If Huckabee were to win the nomination, a National Security third party could pull voters from Republicans, independents and Democrats in the Presidential election.

I am a lifelong Republican.  I have been a Romney supporter for the nomination since early 2006.  Giuliani is my second choice.  I could readily vote for Thompson, if nominated, and reluctantly vote for McCain, if nominated.  However, Huckabee scares me.  I think he is clueless on national security (see his comments on Gitmo and in Foreign Affairs), gullible (see his list of pardons as governor), ethically-challenged (see his back-handed, “who-me” sideswipes at Mormons, his gift-taking as governor, and his misrepresentation of his tuition break program for illegals in the Stephanopoulos interview), a spender (see his growth in Arkansas government), and a blind populist on the economy (see his comments about control by the upper class).  If nominated by the Republicans, I don’t think I could vote for him, and if he were elected (which he wouldn’t be – he’d lose in a landslide) I think he would be a disaster for the country.

The Republican party has three main constituencies – national security conservatives, economic conservatives, and social conservatives.  In many ways, I am in all three constituencies, but, for me, they are prioritized in the order in which I have listed them.  National Security at the federal level trumps everything in times of war.  (By the way, I really like Rudy’s name for the war – the Terrorist War on Us – rather than the GWOT.)  Even though I am a regularly attending Christian (Methodist), I find Huckabee’s running as the “Christian candidate” to be an offensive example of identity politics.

Unlike a social conservative third party candidate, I think a national security candidate could actually win if a coalition is built.  A social conservative would draw virtually no one from the independents and Democrats, but a national security coalition would.  I think Lieberman’s re-election shows that there are still some Scoop Jackson Democrats.  (Yes, I know that many Republicans also voted for him.)  Building the coalition would mean compromising on some social and economic issues, but it would be better than a Democratic presidency (or a Huckabee presidency).  Natural leaders to pursue to assemble the coalition would be Giuliani, McCain, and Lieberman.  Bloomberg has no place on the ticket because he has no substance on national security, although his endorsement would be helpful.  Perhaps Norm Coleman, Tim Pawlenty, George Pataki, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Olympia Snowe, Gordon Smith, Colin Powell, Bill Bradley, Sam Nunn, General Anthony Zinni, Jon Tester, and Ken Salazar would endorse the National Security ticket.  Maybe even some of the conservative commentators whose first concern is National Security would endorse it as well.

This is not where I want to be; I want to see Romney or Giuliani nominated and elected.  But if Huckabee were to be nominated, I think a National Security third party candidate could win and would be better for the country than the likely Democratic winner (or an unlikely Huckabee winner).