McCain-Huckabee?

By Jennifer J. Foster

U.S. News’ James Pethokoukis says so.

Mike Huckabee tops the list, Pethokoukis says, and that’s according to “a top McCain fundraiser and longtime Republican moneyman who has spoken to McCain’s inner circle.“

That’s a wordy way of saying, “an anonymous source.“ But hey! That’s what blogs are for, right?!

(Except that the trend is also appearing in print and has become an ubiquitous crutch for reporters who don’t bother to take the time to verify the information or get it from someone who will use his name!! But wait—this is 2008, after all. Journalists can’t be expected to live by those stuffy pre-Internet rumor rules in this modern age, right?!)

But I digress. Ahem. Anyway, Huckabee is rumored to be McCain’s current top choice. It would be a good pick, Pethokoukis says, because:

1) He is a great campaigner and communicator who could both shore up support in the South among social conservatives ... and appeal to working-class voters ...

2) As any pollster knows, voters search for candidates who “care about people like me,“ and Huckabee would probably score a lot higher on that quality than millionaire investor Mitt Romney ...

3) Economic conservatives and supply-siders may balk, but the threat of four years of Obamanomics and higher investment, income, and corporate taxes might be enough to keep them on board.

But McCain-Huckabee isn’t exactly the Dream Team. Need proof? Just read a few of the testy comments below Pethokoukis’ post.

Just as there are folks who hope Obama falls flat in November so Hillary Clinton can run again, so are there Huckabee supporters hoping for a McCain loss—or even a one-term McCain presidency—so Huckabee can give it another go. Clinton vs. Huckabee ... imagine that general election campaign!

In other words, just as independents may be put off by the Moderate Maverick putting The Good Reverend on the ticket, Huckabee supporters—conservatives and moderates alike—believe that it would be bad news for Huckabee to hitch his wagon to McCain’s star. Huckabee represented a new kind of Republicanism to many people who believed that the GOP’s claims of “compassionate conservatism” rang hollow. (The Dallas Morning News gave voice to the argument in its editorial endorsement of Huckabee on the eve of the Texas primary in March. Give it a read if you have time.) For his supporters, Huckabee throwing in with McCain would be akin to Obama throwing in as Clinton’s No. 2 after all his talk about a “new kind of politics.“

The bottom line: McCain could make a better pick, one that would shore up the South without alienating independents. A Haley Barbour, for example.

But it’s Huckabee, at least for now, Pethokoukis says—another “top Republican political strategist” told him so a month ago.

Two anonymous sources???? It has to be true!

West Virginia’s turn

By Jennifer J. Foster

Voters in West Virginia are going to the polls today to take their turn in the presidential contest that just keeps on going.

West Virginians are excited: It’s the first time they have been in a position to impact the presidential race since 1960.

But for all their excitement and the opportunity to bully-pulpit the candidates on bulking up the WV economy, there isn’t any drama about what’s going to happen tonight.

As polls opened this morning, Hillary Clinton maintained a huge lead on Barack Obama, estimated to be anywhere from 15 to 43 points in recent surveys. Obama’s campaign admits he’s going to get hammered, but they are taking pains to demonstrate that they are concentrating on general election strategy and tonight’s results won’t matter much in the overall race for the Democratic nomination.

Expect lots of talk—ad nauseum—about Obama and white guys tonight. His surrogates will say he will win them over with his life story as they get to know him in the general election campaign; Clinton’s surrogates will say they know him well enough already to know they don’t like him.

Brazile - Begala, Round 2 ... eight hours and 40 minutes away.

Oh, they’re supposed to be poor

By Jennifer J. Foster

Two New York University researchers are taking a stab at explaining the conventional wisdom that holds that conservatives are happier people than liberals:

They just rationalize social and economic inequalities.

According to the story:

Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person’s tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities.

The rationalization measure included statements such as: “It is not really that big a problem if some people have more of a chance in life than others,“ and “This country would be better off if we worried less about how equal people are.“

The researchers say liberals apparently “lack ideological rationalizations that would help them frame inequality in a positive (or at least neutral) light,“ leaving them “frustrated and disheartened,“ according to the story.

Hmm ...

Maybe, since conservative political ideology places more emphasis on the individual work ethic, whereas liberal political ideology believes in more of a government role to make upward mobility possible. But regarding the overall sense of “happiness” conservatives seem to enjoy, it would seem to me that researchers are missing out on one major potential explanation: The religious component that present in many conservatives’ lives.

The rationalization argument implies that conservatives simply look at things like homelessness, hunger, homelessness and poverty and say, “Oh, they’re getting what they deserve because they are slackers,“ or some form of that argument. This denies the teachings of their religion underpinnings, which say that problems like these are opportunities for Christian ministry and that there is a source of greater hope that can provide joy even in the face of persistent, pervasive societal problems.

I’m not saying that all conservatives are religious or that no liberals are religious. But taken as a group, more conservatives are conscious of religion in their lives than liberals. I’m just saying that it seems strange to not account for that component when trying to determine why—or whether—conservatives are “happier” as a group than liberals.

Read the whole story here. What do you think?

More from David Grimes

By Jennifer J. Foster

More from my chat last week with State Rep. David Grimes, a Republican candidate for Alabama’s 2nd Congressional District:

* On fundraising, Grimes said four of his opponents – State Sen. Harri Anne Smith, State Rep. Jay Love, Dr. Craig Schmidtke and television executive David Woods – have an inherent financial advantage over him. (Retired Army officer John W. Martin is also in the race.) “I’m trying to do what I can to put together as many coalitions to help me raise money,” Grimes said, noting that he won’t be on the air with advertisements – as three of his opponents already are – until he can close the money gap. “These other people have all committed a million each of their personal money,” Grimes said: Love said in a recent television interview that he “would put in as much as necessary; Love, Schmidtke and Woods are on the record as saying they are funding their own campaigns; and Schmidtke said he’s not asking for any money “so he’s not beholden to anybody.” “There’s nothing wrong with (self-funding), but I want people to know,” he said.

* As for Smith, Grimes said she also has a fundraising advantage: “People can’t say no to someone who owns a bank,” he said. (According to her Senate bio, Smith is executive vice president for Slocomb National Bank.) “There’s nothing wrong with that. She’s a sweet girl, she’s nice. I just don’t see her handling the pressures of any types of rigorous agendas … With all due respect, she absolutely crumbled under the pressure of that bill she introduced last week.” (Grimes was apparently referring to SB 372, a bill to provide for the display of POW-MIA flags. The bill was passed unanimously by the Senate on April 30 and introduced into the House the next day. He did not respond to an e-mail request for clarification.)

* Grimes made it clear that he will make an issue of what he perceives is his opponents’ lack of participation in civic and community events before the congressional campaign began. “One big thing is that I’ve been a civically aware person long before I stated running for Congress,” Grimes said. “I don’t know of anything my opponents have done without pay in the community.” Grimes noted Hospice programs, Walk for America, and the multiple sclerosis and muscular dystrophy associations among his civic endeavors. “I do a lot of this stuff, and these other people haven’t been noticed doing that sort of stuff – especially Love. All he did was make a living, and that’s OK,” Grimes said. 

* Grimes defended his vote for cloture on the much-ballyhooed bingo bill. “I voted to put the bingo bill on the floor for debate, and I got criticized, chastised and hung in effigy” by people against the bill, Grimes said. “They put me on their back page, and they did that to put me out of their box … People need to know, that will bill will save more people’s lives than leaving it alone,” Grimes said. “These wayward people who wander into these parlors and throw their money away, you can’t protect them by having unguarded, unaccounted-for machines out there.” Grimes said that “all the sheriffs in five or six counties I’ve talked to” ask why legislators would continue to support the existing law, which provides for $150 fines on untaxed machines, when the new law would provide for a $5,000 fine and make the crime a felony. Grimes maintained that under current law, violators simply pay the $150 and are “back in business the next day.” The new, heftier penalties, he said, “will shut them down. I’ll stand by that vote. I’m looking out for the people,” Grimes said. As for gambling godfather Milton McGregor: “You can’t get but so rich. You can’t determine the will of a bill according to what one man makes,” Grimes said, adding that although McGregor has offered him campaign contributions in the past, “I have never taken any money from him.”

* On campaigning in the 2nd Congressional District: Grimes said that he drives 500 to 600 miles a day through the district on his days off from the Legislature. He’s met with “every editor of every paper” and all the probate judges but three, along with circuit and district judges throughout the district, he said, and he has 1,200 yard signs scattered throughout the 16 counties in the district. Win or lose, he said, “I will gain from the experience because I have learned so much.”