One of Saturday’s three Republican presidential caucuses stirred up some controversy, an unfortunate occurrence that needlessly poured fuel onto the Huckabee campaign’s conspiratorial fire, with his chairman reviving memories of Al Gore in Florida 2000:
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee is crying foul after John McCain’s apparent victory in the Washington caucuses on Saturday.
Huckabee’s campaign released a statement Sunday saying it will be exploring all available legal options regarding the ”dubious final results.” Arizona Sen. McCain was announced as the victor in the caucuses with 26 percent of the vote to Huckabee’s 24 percent.
But Huckabee’s campaign chairman, Ed Rollins, said Luke Esser, Washington’s Republican Party chairman, chose to call the race too quickly for McCain.
Rollins said Huckabee was losing by 242 votes with 87 percent of the vote counted. He said there were another 1,500 or so votes that were apparently not counted.
”That is an outrage,” Rollins said.
Rollins said the Huckabee campaign’s lawyers will be on the ground in Washington soon to see why the count took so long, and why the vote-counting was stopped prematurely.
But as Ed Morrissey at Captain’s Quarters this morning follows up to show the results not changing:
With 94% of the precincts now reporting, McCain still leads by about the same percentage.
And as Pudge at Sound Politics reports from the ground in Washington State, here’s how much the presidential preference results even mean:
Nothing.
People from all over the media, from Josh Marshall to Tim Russert, and Mike Huckabee, are talking about the party declaring a winner, whether it was too soon, and so on. But what the party said about the results literally means nothing at all….
For Huckabee to be talking about legal challenges to a completely meaningless result shows that either he has no idea what the results actually mean (nothing), or he is just doing this for show.
My guess is the latter. The former Arkansas governor has had a better run for the nomination than most analysts would have predicted, but the media oxygen is escaping from his campaign. You don’t have to be a “math major” to see he cannot win the nomination, though maybe his continued presence in the race will have some effect of sending a conservative message to the GOP’s impending nominee, John McCain.
Meanwhile, the effects of Washington state’s real election scandal of 2004 live on.
I actually was a math major. He can win the nomination. Not sure about your fuzzy math.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCFrCIt1aas
Ben – I agree with Terry. It is possible… difficult, but possible. In any case, Huckabee’s remaining presence in this race, as you said, is to ensure that the social conservative vote is prominent in the 2008 nominating process.
Hugh Hewitt said on Feb 6th that he is glad Huck and Romney are still in the race, because taking your ball and going home after a loss is not how we should play. If we leave, the message is lost. The next day, Romeny was out, and Huckabee is left to carry the banner, ensuring that the conservative base of the GOP still has a voice.
Please notice, Steven, that I have not called for Huck to get out of the race. I’m glad he’s still in it, too, for the reason you mentioned and others. But I have yet to see anyone actually do a state-by-state breakdown and political analysis to show how Huck can win.
I watched the YouTube. The reason why it was less than convincing is the utter lack of analysis of upcoming primary / caucus states and their apportionment of delegates. Though I have not looked at them all myself, trusted sources say most of them are not winner-take-all states, but rather proportional delegate states. This places a much greater burden on Huckabee to win an overwhelming percentage of the vote, which frankly, isn’t possible.
But if there’s been a more precise analysis out there, please, I’d love to see it. Anyone who knows me knows I am not a McCain fan.
If another member of the Council on Foreign Relations wins the presidency, we all lose. The C. F. R. is nothing more than a front for the Papacies New World Order.
> Anyone who knows me knows I am not a McCain fan.
I’m baffled.
Terry, Baffled by what? I’m not blinded by rose-colored glasses.
If you want to go back and read through the archives of the past two or three months on this blog, you will see what I mean. Or just do a keyword search for any of the following:
John McCain
Mitt Romney
Fred Thompson
Mike Huckabee
You will see what I mean.
One doesn’t have to be a McCain fan to believe he’s a much better choice than the socialists on the other side. Would I like to see him make more solid moves & pledges to the conservative side? Yes. And I’ll keep arguing for it here. But I’m not going to throw mud on him to sate some primal urge.
I believe it’s the grown-up thing to do. But I appreciate your devotion to Huckabee, even though it’s now abundantly clear that his chances of winning the nomination are indeed mathematically impossible.
As I said above, fine by me if Huck stays in the race. But it would be better if more Republicans came to grips with reality.