Senate 2010? VOTE NOW
If Mike Huckabee does run for president in 2012, it would help if he had a platform from which to make the race. Such as U.S. Senate. I know. It's less money than he'd like with more limits on outside income. But it's become fashion for senators to land fancy do-nothing jobs for their spouses, so he probably could wangle a supplement for Janet.
But first he has to get in the Senate. The question of the day: Will Mike Huckabee run against Sen. Blanche Lincoln in 2010? Her poll numbers aren't terribly weak, but they are consistently weaker than those of other Democrats. Arkansas trended Republican in this presidential election more than any state in the country. Lincoln's few progressive tendencies are on social issues, perhaps a useful line of attack in Arkansas, judging by recent events. The big money crowd loves Lincoln for her affection for credit card companies, big retailers, farmers and investment houses (and coldness toward struggling consumers). Huckabee's not much of a fund-raiser, but there are ample deep Republican pockets nationally to stuff his treasury, presuming he doesn't siphon off too much for care and feeding of his brood.
What do you think? Could this be THE race of 2010. (Mike Beebe should cruise.) Hey, Kinkade, how about putting The Arkansas Project readership on this question so we can get some balance from the red end of the spectrum.
David Kinkade has graciously created a survey for his readers on the Huck v. Lincoln question. Go here to vote in the Arkansas Times survey on the question. (erk. I screwed up link. I think it's fixed.)
UPDATE: It took me an hour or so before I get my poll working right. Finally, the tallies are coming in.
FINAL COUN
The Arkansas Project readers favor a Huckabee race 37-21. Here, the count is 38-43 against, or 75-64 total in favor of a Huckabee candidacy.
But ..... I added a second question to the Ark. Blog's poll. Who would the voters favor should Huck run? A runaway. Arkansas Blog readers favor Blanche 61-19. That suggests the desire for him to run among readers here is accompanied by a little malicious pleasure at the thought of beating him.




Comments
Actually, other than being a gd Republican, Huckabee might even be a tiny step up from Lincoln's indolent service as a representative of Arkansans without money or influence.
Posted by: Maj. T.J. 'King' Kong
|
November 7, 2008 10:22 AM
ArkBlog: "Arkansas trended Republican in this presidential election more than any state in the country. " Let's be clear about this statement. Arkansas' Republican vote increased more than most others when comparing the 2004 and 2008 elections. Arkansas does not trend more Republican than many other states. e.g. Utah, Oklahoma, etc. I'm depressed enough about our state without that kind of misleading statment.
Posted by: Perplexed
|
November 7, 2008 10:24 AM
Well, ONE thing worse than Ms. Blank would be an actual Republican!! She's not a snake to the extent of Pryor (and hopefully he got a BIG wake-up call this time!) but if he runs it'll be Huckabuck in a cake walk.
Sadly - commenting about the quality of Lincoln, NOT the Huckster...
Posted by: Larry
|
November 7, 2008 10:25 AM
Wait - I'm confused. Is Ms Blank up in 2010? Seems just a couple years ago I held my nose and marked her name.
Posted by: 70%er
|
November 7, 2008 10:34 AM
A-T bloggers who care to actually read and inform themselves, if any (and I know there are some), might wish to take an hour or so to peruse David Bromwich's remarkable, incredible, article - "The Co-President at Work" - in the current issue of the New York Review of Books (at clicky link). He is Sterling Professor of English at Yale.
Among many salient excerpts from his lengthy analysis of Dick Cheney's long-building co-Presidency, the political and corporate minions (including Cheney's years as CEO of Halliburton) behind it, its nefarious effects on America's Constitution, and the neoconservatives' continuing influence no matter who is President, are these two:
"While at Halliburton, Cheney would commission a study of the utility of employing private security contractors to fight in wars - only a piece of "research" at the time, but it would pay later for both the company and the vice-president, with the off-the-books contracts that by privatizing state protection kept much of the Iraq occupation out of public view."
Or:
"When placed alongside the norms of the containment policy during the years 1946-1989, the new dogma betrayed a shift so tremendous that it could not have been ratified without a layer of well-instructed opinion makers [read media control] to prepare and soften its acceptance."
In lieu of many of the ill-informed yet passionate opinions expressed on this blog by those with the attention-span of a sound-bite, Bromwich's long piece is required reading for anybody seeking genuine understanding of the massive forces at work beneath the slow and ongoing hijacking of the Land of the Free.
Posted by: NormaBates
|
November 7, 2008 10:55 AM
To further Perplexed's commentary, I would suggest that Arkansas likely would have voted for Hillary if she had won the nomination. Also, Arkansas may not have trended so heavily for McCain if Obama had ever stepped foot in our state. People are making mountains out of molehills on this issue.
Posted by: PossumKing
|
November 7, 2008 10:55 AM
"Arkansas trended Republican in this presidential election more than any state in the country."
Very misleading indeed. Arkansas has all the white racists like the rest of the south but not as many black voters to offset them. That's why those areas voted more for McCain than Kerry.
Posted by: eark
|
November 7, 2008 11:01 AM
If 5, 10 or 20 percent of those 201,896 Arkansans who cast a vote for Kennedy would just put their money (and organize) where their vote is/was... things sure would get interesting in AR very quickly.
Posted by: Eureka Springs, AR
|
November 7, 2008 11:24 AM
If I were one of Huck's advisers I'd tell him to run. Why not? Could be a springboard for 2012...
Believe me, I ain't a huge Blanche fan but she is much better than Huck...
Posted by: rosso
|
November 7, 2008 11:30 AM
The Blanche or Huck choice.. especially at this point in time is a false choice.
The thing to consider is if AR citizens can or will even try to nominate someone, anyone, who might be an improvement.. not a false race to stay at the bottom between two awful awful parties/potential candidates of olde.
Posted by: Eureka Springs, AR
|
November 7, 2008 11:38 AM
What my survey would look like if it were on paper:
1. Should Mike Huckabee run for U.S. Senate against Sen. Blanche Lincoln in 2010?
X Yes
No
2. If Mike Huckabee runs for U.S. Senate, who would you vote for?
Mike Huckabee
Blanche Lincoln
X Other
Posted by: hugh hussein mann
|
November 7, 2008 01:08 PM
Of course he's free to contest the seat. I'd vote reluctantly for Lincoln as she's slightly less republican than the Huckster.
Posted by: Roym
|
November 7, 2008 03:08 PM
Am I the only one who smells a rat....in fact a very decomposing rat.. with many of the election results?Here in Jefferson County we used touch screens and many people had trouble understanding how to use them. I think we need to return to verifiable paper ballot....yesterday at the latest.
Posted by: Roym
|
November 7, 2008 03:14 PM