Should Mike Huckabee run for the U.S. Senate in 2010?

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: A guy with the Internet handle of "The Unablogger" blogs from Missouri. He has taken a look to the South and has made an interesting argument for why former Gov. Mike Huckabee should run for the U.S. Senate in 2010. His logic is solid as he identifies the sacrifice it would take for Mike Huckabee to step forward. In addition, he points out the cost to both America and Huckabee if Mike does not run and win. While not making judgments about the candidates who have come forward to pick up the gauntlet to challenge Sen. Blanche Lincoln, I agree that we need the best knight to enter the arena to fight for us and help us save America before it is too late.

While I was critical at times of Mike Huckabee during the GOP primary races, I would have supported and worked for Mike if he had received the nomination. At the end of the primary, my preferences were was not on the ticket and I supported and voted for VP Candidate Sarah Palin and that other guy.

Looking back, even Huckabee may not have been able to stop the Obama train which crushed Hillary Clinton. Obama's background and inexperience was there for every voter to take note of and yet people voted for him, he won, and "change occurred. The reasons for Obama winning and the GOP losing has been analyzed and re-analyzed and is not repeated here. But, we all know what we have experienced in just seven months since he became president with the control of Congress also in the hands of the democrats.

There are no checks and balances in Washington, D.C. Even for those who voted for Obama, it is not "the change" they or rest to America expected. Inexperience and socialism are running our country. And the current Congress has become a big rubber stamp for Obama's actions and for socialism. People have even been confirmed who are tax cheats or worse.

In 2008, many wanted Huckabee to run against Sen. Pryor in 2008. However, we understand that Mike deserved his chance at the presidential nomination. His participation in the national process raised his name recognition, he started his own Fox News show, and has many other great options to pursue. However, today, things are now much worse for all of the country. The future of our children and grandchildren has been mortgaged with a trillion dollar debt and more debt is coming by the Obama administration and Congress. Government is moving to interfere with all aspects of our life (cradle to grave). Freedoms and rights are being challenged or actually taken away.

In the upcoming 2010 races for Congress, we need numerous victories to put the breaks on the efforts to reshape and destroy America as we know it. In Arkansas, Sen. Blanche Lincoln needs to be defeated. She does not need another 6 years to advance the Democrats liberal agenda. She is already unavailable to most Arkansans unless we cough up over a $1000 for a few minutes at a fund raiser and maybe it on to her list of people from whom she will accept a call.

Will the man from Hope to take on the Arkansas elites who side with liberals in Washington rather than Arkansas values? Would it cost Mike Huckabee many of his options to run? Maybe! Would Mike have to sacrifice? Yes! But then, he also already knows that most of his fellow Arkansan are already having to sacrifice. Let's skip addressing the loss of banks, loss of major industry, declining investments, falling homes values, rising unemployment and the closing of small businesses. Consider that Arkansans like other concerned heartland Americans have been forced to sacrifice their time with their families and other personal life choices. They are spending enormous hours, effort and resources focusing on and responding to the threats or actions by the Obama administration and Congress.

We have lost trust in our Congressional delegation because most of them, including Senator Lincoln, do not reflect the values of the majority of Arkansans. Actions, to numerous to list, by Washington D.C. now threaten our freedoms, rights, choices, finances, property and property rights. Lincoln's actions to "bring home the bacon" (money to the state) no longer means anything when she is "sacrificing the farm" (Arkansas values and freedoms).

Now consider The "Missouri" Unablogger (not the unabomber) frank viewpoint about Mike Huckabee running for the US Senate in 2010:

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee broke into the national spotlight last year as a fresh new face offering straight talk in a charming way, winning the hearts and votes of many conservatives. Since falling short in his initial presidential run, he has landed a cushy, high-profile gig on Fox News Channel at which he excels. In ordinary times, this situation would be perfect for a four-year build-up to a second presidential run.

But these are no ordinary times. The real threat that the Obama Administration and the Pelosi/Reid Congress could permanently transform American capitalism into European socialism and dumb down health care requires a massive electoral reaction at the ballot box in the 2010 off-year election. It is essential that the Pelosi/Reid congressional majorities be reversed, or at least significantly pared back. That happens one seat at a time, and it only happens when viable candidates who can be trusted sacrifice their personal plans to make themselves available to take those seats.

In the U.S. Senate, Harry Reid’s Democrats have a working 60-40 margin that can ram through harmful legislation immune from filibuster. Since senate seats only come up every six years, Republicans can’t yet reclaim the senate seats they lost in the last two cycles. What are up in 2010 are an even mix of seats filled in the last “Republican year” before the Democrat resurgence. That leaves most senate Democrats immune from public outrage in 2010 over Democrat policies and tactics. But Republicans have to defend “open” seats of retiring Republican senators in three states that Obama won handily last year (New Hampshire, Ohio, and Florida) and two others (Missouri and Kentucky) where retention could still be challenging. Special situations also put GOP incumbents in Louisiana (sex scandal) and North Carolina (pro-Democratic demographic changes) in some danger. Therefore, Republicans need to take every opportunity to defeat Democrat incumbents in “red states” to give Republicans a chance to win back just the power of filibuster. This is especially true in low-population states where campaigns are not prohibitively expensive. (In contrast, vulnerable Democrat seats in New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois and California would all require more money than Republicans can realistically raise.)

A prime Republican opportunity is the Arkansas senate seat held by two-term Democrat Blanche Lincoln. Elected to an open seat in 1998, a Democrat year fueled by concern over the impending impeachment of home-state President Bill Clinton, and having faced only token opposition in 2004, Lincoln has enjoyed a charmed political life. Two years ago, Republicans failed to field even a token opponent to Sen. Mark Pryor in a year when the Republican presidential ticket carried the state by 20 points. The Arkansas Republican with the personal popularity and gravitas to compete against the incumbent on even terms is Huckabee.

For the moment, Huckabee seems focused on a 2012 presidential run. Make no mistake, running for the Arkansas senate seat would be a huge sacrifice for Huckabee. He would have to give up his (presumably) lucrative Fox News gig that puts him on a national stage in a controlled favorable light mostly before likely Republican primary voters, and do it two years earlier than he would otherwise have to do so. While it would open up a separate fundraising opportunity, it would also deplete all those new resources and more to conduct a 2010 campaign. Also, Huckabee would take a big risk that he could still lose the Arkansas contest. It’s always tough to unseat an incumbent, because “nice” people don’t like to “fire” people from the job they have now. And the political winds could change. If the economy turns around and is cooking again by November, 2010, Democrats will be hard to beat. And ironically, if Obama’s weak national defense exposes us to a major terrorist attack before then, the natural inclination of American voters is to rally around their president, even if he was at fault for exposing us to attack. So taking on Blanche Lincoln is far from a sure thing. And, Huckabee and his strategists may fear, losing to Lincoln in 2010 could damage his 2012 presidential prospects.

But I submit that NOT running in 2010 poses an even greater danger to Huckabee’s 2012 chances. His party NEEDS him, and Republicans appreciate risk-takers. If he takes a personal risk but still loses, people will still appreciate the effort. And if Huckabee unseats Lincoln, he will have helped save the country. And the public demonstrated their willingness to elect a rookie senator to the presidency in 2008.

On the other hand, if Huckabee selfishly puts his personal ambitions ahead of the country’s need to retake control of the U.S. Senate and the second-tier candidate Arkansas Republicans settle for loses, Republicans nationally (specifically including me) will blame Huckabee. This is that rare situation when NOT running in a risky election will effectively disqualify the candidate for later presidential candidacy.

The country needs Mike Huckabee to win Arkansas’ senate seat in 2010. If he doesn’t even try, he doesn’t deserve to carry his party’s standard for president in 2012.

---

Tags: 2010, Arkansas, Bill Smith, Blanche Lincoln, Freedom, Mike Huckabee, Sacrifice, US Senate, values To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!