Posted on 01/01/2008 9:01:14 AM PST by RKB-AFG
Republican Blood Feud
The worst-case primary scenario.
By David Freddoso
Less than a week remains before Republicans begin the long and arduous road to choosing a nominee. It begins in Iowa on Jan. 3, and continues at least through Feb. 5, the day that more than 20 states will select delegates to the convention in Minnesota’s Twin Cities next fall.
The possibility for idle speculation is endless. But there are a number of things we know for sure. First, the rise of former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee is more than a passing phenomenon. Polls show that his religious conservative voters are highly dedicated and motivated — 65 percent of his backers will “definitely” vote for him in Iowa, better than any other candidate. They could even prove to be better organized than his shoestring campaign would suggest, thanks to churches and pastors in that state and several others.
Second, although former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is struggling and slipping badly in national and key state polls, he is almost certain to win hundreds of delegates by the time Super Tuesday is over, no matter how poorly he does before that date. New York alone guarantees him 101 delegates (about 1,190 are required to win). Throw in Connecticut, New Jersey, and Delaware (all of which have adopted winner-take-all), and he cannot do worse than 201 delegates — not even if he fails to take Florida’s 57.
These two certainties point to one possible outcome that should alarm Republicans of all ideological stripes — the religious and the irreligious, the right-to-lifers, the gun-rights advocates, the supply-siders, and the neoconservatives alike. A two-way knock-down-drag-out fight between Huckabee and Giuliani could completely destroy the coalition that Ronald Reagan built by combining social and economic conservatives with anti-Communists.
In one corner stands Mike Huckabee, whose campaign speaks freely of destroying the conservative movement. “It’s gone,” said Ed Rollins, his national campaign chairman. “The breakup of what was the Reagan coalition — social conservatives, defense conservatives, antitax conservatives — it doesn’t mean a whole lot to people anymore.” Naturally, Rollins points to Huckabee as the figure to form the new coalition.
Huckabee, a Baptist minister, has an appeal that doubles as his most unattractive quality. Far from merely appealing to Christians or engaging in normal expressions of faith, he is consciously making himself the “Jesus candidate” in order to win the Republican nomination. It is a strategy exploitative of faith, yet it has worked so far because so many Republicans are Christians and so many are also unhappy with the rest of the Republican field.
Lost in the so-called “floating cross” controversy over Huckabee’s Christmas ad was the ad’s overt use of Christianity to win an election. When Huckabee reminded Iowans in the ad that “what really matters is the celebration of the birth of Christ,” it obviously had a lot less to do with glorifying the Lord on Dec. 25 than it did with convincing a certain kind of Iowan to caucus for Huckabee on Jan. 3. Huckabee’s campaign has been replete with such uses of faith, including other ads touting his Christian leadership and gratuitous quotations from Isaiah. Asked about his surge in the polls, Huckabee said earlier this month, “There’s only one explanation for it, and it’s not a human one. It’s the same power that helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of five thousand people.”
As he flashes his cross for all to see, Huckabee and his campaign routinely launch populist tirades against economic conservatives, denouncing “the Club for Greed” and the “Washington-Wall Street Axis.” He is denouncing people whose support he will need if he wins the nomination — and considering his record of raising taxes, one might expect a more conciliatory approach. He has adopted the language of President Bush’s “compassionate conservatism,” also known as “bigger government.” He prefers talks with Iran to further confrontation, but beyond that has been far from articulate on foreign policy.
In the opposite corner stands former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the fading frontrunner and Huckabee’s polar opposite. Giuliani’s personal life is the dream of every opposition researcher. Any dip into the New York Post archives on the twice-divorced Catholic Giuliani — who his Church may come to criticize along the way — gives credence to Hillary Clinton as a champion of family values.
Giuliani is pro legal abortion, and this alone will cost him many votes, both in the primary and in a general election against a pro-abortion Democrat. Unlike Huckabee, Giuliani looks to be trying to attract Republicans who disagree with him on key issues, yet his nomination would nonetheless create the greatest demand for a third-party candidate since 1996, or even 1992.
Giuliani’s record on taxes and his understanding of complex economic issues such as health insurance are his main selling points for the average conservative. But on just about everything else — including gun rights — he is a Republican apostate. While distancing himself from Bush’s failure of “compassionate conservatism,” Rudy advocates an even more aggressive foreign policy that may include war with Iran. For those already firmly in his camp, this is terrific — for many others on the Right, it is terrifying.
A Huck-Rudy showdown would be a primary fight between two candidates with almost nothing in common. It would polarize and tear apart the Republican party just as the national electorate is currently polarized.
Such a disaster is a very distinct possibility. If Huckabee takes out Romney in Iowa and New Hampshire, or else heads off a resurgent McCain in South Carolina (or even Michigan), everything could come down to the close race developing between Huckabee and Giuliani in Florida. By the time Feb. 5 is over, Huckabee and Giuliani could be the clear frontrunners with their delegate counts, and more than half the convention delegates will have already been awarded.
For the late contests, Republicans of one stripe would decide that Rudy is the only man who can stop Huckabee. And Republicans of a different stripe would fall in behind Huckabee as the only man who can stop Rudy. This bitter fight would also leave many Republican voters with a paralyzing choice between two poor general election candidates. From there, it becomes a Republican blood feud unless a third candidate can force a brokered convention.
— David Freddoso is an NRO staff reporter.
I think because the SoCons, the Fiscons, and the DefCons are a pretty hard-headed bunch that are loyal to their candidates.
Once these groups start pooling together, the numbers will change.
Tell you what. I am going to stay with my feeling about this. Otherwise, I have lost any enthusiasm I might have had for the 2008 race.
I hope GOP voters aren’t really as dumb that they would buy snake oil,and doom their party.
In what respectable pol is Paul doing better than McCain or Fred?
DMR. Equal to Fred.
All the people calling those who don’t endorse their candidate “stupid”, “unintelligent” or “sheep” are part of the problem. Conservative politics is made up of a large group of people who all have their most important individual issue whether it be abortion, taxes or gun rights, etc. Just because someone else doesn’t have your #1 agenda item at heart doesn’t make theirs any less important to them.
For the last 30 years we have had an unwritten agreement. We fight hard in the primaries to get our favored candidate the nod, but pull together and vote as a group once that decision is made. You’re candidate might not win but with any candidate from the GOP you have a good chance of having your issues acted on...with the dems, you have little or none and the damage they could do to any of them might set those political agendas back decades.
I was very disappointed when some leaders of the Christian right came out and said they absolutely wouldn’t vote for a candidate not to their liking. This is an abrogation of that unwritten agreement and could very well lead to a schism in the conservative community that could rip it apart and usher in dem control of congress and the white house for decades. Sad.
That being said, I believe we need to hold fast to our agreement. Huckabee is not my preferred candidate but if he gets the nod I will support him in the general election.
I hope others, including those to whom abortion is their #1 concern, will see the long term sanity of this strategy, and do the same.
Rudy, clearly. And I wouldn’t famously “sit out” the election either, as some always like to suggest. Of many, the thing that troubles me most about Huck is how he leads with his religion, rather than letting it just subtly infuse his campaign (as other great leaders have done).
There has been nothing brilliant about Fred’s strategy in this campaign. He frittered away his “moment” last summer by announcing late and then appearing disorganized/disinterested. There’s just no fire in his belly, as voters sense it. As you suggest, he’ll fare poorly in IA and NH, and then quietly bow out of the race. Clearly behind, he simply doesn’t have the fighter’s instinct necessary to battle back. . .
It's because, unfortunately, Fred isn't into sound bites, so what he says often flies right over the heads of your typical Republican primary voters.
There would be NO sanity in the Huckster as our candidate.
It would doom us to a Hillary as president. You would see even more Democrats go out and vote to make sure Huck never wins. Huck is the democrat dream for the opposing candidate. Count on it.
You would not be able to generate the enthusiasm needed to beat the Beast or any Democrat.
Just common sense.
Now why do you think that? just because the liberal socialist Democrat press give the Hillery all the free ink they can?
True that. And the problem is that neither of them offers anything to the other half of the coalition.
... and also that Republicans are facing a dismal November.
President Hillary?
President Obama?
I wish it weren't so.
But things don't look good from where I sit....
- John
Well put. We are a passionate crowd!
I heard him say a few weeks ago that he needed to place third in Iowa in order to remain as a viable candidate. That sentiment would seem to indicate his dropping out if Thursday's results put him in the fourth position or worse.
On the other hand, I guess he's allowed to "flip" on the issue as long as he doesn't "flip-flop."
(My Venn diagram says that even though all "flops" are "flips," not all "flips" are "flops." Sorry that my HTML skills don't permit me to post the graphic.)
A word to the wise:
The "word police" may soon be on your case, the way they've been after me. No more of this fire-in-the-belly cliché!
> he simply doesn’t have the fighter’s instinct <
Now you're talking correctly! I second the motion.
I agree. The Huckster is our worse nightmare. The Huckster has many strikes against him in a national election. The Baptist minister background and Arkansas background will be strong liabilities. He also has little name recognition nationally. These aspects will hurt him for independent votes. His positions and past votes on immigration, taxes, global warming, entitlements, and government spending are suspect at best so conservative support will be soft. He is good speaker and likable person so perhaps those attributes will help on the independent votes.
His nickname as the Huckster will also damage him nationally. I do not like to refer to a Republican in this manner but his actions seem to fit the nickname. I can excuse Giulliani and Romney for some of their liberal positions because they governed in very liberal places. The Huckster has no excuses for his political record however.
We need a candidate with clearly articulated positions on immigration, taxes, entitlements, global warming, energy, and other areas. These positions need to contrast with the rat positions. FDT is the only man with these clear positions, the ability to win in November, and the fortitude to stand behind his principles.
How can tax exempt churches, pastors etc shill and organize for a single political candidate?
“There would be NO sanity in the Huckster as our candidate.”
That maybe so, butif he gets the nominatin, I will support him.
“It would doom us to a Hillary as president.”
Baloney. You never get everything you want in politics but with a GOP in the White House at least the door will be open and the party can exert it’s own kind of pressure to get it’s agenda on the table.
Remember Harriet Meyers? The immigration debacle? Do you think conservatives can successfully exert that kind of pressure on Hillary.
“You would see even more Democrats go out and vote to make sure Huck never wins.”
Why?
“Huck is the democrat dream for the opposing candidate.”
Why?
“You would not be able to generate the enthusiasm needed to beat the Beast or any Democrat.”
The religious right sitting out an election is suicide for the GOP.
REDBOB: “To the extent that so-called ‘religious conservatives’ support Huckaby, they demonstrate they are, at best, not at all conservative, and at worst, that they are, shall we say, easily led.”
Hmmmm, I’m guessing you’ll be over there with that faction that’ll be supporting the pro-abort cross-dresser.
Absolutely Rudy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.