Ed Rollins takes the blame for Huckabee’s attack ad on Romney; Update: Huck now thinks he “probably” shouldn’t have shown the ad; Update: Cancellation cost Huck $150K?
posted at 9:16 am on January 2, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
This comes courtesy of an e-mailer who thinks that with all of our negative coverage of Huck — criticizing his religious demagoguery, knocking him for his left-ish positions on immigration and foreign policy and taxes, pointing out how he frequently seems not to know what he’s talking about, etc — we owe it to our readers to tell them that the Attack Ad That Wasn’t seems to have been not so much a stunt as a genuine strategic disagreement between Huck and campaign manager Rollins. The fact that they actually spent money on an ad buy before canceling it does point in that direction, although if they hadn’t spent it, there’d have been no reason for the dramatic, headline-grabbing presser, would there? They simply would have canceled it and the spot would have ended up on their shelf, like McCain’s own recently unveiled attack ad on Romney.
The 30-second commercial was filmed in one day and shipped to stations across Iowa. Rollins loved the ad for the way Huckabee lashed out at Romney’s own record on gun control and abortion.
Then came Huckabee’s morning run on Monday back in Des Moines. His head cleared from exercise and prayer, he told Rollins and others he’d changed his mind about the whole thing. He wanted it stopped…
Rollins says it had been his idea to show the ad to reporters, the logic being that it was already in the hands of television stations. As for the gathering, Rollins says, “Now would I have loved to cancel the press conference? You betcha. Would I have loved to pull the signs down? Yes. But this decision was made about 11, 11:10 in the morning.” The news conference was scheduled for noon…
“I admire the fact he’s trying to change the environment,” Rollins says. “What I have to do is make sure that my anger with a guy like Romney, whose teeth I want to knock out, doesn’t get in the way of my thought process.”
Remember, this wasn’t something that was farmed out to Huck’s video team to stitch together from photos and graphics. He appears in the ad himself. At no time before or after sitting down in front of a camera to call Mitt Romney dishonest did he have second thoughts until an hour before the presser to unveil the ad? Really?
Romney’s team evidently thinks his misgivings had less to do with regrets about nastiness than the very fact that he did appear personally in the spot and thereby left his “fingerprints on the gun.” I find it hard to believe he’d have showed the ad to the media if that were true, but so it goes.
Update: Fancy that, another change of heart: “Probably if I had it to do over again, I wouldn’t have shown it. And you would have said ‘Aww, show it, you don’t really have one,’ and then you would’ve beaten me up for not showing it…”
Update: The expense of it all is the best evidence that Huck is on the level and Politico says there’s even more expense than we thought here — $150,000 for the ad, a related radio spot, and mailings. Even so, Geraghty’s looking at the timeline and something doesn’t add up. If Huck changed his mind an hour before the presser, why were TV stations told to cancel the ad an hour before that?
Update: Says Chuck Norris of Team Romney, “I’d just like to choke those guys out.” And if you’re looking for still more reasons to worry about Huck, polls indicate that he’d make the waters nice and warm for Bloomberg.
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:
You guys are trying way too hard.
EduardoOTI on January 2, 2008 at 9:20 AM
Translation: Actually daring to look into his record and criticize him for his stupidity.
amerpundit on January 2, 2008 at 9:22 AM
Exactly. I’m planning a lot of “negative coverage” of the Democratic nominee this year, FYI.
Allahpundit on January 2, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Not as hard as you supporters. It’s got to be tough, defending a candidate like Huckabee.
Slublog on January 2, 2008 at 9:26 AM
Maybe Hot Air could put up a post saying ‘well, we were going to put up a post…
…but we decided not to.’
That should make the Hucka-hucka-burnin’ lovers happy, because after all, it doesn’t count as an attack post…it’s a strategic disagreement.
James on January 2, 2008 at 9:32 AM
I don’t buy it. This was a calculated risk to get an attack ad out there without having to actually be attached to it. I doubt this response by Rollins is a scramble to do damage control. It was part of the strategy if the Ad-that-never-was backfired on them.
BUT……I think Huck should continue to use his affable nature instead of substantive policy positions. His gaffs on Pakistan, Bolton, and the rest, don’t seem to be hurting him too much. The voters in Iowa seem to be able to overlook those errors in favor of his likable persona. I watched Frank Luntz on H&C, and he says that 5 times the amount of people are turning out for Huck than for Mitt. I don’t know about the rest of you guys, but that doesn’t look good for Mitt. I’d trust that way more than I trust polls. I just don’t see any reason to think that those numbers of people wont turn into caucus votes on Thursday.
Does anyone think otherwise?
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 9:32 AM
Ah…Mr. Edward “The Reagan Coalition is Dead” Rollins.
We should put the Huckster-Rollins strategy to the test in the primaries and find out if Republicans agree with their direction for the party.
Everyone who agrees that Reagan’s vision and leadership are dead relics from the past, please vote for Huckabee. Everyone who believes in Reagan vote for the person most likely to defeat Huckabee.
If people really knew the stakes and consequences of voting for Huckabee, they wouldn’t touch the man with a ten foot pole.
Nessuno on January 2, 2008 at 9:33 AM
That would be more tricky than showing it to a room full of journalists and cameras while simultaneously saying you’re pulling it?
amerpundit on January 2, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Exactly!
davenp35 on January 2, 2008 at 9:40 AM
more tricky=trickier
*Amerpundit goes off to get coffee*
amerpundit on January 2, 2008 at 9:41 AM
This is an example of exactly why if the dumbass gets the nomination the Dems will beat the living he11 out of him and us. The man is a fool. You can get that after listening to him talk for 10 minutes. I’m sure he hires other fools. And he runs a foolish campaign. I’ll be praying for him… praying that 1 year from now most folks are saying “who was this Huckabee guy?”
Griz on January 2, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Happy New Year
JiangxiDad on January 2, 2008 at 9:54 AM
It doesn’t take 10 minutes, if you can actually get him talking about specific issues.
Fool or no fool, he is definitely not a conservative.
Ali-Bubba on January 2, 2008 at 9:58 AM
So Huckabee’s campaign manager is threatening physical violence against Romney now?
davenp35 on January 2, 2008 at 10:04 AM
Anyone else starting to get the idea that maybe God is talking to Huckabee, but only as part of a Punk’d-style reality TV show set to air in heaven? As Huck is about to accept the Republican nomination, a lightning bolt will come down from heaven striking him dead and a voice will boom “Dude! You got Huck’d!” And America will be like “OMG, you so totally had us!” And then Hillary will get elected.
Minus the lightning, it’s a fairly plausible scenario.
Mark Jaquith on January 2, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Perhaps the reason Huck is so popular is because a certain segment of his supporters believe that the second coming of Christ is neigh and they want a God fearing president regardless of his other policies? Perhaps they think he will govern as a pastor if it ever appears that the end is clearly evident? With the “Left Behind” series and the talk coming from the evangelicals about the second coming, their focus may be on the eventual theocracy on earth that will be headed by Christ. The violent nature of the Muslims feed into this belief. They appear to be the whore of Babylon and the main threat against God.
It’s just a thought.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 10:06 AM
I THINK I understand what that means, and that is funny as he11!!!!!
hahahahahaha!!!!
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 10:10 AM
And it got him forefront on political blogs, news websites, and in many conversations.
amerpundit on January 2, 2008 at 10:15 AM
That doesn’t add up.
On the one hand it’s already been shipped to every tv station in Iowa, but on tyhe other hand, the press won’t believe it was ever made if he didn’t tell them to roll film, then show it.
Sorry, no sale. And I really don’t have much more use for the Yacht Salesman than the Chuckleberry.
Typhoon on January 2, 2008 at 10:16 AM
yep. you got it.
JiangxiDad on January 2, 2008 at 10:17 AM
I thought contemporary Evangelical legend held that America was “Babylon.” ’cause of uhbortion and homersectuals, likely.
Mark Jaquith on January 2, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Jim’s post is interesting. If Huck only decided against it at 11 AM, why was a station notified of the cancellation at 10?
amerpundit on January 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM
This is a good article about the whole affair. It looks like most of it was Rollins idea and at the last minute Huck pulled it. Shows some good insight in what happens during a campaign.
bnelson44 on January 2, 2008 at 10:50 AM
Good article. It was just as good when AP posted it, and gave his analysis of it at the beginning of this post, too. Sounds like Huckabee and Rollins are doing damage control for a stunt gone bad to me.
Slublog on January 2, 2008 at 11:26 AM
I’m not really up on the majority views of evangelicals on this issue. I am only reacting to what I have heard lately. I don’t see a lot of Westboro Baptist Churches out there. Lots of anti-anyone-who-isn’t-an-evangelical types though.
csdeven on January 2, 2008 at 11:34 AM
So Huckabee’s campaign manager is threatening physical violence against Romney now?
davenp35 on January 2, 2008 at 10:04 AM
Yep. Rollins wants to “knock his teeth out” and Norris “won’t use a round-house kick, but a chokehold, I’ll choke him out!”.
DfDeportation on January 2, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Dang. I wonder if my deposit for 12-steps-to-break-your-addiction-to-Hot-Air self help series is refundable?
RushBaby on January 2, 2008 at 11:40 AM
It doesn’t take 10 minutes, if you can actually get him talking about specific issues.
Fool or no fool, he is definitely not a conservative.
Ali-Bubba on January 2, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Correct! The Huckster and McCain are OPEN BORDERS ZEALOTS!
DfDeportation on January 2, 2008 at 11:43 AM
That’s not very “Christian” of them.
davenp35 on January 2, 2008 at 11:51 AM
I’m no Huckabee fan, but I think Allah is projecting too much of his own feelings about Christianity on Huckabee.
Rightwingsparkle on January 2, 2008 at 12:16 PM
davenp35,
That is the problem with hiring a “pit bull” political guy to help run your campaign. I wrote a little bit ago the problem with trying to run for President while wearing your Christianity on your sleeve. It’s a problem Huckabee won’t be able to overcome after Iowa.
Rightwingsparkle on January 2, 2008 at 12:18 PM
Did you see Huck’s line about how bloggers were doing the “Lord’s work” by clogging up phone lines?
Spirit of 1776 on January 2, 2008 at 12:35 PM
Care to defend that?
Allahpundit on January 2, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Thanks for the laughs RB. I need such series, badly. What’s the source?
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 12:45 PM
Huck is doing an awfully good impression of a Democrat nominee.
And I think this article is damage control from Rollins. And I also think they’re hoping the tonight show will be kind of like a Clinton/Arsenio Hall moment for him. Expect some bass(?)playing and sunglasses.
PowWow on January 2, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Take one look at the Drudgereport – it’s enough to run away:
- Huckabee mania by his top guy
- Gold going high
- Oil at $100
- But…Americans are “content with their lives”
Plus a few other crazy things.
Entelechy on January 2, 2008 at 1:18 PM
That’s not very “Christian” of them.
davenp35 on January 2, 2008 at 11:51 AM
They must be responding to a Mormon Jihad….with a Jewish guy leading the charge….ha ha ha
DfDeportation on January 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM
Mail order catalog! Page 12, “Things you can do today to help put a Democrat in the White House.” Order yours NOW by writing:
Hillary Clinton for President
4420 North Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22203
RushBaby on January 2, 2008 at 1:31 PM
Hillary is not a Democrat….she’s a Socialist who hasn’t supported American workers for the past 20 years. She even supported NAFTA. That’s her experience…
DfDeportation on January 2, 2008 at 1:36 PM
Allah,
I’m just saying that from the beginning of Huckabee’s rise you have been on his case in a negative way. Even mocking him occasionally.
Huckabee uses the language of faith. Anyone who has ever gone into a Baptist church knows what I am talking about. You automatically assume that this is a ploy on Huckabee’s part. You assume the worst everytime. Why is that?
If you read my link about Huckabee you can see my problems with him. They are related to wearing one’s Christianity on his sleeve, but it isn’t because he IS a Christian.
By what I have read that you have written about Huckabee, it seems that the way he presents his faith bugs you. That’s all I am saying.
Rightwingsparkle on January 2, 2008 at 1:45 PM
Why is that important? Why should AP’s motives, even if we truly knew them, influence how the rest of us think? If he presents facts, even with a few crap stirring questions, I’m inclined to evaluate them, as long as he is an equal opportunity basher. I haven’t noticed any bias,..just squeals from all bands of the spectrum when he delicately plants the dart.
a capella on January 2, 2008 at 2:06 PM
Isn’t your “problem” with Huck essentially the same that you are accusing AP of?
awake on January 2, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Amen+1. So much squealing, so little love. :)RushBaby on January 2, 2008 at 2:18 PM
So now, The Huckster is saying that Romney is so rich that he’s “out of touch” with Americans. Let’s see, in-state college tuition rates for Illegal Aliens and their children, $1-a-year lease for the Mexican Governments’ Consulate in Little Rock, AMNESTY for Illegal Aliens, and paroles rapists and murderers…now just who’s “out of touch” with Americans???
DfDeportation on January 2, 2008 at 2:24 PM
AP isn’t the only one making that claim. Peggy Noonan and Charles Krauthammer have also noticed Huckabee’s use of faith and criticized it for the same reasons.
Slublog on January 2, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Sublog,
That isn’t the point. I have noticed his use of faith and criticized it.
There is a difference between being uncomfortable with how one is using one’s faith and being uncomfortable with faith in general.
Rightwingsparkle on January 2, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Yes, but faith is not the point of criticism when it comes to Huckabee. His use of that faith is – saying someone has a problem with faith in general and that’s why they criticize a candidate of faith is misreading the situation.
Slublog on January 2, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Or the use of the words of faith that make Christians look like political opportunists.
Spirit of 1776 on January 2, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Kind of ironic that he’s the one saying you can’t believe anything Mitt says.
No matter! There’s still no way in hell anyone will elect a President Huckabee. All his winning the nomination would do is guarantee 8 years of liberal whining, more taxes everywhere, and all of them with their heads buried in the ground hoping no one will nuke us…
stacman on January 2, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Cancellation cost 149 grand
Huckabee looking like that creepy deceitful fool he is.. Priceless
TheSitRep on January 2, 2008 at 8:34 PM
Comment pages: