Why Huckabee must not be VP

Why oh why was Mike Huckabee missing from my ballot of McCain VP picks?

That was the question from post after post. So I suppose I better explain myself.

I excluded Huckabee because McCain won't pick him. And shouldn't.

The Republicans are in deep trouble. The Senate and House races are looking bad. But there's just the slimmest of chances that they could hold the White House. That's because they have in John McCain a candidate with some chance of appealing to independents.

Now he is going to have his work cut out as it is. But it is vital that he is consistent in his message - that he is a moderate and his own man.

Mike Huckabee is a natural pol, with great ability. But his appeal is really to the faithful not the swing voter. In a normal year you might be able to get away with choosing such a candidate for VP. But not this year.

Why? Because of McCain's age. His VP candidate has got to be someone swing voters want in the White House or at the very least do not NOT want. So it really can't be Huckabee.

Plus, he doesn't believe in evolution.

Comments

[Jonathan]

To paraphrase Charles Darwin (c 1850): "My theory demands a smooth evolution from mollusc to man. The imcomplete fossil record is the reason why so many "Missing Links" exist. If within 50 years these gaps have not been filled then you may discount my theory."

Over a century after Darwin's 50 years ran out we still have 4 huge gaps. These coincidentally(?) correspond to the verses in Genesis that relate to the creation of animals, fish etc, for example, "And God created Man."

When will fossils of "The Missing Link" become commonplace?

[Frank Upton]

Other politicians who did not believe in evolution include Pericles, Augustus Caesar, Emperor Wu Ti, Charlemagne, Tokugawa and Napoleon.

[DeWayne]

McCain has a bigger problem, though. Especially after distancing himself from Hagee and Parsley, he has almost no real vibrant conservative support. He is not motivating his base at all to vote for his ticket as he moves closer and closer to the "moderate".

That's wonderful if he captures all the swing voters, but what good is it if only half of his base turns out. He still loses.

Sure, the die hard republicans will turn out for him, but they don't like it. Huckabee gives conservatives a reason to want to vote in this election. I think if you end up with two overly "moderate" candidates, they look like democrat appeasers and conservatives will balk.

McCain is letting Obama, who is literally the most liberal candidate in US history, control the tone of this election, and going more and more liberal.

Talk show hosts may scoff that the conservative base may stay home. But if McCain over plays the "I'm liberal friendly" card, I'll be staying home as well. And don't anyone give me the "anythings better than Obama" speech. It didn't work for Kerry, and democrats got the message that unmotivating, moderate (Kerry hasn't been a distinguishing liberal apparently since the 1970's) democrats can't win the presidency this decade. Republicans may learn, liberal leaning republicans can't win this decade. I, for one, hope that turns out to be true. Clear distinctions in party lines gives America a real choice.

Remember, Bush didn't win because of swing voters. He won because he motivated the conservative core. Obama is not popular because of swing voters, but because of the liberal core. Obama sucks with working class swing voters, who Hilary does great with, but who like McCain can't motivate excitement with her traditional core.

[Ted]

Here's an important piece of advice: If it looks like it's going to be McCain/Palin anyway (and that should be a "no brainer" for Team McCain), McCain should announce NOW or VERY SOON, rather than later towards the convention. There's currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dems are likely aware of the Palin phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows -- even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick -- selecting Palin will be portrayed by Dems/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (overshawdoing Palin's own remarkable assets), rather than McCain taking the lead on this. Selecting Palin now or early (contrary to the punditocracy) will mean McCain will be seen as driving the course of this campaign overwhelmingly, and the DEMS will be seen as merely reacting. And, there's absoultely no down-side to this because even if Hillary is a no-go as VP for Obama, the GOP gains by acting early. McCain the maverick. Palin the maverick. Do it now!

There's no reason, and actually substantial negative, in McCain waiting to see what the Dems do first insofar as his picking Palin as VP, because, no matter who Obama picks, Palin is by far (and I mean far) the best pick for McCain and the GOP, especially in this time of GOP woes. The GOP can be seen as the party of real 'change' (albeit I hate that mantra, change, change, bla bla), while not really having to change from GOP core conservative values, which Palin more than represents.

In light of the current oil/energy situation, as well as the disaffected female Hillary voters situation, and growing focus on McCain's age and health, Palin is more than perfect -- now.

(Perhaps Team McCain is already on to this.)

[JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO]

Daniel, I agree with your analysis.

But I take exception to the following (unqualified) statement:

"Mike Huckabee is a natural pol, with great ability."

He is a natural pol, so long as you are talking about a body politic the size and nature of Arkansas.

But at the national level, he has little ability, much less great ability.

He has about the same appeal (and effective intelligence) as Pat Robertson.

His whole way of speaking, his retarded ideas, and his hypocritical religiosity have zero appeal outside of America's band of Appalachian Throwback states.

True, McCain, an unreligious man much disliked by the Religious Right, needs these votes.

But if he were to try to get them with this cretin, he would automatically lose votes and a great deal of confidence in other, more important places.

[roger]

obama most liberal? What does that mean?

Does he want to spend your money faster than Bush and McCain? No evidence of that.

[jon rose]

From reading and talking with my friends in usa, palin seem to be best choice.
But usa has as the only superpower at moment to lead by example, we now are in a time of crisis economically and climatically, the usa needs a strong president who will put those issues first instead of haveing someone as corrupt as bush in power, who used terrorism and caused terrorism by his tactics to grab one of the middle-east oil areas for his company, him and blair now get out of politics very rich, and remember bush family were already rich from oil, until you can get someone as president who has no money but integrity there is no such thing as freedom of speech, as the gap between the rich and poor has widened over the last 30 yrs, in the west; fact

McCain hopefully can overcome the problems the bush family administration,have lef, the middle east is now all in arms, now, if u look at world map the middle-east is a pivotal area, because it makes it easy to hit russia and china from bases in there countries, this is partly what the bush administration have done is prepare for world war 3, and have actually pushed it closer, because they have almost destroyed the UN as a policy making body, very much in the same way the league of nations was destroyed previously!
russia is now slowly re-arming thanks to this idiot, and his cronies in power.
It will take a strong president to overcome this and McCain is all that, and actually has seen war first hand, whereas bush was busy with rich buddies out partying.
Now is the crucial time for your president, and luckily McCain is all that, as an Independant, who won't be pushed around by the bureacracy, or be brought by the rich companies, as bush allegedly seems to have been!

[Andy C]

Huckabee is gearing up for 2012, it's the reason he stayed in the race for so long after he'd lost.

He's not politicking McCain in the way some of the other potentials are (Crist, Romney) plus his recent gaffes specifically over Obama at the NRA meeting, pretty much rule him out.

[Bill Billyson]

"To paraphrase Charles Darwin"

You sir, have a "mollusc" for a brain!

[Lisa]

To Roger: "Most liberal" refers to his voting record. It does mean quite a bit.

[mirth]

Left off the veep list is the most obvious choice, especially considering that the convention will be held in Minnesota. Idaho's Senator Larry Craig is sure to be the guy. PUT YOUR BEST FOOT FORWARD WITH McCAIN & CRAIG!

[Hotspur]

The economy is clearly the nbr one issue. Romney is clearly the economic wonk of the VP candidates. Romney is the best VP choice. And his ability to increasing fund raising is clearly the best - even if he's got to donate his personal fortune.

[John Harper]

I am relieved that the writer confessed that evolution was a religion that needed to be believed in, rather than trying the normal propaganda of trying to state evolution as a proven fact. Science (a religion in itself) insists in full proven evidence before it accepts anything as true, certainly when it pertains to God at least, yet promotes evolution as fact when there are clearly enormous holes in the evidence chain. God help America if it elects an irreligious man or two phoney religionists.

[viswanath]

Macain can not win the election based on moderate values.He can win easily if he focuses o conservative votes. Democrats never learn. They have chosen Obama who is more liberal than Kerry. Democrats have to choose some one who can win nationally not primaries.
Democratic party needs to change what is best for the party. Not the speech makers who wants to make changes to Washington when they can not win the trust of either female or white blue collared voters.
Hope Macain wins the election

[Jim]

I think you may be imagining McCain was running in England. Huckabee does in fact appeal to independents in the US, as his record as governor shows. In some areas he may be more popular with Democrats than Republicans, which is part of the reason he did not win the nomination.

[Stephen Nelson]

I understand nothing about American politics but I hope that the "Palin" referred to by your correspondents is Michael Palin. He is a delightful man and his Python heritage is exactly what the US needs to redeem its credibility in the Rest of the World.

[Greg Lorriman]

One of the marka of a good leader is in his relationship with those with whom he does not agree.

Nothing here about that.

[San Ying]

I saw and heard Huckabee address the National Rifle Association. His body language was disturbing, his accent ghastly, his supposed sense of humour atrocious and his self importance Garguantuan. God help McCain if he is dumb enough to choose Huck as
V-P!

[JC]

According to polls, at least 51% of Americans do not believe in evolution. Saying that a candidate such as Huckabee does not believe in evolution does not cause a political problem in the U.S. He is not a cretin, and is actually in the majority with his views. See this URL from CBS News.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml

[Islywn]

Re: Frank Upton: Was this post a joke? I think I'm right in saying that none of his politicians were alive post Darwin. Evolution what's that?

[Olaf]

You say that McCain has to stay consistent in his message - that he is a moderate and his own man.

That is not his real message. If you listen closely, he is saying that voting for him is like voting for a third term for GWB. He will do what GWB would do - that's what he means by being moderate and being his own man.

[Stan]

Science is not about belief and not about proof, it is about theory and evidence. To be valid a theory must be falsifiable - there must be some way of testing it which could lead to the answer "WRONG". A theory may be found to be reliable (like gravity) but it is never 'proved' however many positive tests there may be. With evolution a huge body of evidence in support has built up over the last 150 years but no clear, unambiguous evidence to the contrary.

Darwin was a skilled zoologist who wrote extensively on many subjects but neither I nor any colleague can recall the one Jonathan refers to. It would be helpful if he could provide a reference for Darwin's supposed quotation on man's being descended from molluscs.

[Daphne Kenward]

McCain will not win the next general electon. McCain has some of the most notorious people who supported dictators who massacured people as closely associated to his campaign. It sends out a very bad signal, it shows his standards. And where it is going to take the country. All bad news for McCain. Electing McCain is the same as electing Adolph Hitler.

[David]

“Plus, he doesn't believe in evolution.” Why is it that the author inserts this? Does the author really believe that to be a good leader one needs to believe in evolution? Hitler and Stalin and Mao believed evolution. Yet a vast number of presidents like Lincoln and Washington didn’t…. Hmmm. I find it difficult to think that a leader who believes in evolution, and hence believes that people of the USA are no different than a fruit fly, would really care too much about the people of the USA.

[CER]

"Now is the crucial time for your president, and luckily McCain is all that, as an Independant, who won't be pushed around by the bureacracy, or be brought by the rich companies, as bush allegedly seems to have been!

Posted by: jon rose | 27 May 2008 15:35:22 "

If jon rose really thinks MCain is 'independant" (sic), he really needs to pay more attention.

A McCain presidency would be a continuation of the Bush II Presidency.

[Stan]

What is worrying is not who believes in evolution, science does not ask for belief, it is that politicians are pushed into professing belief in positions which are not supported by the vast bulk of the evidence.

Assessing and acting on evidence, even when that evidence is unwelcome, is a vital part of being a leader. Treating with scepticism those who misrepresent propositions and evidence is also a vital function.

Hopefully the candidates have their tongues firmly in their cheeks and are only paying lip service to the current superstitions. One Than Shwee with his blind astrologer in Burma is bad enough, one in the White House it would be really frightening.

[Dave R]

Sometimes I wonder if we aspire to highly, to rank as high as a fruit fly.

[Brent]

Two words: Ron Paul. ;-)

[Dean Hallett]

I can't understand why so many American Christians find the idea of evolution so threatening. Their irrational rejection of this well grounded theory simply makes them look intolerant and ridiculous to the rest of the world. Evolution could be God's method for making people, couldn't it?

[KIMBERLY NORTON]

In reply to JOHN CHUCKMAN, you are WRONG about Mike Huckabee. I wonder if you watched any of the debates during the primaries? I DID! I had never heard of Mike Huckabee, and was enthralled by him. He is intelligent, has a wonderful sense of humor, but more importantly, he believes in MORALITY! And, oh FYI, I am a registered Independent, but tend to lean Democrat, and I DO NOT live in a "Appalachian Throwback state". I am a life long resident of Massachusetts, so your "theory" is way off base!

America has turned into a country filled with greed, (Bush and Cheney's greed has led to the worst economic fall since WW2) corruption, posturing, self-indulgence, complacency, and vulgarity! It is frightening that despite all the problems we are facing, that our citizens are NOT taking their vote for our next president seriously! Voting because of skin color or sex or even party ticket is ignorant.

And to JON ROSE, your comment about McCain being the ONLY choice for our next president; you obviously don't have a clue about him! Yes he is a "nice" man, but he is a BIG believer in Bush's war,etc,. and is against getting out!

Our world, not just America is heading into a very grave and scary future. So, maybe a man like Huckabee, is really what we DO need. A return to ethics, humility, humbleness, charity and dignity. I hope and pray, that before anyone makes any more decisions, that they really pay attention to the candidates and their politics. Thank You.

[Mike Kemp]

Modern day elections are largely won as a result of one major negative factor - swing voters or independents vote AGAINST the person or party that they don't want to win. This is a much more powerful motivation than positive support for one party or candidate they they might prefer.

The Presidential election is still wide open but it is obvious that the Democrats will be the overall winners in the Congressional races. The conservative and Christian Fundamentalist core of the Republicans WILL turnout to vote for McCain because they don't want to see Obama or Clinton win. Therefore the real issue is how to capture the swing voter.

The VP candidate will be more critical this year than usual. Obama will be the Democratic candidate but the race issue, a 'too liberal' allegation and the 'lack of experience' factor are all hurdles that he still has to overcome. McCain has the age factor and the 'successor to a tainted Bush' allegation as his major hurdles.

McCain has a better chance to win the Presidency IF he can overcome his hurdles than Obama can at this stage. Obama has a better chance of winning a future contest having established his national credentials through this campaign and after 4 more high profile years in the Senate. One of McCains tasks is to select a VP who will not alienate the independents and who can be viewed as a credible 'President-in-waiting' due to the 'age' issue. Huckabee is too controversial, Romney is too bland and Jindal is too young. The most viable options are Charlie Crist, Sarah Palin or a wildcard like Mike Bloomberg.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Charlie Crist will fill the spot but that both Palin and Bloomberg will have high profile roles as part of an allstar prospective Cabinet team in a McCain administration, which could also include big hitters like Jindal and Joe Lieberman.

This could be the first time that a candidate runs a Presidential campaign as an allstar 'team leader' in contrast to the more individual campaigns that have characterised all previous elections and this could turnout to be McCains strongest card !

[Daphne Kenward]

To have change, the American people need to take a look at what makes a difference in the world & their country. Worring about OPRAH is not a political issue. Rev Wright he is not a political issue. Haggee is not a Political issue, what matters is the things that has an impact on the world and our communities & our societies. The war in IRAQ will not go away because DEPLETED URANIUN is now causing Birth defects in Fallhjah, which is a problem for the people of IRAQ. Its a problem for the American government because they could be tried for WAR Crimes, America did the same thing in Vietnam. Children is still being born beformed. Now the other side to that AMERICAN service men and women will have been exposed to the Depleted Uranium too, and will also have defective children. I would like to see BUSH tried for war crimes & Tony Blair. Because the world does not belong to BUSH & BLAIR. Like all of us are answerable for our errors, so must all leaders, be answerable for their crimes. If the people elect a leader it is not a passport to kill people we dont like based on colour race or religion. OPRAH knows that she wanted change from war criminals to people who act in the interest of growth and good moral standards, and I support that, and will continue to do so till I am dead, because that is what being a humanbeing means, the growth and betterment of mankind, and not the idea we can poison our soil with toxic chemicals, because irrisponsible WAR CRIMINALS think it will help to fill his or hers bank accounts. McCain is another WAR CRIMINAL who wants to take revenge on the world, and we have a duty to stop him.

[Frank Upton]

JC - I wanted to point out that Mr Huckabee's views on the origin of species are not that relevant to his possible ability as a Vice President, any more than, say, his views on the designated hitter rule or whether to put the milk in first.

[Tom Price]

Just be honest Mr Finkelstein, you don't think that evangelicals deserve political representation. How glad I am that such a responsible and intelligent political critic as yourself, is able to recognise true madness when it shows its burly and unwanted head and concentrate on a detailed and meaningful engagement with the issues that matter. IE. Huckabee's actual ideas and policy ideals.

[Daphne Kenward]

Its been really great reading all the comments on this page, the one thing I got from it in way of information, was an insight, on how the Primaries has got people airing their opinions. Uniting America I think is an impossibility. People in America are divided along Religious & Racial lines. Even after George Walker Bush, people are still not thinking about what they are voting for, they are still in the same TRANCE that landed them the biggest Arsehole in AMERICAN History.So I draw my conclusion that these people have learnt absolutely nothing, and are quite happy to spend TRILLIONS fighting for nothing. Some even lack the basic common sense to know their country is in recession. When they speak about the candidates they are emotionally charge on racial lines, which I can pick up in their comments. Some Americans would rather be homeless, jobless, and moneyless than vote for a BLACK candidate. Some are so mislead they think OBAMA is Muslim, some think because his wife spoke warmly about how proud she is of her country, to see how well the American public have been warm towards them, they have turned it into an issue. Many suffer from Attention Deficit, and can't focus on the policies. Some have forgotten that they are at WAR, they think the war is in the Democratic Party. The Election has done well to show a SUPER POWER who lack self control and discipline, Hillary showed her self up worse of the lot.

[Alex]

NO NO NO NO.

Please, before you talk about evolution, educate yourselves. I find it incredible how people of faith are so inclined to swallow the propaganda dished out to them by those who see evolution as a threat to their religion.

And then they present it as if it's their own considered opinion.

There are NOT (I repeat NOT) huge flaws with evolution. It is a beautiful and complex solution, more complex than even fairly knowledgeable people realise. So have some intellectual curiosity, go and read about it before you come and self-righteously regurgitate some rubbish which some ignorant idiot has told you to believe.

It is of course the case that evolution could be very quickly disproven. And this is what makes it a worthwhile scientific theory. Karl Popper called it his theory of 'falsifiability'. It is not meaningless and entirely vague, like, say, 'God is love', or something similar.

What is remarkable is that evolution has not been disproven. Here are a few things which would instantly disprove evolution. If we discovered:

A reptile with nipples
A bird with fur
A fossil in the wrong place

There are many more possibilities. Yet in 150 years, every bit of new evidence discovered supports the theory of evolution. Now that's quite something, given that the vast majority of new scientific theories are disproven so quickly that no one ever hears of them.

One last thing. I was brought up to be religious and am still close to my religious family members. The difference between me and them/you is that I have spent years meticulously analysing my beliefs and educating myself. I hold nothing against religious people per se, but I suggest you evolution denouncers go and do some serious self-education before you express an opinion on the matter again.

[Alex]

I should just add to my previous comment that, while I am today a committed atheist, evolution and religion are not necessarily incompatible - Pope Jean Paul II himself called evolution a 'beautiful fact'.

What evolution is truly incompatible with is the set of beliefs held by creationists. But I'm sure no one here is stupid enough to hold such views, right? After all, an average primary school kid should possess the logical and analytical capabilities required to completely denounce creationist ideas. Unless of course they are brainwashed/tortured from an early age to believe what their parents want them to believe.

And on that note, I recommend that you watch 'Jesus Camp' on youtube. It is in nine parts, and is a sobering experience.

[Clerkenwellman]

Huckabee should be ruled out because he is clearly a man who ignores good evidence in favour of nonsense. The process of evolution, as we now know and described it, is great explanation of how life occurs and why it is so varied and it is proved beyond reasonable doubt. The alternative hypotheses relating to 'intelligent design' do not hold water. If you don't get this, then you cannot be trusted to understand issues that require any rigorous analysis and you must be ruled out of public office. If that means ruling out half the population of the USA then so be it.

[Tim]

There's quite a few comments in here noting how belief or lack of belief in evolution is not relevant to someone's ability to be a good political leader. It is arguably seen as similar to a "religious test" that also has no place in politics. I personally disagree in that disbelief in perfectly rational scientific theories (which don't HAVE to invalidate one's religious beliefs) indicates lack of support for science initiatives. Bush has already done his part to reduce scientific grants, on top of vetoing stem cell research.

Putting one's personal religious beliefs above a scientific progress is a bad thing, and shows an inability to lead a diverse nation. Leadership must be about reconciling conflicting ideologies and viewpoints & unifying them to make progress, without resorting to the worthless "50/50" centrist compromise.

[Mike]

I find it hilarious that liberals always assume theres very few republicans who aren't moderates just a few bad apples. Thats why youve only picked 2 winners in 40 years and they were both southerners.

[Daphne Kenward]

AMERICANS needs to send a signal to the REPUBLICANS that, war crimes is unacceptable. Any AMERICAN administration must be govern by the rule of law, no torture, no use of false information to kill our fellow man. The UN was set up after the 2nd world war for a reason. And must be respected. Change is for the use of progress. To govern it must be by justice Freedom & liberty for it's citizens. Leading by example with justice freedom and liberty. Hitler was elected by the rules but choose to ignore and as a result he went on to murder 6 Million people, which could happen in America because they have a history of race crimes. WE the people of the world must hold AMERICA responsible for any crimes against any citizen of AMERICA and else where in the world, the world is watching you.

[Tarvu]

Unnecessary CAPITALIZATION makes you seem RETARDED.

[Gregory Wonderwheel]

Very interesting to see all the thinnly disguised racism used to support McCain in these comments. Yes, there are still people who sit around the diners in Pennsylvania and use the N word when talking openly in public about Obama. Will these people prevent Obama's election? I hope not, and I don't think they will.

The fiscal and family values professed by conservatives are more alive in the Democratic Party by far than they are in the Republicans. Just look at how McCain got his wealth. There is nothing in his family values to recommend him as he abandoned his first wife, who stood by him while he was a POW, to take up with his wealthy heiress trophy wife to help him get elected. I'm divorced and remarried myself so I'm not faulting him for that, but for how it happened and for the obvious political motivations involved having nothing to do with "family values". Also, talking about fiscal values, when Theresa Heinz was reluctant to release her tax reports the Republicans howled bloody murder. Now that McCain's wife is refusing to release her tax reports the Republicans are either silent or hypocritically defending her. This is how Republicans act without principles and are fundamentaly self-serving in all their political actions and positions.