Why Huckabee wins with the values voter
posted at 11:34 am on January 4, 2008 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view
Dwayne Horner has a good take, to which I would add something that’s purely gut but may be valid.
Much has rightly been made of Huckabee’s 1000+ clemencies and particularly the DuMond case. That’s a legitimate issue as far as I’m concerned, and one that resonates with the law and order side of the values vote. Put beside Romney’s record of 0 clemencies and you ought to have a clear win for Romney.
But there’s another issue that may resonate more strongly with the values vote, and it’s Mitt Romney’s $50 abortion component of the MA universal health care plan. I know when I saw it I found it repulsive, and I’m the kind of voter who is both a values sort but predisposed to like Romney for his executive experience and record of saving major efforts from certain calamity. I would put someone with his record to work on problems like Social Security in a heartbeat, long before I would put Huckabee in the same role. Same goes for the war, which is my paramount issue. I’ll take Romney or Thompson or McCain on the war before Huckabee. But the war isn’t the only issue, certainly not for most values voters. It seems to be less of an issue for a majority of values voters than I’d suspected.
This is more guess than anything, but values voters may have looked at Huckabee’s lackluster record on clemencies alongside the $50 abortion and rightly concluded that neither is good but the latter is responsible for far more death than the former and in the grand scheme cuts more strongly against their values. The $50 abortion is the kind of issue that can fly through the kind of word-of-mouth network that propelled Huckabee to win in Iowa but will never register in the press because they won’t ask the questions that could get them there, and that goes for the conservative punditry as well. Mitt’s problem with the values voter, then, is that while he’s very much one of them on his life history and his executive experience is formidable, he has a public record that just kills him with values voters at an instinctive level. It’s not bigotry at work. It’s a legitimate issue that speaks to what candidates have done with political power.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
One can only hope Huckabee fades away; He has many poor values regarding illegal aliens, the war on terror, murders and rapists and in my opinion there is no not a wit of difference on their stance on abortion.
Shame on those that are using Romney’s faith as a reason not to vote for him. You don’t have to agree with the Mormon’s on matters of faith, to accept that Romney is a decent man, stating his position well on conservative values and idea’s.
It would have been nice to see Duncan Hunter do bettter.
MarkB on January 4, 2008 at 1:45 PM
Values voter?
Not Barry Goldwater values. Not at all.
By the early ’90s, there could be no doubt: Goldwater damned the Religious Right at every opportunity, spoke out for abortion rights, and not only supported letting gays serve openly in the military, but even lent his name to an effort to pass federal anti-discrimination laws for homosexuals.
If they succeed in establishing religion as a basic Republican Party tenet, they could do us in. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye.
The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others, less the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives. We have succeeded for 205 years in keeping the affairs of state separate from the uncompromising idealism of religious groups and we mustn’t stop now. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism and the values upon which the framers built this democratic republic.
- Barry Goldwater
MB4 on January 4, 2008 at 1:48 PM
True, very true.
Zetterson on January 4, 2008 at 1:49 PM
I don’t think those who vote for Huck are stupid. I think they are unrealistic on social issues, liberals on economic issues, and just a wee bit gullible.
I think they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the what actions a President can take to advance the Christian Right’s social agenda, and imagine the Presidency as having far more power on these issues than the office provides.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 1:50 PM
Here is a hypothetical question for Huck supporters:
If Hillary Clinton was a conservative on social issues, but still an uber-liberal on everything else, would you vote for her?
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 1:54 PM
most of the worst americans were christians.
there was a time when everybody shat in the same dirty river they drank from too. good people, bad people, mediocre and great. their greatness of the great ones didn’t spring from the feces-poluted water they drank. but that’s the nonsence you’re trying to push with this “great americans were christian” crap, which isn’t even true in many cases.
enjoy your christian party. expect it to lose the general.
jummy on January 4, 2008 at 2:00 PM
It’s “the Godfather of Conservatism” who said:
“I am a conservative Republican, but I believe in democracy and the separation of church and state. The conservative movement is founded on the simple tenet that people have the right to live life as they please as long as they don’t hurt anyone else in the process.”
“The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others,”
“I don’t have any respect for the Religious Right.”
“Every good Christian should line up and kick
Jerry Falwell’sMike Huckabee’s [updated] ass.”“A woman has a right to an abortion [I doubt that he was including "late-term" abortion].”
“You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”
MB4 on January 4, 2008 at 2:03 PM
Buy Danish. Here’s what I said in the paragraph before that. In fact, it’s the only thing I said in the paragraph before that.
Value voters operate on the same reality you do – the one they see in front of them. And so long as you continue acting as if they don’t, you won’t win a single one of them to your candidate. In fact, they’ll make a point of staying away from you because your way of “convincing” them by implying that they’re idiots.
I’ll tell you again what I believe they’d say. Romney didn’t fight nearly hard enough. Not by half. That’s fine if he wants to prioritize things in that manner but it’s not fine with me. I’ll vote for someone who takes me seriously and doesn’t blow off my concerns with a shrug and a “what could I do?”.
Jimmie on January 4, 2008 at 2:05 PM
Remember that a government powerful enough to give you everything you want is also powerful enough to take away everything you have.
- Barry Goldwater
MB4 on January 4, 2008 at 2:07 PM
even reagan wouldn’t be allowed to run in this primary. the “base” would have eliminated him early for some “real conservative”. i think its hilarious to read in these comments people waxing about hunter all of a sudden. fred’s not even out. i remember when he was the “real conservative”.
jummy on January 4, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Yes, and that’s why we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights.
:-)
I got all that but then you went on to propose pie in the sky solutions.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Most of the people I know who like Huckabee do so because he isn’t wishy-washy about his Evangelicalism. Much of his 1000+ clemencies are moslty unknown to the masses, and most of them would consider clemencies legitimate for a wide range of reasons.
And… to follow up, with regard to this statement:
Other than this statement being stupidly wrong, most Christians could care less what anti-Christian rhetoric is out there. If anything, anti-Christian rhetoric like this just encourages Christians to vote for an openly Evangelical candidate.
So, I really should be thanking jummy for helping us out like this.
Lawrence on January 4, 2008 at 2:11 PM
Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.
- Elbert Hubbard
MB4 on January 4, 2008 at 2:12 PM
What, like “listen to them” and “take them seriously”?
Yeah, that’s pie in the sky all right.
Jimmie on January 4, 2008 at 2:16 PM
like i said, it’s yours. take it.
curious though, hoow was my statement “wrong”?
bull connor? christian.
rockwell, founder of the american nazi party? christian.
benedict arnold? christian.
etc.
jummy on January 4, 2008 at 2:16 PM
Hence it happened that all the armed prophets conquered, all the unarmed perished.
- Niccolo Machiavelli
MB4 on January 4, 2008 at 2:17 PM
True, but presidential power does include the ability to make some godawful errors on foreign policy, national security/immigration, and the economy, which apparently is not significant in their minds,..at least compared to the social issues.
a capella on January 4, 2008 at 2:19 PM
It is wrong in that it is a blatant ad hominem insult based on a common straw-man argument. Basically your position holds no intellectual integrity, regurgitating ideas bantered around since before you and I were born.
As far as Huckabee, I’m a Duncan Hunter supporter. It doesn’t matter which front running GOP candidate wins this mess, I’ve already lost.
However, I do believe that Huckabee is just as good a candidate in his way as any other GOP candidate is in theirs. And I am prepared to vote for any one of the GOP candidates over all of the Democratic candidates.
Lawrence on January 4, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Yes, and my values on the abortion are just the opposite of the so-called values voters. But I’m willing to going along with a party that is generally anti-abortion because the war is a much bigger issue for me and should be for everyone.
thuja on January 4, 2008 at 2:29 PM
Do you understand that Governors and Presidents have to follow the law and Supreme Court decisions?
Do you understand that we do not live under a dictatorship and that we have 3 branches of government?
Yes, but my point is that vital issues like foreign policy ARE under the purview of the Executive office, while abortion is under the purview of the courts. Even if the President is presented with legislation that restricts or outlaws abortion, it still ends up in the courts.
The President has direct and immediate power over foreign policy, but has only indirect power with the courts which is limited to judicial appointments.
Those appointments of course are crucial, not only vis a vis social issues, but the president cannot singlehandedly change overturn roe v. wade, end gay marriage, and so forth.
Where steam starts to come out of my ears is when I hear values voters say that they will sit out the election if their candidate doesn’t win the nomination.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 2:30 PM
You are painting Christians as ignorant. Just like jummy. See my post above regarding ad hominem attacks lacking intellectual integrity in this debate.
The facts are that Christians who actually understand what they believe and profess are for the most part well educated and pay attention to politics.
And these Christians are not going to be swayed by portrayals to the contrary. Either by your back-handed compliments, or by jummy front-handed attacks.
Lawrence on January 4, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Wouldn’t that make Goldwater Libertarian-leaning? Libertarians aren’t exactly known for socially conservative policies.
By the way, where do you get all those quotes? Do you have a master page of them saved somewhere?
BKennedy on January 4, 2008 at 2:36 PM
I’m sure if someone is a deviant that would be true.
Are you speaking for your immediate family, or just friends? This might have something to do with the source of your logic, but I don;t see where it has anything to do with this topic.
The Republican Party is a Christian values party, which is something I feel you have no clue about.
Hening on January 4, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Well, this was interesting for a while, but the open Kos-like Christian bigotry spells the end of this discussion for me. I’m not a Christian myself, heck, I’m not even religious, but this “most of the worst americans were christians” turn is just disgusting.
jmuchow on January 4, 2008 at 2:52 PM
I’m a Christian. I’m a conservative. I don’t think Christians are ignorant. I have nothing in common with Jummy.
I think single-issue voters whose priorities cannot be met by the Executive office alone, whether they be Christians, Atheists, Liberals, or conservatives do a lot of harm and get zero, zip, nada accomplished other than to create warring camps in an endless war that is never won, but where there are many wounded.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 2:53 PM
they sure turn out to be deviants rather reliably don’t they? it seems as if cruising for guys and smoking crystal is what faith’s all about.
no, we’re well aware. thanks for enunciating it so clearly. usually when i say the exact same thing about the theocratic formulation of christianity qua conservativism, one of you rushes up to tell me how awfully wrong i am and how christians are repectful of the constitution and the secularity of our public institutions.
i know that’s a lie and you know that’s a lie.
jummy on January 4, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Summs it up to perfection but few Christians, or far righties think/believe like you. They are as dangerous to the conservatives/country, as are the far lefties to their party/country. I know, the knives have been after me for this before. I can take it. It’s still the sad reality.
I’m guilty of stating that I won’t vote for Mr. Huckabee either. It has nothing to do with his religion – it’s striclty based on his policies, and that he’d be inclined to govern based on religion instead of Constitution/secularism. Also, he’s a socialist.
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Clarification – BD, didn’t mean to imply that you are a “far rightie”. Sorry, if that came across, being added on to the “Christians”.
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 3:09 PM
I would still vote for Huckabee. His judicial appointments alone (assuming Congress approved them) would make him far better than any of the Dems. I have no doubt at all that Rudy, Romney, and Fred would also appoint stellar nominees with conservative creds. I’m not so sure about McCain since he is so mamby pamby on issues like water boarding, and wants to close Gitmo.
I also think he’d be much better on the W.O.T. than they would, and I like the Fair Tax plan (although I doubt it would ever pass).
He is a liberal in all other respects, however but I’ll take a 2/4 liberal over a 4/4 liberal if that’s what it comes down to.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Woops, delete “however” in front of “but”. Or delete “but” and replace with “however”.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM
If America’s value voters are this il-informed and refuse to make the effort to search out the reasoning behind this particular compromise then it’s over. And if the media flat refuses to tell the truth and make an effort to find the truth behind such compromises then it’s over as well. Hand the keys to O’BamBam.
Mitt made a compromise to get a bill thru. Signed it and moved on. Plain and simple. Exactly the kind of thing that occurs and must occur everyday in Washington. The next president will not be immune to these practices. No president or governor ever are. It’s the only way to get “anything” done. Ever.
I’m not even a Mitt supporter and I was able to find the facts behind this story. Someone please tell the goddam truth for once.
Griz on January 4, 2008 at 3:29 PM
This what I’m talking about if anyone cares. Complete and total bu11chit.
Griz on January 4, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Well, I’ve spent quite a number of years carrying the flag of the ‘Old Conservatism.’ And I can say with conviction that the religious issues of these groups have little or nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics. The uncompromising position of these groups is a divisive element that could tear apart the very spirit of our representative system, if they gain sufficient strength.
Being a conservative in America traditionally has meant that one holds a deep, abiding respect for the Constitution. We conservatives believe sincerely in the integrity of the Constitution. We treasure the freedoms that document protects. By maintaining the separation of church and state, the United States has avoided the intolerance which has so divided the rest of the world with religious wars.
- Barry Goldwater
MB4 on January 4, 2008 at 3:34 PM
I have asked this of a number of people today with no satisfactory response:
What specifically did you want Mitt Romney to do?
Surely one of you these value voters can give me a realistic strategy that he could have followed. Pie in the sky, wishin’ and a hopin’ doesn’t count.
I’d like to see a specific plan which followed the law and could have been approved by the Massachusetts legislature, which didn’t require tossing his health insurance plan out the window in a fit of pique.
I’m all ears.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 3:41 PM
He is also totally corrupt, as proven by his “wedding gift registry” even though he was already married and his trying to steal 80K worth of furniture while the Goobernator of Arkansauce.
He also has bad teeth.
MB4 on January 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM
IOW, when push came to shove Mitt governed like a moderate, pro-choice Republican. But trust him now when he says that he has had an epiphany. No thanks.
Bill C on January 4, 2008 at 3:49 PM
BD, I didn’t want Mitt to do anything other than what he did. In the most liberal American state Mitt passed a healthcare plan that in order to become law had to pass the court’s muster which demanded the co-pay be there. So Mitt compromised. I say good man. He got chit done for his state. Now the Huxter will spread lying propaganda in order to get the moron’s votes and anther wave of corruption goes unnoticed in American politics. The Huxster is a corrupt crooked POS. Period. And I repeat… I am not a Mitt supporter… I’m just sick of the lies and the media who repeat those lies in order to sell their controversy.
Griz on January 4, 2008 at 3:50 PM
I’m with Barry until the very last sentence, which is based on a false interpretation of the Bill of Rights. Or maybe a false interpretation of “Church and State”, which is not the same thing as “religion and State”.
There should be a separation between church and state because that implies that we could have a state religion (”church”)/theocracy.
Separating religion and state is quite different and is protected in these words:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I realize this has been addressed ad nauseum by scholars and pundits, but I wanted to make my position clear on the issue, particularly to the values voters who may assume that I hold a different position.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Sorry, I realize that I forgot to start that with “I agree” with most everything you said. What you have added is a good and fair analysis.
I’m still waiting for a values voter to give me a plan!
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Hening on January 4, 2008 at 4:10 PM
You and I worry too much about corrections. I think they, like apologies, are also overrated :) S/b like e-mail writing where hardly anyone cares, so long as the message gets across. On a personal note, I do care about correct writing, though – it’s just that my emotions are faster than my patience to hit the preview button – too eager to participate, often. Plus, this way many of my buddies have had much fun :)
MB4, I appreciated the Goldwater quote. First I thought you were saying those things…since you quoted, I assume that we’re copacetic on them, for more reasons than one, each enough for an entire thread. The substance overrides it all here, though. I am a conservative in the Goldwater sense, just like Zell Miller is a liberal. If only so many could internalize this. All other is destructive to both parties and I’m hopeful, if they don’t wake up, that a viable 3rd one will emerge. It is waiting for a leader. The participants are there, in droves, sick of both extremes.
When I became citizen, this is the main reason why I didn’t become a Republican. Why I didn’t register with the left s/b blatantly obvious by now.
As political corruption goes, these aren’t even the worst examples. I have issues with him that are way bigger, and will not vote for him.
On the teeth part, while you made me smile, it’s as bad as the “corn” thing on a thread on the right side. This will not affect my decision :)
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Ooops, the corn-thread moved to the left. It’s going like lightening…
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 4:17 PM
Despite utilizing the preview button I suffer from a mysterious malady which can render me temporarily blind, and as a result I often see my errors immediately after my comments post. Sometimes I ignore them in the hopes that no one will notice, but sometimes I am too overcome with embarrassment to let them slide.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 4:22 PM
Buy Danish, if your statement about the “mysterious malady” was true, you must look into that right away and get it taken care of. Temporary blindness moves more to permanent than not. No need to explain, just to not let it go, which you’re probably addressing already. Best of luck with it,
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 5:12 PM
I was kidding! Are you? This is how misunderstandings begin!
It is true that for some reason I often don’t see my mistakes until just after the comments post, but that is not from any physical disability.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 5:17 PM
BD, that’s why I added the “if” – were it true, I would not be kidding, as I find life and sight to be very serious. All’s well then.
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Howard Dean’s letter to his ‘children’ begins like this:
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Huckabee does not win with “values voters” he wins with “identity politics” voters of the Christian-ish sort.
TBinSTL on January 4, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Heavy on the “ish”.
Buy Danish on January 4, 2008 at 9:00 PM
Don’t think it’s just value voters that Huckabee wins:
A Poll Of Conservatives by Grassfire.org Gives Huckabee Wide Lead Over All Challengers: Huckabee Leads All Other Candidates By 2-To-1 Margin Among Conservatives
If you plan on voting Republican and your party’s primary or caucus were held today, for whom would you vote? (select one)
Mike Huckabee 34%
Fred Thompson 16%
Mitt Romney 15%
Rudy Giuliani 8%
John McCain 4%
Over 67,000 responded to Grassfire.org’s poll (margin of error is less than 1%) and Huckabee won by over a 2-1 margin as the choice of grassroots conservatives. The #1 issue? Border Security. The #2 issue? Reducing the tax burden.
The poll also found that grassroots conservatives find Hucakbee among the most trustworthy on the issue of stopping illegal immigration.
Don’t count this out, dismiss it at your own peril!
Dhornertx on January 5, 2008 at 1:29 AM
Yeah, that’s really reliable polling data.
From the Grassfire poll:
From Grassfire’s website.
Are most Huckabee supporters incapable of objectively parsing through data, and data sources?
/rhetorical question
Buy Danish on January 5, 2008 at 9:24 AM
Lest I be misunderstood, I want to make it clear that I share many (but not all) of the concerns of the Redeem the Vote crowd when it comes to social issues. Where I diverge completely is with their methods, reasoning, and dogmatic approach.
And I loathe demagogues and populists.
Buy Danish on January 5, 2008 at 10:54 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2