Dec 06 2008
Huckabee And Palin Tied For Lead In 2012 Race
I have no desire to start blogging the 2012 elections yet (not even the 2010). But I do find it interesting that two popular and somewhat moderate Governors are topping the GOP list of 2012 presidential contenders:
hirty-four percent of Republicans and independent voters who lean towards the GOP say they are very likely to support the former Arkansas governor if he were to become their party’s nominee in 2012. Huckabee surprised many by winning this year’s Republican caucuses in Iowa and seven other contests before ending his run in March.
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, John McCain’s running mate in this year’s election, draws nearly as much support: 32 percent of those polled said they would get behind a Palin nomination. And with the survey’s sampling error of plus or minus 4.5 points, Palin and Huckabee are statistically tied.
I am not surprised by Huckabee’s standing. His ‘awe-shucks’ demeanor is quite attracting. But of the two choices Huckabee is probably the more moderate, and I recall a few eye-opening proposals during the campaign (though I don’t have time to find them this morning and link to them).
Palin is also nowhere near as far right as the media tried to portray her. She does not attempt to impose her social morals on the general public. This was all mythology built up by the news media and projection by conservatives trying to find a reason to vote for McCain (since opposing Obama and liberals is not enough for some voters).
I note the Governor Jindal and others are way down on the list. My guess is the more ‘true conservative’ a candidate it the less support they will garner. The ‘true conservatism’ brand is that badly damaged. Whoever is selected is almost irrelevant. As long as insecurity and hate towards fellow Americans are the loudest choir voices coming out of the conservative movement they will not gain enough support to win statewide elections, let alone national ones.Â
The good news – there is a new and fresh GOP over the horizon for those ready to work together.
[…] So much for those in the media that said that Sarah Palin was a drag of the McCain/Palin ticket. Although it is far to soon to begin covering 2012, it is always interesting to see who is out there and what the public perception […]
A fresh new GOP on the horizon? Led by proven losers like Palin and Huckabee? The GOP will really deserve its label ‘the stupid party’ if they go for either of these ‘folksy’ gee whiz types.
During the Bush/Rove years the GOP has been dumbed down. They’re delighted to be known as ‘anti-elitist’. Idiotic sloganeering and Jesus talk are not substitutes for intelligence. Under Bush people who are educated have run away from the party that cherishes its anti-intellectual image. A Palin/Huckabee party will be popular with white small town, anti-intellectual, Bible-thumping militarists and…well, nobody else. That demographic isn’t big enough to win today, and it is getting smaller with each election cycle (in part thanks to the GOP/Wall Street preference for open borders).
As Daniel Larison at The American Conservative website has pointed out the GOP hasn’t even considered a rethink on the war that has destroyed the brand name of the GOP. I particularly liked this comment that was posted:
Most of the pro-war arguments aren’t even arguments at all, they are projections of a certain self-image onto the world scene. This is why it is so hard to argue against, because one is then attacking a deeply cherished self-image, and a national self-image, that wants to remain in place in spite of facts. This is why even the facts of the war’s failure may convince people that the war was a mistake, but they still cling to rationalizations for that which allow them to preserve their very self-image, and national image, that actually led them to support the war in the first place.
Link
Reason and facts don’t persuade people who cling to positions for non-intellectual reasons.
The GOP stands for open borders, foreign wars that do not benefit the US, bail-outs for big business, big government, religious fundamentalism, and hatred of elitists (ie. successful people). Outside of the South it hasn’t got a prayer.
Lets have a look at things in a bit larger perspective.
California, for example, has increased their minimum wage. This causes problems far beyond what might be obvious.
Lets say you had people at $7.00 an hour to start and after they were trained and shown to be responsible, you bump them up to $8.00 an hour. Now the state increases the minimum wage to $8.00. So you not only have to increase the wage of the people who were making $7.00 to 8.00, you have to increase the wage of the ones making $8.00, too. So what do you do?
In some cases, businesses might decide to simply let the people go who were making $7.00. Now you get an illegal immigrant who shows up and offers labor at $7.00 under the table.
Democratic “progressive” policies actually cause unemployment of citizens and opens job opportunities for people willing to work for less than the official “minimum”. Illegals are less likely to report an employer when they themselves offered their labor at less than the “official” rate.
I don’t think the GOP stands for “open borders” but what the GOP *should* be standing for are policies that are more focused on general economic growth and less focused on increasing transfer of wealth from one economic sector to another. This is because a general expansion helps everyone equally.
Our current recession is the result of putting people who can barely afford a home into adjustible rate mortgages combined with Sarbanes-Oxley business reporting requirements. When interest rates adjusted upwards, many people could no longer afford their mortgage payments and defaulted. This caused their home to be sold for less than the current market, in many cases. Due to Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, once that first house sold for less than the market, the lenders were required to mark down the value of every single mortgage in that neighborhood (mark to market). This means that many mortgages that were an asset (value higher than mortgage balance) became a liability on the books of the lenders (house is worth less than amount owed).
Lenders are the lubricant to the economy. The same lenders that offer home mortgages also provide letters of credit and bridge loans for things such as international shipping of goods, leasing of equipment, etc. When the sinking of real estate values wiped out their asset balance, the lenders could not lend money. This means that business can not lease equipment, can not obtain a letter of credit to obtain a shipment of parts from overseas, can’t borrow to build a new plant or upgrade an old one.
So the result of government social engineering in the mortgage market has been the marching of the entire economy off the cliff when interest rates went up in 2007. Lenders were required to make a certain percentage of loans to a certain class of lender at payments they could afford regardless of their own better judgment. As a result, Democratic “progressive” housing policy has turned what was a lubricant for the economy into glue.
The other thing the sinking of home values did was to basically eliminate the home equity line of credit. Many cars, boats, home repairs, furnishing, college tuition, etc. were financed through home equity loans. The elimination of home equity has eliminated the source of funding for a wide variety of “durable goods”.
I know at least three people who were literally living off of home appreciation. They are now forced to go back to work.
Huckleberry is a joke. He is being touted by the MSM to embarrass and mock the republican party to the rest of the country, especially the independents who elect every President. Independents think Huck is less than a hayseed.
He has no chance of ever being elected President. Everyone but his supporters know this.
Huckabee is a caricature of the Republican party that the media loves to promote as an example of Republicanism. I agree with you, Patrick.
We need to concentrate more on “role of government” issues and building a strong economy and a strong national defense rather than social issues and tossing cash around.
Jules,
I don’t even recognize your depiction of Palin and conservatives. It must be a stereotype found in news stand magazines.
Smart “educated” people don’t throw around charges of “failed war” and “fundamentalism” in such cavalier fashion. .
Smart “educated” people read analysts like Victor Davis Hanson, Shelby Steele, Marc Stein, George Gilder and Lawrence Kudlow.
Of course there are vacuous “educated” people.
Smart “educated†people read analysts like Victor Davis Hanson, Shelby Steele, Marc Stein, George Gilder and Lawrence Kudlow.
That is laugh out loud funny. Kudlow and Hanson? It would be difficult to name two men who have been more consistently wrong over the last decade. OK, maybe Bill Kristol and Paul Krugman. Steyn and Steele are more interesting but the average Palin supporter is unlikely to read either of them…or anyone else for that matter.
I don’t even recognize your depiction of Palin and conservatives.
Virtually everyone above the Mason-Dixon line would recognize my depiction of Palin and the GOP since Bush took charge.
So the result of government social engineering in the mortgage market has been the marching of the entire economy off the cliff when interest rates went up in 2007.
Agreed. Unfortunately for the GOP George Bush led the social engineering process. As I’ve shown in previous posts at this site, George Bush, year after year of his presidency attacked those who would not hand out mortgages to Hispanics and other minorities like candy and he backed up his rhetoric with action. But the new dumbed down GOP will never admit that their man was responsible for anything.
Huckleberry is a joke. He is being touted by the MSM to embarrass and mock the republican party to the rest of the country, especially the independents who elect every President.
Correct. Huckabee is the media’s dream candidate for the GOP.
Jules,
It is doubtful that you have any familiarity with Hanson and Kudlow. You lack specificity in labeling them “always wrong.”
Palin is from north of the Mason-Dixon Line. And if that is your way of distinguishing the literatti from the rubes, well, take a look at some of the hell holes in the northern blue states, where the Acorn thugs operate .
The average “Palin supporter” is a hard working American, tired of being patronized, and seeing in her a proven executive with uplifting values.
Looks like Romney may make another run also:
Romney working on possible 2012 run
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705269132,00.html?pg=1
May see Jindal and some unexpected candidates also.
Palin, Huckabee, Romney, Jindal……all are great candidates.
Palin is easily considered a “true conservative” by Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, etc. (but, she attracts moderates like AJ also). Huckabee attracts social conservatives (I like his Fair Tax). Romney is more the moderate than the others, and Jindal is just great in so many ways.
I had a real hard time coming around to supporting McCain. I could easily support any of the top candidates these polls are suggesting.