1) Fred is all-in in Iowa
It was bound to happen. Mike Huckabee has officially stolen Fred Thompson's thunder as the alternative to Giuliani, McCain, and Romney. So, Thompson is camping out in Iowa until the caucuses in a near-desperate attempt to gain some mo'. Given the state of play, expect him to keep throwing barbs at Huckabee at every opportunity (like this direct mail).
2) Romney is in a very awkward spot
Campaigns are full of unexpected events, but the amazingly rapid coalescence of Evangelical conservatives around Mike Huckabee has turned the race upside down. Expectations for Iowa have been officially re-ordered, with Huckabee now the favorite.
The timing of Huckabee's rise is awful for just about everyone not named Mike given that it is has spread beyond Iowa, into South Carolina, and beyond. Everyone else needs the same media scrutiny all the other major candidates have received to pop his bubble. While that's happening to a degree with the national press, Jonathan Martin and Marc Ambinder note the Iowa press is still giving Huckabee a comparative pass. With three weeks to go until the caucuses - and the complication of the holiday season in between - Team Romney has made the undesirable choice to start doing contrasts via paid media. In other words, doing the job the media would have done for them had Huckabee's rise come even a month earlier.
The ad itself is good and actually threads the needle quite nicely on an issue that cuts across the Republican spectrum in Iowa more so than any other topic, but it's still a significant risk:
Meanwhile, Romney's campaign has the equally difficult problem of addressing what some people call a credibility gap, but is more accurately described as a "comfort gap." We talked recently about how many ardent, religious, socially conservative voters (a sizable portion of Iowan caucus-goers) are just more comfortable with Mike Huckabee, no matter what his other flaws. Some of those voters could support Romney - and probably would if Huckabee wasn't running - but would rather vote with their heart during the primary season if given the chance. Romney's challenge is ensuring his campaign message over the next few weeks retains potential appeal to voters who might sour on Huckabee. Why might that happen?
3) The whirlwind is coming for Huckabee
Thompson and Romney have to take Huckabee down a notch, as discussed above. That's not the half of it for Huckabee to deal with, however, as the orgy of gratuitously positive press coverage he has been riding to success in the polls comes to an inevitable end.
The MSM is going to be out for blood thanks to Huckabee's comments on homosexuality and indefensible "quarantine the AIDS patients" statement. Many a national political reporter is now digging for "crazy social conservative" storylines. Plus, the Dumond story may still have legs since Arkansas officials keep contradicting Huckabee.
Meanwhile, the Club for Growth has launched its long-expected attack ads against Huckabee. They're hitting him on taxes, for now, in Iowa, South Carolina, and nationally on Fox, plus they plan to up the ad buys too. All this while other conservative outlets continue to pound away on him, including the National Review for his unserious approach to foreign policy and the Wall Street Journal for Huckabee's equally unserious position on taxes. [Note: this could be the source of an effective attack-ad if someone has the gumption use it. Does anyone you know want to pay a 30% federal sales tax, including on new cars and homes, without getting rid of the income tax for good? I didn't think so.]
Many Republicans are incredibly nervous about Huckabee as the GOP nominee given his potential ability to divide the GOP coalition even more than some have theorized about Rudy Giuliani. But if he can withstand the inevitable firestorm of the next several weeks then he will at least deserve a tremendous about of respect and might yet turn out to be a formidable general election candidate. He's going to be taking heavy incoming fire from all sides from this point forward.
4) McCain is alive
To which many conservatives say, "WHAT?!?" It's true. Giuliani's ongoing fade has given McCain a tad more oxygen. I generally concur with Richelieu's take, that unless something changes for Giuliani, he's less likely than Huckabee, Romney, and McCain to have any momentum after the first few states. Can McCain win the nomination? Not rationally, after years spent aggravating huge numbers of conservatives. But you have to hand it to the man; he's still kicking.
All that to say the fluidity of this race continues to be awe-inspiring. Huckabee's come-from-nowhere rise makes a potentially murky picture between the Iowa Caucuses and the de facto national primary day on February 5th even more confused. There is now even more of a premium on the ability of campaigns to respond effectively to events after each contest from Iowa forward, which makes the number of "unknown unknowns" that are yet to effect the nomination process somewhat breathtaking. The trite phrase "a wide open race" is an understatement.
Anyone think Wednesday's debate in Des Moines might be lively?
UPDATE: this news from Drudge should scare the hell out of Republican operatives if it's true. The psychology of the story is fascinating if you think about it. The facts are more troubling.
Posted by Eric Earling at December 10, 2007 10:53 PM | Email ThisAnd it seems to work pretty well in Cuba - I wonder why the MSM is all bent out of shape over his call for quarantines but ignores that enforced by uncle Fidel...
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on December 10, 2007 10:52 PMHuckabee -- The Ultimate Liberal Plant
Huckabee will kill us, moderate R's will sit out or use a big clothespin and vote D.
Posted by: K on December 10, 2007 11:39 PM
Pro-Romney Bloggers Push Negative Huck Narrative
MyManMitt: Huckabee Spoke at "Anti-Mormon" Convention
Can we stop eating each other and PLEASE start dining on some lowdown rotten Democrat scoundrels?
God, I'll be glad when the primaries are over.
which candidate is closest to maionstream Christians?
Romney .. the pagan
Guiliani .. the Hnery VIIIth imitation
Huckabee ... Not descended from a monkey
or
Obama
WWJD?
J .. Jefferson OR Jesus would vote Obama.
The GOPs worst dream .. he could take Texas!
Posted by: SeattleJew on December 11, 2007 01:40 AMWhat would Jefferson do? He'd actually vote for Ron Paul. (I bet Jesus would too.)
Posted by: blindman on December 11, 2007 06:34 AMIt will be decades before a name like Barak Hussein Obama will be the name of a president.
And the same for the name Huckabee. The country won't elect Huckabees. But it does name peculiar films after them. Rent "I Heart Huckabees" to see the most acceptable use of Huckabee.
Don't misunderstand. I would be full of joy if the dems nominate Obama. By the last week of the campaign, every voter will have seen the video of the ceremony in which Obama was twiddling his thumbs while Edwards, and Hillary held their hands to their hearts while during the national anthem.
Posted by: Bart Cannon on December 11, 2007 06:50 AMAfter the interview, I went "Hmmmm, he sounds like a Democrat", but I couldn't point out anything specific.
Personally, the AIDS comment is a non-starter for me as it was a reaction to the times and knowledge we had. But, to completely isolate them, that is borderline.
Posted by: swatter on December 11, 2007 06:51 AMBelieve what you'd like. I cover who is newsworthy, and Huckabee is a) newsworthy and b) the news is what it is. I'm not mentioning Giuliani much right now because he is fading as a core element of the race (and even when I did you'll recall I also had some very good things to say about him). I've also made mention of Romney's weaknesses along the way, including this post which again covers the flip-flop issue in the provided link as well as him getting the inevitable headline of "first to go negative" thanks to the latest TV ad.
That said, I concur that the scenario you outline is possible. I'm just totally unimpressed with Giuliani's campaign the last few months so am not sure he could pull it out even if the split-decision in the early states he needs actually unfolds. Great potential candidate, bad campaign.
Posted by: Eric Earling on December 11, 2007 07:04 AMI admire the European Pagan religions very much, particularly Wicca. I consider myself sort of an "armchair" Neo-Pagan: I just haven't made the leap to being a full-blown Wiccan yet.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on December 11, 2007 07:50 AMAnd Eric, for a blogger type, you are very balanced on your coverage. Don't fret Doug. You have said you have a bias for Romney and your bias isn't over-the-top by any means.
Posted by: swatter on December 11, 2007 07:51 AM1. Sorry for being naive, but what does the acronym MSM stand for? Am I the only one who is clueless on this acroynm.
2. K: I don't get it. Swatter calls Huck a Democrat/moderate and you state that if Huck is nominated moderates will sit out. Seems to be both polls there. You two need to work out your differences.
3. Bart: Talk about stereotyping. You insinuate the falsehood that Barack is tied to extremist Muslims (IT HAS BEEN DEMOSTRATED THAT THIS IS A COMPLETE FABRICATION--Is that loud enough for you). Then you insinuate another falsehood that Obama isn't Patriotic. Instead of attacking with falsehoods, why don't you attack his positions, like others here do. At least it could be an conversation.
4. Swatter (good bud): I would agree that in some cases Huckabee doesn't sound like a normal conservative. That may be because instead of talking faith to win elections and not living it (i.e., GW), he actually tries to live his faith out. Much of what Jesus stated in regards to compassion for the poor and downtrodden isn't very conservative in message.
5. I do think Huckabee's biggest problem is with statements like the Aids statement and the naivete shown in the Dumond case. It may eat him alive that he is a decent ordinary person that may at times be living in a simplier world where people trust people and believe in people. People will see him as not tough enough. Again, my analogy to the President on 24 after David Palmer keeps coming to my mind.
6. I like the fact that McCain is bounding back. It is too bad he had to suck up to GW four years ago. This cost him his independent voters and didn't get him anywhere with Bush's base.
Posted by: tc on December 11, 2007 08:00 AMhttp://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/2006/11/huckabees_registered_for_gifts.aspx
Posted by: Suzihomemaker on December 11, 2007 08:02 AMAnd you see him as a conservative. So, that leaves quite a range that people paint him. And quite a trick of hand if he can pull it off (like the Mahster hisself- the original Slick).
And someone is going to have to tell me why Bush is so bad and why we aren't better off than we were 8 years ago. Am I the only one really upbeat? Don't let the MSM get you down.
And suzih, the country was going to have to address Medicaid and NCLB. With Bush the fiscal damage was less than it could have been with Gore/Kerry or any other R, for that matter.
Posted by: swatter on December 11, 2007 08:33 AMMain Stream Media
Here's the refernce Swatter just made. I agree.
DEMS HOLD FIRE ON HUCKABEE; SEE 'EASY KILL' IN GENERAL ELECTION
Huck, I think you are probably a great guy. I'm glad for your recent success. BUT, we all know it's too sudden, too clean, too... something, and we have to wonder why. The questions are getting louder and can't be ignored. In your success please don't allow yourself to become the "useful idiot" the damndems love to humiliate.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 11, 2007 08:56 AMThe fiscal damage might have been worse under Gore or Kerry but was still a significant expansion of Federal powers and a huge unfunded time bomb on my kids! My concerns with Huckabee stand - he has made several statements in the past about a national campaign against obesity and banning smoking in all public places. While I don't smoke and I'm all for healthier eating habits, neither of those are matters for the Federal Government! I don't need or want a President with a do-good agenda - it's great that he is a Christian but Jesus taught that INDIVIDUALS are repsonsible to love their neighbors - it is NOT up to the government to play Robin Hood or the Good Samaritan! I remember the Carter years all too well - I DON"T want a repeat and that is what I see happening if Mike Huckabee were to get into office (which I don't think would happen anyway as he would probably get trounced in the general election once all of his views were made public).
Posted by: Suzihomemaker on December 11, 2007 09:03 AMIt's great to see such a diverse bunch of candidates in this race on both sides.
I would love to see the GOP candidates duke it out at the Republican National Convention....might actually be worth watching. Harken back to the days where you had to work for the nomination rather than have it handed to you.
Swatter,
A couple of points:
1. I would state that Huckabee is a social conservative, given the current definition. I would agree that he doesn't meet the definition of fiscal conservative, given his tax record. He is also more pro-environment than probably the business conservatives who our out to rape the country to make their fortunes want to contend, but so is respected evangelicals like Rick Warren. Does he care about the poor and down-trodden, you bet! He didn't grow up with a "silver" spoon in his mouth like the current president, he of the Kennebunkport vacation, and rich Conneticutt family back-ground, where his granddaddy made his money in much the same way as the Kennedy's.
2. There are plenty of moderate Democrats, you just don't care to look. For example, Jim Webb of Virginia. Most are southern based, given that 30-40 years ago, everyone in the south was practically "yellow-dog" Democrats, since the Republicans represented Lincoln and the freedom of slaves.
With regards to MSM going easy on Huckabee, the left sure isn't. I think that Huffington Post has it out for Huckabee. They are relentlessly trying to bring him down. It kind of deflates the argument that the Democrats want him nominated.
As far as Drudge, I am disappointed in Drudge lately who seems to now be the Hillary campaign mouth piece. What ever Hillary wants printed on other candidates, she feeds to Drudge to print, irrespective of whether it is true or not, which is quite the irony given Drudge's history with the whole Monica-gate.
Posted by: tc on December 11, 2007 09:33 AMtc, you've been bringing it. Keep it up.
Huck is too nice to be president, though. And I don't want anyone named Bush or Clinton (even though I hear Jeb is the best of the batch) nor do I want anyone from Arkansas, home of the Arkansas chickens.
Time for new blood.
Posted by: swatter on December 11, 2007 09:43 AMI haven't given up on Fred yet. He's certainly not the most charismatic candidate out there I know. In fact in terms of firing people up with exciting rhetoric, he's more like Eisenhower than JFK or Bill Clinton. Maybe I'm the only one who doesn't care about rhetoric but I like his positions on everything I'm aware of so far.
Don't give up on whoever you like best till the fat lady sings.
Posted by: RBW on December 11, 2007 10:17 AMFunny this seems to be the only criticism anyone can seem to come up with. Seems like they used to call Reagan lazy too. But the first link doesn't sound all that lazy.
Posted by: RBW on December 11, 2007 11:00 AM"Oh shit, he's dumb as hell,"
- Richard Nixon (discussing Fred Thompson)
Joh Stossel has posted his interview Ron Paul Unplugged
While the interview is, eh... moderately interesting, the disparity in the comments between the Paulbearing crusaders and those, um, less strident about RP pretty much mirrors us here at SP. And just like here, the Paulbearers have followed the post/vote (annoy)plan.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 11, 2007 12:59 PMExactly so you know they don't have a chance in their home states. Since Florida folks seem to flee New York and Mass so they may not be so inclined to vote for them. I don't have any insight on how voters in Ohio or Michigan feel about left leaning northeastern elitist Republicans. They may feel better about electing a family values evangelical preacher from a securely right leaning state.
Either way it's an interesting crop of candidates this time round.
We also have a former Governor from Massachusetts (or Taxacusets as many here call it), sadly he's a Mormon and a lot of Christian voters (largely responsible for W's win) feel that Mormons are a cult and are going to hell. Do you really think the Ralph Reid/Pat Robertson types would willingly vote for their version of the anti-Christ?
NY is going to go Hillary, Massachusetts will likely go Hillary.
They love Hillary in California, she has 52% of the Dem vote locked up according to polls. Meanwhile Giuliani is coming in around the mid-30's.
Neither is Giuliani a traditional conservative Republican. This cycle, like we started this thread, it appears a more centrist will be selected by the Rs.
Posted by: swatter on December 11, 2007 04:49 PMHalf of the GOP is also scared shitless of Huckabee.
It will be very interesting to watch the country club Republicans respond as Huck gains a little steam, and their gay boy Julie-Annie drops from sight.
I repeat: no chance.
He has as much chance as John Edwards does. He has a core constituency (and no, it's not "evangelicals"), but it won't be enough to carry him to anything close to victory, even if he can take Iowa.
And I'm glad. Huckabee is no conservative. He wants to use government to fix problems by forcing taxpayers to contribute to whatever chartiable works he finds to be worthwhile. He is a liberal on these issues. He is no "Christian conservative." Being anti-abortion is not conservative. Conservative is not what your views are so much as how you want to accomplish your goals. Huckabee's a liberal.
To prove the point: I saw a Huckabee video on YouTube about homeschooling. He trumpets his great record on homeschooling in Arkansas. But what was the main reason he gave when governor for supporting homeschooling? Because, in his eyes, homeschooling "works."
But a conservative supports homeschooling because a parent has a right to do it, not because someone in government thinks it works.
The is just one of many examples for Huckabee. I like him. He's a nice guy. I WISH he were a conservative so I could support him, because I really do like him a lot. But he's not, and I don't.
Just Say No to Liberalism. Say No to Huckabee.
Posted by: pudge on December 11, 2007 08:40 PMIf Romney is to have a chance he needs to win Iowa or just not lose to Huckabee there. He can't go negative in an overt fashion in Iowa or he's doomed. He needs to get surrogates to find a way to make Huck look like he can't be counted on to do what he says, if Huck doesn't lose credibility then Romney can't beat him now. The immigration issue won't do it, it has to be done on credibility.
Posted by: Doug on December 11, 2007 08:55 PM