Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney – Looking forward to 2012
Mike Huckabee
Some may say this post is about two or three years early and they may very well be right, but this is something that has been on my mind for some time and I suppose now is as good a time as any to put pen to paper, so to speak. Yes, I understand it is only 2009 and Barack Obama has only been in office for about four months, but we will have a chance to vote him out of office in 2012 and the campaign will start earlier than that.
As I have said before, it’s no secret that I am a supporter of Mike Huckabee, former Governor of Arkansas. All you have to do is a search on Political Realities for his name and you will see just how strong a supporter I was and still am. Depending on who joins the race in 2012, I fully expect to support him just as strongly then, if he chooses to run. Who knows, he may not even join the race, deciding he can do more good where he is at now. Only time will tell.
I really do not want to get into all the reasons why I support Mike Huckabee because I think I have covered that ad nauseam. I also do not want to get into the reasons I chose not to support Mitt Romney during the 2008 primary season, because I have covered those as well. What I want to cover in this article is the very heated rivalry between the two men and their supporters. Let me pose a question for you to think about as you read this article. No matter if you supported Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney, do you think the rivalry that is still ongoing is doing more harm than good to the Republican Party and our chances of voting President Obama out of office after only one term?
As with any disagreement or argument, there is always two sides to the story. Being a Huckabee supporter, I found it very egregious to see how the Romney campaign mischaracterized Huckabee’s record as Governor of Arkansas and I know for a fact I am not the only one who felt that way. By the same token, I know the supporters of Mitt Romney took great exception to their candidate being called a flip flopper and to the question Huckabee himself asked of the New York Times reporter about Romney’s Mormon faith. The rivalry grew from there and it only got worse.
Mitt Romney
As the primaries continued with Romney dropping out in February and Huckabee dropping out in March, after the Texas primary, the rivalry grew even more heated, especially between the supporters of both men, over their possible selection as John McCain’s running mate for the general election. Huckabee has even been accused of running a public campaign to prevent Romney’s selection as McCain’s running mate. Many votes were cast in many online polls, with Huckabee and Romney supporters thinking they could persuade McCain to pick their man. As it turned out, neither man received the nod, with McCain choosing Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska to join him on the Republican ticket.
After the election was over and Barack Obama had won in a big way, both men went their separate ways. Both have created political action committees to elect Republican candidates and Huckabee now has his own television show on FOX, as well as The Huckabee Report. Both men have campaigned across the country for Republicans, working to regain control of Congress in 2010 and Romney has come out especially hard against the Employee Free Choice Act. Neither man has been idle, that’s for sure.
You may wonder why I am rehashing old history, but there is a reason. I frequent several different blogs and one in particular, Race 2012, has already been looking forward to the next presidential campaign. They have been testing the water for each candidate who may throw their hat in the ring. I have seen some very strong opinions for and against each candidate, so trust me when I say the rivalry is still very strong between the supporters. Romney supporters still blame Huckabee for keeping their man from winning the nomination and vice versa. A lot of Huckabee supporters still do not believe Romney is sincere about his conservative values; the list goes on and on.
So, back to my earlier question. Is this rivalry doing the Republican Party more harm than good? At the present time, the GOP is about as fractured as I have ever saw. Conservative Republicans say the party needs to move more to the right and the moderates say it needs to move more to the center. The rivalry between Huckabee and Romney is adding to this problem. At the present time, a lot of each man’s supporters will simply refuse to vote for the other man. I did vote for McCain, but I honestly do not know if I would have voted for Romney, had he won the nomination. He probably would have received my vote because my fear of an Obama administration was so great, but that is only speculation until I face the choice.
My point is this. We are facing at least four years of Barack Obama and a high possibility of another four years, if we do not get our act together as a party. Fighting between Huckabee and Romney supporters is not doing us any good and it will not bode well for us in 2012. I don’t expect Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney to read my post, but if it was to find it’s way to their computer screen, I would say this to both men. It would do us all good to see them get together and discuss the problems they have had. If there truly is bad blood, it would do good to clear the air between them.
I do not presume to say either man will win the nomination or if they will even choose to run, but regardless, this rivalry is going to affect the next presidential election. To think otherwise would be naive. Whomever wins the nomination can not hope to defeat President Obama without the support of a lot of people and that will have to include the supporters of other candidates. Would it not be better to start working on this now, instead of waiting until 2012 is upon us and we have to scramble to play catch up with the liberals who are taking our country down a very dangerous path? If we hope to win, it’s something we are going to have to face and sooner would be better than later.
I have also considered the possibility of an ongoing rivalry between Huckabee and Romney in the 2012 presidential race (if the leftists have not managed a dictatorial tyranny by then). One of the disconcerting things about the Huckabee and Romney rivalry is that it splits the generally social conservative bond between Evangelicals and Mormons. Mormons voted overwhelmingly for Romney because he was a fellow Mormon and many of them developed an antipathy toward Huckabee. While I would prefer an Evangelical to a Mormon, all other things being equal, I can aver in all honesty that it was the decidely liberal compromises Romney made when governor of Massachusetts that caused me to oppose him.
With many mainline Republicans veering further toward liberalism and with the growth of a secular Libertarian movement on the right that either opposes or is lukewarm toward social conservatism, it is troubling to see the possibility of a major split between the social conservatives themselves.
Raymond,
Thanks for your comment. I meant to reply earlier, but I was sidetracked because I had to set up a swimming pool for my daughter.
I felt the same way about Romney as you did. It was not his religion that prevented me from supporting him, but rather his very liberal tendencies. It seemed that a lot of his supporters don’t want to believe that, but it is true in my case.
I’m afraid I have no intention of voting Republican in the next election. I will be choosing the candidate I can trust (within reason) and who is qualified.
As for Mitt Romney, I don’t trust him. Can’t give you any specifics, he just rubs me the wrong way. Maybe it’s because he is of the “elite” class…I don’t know.
As for Huckabee, I would support him. I would also support a third party candidate if the were a viable option. For me, party affiliations no longer mean anything to me. I am going to closely analyze the individual candidate.
Dominique’s last blog post..will ACORN be OBAMA’s Demise?
I am not advocating voting straight Republican if the candidates can not be trusted or are not qualified, etc. Having said that, a third party candidate for President has no chance of winning the election. Third party candidates only received 1,696,043 votes in the 2008 election. That would not have been enough to swing the election in McCain’s favor. The main point I wanted to make with the article is that the rivalry between Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney and their supporters is not doing the Republicans any good. There is no way they can hope to put together a winning ticket in 2012 if the factions do not make up to some degree.
I did understand you article was to do with the rivalry.
I really struggle with the not voting a third party because I think that means that your vote than becomes marginalized because you are voting between bad and worse. (unless we have some really good Republican candidates like Jindal, Huckabee, or Palin, etc.)
Anyway, I apologize for taking a rabbit trail. I was tired when I was posting around 1am!
Dominique’s last blog post..will ACORN be OBAMA’s Demise?
Larry, I think your point is a good one. Republicans need to do some math. Given the numbers of voters who identify themselves as Dems, GOP, and Independent, the Republicans have little chance of winning if they field a strong social conservative unless Obama shoots himself in the foot (not an unlikely possibility). Conservatives need to decide if they can support a candidate who supports 80% of their views or a third party candidacy is entirely possible. Gore didn’t lose the 2000 election because of Florida or the Supreme Court — he lost because of Ralph Nader. A third party candidate from either the social conservatives or moderate Republicans hands Obama the election. You have it right Larry — the two sides need to find the common ground and Republicans need to have a cohesive strategy. The alternative is they become irrelevant for the next 10 years and that’s a very bad thing for the country.
The Republican party is mostly made up of conservatives who care about social/moral issues (abortion/traditional marriage), sound economics, and strong national defense.
Some economic conservatives could care less about the social/moral issues, but the important thing that they need to realize is this: The fact of the matter is that the VAST majority of social/moral conservatives are naturally already economic conservatives as well. That’s the main reason that the pro-life movement has gravitated almost exclusively on the side of the GOP instead of the Democrat Party.
Therefore, if economics-only conservatives want to see any of their concerns addressed through government, they will NEED to support the social/moral conservative candidates, because such a significantly large portion the base of the Republican Party is made up of social/moral conservatives who get far more energized when they are fighting for candidates who are on what they (we) consider to be the correct side of a life and death matter. This should not be considered a curse by the economics-only conservatives, because it could be worse; our strong logical thinking patterns cause us social/moral conservatives to also be drawn to the GOP rather than the Democrats – imagine if that were not the case. They would NEVER have us on their side.
Social/moral conservatives are people who tend to be busy with family, jobs, church, and charity activities. If we aren’t seeing a candidate in a race who supports our social/moral issue concerns, we’re not likely to take away time and resources from these other important activities, in order to get involved in political activities. The sooner that economics-only conservatives recognize this, the sooner we can get our nation’s fiscal house in order.
Patrick,
First of all, thanks for commenting on Political Realities. I agree with your idea that economics-only conservatives need to be willing to work with social/moral conservatives, but I think that blade cuts both ways. I am not advocating compromise, compromise, compromise, but there is something that needs to be taken into consideration.
For much too long, the Republican Party has been unable to reconcile the differences between the different factions contained therein. The fiscal conservatives have blinders on and refuse to see any other point of view and the same could be said of the social conservatives. Because of that, they find it very hard to work together, resulting in the inability to come together long enough to field a good, solid candidate for President. This may not go over well with a lot of people, but both factions are to blame for this failure and until something changes, we can expect more of the same.
Thank you for the response. I guess my point is that the fiscal-only conservatives would serve their own interest very well if they would recognize the political reality that social conservatives are automatically already on their team, as a natural ally, if they will only allow for candidates nominated to also be consistent, authentic social conservatives(such as Mike Huckabee). Often, fiscal conservatives complain that social conservatives somehow get in their way, but that doesn’t make any sense because both interest are served when a social conservative gets elected. In Mike Huckabee’s case, he even had several false accusations made against him. The irony of Fred Thompson, who was a co-signer of McCain/Feingold, loudly and rudely proclaiming, “Mike Huckabee is a pro-life liberal”, stands out in my mind. Especially, since Thompson was given the National Right To Life Committee’s endorsement when he doesn’t even agree with the decades-old plank in the Republican Party Platform that calls for a Human Life Amendment to the US Constitution (Which both the NRLC and Mike Huckabee officially support).
While the blade may cut both ways a little bit, it is a blade that is not built to work that way. 99% of Social Conservatives ARE Fiscal Conservatives. Perhaps only 60-80% of Fiscal Conservatives are Social Conservatives. I don’t believe that is a blade that is well-sharpened on both sides. The Political Reality is that if Fiscal-Only type of Conservatives recognize that they have a tool available to them that the Democrats don’t have, the extra boost of potential energy from Social Conservatives, then they can tap into that energy to get victory in the area that they are most concerned about. They need to realize that social conservatives see the social issues as something that cannot be compromised due to the fact that they deal with life and death issues and the basic societal and Constitutional building blocks.
The two interest are not exclusive of each other. In fact, social conservatism automatically causes fiscal conservatism’s goal to be accomplished. (i.e. Lower unplanned teenage motherhood rates leads to a better economy.)
First of all, this is my first visit. I found your blog on stumble and added you as a friend there.
I agree with you in that the rift will cause the Republican Party to split- just as it did last time. I think that the split support between Romney and Huckabee ensured McCain the nomination… which as we see did not pan out so well. However, rifts between candidates bring out qualities, pasts, and character of all the candidates. It also helps the voter discover things about candidates that most likely would not have been dug up otherwise.
I guess I will be the odd ball out here…as I was a Mitt Romney supporter. If he runs again, I will probably support him unless someone like Paul Ryan runs.
ashley rowell´s last blog ..Lose The Training Wheels Camp: Help Your Special Needs Child Learn How To Ride A Bike!
Ashley,
Thanks for taking the time to comment on Political Realities. I hope you will return and become a regular member of the discussion we have around here.
Concerning the rift between Romney and Huckabee, let me say this. I did not think it was a good thing for the GOP when it was in full swing and I stand by that theory today. There was entirely too much dissension between the two camps and I feel it led, albeit indirectly, to the election of Barack Obama.
Yes, it brought out things about both candidates, but I think there must be a way to accomplish that without splitting the party. At least in my mind, there should be.
As for 2012, I seriously doubt Mike Huckabee joins the race. I am not sure about Romney. Who I will support depends on who is running, obviously. I would be willing to give someone like Paul Ryan a chance, although he is a bit young. Still plenty of time for all of that.