They do in the general election, but it looks as if no GOP candidate is going to draw much in the way of independent/crossover votes in the primaries. This is going to be an overwhelmingly intramural event. And unabashed conservatism is no handicap in that world.
I think the corporate types are likely to note that despite Huckabee’s compassionate talk, he’s proposed a tax plan that would decrease the burden on the richest 20% and increase it on the bottom 80%, and decide that he’s someone they can live with. They’ve supported a ‘compassionate conservative’ before, and made out like gangbusters as a result. And they’ll certainly want to have an ‘in’ with whoever wins, and you don’t get there by fighting to block a guy who’s in good shape to win.
IMHO, Huckabee doesn’t have to face one factor that helped bring down Dean: the mainstream media. The Broders and Russerts of the world don’t seem to take a strong position on the GOP’s base-v-moderate struggles - or rather, they hyperventilate with excitement over every hint of spoken moderation by a Chuck Hagel or Lindsey Graham or John McCain or Mike Huckabee, no matter how solidly conservative they are in their actions. I doubt that even Huckabee’s view of the age of the Earth will hurt him much with the commentariat.
But the pundit class is unequivocally hostile to the Democratic base; they’d love a party full of Liebermen. They did far more to kill Dean’s candidacy than the ‘scream’ did - which as you recall came after he’d tanked in Iowa.
As a result, Huck can expect the press to at least be neutral in his quest for the nomination, which they weren’t with respect to Dean.
Wow. I’d forgotten that I’d even written that. Go me! Although I agree that Hippy Hollow takes the prognostication game by a landslide.
I will revise my prediction somewhat, though: I think if Huckabee wins the nomination, he’ll get crushed in the general. First, he’ll get Willie Hortoned by the Wayne Dumond story. Second, he speaks well, but his policy positions come across like someone who read an interesting article once in the National Review and decided to run with it. I mean come on… the FairTax?
I think if it gets down to a Clinton/Huckabee contest, you’re going to see big business supporting Clinton. They’ll figure she’s somebody they can make deals with. They’ll worry that Huckabee might actually act on some of his Christian beliefs and it’ll be bad for business.
There’s a mini-debate going on in blogland about Rudy’s performance yesterday on Meet the Press. M.J. Rosenberg at TPM Cafe said “Rudy Giuliani provided the worst performance [on MTP] I’ve ever seen by a major Presidential candidate.” Rosenberg thinks it was so bad, it should just about put paid to Rudy’s Presidential hopes.
But I’ve tracked down three clips of different parts of Rudy’s appearance yesterday on MTP, and I sure don’t see that. I mean, sure, he dodges and talks around Russert’s questions, and Russert manages to let him off the hook despite his nonanswers, but that’s gonna bother who, exactly? Two geeks like me out of every hundred people? This stuff is the norm when pols get tough questions.
If you want to see for yourself, two of the clips were at Crooks & Liars, and the third one, which overlaps with about a minute of one of the C&L clips, is at Andrew Sullivan’s blog. Sully calls it “a media bloodbath.”
All I can say is, both of these guys are seeing something I’m not seeing. I don’t see any moment where Rudy lost his cool in a big way, spoke or giggled (or whatever) inappropriately - nothing. If there’s a YouTube clip here that you could show your friends and say, “are you sure you want this guy as your next President?” it wasn’t a part of any of those three fairly longish clips.
I’m developing a theory that Presidential candidates have a natural trajectory. When their campaign first grabs public attention, their positives get the most publicity, and people shift to their camp. But this process inherently sets in motion the trends that bring about its own downfall. As the candidate becomes more popular, everybody else starts digging into his past to unearth the most negative material they can find. As this comes to light, the candidate’s popularity tapers off and then starts to decline.
This seems to describe what happened to Romney last winter and Thomson in the summer and fall, as well as Howard Dean and Wesley Clark in last round’s Democratic primary campaign. I’m fairly certain Huckabee will follow the same course, but the interesting question is, “Will he reach his peak at exactly the right time?” If his popularity reaches a maximum precisely on the date when 20+ states are voting, it might just be enough to carry him past Giuliani.
Chris Matthews strung together several of Rudi’s “nervous laughter” moments on MTP for tonight’s show. I was really embarrassed for Rudi. Matthews gave the final count for Rudi responding with nervous laughter to serious questions at fifteen. Matthews was fairly disgusted at this behaviour.
So have you guys figured out whose gloat is bigger yet?
I don’t know who is going to take the nod, but Huckabee is beginning to look like he’d have the best shot to beat the Dem candidate. His fundie creds and old gay-bashing statements would do him well with all those who voted for Bush, and yet he’s no Bush toadie and is unassociated with Bush baggage. He at least seems like he believes what he says, he’s comfortable thinking on his feet, and dang it, he’s likable. He has a vision for America and articulates it well. It may not be a vision I agree with, but lots of America does, even if they have become disgusted with Bush as a spokesman for that vision. And some of what is being dredged up about him will actually help him. He dealt with his state legislature and raised some taxes to keep the lights on … that pragmatism and ability to compromise will reassure many who want to see someone other than a Bush-a-like. Against HRC in the general? What is her vision again? Likable? Her?
What does he have to appeal to independents and moderate republicans who are not slaves to social issues? You cannot be elected by appealing to the base alone. Huckabee is this liberal democrat’s dream opponent, and I have my fingers crossed that he is the nominee.
Bush got a lot of votes last time from moderates and independents that thought Kerry was unfit to lead the nation in war. Bush also all the votes from the hard core religious righties by the whisper campaign that President Kerry = Gay Marriage.
Huckabee will get that anti-gay vote, but where is his appeal to the moderates and independents.
Meh. We’re used to having a President who is a fundie. With a Democratic Congress he’d have to put in less than extremist Supremes. He disarms his Creationism moderately effectively by saying that these are his personal beliefs and that neither he nor the Feds should be writing science curriculum - states should. He doesn’t defend having gotten into Iraq but is firm that we have an obligation to see it through. That plays well to that side of the fence. Easy to rationalize that he wouldn’t be too bad to many independents and moderate Republicans.
About half the country shares his views, or is at least closer to sharing them than they are to sharing yours - that’s how we got Bush. And he is, so far, hard to hate, even if his views are, to my mind, despicable in many ways. HRC is, OTOH, easy for even those of us who agree with her current positions, which she articulates well, to dislike. Not that she’s got it wrapped up mind you.
Most of America will vote that gut like or dislike more than anything else.
Just to avoid confusion, I am not one of the SDMB’s liberals, I am and have been leaning towards Rudy and I voted for Reagan way back when. I do share the majority of the boards hatred of the current administration and its dismal despicable policies. I don’t believe that half the nation shares his views on creationism.
