Bottom Line:
The guy I still support (Romney) did not win. A guy I like did. I still don’t think the guy I like is the best choice.
Scattered Observations:
The first rule in politics for a traditional Christian is “put not your trust in princes.” (Psalm 146:3) We love small government (or should!), because the Messiah has come and His name is not Obama or Huckabee.
To their credit both Obama and Huckabee seemed to understand that last night in their victory speeches. Huckabee in particular struck the right notes.
As a man who gets his politics from Burke, I hope mostly that the government will not start revolutions and that traditional Christians (who have the advantage of being in touch with reality) will be left alone. If left alone, we do quite well (recall the whole reality thing).
Political power is a very blunt instrument. Using it for cultural change (beyond the bully pulpit) is usually a bad idea. Our foes used it with Roe versus Wade and have generally been losing the abortion argument ever since. Their attempt to destroy traditional marriage by the courts and not the legislatures bids fare to do the same.
So what is the state of the race?
Republicans:
Mike Huckabee:
He is the big winner for Republicans in Iowa and could win the nomination.
To do so he needs Rudy, McCain, Thompson, and Romney to keep splitting the anti-Huck vote. If all of them stay in the race through February, then he could win.
Doesn’t anyone get the fact that Huckabee has the largest interest group in the party behind him? Doesn’t anyone understand that most of the attacks on him have been stupid and have actually helped him?
Drop the “he is too Christian” line now (in a nation that is eighty percent Christian) or he will be the nominee. The Democrats will own the “seculars” . . . all ten percent of them can rejoice in the fact that they own the modern Democrat party. The left-wing Church (including all five people still in the Episcopal Church) can have a party about their power . . . but the rest of the nation is not so secular.
If Huckabee can come across as a Billy-Graham style Christian, then he can win. Do people forget that Billy Graham was very popular with everyone not in the secular ten percent?
I think too many conservative pundits hang out with that ten percent and forget this basic fact.
Will the conservative media listen to what he is saying and not just run their standard “angry bumpkin Evangelical” lies? (Take a tip from Michael Medved. This post is so good that I am pretending I could have written it.)
Huckabee is talking about the environment, the working poor, and social justice at every turn. Talking about these things does not make him a liberal. He is a traditional conservative. Attempts to portray him as a liberal are not going to work, because he is not one and does not come across as one.
Period.
Attack him for being wrong (on the War for example), but don’t try to turn him into Jimmy Carter or Pat Robertson. He isn’t and after the first impact of the blow, it will redound on the attacker, because it is obviously false.
Robertson (it turned out) had bizarre conspiracy theory views of history and Jimmy Carter was a liberal religiously and in every other way.
He is not a “hater” who sees evil conspiracies around every corner. His Iowa victory speech shows that. He is not going to draw his cabinet from the Jimmy Carter pool and to pretend he would govern as anything other than a right-of-center Republican is bizarre.
Huckabee is tolerant in ways Pat Buchanan (to give another example) was not (or did not seem to be).
Unless “inclusion” is just a main stream media code for “homosexuality is good,” he is also an inclusive candidate. He is not a hater . . . period.
I don’t understand why people I like at places like National Review On Line are soft on Rudy getting the nomination (who is bluntly a liberal) and in a lather over Huckabee. There are pro-Rudy writers there. . . but I am hard pressed to find one pro-Huckabee writer.
I don’t agree with Huckabee on some issues, so I will not support him in the primaries, but the reaction (over-reaction) of some conservatives to him is just silly and counter-productive to beating him.
How Huckabee should be attacked:
1. Ethics.
Arkansas ethics in politics are . . . shall we say, flexible.
2. His tax proposal.
While interesting, it is also revolutionary and Utopian.
3. His foreign policy knowledge.
Which is now zero, but as a bright guy soon will not be soon. He needs to be hit on this now, before he mugs up on it.
Mitt Romney:
He did well enough to keep going, but let’s face it, he lost.
He must get close in New Hampshire or risk being the Phil Gramm of this cycle. Phil Gramm, for the youngsters out there, was the darling of “idea” conservatives back in the day. . . and spent a ton of money to go no place.
What is close?
Romney must come within single digits of McCain to be able to argue: I can run well everywhere. I am not a regional candidate.
Otherwise, my guy will begin to look like Phil Gramm began to look: a loser with the voters who was backed by pundits and idea people for his ideas.
Keen observation: you have to get votes to be president. Romney needs to keep showing he can get them.
Romney is very bright . . . so was Gramm.
Romney is qualified for office . . . so was Gramm.
Romney needs to go unplugged, do as many open forum events as possible, ignore McCain (who is impossible to attack in New Hampshire), and get it close in the polls.
John McCain:
He is the other Republican winner in Iowa, but I still don’t see how he wins the nomination.
He is a one state candidate. He must win in New Hampshire to go ahead, but where else will he do well?
Unless it is a two way race with Rudy (where he gets the social conservatives) or Huckabee (where he gets the non-Huck crowd), he has no chance.
He is an American hero that is temperamentally unsuited to be President. An aging McCain running against Obama is a video disaster.
Rudy:
He has less chance of being the nominee than Huckabee.
Both need a multiple candidate race in February to win (which I think they will get), but Rudy has a much, much smaller and less enthusiastic base.
Social conservatives will not vote for Rudy. That may be a mistake, but they will stay home in the general. Friends (and I do have such friends!) who think that the Republican base will back Rudy are deceived.
Rudy cannot win a two-way race against anyone . . . including Huck in the Republican primaries.
Ron Paul:
Sorry.
If you cannot do better than you did in a caucus state, you are not going to win in a primary state. Keep talking up small government. That is a good thing.
Being a loser, but an idea guy is better than being a loser who just spent money and lost.
Democrats:
Obama:
My students favorite Democrat is stunning the pundits. He should not be. He is John and Robert Kennedy for the modern age. He is smart, a great speaker, and a uniter.
He is also the most liberal person to run for President in my lifetime. He just does not seem that way.
I don’t think negative politics will work on him.
I also don’t think he is, yet, the front runner, but he is the first Democrat in my lifetime for whom I wish I could vote. I don’t agree with him on the issues, so I will not, but he is an awesome charismatic force.
Voters should remember that such awesome forces are not to be trusted in politics. He is also still a long shot.
Why?
Clinton:
He is her best friend now. If anybody knows how to come back, he does. Don’t count Clinton out.
Bill Clinton wants to be back in the White House. His Evita is wounded, but they have money, smarts, and the establishment.
Hillary (!) was always his surrogate. Historically he looks like the Interregnum between two Bush administrations . . . unless She wins. He is mad now . . . and a mad Bill Clinton is (or was) politically fierce. He owns the establishment and there is much to be said for the establishment.
Poor Hillary is now reduced to hoping that her ties to Bill will keep her career alive.
Again.
She can survive a narrow loss in New Hampshire . . . barely. She has to win soon, but I think she is still the front runner (barely).
A big loss (ten points) in New Hampshire and Obama-mania will sweep her away.
Edwards:
Thanks for playing.
If he cannot win in Iowa, then he must hope for Clinton and Obama to engage in a murder/suicide. (Obama ripped by a money scandal . . . only money can taint his White Knight image . . . and Clinton having finger prints on the release of the scandal. We will hate the messenger.)
Edwards will be the nominee only if the Democrats know they are going to lose, because their political Messiah and Establishment have destroyed each other.