Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 10:37 AM


 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 3:58 PM

I just taped an interview with Mitt Romney which will air at 7:06 EST.  I will post the audio and transcript here as soon as we can process it.

My first question is about these rather stunning numbers from Rasmussen, which show Romney leading Obama by 6 points among likely voters --45%-39%-- with former Speaker Gingrich and former Senator Santorum 10 points behind the president, 37%-47%.  That is quite an electability gap and I open the interview by asking the former Massachusetts governor what he attributes that to.  We also cover the president's credibility gap, the slide of Egypt towards islamist extremism, his expectations in Iowa and the Keystone XL pipeline.

12-29hhs-romney.mp3

HH: I begin this hour with former Massachusetts Governor, current presidential candidate, Mitt Romney. Governor Romney, welcome back, and a early Happy New Year to you. 

MR: Well, thank you, and Happy New Year to you as well, Hugh.

HH: I want to start with the Rasmussen poll today, Governor. You are ahead of President Obama by six points among likely voters, a thousand of them. The next closest Republicans, Speaker Gingrich and Senator Santorum, are ten points behind President Obama. That’s a sixteen point advantage in electability. To what do you attribute those numbers?

 Read More...

 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 3:00 PM



Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker will join me in studio today to discuss his first year in office and the effort by the public employee unions of Wisconsin backed by radicalized big labor across the United States to recall this very effective reformer.

If the unions come up with enough non-fraudulent signatures --there's already a lot of controversy about the ACORN-like signature collection practices of the left-- then Walker will be in a months long recall campaign that will very much impact the general election of 2012.

You can support Scott Walker with a contribution through his website here
, and hopefully will do so again and again throughout 2012 as an indication that the crucial reforms needed in every state won't be blocked by union thuggery and intimidation.

.
 

 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 9:45 AM


 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 10:12 PM

Transcripts of Wednesday's interviews with Rick Santorum, Tagg Romney and Kevin D. Williamson provide plenty of variety.

Senator Santorum is surging in Iowa, has launched another moneybomb at his website to take advantage of the new-found support, and discusses the perilous situation in Egypt with a candor and forcefulness that explains his rising appeal.  His criticisms of the president's epic ineptitude are blunt but provide the necessary sort of clarity the next year will require.

Tagg Romney talks with equal candor about the differences between Campaign '12 and Campaign '08.  Expect to see more and more of Mitt Romney's oldest son as a forceful, effective surrogate for his father.

Kevin D. Williamson and I mixed it up over his Repo Man article at NationalReview.com.  There is far too much of the Paulanista intimation of "sinister forces at work behind the scenes" for the piece to go unchallenged, and Williamson's bristling at my Bilderberger characterization marks exactly the sort of reaction of the average Ron Paul supporter called on the average fringy Paul statement.  Williamson is not a supporter of Paul and indeed is a critic of some of his rhetoric, but Repo Man is full of the same nonsense that animates the Occupiers and the conspiracists of all sorts.  Whenever someone starts talking about "they," ask for names, numbers and addresses.  It is nonsense, and the sort of nonsense that may serve to score some cheap points in a primary campaign against Romney but which undermines the central tenets of free market theory, wherein finance is understood to serve a crucial indeed irreplaceable function.  Some people make a lot of money moving money, and more power to them.  The spirit of envy that stirs up anger at the success of Wall Street investment bankers is the first step to ruinous overregulation and confiscatory taxation. 

UPDATE: More on the Williamson piece from Article VI Blog.
 

 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 4:55 PM


 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 10:43 AM


Powerline is among the most influential of the conservative online opinion-sites, and not just because they broke Dan Rather on the wheel of Rathergate.  John Hinderaker and Scott Johnson, strengthened by Steve Hayward after the retirement of Paul Mirengoff, do serious work and do it well, writing careful, well-researched and thoughtful essays on all sorts of subjects, but especially on politics and public policy.

In many ways they are stand-ins for the vast numbers of very competent hard-working professionals in the country who are executives, lawyers, doctors, teachers, engineers and analysts who just don't have time for the political stuff but who vote and who contribute and who know that we are in a very bad place as a country.

So John Hinderaker's endorsement of Mitt Romney means quite a lot to a lot of GOP voters
.  Here is the short version of his argument for Romney:

First, he is a tremendously smart, competent and hard-working person....

Second, Romney has led an exemplary life. He is, by any ordinary measure, an exceptionally good man....

Third, Romney has exactly the expertise we need for the next four years....

Fourth, Romney can and will, I think, beat Barack Obama.

Read, as we used to say quite often, the whole thing.  I am pretty sure Team Romney will be sending it around the blogosphere and to the MSM that still doesn't have a clue on how the center-right works.

Can The Fraters be far behind? Almost certainly yes.  But the rest of the Northern Alliance?

.

   

 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 9:58 AM



The New York Times discovers that Mitt Romney is succeeding on the campaign trail:
“No one is an expert at it when they first do it,” said Eric Fehrnstrom, a senior adviser to Mr. Romney, who has watched him ring hundreds of doorbells over the years. “There has been an improvement over time, just as you would expect.”

Campaigns are learning experiences, an presidential campaigns are among the steepest learning curves of all.  Romney is doing better at the basics because he has done them all before, and he did the pretty well the first time.

In April of 2009 I interviewed Steve Schmidt, the campaign manager for John McCain's 2008 effort.
  It is interesting to reread that conversation now, two-and-a-half-years later, especially for what he said about Romney then:

HH: Let me ask you just as a professional, not your hope for, not your wishes and dreams, who would you have to predict right now is going to be the Republican nominee in 2012?

SS: If I had to bet money on it, if I had to bet money on it today, you’d have to say that the people that I think look very good, very strong right now are Governor Romney, Governor Huntsman. I think Newt Gingrich, should he run, is going to be a very formidable, very formidable candidate. But the history of the Republican Party nominating process is that it almost always goes to someone who’s been around the track once before. And in that instance, in this instance, it would be Governor Romney. I thought he was a very scary opponent looking from the other side of the table in that he was almost like a learning organism at the end. He just kept getting better week by week by week, and kept becoming stronger. And I think these national campaigns are very unique, and I think most people learn a great deal with they go through them. And I think one of the reasons that President Bush was able to make it through the process the first time, unlike most people on the Republican side, is because he had been up close and personal through a couple of national races. And I think Mitt Romney is a candidate, is a far stronger candidate, prospectively, for the ’12 race because of his experience in ’08 than he was heading into the ’08 race.

"He was like a learning organism at the end.  He just kept getting better week by week, and kept becoming stronger."

So Romney's strength in New Hampshire and his growing momentum in Iowa shouldn't surprise, and his nomination if it happens will reassure a lot of people that President Obama is in for a serious challenge and not merely a romp like Reagan had in '84 or Nixon in '72.  Romney's been preparing for a fall presidential campaign for five years.  That's a great advantage in the weeks ahead, and a serious problem for Obama, which is why Axelrod has done his best to obstruct a Romney nomination.

There's a second reason to believe Obama is in big trouble, and it has to do with his learning the wrong lessons from 2008.  The president drew as his opponent in Senator McCain a great American but a terrible campaigner, who in turn chose an inspirational but very inexperienced running mate in Sarah Palin.  Together the two of them made many unforced errors that allowed Obama to in effect coast to the presidency, including three debates he handily won versus Senator McCain.  The president's hubris predated his 2008 campaign, but that campaign's particular and very one-sided dynamics sure added to it, and wrongfully so as he did not win in 2008 so much as he watched others lose it and the panic of the fall seal the deal. 

Now Obama  is burdened with failure upon failure, and crisis upon crisis is mounting as far as the eye can see. If Romney is the nominee, a well-funded, well-managed, experienced campaign team headed by a nominee with well-known planning and management skills is coming at him, as is Crossroads and other Super-PACs and the new and much strengthened conservative media online and on air.  Obama is surrounded by the same-old same-old playing the same-old games.  Incredibly he has hung on to Eric Holder and Timothy Geithner as the faces of his domestic policy even as Egypt lurches into an Islamist nightmare, the Euro struggles and China surges, defining his foreign policy abroad.  The president's pals in the MSM have operated to keep the bad news from him, and the rookie errors of the House GOP leadership has led him to conclude that all Republicans manage their political efforts the way McCain-Palin did.

When he loses in a landslide, he will be as stunned as Jimmy Carter in 1980.  So too will the MSM.  "I only know one person who voted for Nixon," remarked the New Yorker's film critic Pauline Kael after the 1972 blow-out of the left's matinee idol of that year, George McGovern.  (This is the accurate version of what she said, unearthed thanks to John Podhoretz.) 

Happy New Year, Mr. President, and enjoy the golf.  There's a reason why the GOP traditionally wins presidential elections in the modern era when it nominates a mainstream conservative, especially when he is running against an Alinskyite walking-and-talking train wreck of an incumbent.  The country is center-right,and it is desperate to get back to the free-market driven prosperity of the fifty years before you won your fluke election in 2008.

.




 

 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 10:29 AM

The weekly column from Clark Judge:

GOP New Year’s Blues
By Clark S. Judge: managing director, White House Writers Group, Inc.; chairman, Pacific Research Institute
 

With the Iowa caucuses a week away, uneasiness pervades GOP circles in Washington and around the country.
 
Part of the reason – but only part – stems from continuing uneasiness about the field of candidates.
 
“Mitt or Newt,” I was asked at a holiday party of longtime conservatives and activists last night.  No matter how I replied everyone groaned.  It turned out that in the minds of this group of political veterans there was no right answer.
 
Anxiety about whether former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has the temperament for the job – including whether he has the organizational skill to run a national scale political organization – wasn’t helped by the Christmas Eve announcement that he had missed Virginia’s primary filing deadline.  Meanwhile, comments that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has failed to articulate a story – a narrative of the nation’s past and present and the choices and prospects for its future – brought vigorous nods.













 Read More...

 
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 9:55 AM

Photo of Rick Santorum















Jay Cost is among the best of the political analysts at work these days, and his take on the run-up to Iowa is worth reading and rereading, especially as it deals with the MSM's favorite Romney cliche that the GOP primary is full of vehement anti-Romneys. "[T]he conventional wisdom about Romney’s candidacy—that there is a huge “not Romney” bloc of GOP voters out there—is massively overstated," Cost writes, and he could well have added as an explanatory note that the MSM's cliche is rooted in the stridency of a very small anti-Romney extreme that is quite loud. 

There are a lot of candidates, each with ardent supporters, and a few bands of disappointed activists who had really hoped for Governors Palin, Daniels, Christie or Jeb Bush to step forward.  Some of these strong supporters of a different candidate are part of the "not Romney" block, but not for long.  As Cost points out, Romney's favorability ratings are actually high among most Republicans. 

"Romney’s favorable rating among prospective Republican primary voters is quite high, upwards of 60 percent," notes Cost, "and the latest CNN poll of GOP voters shows that 80 percent of Republicans either support him now or would consider supporting him at some point; this is a larger number than that of any of his major competitors."

If Romney does well in Iowa and wins outright in New Hampshire those numbers will shift towards him in greater degree, and even a loss in South Carolina won't do much to undo them.  Underlying favorability is not dependent upon winning or losing elections but upon personal qualities and Romney's are strong --marriage, family, service, affability.  If Romney doesn't blow up at an opponent or flash an unseemly ungraciousness towards any departing rival in the next month or so, his numbers will continue to firm as most of the supporters of that exiting candidate look to join the winning team.

The fellow who could surprise in Iowa is Rick Santorum as another Weekly Standard writer, John McCormack notes this morning.  Many of the things that have been written about Romney over the past five years have been written about Santorum over the past five months: he doesn't connect, he doesn't get voters enthused.  "Santorum is combative and earnest," writes McCormack, as though those qualities would be handicaps in a race against the Chicago machine that is daily sharpening the knives.

GOP primary electorates are smart, hyper-informed on the race and above all they want to win.  They know this golf-playing president spends all of the time he doesn't spend on the links, doesn't spend worrying about the rise of Egypt's Islamists or the massacred in Syria, and doesn't spend figuring out how jobs are actually created when a government check isn't involved --he spends all that time on politics with Axe and friends.  Romney's too smart and too disciplined?  Santorum is too combative and earnest?  These are qualities a late-deciding voter will want if he or she wants mostly to win, wants to send Obama packing back to his golf and awards ceremonies, far from the levers of power he knows so little about working.

Romney and Santorum look like the most disciplined, the most prepared to run and the most prepared to govern of the GOP field.  It won't be surprising to see them rewarded by the serious voters that the MSM didn't connect with this time next week.

.