11 Comments »

1. 1 redfish

   January 16, 2008 @ 8:32 am CET

   sure and when people dislike Huckabee for his rhetoric being too religious, thats a right criticism, unlike some of the other criticisms being used against him. not to mention most people, including me,  have issues with amending the constitution on abortion and gay marriage

   but on a realistic note, when evangelicals talk like this, they’re basically only talking about abortion and gay marriage, so people get more hysteric about it than the issue deserves.

2. 2 C Stanley

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:02 pm CET

   Fill in the blank and Huckabee in 08 anyone?

   Yes, that’s what I’ve been thinking (and somewhat hoping) for a while now. As you pointed out, he complements almost all of the other top tier candidates by bringing home the evangelical base- but there are other ways too that he rounds out all of the potential tickets. He brings charm, affability, Southern-ness, communication skills, moderation, and a lite economic populism. All of these are lacking in the other candidates to one degree or another, and I think all are going to be important for electability (particularly the economic popolism which at least acknowledges that people are hurting in an economic downturn. Like it or not, lots of voters want to know that their presidential candidates ‘feel their pain’.)

3. 3 Michael van der Galien

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:04 pm CET

   One problem: Huckabee on the ticket will cause the Presidential candidate a terrific problem with the rest of the population imo.

   For GOP I think this is a good set-up: Romney / Thompson (or the other way around).

4. 4 C Stanley

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:10 pm CET

   Well, again, I think that people who rely on the blogosphere for a read on how the US voters in general feel about a Christian message by a politician will have a skewed view of how voters actually react to that. How else do you explain Huckabee’s popularity in the national polls (though I know he’s slipping- but if people were willing to say they’d support him, it’s not as though they didn’t already know that he’s a Baptist preacher who uses a strong Christian values message in his campaign.)

5. 5 Michael van der Galien

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:20 pm CET

   How else do you explain Huckabee’s popularity in the national polls

   1. He’s slipping.
   2. We’re talking about Republican voters
   3. He’s doing very badly in match-ups

   In other words, looking at national polls actually confirms what I’m saying.

   And if he doesn’t win in South Carolina, I think that we can finally safely say that he, at least, is out. If Thompson doesn’t do well, he’s got the same issue, so that would mean that both Thompson and Huckasaint are out.

6. 6 C Stanley

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:29 pm CET

   1. He’s slipping.

   Yes, but I don’t see the evidence that he’s slipping because of his Christian message. I think it could well be that he needs to move away from that to show that this isn’t all he’s about, but I really can’t see that he’s getting the kind of backlash you’re expecting.  A certain number of people have opposed him because of the religious emphasis all along, but it seems to be a steady number that feels that way, not a growing one.

   2. We’re talking about Republican voters.

   No, I’m talking about national polling of all likely voters.

   3. He’s doing very badly in match-ups.

   Actually McCain is the only one who’s doing well in matchups, and Romney is among the worst against both Hillary and Obama.

7. 7 Michael van der Galien

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:35 pm CET

   Actually: that’ll change asap. And I see I have to take my words back:

   Those surveys find Mike Huckabee leading Clinton 45% to 42% while Obama leads Huckabee 45% to 43%.

   Now that Romney has won, you’ll see his numbers go up. Just like Huckabee’s went up. What I think will happen is that it’ll be very close indeed come November.

   McCAin, by the way, is kicking Clinton’s butt:

   The survey, conducted on the two nights following New Hampshire’s Primary, shows McCain attracting 49% of the vote nationwide while Clinton earns 38%.

   Keep in mind when it was conducted though: shortly after McCain’s victory and Huckabee’s victory in Iowa.

   One thing: I’m convinced - yes convinced - that if Huckabee becomes the nominee, Clitnon or Obama will wipe the floor with him. His "change the constitution according to God’s standards" will be disastrous.

8. 8 Michael van der Galien

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:36 pm CET

   With regards to who the best chance has of winning the nomination, Rasmussen Markets says McCain, followed by Giuliani and Romney.

9. 9 C Stanley

   January 16, 2008 @ 3:43 pm CET

   I agree with you about the bumps in the polls after a primary/caucus win, so I’m not trying to make too much of those matchups. Still though, I don’t see how you can support your assertion that Huckabee’s Christian message is so toxic. It seems to be based on your own feelings as well as those of politically minded people who blog- but it doesn’t match up with what I see in everyday experience of how Americans overall view religion in politics.

10. 10 Michael van der Galien

    January 16, 2008 @ 3:50 pm CET

    but it doesn’t match up with what I see in everyday experience of how Americans overall view religion in politics.

    Could that be because you live in a red state and probably deal mostly with people who think like you?

    I think he’ll be a great hit, especially in the North East.

    Heh.

    No I think we disagree on this and I think that only time will tell who’s right. But I’m feeling pretty confident.

11. 11 C Stanley

    January 16, 2008 @ 4:01 pm CET

    Of course my view could be skewed, but you don’t seem to see that yours is also greatly skewed in the other direction because you live in secular Europe and you only view the American political system through the lens of bloggers and pundits.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or willfully misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid use of vulgar language as well as racial, ethnic, or religious slurs.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email.