Posted on 05/30/2007 7:19:37 AM PDT by Reaganesque
WASHINGTON — Just a few weeks ago, advisers to Mitt Romney spoke about a steady, gradual climb from obscurity to the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. Mitt Romney, speaking in Lakeland, Fla., Thursday, appears to have momentum on his side among GOP presidential contenders.
Now, Romney has rocketed from behind and is leading the race or is neck and neck for the lead in the pivotal states of Iowa and New Hampshire.
The road to next January's voting still is marked by numerous potholes, including persistent charges that he's a flip-flopper without conviction, a Mormon faith still unfamiliar and perhaps suspect to some voters as well as potential new competition from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Sen. Fred Thompson.
Also, his rapid rise may say as much about the fickleness of Republicans this early in the campaign as it does about the former Massachusetts governor.
But for now at least, Romney enters the summer astride the top tier and within reach of being able to claim that he's the front-runner for the nomination.
"He clearly has the three M's: media, money and momentum," independent pollster John Zogby said.
Romney led the field in fund raising in the first three months of this year. Yet until now, he trailed in popularity well behind Rudy Giuliani and Arizona Sen. John McCain in most polls, either nationally or in early voting states such as Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina.
However, a poll in Iowa by The Des Moines Register last week found Romney leaping ahead with the support of 30 percent of likely attendees at January's precinct caucuses, well ahead of McCain's 18 percent and Giuliani's 17 percent.
In another new Iowa survey by the Republican public relations firm Strategic Vision, Romney led with 20 percent, up sharply from 8 percent the month before. He was followed by Giuliani with 18 percent and McCain with 16 percent. (A third poll showed McCain with 18 percent, Giuliani with 17 percent and Romney with 16 percent.)
Romney surged in New Hampshire as well. A new Zogby poll there found he had the support of 35 percent of likely primary voters, up from 25 percent the month before. That was well ahead of Giuliani and McCain, each with 19 percent.
Analysts and insiders pointed to three reasons for the Romney rise:
• Good reviews from party members and pundits for his performance in the party's first debate, May 3 in California.
• Unusually early television advertising in Iowa and New Hampshire. Romney has been advertising there for weeks, boasting about his record as a business executive and governor. A new ad Thursday bragged that he cut spending and taxes as governor and "enforced immigration laws, stood up for traditional marriage and the sanctity of human life."
• His rivals are in trouble with the party's conservative base. Giuliani's support for abortion rights was highlighted in the first two debates, a problem in a party that still opposes abortion rights. McCain stood with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., on an immigration bill widely reviled by conservatives as amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Romney's criticism of the immigration proposal — which is similar to one he supported a year ago — drew a sharp rebuke from McCain.
That, conservative strategist Greg Mueller said, was a mistake that helped elevate Romney as THE conservative critic of the unpopular proposal among the presidential candidates. "The McCain attack is the best thing that's happened to Romney since the day he got in," Mueller said.
He still faces formidable obstacles.
Foremost is the charge that he's a campaign convert to conservatism after running as a more moderate or liberal candidate in Massachusetts. Notably, he supported abortion rights when he ran for the Senate against Kennedy in 1994 and now opposes them.
"That could be his Achilles' heel," said David Johnson of Strategic Vision, which found in its new poll that Romney loses 4 percentage points of his support when voters are reminded that he supported abortion rights and gay rights in the 1990s.
"That's the one reluctance about Mitt Romney among conservatives," Johnson said. "They don't know if he's a true conservative."
The other potential challenge is his Mormon faith. In Iowa, the recent Register poll found that 1 out of 5 Republicans said they were less likely to vote for Romney because of his faith. But Mueller suggested that social conservatives eventually would care more about what Romney would do in the Oval Office than what he would do in church.
"Is there an undercurrent out there nervous about the Mormon thing? Sure. But they really want to know where he stands on the issues they care about," Mueller said.
Romney's campaign aides say he can answer the flip-flop questions by pointing to his record as governor.
"The only position he's ever changed is on life, and he changed in the right direction," Romney's campaign spokesman Kevin Madden said. "It was a matter of him recognizing he was wrong in the past and now he's right on the issue."
Madden also said that Romney's faith faded as an issue when people met the candidate and realized that he "shares the same hopes and aspirations that Americans of many faiths do."
In the end, those close to Romney tamp down any talk of his being the front-runner, perhaps fearful of raising expectations too high and setting him up for a fall if and when the polls in those early states change again.
"It's still fluid. I expect they will change," Madden said.
But he said the key to Romney's success of recent weeks and his hopes for the coming months were the same: that people get to know him and his record — and that they like him.
Sorry, I was figuring that since the article was the subject of the thread, the posts on the thread should relate to the article. I guess you were figuring something else.
And how do we know that? Are we to trust someone who panders and tells people what they want to hear? He isn't called flipping Mitt for no reason.
WE people won't vote for Romeny...YOU people will. That's why we are talking about him at all. WE people like to know our candidate before we make a decision. His religion just so happens to be one of the aspects that many people do not like.
I personally don't like his looks. He's too polished and fake for me. I prefer a more manly type....like someone who has worn a uniform. In that way I prefer McCain to the French-speaking, pandering, flipping, goody-two-face.
Oh! am I allowed to comment on his looks? Perhaps I should take that to General Chat section, if the breathing gets to hot and heavy we could even move that to the Smoky Back Room where fickle women with heaving, burning desires may post about Romney's chest as he windsurfs, or his wonderful smile and nice head of hair. P u l e e z e
The article is about Romney’s surge in the Polls. The article may or may not be the subject of discussion. The News outlet may or may not be the subject of discussion. Romney may or may not be the subject of discussion.
Isn’t conversation wonderful it takes many interesting twists and turns. In fact, you got to learn that the Deseret News is owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Now you are more enlightened than before.
Calm down. Take a deep breath.
Let go of some of that bitterness. Enjoy life a little.
Yep, there are two main papers in Utah, the Salt Lake Tribune (oddly, anti-Mormon in many ways) and the Deseret Morning News, which is staunchly pro-LDS.
Since news of Fred's candidacy is starting to pick up steam, they're trying one more rah-rah for Mitt. Mitt has done remarkably well, picking up support while McCain and Rudy have been self-destructing with the Republican base. I really didn't expect Fred to do this "fund-raising entity" thing until July, but clearly Mitt's successes have moved his timetable along.
Oh yes, the accusations of bitterness. What next, bigotry?
Hate? Disappointment? Anger? Let me take my prosac and be a good, silent little proletariat for the “elect Mitt at any cost” people. I should just be nice and quiet, calm, barefoot and pregnant. I should know my place and be greatful to you for reminding me. Big breaths....in...out...let the nice people tell you what is good for you. There...don’t you feel better. Go to the Temple, it is such an escape from the “real” world. AAAhhhhh
I wonder what dog you have in this dogfight?
If Fred T had the necessary fire in the belly, he’d have put himself out by participating in the first two debates. Johnny come lately trying to “save” the party. Give me a break. What an ego. And I could say the same thing for Newt.
Now, regarding Romney’s religious beliefs. It is unconstitutional to place a religious test on candidates for office. It’s a free country and anyone can run. Romney deserves a lot of credit for standing there with his head held high and taking all these CHEAP SHOTS BELOW THE BELT.
I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I love my Savior. I am a Mormon.
That, conservative strategist Greg Mueller said, was a mistake that helped elevate Romney as THE conservative critic of the unpopular proposal among the presidential candidates. "The McCain attack is the best thing that's happened to Romney since the day he got in," Mueller said.
(snicker)
Have a nice day, CC.
He needs to start wearing his seatbelt in his SUV while being interviewed by a newsbabe.
“Talking points” - don’t have a clue what they may be. This is a free forum where people like me may express their opinions, hopefully without fear.
Yes, I am enlightened. Just as Rodney Dangerfield would go to a fight, and a hockey game would break out, so too do political threads on this political forum twist and turn always in the same direction until a theological discussion breaks out. And come to find that one of the conversation twister/turners never even read the article before wading right into the theological mire!
I'd say that is a thread hijack, not wonderful conversation. If you want to delve into the theological aspects of Romney's candidacy, start a thread in which that is the subject, and you can all go at it. The rest of us can avoid that thread, and thus have the distinct pleasure of Freeping without being subjected to your theological musings.
The issue isn't whether Mitt Romney would allow his religious beliefs dictate his policies in office, the issue is whether his religion will be exploited by the opposition to suppress voter turnout. You refuse to believe it will and would ingore the realities of the DNC and media history. THAT is the issue, but keep trying to focus attention on your red herrings until you've handed the election to the DNC. You won't shut me up or run me off of the threads, BTW. But that is another nice try by Romney apologists, girl. I admire the determination and it's a whole lot better thsn denigrating the competition in order to raise your choice above the cesspool created.
Oh my dear Plutarch. I wonder if your were referring to me. I didn't say I never read the article, I said I hadn't formed an opinion on its truthfulness. In order to do that I would need to consult other polls and opinions. I did comment on some of the facts. I did post about the ownership of the Deseret News, when someone else asked. I really haven't posted much else regarding theology and I don't unless asked. Check the thread and see.
And I hear that James Carville is a great dad!
Using blinders and being proud of it isn’t something to be proud of, girl. But you can ignore the realities and imagine that Plutarch will also ... frankly, I doubt it.
Okay, I checked. I guess this isn't theological, no sir.
...And he believes is a specious religion who’s founder claimed many fantastical things that most Americans reject...
I would say that post qualifies as "not much". You are entitled to your own opinion. Are you LDS?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.