Dan Balz's Take
Iowa Surprise In Store for Republican Field?
Former Ark. governor Mike Huckabee could upset the Iowa field. (AP).
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa--The latest Iowa Poll, published Sunday in the Des Moines Register, has drawn attention largely because of what it shows about the Democratic race: Hillary Clinton is now leading in the state. What has drawn less attention, but is equally interesting, are the gyrations underway in the Republican race.
Mitt Romney, who has spent the most and campaigned the hardest in the state, has maintained the double-digit lead he established last spring. But the order of finish among the rest of the field has undergone a sizeable shakeup -- and even Romney should be nervous about what the poll reveals.
Back in May, when the Register last surveyed the state, Rudy Giuliani and John McCain were essentially tied for second in Iowa, with McCain at 18 percent and Giuliani at 17 percent. Today, second places goes to Fred Thompson, at 18 percent. Mike Huckabee is now third at 12 percent in a virtual tie with Giuliani, who has dropped to 11 percent.
McCain, who may be showing some signs of revival in New Hampshire, continues to languish in Iowa. He has fallen all the way to fifth in Iowa, at just 7 percent, which puts him only a few points ahead of Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul.
McCain's descent in Iowa is closely tied to his position on immigration, which was just beginning to hit his candidacy when the last Iowa Poll was conducted. In the survey released Sunday, 58 percent of likely Republican caucus attendees said his advocacy for comprehensive immigration reform was a major factor in their decision not to support him. More than half of Republican caucus-goers already say they have ruled out voting for him.
Giuliani's weakness is twofold. First is his support for abortion rights. Fifty-five percent of those surveyed said his position on abortion was a major factor in their decision not to support him. But Giuliani also has stopped campaigning in Iowa -- or at least has not been here since early August.
His campaign has said he will compete energetically in the caucuses, but he shows little evidence of it right now -- and Iowans take those slights personally. At this point nearly half of those surveyed said they have ruled out supporting him.
Romney and Thompson are the apparent beneficiaries of the slippage by Giuliani and McCain. Thompson has made himself a force here by virtue of his generally conservative image and by showing up, even though he has played to mediocre reviews in the national press.
Whether he benefited by being in the state at the time the poll was taken isn't clear, although there were some signs that he is still far from making the sale with Iowa Republicans. That was clear from the responses to the question of which candidate voters saw as making the best president.
Neither Thompson nor Romney did as well on that question as their overall poll numbers would have suggested. While Romney led among the Republicans in terms of overall support, at 29 percent, just 20 percent said they thought he would make the best president. Half of Republicans surveyed said they are concerned about his flip-flops on abortion.
Thompson, who was at 18 percent on the ballot test, was cited by just 12 percent as making the best president. Also more than half said the fact that a candidate has had serious health problems would make them less likely to back them in the caucuses. Thompson revealed in the spring that he suffers from lymphoma, although he said it is in remission.
All that indicates that Republicans have some potential reservations about him that could affect his standing between now and January, when the caucuses will kick off the nomination battle. Working in his favor is that he appears more broadly acceptable to the GOP electorate in Iowa than any other candidate. Just 30 percent said they have ruled him out.
Huckabee, who lacks both the resources and the celebrity status of the big four candidates in the GOP field, now appears poised to embarrass several of them in January. He was virtually tied with Giuliani on the question of who would truly be the best president among the Republican candidates. His status as a former governor is appealing in the abstract to GOP voters.
His second-place finish in the Iowa straw poll has not given him the fundraising boost that he might have hoped, but he continues to perform well in debates with his rivals and his conservative positions and sunny disposition have begun to impress Iowans of both parties.
When I sat down on Friday evening with a group of Linn County Democratic Party officials and activists to talk about politics, the last thing I asked them was to give me their impressions of the Republican field. I wanted to know which candidate they thought might prove toughest in a general election race.
Surprisingly they named Huckabee. McCain, they said, was past his time. Romney's flip-flops, they suggested, would make him an easy target in a general election. They also said they found him too slick and plastic.
One said Giuliani would appeal to Democrats and worried about that. But others argued that Giuliani was too much identified with New York and the East Coast to play well in the Midwest, which once again is likely to be the critical battleground in 2008. Plus they thought he would split the Republican Party.
Huckabee drew only positive comments. One in the group said she has a friend in Arkansas who told her people there admire what he did for the state as governor. Another said he seemed like "a genuinely nice guy." Another described him as "grounded."
Huckabee remains the intriguing dark horse in the Republican race -- a candidate whose appeal in Iowa could further shake up a contest in which none of the candidates is yet able to take control.
--Dan Balz
Watch Dan Balz's conversation with campaign staffers on the ground in Iowa:
Posted at 11:30 AM ET on Oct 8, 2007
| Category:
Dan Balz's Take
Share This: 
Technorati
| Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Posted by: bghgh | October 9, 2007 6:52 PM
Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist. He fully supports trade, dialogue and negotiations with every and any nation that wishes to do so. He just believes that "American values" are better exported by setting a good example, and engaging via dialogue and trade with other nations - NOT by pointing a gun at them.
-----
Also, I didn't see the "values voter debate", but I suspect that when Ron Paul said "No" to "protecting people like Terry Shiavo", he meant that this was an issue for the states and not one the Federal Government (and the Executive Branch) were constitutionally authorized to weigh in on. If Ron Paul were elected President, it would be refreshing to know that at least one branch of the Federal Government understood what its Constitutional limitations were.
Posted by: MDLaxer | October 9, 2007 11:47 AM
Eeeewww. For some reason Huckabee makes me feel gross. Yuckabee.
Posted by: sequoiaqueneaux | October 9, 2007 11:34 AM
LOLZ @ Ron Paul spammers using straw polls as some sort of measuring stick.
Want to know who won the Texas Republican Straw Poll? Some engineer from Georgia who has raised about $650. Seriously folks.
Posted by: thegribbler1 | October 9, 2007 10:48 AM
Ron Paul supporters need to come to terms with the cold hard fact that average Americans will not vote for this man. True Christians do not want to see drugs & prostitution legal. Most people with a faith background find someone like Ron Paul totally unacceptable.
During the values voter debate, the candidates were asked if they would protect people like Terry Shiavo, Ron Paul answered NO. Though Ron Paul is anti-abortion he is not a true pro-life candidate. Pro-life means standing up for life from the cradle to the grave.
Ron Paul seems like a nice fellow but his answers to questions in many debates are down right shocking and he is wrong for America, Holland maybe, America no...
Posted by: Barry2 | October 9, 2007 6:32 AM
Former Senator Fred Thompson is the only candidate that gets it. He makes decisions based on principles. Principles don't change. You have to stand for something and not change who you are based on the polls. That is what Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have done and all of the Democrats do it. Give me a leader that will stand by his principles anyday versus someone that stands for everything.
I know many, many Republicans that will stay home if Rudy Giuliani is the candidate. He does not represent our values as conservatives, and never will. Millionaire Mitt Romney is a Republican-in-name-only (RINO) that simply has everything else and nothing to do. "I guess I'll just try to buy the presidency". THE WHITE HOUSE IS NOT FOR SALE!! Conservatives will simply stay home...the Democrats will pick up additional seats in the House and probably get the 60 seats in the Senate they need to completely destroy our country. Nice picture huh?
However, I think Fred Thompson can bring America back together, if that's even possible. America needs a rebirth of patriotism and honor. Republicans also need a rebirth. President Reagan was our last rebirth and he can never be duplicated. Fred will bring his own down- to-earth common sense to this country and strength back to our party. A little of the good old days of faith, federalism and family would do well for this country. If a conservative runs as a conservative, he will win!
Think of it this way: Eight more years of another Clinton White House? Now, if that's not a sufficient enough reason to pull together as a party, as a country, and fight this liberal takeover of our government, what is?!
Friends, we are in for the fight of our lives, just as our young men & women are fighting for our freedoms in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must fight for our country right here and now! I truly believe Fred Thompson is the one man who can pull this nation back together! Rudy Giuliani, like Hillary Clinton, will just tear us apart! Putting lipstick on a pig doesn't change it...
Posted by: fkpaxson | October 8, 2007 11:10 PM
Ron Paul is a bit of a Loon! I welcome his wish for smaller government but his views on global affairs are unrealistic and a bit frighting. Paul is too much of an isolationist and he needs to get his head out of the sand and see whats going on in the rest of the world. You can't solve a problem by pretending it's not there...
Ron Paul does not have the stuff that presidents are made of.
Generally, governors (and mayors of very large cities) have the best qualifications to run a country and we have several to choose from.
As for me , I Like Mike.
Posted by: eeyw09b | October 8, 2007 8:40 PM
MarcMyWords said:
"It shouldn't suprise anyone if Huckabee does well. I am a Democrat and I actually like this guy. If he were more moderate on social issues there is a good chance I would vote for him."
In other words, there are some people who would vote for Huckabee, if it weren't for the fact that they don't agree with his positions on the issues.
Sounds like a ticket to the White House all right.
Posted by: bot_feeder | October 8, 2007 7:47 PM
raphael said:
"Like Gingrich & Bill Clinton said last week, He's the dark horse with the only chance."
Gingrich is clueless and runs around like a chicken with his head cut off. What was that thing about world war 3 a while back? The guy doesn't have a very firm grip on reality.
Clinton is of course an astute politician, but you have to recognize that when a Democrat gives their political analysis on a Republican race, there might just be a wee bit of spin involved.
Like, perhaps Clinton would LOVE for Huckabee to be the Republican nominee.
But at least you didn't use Dick Morris as your authoritative political analyst.
Posted by: bot_feeder | October 8, 2007 7:41 PM
One achilles heel for Huckabee in Iowa that hasn't apparently affected him yet but very well could:
When state legislators attempted to pass legislation in Arkansas to make it harder for illegal aliens to get public benefits, Huckabee not only was violently opposed, but he smeared those involved with some very nasty defamatory statements.
We already know Iowans are concerned about illegal immigration, their response to John McCain shows that.
Not being on the national stage, Huckabee has not been a champion of open-borders policies like McCain has, but his involvement at the state level has been high profile, and he is well known and very disliked by the immigration reform community for the way he dealt with the matter.
The only question in my mind is whether Huckabee will become a viable enough contender that Iowans start taking a closer look at his record. If they do, they are going to see that there are some big problems with Huckabee.
Posted by: bot_feeder | October 8, 2007 7:35 PM
For anyone even considering the possibility of huckabee as president needs to consider the damage he did to Arkansas as an "accidental" governor. If you think bush is an incompetent moron, huckabee would only be more of the same or worse. God help us if that should ever happen.
A citizen of Arkansa during this joke of a governor.
Posted by: t4rnr | October 8, 2007 6:43 PM
Wheee! All the sage comments. The real surprise for Iowa is that the voters will return to the folds of the Democratic Party after voting GOP in 2004. Had enough GOP? You bet. Iowa has voted Gore in 2000, Clinton in 1992 and 1996, and Dukakis in 1988.....What really surprises me is the amount of time and effort the GOP has spent this week trying to figure out what Hillary's laughing means.....Tied with that surprise is all the media ink telling of the importance of the Iowa vote...hey folks, Iowa has 7, say it outloud "7" Electorial Votes. 2008 vote will never get that close......BTW, I personally get hysterical with laughter at some of the medias' stupid questions......Grow up media: I don't care about what or which church the candidates go to....I don't care if they have pets/kids/spouses/lovers etc....Can they get the job done???
Posted by: GenieHal | October 8, 2007 6:31 PM
Yet another exhaustive Post article about the horse race without even giving a hint of what the candidates believe, say, or do, unless it has something to do with fashion.
Why are you people so shallow? Seriously. I don't mean that as a rhetorical question. Why?
Posted by: mhwebster | October 8, 2007 6:07 PM
It's interesting to read all these postings as if 'we' (whoever that is) have anything to say about our Rulers. Money talks, and money will speak. As a fellow in my office correctly stated, 'It doesn't matter who YOU vote for, this state (Texas) is going to vote Republican, so what you think doesn't matter.' He's perfectly correct... The Big Money of those who run the nation can buy as many votes as needed, and freeze out those who can't 'pay the bill'. Wake up, folks. We live in a plutocracy and it isn't going to change...
Posted by: tbrucia | October 8, 2007 6:06 PM
Sure are a lot of Ron Paul fans commenting today, I guess there must not be a lot going on a RP's campaign office today. I love the fact that they seem to think that the WP's technical error is some grand scheme against their guy. Your guy is not a factor in the presidential race nor will he be.
Posted by: Nperazich | October 8, 2007 5:50 PM
My prediction:
Giuliani, Huckabee, and Thompson will emerge from Iowa and New Hampshire as the major contenders. Hillary will have it in the bag by Feb 6. The GOP nomination will be a dogfight to the finish line, with the nominee decided at the convention. By convention time, Hillary will have raised more than 1 billion $ for the general election. She will prepurchase ALL available TV commercial slots in the fall in any media market covering a contested state before the GOP even has a nominee. Hillary will win more than 40 states and a dem landslide in the Senate races as well.
Posted by: andrewp111 | October 8, 2007 5:50 PM
I, for one, plan to vote for Mike Huckabee based on 3 reasons.
1) His authentic social conservatism - long held views on the sanctity of life, traditional marriage and the 2nd Amendment. He could energize the party base, unlike Guliani or Romney. (Forget Fred...like George Will says he's the next New Coke or dot com bubble)
2)His electability against Hillary is based on his crossover appeal. Mike Huckabee, not only, could bring in the huge evangelical vote, he also has a crossover appeal to African Americans (48% vote in heavily Deomocratic Arkansas). He's the only Republican to have have a major union endorsement - the American Machinists & Aerospace Workers.
To presuppose that a moderate is the best bet to defeat Hillary is absurd on its face. The conservative base will not be energized by such a candidate. It will open the door for a third party candidate. And without Perot and Nader, there were 2 elections which would have had a different outcome.
3) Democrats fear him. "If he had money, he would be our worst nightmare," says Democrat strategist John Lapp about Governor Huckabee. Like Gingrich & Bill Clinton said last week, He's the dark horse with the only chance.
Posted by: dale | October 8, 2007 5:44 PM
Ron Paul? Who is he?
Posted by: irizarryrafael | October 8, 2007 5:32 PM
Ron Paul will be the real January surprise in Iowa, not Mike Huckabee. While the Washington Post and other major newspapers are doing the best that they can to ignore him,Iowa voters are paying attention, and will be sending America a strong message in January. Americans want a president who understands and follows the Constitution!
Posted by: gmdoyle | October 8, 2007 5:31 PM
i'm guessing it's not dan balz who does the production assistance i.e. sets the links for this page...i think you're emailing the wrong person about this. but ron paul does deserve to be taken seriously. writing the article and putting it up on the site are usually separate jobs.
Posted by: sarah_c | October 8, 2007 5:29 PM
LOL!
WASHPOST3-Huckelberry is a Baptist Minister! The Chimp is an Evangelical!
Believe me, after Hamstringing the Military with a religious nut, for the last 7 years, NO BAPTIST MINISTERS OR EVANGELICALS NEED APPLY!
Now, SKIPPER2-Ron Paul is a Contrarian of no small degree. He is Against almost EVERYTHING! He is well known in Texas Politics, as Doctor NO!
However, I happen to LIKE some of what Dr. NO is talking about, and his expertice on the Medical Profession is invaluable-especially his first-Hand knowledge of the Military System.
What I find hillarious is the debate about Abortion by the Exectutive! Like the President really controls the issue at all?! Also, the President needs to represent the People. I believe this is exactly what has so many people so ticked at Bushie! HE may want his Amigos, and a damned Shia Theocracy-WE DON'T!
I want a President that is willing to listen, and be the Statesman-NOT some Clown Know-It-All(In his own imaginary reality), like Carter, and another guy I can think of!
Get the Babtist Minister back in his Flock, Get Dr. No, Giulliani, Tancredo, McCain, and any other qualified experts into the Cabinet, of Romney/Thompson's Ticket, and WIN!
To try to succeed individually is a lost cause for all of them!
Your Welcome!
Posted by: rat-the | October 8, 2007 5:25 PM
If Ron Paul wins the nomination, I WILL VOT FOR HIM....I used to always vote republican, but that was before BUSH. I have since vowed never to vote Republican again, although Ron Paul is really a Libertarian. If he doesn't win the nomination, I will vote Libertarian Party ONLY! No LP running for any given office and I do NOT vote for that office.
NO MORE TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS!
NO MORE BORROW AND SPEND CONSERVATIVES!
NO MORE GOP/DEM CROOKS!
VOTE LIBERTARIAN WHILE YOU STILL CAN! KICK OUT ALL THE CROOKS!
Posted by: fixitj | October 8, 2007 4:44 PM
Ron Paul will take Iowa & be the next U.S. President.
Posted by: grannymiller | October 8, 2007 4:34 PM
Speaking as a liberal-leaning independent, I have been, in some respects, very impressed by Mike Huckabee. I do have reservations about his religious beliefs, but I see him as separate from the right wing hypocritical, greedy Christian bigots and haters. He does appear to genuinely possess the characteristics I was raised to believe were the qualities of a good Christian and a good person -- compassion, concern for those less fortunate than himself, love for his fellow human, and a desire to serve more than himself and his ambition. He seems to be intelligent, thoughtful, and able to think creatively about the enormous problems will face us in the wake of the Bush presidency.
I believe most of the other presidential candidates, Republican and Democrat alike, are more interested in serving themselves and huge corporations and big donors than they are in serving the citizens of the United States.
After eight years of corporatist elites and defense contractors getting richer and richer and the middle class growing steadily poorer, it's time to take the government back for the people. At this point, if I'm reading Mike Huckabee right, I think he could do it. I think Al Gore could do it, too, but he doesn't seem interested in running. (And who can blame him?) I certainly don't see anybody else with the interest or the ability to do what we need to do to make America a place to be proud of again.
Posted by: nicekid | October 8, 2007 4:31 PM
It will be nice to have a doctor in the house!!!!!
Posted by: Chance1 | October 8, 2007 4:22 PM
Trends in the presidential nomination races can't seem to get any better for Hillary. If she wins in Iowa, which the latest major poll suggests, she's ipso facto the Democratic nominee. And if most Republicans in Iowa and elsewhere should decide that Mike Hackabee is their best bet in the general election, then Sen. Clinton should be the one person more pleased about that development than Dr. James Dobson.
Posted by: Eureka1 | October 8, 2007 4:14 PM
I'm not sure that I know who Ron Paul is. Could I be enlightened? Also, Huckabee. I'm not up on the midwestern candidates.
Posted by: skipper2 | October 8, 2007 4:13 PM
strange how the most qualified are shuffled to parts unknown Yes its about Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. I guess its
par for the course. Business as usual.
Posted by: robertuoo | October 8, 2007 4:10 PM
We don need anymore actor, acting like politicans Regan, Thompson and we the ILLEGAL govenor from Kailfornia and dumb a$$ for a president...Elect somebody that has some smarts, and wont take into another war...
Posted by: llevario2 | October 8, 2007 4:03 PM
The Huckster is pro Iraqi War and pro illegal immigration. He is a darling of the Value Voters because he is an Evangelical pastor. We for Ron Paul ain't going to vote for The Huckster under any circumstance. In any case, if The Huckster gets in for the Reps it will be HillBilly as the next pres.
Disclaimer: I am the original washport but the suits at Wash Post changed my moniker to washpost3 as punishment for not being a liberal.
Posted by: washpost3 | October 8, 2007 4:02 PM
I hope the GOP nominates Huckabee, the pandering fool. He's lurched in every direction since last spring, saying anything and latching on to any gimmick ("Look at me! I play gee-tar! I'm a Main-Street Republican! I'm a Fair-Taxer! I'm an Evangelical! I took on Ron Paul! I'm pro-union! Lefties love me!") in a desperate bid for attention. He's got some Arkansas skeletons, too, and his son is a real piece of work. Good luck, Huck!
Posted by: shannon4 | October 8, 2007 3:59 PM
What a disgrace you are Balz. This newspaper is so bias against Ron Paul. We are getting pretty sick AND TIRED of this everywhere.tHE MEDIA IS PURPOSELY TRYING TO DOWN PLAY RON. THE PEOPLE WANT RON, NOT THE BIG GOVN DISHONEST MONEY GRABBERS Sooner or later you will have to admit,HE'S IN THIS RACE BIG TIME. RON HAS WON ALL THE STRAW POLLS.
Posted by: Chance1 | October 8, 2007 3:57 PM
I'm a Democrat. My whole family are Democrats. We are rooting for Fred Thompson becasue we intend to vote for him as President if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee. And, in an early warning to Mr. Schumer, et al, we WILL NOT vote for any DCemocrat who endorses her. Clinton is nothing less than Bush in drag and the Democratic leadership's foisting her off on us is disgraceful and disgusting and we intend to punish you for it.
Posted by: mibrooks27 | October 8, 2007 3:54 PM
Posted by: votenic | October 8, 2007 3:37 PM
Posted by: votenic | October 8, 2007 3:26 PM
**********************************
**********************************
Email Dan Balz (the blogger who wrote this article) to POLITELY ask him to please fix the link to Ron Paul.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/dan+balz/
**********************************
**********************************
Posted by: jezzthisisfull | October 8, 2007 3:19 PM
I like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich for what they have had to say; neither man gets a hearing from the "mainstream"--read untrustworthy--reporters/editors covering the election cycle. Everyone with his/her hand in the till fears a serious as opposed to a mere political candidate.
Is it any wonder that Republican Iowans are disaffected? Or that the Democrats will settle for the woman whose husband Republicanized their party?
Hopeless!
Posted by: richjmurphy | October 8, 2007 3:16 PM
Proper link for Ron Paul
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/ron-paul/
Posted by: junk | October 8, 2007 3:03 PM
GO RON PAUL !!
Posted by: jjinmi | October 8, 2007 2:55 PM
I love how Huckabee has been flying under the radar screen, with very little resources, and has built a very strong network on the ground in Iowa. He's doing the same thing in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Even though he hasn't raised the money to run TV ads, or the endorsement of some of the evangelical leaders (although rumor has it that those endorsements are coming soon)...Huckabee still keeps slowly climbing in the polls. The early states are key (why do you think Mitt is dumping so much money into them?), as the national polls truly mean very little (see: John Kerry in the 2004 Iowa Caucus). This is just the beginning for Huckabee. It will be nice to have a Washington/Wall St. outsider in the White House!
Posted by: eludeu | October 8, 2007 2:55 PM
How many people need to make a comment before you fix the link to Ron Paul's website?
Posted by: joel_spam | October 8, 2007 2:51 PM
For G-d's sake, Republicans, please get Gen. Schwarzkopf out of his PO Box at CENTCOM and into the race!
Posted by: filoporquequilo | October 8, 2007 2:43 PM
Gov. Huckabee is on the rise in polling data, despite that fact of low funding. I hope that Paul will one day endorse Huckabee and give him some of those large givings.
As to Arkansas being under a bully pulpit during Huckabee's two terms as a republican Governor of a democrat state, sounds like something we need in Washington. Ban smoking in public? Look around, near every state legislature has done so. Is it fair? As an x-smoker, your lungs will be thankful and so will your grandchildren.
Governor Huckabee will be the surprise of this election and will be conversation for ages to come of how a candidate overcame the money changers.
Posted by: rgdunn | October 8, 2007 2:43 PM
the thing about Huckabee is, he uses his power to do as he wants, we don't need another George, he's personable, but people needs to look at what he did in Arkansas, erasing hard drives, decorating the Governors Mansion at Tax Payers Expense,banning Public Smoking even in designated places, and when he lost all his weight everyone was suppose to go on a Diet even School Children, Forcing Small Schools to Consolidate, no matter the thoughts of the Parents are the Community, if you want another Bush Vote Huckabee, a Citizen from Arkansas
Posted by: sueb3 | October 8, 2007 2:26 PM
Thompson is an "empty suit." Like Regan, he may be a good actor. Unlike Regan, Thompson is *NOT* Presidential timber.
Posted by: furtdw | October 8, 2007 2:23 PM
Huck is a great guy and no doubt a genuine Christian gentleman, however....Ron Paul is all of that AND a small government conservative honouring the US Costitution above political whims.
Would anything REALLY change if Huck were elected? No, the existing status quo would persist indefinitely.
Ron Paul is our only choice for limited gov't.
Posted by: tomdawg | October 8, 2007 2:21 PM
isn't this sweet?
FRED THOMPSON IS A VISTING FELLOW at ZIONIST CENTRAL
AEI
about Lynne Cheney, she works for AEI...which used to be PNAC...an organization that has DEEP ZIONIST ROOTS...
she also worked strongly to bring "core values," to public schools....aka hate as a family value...supported by republicans not of color.
AEI: Scholars and fellows
AEI lists their scholars and fellows on their web site. Some prominent current or former AEI scholars and fellows include the following:
John R. Bolton, former U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations.
Lynne Cheney, wife of U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, AEI senior fellow.
Ted Frank, serves on the Executive Committee of the Federalist Society's Litigation Practice Group
David Frum, an author and former speechwriter for Bush, is a resident fellow.
Reuel Marc Gerecht is a resident fellow.
He is the director of [PNAC], the Project for the New American Century's Middle East Initiative and a former Middle East specialist at the CIA.
Newt Gingrich, member of the Republican Party and Speaker of the United States House of Representatives between 1995 and 1999, is a senior fellow at AEI focusing on health care (he has founded the Center for Health Transformation), information technology, the military, and politics.
James K. Glassman, author of Dow 36,000, is a resident fellow.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a former Dutch politician, women's rights activist and critic of Islamism & Shar'ia Law.
Frederick Kagan is a military historian and signatory of Project for the New American Century [PNAC] manifesto titled Rebuilding America's Defenses (2000) along with his brother Robert (co-founder of the PNAC) and his father and fellow neo-conservative, Donald Kagan.
Alan Keyes, former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, was an AEI resident scholar.
Jeane Kirkpatrick was the former U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations and was an AEI senior fellow until she died in 2006.
Michael Ledeen was previously involved in the transfer of arms to Iran during the Iran-Contra affair -- an adventure that he documented in his book, Perilous Statecraft: An Insider's Account of the Iran-Contra Affair.
Allan Meltzer is one of the foremost academics studying monetary policy and the Federal Reserve Bank. He, along with economist Milton Friedman, pioneered monetarism, the now widely accepted theory that inflation is entirely the result of the growth of the money supply. Meltzer is currently working on the second volume of his History of the Federal Reserve.
Joshua Muravchik is a resident scholar. He researches Middle East politics, democracy, neoconservatism and the history of socialism.
Charles Murray, an influential policy writer and a researcher, is the W.H. Brady Scholar in Culture and Freedom. He is best known as the co-author of the controversial 1994 book, The Bell Curve.
Michael Novak is the George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion, Philosophy and Public Policy and Director of Social and Political Studies at the institute. He has written extensively about the role of faith in government.
Norman Ornstein has been a Congressional analyst and political commentator for more than thirty five years.
Richard Perle served on the United States Defense Policy Board and is a former Assistant Secretary of Defense....from which he was asked to resign because of conflict of interests with his zionist positions.
Danielle Pletka, Vice President, her research areas include the Middle East
Sally Satel is a psychiatrist and author of PC, M.D.: How Political Correctness is Corrupting Medicine.
Christina Hoff Sommers is a critic of the feminist movement. She is the author of Who Stole Feminism and The War Against Boys.
*FRED THOMPSON* , Television and film actor, currently appearing on the television show Law & Order, former U.S. Senator, and current Republican presidential primary candidate, is a visiting fellow.
Posted by: afraidofme | October 8, 2007 2:20 PM
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron."
-- Dwight Eisenhower, April 16, 1953
"I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it."
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower in a letter to his brother Edgar, November 8, 1954
=================
"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience ... In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic process."
-- President Dwight Eisenhower, farewell speech to the nation, January 17, 1961
Posted by: afraidofme | October 8, 2007 2:11 PM
It shouldn't suprise anyone if Huckabee does well. I am a Democrat and I actually like this guy. If he were more moderate on social issues there is a good chance I would vote for him. Of course thats not gonna happen! lol
Posted by: MarcMyWords | October 8, 2007 1:46 PM
Of all the low-down dirty tricks, linking Ron Paul's name to Mike Huckabee's bio has to be one of the lowest.
Could you guys in the MSM be any more transparent?
C'mon, we caught you, now fix it.
Posted by: demonrats | October 8, 2007 1:34 PM
"...even though he (Thompson) has played to mediocre reviews in the national press."
Given that the public's opinion of the press generally polls lower than that of the dismal Congressional rating ....this is a bad thing, how??
Posted by: franco1 | October 8, 2007 1:28 PM
That's too funny. Click Ron Pauls name and it takes you to Huckabees Web sight. A human error,or a "machine" error. Is Mr.Paul worrying you guys or what. Shameful!
Posted by: jime2000 | October 8, 2007 1:18 PM
Its really funny. I hope you did learn how to analyze numbers when you went through your educational years.
Ron Paul made 5.1 million dollars and still has 5.3 on hand. The man wins or gathers top 3 votes in all the straw polls that have been taken across the country.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/
National polls are rigged to ask people with land lines. Straw polls show who is going out and cares, and people care for Ron Pauls message.
RON PAUL 2008
sooner or later, you cant ignore the facts.
Posted by: rcalvello | October 8, 2007 1:15 PM
Mr. Balz - interesting take on the Iowa caucuses. I agree that Huckabee brings some unique strengths to the race, but don't you think his lack of fund-raising prowess is a bad sign? He hardly even registers. Ron Paul brought in over 5 million last quarter (5 times as much as Huckabee) but warrants only a passing mention in your column. Do you think Huckabee can overcome the failure to raise money?
Posted by: philwfu | October 8, 2007 12:52 PM
I noticed when you scroll over Ron Paul's name it takes you to Mike Huckabee's bio. Could you maybe fix that, please?
Posted by: emilyandshannon | October 8, 2007 12:42 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
I found Huckabee charming and his statements about evolution were ambiguous enough that I thought he might be able to see both sides of the debate, but then I heard the rude comment he made about Hillary Clinton quoted on the John Stuart show. Something about having her lips planted on the backside of George Soros. I was so offended that my entire view of the man changed. The remark was totally unnecessary. It had something to do with the SChip veto.
Anyone who has to use crude language in public about his/her opponent deserves not to have a single vote which is how many I hope he gets.
Here he is a Baptist minister using crude language about a female opponent. Sorry, he just seemed like a nice person, but wasn't one in fact.