Rich Lowry goes there: Huckabee for VP?
posted at 11:20 am on August 26, 2008 by Allahpundit
Not the first time Lowry’s blown this little bubble, do note. And in both cases he’s punctuated his thought with words to the effect of, “Too bad he’s so awful on economics and national security and pretty much everything else.” Yeah, too bad.
But wouldn’t Huckabee make a lot of sense given the things we’ve learned the last two weeks? 1) McCain might have a “wealth problem,” and certainly Democrats are going to try to hit his wealth for all its worth in their play for working-class voters; Huckabee doesn’t have a problem on this front, and has lots of working-class cred. 2) The pro-choice trial balloon hasn’t been well received, and it’s clear that a pro-choice nominee would create a major disruption; Huckabee is pro-life. 3) Obama picked Biden who is going to a vivid presence (for better or worse) on the stump and could be formidable in debate; Huckabee is a great campaigner and might be just the guy to puncture Biden in a debate. 4) (This is a less important point.) The McCain folks have made a huge deal about differences between Obama and Biden during the primaries; McCain and Huckabee didn’t have much in the way of differences and went out of their way to praise each other.
The only one that’s persuasive is number three, and really, how important will the VP debate be? Huck’s blue-collar-ness won’t get McCain off the hook for his wealth, and needless to say, there are other pro-life candidates available who are blessedly unblemished by an anti-McCain record — the current frontrunner notably excepted. In fact, almost everything here applies as well to Pawlenty as it does to Huckabee. The big difference (as Lowry later acknowledges) is media savvy — worth $125 million in Huck’s case according to one estimate, remember — but Pawlenty can deliver a soundbite when needed. On the prospects of facing off against Barry O’s windbag of a VP: “They’re going to have to extend the length of the debate to two or three hours.” And of course, unlike Huck, Pawlenty could flip his home state.
Isn’t the real problem with Huckabee that a lot of conservatives simply loathe him? He and Mitt are similar in that regard, ironically, although of course there’s practically no overlap between one group of haters and the other. In fact, Jonathan Adler’s already threatening at the Corner to walk the plank if the Lowry plan is put in play. Exit question: Gosh, I wonder how the Hot Air faithful will greet this idea. Huckamania?
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 3 4 Next »
Your username links to an anti-Romney site. Throw stones much?
Vashta.Nerada on August 26, 2008 at 11:46 AM
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!
I will not vote for Huckabee
I will not vote Mr. Lowry
Will you vote for him in a box
Will you vote for him with a fox
Not in a box
Not with a fox
I will not vote for Huckabee
I will not vote Mr. Lowry
DWSC on August 26, 2008 at 11:46 AM
Once again, Rich Lowry leaves the reader wondering how he ever got his job at National Review. He’s about as bright as Bill Buckley’s socks.
Jaibones on August 26, 2008 at 11:47 AM
At least we don’t sound shrill (like Hillary) or go ape (like Dean)….
upinak on August 26, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Wow. It only took 20 minutes or so to reach over 100 comments.
Solid gold.
Slublog on August 26, 2008 at 11:47 AM
SaintOlaf on August 26, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Saint Olaf,
Got a cite for the polling numbers, please?
Mew
acat on August 26, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Huck the schmuck, GFY
(no, Complete7; I won’t vote for McCain/Huck)
urbancenturion on August 26, 2008 at 11:48 AM
over-dramatic much?
Basing your entire decision on who to vote for PRESIDENT is dependent on who the second fiddle is like deciding to buy a car based on how nice the bumpers look.
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 11:48 AM
It was only a matter of time…heh
Huck Evangelicals hardly represent Christianity.
As steadfast a Catholic that I am, I don’t want religion mixed in with politics, pure and simple.
JetBoy on August 26, 2008 at 11:49 AM
Frankly I’m not suprised at all.
I’ve always thought that Romney was like the white version of Obama.
It makes sense that there would be some Rombots as well.
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Seems like you lefties keep forgetting that all those “yokels” in the “flyover states” do not agree with you whatsoever.
That is why the rasmussen and zogby polls show that Mike Huckabee HELPS Mccain more than anyother candidate and has the lowest boycott rate of all VP candidates.
SaintOlaf on August 26, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Another of Rich Lowry’s multiple confirmations of douchebaggery.
ashleymatt on August 26, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Awesome. I love Dr. Suess.
http://thepajamapundit.com/
thePajamaPundit on August 26, 2008 at 11:50 AM
I’ve yet to see any reason on earth I’d pull the lever for Huck. Even Obama would be better for me in my situation.
There’s over 6 million Mormons in the United States. Look at how Huck has treated Romney. Look at Hucks supporters fervent Mormon bashing.
What, exactly, should Mormons expect from Huck being in position of power? Obama would screw everyone over, that’s true. How do I know Huck wouldn’t target Mormons specifically, and be vindictive about it? Is there any evidence Huck wouldn’t target people like me, outside of “Oh, come on–Huck wouldn’t do that!” Well, Huck wouldn’t still be bitter against one guy this late in the campaign, either, would he?
Huck got 2 percent in Utah. The lowest anywhere. If Huck is on the ticket, Utah might flip. Certainly all the LDS people in Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, and Colorado wouldn’t pull that lever. Huck probably loses the mountain west.
No, no, no to Huckabee. I really don’t fancy hearing how evil my faith is for the next four years as an official government policy–and anyone who thinks Huck wouldn’t do that just hasn’t paid attention to him. Sorry, no thanks–why should I vote for someone who wants to persecute me?
Vanceone on August 26, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Bigotry? When did he say this?
Again, did you learn this by yourself firsthand, of somebody told you?
maynila on August 26, 2008 at 11:50 AM
A) Wealth problem? I suppose if you inherited millions from a Criminal family or some sort of European ‘Rothchilds’ type family that might be the case… but both Mrs. McCain and Mr. Romney got their money recently and legally.
B) How much of a chance is it that Lowry is just putting his name out there so the response to it inoculates us from McCain making this choice? Or even just teasing us like Allah loves to do…
Mr Michael on August 26, 2008 at 11:51 AM
BH – why is that a downside? The Democrats do not have this available as an issue in any way, shape or form. The Senate is littered with hundred-millionaire Democrats, and Hollywood’s list of the wealthiest is 99% Demorat.
Hell, business’s list of the wealthiest is littered with liberal nitwits. Not an issue.
Jaibones on August 26, 2008 at 11:51 AM
sulla on August 26, 2008 at 11:43 AM
That’s certainly how it seems, this whole hatred of Huckabee is bordering on the Orwellian.
I agree about Huck’s blemished record, to an extent. But why is Romney considered a conservative savior? Human Events in 2005 called him one of the top 10 RINOs. Certainly if you measure a man by his online faithful Romney is a conservative. But his track record?
And I love posts that talk about Huck’s weakness among non-evangelicals, as if Evangelicals weren’t a huge swath of the Republican base, responsible for GOTV efforts and other volunteer work. In an election where most folks aren’t paying enough attention, and the Democrats are running “that one guy who talks about God a lot”, this is not the time to write off Evangelicals, if winning is the goal.
bcm4134 on August 26, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Yeah, but if McCain has a heart attack while spewing at Putin, the last thing we need is a theocracy war with half of the planet (especially with Huck’s uncontrollable mouth).
Jealous? ;-)
Darnell Clayton on August 26, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Isn’t everything Huck does, Dr Suess-ish? Also, since it is known that the man who created the books hated kids… Makes you wonder about those in other “professions”.
upinak on August 26, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Dang straight.
YAAARGH!!
sulla on August 26, 2008 at 11:52 AM
How much of the abortion debate do you think comes about because of religion?
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Catnip. Profitable catnip. Allah lures Saint Olaf in and just puts it on cruise control. Good for him!! I love capitalism.
a capella on August 26, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Ok Romney got 95%+ of Utah’s vote. Is that supposed to be shocking?
SaintOlaf on August 26, 2008 at 11:52 AM
There is no way in the world I would vote for any ticket with the Huckster on it.
I am not basing my entire decision on the VP pick, but when it was difficult for me to support McCain in the first place, a Huck VP pick will send me flying away. I will write in Ron Paul on Nov. 4th.
bopbottle on August 26, 2008 at 11:53 AM
There is that Pirate thing again!
upinak on August 26, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Yeah, what did he say? BTW, don’t those Mormons think lucifer and jesus are brothers? /s
phronesis on August 26, 2008 at 11:53 AM
I couldn’t think of a better way to split social cons from fiscal and defense cons than to select Huckabee.
SWLiP on August 26, 2008 at 11:53 AM
He’s a nice man with a good heart but politically he’s not just wrong… he’s wrong-headed.
No thanx.
lillyanneinc on August 26, 2008 at 11:53 AM
I hope McCain’s team is reading this thread…
Dariaanne on August 26, 2008 at 11:54 AM
Never Huck. NEVER.
hanzblinx on August 26, 2008 at 11:54 AM
+1
Don’t forget that Huck would likely cost McCain Colorado and probably Nevada as well.
Vashta.Nerada on August 26, 2008 at 11:55 AM
“This is the funniest thing I have ever seen. Just yesterday all the Romney supporters were screaming at Huckabee supporters that they need to suck it up and vote Romney for the good of the party. What happened to that theory? Does it only work when it is in your favor? Sounds like a spoiled 6 year old not getting his/her way. That would explain all the name calling and insults as well.”
jparks1972 on August 26, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Hey jparks…anyone else from your HucksArmy website you want to let us know about? I’d hate to have some your henchmen around here trying to pretend their impartial…
If Huck weren’t such a jealous, bitter fiscal RINO, maybe we’d go easier on him.
hot-heir on August 26, 2008 at 11:55 AM
You can call it “second fiddle,” but last I checked the VP is a very influential adviser to the President (with the only exception being Al Gore as Hillary pretty much side lined him).
Not to mention heading up the Senate as well.
Huckabee may attract hard core evangelicals, but he will offend virtually everyone else (independents, PUMA’s, minorities, business owners, Mormons in KEY swing states).
Darnell Clayton on August 26, 2008 at 11:56 AM
All I can say is, with me…pro-choice/pro-life debate has nothing to do with my religion. It has everything to do with basic human rights. We punish murderers, and I believe abortion is murder.
And that’s not based on any religious belief.
JetBoy on August 26, 2008 at 11:56 AM
Yes, I’m sure that’s exactly what will happen the minute Huck steps into the oval office.
and I’m sure Romney “I wept out of joy when I heard blacks were allowed into the LDS Church” and “I was for abortion before I was against it” has any less of a loudmouth ;)
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 11:56 AM
Look at this rasmussen poll.
Huckabee is viewed more favorable than any other vp with all americans and among republicans he and Romney are tied. So the question is who would really hurt McCain more, Romney or Huckabee. I think Huckabee will be able to talk economics with blue collar workers a lot better than Romney. And McCain wouldn’t lose those vital evangelicals who are trending Obama, and might jump ship with Romney.
Complete7 on August 26, 2008 at 11:57 AM
The thing is, although the vast majority of Huckabee’s voters were evangelical, a majority of evangelicals did not vote for Huckabee. Many saw right through him early on.
sulla on August 26, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Yes, St. Olaf: Huck means kissing the mountain west goodbye.
I know you don’t care, since the Huckabee supporters have this delusion that All evangelicals everywhere want nothing more than to vote for Huck–but it’s not so.
Huck is a televangelist–a hypocritical televangelist. Plain and simple. He is no Christian in practice, only in name. And most evangelicals are bright enough to see that.
But please, St. Olaf–tell me why I should vote for him. Can you give me any reasons why I in particular should vote for a McCain Huck ticket? And just so you know–Utah is only about 60 % Mormon. So that other 35 % of his vote came from non mormons, too. Only two percent voted for Huck.
Vanceone on August 26, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Ok children,
somebody won the primaries,
cry if you must, but respect the results.
maynila on August 26, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Interesting poll. Both Huckabee and Romney seem to violate the first rule of veep selection – “first, do no harm.” They both have high unfavorable ratings and present risk to the ticket. I think McCain’s polling is likely showing the same thing, which is why my gut says it won’t be either of them.
Slublog on August 26, 2008 at 12:00 PM
if the huckster get the nob, that would establish a Mc strategy to lose his right support to gain from the far right. that’s the flip of a Mitt pick.
this stuff is hard.
jimmer on August 26, 2008 at 12:01 PM
You might be surprised, “Saint” Olaf, to find that most Christians do not feel the need to beat others about the head and shoulders with their version of their religion.
I would rather converse with a reasonable atheist any day than to have to put up with a self-righteous so-called Christian who is convinced that his way is the only way.
If my faith is not of the variety that you profess, this does not make you superior or even right. Most people can differentiate between sincere heartfelt belief, and dogmatic, phlegmatic bigotry disguised as faith.
Your worldview is your business, but you will find that life is much better when you allow for the fact that you may not know everything, and in fact know next to nothing about God and the Universe, just like everybody else.
hillbillyjim on August 26, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Speaking of polls, here’s the latest from Zogby:
“Republican Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who also-ran in the GOP presidential primary this spring, is far and away the favorite to be picked as the veep candidate on the Republican side. Almost half – 47%- said they would prefer him as McCain’s running mate, including 49% of Republicans. No other candidate even reached double digits – Sen. Joe Lieberman was second at 7%, while Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty was third with 5%.”
JA on August 26, 2008 at 12:01 PM
SaintOlaf on August 26, 2008 at 11:40 AM
SaintOlaf on August 26, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Saint Olaf,
I do not accept your numbers as valid. Please post cites.
Huck *lost*. Worse, he lost *BADLY* outside the populist-belt – Iowa, Arkansas, Missouri, et al.
Had Iowa not been first up, Huckabee would have been, well, the Vilsack of the Republicans – a guy popular in the central U.S. because of some shared views with that part of the country – but not able to sell the coasts.
He did *NOT* make inroads in the Carolinas, he did *NOT* do well in the northern plains, and he hurts McCains’ attempts to Maverick Cali into a competition that Obama would have to spend spend spend to keep.
I don’t much care for Mitt either – I think he’s a flip-flop away from being a Democrat – but he doesn’t detract in the way Huck does.
Mew
acat on August 26, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Not a Problem, if Hucks on the ticket, McCain will lose in a landslide.
End of story.
ChrisM on August 26, 2008 at 12:02 PM
And 78% won’t vote for a McCain/Romney ticket? Are you enriching uranimum too? I’d love to be in the Bible belt when intolerant people like you have to decide between a black candidate, and one who has a Mormon VP. I think heads will explode.
hot-heir on August 26, 2008 at 12:02 PM
I think if everyone will recall that 2004 was won by socially conservative wedge issues. Let’s not put too much of an emphasis on Mormons in key swing states, I’m pretty sure there are just as many and probably more evangelicals in those key states. as for Huck offending minorities, I refer you to my “Romney wept” post. I also remind you that he was under fire for not having any blacks on his staff.
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Please ignore Olaf. He is a Huck-Trolling-cyber-snot.
upinak on August 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
There are two VP picks that would obviously cost McCain the election – Libermann and Huckabee.
Vashta.Nerada on August 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Really. Huckabee might have a good career in front of him as a pundit and TV personality but since McCain’s big theme is “Ready to Lead” there’s no way he’ll pick likable-yet-wacky Huckabee.
He may as well pick Dick Morris.
Gilda on August 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
You gotta get over here more, Slu…
As I said, I totally agree with you on McCain’s choices. Still sayin’ it’s Crist, but with all the pro-Palin and pro-Jindal sentiment on HA lately, and it just doesn’t seem like either of those are any match for a McCain veep.
JetBoy on August 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Complete7 on August 26, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Poll is from July.
Huck does *NOT* bring in “evangelicals”. He brings in *populists*.
Huck could help if the election were going to be won in Arkansas. Otherwise, he’s a lead weight.
What part of “evangelicals are not a voting bloc” is unclear here?
Mew
acat on August 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
if McCain chooses Huck, I vote for myself!
ConservativePartyNow on August 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Do it and start practicing Hiel President Obama. I am willing to defile my morals enough to vote against Obama and Marxism, but even a wh*re has a limit.
ihasurnominashun on August 26, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Total Christian population in the US: (nearly 76.5% in 2001)
Total Mormon population in the US: (nearly 1.7% in 2001)
Towash on August 26, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Man, I think Allah wants an iPhone 3g. So he opened registration and then made a bunch of Huck posts. Coupled with the Dem convention…. he’ll be buying two!
Vanceone on August 26, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Interestingly enough the pollsters did not float Huck’s name and do everything they can to bury the many polls that clearly show Huck is the best choice…
SaintOlaf on August 26, 2008 at 12:06 PM
I live in the guys state and find him repulsive more so because he is supposed to be on our side.
This is a stupid stupid idea. Arkansas and the south will go republican anyway and that is the only possible thing he could help you with.
BTW putting a mormon on the ticket won’t cause Mcain to lose the south either. He could put Al Roker or Rachel maddow on the ticket and Mcain is still going to win the south.
First you have Kristol saying he thinks lieberman is a good vp choice and now this from Lowry.
They sound desprate or something. Grow some nads and pick a conservative.
kangjie on August 26, 2008 at 12:06 PM
No to Huckabee! Huckabee raised taxes in Arkansas, and let over 700 criminals out of jail on pardons, one of whom raped a woman in Missouri. McCain needs Missouri to win the election, and Huckabee as VP would give Democrats the chance to run Willie-Horton-in-reverse ads all over Missouri, and undermine McCain’s lower-taxes lower-spending campaign.
The McCain campaign has been using Hillary Clinton’s criticism of Obama effectively right now. But the Clintons know Arkansas and all of Huckabee’s dirty little secrets, which they would splash all over the airwaves if Huckabee gets the Veep nomination. Huckabee is a net negative!
Steve Z on August 26, 2008 at 12:06 PM
lol, look for an atheist vs. Christian thread soon.
Towash on August 26, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Which kind of puts the kabosh on the notion that “only Mormons” voted for him in the primaries, doesn’t it?
Marking Time on August 26, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Huckster?
Nevah, evah get my vote. He might as well choose an open borders, pro-amnesty, rabid pro-choice veep.
Huck is positively sick-making.
Cody1991 on August 26, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Ask a mormon then. Are they?
And if so, is that bigotry?
Seems like more of a PC problem to me.
maynila on August 26, 2008 at 12:09 PM
No.
It’s because of Huckabee and a sizeable number of gullible evangelicals that we don’t have a solid conservative candidate for president this year.
thareb on August 26, 2008 at 12:09 PM
I like Huckabee, Romney, or PALIN (the best one out of the bunch).
jencab on August 26, 2008 at 12:09 PM
I remember the same sort of pronouncements before Florida, when McCain was close to winning the nomination. Pure bluster. Believe me, McCain/Huckabee will have the same amount of republican support as Bush did in 04. After two months of McCain/Huckabee hammering Obama/Biden on everything from the economy and judges to war, you would have to be insane to pull the lever for Obama.
Complete7 on August 26, 2008 at 12:09 PM
We already know Huckster is in favor of ignoring state supreme court decisions if they don’t mesh with his religious beliefs. I sure want someone like that running the country if something happened to McCain. I assume the first thing he would do would be to establish a Committee of Virtue and Vice along with enforcers armed with large sticks.
a capella on August 26, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Those numbers lump all Christian denominations into one category. When pollsters break out the various faith groups, those who self-identify as evangelicals (a very large part of Huckabee’s base) comprise only 8% of the population. Those who classify themselves as born-again but not evangelical make up 35%.
Slublog on August 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Huck supports the human life amnendment
Huck supports the marriage amendment
Huck supports amending the constitution to eliminate the income tax
Huck supports teaching Intelligent Design in schools
What more do you want Vance?
Romney does not support ANY of those things.
SaintOlaf on August 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Lieutanant jparks, eh? From the Hotair thread at hucksarmy.com
“I have been on there pretty much all afternoon and evening. Those people are vicious. By the way, I am jparks1972 over there.”
_________________
Conservative Oasis
A place preserved from surrounding unpleasantness, aka Liberalism
http://conservativeoasis.blogspot.com/
Vicious? Oh come on now…we love a flogging every now and then. As long as you Huckies behave, you won’t have much of a problem.
hot-heir on August 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM
oh you mean like a guy who fires illegals to do his landscaping for the last 10 years?
or a guy who was “for abortion before he was against it?”
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM
Naa this is just a stirring of the pot. Finding of the trolls.
upinak on August 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM
That makes sense; I thought the number was way too high.
Towash on August 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM
Lover your NIC!
Towash on August 26, 2008 at 12:12 PM
I don’t SEE 2004 ANYWHERE around me. All the Calenders say 2008. GET out of the PAST and GROW UP!
upinak on August 26, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Tenth look at Fred!
hot-heir on August 26, 2008 at 12:13 PM
I say go ahead and put Hucky on the ticket. I would love to see Utah turn Blue for the first time in 60 years. It might wake up the GOP.
The question used to be “Who lost China?”
Now it would be “Who lost Utah?”
And by the way, Scented Loaf, you are a “ChINO” for sure.
trailboss on August 26, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Anybody with the nerve to issue ultimatums to John McCain saying “give me keynote OR ELSE” is a political terrorist in my book.
hanzblinx on August 26, 2008 at 12:13 PM
I always tend to trust Barna with polls or studies that measure faith. He’s cracked the code.
Slublog on August 26, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Did you steal this post from a Bush-bashing thread at some lety board circa 2003?
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Bahhahhahhaaaaaaaa! Busted! Wrong but yet funny as Huck!
upinak on August 26, 2008 at 12:14 PM
I used to read NRO daily. I quit when I realized the extent to which they held the average conservative voter in contempt. This suggestion just reinforces my beliefs about the stereotypes these people hold.
texette on August 26, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Alright Yellow…so where do rank in the HucksArmy hierarchy? Are you a private…sergeant or what?
hot-heir on August 26, 2008 at 12:15 PM
When has Huckabee attacked someone’s religion? I have read the “Jesus & Satan being brothers” thing, and the charge is technically correct – the LDS church believes they are, although to infer from this fact any sort of reverence or worship of Satan is wrong.
I was raised in an evangelical church and heard this also, believing it to be not just true, which it is, but also a fair characterisation, which it is not.
You cannot prove any sort of malicious sentiment from Huckabee in saying this, though, and I think beyond that one incident, there is little or no evidence to support a charge that Huckabee is intolerant or a bigot. The man apologized to Romney for it, and that should be the end. People who voted for each man in the primaries need to get over this – not call each other bigots, but also not accept bigotry and admit that the LDS church is not some towering institution of Satanism.
Whichever man helps us defeat the Dems is ok with me!
bcm4134 on August 26, 2008 at 12:15 PM
He picks Huckabee, and I stay home on November 4th. It’s that simple.
Huckabee is loser and a disgrace.
D2Boston on August 26, 2008 at 12:16 PM
upinak–probably so. Pretty clever, really.
Lessee. New Huckabites so far: Jparks, of course. YellowDawg. Dominian, I think it was?
Anyone I missed? New ones, of course–St. Olaf and apocalyps seem to be the last ones standing of the old guard.
St. Olaf–you mistake. Why should I, a Mormon, vote for Huck? Plenty of socially conservative Republicans who don’t hate Mormons out there. As for what I want, I’d like a guy who I don’t have a legitimate fear wants to persecute me because of my faith. Huck isn’t that guy. Huck is unacceptable because he hates my religion and sees nothing wrong with using governmental force to enforce what he thinks is the right religious standards. For someone he and his supporters think is a “cult” and “satanic”, that’s not exactly comforting.
In other words, how would you feel about voting for Madeline Murray O’Hair, I think it was, who is a militant atheist? Would you vote for a Republican ticket with her on it? I feel the same about Huck.
Vanceone on August 26, 2008 at 12:17 PM
+1 Put them both in the cabinet. Huck can run the faith based services thing and Romney can run Treasury. Of course I’m not sure they could attend meetings together…..
So, put Romney in the cabinet and help Huckabee find a job elsewhere. :-)
funky chicken on August 26, 2008 at 12:20 PM
What does that even mean? Are you saying that McCain getting the level of republican support bush received in 2004 would be a bad thing? And please don’t use caps it makes you sound crazy.
Complete7 on August 26, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Conservatives see through Huckabee. His nanny state proposals. His assailing populism rhetoric. His viciousness and pettiness against his opponents (Fred and Mitt). His viciousness when we has governor. He seems to be a very angry man when he does not get his way. He certainly was not a “uniter” when he was governor.
The only thing I did like about the Schuck was that he brought the FairTax out. But I still don’t think he understood every nuance of the system. He was using it as a gimmick to get himself an advantage over his rivals.
Also, Wayne Dumond (his version of Dukakis’ Willie Horton) and the $1 Mexican consulate. Those issues will not sit well with the base.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on August 26, 2008 at 12:21 PM
This 80-year old life-long Republican has a big collection of letters from McCain and the RNC begging for more money. They sit on the floor, collecting dust, awaiting for the announcement of McCain’s VP choice. I’ll pull the lever for my old law school class mate Ralphy Nader before I’ll vote for any ticket with Huck4aBuck on it. After viewing his history as Gov, this old man is NOT going to burden his 23 great and 6 (and growing) great grandchildren with the debts the Huckster would impose. No, not now, nor never!
ich dien on August 26, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Again, you want a Southern Baptist? Bob Riley is your man.
funky chicken on August 26, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Given McCain’s apparent interest in making a “maverick” selection … what do people know about Carly Fiorina’s positions on social issues?
The other “maverick”-type picks seem to be pro-choice (Lieberman, Ridge, Meg Whitman). But Fiorina has been quoted as saying, “Personally, I’m pro-life.” So, is she a maverick pick with whom social conservatives might be comfortable?
Aside from her describing herself as personally being prolife, does anybody know what she has said about specific issues and policies related to abortion, marriage, etc.?
Just curious.
(Personally, I think Pawlenty would be a wise selection. But since she might fit well with McCain’s approach of trying to appeal to disaffected Hillary supporters, I’d be interested in knowing more about Fiorina’s positions on the issues.)
BleedingHeartConservative on August 26, 2008 at 12:22 PM
I think the conservative movement is dead when we want a man responsible for Hillarycare running the treasury.
bcm4134 on August 26, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Bcm: it’s not just that one incident. Huck ran a slimy campaign while insisting he was as pure as the driven snow. His “I didn’t want to run this ad because I don’t run attack ads, but reporters, here it is anyway!” thing.
For anti-Mormonism, what else explains his hatred of Romney? He never cleaned anti-Mormon comments off his official website. He was a featured speaker when the Baptists went to Salt Lake to “convert the Mormons.” His “innocent” wonderings about Mormon doctrine. The guy is allegedly a trained theologian! To think that he needs to drop sly comments and “wonderings” like that to a reporter?
The evidence is pretty clear: he’s religiously bigoted. His entire campaign reeked of it, and he did the same thing to Brownback and with Catholicism.
Vanceone on August 26, 2008 at 12:23 PM
I actually just found out about that website ;) Looks like I’m a private.
So are we imitating dailykos now? Or is pointing out Romney’s faults going to get me the same treatment that the OBots gave me?
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Will. Not. Vote. For. Mike. Huckabee. EVER.
Say hello to President Obama.
rockmom on August 26, 2008 at 12:24 PM
He wouldn’t get that support if Huckabee were VP, seems pretty clear. Conservatives won’t accept him, and will vote third party or skip that line on the ballot.
Vashta.Nerada on August 26, 2008 at 12:24 PM
Here is my take in response to Lowry:
* Huckabee has the most executive experience running a state government out of all the candidates running for president on both the republican and democrat side.
* Huckabee won reelection twice in a democrat state. He only left due to term limits. This shows he can reach across the aisle to get things done. His approval rating in Arkansas is still 65%.
* He had 48% of the African American vote-which shows that he could reach out to the conservative African Americans who are appalled at Obama’s liberal social views.
**He appeals to blue collar workers and could bring in the Hillary democrats. This is a plus-Hillary would not campaign against McCain/Huckabee-she would want them to win so she could run again in 2012. She likes McCain as a fellow senator and Huckabee as a fellow Arkansan. So any dirt she has in her files on the two would stay closed and not handed over to the Obama Team.
* Huckabee could out debate Biden. He can do it in a way that does not turn off the voters-he would be charming, humorous, folksy, but get his zingers in.
* Huckabee can bring in the youth vote-those new republicans who are not sure they want to enter the party.
* Huckabee is likeable, which will help with McCain’s grumpy disposition.
* Huckabee knows how to campaign on a dime. He can stretch those public funding dollars just like he did against the money Romney/Giuliani had.
* Finally, Huckabee has thousands of unpaid volunteers ready to roll, blog, work the phones, canvass the streets, wave the signs, etc
The only reason he has not been given the first look is because the Washington elite and beltway insiders do not like him. But the heartland, everyday Americans do.
texasconserv on August 26, 2008 at 12:24 PM
again, had to keep checking the website to make sure it’s not dailykos.
anyone with an opinion against their annointed one is immediately slapped with a label and will be treated as that label.
sigh.
YellowDawg on August 26, 2008 at 12:24 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »