied for either a commutation or parole. If he got a commutation, he would have been released immediately without any supervision whatsoever. Gov. Huckabee decided that the guy had suffered enough for his crime (how would YOU like to have YOURS cut off with scissors??), but Huckabee felt that the guy needed supervision once he was released. I’m sure that no one ever thought a castrated man would commit a sexual assault again, but it happened. (Yes, it CAN.)
(Now where are all the liberals who are in favor of early-release programs and lighter sentences, who believe that our prison system can “rehabilitate” an offender?)
So Huckabee recommended that the guy be paroled. This way the guy would be supervised. The parole board, composed ENTIRELY OF DEMOCRATS appointed by Clinton or Tucker, voted to grant the parole. If they had voted no, Dumond would have remained in prison.
As to whether Huckabee pressured them, accounts differ. Only TWO of the 5 people present claim that there was pressure. And they only claimed it when Huckabee began running for president, and when they weren’t re-appointed to their $75,000 jobs on the parole board.
And, if they really believed back then that Dumond should stay in prison, then why did they vote, apparently against their conscience, to parole him?
It is truly tragic and unspeakably awful that Dumond committed horrible crimes after he was paroled (although he died while awaiting trial for one of them).
Unlike the parole board, Mike Huckabee has expressed to the victim’s family his deep regret and sorrow, and says he wishes he could turn back the clock so that Dumond would never have been freed. I’ve never heard members of the parole board apologizing for their vote to release him.
So if you want to point some fingers, you should look at the Democrats who didn’t protect their prisoner while he was awaiting trial, because he raped a Clinton cousin… the Democrats who didn’t investigate the vigilantes who mutilated the guy… the Democrat who granted the guy a clemency… and the Democrats who made up the entire the parole board.
As one blogger put it:
>>Actually, Huckabee was getting hammered from both sides of the issue. There were lots of people criticizing him because he hadn’t pardoned Dumond. There was court testimony that DNA evidence indicated that Dumond couldn’t have been the rapist. There was testimony that the victim couldn’t pick Dumond out of a lineup until the sheriff had a word with her in private. There was testimony that Dumond was asking a lot of questions about stolen cars in the area and the sheriff’s involvement in that car theft ring. The sheriff did later go to prison on a variety of charges. There was the castration and the fact that the sheriff displayed Dumond’s testicles in a jar on his desk and that the sheriff was a close friend of the victim’s father, who was a distant relative of Clinton’s and a wealthy benefactor of Clinton’s. So there were lots of questions, legitimate questions about how the case was handled from the start.<<
http://www.slate.com/id/2179388/
July 27th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
The hateful remarks on this site are coming mostly from Mormons and people who hate evangelicals. Huckabee will always be unacceptable to them for their own reasons that have nothing to do with his qualifications and policies. He got more votes than Romney and would have won South Carolina had Fred Thompson stayed asleep. People are too quick to believe everything they hear and read in the MSM. The driving force behind Obama is a biased media in his favor. Huckabee appeals to many voters who care more about maintaining a God fearing nation than they do any political party. McCain needs him to even have a chance in November. Enthusiastic, dedicated workers are needed and evangelicals will provide it if Mike Huckabee becomes the V.P. choice.
July 28th, 2008 at 7:47 am
I do think it is a little unfair to blame all hostility against Mr. Huckabee on Mormons, but Sam and many in the Romney camp are way out of line when they speak about half truthes (if that.) Using the Canadian entertainer, Mr. Mercer is really grasping for straws. If anyone knows anything about Mr. Mercer, his a political Comedian, clown and Entertainer, not a political pundit with respect. Perhaps, it would be funny to have a political entertainer from AR go to Canada and interview politicians up there and see what funny answers we get. To say that Mr. Huckabee is Pro-illegal immigrant is missing the whole story to say the least. Mr. Huckabee favored Border Security. Much of what Sam said was irrelevant.
July 28th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Only way McCain will win this election…. dont think he can, I wish the radio fiscal loudmouths what they deserve for attacking Huckabee. I am hoping for Mike Huckabee but will vote for McCain as long as Romney is not on the ticket. I kinda hope he is so when McCain loses Romney will be labeled a loser. Liberal, made his money shutting down factories and reopening them in other countries. We have lost so many jobs I am afraid he would outsource the White House duties.
God please Help us.
very discouraged in Ohio
probably staying home and turning off tv
July 29th, 2008 at 1:35 am
I AM all 3 legs of the conservative stool. I was a fiscal conservative before Roe v. Wade and before there WERE social conservatives. I never voted for G.W. Bush because he was NOT a social conservative, and in fact the size and cost of government under Bush grew at the fastest pace since Johnson in the 60’s. I do appreciate Bush’s resolve in Iraq and in rotecting America in the face of strong political headwinds.
But, I read the past two posts by Brett and all of the comments about Huckabee’s supposed liberalism. I have intensely studied the facts and there is no there, there. In fact, Huckabee was the most conservative candidate in the field. The “liberal” charges were payoffs for MAJOR contributors to The Club for Growth who were Romney supporters or had an axe to grind with Huckabee in one case: billionaires don’t like it when people don’t dance as their told to. Also, Romney and Thompson rode the “liberal” charge to campaign against Huckabee, though both are more liberal than Huckabee.
All of these people who swallow all of this nonsense either hate his Christianity or have just done a very shallow job in their research. Huckabee never favored illegal immigration. He just thought they should be treated humanely and that diligent academic achievers in schools shouldn’t be punished for the crime of their parents. If that’s the measure of a conervative to you, then I pity you. All of my life I have told liberals that conservatism was about recognizing the propensities of human nature, not about being selfish or neglectful. Some people aren’t much help.