Huckabee in '08?

[Neil D]

Propelled by little more than his message and political skills, Republican presidential contender former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has vaulted into a statistical dead heat for first place in crucial, first-in-the-nation caucus state Iowa, according to a new ABC News/Washington Post poll.

Does Iowa Love Huckabee?

Huckabee's surge is equal parts size and intensity, having gained considerable ground among key parts of the GOP base in the Hawkeye state — evangelicals, conservatives, weekly churchgoers and abortion opponents — with 50 percent of his supporters "very enthusiastic" about him, compared with 28 percent of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's supporters.

The affable underdog achieved all this on a shoestring budget with little national infrastructure and close to no support from the Republican establishment.

"The people of Iowa are pretty savvy when it comes to politics," Huckabee told ABC News in an interview. "They are folks who, you know, they auction their cattle, but not their presidential candidates. And so just because somebody's gone in there and spent a bunch of money doesn't necessarily mean the people of Iowa say, 'He's my guy.'"

Huckabee, who placed second in the Iowa Straw Poll in August, suggested that for the last "11 months, everybody's been writing my political obituary each month, saying, 'He can't go on, he can't go on, he doesn't have enough money.' And here I am, tied. I mean, that's not supposed to happen. But it's happening because Americans are electing a president, not somebody who's going to head the fundraising for the United Way."

He insisted that with a successful showing in Iowa Jan. 3, he would have sufficient staff "from the momentum of Iowa, through the next few states, in New Hampshire and South Carolina, Michigan and Nevada" to win the nomination.

"People forget that presidential campaigns are … if they're anything, about momentum," Huckabee said. "And if you have momentum, you'll get the money. You can have money, but if you don't have any momentum, then you'll end up like President Phil Gramm or President Ross Perot or President Steve Forbes."

Is He Electable?

Huckabee's hurdle today remains the same one he faced last week when despite his more ardent opposition to legal abortion he lost the endorsement of the National Right to Life Committee to former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson: Few Americans are convinced he can actually win the White House.

In fact, only 42 percent of Huckabee's supporters in Iowa think he's going to be elected president.

"That's the hurdle I've had since the beginning, and it's also the one that's being erased by every month's standings getting better," Huckabee said. This kind of poll gives more people reason to think, 'Hmm, the guy could win.'"

In 1979, Huckabee says, Ronald Reagan was in fourth place in polls. "He was flat broke. They were living three to a hotel room, eating peanut butter, and nobody thought he had a chance. He had upset the Republican establishment. He certainly wasn't their candidate, and it looked like that he wasn't going anywhere. Now people talk about, 'Oh, the inevitable Ronald Reagan' — but that's not what was going on back at this particular point in time."

Huckabee vs Romney

[John317]

I agree with a lot that he says, but as the article points out, it is highly unlikely that he will get the Republican nomination. It is one thing to win Iowa but something else entirely to win the most delegates to the National Convention. At this point, I think it is still most likely that the top contenders of the two major parties will be Guilliani and Hillary. Hillary has a very strong chance to win the White House. Those who loved Bill the first 8 will be tickled pink to have him back for at least another 4.

[Neil D]

True, John, but the media, from my limited viewing, is far more favorable in thier reporting of him, than of others.... We got a few weeks to go before there is some decisions....

I thought for sure that Fred Thompson was gonna be the man for the GOP...now I am not so sure...

And now I hear that Gulliani is the front runner of the GOP. Gee, you think that all that hype of his doing stuff with 911 would backfire on him....He was on his way out when 911 occured and the New Yorkers had had enough of him....

[John317]

I'm disappointed in Fred Thomson's campaign so far. Like you, I expected him to shake up things and make a good run to be his party's nominee, but he doesn't act like a man who's really hungry for it. I now think he'll drop out fairly soon. He's not very well organized and he doesn't seem to be exciting people the way I thought he would.

Guilliani did clean up New York City and was actually a very good mayor in many ways, but he carries a lot of baggage, which makes me think that if the Republicans can come with a more satisfactory candidate, they will do it. McCain seems to be faiding, probably because of his age. I haven't made up my mind who I'd vote for. No one really excites me. Lots of time yet to make my decision.

[Dr. Shane]

If the primary was today, I would vote for Guilliani. He certainly doesn't have more baggage than Hillary. And senators historically make poor presidential candidates.

I think Hillary has a lot of negatives going against her. Her campaign has already admitted their principle tactic is going to be to run against George Bush. If Guilliani has the Republican nomination it may be harder to pigeon-hole him into the Bush agenda than they think. And of course, the elephant in the room is that Hillary is a woman. No one has ever won the presidency without the majority of the male vote.

[lazarus]

Gulliani is problematic for the GOP in so many ways. If he get the nomination I think it will be disaster and it will destroy the GOPS chances. It will clearly show that the GOP/Conservatives are willing to ditch its "values" to get power. Hannity is the best example of this. Gulliani is a stunningly flwaed candidate. This will all come out as the campaign progresses. The firefighters union will make sure of that.

[Woody]

Quote:

No one has ever won the presidency without the majority of the male vote.

I would be curious about a discussion of WHY Hillary doesn't have the men's vote !!!

[Dr. Shane]

I am not saying whether she does or doesn't have the male vote - only that she will have to get it to win. Regardless if we like it or not, that is an obstacle to overcome. Many minority women in power (political and business) freely admit they have suffered more prejudice from being a woman than being a minority. Obama is likely to lose less votes from being black than Hillary will from being a woman.

[olger]

Ron Paul looks interesting. What is your opinion of him, Shane? John?

Hopefully, someone has the courage to throw back the "treehuggers" and allow more refineries to be built, along with drilling in Anwar and other places.

oG

[adamb]

I am glad to see Ron Paul's name brought up. Why aren't Adventists talking about him? He is the only candidate running who has a clear record of standing by the Constitution. Many talk the talk, but he is the real deal. Not to mention his understanding and stance on having a sound monetary policy. I feel we everyone should check him out, but especially my Seventh-day Adventist brothers and sisters!!! Time is short.

[Woody]

He has a better chance than Hillary because SDA women will not be able to support her.

Just an inside joke for the veterens of CA. Don't get me started on the topic of women voting again. Just look it up in the archives.

[Neil D]

Just an inside joke for the veterens of CA. Don't get me started on the topic of women voting again. Just look it up in the archives.

[said with a limp wrist] Oh, why not???

[/limp wrist]

Gulliani, I am told, has exagerated his creditals on cleaning up New York, and had lost his bid for re-election when 911 happened. However, I will say that he has the most appeal among general voters when it comes to issues...or at least it seems that way....

[Dr. Shane]

Gulliani couldn't run for re-election as mayor because the City of New York has term limits. He didn't lose a re-election because he was not eligible to even run again. He was going to run for the Senate against Hillary but was diagnosed with prostate cancer so he dropped out of the race.

[Woody]

Why is it that having a good Christian like Huckabee surge in his campaign for President frightens me?

[Jeannieb43]

He has a better chance than Hillary because SDA women will not be able to support her.

Sorry. I don't understand what you're referring to. Is there something about Hillary which prohibits SDA women from voting for her?

[Woody]

It is a joke for the old timers here. I would rather not repeat it. But you can look it up in the archives under why "Ellen White would not vote for Hillary". I hope the thread was called something like that.

Anyway ... the outcome was that ONLY those who take E.G.White literally could come to the conclusion that she would not vote for Hillary. Those that tried to take her from some cultural kind of supposed excuse that they could not really understood ... could say that Ellen White COULD possibly under today's culture ... vote for Hillary.

If I include the quote from her again ... it will only open up a can of worms.

If you want to look it up or PM me perhaps I can give it to you.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Why is it that having a good Christian like Huckabee surge in his campaign for President frightens me?

That is a question only "you" can answer. However I can make a general comment which may not by applicable to any specific member on this board.

Many Adventists are overly paranoid about religious men holding office. Many Adventists would feel more comfortable electing a back-slidden, womanizing, alcoholic Unitarian than they would a conservative Baptist or Catholic. Many Adventists are so paranoid about Sunday laws that if a candidate holds Christian convictions, that alone is enough for them not to vote for him or her.

[Woody]

I think it is in our best interest to preserve our Religious Liberty as long as it is possible to spread the Gospel to all corners of the earth.

This issue is about the spreading of the Gospel ... not about Sunday laws. Sunday laws have already been approved and enforced nationally through the courts. No further fear in that regard is warrented.

[Dr. Shane]

Of course we want to preserve religious liberty but that does not justify being paranoid and accusing every Christian politician of wanting to take it away.

[Neil D]

Of course we want to preserve religious liberty but that does not justify being paranoid and accusing every Christian politician of wanting to take it away.

I have a natural fear of organizations that have a history of pushing thier agendas and taking away religious liberty in the name of religion...when those same organizations back canidates wholeheartedly, I tend to have a good amount of fear of that canidate....

After all, you don't like canidates who support abortion rights, like planned parenthood...and you will vote against those canidates because they don't appeal to you when you have a canidate who supports pro-life causes...

[Dr. Shane]

Guilt by association. That is not always reliable.

Which organizations have taken away religious liberty? We are not talking about the NEA are we?