Please, let it be Mitt, and thanks Huck.

So, Josh's opinion is that we're looking at a Mitt Romney nomination on the Republican side.

I can't see this as anything but fantastic news, and as close as one can get to a guaranteed win, for the Democratic nominee, whoever that turns out to be.

Not because of what Romney stands for, position-wise. And not even because of his, errh, "Mormon problem" with the critical segment of the GOP base.

But because a Romney nomination will mean a Huckabee rejection.

Look, in any just world, Huckabee would be nothing more than an Alan Keyes/Gary Bauer-level novelty candidate without any realistic chance of winning either the nomination or the general election.

But for whatever reason (and probably multiple reasons), Huckabee has emerged as a legitimate contender (at least that's the way he's being portrayed in the press).

So here is a candidate who, to the 6000-year-old-Flat-Earth society isn't just sympathetic to their issues, he's one of them. And he's in contention.

A Romney victory, or a Guiliani victory* for that matter, would be a flat-out rejection of Evangelicalism in favor of an until-recently pro-choice, pro-homosexual, Mormon.

I think that kind of victory at this point will keep alot more Religious Right voters at home on election day than if Huckabee had never entered the race.

In my opinion, Huckabee is scaring the shit out of the Republican Power establishment not because they think he'll win the nomination, but because they know he'll lose it, and drag down the Rightwing Christian base with him.

---------------------
The Religious Right consider Guiliani to at least be in the same church, if in a very different pew, then themselves. And heck, if the Catholic candidate is willing to get over the fact that some Evangelical leaders think the Pope is the antichrist and still get in bed with them, the Evangelicals are happy to have them.