Is Fred helping Huckabee by staying in the race?
posted at 11:13 am on January 8, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Think about it. If St. John wins today, he and Huck go into South Carolina as the odds-on favorites to take the state. (Mitt could contend if he takes Michigan next week, but he’s expected to win there and is at a disadvantage vis-a-vis his opponents in hawkish, evangelical SC.) McCain’s already preparing his next moves, in fact, planning a swing through Michigan and then a flight to Charleston tomorrow night to beat the war drum at the Citadel. He’s seven points behind Huck in the state in the new Rasmussen poll, with Mitt and Fred accounting between them for another 26% of, I presume, traditional conservative voters. If either or both of them were to drop out, how would those voters break? I’m guessing towards McCain, although that’s only because I think of Huckabee as a sort of McCain-like figure himself minus the foreign policy strength. What do you gain by choosing Huck over Mac? The answer, I guess, is that one’s a “Christian leader” while the other isn’t, so it would come down to a test of whether Mitt’s and Fred’s voters prioritize the war over “values” or vice versa.
So then. If, as I do (and Ace does, among others), you believe McCain is mildly preferable to Huck, and if you believe the balance of Fred’s voters would shift towards him — especially with a likely endorsement of McCain by Fred following his dropping out — then Fred could be the difference between a Huck victory and a Mac victory in South Carolina. The Fredheads naturally think Thompson can still win the state outright, but imagine this: A week from today, four days before the primary, it’s Huck 35, McCain 35, Mitt 20, Fred 10. Should he drop out then? Yes, yes, ideally Mitt would drop out and his voters would rush off to Thompsonville, but Mitt’s got a bottomless treasury and isn’t getting out soon. Exit question: When is it time to pull the plug, ‘Heads? And as you consider it, bear in mind that the man who not long ago scolded us for punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the sins of their parents is now willing to go this far in pandering to absolve himself.
Update: Maybe the real question is, why is McCain still in the race?
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: « 1 2 [3]
I am ususally loathe to to blog-pimipin’, but it’s not really my blog, so if you want to know why McCain is doing what he’s doing with Huck — and what Fred (or someone else) could do the slow the Huckmentum, you could read this and this. HotAir is even linked in the second one.
Karl on January 8, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Wow those were some bad typos. Preview is not my friend.
Karl on January 8, 2008 at 2:57 PM
So the premise of this thread is: Fredheads, recognize reality and move over to RINO McCain, while the only viable conservative that’s competitive EVERYWHERE and positioned to stop both Huck and McCain should continue to be ignored. Makes sense.
The truth: Fredheads, if you supported Mitt Romney, Huckabee and McCain would both be swiftly defeated, and we’ll have what we should have had all along, a Romney vs. Giuliani showdown on Super Tuesday.
Patriot33 on January 8, 2008 at 2:58 PM
I have context fever like the MSM!
geckomon on January 8, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Good Lord. Some of us newbies are getting a bit long-winded, methinks.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Didn’t know I was wasting analysis on 4 year olds. Funny though.
tommylotto on January 8, 2008 at 3:05 PM
tommylotto is no newbie. I don’t get it, what constitutes a newbie comment? How were you able to come up with your conclusion?
geckomon on January 8, 2008 at 3:06 PM
All in jest!
geckomon on January 8, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Fascinating. However, the question I had asked was to rate these five on immigration. Are you sure you want to keep your choice?
Once again: Rate these five on immigration, best to worst.
wccawa on January 8, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Are you calling me a newbie. Since summer, Fredheads have been crying like babies stewing in their poo every time they see one of my posts!!!
tommylotto on January 8, 2008 at 3:08 PM
I don’t care what you say or how you rationalize it…. If you vote for Hussein Obama..you are a traitor! Remember this is not an ordinary election..this is the most important election ever if the muslim or Hillary Mao are elected we will not be able to recover! Do you want to be responsible for electing our first muslim president 7 years after 9/11. What do you think would signal a bigger defeat for America…surrendering in iraq or electing the muslim manchurian candidate B. Hussein Osama? With him you would get both..and a “bonus” of full scale socialism to boot.
HaraldHardrada on January 8, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Yes. See the second paragraph of my post. None of them have good histories on immigration. Of all of them, Rudy’s policy decisions in the past can be rationalized better than the rest.
tommylotto on January 8, 2008 at 3:12 PM
I rate as follows with Fred being the far better than the rest.
1. Thompson
2. Romney
3. Giuliani
4. Huckabee
5. McCain
However, ranking 3-5 really deserve no trust on the issue of immigration.
azcop on January 8, 2008 at 3:12 PM
Jaw hits the floor.
Dude!
wccawa on January 8, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Fred needs to have rallies in South Carolina, not just a bus tour.
frode on January 8, 2008 at 3:14 PM
I rate it:
Romney
Thompson
McCain
Guiliani
Huckabee
Romney has the complete package as a candidate. He has a strong organization, good debating skills, immense integrity, no skeletons in his closet, and a truly conservative conversion and message.
Thompson comes in second because he’s thoroughly incompetent at running a campaign and would be steamrolled by Hillary and Barack who want it more and have either the dirtiest, slimiest machine going or a Messianic message that can’t be attacked through Fred’s only defense mechanism: sarcasm.
Now, for the crap chute.
McCain will conduct the WOT effectively and is pro-life. He will nominate strict constructivist judges.
Guiliani is McCain without the pro-life and with more skeletons in his closet than King Tut. I find his positions on the Catholic Church being more inclusive of sin rather than sinners a moral affront.
Huckabee, however, is a religious demagogue who would be piling on anti-Catholic rhetoric if his biggest obstacle was a Catholic. He may be pro-life and pro-family, but he’s an ethics-free squish with the same knowledge of the American judicial system that he has of foreign policy. Huckabee would be a horrific disaster for the Republican Party and conservatives everywhere.
BKennedy on January 8, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Admittedly, Fred hasn’t had executive experience to have the chance to screw up immigration enforcement. The others have. Fred will show them what the people really want, enforcement of law.
frode on January 8, 2008 at 3:16 PM
In plain terms: Continued Fred support=Huckabee/McCain nomination
Fred support moving to Romney=Romney vs. Giuliani showdown
Your choice.
Patriot33 on January 8, 2008 at 3:17 PM
From WCCAWA reference at Jan 8 at 2:12 PM
I agree, and this article set the right tone for convincing those evangelicals who may be picking Huck only because he is a “Christian Leader” to reconsider. Calling them “religious crackpots”, or wishing for their “rapture” so they get out of politics, and demeaning their faith just because you don’t agree, will not win any support. And if Hucks rise shows anything, it shows Reps will not win without the evangelicals. And evangelicals better learn that they wont get anywhere by alienating the non-evangelicals.
Whats wrong with “literal” when it was obviously meant to be “literal” by the author. If the constitution reads “Congress shall make no law…” then that is literal. It stands until amended, and not open to interpretation.
I dont follow the “abortions will happen, legal or otherwise” logic to drop it as a policy issue, otherwise that logic can be applied to everything. “Murders will happen, legal or otherwise”, “Border crossings will happen, legal or otherwise”, etc. Keep in mind, to those who are against unfettered abortions, it is the killing of innocent babies. How can someone honestly say that issue is less important than, say, tax-cuts.
AverageJoe on January 8, 2008 at 3:19 PM
You don’t get it. Immigration is a federal responsibility. Fred was the fed. He was in the Senate and was in a position to do something. Mayors and governors have no power to control immigration. They are the victims of the fed’s failures — McCain and Fred’s failures. If Fred was such a tough borders kinda guy, point to something in his Senate history that support that rhetoric. He was buddy buddy with Spencer Abraham voting for all his open boarder proposals. Fred = Fake on immigration.
tommylotto on January 8, 2008 at 3:25 PM
You are correct. That’s what so many do not understand about evangelicals. For evangelicals, abortion is the preeminent life-and-death issue. I happen to see our continued existence as a free non-burka wearing people as an equally important life-and-death issue.
flyfisher on January 8, 2008 at 3:27 PM
McCain will never get my vote. I’ll vote Libertarian before I’ll give him my vote.
McCain is the MSM (sic) choice because he’s almost as liberal as he is. If Fred throws his support behind him, I’ll be very disappointed in Fred, as he should KNOW that McCain is not a Conservative.
As usual, AP, you seem to be very anti Fred and you seem very pro-McCain. I, on the other hand, want a real conservative.
Fuzzball on January 8, 2008 at 3:34 PM
McCain will never get my vote. I’ll vote Libertarian before I’ll give him my vote.
Fuzzball on January 8, 2008 at 3:34 PM
azcop on January 8, 2008 at 3:45 PM
AP does not support McCain or hate Thompson or love Romney or whatever.
AP is an equal opportunity cynic. If a candidate does something dumb he makes a post. If a candidate does something exceptionally smart he makes a post.
You see, AP is actually a robot. An intelligent news-sensing robot left in a New York Basement. He believes only in The Matrix.
BKennedy on January 8, 2008 at 3:47 PM
I agree, and it’s depressing me.
Jezla on January 8, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Sublog–I am big believe in words matching actions and vice versa. Those would say one thing and do another are opportunists who are so obessed with being right on a topic that they cover all their bases.
For example, someone saying I would vote for so-and-so but I don’t think he can win so I will just saying snarky things about him…
That way, if said candidate loses, the snark is right. If the candidate happens to win, the snark can say, “well I supported him”.
Words. Actions. The relationship between them = important.
Montana on January 8, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Like someone else said above, if Fred isn’t in the race come Feb 5 (for me in California) I’m writing him in. It’s as simple as that. I either want to see Fred continue to be a voice in politics or someone else take up the banner of detailed principles he’s put forth because this party is SADLY lacking knowledge of what we really should be standing for as conservatives. We’re almost becoming as rudderless at our core values as the liberals, who have none except to oppose the GOP. Isn’t that starting to sound a little familiar from our own camp?
CTDeLude on January 8, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Ahhhhhhhhhh. That explains alot.
AverageJoe on January 8, 2008 at 4:11 PM
The real question is when will Romney drop out?
Romney’s strategy was always win Iowa and NH and now that this is not going to happen then Romney is just sticking around because he has a lot of money sucking all the air out of the room. Meanwhile the Reagan conservatives like most of the conservative blogosphere pray that their candidate can survive until Romney or McVain drop out.
Bill C on January 8, 2008 at 4:14 PM
So Fred is a friend with someone who was weak on immigration so therefore he is weak on immigration? Guilt by association? How about Romney donating to planned parenthood. That is some real association to be guilty about.
Bill C on January 8, 2008 at 4:17 PM
If Fred does drop out there is a good chance he won’t support anyone.
Rose on January 8, 2008 at 4:20 PM
And my Choices are Huckabee or McCain?
So, stabbed in eyes and ears with a hot poker, or slowly disemboweled with a rusty spoon? So hard to choose.
On one hand, you have the Huckster, who believes that the people really want higher taxes, more spending, and nanny-state Government.
Ont he other hand, you have the man who takes an Oath to defend the Constitution, before stating:
Interesting that this was his choice. His whim over both his oath, and the First Amendment. Heck, he even gives the First Amendment “air quotes” to denigrate it… nice. I’m going to have some trouble mustering support for him either.
Can I pick Obama?
gekkobear on January 8, 2008 at 4:21 PM
I didn’t say it should be dropped as a policy issue. But, it shouldn’t be used to elect someone like Huck. National security, immigration, and fiscal issues are more likely to sink this country faster than the abortion issue. As regards the literal translation thing, I doubt the founding fathers were able to peer into the future and include biowarfare, chemical warfare, nuclear weapons etc, when they wrote the Bill of Rights. I try to take that into consideration when discussing what I think they really meant.
a capella on January 8, 2008 at 4:23 PM
Well said ya’ll.
Ex-tex on January 8, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Bob Krumm says Fred has a very solid lead in upstate South Carolina, over Huckabee and McCain
He goes on to say that usually, that part of SC is a bellwether for the rest of the state.
frode on January 8, 2008 at 4:48 PM
AP, are you trying to tell me that I should vote for Mitt so that McCain or Huckster don’t win? PLEASE!!! If conservative GOPers after rejecting McCain back in 2000 for Bush, and who mostly didn’t like Bush’s Meiers, prescription drug benefits, Kennedy No Child Left Behind, and Shamnesty mistakes, wanna turn around and vote for the likes of McCain who was rejected because of his liberal leanings, I say let them. You want the Leader of the Gang of 13 running the country, go ahead vote for him. Personally, what happens in Iowa and NH mean nothing to me. They are traditionally liberal states and don’t speak to my values. And for Huckster, he’ll get creamed in the end anyway so I’m not worried about that.
My take is this: I’d rather vote for a liberal like Hillary or Obama, who will enact liberal stupid bills and ideas, and have them get blamed for those very same ideas than vote for a RINO Republican who will enact liberal stupid bills but have Republicans get slammed for them. I’m sick of all this incrementalism. Let the Democrats do what they say they’re gonna do behind closed doors in the light of day. Let them get called on it. The ground swell towards conservatism will be more than anything we experienced between Carter v. Reagan.
Nice try, but NEXT….
Sultry Beauty on January 8, 2008 at 5:08 PM
The Bilderberg Group and Trilateral Commission, working in conjunction with the International Zionist Conspiracy, have been using Fred as a secret weapon to keep Ron Paul from being elected.
I really don’t see how that slipped by you all.
Alalazoo on January 8, 2008 at 5:09 PM
I’m hoping that with Fred preparing to spend a lot of time in SC, the voters of SC wake up and realize how good Fred is. Fred has committed himself to campaign in SC so I’m sure his profile will be high. Heck, he was on O’Reilly just last night so his profile is already a bit higher (and then there’s Rush saying positive things about him just yesterday as well).
I’m hoping that Fred will run contrast ads in SC, just put the facts out there. My favorite ad of Fred’s was the one where he put together all the video clips of past interviews and speeches of his rivals to show what hypocrites they are; that should run again.
-Aslan’s Girl
Aslans Girl on January 8, 2008 at 5:12 PM
You’ve spilled the secret. The Black Helocopters are on their way. Don’t worry; the Mossad officers will make it look like an accident.
Hollowpoint on January 8, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Since I’m new here, and since it might not be apparent (because Ron Paul’s supporters really are that loony), I’d like to state for the record that I was just kidding in my previous comment.
Greetings from The Jawa Report.
Alalazoo on January 8, 2008 at 5:18 PM
My sentiments exactly! I’m in CA too. The only candidate that I can vote for is Thompson. If he’s not there, I’ll write him in. If he’s not there in the General, I’ll vote Democrat. I’m not having the GOP blamed for Universal Healthcare which is next on the Agenda. If don’t think that Mitt, Rudy, John, Huckster, and the like won’t give into it after being brow-beat by an almost certain majority Democrat Congress, then you need to call Dorothy because you’re living in OZ.
Sultry Beauty on January 8, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Well said.
By the way, have I asked you to marry me yet?
Hollowpoint on January 8, 2008 at 5:19 PM
Redneck Hippie’s bottom line for today:
“Fred Thompson is the Anti-Huck.”
–Rush Limbaugh
PS - To Fredstates- Make me up a coupla dozen tees, plees.
redneck hippie on January 8, 2008 at 5:25 PM
Now, why didn’t I realize that???? Thanks BKennedy!!
Fuzzball on January 8, 2008 at 5:43 PM
flyfisher on January 8, 2008 at 12:05 PM
I am not against Huckabee. Huckabee is the strongest on energy independence(Giuliani is close second). With me the #1 issue is winning the global war on terror and energy independence is our most powerful weapon in that war.
If america becomes energy independent the muslim oil cartel,russia and venezuela will go bankrupt, their economies will collapse and they will no longer be real threats.
Obviously the military component is important also but in reality U.S. energy independence is our most powerful weapon!
Defeatist Fred lost all support from me with his “America will never become energy independent in ten years” talk! Time for Fred to drop out..Ron Paul is even beating him in many polls.
HaraldHardrada on January 8, 2008 at 5:59 PM
Scary troll… I have my eyes on you. I’m bracing myself for some racist rant.
Sultry Beauty on January 8, 2008 at 6:19 PM
So, the Mittbots are back to their tricks again- dropping the false rumors, trying to depress Fredheads. Im surprised that Michelle and Allah have fallen for the same crap that Politco did. Sure, it’s not been a flawless campaign, but hey, we didn’t pay $248 dollars a vote in Iowa, either.
Im not surprised. Mitt’s credibility is highly suspect, and so are the tactics of his campaign. It’s no wonder why he has the highest negatives out of the Republican field.
Here’s a note for Mitt’s supporters- he is a general election loser. He would not nearly be as strong as Fred is in the south. He is a Northeast Liberal Republican whose conversion to conservatism has taken place in the last election cycle. Factor that in with the fact that he now likes Healthcare mandates, and he won’t actually advocate for a bold CHANGE with social security- it sounds like he’s more representative of the status quo which he takes great pains to separate himself from.
Mitt loves to talk about how we need an “outsider” to “change” Washington. No, Governor Romney, you are mistaken. We need an authentic conservative, from whereever that person may come from. You just are not it. Go back to Michigan, develop your conservative bona fides in a state that desparately needs them, and come back in 8 years when you actually have a conservative resume to run on. As the old saying goes- if you didn’t grow it, you can’t sell it.
yankeegator on January 8, 2008 at 7:00 PM
Scary troll… I have my eyes on you. I’m bracing myself for some racist rant.
Sultry Beauty on January 8, 2008 at 6:19 PM
That’s a typical liberal charge….calling anyone who disagrees with you a rascist.
We may not have the same candidate but in the end we will both vote for the same one…whether it is your candidate or mine. Unless of course your candidate is a democrat.
Next time try debating me instead of calling me a rascist troll. Fair?
HaraldHardrada on January 8, 2008 at 7:19 PM
I don’t care who his friends are. I do care that he gives his vote to friends for an open border agenda. Plus, isn’t Abraham still a big muckity muck in Fred’s campaign?
tommylotto on January 8, 2008 at 8:01 PM
AP, latest sunspots affecting your I-phone? You seam a little upset about Fred …NOT…dropping out after Iowooooaa. I may be a newbee to this site but I’ve been an observer for a long time. You seam to be a provocateur or a closet lib peaking through slates, (sic). Where do you really stand? You see ,I don’t view tapping the keyboard as a sport . I’m here to ,ultimately, let all of you know the real DANGER we are in. Politics this cycle is outdated. Wooha, what does that mean? I know YOU know what I mean, as does MM. We are so close to acts by OTHERS, that……Katrina…a rain storm in August in Kansas, if we don’t get back to the core values that this country was founded on, we ARE doomed. D__n….. Thomson/Hunter08 The clear choice.
jerrytbg on January 8, 2008 at 8:31 PM
I’m a FredHead but if it comes down to Huckabee or McCain, I’ve got to side with the Maverick. Immigration isn’t my issue but for all of you here that are very hard core on it, Fred is your best bet (c’mon look at the other guys? Who’s even close to MM’s position but The Fred?)
bopone on January 8, 2008 at 8:32 PM
McCain is worse than Huck. Huck is willing to pander on Amnesty, and McCain has an obsession with passing it. 100% certain death is worse than 50% certain death, unless you’re suicidal.
Igor R. on January 8, 2008 at 9:44 PM
It wasn’t a disagreement I was talking about and there is nothing you have said I wish to debate. It was merely this particular gem:
That’s some talk I’m not particularly fond of around here. It gives the Kos Kids something to hang their hats on. I don’t like Obama’s politics, that’s enough to not want him elected. We don’t have to go down this road. We have enough religious bigotry to deal with from the lot of GOP primary contenders to start adding comments like that into the mix. You start talking like that and I get a little dodgey, especially after open registration. Like I said, I start preparing myself for AP to slice like a hammer.
Sultry Beauty on January 8, 2008 at 11:29 PM
someone needs to take the trash out. Obama is not a muslim.
James on January 8, 2008 at 11:46 PM
He’s not a Muslim, he just wants to submit to the Muslims. No thanks.
tommylotto on January 9, 2008 at 12:57 AM
Romney has…immense integrity
You’re kidding, right?
Centerfire on January 9, 2008 at 3:09 AM
“That’s some talk I’m not particularly fond of around here”.
Sultry Beauty on January 8, 2008 at 11:29 PM
The “Kos kids” already know that Obama is a muslim…..Hillary Clinton’s folks have been breaking that news for quite awhile already!
HaraldHardrada on January 9, 2008 at 5:24 AM
No, you came in with name recognition and poll numbers in the 20’s, then proceeded to continually screw up and shoot for a third in which you barely edged out McVain.
Maybe “What’s the law?” Fred can explain why he isn’t on the Delaware ballot. He failed to get the signatures of 500 registered Republicans. Fredheads whine that he got 500 signatures, but from reports he got them in 10 minutes before the deadline, and nobody on his campaign bothered to check the rules for ballot entry.
That’s certainly the kind of true leadership and competence I want in a president. If he wants to do the things only a president can do, why doesn’t he start doing the things ordinary Americans and all his campaign opponents can do: read the rules for ballot entry, or hire someone who can.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 10:24 AM
I don’t get the logic AP. Folks who don’t like McCain will all be voting for Huckabee unless Fred is there to siphon them off. Fred may take votes from McCain as well, but the chance of an outright McCain loss increase absent Fred’s participation. The alternatives: a three way impasse or a Fred win are infinitely preferable all around IMO.
JM Hanes on January 9, 2008 at 9:10 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]