It was a pleasure liveblogging with Ben DeGrow of Mount Virtus (extensive coverage--with humor!) and Night Twister (great wrap up analysis). Complete video from the convention--including Rep. Tom Tancredo, Sen. Wayne Allard, and Bob Schaffer's nomination acceptance speech--can be found here.
I'll have more thoughts later, but first, here is Gov. Mitt Romney's stump speech on behalf of Sen. John McCain, followed by a press conference held with Bob Schaffer:
Mitt Romney addressing the Colorado GOP convention, Part 1:
Part 2:
Press conference with Mitt Romney and Bob Schaffer at the conclusion of the day's events (part 1):
Slapstick Politics Exclusive: John McCain Press Conference In Denver
“We have united our party. We are now going to have to reenergize our party, and energize them for a very, very tough race this November”--Sen. John McCain
Updated and bumped . . . scroll for analysis . . .
Sen. John McCain, flanked by former Congressman Bob Beauprez, Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave, Senate candidate Bob Schaffer, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and Sen. Wayne Allard
Exclusive to the blogosphere, at least. Your humble Slapstick Politics was invited to cover the John McCain press conference today as part of the RNC's eCampaign Division outreach. Having new media incorporated into the campaign represents quite a leap forward, at least for the GOP.
Also there, Jeremy Pelzer of PolitickerCo.com, a bookmark-worthy independent online source of political news in Colorado.
The entire press conference, unedited:
Part 1:
Part 2:
If YouTube is acting up, the video is available at Sevenload: sevenload.com One of the questions from the conference will continue to follow McCain throughout the election--how can he mend fences with the conservative base who isn't particularly enthralled with their presumptive nominee, and appeal to Republicans in the Rocky Mountain West who overwhelmingly selected Romney over McCain in the primaries? And what about that old Reagan coalition--is it dead?
McCain knows that his strength--if it can be called that--lies in his projection of the "maverick" theme he has so carefully cultivated, while making sure that he also projects some semblance of acknowledgement of the concerns within his party over areas where McCain is believed to have strayed. The new term "McCain-ocrats" has been put forth as the new column of supporters, coming primarily from the Democratic ranks fed up with their destructive Clinton-Obama primary, as well as center-left leaning independents who might not usually even give the GOP candidate a look, but will now since the nominee is McCain.
With Colorado's rapidly increasing unaffiliated voting bloc soon to surpass the state's registered GOP voters, McCain's nomination could put more of that segment in play--or at the very least stem the tide of tilting Democratic that has delivered almost every recent state and federal level election in Colorado to the Democrats. Democrats need the help of independents to beat their GOP counterparts who enjoy a large voter lead, and anything that prevents a landslide split (60-40 for Democrats and higher) will at least ease those concerns.
Romney did win Colorado's GOP caucus, but the caucus itself was open to registered Republicans only. Had center-right independents, libertarians and conservative Democrats been allowed to vote, it is not clear that Romney would have received comparable results (and given McCain's 1st amendment issues with campaign finance reform, this might not have helped with some of these voters). Now, however, the nomination is settled and Republicans and conservatives alike are rallying to the GOP nominee's side, as they were at this press conference and subsequent fundraiser. Just a little over a month ago, Bob Beauprez and Sen. Wayne Allard were behind Romney during a campaign stop, arguing that he was the best candidate for Colorado and the party. This is politics, however, and as soon as the Democrats finally settle on their choice for the White House, there too will be calls for "bridging gaps" and "coming together."
So when the Democrats and the left target Senate candidate Bob Schaffer for comments he made about Sen. McCain last year that appear critical, ask them how they will handle their party's own squabbles, name-calling, and vitriol. If Schaffer can't offer his opinion and then change/modify/alter it, then it will be tough (even for Democrats) to see either Obama or Clinton offering their support for each other, once the nomination is decided. And the attacks we've seen between those two this primary season make any tension between Schaffer and McCain pale in comparison.
As for uniting the conservatives--social and fiscal conservatives and their center-right, libertarian allies--McCain has a tall order ahead. He does enjoy the benefits of receiving the nomination early, and the ability to make policy, introduce legislation, and continue (at least) a non-offense campaign that might make some of the early defectors at least open to looking at him again. He can also help himself with a strong conservative VP choice, and many have speculated that the duo seen here, McCain and Romney, might be the eventual GOP ticket. The disadvantage to a long road to November is the possibility of committing a serious gaffe or proposed policy choice that just confirms voters' suspicions about where McCain's true loyalties lie.
Bottom line, McCain is the nominee. Once voters outside of the Dems really pay attention to either Clinton or Obama, they may just be scared enough by their socialist/liberal/progressive agendas to give the senator a second look. Just look at McCain's favorability rating versus either Clinton or Obama. His favorability has been increasing, and is now holding steady in the mid-50s.
Exit question: with the Democrats so deeply embroiled in and embittered by the Clinton/Obama struggle, and McCain up on both candidates in some polls already, will the Dems be even more inclined to lash out come this fall, or watch helplessly as a small percentage of their faithful defect to McCain and potentially give him victory? In the battleground states, these margins may prove the critical difference in the electoral vote count in November.
Two 2008 Republican presidential winners arrived in Denver Thursday: John McCain, the presumptive nominee, and Mitt Romney, the overwhelming Colorado caucus winner.
Their goal: to rally Republicans behind McCain in a state where he won only 19 percent of caucusgoers and most major GOP leaders backed Romney or Rudy Giuliani.
“We have united our party,” McCain proclaimed at an afternoon press conference in the Comfort Inn in downtown Denver. “We are now going to have to reenergize our party, and energize them for a very, very tough race this November.”
Asked how he would win over Romney voters in Colorado to his side, McCain motioned towards Romney and said, “I think that he can do a much better job convincing them than I can.”
Romney made it clear how he wanted Coloradans to vote in November.
“I support (McCain) enthusiastically, endorse his campaign and hope that my friends here in Colorado are just as active in supporting him as they’ve been in supporting other great candidates in the past to make sure that we have the kind of leadership America needs at a trying time,” Romney said. “It’s so critical for us not to be talking about politics as we’re watching the Democrats do and process, but instead to be focusing on the direction of this great land.”
Sen. John McCain arrived in Denver this afternoon to make a few remarks and pick up some campaign cash as a part of his swing through the Western states that have become increasingly attractive targets for Democrats.
But before he could utter one word at the Brown Palace Hotel, Democrats launched a pre-emptive strike — getting state party chairs from Nevada, Arizona, Utah and Colorado to blast the presumed Republican presidential nominee during a conference call.
Leading the charge was Colorado Democratic Chairwoman, Pat Waak — with a little bit of swagger.
“We think John McCain is the best candidate we could be running against as Democrats,” she said.
She cited his campaign cash shortage, his getting trounced by fellow Republican Mitt Romney in Colorado’s GOP caucus by a two-to-one margin and that Democrats have registered far more voters than Republicans in the last year.
The Denver Post had a note on the protestors at McCain's fundraiser following the press conference:
About 20 protesters appeared outside the DAC Thursday afternoon to protest McCain's appearance.
They chanted "stop foreclosures" and "McSame as Bush" and "McShame" as the candidate walked through the small throng and entered the front door of the club.
Update (1:30 pm)--Note to Sen. McCain-telling conservatives to "calm down" is no way to build bridges with GOPers like those in Colorado ready to bolt from the party or simply sit on their hands
Update (1:00 pm)--Eye-rolling "Dems are nonpartisan, Republicans are conservative" caucus analysis of the day:
"Obama's that creative-society, nonpartisan, new-advocate-for-change Democrat that we like here," said Denver pollster Floyd Ciruli, pointing to former Colorado Sen. Gary Hart, Sen. Ken Salazar and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper.
Mitt Romney's win over John McCain, on the other hand, showed that Republicans were backing conservative, core-party values over more moderate views.
Update (7:00 am)--voter turnout percentage, based on voter registration for each party and the closed caucus rules-13.6% of Democrats caucused vs. 6.4% of Republicans
Update (3:30 am)--record turnout in Colorado-8x for Democrats (120,000 in 2008 vs. 15,000 in 2004) and 65,000 Republicans
Initial thoughts--despite his Super Tuesday success, here are the image problems in a nutshell John McCain will face in the coming months in his quest to court conservatives in the GOP base (via the awesome Michael Ramirez):
Update (11:45 pm)--The Drunkablog provides tonight's (only?) LOL caucus moment Joshua Sharf--Denver GOP misses a chance to educate and engage Republicans with caucus disorganization
Early numbers from the Colorado Democratic Party showed Obama with a 2 to 1 margin over Sen. Hillary Clinton with less than 10 percent of precincts reporting.
Numbers from the Colorado Republican Party showed Romney had a 10 percent lead over Sen. John McCain and former Gov. Mike Huckabee with only a fraction of precincts reporting.
Update (7:30 pm)--precinct voted 5-1 Romney over McCain.
Candidate speeches were short but heated; Ron Paul supporters vociferous, attack Iraq War to much derision; elected delegate for precinct 409 to Denver County assembly; general mood subdued
Caucus update from Denver County GOP District 4 (6:42 pm)-- Arrived at Lake Middle School--home to both Republican and Democrat caucuses. So far only Dem signs directing voters--GOP voter suppression? (j/k)
Many, many more people (probably 4x at least 6 or 7x) than in 2006, and still 20 minutes to caucus kickoff.
Lots of Ron Paul supporters . . . stay tuned . . .
Even as results from the East coast and Midwest roll in, Coloradans are waiting to contribute their two cents in the Super Tuesday caucus.
Some thoughts going into tonight: With other states having already completed their caucus/primaries, or with exit polling data available, how does an Obama victory in Georgia or an unexpected Huckabee win in West Virginia influence Colorado voters, who haven't even left their houses yet?
How does Colorado's Latino vote influence the Clinton/Obama battle?
And for those who are disaffected/disillusioned by the current GOP field, here's what the Colorado Democrats have in store for their caucus platforms. An update on a story posted earlier--looks like Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News journalists will be allowed to participate in their caucuses after all (and as a result of some legal questioning), but will be limited in their election coverage so as to maintain some semblance of journalistic "objectivity".
At stake in Colorado are 43 Republican and 55 Democratic delegates selected through the caucuses. The caucuses are nonbinding and Colorado voters won't select the delegates until the major parties have their conventions in May.
However, Tuesday's straw polls in Colorado were considered crucial because the final delegates will be selected through that process and it gives political momentum to the winners.
Why do so many conservatives detest — and yes, "detest" is the most accurate word — John McCain?
Why are radio talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Hugh Hewitt abandoning their customary stance on Republican unity by endorsing or supporting Mitt Romney?
Why would the right-wing queen of provocation, Ann Coulter, claim that she would rather campaign for Hillary Clinton than the longtime Republican senator from Arizona?
Why, many talking heads marvel, are conservatives ambushing their only real shot at a general election victory in November?
Well, just maybe, to conservatives, the principle is worth more than the victory.
This explanation squares with my own motto, the one that appears at the top of this blog:
"Supporting party above principle does a disservice to both"
Before registering as a Republican for the 2004 primary election, I had been an "unaffiliated" voter--though certainly not in the "independent" or "moderate" or flip-flopping fence-sitter mode. I was a conservative--fiscally, socially, in foreign policy and in temperament. None of these positions were in the absolutist, ideologue sense--a healthy blend of small-l libertarianism influenced all of my positions, creating the need to balance my views on personal morality and public policy. As these were not always coterminous, a certain tension existed--not one that drew me toward the mushy middle, but one that made it difficult to pigeonhole me ideologically. I'm sure many of you have had the same feelings.
Generally, the problems of this country could not and should not be solved primarily or even substantially by the government. Nanny-state totalitarians masquerading as government do-gooders and demagogues spouting economic populism while excoriating the "evil" business sector--these were the main adversaries, and sometimes even found a home in the GOP. This says nothing of the anti-American, pro-socialist moonbats on the left, or the tinfoil-hat wearing, black helicopter spying, conspiracy theorists.
Government, however, does have a role (and this is why I'm not a big-L Libertarian) in playing the third-party arbiter, law enforcement, and foreign policy roles. One of the failures in this area has been the inability and lack of will regarding enforcing immigration laws. Any regular reader here knows my position on illegal immigration.
McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy violate both of these positions. I'm supposed to "take one for the party" and simply prostrate myself before the failure-turned-juggernaut John McCain campaign? His "bipartisanship" and "maverick" designations generally mean kicking any principled conservative position to the curb, all the while scolding those who dare to disagree.
None of these problems with McCain's policy positions denigrates his service in our military. A casual glance at this blog will disabuse anyone of the notion that I have nothing but respect for McCain on this aspect, and would certainly find him a strong defender of this nation in the foreign policy arena. But one's military service does not mean a default vote for a candidate, much as one's gender or race should not bring an automatic vote either.
Mike Huckabee presents a similar problem. His social conservatism is admirable, but tends toward the evangelical (I'm Catholic, there is some disconnect there). Huck's main shortcomings, in my view, stem from his willingness to view the government as the source of the correctives for any issue that comes before him. A strong dose of economic populism also does much to dissuade.
Ron Paul. Good on domestic policy, atrocious on foreign policy. While he himself may not be a nut, some of his followers are, and tend to be disaffected cranks and conspiracy moonbats. That he has not distanced himself or his campaign from their antics or their contributions doesn't speak well to him as a candidate.
Mitt Romney isn't perfect. He has been accused of "flip-flopping" on any number of core issues that conservatives find important. But at this point, and given the candidate pool that the GOP has been left with, Romney is the only candidate whose professed positions come closer to my own, without the accompanying ideological (Huckabee) or historical (McCain) baggage. We know how McCain would treat conservatives, and I'd rather not be roadkill for "maverick" John McCain.
That being said, I can't see myself pulling the lever for a Democrat or any third party option come November should McCain earn the nomination. An extremely reluctant vote for a Republican will (hopefully) help ensure that either Democrat--and the variance between positions is quite clear to all those who have been paying attention--will not be successful. It will also increase the likelihood that potential Supreme Court nominees--to my mind the most important spoils of victory as evidenced by the 2004 results--will remain at best strict constructionists and at worst, moderates. A Democrat victory will only bring moonbattery and leftist "living document" disaster to the highest court in the land.
However, my enthusiasm remains undaunted for state and local GOP candidates, especially for former Representative Bob Schaffer in Colorado's Senate race. We must not forget down-ticket ramifications and remain on the sidelines by sitting on our hands and refusing to vote. Just because we don't like the candidate--no candidate is perfect or even ideal--doesn't mean we should eschew our responsibility--our right--to vote. Don't like McCain? Great! Now get out there and pour your time and money into the other races at the state and local level, and work to prevent a Democrat-dominated Congressional delegation and Colorado legislature move no further to the left. We need to begin chipping away at their advantages now, and begin identifying prospects for challenging them in 2010. Disdain for McCain is no excuse for failing to support the GOP and conservative principles elsewhere.
Final point. The primary season is the time to air differences, argue positions, and strengthen resolve. Any criticism of McCain now will remain even if he ends up the GOP nominee. But I'd rather work to sway McCain back to conservatism (forcing the death of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill) than have to fight a Democrat President and likely House and Senate tooth-and-nail to stop the country from going into a tailspin.
Colorado Caucus: Colorado Conservative Bloggers Pick GOP Favorites For Super Tuesday
Poring over my fellow Colorado conservatives' blogs these past few weeks, I pulled together a rough list of their picks for the GOP nomination in no particular order (if you would like to add your endorsement to this list, leave a comment and link below):
Democrats and Republicans often have different takes on any given issue. However, on the eve of Super Tuesday, workers at the local headquarters of the respective parties were busy doing the same thing: answering phones.
"A lot of phone calls, a lot of e-mails, a lot of folks have never attended a precinct caucus," said Dick Wadhams, the head of Colorado's Republican Party.
"We actually put in nine new phone lines, there's not a line that's free," said Pat Waak, the head of Colorado's Democratic Party.
9NEWS political analyst Fred Brown says the buzz surrounding the caucus can be partly attributed to the fact that this year's caucus is being held earlier than in the past. Colorado traditionally took part in the process of selecting presidential nominees in March. By then, decisions on nominees were usually already made due to the previous caucuses and primaries. Brown says that made the Colorado caucus a moot point and a lackluster event.
"Now it's early enough in the process that Colorado could have an impact, along with all the other states of course. Everyone will be paying attention to California and New York, but Colorado is right there playing its part," said Brown.
Pollster Floyd Ciruli said caucuses typically attract less than 5 percent of registered partisan voters. Even with the poorly understood system this year, at least double the historic numbers of voters are expected, or more than 200,000 partisans.
CBS4 has a more detailed primeron Colorado's caucus for those who would like more detailed information, including a rough explanation of what will go down tomorrow night.
Last year the state legislature and the state parties agreed to move up the caucus date to Feb. 5. Other states did the same and now 24 states are participating in Super Tuesday.
"No one wants to be a flyover state, and Colorado was a flyover state," said House Majority Leader Alice Madden, D-Boulder. "People would pop in and do a fundraiser in Aspen. Now we have substantial debate in Denver and Broomfield and Boulder."
Democratic and Republican presidential candidates and their surrogates descended on Colorado last week and Monday to drum up caucus support, and Ciruli expects the visits to last throughout the campaign.
"We are going to be in play in November," he said.
That's because Colorado's unaffiliated voters - the second- largest voting block behind Republicans - help call the shots. Both parties will be trying to woo the unaffiliated and undecided voters, as well as proving they care about Western issues, Ciruli and Madden said.
"Every state matters, but in the long run the electoral votes in the West are going to help decide who is the next president of the United States and everybody knows that," Madden said.
Mitt Romney Visits Colorado In Advance Of Super Tuesday
"Romney has the resume and executive experience to be not only an effective president, but a problem-solver in a world full of problems"--Denver Post endorsement, 2-1-08
Mitt Romney greets supporters following his speech at Freeway Ford in Denver
Part 1, introductions from Bob Beauprez and Sen. Wayne Allard
Part 2
Part 3
Denver Post--in a somewhat shocking development--endorsed Mitt Romney (read a transcript of the exchange between Mitt Romney and DP editorial board):
Arizona Sen. John McCain, now the frontrunner, is an American hero, a foreign-policy expert and a veteran of the Washington trenches. But with a volatile economy overtaking Iraq as a chief concern among voters, we believe that Mitt Romney is the best choice for Colorado Republicans.
As a governor of Massachusetts, a skilled businessman and the savior of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Romney possesses the executive acumen necessary to . . . Washington Republicans have strayed far from the fiscal conservatism their party has traditionally championed. So while we applaud McCain's stand against wasteful spending, we're even more impressed with Romney's real-world experience in running lean budgets and bringing financial competency to companies.
We believe his economic growth plan — eliminating taxes on capital gains and interest and dividends for middle-class households — will help spur capital investment and the economy. . . . Romney has the resume and executive experience to be not only an effective president, but a problem-solver in a world full of problems.
Colorado Buried In Avalanche Of Political Visits: Obama, Hillary, Romney, And Even Bush
In no particular order:
Chelsea Clinton campaigned for her mother at CU-Boulder early Thursday, touting Hillary's "more visionary" (more costly and totalitarian?) platform. Oh, and for those still sitting on the fence, Chelsea says her mom bakes "killer" banana bread.
It is time for a new generation of leadership because the old politics just won't do. I am running for president right now because I have met Americans all across this country that cannot afford to wait another day. They understand what Dr. King meant when he said that we had to recognize the "fierce urgency of now." That is why the real choice in this campaign is not between regions, or religions, or genders. It is not about rich versus poor, young versus old, it's certainly not about black versus white. It is about the past versus the future.
Obama--all talk, no substance. Beware candidates whose appeal is primarily emotional.
The Republican presidential hopeful has scheduled a "Change Begins With Us" stop at Freeway Ford, 4471 East Evans Ave. The hourlong event starts at 2 p.m.
Ron Paul will be at the Colorado Convention Center from 6-8pm, you can just follow the Ronulans (the ones with the tinfoil hats).
President Bush, in a fundraising visit for Senate candidate Bob Schaffer, stopped to meet and praise Jeanne Assam, who brought to a halt the fatal shootings at Christian centers last December.
This will probably represent the high point of attention for Colorado's voters until after the conventions.
Now with the caucus just a few days away, here are some of the thoughts of other conservative bloggers:
Colorado is bracing for possible record turnouts in the Feb. 5 presidential caucuses, as state voters get swept up in the country's election fever.
Massive turnouts at the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary indicate that voters want to play a pivotal role in the country's most open presidential seat in more than 50 years. And Colorado voters — on both sides of the aisle — are no different. . . . GOP and Democratic Party officials say they are expecting much higher participation at the caucuses than they have had in years. State GOP head Dick Wadhams said the intensity of the race was certain to bring out new attendees.
State Democrats have told their county precincts "to prepare for record turnout," said spokesman Matt Sugar, who noted that his party is involved in numerous caucus trainings. . . . Unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, Colorado does not have so-called open caucuses. Only those who registered as a Democrat or Republican by the first week in December can attend the caucuses. Unaffiliateds — the state's second-largest registered group — cannot show up and vote.
The state currently boasts just over 1 million Republicans, 994,575 unaffiliateds and 875,650 Democrats. Unaffiliateds have increased by about 50,000 since March, while Democrats went up about 25,000 and Republicans 12,000.
Colorado is one of more than 20 states taking part in what's known as Super Tuesday. The front-loaded nomination schedule has accelerated the process, which may potentially result in both parties producing a nominee by dawn on Feb. 6.
The country would then have a two-candidate race for nine months — a historical first.
Having a closed caucus will prevent unaffiliateds from skewing either party's selection--giving a clearer picture of what rank-and-file Colorado Democrats and Republicans view as their ideal candidate, while leaving pollsters and bloggers to speculate on just how the 2nd largest voting bloc in Colorado will break come November. Ben DeGrow has a good roundup of Colorado caucus information, including Jefferson and Douglas County GOP caucus gathering information and links. More from Colorado GOP Chairman Dick Wadhams.
District 1 - Kennedy High School District 2 - Colorado Automobile Dealers Association offices District 3 - Harvard Gulch Recreation Center, 550 East Iliff (Logan & Iliff) District 4 - Lake Middle School District 5 - Tivoli Auditorium, Auraria Campus District 6 - Location 1: Windsor Gardens, 595 S. Clinton Street (Clinton & Alameda) Location 2: Central Christian Church, 3690 Cherry Creek Drive South (Garfield & Cherry Creek Drive South) District 7 - location TBD District 8 - Park Hill Methodist Church, 5209 Montview Boulevard District 9 - Hamilton Middle School, 8600 Dartmouth
Cory Madden, a student at the University of Denver, said part of his class is engaged in a youth voting project to get people involved in the presidential race.
He hasn't registered yet but plans to as a Democrat. However, he doesn't know which Democrat will get his vote.
"[Dude--ed.] I'm just not getting a huge political vibe yet," said Madden, 19, who is originally from Ohio.
Election '08--Colorado's Bloggers Analyze Iowa, Critique The Debates, And Back Their Favorite GOP Candidates
For the first week of 2008, the conservative blogosphere in Colorado has issued prognostications, offered analysis, and revealed who they think the frontrunners are (or should be). A few have even endorsed their primary candidate, or more importantly, detailed who they won't be voting for should that candidate receive the GOP nomination.
Michael at Best Destiny insightfully details more ground that ALL of the GOP candidates should be steadfast in not ceding to the Democrats this election cycle. Mr. Bob at the Daily Blogster explains his (well-reasoned, IMO) to back Mitt Romney, and also his distaste for the over-the-top antics of radio personality Hugh Hewitt.
Obama 37.36; Edwards 29.97; Clinton 29.45 Huckabee 34; Romney 25; Thompson 14; McCain 13%; Paul 10%
Initial thoughts--nice finish for Fred Thompson Michelle Malkin has a roundup, liveblogging This post will be updated and amended as the results from the Iowa Caucus--the official start to this year's Presidential battle--come in this evening.
Of course, 2008 will not only just be about electing a new commander-in-chief. Colorado's GOP has set its sights on reclaiming both houses of Colorado's legislature, by laying the groundwork for in this election and the mid-term 2010 election, targeting the Democrat-held Senate seat and the governor's mansion. Political cycles are no longer confined to the election year itself or even the normal two-year pattern (off year elections notwithstanding). The campaign for '08 began as soon as John Kerry conceded in November 2004. Republicans, having learned that their vaunted GOTV campaigns can not rescue hapless candidates in a poor political climate, must set to work building, or in some cases, re-building the grassroots elements of the party, and move away from the intraparty bickering and recriminations that have come to define recent primary campaigns, on both a local and national level. This will be put to the clearest test this year in the Presidential campaign, but will also have ramifications for GOP candidates on all levels. A permanent fracture would leave the GOP in permanent minority status, giving Democrats the keys to our government--and our future--not by losing the battle of ideas, but simply by default.
Wash Park Prophet has a post on the "irrational" voters--often those self-proclaimed "unaffiliateds" or "independents"--which might explain the rise of Ron Paul.
**Update--Iowa Rep. Steve King endorses Fred Thompson, in clear and forceful terms (via Michelle Malkin)Haven't had too much time finishing up this semester's work to keep up with the GOP primary--and since the first votes are literally just weeks away, the importance cannot be understated.
Ben at Mount Virtus has done a little looking, and his post on Fred Thompson (and his primary endorsement of Fred!) are certainly echoed here.
"My response is you have to look at the results. New York City had the least amount of illegality per capita of any major city in the country and I brought that change about," Giuliani said during a visit to a Colorado Springs restaurant.
"When we came into office, New York City was the crime capital of America. When I left office, it was the safest large city in America in just about every single category, which means it had the least amount of illegality of any kind, whether you're talking about illegal immigrants or illegal Americans," Giuliani said. . . . Giuliani also answered questions from supporters and customers about his stance on illegal immigrants. He drew a map of the Mexican border on a piece of paper and said fighting illegal immigration will require a combination of physical barriers and technology to fill in the gaps.
Giuliani said immigrants should be given tamperproof identification cards.
"Everyone from a foreign country should be identified," Giuliani told Krystal Holthus, a Colorado Springs resident concerned about the issue.
Mitt Romney has argued that Giuliani's lax position and failure to enforce immigration policies made New York City a de facto "sanctuary city", inherited from his predecessor, Mayor Ed Koch. Giuliani will have to square away his current explanation of his stance on illegal immigration with his statements made in the '90s:
At a June 1994 press conference, Giuliani decried anti-illegal immigration policies as unfair and hostile.
"Some of the hardest-working and most productive people in this city are undocumented aliens," Giuliani said at the time. "If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city. You're somebody that we want to protect, and we want you to get out from under what is often a life of being like a fugitive, which is really unfair."
At a speech in Minneapolis in 1996, Giuliani defended Koch's executive order, that, in his words "protects undocumented immigrants in New York City from being reported to the INS while they are using city services that are critical for their health and safety, and for the health and safety of the entire city."
"There are times when undocumented immigrants must have a substantial degree of protection," Giuliani said.
This is a different decade, and Giuliani is no longer running for office in one of the most liberal cities in America. He will, if he receives the GOP nomination, have to overcome considerable doubt by those who seek border security and enforcement of the law. Anyone concerned by the state of illegal immigration in this country will demand more than platitudes from any candidate seeking their vote come November 2008.
Sen. Wayne Allard hasn't done much in the way of endorsements, but Mitt Romney picked up the conservative's support in yesterday's trip to Iowa:
Allard, considered one of the more consistent conservatives in Congress, is here to tell Iowans that Romney is OK by him - on tax and budget issues, on family values issues, the whole gamut.
At Sunday night's low-key dinner, local chiropractor Sara Mesick asked Allard how Romney, who is Morman, can overcome skepticism from some evangelical Christians who have openly questioned the beliefs of his religion.
Allard said that if the campaign devolves into a fight over religion "there'd never be a Jew or you-name-it" who is elected to political office. He defended the values Romney has shown during his life and said, "If they carry your values, that's what it's all about."
This is the first time Allard has been on the campaign trail at this stage of a presidential election. He said the work isn't hard, especially for a trained veterinarian.
After all, Allard said, "When your conversation lags, you talk about their pets."
And given the recent attention paid to Romney's dog, having a veterinarian's endorsement can't hurt.
What is interesting is Allard throwing his support behind the former governor, and not Fred Thompson, his one-time colleague in the U.S. Senate. Does the Colorado Senator doubt Thompson's conservative credentials, or doubt his ability to win? It's not like he is trying to pick a candidate for his coat-tails, since he is retiring and not running for reelection.
Colorado Republican Sen. Wayne Allard is endorsing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for president, the campaign announced Monday.
Allard praised the candidate as someone who could bring “a much needed breath of fresh air to Washington.” He is the fifth GOP senator to publicly back Romney.
“After reviewing Governor Romney’s impressive resume and having the opportunity to visit one-on-one with him about his vision of innovation and change for America, I am proud to announce my endorsement of him,” Allard said in a statement.
Romney noted the Colorado Republican’s commitment to fiscal conservatism and homeland security.
“Senator Allard’s record of leadership and commitment to change make him a valuable addition to my campaign team,” Romney stated. “In Congress, he has fought to restrain spending while working to ensure that Americans are safe at home and abroad. Senator Allard understands, as I do, that we must bring innovation and transformation to Washington if we are to meet the new generation of challenges facing our country today.”
“Our party is going to grow, and we are going to win in 2008 if we are a party characterized by what we’re for, not if we’re a party that’s known for what we’re against,” the former New York mayor said at a midday campaign stop.
Republicans can win, he said, if they nominate a candidate committed to the fight against terrorism and high taxes, rather than a pure social conservative.
“Our party has to get beyond issues like that,” Giuliani said, a reference to abortion rights, which he supports.
Social conservatives prepared to make allowances for a moderate candidate like Giuliani can accept compromises, or are at the very least willing to entertain a candidate that will at least take them seriously. Ostracizing them with flippant comments dismissing the importance of the issues social conservatives hold dear will do nothing to endear him to skeptical GOP voters hesitant to countenance a socially liberal Presidential candidate.
Want to contribute? Visit our store for conservative gear for 2008! "A lot of guys yearning for adventure and romance would give their left one to be referred to in print as a man "who identified himself only as 'El Presidente.'" Nobody, for example, is ever going to refer to me as a man who "identified himself only as El Presidente." You bastard."--Drunkablog
