February 05, 2008

"A Vote For Huckabee is a Vote for McCain"

That charge has been leveled against Mike Huckabee since it became obvious he could not hope to win the Republican nomination after the South Carolina and Florida primaries, and it has been a charge that Huckabee has vehemently denied.

We'll just add that to the long list of his lies

Mike Huckabee won the first of 21 states being contested by the Republican presidential candidates on Super Tuesday, pulling out a victory in the West Virginia Republican convention.

Huckabee won in the second round of voting, even though Mitt Romney led after the first round. The former Arkansas governor won with 51.5 percent to Romney’s 47.4 percent, pulling ahead after John McCain’s delegates apparently defected to his side.

The convention had to go into a second round of voting after no candidate took a clear majority the first time. Texas Rep. Ron Paul was knocked out, and Huckabee, Romney and McCain moved forward.

Paul finished fourth with 10 percent among the 1,133 participating delegates in the first round, while Romney took 41 percent and Huckabee took 33 percent. McCain, who started the day in New York City before heading to California, reached the second round with 15 percent.

But before Huckabee’s surprising turnaround in the second round, McCain delegates told FOX News they had been instructed by the campaign to throw their support to Huckabee.

McCain delegate John Vuolo said former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer approached him and other McCain supporters at the convention and told them he had spoken to McCain, and that the best thing to do was to support Huckabee in the hope that Huckabee could beat Romney in this winner-take-all state.

Don't get me wrong—for McCain, denying Romney a state he should have won, especially a winner-take-all state, is smart politics.

But I don't want to hear any more that the Huckster from Hope is campaigning because he still has delusions becoming the nominee. That ship sailed long ago. He's still in this race for one reason, and one reason only: to trip up Mitt Romney, and ensure a McCain victory.

I only wonder what promises Huckabee extracted from John McCain in return for his role as spoiler.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at February 5, 2008 03:29 PM

I swear people are being too dramatic about this. I think its clear that Huckabee and Paul and MCcain all wnat Romney out.

Good. I want him out too. THis is what a year of negative adverts will do

As to Huckabee lets see how Georgia, Bama, Tenn, and especially Missouri turn out before we write Huck off.

I turned on Sean Hannity and listened to his crying jag over WV and all I could thin was the Emperor has no clothes

Posted by: jh at February 5, 2008 04:24 PM

You are nuts. A vote for Huckabee is a vote for Huckabee. If you look at the men themselves, rather than the news, clearly Huckabee is the best man for the job. He is the best candidate to come along since Ronald Reagan, and the only candidate that is not in someone elses hip pocket.

Posted by: Frozen Rebel at February 5, 2008 04:31 PM

What was Huckabee supposed to do, say "no thanks"? I am not a Huckabee supporter but I think this says more about McCain than anyone else.

McCain is obviously prepared to pull an underhanded Clintonian move to grab delegates. Anything to screw the conservatives. McCain needs to get into the White House so he can collaborate with Ted Kennedy and Russ Fiengold on the liberal agenda.

Posted by: DaMav at February 5, 2008 04:44 PM

So...who got screwed by this move...

Romney or West Virginian voters? Hard to say. Lets hear it everyone....


there, at least I feel better.

Posted by: mrclark at February 5, 2008 04:51 PM

Huckabee is either in the tank for McCain, a religious bigot, or delusional. For what other reason would he kiss McCain's butt and despise Romney when Romney is closer ideologically? Everyone should be convinced that Huckabee is merely a spoiler at this point. I usually vote as an evangelical, but I have see too much of Huckabee to believe anything from him. Taking cheapshots at fellow Christians faith is not my idea of what a Christian behavior.

Posted by: Don at February 5, 2008 04:54 PM

Huckabee's says he can win, the race is a marathon, anything can happen between now and the finish line. I agree, and am so thankful we have a solid conservative in the race.

Posted by: Cindy at February 5, 2008 05:18 PM

So Cindy, you're saying a back room deal wasn't made between McCain and Huckabee?

Do you have a link? Because I do which says a deal was reached in order to squeeze out Romney.

Posted by: mrclark at February 5, 2008 05:34 PM

While I was out today on my way to the polls, I heard a W.Va guy on the radio say that they were told to support Huck on the 2nd round to knock out Romney and then when Huck withdraws, they can throw the whole shebang to McCain at the Convention.

As CY says, it is good politics, but it is also dirty tricks typical of the McCain camp, because they know they have a candidate that can only win with lies and deceit with backroom deals.

Posted by: Sara at February 5, 2008 06:46 PM

Thanks for that link mrclark, I have heard such reports, though really haven't dug into it to see if they are true or not, because if true I don't see it as wrong in the way the description of "back room deal" connotes. The way I see it, is McCain supporters don't feel Huckabee would be good for the GOP or for America, and neither do us Huckabee supporters. So not only are we voting for our candidate, we are voting against a Romney nomination. So, knowing West Virginia is a winner-take-all state and that the people had spoken--the cumulative majority not wanting Romney--it only made strategic sense, and moral sense, to fairly represent that with the second round voting result. I have no reason to think so cynically, imputing motives I know nothing of, that the decision was a shady deal, when it could just be pragmatic, strategic, and moral.

Posted by: cindy at February 5, 2008 06:47 PM

If we're objective, a vote for Huckabee is actually a vote for Obama or Clinton. McCain is unelectable, as an inferior good to real liberals in the eyes of the "moderates" supporting him. At the same time, he is toxic to fiscal conservatives, those opposed to illegal immigration, those opposed to insider corruption, etc.

A McCain/Huckabee ticket would allow the party to suffer an election loss greater than Dole's failed run. We're approaching Mondale greatness due to the mostly irrational fear most of the secular progressive moderates have of Minister Huck.

As an Iowan who seriously investigated Huckabee after seeing is outstanding debate performance, I discovered he was the Republican Obama... and worse. Obama has the excuse of having no experience and finds a passionate following of clueless wonders who can't point to a single accomplishment of their candidate. Huckabee unfortunately is accomplished and has been consistent in achieving objectives in direct opposition to what he claims now to represent. Tax reform? No, tax increaser. Small government? Nope, bloat. Anti-illegal immigration? No, give them freebies stolen from legal citizens pockets.

At least we now know we too suffer from the same "deluded faithful" who are so attracted to the man's appearance that they disregard extensive evidence he's nothing more than a poseur.

Posted by: redherkey at February 5, 2008 08:23 PM

mrclark, I just stumbled across a link where the Huckabee campaign is denying "a backroom deal"--again, not that it matters to me, but since you inquired, here it is:

Posted by: Cindy at February 5, 2008 10:19 PM

mrclark, per your request, here's a link I just stumbled across where Huckabee campaign denies "backroom deal":

Posted by: Cindy at February 5, 2008 10:22 PM

Thanks Cindy...

Very Gracious of Mrs Huckabee huh...

"Well, it's totally false," Mrs. Huckabee says, "and it's, well, you know, Mitt Romney can't win graciously or lose graciously. And we've worked very hard. It's unfair to our supporters out there for people to call us to bail out right now because the race isn't over, and we're not going to quit until we either get beat or we're sworn in."

Heh...Huckabee the ever gracious winner says:
” I thought (Romney) was saying yesterday no whining? So is it no whining or whining? He can even keep a straight answer on the whining or now whining question, “Huckabee said,” He was saying that I was a liberal, and now he’s saying that I was taking votes from bc I was too conservative, and pulling conservative votes. So which is it?am I conservative taking votes from conservative views, or am I a liberal? Am I a whiner or is he a whiner?”

Posted by: mrclark at February 5, 2008 11:32 PM

If the Evangelicals really wanted Mitt, they'd have voted for him. They didn't. But things are still fluid. Meanwhile - question - what do you think of Rep. Heather Wilson?

Posted by: The Anchoress at February 6, 2008 01:22 AM

Its going to be McCain/Huckabee ticket. The Republican party is split 4 ways: Neo-cons, govt/fiscal conservatives, religious conservs, and "moderates". McCHuck (pun intended) will create a 2/4's collalition and it will be up to the govt/fiscal conservs and neo-cons to decide what to do. Personally, I hope govt/fiscal conservs decide to split and become a bonefide 3rd party with a platform of "no earmarks", no trade deals, balanced budget, "work for your keep" ideals. The neo-cons can go jump in a lake as Mitt's only chance is if McCain is caught on tape waterboarding a voter...

Posted by: matta at February 6, 2008 07:58 AM

The simple fact is, McCain will be the Republican nominee...and Huckabee is counting on his being setup as the VP.

Of course since there are those who could not or would not compromise and go with either Thompson or Rudy...and do NOT like Romney, there is no one for conservatives to vote for in November.

Thus while McCain will most likely be the Republican nominee and Huckabee his VP, they will NOT win the White House and will in fact be humiliated by a lack of votes. This will be because the conservative part of the GOP will not vote in November and will leave McCain to hang out to dry...and we will have Hillary or Obama in the White House.

For if the race is between McCain or Hillary or McCain and Obama, what is the difference really? After all, no matter WHO wins in that scenario, a LIBERAL will be in the White House. And if that is to be the results, the conservatives will just choose not to vote.

Posted by: chiefpayne at February 6, 2008 10:20 AM

So what's a vote for Thompson?

Posted by: Jeff at February 6, 2008 03:02 PM

I feel a sudden urge to be honest with you all. Can I be honest here?

I hate John McCain. I have hated him for many years.

It turns my stomach that I may vote for him in the general election.

What a terrible thing.

That's just me being honest with y'all. Carry on.

Posted by: t.ferg at February 7, 2008 12:17 AM