comMITTed to Romney!

See this link for an update on the economy. I drove to work today listening to George W. Bush saying that for the first time in years, the U.S. economy lost jobs. Does McCain know what that means, “my friends?” HE’S NEVER HAD ONE, SO I’M NOT SURE HE DOES.

Here’s the text of that article:

Make it Mitt for America’s Future
The headlines this morning were about the economy. The first job losses since 2003. In Illinois we’ve lost manufacturing jobs again, Cook County the most. Across Illinois Review territory there are pockets of decline– from the northwest, to east central, to the southwestern part of the state. Of course, Illinois farmers are doing OK, with commodity prices high.

When we vote on Tuesday, we need to ask ourselves–who can do the best job for the American economy? This is Governor Romney’s pledge:

America faces economic challenges at home and abroad. We must improve America’s global competitiveness and unleash the American economy by rolling back tax rates across the board, eliminating taxes on middle class savings, making the Bush tax cuts permanent, lowering the corporate tax rate, making health care expenses tax deductible and eliminating the death tax once and for all.
Mitt Romney respects the hard work and achievement of private enterprise, has strong conservative positions across the board and is not afraid to debate them.

John McCain’s solution is to cut discretionary spending. He has, in fact, been a hero in this arena–a porkbuster. All conservatives and Americans owe him a debt for this stance.

But as Governor Romney has pointed out, the problems of our government and the opportunities for our economy require more skill than saying no to a few bridges to nowhere. Entitlements are 60% of federal spending.

Governor Romney has proved to be a manager of government.

With liberal Massachusetts facing a $3 billion dollar deficit, Mitt Romney persuaded those blue-staters to elect him as governor. Governor Romney streamlined state government and successfully worked with a Democrat legislature to endorse his slashed spending, taking aim at local earmarks. He fought for legislation and brought Massachusetts’ lagging welfare system up to federal workfare standards, managed to get agreement for Medicaid co-pays, and successfully pushed for legislation for new state employees to pay 25% of their health insurance costs, major achievements in tackling entitlements. Governor Romney inherited a state that had lost 141,000 jobs under his predecessor and from the lowest point during his term added 60,000 new jobs, shifting the focus to high-tech jobs. (If you haven’t seen this impromptu testimonial from Cramer last June, check it out.)

At the end of his term he achieved a $2 billion surplus/rainy day fund, all without raising taxes. In contrast, Sen. John McCain was one of only two Republicans to vote against the Bush tax cut, which did so much to get us back on track after Sept. 11th. Governor Romney has pledged to cut taxes because he understands that lower tax rates lead to economic growth and opportunity for all Americans.

As to our economy, Sen. McCain has contrasted patriotism and profit. To be sure, our first duty is patriotism–but our collective wealth is due to the women and men who pursue profit, and incidentally, provide jobs, pay taxes, sponsor Little League teams. Our commonwealth, based on public, private and civil sectors depends on these women and men. Mitt Romney understands this. He has succeeded in the private sector at Bain, he has served in the civil sector rescuing the Salt Lake Olympics, and made government work in Massachussetts.

Vote for Mitt Romney for president.

UPDATE: Nicole Gelinas, CityJournal, “Mitt Romney’s Smart Tax Plan”:
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney made a respectable showing in Tuesday’s Florida primary, and that’s good news for Americans worried about both the home-mortgage meltdown and their tax bills. Unlike Washington politicians, vying to outdo one another printing money to rescue Americans from falling home prices, Romney has proposed a bold long-term tax policy that would encourage Americans to choose their investments, both housing and otherwise, more wisely.
P.S. My friend Tom Mannis, The Bench “Don’t Confuse Courage with Wisdom”

Share on Facebook

Share This

A comment I read recently (perhaps even on this site) was that Republican voters making their mind up based on issues are overwhelmingly choosing Mitt (which is very encouraging), while those that are basing their decision solely on perceptions of character are choosing McCain. This surprises me quite a bit given what I know about Mitt, so I thought it was my duty to say what I know about Mitt’s character. To be clear, I’m not (yet) a personal friend, but I’ve been close enough on occasion to make an observation or two. More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

This from the AP. In a long article about why Obama likes his chances against Hillary, he also added this:

Obama advisers have said privately for months that McCain would be their preferred opponent among all those who sought the GOP nomination. They said a race between Obama, 46, and McCain, 71, would provide the starkest contrast between old vs. new, the future versus the past. It’s an argument that Obama also has been using against Clinton, but his campaign feels it would be even stronger against McCain.

And, if you thought there was a difference between Hillary and McCain, think again:

Clinton and McCain have worked closely together - one source of their shared reputation for working across party lines on common interests. The two serve on the Armed Services Committee and were drinking buddies at least for a night. The New York Times reported that Clinton challenged McCain to a vodka drinking contest during a congressional trip to Estonia in 2004.

I’ve maintained for a while that Obama is the tougher candidate for the GOP to beat. Assuming he convinces Democrats to his vision and becomes the candidate, Obama would cream an even older member of the old guard. If the issue is new ideas vs. old, we need Mitt in there to compete.

Share on Facebook

Share This

“I have the experience, the maturity and the judgement to lead this country. Where’s that ?&%@*! button?!!!”

More on McCain’s Would-be Party Switch

A commenter to an earlier post had this to say about the reports McCain had tried to join with the Democrats officially in 2004. Perhaps he thought he could get more done “from the inside” of the Republican party. Or perhaps Kerry didn’t want him.

Is this not making everyone crazy? I mean even if liberal Republicans knew what he was up to they’d flip out! That’s why they’re still Republicans!!! Why is this not being talked about? Also, Mitt should really talk about the founding fathers wanting decent, respected men coming from their communities and contributing what they could, then returning to their livelihoods and families. They never intended for men to be career politicians! It, as they said, leads to unholy alliances!

Please pass the following around…

Take a listen to and a look at the interchange…
Go to http://mydd.com/story/2007/4/3/11936/97033 to hear John Kerry giving this interview.

John Kerry: “McCain Approached Me About Joining Dem Ticket in 2004”

“Talked to Tom Daschle about jumping the isle and becoming a Democrat”

Jonathan Singer: “On Monday afternoon I had the chance to speak with Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the Democratic Party’s nominee for President in 2004. During the interview, which covers a range of topics and which I will be posting later this afternoon, an item of particular interest jumped out at me: According to Sen. Kerry, it was John McCain’s staff who approached his campaign about potentially filling the Vice President slot on the Democratic ticket in 2004.”

Jonathan Singer: “There’s a story in The Hill, I think on Tuesday, by Bob Cusack on the front page of the paper talking about how John McCain’s people — John Weaver — had approached Tom Daschle and a New York Congressman, I don’t remember his name, about switching parties. And I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about what your discussions were with him in 2004, how far it went, who approached whom… if there was any “there” there.”

John Kerry: “I don’t know all the details of it. I know that Tom, from a conversation with him, was in conversation with a number of Republicans back then. It doesn’t surprise me completely because his people similarly approached me to engage in a discussion about his potentially being on the ticket as Vice President.”

Singer: “Okay. And just to confirm, you said it, but this is something they approached you rather than…”

Kerry: “Absolutely correct. John Weaver of his shop…” [JK answers phone]

For many Republicans, it has been bad enough that John McCain has voted and worked with Democrats against the majority of Republican Senators on a number of occasions in recent years. For Republicans, I would imagine that reports that he approached the Democrats about leaving the Senate GOP caucus in 2001 represent a borderline unpardonable offense. But it seems that reaching out to the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee to talk about running on that party’s ticket would be tantamount to the highest form of political treason to Republicans.

This story could hardly come at a worse time for McCain.

Click the link above to hear it yourself.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Mitt in San Diego

San Diego loves Mitt. It’s home to one of his five sons, four of his grandkids and quite a few real red-state Republicans. So when word came out late yesterday there’d be an endorsement and related press event in downtown San Diego this afternoon, things started buzzing fast. Word got out quickly and there were a few hundred people on hand waving signs and banners when Mitt made his entrance.

Here are a couple pictures.

Notice the cute kid in the lower left. That’s my son Nicolas, a big Mitt fan.

The kid next to Mitt in this picture is my son Zacharie, also a big Mitt fan. He won’t take that cap off.

The occasion for the visit was the acceptance of the endorsement of Brian Bilbray, my congressman. Mr. Bilbray noted he thought it appropriate for his district and the country to know where he stood, in particular with his position as the Chair of the Immigration Reform Caucus. And he strongly endorsed Mitt. Mitt of course graciously accepted the endorsement and went on to discuss a number of topics, including immigration, the economy, how Washington is broken and how it’s time for the politicians to move out. He noted his strength as having served in the private sector and in government, and noted McCain’s self-acknowledged shortcomings on the economy. But Mitt’s best line may have been that while McCain said he’d bring in an expert on the economy as his VP, Mitt said, “sorry, but I’m not available.” The crowd loved it.

Tidbits in the Wings

Afterward in talking with a few of the regulars at the Mitt events, one mentioned that a number of former Giuliani supporters had called her for Mitt signs for their yard. Apparently the choice between Mitt and Mac is becoming one of principle: now that Fred and Rudy are gone, and Huckabee is drifting to the side, people are choosing ideologically between McCain and Mitt, and Mitt represents the real Republican choice for quite a few of these folks. I’m very encouraged by what I’m hearing from all quarters anecdotally.

The Real John McCain?

I ran into a veteran a few days ago at an event for Mitt and he and his wife insisted that there’s a whole story about McCain that no one is telling. They encouraged me to hit the site “Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain.” I can’t say if the site has accurate information, but there’s at least one interesting story there, written back in his 2000 run. It’s the story of McCain’s first wife and how somehow she forgave him for his infidelities when he got home from Vietnam. I’ll leave it to you to look at it and make up your own mind, but there are some who feel quite strongly McCain’s military experience is not the qualifier to be Commander-in-Chief he claims it is, and that his “straight talk” is only straight when it really benefits him. Like Mitt said, facts are stubborn things, and even though McCain has repeated certain distortions time and time again, they’re no more true today than they were the first time. Take a look and make up your own minds; again I’m not sure how much is accurate here, but its enough to make one pause.

Share on Facebook

Share This

It’s still the economy

There, I said it. Last night’s debate once again proved that McCain and Huckabee have no sense on the economy. Are you kidding me? A cap and trade system with no limit to the taxes it imposes on the U.S.? Who does McCain represent, anyway? Mitt continues to show that despite good sounding proposals from the other candidates, his knowledge of the economy trumps their half-baked solutions. Want to solve global warming? McCain’s approach taxes U.S. citizens without a cap for a problem we’re only a part of. Want to stimulate the economy? Huckabee’s solution of using infrastructure projects sounds good, but as Mitt points out, they take years to develop. These are insights that McCain and Huckabee couldn’t come to on their own, suggesting their programs as President would continue to have similar flaws. As usual Mitt’s responses were the most thoughtful, substantive and intelligent. For me, in my relatively few 41 years, I saw Reagan take office with little foreign policy experience and end up winning the cold war. McCain’s Vietnam experience was 30-40 years ago and not as relevant now. Mitt would be a fantastic commander-in-chief. But I’m not ready to see John McCain try to run an economy he barely understands, taking risks with my pocket-book along the way while collecting his government salary and living off his wife’s riches. Mitt’s lived in the real economy and has had to perform in a real job, as well as in government. He’s lived in both worlds; McCain has lived in one, out of touch with me and mine.

Kudos to My Wife

Kudos to my wife for finding the following useful information pre-Super Tuesday:

1. Someone on a Canadian website calls it like it is for U.S. Republicans and their choice of Mitt vs. Mac. This person isn’t even a Mitt fan, but recognizes the choice of McCain would be disastrous. If you’re a Republican reading this, whether conservative or moderate, think about John McCain essentially having free-reign to sign bills into law that a liberal Democratic Congress sends to his desk. Do you think he’d stick with Republican ideals? I really don’t think so as his record indicates otherwise.

2. The National Review seems to remain a voice of reason on Mitt vs. Mac. McCain’s coronation is pre-mature. Sure we would have liked to have had Florida, and we’d have been saying the same things about our being a front-runner if we’d won. But the truth would have been, as it is now, that Mitt’s leading in a number of Super Tuesday states, and the race is unlikely to be decided even afterward. See this link for recent analysis from National Review Online.

Super Tuesday: Who Wins Your Confidence?

With 23 states and, as I recall, a thousand or so delegates up for grabs Tuesday, McCain’s “imposing” lead is how many? Twenty-eight whole delegates, according to CNN. This race is not about those delegates, but about winning the 40X that amount available Tuesday. And even then, the GOP nominee still won’t be decided. This cite is from USA Today:

There will be more than 1,000 Republican delegates at stake on Feb. 5, enough to give a candidate a substantial boost toward the 1,191 needed to win the nomination — but only if one man emerges victorious in numerous states.

“I think you could have two or three viable (GOP) candidates” following Super Tuesday, said Ohio Republican Chairman Robert Bennett.

“Somebody’s going to have some big wins, but you’re going to go into March 4, and you’re not going to have an apparent (GOP) nominee,” Bennett said.

So the race is still up for grabs.

If you’re a California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, etc. etc. voter voting this Tuesday, and you’re choosing between Mitt and Mac, think about who’d you rather have trying to stem the tide from a Democratic Congress: Mitt Romney, the consistent choice of the conservatives in every state so far, or John McCain, choice of the liberals.

Don’t think it matters? Remember the recent debate about expanding SCHIP, the welfare program Congress wanted to expand by multiple billions of dollars? Democrats in Congress passed it, but who stood in the way? President Bush. Without his veto pen, we’d be looking to foot that tax bill now when it’s become clear that tax rebates are required to stimulate the economy, and not huge welfare projects that increase the deficit. When the next bill comes to the desk of the President, and we know it will come, are we confident McCain would vote according to Republican principles? If you think so, think again: McCain was one of two Senators to vote against the Bush tax cuts (McCain admits he was wrong, but if he’d had his way the economy would have been tanked); illegal immigration (McCain supported a permanent residence for illegals, and now only partially admits he was wrong and has assumed Mitt’s position on securing the border); campaign finance reform (he’d do it again); global warming (bad approach, and he’s a co-author). It’s nice to admit when you’re wrong, but it’s even better not to be wrong in the first place on issues that will cost us billions. On issues as complicated as the economy, and even on national security, we need an intelligent man who can figure out what to do before he forms an opinion.

We are not alone.

All us Mittsters, and those who feel they align with Mitt but aren’t sure about voting for him due to the press’ coronation of McCain, should realize that there are a lot of people out there that are looking at Mitt vs. Mac for the first time, whether because they left Fred or Giuliani, because they realize Huckabee isn’t going to win (just look at the Ron Paul-like marginalization of Huckabee in last night’s debate) or whether they just can’t stomach McCain and his liberal past, and Mitt will win among principled Republican voters. Let’s also remind ourselves of the hundreds of thousands that have already voted for Mitt: the total number of voters who have decided 1st vs. 2d in Iowa, NH and FL has been very small. I’d be interested in seeing what the current popular vote count is (the difference between McCain and Mitt is not large). And if we work to get Mitt more delegates than McCain on Super Tuesday, McCain’s 28 delegate lead will recede into memory.

No Scaling Back Now

Some reporting went on this morning about Mitt scaling back advertising, but the National Review pointed to this article at Yahoo to the contrary.

McCain Stole Florida

For those of you first-time readers, you should realize that John McCain’s apparent momentum (all of 5% of the voters in Florida) was the result of what many have reported to be dirty politics. In 2000 McCain got am-Bushed in South Carolina with lies and innuendo. The people who did it to him worked for George Bush, and now work for McCain. And they pulled a similar trick last weekend: they purposefully distorted Mitt’s record supporting the surge and as Massachusetts governor. Issues aside about the actual record (both issues are Mitt strengths), many media outlets have continued to ask McCain about this (including in the debate last night) because it takes a real contortionist to come up with an argument that McCain was using “straight talk,” and Mitt of course called McCain on it. The media then said the fight was getting “nasty,” but in reality it was Mitt responding to lies about his positions. The resulting swing, based on McCain’s untruth’s and the public’s perception of the race getting ugly, turned some in McCain’s favor. Of course it’s ugly to call someone dishonest, but it’s even uglier if that claim is true. In addition there were reports of lots of mis-deeds reported elsewhere on this site. Bottom line: don’t be fooled by the reported “momentum.” The margin of victory wasn’t significant, conservatives are voting for Mitt, many when faced with Mitt vs. Mac are repulsed by the latter, and, last but not least, the most qualified candidate is still Mitt Romney, who hasn’t resorted to the sorts of dishonesty as McCain has.

Huckabee Supporters’ Coming Crisis of Conscience

If you’re a Huckabee supporter, I believe you have a real crisis of conscience developing. Should you support Mike, who represents your views on social issues but is unlikely to get beyond Tuesday, or do you bet on Mitt or Mac. With McCain’s less than solid record on social issues (other posters help me out here), you may want to consider whether you’d be comfortable with McCain as the candidate. Mitt may be your only choice for a real, pro-life, pro-family, anti-gay marriage candidate. It’s been nice to have Mike in the race I’m sure, as he probably looks like folks you know and see in church on Sunday. But who’s closer to your real ideals, Mitt or McCain? I believe it’s Mitt, and would encourage you to really think about who you’re voting for Tuesday. Damaging Mitt for Mac’s gain is counter-productive to your real concerns, and I believe it’s time to switch horses. It looks like Fred Thompson’s supporters have come our way, and it’s likely many Rudy supporters (though not all) will move to McCain. Who are you most like? Conservative Fred, or socially liberal Rudy? Notwithstanding our candidates’ disagreements, we’d welcome you into the fold.

What you can do to help win

Super Tuesday isn’t about Mitt, it’s about us. He carried the load in the “retail politics” states of Iowa, New Hampshire, etc. But now we need to get out in our own areas with signs, buttons, phone calls and reach out to everyone we know to pull them into Mitt’s fold. So, no. 1, get out and vote. No. 2, make those calls if you’re in the campaign. Talk to friends. If they’re pro-Mitt, or supported Fred, Rudy or Huckabee, tell them they have a choice: Mitt vs. Mac, and they need to choose who they really want. Let’s go.

Share on Facebook

Share This

See this link from CNN today. Their political correspondent says:

“A McCain victory in Florida will be particularly significant because only registered Republicans can vote in the Republican primary. It will be a way for McCain to prove his bona fides with the base…if Mitt Romney wins Florida, it will be a clear signal that the base is not happy with McCain. The Arizona senator could be facing a conservative revolt.”

So get out there and be part of the revolution!

Share on Facebook

Share This

There are a few things that are important to me in a President.

First, that he (or she) be someone I can trust. Second, that they share some core conservative principles that I do, like family values and being pro-life. Third, that they be conservative fiscally so as to promote the economy and not have to raise taxes. Finally, I want someone who will support the military. To me, Romney does the best on all these tests.

Someone I Can Trust

On the “someone I can trust” scale, I’ve met some of Mitt’s family and have been impressed without exception at the quality of their character. I trust Mitt will make the right decision for our country, even when no one is looking.

I’ve heard the charges Mitt’s changed his position on issues, but I’ve been paying attention and the only meaningful change was on abortion, where he had been pro-choice on the theory the government shouldn’t get involved, and changed to pro-life when presented with an issue about embryonic research. He realized that Roe v. Wade had cheapened our view of human life, and that life needed to be protected. He didn’t need to make that change: Rudy Giuliani, for example, was comfortable running as a pro choice Republican. To me, the fact he changed shows he was thoughtful, honest and not sticking to a position out of political expediency. And I believe his sincerity on this issue. Readers should note that Reagan started life as a pro-choice politician, but ended up one of the strongest supporters the pro-life movement has seen. As I watch the debates I feel I can get a sense of Mitt’s genuineness. He’s very business-focused, the best-spoken and the most presidential, and I see him as sincerely wanting to debate the issues and do what’s best for our country, while other candidates, McCain and Huckabee in particular, seem to be jockeying for jokes or personal attacks. I trust Mitt, but I don’t trust Huckabee or McCain. Particularly after McCain’s vacation from the truth this weekend in distorting Mitt’s position on any number of issues (see George Will’s article about this, calling McCain’s move Clinton-esque). I trust Mitt so much I’m up at 1 a.m. writing this, flew myself to Iowa on my own nickel to help the campaign, and drove to Vegas to help again. Mitt inspires that sort of loyalty.

Conservative Principles

On conservative principles, he has pledged to appoint conservative judges to the Supreme Court. I don’t believe any other candidate left in the race has Mitt’s commitment on this point. See above.

The Economy

On fiscal matters, I think Mitt Romney stands head and shoulders above the other candidates. With his experience in business, the Olympics, saving a liberal state from a $3 billion deficit without raising taxes and his current economic plan (which I’ve said before I consider to be genius in certain respects, such as the 2 year window to expense capital purchases, which would incent businesses to make large purchases now, creating jobs), he’s got an expertise no other candidate can come close to. And with the economy’s current state, I think this expertise will become even more important. I don’t trust the other candidates to learn how to run the world’s biggest enterprise on the fly, particularly McCain (who’s been inside government his whole life and whose economic stimulus package was roundly criticized as doing as much to harm the economy as help it).

The Military

Finally on the military, I know McCain would support the military but I view that as his only strength, and in some ways this could be a weakness. Pat Buchanan said tonight he believes that if McCain is the nominee, we will go to war with Iran. That’s not what we need after being bogged down in Iraq, but McCain’s likely too stubborn to see that, and too likely to get upset and do something rash. Don’t think that will be lost on the Democrats, either. And we need someone with a broader skill set than just defense. Romney has said he’d build up the military, replace aging machinery and provide better veteran care. And I trust his judgement and temperament much more than McCain’s.

Summing Up

Some of the biggest problems our nation faces have been ignored and festered during McCain’s 24 years in Congress, such as illegal immigration, failure to preserve manufacturing jobs, etc., so I don’t view him as a solution, but part of the problem. He’s not an agent of change, he’s a symbol of the status quo. If he really were a leader, I think he’d have found a way to address some of these issues in Congress. I don’t want to send McCain back as President when he admitted he came to change Washington, but Washington changed him. I trust Mitt to go to Washington, cut the pork, raise military spending, cut taxes and balance the budget. Mitt will lead, he will carry the flag on conservative principles, fix the economy the right way, make our military strong and preserve our national security both economically and militarily. That’s why I think he’s the right man for the job.

Share on Facebook

Share This

See this post on Town Hall. It goes through the reasons Mitt would win in November, including success in healthcare reform, not being a Washington insider, and Mitt’s being “Mr. Clean.” I thought I’d link to it here so you could respond to your liberal McCain loving friends why national polls on who’s “electable” are nonsense at this stage in the game.

Share on Facebook

Share This

In this article on the Real Clear Politics website, George Will aptly compares John McCain to the Clintons. He starts by reminding us of Hillary’s mis-characterization of Obama’s statement that Reagan had been a candidate of ideas. He says Hillary’s twist of Obama’s words:

… was a garden-variety dishonesty, the manufacture of which does not cause a Clinton in midseason form to break a sweat. And it was … not as gross as — St. John of Arizona’s crooked-talk claim in Florida that Mitt Romney wanted to “surrender and wave a white flag, like Senator Clinton wants to do” in Iraq because Romney “wanted to set a date for withdrawal that would have meant disaster.”

Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, the Clintons should bask in the glow of John McCain’s Clintonian gloss on this fact: Ten months ago Romney said that President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki should discuss, privately, “a series of timetables and milestones.” That unremarkable thought was twisted by McCain, whose distortions are notably clumsy, as when Romney said, accurately, that he alone among the candidates has had extensive experience in private-sector business. That truth was subjected to McCain’s sophistry, and he charged that Romney had said “you haven’t had a real job” if you had a military career. If, this autumn, voters must choose between Clinton and McCain, they will face, at least stylistically, an echo, not a choice.

But that dreary scenario need not come to pass. Romney seems to have found his voice as attention turns to the economy, a subject concerning which McCain seems neither conversant nor eager to become so. And in South Carolina, Obama, more than doubling Clinton’s 27 percent, won a majority of the votes, becoming the first person in either party to do so in a contested primary this year. He won a majority of men and of women, which pretty much covers the rainbow of genders. And he used his victory speech to clearly associate the Clintons with “the idea that it’s acceptable to say anything and do anything to win an election” (hello again, Bill, you political ethicist who famously said “you gotta do what you gotta do”) and “the kind of partisanship where you’re not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea — even if it’s one you never agreed with.”

Obama is running against two Clintons — or one and a fraction of one, given how much she has been diminished by her overbearing spouse. Romney is marginally better off running against a Clinton impersonator.

From George Will’s pen to Florida voters’ ears. It hasn’t been lost on some that the similarities between McCain and Hillary seem to be shrinking, if there ever were many.

Share on Facebook

Share This

…they’re not what got you there in the first place.

Mitt is surging in Florida because lots of people, with Mitt and his family at the top of that list, are working tirelessly to get the message out. We need to continue that work to assure victory in Florida. The polls are encouraging and show the message is working, but as we’ve seen the past couple days other candidates are very motivated to do what they can to steal that spotlight and get us off message. That may end up affecting the polls, too. So let’s not let them steal the spotlight for long.

Here’s a great response to my post of a couple hours ago:

We Romney supporters need to start thinking outside the box. It is great to come to this site and feel the Romney love, but we are all voting for Gov. Romney anyway. We need to get out of our comfort zone. Let’s focus on Florida. I know you all do great in your home states, but Florida is everything now. We win here, we have big “Mo” heading into Super Tuesday. Call radio shows (wait the 2 hours on hold for Rush), find radio shows in the Florida market and make a call, e-mail the T.V. networks, go onto other web sites that we would not consider going on and put out the word for Gov. Romney. Change people’s minds. Tell people that when the topic of the economy comes up in the White House I think that our President should be the smartest person in the room. That person is Mitt Romney. Get creative. Let’s see how much of a difference we can make in the next 48 hours.

I agree. Get on the Florida newspaper websites (here’s the list) and continue to talk about why we support Governor Romney. A number of people already have their minds strongly made up for someone else (like we do for Mitt), and that’s fine. But others are reading political blog sites trying to make up their minds, and some of them may be hearing about Mitt for the first time. They’re the “low-hanging fruit” we should be picking in the next 48 hours by giving them a compelling argument to vote FOR Mitt. If along the way we can correct some mis-information, great, but let’s not lose focus and forget the reason we started surging in the polls in the first place. As we all know the one poll in Florida that really matters is the one that will be announced Tuesday evening. So let’s get out of our comfort zone and tell everyone why we support Mitt!

Share on Facebook

Share This

How do you defend against attacks that are purely dishonest? Barack Obama had to struggle with that issue last week when the Clinton machine went after him. Perhaps we can take solace in his resounding win in the Democratic contest that took place yesterday. But I believe the short answer to that question is: control the message (i.e., change the subject).

Readers here know what McCain said about Mitt’s comments weren’t true. I’d seen the clip McCain was referring to weeks ago, and there was nothing in there about Mitt proposing or supporting a timetable for withdrawal: it was about whether there may be a Bush administration timetable and how if there was one it was important not to share any such timetable with our enemies. So why the manipulation of the facts by McCain? As others have said here, it’s likely that he’s seen his lead slip in Florida and felt he needed to do something to change the subject. So let’s change it back.

Unfortunately, as Senator McCain likes to say when he’s not the source of the attack, “you don’t mud wrestle with a pig, because you both get dirty and the pig likes it.” Of course it’s quite hyporcritical for McCain to be doing what he did today (e.g., abandoning “straight talk” and his “principles,” going negative, criticizing Mitt for a position McCain endorsed, etc.). But it’s apparent a discussion of any topic but the economy would be an improvement for him.

So let’s remind ourselves of what Mitt’s message is:

1. Washington is broken. Nothing serves as better evidence of this than McCain’s recent attacks. If we want more of the same we can send the same sorts of people back to Washington. McCain has been there 24 years; now he wants to be President. If we obliged, it’s hard for me to see how things would change, in particular given McCain’s legendary inability to work well with others in the Senate and the vendettas / back room favors he’ll owe if he goes back.

2. The economy needs Mitt. Since the days of Clinton and before, it’s always been about the economy. You can’t have a strong national defense if we dont have manufacturing and a strong economy at home. You can’t be a strong nation if you have to buy all your equipment from your enemies. And the American economy won’t be strong if we can’t keep the jobs from flowing out to our overseas competitors. So we need to send someone to Washington who has an intimate knowledge of the economy and can fix the many manifestations of problems we’ve had recently: stock market crashes, surging oil prices, real estate collapse, mortgage melt down, etc. Unfortunately, John McCain does not have the requisite experience, and has repeatedly said he’d have to find someone else to help him with this issue. McCain didn’t support the Bush tax cuts, then he did. Then he said he wanted to cut government spending to stimulate the economy. Unfortunately in the short run cutting spending would harm the economy and make it more likely to push the country into recession, or at least offset the benefits of any tax rebates. Unfortunately, as he’s said himself, he just doesn’t know enough about economics.

3. Mitt stands for strong families, and he wants to appoint judges to the Supreme Court that will read the Constitution as the framers intended it, not in a manner that creates new laws without a democratic process. Not all the other candidates have this same priority. McCain in fact has gone up against his own party on the issue of judges being appointed, and has a very spotty record on issues of family values.

4. Mitt stands for legal immigration, but “turning off the magnet” on illegal immigration. McCain very recently proposed a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to stay in the country indefinitely. His own party rejected this stance only a few months ago, but he seems ill-at-ease saying he was wrong.

We’ve got lots of positive parts of our own message to spread without getting distracted by McCain’s attack. I’m positive that staying on message will benefit Mitt incredibly (as it’s done in Florida so far), while indulging in mud wrestling allows the media to just report on the wrestling match. I’m hoping that the media really gives it to McCain today for his intentional misrepresentations, but even if they don’t, let’s keep on task and keep spreading our own message.

Share on Facebook

Share This

McCain’s Developing Florida Problem

Take a look at Carl Cameron’s latest post on the Fox News website, in which he acknowledges Mitt’s Florida surge and praises Mitt’s campaign. He’s not calling Mitt the winner yet, but acknowledges it’s quite possible given the surge in the polls and Mitt’s organization.

Here are a couple quotes:

Polls show Mitt Romney could win the Florida Primary. John McCain is under attack, much as he was in 99 and 00. Rudy Giuliani’s slide appears to have halted - so far there is no sign of an uptick out of third.

The timing may be perfect for Romney. His business experience is proving a great asset with the economy dominating much of the contest. He is a tireless, disciplined, smart campaigner. His aides and strategists are top notch. His policies eare fully developed. His rhetoric is tight. His Florida campaign is centered in the triangle between Jacksonville, Orlando, and Tampa where they expect about 57% of the GOP votes to be.

Romney in so many ways has done it the old fashioned way. Any successful candidate in a competitive race for office is going to initially need three things; Message, Money and Organization. Check.
When running for president add; get to Iowa and New Hampshire early and often, have a reasonable claim to your party’s political base in the early states, don’t be the early front-runner, take some risks, survive a few bad patches with a comeback, have dumb luck, then time your peaks for when people are in voting booths. Check, Check, Check, Check.

What about McCain? Carl acknowledges he’s having a hard time converting the Republican base, but doesn’t count him out (and we shouldn’t, either):

Now republicans coast to coast are unleashing on McCain: wrong on the Bush tax cuts, amnesty, campaign finance reform. He collaborates too often, they say, with Ted Kennedy et al. And for years in the senate they say he has been an unreliable republican, largely disliked for angry outbursts and bullying.

Wait. Because McCain is highly respected by the public his rivals are loath to attack hard. Enter the anti-McCain forces. They range from Rudy and Romney boosters to the uncommitted. The only common denominator is they appear to detest McCain. DO NOT rule McCain out. Seniors and veterans and retirees LOVE HIM. There is still some South Carolina wind in his sails. It is a tossup.

More on Mitt’s well-oiled campaign (emphasis added):

As for Governor Romney; Michigan fine tuned his economic message and its clicking in Florida. He has run a text book air war. Several months ago he began with bio ads. They evolved into issue ads. Those turned to contrast ads. Then back to bio ads and now closing arguments. No other candidate came close to such a well run campaign. When the message needed to evolve, it did. When he lost in Iowa and New Hampshire adjustments followed.

Sure he has probably spent more than $30 million of his own money but since when is personal wealth (and spending it) a problem among republicans?

In discussing Mitt’s alleged “flips,” Carl says the following (again emphasis added):

Sure he has flip-flopped on key GOP issues in the last five years, but his bent has been decidedly rightward and his rivals have plenty of policy deviations from GOP orthodoxy of their own.

Intrade’s latest

These numbers vary all the time, but as of a moment ago when I checked, Intrade had Mitt’s odds winning at twice those of McCain’s. A contract for Mitt to win Florida was at 60, while McCain at 30 (roughly 2:1 odds Mitt over Mac), where a 100 is the odds being 100% certain of a win. People out there are feeling the wave!

Keep it up folks, we still need to pull out ahead and there are only a few days left. And McCain, feeling the squeeze, is on the attack.

Share on Facebook

Share This

…who needs enemies? Like the “front-runner” label, the NY Times endorsement may be a kiss of death for a Republican nominee. Here are a few quotes about their man McCain:

We have strong disagreements with all the Republicans running for president. The leading candidates have no plan for getting American troops out of Iraq. They are too wedded to discredited economic theories and unwilling even now to break with the legacy of President Bush. We disagree with them strongly on what makes a good Supreme Court justice.

So, who does this left-leaning, cut-and-run, big spending, big government, activist-judge-lovin’ publication say they find the most attractive? Senator McCain.

What about his occasional conservative positions?

We have shuddered at Mr. McCain’s occasional, tactical pander to the right … He was an early advocate for battling global warming and risked his presidential bid to uphold fundamental American values in the immigration debate.

So, Republicans: if you share the NY Times’ concern for global warming and providing amnesty for illegals, John’s your man. Just forget about your concerns about the economy and social issues.

Oh, and there’s more:

He has been a staunch advocate of campaign finance reform, working with Senator Russ Feingold, among the most liberal of Democrats, on groundbreaking legislation, just as he worked with Senator Edward Kennedy on immigration reform.

The NY Times seems to really like it when you get along well with liberal Democrats. And the McCain Feingold campaign finance reform is something many conservatives still can’t get over.

Boy, if I were John McCain I’d be tempted to call the NY Times and beg them to endorse someone else.

Share on Facebook

Share This

The momentum from Nevada continues to swing our way. Can you feel it? I do!

I just checked the RealClearPolitics website consolidating polls of Florida voters and found MITT’s PULLING A WEEZIE JEFFERSON. He’s MOVIN’ ON UP! That site consolidates five different polls of different organizations taken at different times, and McCain’s overall lead has shrunk to 0.4% on the strength of two recent polls showing Mitt up by 5%. I’m feeling it!

So that I didn’t get too excited I decided to check these results against “Intrade,” an organization that handicaps the odds of a particular candidate winning a race, and Mitt’s odds have gone up significantly, at McCain’s and Rudy’s expense. Whatever we’re all doing is working! Keep it up as there’s more ground to cover, but the momentum is clear. Mitt’s becoming the man to beat in Florida.

I have a couple hypotheses as to why, including Huckabee’s giving signs he’s pulling out of Florida, Fred’s departure altogether and Rudy’s having lost momentum from his no-shows in all the prior races. That leaves the real contenders as McCan’t, who still doesn’t have a consistent economic plan or position on immigration and can’t seem to win a Republican majority in any contest, retreating Rudy, and Mo-jo Mitt, who’s looking like he’s going to shore up support from the right from former Thompson supporters and Hucka-would-be’s with whom Mike couldn’t close the deal. That leaves McCain and Giuliani fighting over the “security” vote and Mitt the entire conservative wing of the party, uncontested. Folks, I like our odds.

Share on Facebook

Share This