The problem the far right has with Huckabee is that he's actually a sincere Christian, and thus has SOME concern for the poor. That's what upset the wingnuts- he strengthened, rather than gutted, Arkansas public schools, and provided increased food stamp credits for healthy food. If this is a bad thing for him, it's really telling in terms of the far right.

I like Huckabee the person a great deal but I recently did an online test as to which candidates position  most matchs your own. It was no surprise for me to find Dodd and Biden at one and two, it was a surprise to find Huckabee at the very bottom. This says to me that Huckabee is a good leader because I find him trustworthy even though I disagree with him. Shouldn't that be enough of a qualification?

Sounds like a tricky test, blackton. I think you're right that Huckabee's a good leader, but I'd be really surprised if you disagreed with him more than with the rest of the candidates. From what I've seen of your opinions, they seem pretty mainstream (if better informed than most), and Huckabee is just that. All attempts to portray him as a radical right-winger have failed. Just ask Betsy Hagan and Phyllis Schlafly.

He's a terrific guy, no doubt - but he's hinky on science stuff RP, you have to admit.  I think not believing in evolution disqualifies you to be President.  Govenor of a state where the majority agree with you? Sure, no problem - but not President of the United States in 2007, where you'll be reponsible for setting  some of the most important science based policies on the planet, no way. I'm also fed up with neaderthal religious fanatics in scientific, women's heatlh, etc positions in government. Real damage has been done by those people.  

Maybe he can set his beliefs aside for these things and I'd be perfectly satisfied if he agreed to do so, but I think his religious perspective defines him, and I respect that.  I just don't see him being able to do that.  

We need someone whose views on scientific and health matters are not dicated by their church.

Huckabee believes in the separation of church and state. And more importantly, as a real conservative he doesn't believe in a Federal role in everything. I have not seen any statement from Huckabee that indicates an anti-science posture--Arkansas schools certainly still teach evolution.

He just scored more points in my book when asked in a Slate interview where he stood on torture. He immediately deferred to McCain on the issue as the only candidate with real knowledge on the subject, and cited the general military finding that, a) it doesn't work and, b) it's bad for us even if it did.

I think if we go by the guy's actual statements instead of things extrapolated from what someone somewhere said maybe he thought, we'd be better off.

Thanks RP  - I"m glad to hear about his record in Arkansas (its not that out of the mainstream to not believe in evolution incidentally, I've read several surprising polls about that). I should hold my fire before I pass judgement on him in that way.  I'm glad to hear that he believes in a separation of church and state and am particulalry impressed with his lack of shallow posturing on torture.

I have never read any statements from him that offended me, and I've always liked him a great deal, the more the better and I agree with him on very little. This, as Blackton says, shows remarkable leadership qualities. He shows a real awareness and comfort with himself, a gravitas, maturity and a sense of humility that I am simly not used to in born again Christians in position of major power.  Give me him over Guiliani any day -  Huckabee is clearly a much more mature, wise man.

I'm in agreement with Wandrey's initial statement -- assertions about Huckabee's commitment to a Church-State separation have the ring of "compassionate conservatism" and "humble foreign policy" to me.  We all know how far we can trust the true believers - after Bush we will not be fooled again.  

It would be ridiculous - perhaps disastrous - to elect a man or woman to the presidency who rejects the scientific advances of the last 200 years.  

Think about what such deliberate self-delusion says about a person's commitment to facts and reason?  Do we really need another faith-based presidency? Can we afford to make that mistake again?  

I agree in principle Neil, absolutely, but if his record in Arkansas is that of a successful government administrator who happens to hold these beliefs, then he deserves a fair hearing.  It's all about if he has walked the walk.  

He just feels more real, more honest to me that GWB by a mile.

John Fund has an interesting column about Mike Huckabee in today's Wall Street Journal. It's

Bob, check out this website: www.wqad.com/.../link.asp

this is the one where you click your positions on a survey and it matches you with the candidate. With Huckabee it seems some issues I can go either way but just took the one opposite his. A lot of them I understand it will be opposite his, such as a Marriage Amendment, which will never pass so it doesn't really matter. Anyway, check it out and tell me what came up.

Same with you Wandrey, check it out. It is interesting.

i did it again out of curiosity, Biden is top at 25 and then Dodd at 22. Huckabee is down at 7 and Rudy bottoms out at 4. McCain is highest Repub. at 13 one below Edwards at 14.

That was interesting, to the point Blackton - but no surprises for me, I was Obama 46, Clinton 46, Biden 45 - sounds about right.  Last was Fred Thompson (I forgot about him) tied with Huckabee at 3.  McCain was the highest Republican for me too - 10.  I'm hopeless.

Great quote on Drudge:

"Schlafly: Huckabee 'destroyed conservative movement in Arkansas, left Republican Party a shambles'...

If true, then I like him even more.

Here's a test that I liked a lot better than the one that blackton offered: [url=www.selectsmart.com/.../2008.html]Visit the 2008 Presidential Candidate Selector[/url]

For me, at least, Huckabee was in the middle of the pack (he was at the bottom of the blackton test), while Obama and Kucinich were at the top.  Go figure.  Apparently, Stephen Colbert is not the candidate for me.  

The above-linked test, BTW, is apparently built from questionaires submitted to the campaigns.  

Kucinich comes up #1 on both tests; my man Edwards does better on the selectsmart test, right behind Obama and Kucinich - but was #7 on the WQAD survey.  Go figure.  

It can only mean one thing...

I will support any candidate who gets the Democratic nomination.  You heard it here first.

One last comment on these questionnaires - Mr Huckabee was dead last on my survey.  So, I guess I don't care whether he accepts the separation of Church and State, since we disagree on everything else.

Bloomberg and Obama #1 on the "selectsmart" (brought to you by PetFoods.com!) survey, Mike Gravel (!) on the quad survey. I suspect my passionate hatred of the death penalty and the gun lobby distort my results.

It would be nice to see acomparison of the IMPORTANCE, alone, assigned to each issue by a) the public and b) the political-journalistic classes. Something tells me that the death penatly, guns, immigration and universal health care would soar to the top of the ranks for the public and would languish at the bottom for the pols/journos.

And of course, economic security would score off the charts for the public-- if the pollsters even bothered to ask about it ie recognized its existence.

did the selectsmart, thanks to kerouc9. Obama was tops at 75%, Lowest was Colbert at 22% (I didn't even know he had positions)

blackton--don't know if you're still reading--I've been on the road for the last three days and nearly didn't find this. Anyway, an interesting experiment. My top choice turned out to be "Theoretical Candidate". No surprise there.

Number 2 was Ron Paul (also no surprise) followed by McCain, Bloomberg, and Dodd. Huckabee turned out to be *24. Go figure.

I think I'll stick with choosing based on what I hear them say. Huckabee was interviewed by Blitzer yesterday, and admitted that he doesn't know how or when the universe was created, he just believes God did it. He's not anti-science, and presents as the most normal person. Still, I have to consider the fact that on the issues, my ideal ticket would apparently be Paul/McCain. Fat chance.