Huck is GOP foil

Although I do not agree with her assessment that Huckabee cannot win the GOP nomination (a lot can happen between now January), Jennifer Rubin of the New York Observer has a nice piece about Huckabee's role as a GOP foil. ("For Thompson and Romney, Huckabee's Routine Is a Killer"). From the article:

"But beyond all that, Mr. Huckabee is a walking, talking advertisement for his opponents’ flaws. Mr. Romney’s elastic views and slick presentation seems that much worse to social conservatives next to Mr. Huckabee, a Baptist preacher whose fire-and-brimstone invocation of religious values makes the Romney message seem plastic and contrived. And Mr. Thompson, he of the forgettable public appearances, lethargic schedule and distain for retail politics, suffers badly when compared to Mr. Huckabee’s considerable charm and energy. It often seems that Mr. Huckabee is the actor and Mr. Thompson the small-state governor. Mr. Huckabee may not have the profile or resources to win the nomination, but he could do serious damage to two contenders who have yet to get their political acts together. In that regard, he may well live up to his hype."

The Huckabee Boomlet--Dick Morris

Interesting observations from Dick Morris THE HUCKABEE BOOMLET. One paragraph:

"Huckabee, who has risen rapidly without either money or organization, is the most interesting phenomenon in either party's race (and the only surprise). He finished second to Romney in the Ames, Iowa straw poll with 18 percent. That's significant because you had to pay $35 to vote. Romney wrote out checks for anyone and everyone, but Huckabee said, 'I can't afford to buy you. I can't even afford to rent you' - and came in strong anyway."

HT: I Heart Huckabee.

"Traction"

From the folks at Rasmussen Reports™:

"Rudy Giuliani remains precariously atop the pack with support from 20% of Likely Republican Primary Voters nationwide. Fred Thompson is close behind at 19% while John McCain enjoys a second straight day in third place with 14% of the vote. Huckabee continues to gain ground and is just two points behind McCain at 12%. This is the first time all year that Huckabee has surpassed Mitt Romney. The former Massachusetts Governor slipped another point and he is now at just 11% nationally. No other Republican attracts more than 3% support while 18% are undecided. (see recent daily numbers). Given Huckabee’s progress in the polls, Rasmussen Reports will add his results to the daily tracking history table starting on Monday."

(emphasis added). While I think the poll numbers in early primary states are more significant, Huckabee is polling in a virtual tie for second with Thompson in Iowa.



Cross-posted at wisdomisvindicated.

Huckabee second by a hair in on-line poll, first by a mile on-site

Jonathan Martin reports from the "Value Voters Summit"("A tale of two polls" - Jonathan Martin's Blog - Politico.com) :

Mitt Romney was announced from the podium Saturday afternoon as the winner of the Family Research Council’s “Values Voter Straw Poll,” narrowly edging Mike Huckabee.

. . . .

Although the audience at the Washington Hilton was not told, the crowd favorite among the 952 attendees who voted in person turned out to be Huckabee by a mile. He got 51 percent of the in-person votes, compared to just 10 percent for Mitt Romney.

Even in the on-line poll, Romney merely edged Huckabee by .47%. That's less than half a percent.


cross-posted at WisdomisVindicated.

Wow: Huckabee and Thompson tied for second in Iowa

Poll of likely Iowas caucus goers

"The first Rasmussen Reports poll of the Iowa Republican Caucus for 2008 finds former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney enjoying a six-point lead while former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee are virtually tied for second.

Romney attracts 25% of the vote from Likely Caucus Participants, Thompson earns 19%, and Huckabee is at 18% in the poll. National frontrunner and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is the only other Republican in double digits at 13%. Arizona Senator John McCain, once considered by some to be the GOP frontrunner, gets just 6% of the vote. Kansas Senator Sam Brownback (3%), rounds out the field with Congressmen Tom Tancredo (2%), Ron Paul (2%), and Duncan Hunter (1%). Eleven percent (11%) are undecided (see crosstabs)."

Liberal jaws dropping 'round the world.

Well, it has been less than a week since Liberals appear to have first realized that Jesus was intolerant of other gods (and that Christians believe what Jesus said!!), but here's another newsflash:

Conservative persons of faith believe that sex outside of marriage is wrong, even if it is "safe." Sexual intercourse with someone infected with an STD is very dangerous, even when a condom is used.

In an awkward response (here) to a question about whether he would support giving $50 billion toward a-moral condom distribution to less-than-first-world countries beset by AIDS and other sexually transmitted disease, Mike Huckabee responded as follows:

"If we really are serious about stopping a problem, whether it's drunk driving...we don't say "Don't drive 'as drunk'?" ...This is an illogical thing that we apply to that one area that we don't apply to any other area. And I'm open-minded to all the arguments, if someone can convince me a little reckless behavior is OK. Maybe that's the message. But it would seem to me that if we're consistent in saying reckless behavior is undesirable we should ask people to move their behavior to the standard and not move the standard to the behavior...We don't say that a little domestic violence is OK, just cut it down a little, just don't hit quite as hard. We say it's wrong."

Though Huckabee is pretty-much known (to persons other than rabid Libs) for non-threatening and reasonably-framed policy statements, he seems to mishandle this question by failing to hide his tough pill (response) in peanut butter or flavoring it like cotton candy.

Granted, wife-beating is more than "reckless behavior" and drunk-driving victims rarely have consented, but when the question is related to a proposal to throw condoms at persons living in an STD-permeated context, Huckabee's answer is not quite as jaw-dropping. Ironically, the UN has a poor record on combating AIDS, and the organization seems more interested in defending a worldview than in saving lives.


hat-tip, huffingtonpost.com.

Cross-posted at WisdomisVindicated.

Maybe they're right about Coulter . . .

Yikes. Ann Coulter has turned her high-caliber pen on GOP candidates Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee. ("Fred Sawyer and Huckabee Finn"). Coulter raises some fair criticisms of Huckabee and Thompson, but they seem much less fair absent the prospect that she will provide withering critiques of each of the candidates. It doesn't appear that she has that in mind, closing her piece thusly:

"If you're bored with our top candidates, go see a slasher movie. Don't take it out on a presidential election."

I believe Ann Coulter is exceptionally gifted as a thinker and communicator, but I am incredulous about her assertion that interest in Fred Thompson or Mike Huckabee amounts to boredom with the "top candidates."

Cross-posted at Wisdomisvindicated.

Are Republicans Crazy? Is Doug Bandow a Republican?

Though his name seems to evoke "Conservative Pundit" from my memory banks, I have to admit I had lost sight of Doug Bandow. But over the transom today came this op/ed ("Are Republicans Crazy?") about the prescience of Ron Paul and the ignorance of all the "other" Republican candidates for president. I say "other" because I think Paul is a fair-weather Republican and his candidacy, if Republican, is quixotic.

If the title doesn't give you the gist of the article, the fact that the article's google pole position is held by antiwar.com should. But here's the thesis of the article:

"The bell is tolling for the GOP warmonger caucus. Unless the leading Republican presidential contenders join Ron Paul – soon – in detaching themselves from the failed Bush policies, many more Americans are likely to conclude that the Republicans are crazy. And to vote accordingly."

Bandow is beside himself that Republicans (not just the GOP presidential candidates) don't agree with him and Ron Paul and Usama Bin Laden about the Global war against Jihadists, and he r_e_p_e_a_t_e_d_l_y proclaims that Paul is not "blaming America" when he says that we are the subject of the Jihad because we have a military presence in that part of the world and because we have been bombing Iraq for the past decade. It sounds to me like Paul is saying that we are causing Jihadists to hate us or that we are forcing them to defend themselves, doesn't it to you?

But that is a semantic game Paul is playing and it isn't really the issue. We have interests in a stable middle east. Israel deserves our support. Oil is a commodity that we need to be able to buy. We cannot allow Jihadists to plot, scheme, train, and arm themselves unhindered in their war against us. A decisive number of GOP primary voters understand this; ergo, it stands to reason that all (save one) persons seeking to win a GOP primary understand (or at least pretend to understand) this.

But even a Republican candidate for president who doesn't view foreign affairs the same way as George W. Bush (or W's zionist neo-con puppetmasters!!!!) can appreciate that Republican voters balk at suggestions that Bush's motives for this war were nefarious; that the mistakes or misjudgments made in this war--as opposed to every other war in history, were extraordinary; or that we will be safe from Jihadist designs if we simply pull our troops out of Iraq (and are on our best Jihad-neutral behavior indefinitely).

Maybe if GOP primary poll samples included Liberal journalists and other pacifist-lite Americans Ron Paul would be polling higher than 2%. Maybe.



cross-posted at WisdomisVindicated.