He ran an honorable campaign—perhaps too long of one, but he has the good sense to bow out with a sense of real class. He ran a race he can be proud of, and had some impressive achievements along the way.

I don’t agree with Huckabee’s politics, but he does represent the Christian evangelical conservative movement in a much more accessible way than past leaders. I would like him remain a leader with evangelicals, and I hope he advises the McCain campaign on ways of speaking to middle class Americans.

My dream involves Angelina Jolie, Eva Green and and a tropical beach.

Both have about the same odds of happening.

One the other hand, there is some sense to what Huckabee is doing—by painting himself as an alternative to McCain he can claim to represent the voice of dispossessed evangelicals. But that seems to be a claim without much merit—Huckabee is winning in contests that don’t much matter, and winning by small margins in contests with low turnouts doesn’t say much about Huckabee personally.

Huckabee seems to be burning bridges at this stage. His stubbornness in staying in the race reflects more poorly on him than a magnanimous departure—even one without an endorsement of McCain. Romney’s bowing out was tactically wise and preserves his standing as a potential future candidate. Huckabee’s insistence on running hurts his future chances, which were slim to begin with.

Ultimately, Huckabee’s proven that he’s a liability to the GOP rather than an asset. He could have been a powerful voice for the evangelical community, but the more contests he loses to McCain the more it sends the signal that McCain can win without evangelical votes. If evangelicals throw the race to the Democrats it won’t make them a stronger voice within the party, but inspire a massive backlash that hurts the interests of both evangelical voters and Republicans. Running an opposition candidacy is not a smart way of ingratiating oneself to the party that best fits your political perspective. Huckabee’s Quixotic run is long past its expiration date, and each day he draws things out the more he ends up hurting himself.

UPDATE: So far, Maryland looks like another McCain rout—the margin is above double digits. Huckabee has done well in the South, but that’s all he’s been able to manage. His campaign seems quite pointless, especially now that the major Southern contests are behind us.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is in trouble. Obama has all the momentum and is now indisputably the front-runner. Neither Clinton nor Obama have ever run a truly competitive campaign, and Obama’s natural magnetism is giving him a decisive edge. Without her air of inevitability, Clinton is in the fight of her life.

Still, I would not count Hillary out. I don’t at all think that Obama is the superstar that the Democrats have made him out to be. In fact, I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that Obama is in fact the more vulnerable candidate. Obama has two huge problems: he’s incredibly inexperienced, and his appeal is quite literally skin deep. Obama is painting himself as a candidate above politics, but that doesn’t work. Sooner or later Barack Obama will have to stop spouting platitudes and start getting real, and he’s not prepared for that in the slightest. Especially now that it’s clear that McCain will be the GOP nominee, this contest will be one that is about clear differences: the young liberal activist versus the elder statesman and American hero. Sorry, Obamamaniacs, but your guy is all fluff. Either candidate will give McCain a very tough run, and he could blow it, but I think that the Obama hype machine is blowing a great deal of smoke up our collective posteriors.

Still, I do take some comfort in watching the collapse of the Clinton political dynasty. For years we on the right have been excoriated for criticizing the Clintons for being a bunch of amoral hyper-political sleezebags. Our friends on the other side of the aisle are about 15 years behind in realizing it, but it’s nice to know that we’re finally vindicated in that belief. Then again, the way in which the Clintons have gone from liberal paragons to persona non grata is more than a little Orwellian…

This race is going to be quite the interesting one, and even though some conservatives are disappointed that McCain is the nominee, I’m starting to come around to the idea that he’s the best possible candidate for these times. This summer will be quite fun to watch, and hopefully we’ll see some real fireworks—although most of them will be from the intra-party civil war on the Democratic side.

The GOP needs to wake up, and fast. Congress’ approval ratings are barely in double digit territory. People have as dismal a view of government as they have ever had. If the GOP wants to be the part of slightly less big government rather than the party that will restore sanity and accountability to government, then the GOP will lose once again.

What is the vision of the Republican Party? Is it based upon our principles of economic liberty, personal morality and strong national defense? Or is it nothing more than the mere desire to scrape together enough interest groups to win? If it is the latter, then the GOP has learned nothing from their failures in 2006.

In a time of rampant public distrust of government, putting the architect of McCain-Feingold together with a clone of Jimmy Carter is exactly the wrong strategy. If people want more government, they can vote Democratic this November and get all the government they can handle.

Ronald Reagan said it best: the most dangerous line in the world is “I’m here from the government, and I’m here to help.” The Republican candidates keep invoking the name of Ronald Reagan—but only one of them seemed to understand what he stood for, and that guy isn’t running any longer.

To lose those principles is to not only lose the Republican base, but the independent voters that the GOP needs to win. You don’t win elections by being pale imitations of the other side, you win elections by bolding and proudly defending your principles. A McCain-Huckabee ticket would send exactly the wrong message.

Jake Files was a newly elected representative when all two dozen Arkansas House Republicans met for their first caucus in 1999. They had doubled their numbers in elections two months earlier, and were ready to join Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee in pushing for conservative government.

That was when Brenda Turner, the governor’s chief of staff, entered.

“Just walked in, shut the door and said, ‘There’s two kinds of people in the world: those who are for Mike Huckabee and those who are against Mike Huckabee. I’ll do everything I can to help the first group. I’ll do everything I can to hurt the second,’ ” said Mr. Files, who left the legislature after two terms.

And that’s the way it was.

There have been plenty of rumors along the campaign trial from former Arkansas figures about a Mike Huckabee that was very different from his public persona. In public, Mike Huckabee is laid-back, affable and solidly conservative. In private, there have been tales of a Huckabee’s who is petty, vindictive and anything but conservative. While these are merely rumors, their sheer number is hard to ignore.

Thankfully, Huckabee’s campaign is sagging after its win Iowa. If Huckabee’s running well behind the other candidates in Florida, and hasn’t gotten much traction in other states. His appeal is in his particular brand of evangelical identity politics—but that’s only working with a plurality of evangelicals. It isn’t enough to merely play identity politics and use the right language: many evangelical voters are looking at Huckabee’s substance and finding it lacking. It seems highly unlikely that Huckabee would be able to defeat Romney then surge ahead to take down McCain. His appeal is skin deep, and that isn’t enough.

Huckabee’s legacy in Arkansas is one of a party that had been left divided and weakened—which should give Republicans good reason to avoid his candidacy as the leader of the national party.

The electoral map does not favor Mike Huckabee. He’s never been able to broaden his appeal beyond a plurality of the evangelical vote—and that isn’t enough to win. If he could campaign to the right of John McCain he might have a chance, but he’s already done enough to blow his reputation among conservatives to make that unlikely.

Right now the dynamics of the race favor McCain. The race is starting to boil down to him versus everyone else, and even with Thompson essentially out of the running there isn’t enough consensus among everyone else to blunt McCain’s momentum into Florida and Super Tuesday. Huckabee’s narrow appeal will help him with the South, but it’s not going to help him in Florida, California, New York, or others. Furthermore, Huckabee is not well liked with Arkansas Republicans, which means he could lose his own home state.

Huckabee’s narrow appeal is hurting both his electoral chances and his fundraising, and that means that Huckabee’s momentum is all but gone. This race may yet come down to McCain versus someone else, but that someone else doesn’t seem likely to be Mike Huckabee.

For all the talk about South Carolina being the death knell for Thompson, who South Carolina really killed was Huckabee. Huckabee is an insurgent. He has neither the establishment support, nor the money, nor the conservative movement mouthpieces to drag him along.

Huckabee has only the force of his own personality and the media momentum perception. Insurgent candidates like Huckabee need to ride a wave to victory and any wave Huckabee had broke on the shores of South Carolina’s coastline.

Huckabee does have the support of a certain segment of the evangelical vote, but his game of identity politics means he’s already alienated everyone else. Right now the media is fawning over the guy they fawned over in 2000, which leaves Huckabee high and dry. He doesn’t have the support to win and he has little chance of broadening their support.

Had Romney been knocked out in Michigan I think Thompson would have probably won South Carolina on the basis of sealing enough of the conservative vote. There’s still an incredibly small chance that as the race continues Thompson could still pull that off—but that’s contingent on having enough money on hand to remain in the race. Right now the conservative vote is split between Thompson and Romney. If their votes were combined, one or the other would be ahead. If they drop out, it leaves conservatives with a choice of John McCain or Mike Huckabee—which is not the most appetizing choice for many, although McCain would almost certainly be the beneficiary in that case.

In the end, South Carolina spells the death of the Huckabee campaign. If he can’t win there, he can’t win elsewhere, and he needed a win to keep his momentum going. Huckabee’s a talented politician, but he can’t broaden his base beyond his evangelical constituency, and he’s made enough tactical mistakes in recent weeks to take the shine off of his campaign.

Thompson may have been put out by South Carolina, but Huckabee’s second place doesn’t give him much room either. The dynamics of the race are changing, and they’re not changing in a way that’s at all helpful to Mike Huckabee. His narrow appeal and lack of experience have ensured that he can’t broaden his base enough to win, which means that his outsider challenge is likely to fail.

Someone has to say it. Mike Huckabee is not a conservative in terms of his view of government. He would be another George W. Bush, but without the resolution on the war. He’s a nice guy to have a beer with, and he’d be a nice pastor. But he’s not POTUS material, and Thompson just forcefully made the case why.

Now Thompson needs to make the case why he’s the best conservative in the race, and if he does that as forcefully as he went after Huckabee he’ll walk away with this debate.

I wasn’t planning on liveblogging tonight, but…

8:39PM: Both Huckabee and Thompson had good lines on Iran. Huck’s line about the “gates of hell” and Thompson’s ad-lib about the Iranians meeting those virgins they’re always pining for was pure red meat for national security conservatives. The difference is that Thompson had more policy detail—which shows that he’s done his homework, but does tend to bog him down a bit.

8:40PM: McCain looks really tired…

8:41PM: Ron Paul brings up the Gulf of Tonkin. Again, he’s the punching bag tonight. Does he not remember the USS Cole?

Thompson’s Iran line: “I think one more step and they would have been meeting those virgins they’ve been looking so forward to seeing.” Classic.

8:43PM: Ron Paul is a whiny little crapweasel. John McCain looks like he’s about ready top jump out of his podium and rip him a new one.

Romney is polished as ever, but it hasn’t helped him yet. Romney is the perfect executive, which just isn’t the same as the perfect Presidential candidate.

8:46PM: McCain has a good line about Iraq, but he still looks so tired. I’d be inclined to support McCain, mainly because he’s been on top of this war, but he’s not inspiring tonight. His stump speech lines are getting old, especially on spending—and I think McCain is 100% dead-on right on the need to control spending.

8:48PM: Giuliani’s answer on Iraq was fine, but he’s also not hitting it tonight. The only two people who are “on” tonight are Fred and Huck, which may mean a lot for the shape of the crucial South Carolina race.

8:51PM: McCain is smacking down Paul, who sounds more and more paranoid and conspiratorial. We supported Osama bin Laden? Bullshit. Why did they bother bringing that raving nutbag into the debate? Unless, of course, it’s to give the serious candidates a convenient punching bag.

8:53PM: Fred just slammed The New York Times on Iraq. Where the hell have you been, Senator? Had you done this well earlier, you’d be leading by 10% right now.

“You can tell the news coming out of Iraq is good, because you read so little about it in the New York Times.” Nice!

What’s nice about Fred tonight is that he has a good applause line followed by some real substantive answers. He’s got energy tonight, and it shows.

Romney mentioned “three dimensional chess.” Is he going for the Trekkie vote? Then again, he had a very sharp answer on Pakistan, mentioning the head of the Pakistani Army.

8:58PM: Now “Mr. Nice Guy” Huckabee is kicking Ron Paul in the ass. He is the punching bag tonight. Small government or not, I’d vote for a dead cow before I’d vote for a nutbag like Ron Paul at this point.

9:00PM: Rudy speaks out on behalf of Israel, followed by Thompson. Thompson goes on the offensive against Huckabee on Pakistan, over the issue of military funding. He needs to go after Huck, and that’s what he’s doing. No good lines for that one, though. He probably should have let it go.

9:03PM: Some quick thoughts: this is Fred’s night. McCain looks tired, Mitt’s moribund, Rudy’s not hitting it, and Ron Paul is a nut. Even Huckabee is just treading water. Fred is going hard after Huckabee on the issues, and it’s putting him on the defensive. Huckabee is not good on the defensive. We’ll see if Fred can keep the pressure on—if so, it will be interesting to see what effect it has at the polls.

9:05PM: Mitt gets a good line: do people want Washington insiders because of Clinton’s NH win? “Nope.” Romney’s positioning himself as the candidate of “change” is his best bet, but the problem is that McCain’s been doing it longer. I think people are getting sick of the word “change” by now—I know I am. Romney’s is talking about his resume, which is impressive, but he’s giving yet another solid second-place performance. That’s not enough for him.

9:07PM: McCain gets a question about being a Washington candidate. He gets a decent line in, then goes back to his stump speech: Iraq, the Boeing deal, etc. However, he does have a great line about the Abrahamoff corruption case. Corruption was a huge issue in 2006, and McCain is doing a good job of positioning himself on it.

9:09PM: Now Huckabee gets attacked for a big-government record. He’s definitely taking flack tonight. He’s not helping himself by talking about raising “hope.” Government doesn’t raise hope, people do. I’m half expecting Fred to take him on over this.

9:10PM: And they give the response to Fred… quelle surprise. Thompson brings up his own record, which is smart. He’s slammed Huck, now it’s time to draw the contests. Fred’s energy is a bit down with this answer, but he’s still solid. He came in tonight with a strategy to contrast himself with Huck on conservative issues, and he’s doing just that. Now, will it work?

9:13PM: Huck gets a response. Oh, and Huck’s slam at Minnesota about bridges was gratuitous. He’d never carry Minnesota, and you’d damn well better think that Minnesota Republicans are not going to like that. This one certainly didn’t.

Rudy’s up. I’ve seen Rudy speak, and he can command a room. Right now, he’s flailing. This questions should be a softball for him, but he’s just not inspiring.

9:16PM: Huck is getting slammed about his line about women “submitting to the servant leadership of her husband.” His answer to this is sold. He brings up his wife, which is nice. The question is very unfair, and shows a lack of what being a “servant leader” is to a Christian. This was designed to be a slam, but Huckabee is walking away with it. You don’t go after Huckabee on a theological issue, because that’s the one thing he’s the most qualified to speak on.

I don’t want Huckabee in the Oval Office, but he’d make a damned fine replacement for Dr. Phil.

9:20PM: Why do they let Ron Paul rant again? God, he’s annoying.

9:22PM: Even The New York Times is giving Fred solid marks tonight.

9:24PM: McCain gets a sharp question on immigration, which is apparently a popular issue. This is McCain’s real Achilles heel, although I don’t think there’s that much daylight between any of the candidates. McCain’s plan is similar to Thompson’s which is similar to Romney’s. But they all still want to try to get traction on this issue.

9:27PM: So is Romney saying we should deport all 12 million illegals? That’s what he seems to say? Exactly how can he pull that off? Attrition is possible, mass deportation would be difficult at best.

9:28PM: Thompson “we need to be a country of high fences and wide gates.” I really like that line. But his answer goes too long.

9:30PM: Ron Paul is almost making sense on immigration. I recall something about stopped clocks… but then he goes to Iraq again. Ugh.

9:32PM: I know immigration is a critical issue, but all this hair-splitting just doesn’t seem to mean much. Huckabee’s answer was as long-winded as Fred’s and less substantive. Rudy’s also flailing here on whether NYC was a “sanctuary city.”

9:35PM: Fred won. I know I’m not unbiased here, but a quick read through of the blog reactions. He just won over the Frank Luntz focus group too.

This is the Fred Thompson that I support.

“Who is your favorite author?” Aleya Deatsch, 7, of West Des Moines asked Mr. Huckabee in one of those posing-like-a-shopping-mall-Santa moments.

Mr. Huckabee paused, then said his favorite author was Dr. Seuss.

In an interview afterward with the news media, Aleya said she was somewhat surprised. She thought the candidate would be reading at a higher level.

“My favorite author is C. S. Lewis,” she said.

Ouch. Just ouch.

It’s simply, folksy, and puts Huckabee above the fray. Rich Lowry sees a hidden strategy behind the ad, and I’m inclined to agree. This was a brilliant political move for Huckabee.

The fact is, however, that Mike Huckabee doesn’t have the policy chops to be President. However, you can bet that he will be the leader for Evangelical Republicans for some time in the future. He does represent a critical sector of the Republican base, and while his appeal to evangelicals won’t get him to the White House, it does give him a lot of power in the Republican Party. A Mike Huckabee that gets a few years of political and foreign policy experience as Vice President could be a potent force in the future.

The essay is a great symbol of Huckabee’s campaign — there are feints in interesting directions, but in the end it’s just a grab-bag of contradictory ideas.

In a New York Times Magazine profile, Huckabee mentions columnist Thomas Friedman and new sovereigntist Frank Gaffney as his foreign policy influences. Those in the know might believe this to be impossible, but Huckabee’s Foreign Affairs essay really is an attempt to mix these two together in some kind of unholy alchemy.

The more one looks at Huckabee the less substance there seems to be. If this guy gets the nomination, it’s lights out for the GOP’s chances in 2008. No wonder the Democrats are pushing for him—he’s the one candidate that makes Obama seem prepared. (A Huckabee-Obama race would be the most vapid Presidential contest in recent history.) His appeal is that he’s a good-old-boy Evangelical, which is enough for about 25% of the GOP electorate, but not enough to win the White House. It won’t even be close.

Thankfully, I don’t think Huck will make it through the nomination process. He’s peaked too early, and now people are asking questions about his record. The Wayne DuMond pardon is just the tip of the iceberg for Huckabee. You can’t be a governor of Arkansas without a few skeletons in your closet, and Huckabee is no exception to that rule.

Huckabee is not Presidential material. He may be a nice guy, he may be a devout Christian, and he may be the sort of person you’d like to have a beer with, but that doesn’t make him someone who could face down Ahmadinejad or work with Congress on solving our Social Security problems. Republican primary voters need to think about which candidate can actually use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to advance conservative ideas—and that will mean working with a hostile Congress and trying to advance American values in an increasingly hostile world. Huckabee’s vapid piece in Foreign Policy demonstrates that not only is Huckabee unprepared, but he possesses a naïvete that is downright dangerous. The GOP can do better than that, and hopefully they will.

SEE ALSO: James Joyner takes a detailed look at what he calls Huckabee’s “Sunday school” foreign policy.

UPDATE: Even Andrew Sullivan gets in on the act. He’s right, though. Huckabee’s statement basically consisted of throwing out the names of two foreign policy theorists that Huckabee could recall off the top of his head, not even realizing that the two stand for essentially opposite concepts of American foreign policy.

In all seriousness, even if Huckabee meant that we should switch to all renewable sources within a decade, it’s still a silly argument. Even if you try to make sense of the statement, there’s just no way it doesn’t come off as being silly. We need a President who actually understands basic issues of policy. Mike Huckabee constantly comes off as someone who is clueless about the world around him.

Gaffes like this, and his statements which either sly anti-Mormon innuendos or signs he slept through his comparative theology classes demonstrate why Huckabee isn’t ready for prime time. He will probably win Iowa, but the reality is that Mike Huckabee is not a strong candidate, he’s not a conservative, and if he gets the nomination Hillary Clinton might as well start picking out drapes for the Oval Office. The Democrats have been holding their fire against him for months now because they know damned well that Mike Huckabee is a carbon copy of George W. Bush with all the same faults. He’s the sort of guy you want to have a beer with, but he would be a lousy President and his instincts are dead wrong on key issues.

Huckabee is a rising star, but his star will fall just as fast when Republican voters realize that he’s simply unready for the job. His appeal is understandable, but it’s all skin deep. Sooner or later Huckabee will crash, and when he does it will be a hard crash—in this race, Huckabee is playing the role of Howard Dean, and while he has some strong support, at the end of the day he is not electable and Republican primary voters need a candidate who can stand up to Hillary Clinton. Mike Huckabee is not that candidate.

The Good

I think this debate was “won” by Mike Huckabee and John McCain. Huckabee came off as the candidate I’d most like to have a beer with some time, and John McCain came off as the elder statesman. McCain put Ron Paul in his place (which is always a good thing for a Republican to do), and he spoke with great moral authority on torture against Romney’s non-answer. Huckabee’s answer that Jesus was too smart to run for public office was a great line. Huckabee came off as very natural and very personable. McCain came off as a man of integrity and honor.

Mitt Romney was also confident and poised. He confidently failed to give a clear answer with great poise. Both he and Giuliani hurt themselves by fighting over abortion—neither one of them are strong on that issue, and both hurt themselves there. Romney’s a very poised candidate, and he has an impressive business background. His honesty on the abortion issue was questioning. It’s nice to have a candidate willing to come out and admit his mistakes.

There were some decent questions that wouldn’t normally be asked in a Presidential debate. As a space exploration fan, I liked the question about the candidate’s vision for space exploration. NASA consumes a very small amount of the federal budget, and the candidates missed the opportunity to talk about private space exploration. Huckabee’s answer wasn’t bad, but it could have been better.

Fred Thompson was very poised and gave very responsive answers. He didn’t knock it out of the park, but he showed the best mastery of the issues. The problem is that he needs to do better—it’s a crowded field and he needs to stand out more. He’s got the substance, but he needs more flash. He has some great ads out that would have done much better than the attack ad he used.

The Bad

First of all, I think Rudy hurt himself with his exchange with Romney. He’s the front-runner (at least nationally), so he doesn’t need to go on the offensive. Hitting Romney below the belt won’t help him, and made him look like a bully. Overall, his answers weren’t a strong as they could be. Rudy needs to get a boost, and this wasn’t it. While he’s still ahead nationally, he’s vulnerable.

The same applies to Fred Thompson’s attack ad. While all the others talked about themselves, Thompson’s offensive seemed out of place. Not only that, but Romney came back with a very human answer that helped him. Huckabee also had a good response. The other campaigns are calling the video an act of “desperation”—and while I don’t think that’s the case, it wasn’t the right call. I’m in Fred’s corner, but even I don’t think that running an attack ad at that point helped him at all.

Ron Paul is a nut. When given a question that basically asked him whether he believes in a bizarre conspiracy theory, he basically said “yes.” I’ll give him some credit for eschewing an independent run, but he’s still the sort of paleoconservative on national defense issues that we don’t need now.

Rudy also hurt himself with his Second Amendment answer. This was not the right crowd to split hairs on regulating guns. This was not a good night for Rudy, and it may hurt him.

This was a solid and substantive debate (at least on the part of the candidates, if not CNN), and it could end up changing the dynamics of the race. Rudy and Romney, the two frontrunners, engaged in a fight that ended up making them both look bad. Mike Huckabee demonstrated once again why he’s gaining the most traction—he was confident and had a decent command of the issues. Fred Thompson did nothing to take him out of the race. John McCain’s campaign was on life support only a few months ago, but he’s not out of the race by any chance, and many may be willing to take a new look at him after tonight.

The biggest loser: CNN. Having a Clinton campaign advisor not only be allowed to ask a question, but then to follow up live demonstrated incredibly poor judgment. At the very least CNN could have Googled the people they were having speak. Either they were trying to bias the debate or they were simply asleep at the wheel—either way it reflects badly on them.

This race is still entirely up in the air, and even with weeks left until the Iowa Caucuses the rankings could change dramatically. Fortunately, the Republican Party has a solid group of candidates to pick from. The problem is that eventually the field must be narrowed to one—and who that may be is anyone’s guess.

This has to be the most bizarre campaign commercial I’ve ever seen…

Huckabee’s biggest liability is that he’s not all that fiscally conservative. His record in Arkansas on taxes is mixed. His governing philosophies tend to be more about expanding the scope and reach of government rather than protecting and preserving individual rights against the state. He’s the sort of President who would be more likely to do things like regulate trans fats and other examples of nanny-state tinkering. Yes, he’s excellent on social issues, but the GOP isn’t driven entirely by social issues.

Despite Huckabee’s great performances and appeal to social conservatives, he’s still below the double digits in most polls. What that suggests is that for all the much-vaunted influence of “values voters,” they don’t have all that big an effect on Republican politics. The media loves to play up their influence because it fits with their narrative of Republicans all being closet theocrats. However, the real face of the Republican Party is much more diverse than that. Huckabee’s appeal is strong, but narrow, and ultimately that’s not enough to push him above his second-tier status.

The other issue that unites the Republican Party is the war—and Huckabee doesn’t have the foreign-policy credentials. With the specter of a nuclear-armed Iran growing more and more pressing with each passing day, the GOP is looking for someone who can lead a vigorous American foreign policy and strongly defend national interests. Mike Huckabee isn’t the sort of man who would strike fear into the heart of a madman like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Republican voters are looking for a President who can.

I think a Giuliani/Huckabee ticket is entirely likely as a way of balancing out Giuliani’s northeastern squishiness with some good old-fashioned Bible belt conservatism. I do think that Mike Huckabee is a charismatic speaker, a man of deep principles, and a great asset to the Republican Party. At the same time, he’s not Presidential material. A successful candidate has to have broad appeal with fiscal and social conservatives to win the GOP nomination. The GOP is characterized as the party of “God, guns, and gays” but that stereotype has little basis in reality. Huckabee may do well with the people who would attend a summit for self-described “values voters” but religious appeal isn’t the only value that Republicans are interested in seeing.

UPDATE: Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth says that putting Huckabee in the VP slot would be a bad idea. Granted, Huckabee’s fiscal record is pretty poor—but ultimately, the job of the modern VP is to break ties in the Senate and help the top of the ticket broaden their political appeal. In terms of formulating policy, I don’t see the next Vice President doing much—certainly not after the Cheney Vice Presidency. So long as Huckabee isn’t influencing tax policy, he would still settle the nerves of conservatives who are wary of a Giuliani Administration.

In all seriousness, Huckabee has done very well in this campaign. Not enough to necessarily challenge the front-runners, but well enough that I’d give good money that he’ll be the winner of the VP race. Especially if Giuliani were to be the nominee, he’d need someone who could appeal to a) Southern voters and b) social conservatives. Mike Huckabee is exactly the sort of person who could help him with those important Republican voting blocs.

Huckabee won’t get the nomination this year unless Giuliani, Thompson and Romney all collapse—but that doesn’t mean that he won’t be a rising star in the Republican Party for some time to come.