Mitt Romney's Not Dead Yet

Opponents say that Mitt Romney is in a “tailspin,” or that he is “flailing,” or that his pathway to the nomination has somehow been blocked by the gravity-generated bodies of John McCain and Mike Huckabee.

It’s clear that John McCain has edged up a few points in New Hampshire ( in part because Rudy Giuliani has pulled out and those voters are shifting back to McCain) and that Mike Huckabee has a polling lead in Iowa.

But Romney’s support in both states hasn’t bottomed out; he’s standing on a solidly built platform of what his campaign now likes to call “full spectrum” conservative Republicans, and he has been disqualified by no means. This is important, I think. Romney’s big problem is that his claim to the mantle of “conservative leader” is new -- he was always more conservative than his public image would attest to, but he never really embraced it -- and a bit synthetic, and he has never been identified with a single cause or a single attribute. (Think: McCain = the war, or apostasy; Giuliani: 9/11, or personal life problems; Huckabee: evangelical; Tancredo: immigration.)

The campaign tried to find a single cause but wound up looking like the guy who tries on lots of sweaters at the department store: some fit (fiscal conservative, veto-man), some don’t (immigration) -- none is blockbuster.

But his big asset is that, aside from anti-Mormon bigots, he’s still in the running -- he still draws second-choice voters; he has plenty of money; he is a supporting player in the stories right now. In Iowa and New Hampshire; he seems to be on the rise in some of the other early states. If he wins Iowa and New Hampshire -- not sure things, but not unbelievable, either -- he's probably going to win the nomination.

The Christmas break was good for Romney, if only because it allowed him to get out of his own way. The MLK march gaffe was both silly, from an empirical perspective, because Romney probably relied on hazy childhood memory and didn’t filter his thoughts -- and damaging, in that it occupied about 72 hours of campaign time.

Now -- the unprecedented personal attacks from two New Hampshire newspapers are kind of stunning and will serve to focus on the attention on Romney for the next few days…. But the world is his candy corn, and more than Huck or McCain, Romney determines Romney’s fate.

Comments

Romney has the ground organization to overcome a 3 to 4 percentage shortfall in the polls. I believe he will win Iowa because of his organization. If he does he will carry enough steam to win the nomination.

Posted by jason willis | December 27, 2007 3:05 PM

Right you are Jason, Romney will have great strength if he can win Iowa. The rags in NH will lose subscriptions for their piling on...stupid stupid stupid.

Posted by Pat Buchanan | December 27, 2007 3:08 PM

PRESIDENT MIKE HUCKABEE / VICE PRESIDENT JOHN MCCAIN 2008

More on Romney’s Leadership check out these links:
www.massresistance.org and http://rightsmart.blogspot.com/

See this video for Mitt Romney caught lying!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DJO_XuM4eM
mitt Romney saw his dad march with Martin Luther King! CAUGHT IN A LIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_zpa77Ehic

Romney is a flip flopping flake, I just found out that he has stock in all of the companies that are major promoters of homosexual rights & abortions, he is not going to do anything to these companies or the procedures but try to implement things that would advance them another example of how eloquent speaking politicians are embedded within Wall Street! HE IS ANOTHER WALL STREET CANDIDATE!all this rhetoric is follishnes and an intent denial to dismiss truth. The Demo-wacks have had control over congress for 2 years now and have done NOTHING but fund pork barrel projects and have not come close to making any kind of real progress that the promised their poor demo-wack supporters. There credibility is SHOT! and as for Huckabee... People fear that he will win, which he is... At this point I will vote for anybody other than a Demowack. i am so frustrated that I have changed party position and will vote Repub this year.I am so proud of Huckabee i do not know what to do. He is a man of principle and he surely just sealed the deal with my vote. He will win and big he will, and while the pundits try to demise him, or his other political rivals try to make him look bad. They may want to look at the mirror at themselves. You got flip flopping mitt, dead fred, pimped out guiliani , small brain mccain, and “paul is crazy and deranged”! And as for the Dems: you got Hell-ary that have sold her soul to the left party lobbyist in america, and you got chronic smoking Obama? which neither one has ANY experience in foreign policy. If it was not for Hell-ary having bill clinton last name, she would not even be known.Huckabee is the sure winner and will win big. I can not wait for romney to get out of the race. i bet he will go back to hiring illegals to work in his yard. check more out about him at www.massresistance.org he is the biggest flake since kellogs!

Posted by sha | December 27, 2007 3:12 PM

I certainly agree that Romney is not dead. How could he be? The media has treated him favorably, he's held center camera position along with Giuliani at every debate, and he has a personal wealth in excess of $200 million and has already demonstrated he has no issue tapping into it to fund his campaign. No... Mitt is here to stay and will be with us all the way up to the Convention in September.

Here's the real question, however... who else is going to be standing at Convention? Certainly Giuliani, the media's favorite republican golden-child, possibly McCain purely because of sheer name recognition, Huckabee?? Not likely. Were it not for his CFR speech, we'd have seen Mike bow out before Tancredo. Thompson?? He'll be lucky if he makes it to Super Tuesday. Hunter?? Nope. No way, no how. Finally, Ron Paul... with over $18 million in the bank and a host of supporters who have yet to reach their $2300 maximums, he's got more money coming. His "internet following" and massive fundraising success WILL translate into votes - votes by people the pollsters would never have contacted. We'll see at least a 3rd place finish in Iowa and a very real possibility of victory in New Hampshire. These strong showings will bring all of those, "I like his message, but he just doesn't have a shot" folks out of the woodwork and then watch the juggernaut roar across America.

Sure, Romney will be one of the few left standing at Convention, but he and Giuliani will both feel the weight of the Ron Paul machine crush their bones on the stage.

Good luck, Mitt.

Posted by Aaron Walker | December 27, 2007 3:30 PM

sha: It's not that your politically brilliant commentary about Romney isn't interesting. It's that it wasn't interesting the first time, or the second, or the third, etc., etc. After running into the same copied-and-pasted post of yours in every blog on the internet today it's really getting nauseating. Get some new material.

Posted by Elbeau | December 27, 2007 3:35 PM

I'm tired of the "gottcha journalism" that has hounded Romney. They try to turn every little word out of his mouth into a scandel, and it's detracting from the issues at hand.

Romney has the intelligence, education, experience and drive to make a difference. Sure he could stay home and enjoy his millions, but he cares about this country enough to dedicate his would-be retirement years to help this nation.

Heaven help the Republican party if Huckabee is elected. The liberal media wants a liberal in office and they are pushing Huckabee as he will be the easiest to defeat in the general election.

Posted by Melissa | December 27, 2007 3:39 PM

Yeah, Romney's still in a comparatively good position...and I do mean COMPARATIVELY.

This race is unbelievably wide open. The number of plausable scenarios for the outcome is mind-boggling...and many of those scenarios can go in Romney's favor.

I've been blogging about this election at nauseum for quite a while now, but I can't imagine the race settling down before Iowa...and probably not before Florida since Guiliani has played all his expectations against that state.

Posted by Elbeau | December 27, 2007 3:41 PM

Marc--

I think its worth noting that what you call "unprecedented personal attacks" by the Union-Leader and the Monitor on Romney were entirely warranted. It is revealing that the Romney campaign didn't even bother responding to the substance of the Monitor editorial; Romney's record of flip-flopping and fantasy is evident to all but Hugh Hewitt & Co.

That said, if Romney can hold onto Iowa (a distinct possibility), he'll be looking pretty good to win the nomination.

Posted by Madorsky | December 27, 2007 3:42 PM

Folks, College students don't vote. Period. Neither does the lower class, or minorities. This is a fact. Remember rock the vote in the 90s? The intitiative to get young people to vote? It bombed. 4% college-age turn-out in the vote.

Romney has the middle-upper-class vote (the ones who show up election day), he has hundreds of buses ready to bring suporters to the polls, and last I heard there is to be a storm the night before the primaries in Iowa keeping many voters of other candidates at home.

Romney will win the nomination - If I were a betting man I would put my money on him.

That aside, he is the only man fit for the presidency among the whole group anyway.

Posted by Bryan | December 27, 2007 3:49 PM

> he has never been identified with a single cause
> or a single attribute.

Are you joking Marc? Romney has been firmly identified with a single attribute and that is.. FLIP-FLOPPING.

Get real Marc.

Posted by queb | December 27, 2007 3:50 PM

The 'anti-endorsement' of Romney is unique and historic. The Concord Monitor called Romney a "phony" who should not be president while the right-wing Republican paper Union Leader calls Romney "not believable".

Concord Monitor said:

When New Hampshire partisans are asked to defend the state's first-in-the-nation primary, we talk about our ability to see the candidates up close, ask tough questions and see through the baloney. If a candidate is a phony, we assure ourselves and the rest of the world, we'll know it.

Mitt Romney is such a candidate. New Hampshire Republicans and independents must vote no.

Romney is simply too big a phony, too big a made-to-order, change-any-position-to-get-elected chameleon to be trusted.

Posted by kurt | December 27, 2007 3:55 PM

GO ROMNEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Steve Rinehart | December 27, 2007 3:55 PM

Romney to the Republicans is what Hillary is to the Democrats - self-centered, arrogant, will-say-anything-to-get-elected, wishy-washy, flip-flopping politicians.

The king of flipflopper is going nowhere.

Posted by nam | December 27, 2007 3:57 PM

Mitt is a pathological liar for sure. Whether it is Mitt marching with MLK, his NRA endorsement or his hunting experience.

Posted by Tag | December 27, 2007 3:59 PM

Sha/Madorsky - If its Huckabee/McCain as our nominees we'll lose more than the white house. Why do you brand Mitt as a flip flopper when at worst he's flipped but never flopped back. Why don't you brand McCain a flip/flopper on the border fence? Now he realized what voters really want? Is the same true with voting against the Bush tax cuts? What about his membership in the "Gang of 14" which torpedoed conservative judicial appointments. What about McCain-Feingold? Free speech? Huckabee is a joke. He had no money and only appeals to evangelicals. The closer you look at him the more he looks like Clinton and Carter.

The closer you look at Mitt, the more you realize that he's a man of principle and integrity. He's got energy, smarts and money to take on Hillary. The ONLY way a Republican can get elected in Mass. is to run as a moderate. This was the only practical thing he could do to advance the conservative cause there. 85% of the legislature in MA is democratic. As some of the problems we face reach their tipping point, its evident that Mitt's leadership, experience, and creativity is our only hope.

Posted by NH Voter | December 27, 2007 4:05 PM

The serial flip-flopper Romney has no substance beyond his hair gel.

Posted by michele | December 27, 2007 4:06 PM

Go Romney!!!

Posted by Daniel | December 27, 2007 4:15 PM

sha- wow lot's of wisdum. Let me suggest that you take a moment now and then to relax, meditate, and try to do some deep thinking as you go through all the boatloads of info available on these candidates. If all you can see and hear is "flipping and flopping" from Mitt Romney you're definitly marching behind one of the many pied pipers that lead good people away from using their own discretion and reasoning. Look at his life, look at his family, look at his endless optimism, look at his ability to lead people to do impossible things, look at his accomplishments in Massachusetts, look at what he did to salvage the 2002 Winter olympics. etc. Mitt Romney is solid compared with the other choices!

Posted by Arlaveen | December 27, 2007 4:24 PM

For those who think Romney is self-centered and phony.

Dare ya....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjwWVWkPr-4

Posted by Carol | December 27, 2007 4:28 PM

I don't know about you guys, but I'm basing my vote on which candidate is the best looking--and Romney's got the looks that will beat ALL the candidates!

I won't cast my vote for Huckabee's jiggling jowls, and I don't want to see Hilary's botoxed face or Obama's lollipop head behind the podium. McCain...his face looks like a snapping turtle, and Ron Paul, he looks like the Crypt Keeper's twin brother! Fred Thompson looks like my grandpa--who has been dead for years.

You go Mitt with your coifed hair and your square jaw! America needs a good-looking guy for president!

Posted by CAforMitt | December 27, 2007 4:32 PM

Romney is not a flip-flopper. Good people sometimes have the wrong position but only a fool sticks to a wrong position. Romney currently has the best platform as a republican candidate. The fact, that Romney admits his error in supporting the wrong platform, and his rejection of those positions makes him wise.

Posted by Daniel | December 27, 2007 4:34 PM

"Romney determines Romney’s fate."
This line is very true. Mitt Romney is the one who determines his fate, not any of the other candidates or the mainstream media.

This is more true of Mitt Romney than any other candidate. The other candidates have less ability to influence whether they win any of the primaries and caucuses. A win for them will be a happy supprise but Mitt Romney will know that he worked for his wins. It is the difference between a student that has studied all semester, and one who crams right before the test.

Posted by Tim | December 27, 2007 4:37 PM

Mitt Romney is in a class of his own. As I understand it, he served as Governor without pay.
Obviously he did not need the money,but in a world driven by money and greed, this speaks volumes in my mind. He is in a class of his own.

Posted by M. Lee Schwab | December 27, 2007 4:42 PM

Mitt to me is a conundrum...but one worth voting for.

I've been back and forth about liking Mitt for weeks now. He has a thoroughly impressive history of public and private service, and yet he is so analytical that he usually comes across as unemotional and detached. That detachment combined with the ridiculous word-for-word, letter-for-letter scrutiny the media gives him gives him the appearance of a faker.

The problem is, I keep looking at his life and it completely contradicts the descriptions of "detached" and "pandering". There's no denying he's a man of principle.

My final ruling: Mitt's the real deal and is only masquerading as a faker.

Mitt...Please...find a way to connect with regular Americans. You can do us good.

Posted by Elbeau | December 27, 2007 4:45 PM

Sha, I can't believe that you'd (or anyone) would endorse Huckabee.

Honestly, do you want someone who is cross-eyed to win the nomination? Do you want another moron in the white house? This would literally ruin the GOP. Do you hate Ronny Reagan that much?

Amazing. Let's hope you don't have kids.

Posted by Clubbietim | December 27, 2007 4:47 PM

I continue to say Run Mitt Run! Romney is hands down the best candidate from either side. He will be an outstanding President. After the dust settles Romney will be on top. Leaders are not selected thruogh hatred. Especially on religious grounds. Look at the character and integrity of each candidate. Again Romney comes out on top. Run Mitt Run!

Mike

Posted by Mike | December 27, 2007 4:59 PM

To all you that are replying to Sha:

Sha is doing blog drive-by's today and does not respond to any replies. You can find Sha's same post on pretty much every article about the election today, especially articles mentioning Romney. The other blogging name Sha uses is "in-God-I-Trust".

Posted by Elbeau | December 27, 2007 5:00 PM

NH Voter--

I'm a Democrat, so you don't need to include me in "our" nominating process.

Romney frightens me because he is the most dangerous thing in politics: a man whose one and only abiding principle is belief that he should be President.

No candidate is for office is ideologically pure. If Republicans want to nominate a winner; they'll go with McCain. Any of the Democrats will be extremely hard-pressed to win.

The last three GOP statewide elected office holders Massachusetts have endorsed either McCain or Guiliani; both Boston papers have opted for McCain. When Romney was elected Gov., Dems outnumbered Republicans 6:1; now it's 8:1. Like John Edwards, Mitt Romney chose not to seek re-election because defeat was the likely result. All these facts speak volumes.

Neither Obama nor Huckabee are perfect candidates, and ultimately both may fail to be nominated. Their rise is evidence, however, that the public has wearied of flip-floppers who stick their finger in the air to decide every issue. Clinton and Romney represent this cynical brand of politics that has disgusted the American people.

Posted by Alex | December 27, 2007 5:03 PM

MITT's the MAN! He has my vote. I find it interesting how these other campaigns desperately try to catch up with Mitt's long-standing, hard-working campaign efforts. Mitt was the only candidate who actively got out in Iowa and made personal connections with voters. All the others can talk the talk, but Mitt walks the walk, and that's why I support him 110%.

Posted by Mitt in 2008! | December 27, 2007 5:03 PM

That last post was by Madorsky, sorry for the inadvertent handle switch.

Posted by Madorsky | December 27, 2007 5:03 PM

Sha/Madorsky - If its Huckabee/McCain as our nominees we'll lose more than the white house. Why do you brand Mitt as a flip flopper when at worst he's flipped but never flopped back. Why don't you brand McCain a flip/flopper on the border fence? Now he realized what voters really want? Is the same true with voting against the Bush tax cuts? What about his membership in the "Gang of 14" which torpedoed conservative judicial appointments. What about McCain-Feingold? Free speech? Huckabee is a joke. He had no money and only appeals to evangelicals. The closer you look at him the more he looks like Clinton and Carter.

The closer you look at Mitt, the more you realize that he's a man of principle and integrity. He's got energy, smarts and money to take on Hillary. The ONLY way a Republican can get elected in Mass. is to run as a moderate. This was the only practical thing he could do to advance the conservative cause there. 85% of the legislature in MA is democratic. As some of the problems we face reach their tipping point, its evident that Mitt's leadership, experience, and creativity is our only hope.

Posted by NH Voter | December 27, 2007 5:08 PM

With Romney you get more politics-as-usual. Listen when he answers direct questions, you rarely get a direct response. You get a "political" response. You can hear these kinds of things coming out of his mouth in the debates... "Well, that's a really great question... and one that is on the mind of every American... blah, blah, blah"... "We really need to take a hard look at this issue... blah, blah, blah"

What has Mitt said that he is going to do about our falling dollar? Our out of control national debt? He's already placed himself in the "stay the course" camp on the war in Iraq... exactly how does he propose to pay for it? Continue borrowing $2 billion per day from the Chinese?

Come on folks, Mitt may seem like a "really great guy" and have that "presidential look" and he may have all the integrity of Ghandi, but what is he (or any other candidate other than Congressman Paul) going to do about our rapidly deteriorating economic conditions? We can't continue policing the world and get our economic health under control at the same time, it's just not possible. Well respected economists everywhere are screaming from the rooftops of our impending economic collapse... all the "optimism" in the world isn't going to pay the mounting interest load on our out of control borrowing from the Fed.

Any pro-war Republican is going to have a very difficult time competing with the Democrats. If Mitt were to win the nomination, the media will turn on him overnight and paint him as a moderate republican who is not so different from the democrats. They'll turn on their republican smear machine and the Dem's will roll over us in the general. Ron Paul has the only legitimate shot at countering the Democratic tidal wave that will come rushing ashore (led by our high quality mainstream media cronies) as soon as the nominations are sealed.

Posted by Aaron Walker | December 27, 2007 5:29 PM

How about this bit of info from a blog on BigLizards.net

December 26, 2007
Another "Anti-Endorsement" of Mitt... This Time By a McCainiac Paper
Media Madness , Presidential Campaign Camp and Porkinstance
Hatched by Dafydd

...the Union Leader hasn't a particularly good track record for picking the eventual nominee. Here are all their GOP endorsements over the past three decades:

2000: Steve Forbes (while attacking John McCain as the most liberal Republican in the race); Bush was nominated.

1996: Pat Buchanan; Bob Dole was nominated.

1992: Pat Buchanan; George H.W. Bush was nominated.

1988: Pete DuPont; George H.W. Bush was nominated.

1984: Ronald Reagan -- but this doesn't really count, since he had no credible GOP opposition;

1980: Ronald Reagan -- who actually won the nomination, the only time in the last thirty years that the Union Leader "hit" in a contested GOP primary;

1976: Ronald Reagan; sitting president Gerald R. Ford was nominated.

Posted by dbs | December 27, 2007 5:40 PM

Romney is a fake, and as someone mentioned, is dangerous because he will say and do anything to get himself elected. He's done it every time he's run for office, and this presidential race is no different. Those few who still support him are fools for doing so. Just because a guy speaks and looks presidential doesn't mean he should be president. This is clear: Mitt needs to be stopped quickly and soundly by the good people from Iowa and NH.

Posted by Publius | December 27, 2007 5:59 PM

Hey Aaron Walker...What about Mitt's reputation as a business genius? Don't you think these abilities will help us in foreign economics issues as well as military foreign policy? He is not a knee-jerk candidate who makes decisions on a whim. He analyzes everything and then comes to the best conclusions......Maybe that's why he's a gazillionaire!!! He is hands down the most brilliant candidate ever to run.

Posted by WendiR8 | December 27, 2007 6:42 PM

Mitt is the only leader in the bunch who can beat the corrupt Hillary and do nothing Obama.

Ralph

Posted by ralph | December 27, 2007 6:47 PM

Romney may have flipped but I haven’t seen him flop. Romney admits he has changed his stance on abortion and gay rights. If Romney changed back that would be a flop! A big flop!! I don’t believe that will ever happen.

If you want to see what a flip flopper looks like, check out Hillary!!!

Posted by Kevin | December 27, 2007 6:55 PM

Publius -- what kind of "fake" could graduate from Harvard Business School AND Harvard Law School? What kind of "fake" could take over the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City and turn a $397 million in-the-hole budget into a $56 million profit? Or what kind of fake could take over as governor of Massachusetts and turn a $3 billion deficit into a surplus, all without raising taxes! While he was pulling the state out of a financial disaster, he also developed a health insurance plan designed to cover all Massachusetts residents--a plan that is being copied by other states now. Or how about this: Romney decided to invest $600,000 in Staples before it opened its first store in Brighton, Mass. After the opening, he invested millions more, and ended up making 8 times his investment in three years. Romney SHOULD be president because he has a PROVEN track record of leadership and intelligence. He certainly has more presidential-qualifying credentials that any of the other candidates.

Sorry, Publius, but my $$$ is on the best qualified candidate for president, MITT ROMNEY!

Posted by JediMormon | December 27, 2007 7:14 PM

The two New Hampshire newspapers who wrote the devastating critiques of Romney are spot on - Romney is nothing more than a shallow opportunist with no distinct principles apart from his bizarre and outrageous Mormonism which he keeps concealed . From an outsider [I am British] observing your political process the American people never opt for a colourless and insincere figure [with the possible exception of Richard Nixon] . Bush beat Gore not because he was intellectually superior but because he came across more genuine . Gore was a wooden figure and the American people knew it . As a conservative I loath Hilary Clintons views but there is no doubt she is a woman of convictions , infact all the main players be they Republican or Democrat appear to be individuals of conviction with the exception of Romney . Leaving aside all other considerations concerning Romney the American people will never opt for such a shallow figure . So Romney can spend his millions it will not avail .

Posted by Andrew Price | December 27, 2007 7:15 PM

Some people agree with Jesus when he says repent and change your ways and some call people like that "flip floppers" and kick them around. I'd rather have a capable, brilliant, decent President like Romney for a leader than any of those belligerent hypocrites, people like that aren't fit for that office.

Posted by AmericanWoman | December 27, 2007 7:17 PM

NH, You captured the truth.

Personally I think Huckabee is possibly the phony in this campaign year. He has the pastor mantle tied to his kite and that is the only reason he is rising at all. Off topic:
I would be very interested to know how a pastor becomes "ordained". As I understand it Huckabee didn't even finish the Seminary. So how can he be a minister? Instruct me on how that is done? Does someone just 'Hang Out a Shingle' saying I am applying to be a minister for a church that I am starting up. Do they just arrive in town saying they are a minister and apply for the job? Is there some board of review that determines a person has studied the Bible enough? Is there a test they have to take? Does God have any say in this? Do they truly represent God or themselves? Why did Huckabee leave the ministry if he was called of God to be a minister? Just wondering how that all works. Do some little boys dream of being ministers just like some little boys dream of being doctors, fireman, astronauts or cowboys? I don't recall those chosen by Christ to represent him, applying for the job. They were called. So how is it done? Could a kind hearted store clerk apply at the local church to be the pastor if he decided that he wanted a career change? Is a pastor any more spiritual than the faithful Bible studying farmer down the road? Does he get better answers to his prayers. Do ministers learn to be motivation speakers in the Seminary? What does a student in the Seminary get that qualifies him to be God's preacher on earth? I'm serious, where does a minister get his authority to be a minister?

Huckabee has his lead in the polls because the sheep of the fold thinks he is "one of them". What exactly does that mean? It can't be his record that has gotten him an Iowa front runner statis. His record is too liberal for the Republican Party. The media have pinned him their "darling" because he won't win the Presidential Election, but they want him there to secure that the nomination goes to a Democrat. If by chance the "sheep fold" where to get Huckabee the nomination in 2008, the Democrates would pretty much have one of their own in office. So it is sort of a win win for the Democrates if Huckabee is elected.

What Huckabee does very well is motivational speaking. That is what he is by profession now, a motivational speaker. I'll bet he was an entertaining minister as well as radio commentator.

I like Huckabee's talent for entertaining others with stories, jokes, testimonials, but on his record he gets a poor grade. I think he has done his very best and has been true to what he feels is the right thing, but I think he makes poor decisions. He wants to be "liked" to much. That may be a carry over from his youth. I read once that he had a pretty rough childhood. It becomes important as an adult to fit in when as a child you never felt like you did. I can see why he wants to be a pleaser. I would guess that is alot of the reason he granted so many pardons.

Posted by Kay | December 27, 2007 7:21 PM

Kay - you sound exactly like Mitt Romney when he was on mission he said all Christian Pastors have no authority and that he ie a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints [the Mormons] is the only one vested with authority .
Perhaps that is why Romney also participated in secret Mormon Temple ceremonies where the Christian Pastor was depicted as being in the hire and pay of Satan . I am sure Mike Huckabee would love to know that Romney believes he as an ordained minister is in the hire and pay of Satan .

Posted by Andrew Price | December 27, 2007 7:34 PM

It's nice to see a good, balanced article like this one. Romney is far from out of this thing, and I still think he's going to win Iowa. And if he wins Iowa, he'll probably win New Hampshire, as long as he keeps a slight lead or doesn't fall too far behind McCain in polls. And if he wins those two, he's got it.

Posted by Joseph Antley | December 27, 2007 7:42 PM

Let's see...
McCain has McCain-Feingold, working with Kennedy to help illegals, Gang of 14, Keating 5, and questionable mental stability.
Romney is the only candidate who can unite ALL types of conservative...fiscal, defense, AND social.
The choice is obvious!

Posted by Cory | December 27, 2007 7:42 PM

It's my belief that narrow-minded, dull people utterly unfamiliar with executive leadership call any serious thinking that leads a leader to change a stance or a staffer amounts to "FLIP-FLOPPING!!!" which I guess is now a grievous sin amongst Fundies and True Believers of the Left and Right.

Working with execs, good ones, not crooked ones - but among the best - I saw that they all placed a premium on integrity and core values, but were very open to shifting strategy, replacing managers, changing tactics if convinced their original thinking wasn't right.

Good Presidents like reagan and Clinton (after a major beating) were smart enough to change their views and go from FDR Democrat to Republican, from signing the nation's most liberal abortion law to thinking it was wrong...to cuting down on big gov't welfare before Bush wrecked it all with his stubborness about giving out maximum corporate welfare.

Bush is bad because he is determined that no one will call him a flip-flopper who will defend Brownie and Rummy and Bremer and Tenet and almost all his choices to the end of his Presidency - because to admit error, change, would show Bush was weak and worse, wrong.
(Perhaps a reason for his other failed businesses).

I would rather have a Romney than a bin Laden or Pastor Huckleberry or a McCain charging forward stubborn and bull-headed and unwilling to listen because it might lead to "A flip-flop, a flip-flop!" taunt from the close-minded who likely have never made a complex decision in their simple lives that needs to be periodically assessed and rethought.

Publius - Romney is a fake, and as someone mentioned, is dangerous because he will say and do anything to get himself elected.

Ah yes, the 400 million-dollar fake. Unable to lead all his life because he says or does anything. He's, he's a Flip-Flopper! A Flip-Flopper! Unlike Bush who never asesses he is wrong once he makes a decision. Never considers any advisor's advice after a decision is made to rethink it!

Frankly, Romney committed on his personal integrity to appoint strict constructionist judges. That locks him in to the only meaningful thing a President can do about abortion - appoint judges who will finally send the matter to The States. Tied to his integrity, that is good enough for me. Even Ron Paul showed intergrity when he went against the Libertarian dogma of Open Borders about 8 years ago.

Whereas, I doubt the integrity of Hillary, Edwards, Obama, McCain, and Rudy. McCain and Rudy have had incidents where their integrity dissolved and treachery showed. Especially McCain, who has not just done the Keating 5, but peeled off the Republican side and cooked up his own little backroom deals betraying them, with Feingold, Schumer, Spector, and Teddy Kennedy. Rudy of course has displayed a lack of integrity in his personal life and I doubt he is "locked" into appointing strict constructionist judges like Romney is, or laying off gun control or his deep desire to get a compromise so his "nation of immigrants" can spread the sanctuary movement when he is President.

I give Huckleberry supporters this - Huck is a liberal to conservative with deep Religious values. But I don't like his liberal record on some matters, I don't share his creationist values, I do not wish programs pushed on a theocratic basis where Huck like Bush says Jesus gives him advice, not White House experts, or Congress, or the Sate Dept.

And Fred, the Tennessee Toad, sure ain't no darn flip-flopper. But Fred is one lazy good ol' boy not suited to be President. Guy would love a SCOTUS appointment. Off 5 months out of the year, all the prestige of President without the work, ability even when Courts in session to dump off the case on the clerks while he whittles, chaws up some tobacco, and leaves early to go home and bang the wife.

Posted by Chris Ford | December 27, 2007 7:43 PM

Flip floppers: Hillary - illegal aliens driver's license 3 times in 2 minutes on stage at democratic debates in October.
McCain - claiming to be for immigration reform recently on a radio program and FLATLY denied ever being for amnesty, which he has been shown many times to support.

Romney is no flip-flopper. He has certainly changed his position, but never reverted back to incorrect positions after realizing his mistake.

It's funny how that's all the "dirt" they can dig up on him. :) His illegals working for him weren't his decision, nor was he about to profile anyone with an accent. Funny that as hard as they try to get dirt on him, he sees right through their line of questioning and discerns their vain attempts to catch him. This is yet another attribute that will lend credibility to his already impressive resume.

I think Mitt is in the BEST position going into the Iowa caucasses because Huckabee is taking all the scrutiny from Rush, Hannity, Beck, Coulter and a lot of the media (brainwash) bias is backing Huck which means one of two things - they either want him to be the nominee because they know Obama or Hillary would pick him apart on his policies and pardons, or the media will turn on him (conveniently) when they feel it is most politically expedient to do so. The more I hear from Rush, Hannity, etc. the more I fear for the country if his lead translates into a nomination.

Romney has the most going for him and needs this the very least. That truly characterizes him as a public servant because he is not furthering any sort of power-hungry grab, but rather lending his vast experience and wisdom to help the country out in the difficult road ahead.

Look at Huckabee's opportunistic speaking engagements that he is still charging for even in an election season. You just know that Hillary or the media will turn that into a campaign funding scandal. This "pass" that he is getting from the media will turn on him so fast if he gets the nomination that he won't know what hit him, and the republican party will be laughed into irrelevance for the next 8 years.

The WORST thing that could happen to our party, would be for the Huckster to win in Iowa. And for McCain to win in NH. Romney clearly has the credentials and the organization, and anyone that listens to newspaper endorsements or democratic endorsements (I.E. Joe Lieberman for McCain) simply shows you how liberal McCain's roots really are.

One that can win Governorship in the most liberal state, can certainly win the presidency. It's funny that Hillary had to find one of the most liberal districts to run for Senate, just so she could get in there. The 50%+ that will NEVER vote for Hillary are the more educated and informed voters, the others are close-minded liberals that should move to socialist countries so they learn the hard way that socialism is slow death and misery. The CNN (and other liberal media) brainwash has already anointed her and it's evident now that Obama's numbers are faltering just days out of the Iowa caucasses.

Prediction: Hillary/Richardson vs. Romney/Thompsen in 2008.

Romney wins 54% to Hillarys 43% (Ron Paul runs independent and gets 2.3%) Sorry, Ron Paul supporters, but Ron is NOT republican and he should stop masquerading as one. If he goes independent, he'll pull more democrat votes than republican because of his staunch "get out of Iraq" stance.

Posted by Devin | December 27, 2007 7:54 PM

It's a cliche, but there is a ton at stake for our country in this election. The outcome will have an enormous impact on our economy, national defense, the Supreme Court and key domestic issues like tax policy, social security & Medicare over the next 8 years and beyond.

If you are a conservative Republican like I am and want a President who is extraordinarily bright, competent in solving big problems and has solid personal integrity, Romney is the real deal. (FYI: The US President is the CEO of the largest, most complex enterprise in the world.)

I believe Romney is uniquely qualified to be the nation’s chief executive, given his background as a very successful, results-oriented, private sector CEO, his success in rescuing the SLC Olympic games from scandal and financial jeopardy, his election and service as Republican governor of a large, liberal state (Massachusetts) where he reversed an inherited $3 billion deficit, balanced the budget every year, did not raise taxes, and last year even achieved the minor miracle of implementing a system of universal health care insurance in cooperation with a democratic state legislature—again, without raising taxes. He is a proven problem solver. He is very well spoken, articulate and has a likeable personality. He is honest, has high personal integrity and wonderful family values.

If your mind is still open: The more you see of and learn about Mitt Romney, the more you will like what you see.

Posted by IMHO | December 27, 2007 7:59 PM

Short of publishing a retraction, the Concord published an opposing opinion today that talks Mitt Romney up. This could help restore their reputation, if the reprint got anywhere near as far as their libelous first editorial.

Mitt IS the real thing. I've met him, and watched him on and off for a good five years. This is the only man who will really do good for America.

Mitt ftw.

Posted by Jed | December 27, 2007 8:17 PM

Here is the opposing piece from the Concord Monitor. Mitt gets a little help from the "liberal rag" that has cooked up all this storm.

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071227/OPINION/712270396

Posted by Jed | December 27, 2007 8:22 PM

I think its noting that the DNC and the Liberal NH newspapers seem to be coming out in full force against one candidate... Mitt Romney. Do you think that this is because they see him as the biggest threat to their cause?? Obviously. I think the endorsement of National Review should be taken into consideration much more.

It is obvious that the liberal media has an adgenda as well... they seem to be still taking about the Huck-a-boom, even thought that ship has sunk a long time ago (look at poll numbers). And they are not going to report a Huck a bust (because that would be their ideal candidate).

Is this just me or is it totally obvious?

Posted by Rod | December 27, 2007 8:46 PM

FLORIDA LOVES ROMNEY!!!

I am here in the capitol city of Tallahassee, and we're a pretty tight network. News from outoftown flows in and out, pretty quickly.

The buzz around here is that people have really taken to Mitt Romney. I'm talking about both Democrats and Republicans. I've been telling the Boston Globe since like July of this year.

The word here in Florida is that Mitt Romney has it. . .I know that's just rumor and speculation. But I don't believe it's really taking folks time to decide.

I think people made up there minds that they liked Romney back in like the Orlando debate! All the Noise from the News Papers is just their attempt to avoid being phased out by like next election cycle.

My bets are on Romney, not Huckaboo and John McGain!

Posted by Mark West | December 27, 2007 9:11 PM

For those wondering what motivates commenter Andrew Price, check this link out.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/01/nmorm01.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/01/ixhome.html

Posted by Bryan Reese | December 27, 2007 10:58 PM

Yeah,Jed. The National Review endorsement sure helped Phil Gramm in '96. I back Rudy and the main reasons are his leadership and his electability. I have many smart friends who are backing Gov. Romney but none of them are able to identify the blue state that he can turn red. I live in California and if you Mitt supporters give him a chance here, you are truly drinking Hugh Hewitt Coolade. Rudy at least makes us competitive. Deep down, you know that we can't continue to write off NY and CA every election. It's okay to change your mind but please, has this guy been consistent on ANY one major issue ever? The guy wouldn't carry ten states.

Posted by Bill Graham | December 27, 2007 11:21 PM

Who can we identify as a man of integrity, character, energy, moral values, honesty, optemism, and a life of success in all that he does? The only man that fits the question is MITT ROMNEY. I just look at his family and that's enough for me.

Posted by Savea | December 28, 2007 12:59 AM

Take a good deep look at Romney.

Romney is a turn-around genius. He saved the Olympics from scandal and thus the country from embarrasment. He brought MA from a heavy deficit to a surplus as Governor. He built an incredibly successly business at Bain.

And...he did the first two without pay.

Romney is still married to his first wife and from all reports he has been a terrific father.

We need a president with Romney's turn-around genius and stellar family man example.

Posted by katrina | December 28, 2007 1:23 AM

the mad scientist financial wizard who is Cramer on Mad Money was intimated when he interviewed with Romney after Harvard Law .. he was just too dang smart .. the "Best Businessman in North America" Cramer calls him ..

listen up .. I'll try to be brief ..

when your drain is plugged up .. who do you call ? that's right .. you don't call your Congressman or Senator ..

Romney is the only candidate who is business is expertise in analysing and managing large organizations that act independently .. and he is judged to be the tops .. and he has done this for decades .. one of his first jobs out of school for Bain was to troubleshoot Monsanto .. have you heard this one ? after a few months there he would talk to people in the organization and they were sure this young guy was a chemical engineer ... the guy is wicked smart .. and he has been doing it for more than thirty years folks .. this is what he does .. he fixes and runs organizations to accomplish their missions ... in case any one doubts it .. this is what we all need .. Democrat or Republican .. it is all the same .. we want good and successful government ..

Posted by carlloeber | December 28, 2007 2:28 AM

JediMormon--The arguments for Romney's business accumen are well-found. He is an incredible mind, and businessman. But does this simple fact make him "the most qualified candidate"? Not in the least. The job entails just a bit more than that. I, as most conservative Americans, am looking for a candidate I can trust on social conservative issues that are important to me and other Republicans; these issues are much more important than how good a candidate's business sense is. In this case, Mitt Romney simply cannot be trusted, and he has proven with his constant flip-flops and false/exaggerated statements (and there isn't a single Mitt lover in this forum who can say he hasn't done both of those things). To me, all of the business sense and brilliance matters little when talking about a snake oil salesman like Romney, and thankfully, most Americans are starting to see him for the used car salesman that he is.

Posted by Publius | December 28, 2007 2:38 AM

HA!

Fred flipped on abortion. McCain and Huckabee flipped on immigration. And I just don't trust untrustworthy Rudy.

You guys deserve the democrats you will get because you apply a double standard in your judgements. You judge Mitt with a different yard stick and yet your own favored candidates have flaws aplenty.

But, hey, don't pick the man the media and dems attack relentlessly. Of course he's the man they don't want to be the republican candidate. Gee, I wonder why.

You will deserve exactly who you will then get.

Hello higher taxes.

Posted by Lizzie Nelson | December 28, 2007 3:46 AM

I live in NH and will be voting for Romney in the primary. As far as I know most of my friends and family will be voting for him too.

Too much is being made of the Concord Monitor's anti endorsement of Romney. The only people that would take the "anti-endorsement" seriously are the morons with Hillary and Obama signs in thier yards who will be voting in the Dem primary anyway. The same goes for all the people on here bashing Mitt and calling hima flip flopper. They're all democrats who supported "I voted for the war before I voted against it," Kerry, and would never vote for a Republican anyway.

Mitt will most certainly win NH and MI and has a very, very good chance at the nomination and if it's him up against Hillary this nation will soon have it's first Mormon president.

Posted by Dave | December 28, 2007 7:06 AM

For those who claim that Mitt is the only flip-flopper, here is a video for you about McCain:
http://mydryfly.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/182/

McCain is as big an opportunist as any of them.

Now for those who call Mitt fake, you need to read this article:
http://mydryfly.wordpress.com/2007/11/29/a-politician-doing-the-right-thingwithout-the-press/

The fact is, Mitt is not perfect. But none of them are. After looking at all of the candidates I am astounded that Mitt is not dominating the polls. He is far better than the rest of them.

Giuliani is NOT the most electable. He would lose 20% of the GOP vote which may throw some red states to the dems, aka Arkansas, etc. He is practically the same as Hillary so why would dems in blue states vote for Rudy? It makes no sense.

Thompson is too lazy and would get destroyed in the general. Huckabee is the least electable, he may even lose the intermountain west due to his perceived anti-mormon stances.

McCain has turned into a one issue candidate: War. He is probably the most electable GOPer but his record is weak and has been on the opposite side of the GOP too many times.

Regardless of what you think of Mitt, the one thing that you can't argue is that he is the hardest worker in the field, the most analytical (which I like), and as smart as (if not smarter) than the rest of the candidates. His "flip-flopping" is a problem, but only because people ignore the flip flops of the rest of the candidates and they have no other dirt on Mitt.

That is another thing. Rudy has so many skeletons in his closet. He would be destroyed by these. In a general election against Hillary, Hillary gets to claim the moral high ground!! At least she has been faithful to her husband and her kid still likes her. Rudy would be a disaster. In fact I have often said that I will not vote for Rudy in the general, period. I will either vote 3rd party, for obama, or not at all. And I am a life-long GOPer.

Posted by Swint | December 28, 2007 8:02 AM

I can't believe that any reasonable person who seriously compared Romney's resume and experience to that of everyone else running would not see how much more qualified Romney is.

From Bain Capital to Staples to the Winter Olympics to Governor of MA......Everything this man has ever done he has succeeded at. He is th emost intelligient, insightful resourceful candidate running and none of the others can match his management and analytical skills.

The left in this country is scared shitless of Romney getting the GOP nomination because they know that the more the American people get to know about Mitt the more they are going to like him. So they are resulting to thier little hit pieces early on...such as we see in the Concord Monitor. If Mitt wasn't such a threat to them and the sociliast stooges that they are offering for president, then why would they be going out of thier way to attack Romney?

I can only hope that the good people of NH, IA, MI, and SC can see through all this crap to see what a truly historically great president Romney would make. I am also completely certain that if it is to be Mitt vs. Hillary on the center stage Mitt's excellence will shine through and America will once and for all put the Clinton's and the Bush's behind them.

Fasten your seatbelts......

It's morning in AMerica once again......

The Romney Revolution is about to begin.........

Posted by Mark | December 28, 2007 8:30 AM

It is impossible to find a politician who hasn't changed a stance or two over the years they were in public office. But when your entire vision changes to pander to the voters you covet, that's dishonest, and that's Mitt Romney. No one argues that Mitt is a strong business mind, but no one can further argue that Mitt has manipulated the truth on many occasions to seem more favorable to voters. I can only hope enough people see the light in Iowa and NH to turn this guy away, because the message needs to be sent that the presidency cannot be bought by a bulging bank account and a pocket full of lies.

Mark--it's dusk, and the sun is setting on the Romney campaign. And America is better off!

Posted by Publius | December 28, 2007 8:39 AM

When it comes to insincere pandering there is no one running that can come close to Hillary.

In a matter of of mere minutes in one debate Hillary took two different positions on the illegal drivers licenses issue. The only time she has a view on an issue is immediately after a public opinion poll has been taken. How can anyone take her seriously?

Hillary stands for absolutely nothing but herself and it appears she is posed to win the Democratic race. How can anyone not side with whomever the GOP has to offer?

Posted by Ryko | December 28, 2007 8:53 AM

Bryan,

Thanks for the heads up on the Andrew Price poster! What a total nut-job!

Andrew, you don't have a mission from God. You have a mental illness. You need to be locked in a padded cell somewhere, preferably before you hurt people.

Posted by Eric | December 28, 2007 11:52 AM

Andrew Price,

So, you are an ordained minister and spend hours and hours daily harrassing people of other faiths, calling their cell phones and running up their bills, stalking them on the streets, pounding on their doors for HOURS, (!), following them through subways and loudly and publically denouncing them....? Wow!

And as an ordained minister you find it offensive that Romney's church supposedly depicted certain ministers as doing the work of Satan...? Well, to tell you the truth, Andrew Price, on that call I think they were right on! And you yourself have proved them right.

And we just read in the news that priests in the Holy Land were assaulting each other over cleaning a church -- at a site where Christ was supposedly born! Were you there by any chance? Did you happen to start start the fray...?

Posted by Steven | December 28, 2007 12:34 PM

Romney keeps his promises!!! Go Mitt!!! He has a clear and successful track record of getting the jobs done no matter how difficult. No Senator running in this race has any record of accomplishment. Romney will eat Clintons shorts in any kind of debate. We need new blood in Washington. Why not pick someone with positive change up his sleeves? He will change America for the good and get the USA back in the right direction with growth, stronger families, stronger economy, stronger schools, stronger military. What's wrong with that? Want a talking, ever talking Senator with no accomplishment? Go ahead waste your vote. Now as for Huckebee, get real people, we don't need a liberal, Gomer-Pile style, Pastor as our President giving away funds that are not his to give with no idea about foreign policy and letting murderers go with the hope of them getting born again at others expense. We need people who are hard on crime and criminals. Letting murderers go to kill others is not my idea of a leader, despite how good his Christmas wishes in his ads are. People who are so smitten by the Pastor in Chief should look at his dog hanging son and the person he fired to protect his position as Governor because of the event. I'm sure Michael Vick would have liked to have had a second chance. Don't be a bigot. Vote for the best, most capable Leader and American and the world will be better for it. Go Mitt!!! Vote for Mitt, you'll be glad you did!!!

Posted by wkf | December 28, 2007 6:10 PM

Nobody argues with Mitt's business sense but the reality is he's unelectable. It's not surprising that the only passion he seems to have is for data. Just like any other robot. I don't want to hand the White House to Hillary but you enthusiastic Willard supporters will do just that if there's enough of you to nominate him.

Posted by Bill Graham | December 28, 2007 10:18 PM

I'll take the blah guy with a passion for data anyday over someone who is passionate, emotional kneejerk reactionary.

Nevertheless, there is nothing about Romney that suggests he is only a robot. A robot would likely not close his business and fly his employess to another city for the purpose of finding a missing girl. He did set up a central "war-room" to examine all the data and find her though. Maybe that's too boring. If he really cared he'd have spent his time sobbing and wringing his hands and doing nothing....

Posted by Ellen | December 28, 2007 11:58 PM

Just found a link discussing Romney's new attack ads on McCain and how the "facts" they point out are either completely untrue or half-truths. Once again, Mitt will do and say anything to get to the White House, and one can only hope that people use their heads and not support this guy. And for those who talk about his "electability", he has consistently been the ONLY Republican candidate who loses to the top 3 Dems in general election polls. The Dems would have a field day poking holes in this guy, to the point that a vote for Romney in the primaries might as well be a vote for the Democrat in the general election. Check out the link on Romney's latest bout of lies:

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTk0YzczMDY3M2IyMzFiNjRhNjJhMjQzYzI5NzE4YWQ=

Posted by Publius | December 29, 2007 3:18 AM

Publius...you just don't get it obviously.

If Hillary is the Dem nomineee the GOP wins regardless of who they run. Like many, you "misunderestimate" the sheer, passionate, unaldutered, utter hatred that your average Republican has for Hillary. And many independents may not share that hatred but they do mistrust her enough to either vote GOP or abstain from voting.

When Jerry Falwell said that Satan himself couldn't even motivate Republicans to vote in the primaries and general more than Hillary it wasn't hyperbole. It was the truth. If Hillary is the Dem nominee you will be able to count on one hand the number of registered republicans who stay home instead of going to the polls in Nov to vote across the nation for the gop candidate.

As far as the GOP field goes........

Rudy is a rino....no thanks

Huckabee has a history of being too tax happpy.....

and John Mccain might as well change his name to Juan Mccain as he has some great love for amnesty and Ted Kennedy......no thanks

Ron Paul...I heard his mother ship will be arriving right after Kucinich's to take him home.....no thanks

The only clear choice is Romney.

Posted by CBK | December 29, 2007 7:06 AM

CBK-the only clear choice that I see is to stop Mitt Romney. If you have been fooled like so many others by his lies and exaggerations then I suggest you do a little research and actually get to know the guy you think you support. For me, rather than backing a huge phony like Romney, I'll take a man of integrity like John McCain any day. But you, like so many others have been fooled by buzzwords like "amnesty" that obviously are entirely untrue or half-truths at best. And even so, if immigration is the only issue you base your vote on, then you should get your priorities straight. For me, McCain trumps Romney in every important aspect of being POTUS.

Posted by Publius | December 29, 2007 11:07 AM

What lies and exagerations are you referring to Publius.?

Please tell me why Hillary would make a better president than Mitt Publius.

Posted by CBK | December 29, 2007 2:38 PM

With his zest for data, it's a crying shame that the Romney Administration missed the opportunity to keep Daniel Tavares in jail. DT is Mitt's Willie Horton-and I don't mean the former Tiger/Blue Jay slugger. Given our party's problems in Ohio and the Mountain Time zone, I still would love for you Mitt backers to tell me which blue state he turns red. I will certainly back him if he's the nominee but you posters that think Hillary can't win because she motivates our base need to remember her sleazy hubby won two terms and left office with high approval ratings. She would dismantle Mitt in the general election and if you Willard Worshipers don't believe it, you need to study some demographic data of your own.

Posted by Bill Graham | December 29, 2007 7:03 PM

Nice post, Bill. The numbers don't lie, and they all point toward Romney getting beaten soundly by all Dems, and to be honest, 4-8 years of Hillary is a bit too much for me to handle.

CBK-It would take a b