In Praise of the GOP’s Free-for-All Primary
December 27, 2007
Despite all the feelings that have been hurt, religions that have been prodded, endorsements that have been given, contentions that have been refuted and all the arguments that have been had, this GOP Primary has been exceedingly good for the conservative Republican voter. I might remind you that it didn’t start out that way.
When I first wrote of my endorsement of the historic, record-setting, earlier-than-ever-before primary race revving up, one thing was crystal clear: Rudy Giuliani was the favored candidate. His lead in the polls was strong. He was even throwing statements around about how he had the Evangelical Christian vote “sewn up.”
But look how far we’ve come….
We’ve heard from the candidates in what has to be a near-record number of times in forums and debates. We saw the early starters criticize Fred Thompson for getting in “so late.” (In all actuality, Thompson entered on roughly the same time table as candidates have in earlier elections.) In his lead up to it Fred was smooth and intense—looking like he’d wipe the floor with the other guys.
John McCain got out the jumper cables and tried three different times to get his “Straight Talk Express” back on the road. I’m still not sure it ever left the terminal.
Rudy even showed face at the conservative conferences—including CPAC and the Values Voters Summit—pitching his, “I’m not really a conservative, but I’m counting on grace points because I’m here talking to you.” And in fairness, I think he won some—at least at the time.
Much ado was made about straw polls, and the whispers were that Brownback was going to win Ames. The Brownbackers made a lot of noise—especially at CPAC. And oh yes—on the issue of straw polls—with every 5th or 6th place finish, Ron Paul supporters would swarm the message boards with predictions of their messiah’s “breakout.” Since then, both Brownback and Paul have backed out of contention.
At the debates Rudy and Mitt would spat, Fred would sleep, and this unassuming but whamo-articulate guy from Arkansas just did his thing. Quietly, his numbers moved up, while others peaked or declined.
Then came the endorsements. “Evangelicals for Mitt” included Bob Jones III, Professor of Theology Wayne Grudem and what looked like a looming stamp of approval from Dr. James Dobson. (Dr. Dobson still hasn’t shut the door to Mitt—but he scratched all the other front runners off his list.) That Arkansas guy wowed us with endorsements from Chuck Norris and Jerry Jenkins—two prominent names to the evangelical right. And, for the beltway elites, National Review knighted Mitt.
There was a surprise at Ames: Mike Huckabee’s second place finish. Then there was a nearly-equal surprise: Mitt Romney’s dominance of the predominantly evangelical Values Voters Summit online straw poll.
While Huckabee got pummeled with questions about his faith, Fred said he didn’t go to church much and didn’t need to meet Dobson. Rudy said he didn’t really think his faith meant anything by way of politics. Tancredo tried to improvise a few Jesus words on the debate platform. And, interestingly enough, one of the most devout men of all, Duncan Hunter, has yet to offer a comment on faith. Then, after much consideration, Mitt floated the idea, pulled it back, then eventually gave a speech that was intended to insulate him from further faith questions, but may have actually opened the Pandora’s box a little wider.
The pundits had fun with it too. Pro-Rudy types were trying to sell “strict constructionist judges” to the values voters. A vocal contingent of conservative columnists attacked Mitt over the damage then-Governor Romney did to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ Constitution. Then Hugh Hewitt started the rumbling about how a vote for Huckabee was a vote for Rudy—until Huckabee himself took a lead in the national polls. More recently, both Romney and Huckabee leapfrogged the Mayor in the state where it was all supposed to come together for him: Florida. National Review’s Byron York took public his disagreement with Rich Lowry and talk show hosts are criticizing the candidates of their colleagues. Even at Townhall, many of the main contributors differ on who they like with just days until the Iowa caucuses.
The November surge of Huckabee into legitimate top-tier status, and then in December into sometimes-front-runner status has caused a lively number of riffs, divisions and arguments. Yet, when I asked a colleague what he thought of it all, he said, “I love it.”
I do too!
For too many election cycles the GOP has appeared passionless, apathetic and uninspiring. Now we have two guys near the front of the pack who have similar records on taxes (in fact, Huckabee’s is slightly but only slightly better than Mitt’s). They both embrace the social issues of the long-established values of the party. They both reject abortion, and embrace a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. They both want to win in Iraq and keep terrorists on the run. They have also both publicly stated that they want to see Americans come together to solve our own problems. Huckabee has the potential to reach out to African-Americans unlike perhaps any candidate the GOP has ever presented, and Mitt has the potential to use his out-of-the-box strategery to solve problems in the private sector that liberals will scream and demand be solved in the public sector—with only more of our tax dollars.
Both men have been executives in their respective states ... the liberals have yet to run a corner store.
At times it’s been ugly, at times exceedingly unfair—but the message has gotten out that this election should be “Anyone but Rudy!” It is in essence a much harsher rehearsal than the battle the GOP will face against the Democrat nominee six months from now. Our guys are tired, but they are also fluid, quick thinking and the sparring is making them better every single day.
And it should! We are not hiring the night manager at McDonalds. The leader of the free world will be forced to spend sleepless nights in prayer on behalf of the nation he seeks to protect and guide. A little yammering from one opponent or another (in this context) is nothing compared to dealing with nuclear programs in Iran or North Korea.
The choices we have left standing with Mitt, Huck and Fred aren’t bad—especially considering what the Democrats are doing to one another.
We are almost there—and it has been worth the ride!
Kevin McCullough is the host of “The MuscleHead Revolution” radio program, heard daily in New York City on WMCA 570 at 2pm ET. He’s the author of “MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking” and regular blogger at www.muscleheadrevolution.com. Contact Kevin at kmc@wmca.com.
Originally published December 27, 2007.
