It’s the smart move. Tessio was always smarter.
There was little surprise in Mike Huckabee’s decision to stay out of the 2012 presidential contest. He was one of the first to come out and speak of how hard it would be to beat Barack Obama, back in the fall. He said it again during the winter. And probably plenty of other times when I didn’t notice it.
And as hard as it might be for some Republicans to believe, he was not immediately struck dead by a lightning bolt on any of these occasions.
Yes, anything can happen between now and next year, but serious candidates have to get rolling NOW, and right now, things don’t look good for anyone seeking to go up against the incumbent.
The other day I exchanged email with a prominent South Carolina Republican who — when I brought up the subject of Jon Huntsman — said he doubted he had the traction to win the nomination. I responded,
Traction is the issue. Because unfortunately, these things tend to boil down to whom the party faithful want — which isn’t what wins elections.
Personally, I’m convinced that, given most scenarios, Obama wins this one. The GOP’s best chance is to come up with someone who appeals to people who might otherwise go for the incumbent. Who better to win over independents than someone who actually served in the Obama administration, then decided to oppose the president? THAT’S a story that works with independents, whereas the “Obama is and always has been the devil” people don’t get anywhere with swing voters.
The amazing thing was that in 2008, both parties went with the candidate most likely to appeal to swing voters. It doesn’t seem likely that the GOP will do that this time, on account of the Tea Party and such. Which means I wouldn’t give much for Republican chances this time (at this point, of course, which must always be our caveat).
To which my unnamed (for his own good) Republican said, “Unfortunately, I tend to agree with your analysis…”
I think a lot of smart Republicans are thinking along the same lines, if not saying it. Which is why these days we hear mostly from the yahoos who don’t get what’s going on… (Or the sad cases like poor Mitt Romney, a guy with an actual accomplishment under his belt who has to run AWAY from said accomplishment.) The smart ones are quieter, understanding the situation better.
So, how does Donald Trump’s announcement today fit with my “smart guy” theory… well, um, not so well… I know! He is the exception who proves the rule! I mean, if Huckabee is Tessio under my theory, then… well, there was nobody in “The Godfather” like Trump, unless it was Moe Green. Trump is like… Crazy Joey Gallo.
Seriously, I don’t care why he dropped out, since I never thought he was worth speaking of seriously. I guess he found another shiny toy to play with.
Related Posts
My feelings (to use the term you loathe) about Huckabee are so confusing. I’m an agnostic pro-choice, pro-gun rights libertarian-leaning feminist liberal. He should scare the crap out of me. But I *like* the guy. I probably could never vote for him because an intellectual analysis shows him to be way off from me on the issues. But I trust him. He seems like a real person to me. How often are we ever able to say that about a politician?
I like Huckabee as a person. Not as a civic leader. Bottom line for me is the basic question about teaching creationism in public schools.
Yeah… personally, I like him better than either Tessio or Clemenza…
I also like Huckabee. To bad he’s on the wrong side of virtually all issues.
Which raises an interesting question. Is it better to vote for a likeable guy who you trust but is wrong on the issues or, a candidate who is right on the issues yet is an unlikeable scoundrel? Not an easy question to answer.
Put another way, and you get to the character issue. And for me, whether someone is trustworthy is far, far more important than stance on issues.
Likability is SORT of related. For one thing, if I can’t trust somebody, I’m not going to like that person. Then there’s the problem that if a person can’t deal constructively with other people (that is, isn’t likable), that person is not going to accomplish anything anyway, so what does the platform matter?
For instance… I’m reminded of the day that we met with both John Kerry and Howard Dean on the same day. I would guess that if you went issue by issue, I’d agree with Kerry on more things than with Dean. But if I had no other choice with either…
… wait a sec. I just realized my point doesn’t hold up. I was about to say that if ONE of them had to be president, I’d prefer Dean. But I probably wouldn’t. I probably would suppress the fact that I liked Dean as a person a LOT more, and trusted him more, but probably would have gone with Kerry on policy. And then been really uncomfortable with the choice.
Of course, it’s pretty moot. That was the day that I wouldn’t let the editorial board out of the room until they agreed, after three hours, to go along with me on Lieberman. I lost my voice that day from talking, and actually got very sick over the weekend, I had worn myself down so (after the Dean and Kerry meetings and the three-hour debate, I had to write the endorsement editorial AND a column about it before leaving that night). But it was worth it.
Because I liked him way better personally AND preferred him on policy.
Oh, and before anyone mentions how few votes he got, guess what? I don’t care. I’m still very happy with the decision. Because the alternatives, in that discussion, were Edwards and Kerry. And you know who had the most support on our board (and also ended up getting the most votes)? Yep, the big phony. So I was fighting that almost as much as I was advocating for Joe.
@ bud– I’ll take Bill Clinton, the scoundrel I agree with, over George W. Bush, the nice guy I don’t, any day!
The thought of President Lieberman makes my skin crawl. No telling how many wars we’d be in if he’d ever become POTUS. With all his many faults as a human being I’d still prefer Edwards.
@Bud
Agreed. Lieberman’s a Republican who runs as Democrat to win in Connecticut.
One thing though, he would have helped cure any American who had insomnia. The charisma of an accountant combined with the voice of Elmer Fudd.
Watching the movie W does kind of make you want to have a beer or two with ole George W. Not sure I’d ever be able to regard him as a friend though. He’s just done too much damage to our country. Hard to overlook that.
I think W would be a great friend–not perhaps the most fascinating dinner companion– Bubba gets that one, but the kind of guy you can count on when you’re down (Heckuva job, Brownie!) –which may have led to in appropriate decisions as POTUS…
Maybe this can all be resolved by replacing “Fighting” with “Drunken” and really give the politically correct crowd something to scream about.
Um… did you mean to put that on a different ongoing discussion?