A Question to Republican Apologists: Why Not Huckabee?

So during this nomination, and especially in the post-Iowa caucus landscape, all of the big GOP power players from elected officials to Rush Limbaugh are really aggressively pushing for an "anyone but Huckabee" nominee, but why?

In Mike Huckabee, the right has the perfect candidate. He's just so darn likeable! I almost want him to become president. He's funny, engaging, fresh, and above all else, the man is honest. Agree with him or not, there's no doubt in my mind, and there shouldn't be in anyone else's, that he is one candidate who believes deeply in everything that he says.

Think about it for a second. A national figure from the right of the Republican Party who possesses deep personal beliefs in something. It actually does take a second to set in.

Because of his believability, authenticity, and sincerity of character, Huckabee is the perfect candidate to run against Hillary Clinton, who seems to take polls before publically stating what she believes in, and Obama, who barely has a clue at any given moment, and is usually too busy agreeing with everyone else in the debates to formulate and independent though. Further, his vague, overbroad "hope: and "change" rhetoric is wearing thin fast.

On the other side of the spectrum, a lot of powerful Republicans, including a few Bush's, are pushing Romney, who, for those who haven't noticed, is just getting creamed. The only real contest he's managed to win is Michigan, where his father was elected governor three times.

Romney's negatives among Republicans are way up, despite the perception that he is perhaps the most "electable" in the field. His GOP opponents joke that he is the one true candidate of change, because he changes his positions on issues just about as often has he changes landscaping companies.