Plus apathetics who like Internet memes and don’t follow politics all that well might accidentally vote for Huckabee. (I mean, his name is the same name as that movie…)
What? I’m not THAT uninformed. I’m not!
Well, Huckabee did compare abortion to the holocaust and somehow linked abortion to immigration. He wants to abolish the IRS and income tax. If this is the best candidate to run for office, it is a pathetic commentary of American politics. But, he does think outside the box and is likable. I will give him that much credit. It may be enough to persuade voters.
Mike Huckabee is the David Duke of the far right. Not that I think the far right is the equivalent of the KKK. The comparison is that Huckabee puts a charming face to ideas that are unpalatable to the majority of the nation. Staunchly pro-life, anti-gay, pro-Iraq war, pro-Israel, pro-gun, pro-farmer subsidies, and anti-illegal immigrant. Of course this platform appeals to a lot of people, but he is on the fringe of most of these movements, and not the good fringe. That’s not even mentioning his ridiculous tax position. He’s charming, but he won’t win the Republican nomination, and even if he did he would be trounced in the election.
To be fair (and to respond to certain outraged commenters in the stories you linked), he isn’t quoted in either article as saying “the holocaust”, but rather “a holocaust”. While certainly the word is most commonly associated today with Nazi atrocities against European Jews, it was not coined to describe that horror. The word “holocaust” dates back to the 14th century, and one definition is “any mass slaughter or reckless destruction of life”, which is a fitting definition if you’re strongly opposed to abortion.
The mass purges in the Soviet Union, and the killing fields of Cambodia were holocausts too — the general public in the West just didn’t know about them until the word was already ingrained as a reference to WWII Nazi atrocities.
I disagree. Charm goes a long way. People may overlook the lunacy of the “Fair Tax” in the primaries & vote for an apparent populist (aka “compassionate conservative”, “pro-life liberal”). And in the general? You just have to win over swing voters. Likeability goes a long way.
I’m worried he could win unless the GOP really turn on him in the primary process, but I don’t think they do substantive policy criticism [del]well[/del] much at all in the caucus/primary process. And we know the GOP & the American people will vote for a dumb cluck with bad ideas because he seems like a good guy.
Indeed. Charm has gotten him a ton more recognition and support than his ideas have. However, I don’t see charm beating off targeted ads and campaigning in a national election.
Chuck Norris? Who cares about that old fossil?
When I saw the thread title, I was sure it’d be this Chuck. 