Huckabee sounds like a democrat on Bush, Iraq

Hey, it's a free country, and Huckabee can think and say whatever he wants to.  But, if you want to elect a democrat to the White House, why not just go all the way and elect an actual democrat instead of a RINO who talks like one?

Comments

[OregonGuy]

Write-in Bob Packwood for US Senate.

[Mike Clark]

Gully.

Go back a couple months and look at this:

http://gullyborg.typepad.com/weblog_archive/2007/10/as-far-as-im-co.html#comments

This is were I mentioned that I thought Huckabee was the dark horse. I'm still for a Fred/Rudy ticket, but at this point I don't know how you stop Huckabee from being our nominee.

With a week to go before no one cares much about this stuff during Christmas and New Years and then BAM it's Iowa time. Huckabee wins. Finishes top 2 in NH and then carries SC by a huge margin.

Interested to know how you would stop that momentum if you were in charge of Fred's campaign.

[Gullyborg]

Howard Dean was in first place this time four years ago.

A lot can happen in a few days. Also, there is usually a big difference between polling and reality.

Polls only connect to people who are willing to talk on a landline phone. That used to be the norm, but times and technology have changed and polling services still have yet to adapt. I think the flaws in polling are likely to bias them in favor of a less sophisticated demographic.

Also, Iowa is a caucus state and second-choice candidates get votes. Fred is the second choice of more voters than any other candidate. Huck is hardly anyone's second choice.

Fred can do much better in the actual voting than the talking head experts think he can do.

I'm not saying he WILL, but that he CAN.

If Fred does "surprisingly" well, even a Huckabee win becomes irrelevant. But if Huckabee, after all this build up, isn't a dominating winner, he "loses."

Either way, Romney is hurt, and as Romney loses support, it won't go to Huckabee. It won't necessarily go to Fred, either, as some will go to McCain and some to Giuliani. But casual Romney supporters who bail now probably won't be attracted to Huckabee.

If, after SC, the field has narrowed down to three candidates, then everything leading up to SC becomes meaningless. No one is going to win the early states by majority margins. There are eight candidates, and the big dogs will be in the 20s.

The also rans will drop out, and their support could go anywhere. The candidates with the best national organizations and the best national support will be the most likely to pick up stray support.

It could very well end up being Giuliani, Thompson, and Huckabee continuing past SC. In that scenario, I think Huckabee doesn't fare as well as he does when Romney and McCain are diluting his opposition.

This happened to Bill Clinton, you know... he didn't do well in either Iowa or NH, but by SC the field had narrowed significantly and was the recipient of many of the also-rans' support.

Also, the slams on Huck are only just starting to reach the voters. Just this morning on Rush, he was critical of Huck's attack on Bush's foreign policy. That will reach a large audience, made "primarily" of the sort of people who vote in GOP primaries. Ann Coulter has joined in attacking Huck on FOX News. I haven't heard Michael Savage lately, but I can't imagine him saying anything positive about Huckabee on his show.

Huck might be able to pull together enough supporters to dominate an early primary with seven opponents. But he will have a MUCH harder time keeping it together when he needs to maintain enough support to win a 2 or 3 man race and after the conservative punditry has really had a chance to lambast him and his liberal ways.

I say keep supporting the man you think is the best to lead the country, and don't listen to anyone telling you someone else is "going" to win.