God-o-Meter caught up the other day with Charmaine Yoest, the Family Research Council VP of communications who left her post last year to become a senior advisor to Mike Huckabee. Yoest returned to FRC last month, when Huckabee’s cash flow got too tight, but she had this interesting insight in what keeps Huckabee going in the face of very long odds:
It fits with a worldview that sees life as being dependent on God’s will... and a Christian following God’s will means taking the next step that’s in front of you. That’s where I think he’s coming from to a large degree. It’s entirely consistent to say, “I’m goiong to play that out—it’s not over till it’s over.”I don’t understand why you guys in the media aren’t more interested in the brokered convention path. There’s a route to a brokered convention. It may not be pretty, but it’s possible.
9
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
I think that the Huckabee camp might want to start asking themselves if they really want to do what's possible at the expense of what's the right thing to do. We would the majority of voters want their election results overturned just because someone wants to play the spoiler?
Study the primary process and you'll see that election results are NOT being overturned. For instance, delegates (no matter what the exiting candidate says) must vote on the first ballot at the convention for their candidate - even if that candidate left the race long ago. Who is to say what the 'right thing' is for where those votes go? Should one man/woman (the no-longer-running candidate) have the say over what might be the will of those voters?
The primary process is convoluted at best. It awards party leaders, distributes delegates based on prior voting (giving 'bonus' delegates to states who have voted their way in the past), and gets so complicated that even now, the number of delegates each candidate has varies depending on which media outlet you read/watch.
The primary process requires a candidate to get 1,191 votes (in the Republican party). If a candidate does not get that - because he or she cannot gain the support of the very people who should be his or her base - should that candidate simply be awarded the nomination? That is truly overturning election results. The primary season isn't over - and many conservative-leaning (so-called red states) haven't even voted yet, because of a front-loaded season (again, a process - all legal - that is not as upfront and 'fair' as we may assume) that benefited a more liberal candidate.
I'm all for this process being carried out. If a sports game goes to a tie, and no one won at the end, is it suddenly unfair to follow the rules until someone prevails?
Mike Huckabee is not a spoiler for wanting major parts of the country to have a voice, a vote in this primary process. And if John McCain can't handle a debate (oh yeah, remember those?) within his own party, how on earth will he handle the general election? If Mike Huckabee speaks for many in this country - who have voted, and many who haven't even had the chance yet - how is that not 'the right thing to do' to continue, so the process goes forward, and the people get to vote? I fail to see the logic here.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.