From the New York Times:
Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, will announce on Saturday whether he will run for president, the producer of his show on the Fox News Channel said Friday.
“Governor Huckabee will announce tomorrow night on his program whether or not he intends to explore a presidential bid,” Woody Fraser, the executive producer of “Huckabee” said in a statement. “He has not told anyone at FOX News Channel his decision.”
Senior political aides to Mr. Huckabee also said Friday they do not know what he will decide, raising suspicions that Mr. Huckabee will take a pass on another campaign.
UPDATE: Ed Rollins, Huckabee’s 2008 campaign chair, tells National Review Online he doesn’t think Huckabee will be announcing a presidential run.
“I don’t know what he is going to say. To the best of my knowledge no one else does either,” Rollins says about Huckabee’s announcement tomorrow night on his Fox News show. “I assume that means he is not going to run.”
Huckabee didn't raise taxes, he raised hope.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf Huck does not run, this probably boosts Santourm, since he will be the only cultural conservative running.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Mike,
I made the comment the other day that I could see Santorum emerging from this field if Huckabee does not run. Of course, all the anti-social conservatives on here smirked at me.
Santorum is a well rounded conservative, not just a social/cultural conservative. I think he's far more fiscally conservative than Mitch Daniels, who seems open to tax hikes.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHuck can make his bigoted comments about Mormons from the set of his TV show. He does not have to run this time.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt couldn't be any clearer that Huckabee isn't running, and no one is happier than Romney.
There is of course no way that social conservatives are going to get behind Romney, or Daniels and they've been hesitant to embrace Palin, probably because of the sideshow that is her family.
As others have pointed out, the only other reliably social conservative left is Santorum - a guy who is perhaps even more socially conservative than Huckabee but possessing half the communication ability and significantly less likable. A Santorum candidacy is going nowhere, which will end up disenfranchising a considerable number of SoCons. That should make for an interesting and perhaps volatile primary dynamic as well.
If Pawlenty was smart, he'd start trumpeting whatever social conservative bona fides he has. But, without Huck in the race, Romney is clearly going to be the man to beat, sadly.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@scott wilson,
You hate any Republican that is a legit social conservative.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Matt X - Matt, is it possible for you to engage in political debate without personal attacking someone with fallacious arguments? From everything I've seen from you, I'm skeptical.
Why don't you stick to making political points and refrain from attacking other Corner commenters? Perhaps then people will take you more seriously. Just saying.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@scott,
You just finished attacking Santorum, and it was quite personal, yet I have coddle you like a small child?
You do hate social conservatives, that was the basis of your attack on Santorum. You can whine about it all you want but I nailed you to the wall on it.
I don't remember "attacking" anybody else on here but I understand you want to demonize me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMatt, I don't wish nor attempt to demonize you. But, you seem to be doing an adequate job of that, all by yourself.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHuck: "Ah shucks"
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is what I thought from the git-go based on Huck announcing it on his show. With this coming from Rollins, I'm convinced.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseScott, I think Romney committed political seppuku yesterday. I see this benefiting Gingrich, unfortunately, but do not underestimate Cain and Bachmann.
Ok Scott.
I'm stil perplexed how you can assert that Santorum is not likable right after you assert he's some kind of right wing radical on social issues, but then you whine if I say you hate social conservatives.
It is a logical conclusion. All I did it made an observation about your political beliefs. Why not just admit you hate social cons, you won't go to jail for it, I promise.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe good thing about Cain is has experience in the private sector...the bad thing is he has no record in public office, so we don't have any indication of how he would act if he were elected president. Anybody can talk like a conservative in a campaign.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWith Pawlenty failing to break from the pack after the GOP debate and Romney winning few friends with his health care speech, this would be a good week for Huckabee to enter the race.
Just saying.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSeems like Huckabee should be a longshot for the Republican nomination, given the fact he raised taxes, supported more spending, pardoned several criminals (at least one went on to murder other people), supported amnesty, and seems like the male version of Michelle Obama on the obesity issue.
It's depressing that we don't have a more conservative field...Romney, Huckabee, Daniels, Pawlenty, Gingrich are moderate Republicans at best. I would have thought that a conservative "firebrand" would have emerged with Obama in the Whitehouse.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@MattX - "I'm stil perplexed how you can assert that Santorum is not likable..."
If you're "perplexed" then you must be unaware of the drubbing Santorum took in his last reelection bid for Senate. It was one of the worst defeats for a Senate incumbent in the last 50-years. How bad was it? Sestak, in a year for Dems that was just as bad as 2006 was for Republicans, still managed to exceed Santorum's 2006 vote total by more than 260K votes.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSantorum also won once in PA, a state that skews Democratic.
You brought up Santorum was a huge social con, "worse than Huckabee", and then immediately asserted he was not likeable.
Again, it's logical to conclude that YOU do not like him because he is a conservative who cares about social issues. To assert he's "not likeable" based on the fact he lost one election is bit of a reach. Reagan lost at least one election, was he not likeable?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseScott - there is no comparison in the two PA Senate elections. Bush never even carried PA, while Obama easily won the state by 10%, so while 2006 and 2010 may have similarity in terms of which party dominated nationwide, you have to look deeper.
In addition, Santorum was running against Casey - PA's version of political royalty. And you may recall, Casey had to effectively argue he was far more socially conservative than the average Democrat - though we all knew he would vote lockstep with the Dems when actually elected.
And as with any election where the pre-election polls show a blowout for that particular race (unlike Sestak's race) - the GOP turnout was atrocious.
Santorum has a real solid chance of carrying PA as the nominee, and that switch in the electoral count (assuming OH, FL, NC, VA go back to 'red') would win the election (no matter what CO, WI, IN, NH end up doing)
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"You brought up Santorum was a huge social con, "worse than Huckabee", and then immediately asserted he was not likeable."
First, Ronald Reagan never lost a general election - ever.
The statement that Santorum isn't likeable isn't based on his philosophical ideology, but his election results and contemporary polling numbers.
Rick Santorum isn't the GOP primary favorite in ANY PA poll that I have seen, and in some polls I have seen he's not even the 2nd or 3rd choice. Now, imagine if Barack Obama wasn't the hands-on favorite in IL, George Bush wasn't the overwhelming favorite in TX, or Reagan in CA, or Clinton in AR. All of those men were the clear and decisive primary leaders in their home states, as you would expect.
External Link
Not only does Santorum fail to break into double digits in most national polls, he can't even lead all comers in his home state. THAT is a sign of "unlikablity". It's not complicated.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseScott,
I don't see Mitch Daniels doing well in an any national polls, but you won't say he's unlikable beacuse that is your candidate.
Reagan lost a Republican primary, by your logic that must mean he's not likeable, he wasn't even liked by conservatives.
Santorum's problem is low name recognition and people like you that paint him as nothing but a social conservative who wants to spy on you in the bedroom, although he is more fiscally conservative than Daniels and others touting themselves as such.
I think Santorum does have a chance to emerge as the "true conservative" in this race if Palin stays out and Huckabee staying out (although he's not true conservative). You have a lot of moderate Republicans splitting up the moderate vote.
I don't know if he can win or not, but your projecting your own dislike of him onto onto other voters who just prefer other candidates at this point.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse