MIKE HUCKABEE - AS A CANDIDATE...
I like Mike Huckabee. I've seen him on a lot of talk shows and listened to a lot of interviews, and I like him. He's funny, charming, disarming, folksey (in a good way) and has an inspiring personal story that many Americans, and many people around the world, wished rang true for them as well. The fat man made marathon runner in the space of two years - that's an impressive achievement even when you ignore that he did it while Governor of Arkansas!
However, the cracks in the Huckabee charm are starting to show, and they reveal an unfortunately amateurish operation. He doesn't have the money to be the best-oiled candidate, that's for sure, and perhaps we should leave him alone for that reason. However, I think there are some troubling signs of disengagement about some issues that make me concerned about Huckabee, a position which grains against my natural affection for him because he's just such a nice guy.
Presidential candidates don't need to be the most experienced candidates in foreign policy. Neither Clinton nor Reagan, both Governors, had no foreign policy experience before sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office and it worked out pretty well for them. However, it is indefensible that hours after the NIE had been released about Iran Huckabee had not been briefed on it. Also that he made a number of slips in regards to the situation in Pakistan. Though candidates don't need to have massive foreign policy experience to qualify them to become candidates, the moment they announce they do need to be plugged into foreign policy issues. It's important, and considering the number of TV screens he must have passed between when the NIE was released and the questions he received about it, it's indicative of a failure that he had no answer. Some of his other ideas are a little unusual. Eliminating the income tax and implementing the Fair Tax is straight out of the far-out playbook. It's an unusual proposition.
Whether he's a national candidate or not, and we're all just getting sucked into the media narrative of Iowa hype, we have yet to see. I wonder what the reflective pieces of Huckabee will say when this is all over. Perhaps there's a Veep spot in it for Huckabee. That would certainly be interesting.
...AND THE IDENTITY CRISIS HE REPRESENTS
Huckabee represents a schism in the Republican Party that was just waiting to happen, particularly after the 2006 elections. The Republican Party has always tried to nominate candidates who would hold the disparate wings of the Republican Party (Wall Street bankers and Baptist ministers) together with their bear hands - like Reagan and W Bush. However, there are no candidates in this election who could really do that.
Huckabee represents the Baptist Minister crowd, being one himself. He is not the darling of the Republican major contributors - the Wall Street bankers. Mitt Romney is. But Romney, as a Mormon and someone who has changed his view on many of their important issues (see below), could never hope to represent the Evangelical wing. Giuliani is far too liberal to represent the Evangelical wing, and his pitch is that special times call for special national-security candidates, like him. McCain has too often annoyed all wings of the Republican Party because of his maverick nature (just because he doesn't talk about it anymore doesn't make it untrue) to really be a standard-bearer for anyone except himself. And Fred Thompson is just too lazy to be anything.
This is the problem that the Party faced in 1988 when VP George HW Bush faced off against Pat Robertson. However, it wasn't that big a problem, since a Reverend with no governing experience was facing a sitting VP. It was easy to forecast who would win that particular contest, and so these problems with the Republican identity (also see E.H Carr's 'Why Americans Hate Politics' for a great discussion on the Republican identity crisis) haven't entered the national conscience. This year, however, with no strong front-runner the crisis is in full relief. Who does the Republican party rally around? There are no candidates with the special brand of dual-appeal to working class Christian conservatives and Fortune 500 CEOs that they can set aside their differences and annoint that candidate.
Will the Republican Party be weakened by the 2008 contest? We'll have to see. I think this situation was, to a degree, inevitable, in much the same way that the Democratic Party has its periodic identity crisis primary contests to determine the future of the party (into which category I would place 1988 and 2004.) How the Party will handle the fall-out from 2008, particularly if they lose the White House, is something they'll have to deal with when we get there.
We get the beginning of the big picture tonight, when the Iowa Caucuses are held.
1 comment:
Schism is perhaps a term that insinuates far too much purposeful organisation in the current inner movements of the Republican Party.
I think the effects of the 2006 Congressional Elections (ie a Democratic Congress both sides of the aisle), and most notably the avalanche of (sex) scandals, in addition the latest toe-tappin' adventures of former Senator Craig, really handicapped the Republican Party. Furthermore, after lacklustre attempts to redeem the Bush administration from a legacy of Iraqi Tragedy (through the Annapolis summit and environmental awareness), the party is really suffering.
And it's showing! Not only through the media and lack of public support public, but also in their own lack of confidence! Often resigning themselves to bitchy filibustering on the House floor.
Knowledgeable enough to know that the Baptist Priest and Banker mix for their candidate will not cut it, they just don't know what they're looking for. Hence why, as you say Alex, there's a Maverick Senator who's often gone against his party, a Mormon with a zeal for business and flip-flopping,and Mr. Liberal 9/11 who speaks as if he's on Oprah, among others, all running for RP Candidate.
They know they're going to lose if they don't TRY to appeal to the moderate...but can they do that without alienating their so-called base? Hopefully a more stable candidate will come out of the primary process.
It seems the Republican Party is spending more time questioning its sexuality than running a viable '08Presidential candidate.
In fact, I think the Simpsons captured it best. Imagine a group of well dressed, crisp shirt, red tie wearing groomed men sitting around a boardroom table asking "We need a logo that says we're both Republican....and Gay...". At that very moment, a pink elephant floats into the room.
Now there's a candidate I can get behind. No pun intended.
Post a Comment