Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee’s been the hot candidate in the Republican race since he finished second in the Iowa GOP’s straw poll back in August.
Oh, there was a little time out for some chatter about Fred Thompson, but as he has fallen flat, the talk about Huckabee has resumed.
In recent days, that talk has escalated to a new level of buzz: Huckabee’s doing so well in Iowa, he just might be able to win the Iowa Republican caucuses.
Wow. Conventional wisdom dictates former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s going to win Iowa. Ever since that straw poll, the buzzmeisters have slotted Huckabee to take second or third. To suggest he’s going to win Iowa is taking it to a new level.
It makes Huckabee people wince. Romney’s had a juggernaut in Iowa for months. He’s spent millions, runs lots of TV commercials, has made a couple of hundred appearances in the state and has staff all over it, including those in a sprawling suburban office park.
Huckabee’s low-budget campaign is, well, the difference between Beacon Hill and a trailer park. He’s got only eight full-time staffers and runs his operation out of a low-rent storefront in downtown Des Moines. If homeless people went to caucuses, they’d have great access to Huckabee’s campaign.
Like Huckabee, Romney is fond of telling people he ran and won in a Democratic state. It’s also true Romney ran as a liberal on social issues such as gay rights and abortion. Had he taken the positions on those issues that he proclaims now, he never would have been elected in Massachusetts.
Huckabee, on the other hand, has been consistent, and GOP stalwarts are noticing that difference between the two men. Huckabee’s rallied enough social conservatives to force Sam Brownback out of the race.
If Huck were to win Iowa (Very far from happening, I don’t think it will), Romney is done…Fred’s southern Strategy will be moot as Huck will have all the Mo…Then comes NH…Where a surprise showing by Huck will put him in a one on one matchup with Rudy on Feb. 5th…
October 30th, 2007 at 8:49 am
Yepsen’s title for his article was:
Positive, Reagan-like spirit spurs Huckabee’s rise
I can see why you’d leave out that type of stick in the eye to the other candidates. Still optimism isn’t what you associate the other candidates with.
Rudy is the fear candidate (fear Hillary, terrorists).
Romney is the brain candidate (I’ll run America like Bain Capital).
McCain is the courage candidate (Straight talk on hard choices with honor).
Fred is the… other Southern candidate (Uh, I say, I say, now son what was I saying).
October 30th, 2007 at 8:53 am
Rett,
That is over blown to say if Romney looses Iowa he’s done. Would it hurt him? Yes. Mortally? I doubt it.
Also, Readers should note that Yepsen doesn’t even offer one substantive reason (a statistic, poll, leaders in Iowa lining up behind huckabee, etc.) why Huckabee would win. The only thing Yepsen offers is Huckabee is a nice speaker. Yet no evidence to show an ability to win.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:55 am
Consistent on social issues, but not fiscal.
if you think illegal immigration is good and raising taxes and using government to solve social problems, then yes, he had been consistent.
Even if he did win iowa. what does that do for him? it just helps him in his attempts to be a vice presidential nominee.
Huck is the only candidate I will not support if he gets the nod.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:57 am
funny econ grad. i like your category for Fred. ‘the southern candidate’
huck should be the ‘i make funny folksy one liners so much it gets annoying and on everybody’s nerves’ candidate
October 30th, 2007 at 8:58 am
i think its hilarious taht anybody is even saying the race is between huck and rudy.
talk about a stretch from the facts as they exist.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:01 am
I think this has become a two man Rudy-Romney race. Any positive momentum by any candidate other then Romney hurts him and helps Rudy. Thus Rudy and his fans will cheer anyone other then Romney. I think we should talk about each of the other 3(McHuckson) in the context of Romney spoilers and not as having a real chance of winning the whole thing or even having a Feb showdown with Rudy.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Rett, Huckabee’s dream of an upset in Iowa and or New Hampshire is just that, a dream. Can he make it close in Iowa, sure, but it’s an up hill battle. Check out the latest:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/29/romney.roll/index.html?section=cnn_latest
October 30th, 2007 at 9:16 am
Oh you guys…I don’t write these aritcles, I just post them…Write the editor if you think they are
idiotic…hahaha…And Jason, to say that He wouldn’t be mortally done is incorrect…Anyone who invests that kind of money in a state and loses…IS DONE…
October 30th, 2007 at 9:21 am
Rett,
Your correct, but when you post it people on the board will call you out on it, it’s not a personal attack at all.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:23 am
Mike Huckabee is an entirely consistent conservative? Good grief. Why is it that journalists seemingly make this off the cuff statement, without bothering to look at his record or past statements? How about him raising taxes to the tune of 500 million dollars, increasing spending by twice inflation, every single year? Where’s the conservative there? How about the “consistent”, when compared to his insistence that he’s a fiscal conservative now? How about his deeply worrying statements on immigration, including calling some conservatives racists on the issue? How is that conservative? Where does the “consistent” come from, when compared to his insistence that he’s for strict immigration enforcement now? What about his campaign manager admitting that they’d characterized Huckabee as a moderate during his Arkansas races? I haven’t even mentioned the areas where he’s been consistent, but decidedly not conservative. Trade, health care (supporting something more expansive then the just vetoed SCHIP bill while Arkansas’s governor), various populistic rhetorical thrusts. Yepsen makes the same mistake alot of people are making, and it’s a mistake that may well give Huckabee a fighting chance in this race: he assumes that a socially conservative Baptist minister must be genuinely conservative across the board.
Even if it were the case that Huckabee’s been “consistent”, it hardly seems enough to make Republicans back him. John McCain’s been rather consistent, but unfortunately he’s on the wrong side of too many issues conservatives care about (though he’s considerably more conservative then Huckabee is). People are saying such silly things about Huckabee, because they like him, and because they have a particular archetype of Southern Baptist Ministers in mind. That may well be enough for him to fool voters, but it certainly shouldn’t be enough for discerning readers to take seriously claims that Huckabee has been “an entirely consistent conservative”.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:33 am
I can see where losing Iowa would be a blow to Romney. It is a major part of his strategy.
But to turn that around, if Huckabee loses in Iowa, where does that leave him? It seems to me that winning Iowa is far more crucial to him than Romney. Romney could conceivably recover in New Hampshire, Michigan, and/or S.C. He has been investing heavily elsewhere, and has the organization to fall back on. But Iowa is all or nothing for Huckabee.
The only two candidates that would not hurt much if they lose Iowa are Giuliani and McCain. Neither has invested much there, preferring to put their time and effort elsewhere.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:49 am
MarK,
100% correct.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:50 am
“If Huck were to win Iowa (Very far from happening, I don’t think it will), Romney is done.â€
Well, Romney would still have New Hampshire, and if he can lose Iowa, then it’s possible he could win Nevada, South Carolina, Florida, and Michigan (though probably not all of them). But, I do agree, if Romney gets hit by a bus-he’s done.
October 30th, 2007 at 10:04 am
I liked Huckabee a lot as the little guy. He is superb on social issues, but as I get to know his record better, he comes off as way too soft, almost like a really liberal Jesus. He’s a “I’m my brother’s keeper” and “turn the other cheek” type social conservative, which is what I like to hear in church. The problem comes when people try to institutionalize such sentiments into government. It’s called liberalism. Conservatism on the other hand, is concerned about freedom, and personal accountability. Yes, I want to be like Jesus, but I don’t want to be forced to do it.
It’s odd, but the more I get to know Huckabee, the more I like Rudy. I don’t want a warm friendly president, just a competent one who will protect my freedoms and lower the influence and size of government. If Rudy was even a semi decent person, and if he wasn’t so entirely lacking creditability on judges, he may just be my choice in the primary. He’s a live and let live kind of guy, which I like.
I’ve already stated that Rudy is a no go for me in the primary because he fails to bring social conservatism to the table. Well, now Huckabee’s a non-starter for me too, because he fails to offer any degree of credibility on fiscal conservatism. Heck, McCain’s even looking good to me about now. How odd!
October 30th, 2007 at 10:24 am
“Where a surprise showing by Huck will put him in a one on one matchup with Rudy on Feb. 5th…”………… And then Rudy wins….. Well, I would prefer Mitt, but at least Rudy could beat Hillary where the Huckster would get slaughtered
October 30th, 2007 at 11:53 am
Yepson and his paper are not exactly unbiased observers. They are only slightly closer to our party’s positions than the New York Times. A puff piece like this for Huck should be looked upon like a puff piece on Rudy by The Grey Lady.
As Matthew points out, Yepson is inaccurate (or downright misleading, depending on how you take his intent) on Huck’s “consistent” conservatism. He’s also overstating the case on Romney’s liberal position on gay rights, but we’ve batted that one back and forth for months around here. It’s so ingrained in the mantra of the RomNots that no amount of facts will change their minds on it.
I agree with a number of the points made by posters. I think if Romney were to actually lose Iowa, the media storm will suck most, if not all, of the life out of his run. Could he recover? Yes, but not likely, short of a complete tanking by Rudy. On the other hand, with all the puffing Huck is getting lately, unless he can caucus within single digits of Romney he’s done as well. Yes indeed, the expectation game goes both ways.
October 30th, 2007 at 11:55 am
Go Johnny Mac
October 30th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Huckabee’s unifying qualities will win the day in a nation whose citizens yearn for…well…unity.
Get on board…Huck’s the only viable candidate in the GOP race.
October 31st, 2007 at 9:45 am
[...] was reading Yepsen’s article on how Huckabee could very well win Iowa. I thought for certain a writer such as Yepsen would offer [...]