Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Romney's Fundraising Team Planned for Wins


Mitt Romney is in a tight race in New Hampshire. (Bloomberg News).

By Matthew Mosk
A month ago it seemed like a great idea -- Mitt Romney would bring his top donors into Boston for a big fundraising phone-a-thon to capitalize on his surefire success in the New Hampshire primary.

The event was set for Wednesday, and was intended to remind folks of the kick-off event Romney held a year earlier, where his initial fundraising supporters came together at a giant phone bank and raised him more than $6 million. Only this time, he would be collecting general election money, and gobs of it, as the campaign burst out of New Hampshire with the momentum of two big early contest victories.

Today, however, there's a catch: Romney finished second in Iowa, and, based on the latest polling, he could see another second place finish in New Hampshire. That outcome won't provide much of a momentum boost.

One Romney supporter called the idea of bringing all his fundraisers together to soak in a potential loss to John McCain in New Hampshire a "very, very dark scenario."

"Obviously, the enthusiasm will be less," said another Romney fundraiser, who is heading to Boston for the event.

But others were more upbeat. Tom Stemberg, the founder of the Staples chain who forged a bond with Romney when the presidential contender's equity firm helped the company find its financial footing, said he believes the fundraising effort will be a success no matter what the outcome in New Hampshire.

"Let's look at it objectively. We would have had three events, one in Iowa, one in Wyoming and New Hampshire. And he would have gotten the gold and two silvers," Stemberg said, referring to Romney's caucus win in Wyoming. "What's wrong with that? No one else is even close. People are throwing expectations around. I bet the excitement level will be high."

Another fundraiser, Washington lobbyist Lee Cowen, agreed. "Even if he comes in second, he'll have two seconds and nobody has done as well as that," he said.

Unlike Romney's first big call day one year ago, this one is closed to press.

By Web Politics Editor  |  January 7, 2008; 4:50 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama's Rise Sidelines Bloggers
Next: McCain Supporters Cry, 'Mac is Back!'

Comments

I was asking CarolM, but thanks.

Posted by: JakeD | January 8, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

John McCain has support in the second Furthest NORTH State in the Mainland! THEY do not yet have an overabundance of Hispanics threatening their Communities!

South of the Mason Dixon Line, McCain is not likely to place above 4Th!

Not only is he Pro Amnesty, he is part of the "Old School" Mentality, everyone is wanting GONE!

Cripes, he probably won't survive his Term if he got one!

Reality check!-Look, I mean take a GOOD Look, at George W Bush in 2000, and just 7 Years later!

It is a Killer of a Job! It is too big, for any one, or even two people to effectively Handle!

Especially with a Contemptuous, Hostile, and Obstructionistic Congress to deal with!

However, Succomb to Congress?

I don't think so!

Posted by: rat-the | January 8, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

A follow-up question:

Would you vote for John McCain vs. Hillary?

Posted by: JakeD | January 8, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

CarolM:

Like I said, I am definitely a Romney supporter for now -- there's no way I could vote for Hillary -- you really think Huckabee is "liberal" as her on immigration, Iraq, taxes, healthcare, 2nd Amendment, abortion, gay rights, etc.?! "Polarizing" is not a dirty word to me -- and I could care less what the "non-religious" people think -- the fact is that Jesus Christ was the most "polarizing" Man in history. I hope you will learn more about the issues and reconsider your vote if the GOP nominee is Huckabee.

Posted by: JakeD | January 8, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

JakeD,

Unlike you, I could NOT support Huckabee if Romney should eventually lose the delegate count. I'm thinking that EVEN if the choice were Hillary.... Yikes. This is painful to say, but if my only choices are a liberal (Huckabee) and a liberal (Clinton) then I think I would have to choose the liberal that is most versed in foreign affairs and all round better educated. This is the leader of the free-world we are talking about, and Huckabee displays too much of his narrow bible-schooled world-view, well, because that is what he is. Furthermore, I think him every bit as much a polarizer as Hillary. Non-religious people loathe and disdain him. I really think he will lose to the Dem, who I hope is not Hillary.

One of the things that I like about Romney is that he can work so well with people of differing opinions. It would be a real shame to lose him, like the TV pundits are determined to think will happen after NH. But unlike them, Romney can do the math.... He knows he's still winning the delegate count, even if he does come in second in NH.

With McCain becoming more and more openly hateful, Romney will look more and more presidential.

Posted by: carolm62 | January 8, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

The Romney campaign strategy of early-state momentum looks like its going to take a 1-2 punch tomorrow in NH. If it's real close with McCain, he still has a chance for a gold in Michigan.

Wyoming got almost NO coverage at all.

Some more thoughts on the subject...

http://thepoliticalpost.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/new-hampshire-republican-primary-rcp-averages/

Posted by: thepoliticalpost | January 7, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Clearly the liberal press wants Obama and he is rocking. His youthful charismatic message of change will take all the old-fogey republicans to the cleaners.

All, that is, except for Romney. This is why the liberal bias is bent on taking out Romney. Take out Romney and Obama takes the White House.

Remember how the press took out Romney's father. We got Nixon instead. That turned out well didn't it?

Posted by: drnewknee | January 7, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

What I can not stand, is the Pollsters acting like they are always right! Often, they are not!
Even then, there are ligitimate reasons for McCain to be getting union Support. Just as he did before-that never amounted to a hill of beans later-when he was actually YOUNGER!
Delegates for McCain are lost! His Pro Invasoria stance has costed him Nationally!

And no amount of Wealth he could ever possibly Accumulate will ever offset it! He could other people's entire fortunes, and he still will never win Job Displaced, Wage destroyed, Americans like myself over!

Mitt and his perfect Cabinet Minister Fred Thompson have it exactly right-ENFORCE THE LAWS PROTECTING LEGAL WORKERS, WE ALREADY HAVE!

When we DID, we did not have the problems we do now! The Attrition against the Employers cheating Americans and the Government, will cause all of Presidente Cabrones-Er, Oops, Calderon's, and Minister Espinosa Cantellana's Abused Mexicans to go Home, where they are so loved and cherished!

How Dare we abuse their Mexican Citizens so badly! We don't deserve them! Calderon and Espinosa Cantellano want you ALL to come back Home-Where you all belong!

Posted by: rat-the | January 7, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Mitt is the unifier of the Republican party. Of all the candidates he best represents the cross-section of the party. Huckabee represents Evangelicals, Guiliani and McCain the pro-war, liberal republicans, Ron Paul the independents.

Proof that Mitt is the unifier is that he is in the top 1 or 2 of each state so far.

Huckabee and his fair tax is too far out there for most Americans. His pardons of criminals including murderers and his ethics violations should raise eyebrows.

McCain is part of the old establishment. How is he going to change Washington? He has been there 25 years and what has he done?

It is time for real change -- Mitt Romney.

Posted by: JohnJacobs99 | January 7, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Good point, DanLounsbury, but keep in mind that Hillary Clinton is currently "in the lead" in the delegate count and has plenty of money too -- I would hate to see Romney go down in flames like her, but at least I could support Huckabee -- I wouldn't completely discount the millions in free advertisements just yet.

Posted by: JakeD | January 7, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Thank you for nearly pointing out that Romney has more delegates than any other candidate.

Romney plans for success unlike Huckabee who had it thrust upon him by the mainstream media's lovefest of him--granting him millions in free advertisements.

And while Romney planned for success early, and it was admittedly part of his plan, he is not out of the race if he loses NH because he has money to keep going.

Posted by: DanLounsbury | January 7, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Actually, marinepatriot, Mitt says he is currently pro-life -- if you don't want to believe him, that is of course up to you -- if you do believe him, it is not accurate to state "Mitt is not pro-life".

Posted by: JakeD | January 7, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Mitt flop the flip flop

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inmijrUIA-4&feature=related

Watch the video for yourself. Candidates in past stated " Mitt is not pro-life or pro-choice" "He is multiple choice!"

We need real leadership in America.

Posted by: marinepatriot | January 7, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

I have no problem with the event being closed to the MSM "liberal" press -- no hob-nobing and fancy food for you -- maybe you guys could do your jobs instead; and start by NAMING the anonymous "Romney supporter / fundraiser"?

Posted by: JakeD | January 7, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company