Defusing the Huckabomb
by Patrick Ruffini :: December 11th, 2007 1:24 amA particularly shrewed corresponded emailed tonight with this observation:
Not to confuse the Romney camp with the Kremlin, but using Huckabee to take out Mitt in Iowa seems to resemble using the Muhadjadeen to remove the Soviets from Afghanistan…once they are done they will be as big a problem for us as the old enemy was.
Huckabee has moved from niche regional contender to (for now) bona-fide national frontrunner. He is now within 1 and 2 points of Rudy Giuliani nationally in two national polls released this evening (with a decent post-speech bump for Mitt). This is the first time anyone has gotten so close to Rudy in a non-Rasmussen poll (which uses a very tight likely voter screen — itself ominous for the Mayor). Huck is now overperforming Fred at his peak.
This is no longer just an Iowa deal. Huckabee leads in South Carolina. He can win Florida. He can play in Michigan with the help of the unions, and the Wolverine State has a habit of awarding unorthodox primary wins.
With Huckabee no longer content to play foil to Mitt Romney, he becomes a threat to Rudy. Rudy’s recent dip in the RCP average coincides precisely with Huck’s meteoric rise. Sooner or later, both Mitt and Rudy will have to deal with Huckabee.
Mitt’s attempt starts tomorrow, in the form of a negative TV ad aimed at Iowa households. It’s unlikely this alone will do it, but the idea here is to start a drumbeat of negative buzz and scrutiny of Huckabee that crests just in time to eeke out a narrow win or loss on the 3rd. Since Iowa is effectively a two-man race right now, Romney’s people are probably betting they can evade the murder/suicide scenario.
How does Romney put away Huckabee? I’ve written “the memo” before, but it bears repeating: Mitt Romney’s progress in the polls has been plodding at best because he appeals to people’s heads and not their hearts. My advice to Mitt simple: let people get to know you. Talk about the Olympics, talk about your business successes, talk about how you’ve turned around everything you’ve touched — and go light on the policy stuff. Do an ad straight to the camera and say, “I’m not the flavor of the month — but if you want someone who has the real world experience to turn things around, I’m your guy.” On conservatism, tell people you’ve got “the whole package” — and scratch the awful, elitist “three legged stool” metaphor. Rudy’s a social liberal. Huck’s an economic liberal. Mitt’s just right.
For Rudy to survive, his campaign mantra for the next 29 days must be: national security, national security, national security. Is the national security party really going to nominee a former governor with zero national security experience to face al-Qaeda? This is Rudy’s key differentiator against Huckabee — and Mitt too. It is also McCain’s narrative — I saw first hand at the Florida debate how McCain gained goodwill just by being the only one to talk about the war. But by owning McCain’s issue — and by remaining the stronger of the two — McCain’s voters may finally get the hint and go Rudy.
The rap on Rudy is that he talks about 9/11 incessantly. If only that were so, he’d be doing a lot better. The reason Rudy has remained so strong for so long is not that he cut the welfare rolls in New York City, it’s not because he kicked the squeegies out, and it’s not even the dramatic reduction in crime he’s best known for. He loves to talk about these things, but primary voters don’t care. The one and only reason Giuliani was ever a national frontrunner is because of his performance on 9/11 and what that said about his ability to lead in a crisis.
Why he hasn’t run a campaign that is singularly evocative of that theme — just as Mitt has glossed over his experience as a turnaround artist — is baffling. Rudy’s message seems to have devolved into a 1996 Bill Clinton school uniforms message, just as Mitt’s has become a conservative panderfest.
Rudy needs to seal the deal on national security. Unlike McCain, who is Mr. Iraq, he can broaden it to toughness on Iran and the broader terror war. The central theme of a Rudy-Huck fight will be “Who do you trust as Commander-in-Chief?”
GOP primary voters feel passionately about two things: values and the war. Huckabee has cornered the market on the first. His success is not about ideology, but identity. For his voters, he’s a Christian first, and a conservative second. Attacking him on conventional conservative issues won’t undermine his core support because it has nothing to do with being a conservative.
And McCain, poised ominously for a comeback in New Hampshire, is on track to win the second by default, despite his narrow focus on Iraq, the weakest link in our national security message.
Can Romney reassert himself as the best all-around conservative when people believe he’s a conservative of convenience? Can Rudy steal back the national security issue?
The survival of the GOP’s conventional frontrunners hinges on the answers to these questions.
Tagged: mike huckabee 
mitt romney rudy giuliani
Comments (18) 
Trackbacks (3) 
del.icio.us 
digg it 
subscribe
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Great post Patrick! Are you concerned though that Mitt is also breaking Reagan’s Commandment?
Speaking of Romney going negative, I called it when I saw the Newsweek poll a few days ago.
Keep up the great work!
Patrick,
I suggest you watch Rudy’s TV ads again. Although they don’t mention 9/11 by name, they are all about 9/11. “I’ve been tested in times of crisis” he says. Even the style of the ads evoke serious/somber tones.
Point taken, but the time for subtlety is long past.
I love Mitt Romney, but I think he needs to go positive a little more often and highlight how his business experience will translate into more and better jobs for everyone, especially in Michigan. However, I don’t consider this new ad to be in any way negative, and I resent the media painting it that way. If Huckabee still supports the positions Mitt is putting on this ad (which he says he does), then how can that be negative. The fact is that even though Huckabee still likes those positions, he knows that voters don’t.
I support Rudy because of his results in NY: crime, welfare, taxes, spending, general cleanliness. It is silly to imagine that this doesn’t play into his support!
The idea that this article gives an intellectually honest analysis of Rudy’s campaign is ridiculous. Sometimes, I think the GOP is just as bad as the dems: so many analysts, like Patrick here, make things up to justify their a-priori favorites.
Mitt is doing this ad in a respectful way. He’s not throwing dirt, folks. He is just basically saying “we’re two conservative candidates and THIS is where we differ”. Credit Romney for this so-called “negative” ad with focusing on issues and not settling for personal attacks (as so many of Romney’s detractors are doing…). I say Mitt’s attitude IS presidential and statesmanlike.
“For Rudy to survive, his campaign mantra for the next 29 days must be: national security, national security, national security. Is the national security party really going to nominee a former governor with zero national security experience to face al-Qaeda?”
Jog my memory here. Exactly what national security experience does Giuliani have?
Jim,
“Jog my memory here. Exactly what national security experience does Giuliani have?”
To put it bluntly, the kind that comes from watching people jump from the 90th floor. And being the lead US prosecutor against Islamist terrorists in the 1980s.
Not the kind that comes from sitting back in some useless, genteel Senate committee.
“To put it bluntly, the kind that comes from watching people jump from the 110th floor.”
That is absurd. That has nothing whatsoever to do with national security.
But if it does, I and thousands of other people who were in lower Manhattan that day are qualified to be President of the United States. I assume you’ll be sending me your check shortly?
“And being the lead US prosecutor against Islamist terrorists in the 1980s.”
This is factually incorrect. Giuliani prosecuted only one major terror case in the 1980’s, involving the sale of arms to Iran, and he did a poor job on it.
Great summary of the Mitt campaign. He seems to be regarding the voters as Board Members who need to be convinced of the logic of a business case. Unfortunately for him, people want to be sold, and Huckabee is doing that right now (the voters are “falling in love”, as The Fix put it)
If Huck knocks out Mitt in Iowa, and then McCain wins New Hampshire then those two will go head to head in South Carolina. Rudy’s February 5 strategy looks more foolish the closer we get to polling day. Surely he needs to flood NH with resources to win there? Otherwise his opponents will have too much momentum to claw back.
I tend to agree that Rudy’s expertise is in domestic issues. He talks about crime, taxes, crisis, etc. Obviously NY had to deal with terrorism, but it didn’t involve the military, CIA, State Department, etc.
It might be true that Rudy’s strength on national security is because he can argue that he is tougher than the other candidates. It is a scary world, and Rudy can argue that he is the best man to deal with it, even if he doesn’t have a lot of expertise in the area as of yet. Furthermore, he has been bolstering his foreign policy credentials since NY, and has built a huge campaign team to advise him. No one walks into the oval office 100% ready to go, but Rudy’s ability to take on things and grow into the job demonstrate he can do it for this job. If you believe the world is scary, you can argue that Rudy is the toughest and best guy for the job.
Anyway, my point remains unresponded to: that Rudy has many reasons to be supported: his toughness, his brilliance, his varied public service and executive experience, his ability to achieve amazing results in difficult situations, his ability to appeal to people of both parties, his moderate social issues, his fiscal conservatism, etc.
I’m a fan of Patrick, but I think he’s not thinking clearly about Rudy. Anyway, it doesn’t matter that so many pundits support other folks (National Review just endorsed Mitt today — they’ve had a crush on him for years!) as Rudy will win the nomination and be our next president. He’s been the front runner for several years, and no one has knocked him off. In fact, many of his opponents have imploded in certain ways! Certainly John McCain, and Fred Thompson, and Mitt for all his money and time is losing in Iowa and still has very little traction nationally.
Furthermore, Rudy supporters like me are typically stronger supporters. I’m extremely passionate about him. What is there to be as passionate about with Huck or Mitt?
Its because people in New Hampshire are reading stories like this about Mike Huckabee that make them nervous to support him: http://www.arkansasleader.com/frontstories/st_07_21_04/huckabee5.html Gov. Huckabee probably never read the confession of a demented killer named Glen Green before he made the monster eligible for parole. Green’s confession is so depraved, its sadistic details so scary that no sane, responsible adult would consider him for parole. If the governor didn’t read the confession, he is guilty of dereliction of duty. But if he read the confession and still considers Green deserving of parole, he’s certainly unfit to hold office. Who would free a madman who beat an 18-year-old woman with Chinese martial-arts sticks, raped her as she barely clung to life, ran over her with his car, then dumped her in the bayou, her hand reaching up, as if begging for mercy? We’re publishing the gruesome picture of Green’s victim on the front page because we believe her hand is reaching up to demand justice. ___ In usual fashion, Huckabee’s office didn’t even contact the victim’s family about the clemency. Although he’s required to by the Constitution, the governor, as is his custom, won’t say why he granted clemency to this crazed killer (over the unanimous objections of the Post-Prison Transfer Board). Huckabee apparently listened to Green’s minister (and a friend of the governor), who thinks the murder was an accident and Green was forced to confess. The Jacksonville police, who arrested Green in 1974 after a witness linked him to the crime, think the minister and Huckabee are both delusional, which is the mildest epitaph we can print. This old police reporter knows a genuine confession when he sees one, and Green’s depravity has the ring of truth. Green, a 22-year-old sergeant, kidnapped Helen Lynette Spencer on Little Rock Air Force Base, where he beat and kicked her as he tried to rape her in a secluded area. She broke loose and ran toward the barracks’ parking lot, where he caught up with her and beat her with a pair of nunchucks. He then stuffed her into the trunk of his car and left her there while he cleaned up. Several hours later, he drove down Graham Road, past Loop Road and stopped near a bridge in Lonoke County. Green told investigators he put her body in the front seat and raped her because her body was still warm. He dragged Spencer out of his vehicle and put her in front of the car and ran over her several times, going back and forth. He then collected himself long enough to dump her body in Twin Prairie Bayou. This is what the Rev. Johnny Jackson, interim pastor at Bethel Baptist Church in Jacksonville, calls an accident, and apparently Huckabee believes him. “There is no doubt in my mind that he could kill again,” warns Pulaski County Prosecutor Larry Jegley. The crime started out in his jurisdiction and ended in Lonoke County, where Prosecutor Lona McCastlain has also spoken out against the clemency. “Life means life,” she said, referring to Green’s sentence after he plead guilty to Spencer’s kidnapping, rape and murder. As he grants clemency to scores of violent criminals, Huckabee’s motives are the subject of speculation: Why, people are asking, is he doing it? After studying the record for several weeks, all one can say is that his actions perhaps reflect a combination of arrogance and avarice and ignorance. While his fellow governors keep electing him to top positions in their little club, he has alienated Arkansans of both parties. They’re shocked at not only the amazing number of clemencies but also at the way he ignores the suffering of the victims’ families, who are always the last to know when their loved one’s killer is up for parole. Bilenda Harris-Ritter, an attorney who now lives in California, is one of those people who worry all the time that Huckabee might free the man who killed their relatives. Harris-Ritter’s parents were murdered in north Arkansas, and she has had to deal with heartless state bureaucrats as she fights to keep the killer locked up. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger recently named Harris-Ritter chairman of the Public Employees Board, which oversees collective-bargaining agreements among 7,000 employers and 2 million employees. She is upset that our governor has not been more forthright about his clemencies. “Huckabee is required by law to make certain notifications. When he does not, the pardon should be voidable,” she told us. She continued, “The people of the good state of Arkansas (and I really mean that) need to think seriously about impeachment.” When told that many people consider Huckabee our worst governor in recent memory, Harris-Ritter replied, “No argument from me, and I am a Republican!
For once I agree with Patrick on something. His analysis of Romney’s candidacy is on the money as far as I can see. I’m less sure about what he says about Huckabee, but I think the reasons for Huckabee’s surge complex and probably no one has really got it right yet. I suspect that what we’re seeing is that the grassroots evangelicals have a lot more influence than has been assumed and the big names like Robertson and Dobson are necessarily all that important. But why that should be the case is still a bit obscure. Huckabee’s biggest asset, I suspect, is his authenticity. He is seen as genuine in the positions he takes while Romney has shifted too often and Giuliani has too much to apologize for.
But when it comes to Rudy, I agree with those who say that Patrick is way off base. Rudy’s foreign policy experience is non-existent. His essay in Foreign Affairs magazine was downright childish. The Salt Lake City Winter Olympics was more foreign policy experience than Rudy ever participated in, and I don’t mean that as an endorsement of Romney’s credentials.
Rudy’s constant talk of 9/11 became tiresome a very long time ago. He is right to talk about his executive experience, his experience as a prosecutor, and his record on crime. These are not irrelevant to national security, bu t they are most relevant to securing our borders which runs counter to Giuliani’s immigration stance.
Ultimately, however, Giuliani simply doesn’t generate any excitement because he isn’t really talking about the future of the country, and that’s what elections are about.
I’ll grant that the other candidates aren’t doing much of this either, that’s why we’re seeing such a divided race.
Jim asks, “Jog my memory here. Exactly what national security experience does Giuliani have?”
Well, duh! He and his partners represented the al-Qaeda-sympathizing government of Qatar, according to the rabidly liberal Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119440640166884884.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us).
These guys are all peaking too early, I have been in politics for awhile. I can tell you, peaking before Christmas is not good - the person in the lead will be forgotten in the fog of gifts and eggnog. There is only one candidate that has been consistantly climbing in both polling numbers and large amounts of money. That candidate is Ron Paul. He has a huge support network, larger than all the other Republican candidates combined. He is the tortoise in that old race between the hare.
Your advice to Romney, let people get to know you…
But who is he, liberal, moderate or conservative?
On TV, he just not not connect with people at the heart level, most of what he says comes across as a powerpoint presentation.
How has he struggled in his life, like most of us have?
Fred Thompson, curiously ommitted from much of this discussion, is the only one who can defuse the Huckbomb and rally all of the representative coalitions which compromise the Republican party. Romney’s problem is his credibility. Rudy’s problem is that he is a RINO who abandons the social conservative planks of the party. And Huckabee’s liberalism outside of the social conservative sphere combined with his nanny-statist ideals makes him probably the weakest candidate of them all. Huck fans- there is nothing wrong with “negative” ads, so long as they are true, when they are about issues of import. Politics, after all, is about drawing distinctions between yourself and the other fellow. What has been particularly disappointing is the lack of Huckabee supporters who really want to debate the substance and merits of a Huckabee candidacy. It seems all his supporters want to do is marve at his current surge, and run the clock out- substantive discussions about his policy stances be damned.
[…] This morning I noticed this post on Patrick Ruffini’s site which included this money quote from one of his readers: Not to confuse the Romney camp with the Kremlin, but using Huckabee to take out Mitt in Iowa seems to resemble using the Muhadjadeen to remove the Soviets from Afghanistan…once they are done they will be as big a problem for us as the old enemy was. […]
[…] Defusing the Huckabomb. Patrick Ruffini Huck-a-boom. Expat Teacher. Their Lack of Faith is Disturbing. EM Zanotti […]
Oh, what changes he’s seen…
Sam’s brother drove it until he moved to Tullahoma to start his own business. “Papa had to sell the truck…