Posted on 04/21/2015 12:20:15 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The Upshot’’s Nate Cohn is making the contrarian case for Mike Huckabee. I give him credit for seeing things that others might not, but—despite the optimistic headline: “Mike Huckabee Would Be a More Important Candidate Than You Might Think,” he actually underestimates Huck’s potential as a disruptive factor in this campaign.
It’s unclear what’s in the water in Hope, Arkansas, but that Bill Clinton and Huck are both from the same hamlet is nothing short of miraculous. Put aside the snake oil salesman stuff, and the numerous ridiculous things Huckabee has said to get attention, and you’re left with a man who is essentially the love child of Clinton and Ronald Reagan. I recently argued that only the great politicians like The Gipper and Bubba can oscillate between indignation and compassion. Well, guess what: Huckabee can do both, too. This is a guy who’s so compelling he actually got Jon Stewart to question his own abortion stance.
“I’m a conservative; I’m just not mad about it,” he often quips. Except he can be mad about it—or feign anger, at least. So he can play the reasonable conservative or he can hurl red meat. As they say in football, he can play both sides of the ball. In 2008, Huckabee came out of nowhere to wow us in the debates. The competition will be stiffer this time around, but he can do it again.
The fact that Huckabee is a good communicator—and that he can appeal to evangelical Christians, a hugely important constituency in Iowa—is not exactly the most novel observation. But I think there are two additional things Huckabee has going for him that are not as widely appreciated.
The first is that he spent the last several years as a Fox News host. Now, let’s be honest: It’s unlikely that many people reading this have ever watched Huckabee’s Saturday night show—except to see if he was going to announce for president (or for purely ironic purposes). And I’m not even suggesting you were watching Girls instead. A lot of us who watch Fox shows like Special Report wouldn’t think to turn on Huckabee.
But millions of Americans did watch his show—and guess what? Many of these same Americans will vote in Republican primaries. I think we probably underestimate the impact of hosting a weekly show on Fox News.
Lastly, though, I think there is a huge underserved constituency in the GOP—and that constituency is what might best be termed populist conservatives. These folks tend to be white and working-class and who feel they’ve been left behind in America. They are culturally conservative—but they also want to keep government out of their Medicare.
Mitt Romney was arguably the worst candidate Republicans could have ever nominated to appeal to this constituency. But while candidates like Huckabee and Rick Santorum flirted with going full populist, something always seemed to keep them from really doubling down on it.
One can only assume this is because there is a ceiling on how much populist demagoguery one is permitted to dole out—and still remain a Republican in good standing. There’s a fine line between attacking the “fat cats” and engaging in class warfare, and one doesn’t want to get on the wrong side of that line. But having cashed in, and now finding himself in his post-radio, and possibly post-TV phase, Huckabee might well decide it’s time to throw caution to the wind.
Don’t get me wrong: As a free market conservative, this brand of populism isn’t my cup of tea. Nor do I think Huckabee can win the nomination. He’s always lacked money and organization, and that won’t change. But as a political observer, I can’t help but suspect that there is a huge opening for a conservative candidate willing to be the working man’s conservative.
The last time someone really tried this was when “Pitchfork” Pat Buchanan, and then Ross Perot, ran in 1992. It resonated then, but that was before the “giant sucking sound” really kicked in. Whether it’s globalization or immigration—or whatever “-ation” might have taken your job—it stands to reason that the same grassroots phenomenon that helped Buchanan and Perot tap into an underserved constituency might be even more potent today.
Already known as a tax-and-spender, Mike Huckabee isn’t soon going to win over Steve Forbes or Larry Kudlow or The Club for Growth, so why try? There are tons of Americans out there listening to country radio, clinging to God and guns…and government.
The other day, when New Jersey Governor Chris Christie proposed some fairly modest reforms to save social security (means testing and raising the retirement age to 69), ostensibly conservative readers weighed in against it on the Facebook page of the Daily Caller, where I work.
“I’m entitled to social security because it’s MY money that I have given to the govt since I was 16 years old with the PROMISE I would get it back when I was older. FU Christie.” Yes, this is anecdotal—but this comment was also representative of a lot of comments on that particular post. A lot of conservatives appear to believe there is some lockbox where “their” money is being saved for their retirement.
A few days later came this headline from the Weekly Standard: “Huckabee Bashes Republican Plans to Reform Medicare and Social Security.” As Huckabee himself told The Daily Beast over the weekend, “I’m getting slammed by some in the GOP ruling class for thinking it wrong to involuntarily take money from people’s paychecks for 50 years and then not keep the promise government made.”
Some of the same underlying trends behind the excitement over Elizabeth Warren are present, if dormant, on the right. So how can Huckabee break away from the pack? Most free market conservatives I know agree that “crony capitalism” is a problem. This has become boilerplate language you can expect from everyone from Marco Rubio to Ted Cruz, and it’s a kind of flirting with populism.
But Huckabee appears poised to do what no other Republican will have the ability or the inclination to do—and that is to go full populist in a way that acknowledges the fact that a lot of folks need the government’s help, that resents the fact that the game has been rigged by the rich and the corporations, yet still embraces a culturally conservative lifestyle. This will provoke serious pushback from the libertarian and pro-business wings of the conservative coalition. But if he does it—if he sticks to it—out there in the hinterland, there’ll be a market for it.
Get your pitchforks ready.
*******
Editor's note: Matt Lewis's wife previously consulted for Ted Cruz's senate campaign, and currently consults for RickPAC, the leadership PAC affiliated with Rick Perry.
I see him as too much of a go along to get along type of person. For that reason I agree with you. I’m sure common core seems to him a relatively harmless practice. What he doesn’t realize is the insidiousness of progressivism. They start small eventually stick their hooks in and take as much freedom from you as they can. No more compromise with the left. I want a president who will dig in and move away from the left in every way possible
The danger for the baby boomers and beyond is not enough people working to support those getting benefits.
I am almost 60 and have been reading the pro and con arguments over when to take SS, at 62 or later.
Given the Demographics, Budget problems, and the state of the Social Welfare programs financially, it might make sense to take it at 62 and get all you can before the implosion.
Once a voter goes into CRUZ-control, there’s no turning back.
You need the co-operation of Congress as a whole to tackle the major problems we have.
Just the other day I learn that if we don't change on spending and paying down the debt, at least $1 Trillion of the budget will be to do nothing but pay interest on the Debt.
The Fed will never be able to raise interest rates for that simple reason, they have to control the long end of the Bond Market and keep rates as low as possible. So right now we are screwed.
Go away, Huckster.
You’re so 1990s.
Huck’s a tax raiser and an amnesty queen.
The liberals are really scared of Cruz and Walker! They are throwing all these stories of “alternative” candidates at the readers.
Huckabee has a problem. He is not electable. He is a sunshine conservative.
How come there are so many moderate democrats running for the GOP ticket?
To me, Huckabee is one step up from the Bible-shysters like TV-preachers! I don’t trust him any further than I can throw him!
I’m not sure how I’m screwed anytime soon. When interest rates start to go up I will likely change my investment strategy.
You’re right, of course, that any progress will require the support of Congress. Over the last few decades congress has been almost embarrassingly deferential to the chief executive. A strong-willed president with a clear mandate will get his way with Congress in almost every way
The evangelical christians, especially from the south would prefer Huckabee over Cruz.
“Why would I want Huckabee when I can have Cruz? Same thing with Santorum.”
I agree. But both will shave off a few point here or there and get some money, especially when propped up by Roger Ailes.
People believe that they traded 15%* of their incomes over decades for a promise by the federal government to pay them certain sums of money at retirement, no different from any pension plan. That elements of the GOP want to renege on this promise is not just politically retarded, it is an injustice for which the party will pay at the polls if it follows through. Paul Ryan, the political autist who dreamed up a misconceived scheme to cut SS and Medicare that strikes at retirement incomes for core middle income GOP voters (sub-$50K), has deservedly had his presidential hopes deep-sixed.
* 15% is more than many people (sub-$50K income) pay in Federal income taxes as a % of total income, so this isn't a trivial amount.
Not pickin’ on you. Just wanted to express my reaction to anything Huckabee in as few words as possible. The only other two word phrase that comes to mind is: Good Grief!
HUCKABEER
awesome!
That one just might stick. LOL!
Huckabee is to the left of most democrats on fiscal issues. He’s a conservative on social issues only.
“I agree. But both will shave off a few point here or there and get some money, especially when propped up by Roger Ailes.”
Not sure. If in your vast skill set you have the same skills as your primary opponent, you are at an advantage. Cruz can get the evangelicals just as well as Huckabee or Santorum could plus he has his other qualities which neither have.
I cannot see a donor, spending millions to siphon votes... scratch that, I can see it. Just not someone like the Kochs.
Whether I like it or not, if there are not enough workers,i.e., Demographics to make the Ponzi scheme work then it can't.
I see no real choice but to cut benefits if the programs are to survive in their current state.
We are all in a hole that can't be fixed without hard choices and there just won't be any made. Everyone wants more government and their benefits. We are heading for Japan like status, maybe already there. They can't let their interest rates rise above 1.5% or their entire budget blows to Hell. We have kicked the Can Down the Road about as far as it can go. So the next step will be a selective Debt Default to survive or a complete collapse that will probably be presided over by Hillary.
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.