National Journal Rankings: Giuliani First, Romney Third
Labels: Giuliani, McCain, National Journal
Labels: Giuliani, McCain, National Journal
In this Zogby poll, we can't look at Mr. Gingrich's support for a simple reason: They decided to take Mr. Gingrich (and Condi Rice) out of their polls on the assumption that neither is running for president. While, with Condi, I think that makes sense, it's not terribly helpful to have Mr. Gingrich out of the mix.
While the rise of Thompson has had some interesting effects on the polls, most of these early numbers will be aberrational. Essentially Thompson is the flavor of the week and the polls reflect that. Slate describes it this way:
Update: The DeMoines Register is also reporting the Zogby poll numbers for Iowa:Thompson's chief appeal is emotional…Authenticity and star power conjure visions of Ronald Reagan. But Reagan had genuine experience running something—namely the state of California. Thompson's résumé is thin—an undistinguished eight years in the Senate, an acting career, and a youthful turn as co-counsel in the Watergate hearings. Supporters try to pump up his résumé by boasting that he shepherded John Roberts through his confirmation hearings—but that was the legal equivalent of walking Michael Jordan onto the court.
Labels: Bob Beauprez, Fred Thompson, New York Sun, S. Craig Lindner, Zogby Poll
Labels: commission, Fundraising, Ken Mehlman, students
But instead of returning the saved money to the taxpayers, Romney stated that they were able to use the money for other, more important services. As Romney explained, "efficiency is desperately needed" -- not that the size of government needs to be reduced.Warshawsky continues that somehow congressional gridlock will prevent Romney from managing effectively:
Perhaps he will be a better manager than President Bush but he will have to contend with a hostile and intransigent Congress and bureaucracy that will oppose any serious effort to bring "business management principles" to the operations of government.Apparently Warshawsky feels that the Massachusetts legislature was friendlier to Romney and his “business management principles.” Warshawsky then proceeds to criticize Romney for the order of points he talked about and for not mentioning others.
Competition with China: “But the message I came away with is of a top-down, government-led effort in these areas.”
Fighting jihadists: “How this could be a lesser priority than economic competition from China, I don't understand, and Romney did not explain.”
Energy independence: “Frankly, either Romney has forgotten his basic economics or he is pandering on environmental issues.”
Immigration and Health Care: “Incredibly, Romney did not address the immigration problem, or the seemingly inexorably slide towards socialized medicine.”
Labels: American Thinker, China, Efficiency, Immigration, Steven M. Warshawsky
One reason for Thompson's fast start is name identification, says Republican strategist Rich Galen. "More people watch him every week on TV than will vote in total next Feb. 5," he says, the day of primaries in about a dozen states.So other than name recognition, what does Thompson bring to the table? The Fix’s Chris Cillizza sums it up like this:
Galen also notes, however, that neither Giuliani nor Clinton can yet claim the allegiance of a majority. "In both parties, at least two-thirds of the members are looking for alternatives or at least options," he says. That provides an opening for contenders such as Thompson or Gore who aren't running — at least so far.
Combine Thompson's capacity for fundraising in his home state with his starpower and his acceptability to social conservatives and you have a package that no other candidate in the field offers.Perhaps it is a unique thing to be able to raise funds in Tennessee, but it is hardly defining of potential presidents to be able to raise funds in their home state. That leaves Thompson’s star power and acceptability to social conservatives. But how acceptable to social conservatives is Thompson? Chris Cillizza lists this collection of positions:
Thompson -- along with McCain -- was one of the main backers of campaign finance reform legislation that is roundly despised by social conservatives.Whether conservatives will give him a pass on these issues is unclear, but Thompson’s candidacy certainly raises some of the same questions on the issues that Romney’s does.
And when he ran for the Senate in 1994, Thompson was routinely described as a supporter of abortion rights. (Confirmed here, here, and here, although his record appears consistently pro-life)
Two factors make a bid by Thompson an ill-advised proposition -- the incredibly early start of the 2008 campaign and the former senator's well-known distaste for the nuts and bolts of campaigning.
Labels: Fred Thompson
If a candidate truly believes in a church, its principles are likely to be the most fundamental building blocks of that person's character. And personal character is always one of the key attributes voters should consider when electing a president. Thus, it seems obvious that voters should try to ascertain both the depth of a candidate's faith and the primary principles of that faith.The topic of whether Romney should make a grand pronouncement of independence from his church on the subject of national politics has been one that has perplexed me. As Wilson describes, there is a lot of bad information about the LDS Church out there and it will certainly play a role in Romney’s campaign. On the other hand, talking openly, as Wilson advocates, about Romney’s faith invites more questions and emphasis to be put on religious theology than political philosophy.
But as Mr. Kennedy discovered in 1960, members of other faiths who have an ax to grind are more than willing to fill the vacuum, turning theological molehills into mountains of misconception…Mr. Romney should guard against misinformation defining his faith by speaking openly about it when asked.
Labels: Baltimore Sun, Bruce Wilson, John F. Kennedy, Religion
Labels: Michigan, New Hampshire, Polls
Labels: Endorsements, Orrin Hatch, Romney
Kyle already threw up the LKL videos, but here are a few other nuggets from the press worth looking over:
Swift Boat Money Man Raising $ For Romney (Washington Post) - Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post is reporting that one of primary financiers of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 527 (he donated $4.5 million to the group) has signed on to raise money for Mitt Romney. Cillizza points out why he thinks this is meaningful:
First, it likely means a significant financial windfall for Romney's campaign.... Second, the Romney team is likely to paint Perry's decision as a slap in the face to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).... Third is the symbolism of Romney linking himself to Perry. No single person is more closely identified with the Swift Boat Veterans and their controversial campaign to discredit John Kerry than Perry.
Romney's Stratified Fundraising System (Washington Post): The same article above also notes that "Romney has created a stratified bundling system based on the "Rangers" and "Pioneers" model employed by Bush in 2000 and 2004. To be a "Founder," an individual must raise $250,000 for the campaign; a "Statesman" is charged with collecting $100,000, and a "Patriot" $50,000."
Book Says Romney Is Able To Overcome (Deseret News): The Deseret News takes a look at conservative pundit and blogger Hugh Hewitt and his book A Mormon in the White House? 10 Things Every American Should Know about Mitt Romney. Hewitt boils down concerns about an LDS president to three general issues:
First, some worry that an LDS president would be controlled by church leaders in Salt Lake City. "That is the easiest of the objections to dismiss," Hewitt said.... The second objection may be the toughest for Romney, Hewitt said. It comes from some evangelical conservatives who worry that a Mormon president "would greater legitimize Mormon missionary work abroad and lead to more converts".... The third objection is that Mormonism is "just too weird," and anyone who believes in such "fantasy" should not be elected.Romney's Words Grow Hard On Immigration (Boston Globe): The Globe reports, with audio included, on how Romney's rhetoric on immigration and the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill has changed markedly over the past two years. The audio clips are from 2005 (he made similar comments to the Lowell Sun last March).
Mitt Romney Scrambles To Raise Cash For White House Campaign (AP): The AP reports on Romney's fundraising push this month:In a November 2005 interview with the Globe, Romney described immigration proposals by McCain and others as "quite different" from amnesty, because they required illegal immigrants to register with the government, work for years, pay taxes, not take public benefits, and pay a fine before applying for citizenship.
"That's very different than amnesty, where you literally say, 'OK, everybody here gets to stay,' " Romney said in the interview. "It's saying you could work your way into becoming a legal resident of the country by working here without taking benefits and then applying and then paying a fine."
The former Massachusetts governor had scheduled 20 fundraising events this month, all in advance of an end-of-the-month deadline that will give the first true look at the fundraising prowess of all the 2008 presidential contenders. Reports detailing how much money was raised by March 31, as well as how it was spent, will become public by April 15. The first total is especially important for Romney, who has been trying to elevate his name recognition nationally after placing a distant third behind former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in several national polls gauging the GOP candidates. "What he's trying to do is establish himself as a leading candidate by being able to compete financially with Giuliani and McCain," said Anthony Corrado, a government professor at Colby College who specializes in presidential campaign finance. "If he were to beat one of those guys, that would be a news story."These fundraising efforts include stops in places that range from unorthodox, like Boise and Southern Utah, to standard fare like Orange County.
"I have a better marriage because of my faith. My children are better because of my faith. I'm a better person because of my faith," he said. "I think the American public would like to have a person of faith lead the country."Campaign Additions (Press Releases): Nothing groundbreaking, but a few campaign additions to note:
Labels: Fundraising, Hugh Hewitt, Immigration, Romney, Swift Boat Fundraiser, Tagg Romney
The reasons are many, and they include the impressive analysis of the international situation that Romney articulated after his trip to Asia earlier this year…No prospective President can come close to offering the diverse record of executive leadership that Romney can…Our Republican standard bearer should be someone who remains true to our important principles of limited government while celebrating individual responsibility and personal liberty.Why the shift from McCain to Romney? Moffett has several reasons ranging from lack of executive experience to ideological differences over McCain-Kennedy and McCain-Feingold.
Mitt Romney is such a person.
Labels: Campaign Finance, Immigration, leadership, Michael Moffett, New Hampshire, Union Leader
Labels: Abortion, Ann Romney, Romney, Youtube
The Romney campaign has been expecting a torrent of “anti-Mormon prejudice.” But it hasn’t happened. Mitt has mostly been left alone. Most unexpectedly, Evangelical Christians have been reluctant to say much. While my own reading of polls leads me to guess that Evangelicals are evenly split on accepting a Mormon as president, they are united in their silence on the matter.
This is a key development because the liberal mainstream media will now feel free to go after Romney. Most journalists were initially anticipating a Religious Right attack on the former Massachusetts governor. So the press held back from scrutinizing Romney’s faith. In a fight between James Dobson or Jerry Falwell and Mitt Romney, most reporters would have taken the candidate’s side. But barring a situation where “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” Romney is soon going to be fair game for enterprising reporters.
Labels: Evangelicals, Mormon, Romney
Immigration: Of the GOP front-runners, Romney clearly has the most conservative position on illegal immigration. It makes sense considering it's an issue that many of the conservatives Romney is trying to court feel pretty passionate about. I wonder how his tough talk on "amnesty" will go over in a general election. Hardline stances on immigration purportedly helped to sink a few Republican election bids in the House this past fall and many heavy weights that have influence in the Republican party advocate a much more moderate stance (President Bush, RNC Chair Mel Martinez, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, etc.). There are areas of the country where Romney's hardline clearly doesn't go over well. Florida for instance. This past weekend during his visit there, Romney avoided talking about the issue as much as possible, but still got bruised in the Florida press over it. Yesterday in Arizona, however, he made an effort to emphasize his position, even suggesting state and local police agencies make "deals with the federal government to have their officers trained in enforcing elements of federal immigration law." It doesn't seem to help that this is another issue he seems to have shifted positions on. Just last year he seemed to support what he now lambasts as "amnesty," telling the Lowell Sun that he didn't "believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country. With these 11 million people, let’s have them registered, know who they are. Those who’ve been arrested or convicted of crimes shouldn’t be here; those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process toward application for citizenship, as they would from their home country." Ultimately, I think this is a tough issue for Romney, because he needs the support of the part of the base that feels most strongly about this issue, and yet his position is destined to alienate many who might support him (for example, there is no way anyone who advocates such a hardline on immigration will pick up anywhere near the 41% of the Hispanic vote that Bush picked up in 2004).While the balancing act is a challenge for most politicians, I think it is a particularly difficult one for Romney in this election because he doesn't seem well-positioned to garner the more independent-leaning conservatives who appear to be flocking to Giuliani and McCain at this point. He NEEDS the social conservative voters who are disenchanted with Giuliani and McCain's more moderate positions on a host of issues. Part of me feels like Romney almost has to put off worrying about how he will cast himself as a general election candidate and just focus on the primaries. It may cause a few problems for him image-wise in a general election campaign, but I think he'd prefer to have to deal with those sorts of problems than be watching from the sidelines.
Right to Life: Romney's come a long way this past year in his efforts to reassure social conservatives about his position on right-to-life issues. He touts his opposition to abortion and certain forms of stem-cell research at nearly every campaign stop and has brought well-known pro-life advocates like James Bopp onto his campaign. Certainly, this is something that most concede he must do if he wants to burnish his credentials as the "real" conservative in the race and remain competitive in the GOP primaries next year. This past weekend, however, he seemed to push back against social conservatives just a little as he spoke out against the government intervention in the Terri Schiavo case a couple of years ago. Even though this position places him safely with most of the American public, it hurts him among the pro-life base he is currently reaching out to. Many pro-life blogs were quick to denounce his position and Schiavo's brother promptly endorsed Sam Brownback. Add to this Romney's balancing act on stem cell research (opposing somatic cell nuclear transfer (i.e. "therapeutic cloning"), but generally supporting the use of frozen embryos from IVF clinics that would otherwise be discarded. These deviations, again, put him in the mainstream of popular opinion, but they could potentially hurt him in his push for the nomination. He's gone out of his way to brand himself as being with social conservatives on all of these issues, to be contrasted with deviants like McCain and Giuliani.
Labels: Abortion, Giuliani, Immigration, McCain, Right to Life, Romney, Social Issues, Stem Cell Research
Will Mormon Faith Hurt Bid For White House? (March 13th, USA Today): USA Today explores Romney's faith and the question of whether it will hurt his bid for the White House. I think it's a fair article that has some interesting soundbites: "[BYU Professor David] Magleby and [Boston College Professor Alan] Wolfe say Romney should heed Arizona Sen. John McCain's experience in South Carolina's 2000 primary. McCain was accused, among other things, of having illegitimate children, betraying veterans and being brainwashed while a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Magleby predicts polygamy will be "a major attack point below the radar and maybe above." Wolfe says such attacks will start "the minute you get into the Republican primaries and somebody gets desperate."
The trickle of states moving their 2008 presidential primaries to Feb. 5 has turned into an avalanche, forcing all the presidential campaigns to reconsider every aspect of their nominating strategy — where to compete, how to spend money, when to start television advertising — as they gird for the prospect of a 20-state national primary day.... There is near-universal agreement among officials of both parties that the new calendar will give a huge advantage to well-known candidates, in particular Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Giuliani, Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama. Beyond that, California and New Jersey are likely to be more receptive to Mr. Giuliani than are Iowa and South Carolina, with their many conservative voters.Acknowledging these challenges, Romney seems to be trying to position himself as the only acceptable alternative to the current frontrunners, Giulaini and McCain. If no other formidable candidates enter the race, I think it is a sound strategy. I think Romney is going to have a tough time if a Newt Gingrich jumps in on the action though.
For the G.O.P., 2008 looks like a daunting year. It's hard for one party to win three straight Presidential elections even in the best of times. (It's only happened once in the last 50 years). And the radical unpopularity of the Bush Administration and the Iraq war will make it harder still. So conservatives should be thrilled they have candidates like McCain, Giuliani and Romney, with proven appeal to Democrats and independents. And they should understand that, given the dismal image of the Washington G.O.P., a Republican Presidential nominee must maintain a maverick or outsider image to have any shot at victory. Instead, even as McCain, Giuliani and Romney move frantically in their ideological direction, conservative activists are raising the bar and threatening to stay home next fall.
As I reported in the Nation last November, Lopez was given a private reception by Romney last October. The visit yielded a fawning blog post and a softball interview in which NR editors acknowledged that KLo "has some pro-Romney tendencies." What the National Review failed to acknowledge was that Romney donated $10,000 to its in-house think tank, the National Review Institute, right before declaring his presidential candidacy.NRO’s Lopez takes Blumenthal to task over his version of the story:
If my — or NRO/NR's — pro-life creds could be bought for $5,000, I suspect candidates would be whipping out their checkbooks much more frequently. The contention that my view of Romney was somehow transformed in October because of the NRI donation is laughable, as any Google search or click on my NRO archive would suggest. My first friendly-to-Romney piece was posted in early February 2005 — as he was taking on Harvard on cloning.You can read Lopez’s full retort here. Blumenthal, however, does not single out NRO. He goes on to suggest that the Federalist Society, Focus on the Family, and Grover Norquist have been bought off. Blumenthal also notably scathes Jay Sekulow who has endorsed Romney and serves as an advisor to the campaign:
Sekulow happens to be one of the biggest hucksters in American politics: through his 501 c-3, the American Center for Law and Justice, he solicits millions in small donations from little old ladies, then uses it to pay his family, finance his two mansions, private jet, and himself -- Sekulow "earns" over $600,000, an unheard of salary for the director of a non-profit group. Sekulow should feel at home on the mercenary-minded Romney campaign.Blumenthal suffers from the same prejudices as Daniel Gross from Slate, as outlined here. Blumenthal takes the opportunity to tie together several of his own dislikes, namely Romney, political money, corporate America, and even gratuitously throwing out Jack Abramoff’s name though there is no discernible tie between him and Romney in the article.
If you total the donations "uncovered" by the Times for this article, they total less than $150,000 --hardly chump change, but so small compared to the budgets
of the organizations involved as to mock the premise of the article. The article fails to indicate the number of dry holes Kilpatrick dug and doesn't provide background on the "critics" it cites. Mr. Kilpatrick was personable, and certainly skilled. But this isn't objective journalism. It is agenda journalism.
Labels: Hugh Hewitt, Kathryn Jean Lopez, Max Blumenthal, NRO, NY Times, The Nation
If anyone benefits from this announcement, I’d say it’s Romney. The more the public finds out about Giuliani’s and Gingrich’s peccadilloes, the more comparatively attractive Mitt becomes. If his camp’s willing to play dirty, I’d expect them to go after McCain’s indiscretions and make the case even clearer to morals voters that there’s only one choice for them among the major candidates.Do personal indiscretions disqualify someone from representing morals voters? That probably is the question for republican voters in 2008. All three candidates ahead of Romney (I’m lumping in Gingrich even though he hasn’t announced) have had their problems with personal morality. Personally, at this point, I’m not sure how much these types of stories will help Romney. Most notably for Giuliani, voters polled have been willing to overlook the personal lives of candidates. Plus, focusing on the personal past of other candidates opens the door for other candidates to more closely scrutinize Romney’s political past, something that has not been a strong point for him so far.
Labels: Hotair, Morals, Newt Gingrich
Mitt Romney stands out as the candidate who is significantly less well known than the others. Over half of Republicans say they don't know enough about Romney to be able to rate him. His image among those Republicans who do know him is quite positive. This suggests the possibility that if Romney maintains his net positive image among Republicans as the campaign progresses, he could be in a position to become more of a factor in the presidential nomination picture.Admittedly these numbers were taken the same weekend as CPAC and so they likely don’t reflect the increased press received from the straw poll win. However, as Jonathan Martin at the Politico points out, Romney’s numbers have improved since February when he had 27% favorable and 13% unfavorable ratings. The new numbers show a net gain of 12% in favorable versus unfavorable rating.
Labels: Gallup Poll
At CPAC, Romney gave the most polished speech, touching all the conservative movement's erogenous zones, pointedly denouncing the "McCain-Kennedy" immigration bill and promising to seek repeal of the McCain-Feingold law regulating campaign speech. Romney, however, is criticized by many conservatives for what they consider multiple conversions of convenience -- on abortion, stem cell research, gay rights, gun control. But if Romney is now locked into positions that these conservatives like, why do they care so much about whether political calculation or moral epiphany moved him there?All three candidates aside, I say there's no one I like to hear talk about "erogenous zones" more than George Will.
Labels: Erogenous Zones, George Will, Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Washington Post
Labels: Ankle Biting Pundits., Giuliani, Leak, McCain, National Review, Politico, Romney, Strategy
Labels: Ads, Ann Coulter, Boston Globe, Brownback, CPAC, Family, Family Values, Gingrich, Giuliani, Mormon, Newsweek, Romney, Spanish, Washington Times
Some people will tell you that Mitt Romney didn't deserve to win (because he bussed in College Republicans to vote for him). That's like saying George W. Bush didn't deserve to win because he raised more money than his opponent. Romney's ability to organize, inspire, and transport college students to the conference is precisely why he did deserve to win! A campaign that has the organizational ability to bus in college students has the organizational ability to do a lot of other things, too. The rules allow for it, so what's wrong with Romney doing what he has to do (within the rules) to win?
Labels: CPAC, Matt Lewis, Straw Poll, Townhall
Labels: Ann Coulter, Giuliani, McCain, Romney
Labels: Brownback, CPAC, Gingrich, Giuliani, Hunter, McCain, MSM, Romney, Straw Poll
Readers may recall that I was disappointed by Mitt Romney's speech at National Review's conservative summit. But Mitt didn't disappoint today at CPAC. Instead, building on the theme of a unified conservative movement articulated by Ronald Reagan at the same forum 30 years ago, Romney presented a fiery defense of all three major strands of conservatism -- economic, social, and security.And for those who are wondering why it is that conservatives are so excited, here are excerpts of his speech.
In the absence of another first-tier Republican candidate with a longer track-record of up-front social conservatism, Romney is the social conservative in this race as far as I'm concerned. Indeed, one would be hard-pressed to listen to his speech of today and doubt that Romney is the most solidly conservative of the three front-runners, period.
Labels: CPAC, Policy Speech, Powerline
Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican Mitt Romney have emerged as the leading presidential favorites among party insiders, according to a new Los Angeles Times Poll, which found deep partisan divisions over the country's direction and top issues in the 2008 campaign....
"The DNC and RNC members are not just delegates" to the national nominating conventions, said Charlie Cook, a nonpartisan campaign analyst in Washington. "They are key organizers and opinion leaders. They can help build or kill a groundswell, make a candidate's challenge in a state easier or much harder. They matter a lot"....
Among Republicans, Romney had the most backing among party insiders, with 20% support, followed by Giuliani with 14%, McCain with 10% and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia — who has said he might enter the race in the fall — with 8%....
In a potentially worrisome sign for McCain, just over 1 in 10 RNC members said they would not support him if he won the party's nomination in his second attempt. "It shows just how much resistance there is within the Republican establishment to McCain and how open the party is to candidates who either aren't very conservative, like Giuliani, or only recently minted conservatives, like Romney," [Charlie] Cook said. "McCain has worked pretty hard since 2000 to be a team player, but these numbers would suggest that there is still a problem for him."
Labels: Conservatives, CPAC, Giuliani, MSM, Romney
Opinion of the Mormon Religion by Subgroup | |||||
|
| Total | Total | Net | Don't |
% | % | pct. pts. | % | ||
Total sample | 42 | 46 | -4 | 11 | |
|
|
|
| ||
Region | East | 41 | 49 | -8 | 11 |
Midwest | 40 | 43 | -3 | 18 | |
South | 40 | 46 | -6 | 14 | |
West | 50 | 47 | +3 | 3 | |
|
|
|
| ||
Party | Republican | 42 | 52 | -10 | 5 |
Independent | 43 | 40 | +3 | 18 | |
Democrat | 43 | 47 | -4 | 11 | |
|
|
|
| ||
Ideology | Conservative | 44 | 45 | -1 | 10 |
Moderate | 48 | 40 | +8 | 13 | |
Liberal | 28 | 61 | -33 | 11 | |
|
|
|
| ||
Church attendance | Weekly | 34 | 55 | -21 | 11 |
Nearly weekly/ | 41 | 47 | -6 | 12 | |
Seldom/ | 49 | 39 | +10 | 11 | |
|
|
|
| ||
Religion | Total Christian | 43 | 45 | -2 | 11 |
Protestant | 36 | 52 | -16 | 13 | |
Catholic | 56 | 31 | +25 | 12 | |
Non-Christian | 39 | 46 | -7 | 15 | |
None | 39 | 46 | -7 | 14 |
Labels: Gallup Poll, Mormon, Polls, Religion