The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

McCain Team Critiques Romney Record

Updated: 1:43 p.m.
By Howard Kurtz
Greenville, S.C. -- The morning after John McCain lost the Michigan primary to Mitt Romney, his team rolled out a new attack on the former Massachusetts governor, even likening him to John Kerry as a flip-flopper.

Steve Schmidt, a top McCain strategist, attributed yesterday's loss to "Mitt Romney's pandering up in Michigan" by promising what Schmidt called a "$100 billion bailout of the auto industry...Mitt Romney should explain to the rest of the country how he's going to pay for it."

While Romney has proposed a five-year, $20 billion-a-year effort to revitalize the ailing auto industry, the Arizona senator has emphasized worker retraining and research into green technologies. Schmidt would not put a price tag on that but minimized the retraining plan as a consolidation of existing programs.

Speaking to reporters after a rally here today, McCain declined to use the word "pandering" but said of Romney: "By promising that amount of money to the auto industry, at least he ought to be able to say where it's going to come from." McCain cited statistics purporting to show that Massachusetts lagged the nation in economic growth during Romney's four-year term.

Asked why he began the Greenville rally by touting his record of opposing abortion, McCain said it is an important issue here and that "we know there are phone calls being made that I am pro-choice."

Schmidt, a top official in President Bush's reelection campaign, told reporters earlier today that Romney's shifting positions are reminiscent of Kerry, who was dogged by charges of flip-flopping in 2004. "When you have a candidate like Mitt Romney who's been on both sides of every issue...it's a tremendous liability in a general election," he said.

Schmidt broadened the verbal assault to include what he called Romney's "rather weak record as governor of Massachusetts," including sluggish job growth and a $700 million boost in taxes and fees, and said Romney's record of trimming jobs as a corporate takeover artist would also be fair game.

The remarks, significantly harsher than what McCain has said, clearly reflect an effort to rough up Romney and blunt any momentum he may have garnered heading into Saturday's South Carolina primary. Although McCain campaigned hard in Michigan, Schmidt dismissed the victory by Romney, who grew up there, as a triumph by a "native son."

The McCain camp was rather annoyed last night when Romney gave his victory speech soon after the networks projected him the winner at 9 p.m., prompting some cable networks to break away from McCain's remarks. Protocol usually dictates that the winner wait until the losing candidates have thanked their supporters.

"Totally classless," Schmidt said.

Posted at 1:43 PM ET on Jan 16, 2008
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Big Game Hunters for Giuliani | Next: Obama Touts War Opposition, Lobby Reform


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



It is scary to see how many of the conservative beliefs people are ready to through out the window to support John McCain. He has shown himself to be liberal on many issues including taxes, immigration, and campaign finance. How come no one points out that he has been a Senator of a state for the last 25 years that has had uncontrolled illegal immigration. He couldn't change anything in his state for 25 years? Not to mention that do we really want this loose cannon running our country. McCain has repeatedly lost his temper when challenged. Wake up everyone, let's back a candidate that will actually be well qualified and have the vision to help our country. A vote for McCain is a vote for the establishment that has gotten us into the mess that we are in now.

Posted by: pccu | January 21, 2008 5:25 PM

I love how all the nativists and white supremacist fascists in this country conveniently forget that their idol, Ronald Reagan, was the original author of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Idiots.

Posted by: PBL4 | January 17, 2008 10:10 PM

I currently support Mike Huckabee, but I'm willing to switch to Fred Thompson if the Giuliani, Romney, and McCain people will do the same.

http://www.fredconsensus.blogspot.com/

Posted by: cpatter6 | January 17, 2008 7:37 PM

We have an arrogant, incompetent, illiterate, and inept fool in the White House, a demoralized and decimated military, plundered treasury, trashed world standing, trampled rule of Law and Constitution. While the nation is sinking under an tidal wave of Uneducated Illegal Aliens waving the Mexican flag, demanding their rights, while feasting at the trough of Public Welfare, as they Kill, Rob, and Rape thousands of American Citizens each year. While most of the Candidates are pandering for the Latino vote by implying or promising Amnesty!

We as a nation can survive fools in our White House. What we CANNOT survive is fools both in our Congress and white house like Bush, McCain, Hillary, Obama, etc. Each promising a new American, rebuilding the middle class and taking care of the poor. But what they refuse to acknowledge or recognize is no single Nation or people is rich enough to lift the 100,s of millions of poor out of poverty. In others words American & American taxpayers cannot bear the cost of becoming the welfare state for Mexico and Latin American. To attempt to do so will only reduce all Americans to poverty equaling what the uneducated invaders are fleeing from in their home countries. The poor and criminals pouring across our Borders have an average of an six grade education. Each person with less than a high education is a net cost of 20k per year for American taxpayers. So the displaced compassion, flawed logic, or just pandering for votes, endorsed by Edwards, Obama, McCain, Hillary . is deeply flawed. Failure to close our border or to give Amnesty to the 12 to 30 millions of Illegal Aliens in this country will in the long run, with the Chain Immigration result in adding 100 to 160 millions poor citizens to our welfare rolls. Their high school drop out rates exceed 50 percent with a high crime rate and a very high illegitimate birth rate, this is very combination that keeps Mexico & Latin American a cesspool of crime, corruption, poverty & misery!

Maybe the results is what the multinational companies and the rich dream of, a Nation full of poor docile labors like China, India, Mexico, but I do not believe it is the future most Americans aspire to for their children and grand children!

In all, my country, a potential benefactor and beacon for all the world - is headed right off a cliff and to an third world status!

In my view - - this has all come to pass because the Politicians, the elected and sworn stewards of this country, both Republicans & Democrats have allowed it to happen. Surely they should have known better when they build bridges to nowhere, when they wasted 100,s of billion in pork and sold their votes to the highest bidder....when they refused to abide by the Constitution against invasion or enforce the very laws they passed, they have disgraced and dishonored their oath of office and brought shame upon our Nation. One way this Nation can start to recover is for the lot of them to be gone from those hallowed halls of Congress and the White House, because most of them have become a house of party-bound Prostitutes paid by the special interests, swirling and partying, amidst the rubble of their own malfeasance - taking this Nation right down in the gutter with them.

If the Politicians with the Citizens support, decide they must do more for the worlds poor then they must find a way like an Marshall plan for Latin American. What they must not be allowed to do, though flawed logic, false compassion, or by criminal intent is to turn this Nation into a Cesspool of Crime, Corruption, Poverty, and Misery by continuing the open borders policy and Amnesty for the millions of uneducated peons pouring across our borders.

As a proud and concerned American that proudly served my Country in time of War as did my Father, my two brothers and my son. I am appalled and very angry at what self severing, stupid/corrupt politicians have done to my country!

Posted by: american1 | January 17, 2008 6:30 PM

I notice that this morning on "Morning Joe" on MSNBC, they are back promoting Huckabee. They had an interview with some Author, to tell the difference between the Candidates. Everyone was mentioned, Campaign clips played, with the exception of Romney. It seems like the MSM does not like, nor want Romney to win. My guess, they must think he is the strangest one to go up against their favorite Demo Candidate. They don't hesitate to find something negative to report on Romney. McCain has gone SO negative an personal against Romney, along with those little humorous digs that Huckabee get in also. But the Press gives them a pass. Where is the anal exam of Huckabee on his promoting religion into Politics, which they never miss a chance at blasting the President for. Hypocrisy by the MSM is rampant.

Posted by: eafcat | January 17, 2008 12:24 PM

Anyone who thinks that Mitt or Huck have even A CHANCE in the general election is terribly deluded. The Dems will TEAR HIM APART. New national poll numbers on potential general election matchups:

Obama (D) 43%, McCain (R) 42%
McCain (R) 48%, Clinton (D) 45%
Obama (D) 54%, Huckabee (R) 31%
Clinton (D) 49%, Huckabee (R) 40%
Obama (D) 57%, Romney (R) 27%
Clinton (D) 50%, Romney (R) 39%
McCain (R) 48%, Edwards (D) 40%
Edwards (D) 48%, Huckabee (R) 33%
Edwards (D) 50%, Romney (R) 34%

In a general election matchup, John McCain destroys Edwards, beats Hillary and is extremely competitive and within the margin of error with Obama. No other GOP candidate comes within even 9 points of beating a democrat. Huckabee loses all 3 elections by an average of 16 points, and Romney loses by a whopping 19 points on average.

A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for HilEdBama. That's why the liberal establishment in Michigan was pushing Democrats to vote for Romney. But, hey. I'm sure these facts are just "liberal media propaganda". Feel free to reject reality and substitute your own. While you're at it, pass me some of what you're smoking.

When you finally wake up and stop deluding yourself, vote for John McCain.

Source:

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/hotlinediageo_national_dem_race_close_mccain_leads_gop.php

Posted by: PBL4 | January 17, 2008 12:24 PM

I hope the R's nominate Romney for the general election and not McCain. Romney is easy fodder for any of the remaining D's in the race. His stance(s) on every issue, his record in MA, his job slashing corporate raider skills and his overt pandering to get support will make him almost as comical as Rudy if he were to make it.

VOTE MITT!

Posted by: raincntry | January 17, 2008 10:05 AM

John McCain...same old, same OLD. All we heard from the liberal MSM in the 1996 race was that Bob Dole (at 73) was too old to be president.

But now that THEIR (not the GOP's) hero, RINO McCain (71) is running, age apparently doesn't mean a thing!

Nothing like a little media bias/hypocrisy.

Posted by: mrunpc | January 17, 2008 9:27 AM

DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED MEDIA'S AGENDA...ANYBODY BUT ROMNEY

The Democrat controlled liberal Media machine is doing all it can to choose THEIR "favorite" GOP candidate, which means ANYONE but Mitt Romney. This is how Mike Huckabee was elevated to frontrunner status in IA, emerging from obscurity in a matter of a few weeks. There were nothing but puff pieces/articles/stories and absolutely NO scrutiny of his mediocre, often liberal, voting record as AR Governor. As a result, and much to the joy of the liberals, IA voters were convinced that Mr. Huckabee should be their choice...NOT as President but as Pastor of the United States. Mike Huckabee is, by far, the weakest and least qualified GOP candidate and the easiest to beat and the Liberals are salivating at the prospect of his winning the nomination. Now that they're done with the Huckster, it's McCain's turn.

John McCain is nothing more than a RINO (Republican In Name Only). He's been in the Senate forever and is an entrenced "good ol' boy". He is a big supporter of numerous liberal bills, including the requirement of much tighter auto emissions standards, costing auto manufacturers (and us consumers) BILLIONS in unnecessary costs.

The McCain domestic record is a disaster. To say he fought spending, most particularly earmarks, is to nibble around the edges and miss the heart of the matter. For starters, consider:

McCain-Feingold -- the most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.

McCain-Kennedy -- the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.

McCain-Lieberman -- the most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry -- through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases -- in American history.

McCain-Kennedy-Edwards -- the biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients' bill of rights.

McCain-Reimportantion of Drugs -- a significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention, see link).

And McCain's stated opposition to the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts was largely based on socialist, class-warfare rhetoric -- tax cuts for the rich, not for the middle class. The public record is full of these statements. Today, he recalls only his insistence on accompanying spending cuts.

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, McCain was consistently hostile to American enterprise, from media and pharmaceutical companies to technology and energy companies.

McCain also led the Gang of 14, which prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the systematic use (actual and threatened) of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominees.

And then there's the McCain defense record.
His supporters point to essentially one policy strength, McCain's early support for a surge and counterinsurgency. It has now evolved into McCain taking credit for forcing the president to adopt General David Petreaus's strategy. Where's the evidence to support such a claim?
Moreover, Iraq is an important battle in our war against the Islamo-fascist threat. But the war is a global war, and it most certainly includes the continental United States, which, after all, was struck on 9/11. How does
McCain fare in that regard?

McCain-ACLU -- the unprecedented granting of due-process rights to unlawful enemy combatants (terrorists). McCain has repeatedly called for the immediate closing of Guantanamo Bay and the introduction of al-Qaeda terrorists into our own prisons -- despite the legal rights they would immediately gain and the burdens of managing such a dangerous population.

While McCain proudly and repeatedly points to his battles with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who had to rebuild the U.S. military and fight a complex war, where was McCain in the lead-up to the war -- when the military was being dangerously downsized by the Clinton administration and McCain's friend, former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen? Where was McCain when the CIA was in desperate need of attention? Also, McCain was apparently in the dark about al-Qaeda like most of Washington, despite a decade of warnings.

Mitt Romney is by far the most qualified man in EITHER party and is a class act all the way. And yet since he became a GOP candidate for president, I have seen nothing but negative, trivial articles/stories about his Mormon religion, his money, his slick appearance, etc. fully intended to sway a naive electorate that pays far too little attention to the most important 4 year event in our country.

Mitt Romney is a TRUE family man and very successful at turning failed or failing enterprises around and Lord knows the United States of America needs turning around. It should be run as a business first, with a strong military to protect it from harm. All other social, giveaway programs should be scrutinized (and certainly would be under a Romney presidency) as to efficiency and even necessity. The fact that he was even elected Governor in a state (MA) controlled by 85% Democrat legislature was a feat in itself. In spite of it, he did a very admirable job as Governor, turning a large state deficit into a surplus. Of course, his many justified vetoes were constantly overturned by those liberal Democrats which made for a lot of frustration.

If Mitt Romney does get the GOP nomination it will be MUCH to the chagrin of the Democrat National Committee liberal propaganda machine because he will be their worst nightmare and most difficult to defeat...Obama, Clinton, or otherwise.

Posted by: mrunpc | January 17, 2008 9:19 AM

If I could ask one question on behalf of all Americans to each of these presidential candidates it would be..."what poet in your life touched your soul"...I was born in 1945, and the poets of my generation came with guitars in their hands, but I'm afraid 80% of my generation never really heard Bob Dylan...Buffalo Springfield...or Jimi Hendrix doing "Little Wings." John McCain acknowledges he's a little behind in music...stating his favorites are Frank Sinatra and Abba....how many American generations does John McCain feel he can lead when he doesn't know a damn thing about any of these generations...Abe Lincoln knew Walt Whitman and Henry David Thoreau..John McCain knows Abba.When we finally are brave enough to choose leaders who dared to create in themselves a person that most Americans can barely understand,we might get close to the demands that the founding fathers set forth for us.

Posted by: soonipi6 | January 16, 2008 11:44 PM

Wow! some of these comments are out of control. Name calling, ungrounded assessments etc. The fact is if you took anyone's comments, records whatever, out of context you can make anyone look like a liar. It's up to us to judge whether someone has good character and integrity or not and not give in to the hype. In order to really judge you have to know someone personally, and have observed their behavior over time. Even then, judging someone's character is a risky proposition.

We'd do a lot better as voters to stick with what we know, instead of the wild accusations and speculation. I sense a very cynical mood among many voters. Cynics are generally not living in reality, while skeptics are.

I am close to people who have worked closely with both Senator McCain and Gov. Romney. My father served in the Senate with McCain for many years. They are both good men and about as honest as a man can be. They still put their pants on one leg at a time, just like the rest of us.

McCain is a go it alone Lone Ranger kind of guy who rubs a lot of his colleagues in the Senate the wrong way. Romney is a networker and relationship builder who organizes the talents of others and leads with vision. Of the two, I think Sen. McCain's talents serve him well in the Senate, while Romney is a natural executive more suited to the Presidency.

One last note: During Mitt Romney's campaign for Gov. of MA, Sen. McCain made campaign appearances for Romney. McCain repeatedly referred to then Mr. Romney as a man of the highest integrity, who has a reputation for honesty and the highest ethical standards.

I don't think those standards of integrity are in question merely because he has changed on one issue. It is simply not factual to say he has changed on every major issue. For example, it is not dishonest to say you support the basic constitutional rights of every human being including gays while also not supporting gay marriage. Gov. Romney has never supported gay marriage, and there is no change of position here. it's a great position and one I happen to agree with.

Many of you bloggers, even those who state so called facts, are very sloppy in doing an objective and fair analysis. That's the media's job to be sloppy and to be misleading. The MSM does a much better job at it then any of the candidates, because they are pros in the art of contextual spin. Our job as voters is to find the truth, through all the media BS, including the BS of the blogasphere.

Posted by: jakewgarn | January 16, 2008 10:38 PM

What does McCain and Hillary mean by EXPERIENCE?
McCain says he is the straight talk candidate as long as it comes from somebody elses mouth - two examples:
He sits by his aging mother while she goes on a bigoted tirade against Mitt Romney and Mormons - McCain of course said he knew nothing of what his mother was going to say - in the New Hampshire debate McCain wants to call Mitt Romney a liar but the straight talker quotes Joe Lieberman (a conservative Republican) says McCain in New Hampshire debate Senator Lieberman says anyone who calls my immigration bill amnesty is a liar - McCain can't speak for himself
Likewise Hillary calls in third-party people (most importantly Bill) to say what she wants to say about race. What these two mean by EXPERIENCE is that their years in Washington have taught them how to speak through a third-party person as a typical politician. We need HOPE and CHANGE

Posted by: simaahinchina | January 16, 2008 10:13 PM

PBL4. You might be a fan of McCain's amnesty policy and his predisposition to war but surely you cannot be a fan of his sleazy campaigning or his integrity in his "public positions."

According to recent news reports: "FactCheck.org concluded that on the whole John McCain's portrayal of Romney's record as governor of Massachusetts was "so distorted as to discredit McCain's claim to be the candidate of 'straight talk.'"

"Sen. McCain apparently had a nasty habit of leaving one impression in public on social issues like abortion and marriage, and another behind closed Senate doors, according to [Senator] Santorum."

So stop trashing Romney on issues on integrity when your hero is himself sullied. I am sure many would be happy to debate you and McCain on the policy issues.

Posted by: tom | January 16, 2008 9:05 PM

the United States of America needs an accomplished leader, a family man, a statesman, a diplomat to lead it into the next era with economic stability and strength as such is with Romney.

America does NOT need a restless general, a fire and brimstone preacher, an acting clown, a sweet talking rookie and worst of all a cheated wife to run the country.

They have no place as the image or leader of America.

Posted by: qtboy | January 16, 2008 7:32 PM

"PBL4. Are you paid by McCain to dish out slander and bigotry? Just asking."

I have said nothing slanderous OR bigoted. And no. I am not connected to McCain's campaign at all, but I'm an Arizonan and I have been a McCain supporter since the 2000 election. Besides, that's the kind of dirty politics that McCain decries. I'd expect big-money Mitt to do something like that, or push-polling Huck.

"Why don't you talk about McCain's position on immigration, or perhaps you can try to explain McCain's proposal for a 100 year Iraqi war."

I may be in the minority, but I was a HUGE supporter of the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill, because it was the only solution that 1. fixed the problem 2. tackled immigration realistically, and 3. treated illegal immigrants as human beings, rather than animals. I also support McCain's stance that "I would rather lose the campaign than lose the war." McCain is in Iraq to win.

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 7:28 PM

PBL4--stop the bigoted comments. Kool-aid? Tithing? C'mon. How old are you? Question though, for you and any other more knowledgeable political guru: all this talk about Romney flip-flopping, what did he flip-flop on besides abortion? Let me know...

Posted by: michman | January 16, 2008 06:50 PM

*SIGH*

How DARE you call me a bigot. I asked a freaking question. I didn't say there's anything wrong with it, I was just curious. I work with, respect, and love Mormons, but Willard Mitt Romney is NOT a true Mormon. Most members of the Church of LDS are fine, upstanding citizens with integrity to spare.

I'm not bigoted against Mormons. I'm bigoted against Mormons who will lie and say anything, change any of their beliefs, to get themselves elected. In short, I'm bigoted against THIS Mormon.

The "drink the Kool-Aid" comment had nothing to do with the fact that some consider the LDS Church to be a cult, in fact I didn't even think of that. I meant that for some reason, people are drinking up what Romney's dispensing, when it's got turds floating in it. If I meant to stereotype Mormonism, instead of "drink the Kool-Aid", I would have said "eat the Jell-O". (If you're not a Mormon, ask someone who is)

Mitt Romney as governor of MA:
*Pro-choice
*Pro-gun control
*Wanted to reduce taxes on hybrids, with a corresponding rise in taxes on SUVs
*Raised taxes
*Extended state benefits to illegal immigrants (Not to mention employing them at his estate)
*Pro-gay rights (Gay marriage took place under Romney for the first timein MA)
*Criticized federal CAFE fuel economy standards as being too lenient in 2005
*Refused to sign the GOP's no-tax pledge in 2002, dismissing it as "gimmicky"

Mitt Romney as GOP presidential candidate:
*Pro-life
*Pro-gun rights
*Criticized federal CAFE fuel economy standards as being too strict and crippling the auto industry
*Anti-immigrant
*Anti-gay rights
*Signed GOP no-tax pledge ASAP so he could brag about it and look "conservative".

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 7:10 PM

PBL4. Are you paid by McCain to dish out slander and bigotry? Just asking.

Why don't you talk about McCain's position on immigration, or perhaps you can try to explain McCain's proposal for a 100 year Iraqi war.

McCain was the subject of nasty slurs in 2000. Now it appears that he and his supporters are the authors of the same.

Shame on you and your boss.

Posted by: tom | January 16, 2008 7:00 PM

PBL4--stop the bigoted comments. Kool-aid? Tithing? C'mon. How old are you? Question though, for you and any other more knowledgeable political guru: all this talk about Romney flip-flopping, what did he flip-flop on besides abortion? Let me know...

Posted by: michman | January 16, 2008 6:50 PM

If Mitt Romney wins, will he use our taxdollars to pay a tithe to the Mormon Church?

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 6:15 PM

One thing I will never understand is how Romney supporters can be so disingenuous. pccu claims that Romney is strong on "the conservative beliefs that the GOP was founded on." Then he lists Romney as, among other things, being strong on the economy, taxes, and healthcare.

Whaaaaa?? (Moe Szezlak voice) When Romney was governor of MA, the economy was TERRIBLE and showed little to no growth. (Despite his claims to be a great businessman. Yeah, it takes a lot of business acumen to inherit money.) You claim to be in favor of conservative values, yet you endorse Romney's healthcare plan. So... the socialized medical plan in MA that was completely Mitt Romney's creation is a part of conservative belief? Hillary Clinton will be amused to hear that. On taxes -- Romney claims to be pro-tax cuts now, but as a gross average, taxes actually INCREASED in MA (Taxachusetts) while he was governor. He was also pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control, and pro-taxing SUVs; NOW, he's pro-life, anti-gay rights, pro-gun rights, and wants to help out the auto industry, apparently. (At least, that's what he told Michiganders.) Another thing -- you REALLY think that giving $100 billion in bailouts to a fading American auto industry is GOOD use of our tax dollars?? Our auto companies need to COMPETE with Japanese carmakers. They won't compete from being subsidized, it'll just retard their growth over the long term. Finally, for all Mitt's bluster in MI and claim to "be willing to fight for Michigan jobs", his economic plan was virtually identical to McCain's: retrain laid-off workers. Seriously. That was his solution. He just spun it differently. McCain actually pledged to do MORE, because he promised that the federal gov't would make up the difference in salaries from workers' old jobs to their new ones.

You can drink the Kool-Aid all you want. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, Mitt Romney's political consultants may tell him to tell you that it's a chicken, but it's still a freaking duck.

Finally, for what it's worth, I am NOT a Republican. I am an independent, who will probably vote Democrat if McCain isn't the GOP nominee. Myself and many voters like me will cross over to vote for McCain, but not for any of the other schmucks in the GOP race.

Vote for John McCain -- the future 44th president of this great nation.

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 5:38 PM

It's very discouraging ready the entries by many "Republicans" on this blog regarding John McCain. People are constantly holding up "electability" as the mantra for nominating McCain.

Although this is important, it isn't important as nominating someone who reflects the conservative beliefs that the GOP was founded on. These are principles of limited government, security (both border and national), fiscal responsibility, and social issues. McCain is strong on defense, but so incredibly weak in many other areas. He is on the wrong side of taxes, he is weak on illegal immigration, he co-authored the horrible McCain/Feingold, and he opposed the Bush tax cuts. The fact that McCain is being endorsed by so many Dems should be a red flag to everyone.

Although I believe McCain is a good man, these are issues that I completely disagree with him. Romney, on the other hand, is much stronger than McCain on the economy, healthcare, taxes, and immigration. McCain is stronger on defense, but I don't think that is enough to elect him our President. He would make a much better Secretary of Defense. By the way, McCain is being a big hypocrite on attacking Romney when just a few days ago he was crying about being attacked. I don't have a problem with the ads, but stop complaining when someone hits you.

Romney is the clear choice (now that Fred is out).

Posted by: pccu | January 16, 2008 5:17 PM

"Romney DESTROYED McCain in every single category of voter in Michigan, including those identifying themselves as "left of center". Almost 10 points, not even close. In the big cities, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Flint, etc., Romney's margins were 15 - 20 points over McCain."

Romney beat McCain because Michigan is his home state, and because he claimed that he was going to focus the entirety of his first 100 days as president on Michigan and its problems. If polls had showed that Michigan preferred blonde candidates to those with dark hair, then Romney would have immediately become a "lifetime blonde".

"Romney, Guliani, and Thompson will be just as good, if not better, in that area."

Good luck getting any of them elected. Giuliani has major issues, Thompson is lazy and too conservative, Romney is waaay too conservative (as of about a year ago, anyway) to win the general election. The country is sick of all this GOP bulls---, thanks to Bush and his cronies. McCain is the only way the Republicans hang onto the White House.

What kinda f---ing idiot thinks Romney has even A CHANCE at beating the Clinton Machine in a general election??

McCain in 08

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 4:46 PM

John McCain has spent a large part of his legislative career trying to remove all the dirty money in politics. John believes that you shouldn't have to be super rich or a party hack to win an election in America. If you like interest groups and lobbyists, vote for Romney. If you like democracy, vote McCain.

Romney's record leaves a lot to be desired, too. Massachusetts under his tenure had tax hikes, sluggish economic growth, and legalized gay marriage.

National polls CONSISTENTLY show that John McCain is the only republican candidate who can garner enough democrats and independents to beat Hillary and/or Obama. McCain's a centrist. He won't stick to party lines, but he's got friends on both sides of the aisle. He's the only candidate who can get something done and close the partisanship that's tearing Washington apart.

The democrats are SALIVATING over the prospect of facing Mitt Romney. They will TEAR HIM APART: from his supposed sudden social conservative "conversion", to his fortune made in private equity, (which is very damaging to workers) to his clear and present pandering, to his image as the perfectly molded plastic republican candidate. If you went to a GOP consultant and said "I want the perfect Republican presidential candidate, made to order," then they'd give you Mitt Romney. Romney's designed to win the primaries, not the generals.

Mitt Romney: Endorsed by Hillary and liberals everywhere.

John McCain: The candidate that NO democrat wants to face, the only one who can save the GOP from itself.

Vote McCain.

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 4:36 PM

Romney DESTROYED McCain in every single category of voter in Michigan, including those identifying themselves as "left of center". Almost 10 points, not even close. In the big cities, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Flint, etc., Romney's margins were 15 - 20 points over McCain. Predictably, the press is wringing their hands and crying all the way to South Carolina and can't figure out how he did it.

Did you watch Romney at all the last couple days? This guy is for real. And he is the front runner, most delegates, won two states (although the press reports only one), finished second in the other two. He may not win South Carolina, but he is going to do a lot better there than he would have just a week ago. NO WAY Huckabee wins South Carolina, but the press is desperate now and trying to make it look like a two-way race between him and McCain, who they are scrambling to prop up after getting such an ass-whipping in a state he was widely predicted to win by the same margin Romney beat him. I think McCain is in trouble -- if he loses South Carolina, he may be toast. That's one week before Florida (Guliani, maybe even Romney now) and then Super Tuesday (20 states, 1000 delegates), and he is going to get whipped again in states where there is no cross over allowed, where only declared republicans can vote for declared republicans. Romney might be emerging finally. This scenario has played out two times before in recent history --- Reagan in 1980 and Clinton in 1992. We all know what those nominations led to.

I think the dark horse (and spoiler for Huckabee) in South Carolina is going to be Fred Thompson. Look out for this guy. He could finish third or better, maybe even shock everyone and win that state. If that happens, you are looking at Guliani picking up Florida the week following and you suddenly have five major states (Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, South Carolina, and Florida) and five different winners in each. Amazing. Again, this is eerily similar to 1980 when Reagan finished almost last in Iowa, 4th in New Hampshire, was written off in Michigan, and suddenly came alive in South Carolina and then did fairly well on Super Tuesday a week later, and all of a sudden he becomes the nominee. Again, I think Romney, Guliani, and Thompson are the eventual top three and Huckster and McCain are fading or even gone by February 5th. McCain could stay alive for a while if he wins South Carolina because the press will prop him up again, but it's only a matter of time. The results in Michigan had to be devastating to his campaign because it showed very clearly what every establishment Republican knows already: he can't win support from the republican base, depends on Democrats and crossover votes to win, and is really a liberal in every possible way EXCEPT national defense. I'm not willing to trade the farm for that one area, because Romney, Guliani, and Thompson will be just as good, if not better, in that area.

Posted by: Nimblerod | January 16, 2008 4:34 PM

Hmmmm...I wonder how many of these pro-Romney posts are made by volunteers/paid Romney staffers. Money buys a lot...including people to scour the internet and post pro-Romney/anti-McCain rants everywhere. Guess he is taking a page out of Ron Paul's play book.

This is interesting, even the AP says Romney panders:
Mitt won, authenticity lost
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080116/ap_po/on_deadline_michigan_1

Posted by: coop3nh | January 16, 2008 4:29 PM

Conservatives need to remember one of the reasons for McCain/Feingold was because McCain felt he lost S. Carolina to Bush's superior wealth. Now we have bad legislation because McCain got his feelings hurt in 2000. McCain and Huckabee are both liberals in GOP clothing. Whether its taxes, illegal immigration, or the overall economy...both of them come down on the wrong side of the issue. Mitt Romney is the only guy who can compete against the wave of anti GOP feeling next November. He can compete on the economy and healthcare - people should not underestimate these issues in the general election.

Posted by: pccu | January 16, 2008 3:54 PM

John McCain: I would rather lose the election than lose the war.

Mitt Romney: I would rather betray my honesty and my principles than lose the election.

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 3:52 PM

PBL4: you're a bigot. Mormons aren't marginalized people who have no right to be heard, so don't treat them like it.

Posted by: shanehopkins | January 16, 2008 02:37 PM

I take EXTREME offense at this comment. I said NOTHING AT ALL to defame the LDS Church in my comment, I merely expressed my frustration at just another Mormon supporting Romney. It had nothing to do with the fact that he was Mormon. I simply can't stand when voters support a certain candidate because they have some trivial item in common with them: when Mormons support Romney, when evangelicals support Huckabee or Bush, when Jews support Lieberman, when blacks support Obama, when women support Hillary, when homosexuals support Barney Frank, when Catholics supported Kennedy. (I'm a Catholic)

Perhaps the aforementioned poster is not supporting Romney due to his faith. Perhaps he didn't even know Romney's a Mormon. (Doubtful) But the fact that he felt the need to publicly represent himself as a member of the LDS Church, and then proceed to gush about Romney, smells rotten to me.

To be completely frank, you know NOTHING about me. I live in Arizona. I know, respect, and work with, a lot of Mormons. I have a lot of Mormon friends, as well. If anything, I'm disappointed (as the rest of the Mormon church should be, IMO) that a Mormon like Romney has been so dishonest, two-faced, and unreliable. I expected more from a Mormon candidate than I'm getting.

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 3:26 PM

Romney's a joke. He's a flip flopper, and no better than a Bill Clinton - willing to say whatever he needs to say to get votes, truth or reality be damned. Go McCain!!!

Posted by: OldManGibbs | January 16, 2008 3:24 PM

Dear Sir,
He was a governor of a state for 10.5 years and a Lt. Gov. before that. He streamlined government, fixed a horrible infrastructure (i.e., avoided an I-35 bridge collapse), cut taxes, and has a hell of a lot better reach to lower and lower-middle class voters than any other Republican candidate.

Posted by: uplandborg | January 16, 2008 3:09 PM

Somebody wrote: "When the British soldiers were shooting at us George Washington as a Commander in Chief..."

So McCain was there? I knew he was old, but...

Posted by: pjkiger1 | January 16, 2008 3:08 PM

It's funny to me that Huckabee is being taken seriously. My friends who work for McCain tell me that McCain secretly thinks Huckabee is just a "usefull idiot" who he only tried to prop up in Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan in hopes of taking down Romney. Does anyone really believe Huckabee could win the presidency? He dropped out the theological seminary community college, doesn't know the difference between economics and evolution, and his family couldn't fit through the front door of the white house. What is the republican party doing to itself.

Posted by: slr383838 | January 16, 2008 3:02 PM

I don't understand why the other Republican candidates aren't attacking McCain for his horrible campaign finance law. Anyone who thinks that regulating free speech during elections is a good idea should not be given the power to nominate justices to the Supreme Court. We know that the Democrats will not challenge McCain on this so it is the duty of the Republican base to defend free speech NOW!!

Likewise, Guilliani should be criticized for his support of Hate Crime legislation.

Posted by: fallsmeadjc | January 16, 2008 2:56 PM

Mitt Romney has a huge staff who feed him lines. His victory speech last night was a recitation of what Mike Huckabee has been saying for months, and the opposite of what he advocated in the debates. Auto workers walked into the voting booth yesterday, saw his father's last name, thought of good times past, and pulled the lever. He has no chance in South Caroliana or Florida. If he is still able to buy the Presidency, heaven help the United States of America.

Posted by: Andersod7 | January 16, 2008 2:49 PM

Did Martin Luther King, Jr. believe in evolution? If he did not believe in that, especially as a minister, did that diminish his intelligence, message, and overall competence? Just a thought.

Posted by: uplandborg | January 16, 2008 2:43 PM

McCain is a hypocrite. He criticizes change in Romney, but defends it in himself. He lauds his own honesty, even while sending out mailers to supporters that attack Romney with misinformation about his record as governor. His campaign official (Schmidt) lectures about Romney being "classless" while venomously attacking Romney's character rather than his policy. McCain has implied Romney panders while he re-tooled his own message for damage control after writing off Michigan's jobs.

McCain's straight talk is nothing but crooked lies.

Posted by: shanehopkins | January 16, 2008 2:43 PM

PBL4: you're a bigot. Mormons aren't marginalized people who have no right to be heard, so don't treat them like it.

Posted by: shanehopkins | January 16, 2008 2:37 PM

LOL!

"P"oor"B"ad"L"oser4 Amnesty McCain!

Romney's Campaign took him POW!

Did'nt even fight!

Posted by: rat-the | January 16, 2008 2:36 PM

1) How many people noticed that Romney had to flip-flop AGAIN in order to position himself as an economic liberal interventionist in Michigan? Does this help his attempt to pretend that he is a conservative?


2) Romney now has to decide, given the low returns on his commercials this far, will he spend $50 million or upwards of $70-$80 million in commercials in the SuperTuesday states - all with no guarantee that that kind of money will help raise his numbers enough?


This is a great deal of money with very uncertain results.


3) Was jumping on stage as McCain was speaking mean spirited or what? This is the kind of behavior that people notice, and people do not like. That was a mistake.


If I was Romney's sons I would sit down with Dad and say, look, let's not waste this money, we have to divide it 5 ways as it is.


If Romney does go out and waste the money, does he not then prove that he is not a good manager of money?

Posted by: Miata7 | January 16, 2008 2:36 PM

The question is: Will Romney spend $70 - $80 million in order to compete on SuperTuesday ? - AND that will probably only bring him only up into a close position with McCain and throw the race to the convention.

Romney is teaching us the economic concept of diminishing returns.

Posted by: Miata7 | January 16, 2008 2:24 PM

I'm sorry, isn't this the "Straight-talkin" John McCain who told us that America doesn't want or deserve "negative" campaigning and "attack" ads?

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

"Totally Classless" for Romney speak before McCain was finished.

Umm, didn't McCain start HIS speech BEFORE Huckabee was done?

Yep, he did.

What an idiot.

Posted by: mitchellvii | January 16, 2008 2:16 PM

VOTE ROMNEY

Posted by: deseret | January 16, 2008 12:44 PM

Gee... with a handle like "deseret", I wonder if they're Mormon? ::Rolls eyes::

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 2:11 PM

RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT!

Posted by: lopeza | January 16, 2008 2:01 PM

As a Massachusetts voter, I can tell you that whatever Romney's business skills may or may not be - debatable - he is a preening. disinterested politician whose 'moral standards' are both flexible and for sale. He's going to reverse the slide of the US auto industry by what, snapping his fingers? McCain is at least an honest man, which is, unfortunately, probably why he's doomed. Romney has a constituency of 1 - himself - and now he's holding auditions for acolytes/a congregation. What a phony.

Posted by: bokonon13 | January 16, 2008 2:00 PM

Mit Romney is called a Mormon Cultist, that he panders to his audiences telling them what they want to hear, and that as Govenor he was Pro-Choice. If it is cultist to state "We claim the priviliege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and ALLOW all men the same priviliege, let them worship how, where, or what they may" the Mormon 11th Article of Faith, I'm for that kind of Freedom. If Mit actually LISTENS and COMMUNICATES with 'we the people', I'm for that kind of pandering. If former Governor Romney supported the FREEDOM OF CHOICE BY VOTE of the people of his state, I'm for that kind of Freedom. Seems to me that Romney is the only one of all the Presidential Candidates that not only espouses these kinds of freedoms, but has the record to prove he will fight and support them. I'm for that kind of President, I'm for Mit Romney!!

Posted by: littlemountain_2000 | January 16, 2008 1:57 PM

McCain, master of doublespeak. How phony can he be?

His campaign hatchetman criticizes Romney for "flip-flopping".

Yet McCain in an interview with Robert Novak, in explaining his flip-flopping position with regard to tax cuts stated "I may have changed some of my views. You learn over 24 years."

So, it is alright for McCain to change his position but not Romney. If Romney has changed his position over time more than McCain, maybe it is because Romney is a "faster learner."

McCain called Romney a liar for stating that McCain supported amnesty for illegal aliens. Is not removing the consequences of of one's illegal bahaviour by every reasonable definition of amnesty? More McCain doublespeak.

Obviously, McCain's philosophy is that the best defence is an offence. Great! Just what we need. A president with an warmongering attitude and a trigger finger.

Posted by: tom | January 16, 2008 1:55 PM

It's funny McCain attacks...I mean critques Romney's plan. McCain doesn't even have a plan, the only thing he knows is war.

Romney was clear that the current resources that are being used for research would be allocated to help the auto industry, which is what we need to get us OFF of foriegn oil.

McCain is a desperate angry old man and it's showing.

Posted by: onesmallvoice | January 16, 2008 1:41 PM

Attacking Romney's career is ridiculous. People claim that he "bought companies and laid people off." Well, laying some people off to save a company is A LOT better than letting the company go bankrupt and out of business. He SAVED jobs by saving companies. Anybody who knows anything about his business would know this.

Posted by: smham33 | January 16, 2008 1:39 PM

But Romney did pander his way to victory in Michigan. It's a sure-fire way to get votes.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl | January 16, 2008 1:22 PM

Yes, I agree remember the Golden Rule he who has the Gold makes the rules. But don't foget that there is an exception to every rule, when the Man using the Golden Rule is liar he no longer Rules ! Remember that Mitt !
American Jobs are not being lost to North American competitors, but, to the ones in Asia, India, China and nearly every other Asian Nation. Why you may ask Mitt, because of people like you and your Wall Street Gang who have made and continue to Make Fortunes by doing business there instead of here in North America. Why Mitt what are you going to do to Put the Breaks on your Wall Street Friends who sell out America dayly for a small fist full of dollars??
McCain for Straight Talk, "McCain is the only Choice America has" !

Posted by: nicklan | January 16, 2008 1:21 PM

Deseret-I like Mike, and MOST of the other Candidates as well. I also have to agree, that they are not as perfect for the job as Mitt. In a Country cruising down the Road, like Clinton inherited, Huckster is the right Man. However, for a Country suffering as badly as this one is for so many interelated problems, we need a person capable of analyzing the BIG Picture, and making the necessary corrections. Two problems I have mentioned many times, would go a long ways towards correcting things in general. Repealing the Banking De-Regulation of Bill Clinton, and Stopping Un-Documented Employment!

BUT, the list goes on, and on...

Everyone BUT McClown, get on Mitt & Mike's Bus! It is going to take a Team Effort!

Posted by: rat-the | January 16, 2008 1:19 PM

So the Grumpiest Old Man is still trying to bring down the GOP's chances, by launching Smear Campaigns, and Charactor Assainations!

After the Loss Last Night, I figured he'd have surrendered again!

Posted by: rat-the | January 16, 2008 1:11 PM

Romney's record of change is solid. He has helped businesses, the Olympics, and the State of Massachusetts. He is agreat communicator leader in many ways.

It would also be easy to say McCain has changed his stance on issues over time. The other problem with McCain is that some might consider him to be a loose cannon. He drops the "F" bomb against those he disagrees with. Not sure that would make him presidential material.

Posted by: mcentire | January 16, 2008 1:10 PM

All four of the stooges have plenty of ammunition in beating each other to death.

Find out what it is before they even say it;

Candidate Research - Know Who You're Voting For ( The Easy Way ) http://tinyurl.com/2sowta

Posted by: Winghunter | January 16, 2008 1:09 PM

The facts? The facts are paid for.

Remember the Golden rule? He who has the Gold, makes the rules.

If a rich candidate like say, Romney spends over 100 million for the first three voting contests, it's very likely the lies will convince voters. Iowa said they couldn't be bought, making Romney's 62 million dollar buying attempt a failure. Compared to Huckabees 500 thousand dollar honest campaign, I'd say that was a pretty failed business venture.

Romney got rich by buying companies and then laying off and cheating the guys on the bottom of the ladder. In return Romney got big corporate payouts for himself and his friends. Argue all you want, but thats what happened.

I am very thankful that Romney was not running against Abraham Lincoln, honest Abe would have been overpowered by this rich corporate liar. Blacks may still be slaves and our Country may have already dwindled.

Then again, I wonder if Huckabee gets overpowered by a money campaign, what great things will we have lost as a society? Call anyone you know in SC, FL, NV and every other state to tell them about this horrible thing going on. Ask them to vote.

Posted by: marinepatriot | January 16, 2008 1:08 PM

Romney won and has been at the top of every primary, because he is the only well-rounded conservative with a chance on winning the presidency. He is competitive everywhere because:
He has more executive experience than any candidate.
He is a strong social conservative.
He has vision for change
He can turn around other mistakes made prior to his taking the Job. (Bain Capital, Olympics, MA. Huge deficit, Big Dig Fiasco, and he'll do the same in Iraq)

Huckabee is a nice guy... so is Jimmy Carter

I'm not going to take anything away from Rudy, he just shouldn't be President over Romney

Mccain is a great american but he continually pals around with Kennedy, Lieberman, Feingold etc..

Be Smart. Look at the Facts.


VOTE ROMNEY

Posted by: deseret | January 16, 2008 12:44 PM

"McCain team rolls out new attack."

Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran?

Posted by: Bud0 | January 16, 2008 12:44 PM

JOHN MCCAIN FOR PRESIDENT!

When the British soldiers were shooting at us George Washington as a Commander in Chief was always on the Battle Front, on the line of fire, bullets were flying near his head, the sound of Cannons going off and dead soldiers

Hear on this YouTube video whow he says he will conduct the wars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wru8NRLdFE


JOHN MCCAIN FOR PRESIDENT!

Posted by: politiciannc | January 16, 2008 12:42 PM

When Romney highlights McCain's record you call it an attack, where's the equality!
McCain Team Critiques Romney Record? It's not a critique, it's an inaccurate personal attack! McCain's blatant hypocrisy is repugnant.

Please stop the obvious pro-McCain biased.

Posted by: Alvin2 | January 16, 2008 12:34 PM

Time writes:

McCain's chief ally in the state, Sen. Lindsey Graham, elaborated. "You don't need to tear anybody else down to get the votes for John McCain," he said, as the bus approached Mt. Pleasant, S.C. "That's the point. You can contrast your vote with theirs but you don't need to tear anybody else down to get the vote for John McCain."
Less than 24 hours later, a biting McCain campaign mail piece attacking Mitt Romney arrived in South Carolina mail boxes.

"Romney provided taxpayer-funded abortions. Romney signed legislation in 2006 that increased funding for taxpayer-subsidized abortions."

Romney is so anti-abortion it hurts! He always has been and always will be. As Governor he did not change existing laws allowing abortions, but that does not make him pro-Choice. He just allowed people their own terrible choices under the existing law. He has not flipped, he has not flopped. Does John McCain really think Mitt supports killing innocent babies? I don't think so...so why send out these postcards?

Posted by: voiceoreason | January 16, 2008 12:21 PM

Hopefully, if you vote, you will vote Democrat. If not, in the primary, vote smart - vote for McCain or the other guy (Huckabee, though he doesn't believe in evolution - blah) over Giuliani or Romney. We need a true leader in the White House. Romney is a rich kid trying to play president (once again). Let's have somebody be serious about the position for what they are applying.

Posted by: fbutler1 | January 16, 2008 12:00 PM

He makes decisions based on researching data more deeply than anyone I know. As people get to know him better, they'll see an extremely competent, strong leader." !!

South Carolina and Nevada are next, Texas will be ready!! ROMNEY 2008!!

Posted by: voiceoreason | January 16, 2008 11:26 AM

He makes decisions -- and then changes them two years later, depending on what the electorate want to hear.

Mitt Romney is a two-faced, cult-member panderer. Vote McCain.

Posted by: PBL4 | January 16, 2008 11:47 AM

THE NATIONAL REVIEW GOT IT RIGHT:

"We believe that Romney is a natural ally of social conservatives. He speaks often about the toll of fatherlessness in this country.

Romney is an intelligent, articulate, and accomplished former businessman and governor. At a time when voters yearn for competence and have soured on Washington because too often the Bush administration has not demonstrated it, Romney offers proven executive skill. He has demonstrated it in everything he has done in his professional life, and his tightly organized, disciplined campaign is no exception. He himself has shown IMPRESSIVE FOCUS AND ENERGY.

More than the other primary candidates, Romney has President Bush's virtues and avoids his flaws. His moral positions, and his instincts on taxes and foreign policy, are the same. But he is less inclined to federal activism, less tolerant of overspending, better able to defend conservative positions in debate, and more likely to demand performance from his subordinates. A winning combination, by our lights. In this most fluid and unpredictable Republican field, WE VOTE MITT ROMNEY!

FORTUNE MAGAZINE GOT IT RIGHT:

Given Romney's business acumen, it's no surprise he's assembled one of the most successful political money machines ever. "Romney is an incredibly aggressive and efficient fundraiser," says Vogel, who attributes it to his private-sector skills. In April, when he was still relatively unknown nationally, Romney made headlines when his campaign reported it had blown past the rest of the Republican field and raised $23 million in the first quarter!

People who know Mitt won't shut up about how smart and pragmatic and decisive he is. "Mitt never takes anything at face value," says Glenn Hubbard, dean of Columbia's business school and a Romney (and former Bush administration) economic advisor. "He's constantly questioning." Says Fraser Bullock, a former Bain partner who worked with Romney on the Olympics: "He's not an ideologue. He makes decisions based on researching data more deeply than anyone I know. As people get to know him better, they'll see an extremely competent, strong leader." !!

South Carolina and Nevada are next, Texas will be ready!! ROMNEY 2008!!

Posted by: voiceoreason | January 16, 2008 11:26 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company