Redstate

Sorry, not seeing the evidence. Some Mitt supporters are supporting Huck, because West Virginia turnabout is fair play. Some Mitt supporters are supporting McCain. Other Mitt supporters that lean heavy to the soc conservative side are supporting Huck because he is the next best alternative for them.

There were 4 'conservatives' (up to SC) splitting the conservative/very conservative vote, of the two 'moderates', one inexplicably chose not to campaign in the first 4 states so there was no dilution of the 'moderate' vote, the first primaries were 'open' which allowed indies to influence the process, and the NE had WTA on Super Tuesday set up to help a candidate who never made it that far.

Conservatives never coalesced around one candidate and the moderates did, so, despite being about 60% of the party, we ended up with a candidate who is best described these past seven years as a moderate. I'm not bitter (frustrated maybe) 'cause it is what it is, but I think the title of your diary would be entirely applicable (only for it's historical context 'cause it ain't gonna change a thing)

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Jim Tomasik

As a former Fred and then Mitt supporter (although, admittedly, not much of a bona-fide Republican), I would be of the mindset of, between the remaining choices, just sitting out.

That aside, I would point out that, of the wings of American conservatism, the national security conservatives were largely with McCain already. The social conservatives were split between Mitt and Huck, and with Huck the last man standing there, he's getting some boost in support from them.

The economic conservatives, I'm afraid, are probably just sitting these primaries out.

"No matter how much lipstick you put on the taxation pig, it's still a pig... and it's currently snout-down in your wallet." - Michael Fisk

Huck's only hope lies through making a deal with Romney, if he really does want to have a slight chance at this. If Huckabee was really interested in winning, he would be making overtures to us right now. So I am waiting for that. As a purely economic/national security Conservative myself, I'd vote for Huck over McCain in the primaries simply because I do not trust anything McCain says as he panders to Conservatives. I think plenty of Economic Conservatives are voting for Huck over McCain for similar reasons.

Of course many here are singing the unity songs on the topic of why Conservatives should support McCain, but if anyone is a good candidate for betraying the movement in the future, McCain is it.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

Romney supporters are going somewhere but this doesn't prove where or why.

Some undecideds could be making up their minds and some of Romneys could be going undecided. Most likely a mix of everything.

Unless there is some indepth study (why?) it means about as much as a coin toss.

The two candidates that are left in the hunt for the nomination were both tied as my last choices in the Republican field. I will not take the "Never vote for McCain" pledge but I have not decided what I will do in November either. I don't like either of them even slightly.

But not having a dog in the fight has allowed me to watch the primaries with a whole new attitude. They have gotten considerably more amusing. I got quite a chuckle out of watching Huckabee spank McCain in Kanasas and beat him in Louisiana. And it is kind of funny to consider that McCain's one victory in Washington was so pathetic that 3 out of 4 Republicans voted against him. I don't even understand the impossible arithmatic that allows the winner of a 2 man race to only carry 26% of the vote. Stuff like that could cause the famous McCain temper to "go postal" and that would certainly be fun to watch.

I think they should just throw McCain and Huck into a boxing ring with all manner of hideous and potent weapons and let them fight it out, Celebrity Death Match stlye. That would at least give this most pathetic of primary seasons a positive ending.

Weyrich's endorsement sadly didn't do a lot for Romney. Huck is now the default conservative which is about as exciting for some as McCain being the nominee.

the thousand or so people he pardoned. That won't help him either.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

...won't vote for him. I guess they'd vote McCain, if they could vote, huh?

Mr. Ed
Straight from the Horse's Mouth

When he was governor, he obviously reviewed over 10,000 inmates for pardon/commutation requests. He was gov for 10 years, or roughly 400 work weeks allowing for vacation and holidays. That works out to 250 reviews per week. If he spent full time on the reviews, thats 9.6 minutes per review.

That seems to me to be a very small number. Maybe he was just shooting from the hip, like he does on all of his policy statements.

And, the 9,000 most likely won't be voting for anybody unless they've had their civil rights restored.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

That the vast majority of pardon/commutation requests and approvals were procedural rather than substantive.

I've always wanted to ask those criticizing Huck on his pardons/commutations -- and this is a serious question -- what is an appropriate percentage or percentage range of approvals to requests?

Certainly zero percent is too low -- as it assumes there has not been a single instance of miscarraige of justice. Half is obviously too high.

I'm not sure what the appropriate percentage is...that is the range in which it is generally thought to not be too high or too low. I suspect for conservatives like us, it's probably in the 5-15% range.

Since you work with a prison ministry, mbecker, I'd be curious what you think a reasonable percentage is.

Mr. Ed
Straight from the Horse's Mouth

I know this question was to mbecker, but 5-15%?

I agree that 0% may be too few, but you're saying that conservatives like you and maybe mbecker feel that juries are wrong 15% of the time?! That's very hard for me to swallow. I find your faith in juris prudence lacking [Darth voice /].

I think there should be more funds allotted for DNA testing as the back log is just unacceptable. Yet, I find it hard to accept the large number of overturning of verdicts by juries that Huckabee did. Am I wrong, did he not overturn over 8% of the decisions made by juries? I know that new evidence comes up, but I'd like to see a study that shows new evidence vindicated over 8% of these convicts. Compassion is fine with me for the victims or families of the victims, but the law is here for all of us.

I can see 1 - 2%, but 5 - 15% comes across as liberal to me.

I think 5%-15% pardons of jury verdicts is likely high. Perhaps this range is more appropriate for the combined pardons/commutations category, the vast majority of which, I assume, are commutations.

And in Arkansas, my understanding is that the vast majority of commutations are procedural and required under many circumstances.

Mr. Ed
Straight from the Horse's Mouth

We have a judicial system that handles criminal justice. It should be a very rare circumstance when a governor steps in and throws away the conclusion reached by the judge, jury, and law enforcement. These people spent weeks or months working on this case. Huckabee has no problem throwing that out and substituting his own will in its place... it shows extreme arrogance to abuse that power like Huckabee did.

You should be able to count the number of pardons and commutations issued over the course of a term on your fingers and toes.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

you and I are threadjacking YOUR blog, we'll hopefully get some slack. :>)

There isn't a reasonable percentage. That's just not how it works. FWIW, I have huge issues with the criminal justice system. In the world of broken things, it makes federal welfare programs and NCLB look really good. I won't elaborate here, other than to reinforce the comment that the system is really broken.

With respect to pardons/commutations, realistically there should be very few. Reasons to consider an inmate for a pardon/commutation would include:

1. Humanitarian concerns. Such as the inmate has a terminal illness and can be released to immediate family who will care for him so he can die at home.
2. Overwhelming new evidence that indicates the inmate is innocent. This would effectively fall into two categories, the first where the court will not grant a new trial even though the evidence is clear (eg: DNA); second, in advance of a new trial, the inmate could be released on supervised parole but kept "in the system".

Other than those two, I can't think of any other reasons I would consider pardon/commutation. I would never intercede for early release or parole, for any reason.

With respect to Huck's record, I will say that there is no way in hell he should have looked at 1,000 requests per year for 10 years. And he should not have interceded by granting 1,000 over his term of office. As bad as the criminal justice system is, Huck's behavior simply makes a mockery of the system (and it doesn't need the help) and feeds the opportunists and gamers in the system.

If he really wanted to do something that would benefit both the system and the imates, there are private groups who work in prisons on real rehabilitation that dramatically lowers recividism. For every ten people who leave the system, seven are back in three to four years. The real question in "corrections" is do we lock people up forever, or do we try to implement programs that actually work with respect to rehabilitation? I'm no bleeding heart, I know exactly who and what we are dealing with in the CJ system, but I also know that when the system fails seven out of ten times, it's broke.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.