Republican Blood Feud

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.

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...

The exact same thing applies to supporters of Romney and of Guliani.

"He would lose because he has tried to USE religion to get the nomination."

Every president, maybe every politician, that I can remember has used religion in way or another to get votes. That you do not admit this and then use it as a disqualification factor is disengenuous.

Now if you want to claim that you don't agree with the way Huckabee has done so, fine. But the fact is 80% of Americans identify with a religion or at least a supreme being and politicians use it to their advantage...even Hillary.

It’s difficult to be sick of Fred. He’s not a gregarious politician flinging mud. He just defends himself when attacked and sticks to the issues at hand. He has the appropriate character for the job IMO.

Fred is the best candidate hands down, the public will love him in national debates.

I have to disagree. That is not true. The most loved and successful candidate was Reagan. He won by landslides. He was not really very religious. What he did was respect the Judeo-Christian values of our founders and the Constitution.

That is what voters want. Freedom to practice their chosen religion, or freedom to not. That is America.

Huckabee is an abomination, hurting the cause of religion to pander to a very few. Do we need them? Maybe. Do we want to lose to socialists like Hillary and most of the Democrats to support a losing cause like Huckabee? NO, not me. That sir, is what will happen. That is why the MSM gives this guy a pass.

I never said I supported Huck but I do understand why he is pandering to the religious right. It’s politics and if and when he gets the nomination you can expect his tune to change. How much that will hurt him is yet to be seen but you know the MSM is not going to let anyone to forget.

However, you are making the claim that Huck cannot win against the dem and I don’t agree. May conservatives will hold their nose and vote for him and you know the cultural bloc will come out en mass...with their pocketbooks

Any GOP candidate will fire up the left, they have been out of the White House for 8 years and are itching. Agreed, Hucks abortion and gay comments are going to play well to that part of the left but his somewhat soft stance on the WOT may offset that.

BTW - If you’re going to compare every candidate to Reagan no one will ever be good enough. Nothing is as cut and dried as some would want you to believe, politics is made up of shades of grey. Discerning those shades is the difference between losing and winning.

Okay Bob J, I wasn’t making a comparison to Reagan the man. I was saying that Reagan , the MAN, knew that what US citzens wanted was a strict defense of the Constitution and strength based on pride and honesty.

Huck is no where near what we need to win. The Huck stance will kill the GOP. Mind you, Rudy would do the same from a different perspective.

Therin lies the secret to winning. It is there and it is obvious. FR talks about it it daily. Can you see it?

I really believe Huck supporters are as blind as Rudy supporters. Either way, we will end up losing.

All the people calling those who don’t endorse their candidate “stupid”, “unintelligent” or “sheep” are part of the problem.

I agree wholeheartedly. I am really getting tired of the attacks.

I am vehemently against Giuliani, but don't think I have not called Giuliani supporters names. Lately, it has gotten pretty nasty around here, especially on Romney and Paul threads.

From there, it becomes a Republican blood feud unless a third candidate can force a brokered convention.

This is the dumb beat. It has been faint up until now, but it's growing.

RINOs in charge is not the inevitable future for the Republican party.

Republicans, working against today's top tier of RINO candidates, have a hope that with perseverance, one of the true conservatives can win out.

There is little information out about the other Super Tuesday states and Rudy is doing better in those than one might expect, given the press about IA and NH. There are also delegates who are not committed by primary results but can use their own authority, many of whom are Rudy supporters. It’s way to early to count him out.

I can excuse Giulliani and Romney for some of their liberal positions because they governed in very liberal places. Huckster has no excuses for his political record however.

Nonsense. Huckabee won elections as a Republican in a state that is dominated by Democrats and has been for a very long time.

The twisted logic that Huckabee can't win a national election because he is not an arch-conservative is 180 degrees out of phase. In fact, I don't believe an arch-conservative can win a national election.

Huckabee may have the best chance of any Republican to win national election because he has cross-over appeal and is not the bought and paid-for lackey of the establishment.

I am a conservative and I don't agree with Huckabee on many points but the character assassination of him on this site is completely out of line.

Further, I don't believe Mike Huckabee needs the support of arch-conservatives to win the presidency. The country is evenly divided in its politics. Extremist positions in either direction will NOT get the job done.

If you are not proud to call him "Huckster," don't do it. Name-calling may seem cute but it is more a reflection of the character of the name-caller than upon that of the target.

Mike Huckabee is not this country's worst nightmare. That is a preposterous assertion that doesn't begin to take into account other choices running for president who could be far worse for the future of the U.S.

I am a conservative and I don't agree with Huckabee on many points but the character assassination of him on this site is completely out of line.

It is completely in-line for what should be going on during a primary. What's your dog in this Huckabee hunt?

Mike Huckabee is not this country's worst nightmare.

True! But he does happen to be a significant problem [at the very least, a bad dream] to the political party he claims to represent. Last I checked, this party at least paid lip-service to limited government and steered clear of class envy rhetoric. Has Huckabee done these things?

This is a rather shallow analysis of a complex situation.

They take no account of supporters shifting from one candidate to another as candidates drop out. Nor does the article account for the 10-20% undecided or the shallow support for the various candidates.

Romney and Rudy have the most money so they will be in to the end. Next is McCain and then Fred. If Fred can outperform McCain, he may get his old friend to drop out and recommend him.

Huckabee, I think, is a one state wonder. If he disappoints in IA (lower than 2nd place), I think he’s through for the campaign. He doesn’t have much money.

Right now I see Romney, Fred, and Huck in IA. We’ll see on January 3rd.

"Mike Huckabee is not this country's worst nightmare."

Not as a person. "Compassionate conservatism" is over. President Bush tried it and ended up getting spit on and insulted by the democrats he worked with. And he didn't respond back as he should have. A leader must show his opponents his tolerance limit. And he has a Harvard MBA.

And he has a bunch of countries afraid of him like democrats should be. Go figure this out.

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.