Dec 12 2007
Religious Purity Wars Decimating GOP Contenders
The GOP far right have been on a purity putsch for years now – ever since they starting losing support in 2005. It alienated moderates – affectionately derided as RINOs – and now is opening up into an all out ugly religious war on who’s religion is better. Sadly this latest disaster has been fueled by the latest up and coming candidate to challenge Giuliani – Huckabee:
Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee, an ordained Southern Baptist minister, asks in an upcoming article, “Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?”
Dumb question and totally irrelevant to being President. And in fact this shows Huckabee too willing to questions someone else’s beliefs – something a President should never do. The problem is these candidates are trying to appease the evangelical base of the GOP. Fine, that can be done without creating religious wars on whose religion is the better brand. Romney has responded (h/t Drudge), but the fact is he had it right the other week when he noted America is a Symphony of Faiths – or something to that effect. I loved the use of the word ‘symphony’ because it implied an underlying harmony that allowed syncopation beats to work of each other to create a common theme. Whoever wrote that line deserves a Pulitzer for writing. It is how America should be and normally is.
This gaffe probably spells the end of Huckabees run. And it should be a signal to the GOP base to end this useless contest of who is more right (pun intended) on religion, beliefs, policy. We can debate ideas, we should NEVER debase ideas (unless they fall into the realm of thought shared by Hitler and al-Qaeda of course). End the purity wars.
I find that Huckabee is my least favorite candidate these days – there’s just too much of the Elmer Gantry about him, and he seems to me a slightly updated, slightly more conservative version of Jimmy Carter but with most of the same fundamental character flaws that Carter had. (An overwhelming belief in his own moral purity, for one – Al Gore has that problem, as well)
I know the press will make a big deal about Iowa – but who cares about Iowa, really? Besides the MSM, of course, who are so heavily invested in viewing everything as a “horse race”.
Let me say it outright – the idea of “momentum” in primary races is stupid. Different candidates have diverging areas of support and diverging constituencies that they appeal to, and a handful of Iowa farmers isn’t going to make everyone change their minds overnight. The concept/conceit is simply silly.
AJ
I cant fully explain it yet, but I differ from you here. The right you are talking about could never have enough strength to have pushed the shift in Hucks poll numbers from the basement to where they are now on their own.
If you believed your position , he would never ever have been that far in the basement to start with and would have had stronger numbers the whole time.
It seems that maybe voters are getting buyers cold feet on both Rudy and Mitt plus maybe some false flag polling input by left siders trying to make Huck look stronger than he is since the DNC sees him as a glass jawed easy take out in the general.
I said I can’t piece it all together but it comes from little bits here and there on a lot of blogs and not just on the right side blogs either. Some of what I am seeing is coming from the way far left. There is not one smoking gun post you could point at, but the general concept is trying to push Huck up in the polls while attacking Rudy and Mitt.
Then at the same time slip some money to Ron Paul to keep his hopes alive thus allowing two low tier candidates to live longer in the race than either ever should have.
When you look at some of the PaulBots they would fit more naturally in the Rosie Odonnell / DU crowd rather than on the right. Plus you have a question in the YouTube debate urging Paul to run as a 3rd party player after he just got a money infusion.
So if you buy into what is quietly rolling around out there at the moment some places are wondering if both Huck and Paul are in essence being used as pawns by the left just enough to keep the primaries stirred up on the right.
I don’t buy it myself, but it really is hard to explain the sudden change in fortunes for those two with good solid reasons.
Merlin,
The far right has been moving from Tancredo, Paul, Thompson and now Huck. You can see Rudy, Mitt and McCain sitting still as the far right base raises an alternative up and then runs to the next one, letting the previous favored one drop back into oblivion.
They will run out of options now and realize they either support the moderates or they allow Hillary to win. And their choice will seal their fate in conservative circles. They either buckle down and rejoin the GOVERNING conservative coalition or the sit on the sidelines demanding purity to their cause.
Either way the don’t get what they want. It is now a question of how they deal with it.
AJ
I am not buying that many shifts of support, it seems to be a bit of a stretch to get there.
As I said the closest match for the religious right would have been support for Huck from the beginning and his numbers simply did not show that and his bank account even less.
None of the others you say they rolled from one after the other would have fit their mold enough to really pull it together except maybe Fred.
There is just not enough good solid reasons to explain the hopscotch you are saying.
What I am seeing is the plan on the left is just to keep things stirred to split right side strength in Iowa and make any of the Dems look stronger than the right side.
Once they get that far Paul and Huck can fall by the way side as tools well used.
The left side wet dream would be Hill running against Huck with Paul on the Lib party as a 3rd and Cynthia McKinney running on Greens as a 4th wheel.
AJ,
You and Merlin both make good points.
Conservatives are a coalition and can’t govern without sticking together. And the liberal left does want to see it fracture.
I think I see something more in the Huckster’s rise than just input from the Right.
I see a not so veiled movement by the MSM to build up and deliver a more defeatable candidate.
I also suspect a veiled movement by those who would never vote on the Conservative side to build this guy up in an effort to be sure that he is the ultimate nominee.
Once nominated, the MSM and the (so far) unseen forces will take him apart at the joints and devour his flesh thus delivering the Presidency to the Left.
It’s the classic “Bait and Switch” being performed right before our eyes.
I’ll admit that I’m pretty far to the right on many, if not most, issues but the Huckster is not doing himself any favors with me.
From the beginning I have said that I liked him OK but there was just something about him that I couldn’t put my finger on.
These last couple of weeks have helped me put my finger on it.
From most of the right side I personally know right now because of how early this election cycle campaign started still have not picked which horse they are going to run with. In fact most I know did not like AN Y of the runners at all until Fred stepped up to the plate, but then so far he hasn’t put it together well enough to keep their interest.
Fred is putting it all into Iowa right now and if Huck takes a nose dive from all these issues Fred will be the one a lot of those yet to pick go for unless they have to settle for Rudy or Mitt as the more electable one.
People I know say my heart is with Fred but my head is with what will work to be an anybody but Hillary run.
BG&G
I agree with your point that the MSM has been giving Huck a love fest that is 180 out from how they diss all things on the right.
Big smell test problem here.
Will have to go back and look at the transcript, but for most of the debates Huck was a space holder and he may have gotten the most softball stuff in the YouTube debate. Will have to look at that.
I look at all the usual suspects on the left and they are taking shots at everybody on the right EXCEPT Huck.
Why are they giving him a pass just like the DNC?
AJ, Romney said in his TV interview with Greta Van Sustern that he wrote the entire speech himself, so you can give him the kudos for “symphony.” I heard Rove somewhat confirm this yesterday as he praised the speech.
As to who is raising Huckabee’s poll numbers. Let’s get real. The DNC and MSM want Huckabee to win the nomination. The DNC has said that he is a loser and the GOP’s McGovern and they’ve put out the word not to attack him, not even on his stance on gays. They are salivating for a Huck in the General. Isn’t going to happen, however. He and Paul are the two candidates who would force me to stay home and not vote if either got the nod. And I’ve seen on more blogs than I care to count, that should Huck win the nomination, they will vote for Hillary. Conservative bloggers too. Shudder.
“I look at all the usual suspects on the left and they are taking shots at everybody on the right EXCEPT Huck.
Why are they giving him a pass just like the DNC? ”
Bait and Switch
Bait and Switch
I think Merlin has a couple of good points. The propaganda press WILL try to intervene in this election…and if I were the Dems, Huckabee is one of the candidates I would most want to run against. He DOES have a political glass jaw.
On the other hand, Huckabee has been developing cracks over the last week. And I think this latest gaffe will hurt him. Particularly since there is a large bloc in the Republican Party that are not terribly enthusiastic about nominating someone who flaunts his faith. There are some people, including myself, who would prefer that our elected officials not do their praying in our faces.
Me? I think Thompson is maneuvering to do better than anyone thinks.
Mike,
I see Thompson as the man to beat too.
He is a “dark horse” in that the MSM is not talking about him at all. Ignoring him in fact.
The Huckster is being used as a distraction. Sort of a “No, no, don’t look over there….look over here at the bright shiny object” kind of thing.
Personally, I believe Malkin is responsible for a lot of this.
The only candidate that has enough draw from Independents and Democrats is Rudy. I don’t care HOW well a Republican candidate does with Republicans, that isn’t what gets you elected. What gets a candidate elected (in order of importance) are:
1. Independent voters
2. Crossovers from the other party
You can win only half your own party if you get enough of the other two demographics to vote for you.
All this bashing of Republican candidates by “conservative” websites is going to really hurt the Republicans. Personally, I wish the “conservatives” would just form their own darned party and leave the Republicans alone. I just want a party that is big on national security, capitalism, against nanny government, and for personal liberties. I really don’t care about the cultural/social crap. That stuff has no business being debated at the national level and should be done at the state level.
>>Personally, I wish the “conservatives†would just form their own darned party and leave the Republicans alone.
Oops, don’t know what happened. After the quote, my last comment should read:
Crosspatch: I said the very same thing to my son just last night.
CP,
The parties are so evenly split that the elections are decided 51 to 49%. This means a candidate has to hold his own party in order to win. And capturing “crossover voters must not be at the expense of his own.
Both parties are coalitions. That’s the nature of the 2 party system. By dismissing the issues you don’t value, you are dismissing the voters that do. Politics is about social issues. And probably 30% of Republicans care about them.