Over at Media Nation, Dan Kennedy has been having a discussion about the GOP race and where things stand. He first thought that the McCain victory in South Carolina made him the frontrunner. The next afternoon, he revised his thoughts calling it a two-person race between McCain and Romney. He made some pretty good points and I agree with the premise overall - that "Romney's personal fortune and his willingness to say absolutely anything to get elected" gives him "the edge."
However, I don't think Mike Huckabee [and to a lesser extent, John Edwards, on the Dem side] can be counted out just yet. They will remain factors in the race. Do I think they have shots at the nomination? Very slim, admittedly. But their tenacity and ability to run relatively low-dough campaigns will make them a thorn in the sides of the supposed frontrunners for at least another month.
GOP side
Nationally, Huckabee is still polling well in future states and while polls are just a snapshot and not actual results, that is what we have to look at for speculation purposes. While there will be some consolidation around a leader, on the Republican side, probably McCain and Romney, neither has a lock on the nom and won't by Tsunami Tuesday, Feb. 5. Same for the Dems.
Let's look at some of the poll numbers on the Republican side to see if this theory hashes out:
Florida is the next contest, on Jan. 29, and over the past four weeks, there have been eight polls: Huckabee has led in two polls, McCain has led in two, and Giuliani has led in four. In all the polls, Romney has been bunched up with all the others at the top. A lot has changed in four weeks so let's look a the two most recent:
Insider Advantage from four days ago has it Giuliani 21, Romney/McCain 20, Huckabee 12; six days ago, Survey USA had it McCain 25, Giuliani 23, Huckabee and Romney 18. Or, essentially, it is still anyone's state. The vote is in eight more days. It is not an open primary, meaning indies can't vote in the primaries unless they re-registered to join either party before Dec. 31, 2007. So, it is anyone's guess who will win.
As was pointed out earlier on another board, Florida is a winner-take-all state. So, whoever wins gets the prize. Second place or less is not going to matter. Assuming Giuliani's firewall concept works [I doubt it, but whatever], it will not ensure that candidates such as Huckabee will get out of the race after losing the state.
After Florida is the Maine Caucus but there hasn't been a poll done there in more than a year so who knows how that will go.
There has not been much polling done in the Feb. 5 states for Republicans but here are some:
In California, there have been four polls done in the last month and McCain has led two and Giuliani has led in two. Here is the most recent from Rasmussen: McCain 24, Romney 17, Huckabee and Thompson at 13, and Giuliani at 11.
The Hartford Courant has a Connecticut poll from last week showing McCain at 39, Giuliani at 16, and Romney at 11. This is another winner-take-all state for the GOP, with 27 delegates, so it looks like a lock for McCain.
Huckabee led the only poll done in Georgia back in December by six points over Giuliani with 23. Romney and McCain were at 10 and 11.
There have been three polls from New Jersey in the last month with Giuliani and McCain essentially tied. Rasmussen had one six days ago showing McCain with 27, Giuliani with 25, and Huckabee/Romney with 10; Monmouth College had one eight days ago with McCain at 29, Giuliani at 25, and Huckabee with 11. Romney had 10. So, Huckabee is third there. He was also third in the Quinnipiac poll from December. Jersey is a winner-take-all state with 52 delegates.
There have been two polls from Oklahoma in the past month and Huckabee led in both of them. The most recent by Survey USA nine days ago had Huckabee with 31, McCain with 29, and Thompson with 13. So, Huckabee could potential win that state.
None of the other Feb. 5 states has polls in them but let's make some easy assumption about potential results.
Giuliani will probably win his home state of New York, another winner-take-all state, with 87 delegates. McCain will probably win his home state of Arizona. Huckabee will probably win his home state Arkansas. Romney will probably win in Utah where there are a lot of Mormon voters and where he has a home. Romney and McCain will split Massachusetts. Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee will probably split Tennessee up. And I suspect that Huckabee will do well in other southern/midwestern states, including Alabama, Kansas, and Missouri.
With so many delegates being spread out on Feb. 5 and at least three to five candidates winning some of the 20-plus states which vote that day, I suspect that there will not be a clear nominee after those races. And, since Romney has infinite assets to draw on if he needs to, no, he cannot be ruled out even if he wins few states on Feb. 5. But, at the same time, Huckabee cannot be ruled out since he will probably win more states and more delegates than Romney on Feb. 5.
After Feb. 5 comes Feb. 9 where Hawaii, Kansas, and Louisiana vote. Huckabee could potential win or come in second in two of those states.
I have been saying for a while now that I thought there would be brokered conventions in 2008 in at least one if not both party conventions. Well, the more I watch the GOP side, the more I believe they will have a brokered convention in 2008. Lastly, I think if there is a brokered convention, you may see a McCain/Huckabee ticket emerge as victorious.
Them Dems
Over on the Democratic side, it is a bit more complicated. When people joked about Hillary Clinton being "inevitable," it was not really a joke. She has led in virtually every state and national poll for about a year before the summer of 2007 when people started taking a look at Barack Obama's campaign [In 2003 the same thing happened: Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt were leading in most polls until a little known governor from Vermont started rabble rousing ...]
Since that time, things have leveled out a bit but Hillary still has confident poll positions in future states. Granted, we have seen the polls be wildly wrong but not completely inaccurate.
The big contest is South Carolina this Saturday and the numbers are very interesting. In the first recorded poll from December 2006, Clinton had 34, Edwards had 30, and Obama had 10. Oh how things can change.
Between February 2007 and the end of July, Clinton and Obama traded leads. Then, from August to early December, Clinton had solid leads. For the next three weeks, the polling shifted between the two. The first week of January 2008, Obama opened up a 20 point lead and has held the lead in the state over the last three weeks, with numbers anywhere from 6 to 13 percent. Clinton has gained a bit from that 20 point poll, mostly at the expense of Edwards.
Some polling suggests that unlike in New Hampshire or Iowa, where Edwards' voters second choice was Obama, votes would shift from Edwards to Clinton in South Carolina. So, essentially, Edwards staying in is indirectly helping Obama in South Carolina. This could change in future states but probably not in the south.
After South Carolina comes Tsunami Tuesday again, with 20-plus states voting. Not unlike the GOP side, there has not been a lot of polling in those states. However, here is what we have to look at.
In California, there have been four polls in the last month. Clinton has led them all. The most recent, a Rasmussen poll from last week, has Clinton at 38, Obama 33, and Edwards at 12.
The Hartford Courant has a Connecticut poll from last week showing Clinton with a sizable 41 to 27 lead over Obama with Edwards at 9, with more than 20 percent undecided [Note: in 1992, CT picked Jerry Brown over Clinton by 3 or 4 points when Tsongas was leading the state for months. Voters there are fickle even if Clinton is a senator from a neighboring state].
A poll from Georgia in December by Strategic Vision has it Clinton 34, Obama 27, and Edwards 12.
A December poll from Tribune/WGN has Obama winning his home state of Illinois by a two-to-one margin.
There have been two polls from New Jersey in the last three weeks and Clinton leads both of them by 12 to 19 points.
Clinton leads the only poll done in her home state this month by an almost two-to-one margin.
One poll in Oklahoma in the last three weeks shows Clinton at 41, Edwards at 25, and Obama at 19.
In the other states, who knows.
Black voter turnout will be crucial for Obama and, as we have seen, female voters are coming out to support Clinton. If Edwards stays in this thing and continues to peel off white voters from Clinton, as he seems to be doing in South Carolina, this could get interesting.
And even though his numbers are low, I suspect that Edwards will reach the 15 percent area in most of those states if not all and will continue to gather up delegates. We'll see what happens after Saturday.
Editor's Note: This is an updated of a previous edition.
However, I don't think Mike Huckabee [and to a lesser extent, John Edwards, on the Dem side] can be counted out just yet. They will remain factors in the race. Do I think they have shots at the nomination? Very slim, admittedly. But their tenacity and ability to run relatively low-dough campaigns will make them a thorn in the sides of the supposed frontrunners for at least another month.
GOP side
Nationally, Huckabee is still polling well in future states and while polls are just a snapshot and not actual results, that is what we have to look at for speculation purposes. While there will be some consolidation around a leader, on the Republican side, probably McCain and Romney, neither has a lock on the nom and won't by Tsunami Tuesday, Feb. 5. Same for the Dems.
Let's look at some of the poll numbers on the Republican side to see if this theory hashes out:
Florida is the next contest, on Jan. 29, and over the past four weeks, there have been eight polls: Huckabee has led in two polls, McCain has led in two, and Giuliani has led in four. In all the polls, Romney has been bunched up with all the others at the top. A lot has changed in four weeks so let's look a the two most recent:
Insider Advantage from four days ago has it Giuliani 21, Romney/McCain 20, Huckabee 12; six days ago, Survey USA had it McCain 25, Giuliani 23, Huckabee and Romney 18. Or, essentially, it is still anyone's state. The vote is in eight more days. It is not an open primary, meaning indies can't vote in the primaries unless they re-registered to join either party before Dec. 31, 2007. So, it is anyone's guess who will win.
As was pointed out earlier on another board, Florida is a winner-take-all state. So, whoever wins gets the prize. Second place or less is not going to matter. Assuming Giuliani's firewall concept works [I doubt it, but whatever], it will not ensure that candidates such as Huckabee will get out of the race after losing the state.
After Florida is the Maine Caucus but there hasn't been a poll done there in more than a year so who knows how that will go.
There has not been much polling done in the Feb. 5 states for Republicans but here are some:
In California, there have been four polls done in the last month and McCain has led two and Giuliani has led in two. Here is the most recent from Rasmussen: McCain 24, Romney 17, Huckabee and Thompson at 13, and Giuliani at 11.
The Hartford Courant has a Connecticut poll from last week showing McCain at 39, Giuliani at 16, and Romney at 11. This is another winner-take-all state for the GOP, with 27 delegates, so it looks like a lock for McCain.
Huckabee led the only poll done in Georgia back in December by six points over Giuliani with 23. Romney and McCain were at 10 and 11.
There have been three polls from New Jersey in the last month with Giuliani and McCain essentially tied. Rasmussen had one six days ago showing McCain with 27, Giuliani with 25, and Huckabee/Romney with 10; Monmouth College had one eight days ago with McCain at 29, Giuliani at 25, and Huckabee with 11. Romney had 10. So, Huckabee is third there. He was also third in the Quinnipiac poll from December. Jersey is a winner-take-all state with 52 delegates.
There have been two polls from Oklahoma in the past month and Huckabee led in both of them. The most recent by Survey USA nine days ago had Huckabee with 31, McCain with 29, and Thompson with 13. So, Huckabee could potential win that state.
None of the other Feb. 5 states has polls in them but let's make some easy assumption about potential results.
Giuliani will probably win his home state of New York, another winner-take-all state, with 87 delegates. McCain will probably win his home state of Arizona. Huckabee will probably win his home state Arkansas. Romney will probably win in Utah where there are a lot of Mormon voters and where he has a home. Romney and McCain will split Massachusetts. Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee will probably split Tennessee up. And I suspect that Huckabee will do well in other southern/midwestern states, including Alabama, Kansas, and Missouri.
With so many delegates being spread out on Feb. 5 and at least three to five candidates winning some of the 20-plus states which vote that day, I suspect that there will not be a clear nominee after those races. And, since Romney has infinite assets to draw on if he needs to, no, he cannot be ruled out even if he wins few states on Feb. 5. But, at the same time, Huckabee cannot be ruled out since he will probably win more states and more delegates than Romney on Feb. 5.
After Feb. 5 comes Feb. 9 where Hawaii, Kansas, and Louisiana vote. Huckabee could potential win or come in second in two of those states.
I have been saying for a while now that I thought there would be brokered conventions in 2008 in at least one if not both party conventions. Well, the more I watch the GOP side, the more I believe they will have a brokered convention in 2008. Lastly, I think if there is a brokered convention, you may see a McCain/Huckabee ticket emerge as victorious.
Them Dems
Over on the Democratic side, it is a bit more complicated. When people joked about Hillary Clinton being "inevitable," it was not really a joke. She has led in virtually every state and national poll for about a year before the summer of 2007 when people started taking a look at Barack Obama's campaign [In 2003 the same thing happened: Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt were leading in most polls until a little known governor from Vermont started rabble rousing ...]
Since that time, things have leveled out a bit but Hillary still has confident poll positions in future states. Granted, we have seen the polls be wildly wrong but not completely inaccurate.
The big contest is South Carolina this Saturday and the numbers are very interesting. In the first recorded poll from December 2006, Clinton had 34, Edwards had 30, and Obama had 10. Oh how things can change.
Between February 2007 and the end of July, Clinton and Obama traded leads. Then, from August to early December, Clinton had solid leads. For the next three weeks, the polling shifted between the two. The first week of January 2008, Obama opened up a 20 point lead and has held the lead in the state over the last three weeks, with numbers anywhere from 6 to 13 percent. Clinton has gained a bit from that 20 point poll, mostly at the expense of Edwards.
Some polling suggests that unlike in New Hampshire or Iowa, where Edwards' voters second choice was Obama, votes would shift from Edwards to Clinton in South Carolina. So, essentially, Edwards staying in is indirectly helping Obama in South Carolina. This could change in future states but probably not in the south.
After South Carolina comes Tsunami Tuesday again, with 20-plus states voting. Not unlike the GOP side, there has not been a lot of polling in those states. However, here is what we have to look at.
In California, there have been four polls in the last month. Clinton has led them all. The most recent, a Rasmussen poll from last week, has Clinton at 38, Obama 33, and Edwards at 12.
The Hartford Courant has a Connecticut poll from last week showing Clinton with a sizable 41 to 27 lead over Obama with Edwards at 9, with more than 20 percent undecided [Note: in 1992, CT picked Jerry Brown over Clinton by 3 or 4 points when Tsongas was leading the state for months. Voters there are fickle even if Clinton is a senator from a neighboring state].
A poll from Georgia in December by Strategic Vision has it Clinton 34, Obama 27, and Edwards 12.
A December poll from Tribune/WGN has Obama winning his home state of Illinois by a two-to-one margin.
There have been two polls from New Jersey in the last three weeks and Clinton leads both of them by 12 to 19 points.
Clinton leads the only poll done in her home state this month by an almost two-to-one margin.
One poll in Oklahoma in the last three weeks shows Clinton at 41, Edwards at 25, and Obama at 19.
In the other states, who knows.
Black voter turnout will be crucial for Obama and, as we have seen, female voters are coming out to support Clinton. If Edwards stays in this thing and continues to peel off white voters from Clinton, as he seems to be doing in South Carolina, this could get interesting.
And even though his numbers are low, I suspect that Edwards will reach the 15 percent area in most of those states if not all and will continue to gather up delegates. We'll see what happens after Saturday.
Editor's Note: This is an updated of a previous edition.
3 comments:
Everyone is counting Romney out at every turn, saying that he is only carried by his wealth and his ability to say anything? What kind of talk is that? It is simply that people can not feel comfortable that a man has done well for himself by hard work alone and have to try to find something to call him on. I guess that is why he is continued to be called Mormon while Huck gets a free ride and not called Pastor Huck. Romney has a very very good chance at being the next President.
Romney will win Florida because he's real and has a good message. He's consistent and not changing strategy as Rudy and McCain are.
Hey Christopher,
Thanks for posting. I don't think I am counting Romney out per se but I think his chances are slim. Better than Huckabee's though.
Romney's problems are HUGE. I think the flip-flopping - as bad or worse than Kerry, IMHO - is a more difficult thing to overcome than McCain's minor baggage about not supporting Bush's tax cuts when he had a chance to vote on them or the horrible "amnesty" immigration bill [Add Romney's comments here: I never called the bill amnesty but I did call it amnesty ...].
That said, your comments about Romney's Mormonism being an issue and Huckabee's role as a born again Pastor not being an issue don't wash at all. At almost every turn, Huckabee's spirituality has made it into every story about him. His campaign has been marginalized - granted, by the Northeastern and D.C. media establishment, many of whom who don't understand or respect Christianity - as nothing more than evangelicals trying to flex some muscle in the part. They have ignored Huckabee's populist economic positions, the fact that when push came to shove, he did some amazing things as governor of Arkansas, or the fact that he is extremely likable. By making reasonable investments in the infrastructure there, he improved roads, created jobs, and raised the state from 48th in education - where Bill Clinton left it, BTW - to 27th. Huckabee was so popular, he actually received 48 percent of the black vote in his last race for governor. So much for being a Confederate flag loving bumpkin.
Don't forget: The Reagan coalition had populist, lunch bucket, conservative Democrats on board, something the CEO/corporate wing of the party has been unable to win back. If a fair-trader like Edwards or Obama is nominated by the Dems, Romney will get hammered.
Lastly, on your previous comments about Romney and lobbyists on another part of my site, you really need to get a little focused. While Glen Johnson probably should not have interrupted Romney - and may have even saved Romney - the fact remains that Romney has a slew of Washington lobbyists assisting his campaign. The rhetoric, IMHO, does not match the campaign. Here are some examples:
Mitt’s Snit Shatters Credibility,
Drives Him Out of South Carolina
Washington, DC - Smooth talking Mitt Romney is at it again. Yesterday, Romney was caught on tape playing semantics with an Associated Press reporter over the role of lobbyists in his campaign. Romney grew visibly irritated when the reporter challenged his claim that he did not have lobbyists running his campaign or sitting in on strategy meetings, despite the fact that veteran Republican lobbyists like Ron Kaufman, Barbara Comstock and Al Cardenas have served as high-profile advisors and strategists since he announced his candidacy. [Associated Press, 1/17/08]
Mitt’s snit over lobbyists is the latest in a pattern of exaggerations, flip-flops and shameless semantic debates that have destroyed Romney’s credibility throughout this campaign. Last month, Romney was caught misleading the voters on his father’s civil rights record by claiming he “saw” his father march with Martin Luther King even though Romney’s father had never appeared with Dr. King. After reports revealed that Romney falsely told Meet the Press that the National Rifle Association had endorsed him in 2002, Romney tried to debate the definition of the word “endorsement.” After Romney called himself a “lifelong hunter,” media reports revealed he had only been hunting twice in his life and never held a hunting license. Romney also told an Iowa audience he was “very proud of the fact” that he had “made it tougher for people with meth labs” despite that fact that his proposed legislation never became law. [New York Times, 12/21/07]
Now, with polls showing South Carolina voters rejecting Romney’s latest attempts to smooth talk himself out of his record by trying to reposition himself as an economic populist, Romney is simply leaving town and banking his increasingly desperate campaign on Nevada–a state where no other leading Republican is even competing. [New York Times, 1/18/08]
“Smooth talking Mitt Romney may be running for linguist-in-chief, but he has already redefined terms like ‘craven panderer’ and ’shameless flip-flopper’ for the American people,” said Democratic National Committee spokesman Damien LaVera. “Romney’s parsing, pandering and empty promises can’t hide the fact that he has spent the last year running for a third Bush term on everything from health care and the economy to the war in Iraq.”
ROMNEY’S OUTSIDER RHETORIC…
Romney: No Lobbyists “Tied To Me.” “I don’t have lobbyists that are running my campaign. I don’t have lobbyists that are tied to me…. Somebody doesn’t put the kind of financial resources that I’ve put into this campaign and the personal resources that I’ve put into the campaign in order to do favors for lobbyists.” [CBSNews.com, 1/17/08 http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/17/politics/fromtheroad/entry3724226.shtml ]
….DOESN’T MATCH HIS INSIDER CAMPAIGN
Washington Lobbyists Advising Romney:
Ron Kaufman: Ron Kaufman a Senior Advisor. Since the beginning of his presidential run, Romney has relied upon close advisor and lobbyist Ron Kaufman. Kaufman has nearly three decades experience in national Republican politics, beginning his career with George H.W. Bush in 1978, managing his NH primary campaign, and working as the White House political director for Ronald Reagan. Kaufman works as a top lobbyist for Dutko Worldwide and serves on the board of Representative Chris Cannon’s (UT) Eagle Leadership PAC. [Evote, 12/16/06; Dutko Worldwide Online, accessed 4/19/07; Salt Lake Tribune, 4/13/07]
Barbara Comstock: Noted Republican Lobbyist, Attorney, and Campaign and Media Advisor. “The Philadelphia-based law firm formally launched a separate lobbying arm in Washington, Blank Rome Government Relations, which included the three former White House staffers and the Dyer Ellis principals. Later that year, the firm also brought on Barbara Comstock, a former congressional staffer who had served as the chief spokesperson for then-Attorney General John Ashcroft — after becoming notorious as the head of the opposition research team at the Republican National Committee (RNC) in 2000; The Washington Post dubbed her a ‘one-woman wrecking crew.’ Since joining Blank Rome, Comstock also has led a public relations campaign on behalf of Tom DeLay and is spokeswoman for former Cheney aide I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby’s legal defense fund.” [American Prospect, 12/18/05]
Gary Marx: Romney Paid Focus on the Family Lobbyist More Than $70,000. Gary Marx was paid nearly $71,431 by the Romney campaign for consulting in the first three quarters of 2007. Marx’s experience includes serving as the coalition’s director for the national Bush/Cheney 04 campaign, working as a lobbyist for Focus on the Family, and working at Ralph Reed’s political consulting firm, where his primary client was Pres. Bush. [Judicial Confirmation Network, judicialnetwork.com; FEC Data]
Al Cardenas: Federal Lobbyist Heads At Least Four Romney Steering Committees National Hispanic Committee. Alberto Cardenas, former Florida GOP chair, holds a number of positions in the Romney campaign, heading up Romney’s National Hispanic Steering Committee, and serving on his Latin American Policy Committee and his Florida Statewide Steering and Finance Committees. Cardenas is also a partner of Tew Cardenas, the expansive law and lobbying firm with offices in Tallahassee, Miami and Washington DC that bears his name. While on FEC reports he has neglected to note his position as a lobbyist, identifying himself as an attorney instead, Cardenas has defended his lobbying. “I do lobby, am proud of it and have (to my knowledge) always registered on behalf of [the] firm’s clients for whom I have personally done lobbying work,” Cardenas wrote in an email to The Hill. [Romney Release, 2/7/07; Romney Release, 2/22/07; Romney Release, 6/7/07; Romney Release, 1/28/07; The Hill, 4/18/07]
Cindy Gillespie: “Senior Romney Campaign Aide” Turned Health Care Lobbyists Serves on Romney Healthcare Advisory Group. Before leaving her paid position on the Romney campaign in September 2007, Cindy Gillespie served as a senior Romney campaign aide and trusted advisor. During his term as MA governor, she served as Romney’s counselor and chief of legislative and intergovernmental relations. She joined McKenna Long & Aldridge’s Government Affairs practice, where she “focuses on healthcare and legislative matters.” During her time with the Romney campaign, she was paid nearly $50,000. She remains involved in the campaign as a member of his Healthcare Policy Advisory Group. [Romney Release, 8/22/07; McKenna Long & Albridge, www.mckennalong.com/people-1113.html ; Washington Business Journal, 9/21/07]
Washington Insiders On The Romney Campaign:
Glen Hubbard: Chairman of Bush’s Economic Council. Romney’s Economic team mirrors President Bush’s 2001 Social Security Commission. According to Fox News Network’s Carl Cameron, “Many on Romney’s economic team worked for President Bush, including Glen Hubbard, the former chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, and Robert Posen, who helped craft the president’s failed 2005 plan to reform Social Security with private accounts.” [Special Report with Brit Hume, FNN, 2/7/07]
Cofer Black: Former Bush CIA Counterterrorism Chief Now Romney’s Counterterrorism Policy Chief. In April 2007, Mitt Romney named J. Cofer Black, State Department Counterterrorism Coordinator and Central Intelligence Agency Counterterrorism Chief, as his “Senior Adviser for counterterrorism and national security issues.” In September 2007, Romney expanded Black’s role, naming him as chair of his counterterrorism policy advisory group. [Romney Release, 4/26/07; Romney Release, 9/13/07]
Beth Myers: Romney Campaign Manager a Karl Rove “Protégé.” Beth Myers, who formerly served as Romney’s chief of staff during his term as MA governor, is Romney’s campaign manager and closest aide. Myers is a protégé of Karl Rove, having served as a deputy campaign manager under him in 1986 during the campaign of former Texas Gov. Bill Clements (R). [Washington Post, The Fix blog, 4/9/07; Washington Post, 1/7/07]
Carl Forti: Former NRCC Spokesman Hired as Romney Political Director. Forti, hired by Romney to be the campaign’s political director, was formerly the communications director for the Republican Congressional Committee. Forti worked at the NRCC for seven and a half years and also headed up the NRCC’s independent expenditure program for the 2002, 2004, and 2006 cycles. [Washington Post, The Fix blog, 1/11/07]
Matt Rhoades: RNC Research Director Hired as Romney Communications Director. Matt Rhoades, highly-regarded by GOP insiders for heading up the RNC research efforts in the 2006 cycle for the RNC and 2004 for Bush’s reelection, is another high-profile addition to the Romney camp. Rhoades is also friendly with Matt Drudge — founder of the conservative Drudge Report. [Washington Post, The Fix blog, 4/9/07]
Kevin Madden: Former Tom DeLay, John Boehner Spokesman Hired as Romney Press Secretary. Kevin Madden, hired as Romney’s spokesman, was “a staple of Capitol Hill,” having worked as the spokesman to former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and current Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). Madden also worked as the Ohio spokesman for Bush’s 2004 reelection campaign. [Washington Post, The Fix blog, 4/9/07; USA Today, 11/30/06]
Aaron Baer: Bush-Cheney Rapid Responder Running Romney’s “War Room.” Aaron Baer, who worked on the Bush-Cheney’04 campaign, maintains the Romney “war room” where 16 televisions line a wall showing everything from CNN and C-Span to the major networks and cable stations. [Deseret Morning News, 4/3/07]
###
Thank you for the information.
Post a Comment