Comments on: Huckabee Second in AP Poll

By: laura

laura — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:50:48 +0000

Under pressure from a coalition of religious activists, Huck persuaded the parole board to free a serial rapist who then raped and murdered a woman. The relgious activists were motivated by their belief that the rapist was innocent. The problem with this is that they had no facts whatsoever upon which to base their belief. They convinced themselves that the victim-a high school girl- had to be lying because her father was a Clinton donor and the family was distantly related to Clinton.

Huck, as this story shows, is considerably influenced by religious nuts.

Also he lied repeatedly about this situation. He lied that he had no way of knowing the rapist was dangerous. In fact three of the rapist's victims begged him to keep the rapist in jail. He lied that he did not influence the parole board. The record shows that he made a pitch on behalf of the rapist. He then tried to blame everything on Clinton.

And yes he did imply that God has chosen him to be His candidate. You'd think God would pick someone smarter.

Stormy is partly right about the Republican party. At the base iy is a coalition of haters, conspiracy theorists, and relgiouus extremists.

How ever, at the top, it's the party of oligarchs.

There is a big discrepency between this base of willfully ignorant believers and the leadership of ethically impaired robber barons.

By: Little Miss Attila

Little Miss Attila — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 10:29:20 +0000

Please, God.... No. Just no. I don't think I could vote for Huckabee. I just cannot envision doing that. He's at the far end of statism—just because it claims to be benevolent doesn't make it any less a dictatorship. No.......

By: Wayne

Wayne — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:49:43 +0000

Stormy
Do you have any example to back up your accusations or are you just throwing mud in hope that it might stick.

The last example that many have given that claim Huck was talking on God’s behalf was pretty lame. I suspect yours will be as well.

By: Tlaloc

Tlaloc — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:42:54 +0000

Usually the GOP has an established accepted candidate. Sure there may be some scrappy challengers but they are usually petty and fall by the wayside pretty quickly. I think I am beginning to see why. This year there is no pre-determined nominee and the results? Yikes. Take Redstate as an example of the GOP in microcosm. It is like a warzone with each faction under the "Big Tent" screaming about how they won't vote for this or that candidate who is favored by another faction. It's gotten so bad that RS has literally banned any commentor from saying anything positive about Ron Paul unless they're a long time member. Think about that. A dedicated conservative website will ban on site anyone who comes and says something positive about a certin republican candidate for the upcoming election! Holy jumpin mother of god in a side car with chocolate jimmies and a lobster bib, Sam! The usually brutal dem primaries look positively staid by comparison.

By: Stormy Dragon

Stormy Dragon — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:27:00 +0000

>A candidate is a strong Christian so that make
>those voting for him a Populist Jesus Party?

No, a candidate who pushes all manner of economic protectionism and federal interference into what are rightly state or private manners coupled with a delusional belief that he is the official voice of God in America makes those voting for him a Populist Jesus Party.

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:18:50 +0000

I don't think he'll stand up to scrutiny. We'll see.

By: Wayne

Wayne — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:59:14 +0000

A candidate is a strong Christian so that make those voting for him a Populist Jesus Party? Please take your bigotry somewhere else.

As I said to James in an earlier thread a few weeks ago, Huckabee is impressive in interviews and debates. Huck is at a great disadvantage when it comes to money and campaign infrastructure. However I could see him doing quite well. It was a matter of getting his name recognition out there.

Now is the big question. Huck now has the attention from people. He will face a great deal more scrutiny which is good. How he deals with it will determine how he does. I don’t expect him or anyone else to be perfect but I will make up my mind base on what I see. It seems that many people pick a favorite from the start and become entrench in that choice.

By: Russell Newquist

Russell Newquist — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:34:57 +0000

"But, clearly, something’s happening."

Chuck Norris doesn't endorse - he tells America how it's gonna be.

By: Stormy Dragon

Stormy Dragon — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:31:36 +0000

>But, clearly, something’s happening.

Yeah, the Republican party has abandoned even the pretense of conservatism and has finished its transformation into the Populist Jesus Party.

By: markm

markm — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:05:44 +0000

Keep in mind that being off the radar in the polls also means less scrutiny. As he's been rising the scrutiny has picked up. We'll have to wait and see if it's a trend or a blip.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:05:23 +0000

What a year for political junkies. First open seat for the White House in a long time (e.g. 40 years for no sitting president or VP running, 56 years for no sitting or former VP running). First woman, Black, Mormon running with a serious chance of winning. Less than a month to go before the first primary and it is a serious multi-person horse race for both parties. Various third party trial balloons. New media changing some of the rules. New technology starting to raise issues with polling accuracy. States jockeying for primary/caucus position.

Of course the down side for political junkies in all of this is that predictions are tenuous which means a lot of uncertainty.