2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (04/05/08)

During this show, the gurus discuss the state of the race, the Clinton tax returns, Obama’s strategy in Penn., McCain strategy, a general election preview and much more….

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast). 

Sphere: Related Content

Daily Links (August 20, 2007)

Today’s notable reads…

• Someone used an Obama computer to make a weird change on Wikipedia. [The Caucus]
• Fred Thompson had to clarify his position on gay marriage, as he tries to push his federalist message. [Marc Ambinder]
• Domenico Montanaro goes over the reverse psychology possibilities on what Rove said on Clinton. [First Read]
• Bob Kerrey might run for Senate if Chuck Hagel does not. [The Caucus]
• Tom Tancredo vowed in the notes here to campaign through to 2008. [Denver Post]
• Giuliani is barely leading in Oregon, but compared to a few months ago, his support has “fallen off a cliff.” and is down almost 20 points. [Oregon Live]

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday Morning Talk: Paul, Gravel, Hagel

This Week (ABC): Mike Gravel, Ron Paul, John Conyers

Meet the Press (NBC): Chuck Hagel

Face the Nation (CBS): Chuck Schumer, Orrin Hatch

Fox News Sunday: Chris Van Hollen, Chris Cannon, Pete Hoekstra

Late Edition (CNN): Dick Lugar, Mowaffak al-Rubaie, Patrick Leahy, and Arlen Specter

Sphere: Related Content

Poll Vaulting: McCain, Clinton Lead in Iowa; Romney Gains, Obama and Fred Thompson Fall

The American Research Group has released two new polls from Iowa for both Republicans and Democrats. I’m going to compare those results with the results form the May 2007 poll conducted by the Des Moines Register.

Starting with the Democrats:

Candidate	ARG May 07	DMR May 07	ARG April 07	ARG March 07
Hillary Clinton	31 %	21 %	23 %	34 %
John Edwards	25 %	29 %	27 %	33 %
Barack Obama	11 %	23 %	19 %	16 %
Bill Richardson	8 %	10 %	5 %	1 %
Dennis Kucinich	4 %	2 %	2 %	1 %
Joe Biden	3 %	3 %	6 %	2 %
Chris Dodd	2 %	–	2 %	1 %
Wesley Clark	1 %	N/I	–	2 %
Mike Gravel	1 %	1 %	–	–
Undecided	14 %	11 %	16 %	10 %

A few interesting things that stand out. First is Barack Obama’s precipitous fall in the ARG poll. The margin of error is 4%, which could put him even behind Richardson. His campaign might have to ask if he is spending enough time there, getting to know enough insiders to get a caucus victory. John Edwards is trending the wrong way in Iowa (even after the withdrawal of Tom Vilsack, which Edwards had obviously hoped to use as a boost), but Edwards still remains a clear number two overall in recent polls. The Des Moines Register poll gives Clinton something to worry about, but she’s still ahead. Richardson clearly is breaking from the second tier twoards the first tier. Whether he has enough gas in the tank to get to the top tier is still a question that needs to be answered. The lower tier really is not doing anything that notable.

I’m interested in the ARG poll though - every month they seem to have one candidate really fall in the polls, only to rebound the next month. In April it was Clinton. In May it is Obama - there hasn’t been any type of indication that Obama’s support is this low. So until there is some confirmation of that, take it with a grain of salt.

Now, the Republicans:

Candidate	ARG May 07	DMR May 07	ARG April 07	ARG March 07
John McCain	25 %	18 %	26 %	29 %
Rudy Giuliani	23 %	17 %	19 %	29 %
Mitt Romney	16 %	30 %	14 %	10 %
Newt Gingrich	8 %	N/I	8 %	7 %
Fred Thompson	6 %	N/I	13 %	12 %
Sam Brownback	3 %	5 %	1 %	–
Tom Tancredo	2 %	4 %	2 %	1 %
Chuck Hagel	2 %	N/I	1 %	1 %
Tommy Thompson	2 %	7 %	1 %	1 %
Jim Gilmore	1 %	1 %	1 %	–
Duncan Hunter	–	1 %	–	–
John Cox	N/I	1 %	N/I	N/I
Ron Paul	–	–	–	–
Undecided	10 %	12 %	12 %	11 %

Looking at the Republican results, one thing that jumps out is Fred Thompson starting to drop before he even gets into the race. But like Obama above, it’s hard to judge the validity of these results without independent confirmation; and the Des Moines Register poll did not include potential candidates like Thompson or Gingrich.

Among the top group, it’s clear that Mitt Romney is the one with all the momentum. Giuliani seems to have weathered the storm, as he is no longer bottoming out, but he’s not even where he was a mere few months before. Romney, on the other hand, keeps trending up. The30% of the Des Moines poll is not repeated once Thompson and Gingrich are included, but he’s still growing. John McCain seems to be losing a little ground, but retaining most of his supporters in the state that he skipped in 1999.

On the lower tier, the hope for the lower tier that the Des Moines poll gave - bumps for Tommy Thompson, Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, and Tom Tancredo - seems to be erased in the ARG poll. I have to wonder if the now imminent entry of Fred Thompson into the race spells the end for this lower tier. Not only do they have to distinguish themselves from the top tier, they also have to distinguish themselves from each other. I imagine that the Republican debate on Tuesday will be a key last time for that to happen; if not, it will certainly be the Iowa Straw Poll in August.

There’s reasons to take these polls with grains of salt - for instance there’s reasons to both include and exclude declared candidates like Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich - but it’s worth keeping in mind exactly who these polls include while considering what they mean. For instance, Al Gore was not included in any of the Iowa polls.

Sphere: Related Content

Candidate Statements on the War Funding Bill

Biden, Hagel, McCain, Hunter, and Tancredo voted for the bill. Kerry, Obama, Clinton, Dodd, and Paul voted against it. Sam Brownback was not present. (Senate vote, House Vote)

Barack Obama:

“This vote is a choice between validating the same failed policy in Iraq that has cost us so many lives and demanding a new one. And I am demanding a new one.”

“We must fund our troops. But we owe them something more. We owe them a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else’s civil war. We need a plan to compel the Iraqi people to reach a political accommodation and to take responsibility for their own future. It’s time to change course.”

“I opposed this war in 2002 precisely because I feared it would lead us to the open-ended occupation in which we find ourselves today.”

“This President has led us down a disastrous path and has arrogantly refused to acknowledge the grim reality of this war, which has cost us so dearly in lives and treasure.”

“After he vetoed a plan that would have funded the troops and begun to bring them home, this bill represents more of his stubborn refusal to address his failed policy.”

“We should not give the President a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path.”

“With my vote today, I am saying to the President that enough is enough. We must negotiate a better plan that funds our troops, signals to the Iraqis that it is time for them to act and that begins to bring our brave servicemen and women home safely and responsibly.”

Bill Richardson:

“The best way to support our troops is to get them out of Iraq, and this bill will not move us any closer to that. The Democratic Congress is missing an opportunity. They should repeal the original resolution that gave the President the authority to take action against Iraq and replace it with one that requires the President to take all the troops out of Iraq by the end of the year. Congress has the authority to do that under Article One of the Constitution and under the War Powers Act and the President cannot veto it. Congress should not pass any appropriations beyond the date of de-authorization. By doing it that way, Congress would both fully fund our troops and get them out of Iraq as soon as possible.”

Chris Dodd:

“I’m disappointed that there is no firm deadline in this version of the bill, because I believe that’s the only way to responsibly bring this war to an end. I will fight for, and hope that the bill that emerges from conference has, a firm deadline to redeploy our troops.”

Dennis Kucinich:

“Just as the Democrats could have prevented the invasion of Iraq in 2003, when Senators Edwards, Clinton, Biden, and Dodd supported it,” Kucinich said, “and just as the Democrats could have ended the occupation of Iraq at any point by ending the funding, while Senators Clinton, Obama, Biden, and Dodd have voted over and over again to fund it, so too the Democratic leadership could have ended the occupation this week by not bringing any funding bills up for votes.”

“The Democratic Party has to choose,” Kucinich said, “between standing for peace or continuing to support war and occupation, between heeding the demand of the voters last November or caving in to the demands of President Bush and Vice President Cheney. We can’t have it both ways. We can’t facilitate the passage of another bill to fund the war and at the same time claim that we want the war to end. The public sees through such hypocritical maneuvering.”

“It’s instructive,” Kucinich added, “that the leadership removed from the Supplemental a requirement that the president gain Congress’s consent before launching an additional aggressive war against Iran. Senator Clinton, Senator Obama, and former Senator Edwards have all said that with regard to Iran all options are on the table, a thinly veiled euphemism for a unilateral preemptive military attack.”

“If Senators Clinton, Obama, Biden, and Dodd want to end the occupation of Iraq,” Kucinich noted, “they can vote against any more funding, and they can filibuster bills that provide it. I urge every Senator to take that step.”

Hillary Clinton:

“Tonight I voted against the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill because it fails to compel the President to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq. I believe that the President should begin a phased redeployment of our troops out of Iraq and abandon this escalation. I fully support our troops, and wish the President had followed the will of the people and signed the original bill we sent which both funded the troops and set a new course of phased redeployment. But the President vetoed Congress’s new strategy and so Congress must reject the President’s failed policies. I will also continue to press with Senator Byrd for our legislation to end the authorization of the war in Iraq.

“While I am deeply disappointed that the supplemental does not provide for a new course in Iraq, I want to recognize the many worthy parts of this bill: funding to help those sickened in the aftermath of 9/11, additional relief for Katrina and Rita victims, homeland security funds for high-threat cities like New York City, resources to protect parts of New York affected by recent flooding, $650 million for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, and the first federal minimum wage increase in ten years. I support these measures but cannot support this Emergency Supplemental which will not change our course in Iraq.”

Joe Biden:

“Earlier this month, Congress sent the President an emergency spending bill for Iraq. It provided every dollar our troops need and the President requested - and then some. It also provided the American people a plan to bring this war to a responsible end. In vetoing the bill, the President denied our troops the funding they need, and the American people the plan they want.

“The bill we are voting on denies the American people a plan for a responsible way out of Iraq. I also disagree with the approach in this bill - cutting off economic aid if benchmarks aren’t met would be self-defeating. Much of our aid is being used to build local and provincial governments, consistent with the federalism-based political solution I advocate.

“But the practical reality is that, for now, those of us who want to change course in Iraq don’t have the votes to override the President’s veto. And I believe that as long as we have troops on the frontlines, we must give them the equipment and protection they need. So I will vote for the supplemental.

“But we also must - and we will - bring this war to a responsible end. Day after day, vote after vote, I will work to keep the pressure on Republicans to stop reflexively backing the President and start supporting a responsible path out of Iraq.”

John Edwards:

“Washington failed America today when Congress surrendered to the president’s demand for another blank check that prolongs the war in Iraq. It is time for this war to end.

“Congress should immediately use its funding power to cap troop levels in Iraq at 100,000, stop the ongoing surge, and force an immediate drawdown of 40-50,000 troops, followed by a complete withdrawal in about a year.

“The American people’s call for a new course in Iraq was not answered today, but Congress still has the power to end this war. Our security and democracy alike demand it.”

John McCain Statement One:

“I was very disappointed to see Senator Obama and Senator Clinton embrace the policy of surrender by voting against funds to support our brave men and women fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“This vote may win favor with MoveOn and liberal primary voters, but it’s the equivalent of waving a white flag to al Qaeda.”

John McCain Statement Two:

“Mr. President, our servicemen and women on the front lines in the War on Terror have been waiting too long for the funding this bill provides. Our soldiers, airmen, and marines need this appropriation to carry out their vital work, and we should have provided it months ago. The Congress, which authorized the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has an obligation to give our troops everything they need to prevail in their missions. As such, I will vote for its passage. But I do so with deep reservations. The legislation we are considering now is the wrong way to fund this war, and it fails the most basic tests imposed on us as stewards of taxpayer dollars.

“This emergency supplemental appropriations bill contains $120 billion in funding, approximately $17 billion above the President’s request. It is filled with billions of dollars in non-emergency spending that has nothing to do with funding the troops. In a time of war, with large federal budget deficits, we should be constraining our federal expenditures. Sadly, we have chosen, once again, to do the opposite, and loaded this bill with billions of dollars in spending we don’t need, spending that was not requested, spending that will only add to the already excessive size of government.

“The President submitted his supplemental funding request on February 5th – nearly 4 months ago. The Senate finally passed a very flawed version of a bill on March 29th – a bill that everyone knew was nothing more than a political stunt, one that was dead before arrival to the President. Instead of putting our country first and providing the troops with full funding as expeditiously as possible, we let partisan politics rule the day. While some may believe that they scored political points by forcing meaningless procedural votes, I would ask them to reflect for a moment. What gain inheres in playing partisan politics with the lives of our honorable warriors and their families? How can we possibly find honor in using the fate of our servicemen to score political advantage in Washington? There is no pride to be had in such efforts, Mr. President. We are at war, a hard and challenging war, and we do no service for the best of us - those who fight and risk all on our behalf - by playing politics with their service.

“So now, nearly four months after the supplemental funding request was submitted, here we are, with money literally running out to fund this war. We are about to pass a bill that while better than the last version, still contains billions of dollars that have nothing to do with the War on Terror. We can do better than this. The American taxpayers deserve and expect more.

“As my colleagues know, I’ve been meeting with citizens across the country, and let me assure you, they are not happy with the workings of Congress. There is a reason that the poll results on Congress’s favorability rating are at such lows–the latest at 31 percent. It is because of partisan politics having a greater priority in Washington than doing the people’s business. It is because we are not making the tough choices to halt deficit spending and fix the out of control entitlement programs. It is because we seem to care more about our own reelections than about reforming government. This is not the way the American public wants their elected officials to behave. What will it take for that to sink in?

“Let me mention some of the un-requested and un-authorized items contained in this bill:

· $110 million in aid to the shrimp and fisheries industries;

· $11 million for flood control projects in New York and New Jersey;

· $37 million to modernize the Farm Service Agency’s computer system;

· $13 million for the Save America’s Treasures program; and,

· $3 billion in agriculture disaster assistance, including $22 million to support the Department of Agriculture in implementing programs to provide this un-requested and unauthorized funding.

“Mr. President, there are also several items in this bill that seek to legislate on an appropriations bill rather than allowing such items to move through the regular legislative process. Examples include language that:

· Raises the minimum wage;

· Restricts the Department of Transportation from implementing the North American Free Trade Agreement’s (NAFTA) provisions expanding cross-border trade between Mexico and the United States with the introduction of a pilot program that would allow a select group of Mexican trucking companies to make deliveries into our country beyond the 25 miles that current law permits;

· Extends several tax credits, while setting forth new Internal Revenue Service definitions and exempting some programs from taxation; and,

· Amends the Food Security Act to make adjustments to the Department of Agriculture’s land and soil conservation program.

“Another provision that seeks to legislate on this appropriations bill is a provision that would end-run the Defense Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process. The 2005 BRAC commission decided to close the Naval Air Station at Willow Grove, Pennsylvania, and the Department of Navy was in the process of closing the base in accordance with the law. This bill, however, would transfer the land and facilities to the Air Force – even though the Secretary of the Air Force stated on April 12, 2007 that there is not a military need for the land it will be forced to receive. This provision was not requested by the Administration, is not an emergency, and is not a responsible way to legislate. It was not reviewed or debated in any committee, and the committee of jurisdiction has had no say in the matter. Yet, the American people will now be forced to continue to pay for the maintenance of this unwanted land when the Air Force receives it.

“Despite these unacceptable earmarks and legislative language, I am pleased that this bill does not contain a timeline for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, regardless of the conditions there. Such a mandate would have had grave consequences for the future of Iraq and the security of Americans. The President was right to veto the first iteration of this legislation.

“I do have concerns, however, with the way in which this measure conditions aid to the Iraqi government by requiring the government to meet benchmarks. Although I support benchmarks for the Iraqi government, and I believe that we should encourage the Iraqi government to move ahead as rapidly as possible on a number of fronts, some of the benchmarks contained in this bill are beyond the control of the Iraqi leadership. One of the benchmarks, for example, mandates that there will be no safe haven for “any outlaws.” This should of course be an aspiration, but if terrorists or insurgents hang on and hole up in Baghdad, should this constitute a reason why the United States withholds economic aid to the government? Similarly, another benchmark requires the Iraqi government to reduce the level of sectarian violence. But if sectarian violence does not decline as rapidly as we would like, does this suggest that the answer is to cut off reconstruction aid? It’s not at all clear to me that it does.

“I believe that, instead of legislating a list of benchmarks that must be met by the Iraqis, and imposing statutory penalties for non-performance, it would be preferable for the administration to reach agreement on a series of benchmarks with the Iraqi government, a timeline for implementation, and consequences attached to each. Such an approach would make clear to the Iraqis that they must make progress, but would do so in a way that is specific, flexible, and realistic.

“Mr. President, if this bill is to have benchmarks at all, it should be a benchmark that Congress may not approve any earmark, no matter how valid the cause, without an authorization, an Administration request or inclusion in the budget. The national debt grows $75 million dollars an hour and $1.3 billion dollars a day. Congress should benchmark its spending sprees on zero debt, but it won’t. This body would rather set benchmarks for others around the world than take responsibility for its own actions. For these reasons, this bill is flawed and irresponsible, but I will vote for it nonetheless in order to support our brave men and women fighting for freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Mitt Romney:

“At a time when the men and women of our military fighting terrorism around the globe needed them most, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama cast a vote that singularly defines their lack of leadership and serves as a glaring example of an unrealistic and inexperienced worldview on national security that is regrettably shared by too many of their fellow Capitol Hill Democrats.

“Voting against our troops during a time of war shows the American people that the leaders of the Democrat Party will abandon principle in favor of political positioning.

“Their votes render them undependable in the eyes of the men and women of the United States military and the American people.”

Sphere: Related Content

Poll Vaulting: Iowans Call For Al Gore And Condoleezza Rice

An interesting new poll from The DesMoines Register gives high marks amongst likely Democratic primary voters to Al Gore and high marks amongst likely Republican primary voters to Condi Rice, Newt Gingrich and Fred Thompson…

Usually, I don’t find polls particularly meaningful, but they can be interesting or entertaining; this poll is both. The one take away from this poll is that yet again it appears as though Republicans are significantly less satisfied with their choices than the Democrats are. Enjoy!

Sphere: Related Content

2008 Central’s Presidential Election Podcast (5/13/07)

This week’s podcast covers…

• Rudy’s rough week on abortion
• Tough questions Romney faced about his sex life
• Tom Tancredo needs to get with the program
• Fred Thompson’s impending candidacy
• Buzz about a Bloomberg/Hagel ticket
• Hillary Clinton’s campaign surge in New Hampshire
• Bill Richardson’s new ads
• And more…

Subscribe to 2008 Central’s Presidential Election Podcast

Sphere: Related Content

Hagel Drops Serious Hints of Running as an Independent

On Face the Nation this morning, Chuck Hagel dropped serious hints of a possible independent run with Mike Bloomberg.

We posted on their initial meeting here. With this type of outspoken criticism of Republicans, it’s probably time to move Hagel to an Independent category: I can’t see him trying to play to the base in a primary after blasting the base so hard here.

Sphere: Related Content

Mike Bloomberg: I Have An Energy Plan … for America

First, Mike Bloomberg had a big and bold energy plan for New York City. Then he hung out with Al Gore during the Tribeca Film Festival. Now Bloomberg has rolled out an energy plan for all of America.

From the Houston Chronicle:

Despite constant denials that he is running for president, Mayor Michael Bloomberg laid out a national energy plan today in a speech in Houston and took veiled jabs at his potential opponents, accusing them of “politics as usual.”

The Republican billionaire outlined an energy plan that proposes creating profit motives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, building new wind farms and nuclear plants, phasing out the incandescent light bulb and setting early deadlines to accomplish these goals.

Bloomberg, who recently launched an effort to drastically reduce pollution by 2030 in New York City, suggested that those who set later deadlines like 2050 and 2070 are afraid to do the work and make the commitments now. A number of presidential candidates, including Democrats John Edwards, Barack Obama and Chris Dodd, and Republican John McCain, have their own proposals with a 2050 endpoint, or support plans with that deadline.

“When an elected official makes a promise to achieve something in the far-off distant future, but refuses to take the steps now that would allow us to begin making progress, that’s not leadership. It’s passing the buck. And unfortunately, it’s politics as usual,” Bloomberg said, according to a copy of his prepared remarks.

Here’s a look at his speech.

Bloomberg also relaunched his personal website this week, previously used for his two mayoral runs in New York City. He said regarding the launch, “This site will help you learn more about the issues important to me and the causes I’ve supported in business, philanthropy and public life.”

This comes on the heels of Howard Fineman’s article about Bloomberg, Gore, and Arnold Schwarzenegger being a ‘third force’ for politics, and shortly after Bloomberg’s lunch with Chuck Hagel.

Bloomberg is setting himself up well in fact, he is acting more of the Presidential candidate than most of the field at this point. Compared to the other ‘non-runners’ like Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich, Al Gore, Chuck Hagel, etc. Bloomberg has staked out far more clear and bold territory and even established himself as an alternative to either field at this point … without making himself look like a disappointment if he doesn’t run.

I still don’t think he runs unless he believes the nominees on either side are too tied to the far left and right (say, Edwards/Romney) … but given the long gap between when the nominee will be named and the conventions (7 months!), Bloomberg is setting himself up well as a spoiler should one or both candidate fail to inspire. Fineman’s article documents this timetable exceptionally well. He’ll be someone to keep an eye on over the next year.

There’s also this article, which seems to be based on possible ties between Bloomberg and the Independence article. But party affiliation is not even close to the top of the list of things for Bloomberg to ponder. It’s much ado about nothing.

Sphere: Related Content

2008 Central’s Presidential Election Podcast (5/5/07)

Announcement: We apologize for the poor audio quality of previous podcasts. Thanks to the feedback we have received, we’ve invested in new equipment. The quality issues have been largely addressed in this podcast and will be completely fixed by the next one. Many thanks to all of our listeners who have made our podcast a success. Spread the word!

This week’s podcast covers…

• Republican Primary Debate
• Mike Gravel’s campaign revival
• Barack Obama’s MySpace snafu
• Hillary Clinton’s legislation to de-authorize the Iraq War / Joe Biden’s “I told you so”
• And more…

Subscribe to 2008 Central’s Presidential Election Podcast

Sphere: Related Content

Bloomberg and Hagel Do Washington

Wednesday night, possible White House contenders Mike Bloomberg and Chuck Hagel ate at a Washington DC steak house. The New York Sun took this as an opportunity to chide Hagel for his record on terrorism. Given that they are the only two Republicans who could potentially run who have spoken out against the Iraq war, it’s possible they were indeed discussing a joint independent run, or a Unity 08 run, where they are among the top vote getters (though neither is technically a Democrat right now, Bloomberg was a Democrat until he ran for mayor).

And just today, Hagel said that he would consider such a run at the Presidency, via Bloomberg News

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said he would consider entering the 2008 presidential campaign as an independent.

An independent bid “is possible,” Hagel, 60, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” scheduled to air today. “I don’t ever foreclose any options.” He will decide in the next few months whether to run for a third Senate term, pursue the presidency or leave politics altogether, he said.

Sphere: Related Content

Live Blog of Republican Debate

7:07 pm: MSNBC shows a procession (I kid you not) of the candidates through some hallways. Awkward small talk abounds as the candidates walk off into the distance.

 7:18 pm: The candidates are herded down another hallway. Hunter and Giuliani wave awkwardly at the camera. More awkward small talk; Gilmore chats up McCain and I worry that McCain will snap and go Chuck Norris on him.

7:21 pm: All the candidates line up in the replica Oval Office to have a picture taken with Reagan and Chris Matthews. Brownback smiles like I did when I was five: teeth clenched and mouth open, while he looks around the room awkwardly.

7:25 pm: MSNBC comes back from commercial and reruns the Brownback awkward smile. And then goes right back to commercial.

 7:34 pm: The Governator escorts a fragile-looking Nancy Reagan to her seat to a standing ovation. If Schwarzenegger storms the stage, ratings would probably go up 5000%. Sadly, I don’t think that will be happening.

7:39 pm: MSNBC keeps pushing Chuck Hagel as a potential candidate in the way that Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich are, but I don’t see it. His disaster of apress conference pretty much killed that for the time being; at least Biden’s gaffe about Obama was something innocent. Hagel’s disastrous press conference seems to reflect some kind of deeper inadequacies.

7:43 pm: I should comment on the ostentatious settings. The debate is being held in the hanger that holds Reagan’s Air Force One, and the wing of the plane literally hangs over them.

7:46 pm: The candidates take the stage and wave at the audience. They stand shoulder to shoulder and then walk to the podiums. If you happen to care about how they are dressed, it’s all completely the same sans tie color.

7:48 pm: Chris Matthews takes the stage. There’s going to be an unfathomable amount of reaction shots of Nancy Reagan tonight with Schwarzenegger at her side.

7:56 pm: Candidates walk away from the podiums and chat each other up as Howard Fineman admits that nothing significant will happen because everyone will be cautious in the presence of Nancy Reagan.

7:58 pm: There’s an actual two minute warning, and candidates start to return to the podiums.

7:59 pm: The side camera shows that candidates have a bottle of water and a glass of water, in case you want to know.

8:00 pm: A sweeping intro narrated by Chris Matthews. And awayyyyyy we go.

8:02 pm: We have yellow and red lights today to indicate when time is up. Bill Richardson is grateful no one thought about this last week.

8:03 pm: Giuliani gets the first question about Reagan’s morning in America. Giuliani talks Reagan and his record in mayor, going back and forth between the two. A very subtle linking of his record with Giuliani. Giuliani attacks socialized medicine and passivism on terrorism.

8:04 pm: McCain is asked what he needs to win in Iraq. McCain needs a chance to show America it is working. Stump response about the new strategy. McCain smartly looks right into the camera; McCain strongly condemns Reid and House Democrats for saying America lost. Follow up, McCain says the war was terribly mismanaged.

8:06 pm: Tommy Thompson is asked what it takes to win, Thompson says support the troops. Thompson says the Maliki government must be asked if they want America there; he also wants local governments (like states). Thompson also wants oil revenues split to give citizens a “chance to invest.”

8:07 pm: Hunter says standing up the Iraqi military is critical in Iraq.

8:08 pm: Romney is asked about negative polls about Iraq. Romney says leadership is key and leaving the wrong way is the risk, citing Iran, Turkey, and Syria (undermining comments about him as governor not knowing foreign policy).

8:09 pm: Matthews asks Brownback how we win the war if terrorists are replaced, and says America wins by standing up for values and working with modern Muslim regimes. Brownback calls for “aggressive” policy on Iran but working with moderate countries. Matthews points out that even in the moderate countries there is low level of American support. Brownback concedes, but says that engagement should be multi-faceted.

8:11 pm: Huckabee is asked about firing Rumsfeld, and says he would certainly have done it before the election, and says that Generals were not listened to (citing 300,000+ troops being called for. Shinseki-light). But he says that finishing the job in Iraq is important.

8:12 pm: Gilmore is asked about intelligence and foreign policy, and says engagement in the Middle East is a long term issue.

8:14 pm: Paul is asked about his position on Iraq. Paul talks about his position on foreign policy. He talks about the Republicans traditionally staying out of nation building. He also talks about the Constitution.

8:15 pm: McCain is asked about Iran, and sending IEDs into Iran (what, no IED joke?). Says Iran is “one of the greatest threats” to the world right now. McCain still is looking into the camera - and it’s effective. Matthews asked what the trip wire is: McCain says that war is a final option and its not close, but that if they acquire the weapon, it would be certain.

8:17 pm: Tancredo is asked about helping Israel attack Iran, hypothetically. He says working to stop a madman with a nuclear weapon is obviously important. Choppy speaking.

8:18 pm: Giuliani says the hypothetical would depend on our intelligence, but that a nuclear weapon for Iran is off the table.

8:19 pm: Gilmore is asked whether Romney or Gilmore is right about the comments last week on UBL. Great question. Gilmore says that more work to change the Middle East is key. When asked if Bush is to blame, Gilmore dodges the question.

8:20 pm: Romney says on UBL that getting him is obviously important, but it’s also bigger than Bin Laden. On Bin Laden: “He is going to pay and he will die.”

8:21 pm: McCain is asked if he would be comfortable with Tancredo as head of the immigration services. “In a word, no.” He then talks about firing

8:22 pm: When asked if amending the constitution to allow Arnold to run, there’s a lot of nos. Huckabee seizes the moment and jokes he would definitely do it after he has serves 2 terms.

8:24 pm: Giuliani is asked about being a mayor and touts his record. I missed most the question.

8:25 pm: Romney is asked about what he likes least about America and gives a fluff answer and cites Reagan. Total softball question.

8:25 pm: Huckabee is asked about climate change. He says that whatever is happening, basic human responsibility says you have to leave the Earth better.

8:26 pm: Tancredo is asked about plans to solve the shortage of organs. Tancredo says it’s not a government problem. He says that using cloning for this is ridiculous.

8:27 pm: Hunter says he is a compassionate conservative, and uses the rest of his time to talk about IEDs being brought into Iraq from Iran.

8:28 pm: Paul is asked if he would phase out the IRS, he says he would do it immediately, and talks about changing the role of government.

8:29 pm: When asked if Roe being overturned would be a good day, everyone but Giuliani says it would be a good day. Giuliani says it is up to judges to decide. Gilmore says that he would be OK with abortions in the first 8-12 weeks. Thompson says that the issue ought be left to the states if Roe is overturned.

8:30 pm: Romney is asked about his record on abortion. He says he was always personally pro-life, and cites Reagan. When asked if its a politically convenient statement, he says it is not. …. And he repeats that two years ago he changed his mind. He’s not really effective at all when he’s pushed. He just repeats his talking points.

8:32 pm: Brownback says he could support a pro-choice candidate. and the camera shot of Romney looking at him is … interesting. Brownback talks then about the importance of life.

8:33 pm: Giuliani is asked about funding abortions. Giuliani says its a state issue. Matthews presses him and Giuliani admits he supported funding abortion in New York State.

8:34 pm: McCain asked about unifying the country, and says he’s prepared to lead, and goes into a stump speech, speaking not to Matthews but directly to voters. Good stuff from him.

8:35 pm: Hunter talks about his record on defense in the House (but not about Walter Reed). He mentions China and North Korea.

8:36 pm: Huckabee says that America is great, and cites how much America values life as a core value.

8:36 pm: Paul is asked about freedom, and talks again about the role of government, and that unnecessary war minimizes freedom.

8:37 pm: When asked if firing for homosexuality is wrong, Thompson says it is up to the business, and when pressed, he says that’s a yes answer.

8:38 pm: Romney is asked about Roman Catholic bishops, and says that they are private and we should celebrate that independence.

8:39 pm: Huckabee is asked about his faith comments on Romney. And he says that faith should explain decision making process, using biblical language. Matthews presses hard on Huckabee chaning his position, and Huckabee denies that, repeating his comments. Romney gets a follow up and talks about America’s faith again.

8:41 pm: Brownback says that faith needs to be brought into the public square “As my friend Mr. Leiberman, a Jew, says.”

8:42 pm: Hunter is asked about Arnold’s record of governing. Hunter talks about how he got the border fence built by San Diego. Non-answer.

8:43 pm: Gilmore is asked if Karl Rove is his friend. Gilmore says that a President can emplyo who he wants and that Rove is not important. The candidates are running away from anything Bush tonight.

8:44 pm: Tancredo says Rove would not be in his White House, and cites differences on immigration.

8:44 pm: When asked if Christian conservatives are good for the party, Giuliani briefly says yes because large groups of people are good for people, and cites George Will touting him with aplomb. Uncomfortably self-promoting, to me at least.

8:45 pm: Thompson cites his record in a Blue State and how he would appeal to voters of both sides.

8:46 pm: Brownback is asked about the GOP scandals. Brownback says it’s a Democratic problem too and that anyone who did these things should go to jail. And talks about society pushing standards upon the leaders, and says that the family structure is at its root, and links it to Imus.

8:47 pm: Tancredo says the ethics problems are personal issues, not party issues. And he then talks about Reagan not being a centrist and that a centrist is not necessary.

8:48 pm: McCain is asked about his comments about first responders, and McCain says it is not about NYC, but about special interests. Tough question well handled; McCain says that spending problems have caused the GOP problem. McCain is asked what he would do, and says a line item veto would help, but stopping pork barrel spending is crucial.

8:50 pm: Huckabee says its too early to give the Bush administration a grade, and jokes about never getting a good grade in Arkansas.

8:51 pm: Romney is asked about what he would do for abortion beyond appointing judges, and Romney cites partial birth abortion and other issues, including McCain-Feingold as time expires.

8:52 pm: Giuliani is asked about abortion. Giuliani says he hates abortion, but would respect a woman’s right to choose otherwise.

8:53 pm: Thompson is asked about racism. He says a President can set the tone and cites Reagan.

8:53 pm: Tancredo is asked about who else besides him should be President. Tancredo says if he supported anyone else, he would not be here, and cites …. immigration reform!

8:54 pm: McCain follows up by talking about the work towards a comprehensive reform and needing a temporary worker program.

8:55 pm: Hunter is asked about An Inconvenient Truth. Says no, but moves past it to talk about a serious undertaking to become energy independence. An answer a Democrat could easily give.

8:56 pm: Paul is asked about making a decision in a crisis, and talks about his decision making as a Doctor. He says he did urge against the war in Iraq.

8:57 pm: Gilmore is asked about mothers in prison. He says that its important to follow the rule of law.

8:58 pm: Matthews asks about empryonic stem cell research. Romney says that he will use alternate nuclear transfer. Brownback says he will not kill human life. Gilmore says no, Huckabee says no, Hunter says no, Thompson says its beyond yes or no, citing research in Wisconsin, McCain says he would fund it, but admits its tough. Paul says programs like this are not permitted under the Constitution. Giuliani says yes if there are limitation, Tancredo says no taxpayer funds are needed.

9:01 pm: Romney says he loves the health care plan in Massachusetts and jokes about Ted Kennedy and says it is not “Hillarycare.” Says its using the market to solve health care, not using taxes. Also says he helped to write it … that might be a mistake.

9:02 pm: McCain is asked about his tax cuts. He says he proposed his own tax cuts and the Bush tax cuts had no provision to stop spending. McCain again says he would veto any pork laden bills.

9:03 pm: Romney says middle income Americans should not pay taxes on capital gains. Brownback talks about an alternative flat tax. Gilmore talks about eliminating the car tax in Virginia. Huckabee talks about the fair tax (VAT tax esque). Hunter talks about eliminating manufacturing taxes. Thompson says he vetoed 1900 items and talks about the alternative minimum tax, and touts the fair tax. McCain talks about the alternate minimum tax and line item veto; also a tax credit for the lower class for health care. Paul would get rid of the IRS and the inflation tax, since inflation of printing more money hurts the poor and middle class. Giuliani agrees on the alternateminimum tax, and the death tax. Tancredo says he supports the fair tax.

9:08 pm: McCain is asked about appointing a Democrat to his cabinet, someone other than Joe Lieberman. He talks about great monetary talent or people in Silicon Valley, not their party.

9:09 pm: Hunter says the government targets Zarqawi well, but does not secure the border well.

9:10 pm: Does McCain believe in Evolution? “Yes.” On a show of hands, Tancredo, Brownback, and Huckabee appear to not believe in evolution, although I may be mis-identifying the last two.l

9:11 pm: Romney is asked about the family and talks about the importance of marriage.

9:12 pm: Giuliani correctly identifies the difference between Sunnis and Shi’ites.

9:12 pm: Gilmore says he never said he was the only conservative in the race, just a consistent conservative.

9:13 pm: Paul says he trusts some of the MSM, and says he trusts the internet more.

9:13 pm: Brownback says personal beliefs of everyone shape everyone. His personal beliefs influence his thoughts on foreign policy.

9:14 pm: Giuliani is asked about his weakness. Giuliani says he has weaknesses, but is an optimist, citing turning around New York City.

9:15 pm: Brownback says the candidates are a good group.

9:15 pm: Huckabee is asked about corruption: he says that jobs cannot be overseas while CEOs get $100 million bonus while losing a pension.

9:16 pm: Tancredo says he would support womens rights, but not abortion.

9:16 pm: Thompson is asked how many troops have been killed and injured; he cites the number 3,00 killed, and then talks about the importance of protecting soldiers.

9:17 pm: Giuliani talks about national ID cards as a means to have a tamper-proof system. Romney is asked about security, he agrees about the card. Brownback says he disagrees, and says he would secure the border and use the Social Security card. McCain supports it and cites the 9/11 Commission. Paul says its an afront to a free society. Tancredo agrees with Paul, but says a SOcial Security card should be verifiable.

9:20 pm: Pardon Scooter Libby. Romney demurs, but says the prosecutor was wrong. Says a national ID card for foreigners only; Giuliani agrees. Brownback demurs totally. Gilmore says anyone should go to the people to make his case. Tancredo alone would pardon Libby, but he would also pardon Ramos and compean. Paul says he would not pardon because Libby promoted misinformation.

9:23 pm: Romney says Congress should not have been involved in the Schiavo case. Brownback says Congress should have gotten involved. McCain says Congress would too hasty. Giuliani says the issue is for the courts.

9:24 pm: Would it be good for Bill Clinton to be back in the White House? Romney takes the lead and says it would be awful. Brownback goes after Clinton’s policies. Gilmore attacks socialized medicine. Huckabee jokes about knowing Clinton and says no. Hunter says Clinton cut the military, and on chiavo, err on the side of life. Thompson recites recent answers. McCain talks about the appointment of Supreme Court justices, citing Alito and Roberts. Paul talks about voting to impeach Clinton. Giuliani says it means being on defense on terrorism. Tancredo jokes.

9:28 pm: How are candidates different from Bush? Romney talks about generalities and the war on terror and spending more on the military. McCain talks about mismanaging the war and how he would veto spending bills. Gilmore talks about drawing people to America. Huckabee talks about stronger states. Hunter talks about a stronger industrial base and fighting China economically. Brownback talks about a federated state in Iraq - the Biden plan, more or less. Tancredo cites No Child Left Behind and the Medicare reform, and Matthews cuts him off. Thompson again talks about his Iraq plan, finishing on his medical diplomacy. Giuliani talks about going on “offense” against terrorists. Paul talks about changing foreign polic yto be more Taft-like (holy crap) and that he would never abuse habeas corpus.

Matthews wraps it up.

Good performance by Matthews; a less aggressive moderator would never have gotten some of the answers from the candidates.

I hope the future debates have him or someone like him moderating. Pushing on follow up questions is crucial.

Sphere: Related Content

Poll Vaulting: Thompson Enters SC Poll, McCain Loses No Ground, Takes Lead

We’ve been touting the John McCain comeback in the polls for weeks.

Maybe now the MSM will follow along.

 A new poll released by the American Research Group shows exactly how well McCain is doing right now:

John McCain	36%
Rudy Giuliani	23%
Fred Thompson	10%
Mitt Romney	6%
Newt Gingrich	6%
Mike Huckabee	2%
Sam Brownback	1%
Jim Gilmore	1%
Chuck Hagel	1%
Tom Tancredo	1%
Tommy Thompson	1%
Undecided	10%

Good news for McCain. Right off the bat, Fred Thompson entered the race and in South Carolina, McCain did not take a hit whatsoever. It goes to support our thesis that McCain supports, knowing him so well over the past 8 years, are sticking with him. Poll after poll reflects that.

More soberly, though, the poll reflects that there is a coalition of people out there looking for an alternative to McCain. That’s going to be the challenge for the McCain campaign, getting enough support from outside his current level to take the nomination.

For the other candidates, good news for the most part; Giuliani knew that he would have a hard time running in as conservative of a state as South Carolina. Keeping such a sizeable amount of support has to be looked at as a positive. Mike Huckabee looks like he may be starting to emerge from the lower tier of Republicans. Is it a blip or too little too late? I think the debates could be crucial for him, just to get enough support as a jumping off point.

Mitt Romney is still lagging behind, but he’s devoting more energy to Iowa and New Hampshire. I think he’s relying on his ad buys more for South Carolina than anything else; the debates might see him jump up or stay the same. I’m intrigued by his position in this state. He seems like he could either win the state or finish dead last. I need to see more information.

But the real winners are those that registered 1 percent. Why you ask? The Fox News Republican debate scheduled for May 15 in South Carolina has polling numbers as a standard to get in:

Marty Ryan, executive producer of political programming for Fox News Channel, said the polling criteria would ensure ”that serious candidates were taking part in our debate.”

The party sent a letter to the candidates saying they must have filed papers establishing an exploratory committee or full-blown candidacy and paid the fees associated with the state primary.

They also must have ”garnered at least 1 percent in recent state and national polls leading up to the registration deadline, as determined by Fox News Channel and the South Carolina Republican Party,” according to Rob Godfrey, the state party’s communications director.

So Huckabee, Brownback, Gilmore, Tancredo and Thompson at least have a shot to get in off this polling (Hagel is not a candidate right now and I doubt that will change in the next two weeks). The key is national polls. My best guess is that of those on the fringe, that Huckabee and Brownback definitely get in the debate and that Gilmore and Paul will not (unless Gilmroe surges in the national polls soon). Tancredo probably will; Hunter is on the fence, so to speak. These results have to be a real downer for his campaign (and that of Paul as well), since Hunter had previously stated that he was running strongest in South Carolina.

(Note: My predictions in no way reflect whom I would like to see debate; they are merely prognostications given the standards mentioned above.)

Details of the poll: Read more

Sphere: Related Content

What Candidates Cook

Thank God for the AP asking the tough questions. This is why they left Knight-Ridder in the dust behind them.

Today’s query: What do you like to cook?

Democrats
Joe Biden: Pasta
Hillary Clinton: “I’m a lousy cook, but I make pretty good soft scrambled eggs.”
Chris Dodd: “An August New England dinner: Lobster, corn and tomatoes.”
John Edwards: Hamburgers
Dennis Kucinich: Hot water, according to his wife, Elizabeth. Doesn’t cook. A vegan, he favors fresh fruits and vegetables.
Barack Obama: Chili
Bill Richardson: Diet milkshake

Harder to politicize these answers for the most part. Clinton’s answer seems portrayed as a distancing herself from the stereotype that a woman belongs in the kitchen, which is probably smart on her part: it’s a risky question for her in a way that it isn’t for anyone else, whatever you think of her as a candidate. Good to see Richardson is still working on a diet, though if you check his calendar, he seems to be having an awful lot of meetings at restaurants, particularly when he’s in South Carolina. The other responses are what they are.

Republicans
Sam Brownback: Beef
Rudy Giuliani: Hamburgers or steak on the grill
Mike Huckabee: Rib-eye steak on the grill
Duncan Hunter: Chicken fried venison.
John McCain: Baby-back ribs
Mitt Romney: Hot dog
Tom Tancredo: Doesn’t cook.

Not many, if any, political statements there. I’d love to see McCain sing the Chili’s baby back song next time he needs to sing a tune, I guess. But again, shame on Tancredo for not participating. I find it hard to believe he doesn’t cook anything. I mean, even the Governator doesn’t mind posing with food. Humanizing candidates is an essential part of the race - second to policy for sure, but definitely essential. It’s one thing to overplay personality and risk being looked at as not serious, it’s quite another to never talk about anything other than one issue and to never engage voters at a personal level.

Sphere: Related Content

Poll Vaulting: McCain Takes Lead in South Carolina

Remember this weekend when McCain did poorly at all the county GOP conventions? Well, think again.

A new Zogby Poll has McCain out in front in the state:

McCain	22%
Giuliani	19%
Fred Thompson	11%
Romney	10%
Sanford	8%
Huckabee	2%
Brownback	1%
Hunter	1%
Paul	1%
Hagel	Less than 1%
Tommy Thompson	Less than 1%
Undecided	22%

This poll should be taken in conjuntion with this weekend’s results at the straw polls. The difference is not in the sample size of the poll versus the straw polls - the poll asked 512 people compared with more combined on this weekend. The difference is that the poll asked 512 self-identified likely primary voters versus the active political members who attended the conventions. This poll just indicates how well the names of the candidates have sunk down to the rank and file type Republicans, which in general is not that well. Romney has a lot more work ahead of him in South Carolina in getting his name out. The good news for him is that he seems to have support at the top, it just has to work its way down more than it already has. And what that will take is money. Compare Romney to Huckabee and Hunter, both of whom had some positive results at the conventions as well; neither of those two right now has the cash to get their name out, given their first quarter returns. If they can translate those results into cash and then organize, they might have a bettter chance. But money is a huge obstacle and the biggest difference between the likes of Huckabee and Hunter and that of Romney. Building organization to get the vote out and spread your name is crucial in these early primary states, especially for these types of candidates who want to use South carolina as a springboard to better results in the following elections.

For McCain, on the other hand, this poll and the conventions show where he is at; South Carolina, despite all the negatives surrounding McCain, is still winnable. His strategy of avoiding the conventions may have an upside - the type of campaigning he will do in the state will be more grassroots and get him more positive headlines, as opposed to him speaking in front of crowds he knows will be hostile for political reasons. We’ve said it before - count McCain out at your own risk. He’s not the candidate he was in 1999, but he’s not the candidate that Joe Lieberman was in 2004 either.

As for Giuliani, winning would be nice but ultimately irrevelant in South Carolina - he just needs to maintain a decent level of support to not undermine him in the bigger more moderate states having primaries on or before February 5.

I would not make too much of Sanford’s name in the poll; he’s been mentioned as a presidential candidate in the past but it seems more than a little late for him to jump in. A definite VP candidate, as Romney has said.

Sphere: Related Content

Republican Roundup

Chuck Hagel

Hagel went to Iraq this past weekend, and held a press conference to say the committment was not open ended, and criticized the ‘long war.’ He also criticized McCain’s shopping trip of a week prior.

Hagel raised $142,000 in the first quarter, which leaves open to him either retiring, running for Senate, or President. We’ll have to wait a while longer.

Duncan Hunter

Hunter spoke to the Alabama state legislature, focusing on his stump speech and pet issues, like China and trading; he received some positive feedback.

Hunter was a guest on the CQ talk radio show.

Hunter has posted a set of media appearances on his site.

Fred Thompson

Thompson is still polling extremely well in polls, coming in right at second or third consistently.

Thompson is meeting with about 50 Congressmen and women tomorrow in Washington.

Jim Gilmore

Gilmore went to the Iowa Lincoln Day Dinner and went after ‘Rudy McRomney’ for not being a conservative, drawing boos from the audience. Hard to see him gaining traction rarely campaigning and then attacking the front runners.

A hypothetical look on how Gilmore wins the nomination. I’m not seeing it, though.

John Cox

A brief look at John Cox’s speech to the Iowa Lincoln Day Dinner.

This look at John Cox says the media ignorance will have doomed his campaign. I’m not sure I can begin to buy that. Is it the media’s job to make candidates a year before the election when they raise less than $3,000 in a quarter?

An editorial taking a positive look at John Cox and his book.

John McCain

McCain has been talking fiscal discipline lately, calling for a tighter federal budget using strong words. But he’s not convincing everyone yet. President of the Club for Growth Pat Toomey said to the NYT that: “While Senator McCain deserves credit for his support for free trade, limited spending and extending the Bush tax cuts, his record of opposing tax cuts speaks louder than his words today.”

McCain took a strong stance for gun rights in the face of the shooting in Virginia. It’s risky timing for a political statement (given that some people will surely roll their eyes at it), but goes to show how much he needs to court favor on the right for this election.

Fred Kaplan took offense of McCain saying the stakes were so high in Iraq that surrender was not an option, but that he would withdraw is an overwhelming amount of Americans favored it. It’s hard to see how it isn’t McCain blatantly trying to have it both ways.

McCain is deliberately avoiding state GOP conventions in South Carolina in favor of speaking longer to smaller crowds. I’m guessing he doesn’t have much confidence in his stump speech right now to persuade those who have coalesced against him. It’s not a bad idea - wait until he gains popularity to speak in such a controlled environment. The risk is waiting too long and he ends up demoting himself to the second tier.

David Brooks points out that the election will not be about the surge, it will be about the bigger problems in Iraq, and McCain’s support of the war may hurt him in that regard. Hard to say how true that is in a Presidential election, though, and it depends on the circumstances. Even modest steps in the next couple of months could help McCain.

Mike Huckabee

Huckabee is augmenting his trip to New Hampshire with a ‘fun run’ and he will also be playing with a local band at a high school. I think these events are good - he needs the popularity - but he’ll have to make a point to show gravitas during his stump speeches, lest people see him as a bass player and not a candidate.

Huckabee talked with the editorial board of the Des Moines register, mentioning that he advocates a flat tax, and would hold a regional summit to discuss problems in Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan. He also talked about the need of building a beter future in general.

Huckabee did not even fundraise well in Arkansas, although he was relatively better there than anywhere else.

Huckabee answered ten more questions from Time, including one about Iran, to which he answered: “The statements of Iran’s leader are troubling. But we do need to engage in ongoing discussions. Because it is never wrong to have conversations. It’s only wrong to have negotiations with those who are unreasonable. We should see Iran as a nation who has a leader with which we don’t agree, but respect that their are millions of people within Iran who do not share that same view towards the United States, as does its leader.”

Mitt Romney

Hotline uses simple math to debunk Romney’s claims of internet donations. Hard to claim bias on this one - the math is all right there. Romney just seems to be including things under internet fundraising that really aren’t that. It’s not a serious offense or anything close, but sometihng to keep an eye on.

Mitt Romney praised Hillary Clinton’s book about raising children in 1998, and harshly criticized it in 2004. Another flip-flop on the periphery of his campaign. You have to wonder if all of these will come back to hurt him; if not, we will see more politicians going this route in the future, I imagine.

The Florida primary being tentatively scheduled for a week after the New Hampshire primary could be a big help for a candidate with good organization like Romney, particularly if Giuliani keeps lagging behind in that regard.

Sen. Wayne Allard of Colorado endorsed Romney.

Romney outlined his energy policy, focusing on energy independence as a security issue.

Romney’s silence among top Republicans about South Carolina’s new law requiring women to view an ultrasound of the fetus/unborn baby before they have an abortion is puzzling. It’s hard to see many negative repercussions from backing it given his stance on abortion.

A look at Romney’s history with gun control in Massachusetts. He signed a statewide ban on assault weapons, saying, “Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. … These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.” The record is generally favorable for hunters and those who use guns for self-defense.

Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich writes about the importance of English language education, as he juxtaposes it with his own story of trying to learn Spanish.

Gingrich spoke about the future of government and science yesterday.

Gingrich has a base of potential support in his home state of Georgia among some Congressmen.

This doesn’t have anything to do with the election, but it’s still a fascinating read of a comparison of Gingrich and Nancy Pelosi in terms of political style.

A hard look from the right on whether Ginrich is presidential. This strikes me as a view that could gain a lot of traction given the circumstances of Gingich’s fall from power. I wonder myself whether Gingrich would rather have someone run on his ideas or just run himself.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul spoke with Politico, and took the bold position of saying that more guns on campus could have prevented the massacre at Virginia Tech. I understand his position, but asking for a responsible student to carry a gun on a college campus - where responsibility is safe to say not the norm - is asking a lot.

Paul discussed his libertarian feelings on domestic and foriegn issues with the Des Moines editorial board.

Paul will be on Lou Dobbs tomorrow night.

Rudy Giuliani

Giuliani was on with Hugh Hewitt, and talked largely about his biography (he also goes into 9/11 conspiracy theories a bit and Rosie O’Donnell). He was also pushed on abortion, saying:

Hewitt: Would you like to see Roe V. Wade reversed, Mayor?
Giuliani: I would [hesitates, not indicating agreement]…what I’d like to see are abortions reduced, and adoptions increased. And I reduced…abortions declined about 15, 16% while I was Mayor, I think more than the national average. But most importantly, adoptions went up over 60%.
Hewitt: But would it be a good day or a bad day for America if Roe V. Wade was reversed by the Roberts’ Court?
Giuliani: Oh, I think that’s something the Court has to decide.

I have to wonder how many Republicans take this view of Giuliani regarding abortion. Is it cynical to not trust what Giuliani personally believes, or is it a mainstream view? It’s hard for anyone to say at this point. Later in the summer it should be more clear. However, comments like Giuliani recently made calling for the GOP to “get beyond” abortion are not going to make this issue go away. Giuliani is an interesting litmus test on how important abortion is to the modern Republican Party. This blog entry goes over what Giuliani said in full and commends him for standing up for it and defending the GOP as the big tent party. I’ve said it before, but I’ll reiterate it here: the abbreviated schedule in January and February could really help Giuliani, whereas in previous years potentially disappointing finishes in Iowa and South Carolina could have hurt him.

Giuliani’s cross-dressing is making the rounds in the papers. It was a good joke, nothing to take seriously. It’d be like voting for or against Clinton because he played the sax or for or against George W. Bush because he stumbles over words from time to time.

Giuliani’s draft-dodging history has come up, but if the country could elect two presidents recently with the non-existant or unimpressive military histories of Clinton and Bush …. Giuliani going to law school rather than serving will probably not be an issue. His vague opposition to the war in Vietnam is far more interesting, though I don’t know if it’ll go anywhere.

Sam Brownback

Brownback has changed his position on No Child Left Behind since it has been enacted.

Brownback continues to run a campaign based on his social conservatism, speaking last week in South Carolina.

He is currently proposing to split Iraq into three separate states - Sunni, Shia, Kurd - something nearly everyone else is opposed to.

Looks like the Romney-Brownback feud is restarting again.

Brownback is advocating a flat tax plan, as this notebook details. His two pages on taxes, here and here, do not get into any significant details.

Tom Tancredo

Tancredo addressed the issue of extremists sending him money: “There are kooky groups on both sides of the immigration issue. … I can only be responsible for the things I say or do. I can’t help who decides to send me money or support me.” He can say that if he wants, but he also then can’t criticize anyone else from either party for taking money from anyone. It’s a bit strange, though, given that he in the past has refused to take money from gun advocacy groups after the tragedy at Columbine.

Tancredo elaborates on his other positions: he wants to disengage in Iraq but not leave and he wants government involvement in energy development to free the country from OPEC. He mostly talked about immigration, though, not surprisingly.

Tancredo’s message was well-received at the Lincoln Day Dinner in Iowa. Here’s another look.

Tancredo transferred money from his House election fund to his Presidential fund. It’s unclear if he will be running for both, as Kucinich has in the past.

Tommy Thompson

Thompson campaigned in Fort Dodge, IA this past weekend.

In Wisconsin, he reiterated his plan for Iraq: “I would demand that the federal government in Iraq vote as to whether they want the U.S. in Iraq. And, if they vote yes, it gives us legitimacy for being there. And, if they vote no, they don’t want us there, we should leave.”

A review of Thompson’s long speech at the Iowa Lincoln Day Dinner.

Lincoln Day Dinner

This weekend, most Republican candidates gathered for the Iowa Lincoln Day Dinner. No need to recap it here extensively, since the first hand reports elsewhere are so thorough. Cyclone Conservative and Krusty Konservative both weighed in after attending, and the former took pictures as well. Iowa voice watched the event online (which I may end up doing yet).
The report in the Des Moines Register focused on the tension between the candidates; that was underscored by Gilmore’s comments, as mentioned above. The next few Iowa polls should be crucial in finding out what changes the dinner had, if any. The views, even of the few bloggers I linked to, are so drastically different in some instances that it’s hard to make judgments.

Lastly, this NYT graph is a great look at where funds were raised from.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday Morning GOP Roundup

The Republican Debate scheduled for May 3 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library as of Wednesday includes Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Tommy Thompson. I would be surprised if Tancredo did not go as well, as we was even reported to be attending; he doesn’t have anything to lose by debating.

Chuck Hagel

Democratic Sen. from Nebraska Ben Nelson said he would like to see Hagel run, and that he would be a competant President, but that he can’t win the Republican nomination as an anti-war candidate. That’s definitely safe to say.

Duncan Hunter

NewsMax conducted an interview with Hunter about immigration, stem cells, the trade deficit, Iraq, and the status of his campaign. Pretty standard interview, nothing controversial or especially interesting if you’ve been following his campaign. More interesting is this video outreach to conservative bloggers pleading for support.

Hunter did not raise much money in the first quarter, less than $500,000.

Hunter campaigned in Iowa this past week.

Fred Thompson

It’s less than a month until Thompson makes an appearance in Orange County, and the ‘Draft Fred Thompson’ site has already re-launched in anticipation.

Some evangelical leaders think Thompson might be the answer to the lack of socially conservative candidates.

This Politico report indicates that Thompson has begun to assemble a campaign around him.

Another national poll shows Thompson doing exceptionally well, at 14%, taking most of his support from Giuliani.

Jim Gilmore

A rare look inside the Gilmore campaign. What a disaster. His staff buying beer at a liquor store minutes before hi CPAC speech? His campaign manager not playing the fundraising ‘game’? Considering campaigning in New Hampshire a “waste of time”? His numbers cannot change unless he shakes up his staff (and even then, don’t count on much).

John Cox

State chairs are leaving the Cox campaign, including this teenager who was his state chair in Wisconsin.

Cox vowed in an interview published with the Des Moines Register to stay in the race through January. He also talked about abortion (against it in all cases, including rape and incest), the FAIR tax, and supply-side economics - and his distaste with the Republican Party as it is.

John McCain

McCain will make a policy speech on Iraq this Wednesday at the Virginia Military Institute. The goal is to convince potential supporters that the war in Iraq is still winnable, and is essential to American’s security. This comes after clips of McCain saying he misspoke about Iraq (it’s not yet clear exactly what he said he misspoke about) on 60 Minutes, which will air in full this Sunday.

This article in the NY Times details how McCain is overhauling his fundraising to more mirror the structure Bush used. Also, McCain’s schedule is being loaded with fundraisers in the next few months and his campaign fundraising chair admits it’s a sprint, not a marathon (hear that, Mike Huckabee?)

McCain announced his ‘Sportsmen Coalition’ in New Hampshire, which will contrast starkly with the Romney hunting stories going around.

Mike Huckabee

Huckabee was interviewed by Hugh Hewitt, going in detail over his thoughts on immigration, guns, and his marathon times. Huckabee was asked about machine guns, to which he stated, “I’ve got friends who own them. They have the legal process to own them. But once again, I’m not afraid of a law abiding citizen owning anything. I’m afraid of a criminal getting his hands on a gun. That’s where the crackdown needs to be. This country’s gone crazy. It’s cracking down on law abiding citizens, and turning their heads at people who break the law. That’s the polar opposite.” Mike Huckabee has friends who own machine guns? More seriously, the long dialogue about his marathon times is one reason people might not take him seriously as a presidential candidate. It seems so trite for a presidential candidate in an interview to spend so much time talking about the marathon he ran in New York.

Huckabee answered ten questions posed by voters for Time. The answer to the first question is purely a cliche. I can’t imagine anyone would vote for him just because he says he’s the underdog. His answer regarding ‘accepting responsibility’ seems to end right in the middle.

Huckabee will be the guest at a luncheon in Iowa this Wednesday, the end of this article notes. It’s also mentioned that the Huckabee set a goal of only $500,000 for fundraisingin the first quarter. That’s either a complete lie, or the campaign from the beginning knew it would be running this far behind.

Mitt Romney

A lengthy write-up in the Boston Globe of the Romney hunting debacle. He does not own a firearm, despite claiming to earlier in the year. Read more here.

A Zogby poll taken in New Hampshire just after the April fundraising numbers came out shows Romney jumping up into a tie with McCain for the lead in the state, with Giuliani just behind.

Romney received some endorsements from Iowa politicians.

Romney is speaking to a Livingston County (Michigan) Republican dinner on April 27.

Newt Gingrich

Gingrich apologized for saying, “We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English, … so people learn the common language of the country and they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto.”









On Tuesday morning, Gingrich will debate Sen. John Kerry on the environment and climate change. He is speaking at George Washington University on Monday.

Gingrich called for comprehensive health care reform, and focus on preventing health care through physical education in grade schools.

Gingrich is trying to create a massive movement behind his ideals. He’s holding ‘internet-based workshops’ in late September to try to create the massive network. The ultimate goal is for a candidate to embrace his ideals.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul will be campaigning in Iowa this coming Wednesday.

Paul wrote about his campaigning out west earlier this week.

Rudy Giuliani

Giuliani has drawn mild and scattered criticism for impersonating Don Corleone on the campaign trail. There’s a zero percent chance Giuliani will change based on this sort of criticism.

Giuliani supports more oil drilling now as a bridge to renewable energy, saying, “Energy independence means everything has to be open for discussion. … The idea of having more oil under our command, so to speak, or within our orbit probably for some period of time is going to be important. The ultimate goal, however, should be renewable sources of energy.”

I do not agree with most of the criticism in this article, but I do agree that the Giuliani abortion speeches seemed to be handled sloppily. What I do not agree with is that his position will kill him. Perhaps in prior years, but not with the primary schedule being the way it is now.

Sam Brownback

A video interview with Sam Brownback on New Hampshire TV, discussing Iraq, health care, social security, and veterans hospitals.

Brownback is stumping in Iowa, attending multiple prayer breakfasts. He wants to economically incentivize poor people to marry.

Brownback raised $1.3 million in the first quarter.

Tom Tancredo

Tancredo is still optimistic about his campaign. His message is still the same, in case you wondered.

Tommy Thompson

Tommy Thompson kicked off his campaign in Wisconsin and Iowa on Wednesday. His speech in Wisconsin reviewed his policy stances on all the important issues.

Thompson raised $400,000 in the first quarter, and has $186,000 on hand.

Newt Gingrich thinks that Thompson could surprise in Iowa, saying, “Given his small-town Wisconsin background, I think he’s going to be very effective in Iowa and very effective in New Hampshire.” He also said, “The truth is, he’s a character, but characters sometimes do very well in American politics. And I think if he relaxes and just is Tommy Thompson, he may do surprisingly well in Iowa and New Hampshire.”

George Pataki

Making a cameo appearance, Pataki appears by joing a NYC law firm to have decided not to run. He said he could support either McCain or Giuliani.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday Night GOP Roundup

Chuck Hagel

Hagel was on ‘This Week’ earlier today and said that he was not happy with the Bush Administration ignoring popular angst about the war, saying “Any president who says, I don’t care, or I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else, or I don’t care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed — if a president really believes that, then there are — what I was pointing out, there are ways to deal with that.” He added: “We have clearly a situation where the president has lost the confidence of the American people in his war effort. … It is now time, going into the fifth year of that effort, for the Congress to step forward and be part of setting some boundaries and some conditions as to our involvement.” Implying impeachment so strongly will win Hagel no favors in GOP corners.

Hagel stopped short of calling for Gonzalez’ resignation, but said he had a credibility problem.

Duncan Hunter

Hunter is speaking at Keene State College in New Hampshire tomorrow morning. He spoke out about trade and border security in Keene earlier this weekend.

Hunter’s son is getting more press for running to take his father’s spot in the House than Hunter himself is getting in the run for the White House. It makes me (and others) wonder how serious he really is.

Fred Thompson

Fred Thompson won the presidential straw poll in Georgia. Hs has similar positions on the issues as McCain, but has the charisma and star policy to sell them right now; he’s in a somewhat similar position as Obama and Giuliani: when people start looking at him for the second, third, and fourth time, will the support stick? It may and it may not, but Thompson definitely has credibility on conservative issues that the top 3 would kill for.

His wife is reportedly urging him to run, but no announcement is expected in the near future.

Jim Gilmore

Gilmore did an interview with Human events. His position on abortion is slightly different than many on the right: “[M]y view is that after about a period of about eight weeks where there is time for a baby to form. After that period of time I think there should be no further abortions — because I think the child has emerged — except to save the life of the mother and situations of extremes.”

On gay marriage, Gilmore said that “... I don’t support gay marriage. I think that the traditional marriage values that we’ve had over generations in America is the appropriate thing. The extent that people can find some way to build some kind of contractual relationship between themselves, fine, but I don’t think it should rise to a civil union which is really a substitute for the concept of marriage and I don’t support that either. But at the same time, I think that if people who are gay want to try to create some kind of relationship between themselves, I should probably be able to do that under American law. “

Gilmore spent a significant amount of time in the interview talking about his fiscal record and position. He also directly attacked Mccain, Romney, and Giuliani for their conservative shortcomings.

John McCain

In New Hampshire this weekend, McCain tried to lower expectations of money raised in the first quarter. It’s just the opening salvo of political maneuvering between now and when the first quarter results are revealed in early April.

Meanwhile, Iraq threatens McCain’s popularity from the left, and immigration from the right.

McCain was in New Jersey earlier this week for two fundraisers and campaigning.

McCain stumped about Iraq, immigration, and climate change in New Hampshire this weekend, saying about global warming that, “We could and should reduce greenhouse gasses. … Even if we’re wrong, we’ve given our grandchildren a cleaner place to live.”

Mike Huckabee

Huckabee made only his second visit to Iowa since forming his exploratory committee, a statement that is fairly shocking when you take a glance at any poll and see how low he is. He talked about his chances of winning, winning in Iraq, and building bipartisan relationships. He seems to understand though that he needs to spend more time in Iowa, as he stated: “I am going to be spending an enormous amount of time in Iowa. … I still think Iowa matters. Candidates like me need a breakthrough in Iowa.”

Good news for Huckabee: Undecided GOP county in Iowa chairs like him and Romney more than any other candidate.

Huckabee talked about his beliefs on some issues on a local NH TV station.

South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds is going to be working on the National Steering Committee for Huckabee.

Mitt Romney

The McCain and Romney camps are fighting hard to lower their fundraising expectations and raise the expectations for the other. The National Journal highlights some rumors (McCain below $30 million, Romney below $20), but I wouldn’t take any of these rumors too seriously right now; everything they say is a game between the two of them.

Massachusetts pro-choice/anti-abortion activists are speaking out about meetings they had where Romney made promises. This adds a personal level to the flip-flopping accusations; it’s incredibly similar to the swift boat ads, really.

Romney’s office in Manchester, NH was opened by his son.

The secretary of the Christian Coalition signed on to Romney’s campaign in South Carolina.

Romney’s lack of experience in international politics and some other areas have the potential to embarass him on the trail on occasion, as the recent issue with him quoting “Fatherland or Death, We Shall Overcome.” showed. That doesn’t mean he can’t win - just that these types of situations may rise up from time to time and -ironically- Romney will have to overcome them.

Newt Gingrich

Gingrich has decried fundraising so early, but his 527, American Solutions for Winning the Future, has raised over 2 million dollars, which he can use as the base of a campaign. It has been bolstered two contributions of one million dollars.

Gingrich will speak at EcoVision 2007 in mid-April.

Ron Paul

Paul was the first candidate to sign the American Freedom Agenda Pledge, a pledge being put forward by the Liberty Coalition. Details at this link. I could see some second tier Democratic candidates signing the pledge; beyond that I’m not sure.

In this interview about his foreign policy ideals, Paul spoke about the perception problems with opposing a war: “It’s very difficult because the executive branch, and particularly the president, always has the bully pulpit. He can say it over and over and over again, and it’s always heard: “If you don’t vote for the money and you don’t support the policy, you don’t support the troops.” And that’s not true because if you’re spending money to support a policy that puts the troops in harm’s way, performing a task that’s unachievable, then you’re doing everything in the world to hurt the troops. You’re doing everything you can to undermine the rule of law because it’s an undeclared illegal war and it’s very detrimental economically. So to argue that you’re unpatriotic because you don’t support the troops, because you don’t support the policy, is a canard, it’s just not true. Even the strong opponents to the war, in the Congress here, are intimidated by that. Not so much that they believe it, but they’re intimidated, they say “when I go home the people are going to say that I’m unpatriotic and I don’t support the troops and I don’t support national defense and I might lose my congressional seat.” As political pragmatists they back away from doing what I’m quite sure a lot of them would know would be the right thing to do. And that is to change the policy and de-fund the war.”

The grassroots effort keeps getting Paul some attention. Eventually, he’ll have to translate that attention into some support in the polls to have some influence.

Paul has blamed Greenspan, Bernanke, and the Fed for creating the housing bubble.

Rudy Giuliani

Giuliani has gained significant ground on McCain in Arizona over the past two months, closing from 27 points behind to within 11 points currently. That probably says more about McCain than it does Giuliani, though.

Giuliani was in Newport Beach campaigning and fundraising, and learned what phrase he always needs to keep using: “Sept. 11, 2001, taught me — and I believe it taught a lot of people, including President Bush — that we have to remain on offense. … That means that we have to use our military. We can’t show weakness.”

According to some sources, Judith Giuliani reportedly is causing some problems in the campaign, but anything of the sort was denied by a Giuliani spokesman. Also in the article, Giuliani and his wife will speak to Barbara Walters this week on 20/20.

Giuliani has some skeletons in his closet: Bernard Kerik, WIlliam Bretton, Donna Hanover (second wife), and Regina Peruggi (first wife). It remains to be seen how much those will hurt Giuliani. His stances on social issues will probably hurt him more.

Giuliani launched his new website, and it’s everything that McCain’s is not: Personable, with a smiling picture of him on the front, and most importantly, in color. Take a look, it’s well done. The ‘call talk radio’ feature is impressive.

Sam Brownback

Brownback’s campaign needs a win or near-win in Iowa and then a win in South Carolina to realistically have a chance. The article advises him to spend more time in Iowa before the Aug. 11 straw poll, which wouldn’t be a bad idea at all. Indeed, the Washington Post blog says he is focused ‘laser-like’ on Iowa. The state is the absolute keystone for Brownback. And speaking to supporters in Iowa, he stated, “I can win. I need you to win this. Iowa is key.”

Brownback spoke about the global water crisis on World Water Day.

Brownback will keynote an adoption even in New York City on April 11.

Brownback supports a flat tax.

Tom Tancredo

Tancredo will decide within the next few weeks whether his bid for the presidency will go forward.

Tancredo spoke at Muscatine Community College about being a one issue candidate: “Sometimes I am accused of being a one-issue candidate, I have heard that before. I say, ‘Well, at least I have an issue, and frankly it is an issue that touches so many parts of our life. … You want to talk about education? I will talk to you about the cost of educating the children of illegal aliens. You want to talk about our health care problems? I will talk to you about the 86 hospitals that have shut down because they can no longer afford to provide free treatment for illegal aliens that have overwhelmed them. You want to talk about national security? How secure do you think it is to have our borders be porous and people come through at their desire, not because we say they can?”

Tancredo broke down his position to one of language: “The English language is the glue that holds this country together. … Bilingual countries don’t work well. Multicultural countries do not work well. When people come to the United States, they need to become Americans.”

Tommy Thompson

Thompson was named the chairman of the board of Healthshares. The description: “HealthShares(TM) ETFs are organized into therapeutic ‘Verticals’ and represent specific areas of the healthcare, life science and biotechnology industries. Each Vertical addresses a distinct sub-segment of healthcare, such as the diagnosis and treatment of specific therapeutic areas (e.g. cardiology, cancer, infectious disease, etc.) and the development of medical devices (e.g. orthopedic repair, cardio devices, etc.). Each ETF tracks an index of 22-25 stocks and offers institutional and individual investors a more precise financial instrument that leverages the potential of healthcare investing while mitigating the risks of single stock picking.”

Thompson receives high marks for his work from social conservatives for his positions on abortion and abstinence education, but lower marks for his support of embryonic stemm cell research.

Thompson spent another weekend in Iowa, stumping in Denison and Boone. He stated he would like to see nicotine become a regulated substance, saying, “One of the most addictive [drugs] that’s legal but it causes a tremendous amount of harm and nobody really is trying to regulate that, and that’s nicotine. … Nicotine killed 443,000 Americans last year. … I don’t think you’ll make tobacco illegal, but I want to see nicotine regulated.”

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »