Edsall: Attack on Mitt is McCain camp’s death rattle; Update: McCain buys “Mitt vs. Fact” URL; Update: Brownback piles on

posted at 9:24 am on June 14, 2007 by Allahpundit

Neither Ace nor Kaus nor I understand why he persists in smacking Romney. A McCain pal told the Hill that the campaign is “in the doldrums,” which might explain the attack but doesn’t explain why he’s attacking the guy in fourth place instead of the Rockefeller Republican who’s leading nationally. Back in the days Before Fred I theorized that he and Rudy would each hammer Mitt to drive him out so that neither one had to face a social con head-on for the nomination. With Fred running, though, that theory explodes: even if they did get rid of Mitt, his supporters would bounce to Thompson.

Edsall’s theory:

The McCain campaign’s abrupt decision to lash out at Mitt Romney as a flip-flopper on abortion is a last ditch bid to revive a candidate whose poll numbers and financial resources are dwindling…

McCain has targeted Romney because of Romney’s lead in the early caucus and primary states. Romney has been spending more than $4 million on advertising to take first place in polls in both Iowa and New Hampshire, and he is expected to attempt to launch television ads soon in South Carolina.

The net result has been the marginalization of McCain. Marginal candidates cannot raise money, making it much more difficult for McCain to compete in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, the three early primary states that can make or break campaigns.

The only one of those where McCain’s leading right now is in redder-than-red South Carolina and even there a few polls have Giuliani, of all people, ahead of him. With two social cons in the race now and the amnesty bill like a bear trap cinched on his leg, why not focus his energies on knocking out Rudy, reclaiming the center for himself, and running on his war record? That would leave Fred and Mitt to wrestle for the social-con slot and would let him argue, not implausibly, that as the most centrist of the three he stands the best chance of attracting independents in the general election.

Exit question one: Why hasn’t anyone attacked Rudy yet? Exit question two: Ace thinks if McCain does drop out, Rudy will stand to benefit the most. I think the converse of that is true, but that McCain’s supporters are more likely to catch Fredmania than Rudymania. Who’s right?

Update: Totally pathetic, totally embarrassing.

In another sign of John McCain’s plan to assault former Mitt Romney over his alleged flip-flops, the Arizona senator’s campaign has purchased the website “www.mittvsfact.com” and will launch it in the coming weeks as a compendium of what they say are the former governor’s differing stances.

The McCain camp yesterday attacked Romney on abortion under a “Mitt vs Fact” letterhead that aped their rival’s campaign logo. Late in the day, a tipster pointed out that a URL of the same had been purchased and privately registered. A McCain aide confirmed today that they secured the site last month and indicated that they would use it as a sort of one-stop-shop “to brand” Romney.

They’ve been desperate for weeks.

Update: This makes sense, at least.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Quite frankly, I think no one is attacking Rudy because they don’t want to be seen as going after the guy who stood tall on 9/11. As far as who benefits from a McCain dropout? I’d say it’s whoever the front runner is. McCain’s appeal to a lot of people is his perceived “electability”.

Farmer_Joe on June 14, 2007 at 9:31 AM

Exit Answer 1: What is there to attack him on? His stance on abortion? He’s made that clear. The fact he’s had three wives? People know that. His stance on Gun Rights? He’s said he wants that left to the states. Appointing Judges? He’s made very clear he wants to appoint very strict Constructionist Judges.

The problem with attacking Giuliani is that people know a lot about him already. He’s made it clear. The leads he has in the polls are after everyone knows his stances, and a chunk of his history.

amerpundit on June 14, 2007 at 9:37 AM

Exit question one: Why hasn’t anyone attacked Rudy yet?

Rudy’s stances are enough to sink him in a primary where something north of 2 out of 3 voters are conservative. Why expend energy on somebody who won’t win?

Exit question two: Ace thinks if McCain does drop out, Rudy will stand to benefit the most. I think the converse of that is true, but that McCain’s supporters are more likely to catch Fredmania than Rudymania. Who’s right?

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Oh, and Edsall nails it. Whoever gets to 2 wins first will take the nomination.

steveegg on June 14, 2007 at 9:38 AM

Exit Answer two: Who benefits? The entire nation. I don’t think there will be a mass migration to one or the other. I think the supporters of McCain will split to different candidates.

amerpundit on June 14, 2007 at 9:40 AM

Rudy’s stances are enough to sink him in a primary where something north of 2 out of 3 voters are conservative. Why expend energy on somebody who won’t win?

Except he continues to lead in the red states, and they already know his stances.

amerpundit on June 14, 2007 at 9:41 AM

I still don’t get how Romney is perceived as anything but someone who looks the part and says whatever is needed to get elected. It’s too juicy not to attack him when his position on abortion has, ahem, “evolved” from his Senate run in Mass.
And if it’s centrists that are going for McCain, it would make sense that they’ll go for Rudy as opposed to Thompson.

SouthernDem on June 14, 2007 at 9:42 AM

I think Rudy benefits more because St. John’s #1 draw is his stance on the war on terror. Rudy next best personifies that bulldog attitude of never let up, stay on offense.

Spirit of 1776 on June 14, 2007 at 9:42 AM

McCain has been the most consistent candidate. He has voted most conservatively as well.

tomas on June 14, 2007 at 9:43 AM

Conservatives benefit the most if St. John drops out. I lived in Michigan during the 2000 primaries. Democrats are allowed to vote in the Republican primary. Union officials were encouraging members to vote for McCain because they knew he would not carry conservatives and Gore would win the election.

jeffNWV on June 14, 2007 at 9:47 AM

I think no one is attacking Giuliani because the only real attacking that has gone on so far between the top 4 is McCain after Romney and look how well that has gone? I’m fairly certain they understand that most of us don’t have a whole lot of patience for that sort of stupidity.

I’m wondering if McCain will fight even harder for shamnesty now that his Presidential bid is essentially over. Then again he can’t even get support for his shamnesty bill on his own website.

bj1126 on June 14, 2007 at 9:55 AM

Except he continues to lead in the red states, and they already know his stances.

Are you sure? I have a feeling that your average church-going, non-blogging Mississipian has no idea that Rudy’s a social lib.

Enrique on June 14, 2007 at 9:57 AM

tomas on June 14, 2007 at 9:43 AM

Umm, no. First of all, except for Fred, you don’t know how the other leaders would vote. Second, he was the Sponsor of last year’s horrible immigration bill.

Rudy and the others have said they want a physical fence, to end illegal immigration, and identify the illegals in our nation. Rudy doesn’t think we need new legislation, we just need to enforce our existing laws. Watch the Hannity video from the other day.

amerpundit on June 14, 2007 at 9:58 AM

He should go down in flames, after all he is breaking Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment, “Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican.”

Exit question one: Why hasn’t anyone attacked Rudy yet?

Maybe McCain is looking at a VP run with Rudy.

abinitioadinfinitum on June 14, 2007 at 10:01 AM

Enrique on June 14, 2007 at 9:57 AM

But, they do most likely watch the news. And by the same logic you present, they most likely don’t know that Fred was in favor of abortion “in all cases” in 1994. They probably also wouldn’t know that Mitt was pro-choice.

I don’t know any Mississipians, but I do know a few church-going Conservative Floridians. Most of ‘em would prefer a more Conservative candidate, but they wouldn’t cry if Rudy got the nod.

amerpundit on June 14, 2007 at 10:03 AM

I don’t know any Mississipians, but I do know a few church-going Conservative Floridians. Most of ‘em would prefer a more Conservative candidate, but they wouldn’t cry if Rudy got the nod.

amerpundit on June 14, 2007 at 10:03 AM

Even if they would cry under normal circumstances, there’s a wild card this year. Church Going Folk may bristle at a social lib, but as one Christian leader said recently there are two words that change the whole dynamic: Hillary Clinton. For whatever reason, many Republicans will literally vote in anyone who isn’t a Clinton and will turn out to vote against her (as opposed to staying home). They hate Clintons with a passion.

And with Clinton so far out in the lead of the Democrats I find it hard to believe any scenario in which hard conservative or tribal Republicans stay home from the voting booths, no matter who gets the nomination on the Right.

Lehosh on June 14, 2007 at 10:08 AM

The net result has been the marginalization of McCain. Marginal candidates cannot raise money…

It’ll get worse for McCain, too.

According to the FEC, McCain had a squirt over $4.1m on hand at the end of the April reporting period compared to $9.9m for Rudy and $9.5m for Mitt.

No wonder McCain is by-passing a couple of primaries. He cannot afford to spread his war-chest to thinly and will have to concentrate his advertising on must-win states like South Carolina.

Exit Question #2 – Depends entirely on how Fred comes across in his first debate. If he comes across as a cornpone, “yuk yuk” candidate with no “gravitas” (as they say), I think Fred’s support will move to Mitt. If Fred looks good, McCain’s support will dwindle more towards Fred rather than Rudy.

Don’t underestimate the burning desire of the base for a real conservative.

Fun isn’t it!!

BacaDog on June 14, 2007 at 10:09 AM

abi, I just can’t see McCain playing second fiddle to anyone.

Enrique, right. It’s a delicate dance for the left, though. Can they really go into a general election trumpeting Rudy’s past social-lib stances as a bad thing?

(Answer: Duh. Can they really out their own fellow queers in the national media? Yes, of course they can…)

Jaibones on June 14, 2007 at 10:14 AM

For whatever reason, many Republicans will literally vote in anyone who isn’t a Clinton and will turn out to vote against her (as opposed to staying home). They hate Clintons with a passion.

Right. That’s why we can’t stay home in 08.

If the dems nominate Hillary, I’ll go to the poll and pull the “R” lever regardless of the name beside it.

BacaDog on June 14, 2007 at 10:15 AM

The reason McCain is attacking Mitt! is because, for the bagillioneth time…..fred? IS NOT a candidate. Jezze! How the hell can he attack a guy who isn’t even in the race? How stupid does that make him look?

And, unlike the fredheads, most in the know understand that freds? poll numbers are based on the ignorance of the people being polled. fred? hasn’t had to answer any questions, but people judge him equally with those who have? fred? is like a AA ball player bragging that he has more home runs than a major leaguer and his fans agree. Yeah, I trust THAT mentality.

Look at freds? dismal performances on Leno and the Robinson interview. McCain knows that if he can kill off Mitt! and after fred? implodes, all those juicy, juicy, social conservatives will have two choices. Rudy and McCain.

Exit question one: Why hasn’t anyone attacked Rudy yet?

It isn’t time. The social-cons have to be vetted down to one, and that candidate will go after Rudy.

Exit question two: Ace thinks if McCain does drop out, Rudy will stand to benefit the most. I think the converse of that is true, but that McCain’s supporters are more likely to catch Fredmania than Rudymania. Who’s right?

Like usual, you’re both wrong. :-) If McCain drops out without fred? in the race, they go to Mitt!. If McCain drops out after fred? actually commits, some of McCains support temporarily goes to fred?, but then goes back to Mitt! the second fred? has his eventual meltdown in a debate and his history is exposed.

Remember, freddie boy has a 20 year history in the same profession as abramoff, he is lazy, he’s a faker, he’s a pro-choice flip-flopper, and he has zero, nil, nada, NO experience that translates to the position of the most powerful executive on the face of the earth.

McCain knows this and is attacking the right guy and Mitt! knows it and that’s why he mounted an immediate defense.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 10:17 AM

McCain has been the most consistent candidate. He has voted most conservatively as well.

Guess you picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue. The only consistency McCain has shown has been on the war; everything else (immigration, treatment of detainees, freedom of speech) he’s been out of step and downright insulting to the base. I know I shouldn’t feed the trolls but when I see the mental equivalent of dog cr*p sitting on the sidewalk that is the comments section, I have this need to scatter it.

austinnelly on June 14, 2007 at 10:19 AM

Remember, freddie boy has a 20 year history in the same profession as abramoff, he is lazy, he’s a faker, he’s a pro-choice flip-flopper, and he has zero, nil, nada, NO experience that translates to the position of the most powerful executive on the face of the earth.

And he eats kitties… with Worchestershire Sauceof all things. Completely unacceptable. I’d could forgive a kitten in honey mustard at least.

Lehosh on June 14, 2007 at 10:22 AM

bah, formatting and grammar pwned me.

Lehosh on June 14, 2007 at 10:23 AM

Can csdeven officially declared the first sufferer of FDS (Fred Derangement Syndrome)?

bj1126 on June 14, 2007 at 10:24 AM

Like usual, you’re both wrong. :-) If McCain drops out without fred? in the race, they go to Mitt!

because?

Spirit of 1776 on June 14, 2007 at 10:24 AM

Remember, freddie boy has a 20 year history in the same profession as abramoff, he is lazy, he’s a faker, he’s a pro-choice flip-flopper, and he has zero, nil, nada, NO experience that translates to the position of the most powerful executive on the face of the earth.

Good grief, csdeven.

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 10:25 AM

bah, formatting and grammar pwned me.
Lehosh on June 14, 2007 at 10:23 AM

Welcome to the club. We would really like to have an edit feature.

I prefer baby seals with mango salsa.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 10:28 AM

Except he continues to lead in the red states, and they already know his stances.

amerpundit on June 14, 2007 at 9:41 AM

He can’t count on those red states because almost all of them are part of Super-Duper Tuesday, and those inclined to vote for him in the Pubbie primary are more-inclined to choose between Hillary and Barak Hussein Obama as that race won’t be settled before Super-Duper Tuesday.

steveegg on June 14, 2007 at 10:28 AM

Can csdeven officially declared the first sufferer of FDS (Fred Derangement Syndrome)?

bj1126 on June 14, 2007 at 10:24 AM

Yes.

steveegg on June 14, 2007 at 10:29 AM

because?
Spirit of 1776 on June 14, 2007 at 10:24 AM

They are for the most part socially conservative and Mitt!, regardless of the flip-flop, has a pretty good story as to why he has “evolved” on the abortion issue. It isn’t about the perfect conservative, it’s about the lesser of two weevils.

Understanding the LDS like I do, Mitts flip-flop was in 1994. He is now taking the position he really believes.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 10:32 AM

The reason McCain is attacking Mitt! is because, for the bagillioneth time…..fred? IS NOT a candidate. Jezze! How the hell can he attack a guy who isn’t even in the race? How stupid does that make him me look?

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 10:17 AM

Fixed.

Bill C on June 14, 2007 at 10:33 AM

Remember, freddie boy has a 20 year history in the same profession as abramoff, he is lazy, he’s a faker, he’s a pro-choice flip-flopper, and he has zero, nil, nada, NO experience that translates to the position of the most powerful executive on the face of the earth.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 10:17 AM

Your irrational crusade againt Fred is downright pathological.

infidel4life on June 14, 2007 at 10:42 AM

Yet more evidence of too much time in the sun for St. John.

Valiant on June 14, 2007 at 10:44 AM

csFDS

Remember, freddie boy has a 20 year history in the same profession as abramoff, he is lazy, he’s a faker, he’s a pro-choice flip-flopper, and he has zero, nil, nada, NO experience that translates to the position of the most powerful executive on the face of the earth.

Yet another juvinile, vain, and utterly futile attempt to manufacture ‘history’, ‘facts’, and ‘consensus’, using the Big Lie Repeated Often Enough Becomes Truth strategy.

But don’t forget that the anti-Fred!head is ’10 steps ahead’ of all of us in its clear-eyed conservative understanding. I know this because it say so. Repeatedly.

csdeven… a legend in its own mind.

Tedious.

techno_barbarian on June 14, 2007 at 10:53 AM

he has zero, nil, nada, NO experience that translates to the position of the most powerful executive on the face of the earth.

I guess those 9 years in the Senate was just killing time. Mitt was governor for 4 years in one of the most liberal states in the nation. Rudy was mayer for 7 years in one of the most liberal cities in the nation. Wow, that’s some impressive experience.

You’re grasping at straws.

natesnake on June 14, 2007 at 11:20 AM

McCain has been the most consistent candidate. He has voted most conservatively as well.

tomas

Thanks for the laugh. I needed one after watching the jihad video.

I’ll give you that he’s been more consistent in making bad choices, i.e., no waterboarding the poor defenseless terrorists and supporting this joke of an immigration bill.

moonsbreath on June 14, 2007 at 11:21 AM

Well, one wonders if Ted Kennedy’s assigned job was to take down any Republican candidate foolish enough to hitch himself to him.
If that’s the case, fare thee well, McCain! and wishing all the best to Kennedy in his endeavors. The Dems gamble is that the Republican field will be clear-cutted for the triumphal passage of the Democrat Arkansas dynasty in-the-making.

naliaka on June 14, 2007 at 11:28 AM

I think McCain is the strongest pro life candidate

tomas on June 14, 2007 at 11:55 AM

Rockefeller Republican my ass!

Hilts on June 14, 2007 at 12:01 PM

Good grief, csdeven.
Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 10:25 AM

Was fred? a lobbyist for 20 years? (and more recently) And was abramoff a lobbyist also?

Does he have the reputation for being lazy? Didn’t he say once that he didn’t want to spend his life in the senate and didn’t want to spend long hours voting on procedural stuff? And his senate record is weak and the very best. Don’t most people who are fredheads question is passion? His quote from Leno…“I’ve never craved the job of president, but I want to do some things that only a president can do, so the answer is yes.”

Did, as his former manager admitted and an eye witness reports, use a pickup truck to create an image that he wasn’t really living?

In 1994 did freddie boy support giving the woman the final choice in abortion?

Does fred? have any executive experience?

No one has ever been able to point to anything other than their zeal for his rhetoric to refute those rock solid facts.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:02 PM

It’s simple. Mitt got under McVains’s skin.

TheBigOldDog on June 14, 2007 at 12:04 PM

I guess those 9 years in the Senate was just killing time.
natesnake on June 14, 2007 at 11:20 AM

Basically, by reasoned accounts, yes it was. He did very little. If you think his accomplishes were so great, look up the supporters of the McCain/Feingold.

Do you understand what executive experience is? The senate has ZERO executive responsibilities where as a Governor and a mayor are the epitome executive jobs. (short of the presidency)

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:08 PM

Welcome to the club. We would really like to have an edit feature.
csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 10:28 AM

And the rest of us would prefer an “ignore” feature, since you have nothing to offer but mindless, repetitive trolling. It would cut the Fred! threads at least in half while quadrupling the collective IQ after your substance-free, hateful trolling was relegated to the virtual trash.

You’re a juvenile one-trick-pony that should’ve been banned long ago.

Hollowpoint on June 14, 2007 at 12:11 PM

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:02 PM

I’m not a Fredhead, csdeven. I’m just tired of seeing every single political thread turn into a Fred Flamewar because you keep repeating the same talking points.

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 12:16 PM

I think McCain is the strongest pro life candidate
tomas on June 14, 2007 at 11:55 AM

And yet he made it harder, with the Gang of 14, for the president to appoint pro-life judges.

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 12:17 PM

Understanding the LDS like I do, Mitts flip-flop was in 1994. He is now taking the position he really believes.
csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 10:32 AM

Ummm, try the 2002 election. Or has that also been explained to your satisfaction?
Talk about professional flip flops.

SouthernDem on June 14, 2007 at 12:26 PM

Do you understand what executive experience is? The senate has ZERO executive responsibilities where as a Governor and a mayor are the epitome executive jobs. (short of the presidency)

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:08 PM

Do you understand that executive experience in the liberal NE is not an asset when trying to get the conservative vote?

Gianni on June 14, 2007 at 12:35 PM

Do you understand that executive experience in the liberal NE is not an asset when trying to get the conservative vote?

Gianni on June 14, 2007 at 12:35 PM

Explain why.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:44 PM

Do you understand that executive experience in the liberal NE is not an asset when trying to get the conservative vote?
Gianni on June 14, 2007 at 12:35 PM

Actually, experience as an elected Republican in the “liberal NE” is a pretty good indicator of general appeal.

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 12:46 PM

Ummm, try the 2002 election. Or has that also been explained to your satisfaction?
Talk about professional flip flops.
SouthernDem on June 14, 2007 at 12:26 PM

Do you know what the LDS believe about abortion?

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:48 PM

McCain knows that if he can kill off Mitt! and after fred? implodes, all those juicy, juicy, social conservatives will have two choices. Rudy and McCain.

And then:

Do you understand what executive experience is? The senate has ZERO executive responsibilities where as a Governor and a mayor are the epitome executive jobs. (short of the presidency)

Do you understand what executive experience is? Well which is it csdeven? Senate experience is fine for McCain but not for Fred? McCain has wizard powers? What is it?

You are talking in circles.

natesnake on June 14, 2007 at 12:51 PM

It’s simple. Mitt got under McVains’s skin.
TheBigOldDog on June 14, 2007 at 12:04 PM

Sure did, which is a huge plus for Mitt in my book.

I think so far Romney has run an excellent campaign that invokes feelings of competency and confidence. He’s gone from virtually unknown nationally to money primary winner, two strong debate showings and now is the current leader in both NH and Iowa. He seems to be spending his money wisely/efficiently and has handled the few missteps/challenges so far pretty well by not allowing them to damage his campaign in any measurable way. I think he’s going to get better as this thing drags on and it will be interesting to see how Fred measures up when they are actually standing side by side.

Zetterson on June 14, 2007 at 12:51 PM

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 12:16 PM

I do not contribute to the personal flaming. I attack a public figure and do so as vehemently against him as some do for him. I repeat my position for the same reason other repeat their positions. It’s balance.

Being a mature adult, I can deal with the balance, but as you can see by the personal attacks against me, many cannot handle the balance.

I mistook your statement as another one liner attacking me instead of dealing with the facts. I apologize. But please notice I did not attack you personally.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:55 PM

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:55 PM

No apologies necessary. It’s not like you called me lazy.*

*But I am.

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 12:58 PM

Any Republicans still in the McCain camp have got to wake up. WTFU! McCain is a liberal democrat with an R in front of his name. I am going to really enjoy watching his political career plummet because of the one final Amnesty betrayal. It cannot fall off the face of the earth fast enough.

Zetterson on June 14, 2007 at 1:00 PM

“I will not take the low road to the highest office in this land. I want the presidency in the best way, not the worst way. A clear choice will be offered, a choice between my optimistic and welcoming conservatism and the negative message of fear..I’m going to fight with every ounce of strength I have, but I’m going to keep fighting clean, I’m going to keep fighting fair, and I’m going to keep fighting the battle of ideas.”
-John McCain, February 2000

How’s that low road looking now, Senator?

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 1:02 PM

Do you know what the LDS believe about abortion?
csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 12:48 PM

Effectively no abortion except cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at stake “after receiving divine confirmation through prayer.” Right?
He hasn’t exactly taken this position. He’s for states rights on the issue and vowed as governor not to endorse changes concerning Mass abortion laws. How is this consistent with LDS? And what does this matter anyway? I don’t care about his religion.

SouthernDem on June 14, 2007 at 1:09 PM

SouthernDem on June 14, 2007 at 1:09 PM

My point is that I believe Mitt! has always believed that, but went against that to get elected in MA. Where he is at now is more in line with his beliefs and a better indication of his approach toward nominating judges and justices. He for sure flip-flopped, but I think it happened in the 90′s and not in 2003. I expect a lot of reps to have had some somewhat “nuanced” positions during the clinton years. It’s still a concern, but it appears we will be stuck with the lesser of two evils and I will not let that flip-flop keep me home if he’s the nominee.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 1:21 PM

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 1:21 PM

I have to disagree. When one says, in 2002 no less, “I believe women should have the right to make their own choice”, it’s a pretty clear message in my mind. If he alters his true opinion in the interest of getting elected in lib land Mass, what’s to say he’s not feeding you all a bunch of bull to get the Republican nomination?
I certainly agree that the flip flop shouldn’t keep you at home, though.
Sorry if I’m going OT on this thread, btw.

SouthernDem on June 14, 2007 at 1:37 PM

Why hasn’t anyone attacked Rudy yet?

Because he’d be a great one to beat the Glacier, to be VP for anyone, or fill the Homeland Security post for anyone…, or another prominent admin. post, young enough to run for president later, after 4 or 8 years, strong convictions, plausible, driven, proven record, human flaws like all others, not perfect but who is?

Not that his ego could stomach it, but I’m thinking that McCain is almost now vying for VP for Fred, or another…better that than none…just playing with political dominos. Surely, he’s seen the numbers and it hurts. Amnesty will be great for Fred and Giuliani (if he’s had a sincere conversion and it’s not just for political expediency).

For me, Rudy is the most nonchalant about the Fred entrance. I like that in him. He’s probably very pragmatic about it and secure either way. Right now, McCain being out, I believe Romney has the most to worry about.

Entelechy on June 14, 2007 at 2:00 PM

Clarification – not “amnesty will be great”, but their take on shamnesty.

Entelechy on June 14, 2007 at 2:03 PM

In another sign of John McCain’s plan to assault former Mitt Romney

What, did he change his name to Prince or something?

Remember, freddie boy has a 20 year history in the same profession as abramoff

Guilt by horrendously stretched association? That one’s too pathetic even for you.

Jeff Kent is a ‘roid user. How do I know? Duh, he used to play on the same team as Barry.

It’s only a matter of time until we discover how many people Will Smith has murdered. Hey, he’s a rapper! They’re ALL murderers.

Until you have a shred of evidence that Mr. Thompson, during his tenure as a public advocacy lobbyist, arranged corrupt deals with legislators, this line is completely absurd.

Methinks the Fred!basher just gets a thrill from spouting stuff that would bring a libel suit were its target not a public figure.

Freelancer on June 14, 2007 at 2:23 PM

Exit question two:

Since Fred!s name began appearing in straw polls, the McCain supporters have held a substantially more favorable opinion of Fred than of Rudy. The suggestion would be that McCain’s departure would benefit Thompson more than Giuliani.

This is one of the reasons why Fred won’t answer a question about McCain or Giuliani; he refuses to give supporters of either a negative feeling, so that when their guys give up he’ll be remembered positively. The other reason is that his campaign isn’t about other candidates, it’s about the issues, and I’m hoping he keeps it that way.

Freelancer on June 14, 2007 at 2:29 PM

Freelancer on June 14, 2007 at 2:23 PM

So, all that means fred? isn’t going to have to answer questions about it? What happens if fred? was lobbying for a less than upstanding client?

You’ve got your head in the sand if you think freds? career as am arm twisting lobbyist isn’t going to come into play. Most people do not trust lobbyists. And abramoff is just another reason why.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 3:34 PM

what’s to say he’s not feeding you all a bunch of bull to get the Republican nomination?
SouthernDem on June 14, 2007 at 1:37 PM

We really don’t. I am just going on what I know to be the position held by a majority of Mormons. I do not see Mitt! changing his stance once he becomes the president.

csdeven on June 14, 2007 at 3:44 PM

Romney is a natural choice to attack since he leads in several of the early states. The national poll numbers are almost irellevant next to that.

For those worried about flip-flops by Romney, there is something you are not getting. He sticks by the platform he runs on. A traditional flip-flop would be when you run on one idea and change it. Romney has never done that. He is announcing the positions he will govern with accurately as a canditate for that position

Resolute on June 14, 2007 at 7:44 PM

Actually, experience as an elected Republican in the “liberal NE” is a pretty good indicator of general appeal.

Slublog on June 14, 2007 at 12:46 PM

Sure it can show general appeal, but if the person is able to get that kind of support in the most liberal state of the country or one of the most liberal cities, do you really think that people in the conservative strongholds are going to trust them? I just can’t see someone from the NE getting the Republican nomination. Even the last couple of Democrat Presidents have been from the South.

Gianni on June 14, 2007 at 10:14 PM