Mike Huckabee thinks he has Iowa evangelicals locked down. He’s wrong. [CRUZ]

national journal ^ | Tim Alberta

[SoConPubbie]

Just as Ted Cruz was electrifying Iowa's right-wing activists in Des Moines with a call for America's rebirth, Mike Huckabee's team was erecting a display of free books in the hall outside.

Cruz's time was running short. A few more speakers and then Huckabee, another crowd favorite, would be up. So the Texan ended his fiery speech with a request: Conservatives who wanted to join his "grassroots army" should text "Constitution" to a special phone number. It was a smart stunt. The Freedom Summit auditorium sparkled with LED screens, giving Cruz, his adviser brags, more than 1,000 Iowa phone numbers for less than 30 seconds of work.

Huckabee wanted to make those connections, too. For more than 90 minutes, his team circled the book display with clipboards and pens, asking for activists' contact information. Some attendees obliged; many others hurried by. The clipboards just couldn't keep pace.

This is what Huckabee is up against. The former Arkansas governor who came from nowhere to win Iowa's 2008 Republican caucuses remains immensely popular in the state. He connects on personal and spiritual levels in evangelical-heavy Iowa, and social conservatives in this state have adopted him as one of their own. Huckabee's team is counting on that loyalty as he prepares to launch a second presidential campaign.

But things have changed since Huckabee's last campaign here. Not only have the operational tactics evolved—as demonstrated by Cruz's efficient data-collection strategy—but the race to win religious voters has also become crowded. Whereas Huckabee in 2008 faced little competition in wooing socially conservative caucus-goers, this time around, more than a half dozen viable candidates will target that critical subset of the Iowa electorate.

This means trouble for Huckabee. The last time he won an election was 2002, before Facebook, before Twitter. Before Instagram, Snapchat, and iPhones. The last time he won the caucuses, in 2008, the tea-party movement did not exist. He'll now face a more conservative field, one that's younger, tech-savvy, and already aggressively reaching for his core supporters. And while Huckabee can still sell books, it's not clear that he can still sell himself.

“Huckabee’s 2008 supporters are not locked up, and it’s not because they’re all staying with Santorum,” says Greg Baker, a Santorum 2012 supporter who is the political director at the Iowa Family Leader.

"We need some new, young blood in the party," says Patricia Hatfield, standing outside Books-A-Million in Ames, where Huckabee has just signed copies of his new manifesto, God, Guns, Grits and Gravy.

Hatfield and her husband, Jerry, are precisely the kind of people Huckabee can't afford to lose. They are self-identified evangelicals who supported Huckabee in 2008, and, when he decided not to run in 2012, they helped former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania win the Iowa caucuses. The Hatfields are active in state politics, and they adore Huckabee personally. But they are ready for something new. "Eight years," Jerry Hatfield says, remembering Huckabee's 2008 campaign, "is a long time."

This sentiment echoes resoundingly among caucus-goers here. Recent interviews with more than a dozen former Huckabee supporters yielded only a single ironclad commitment to back him again in 2016. Explanations were straightforward: The country is changing, the party is changing, and campaigns are changing. 2016, they say, will look nothing like 2008. The ground has shifted beneath Huckabee's feet.

But Huckabee's team doesn't buy it. For months, staffers have laid the groundwork for another campaign—and have done so under the pretense that things haven't changed in Iowa. That Huckabee still connects distinctively with social conservatives. That his message still resonates uniquely with Republican voters. And that no other candidate will compete with him for the affections of the evangelical base. "When it comes to rallying social conservatives, Ted Cruz doesn't hold a candle to Mike Huckabee," the former governor's spokeswoman, Alice Stewart, told National Journal late last year.

That theory is about to be tested. Cruz leads a large pack of conservative White House contenders aiming their campaign operations straight at evangelicals, the heart of the Iowa Republican electorate. In recent presidential cycles, they have coalesced behind one candidate. In 2012, that was Santorum, adopted by Huckabee's 2008 supporters as the antiestablishment vessel (after flings with Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann). This time around, Iowa faces an unprecedented situation: two former winners competing in the first-in-the-nation caucuses.

But, here again, Huckabee's team is dismissive. One senior Huckabee adviser, describing the conversations within his camp, puts it thusly: "Santorum rented Iowa. Huckabee owns it."

In this case, Team Huckabee's hubris is justifiable. Santorum still has a presence throughout the state, thanks to his Patriot Voices super PAC and affiliated nonprofit. But many of his top Iowa officials from 2012 have moved on. One of them, speaking on condition of anonymity because of their personal friendship, says Santorum "was just the last man standing" against Mitt Romney in 2012. If loyalty is an issue for Huckabee heading into his second run, Iowa Republicans say, it's even more problematic for Santorum.

"Huckabee's 2008 supporters are not locked up, and it's not because they're all staying with Santorum," says Greg Baker, a Santorum 2012 supporter who is the political director at the Iowa Family Leader.

Indeed, Santorum should be the least of Team Huckabee's concerns this time around. A new cast of characters, many of them fresh-faced and allied with the grassroots, are working hard to make inroads with evangelicals.

Certainly, there's Cruz, who has been reaching out to Christian leaders for advice on hiring a state director to run his Iowa operation. But the list also includes Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who recently hired top Iowa strategist David Polyansky, the man credited with orchestrating Huckabee's 2008 caucus triumph; Texas Gov. Rick Perry, whose top Iowa adviser, Bob Haus, is highly respected in social-conservative circles; Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who missed the Freedom Summit because he was hosting a day of prayer in his home state; and neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who recently tapped Ryan Rhodes, chairman of the Iowa Tea Party and a well-connected evangelical, to run his Iowa operation.

"It's a good problem to have for Christian conservatives," says Jamie Johnson, a leading evangelical organizer and member of the Iowa GOP's state Central Committee.

Steve Scheffler, president of the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition and the state's GOP national committeeman, says the race to become the consensus evangelical favorite is "wide open." But he warns that while several candidates are already connecting with religious voters, he's waiting to see who actually puts together a functional campaign. "You might have the right message and energy, but you have to have an organization to turn people out. And that's not easy."

It may be premature to appraise campaign organizations, but there is a pervasive sense on the ground that Carson isn't built to last. The soft-spoken outsider has generated large crowds, and there is plenty of talk about how his campaign presence spans all of Iowa's 99 counties. But Carson's support, one unaffiliated conservative leader emphasizes, is "a mile wide and an inch deep." In fact, two neutral Republican officials, in separate interviews, noted that one of Carson's county chairs is elderly, infirm, and rarely leaves the house.

So, who has both the conservative bona fides and the organizational muscle needed to win Iowa? Influential Republicans here suspect the field will boil down to Walker and Cruz.

The son of a Baptist minister, Walker spent a chunk of his childhood in rural Iowa before moving to neighboring Wisconsin. He often spoke from his father's pulpit on Sunday mornings, and he took his faith so seriously that friends expected him to become a minister. This religious and cultural authenticity has helped Walker woo voters in Wisconsin, and his campaign hopes it will help him gain a foothold in Iowa. He opened his Freedom Summit speech by advocating the power of prayer—a message that was appreciated by top evangelical leaders, including some influential church pastors, in attendance.

Cruz, on the other hand, has made no top-level hires in Iowa. But he has spent significant time in the state over the past two years. So has his father, Pastor Rafael Cruz, who draws crowds that could rival any other candidate's.

[DoodleDawg]

About the only voting block Huckaboob has locked down is the anti-Beyonce’ voters.

[EternalVigilance]

As an Iowan with at least some small sense of what is going on in my state, I’ll say that, in my opinion, the article is pretty accurate.

[alstewartfan]

Walker is attempting to wear half-cowboy hat, half sombrero. I’m sick of these weak candidates who will allow the onslaught of socialist destruction through our borders.

[jjotto]

That highlights the importance of a couple of small states getting some attention at the outset. An overlooked candidate can emerge from the crowd without already having tens of millions of dollars, and top-tier candidates can stumble early and avoid being a distraction when the process is farther along.

[DoodleDawg]

Cruz makes good speeeches and is a good debater, but he has not record of conservative accomplishments.

But he has a record of Conservative stands in the Senate. His opposition to Obamacare. His stands against amnesty and Obama's executive orders. His filibuster of last year's spending bill. His opposition to Obama appointments. He may not have been successful but when it comes to taking a stand on conservative principles then Cruz's record takes second place to nobody.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Your check bounced....

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Walker is attempting to wear half-cowboy hat, half sombrero. I’m sick of these weak candidates who will allow the onslaught of socialist destruction through our borders.”

I do my own research on candidates. Walker has a 2 year trail of amnesty, and unlimited HB1 visas. Might as well vote for Rubio : )

[Old Retired Army Guy]

Cruz is a Senator. Haven’t we had enough of those guys? All Senators are just more of “blah, blah, blah). I would prefer a Governor who has had to face down an unfriendly Legislature and courts, not to mention the Democrat and Union money with succcess.

[stephenjohnbanker]

So he fought the unions......I hope you spee sponish : )

[gwgn02]

I’ve had enough of RINO’s...be them Gov’s or Senators...and faux conservatives who pretend to be grassroots like Scott Walker.

I’ll support a real leader...Ted Cruz.

[SoConPubbie]

Cruz is a Senator. Haven’t we had enough of those guys? All Senators are just more of “blah, blah, blah). I would prefer a Governor who has had to face down an unfriendly Legislature and courts, not to mention the Democrat and Union money with succcess.


So, James Madison and John Quincy Adams were all just "blah, blah, blah"?

There have been just as many horrible Presidents who were Governors first as there have been horrible Presidents that were Senators first.

This whole thing about Executive Experience is nothing but a Smoke Screen issue designed by Walker supporters to cover for the fact that he is much less conservative than Ted Cruz and that Ted Cruz IS the best choice for POTUS.

You've never had anything good to say about Ted Cruz.

Why would anyone with a modicum of common sense listen to anything you have to say about Ted Cruz?

James Monroe:

He was of French and Scottish descent. Born in Westmoreland County, Virginia, Monroe was of the planter class and fought in the American Revolutionary War. He was wounded in the Battle of Trenton with a musket ball to his shoulder. After studying law under Thomas Jefferson from 1780 to 1783, he served as a delegate in the Continental Congress. As an anti-federalist delegate to the Virginia convention that considered ratification of the United States Constitution, Monroe opposed ratification, claiming it gave too much power to the central government. He took an active part in the new government, and in 1790 he was elected to the Senate of the first United States Congress, where he joined the Jeffersonians. He gained experience as an executive as the Governor of Virginia and rose to national prominence as a diplomat in France, when he helped negotiate the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. During the War of 1812, Monroe held the critical roles of Secretary of State and the Secretary of War under President James Madison.[2]

Facing little opposition from the fractured Federalist Party, Monroe was easily elected president in 1816, winning over 80 percent of the electoral vote and becoming the last president during the First Party System era of American politics. As president, he bought Florida from Spain and sought to ease partisan tensions, embarking on a tour of the country that was generally well received. With the ratification of the Treaty of 1818, under the successful diplomacy of his Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, the United States extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific, giving America harbor and fishing rights in the Pacific Northwest. The United States and Britain jointly occupied the Oregon Country. In addition to the acquisition of Florida, the landmark Treaty of 1819 secured the border of the United States along the 42nd Parallel to the Pacific Ocean and represented America's first determined attempt at creating an "American global empire".[3] As nationalism surged, partisan fury subsided and the "Era of Good Feelings" ensued until the Panic of 1819 struck and dispute over the admission of Missouri embroiled the country in 1820. Nonetheless, Monroe won near-unanimous reelection.

Monroe supported the founding of colonies in Africa for free African Americans that would eventually form the nation of Liberia, whose capital, Monrovia, is named in his honor. In 1823, he announced the United States' opposition to any European intervention in the recently independent countries of the Americas with the Monroe Doctrine, which became a landmark in American foreign policy. His presidency concluded the first period of American presidential history before the beginning of Jacksonian democracy and the Second Party System era. Following his retirement in 1825, Monroe was plagued by financial difficulties. He died in New York City on July 4, 1831.

John Quincy Adams -

As president he sought to modernize the American economy and promote education. Adams enacted a part of his agenda and paid off much of the national debt.[7] However he was stymied time and again by a Congress controlled by his enemies, and his lack of patronage networks helped politicians eager to undercut him. He lost his 1828 bid for re-election to Andrew Jackson. Adams is best known as a diplomat who shaped America's foreign policy in line with his ardently nationalist commitment to America's republican values. More recently, he has been portrayed as the exemplar and moral leader in an era of modernization. During Adams' lifetime, technological innovations and new means of communication spread messages of religious revival, social reform, and party politics. Goods, money, and people traveled more rapidly and efficiently than ever before.[8]

If you are going to post an opinion like that, you might want to check your history first.

To date, sixteen senators have also served as president of the United States. Three senators, Warren G. Harding, John F. Kennedy, and Barack Obama moved directly from the U.S. Senate to the White House.  

(Photo: Warren G. Harding. Senate Historical Office)

-----------------------------------------------------

James Monroe

Senator, 1790-1794

President, 1817-1825

-----------------------------------------------------

John Quincy Adams

Senator, 1803-1808

President, 1825-1829

-----------------------------------------------------

Andrew Jackson

Senator, 1797-1798; 1823-1825

President, 1829-1837

-----------------------------------------------------

Martin Van Buren

Senator, 1821-1828

President, 1837-1841

-----------------------------------------------------

William Henry Harrison

Senator, 1825-1828

President, 1841

-----------------------------------------------------

John Tyler

Senator, 1827-1836

President, 1841-1845

-----------------------------------------------------

Franklin Pierce

Senator, 1837-1842

President, 1853-1857

-----------------------------------------------------

James Buchanan

Senator, 1834-1845

President, 1857-1861

-----------------------------------------------------

Andrew Johnson

Senator, 1857-1862; 1875

President, 1865-1869

-----------------------------------------------------

Benjamin Harrison

Senator, 1881-1887

President, 1889-1893

-----------------------------------------------------

Warren G. Harding

Senator, 1915-1921

President, 1921-1923

-----------------------------------------------------

Harry S. Truman

Senator, 1935-1945

President, 1945-1953

-----------------------------------------------------

John F. Kennedy

Senator, 1953-1960

President, 1961-1963

-----------------------------------------------------

Lyndon B. Johnson

Senator, 1949-1961

President, 1963-1969

-----------------------------------------------------

Richard M. Nixon

Senator, 1950-1953

President, 1969-1974

-------

CRUZ or LOSE!

[xzins]

Huckabee is in the race specifically to split the support for Cruz.

[Beagle8U]

The fact that Walker is the son of a Preacher won’t hurt him in Iowa either.

[stephenjohnbanker]

CRUZ is the O N L Y candidate who is a real conservative, with a trail to prove it. Nobody else is even in the ball park.None of them will get the conservative vote, so that means they CANNOT win, PERIOD!

Even a somewhat addled mind should know this, unless of course they don’t want to.

[Old Retired Army Guy]

Nice list. Didn’t see any name on it that had any conservative accomplishments. Of course, I would discard the ones who were in office 200 years ago as times were a little different. By the way, I would suggest you do not lower yourself to the same status as Liberals by resorting to name calling of those who have a different opinion than yours. Conservatives should be above that kind of rhetoric. I have 30 years of service in the Military and am probably more conservative than most of the “proclaimed Conservatives”. What are your credentials?

[Din Maker]

When Santorum endorsed Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey, years ago, that convinced me that his principles are shallow. Huckabee has become a RINO since ‘08. He’s cozied up the GOP Establishment and would do their bidding if his fat, Hillbilly-bacon ass should sit in the chair in the Oval Office. Both of these “good Christians” have the propensity to be a political whore for political gain.

[BJ1]

>>>I would prefer a Governor who has had to face down an unfriendly Legislature and courts, not to mention the Democrat and Union money with succcess.<<<

I would prefer a guy who isn’t afraid to get dirty. I would prefer a guy who doesn’t give a damn about playing the game the way it has been played before. I would prefer a guy who didn’t suck up to the media. I mean you know who is going to side with whom. You need somebody like Reagan who could rise above the noise and get his message to the voters. Most Americans think things are screwed up. Now who is best able to get his message out in a crowded field? Who is best able to cut through the bias the typical reporter puts on presidential candidate? Who is best able to sound like he has common sense?

I mean Jeb/Christie/Huckster/Santorum are all pretty much the same old thing. If anyone of them won the nomination they would likely lose don’t you guys think?

Cruz, I dunno how well he will do. He’s a smart guy, but senators meh. Governors usually win the presidency. 2008 was two senators running so let’s not read anything in BHO. Walker? Maybe. Jindal, I’m not up to speed on him. Somebody care to offer analysis? Rand Paul? Despite being a senator, he has a message so different. That libertarian bent of his makes him have a cross over appeal to voters who don’t normally vote R. I think he would do the best (in the current field) in a campaign: If he can be smart enough not get the “nut” label attached to him. Remember the lady from NJ who said “I’m not a witch.” LOL what a bad quote. We also have Rubio, but can he do more than make a convincing argument to elect him because he thinks he can get the Latino vote? Can he actually deliver that and change the electoral landscape in 2016?

Personally, I like Cruz.

[SoConPubbie]

Of course, I would discard the ones who were in office 200 years ago as times were a little different.

Of course you would, nevermind that the problems that they faced at that time with a new country and with all of the super-powers of that time were at least as dangerous and complicated as what any president of the current time-frame has to face, you have to throw those out because it thoroughly discredits your lack-luster attempt to discredit Cruz in favor of Walker.

[txhurl]

But he has spent significant time in the state over the past two years. So has his father, Pastor Rafael Cruz, who draws crowds that could rival any other candidate’s.

---

Throw Sarah and Ted in with him on stage, and you have 20K minimum turnout crowds wherever they go. The other candidates will never be able to afford the astroturf their rallies would need, even with free cheese and beer!

[Din Maker]

Re: Your Post #11: You make a very valid point in reference to Ted Cruz. I would say, however, that Walker is not the guy to “watch” but, maybe, the guy to “consider”. To “watch” someone sounds like they are an impostor. I know a lot of FReepers are “watching” Walker like he is the enemy because they think he is a closet Amnesty supporter. Not so.