Size Guru: McCain v. Romney

In Michigan today:

1. “Meanwhile, about 60 people are waiting for Romney to show up at his 2:30 p.m. event in Grand Rapids, including media. Word is, he might be there within the hour, so he's rather late.”

2. “McCain @ Oakland Co. Airport: I hear he had 800-1,000 people at a rally there.”

Comments

Hearing someone invoke audience size as a metric, I'm reminded out how pleased I was at the size of Obama's crowds and the talk that Hillary had to import supporters from other states to fill venues right up until the moment that she won the primary.

Posted by Helter | January 9, 2008 5:08 PM

Hello, Marc-

I publish a McCain-related site - I'll have a post on this post later on...

Good find on the crowd size differential. Obviously, attracting large and enthusiastic crowds is not an absolute guarantee of success on Election Day. That having been said, I would wholeheartedly affirm that other things being equal, I would rather have the candidate I support drawing the large crowds, than the candidate I oppose. I would think that all campaigns would view it in the same way.

A good analogy would be poll numbers. They don't guarantee a candidate victory - but everyone would rather have the polls on their side. So I think it's a very good sign for McCain, that his crowd is that large.

Posted by ElectionNightHQ.com Publisher | January 9, 2008 5:35 PM

It's over for Mitt. The death watch begins...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by matt | January 9, 2008 6:01 PM

We actually got a poll in Michigan today with Huckabee leading followed by Romney and then McCain. A very tight race that could go down to the wire.

Posted by Daniel | January 9, 2008 9:10 PM

« Democrats and faith: Still unfathomable | Main | Breaking News: N.M. Gov. Bill Richardson drops out »

Californian carries some water for Mitt Romney
BOSTON -- In Iowa, Mitt Romney bashed Mike Huckabee. In New Hampshire, he took on John McCain. Both targets withstood the damage and romped past Romney to victory.

So now, with a three-way battle shaping up in Michigan's Republican primary on Tuesday, will Romney lash out at both? Will he get personal?

Yes and yes, if remarks by a top Romney fundraiser on Wednesday offer any gauge of things to come.

Mark Chapin Johnson, a California co-chair of Romney's Republican presidential campaign, asserted that McCain's temperament and Huckabee's background as a minister made each unsuitable for the Oval Office.

[UPDATE: A Romney spokesman later said Johnson was expressing purely personal views that had not been sanctioned by the campaign.]

Johnson made his comments a few minutes after greeting Romney in Boston at a fundraising event, Johnson called McCain "extremely volatile."

"I like him, but he's got a short fuse," Johnson said in an interview. "He's got a short temper."

As for Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister ...

... and former governor of Arkansas, Johnson said that Romney, a Mormon, would do a better job of keeping religion out of government.

"He's not running for pastor, he's running for president," Johnson said of Romney. "Huckabee's running for pastor."

Johnson, a San Juan Capistrano medical-company mogul, has raised several hundred thousand dollars for Romney. He described himself as an evangelical.

"A spiritual foundation is an important part of my life. But that's not what the president of the United States should be about."

"How could a pastor become a president of the United States and detach himself from his pastoral roots?" Johnson added. "That's not possible in my mind."

-- Michael Finnegan

January 09, 2008 in California, Candidate Character, Faith and Politics, Fundraising, Iowa, Money, Mormonism, New Hampshire, Presidential Campaign, Religion, Republican Politics | Permalink

TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/816965/24973552

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Californian carries some water for Mitt Romney:

Comments
I agree. McCain is too liberal and old -- he also has roots with Kennedy/Feinstein, and Huckabee is much more liberal than he claims and is running for Baptist Preacher/Baptist President. We need the next American President, which is Mitt Romney.

Posted by: Debrar | January 09, 2008 at 02:31 PM

IF it isn't Ron Paul it better be Romney. Huckee Cheese and McDonkey can try again later. We need someone who doesn't need a gov't job but wants to lead America.

Posted by: Texas | January 09, 2008 at 03:40 PM

Michael,
I am not so sure that I (as a Mormon) couldn't vote for a Baptist Minister for president, I do not think I could vote for "This" Minister, Mr. Huckabee. He HAS shown that he cannot seperate religion and politics. The pardons alone prove that.

If there were a clergyman, with a history of being able to separate political and church I can easily see a vote for him. Just knowing the base values are there would be of comfort for me.

Posted by: MikeH | January 09, 2008 at 03:51 PM

MC-CAIN THE NEO-CON CANDIDATE IN THE AMERICAN CULTURAL WAR ---
NEW HAMPSHIRE PODHORETZ NEO-CONS, WHO NOW DOMINATE THE NEWS MEDIA, NARROWLY PREVAILED OVER RONALD REAGAN CONSERVATIVES, BY 37% TO 32%. DOES THIS VICTORY PREDICT THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDACY FOR NEO-CON MC-CAIN, THE NOTORIOUS TYRANT WHO SUPPORTS AMNESTY FOR THE 12-20 MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS OCCUPYING AMERICA, WOMEN SACRIFICING THE LIVES OF THE CHILDREN BY ABORTION, AND THE SACRIFICE OF THE PRECIOUS WEALTH AND PRICELESS OF BLOOD OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN UN-CONSTITUTIONAL WARS ON BEHALF OF ISRAEL; OR, DOES THIS VICTORY PREDICT THE REPUBLICAN FIRING SQUAD? OBSERVE THAT THE NEO-CON SUM OF GUIULIANI 9% PLUS MC-CAIN 37% IS 46%; AND THE CONSERVATIVE SUM OF ROMNEY 31%, PLUS HUCKABEE 11%, PLUS RON PAUL 8% COUNTED + 2% UN-COUNTED, PLUS THOMPSON 1%, PLUS DUNCAN 1% IS A TOTAL OF 54%.

Posted by: Jeugenen | January 09, 2008 at 04:00 PM

If Mike Huckabee had made racial comments about a leading black candidate or
sexist comments about a leading female candidate, he would have been
castigated by the media. How he was able to launch his surge with religious
bigotry is dumbfounding to me. It seems that everyone is oblivious to the
obvious.

In the event that Mitt Romney does not win the nomination, then history will
show that Mike Huckabee pulled off the political crime of the century. It
was Mike Huckabee that raised religious issues among Iowa evangelicals by
comments toward Romney's religion.

As Huckabee's tactics started to show in the Iowa polls, Mitt responded with
his "Faith in America" speech. Romney was then forced to work on damage
control. Romney's efforts in Iowa payed off and he continued to rise back in
the polls but the damage gave him a second in a state he held firmly until
Huckabee's misuse of the public forum.

McCain saw his window and concentrated on New Hampshire while Romney was
being unduely "occupied" in Iowa. Romney was forced to agressively address
things detracting from what his positive messaging had been and did so
famously. Romney then relied on comparison ads to contrast differences.
These ads were constantly referred to as "attack ads" by Huckabee, who
continually portrayed him as "desperate", and "attacking".

Now Huckabee is able to capitalize on such tactics. Because of his use of
the majority evangelical state of Iowa and with the ignorance of the media
toward the Mormon religion, he flew under the radar of a nation that has
worked since Lincoln to erase such bigotry.

A majority of the nation now sees only that Mike Huckabee won the Iowa
caucus and know nothing of the back story. I think it important to present
it. Observe for yourself and pass these perspectives along. We need a TRUE
man for change and a proven record of turning things around in the oval
office.

Vote Mitt Romney

Posted by Wendy | January 9, 2008 9:21 PM

It's been reported that Mitt Romney brought in over 5 MILLION DOLLARS TODAY, Jan. 9th, in Boston with fund raisers and supporters rallying behind him. I know I did. Even McCain's home state of Arizona donated around $146,000.00 to Romney's campaign. There must be some substance behind all that support---hmmmm, maybe it's because Mitt has an unbeatable resume and platform that is comprehensive, intelligent and not just 1" deep like McCain and Huckabee's.

Do you know why McCain and Huckabee can't illicit that kind of support? It's because McCain's support comes from Democrats/Indi's who vote against Romney. Voters aren't impassioned for a candidate that will be a lame duck president (80 years old in his second term!!). Huckabee has Evangelical pastors compelling their congregations to vote with their religion, and not with their heads. Scary, very scary.....

If Mitt doesn't win the Demo/Indie's vote in Michigan next week---it won't concern me at all. With the kind of support (and true conservative platform) like he received today....Mitt can outlast Huckabee and McCain to the end..

Go to a TRUE CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN WEBSITE - rushlimbaugh.com and see what he says about liberal candidates McCain and Huckabee and the state of the race. It's just beginning.....

P.S. The McCain supporters at the airport were all Democrats.... Go Obama/McCain (or insert any other liberal leaning candidate.....ie: Huckabee)

Posted by Coco | January 9, 2008 10:11 PM

Do you know why McCain and Huckabee can't illicit that kind of support?

You mean "elicit".

Sorry, Coco, but Romney probably won't continue with his candidacy if he still hasn't won anything by the end of the Michigan primary. He's smart enough to stop wasting his own fortune on a lost cause. Maybe next time he runs for office he will also be smart enough to not run a disgustingly cynical campaign that is based on pandering to the religious right and demanding that other candidates apologize to the worst president in modern history for stating the obvious about the disastrous foreign policy of the last seven years. I actually think Romney wouldn't be a terrible president, but unfortunately he thought America wanted Bush 2.0 with double the GITMO.

Posted by tinisoli | January 9, 2008 11:47 PM