Comments on: Poll: Huckabee’s Support Reportedly “Surging” In Iowa http://themoderatevoice.com/16408/poll-huckabees-support-reportedly-surging-in-iowa/ An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:20:07 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: DLS http://themoderatevoice.com/16408/poll-huckabees-support-reportedly-surging-in-iowa/comment-page-1/#comment-107535 DLS Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:06:34 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/religion/atheists/16408/poll-huckabees-support-reportedly-surging-in-iowa/#comment-107535 Are you hoping that Huckabee would topple Giuliani, the acknowledged leader to date in this country and likely nominee already, and have voters be more associative of the GOP with Huckabee (and Ronmey) so an anti-religious vote would clinch the Dem nomination eventually? Just as it's foolish to expect anyone else to greatly upset Hillary Clinton (for whatever reasons, valid or not), it's foolish to expect Huckabee to surge beyond Iowa. I'm in Iowa and can easily explain it, but anyone who read the Pew report knows why. There is a large Christian conservative as well as other conservative presence here in Iowa (and a surprisingly large liberal population, too, not just college students and other people in academia). If you look at the USA support for "Huck" and the support in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, you'll see that the rise of Huck (and Romney's standing) is explained by the Christian as well as conservative presence here. (Giuliani? NEW YORK. Romney? MASSACHUSETTS. How about real America, or at least something more appealing to Iowans?) USA GOP voters overall have McCain in second place! ??? !!! OK, maybe that's that die-hard fraction normally considered still-Bush-backers, the "unreality" right-wing crowd the lefties laugh at or worse. "Mitt" USA, 13% (tied for 3rd with Thompson) "Huck" USA, 11% (5th) "Rudy" USA, 26% (1st) "Mitt" IA, 25% (1st), NH 37% (1st), SC 19% (tie 1) "Huck" IA, 24% (2nd), NH 7% (5th), SC 10% (5th) "Rudy" IA, 14% (3rd), NH 19% (2nd), SC 19% (tie 1) I'm not a social conservative and I like Mike Huckabee, as exemplified for what he did for the hurricane victims (handling his state as a grown-up would, not dependent on the federal government), someone more like a Democrat than a Republican, and whom only the vile revile because he is a Christian. (My radical friend in DC likes him, too, for the same intelligent as well as moral reasons.) Giuliani with Romney or Huckabee as VP would probably be the best way to actually appeal to social conservatives (not the same as Christian conservatives; Christian conservatives as a rule are social conservatives, but social conservatives are not limited to Christian conservatives -- and those of us who aren't social conservatives, would not want moralistic authoritarianism in Washington, are still socially conservative in that we insist on decency and morality in people, even though the Left so often hates even the concept of that, while being totalitarian toward business and other objects of its wrath, including social and especially Christian conservatives). Giuliani with Romney is inferior because it has regional-alienation, and liberals-posing-now-as-conservatives, baggage. Are you hoping that Huckabee would topple Giuliani, the acknowledged leader to date in this country and likely nominee already, and have voters be more associative of the GOP with Huckabee (and Ronmey) so an anti-religious vote would clinch the Dem nomination eventually?

Just as it’s foolish to expect anyone else to greatly upset Hillary Clinton (for whatever reasons, valid or not), it’s foolish to expect Huckabee to surge beyond Iowa. I’m in Iowa and can easily explain it, but anyone who read the Pew report knows why. There is a large Christian conservative as well as other conservative presence here in Iowa (and a surprisingly large liberal population, too, not just college students and other people in academia). If you look at the USA support for “Huck” and the support in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, you’ll see that the rise of Huck (and Romney’s standing) is explained by the Christian as well as conservative presence here. (Giuliani? NEW YORK. Romney? MASSACHUSETTS. How about real America, or at least something more appealing to Iowans?) USA GOP voters overall have McCain in second place! ??? !!! OK, maybe that’s that die-hard fraction normally considered still-Bush-backers, the “unreality” right-wing crowd the lefties laugh at or worse.

“Mitt” USA, 13% (tied for 3rd with Thompson)
“Huck” USA, 11% (5th)
“Rudy” USA, 26% (1st)

“Mitt” IA, 25% (1st), NH 37% (1st), SC 19% (tie 1)
“Huck” IA, 24% (2nd), NH 7% (5th), SC 10% (5th)
“Rudy” IA, 14% (3rd), NH 19% (2nd), SC 19% (tie 1)

I’m not a social conservative and I like Mike Huckabee, as exemplified for what he did for the hurricane victims (handling his state as a grown-up would, not dependent on the federal government), someone more like a Democrat than a Republican, and whom only the vile revile because he is a Christian. (My radical friend in DC likes him, too, for the same intelligent as well as moral reasons.)

Giuliani with Romney or Huckabee as VP would probably be the best way to actually appeal to social conservatives (not the same as Christian conservatives; Christian conservatives as a rule are social conservatives, but social conservatives are not limited to Christian conservatives — and those of us who aren’t social conservatives, would not want moralistic authoritarianism in Washington, are still socially conservative in that we insist on decency and morality in people, even though the Left so often hates even the concept of that, while being totalitarian toward business and other objects of its wrath, including social and especially Christian conservatives). Giuliani with Romney is inferior because it has regional-alienation, and liberals-posing-now-as-conservatives, baggage.

]]>