I took a look at Huck after some good performances in the early debates even though he had so little money to through into the fight, but so many liberal sounding ‘gaffs’ (or are they really thought out stances on the issues?) had me rejecting his candidacy as soon as I turned my attention his way.

I am strongly anti-McCain for the history of compromising conservative principals at only the critical votes. This is why he can claim an 80% conservative voting record and still have conservatives so angry at him. That ‘straight talk’ reputation tastes more like back stabbing than a realistic view of the issues. Reaching across the aisle shouldn’t mean moving to the other side. McCain-Feingold is a fein example of what I’m referring to. The torture definition is another example. Scaring prisoners is not the same as damaging or harming prisoners, and making the practice so public essentially made the practice ineffective.

I get a feel for the common voters’ leanings by talking to my Evangelical family who have very little interest in Politics. My sister, who knows nothing of voting records or political strengths and tactics, supports Huck. She relies on the familiarity of our faith to feel a connection with him. My nephews probably won’t even vote. My brothers will not even bother to watch news reports on the political race. They are looking at McCain because the press favor him and so he gets a positive look in every blurp on the TV. (You can’t avoid the coverage completely unless you live under a rock) I don’t see how McCain can carry the R to the White House. I believe, if he gets the nod, Hillary will be the next pres.

One of my clients gave me an e-mail circular with a definition for Electile Dysfunction: The inablility to become aroused over any of the choices for election year.
http://judgeright.blogspot.com

It can credibly be speculated that Huckabee is in the race to improve his standing with his coreligionists. You’ve so speculated, and you’re not the only ones.

No one has speculated that Romney is in the race to improve his standing with his coreligionists. That idea is too risible. Lowell can expostulate further on why that’s so, but it’s not just the fact that Romney has always had a serious shot at the nomination.

I don’t think this bodes well for Evangelicals.

McCain fights Romney over national security issues and business issues. Huckabee competes with Romney over social conservative issues. McCain and Huckabee appeal to largely different customer bases. They both know this.

People who vote for Huckabee on religion would not vote for McCain–remember McCain’s attack on Evangelicals after his loss in South Caroline in 2000. (Is this a flip-flop by McCain?) People who vote for McCain on national security issues would hardly vote for Huckabee, who has no international or military experience. McCain knows that Huckabee is not making a dent in the economic conservatives, since Huckabee is actually more liberal than McCain there. So Huckabee hardly hurts McCain, while he draws many “values voters” away from Romney.

As demonstrated in New Hampshire, since the “winner” title is awarded on the basis of pluralities rather than majorities, McCain is happy because Huckabee wears down Romney’s support just enough to give him a 5% margin.

The real mystery is not why McCain likes Huckabee in the race, but rather why Huckabee stays in the race when he clearly cannot “win” a lot more states and he is actually helping McCain more than himself to get the nomination.

One reason may be that Huckabee believes in miracles. After all, many Democrats bowed out of the 1992 elections when Bush 41 had a 90% approval rating after Desert Storm. Bill Clinton hung on, and took advantage of the accident of the economic downturn. Who knows what events might turn things in Huckabee’s favor?

Second, Huckabee’s campaign depends a lot on use of the resources of churches and pastors. Apparently this in-kind aid has not been barred by McCain-Feingold, just as it does not bar Oprah Winfrey from using her celebrity to make a multi-million dollar in-kind donation of her endorsement. Competing as the underdog probably elicits just as much support as it discourages. Huckabee thinks he can go along running a low cost campaign, relying on each effort to raise just enough funds to finance the next stage. Although how he applies that to the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday in 21 states is hard to see. I assume that, since he knows he only has a shot where Evangelicals are most dominant, he will concentrate on Southern states and forget the rest, such as Utah, where he might get 1%.

Third, Huckabee might feel, as some have speculated about John Edwards, that even at a poor 3rd in the primaries, the delegates he collects could be the difference between either Romney or McCain having a majority or being forced to dicker with Huckabee to win it. He can hold out for Vice President or something else. If you get enough prominence, you can celebrity into a money-making machine. I can’t think of any reason for McCain to not offer him the VP job in return for his delegates, except for what I believe is McCain’s secret master stroke for securing independent but pro-war on terrorism voters, by naming Joe Lieberman as his VP.

While political bedfellows are often strange–witness Johnson as Kennedy’s running mate–there are real reasons why people entertain the notion that Johnson was complicit in Kennedy’s assassination. At the very least, if the VP hates you and has no real political loyalty to you, when the press starts attacking you, it is not helpful to have someone who directly benefits from your fall being on “your team.” Recall that Huckabee came into office as Governor in Arkansas by leading what some viewed as a “coup” against the convicted Jim Guy Tucker. I would have a hard time swallowing Romney lining up with Huckabee, without a lot of actions by Huckabee that undercut his status as the attack dog of Evangelicalism against Mormon heresy, such as attending a Mormon Sunday service with Romney and vice versa, with similar positive statements all around by each candidate about the other’s church.

So, it appears to me that Huckabee has no hope of getting the nomination barring an “act of God”–like Romney being killed in a mid-air collision–but he has settled into a rhythm where he has found a cheap way of campaigning that can finance itself enough to give him the 10% of the delegates that might put him in the catbird seat at a convention where both Romney and McCain are just shy of a majority. He would be the obstacle to a majority that Ross Perot was for Bush 41. And he can brag to his base about how he stopped the evil Romney from being President. He would do it without using the term “Mormon”, but he will use substitutes that his followers understand, like “flip-flopping” and “lacking integrity” or even not being “intelligent” or being too “slick” or “rich”.

So Huckabee does not need to really resent Mormons in order to be motivated against Romney. My own estimate is that he is more vain than religious in this race. He is using–in my view cynically–his fellow Evangelicals to give him a boost into national political prominence, even though any attempt on his part to enact the portion of an Evangelical-oriented conservative social agenda that Republicans like Bush are not already committed to would be doomed to failure, especially against a Democratic majority in Congress. The expectations of Huckabee supporters are Messianic in their terminology, exactly the kind of thing that critics of Romney’s Mormonism accuse him of, without evidence. The real Mormon view is much more sober, since it is an individual evaluation rather than one driven in any way by their church leaders. Huckabee will just blame the forces of Satan for his losses and frustrations, implicitly criticizing Evangelicals and Catholics in Michigan, and Mormons in Nevada, for Romney’s successes. So the bottom line is that Huckabee, who started with no political capital to speak of, cannot lose in the long run. He can parlay his exposure into a national cable TV network (which is where his business experience is) and internet spin-offs, the “Take America back for Jesus” channel, and make himself a king-maker in the political realm as a self-appointed spokesman for Evangelical voters.