Posted on 02/12/2008 8:03:58 AM PST by TornadoAlley3
Huckabee’s right...not that Huckabee can do any better.
But he’s got a great ability to alienate it.
Is it even a question anymore?
The real question is: can Huckabee do any better?
Hmmm. Didn't see THAT one coming...
I question his ability to energize anything.
Exactly what I was thinking — Huck’s correct that McCain sucks, but Mr. Import-Illegal-Aliens-for-Jesus Huck is no better.
What? You not energized by his one liners? /s
Now there's a great campaign promise. I think I'd like the guy with a lessor chance of doing those things. ;-)
One thing a vote for Huckabee could do, is show the RNC that conservatives do not have to vote for their annointed one.
I agree. I guess one question is “What is the base?”. I don’t really know. The viability of the Republican party is, in my view, contingent upon answering that question and finding the common thread that unites. Clearly not all Republicans and not all conservatives have the same religious views, so specific details about one group’s religious convictions can’t be that point of unity. More general convictions like belief in self-determination, personal responsibility, the sanctity of life, commitment to providing the most nurturing environment for children, keeping America strong in the world, effort and merit-based achievement vs. socialism, etc. are more likely to be shared views and thus points of unity. What do we all agree on? Does anyone know?
The Huckster is only picking up support now because he's not John McCain.
He and McCain teamed up to get the last acceptable candidate out of the race and now he's representing himself as an alternative to McCain?
I'd vote for Ron Paul first, like the people in Montana.
I question Hucksterbee’s ability to energize anyone but brainwashed Amway/Quixtar pyramid scheme folks and religous fanatics.
My vote is with Ron Paul.
I disagree..check out Huck's speech from CPAC:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1967971/posts
"If you can't beat 'em, maybe another option?""
Sunday, Jan 20, 2008
By David Sanders
When word got out this week that Sen. Mark Pryor wouldn't face the threat of a creditable Republican opponent, thanks, in part, to state Republican Party chairman Dennis Milligan's discouraging would-be challengers in his party from running against the first-term Democrat, it elicited a few responses from yours truly.
Simply on the surface, it appears that Milligan is derelict in his duties, which includes recruiting quality Republican candidates. His justification, best I can tell, is that putting up someone to challenge Pryor, who is widely considered unbeatable, might provide extra incentive for Democrats to work harder this year. Republicans don't want that, especially since Arkansas figures to be a target state in the upcoming presidential contest.
But is sitting out the race the only option for Republicans?
This election year has already provided numerous ups and downs - frankly, at times it has seemed like up is down and down is up. What was predicted to happen in the presidential primaries hasn't gone according to plan.
Since things are so unpredictable only weeks into 2008, there is always a possibility, albeit small, that the popular anti-Washington-we-need-a-change sentiment driving this presidential campaign, might, at some point, proliferate through the electorate and affect key senatorial and congressional contests, rendering vulnerable politicians who were once considered a lock for re-election.
That said, someone would have to be willing to run, to take advantage of such a future electoral ethos, but it appears the well is dry. No Republican of any stature is willing to challenge Pryor.
So I've come full circle - this isn't all Milligan's fault. In fact, fending off any serious challenge is a testament to Pryor's ability. He has avoided toeing the Democratic line in spite of some very serious divisions between the two parties.
During his five years in the Senate, he has carved out some positions that are indistinguishable from some of the Republicans running for president. That doesn't mean those positions were always preferred or acceptable. It's merely a qualitative appraisal of a record Pryor's staff likes to highlight these days.
In terms of the war in Iraq, Pryor went against his party, voting against a resolution to pull the troops out and another plan containing a defined timeline for a troop withdrawal. Pryor pushed a plan to leave Iraq, but with a "secret" pull-out date. For a while last year, Mitt Romney was supportive of Pryor's secret withdrawal.
He voted for the Patriot Act, which puts him in line with every Republican except Ron Paul.
After he voted for the ban on partial-birth abortion, he voted against a resolution affirming Roe v. Wade as the law of the land. This places him to the right of Rudy Giuliani and more in line with pro-life Republicans like Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson, and others. (According to National Right to Life, Pryor's most recent votes on pro-life issues leave a lot to be desired.)
Pryor and Sen. John McCain teamed up together on the so-called "Gang of 14" to prevent a Senate meltdown over judicial appointments. They prevented Republicans from using the "nuclear option" to break the Democrats' filibuster, but they also cleared the way for many of Bush's nominees to receive a vote on the Senate floor.
Last summer, Pryor voted against his friend McCain to block the controversial immigration reform bill backed by the White House and Democratic leaders. In the past, Pryor had supported measures more friendly to illegal immigrants, which puts him in good company. Both Giuliani and Huckabee have now taken a hard line (to varying degrees) on illegal immigration, but in their previous jobs, both men supported pro-illegal immigrate policies.
Pryor voted to protect gun manufacturers from frivolous lawsuits and against a bill that would have outlawed a significant amount of gun ammunition as well as other bills supporting the Second Amendment, which puts him in line with Huckabee and Thompson, but to the right of Giuliani and Romney.
Milligan told The Associated Press that the 2006 Democratic sweep set Arkansas Republicans back 20 years. Since Arkansas' junior Democratic senator is getting a pass from Republicans and given the fact that he's been fairly conservative (comparatively speaking), Milligan and his party cohorts could, in the spirit of bipartisanship, consider Pryor for the GOP nomination. They have nothing to lose and are desperate to win.
------- David Sanders writes twice weekly for the Arkansas News Bureau in Little Rock and is a host of the Arkansas Education Television Network's "Unconventional Wisdom." His e-mail address is DavidJSanders@aol.com.
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.