« News; Florida GOPers Try To Preserve Delegate Strength | Main | Hillary Clinton's First Ad »

How Did Huckabee Place Second?

13 Aug 2007 12:09 pm

As Soren Dayton notes, there are two salient facts: Mike Huckabee's campaign did not rent buses to drive supporters to the straw poll in Ames, Iowa and he supports the Fair Tax, which would replace the income tax and most of the tax code with a national retail sales tax.

Here is what Dayton is getting at. Fairtax.org, a 504 (c) 4, filled at least 20 buses worth of economically conservative Iowans and drove them to the straw poll. Of the mainstream Republican candidates, only Huckabee has made the Fair Tax a staple of his domestic policy program.

In an e-mail to supporters Saturday, FairTax.org bragged that it "made history tonight. Our grassroots efforts in Iowa made the FairTax the deciding issue in Iowa's Straw Poll. We did it!"

[We] want to especially thank our dedicated volunteers and hardworking staff members who braved almost 100 degree temperatures to make our rallies and hospitality tent the places to be at the Iowa Straw Poll. Their hard work, in extremely difficult weather conditions, set the bar even higher for our next major rally. Yes, we will be rallying on the East Coast again - details coming soon.

Nowhere does FairTax.org claim that it specifically aided the Huckabee effort and 20 to 30 buses worth of supporters would be responsible for at most half of Huckabee's margin. Not incidentally, any collusion between the Huckabee campaign and Fair Tax.org would be legally questionable.

Here's another source of Huckabee's strength: home schoolers. It's true -- a campaign tells me that national home school advocate Michael Farris helped to organize a train of car poolers for Iowa homeschools and points out that Huckabee had two breakfast meetings on Saturday morning with some of his more ardent home-school-parent supporters.

In his speech to straw-poll goers, Huckabee dared them to prove their "maturity" -- his word -- by casting their ballots based on an assessment of substance, not style. It was a powerful appeal to reason, and some might speculate that his words moved votes. The problem is that Huckabee spoke around 2:00 pm. By that point, about 12,000 of 14,000 votes had already been cast. It's possible that the lion's share of afternoon votes went to Huckabee, but there's no way to prove this.

So -- how did Huckabee finish so highly?

1. He is a powerful political communicator.
2. His campaign paid for about 1800 tickets.
3. His support of the Fair Tax proposal
4. His affinity with evangelical Christians and home schoolers
5. His many visits to Iowa and high-profile evangelical activist supporters
6. He needed only about 2600 votes to finish second
7. His debate performances

Comments (33)

I've long thought that Mike Huckabee would actually be the GOP's best shot at keeping the White House. He's certainly the most likable of the Republican candidates, and likable usually wins.

He's even said, "My brand of conservatism isn't a mean one."

Ugh, please. No more compassionate conservatism. Be "mean" and get the government out of my way and let me be free.

seconded T.L.

Huckabee is probably the GOP's best candidate--he doesn't have any huge disqualifiers to the base (at least, not to evangelicals), and he's insufficiently threatening to turn away moderates. He speaks well on a lot of issues--no propaganda, just honest, thoughtful answers that I often disagree with, but I can see where he's coming from. He's also got a pretty good political style as well--not too much pandering, a fair amount of wit, and some actual populism. Real populism--not the GOP's interpretation of it. He's probably the only GOP candidate who can be said to come down on the side of the middle and working classes when it comes to the unending class war in this country.

As a loyal Democrat I wouldn't vote for him--although I'm sympathetic to his pro-life arguments (he actually goes further than just abortion and ties being pro-life to improving quality of life, which makes sense to me) but his Iraq stance is unpalatable to me, as are his views on gays, science, etc. Still, if I had to have a Republican President, Huckabee is one I could easily live with.

This may have something to do with his extensive homeschooler support:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=L-q0h1cb6xE

He's certainly the most likable of the Republican candidates, and likable usually wins.

Vote for the guy you'd like to have a beer with!

Yeah, that's worked out brilliantly these past seven years, hasn't it? How about we not worry about who's most likable in favor of the person most likely to do the best job? The last time I voted based on popularity was for class president in high school, and that tuned out to be a lousy choice, too.

If he'll promise not to shove religion down my throat, in particular creationism being shoved down children's throats in schools, I could live with him.

So far he's certainly more palatable than the rest of the Rep clowns running.

I could be wrong though...on both counts...

God commands you to vote for him. You have no choice!

Huckabee seems charming (in a way similar to John Edwards), but there is no way I could vote for him. If a candidate is unmoved by overwhelming consensus of the scientific community (on issues like evolution, or the global warming) then I don't see who they could effectively preside over EPA, FDA, CIA, and a host of other agencies that require weighing subtle evidence and reasons.

Mike Huckabee is a Jeffersonian Conservative. His personal stance is to reduce the influence the federal government has on our lives, and increase the focus on state and local governments that are more representative of our communities and choices of lifestyle... so T.L. and Faye, he IS the guy to get the government out of your way... that is why he endorses the Fair Tax... Close down the IRS, eliminate Income Tax, and reduce the over-inflated federal government... the best thing for this country!

John S-

I wasn't actually advocating for people to vote for him based on wanting to have a beer with him. That's not how I vote at all. I look at the issues. All I was saying was that elections--close presidential ones especially--are often decided based on who is more likable to average voters who don't usually pay attention.

In that respect Huckabee would be a great nominee. By the way, I'm a raging liberal Democrat and would never vote for Huckabee, but I find myself strangely liking him when I watch his speeches and interviews, and if I find myself liking him, that's a bad sign. Let's hope he doesn't get the nod.

Did Huckabee get his stomach stapled? Last time I sam him he was three hundred pounds. What gives?

You know I am a democrat and I am leaning toward Huckabee, he is more up on social issues than any of the Democratic candidates running for election. I like Huckabee's style. Wow, this guy could make me leave my party, now that really says something doesnt it?????????

Actually, as an independent I happen to like Huckabee on several issues, including his support of the Fair Tax. The one area in which he has me somewhat nervous is his stance on certain social issues. I believe he is way too conservative on his gay rights position. I also tend to think he brings a bit too much of his religion into his policy thinking on social issues. But he is someone I am looking at closely.

Did he have his stomach stapled? You should read
more often Betty.
Gov Huckabee went on a good diet and he
exercises. He has done what the average
American refuses to do - TAKE CARE OF THE BODY!

FAIRTAX!!!!!he's got my vote...to he?? with the rest of them.....

I am interested in the comment by Carlos concerning a "overwhelming consensus" of the scientific community. Science and math do not accept consensus as a method of proof. It set a hypothesis, develops an experimental method, conducts the study using a control (or several control) group(s), does a mathematical analysis of the data and repeats the experiment.

This is the experimental scientific method. If the experiment can not reproduce the results over and over, it labels the hypothesis or the experiment invalid.

The term consensus means nothing in the scientific community. Some learned scholars might decide that the point of freezing (actually the temperature of ice melting) might be 45' Fahrenheit instead of the proven 32'. Many articles could be written and published supporting the idea of a 45' freeze point. We can actually reach a consensus of more than 90%. However, this does not change the proven fact that the freeze point is 32'.

I am not saying that the world is not warming. I am only saying that accepting a consensus instead of scientific proof might leave a person looking foolish if the scientific data actually proves something different.

Hey Carlos, Science is not done by consensus. Science should always be questioned, that is the scientific method. Global warming must be questioned especially when people like NASA are caught cooking the books on temperatures as they most certainly have been caught. And as for evolution, it takes far more faith to believe in it then it does to believe in creationism.

Huckabee is a very smart man and the most honest of the candidates. I do not agree with him on some issues, but he wants to make the government smaller and less intrusive, that is a good thing.

Carlos is a Evangelical Global Warmist who can't take the blinders off to see that there is NO scientific consensus on global warming.

Never mind that many of the weather stations that record temperatures around the US and the world for that matter, are in locations that make the data they return useless. A large number of them have been shown to be located on airport tarmacs (now there is a real chilly place to be on a hot August day), underneath air condition exhausts, etc.

Never mind that just today, there are reports of articles being found in the national archives from the 1920's talking about the alarming disappearance of glaciers, etc.

Never mind that scientific studies show that Greenland was once a warm, almost tropical land.

Does anybody know about or remember Mike Huckabee's "Tax Me More Fund"?

When he was the Governor of Arkansas, he was under a lot of pressure to raise state taxes from several sources. His response was to establish his "Tax Me More Fund", to which he invited everyone living in Arkansas who believed that they themselves should be paying more state taxes to give what they believed they should be paying in additional taxes to. The moment I heard about this, I decided that if he were ever to run for president, I'd vote for him.

By the way, this fund, over the course of several months raised about $2.50. just goes to show you. When most people say that they believe that we should pay more taxes, What they actaully mean is that YOU, should pay more...not them.

Like a previous poster, though I am a cold hearted Republican and not a Democrat, I find myself strangely attracted to Gov. Mike. Is it it possible that there is a common ground? I daresay that it has not happened in my lifetime of 35 years. If he can only use his obviously gifted intelligence to communicate, Barak the Articulate and Hillary are doomed. Duncan Hunter or Fred Thompson as V.P.

Mike Huckabee's support of the FairTax, and the people's support for him in turn, show that the man who cares about the people can garner support across the board. If he's not elected at least He's awaken the media and many people to the FairTax and it's many benefits.

I have to agree that Mike Huckabee is a very likable guy who knows what this country wants and needs, and on both sides of the political fence he is probably the most qualified to run this great country. He's got my vote.
p.s it's nice to see dems takin' a likin' to Mike it just goes to show that he will be able to work with a congress run by either party as he has done in the past as Governer.

Anybody who's advocating the so-called "Fair Tax" as a major campaign plank is either a scammer or economically clueless, or both. (That's not to say that their opponents aren't scammers or clueless also.)

Even if Congress adds a National Sales Tax, or a VAT, it's not going to get rid of the Income Tax, it's just going to have more taxes. And the Federal government's not going to spend less money, so a tax that doesn't generate less money isn't going to fly. (Even if we elected fiscally responsible conservatives, they'd have to pay off Bush's record debts, and the modern world economy doesn't let you inflate them away the way Reagan did.)

The real thing this tax does is double-tax old people, which as a middle-aged guy who hopes to retire some day, I don't consider to be fair. Old people spent their working careers paying income tax, so any money they've saved up has already been taxed. Imposing a national sales tax on them when they're retired and spending their savings just taxes that money again.

I think of Huckabee as one of those nice guys who're going to finish last. I like Ron Paul better except on immigration issues, where his opinions are unconstitutional and unlibertarian, and I voted for him in 1988, but he's also in that group.

"Even if Congress adds a National Sales Tax, or a VAT, it's not going to get rid of the Income Tax, it's just going to have more taxes."

Ok, so that isn't the Fair Tax!

Part of the Fair Tax is getting rid of the Income
tax, and corporate taxes.

I think we need to clean house. Get rid of
Byrd, Pelosi, Jefferson, Kennedy, Young, Stevens,
and anyone else who can't seem to understand
that it's OUR money they are spending.

The Fair Tax may not be perfect, but it's the best
start so far. Bring the power back to THE PEOPLE!

And another thing...

"The real thing this tax does is double-tax old people, which as a middle-aged guy who hopes to retire some day, I don't consider to be fair. Old people spent their working careers paying income tax, so any money they've saved up has already been taxed. Imposing a national sales tax on them when they're retired and spending their savings just taxes that money again."

Ok.. maybe it isn't fair. But SOMETHING needs
done. Think about all those people (like me) who
are paying into Social Security. Do you really
think it's going to be around when I retire?

What about those people who save money their whole
lives, and then they die. The government walks
in and takes their piece of it because of the
death tax and inheritance tax.

Look at all the corporations that are moving their
headquarters to other countries. Sure everyone
likes to call them names, but THEY NEED TO SURVIVE just like you do. If they can't compete,
then they fail, and then that's less tax for
the government.

Think about all the time invested each year to
deal with taxes. Millions of dollars per year
and thousands of hours per year are spent dealing
with taxes.

I think the Fair Tax would actually have a shot
if stupid people could just understand one thing,
and that is that corporations don't pay taxes.
They are simply tax collectors. Raise the tax
that a company has to pay, and they raise the
price of their goods and services, which means
that you are going to be paying for that tax
increase through higher prices. Simple concept,
but people are too stupid to understand it.

I think Ron Paul is superior - he also wants to get rid of the IRS while at the same time he isn't nearly as intrusive in his civil liberties as Huckabee is.

I get a lot of hateful messages from Huckabees people..

gcwhn zltrhmi uynasdx aztesyjo nwrgfo rngelyvzp vxpdezias

gcwhn zltrhmi uynasdx aztesyjo nwrgfo rngelyvzp vxpdezias

jeabvcygt qjstuezd rabepiz tkmasnvf mvjfp ixuv kuemy http://www.czkndh.okhmi.com

tscgkubyw hcofgz rfuic qjsihdcvb wyndvofjr azpwtg psgev mfdv xqimlz

ofgendubx kmbtqpj cuofv nlry ypscgald thnjqx oiqjc