Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Is Huckabee Democrats' Biggest Nightmare?

Mike Huckabee's rapid rise in the Republican presidential race is prompting concern among some Democratic strategists who believe that the former Arkansas governor could become a daunting general election foe should he secure the GOP nomination.

Mike Huckabee
Is it Huckabee, not Giuliani, who'd be the toughest candidate for Democrats to beat next year? (AP Photo)

These operatives believe that Huckabee's profile -- former Baptist minister, southern governor, fitness preacher -- and self-effacing style on the stump could prove an appealing combination for moderate and independent voters.

"Mike Huckabee is the Republican that probably worries me the most," said Wooten Johnson, a Democratic strategist based in Louisiana. "Unlike the other Republicans, he isn't flawed in the eyes of the Republican base. But more importantly, he has a record of being a true compassionate conservative. He will be able to attract those suburban voters that don't want to vote for [a] Democrat."

John Anzalone, a Democratic pollster based in Alabama, offered a similar sentiment about Huckabee: "He is the type of person who plays well in both a People Magazine profile, on Leno and in debates," said Anzalone. "Real people seem to see a bit of themselves in Huck, and I think he will be difficult to demonize."

Anzalone added that while he was not "terrified" of a Huckabee candidacy, he could "see [the former governor] hitting a chord with the public beyond primary voters."

For months, Democrats have been game-planning for what a general election would look like against one of four possible candidates: Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain and Fred Thompson. But Huckabee's recent surge in (and nationally) has forced Democrats to consider the prospect of facing off against him next November.

There is little empirical evidence to help guide their way. The lone poll that matched Huckabee against any of the leading Democratic candidates in a hypothetical general election match-up was conducted by NBC/Wall Street Journal in early September. It showed Hillary Rodham Clinton leading Huckabee 50 percent to 36 percent. (So sparse is polling matching Huckabee against the Democratic field that Real Clear Politics doesn't even include him in its list of potential general election match-ups.)

With so little to guide the way, the best way to figure out what sort of general election candidate Huckabee might be is to look back at the races he has run in Arkansas.

Huckabee's first foray into elective office was an unsuccessful one. In 1992, he took on Sen. Dale Bumpers (D) and, even then, his penchant for one-liners was apparent. "We need to give the people of Arkansas a senator who does more than talk cornbread and catfish in Arkansas but votes Kennedy and Cranston in Washington," Huckabee said on the stump that year. Huckabee was outspent at by a two-to-one margin and lost the race 60 percent to 40 percent -- in the same year fellow Arkansan Bill Clinton was winning the White House at the top of the ticket.

Huckabee was back less than a year later when he ran in a special election to fill the vacant lieutenant governor's job. (Jim Guy Tucker, a Democrat, had ascended to the governorship following Clinton's presidential victory.) Huckabee's opponent was Little Rock attorney Nate Coulter (D), who had managed Bumpers's successful campaign the previous year. Huckabee won with 51 percent, becoming the first Republican to win a statewide post in Arkansas since 1980.

Elected to the largely ceremonial post -- the only official role for the lieutenant governor is to open Senate sessions and stand in for the governor when he is out of the state -- Huckabee quickly used the office to raise his profile in the state. As a result, he cruised to a win over state Sen. Charlie Cole Chaffin (D) to claim a full, four-year term in November 1994 -- piling up the largest percentage of the vote (59 percent) of any Arkansas Republican running for statewide office in a century.

The retirement announcement by Sen. David Pryor (D) in 1995 gave Huckabee another chance to move up the political food chain. He announced for the 1996 open-seat race, but fate intervened in the form of Jim Guy Tucker's criminal conviction and subsequent resignation in July 1996. Huckabee, at age 40, was suddenly the governor.

In 1998, Gov. Huckabee faced attorney Bill Bristow, whose client list included Danny Ferguson, the Arkansas state trooper who was a co-defendant with Bill Clinton in Paula Jones's sexual harassment case. Bristow sought to paint Huckabee as an extremist, arguing that the incumbent favored women being paid less than men for equal work and believed women should be subservient to their husbands. It didn't work, as Huckabee won the governorship in his own right with 60 percent of the vote.

Four years later, Huckabee seemed on cruise control to reelection, as a series of big-name Democrats took a pass, including Mike Beebe, the state's current governor. The eventual Democratic choice was state Treasurer Jimmie Lou Fisher, who was a surprisingly strong candidate. Huckabee didn't help his own cause; his support for the release of convicted rapist Wayne DuMond -- who raped and murdered a woman a month after being paroled in 1999 -- became a major issue and gave Fisher an angle to question the incumbent's judgment. She also battered Huckabee for accepting gifts from political supporters. He escaped -- barely, taking 53 percent of the vote to Fisher's 47 percent.

What lessons can Democrats learn from Huckabee's past political career? First and foremost, painting him as an extremist just doesn't work. While Huckabee is likely more conservative than the average voter, he doesn't come across as a fire-breathing conservative, and Democrats seeking to paint him as such have come up short before.

"What he says is deeply reactionary, but his affability may take the edge off the harshness of his world-view," said Matt Bennett, a former Clinton administration official now affiliated with Third Way.

If history is a guide, the best way to attack Huckabee is on his record. Obviously, the DuMond case is generating considerable talk at the moment and could well slow Huckabee's rise. His record on taxes and spending -- prime fodder for his Republican rivals -- might actually play somewhat well in a general election, however, as polls show the American public swinging back to the view that government can play a constructive role in their daily lives.

The biggest argument against Huckabee could well be that his decade of service in Arkansas ill-prepares him to deal with a post-Sept. 11 world -- a fascinating twist given that John Kerry's loss in 2004 was largely blamed on voters' doubts about his ability to keep them safe.

"Former governors of Arkansas may have made fine general election candidates pre-9/11, but it's hard to see how Huckabee makes us feel safe and protected," said Democratic media consultant Jennifer Burton.

So, there are clearly lines of attack available to Democrats if Huckabee becomes the nominee. But the current trepidation about that prospect speaks to just how much of an unknown variable Huckabee represents in the presidential race.

Huckabee is not easily caricatured -- either as a rabid conservative or a partisan warrior. During the Republican primary so far he has proven himself an adept debater, effective speaker and, perhaps most importantly, someone who has been able to run a strong campaign with very little money or organization.

Should Huckabee wind up as the GOP nominee, the traditional Democratic playbook might well have to be rewritten to cope with his unorthodox approach. That doesn't mean it can't be done, but rather that he poses a unique challenge to Democratic strategists.

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 6, 2007; 5:30 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Fix Picks: Reading Up on Romney
Next: Romney's "Faith in America" Speech: What Worked and What Didn't

Comments

graysce101 -- How about posting your real name after this garbage? I double dare you to actually take ownership for your vile lies.

Posted by: _Colin | December 7, 2007 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Why OBAMA can not be trusted?

--Muslim blood. His father was a Muslim. Muslim's sons are Muslims for life.
--tried to change his identity. If you were born as a Muslim, you will always be a Muslim. No matter what you say or do.
--refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance. He did not want to offend ISLAM so he refused
--claims he's running on his record
-- had 17 years' old unpaid parking tickets
--made personal "questionable" investments
--insisted that his health care provides care to everyone, does he know what universal means?
--a fabulous orator, but we need more than words....
--he says one thing and does another
--claimed that as a young boy who lived in overseas for 10 years made him an expert of foreign affairs.
--will meet with enemies without preconditions
--recruited out of state non-Iowan residents to vote for him on Jan 3.
--he said that he was not taking money from the Lobbyists. Yeah right?
--playing old politics as usual, after he promised hope and change....
--AWOL for an IRAN vote in the Senate, then criticized his opponent.
--inexperience with little accomplishments, we need a doer not a talker

Pls don't be fooled by this PHONY ROOKIE. If he is the nominee, the Republican will eat him alive. The Democrat will lose again...

Posted by: graysce101 | December 7, 2007 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Bears Empty Pot For Americans
December 6, 2007
Carl Fiser

(Smithtown, N.Y.) Many contend that Ron Paul, although an honest, plain-talking man, comes to the 2008 presidential campaign podium without a lot of achievement. While in office, he hasn't steer-headed proposed legislation into law, or galvanized broad-based support for this national agenda or that, or even been on board with most post-911 bills and actions. For almost twenty years, he's been a dedicated representative for his Texas District and has not a potpourri of achievements about which to boast on the presidential campaign trail. Is this exactly true? How could someone serve for so long, and have so little to show for it?

At this time, I should share a story I heard from two entertainers at my son's grade school. The entertainers were turning books from different parts of the world into short, little plays, in order to spark the children's interest in reading. The following story took place centuries ago in the Far East.

The wise, old emperor was keenly aware that he was getting along in years, and he worried about finding a suitable replacement to lead the people. One day, he solicited the young people of his kingdom to gather, and he shocked them by telling them that he would be stepping down and that he would choose one of them to be his successor. "I am going to give each one of you a seed today, a very special seed. I want you to plant the seed, water it and come back here one year from today with what you have grown from the seed. I will then judge the plants that you bring, and the one I choose will be the next emperor!"

One young man named Ling, a son of a farmer, was there that day, and he was certain that he could cultivate that seed better than anyone else. He got a pot, filled it with rich soil and watered it carefully. Day after day, he checked the pot. Weeks passed by, then months, and still nothing had grown. Other youths from the kingdom began to talk about their plants and flowers and trees, but Ling said nothing. He was sure that he somehow had killed the seed.

After a year had passed, all the youths of the kingdom brought their plants to the emperor for inspection. Ling's first inclination was not to attend, but he showed up that day, sick to his stomach. He was amazed at the plants that the others had brought. They were of all different varieties and all so beautiful. Some of the others made fun of Ling's empty pot and others felt pity for him. Ling stood toward the back of the crowd.

The emperor looked over the vast array and seemed pleased. Then, he spotted Ling standing at the back of the room with his empty pot, and he ordered his guards to bring the young man to the front. Ling was led grudgingly, fearful that he may be punished for his utter failure. The emperor asked his name. "My name is Ling," he replied. Now, all the youths were laughing and making fun. The emperor then announced to the crowd, "Behold your new emperor! His name is Ling!"
The emperor continued,

One year ago today, I gave everyone here a seed. I told you to take the seed, plant it, water it and bring it back to me today. But I gave you all boiled seeds which would not grow. The rest of you substituted your own seeds for the one I gave you, but Ling was the only one with the courage and honesty to bring me a pot with my seed in it. Therefore, he is the one who will be your new emperor!

Ron Paul, like Ling, is a great truth-teller. His voting record is one of the most consistent
this writer has ever seen. No flip-flops are to be found. As well, he is a courageous and wise man, and a heck of an economist. Just ask the Wall Streeters. However, he bears to his fellow countrymen (and countrywomen), an empty pot. He can't claim to have brought you wars or higher taxes, which we now have. He never brought you an unbalanced budget, which is a perennial joke. He never voted himself a wage increase and, to this day, gives back part of his salary every year. He has always voted to preserve the Constitution, cut government spending, lower healthcare costs, end the war on drugs, secure our borders with immigration reform and protect our civil liberties. Sorrowfully, he was outvoted or shot down on all measures. The Constitution has been chiseled down, government spending is through the roof, healthcare costs are out of control, the war on drugs keeps getting less effective, immigration issues remain unresolved and our civil liberties have been crimped for our own safety. I'll just throw in that Ron Paul opposes regulation of the internet, which has been a revolution in the exchange of ideas, this article being a case in point.

The eye-popping reality of the situation is this. No longer can it be said that Ron Paul is running for President. Amazingly enough, his candidacy has been hijacked, and it appears now that the people are running for President. . . through Ron Paul! That's the true revolution about which your neighbors are speaking.

So, do you want the plants and flowers that your other government representatives have cultivated for you year after year, or do you want an open and honest effort at change, not for the powerful interests, but for you and for members of your family yet to arrive. If you want to see an unprecedented effort at change - starting with the only man on the campaign trail who is not afraid to tell you the truth - your action must start now. Get informed. Get angry. Get talking to your neighbors. Then, get to the voting booths!

Please join us this December 16th 2007 for the largest one-day political donation event in history. Our goal is to bring together 100,000 people to donate $100 each, creating a one day donation total of $10,000,000.

http://www.teaparty07.com/

*** Defend the Constitution ***
http://www.RonPaul2008.com

Posted by: US-Citizen | December 7, 2007 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Bears Empty Pot For Americans
December 6, 2007
Carl Fiser

(Smithtown, N.Y.) Many contend that Ron Paul, although an honest, plain-talking man, comes to the 2008 presidential campaign podium without a lot of achievement. While in office, he hasn't steer-headed proposed legislation into law, or galvanized broad-based support for this national agenda or that, or even been on board with most post-911 bills and actions. For almost twenty years, he's been a dedicated representative for his Texas District and has not a potpourri of achievements about which to boast on the presidential campaign trail. Is this exactly true? How could someone serve for so long, and have so little to show for it?

At this time, I should share a story I heard from two entertainers at my son's grade school. The entertainers were turning books from different parts of the world into short, little plays, in order to spark the children's interest in reading. The following story took place centuries ago in the Far East.

The wise, old emperor was keenly aware that he was getting along in years, and he worried about finding a suitable replacement to lead the people. One day, he solicited the young people of his kingdom to gather, and he shocked them by telling them that he would be stepping down and that he would choose one of them to be his successor. "I am going to give each one of you a seed today, a very special seed. I want you to plant the seed, water it and come back here one year from today with what you have grown from the seed. I will then judge the plants that you bring, and the one I choose will be the next emperor!"

One young man named Ling, a son of a farmer, was there that day, and he was certain that he could cultivate that seed better than anyone else. He got a pot, filled it with rich soil and watered it carefully. Day after day, he checked the pot. Weeks passed by, then months, and still nothing had grown. Other youths from the kingdom began to talk about their plants and flowers and trees, but Ling said nothing. He was sure that he somehow had killed the seed.

After a year had passed, all the youths of the kingdom brought their plants to the emperor for inspection. Ling's first inclination was not to attend, but he showed up that day, sick to his stomach. He was amazed at the plants that the others had brought. They were of all different varieties and all so beautiful. Some of the others made fun of Ling's empty pot and others felt pity for him. Ling stood toward the back of the crowd.

The emperor looked over the vast array and seemed pleased. Then, he spotted Ling standing at the back of the room with his empty pot, and he ordered his guards to bring the young man to the front. Ling was led grudgingly, fearful that he may be punished for his utter failure. The emperor asked his name. "My name is Ling," he replied. Now, all the youths were laughing and making fun. The emperor then announced to the crowd, "Behold your new emperor! His name is Ling!"
The emperor continued,

One year ago today, I gave everyone here a seed. I told you to take the seed, plant it, water it and bring it back to me today. But I gave you all boiled seeds which would not grow. The rest of you substituted your own seeds for the one I gave you, but Ling was the only one with the courage and honesty to bring me a pot with my seed in it. Therefore, he is the one who will be your new emperor!

Ron Paul, like Ling, is a great truth-teller. His voting record is one of the most consistent
this writer has ever seen. No flip-flops are to be found. As well, he is a courageous and wise man, and a heck of an economist. Just ask the Wall Streeters. However, he bears to his fellow countrymen (and countrywomen), an empty pot. He can't claim to have brought you wars or higher taxes, which we now have. He never brought you an unbalanced budget, which is a perennial joke. He never voted himself a wage increase and, to this day, gives back part of his salary every year. He has always voted to preserve the Constitution, cut government spending, lower healthcare costs, end the war on drugs, secure our borders with immigration reform and protect our civil liberties. Sorrowfully, he was outvoted or shot down on all measures. The Constitution has been chiseled down, government spending is through the roof, healthcare costs are out of control, the war on drugs keeps getting less effective, immigration issues remain unresolved and our civil liberties have been crimped for our own safety. I'll just throw in that Ron Paul opposes regulation of the internet, which has been a revolution in the exchange of ideas, this article being a case in point.

The eye-popping reality of the situation is this. No longer can it be said that Ron Paul is running for President. Amazingly enough, his candidacy has been hijacked, and it appears now that the people are running for President. . . through Ron Paul! That's the true revolution about which your neighbors are speaking.

So, do you want the plants and flowers that your other government representatives have cultivated for you year after year, or do you want an open and honest effort at change, not for the powerful interests, but for you and for members of your family yet to arrive. If you want to see an unprecedented effort at change - starting with the only man on the campaign trail who is not afraid to tell you the truth - your action must start now. Get informed. Get angry. Get talking to your neighbors. Then, get to the voting booths!

Please join us this December 16th 2007 for the largest one-day political donation event in history. Our goal is to bring together 100,000 people to donate $100 each, creating a one day donation total of $10,000,000.

http://www.teaparty07.com/

*** Defend the Constitution ***
http://www.RonPaul2008.com

Posted by: US-Citizen | December 7, 2007 10:46 AM | Report abuse

PutDownTheKoolAid - "But the most ludicrous of all these comments is from the nutjob who wrote that Republicans own up to their crimes and sins. Talk about delusional!"

Hey PutDownTheKoolAid, how bout PuttingUpAnArguement instead of the "Liar Liar Pants on Fire" approach.

Posted by: dave | December 7, 2007 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Huckabee is leading in the Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking among Republican candidates Nationally, and in the states of Iowa, South Carolina and in Arkansas. Additionally Mike Huckabee is shown by Rasmussen to be the only Republican candidate defeating Hillary Clinton in Arkansas and this by a good margin.

Posted by: mwp62 | December 7, 2007 2:16 AM | Report abuse

"To most of us Christians (I'm Catholic), Mormon is a cult. There is no other book in the world that can replace the Bible. That is the bottom line and Mitt has to realize that."

Freedom of religion in America is a beautiful thing. One we should always remember - one we should always embrace.

Not only does Romney have the freedom to be Mormon, he has the freedom to be a Mormon running for office, without passing a Bible test.

I probably won't vote for him in the primary, but as a fellow Catholic, I might pray for him to be led to the Church, but I won't *not* vote for him because of his religion, as long as he demonstrates the values necessary to lead this country.

I think everyone, even the D's on the fix, can agree that Mitt Romney is (or at least seems to be) a good, smart, hard-working man, with a strong family, who loves America, and believes in liberty and equality.

Christianity does not have a monopoly on liberty.

It just happens that we're the ones defending her in her current struggle against freedom-haters.

But don't call Mormanism a cult man. Even if you think is, don't punish a perfectly viable candidate.

Posted by: USMC_Mike | December 7, 2007 12:21 AM | Report abuse

*************************************************************************************************

Chris right that the Huckster is the biggest threat to the Dems. The dismal performance Mitt gave at the recent debate will haunt him for years. He was not only well prepared for the debate, but he bit the immigration bait that knocked off his radar and never recovered. He had a hard time, just like Giuliani did, answering the Bible question, giving Huckabee a boost on his flawless performance.

Clearly without the money, Mitt wouldn't be where he is on the polls. I'm not blaming the guy for being rich, oh no, one has to be smart to be rich; however, the exposure his money has bought him is not enough to convince the GOP electorate that he is the right man. His Mormon faith is his biggest downfall, bar none. While some people might understand his claims of not knowing who worked his yard, he was born and bred a Mormon and he is damn proud of it. To most of us Christians (I'm Catholic), Mormon is a cult. There is no other book in the world that can replace the Bible. That is the bottom line and Mitt has to realize that.

Where as the US President represents all Americans, regardless of religious affiliation, one has to understand that this is the GOP and God comes first.

Giuliani is done, and yet he doesn't know that. His stance on the abortion issue (won't sign bill to criminalize abortion) and gay rights (approves civil unions) is contrary to the core values of the GOP.
Perhaps the dems or independents will vote for him!!

McCain has not quite recovered from his earlier support for the troop surge, nor did his support for amnesty help his cause. Nevertheless, he would make an excellent running mate for Huckabee.

Old Freddy is not sure whether he is in the mix or not, however, he wasted the most important tool he had over the other candidates; name recognition. He too can make an excellent running mate for Huckabee; however, he will have wake up and come to life.

Ron Paul will run as an independent thus squashing any possibility of a Gore Bloomberg ticket. If history is right, he will be another Ross Perot, because this nation only elects from too parties.

Huckabee emerges as the clear cut winner with all the evangelicals and die hard Republicans rallying behind him. His experience both as a Pastor and Governor, not to mention a stint as a DJ, have elevated his campaign from a tier 3 candidate to the front runner. His firm conservative views resonate very well with potential voters who actually vote. He has risen above the fray and while being on top paints a big bull's-eye on all sides is taking criticism very well and trudging on to victory lane.

A misinformed attack by a leftwing liberal blog trying to pass itself as a genuine mainstream news media citing his record as Governor, and trying to tie him to Dumond, a convicted rapist who was paroled only to rape again and murder his victim, was easily and honestly rebuked for what it was. In today's morning shows, Huckabee addressed the subject without giving credibility to the blog by mentioning its name, saying that he was invited by the parole board to discuss the Dumond issue and that he never pressed them to release him. He went on to say that Dumond's sentence had been reduced at the intervention of the then President Clinton and Governor Jim, paving the way for his parole. The said aide who was quoted by the blog was to release a statement to back Huckabee's remarks, that he was not actively involved in the parole.

With all said and done. Huckabee will make an excellent President and perhaps unite the country that is on the verge of splitting on party affiliation.

See how he fairs against a potential billary matchup:


http://www.capitalpoliticking.com
.

Posted by: BROKESPENDER2 | December 6, 2007 11:05 PM | Report abuse

*************************************************************************************************

Chris right that the Huckster is the biggest threat to the Dems. The dismal performance Mitt gave at the recent debate will haunt him for years. He was not only well prepared for the debate, but he bit the immigration bait that knocked off his radar and never recovered. He had a hard time, just like Giuliani did, answering the Bible question, giving Huckabee a boost on his flawless performance.

Clearly without the money, Mitt wouldn't be where he is on the polls. I'm not blaming the guy for being rich, oh no, one has to be smart to be rich; however, the exposure his money has bought him is not enough to convince the GOP electorate that he is the right man. His Mormon faith is his biggest downfall, bar none. While some people might understand his claims of not knowing who worked his yard, he was born and bred a Mormon and he is damn proud of it. To most of us Christians (I'm Catholic), Mormon is a cult. There is no other book in the world that can replace the Bible. That is the bottom line and Mitt has to realize that.

Where as the US President represents all Americans, regardless of religious affiliation, one has to understand that this is the GOP and God comes first.

Giuliani is done, and yet he doesn't know that. His stance on the abortion issue (won't sign bill to criminalize abortion) and gay rights (approves civil unions) is contrary to the core values of the GOP.
Perhaps the dems or independents will vote for him!!

McCain has not quite recovered from his earlier support for the troop surge, nor did his support for amnesty help his cause. Nevertheless, he would make an excellent running mate for Huckabee.

Old Freddy is not sure whether he is in the mix or not, however, he wasted the most important tool he had over the other candidates; name recognition. He too can make an excellent running mate for Huckabee; however, he will have wake up and come to life.

Ron Paul will run as an independent thus squashing any possibility of a Gore Bloomberg ticket. If history is right, he will be another Ross Perot, because this nation only elects from too parties.

Huckabee emerges as the clear cut winner with all the evangelicals and die hard Republicans rallying behind him. His experience both as a Pastor and Governor, not to mention a stint as a DJ, have elevated his campaign from a tier 3 candidate to the front runner. His firm conservative views resonate very well with potential voters who actually vote. He has risen above the fray and while being on top paints a big bull's-eye on all sides is taking criticism very well and trudging on to victory lane.

A misinformed attack by a leftwing liberal blog trying to pass itself as a genuine mainstream news media citing his record as Governor, and trying to tie him to Dumond, a convicted rapist who was paroled only to rape again and murder his victim, was easily and honestly rebuked for what it was. In today's morning shows, Huckabee addressed the subject without giving credibility to the blog by mentioning its name, saying that he was invited by the parole board to discuss the Dumond issue and that he never pressed them to release him. He went on to say that Dumond's sentence had been reduced at the intervention of the then President Clinton and Governor Jim, paving the way for his parole. The said aide who was quoted by the blog was to release a statement to back Huckabee's remarks, that he was not actively involved in the parole.

With all said and done. Huckabee will make an excellent President and perhaps unite the country that is on the verge of splitting on party affiliation.

See how he fairs against a potential billary matchup:

http://www.capitalpoliticking.com
.

Posted by: BROKESPENDER2 | December 6, 2007 11:04 PM | Report abuse

Huck is definetly capable of speaking the language of the people. It will be Huck and Obama in the finals, two guys who don't seem strident, angry, or vindictive and who stick to their positions, popular or not.

Posted by: TrueHawk | December 6, 2007 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Chris-

I think your nuts on this one.

The dems know that Independents will swing the vote. What really should worry them is HRC - she is too divisive to gain independents. They should also worry about Romney, Rudy, and McCain - all three appeal to Independents. The far right and far left will vote their party regardless.

Posted by: weinbob | December 6, 2007 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Oh so scary, especially when we get to the part about how clueless he is on current events. What sells with bible thumpers in the primaries will bury him in the general election. How about the crooked mayor or flip flopping governor instead ? Bring it on.

Posted by: barnardj1 | December 6, 2007 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Huckabee is as slick as slick Willie ever was. I'll give him a nod for the "Elmer Gantry" award but not my vote.

Posted by: rcasey99 | December 6, 2007 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Elections are called races for a reason. If Huckabee is the Dem nominee the strategy should NOT be to find a way to attack him. The strategy should be to out run him and make him look weak by comparison. The Dem nominee should create the vision and back it up with policy proposals and plans to make it clear who is best suited to lead our country at this point in time. If the nominee is not Hillary, there is also the potential narrative that we don't need another governor from Arkansas -- I'd love to watch the Republicans counter that without looking like they are defending Clinton.

Posted by: matt_ahrens | December 6, 2007 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Elections are called races for a reason. If Huckabee is the Dem nominee the strategy should NOT be to find a way to attack him. The strategy should be to out run him and make him look weak by comparison. The Dem nominee should create the vision and back it up with policy proposals and plans to make it clear who is best suited to lead our country at this point in time. If the nominee is not Hillary, there is also the potential narrative that we don't need another governor from Arkansas -- I'd love to watch the Republicans counter that without looking like they are defending Clinton.

Posted by: matt_ahrens | December 6, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Elections are called races for a reason. If Huckabee is the Dem nominee the strategy should NOT be to find a way to attack him. The strategy should be to out run him and make him look weak by comparison. The Dem nominee should create the vision and back it up with policy proposals and plans to make it clear who is best suited to lead our country at this point in time. If the nominee is not Hillary, there is also the potential narrative that we don't need another governor from Arkansas -- I'd love to watch the Republicans counter that without looking like they are defending Clinton.

Posted by: matt_ahrens | December 6, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

memphis1: I still cannot find much "Factual" information about this case. I am relying mostly on memory, I haven't even thought of it for years, and memories fade. Does anyone actually know the answers to my questions?

Posted by: lylepink | December 6, 2007 5:09 PM | Report abuse

To answer the headline:

yes.

Huckabee can bring people together like no one else can - and this country needs that now more than ever....

Posted by: lgander | December 6, 2007 5:01 PM | Report abuse

murray waas???? about 5 people here care who this guy is and the rest have never heard of him.

Posted by: Anti-wimp | December 6, 2007 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Claudia--Since you asked..I think the comment you pointed out was indeed offensive, and CC should enforce the posting standards when something this inappropriate is written by someone who is clearly fixated on you. Back to the topic .. until the recent Rudy scandal stuff came to light, I've long thought that Rudy/Huck might be a possibility. They complement and complete each other in the sort of authoritarian, theocratic way that might appeal to the GOP base. But then I tell myself this couldn't really happen, could it?

Posted by: rdklingus | December 6, 2007 4:41 PM | Report abuse

memphis1 - who is the long time respected journalist in AR you speak of?

Posted by: Anti-wimp | December 6, 2007 4:34 PM | Report abuse

okay, families: Huck made a bad mistake and learned from it. I'm sorry. As is he. It is/was terrible. Now let's grow as best we can from here and I'm happy to help.

it was the st francis county sheriff? awesome. glad you got that straight because it changes my whole point and the fact that the balls were hanging out on the desk. thanks. (are you sitting next to your liberal washing machine on your porch?)

Posted by: Anti-wimp | December 6, 2007 4:27 PM | Report abuse

note to two people: Huck doesn't drink beer. And John McCain whispers when he talks and is not presidential. WAY too much time in D.C. Not a chance.

Posted by: Anti-wimp | December 6, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

yeah, right. it was the St. Francis County Sheriff who displayed Dumond's testicles in a jar on his desk, not the police chief. if you were as knowledgeable about all this as you claim, you would have known that.

huckabee made a "bad mistake" and "learned from it?" Tell that to the families of the two women Dumond killed.

Posted by: memphis1 | December 6, 2007 4:21 PM | Report abuse

folks...i'm a conservative capitalist pig. huck raised only a few taxes here and if you lived in this poor, highly uneducated state run by lazy liberals who promote more of the poor uneducated ways, you'd have to do some moderate things simply to get anything done. why do you think he was re-elected and also with so much of the black vote? because he got some real results. he's signed the no tax pledge and doesn't have to deal with a 90% democratic congress. figure it out. the illegal thing is/was fine. don't pusish the kids. simple as pie. quit taking things out of context.

Posted by: Anti-wimp | December 6, 2007 4:21 PM | Report abuse

lylepink: the castration was ordered by clinton's hitmen. my sister went to school with the victim. sad deal for sure. she was a distant cousin of mob boss clinton (he's governed my life most of it thank god he's gone) and he ordered the hit as many here know. the police chief in the town had a glass jar on his desk which contained the testicles of dumond. huck made a bad mistake. he learned from it. and it shouldn't define his readiness to bring optimistic, rational, leadership to the country. ask me anything folks..i live here and know all the players, dems or repubs. but watch out if you come, clinton's hitmen are still lurking...

Posted by: Anti-wimp | December 6, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

So Governor Huckabee is a compassionate conservative, eh? Try telling that to the women raped by Mr. Dumond. And to the millions of women a compassionate conservative needs to be elected.

Posted by: rrickards10 | December 6, 2007 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Chris the Fix is in love with Huckabee. But Hukabee doesn't have the organization or the resources to win the presidency let alone go up against the Clintons. I agree he is a nice guy and plays the guitar. He also has a habit of raising taxes and giving encouragement to illegal immigrants.

Posted by: bryantford | December 6, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

My guess is that you would be drinking lemonade.

The Huckster is just the latest media crush and will be undone by his past just as Thug Guliani is being undone.

The Dumond issue is not so much that Huck was involved in letting this low life out of jail and went on to destroy other lives it is why the Govenor intervened. He intervened becasue he suffers from Clinton Derangement Syndrom. Chris failed to bring up that a major factor in all this is that Huck did not beleive the guy was guilty that DUmaond was railroaded. Why? Becasue he was charged and convicted with raping a 2nd cousin once removed of Bill Clinton's. Therefore Mr Dumond was castrated and sentenced to prison because Bill Clinton demanded it.

Oh then there is the whole evolution problem, anti-choice, regressive sales tax on all. He is dangerous because he is so "nice" and becasue the press will not hammer on his charcter problems. Only Democrats are flawed.

Bob O'Reilly

Posted by: rworeilly | December 6, 2007 4:02 PM | Report abuse

The Huff Post piece was written by a long-time Arkansas journalist who is well-respected in his home state.

Anyone who lived in this region at the time is well aware of the role animosity toward Clinton played in the "Free Dumond" movement.

At the time, it was common knowledge that Huckabee was pushing for Dumond's parole.

Posted by: memphis1 | December 6, 2007 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of nightmares, Chris, try this analogy on for size: W. Horton is to Michael D. as W. DuMond is to Michael H.. Got a certain rhythm to it, doesn't it? By the way, how did that Lee Atwater special ad about Willie Horton work out for Michael Dukakis?

Posted by: allen11 | December 6, 2007 3:46 PM | Report abuse

It is comical to read these comments and see how badly out of touch with reality Republicans have become. Little do they seem to understand the gloomy fate that awaits their wretched party of perverts, pedophiles, hypocrites, liars, and above all else, thieves. But the most ludicrous of all these comments is from the nutjob who wrote that Republicans own up to their crimes and sins. Talk about delusional!

Posted by: PutDownTheKoolaid | December 6, 2007 3:45 PM | Report abuse

wmcmichail: The castration of the Rapist, to my knowledge, was unclear as to who was supposed to have done it, when it was done, or if it was done at all. Anyway the Murder and Rape occurred shortly after he was released on parole, so the question I've always had was "How does a castrated man commit Rape?"

Posted by: lylepink | December 6, 2007 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Sure Huckabee is an affable guy, but he has no chance of becoming president.

Let's be serious people, President "Huckabee"?!

What would the ticket be, "Huckabee and Cornpone"?

The most embarassing presidential name to date was probably Hoover. A bit ominous, isn't it?

Posted by: dairving | December 6, 2007 3:43 PM | Report abuse

If the ignorant vote again because they would like to drink a beer with this guy we are in serious trouble.

Posted by: DIMMY | December 6, 2007 3:25 PM | Report abuse

He's just the candidate du jour. It's amazing how rightwingers want to always blame the Dems. for underhanded attacks. The story about the rapist could have come from any campaign. Afterall, it's Repuglicans that he's surging ahead of right now. It's a terrible story and he's lying about his role in it. An assistant of his said Huckabee was very involved. We don't need another lying Republican in such quick succession.

Posted by: shag11 | December 6, 2007 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Huckabee has many good qualities. He comes across as honest, sincere and direct and appears to be a good leader. However, in a general election, there is one candidate that stands out as the leader who can beat Hillary Clinton or any other Democrat nominee, hands down: John McCain. If you look at the polling match- up data, McCain has consistently led or tied Clinton again and again. He is a proven leader, with a track record of making principled decisions; he is a strong conservative who also appeals to independent voters and moderate democrats. He is strong on national security and also knows how to work accross the aisle.

I think Huckabee would make a fine Vice President, but John McCain is THE Republican who Democrats should be worried about.

Posted by: slkellogg_2000 | December 6, 2007 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Huckabee should be any right thinking person's nightmare--he would be a continuation of the current "compassionate conservatism" (What is that but big gov? True conservatism is by its nature compassionate--it means the government trusts you, government won't dictate to you). A Huckabee election would be the continuation of big government conservatism. Scary stuff if you care about things like liberty, your income, world security. In fact, Giuliani (NYC!!) and Romney (Socialized Healthcare in MA!!) are also from the same big gov wing of the Republican party. Shame on Reps for entertaining any of these guys....

Posted by: lovinliberty | December 6, 2007 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Amazing, how all of this GOP canidates want to be like Ronal Reagan, I have news for this clowns, Reagan is DEAD, and so are they, if they dont figure a way to get us the hell out of Iraq and stop spending the taxpayer money, on this stupid war. If, they want to spend this kind of money start by patrolling the Borders fix our interstate roads, healthcare for everybody..Stop killing our young man and women on wars that we created, like WMD DUH!

Posted by: llevario2 | December 6, 2007 3:18 PM | Report abuse

OH, LOL Cillizza!!!

Huck is not their Nightmare!

I AM!

See, I am out to get the Huckster to drop the Religion Wedge, and TEAM UP with the Mittster!

Let's see, the Senior Bushies seem to Like the Mittster, who also like Chuck Norris, who likes Huckleberry(Number "2"), who by Proxie now likes the Mittster!

Hee Hee! Problem solved!

Posted by: rat-the | December 6, 2007 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Go to Huffington Post

he he

go to "i am a complete wacko.com" to read about how bush eats babies for breakfast.

Posted by: kingofzouk | December 6, 2007 3:12 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats worst nightmare will be the uninformed voter, as the Republicans have done all the necessary work on dismantling themselves.

Posted by: once_read | December 6, 2007 3:07 PM | Report abuse

"Some of you are playiny a little loose with the facts on the Dumond case. Huckabee denied him communtation three times and simply signed off on the Paroled Board recommendation that he cannot change or supercede."

Sorry, you are wrong. Huckabee was much more involved in the release of Dumond. Go to Huffington Post to read the whole story including the letters written to Huckabee by two women who were also raped by Drumond, letters Huckabee ignored when he recommended to the parole board that this guy be released.

Posted by: katie11 | December 6, 2007 3:07 PM | Report abuse

sltiowa - you don't understand our deranged poster claudialong aka drindl. all she ever does is throw mud and insults. don't expect an ounce of rationality from her. she is the hyper-female version of rufas. when confronted with reality she retreats back into her shadow world.

Posted by: kingofzouk | December 6, 2007 3:01 PM | Report abuse

What do Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and Mike Huckabee, general election juggernaut, all have in common?

Posted by: LouisTheRogue | December 6, 2007 2:52 PM | Report abuse

I like Huckabee, and he certainly is getting my vote. He doesn't flip flop on things, he's a truely social conservative & he has new and bold ideas. He believes in public health and has fought for fitness and health to be part of children's lives. Working in insurance as I do, I'm certainly greatful for this change. I also welcome his support of the Fair Tax. I'm not certain as to what rates we would pay and how drug dealers would be caught, but I'm certainly interested in the details of this plan. His support & interest in education attracts me to him. His reverence to God and Christian walk make him very attractive. I believe with these attributes, and now a little publicity, he's on a heck of a racehorse that just may enter the Whitehouse.

Posted by: bryant_flier2006 | December 6, 2007 2:51 PM | Report abuse

I hope this is a joke because no Journalist would write this trash. Huckabee didn't even know about Iran not having NUKES as it was all over the news. Bush/Israel wanted to bomb Iran and we found out that only Israel had NUKES not Iran. We have had a President for 7 years who knows nothing and lies to your face do we really want another unqualified President who is clue less and let's other run the Country. Using God isn't going to work this time, Karl Rove did enough lying while using God's name.

Posted by: qqbDEyZW | December 6, 2007 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Claudialong,

You never addressed my questions concerning responsibility of D candidates votes. Also are you saying that DeMund was a horrible prisoner and the first meeting of the parole board someone actually voted for him being paroled? The Atlantic Review has written a piece with slightly different spin on the information than yours...is that a surprise. Yes, we know that you get your news straight from the tainted source. I hardly think MH newly elected governor in AK at the time will risk his new found power on releasing a convicted rapist simply because he raped Bill Clinton's distant cousin (talk about conspiracy theory). MH never said that DeMund never raped anyone and noted his change in his life that he thought genuine as his reason for the man's release. Who really is the revisionist.

Posted by: sltiowa | December 6, 2007 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris:
Let me be the 18,000th person to say this: Are you reading the news lately? My God, you're putting out a press release for Huckabee, not an analysis of his candidacy.

I'm sure this Dumond pardon controversy will affect his position in future polls;like Giuliani's crony scandal, Romney's illegal immigrant landscaper scandal, and Thompson's sonambulant scandal, Huckabee will take a dive in his support.

Do these guys act like the Dems in the 80's, fighting amongst themselves and throwing PR-fax mud at each other?

That's the story here.

Posted by: spenceradams | December 6, 2007 2:46 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats would LOVE to go up against Huckabee in a general election.

Although he would certainly shore up the social conservative element, he would fail to get support from moderate Republicans and Independents.

His stance on illegal immigration will keep him from being a serious contender down the stretch. NO ONE could possibly win the Republican nomination with a PRO-AMNESTY stance.

The fact that he doesn't believe in evolution will scare away all but the most ardently religious of Republican voters.

His poor taxing record will worry fiscal conservatives to the point of nausea.

His lack of foreign policy experience will render him helpless on the all-important issue of national security.

Surprised that the author of this article could be so in the dark about these issues.

Posted by: gthstonesman | December 6, 2007 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I usually like what you write but man, you are WAY off on this one and on the analysis of Romney's speech. You don't even mention the possible conflict in his statement that freedom requires religion? How can you not address that?

I think FactChecker needs to take on the "freedom requires religion" claim. Pull up some Constitutional excerpts and give him his four earned pinnochios.

Posted by: thecrisis | December 6, 2007 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I'm at a loss to understand the thinking of Republican party operatives if they really believe this: "former Baptist minister, southern governor -- could prove an appealing combination for moderate and independent voters"

That is the exact opposite of what they need to appeal to non-R voters. A social moderate and fiscal conservative (preferably not from the South) would be the most potent combination for moderate and independent voters, if the candidate doesn't have Guiliani's weaknesses.

Novamatt's post about how Huckabee plays well in states that will likely vote for the Republican candidate anyway, but will likely lose possible crossover states (particularly in the West) was spot-on.

Posted by: TEL1 | December 6, 2007 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Bears Empty Pot For Americans
December 6, 2007
Carl Fiser

(Smithtown, N.Y.) Many contend that Ron Paul, although an honest, plain-talking man, comes to the 2008 presidential campaign podium without a lot of achievement. While in office, he hasn't steer-headed proposed legislation into law, or galvanized broad-based support for this national agenda or that, or even been on board with most post-911 bills and actions. For almost twenty years, he's been a dedicated representative for his Texas District and has not a potpourri of achievements about which to boast on the presidential campaign trail. Is this exactly true? How could someone serve for so long, and have so little to show for it?

At this time, I should share a story I heard from two entertainers at my son's grade school. The entertainers were turning books from different parts of the world into short, little plays, in order to spark the children's interest in reading. The following story took place centuries ago in the Far East.

The wise, old emperor was keenly aware that he was getting along in years, and he worried about finding a suitable replacement to lead the people. One day, he solicited the young people of his kingdom to gather, and he shocked them by telling them that he would be stepping down and that he would choose one of them to be his successor. "I am going to give each one of you a seed today, a very special seed. I want you to plant the seed, water it and come back here one year from today with what you have grown from the seed. I will then judge the plants that you bring, and the one I choose will be the next emperor!"

One young man named Ling, a son of a farmer, was there that day, and he was certain that he could cultivate that seed better than anyone else. He got a pot, filled it with rich soil and watered it carefully. Day after day, he checked the pot. Weeks passed by, then months, and still nothing had grown. Other youths from the kingdom began to talk about their plants and flowers and trees, but Ling said nothing. He was sure that he somehow had killed the seed.

After a year had passed, all the youths of the kingdom brought their plants to the emperor for inspection. Ling's first inclination was not to attend, but he showed up that day, sick to his stomach. He was amazed at the plants that the others had brought. They were of all different varieties and all so beautiful. Some of the others made fun of Ling's empty pot and others felt pity for him. Ling stood toward the back of the crowd.

The emperor looked over the vast array and seemed pleased. Then, he spotted Ling standing at the back of the room with his empty pot, and he ordered his guards to bring the young man to the front. Ling was led grudgingly, fearful that he may be punished for his utter failure. The emperor asked his name. "My name is Ling," he replied. Now, all the youths were laughing and making fun. The emperor then announced to the crowd, "Behold your new emperor! His name is Ling!"
The emperor continued,

One year ago today, I gave everyone here a seed. I told you to take the seed, plant it, water it and bring it back to me today. But I gave you all boiled seeds which would not grow. The rest of you substituted your own seeds for the one I gave you, but Ling was the only one with the courage and honesty to bring me a pot with my seed in it. Therefore, he is the one who will be your new emperor!

Ron Paul, like Ling, is a great truth-teller. His voting record is one of the most consistent
this writer has ever seen. No flip-flops are to be found. As well, he is a courageous and wise man, and a heck of an economist. Just ask the Wall Streeters. However, he bears to his fellow countrymen (and countrywomen), an empty pot. He can't claim to have brought you wars or higher taxes, which we now have. He never brought you an unbalanced budget, which is a perennial joke. He never voted himself a wage increase and, to this day, gives back part of his salary every year. He has always voted to preserve the Constitution, cut government spending, lower healthcare costs, end the war on drugs, secure our borders with immigration reform and protect our civil liberties. Sorrowfully, he was outvoted or shot down on all measures. The Constitution has been chiseled down, government spending is through the roof, healthcare costs are out of control, the war on drugs keeps getting less effective, immigration issues remain unresolved and our civil liberties have been crimped for our own safety. I'll just throw in that Ron Paul opposes regulation of the internet, which has been a revolution in the exchange of ideas, this article being a case in point.

The eye-popping reality of the situation is this. No longer can it be said that Ron Paul is running for President. Amazingly enough, his candidacy has been hijacked, and it appears now that the people are running for President. . . through Ron Paul! That's the true revolution about which your neighbors are speaking.

So, do you want the plants and flowers that your other government representatives have cultivated for you year after year, or do you want an open and honest effort at change, not for the powerful interests, but for you and for members of your family yet to arrive. If you want to see an unprecedented effort at change - starting with the only man on the campaign trail who is not afraid to tell you the truth - your action must start now. Get informed. Get angry. Get talking to your neighbors. Then, get to the voting booths!


Posted by: US-Citizen | December 6, 2007 2:29 PM | Report abuse

More like conservatives' worst nightmare. His record in Arkansas is worse on spending than even President Bush's, and he's just as soft on illegal immigration. Why vote for more of the same?

Posted by: drd6000 | December 6, 2007 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Governor Huckabee would be a very strong candidate. He comes from the South - A place where the Democrats can never seem to make inroads. So he shores up the base. He is also Governor and 4 out of the last 5 Presidents were Governors. When people want change they look to Governors, not VPs or Senators.

On similar note I am often troubled by the fact that articles on GOP candidates only attract fired up GOP activists to post and articles on Demcratic candidates only get fired up Democratic activitists posting. I think most of these posts are not taken from an objective viewpoint. I admit, I don't consider myself a Republican, but thought I should draw attention to Governor Huckabee's strengths based on some of the comments here.

Additionally, people should go back and look at voting trends in election over the past 2 or 3 decades to get a sense of where things are going now. The reliance on polls is very misleading because none of these candidates have really been introduced to American people through a convention or campaign. However the strong activists with either party always cite poll numbers when responding to these articles. These polls now will mean nothing when we get to Nov 2008 - and the time we have from now to then is equal to several lifetimes in politics.

Posted by: VApolitics | December 6, 2007 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Huckabee doesn't seem like a nightmare for Democrats to me. Yes, he has charm, but he turns around and does something really nasty the next chance he gets. He does have excellent credentials as an evangelical Christian, but his record in office will not hold up to scrutiny. And the evangelicals may hurt the Democrats in the South, but I don't see Huckabee getting much support from the rest of the Republicans in the country. I would say that Huckabee is more a scourge on the Republicans whose view he doesn't represent, yet whose base he charms. He might end up running his party while being pro-tax and pro-immigrant. I think that really scares his party.

Posted by: bghgh | December 6, 2007 2:05 PM | Report abuse

If Huckabee wasn't involved in the Dumond case and has nothing to hide, then why did he have Dumond's records transferred to the governor's office so they would not be subject to the Arkansas FOIA? He hid the fact that two women who were also victims of Dumond (a long-time violent offender) had written to him as well as the the parole board and asked that Dumond be denied parole because they feared he would be a threat to them and others.

Four members of the parole board are on record stating that Huckabee lobbied them to parole Dumond. Now Huckabee claims they're lying -- at the time, I recall that Huckabee was widely known to believe that the assault involving Ashley Stevens was bogus.

He also lied about Jim Guy Tucker's involvement in Dumond's parole -- Tucker commuted his sentence from life to 39 years, but never advocated for Dumond to be paroled. Clinton recused himself from the Dumond case because the victim was his distant cousin.

I don't trust Huckabee. What else is he hiding?

Posted by: memphis1 | December 6, 2007 2:01 PM | Report abuse


'finally something drindl knows a thing or two about from personal experience - actually the resident expert.'

Just can't stop thinking about me, can you zou? Practically all you talk about, all day every day. I mean, it's flattering, but I'm married you know. I suggest you seek help for your obssession with someone you've nevr even met. I feel such pity for you.

Btw, what did you say you did for a living again? You seem to have so much free time to think about me...

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Huckleberry's strongest suit may be that he isn't a Clinton or Bush. Running on his record isn't such a good idea either, as he was known in Arkansas as "tax hike mike", seemed to pass out get out of jail cards quite liberally and being an ordained Shaman to the wingnut crowd isn't exactly a plus either.

Posted by: slim2 | December 6, 2007 2:01 PM | Report abuse

That Huckabee is even polling about 2% is an embarrassment for middle America. This guy VOCALLY disbelieves in evolution, one of the most strongly supported theories yet put forth by science. That he is not only polling well, but LEADING is sad and disquieting.

When will we STOP putting so much stock in FAITH, and expect more FACTS?

Posted by: FredEvil | December 6, 2007 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Only a DEMOCRATIC insider could fear a wingnut presidential candidate that DENIES EVOLUTION PUBLICLY!

YOU PEOPLE ARE WEAK AND DO NOT DESERVE TO WIN WITH IDEAS LIKE THAT! TIME TO SWEEP THE DECKS OF THE FEARFUL NON-LEADERS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Please begin with the two weakest members - Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Totally unqualified to serve givcen their weakness in the face of neo-con idiots.

Posted by: onestring | December 6, 2007 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"so nuts in their hatred "

finally something drindl knows a thing or two about from personal experience - actually the resident expert.

Posted by: kingofzouk | December 6, 2007 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Huckabee is a strawman being constructed by the leftist media and is the most beatable Republican in the race. He will present a negligible threat to any future Democratic nominee and therefore will ensure a Democratic victory in the 2008 presidential election. This is an innovative ruse but I seriously doubt that it will work.

Posted by: rplat | December 6, 2007 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Huckabee is a strawman being constructed by the leftist media and is the most beatable Republican in the race. He will present a negligible threat to any future Democratic nominee and therefore will ensure a Democratic victory in the 2008 presidential election. This is an innovative ruse but I seriously doubt that it will work.

Posted by: rplat | December 6, 2007 1:47 PM | Report abuse

11 months ago I said Huckabee would be the strongest general candidate the Republicans could run, since he is charismatic and has some appealing liberal positions while gaining the solid support of the evangelical base. That said, am I scared of him? No. He spots the democrats a 1% (Clinton) to 5% (Obama) lead in the polls. He's a creationist (!!!) He has no foreign policy experience. He's been reprimanded repeatedly for ethics violations despite his holier-than-thou image, and Arkansas reporters refer to him as "his huffiness." And libertarians will leave the party in droves to vote for a third party candidate rather than "Tax Hike Mike."

Posted by: Nissl | December 6, 2007 1:38 PM | Report abuse

""In 1996, as a newly elected governor who had received strong support from the Christian right, Huckabee was under intense pressure from conservative activists to pardon Dumond or commute his sentence. The activists claimed that Dumond's initial imprisonment and various other travails were due to the fact that Ashley Stevens, the high school cheerleader he had raped, was a distant cousin of Bill Clinton, and the daughter of a Clinton campaign contributor.

The case for Dumond's innocence was championed in Arkansas by Jay Cole, a Baptist minister and radio host who was a close friend of the Huckabee family. It also became a cause for New York Post columnist Steve Dunleavy, who repeatedly argued for Dumond's release, calling his conviction "a travesty of justice." On Sept. 21, 1999, Dunleavy wrote a column headlined "Clinton's Biggest Crime - Left Innocent Man In Jail For 14 Years":

"Dumond, now 52, was given conditional parole yesterday in Arkansas after having being sentenced to 50 years in jail for the rape of Clinton's cousin," Dunleavy wrote. "That rape never happened."""

Thse people were so nuts in their hatred of Clinton that they pretended a child was never raped, even though there was definitive physical evidence. Go ahead and try to revise hisstory tho, you wingers are good at that.

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Always makes me nervous when the MSM starts pushing a Repub for President. Are they looking for the Candidate that any of the Demos could beat, to make sure they do. The rise of Huckabee is because of all the MSM coverage. He cannot buy that kind of campaign ads. This will be a very interesting election time, would not be surprised if we actually have a Convention that means something, like picking a Candidate for a change.

Posted by: eafcat | December 6, 2007 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Sure if Huckabee runs as a christian candidate he'll get crossover christians to vote for him. However there are a lot of people in this country at this point, who don't like the evangelicalism that is present in the Bush Administration. He might be a true compassionate conservative but his candidacy would push many republicans and independents to voting for a more secular candidate instead and definately would highlight regional differences in a time where even the south is not so sure it is deeply republican, as virginia is breaking away and thats going to be a campaign issue.

Also Huckabee is not seen as very experianced in foreign policy. And creationism, if he supports it, is a major flaw with quite a few people in the country. If the evangelicals want their own candidate that is fine but they'll lose a lot of the secular republicans and while they might get some democrats, i don't know if they would get enough. I would be happier honestly if they were honest about their politics and left us with more political idealogies to choose from instead of this 2 major party crap.

Posted by: persimonix | December 6, 2007 1:28 PM | Report abuse

An election is not a popularity contest for the voters of only one party. It takes a person who also appeals to voters of the OPPOSITE party. That is how Kerry lost.

Posted by: dunnhaupt | December 6, 2007 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Just what the country needs another "flat earth" president with a mild southern Baptist Preacher approach........No way...another Republican jamming God down our throat....

Finally, can we please elect a skilled leader and public administrator not weighted down with dark age thoughts of the way to do business......Enough God, already!!!!

Posted by: fare777 | December 6, 2007 1:25 PM | Report abuse

youcrew: yes, it's a very clever name, since the tax is anything but fair.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 6, 2007 1:22 PM | Report abuse

There is a lot more to the DuMond case than a simple parole and as the former Drindl has suggest in posts his hatred of Bill Clinton was his MO. Pleassssse...releasing a convicted rapist just because he raped a distant cousin...who really has tin foil picking up moon beams.

There are a lot of extenuating circumstances in the case none of which have been vetted yet, but I am sure if Hillary or any other D is nominated and MH is the R nominee all the facts will be ignore along with nuance of the case and the issue will go totally negative...something both parties do so effectively.

If you hold MH accountable for the death of woman what accountability do you hold all the D candidates for voting for the war in Iraq? The data both MH and the D reviewed appeared to suggest something that now has been proven wrong.

DuMond was a model prisoner who on the outside appeared to be rehabilitated and no longer a threat to society. If he was such a threat why did he receive any yes votes for his parole the first time he came-up for review? If he was perceived to be such a threat why did the parole board vote yes the second time around? Who is to say the parole board is not covering their backs by laying the blame on MH. What type of parole board was this that they would vote for a dangerous criminal to keep a job (another MO suggested in the vote). What type of governor would appoint these people...oh yeah it was Clinton (has to be true).

Posted by: sltiowa | December 6, 2007 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Gah, "LoudounVoter", not "LoudonVoter".
Preview, preview, preview.

Posted by: youcrew | December 6, 2007 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Gah, "conversation." Preview, preview, preview.

Posted by: novamatt | December 6, 2007 1:11 PM | Report abuse

LoudonVoter: Thanks for the clarification.

It is still a great name. If you are opposed to the "FAIR Tax", does that mean that you support an "Unfair Tax"?

Clever PR.

Posted by: youcrew | December 6, 2007 1:11 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to see more polling on Huckabee vs. specific Democratic candidates, state by state. My guess, based on the prominence of his religion and his quasi-populist economic stance, is that Huck would do better than other R's in the South and Midwest, and worse than the other first-tier R's in the Pacific and Mountain West, Rust Belt, and Northeast. The trouble for Huck is that the states he'd do better in are the states that Bush already won in '00 and '04, and he'd likely be losing NV, CO, NM, OH, maybe AZ and FL.

Also, and I know others have pointed this out, but it's very important: the moneybags hate him. They'd rather sit this one out and wait for the next cycle than help elect someone like him. How's Huck going to do if he doesn't have the $$ for the air and ground games, if he's outspent 2-to-1 (or worse) by the D nominee?

And, also, let's be completely honest here: sure, sure, the Gang have a crush on Huck right now, but once the initial bloom wears off, Huck's a fundamentalist preacher who espouses some beliefs that non-fundamentalists consider nutty. And none of the Gang are fundamentalists, and very few are even comfortable with that subculture. We could be in for a long semi-hysterical national conversationalism about theological extremism, and that's probably not what Huck wants to be talking about. This could be Goldwateresque.

Posted by: novamatt | December 6, 2007 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I liked Huckabee a while back. I'd seen an interview of him and I thought he sounded like a rational Republican (and believe me, I am desperate for rational Republicans).

But, you can't just say he was given bad information about Wayne Dumond and give him a pass. He put his political ambitions over the welfare and safety of the public. Telling Dumond he had to leave Arkansas was the condition of his parole? Are you f*ing kidding me? Such a release shows everyone involved knew he was going to prey on someone else's mother, sister, daughter--they just wanted it to be somewhere the Arkansas media wouldn't know about it right away.

The one and only reason Wayne Dumond was released from a just prison sentence, one in which he would have never had the opportunity to hurt anyone else ever again, was because the rabid right in Arkansas hated Bill Clinton. How could Huckabee have ever even considered the case something he could get behind, other than the fact that it appealed to some very very maladjusted people?

Huckabee is another 1% winner, willing to do anything to get those fringe votes that will put him over the top of his competitors, and damn the consequences.

We've had enough of those kind of leaders to last us another millenia. Will Huckabee address global warming? Won't that upset the far right? Will he do anything about the war on peace (the one GW Bush has given the Orwellian name of the War on Terror)?

No, he is not the right man for the job. The pet issues of people without a shred of sense are the buttons he would be pushing. As president, how many Wayne Dumonds will he set loose on the world? We cannot afford to find out.

Posted by: LiberalTarian | December 6, 2007 1:06 PM | Report abuse

youcrew: You just demonstrated part of the problem. The flat tax and the FairTax are completely different animals.

Flat tax proposals are still income taxes. The FairTax is a national sales tax. The two have nothing in common.

But of course, that's why the FairTax will never become law. No country on earth has a national sales tax and the US isn't going to be the guinea pig. We won't even enact a VAT; there's no way we'll enact this loser.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 6, 2007 1:04 PM | Report abuse

lonewacko -- I didn't think anyone but me remembered Count Floyd.. yes, he is very scary indeed...

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Can someone tell me when the "Flat Tax" became the "FAIR Tax"?

It is a brilliant piece of propaganda right up there with "Death Tax" as opposed to "Inheretance Tax".

Why is it that the Democrats PR people cannot get out in front of these schemes.
I thought that the term "Death Tax" was smart and a little silly at the same time. I am completely amazed that lightning has struck twice. We are so gullable that almost everyone is now using "Fair" instead of "Flat".

Posted by: youcrew | December 6, 2007 1:00 PM | Report abuse

"But I have yet to hear anyone explain WHY this is, explaining for instance WHY evolution has anything to do with how a president would conduct foreign policy and wage war, how a president would execute economic policy, or how a president would enforce the law?"

It's simple, jinx_8ball. Huckabee believes in young-earth creationism, that the world was created a few thousand years ago. There's not a shred of real evidence for creationism, it has no scientific explanatory power, and it goes against everything we know about the natural world.

A belief in creationism is intellectual laziness. It's accepting words in a book written by nomadic shepherds 3000 years ago, instead of observations about the real world. Belief in creationism doesn't necessarily make someone stupid, but it shows that they don't care about what's true and what's false. Would you trust the decisions of someone who believes everything written in an ancient holy book, no matter how ridiculous? I wouldn't. And I'm hardly alone on that.

Posted by: Blarg | December 6, 2007 12:53 PM | Report abuse

2008 is going to be the Republicans' worst nightmare. I wouldn't worry about the Democrats too much... the GOP has thoroughly lost the support of the middle, swing voters thanks to Bush and the Iraq war. You simply cannot win elections without the middle on your side. Look at the polls. Look at the fundraising. All the Republican candidates have going for them is the wishful thinking of a minority of partisan voters who will support them. The state of denial the right is in currently (as demonstrated by the obviously right wing commenters here) about how bad of shape they are in for 2008 does not bode well for their chances. I see little has changed from the 2006 dynamic. The same right wing losers that said they'd win 2006 no problem are in for yet another rude awakening come November of next year.
To those delusional enough to think a Republican can win the White House next year, I'd like you to cite me a single example from modern American presidential politics wherein a president as deeply unpopular as George W Bush (who's been at 33% approval rating for a year or so now) was followed by another president from the same party. You won't find a single example of that, because it doesn't happen. Deeply unpopular presidents from one party have always been followed by presidents from the other party. Carter got the White House thanks to the unpopularity of Nixon and Ford, then Reagan got the White House thanks to the unpopularity of Carter.
George W Bush's presidency is going to be followed by the presidency of a Democrat. It's that simple in a two-party system. Care to deny that? Fine with me if you do... the right being in a state of denial was key to their losses last year, and will be key to their losses next year.

Posted by: errinfamilia | December 6, 2007 12:49 PM | Report abuse

I like Mike, but personally I think Bush and his rubber-stamp Congress ruined it for Republicans for some time to come. Republicans refused to stand up for things they KNEW were wrong, so no, I can't vote for another Republican Congress. As far as Rudy Giuliani, no man in a dress is ever going to become president -- no offense to gays because Guiliani is not gay. But we can do better with a woman in pants, instead of a man in a dress (not that I plan to vote for Hillary either). I think Joe Biden is a great choice for President. Pleeeeze, no Republicans for awhile. They still haven't lost their stench from the Bush administration. Let's give it awhile to air out in this Country before we put a blind Republican Congress back in office.

Posted by: lindalovejones | December 6, 2007 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Lots of wishful thinking here by the Clinton folks and other Democrats that think/hope she can win if she is the inevitable nominee. She would likely win over Ron Paul or Romney and maybe even Guliani. Huckabee, on the other hand, is a genuine populist very much in touch with the country's anti-outsourcing, anti-illegal, "America First" leanings. Like it or not, vbhoomes is right on the mark, Huckabee (and especially a Huckabee-McCain ticket) will bury just about every Democratic contender (and, that includes people I like, like Obama and Kucinich, as well as the much loathed Clinton). Oh, I think a Biden-Edwards ticket (either man on top) would beat them, but Democrats are too suicidal to actually nominate a winning ticket.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | December 6, 2007 12:46 PM | Report abuse

DROSE: What part of "raise your hand if you don't believe in evolution" didn't you understand?

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 6, 2007 12:46 PM | Report abuse

CaptainQ: The comments from anyone who voted for Jimmy Carter not once but twice will be treated with all due respect.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 6, 2007 12:44 PM | Report abuse

A question to those writing here that Huckabee doesn't believe in evolution: You're kidding? Right?

Posted by: DROSE1 | December 6, 2007 12:42 PM | Report abuse

If Chuckles Huckabee thinks the FairTax will carry him to the White House he is sadly mistaken.

Google Bruce Bartlett and FairTax for what a respected conservative economist has to say about this idiotic proposal.

Posted by: Spectator2 | December 6, 2007 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Two things:
First, at this stage of the game, it's all about rhetoric, especially among Republicans. So Huckabee is a heavy-weight there, but at later stages, he's a bantam-weight in regards to larger policy issues.
Second, Huckabee can run on a 'compassionate conversatiive' platform now because comparisons to Bush aren't bad. In the general election, such comparisons are poison and he'll 'pay the price,' to quote Rove, either by denouncing Bush or by not denouncing Bush.

Posted by: ctown_woody | December 6, 2007 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Oh, I can't wait for FairTax(T)! I can take the extra money, go on vacation in Mexico with empty luggage, buy a wardrobe, wash it, wear it and take it home. Excellent.

Posted by: williams1 | December 6, 2007 12:36 PM | Report abuse

It's worth noting that the only Democrats quoted in Chris' article who view Huckabee as a potential threat are from the South. A Huckabee candidacy would more or less seal the fate of the GOP as a regional rump party for the foreseeable future.

Posted by: jsh1120 | December 6, 2007 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Let's lay all our cards on the table. What scares me and most independents who voted for George Bush, twice, is a Democratic Party constituency that seems to ignore the importance of a candidate's moral foundation. Do Republican politicians do bad things, illegal things? Yes on all counts. But with some exceptions when confronted with their behavior they become contrite, apologize to their families and constituents, and then leave office and seek treatment or counseling.

When a Democrat gets caught with his/her hands in the till, or the pants of a minor, what do they do? They deny it, accuse others of lying, and then seek reelection. And what do the Democratic Party voters do? They reelect them. When Barney Frank was caught having an affair with a teenage male intern who was running a male prostitution business out of the Congressman's office, what happened? He got reelected over and over.

When Congressman Jefferson was found with $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer, what happened? He got re-elected and even defeated an articulate, well-educated black woman in the primary for the Democratic nomination. Why wouldn't the voters opt for her as their choice for a Democrat? It defies all logic.

Go ahead and argue whether Bill Clinton broke the law but one can't deny he lied to the American people and his family and supporters and disgraced America, the presidency, his family, and the White House. Here's a man who pardoned a convicted child molester (12 counts), Democratic Congressman Mel Reynolds, and the FALN terrorists who were responsible for bombings in the U.S. that killed six Americans and maimed dozens of others. And Democrats are looking for guidance from him? His punishment has been speaking engagements worth millions of dollars.

As someone who stuffed McGovern pamphlets under dormitory doors and voted for Jimmy Carter, twice, I fear for the future of an America that reelects the Barney Franks and William Jeffersons of America and idolizes a Bill Clinton who disgraced America and pardoned a child molester (12 counts) and terrorists who killed Americans. For heavens sake, Democrats, at least elect a different Democrat to represent you who has a modicum of moral fiber. Give us some hope your voters aren't totally bereft of common sense and a moral compass.


Posted by: CaptainQ | December 6, 2007 12:30 PM | Report abuse

When and where did Huck say that homosexuals should have no legal rights, thecrisis? Statements like that demand proof.

Posted by: jinx_8ball | December 6, 2007 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Mike Huckabee won't just gain votes from independants like me, i've got many democrat friends who are voting for him as well. He truly crosses over many divides.

Posted by: MoniQue2 | December 6, 2007 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I see lots of people all over the Web declaring that Huck's "disbelief" in evolution makes him unelectable. But I have yet to hear anyone explain WHY this is, explaining for instance WHY evolution has anything to do with how a president would conduct foreign policy and wage war, how a president would execute economic policy, or how a president would enforce the law? Those are the primary roles of a president, and whether one "believes" in evolution or not (and I put believe in quotes because such verbiage is the terminology of religion, not science) has nothing to do with them. I don't see anything in the Constitution or in American tradition wherein a president sets the standards for science.

Posted by: jinx_8ball | December 6, 2007 12:25 PM | Report abuse

It's going to be very interesting watching the Wall Street Wing go against the Christianist Wing in this primary. A pox on both your houses.

Posted by: elroy1 | December 6, 2007 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Let's see, Chris, now Huckabee is the Dem's nightmare? I suppose, by process of elimination he might be considered that -- but that seems a weird way to "pick" the latest "Secret GOP Weapon" after the weak performances of Thompson, the corruption revelations about Guiliani and the realization that too many members of the GOP base consider Romney an infidel. Puh-leaze!

Huckabee announced on a Sunday talking head show recently that he thought the Palestinians should be given a Homeland in some Arab country -- somewhere. But not in the West Bank -- and that the Israelis shouldn't trade land for peace. This guy is nice and, perhaps a "true" compassionate conservative -- but the Bush/Cheney neo-con/Christian Fundamentalist foreign affairs nightmare is the only one I see when I look at Huckabee.

Posted by: rebeccajm | December 6, 2007 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Part of the Huckabee problem with the Dumond case was that the motivation to release Dumond from prison was because Dumond's conviction was for raping a distant relative of Bill Clinton. The rapist was either castrated by irate supporters of the raped woman while out on bail, or he castrated himself. It isn't clear. Clinton hating conspiracy buffs believed Clinton engineered the castration and the harsh sentence and they wanted to strike back at Clinton.

IOW, Dumond was a cause celebre for the anti-Clinton crowd and Huckabee had taken up that banner and had run his campaign for governor with the promise to release Dumond. But, when he took office, there was a public backlash against the idea of his commuting Dumond's sentence to the time already served. He tried to get the Parole Board to release Dumond, but they voted that down at their August meeting. They were not to vote on it again for at least a year, but the anti-Clintonites pressured Huckabee to call a special meeting in January. He had the minutes recorder removed so that he could speak to the Board in secret. They then voted to release Dumond under the condition Dumond leave Arkansas. Even then, there were delays in the release because of public opposition and the fact Dumond had nowhere to go. He was eventally released and soon thereafter went to the Kansas City, MO area where he raped and killed two women. He was convicted for the first rape and died in prison in 2005. Charges were prepared in the second rape-murder but were not filed. I don't know why.

Women who had previously been raped by Dumond wrote to the parole board and to Huckabee pleading with him not to release Dumond. Those letters were hidden, but have now been released by some former aide to Huckabee. They letters are available at the Huffington Post site.

Releasing a dangerous rapist to spite Bill Clinton is not the act of a true Christian, imho.

Posted by: wmcmichael | December 6, 2007 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Funny how everything that happens in the political world is bad for them. I can see the headlines twenty years ahead:

Global Warming Halted
Democrats Lose Major Issue.

And now it's Huckabee's rise that's supposedly bad for the Democrats? Well, I for one would be delighted if he were the GOP nominee. He will drive away independents when the full record of his utterly venal, corrupt Governorship emerges. He's a petty crook. And as he showed last night on CNN, he is also a liar, and a bad one, too. The parole case is going to be his albatross.

Posted by: LevRaphael | December 6, 2007 12:05 PM | Report abuse

jimd52: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Jeb was advising Mitt early on. I don't believe he made a formal endorsement.

Posted by: lylepink | December 6, 2007 12:02 PM | Report abuse

The fair tax idea is hugely unpopular, I'm afraid. Huck can defend it all he wants but your basically telling the middle class and poor that their overall taxes are going up whiled the wealthy are going to be paying less, again.
That's going to go over like a lead balloon. It may be popular in Podunk, but here in the big city your going to have food riots if you boost the price of everything 20%+. People are not going to sit around quietly and starve because you don't like the IRS.

Posted by: dijetlo | December 6, 2007 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama could crush Huckabee. He appeals only to evangelicals and polls have proven this again and again. Why on earth would a moderate vote for a person who believes the earth is 6,000 years old, women should not be able to choose and homosexuals should have no legal rights?

Posted by: thecrisis | December 6, 2007 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Huckabee Suckabee Haven't we had enough of the Republican party?

Posted by: cpettit | December 6, 2007 11:59 AM | Report abuse

"If Dems think that the reason Dukakis was never president is simply because of Willie Horton, they've got bigger issues than anything the Republicans could throw at them..."

I thought it was the picture of Dukakis in that tank.

Posted by: bsimon | December 6, 2007 11:58 AM | Report abuse

As a resident of Arkansas who has been exposed to Huckabee's ideas of ethics, I am astounded that he has been able to snooker so many of the religious people that seem to be supporting him. I guess it is the same kind of singularity that Oral Roberts and Jimmy Swaggart were able to exploit. No one who has Huckabee's extensive record of taking gifts and money under questionable circumstances is really a devout Christian or someone with a strong moral character. All of Huckabee's true intentions are really for the benefit of Huckabee.

Posted by: rbtbob | December 6, 2007 11:57 AM | Report abuse

judgec writes
"as always, it's all relative but compare and contrast Dole and Bush II. Dole had both extensive political experience and some intellectual heft (or at least past evidence of it). "


I won't dispute that!

Posted by: bsimon | December 6, 2007 11:54 AM | Report abuse

dmcc - "None of them [Republicans] will come close to the White House."

By all means start ordering the china now. I like a good underdog story.

Posted by: dave | December 6, 2007 11:51 AM | Report abuse

You mean "tax hike Mike?"

Who advocated the release of a serial rapist who went on to murder two people?

Maybe not so much to worry about, if some Swift-boating 527 on the other side decides to get involved.

Posted by: miffedone | December 6, 2007 11:47 AM | Report abuse

filmex - "If Willie Horton was the GOP gift that destroyed Michael Dukakis, please let us return the favor..."

If Dems think that the reason Dukakis was never president is simply because of Willie Horton, they've got bigger issues than anything the Republicans could throw at them...

Posted by: dave | December 6, 2007 11:47 AM | Report abuse


Don't worry. Another clown in the White House will finish America and nobody will care whose nightmare he is any more.

Posted by: wardropper | December 6, 2007 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Perhaps the national media, including The Washington Post, should pay more attention to Huckabees' behavior as governor of Arkansas, particularly his willingness to engage in what might be described as cronyism or corruption.

Posted by: bkklein | December 6, 2007 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Watched Romny's speech at A&M and was wowed by it. He hit a grand slam. He defintely looked and talked like a President. He puts Martin Sheen to shame. Romney/Huckabee ticket would compliment each others strenghts and 08 would be all uphill for ("SURGE IS A FAILURE/WE'LL ARE ALL LOSERS")Dems in Nov.

Posted by: vbhoomes | December 6, 2007 11:45 AM | Report abuse

REVALATIONS,

I came across a web site a few day's ago, www.churchexecutive.com , then today www.evangelicalsformitt.org . Both site revealed the Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee, is standing up for Kenneth and Gloria Copeland. Does he know the truth behind this ministry? Someone may need to send Huckabee a copy of this letter, and the following documentation.
Letter to,

Kenneth and Gloria Copeland,

Before knowledge of, KCM, BVOV, GLORIA'S HEALING SCHOOL, and EMIC, our lives were simple, and complete. Before BVOV, faith had no mathematical values, you was never told you had to little, or to much. Before BVOV, sickness was not blamed on lack of faith, nor finances. Before BVOV, rewording, or falsifying bible verses, well, before our knowledge of prosperity gospel (materialistic Christian belief: the doctrine taught in some Christian groups that God will grant wishes to the faithful, especially those wishes involving material wealth .Encarta ® World English Dictionary), this act was unheard of, tithes received during collection were used for the upkeep of our church, parsonage, cemetery, and exedra, the exedra was legit. Before BVOV, I had a mother, faith, finances, piece, and a belief in God I never questioned for there was no reason to. My personal thanks goes out to both you and Gloria, prosperity gospel truly is a life changing experience!
The first time I tried to contact (BVOV) was back in 2004, a few months after the death of my mother (Bonnie Parker) who was a long time partner of your ministry, since 1995 to be exact. That's a lot of faithful years is it not. And now what began as a simple request for answers over two years ago, is now national news. Though I made many efforts to contact you, none of which were successful. (Mail, Email, , Phone, and even visiting Eagle Mountain Church personally) We were in Dallas for the filming of a documentary (Suffer the Children sufferthechildren.com)which was being funded, and produced by director Trever Glass. The film was to show, from the victims point of view, the tragic abuse, suffering , and fraudulent behaviors preformed by certain mega church ministers, mainly focusing on the prosperity gospel ministers. I was asked if I would like to visit EMIC, and take a tour of the massive facilities. Nervously I said yes. Was I finally going to be given the chance of speaking with either of you? With a copy of the original letter, and pictures of mom before, and after BVOV, tucked safely in our backpack we began the tour that would leave me with even more questions than answers. The tour guide was very nice, and very informative. She had not a clue that with every gloating word she spoke, I was fighting back the tears they were bringing. Were the trophies you have proudly displayed at EMIC, acquired on these trips? Did you pay to have them stuffed, or did the church catch that bill for you? There I was standing in the maculate office, (by the way, how much did that high dollar office furniture set you or the ministry back), of the very people I felt were most responsible for my mothers death. No you didn't put a gun to her head, but your guidance did prove to seal her fate. I do highly recommend this tour to all your partners that contribute to this lifestyle you both so take advantage of. Nor you or Gloria were present the day we dropped by, but I left the letter, and photos with an employee of EMIC. John Copeland called me a few day's after we toured EMIC, saying how sad I appeared in the video tapes that were recording our every move during our tour.. I was not sure what to say, a Copeland was on the other end, not the one I was hopping for but a Copeland. There was no way to explain to him the hurt I felt inside that not he but his parents created. The call was short, I basically said no comment, for their were no words to express the feelings I had at that moment! Perhaps the Copelands, Kenneth and Gloria, believed my accusations are unprecedented.. By giving me the chance of showing you in moms written proof I will be happy to reveal you the source of my accusations. Never less, no response lead me to believe neither of you have any remorse for their actions, and that you both must believe they had done no wrong. Personally, I could not live with myself after it was brought to my attention that the mere words coming from my mouth, could indeed cause someone to loose their life. Maybe, hopefully, someday sooner than latter, the dangers related to prosperity gospel will become clear to you both, until then God help us all.
Your problem now is, no longer am I the only one publicly asking for answers, you now have the whole United States of America awaiting to see how this Senate investigation unfolds. In February of this year WFAA News in Dallas broadcasted the findings of an investigation (by Brett Shipp) regarding the misuse of the ministry's jet. I'm sorry but it is really hard to comprehend you and your wife going on vacation in a jet my mother paid for with her life. Just incase you missed the news broadcast, that was one comment I voiced loud and clear. After that news broadcast aired, I began relying on WWW.WFAA.COM for any new developments, or some kind of comment from anyone at BVOV, EMIC, or either of you personally. The broadcast received the same response that I had come to know all to well over the years, no response, from either of you. Being in the public eye I'm sure has it's advantages and also disadvantages. You are looked up to by millions of people. It never crossed your minds that a tragedy such as my mom's was a possibility? You take on a huge responsibility when you get in front of a camera, step onto a stage, and in the recordings of your tapes and cd's, to each and every one who are watching and listening. Your words can, will , and have, become fatal, the question now is not will it happen again, but when, if your words go unchanged someone's else's death is inevitable. As for my family the damage is irreversible. The probe into your finances is long overdue. As for the ones already passed on, the bankrupt, the homeless, and the devastated lives your ministry has destroyed over the years, but it's better late than never!! I've been told by some that my mothers story, and my persistence for the truth, played a part in the investigations into your finances. If so my objective is done. Showing the public the possible consequences in becoming involved with the prosperity gospel was my main objective!!!! As well as taking the tour of your ministries assets, your partners need to read for themselves, (anyone sending money to your ministry) the requests from the Senate related to your finances. I believe they also will have a few questions for you. Oh and the comment you made when caught off guard by the media, WFAA news, (you may view this on there web site), and are questioned about the misuse of the ministry's jet, your comment was "None of Your Business", do either of you have the courage to look me in the eyes and say that to me? The cost we paid for that jet can never be repaid. Expenses that accrued during and after moms illness, left us with no choice but to take out a loan on our house, which was paid in full at the beginning of 2004. This was all to much for us to handle, we have struggled to make the note the last few years, but we can't last much longer. So we are basically still paying for that jet, and the joyrides both of you take on it. When mom gave her life for your ministry, and now possibly our home will be lost also, I believe that gave us a right to know where the money goes. We did request a accounting of all mom's contributions, several times, which I have enclosed in this letter, but yet again no response was given. Are either of you, seeing the pattern here? God knows we all, even both of you, make mistakes in life. The difference between both of you and us is plane as day, we know wrong from right! The good hearted, and the sincere, try to make amends for their mistakes, and are most likely forgiven, on earth and in heaven. It's never to late to start this process. I on the other hand, will never be able to forgive, nor forget. We never asked to become involved with either of you, or your false, and dangerous ministry! Unwillingly, and unfortunately our lives crossed paths with the death of my mother, I can't change that, but I wish I could!
Kristy Beach


Dear Kenneth and Gloria Copeland,
If you don't all ready know me I'm Christian Beach granddaughter of Bonnie Parker. The girl who had to watch her grandmother go threw so much pain for her trust in god through you. You didn't help her by telling her not to go to the doctor. No you told her that the doctor was the work of the devil. Yes I remember some of the stuff from your shows and CD's. My grandmother would put so much of her money in to checks and some as just cash, so much in fact that I can't even recall exact amounts. How exactly much does your healing cost, because my grandmother paid with her money and her life? I watch your shows, listened to your CD's at the same time watched my grandmother slowly and painfully be killed by your word not God's word your word!!! You can do what you want and say what you want but you can never be forgiven by me or my family for what you did to us. Don't want the money she sent you back. I just want you to feel the pain that I have felt day after day since she died. How does it make you feel to take a nine year olds grandmother from her? Now the next time you are taking money out of letters and not even reading the at all, think of what you have done to our family by not reading my grandmothers!!! So the next your are flying around in your $20000000 JET, That my grandmother paid with her life!!!
Christian Beach


That letter was written by my daughter, which was nine when mom passed away. I did not encourage her to do this, she insisted. I want both of you to know what she, being a child went through. Mom entrusted her with portions of her involvement regarding both of you. She is just beginning to talk more about the secrets mom kept hidden away from all but her apparently. I have not questioned her about her relationship with mom, I simply let her talk about her memories, when she feels ready. The relationship mom and sissy(nickname), shared was like mine and my mothers. Why mom reviled things to her only, I guess will remain a mystery. Why her and not me, was it the fact she was just a child? When she speaks of listening to your material over and over, it just adds to the
many questions we have that you will not answer. Have these dangerous twisted words been implanted in her head also? The thought of this scares me to death. She as well as us suffered a terrible loss, but her more so. During the time mom was in the nursing home, most of our time was spent by her side. Even though she was just a few miles away from my home, we were not letting her be alone at all. I hired sitters to stay with her even when we were there, merely walking out of her room scared her. The staff at the home was kind, and tried filling her every need. Each one took her into there hearts, and visversa. We turned to family and friends to help keep our lives going outside the nursing home, which also turned out to be devastating. Christians step grandfather took advantage of what was already a bad situation, by putting his filthy hands on my child(sissy). He pleaded guilty, and is being punished for his actions! My point of telling you this is once again, letting you know just how much we have suffered. Had all our attention not been on mom, this surely could have been prevented!!!! Unbelievable that's still not the end either. My brother Todd felt drugs would help him through all this hell, he was picked up for simple possession in September of 2004.To this day he still can't talk about, or deal with the memories of her, bottles of whiskey took the place of drugs. Loosing him is now a huge possibility. Will it ever end?????
Kristy Beach
Request for the accounting of moms contributions.

Dear Kenneth and Gloria Copeland,
Shortly before my wife Bonnie Lynn Parker passed away, she assigned complete power of attorney to me. Both the power of attorney and her death certificate are enclosed herein. The immediate surviving family members are myself, my son Alvin Todd Parker, and my daughter Kristy Parker Beach, who you have met.
Please send us a record of any and all donations, contributions, investments, and/or any money or items she has sent the Kenneth Copeland Ministry, a d/b/a for Eagle Mountain International Church, Inc. We also request a copy of any and all of Bonnie's correspondence with the ministry. This would include any notes, letters, emails, and/or phone calls to or from the ministry.
Please note that I have chosen Kristy Parker Beach to act on our behalf in this matter, when my signature is not required. Your lack of cooperation with my daughter has only caused more grief. We hope you will comply with this request in order to avoid any legal action necessary to obtain these requests.
Sincerely, Alvin Parker

This request was sent certified mail to KCM, and their attorneys. We received back where they signed for them, but no response came regarding our request.

The Senate Finance Committee is investigating the finances of six mega churches, but will this be enough to save lives? Looking into their finances should only be the beginning. By allowing these public roll models to get in front of a camera and silicate money for healing among many other guaranties is just simply wrong! Have there been any inquiries into how many deaths are related to this fraud? Freedom of religion, has become to some a death sentence. It has proven that Gloria's Copeland's Healing School being taught by Gloria herself , has students that fail costing them more than a suspension, it's costing them their lives! Encouraging innocent people to take chances in life concerning their health should be illegal!!!!
Is there anyone out there who cares about the victims of this abuse?
Is there anyone who is willing to stand up for these victims?
Yes, finances are important, but a life taken by this fraud, can not be replaced!!!! Finances can!!!! Have we all forgotten what's important, Wake up! It is not only about the money!!!! Anyone requesting proof of our accusation feel free to contact us.
Our contact Info.
Alvin Parker 318-435-5754
Kristy Beach 318-789-7569 or 318-789-7567 email sis359@gmail.com
Amber Sikes 318-537-4077


Thank you,
Kristy Beach

Posted by: sis359 | December 6, 2007 11:43 AM | Report abuse

newageblues - "an earlier post says Huckabee opposes birth control. While I'm sure he's isn't planning on campaigning against birth control, if accurate this sounds like a good example of his extreme personal views"

Let's see. Catholics must fall into the category of having extreme personal views as the church is against birth control. I know, many, if not most, Catholics don't believe or follow that. So I guess those Catholics that practice birth control are hypocrits. Ergo, if you say you are a Catholic, you must either be an extreme wing nut or you must be a hypocrit. I am beginning to see how this religion game is played.

Posted by: dave | December 6, 2007 11:43 AM | Report abuse

OK, now back on topic with a serving of rationality: Huckabee will not be a "nightmare" for the Democratic nominee, whoever that turns out to be - no, not Huckabee, nor any of the other Republican candidates. None of them will come close to the White House. If any of you can't see why this is so, then you've not been paying attention (or you're dosing yourself with an unhealthy serving of Karl Rove KoolAid).

Posted by: dmcc1 | December 6, 2007 11:41 AM | Report abuse

As a Democrat, I say PLEASE let Huckabee be the nominee.

If Willie Horton was the GOP gift that destroyed Michael Dukakis, please let us return the favor with ads regarding parolee, Wayne Dumond, the man Huckabee pleaded to be released, who went on to rape and murder two other women.

Huckabee, the man who doesn't believe in evolution...

Huckabee, the man who when questioned yesterday had no idea about the recent intelligence report on Iran...

Oh yes, PLEASE let it be Huckabeery Finn.

Posted by: filmex | December 6, 2007 11:40 AM | Report abuse

His biggest problem is his belief that the earth is 7000 years old.

Nice guy aside, someone so disconnected from all tenets of scientific fact cannot be trusted to run a country. You think people will let someone so willfully ignorant of such basic science determine the direction of a nation?

Looney tunes to the max.

Posted by: vze2r3k5 | December 6, 2007 11:34 AM | Report abuse

"' I don't think drindl would know a fact if it was applied with hot wax to her hairy parts.'"

~ "what a disgusting slimbag this creature is. would any of you be offended if he siad this to you? just asking..

~ "wouldn't it be nice if we could maintain the rational tone that generally exists before this nutball shows up?"

~ "Some people are into that sort of thing...

"He enjoys yanking your chain. By responding, you are giving him the feedback he craves. Please deny him that pleasure - we will all be better off for it."

- Umm, you mean we should just ignore it and it will go back to its island and leave us to our rational debate? ~ I don't THINK so: ..."you all will be treated to this 'writer' for the rest of the day with more rants based on nothing."

But hey, wouldn't it be nice if CC would enforce the RULES of his blog?:

"User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site."

Posted by: dmcc1 | December 6, 2007 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Only in your column, Cillizza, would the possibility be raised that moderates and independents, who have just endured 8 years of a former governor of a southern state, who was (with good reason we found out) 'self-effacing', who wore his religion on his sleeve and whose job approval ratings among those same moderates and independents hovers in the high 20s, will run to yet another such candidate. Oh yeah, the Democrats are shivering in their shoes on this one.

Posted by: drasmusesq | December 6, 2007 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Claudia, Claudia, stop with the corruption catcalls. Are we really supposed to ignore the 2007 headlines on Democrats like Congressman Jefferson or these fellows?

The Washington Post published an article titled, Democrats Offer Up Chairmen for Donors (2/24). They should be worrying about this outrageous slap in the face of the voters who gave them the majority. Plus the mounting scandals in our daily headlines like those below are killing their culture of corruption cries, because it turns out its the Dems that are corrupt.

Clarence Norman Jr., leader of the Brooklyn Democratic Party, the biggest Democratic organization east of Chicago, since 1990, was convicted February 23 of coercion, grand larceny by extortion and attempted grand larceny by extortion in what prosecutors said was a scheme to shake down judicial candidates in exchange for party support. This was Norman's third similar conviction. After his first conviction, Mr. Norman was stripped of his Assembly seat, which he had held for 23 years, and his leadership of one of the largest Democratic Party organizations in the country.

Jim Black, North Carolina Democratic Speaker of the House, pleaded guilty to taking about $29,000, mostly in cash, from some chiropractors, is looking at a 10-year maximum and a possible $250,000 fine. He also committed crimes related to the state lottery and allowing a lobbyist to use his office and resources. But to lighten his sentence, Black will name other corrupt Democrats. Black is cooperating with the feds in their investigation as part of his deal. Black was the most powerful politician in North Carolina and directed Democratic party politics for decades. This is just the tip of the iceberg in North Carolina.

New Jersey Democratic legislative officials were hit with a volley of federal subpoenas in a rapidly expanding corruption investigation into the Statehouse by U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie. Christie is seeking information on how millions in public funds were handed out over the last three years of the Democratic party controlled legislature. It was the latest development in a federal probe that began last April (2006) with an investigation into state Sen. Wayne Bryant D-Camden, who was accused by a federal monitor of using his position to steer funding to the states medical university after he received a no-work job there. Among those who received subpoenas were Senate President Richard Codey D-Essex Senate Majority Leader Bernard Kenny D-Hudson Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts D-Camden and Assembly Majority Leader Bonnie Watson Coleman D-Mercer, legislative officials confirmed.

John Celona, Democratic state representative from Rhode Island, who was already headed to federal prison for four years for corruption faces an additional one and a half years behind bars after pleading no contest on February 20 to similar state charges.

Looks like the culture of corruption charge can be used next election again, but this time by the Republicans. Jefferson's case should be in court around that time to reinforce the message. An ironic twist isn't it?

Oh, didn't have room to list other Democrats scandals since the first three months of the year. Those will be posted later. There's just so many to choose from!

Posted by: CaptainQ | December 6, 2007 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Mike Huckabee is too much of a typical Republican: a Southern Baptist minister who is big on culture war issues like "covenant marriage". The GOP nominating him would be like the Democrats nominating a black atheist who serves on the Berkeley city council.

Posted by: jondnorton | December 6, 2007 11:21 AM | Report abuse

"To the extent that Huck and Mitt stay in the race and split the social conservatives, it only helps Giuliani."

JimD: Unless MH can really surge in FL, Guiliani has FL sewed up (as has been true for many months) regardless of Mitt's presence. Even if Mitt won all the states prior to FL I'd still expect Guiliani to win FL (and NY). I am reminded of the story about Miami being a piece of Brooklyn that broke off and floated down to FL.

Posted by: judgeccrater | December 6, 2007 11:17 AM | Report abuse

WV-4Huckabee

I don't think those questions matter all that much if Huckabee wrote that letter.

Posted by: jimd52 | December 6, 2007 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee is only the old crowd in the GOP's worst nightmare. They failed to adapt to base anger at the strategies and politics of GW Bush and Co. and still spout the old rhetoric on most issues.

As for the general, Huckabee can't get away from the fact that he is an anti-abortion militant and is in love with the war in Iraq. He's far from mainstream. Independents and moderates aren't about to be charmed by another folksy Republican.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl | December 6, 2007 11:14 AM | Report abuse

man gotta use that spell check...
I have two other questions that I haven't seen addressed...

Posted by: WV4Huckabee | December 6, 2007 11:12 AM | Report abuse

JimD: I'm still waiting for updated (since the Youtube debate) aggregate polling data out of FL. Expecting a big bounce for MH but not sure how big.

Bsimon: as always, it's all relative but compare and contrast Dole and Bush II. Dole had both extensive political experience and some intellectual heft (or at least past evidence of it). Bush II had, ummm, a monosyllabic last name?

Posted by: judgeccrater | December 6, 2007 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Here are the recent poll results of Arkansans regarding Mike vs Hillary (and a few others)

New numbers in the state of Arkansas from Scott Rasmussen show that Mike Huckabee is the only Republican who would beat Hillary.

PRESIDENT - ARKANSAS

Mike Huckabee 48%
Hillary 42%

Hillary 49%
Rudy Giuliani 35%

Hillary 48%
Mitt Romney 24%


Mike Huckabee 54%
Barack Obama 35%

Barack Obama 42%
Rudy Giuliani 39%

This poll was done December 3rd among 500 likely voters.

I have two other questions tha I haven't seed addressed:
1. Why did former governor (and now convicted felon) Jim Guy Tucker, a Democrat and close associate of Bill and Hillary, commute DuMond's sentence to begin with. Without this commutation, parole would never have been an issue for any subsequent governor.
2.Why aren't the parole board members being castigated for their decision-and it was solely THEIR decision. How were they, a panel of veteran Democrats, so easily imtimidated by a new Republican governor? If they indeed voted 4-1 AGAINST granting the parole, which three members surrendered their principles to vote to release Dumond?
If anyone knows the answers...or why these questions aren't being asked by the media...please let me know

Posted by: WV4Huckabee | December 6, 2007 11:09 AM | Report abuse

When people find out their mortgage interest deductions will be gone, fair tax support disappears. Also, how do you identify the people who are exempt? It is an income based exemption, where does one go to apply, how is it verified, how often do they have to re-affirm their eligibility. What kind of a nightmare will this be for businesses to collect?

Charities will certainly oppose the loss of the contribution deduction. Eliminating corporate taxes will not go over well with large segements of the population. Our economy is largely consumer driven - implementation of a national sales tax would have a devastating effect on retail sales which then effects almost all segments of the economy.

Posted by: jimd52 | December 6, 2007 11:09 AM | Report abuse

The rape case won't be good strategically in a general election, it is only effective in a GOP primary. In the GOP they are supposed to call each other liberal and soft on crime, and they will play it as cruel as their conscience lets them. Romney is probably right now making a TV ad to persuade voters Huck might as well have raped and killed the woman himself. But it will not work when the Democrats do it, they are already considered to be too compassionate to criminals and it will look like they're just desparately throwing whatever mud they can find.

I agree that, if Huck makes it in, it will be a tough tough slog of a race. Best bet is to get him to talk about Bush a lot, defend the policies of the last 7 years and try to get Bush out in public a lot to support him, shake his hand and say heckuva job. You can dispute the fair tax as regressive and talk about roe v. wade, but if you wanna sling mud (or something else brown) there's already a big pile of it in the white house. Forget capital punishment... Would Jesus be in support of war profiteering? Now THERE's a debate question!

Posted by: grimmix | December 6, 2007 11:06 AM | Report abuse

I spoke with veteran political observer Count Floyd, and per him, "Huckabee is scary. Very, very scary!"

Of course, Count Floyd has been known to exaggerate, and he might be trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the GOP by pretending that someone who's weak is strong. So, I suggest taking what the Count says with a big grain of salt.

And, in fact, what Beltway Cluelessness doesn't understand is just how weak Huck is because of his strong support for illegal immigration.

Here's a 30-second intro:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5Dp7FaKIJo

Search for his name at my site to read just some of the very questionable statements he's made over the years:

http://lonewacko.com/

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | December 6, 2007 11:05 AM | Report abuse


Regarding flat tax who is proposed to be in charge of collecting it?
In UK tha VAT is collected by the Customs---who have unlimited powers of search everywhere in the country -at your home or place of business. The Internal Revenue are pussycats.
be careful of what you wish for!

Posted by: craxford | December 6, 2007 11:04 AM | Report abuse

The Crater writes
"I'm interested in an election in which both sides have good candidates. We haven't had one of those since 1996."

I share the same interest, but don't necessarily agree with the quality of the candidates in 96. Dole?!?

Posted by: bsimon | December 6, 2007 11:04 AM | Report abuse

judge,

I have my doubts that Huckabee can sustain a true national campaign. I also can tell you that Giuliani is far ahead in Florida. Jeb Bush is supporting Romney - although he has not formally announced. He has steered advisers and supporters towards Mitt. Huck needs money and organization to compete in large states - he is currently well behind in Florida.

To the extent that Huck and Mitt stay in the race and split the social conservatives, it only helps Giuliani.

Posted by: jimd52 | December 6, 2007 10:59 AM | Report abuse

It's nice to see CC and MSM waking up to MH. He's a flawed candidate (as is everyone) but far better than some of the R alternatives. In the end, I'm interested in an election in which both sides have good candidates. We haven't had one of those since 1996.

"Real people seem to see a bit of themselves in Huck, and I think he will be difficult to demonize."

The GOP primaries will take care of that. Already the knives are drawn, the right-wing bloggers are mobilized and everyone is sniffing around MH's past. Look for more hyper-sensationalized stories about him to break on Drudge over the next 30 days.

Unless they can do a better job of dishing the dirt, MH wins IA, loses NH, wins SC and FL but loses MI, CA and NY.

Posted by: judgeccrater | December 6, 2007 10:51 AM | Report abuse

"what a disgusting slimbag this creature is. would any of you be offended if he siad this to you? just asking.. "

Some people are into that sort of thing...

He enjoys yanking your chain. By responding, you are giving him the feedback he craves. Please deny him that pleasure - we will all be better off for it.

Posted by: bsimon | December 6, 2007 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Chris,

I had written about how difficult Huckabee would be to run against about four months ago here:

http://www.theseventen.com/2007/08/overrated-and-underrated-candidates.html

There was a good National Journal Insiders Poll that talked about overrated and underrated candidates. Mike Huckabee came out on top as the most underrated candidate. Democrats had better hope that Giuliani or Thompson or Romney emerge as the nominee because Huckabee would indeed be "a nightmare," as you put it.

Posted by: theseventen | December 6, 2007 10:48 AM | Report abuse

'Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to "Manufacture Uncertainty" on Climate Change details how the oil company, like the tobacco industry in previous decades, has

raised doubts about even the most indisputable scientific evidence
funded an array of front organizations to create the appearance of a broad platform for a tight-knit group of vocal climate change contrarians who misrepresent peer-reviewed scientific findings
attempted to portray its opposition to action as a positive quest for "sound science" rather than business self-interest
used its access to the Bush administration to block federal policies and shape government communications on global warming

ExxonMobil-funded organizations consist of an overlapping collection of individuals serving as staff, board members, and scientific advisors that publish and re-publish the works of a small group of climate change contrarians. The George C. Marshall Institute, for instance, which has received $630,000 from ExxonMobil, recently touted a book edited by Patrick Michaels, a long-time climate change contrarian who is affiliated with at least 11 organizations funded by ExxonMobil. Similarly, ExxonMobil funds a number of lesser-known groups such as the Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy and Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. Both groups promote the work of several climate change contrarians, including Sallie Baliunas, an astrophysicist who is affiliated with at least nine ExxonMobil-funded groups.

Baliunas is best known for a 2003 paper alleging the climate had not changed significantly in the past millennia that was rebutted by 13 scientists who stated she had misrepresented their work in her paper. This renunciation did not stop ExxonMobil-funded groups from continuing to promote the paper. Through methods such as these, ExxonMobil has been able to amplify and prop up work that has been discredited by reputable climate scientists. '

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 10:36 AM | Report abuse

CC says: "His record on taxes and spending...might actually play somewhat well in a general election, however, as polls show the American public swinging back to the view that government can play a constructive role in their daily lives."


I like Mike Hickabee - he seems engaging and genuine and as long as he doesn't lobby for schools to teach creationism, I could care less what his personal views on evolution are. And I'd love to see the Club for Growth outmaneuvered by him. (His views on women, and the Dumond case, make him a bit less likable, though.)

But he sounds like the 2008 version of a "compassionate conservative" and given Bush's record, I'm skeptical that too many voters will drink that kool aid again. I think (hope) competence and experience will beat affability this time.

Posted by: -pamela | December 6, 2007 10:36 AM | Report abuse

an earlier post says Huckabee opposes birth control. While I'm sure he's isn't planning on campaigning against birth control, if accurate this sounds like a good example of his extreme personal views

Posted by: newageblues | December 6, 2007 10:36 AM | Report abuse

here's the link:

http://www.texasmonthly.com/2008-01-01/talks-2.php


'User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site.'

Follow your policy, CC and rescue your blog from the sandbox.

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 10:33 AM | Report abuse

the rational tone of drindl -
"vile slime Ingraham"
"Wall Street/COC/Club for Greed"
"Your party has been on a 10 year crime spree,"

"Your base will fall for anything, as bhoomes, above has already shown.
"

I guess rational means different things to different people. In drindl's world, anything that reflects badly on Rs is rational - especially if it is vile and offensive. but the minute the same rules are applied to her/it, she gets all uppity. typical Dem. just like hillary, she wants to be respected for some sort of experience which is actually vapor. when you dig down, there is nothing there but female hormones runnning wild. I want to be respected/ the boys arew ganging up on me. no one is paying attention to experience/ the papers are sealed.

It depends on the meaning of the word "is" doesn't it?

Posted by: kingofzouk | December 6, 2007 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Here's how it works. Dan Bartlett explains the echo chamber to you, from Austin, Mark. First the WH feed spin and propaganda to the blogs. They 'reguritate' it, as he says. Drudge is the mainline. Then the so-called MSM regurgitates the blogs..

--Texas Monthly:What about the blogs?

Dan Bartlett: "We had to set up a whole new apparatus to deal with the challenges they pose. Are they real journalists? The Washington Post, for example, has journalists who are now bloggers. Do you treat them as bloggers? Do they get credentials?

Let's think of it as a practical matter. If one of those journalists-turned-bloggers, Chris Cillizza, e-mails you to say he needs an interview, and at the same time one of the Post's print reporters--say, Dan Balz--e-mails you and says he needs an interview, and you can do only one . . .'

Balz.

Because the print edition of the Post has more of an impact?

'Because Balz is on multiple platforms. He's booked more easily on television. He's read by more people. He influences people a bit more. Now, the question might not be as much Chris versus Dan as maybe, "Is it Dan Balz or one of the guys at [the conservative blog] Power Line?"

Yeah, or what if [conservative blogger] Hugh Hewitt called?

'That's when you start going, "Hmm . . ." Because they do reach people who are influential.'

Well, they reach the president's base.

'That's what I mean by influential. I mean, talk about a direct IV into the vein of your support. It's a very efficient way to communicate. They regurgitate exactly and put up on their blogs what you said to them. It is something that we've cultivated and have really tried to put quite a bit of focus on.'

Sorry to hear you're so low on the food chain, CC.

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I see the market has found the quality of drindl's writing to be lacking and set the appropriate price - zero. free blogging it is then!

you all will be treated to this "writer" for the rest of the day with more rants based on nothing.

Let me elaborate - if a Dem says something it is absolutely true and needs no further thought, if an R says something it is clearly a lie. now you know everything drindl knows.

Even if Dem parole boards screw up, it is not their fault, they are victims of the intimidating Repubs, as are all Dems.

but zoning boards who are intimidated by Harry Reid are independent.

Posted by: kingofzouk | December 6, 2007 10:21 AM | Report abuse

' I don't think drindl would know a fact if it was applied with hot wax to her hairy parts.'

what a disgusting slimbag this creature is. would any of you be offended if he siad this to you? just asking..

wouldn't it be nice if we could maintain the rational tone that generally exists before this nutball shows up?

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Look. First, it was Rudy who was the dems worst nightmare because he knew how to defeat Hillary. Then, Mitt was seen as the GOP nominee who could upend the dems because of his glossy looks and experience as a governor. Now, its Huck.

Do you analysts and pundits ever look at this campaign and its developments from the standpoint that things could be bad for the GOP? All I hear from Matthews, Russert, Scarborough, Buchanan and the rest is how bad some development could be for the democrats. GOP candidates are invariably portrayed in the most favorable light.

I expect that if Tom Tancredo were to suddenly catch fire in the polls, you people would be telling us what a problem this is for democrats.

Posted by: jaxas | December 6, 2007 10:17 AM | Report abuse

As an independent, I look askance at well-oiled party machines that serve up candidates. And at candidates that jockey for their blessing. Huckabee is creaky enough to throw the gears out of sync, the perfect prescription for making noise to voters.

I agree with others here who've stated that the Achilles heel of Republicans is America's Bush pilot, the one without the landing gear. How Huckabee wins is not by ignoring the contrails of this administration which streak the political sky; he must launch a serious surface to air attack on the Republicanism of George Bush. Doing that takes thunder away from Hillary and Obama, takes ammunition away from Romney and Guiliani and shows voters that it is a candidate and not the party machinery that is in the command post.

Posted by: petev | December 6, 2007 10:15 AM | Report abuse


"The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust.'

From Mitt's speech. He does't beleive in separation of church and state, as many have long suspected.

Now Huckabee is outright lying about Dumond. Says he didn't have anything to do with it. This just after saying two days ago then when he got him paroled, he 'just didn't know what Dumond was capable of.' He's changes his story 4 times in the last 3 days.

He's got the rovian playbook down--when backed into a corner, keep revising history. Your base will fall for anything, as bhoomes, above has already shown.

This vote, for instance, is on record:

...A more outspoken former member of the board has been Suttlar.

"For Governor Huckabee to say that he had no influence with the board is something that he knows to be untrue. He came before the board and made his views known that [Dumond] should have been paroled ... "

Suttlar noted that just prior to Huckabee's appearance before the board the board had voted 4-1 against Dumond's parole. After Huckabee's board appearance, her colleagues largely reversed themselves, voting 4-1 for Dumond's release.

"Why did all the votes change?" Suttlar asked. The board members knew the governor's position. And Huckabee knows what influence a governor has over a board. Who's going to turn down a governor?"

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 10:13 AM | Report abuse

rabbit3

I consider it scientific fact too - I am just pointing out what poll after poll says about Americans' beliefs. I was responding to posters who said that Huckabee's views on evolution would make him unelectable.

Posted by: jimd52 | December 6, 2007 10:12 AM | Report abuse

"vile slime Ingraham"

I see that leftist moonbat drindl is here again to spew her bile and hate again.

"Your party has been on a 10 year crime spree"

As usual. no facts and all emotionalism based on Daily Kos rants. I don't think drindl would know a fact if it was applied with hot wax to her hairy parts.

the only person we know has been on a crime spree is mr and mrs clinton.

Posted by: kingofzouk | December 6, 2007 10:09 AM | Report abuse

vbhoomes

This is from Fox News web site:

Huckabee acknowledged that shortly after becoming governor in 1996 he did visit the parole board -- all appointees of his predecessors, Bill Clinton and Jim Guy Tucker -- so he could offer his views on crime and parole in general, and the Dumond case came up during that meeting.

Huckabee also reportedly wrote a letter to the convict expressing his wish that he be paroled.

"My desire is that you be released from prison. I feel that parole is the best way for your reintroduction to society to take place," Huckabee wrote in the 1996 letter obtained by National Review Online.

If it is true that Huckabee wrote a letter endorsing the guy's release, he is complicit - this is far more direct involvement than Dukakis in Willie Horton's release.

Posted by: jimd52 | December 6, 2007 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Claudia, just read your other post. Yes, I listen to Ingrahm. Also listen to Bill Press, Dennis Miller, Stephanie Miller, and Ed Schultz. I find Sean boring (but passionate), and I find Rush entertaining, but quite repetitive sometimes.

And let me take this as another coaching moment here; being against illegal immigration, including taking steps to stop it, does NOT make you xenophobic.

If the Democrats nominate someone with that attitude, they are DONE, they will have no chance in '08.

Posted by: JD | December 6, 2007 10:05 AM | Report abuse

After looking at match-up polls all year, I don't believe that any of the Republican candidates could beat any of the major Democratic candidates in any combination. EXCEPT that I think Mike Huckabee could beat Hillary Clinton. She could beat any of these other guys, but not Huckabee. Huckabee's charisma and general likability would overwhelm Clinton's cold, mercenary disposition. His populist streak would seal the deal. Edwards and Obama both have the personal charm to match Huckabee. But not Hillary Clinton.

The match-up reminds me a lot of Mary Sue Terry against George Allen for Governor of Virginia many years ago.

Posted by: JacksonLanders | December 6, 2007 10:03 AM | Report abuse

let's see what his Q4 fund raising totals are before declaring him a nightmare candidate. Huckabee so far has shown little ability to attract the money he will need to run a successful national campaign.

Posted by: labrat94720 | December 6, 2007 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee brings to the presidential campaign a sunny, down to earth, Reaganesque persona that other Republican candidates simply don't have.

It would be interesting (if perhaps disheartening for some) to see and hear Huckabee's adroit handling of issues pitted against someone's with a brittle personality such as erstwhile fellow Arkansan Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: FirstMouse | December 6, 2007 10:03 AM | Report abuse

You say most Americans don't believe in Evolution? I consider it scientific FACT. You are saying most Americans are ignorant. I doubt you would find such statistics in Europe!

Posted by: rabbit3 | December 6, 2007 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Good morning claudia. Allow me to disabuse you of a few misconceptions.

#1 it's not my party; I may very well vote for Obama next year. Depends on who's running on the GOP side.

#2 of course I'm talking about the *pereception* of most Americans. The GOP has traditionally been thought of as the law-n-order party, tougher penalties for crimes, etc. The Dems are traditionally thought of as easier on criminals.

you can deny that all you like, but you're denying reality. As for the rash of Republican politicians breaking the law- that's not what I'm referring to when I speak of getting 'Dukakis'd'; but you knew that already, and wanted a vehicle to take a shot at the GOP.

Posted by: JD | December 6, 2007 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Good column, Chris. I've thought for some time that Huckabee would be formidable.

Speaking of match-up polls yet to be seen, I'd love to see data showing how voters in Arkansas would line up in a Huckabee vs. Clinton match and, simlarly, how voters in New York State would choose between Guiliani and Clinton. The two states which presumably have the longest memories of both sides of the match-ups than the rest of the nation.

Posted by: GaryBelis | December 6, 2007 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Some of you are playiny a little loose with the facts on the Dumond case. Huckabee denied him communtation three times and simply signed off on the Paroled Board recommendation that he cannot change or supercede. The Board members were apppointed by the two previous governors. Uhmn, by Claudia's logic and some others, I guess that makes them complicit in the murder. Huck was on Morning Joe this morning, he's the real deal. The dems can take him lightly at there own peril.

Posted by: vbhoomes | December 6, 2007 9:56 AM | Report abuse

jimd52 writes
" I singled out the Republicans since the percentage is so overwhelming."

In that context, I wonder how many indpendants hold the same view. More specifically, I wonder how many don't find it patently ridiculous that a man running to be the President of the United States believes that the earth is roughly 6 to 8 thousand years old.

If huck can win the GOP nomination, can he attract enough independants to defeat the dems? While his fiscal record might be appealing, can he overcome the biases of people who trust science rather than a literal interpretation of the Bible?

I doubt it, but them I'm biased in favor of the science.

Posted by: bsimon | December 6, 2007 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Good column, Chris. I've thought for some time that Huckabee would be formidable.

Speaking of match-up polls yet to be seen, I'd love to see data showing how voters in Arkansas would line up in a Huckabee vs. Clinton match and how voters in New York State would choose between Guiliani and Clinton. The two states which presumably have long memories of both sides of the match-ups.

Posted by: GaryBelis | December 6, 2007 9:55 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry but I don't think that Huckabee is going to be able to escape his "Willie Horton". I would never vote for someone who lobbied for the release of a convicted rapist under pressure from the religious right. Huckabee was warned by other woman this man raped that he would do it again. He ignored those warnings and negotiated the rapist's pardon. Huckabee is responsible for the rape and death of his last victim, pure and simple. Is that someone you want to be our President?

Posted by: katie11 | December 6, 2007 9:50 AM | Report abuse

"Is Huckabee Democrats' Biggest Nightmare?"

I don't think so. I think Democrats' biggest nightmare is the Republican candidate that can both hold their fracturing coalition together and attract enough moderates to win a majority of the vote in a majority of states (slight oversimplifaction of electoral process there). Given the degree to which the 'Club for Growth' school Republicans are willing to malign Huck, I don't think he's the kind of guy that can hold the GOP coalition together enough to win the nomination. I suspect whoever wins the nomination will keep most of the base, but its entirely unclear that many independants will give the GOP another chance at the White House after the last 7 years. Though that, of course, will depend largely on whom the Dems pick...

Posted by: bsimon | December 6, 2007 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Democrats are scared of everyone. I remember when McCain and Giuliani were unbeatable. Please. Anytime a Republican gains front-runner status, the Dems start shaking in their boots, and they can't control themselves, so they blab to the media.

I am a life-long Democrat, and I am not scared of any of these clowns the Republican Party is about to put up. None of them has laid out a comprehensive policy on anything. Huckabee (while I like the guy) paroled a convicted rapist, who then raped again. If a Democrat did this, that would be his or her tombstone (remember Dukakis and Willie Horton)?

My point is that Democrats need to get some stomach. Hit these people, and hit them hard. They will all fold, because each of them (outside of McCain) is an empty suit. Make the election about whose right and whose wrong; about who will tell the truth when its hard and who won't; whose qualified because they have big dreams for the country and who is stuck arguing over evolution.

Posted by: GoHuskies2004 | December 6, 2007 9:41 AM | Report abuse

About half of Americans don't believe in evolution. The percentages change as the question is asked differently. A large majority does believe divine intervention is involved. I singled out the Republicans since the percentage is so overwhelming.

Posted by: jimd52 | December 6, 2007 9:36 AM | Report abuse

'I think that charge works better against the (soft on crime) Democrats, not against GOP.'

LOL, JD. Let's see, how many republican politicians are in prison/indicted/under investigation this year? Your party has been on a 10 year crime spree, my friend, and it hasn't even all come out. But it will, as the trials are still dragging on, and the Abramoffs and Stevenes are continuing to sing...

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 9:35 AM | Report abuse

"68% of Republicans don't believe in evolution"

The country isn't made up of mostly republicans. He may gain the nomination, but his disregard of scientific fact will not serve him well in the General Election.

Posted by: DJShay | December 6, 2007 9:32 AM | Report abuse

"Unlike the other Republicans, he isn't flawed in the eyes of the Republican base. '

Well, CC -- depends on which republican base you're talking about, doesn't it? The Wall Street base, or the Christian base.

Huck might play well in the General, he has real charisma and appeal, despite his radical views. He's smart and funny. But here are his problems in the general--mainly his views on women. No abortion, no birth control, no gays. Woman should be subserviant to husband, should make less money, preferably should stay at home. Paroled a serial rapist who then promptly killed a woman. This may be okay in arkansas, but do I think women in CA, NY, FL, or almost any urban area will buy this package in this day and age--not really. It sounds like his compassion extends only toward men.

And then there is science -- he doesn't beleive in at least one of the pillars of modern science. So he will be no better than bush re restoring America as a leader in innovation. We are falling far behind many other countries now. If he beleives also that these are The End Times, as suggests by one of his major supporters, the author of the Left Behind series, then he will certainly not be interested in addressing, climate change. These are just a few of the issues his relgious beleifs coud affect.

And separaion of church and state -- he has already proven he doesn't beleive in that. He has an organization of radical pastors who campaign for him and organize busing voters straight from church to the polls.

But the primary is where he will meet stiff resistance. His stance on immigration -- which as we will know will be the republican wedge issue this year --as JD [christ I can't imagine you listen to vile slime Ingraham] has shown, will be anathema to the xebophobic base.

And then there's Wall Street/COC/Club for Greed. He raised taxes, they hate him and are out to get him. Formidable and very well-funded enemies they are.

So frankly, he has a rough road, no matter how charming. Not to say it isn't possible, but...

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2007 9:30 AM | Report abuse

It will be difficult for Huckabee to mount an effective national campaign unless his fundraising improves dramatically. If he wins Iowa, I don't think he can win New Hampshire. He might win South Carolina. Should Mitt win NH and Huck Iowa and SC, Giuliani is in good shape for mega-Tuesday. He has the funding and the name recognition to do very well in the large states. His social issue stands will hurt him less there especially with two social conservatives as opponents. Should Giuliani win the nomination, I would anticipate a Giuliani-Huckabee ticket.

By the way, I do not think his creationsit views will be that much of a hindrance - polls show most Americans do not believe in Evolution. 68% of Republicans don't believe in evolution. Here is a link to Gallup's most recent surveys on attitudes towards evolution.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/27847/Majority-Republicans-Doubt-Theory-Evolution.aspx

Posted by: jimd52 | December 6, 2007 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Thanks, Blarg.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 6, 2007 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Mark in Austin: Sorry I didn't reply to your questions; I somehow missed your post. I'll reply here, because you're more likely to see it.

The McKinsey report did favor more nuclear plants; they were in the middle of the curve, meaning they save a fair amount of CO2 but don't quite pay for themselves. Personally, I support nuclear power. A properly-designed nuclear plant isn't dangerous, and doesn't output much waste. Coal plants put out more radioactive waste than nuclear plants anyway, because of tiny amounts of radioactive material in coal.

Water vapor is a greenhouse gas, but humans aren't directly creating water vapor. The level of water vapor in the atmosphere depends on the temperature, not on human activity. So as global warming increases temperatures, there's more water vapor, and thus even more warming. It's a feedback effect. But the way to break it is to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, not to reduce the humidity.

Posted by: Blarg | December 6, 2007 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee's not ready for prime time. The DuMond story, and the total blank on the NIE, not to mention his denial of evolution prove this. The DuMond issue much more explosive than Willie Horton. Huck KNEW DuMond's history and had received letters stating that the guy was a danger yet still pushed to gain his release anyway.

Posted by: DJShay | December 6, 2007 9:17 AM | Report abuse

So, are we suggesting that Huckabee will get "Dukakis'd", wrt the parole for rapist?

I think that charge works better against the (soft on crime) Democrats, not against GOP.

Posted by: JD | December 6, 2007 9:10 AM | Report abuse

vbhoomes, I did not suggest that candidates do not or should matter. They should. My point is that in this particular election, who the candidate is will be more relevant at the party nomination level. Once nominated, there won't be much of a contest...

Posted by: mom_in_metro | December 6, 2007 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Wow, if the best that the GOP can do is a candidate who specifically advocated for the release of a rapist, who upon release subsequently raped and killed two more women, that says a lot about the "crime fighting" party of "family values."

I'm sure the Wall Street wing of the party loves him. :/

Posted by: elroy1 | December 6, 2007 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee is probably the strongest Republican candidate. He still isn't a "nightmare" for Democrats; Republicans start this election so far in the hole that even the best possible candidate won't have much chance. But he's definitely got the best shot.

I'd be surprised if he wins the nomination, though. His opponents have much better funding and visibility, and his current rise in the polls will stop as his weaknesses become apparent.

Posted by: Blarg | December 6, 2007 8:59 AM | Report abuse

Steven Colbert must be overjoyed.

Huckabee promised Steven, on his show, that if he got the Republican nomination that he'd ask Steven to be his vice-president.

This was a long time ago, of course. Colbert will take complete credit for Huckabee's rise, since his success only came after receiving the "Colbert bump"...

Now *that'd* be a crazy ticket.

Posted by: ggottfri | December 6, 2007 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Increased scrutiny is already starting to tarnish Huckabee a bit and trip up his folksy style. As a presidential candidate, you can't just say "Its unfair to question me on that topic." All questions and topics are fair game, including his Arkansas parole problem and his creationist views.

Still, Huckabee is a gifted, very appealing candidate. And a match up between him and Obama would be a fascinating, and possibly unprecedented "nice fest." Clinton has the most to worry about from Huckabee by far--as he directly contrasts all of her perceived negatives.

Posted by: youba | December 6, 2007 8:39 AM | Report abuse

I have to disagree with Mom, nominees and campaigns are relevant and do matter. Nobody is inevtible and MRS C. is going to find out very soon people don't like being told you am going to be our next President whether you like it or not.

Posted by: vbhoomes | December 6, 2007 8:37 AM | Report abuse

I like Huckabee a lot, but I do not think any republican is going to be a nightmare for any democrat in 2008. For all it matters, both parties could have their respective animal mascots running as presidents and the donkey will still win. Republicans could bring Reagan back from death and the donkey will win. Don't you see , none of these candidates are going to win or lose on their own merit, they will do so based upon the lovely, lovely 8 years provided by the current administration. Republicans, sincere ones, should really take Bush team to task for creating this sort of political mess.

Posted by: mom_in_metro | December 6, 2007 8:28 AM | Report abuse

"These operatives believe that Huckabee's profile -- former Baptist minister, southern governor, fitness preacher -- and self-effacing style on the stump could prove an appealing combination for moderate and independent voters."

Then they remember the governor believes the earth is only 6 to 8 thousand years old and realize they're screwed, no matter whom the nominee is.

Posted by: bsimon | December 6, 2007 8:21 AM | Report abuse

I heard on Laura Ingrahm's show some quotes from Huckabee that were less than impressive, regarding controlling illegal immigration. He was evidently in favor allowing the kids of illegals to get in state tuition, among other benefits, thereby creating something of a magnet effect.

Disappointing.

Posted by: JD | December 6, 2007 8:15 AM | Report abuse

A bizarre column, given the scandal whirling around Huckabee. The liberal blogosphere recognized his potential strengths many months ago. The mainstream media, though, has had its serial crushes on McCain, Thompson & Guiliani, and the horse race narrative has bumbled along with diversions like Ron Paul's fund raising boomlet. The coverage this round, including this column, promises to be even more cutoff from reality than the enabling of Kerry's being swiftboated and the ludicrous "Bush is a regular guy/Gore is a liar" narrative of 2000.

Posted by: thebuckguy | December 6, 2007 8:12 AM | Report abuse

I think the polls in Iowa are now changing at a rate of two or three a day. Seems everywhere you look there is a new one. Looks like Hillary and Mike now, but wait a few hours or until tomorrow when we get some more.

Posted by: lylepink | December 6, 2007 8:06 AM | Report abuse

It really does not matter who the GOP nominee is. The Democrats are going to run against George Bush just as Republicans ran against Jimmy Carter for years after Reagan defeated him. The Democratic nominee wouldn't attack Huckabee's religious beliefs directly, because that would be a losing strategy. But guess who else shares Huckabee's religious beliefs? Why it's that "compassionate conservative," George Bush, and look where he's taken us...

Posted by: BuddyK | December 6, 2007 7:47 AM | Report abuse

What the media including this article continue to ignore is that in addition to all the listed qualities that attract people to Mike Huckabee, there is the fact that he is smart enough to understand the tax reform in the National Retail Sales Tax -- the "Fair Tax" -- and to explain it and defend it. Since everyone hates the IRS, its elimination under the Fair Tax is a huge selling point. So is the fact that the Fair Tax completely removes truly poor people from Federal tax rolls and also removes much of the Federal tax burden for those making under $50,000.00 per year. The Fair Tax will tax the underground economy including all people who are in this country illegally while removing corporate taxes and the costly withholding and tracking of incomes the present tax system requires. This will restore privacy to individuals and remove much of the government's intrustion into private lives. Once people truly understand that the Fair Tax IS "fair" and removes a lot of power from the Washington politicians, it will be even more widely accepted and the cornerstone of his campaign. There are already hundreds of thousands of people who are ardent supporters of the Fair Tax and almost all of them vote. There is a huge grass roots movement that has been developing over the past 25 years and over 100 people in Congress have already signed on as supporters. Since all his other political positions are acceptable to most American voters, Democrats should truly be worried. Stacked against Democrat candidates whose only qualifications are being the wife and protector of the former impeached president, a few years as a U. S. Senator and a trial lawyer, Huckabee may well not only win the nomination and presidency but also help sweep the anti-war, defeatist Democrat majorities out of the House and Senate. Those in the media (most of them, obviously) who do not understand the Fair Tax will continue to assume that his support is only coming from the "Christian right" but they will be wrong! That part of Huckabee -- his formal Christian background -- is something I'm watching with some trepidation but what I'm learning is that he's well grounded in reality, smart, articulate and a man of character. He will truly be a formidable candidate. Go Mike!

Posted by: claywillis | December 6, 2007 7:18 AM | Report abuse

Now we know I was right yesterday that Gray101 was a Clinton Volunteer. Of course Hillary denies it, just like Huckabee and I am sure they were CAREFULL enough to provide themselves deniability. But most of us on this blog are cynical enough to know how the game is played. Politics isn't beanball as someone once famously said.

Posted by: vbhoomes | December 6, 2007 6:46 AM | Report abuse

Actually there is a very recent poll that Cillizza is not yet aware of that shows he is right that Huckabee might be a very strong candidate against Hillary Clinton. I am going to post a link to a Rassmussen poll. (Hucxkabee, BTW, has risen since this poll was taken. If the link does not work, you can find it on the rasmussenreports website.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_huckabee_vs_clinton_obama

Posted by: sandale111 | December 6, 2007 6:45 AM | Report abuse

They are now just figuring out what some of us knew months ago, Huckabee is a winner and a strong candidate. But I still believe our strongest ticket is Romney/Huckabee. Of course Romney is probablly a little angry over the push polling in Iowa that questions his faith. Huckabee denies it of course that he approved of it, he knew, but that's okay it shows he has enough ruthlessness to go against the Queeen of mud.

Posted by: vbhoomes | December 6, 2007 6:27 AM | Report abuse

FYI: The "Black-Ice" phenom discussed recently is being blamed for hundreds of accidents across the state of WV. My neighbor county reports 50 accidents, most of them "Black-Ice related. This story about Mike reflects somewhat the online poll by my local TV station I posted yesterday or the day before.

Posted by: lylepink | December 6, 2007 6:22 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company