Tancredo endorses Romney; Update: “You bet your life” Huckabee was a factor
posted at 3:20 pm on December 20, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
That’s the word from the Des Moines Register. It’ll be negligible in Iowa, probably, but a huge jolt of credibility nationally for Mitt among the base, needless to say. Tanc will be on Cavuto at 4 to talk about it. Stand by for updates.
Update: I thought he was polling 1 or 2 percent in Iowa. I see from the DMR story that it’s 6 percent. Maybe not so negligible.
What do you suppose Mitt offered in return? Director of Homeland Security Tom Tancredo? The boss will swoon.
Update: What a killer for Fred. He was obviously in the running for Tanc’s endorsement and could have used the “true conservative” buzz it would have given him even more than that six percent. It’s especially curious, as MM says, because his pal Steve King opted for Thompson. I wonder if Tanc, who’s quitting the House next year, didn’t look at the two of them and simply go with the guy with the better chance to win. Mitt’s better funded, he’s run a better campaign, ergo he’s the guy most likely to win and give Tanc a position of authority in the next administration.
Update: RW Wacko poses an alternate theory that echoes my reasoning here. Maybe Tanc is as worried as we are about Huck’s rise and went with the guy best positioned to knock him off.
Update: Here’s Tancredo’s statement. RW Wacko vindicated? Note well:
The presidential campaign has come down to less than a handful of viable candidates. Unfortunately several of them have abysmal records on immigration and can’t be trusted to do what is needed to preserve this country if they’re elected. My fear is that if I were to stay in this race my votes could be the factor in handing victory to a pro-amnesty politician. Friends, we have done too much, come too far and the stakes are too high to play that hand. And so I am ending my presidential campaign.
Update: Why Romney?
“There’s a candidate who meets several criteria from my point of view….He will secure our borders….he’ll require those who are presently here illegally to return home. He also has, by the way, a solid record that matches his rhetoric….He can go the distance. This morning I met with Governor Mitt Romney….I am withdrawing from this race and I am endorsing Governor Romney.”…
Tancredo met with Romney for “over an hour” this morning, in order to “clarify” issues.
Update: Too bad MM didn’t include Tanc as an option in her Internet poll this morning. I’m curious to see how he’d have polled vis-a-vis Fred. Certainly he’d have done no worse than second; compare that to his sixth or seventh place standing in Iowa. Proof, if any was needed, that conservative bloggers and blog readers don’t represent the base as neatly as some might think.
Update: Confirmed — blame the Huckaboom.
He also made plain that he was moved to get out of the contest because he feared the rise of Mike Huckabee, who has taken a less hard-line approach to immigration in the past.
“It was important in making this decision — you bet your life it was,” Tancredo said, speaking to a group of reporters and supporters at a press conference.
Update: The video of Tancredo on Cavuto is here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Keep the Tancelot pictures up. You guys don’t like him anyway, so it shouldn’t hurt Fred! all too much.
My thought is this: you’re alone with the curtain drawn behind you, it’s spread open before you, no one will be the wiser, no one will know, do you go with the risky behavior or hold a little back for a later date? You only get one punch. ((Think memories of CA conservatives ripping McClintock apart for their “conservative” man that could win at all costs teh Arnold… My fellow conservative Califorians, was it worth the win?))
Sultry Beauty on December 20, 2007 at 5:14 PM
How do the Paul spammers find every single poll, every time? Is it like a beehive, where the scouts find food and begin to emit powerful pheromones to attract the rest of the hive? I wonder what Paulnut pheromones smell like? Must be something enticing indeed.
aero on December 20, 2007 at 5:16 PM
While everybody’s concentrating on the Huckster, John McAmnesty is coming on strong.
Starting to feel like Whackamo.
Speakup on December 20, 2007 at 5:17 PM
Maybe there is something to that tin-foil thing after all.
Limerick on December 20, 2007 at 5:21 PM
Ok I see. Tanc would consider endorsing a pro-Amnesty candidate. You’re right.
Zetterson on December 20, 2007 at 5:25 PM
Haha, Buy Danish, I know this is going to be frustrating but even that is not enough evidence. I’m just going to keep my suspicions to myself.
Zetterson on December 20, 2007 at 5:27 PM
Dang Technorati. That’s where I’ve gotten all of my Paulbot spam.
Slublog on December 20, 2007 at 5:27 PM
Seriously! Republican voters have gone freaking insane. The least conservative candidates are taking turns surging, and the actual conservatives are sinking like rocks, dropping out, or never made it off the bottom. Whack-a-mole, indeed.
Newt, you could’ve had it. Negatives be damned, it would have been yours for the taking. This is a fool’s circus.
aero on December 20, 2007 at 5:29 PM
When they’ve hit me, they’ve used Rosie’s favorite. Appropriate, isn’t it?
steveegg on December 20, 2007 at 5:31 PM
Doesn’t that latent anti-Mormonism have the potential to cause more mischief in the primaries than the general? Seems to me that it will be neutralized more against someone with Hillary’s high negatives or Obama’s obvious naivity. I know Huck may keep trying to take advantage of it before the nomination, but won’t his efforts be much more obvious and distasteful now that he’s been caught a few times?
a capella on December 20, 2007 at 5:35 PM
I just gave Fred another 50 bucks. I can’t believe our conservative base voting for other candidates. A TOTAL SHAME
msipes on December 20, 2007 at 5:35 PM
Actually, I’m only right about what he said in the interview. The rest of it is coming from your imagination.
Also, my guy’s Fred. Not Romney. I think Tanc was playing his power as well as he thought best. I still hope Fred pulls it out, and with the polls like they are right now, anything’s possible.
techno_barbarian on December 20, 2007 at 5:39 PM
Is there any way under heaven to get Jack Bauer as Director of Homeland Security?
Frozen Tex on December 20, 2007 at 5:41 PM
So will I. Wait…I just did. Someone get me a lemonade and a fan; I’m feeling faint (feint?).
Jaibones on December 20, 2007 at 5:44 PM
Perhaps. But I’m guessing that it won’t be overtly addressed during the general. It will instead become a stealth issue–one that isn’t necessarily talked about openly but nevertheless factors into the turnout level on election day. The anti-Mormons will likely stop talking about it because they’ll stop feeling invested in the process once a Mormon is nominated, and they’ll realize it won’t do them any good anymore to yell about it because the nomination will be a done deal. They’ll feel alienated by the party and simply check out of the process. They’ll stay home in protest and lose the election for us. Short-sighted, bigoted and stupid? Yes. Likely to happen anyway? Very possibly.
Note that the staying home in protest phenomenon is just as likely to happen over the perceived weaknesses of each of the other top 5 as well (different groups would stay home for each). McCain for amnesty, Rudy for abortion, Huck for fiscal liberalism, and Fred for…well, I don’t know what about Fred would make people stay home. Perhaps that’s why I’ve settled on Fred.
aero on December 20, 2007 at 5:45 PM
Believe it or not, not everyone thinks Fred Thompson is the ultimate conservative hero. That’s primarily because Fred can’t run a campaign worth anything and the only thing he’s got under his belt is rhetoric. As a Senator the only thing he’s remembered for is McCain-Feingold. He’s a sideline sitter and a benchwarmer for conservative men of action.
I really wish Tancredo got all the support Fred’s been getting. Fred is a man of many words but when it comes to action he’s at home, tucked inside his warm bed fast asleep. He only awakens when the battle is over to bask in the glory.
At the end of the day all Fred has is a list of votes. He’s never run anything except his mouth.
BKennedy on December 20, 2007 at 5:49 PM
Maybe the Tanc misread the burrito he had last night as a burning in the bosom for Mitt…
right2bright on December 20, 2007 at 6:00 PM
I never said he was. In fact, I just named Newt as the conservative hero I wish had entered the race. Would have made things a lot easier for me if he had–no question about who’s the real conservative when Newt’s around!
But out of the top 5, Fred’s the most conservative in all three categories. That doesn’t make him the “ultimate conservative hero,” but it does make him the best choice out of some admittedly weak choices.
It’s not looking like we’re going to win the general anyway, so it’s all probably moot. The country’s mood continues to swing inexorably left for some insane reason. Probably just the pendulum swinging like it always does, but it’s depressing all the same.
aero on December 20, 2007 at 6:03 PM
Now that Tanc is out, I’ll consider his endorsement of Mitt, who’s stock is rising in my book, but I’m still leaning towards Duncan Hunter in the primary.
CliffHanger on December 20, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Tancredo would have done so much better if he had just gotten a blimp.
Vinnie on December 20, 2007 at 7:08 PM
I like Fred. But here is something for the Fredheads to consider. Who is actually effective at organizing and accomplishing what they say they will. Sorry not Fred. Romney beats all on that test.
Resolute on December 20, 2007 at 7:38 PM
Problem is, what Romney says he’ll do today isn’t what he said he’d do yesterday or what he’ll say tomorrow.
Also, some of those things he says he wants to do (at least today) aren’t that encouraging- lots of spending and more federal gun control.
Hollowpoint on December 20, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Fred’s federalist stance holds great appeal to me and I fear that Romney will just be another big business President but Tancredo’s endorsement is huge. I can’t believe that Tanc would endorse Romney if he didn’t truly believe in him. If Tanc says Mitt is the man I’ll have to look at the whole thing again.
Buzzy on December 20, 2007 at 8:04 PM
He basically said that he did just that. Tanc chose Romney mainly because he thinks he has the “best shot”–not because he “believes in him.” Tanc sold out, in my opinion. Basically he said he talked to Romney and he thinks (hopes?) Romney will stick to what he’s saying on immigration. It didn’t strike me as an overly confident statement. He used the word “think” a lot.
aero on December 20, 2007 at 8:15 PM
Problem is, what Romney says he’ll do today isn’t what he said he’d do yesterday or what he’ll say tomorrow.
Hollowpoint on December 20, 2007 at 7:57 PM
1)accomplshed actions
2)detailed plans
3)campaing positions
4)off the cuff remarks
Romney’s positives tend to align in 1&2 and all his negatives you continually post are in 3&4. Fred is the opposite with him being great in 3&4 and having nothing for #1.
Resolute on December 20, 2007 at 8:33 PM
Yeah, Mitt did say something about an assault weapon ban, didn’t he?
a capella on December 20, 2007 at 8:46 PM
I like the man, and have no problem with his ads. For all those whining about a lack of leadership in the conservative movement, I say Tanredo has certainly stood up during this bid. I always found him to be the most straightforward and seemingly genuine of all the candidates during the campaign coverage. I hope he does run for the Senate and continues to rally us forward towards a more secure America. Excelsior!
Dork B. on December 20, 2007 at 9:37 PM
That’s absurd. There is no precedent for Tanc selling out. Everything he has done has been principled, popular or not.
My question to Fred supporters is, what if Fred drops out and endorses McCain. Are you all going to call him a sell-out?
Spirit of 1776 on December 20, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Yes.
Although it’s not quite a fair comparison, because when Fred drops out there won’t be any true conservatives left in the race for him to endorse (assuming Hunter drops out before Fred does). He won’t have any choices left but sell-outs to endorse.
aero on December 20, 2007 at 10:08 PM
Aero, well it might be sooner than you think if it is true his coffers are running low. Without a topic like the surge success to reintroduce him like McCain, I don’t see a financial rebound. So strange too, I would not have thought money would have been an issue with him in the days running up to his announcement – there was a lot of hype and a lot of anticipation. I’m afraid we’re in for a let-down.
I do think the comparison is quite fair. Mitt was rated higher on imm. issues, so he is the more conservative on immigration. Fred doesn’t really have a record on this to run on, so Tanc made the most practical choice on the most important issue. Makes sense. Try this clip and tell me you don’t believe he is honest.
Spirit of 1776 on December 20, 2007 at 10:19 PM
Absolutely, yes. Do you really think that’s a legit option at this point?
MT on December 20, 2007 at 10:25 PM
Let me answer this with a clarification first. I am NOT a Fred-hater. I’m just being a straight a shooter as I can.
Yes, I think it is likely. The only reason I don’t think it would happen is if Fred stays in the race until the point at which endorsements don’t matter, in other words, after the winner seems clear. It is possible he stays in that long. I’d be surprised if he did, but he said that 3rd would be okay (but that he expects better) in Iowa. He is going to crater in NH, and no better than 3rd in SC. I don’t think he is long for the race.
He and McCain go way back. They are friends and past political allies. If he endorses, I’m sure it will be for McCain unless McCain is out by then too (which I highly doubt).
Spirit of 1776 on December 20, 2007 at 10:34 PM
Fred endorsing Mitt would be palatable compared to an endorsement of McCain. I’d be voting for Hunter if I felt he could organize enough support. I hope Fred can.
MT on December 20, 2007 at 10:36 PM
This primary is really starting to be a headache.
boomer on December 20, 2007 at 10:43 PM
I loved you all, but Fred! will be endorsing no-one. Nor will The Fred be anyone’s VP.
Alpha males have their rules and we must live by those rules.
AZCON on December 21, 2007 at 12:58 AM
I trust the Tanc. He has taken a beating for years, including ostracism by his party for his stand.
I cannot see him selling out although I can imagine anyone crumbling to the skeleton in the closet/motel-photos games played by the big boys.
However, The Tanc is not a good actor and I will watch him closely. I can sniff out a puppet master at fifty paces
I take him at his word for now. He is moving to preserve the Union. It shifts me closer to Mitt because the Tanc is my
kind of American.
entagor on December 21, 2007 at 3:14 AM
From Jason Pulliam, Des Moines Register:
Bowing out was the only way to ensure the momentum behind the anti-illegal immigration movement wouldn’t flame out?
If Tancredo were still campaigning for his own candidacy, American citizens would not care about the illegal alien problems. That is nonsense.
Tancredo does not want to disappear, so he chose to hitch a ride on another’s bandwagon. That same fear of becoming non-existent determined his endorsement. Following his pow-wow with Mitt, Tancredo finished his Christmas shopping in time for his birthday present. Be careful what you wish for.
All that glisters is not gold.
There goes another one down the hole.
maverick muse on December 21, 2007 at 8:23 AM
In error of fact, you neglected to recognize Fred’s clarity in platform as well as his consistency in accomplishing conservative legislation and winning judgements. In those areas, Romney has nothing. Their backgrounds are obviously different.
Fred’s record and platform are readily available.
http://www.Fred08.com
maverick muse on December 21, 2007 at 8:37 AM
“In those areas, Romney has nothing. Their backgrounds are obviously different.”meaning, Romney was neither a Senator nor a District Attorney.
maverick muse on December 21, 2007 at 8:39 AM
No, but Romney was an ace at vetoing liberal legislation as a governor.
Fred’s “conservative record” is a list of votes, a list which he does not even have on his website. The difference between a Tancredo and a Thompson is that on important issues Tancredo puts himself out on a limb and fights on the front lines where Fred sits back and lets everyone else do the heavy lifting while he “supervises,” only to come in and say “I supported this legislation 100%” later.
It is telling that the only influence Fred has ever had on conservative politics is as a pulse and a heartbeat.
BKennedy on December 21, 2007 at 9:25 AM
I’d like to see Tanc appointed as Director of Homeland Security. On his first day, he’d issue a one-line press release regarding illegal immigration:
“It all ends now.”
Zach on December 21, 2007 at 10:01 AM
I think you are spinning the facts. Huck is leading in Iowa and he, to put it mildly, is not on the citizenry’s side of illegal immigration issue. What Tanc did is about the issue with the focus on blunting Huck’s rise by endorsing the best candidate among the front-runners. If he stayed in, he can’t win. His endorsement at a key time, however is a win for his ideals.
Spirit of 1776 on December 21, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Colour me stupid, but lettuce head?
linlithgow on December 22, 2007 at 1:41 AM
According to NumbersUSA, both Romney and Thompson fail in various categories:
The only candidates with really terrific and consistent records are Hunter & Tancredo, although to be fair, Fred has done well in several categories.
I think that for all but the obvious culprits in the Amnesty Bill scam this summer, if they don’t follow up on their now ‘tough guy’ rhetoric, they’re total toast with the base. We’re elephants; we never forgot, ‘read my lips, no new taxes’, eh?
linlithgow on December 22, 2007 at 2:02 AM
Yikes! Here’s the link:
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html
linlithgow on December 22, 2007 at 2:03 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2