One gets the impression that Governor Huckabee has become the favorite in Iowa at this point in time. He’s got the momentum going. Mitt Romney and he are now virtually tied, but Huckabee performed extremely well in yesterday’s debate and he’s getting increasingly more coverage in the MSM. He definitely isn’t a second-tier candidate any longer: he’s first-tier. If he wins Iowa - and, quite frankly, I suspect he will - he’ll create even more momentum and… he might be the surprise of these elections.
Meanwhile, Mitt Romney’s campaign is already playing down expectations. Doug Gross, the 2002 GOP nominee for governor and a member of Romney’s Iowa campaign said (h/t TPM): “It would be nice if Romney won. If he finishes in the top two, he’s fine.”
Sounds like surrender to me.
The question then becomes: can Romney still win the nomination if he doesn’t win Iowa? The answer is yes, but it’ll be even more difficult than it already is.
Meanwhile, if Huckabee doesn’t win the nomination, he’ll probably be the nominee’s running mate.
I don’t know if I’ll end up voting for him, but he’s just so darn likeable and sincere, that I really am rooting for him to defeat megabucks Mitt. Its amazing in this day an age that a plain-speaking man with a simple, yet charismatic message, but no money in his war chest, is able to compete favorably with a multi-millionaire, who has an enormous organization and dozens of handlers to make sure he looks and sounds perfect. Good for the Iowans for being able to discern the difference between a plastic product and the real thing.
I will vote for Huckabee for many things like his authenticity but partly to show that I can’t be bought or suckered by the media’s big name favorites.
Dear Kritter,
I am sorry to say I read your comments with total dismay. It seems to me that you are not being rational being overcome and blinded by your feelings and emotions. Please make your choices based on the very importants issued and who of all the Candidates would fight for them in a calm deliberative manner not on how you feeel about a certain person. Indeed, making decisions based on feelings and emotions are pointless and rather wishy-washy not to mention shallow and totally idiotic.
Saven
I’d like to echo, in a more diplomatic format, Saven’s criticisms of supporting candidates based on how one feels about their personal attributes.
Matt Yglesias had an post on this very topic a day or two ago, pointing to some psychological research showing that one’s personal characteristic can change after obtaining power. Huckabee may be a nice guy now, but if he’s president that may change. And even if it doesn’t, what matters isn’t so much his personal qualities…very few of us will meet him in person…but his policies.
Edit by MvdG: we don’t allow bigotry here. Anti-Mormons have other places to go, you’re not welcome at this blog.
The personality shouldn’t matter in terms of whether we personally like the guy or not (GWB being a guy you want to have a beer with, for example) but it does matter in terms of character (being genuine and principled means that he won’t be as influenced by special interest lobbyists) and in terms of leadership (because he could have some power to unite people behind certain ideas and a positive image of America.) I like the fact that he generally presents his ideas in a way that doesn’t demonize and alienate his opponents, and I think that’s what is resonating with voters who normally wouldn’t give him a second look.
Dear freinds ,
I have pointed out a rather important belief of Mitt Romney in a perfectly rational and objective way which many people would want to know and you label me a bigot which is absurd . Tell me am I being bigoted if I mention something about Mitt Romney’s views on race during the 1970s .
Whether you are liberal or a conservative you would cherish the American principle of freedom - so I guess as it is your blog you are free to have who you like but please do not impugn me for simply raising legitimate issues .
I like Mike, but I couldn’t vote for someone who believes the earth is 6000 years old. Not only that, but I don’t agree with his stances on other issues, also, I don’t think his record as Governor is illustrious. But.. I can’t blame him for this..its the media that is continuously putting candidates to the “religious test”. He is being promoted as a Baptist Preacher, which is unfair to him, and us. He is the best spoken candidate, and he clearly handles himself well. I assume this is the same reason the media created Fred Thompson..but Fred is lost without cue cards and the occasional “take two”.
I of course would look beyond personality to a candidate’s stands on issues, but I do consider it an important factor. For example, Rudy is supposed to be thin-skinned, arrogant and autocratic, and has been dishonest about his affairs—which are not great leadership traits. Romney seems totally willing to remake himself into a slick product that will sell to conservative audiences- which makes you question if he really stands for anything concrete.
At least with Huckabee, you know what you are getting, and like Gerald Ford, he has an innate humbleness about himself. I disagree with him on evolution, but nowhere has he indicated that he’d remove it from our curriculum, and he does believe in the separation of church and state.
Dear Friends,
The continued fragmentation and disunity within the GOP in its failure to quickly coalesce towards a one dominant and emerging candidate as reflected by many of the conflicting Polls is, in my opinion, a result of the inherent religious bigotry within the Christian community.
Many informed people will by now understand that the best Candidate in the GOP field is Romney for many good reasons. For starters, he is young, lean tall and hansome and has a very progressive all-American name. But these traits are merely secondary. More important is that this man knows how to lead given his many successful business years in the Private sector. He is truly a go-getter ala Olympics. I believe, he is the only Conservative who can truly lead from the center as evidenced from his experiences as a Republican governing the liberalest of all blue States - Massachussetts. And mind you he was no lame duck Governor either. He got great results. Now no one can ever successfully govern from strict ideological extremes as Plato clearly expressed: Politics is the art of compromise. Romney is a man who can artfully compromise in order to get results without having to sellout our dignity, morals and values as Americans. He is the only candidate who can get both Republicans and Democrtas working together for the country’s own good like Reagan did.
I am no Mormon nor an apologist for the LDS but I clearly recognize a great leader when I see one. Just to remind you there are currently many good Mormons serving in government: Secretary of Health and Human Services - Mike Leavitt, Democrat Majority Leader- Harry Reed and Utah’s current 2 Senators to name a few.
If Christian Americans can swallow their prejudices towards Mormonism temporarily and be more discerning they will naturally be drawn to the only GOP Candiadate who I believe can defeat Hillary or Obama hands down.
The gall, indeed can you imagine a President Hukkabeeee? I think not! Now can you say Presidenr Romney Sir/Madam!!
Saven