PDA

View Full Version : Sheriff Taylor for President



Harlan Huckleby
10-24-2007, 10:34 AM
From the Back of the Pack

By DAVID BROOKS
Published: October 19, 2007

The first thing you notice about Mike Huckabee is that he has a Mayberry name and a Jim Nabors face. But it’s quickly clear that Huckabee is as good a campaigner as anybody running for president this year. And before too long it becomes easy to come up with reasons why he might have a realistic shot at winning the Republican nomination:

First, Republican voters here and in Iowa are restless. That means that there will be sharp movements during the last 30 days toward whoever seems fresh and hot.

Second, each of the top-tier candidates makes certain parts of the party uncomfortable. Huckabee is the one candidate acceptable to all factions.

Third, Huckabee is the most normal person running for president (a trait that might come in handy in a race against Hillary Clinton). He is funny and engaging — almost impossible not to like. He has no history of flip-flopping in order to be electable. He doesn’t seem to be visibly calculating every gesture. Far from being narcissistic, he is, if anything, too neighborly to seem presidential.

Fourth, he is part of the new generation of evangelical leaders. Huckabee was a Baptist minister. But unlike the first generation of politically engaged Christian conservatives, Huckabee is not at war with mainstream America. As a teenager, he loved Jimi Hendrix, and he’s now the bass player in a rock band that has opened for Willie Nelson and Grand Funk Railroad.

Fifth, though you wouldn’t know it from the past few years, the white working class is the backbone of the G.O.P. Huckabee is most in tune with these voters.

He was the first male in his family’s history to graduate from high school. He paid his way through college by working 40 hours a week and getting a degree in two and half years. He tells audiences that the only soap his family could afford was the rough Lava soap, and that he was in college before he realized showering didn’t have to hurt. “There are people paying $150 for an exfoliation,” he jokes. “I could just hand them a bar of Lava soap.”

His policies reflect that background. At the recent Republican economic debate, he was the candidate who most vociferously argued that the current economy is not working for the middle class. As the others spoke, he thought to himself: “You guys don’t get out much. You should meet somebody who’s not handing you a $2,300 check.”

He condemns “immoral” C.E.O. salaries, and on global trade he sounds like a Democrat: “There’s no free trade without fair trade.” (Polls suggest most Republican voters are, sadly, with him on this).

Sixth, he’s a former governor. He talks about issues in a down-to-earth way that other candidates can’t match. For example, he’s got a riff on childhood obesity that rivets the attention of his audiences. He asks them to compare their own third-grade class photos with the photos of third graders today. Then he goes down the list of the diseases that afflict preteens who get Type 2 diabetes.

“The greatest challenge in health care is not universal coverage,” he argues while introducing his health care plan. “It’s universal health. A healthy country would be less expensive to cover.”

Seventh, he’s a collaborative conservative. Republicans have tended to nominate heroic candidates in the Reagan mold. Huckabee is more of an interactive leader. His Legislature in Arkansas was 90 percent Democratic, but he got enough done to be named among the nation’s top five governors by Time.

He endorses programs that are ideologically incorrect for conservatives, like his passion for arts education. He can’t understand how the argument over the size of the S-chip funding increase became an all-or-nothing holy war. He also criticizes the Bush administration for its arrogance. “There was a time when people looked up to the U.S. Now they resent us, not because we’re a superpower but because we act like one.”

Huckabee has some significant flaws as a candidate. His foreign policy thinking is thin. Some of his policy ideas seem to come off the top of his head (he vows, absurdly, to make the U.S. energy independent within eight years).

But Huckabee is something that the party needs. He is a solid conservative who is both temperamentally and substantively different from the conservatives who have led the country over the past few years.

He’s rising in the polls, especially in Iowa. His popularity with the press corps suggests he could catch a free media wave that would put him in the top tier. He deserves to be there.

Harlan Huckleby
10-24-2007, 10:38 AM
I think Huckabee is the only Republican candidate with a good chance at winning the Presidency. Guilliani, McCain and Thompson are sure losers. Romney might have a shot, but he'd probably lose too.

I'm not for Huckabee, only because I think the country desperately needs a new party in power to wipe away the stain of the Bush presidency around the world. "Fresh Start with Bart" sort of a deal.

MJZiggy
10-24-2007, 10:42 AM
He is intriguing, though isn't he?? But you're right. At this point we need the Anti-Bush.

Freak Out
10-24-2007, 11:26 AM
I've heard a few discussions with Huckabee and he seems like a genuine, honest, hard working guy...unlike most of his rivals. Some of his ideas I agree with but many I don't. He would be much better for the majority of Americans than any other Republican candidate....but I think it's time for some serious changes in national leadership. In the White house and Congress.

hoosier
10-24-2007, 12:10 PM
Romney might have a shot, but he'd probably lose too.


Actually, just look at what Osam - Barack Obama - said just yesterday. Barack Obama, calling on radicals, jihadists of all the different types, to come together in Iraq. 'That is the battlefield. That's the central place,' he says. 'Come join us under one banner'."
(http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=3766053)

He just locked up the "can't distinguish Obama from Osama" vote. There's not stopping him now.

Joemailman
10-24-2007, 05:14 PM
I pretty much agree with the article. When I look at the other Republican candidates, I can come up with a reason why each one can't get nominated:

Rudy: Wrong side on abortion and gay rights.
McCain: Conservatives don't trust him on immigration.
Romney: He's a flip-flopping Mormon.
Thompson: Somebody wake him up.

Huckabee doesn't have any glaring negatives. However, he hasn't been under the same scrutiny as the others yet, which will change if he keeps climbing in the polls.

RashanGary
10-24-2007, 05:34 PM
I like Newt, but Newt is a sure loser too.

I think the republicans are doomed this year and it's not just because Hillary is so good, it's because their guys are that bad.

GoPackGo
10-24-2007, 05:56 PM
I like Newt, but Newt is a sure loser too.

I think the republicans are doomed this year and it's not just because Hillary is so good, it's because their guys are that bad.

I think the candidates from both parties are weak and uninspiring.

Tyrone Bigguns
10-24-2007, 08:13 PM
I'm on the record in my discussions with Rand as supporting Huckabee outta the Repubs. I'm not usually voting Repub, but i could get behind him.

I called his rise way early. What is really funny is watching fox and their commentators basically say he has no chance. He is the last thing they want...well, right before Hillary.

Partial
10-24-2007, 08:34 PM
Bad candidates on both sides. I'd like Ron Paul personally. I want someone who will get an 8 year term and stop spending money. We need to get our economy in order.

Harlan Huckleby
10-24-2007, 09:20 PM
Huckabee doesn't have any glaring negatives. However, he hasn't been under the same scrutiny as the others yet, which will change if he keeps climbing in the polls.

Has he actually been climbing the polls? I'm not following the race closely, but I think he is still stuck back in the pack. His status is more "the best of the rest."

Conservative voters are very, well conservative. When was the last time a lesser know candidate moved up in the Republican primaries? Pat Buchanon made a splash in New Hampshire as a maverick, but he was well known.

Joemailman
10-24-2007, 10:11 PM
Huckabee has been moving up in Iowa. He is third there.

Poll: Hillary And Romney Leading In Iowa — Mike Huckabee Catching Up
By Eric Kleefeld - October 17, 2007, 2:11PM

New polling from Rasmussen shows Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney leading their respective caucuses in Iowa, though the leads are not overwhelming and the fields there are still seemingly in flux — and a dark horse possibly creeping up with Republicans.

On the Democratic side, Hillary has 33%, with John Edwards and Barack Obama statistically tied for second, with Edwards at 22%, Obama 21%, and Bill Richardson far behind with 9%.

Among Republicans, Mitt Romney has 25%. In second place, Fred Thompson is statistically tied with Mike Huckabee for second, with Thompson at 19% and Huckabee with 18%. Rudy Giuliani is in fourth place with 13%, and John McCain in fifth at 6%.

Harlan Huckleby
10-25-2007, 12:34 AM
Iowa is a poor indicator. IT is a smallish state where weak candidates can spend years building a local following and make a respectable showing. Clinton has a 25 point lead nationwide over her democratic competitors. John Edwards has zilch nationwide. In Iowa, it looks like Edwards is vaguely competitive with Hillary - a phony indicator of their actual prospects.

There's this theory that a dark horse candidate can win Iowa and use it as a springboard to take the nation. Only trouble with the theory is that it doesn't work. Paul Tsongas beat Bill Clinton in Iowa. George Bush did poorly in Iowa the year he captured (via the Supreme Court :) ) the presidency. Howard Dean won Iowa against Kerry, if memory serves.

How is Huckabee doing in the National polls? Single digits, I bet. When Huckabee has poll numbers nationally in same neighborhood as Rudy and Mittens, then he's for real.

Joemailman
10-25-2007, 04:37 PM
Harlan,

Kerry won Iowa. Dean finished third. The "I Have A Scream" speech was an attempt to pump up his followers after a tough night.

The reason I think Iowa could be big for Huckabee is because the other candidates all have flaws from a Conservative view, and people might take a closer look at Huckabee if he can win Iowa.

Kiwon
10-25-2007, 07:04 PM
Chuck Norris has endorsed Huckabee and Google has endorsed Chuck Norris.

Check it out (http://clients.arranschlosberg.com/chuck/index.htm?query)

Harlan Huckleby
10-25-2007, 11:01 PM
The reason I think Iowa could be big for Huckabee is because the other candidates all have flaws from a Conservative view, and people might take a closer look at Huckabee if he can win Iowa.

But this is always the theory. An unknown but pure candidate is going to capture momentum. It just doesn't work. The candidates need to have enough money before the primaries start.

What matters are what Huckabee's national poll numbers do between now and January. He doesn't have to lead, but he has to look competitive. A bounce from Iowa would not be enough.

Harlan Huckleby
10-25-2007, 11:11 PM
Who Doesn’t Heart Huckabee?
By GAIL COLLINS
Published: October 25, 2007
Chuck Norris has spoken.

I know many of you were waiting to hear who the star of “Walker, Texas Ranger” has decided to endorse in the presidential race. Well, the winner is ... Mike Huckabee.

“It’s time to quit choosing our leaders based solely upon charisma or one strong suite,” said Norris, in a statement that was rich in historical references, if a little weak on copy editing.

Norris has a side career as a columnist for a conservative news Web site, so perhaps his opinion carries more weight than your average action star who has not yet been elected to public office. (It would help, though, if the “Current Events” section of the Chuck Norris home page was not devoted to the schedule for the World Combat League.) But the question we want to consider today is why he is virtually the only prominent name backing Huckabee, who is this season’s likable presidential candidate. This is the venerable, if not particularly rewarding role once held by Morris Udall and John McCain in 2000, and it involves having reporters appreciate you much more than the politicians and donors do.

Like Bill Clinton, Huckabee was born in a town called Hope and became a pretty good governor of a state that doesn’t make it all that easy. (Plus, you have to love the fact that he lived for a while in a mobile home on the Arkansas Statehouse grounds.) He’s extremely inclusive, defending minorities who are illegal immigrants as well as the ones registered to vote. He can be both funny and convincing on the stump.

On the downside, I think he’d be a terrible president. He doesn’t know beans about foreign affairs, he wants to replace the income tax with a national sales tax, and his positions on social issues are far to the right of the general populace. But why aren’t the social conservatives rallying around this guy? Unlike any of the major candidates, he’s still on his first wife and first position on abortion. Once we start getting into the inevitable personal stories of redemption, Americans would have a much better time listening to Huckabee tell how he lost 110 pounds than sitting through Rudy’s 9/11 story again or looking at pictures of Mitt’s 10 grandchildren.

Yet the leaders of the Values Voters keep waiting for one of the top-tier candidates to change — a strategy that any woman who’s had an unsatisfactory boyfriend could warn them is never going to pan out. They pace around muttering that maybe Fred Thompson will start acting more ... alive, or that Mitt Romney will stop being a Mormon. Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, seems to think Rudy Giuliani has come around on gay marriage. (Perkins should talk to Rudy’s gay former roommate Howard Koeppel about the time the then-mayor promised to marry Koeppel and his partner as soon as the laws change.)

Huckabee’s problems say more about the leaders of the religious right than about him. They’re united mainly by their hatred of abortion and gay marriage, and a desire to win. Considerations like who has the most Christian attitudes toward illegal immigrants don’t register. And the fact that as governor Huckabee spent a lot of time trying to spend money on the needy doesn’t go over all that well with the ones who believe that God’s top priority is eliminating the estate tax.

Lately, anti-Huckabee conservatives have been suggesting he’s soft on crime. The story involves an Arkansas man, Wayne DuMond, who was accused of kidnapping and raping a high school cheerleader in 1985. While he was free awaiting trial, masked men broke into his home, beat and castrated him. His testicles wound up in a jar of formaldehyde, on display on the desk of the local sheriff. At the trial, he was sentenced to life plus 20 years. When Huckabee became governor, DuMond was still in an apparently hopeless situation, though theoretically eligible for parole. Huckabee championed his cause, and wrote him a congratulatory letter when he was finally released in 1999. Then in 2000 DuMond moved to Kansas City, where he sexually assaulted and murdered a woman who lived near his home.

“There’s nothing you can say, but my gosh, it’s the thing you pray never happens,” the clearly tortured Huckabee recently told The National Review. “And it did.” If by some miracle he became the presidential nominee, there would obviously be many opportunities to point out that Michael Dukakis never sent a letter to Willie Horton celebrating his furlough.

Why do the leaders of the religious right keep sidling away from a Baptist minister whose greatest political sin seems to have been showing compassion to a prisoner who appeared to deserve it? Why can’t they rally around the candidate who pushed for more government spending to promote poor children’s health and education, and reminded his conservative critics that when they talk about being pro-life, “life doesn’t begin at conception and end at birth?”

I think we have answered the question.