Never Believe that Anyone Described as Populist is a Fiscal Conservative
Robert Novak has a brilliant column in the Washington Post today on how Huckabee is a false conservative, who is appealing to the evangelicals in the party because of his views on social issues, but has a very liberal fiscal record. I think it says everything that his economic views are frequently referred to as ‘populist’ and am pleased to see that Novak is calling him out on his history of raising taxes and penchant for anti-market reforms.
The Economist recently had a great article which examines the feasibility of some of Huckabee’s claims, including the flaws in his fair tax plan and some isolationist statements he has made that contradict the picture of a free market conservative that he claims to be.
Though I disagree with the social views of all of the candidates except for Giuliani, I could look past that and vote for McCain, Romney or Thompson. But what do Republicans like me get by voting for Huckabee? Why would we vote for someone that we disagree with on just about everything? If we’re going to have a president that’s likely to raise taxes and institute agendas that stifle the free market, well, then I would at least like someone that’s not going to try to legislate morality.
If Mike Huckabee wins the GOP nomination, I believe that many ‘socially liberal’ Republicans who have stood by the party despite its stance on many social issues because at least we were putting more fiscally responsible candidates into office, are either going to stay home on election day, or vote for Hillary.
I despise Hillary, but if my choice is between her and Huckabee, I’ll choose the lesser of two evils and pull the lever for Hillary.
The False Conservative (The Washington Post)
Faith, Hope and Populism (The Economist)
Ed. Note: The NYYRC does not endorse during primary elections. The views expressed here are the personal views of the author and should not be considered an endorsement by the NYYRC.