Newsmax is reporting the Mike Huckabee is leaning against being involved with the 2012 Presidential contest:
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee says he’s leaning slightly against running for president in 2012 but says it’s far too early to say what he will do.
I think this is nothing but publicity for Huckabee. But, if true, I welcome the announcement.
Huckabee is the kind of “conservative” who would give President George W. Bush a bad name. The only things that I’m convinced that Huckabee is conservative on are abortion and gay marriage. Everything else seems to be up for pragmatic adjustments. However, what flavor of conservative Huckabee is or isn’t, is not why I write.
Huckabee has provided several reasons or markers, for why he won’t run, or might yet run, for President:
- It depends upon on the 2010 elections turn out
- Whether the party will unite behind him
- The status of his weekly TV program.
He’s kidding, right?
Running for President, or any political office for that matter, is not something you do on a lark. These are grueling, all encompassing endeavors, not only for the candidate but also for their family and friends. Having seen first hand, the sacrifice required to participate in a simple intraparty election, I would never counsel anyone to run for an office that they weren’t personally convicted and committed that their ideas and leadership were best for their constituents and the office. But, that doesn’t seem to even enter Huckabee’s mind.
Depending upon the 2010 election– If you think you’ve got the best ideas for the country, what difference could this make? Is Huckabee saying that if the Republicans make gains in 2010 that his ideas become irrelevant? If so, his ideas are already irrelevant. Or, is he saying that if the Republicans don’t do well in 2010 that he “won’t play” because it’s too big a challenge?
There is only one valid take Huckabee might have, that I could agree with his reasoning. If Republicans make big gains in 2010, and the force behind that change is the tea party activists, Huckabee would not be the likely nominee as he wouldn’t get the support of most tea party activists.
Whether the party will unite behind him– ummmmm, isn’t this what the nomination process is all about? Did John McCain really think the party was united behind him in 2008? I suppose that it’s possible that his political ego convinced him that they were. If so, it’s just one more reason why McCain never got united support.
A leader will create unity where none exists. They do this by casting a vision and helping others understand and see how that vision is the best for accomplishing the goal or task that confronts them. If Huckabee is unable to create unity, not only will he not be the nominee, he shouldn’t be. Again, looking back at 2008, McCain was beat as much by a competent opponent as by his own incompetency in regularly sticking his finger in the eye of core conservatives and keeping them from unifying with the party even if they wanted to.
Dependent upon his TV show – This is hilarious! Is he suggesting that if his show is doing well he isn’t interested in being President? Or, is he saying that if he bombs on TV, being President sounds like a good interim job while he finds another media gig?
Personally, I’ve never understood the appeal of Mike Huckabee. I’ve always thought him to be a populist who didn’t have any real core convictions. There have been many who’ve tried to convince me that Huckabee was a serious candidate. The next time someone tries to do that, I’ll point them to this article and respond, “Say What?”
