The Daily Five: Romney's Raising For The General

1. Clinton plans "major economic policy address" in NYC tomorrow at NASDAQ marketsite....Obama has campaign events in Iowa; Giuliani raises money in Florida; Edwards in Iowa; Thompson in South Carolina; candidates scrum on Iran in NPR debate; Richardson skips to attend soldiers' funeral.

2. John McCain moves into second place on Real Clear Politics' national average.....Romney campaign plans 1/8 national call day to raise money for general election. Fundraisers received e-mail today alerting them to start raising money in anticipation. Romney plans to write check in excess of $5M for rest of primaries. Candidates Thompson and Giuliani spend much of this week raising money for their primary campaigns.......Romney campaign complains to Iowa Attorney General about "TrustHuckabee" work, contending that it is using unregulated money to intervene in federal elections..........Huckabee endorsed by Georgia Right To Life PAC.....Huckabee endorsed by numerous Iowa pastors.....Republicans (Thompson, Norman Podhoretz" cast doubt on intel cmte's assessment of Iran; Podhoretz suspects a conspiracy.......Monday sees selection of Kansas City grand jury investigating 107 felony counts against Planned Parenthood; pro-life forces trying to bring the issue to the attention of presidential candidates.

3. Contained within the items seized by federal prosecutors from Norman Hsu: a saxophone autographed by Bill Clinton.......Iowa state sen. Joe Bolkcom endorses Barack Obama.....Obama to give "major speech" on national service in Mt. Vernon, Iowa.....Bill Clinton, per the AP: "''One percent of the press coverage was devoted to their record in public life. No wonder people think experience is irrelevant. A lot of the people covering the race think it is (irrelevant)"....Biden becomes fifth candidate to be eligible for federal matching funds.

4. Rumors swirl about an Obama visit to Las Vegas scheduled for Monday. Will he recieve the endorsement of the powerful Culinary Workers' local 226? Not likely -- sources say the group is still deliberating. And Nevada journalist Jon Ralston's sources confer.

5. South Carolina Republican Party charters plane to ferry journalists from Manchester, NH to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina the day before debate. Plan would shave hours, hassles, off journalists' trips.

Comments

A completely stunning new general election poll from Ohio has Huckabee surging about 15% in a month in his match-ups against Clinton and Obama and now faring better than Rudy Giuliani! In a state in which he has barely campaigned in! Also, Clinton wins three out of four match-ups, and Obama only one...

Posted by Daniel | December 4, 2007 5:30 PM

That kind of success is weird in a state where he hasn't campaigned, where they don't know his views, where his message hasn't been sent. Could it be that he's doing so well BECAUSE he hasn't shared his message? Please don't respond with Iowa figures, I just can't take it. The man has no policy statements, he has no core. He goes into a meeting with a group of generals and comes out agreeing with everything they say, without asking for a counterpoint. This rise is just a knee-jerk reaction to the failure of Fred Thompson, Evangelicals so deparate to have someone on social issues that they're ignoring the rest of it. This guy is a pro-life John Edwards and would be a disaster. I know how easy it must be to like a likable guy when you have no idea what he believes, but the presidency is not a popularity contest. We have a field that includes the hero of 9/11, an economic turnaround genius, and a respected war hero. What has Huckabee done? Look at the record, people, this man is not ready.

Posted by Mike | December 4, 2007 5:49 PM

Uh...Mike. Can you read? The guy was a governor for 13 years. He is the most experienced guy in the race. He is not ready? Your comments are absurd. You are clearly not a person to be taken seriously.

Posted by Mike is kind of a Moron | December 4, 2007 6:03 PM

Clinton plans "major economic policy address" in NYC tomorrow at NASDAQ marketsite...

Typical, huh? It's not the people who work on Wall Street who are hurting, Hillary...it's the people on MAIN STREET.

Posted by David | December 4, 2007 6:25 PM

David, I was thinking she's adamant about focusing on economic issues in a desperate attempt not to keep the conversation on foreign policy... like her latest bit of gullibility in following Bush on that Iran vote.

Posted by Paul | December 4, 2007 7:20 PM

David, I'm not a Hillary Clinton fan by any means and I agree that "people on MAIN STREET" are hurting economically and have been for quite a few years right now. But your statement that the "people who work on Wall Street" are not hurting is just plain incorrect.

As someone who works at a financial firm, I've more than seen the pain, I've felt it. Layoffs have been occurring since October and will only continue and get worse. I'm a lowly temp assistant and will not see my contract renewed come the new year. The people I support at work are walking around with their axe above their head, quietly submitting their CVs elsewhere but realizing NO ONE is hiring during this market.

You can argue with me that it's the financial firms own irresponsibility and recklessness that has caused this, but don't tell me people working on Wall Street aren't feeling any pain. I haven't defended Hillary Clinton since the 90s, but she's the Senator of New York and if you know anything about this city, you know its main economic engine is the financial industry; more vital, in my opinion, than tourism. It supports and fuels virtually every other city industry (service, real estate, etc) and pours more money into the city coffers than any other. If our Senator has a plan to help the market economy, it's her duty to present it.

I don't trust a word out of her mouth either; but at least be reasonable and logical with your attacks.

Posted by Macartney | December 4, 2007 11:23 PM

Okay, he was governor. Now tell me what his accomplishments were during that time and why I should trust him. George Bush is president and has been for many years, but I can't look at his history and say I trust him for some hypothetical higher office simply because he won elections. You seem to think there's some kind of causative relationship between winning elections and leadership and there just isn't. Look, I think he's a good guy but I don't know what he stands for. He's doing well and I commend him for that, but he's riding on the popularity contest horserace. I hope people start expecting him to make policy statements soon and then evaluate those statements. The more I learn about him the worse it gets, though it may be unrealistic to expect people will learn about the candidates before they're willing to vote for one. Maybe Huck has it figured out - take no stand, smile a lot, crack jokes instead of answering questions, deflect, smile, win.

Posted by Mike | December 5, 2007 9:15 AM