Patterico's Pontifications

1/31/2008

Romney Rumor Confirmed (UPDATE: Contradicted)

Filed under: 2008 Election — Patterico @ 7:30 am

The report is now confirmed; Romney has not bought TV ad time in any February 5 state, and his spokesman is refusing to say whether he will.

UPDATE: The earlier report was wrong. Romney is planning a major ad blitz.

I’m very encouraged by that, because after watching John McCain’s wretched debate performance last night, I no longer think he’s electable. He’s Bob Dole without the sense of humor.

25 Responses to “Romney Rumor Confirmed (UPDATE: Contradicted)”

  1. It shouldn’t be too surprising. February 5 was always going to be a brutal day for Romney if he didn’t have a big head of steam going into it, and either McCain or Romney did. The bulk of the delegates are from blue states, where McCain or Giuliani were preferred, and southern states, where Romney has always had a problem due to cultural and religious issues, not to mention his problematic history on abortion.

    I’m pulling the lever for McCain and will do so without any hesitation on Feb 5 (I live in California), but I don’t necessarily think this is a sign he’s throwing in the towel. He might be trying to throw the southern states to Huckabee, which could give the ABMcs enough votes to deadlock the convention. I don’t think we will know for certain one way or the other until next week when we learn how much $$ Romney is spending for the post Super Tuesday Primaries.

    Sean P (e57269)

  2. I mean either McCain or Giuliani did. My bad.

    Sean P (e57269)

  3. Ummm… I think Gov Romney has bought a few ads after all.

    dawnsblood (a83e77)

  4. Read the update:

    Late Update: A Romney campaign official tells me that the campaign will be purchasing ad time today, though the official declined to specify how much and where.

    LaMano (fcd61d)

  5. Hell, why not? He should try at least a couple states.

    Mike (c3f277)

  6. better up date this (At least, according to Rush this PM)

    quasimodo (edc74e)

  7. Off Topic:

    This is today’s front-page story in my local paper, the Times-Colonist (aka for years around here as the “Times-Communist”).

    The Times they are a’ changin’?

    ras (fc54bb)

  8. Did I read the updated article correctly? I think it says that Romney has already spent $40M of his own money and may spend up to $7M more. Wow.

    At this rate, in a few years only Bill Gates can afford to be President.

    DRJ (517d26)

  9. “I think it says that Romney has already spent $40M of his own money and may spend up to $7M more.”

    Unbelieveable, if so. And a sad commentary on what it takes to play professional politics in America. (Can he count the 40M a tax write-off if he loses?)

    p.s. …and Oprah, DRJ.

    Dana (b4a26c)

  10. Dana,

    I don’t think he earned enough income in the most recent years to have a 40 mill write-off.

    But once you have a few hundred million, does money matter? Would Romney live a different life if he had a billion more? Only insofar as he can do things like run for president.

    Hope he’s having fun.

    Jem (9e390b)

  11. McCain’s performance may have been wretched, but Romney’s wasn’t far behind; and, McCain IS still electable.

    Missed It By THAT Much (281c10)

  12. $47 million of his own money… I guess the one person who REALLY thinks Mitt Romney should be president is… Mitt Romney.

    Leviticus (b987b0)

  13. DRJ: “Wow. At this rate, in a few years only Bill Gates can afford to be President.”

    DRJ, many expect to be the first BILLION Dollar Presidential election. So far, with 10 months to go, the total raised by all the Presidential candidates is $419,882,145, of which $266,116,024 has already been spent (Based on data released by the FEC on Tuesday, January 22, 2008).

    It’s made the public financing system useless, since all the major candidates have avoided because of the spending limits involved.

    $266,116,024

    $153,796,461

    $2,892,953

    Dems

    8

    $244,545,190

    $133,670,909

    $110,874,674

    $1,629,523

    $224,017,871

    Repubs

    10

    $175,336,955

    $132,445,115

    $42,921,787

    $1,263,430

    $151,378,112

    JayHub (0a6237)

  14. Oops, sorry for those extra irrelvant numbers at the end of my post. It’s more specific data I did not include in the post. If you’re interested, the link to the full info is here:

    http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/stats.asp?cycle=2008

    JayHub (0a6237)

  15. “But once you have a few hundred million, does money matter?”

    I’ll be sure to let you know!

    Of course its all relative but $47M to become POTUS vs. $47M in a third world country’s budget and what that might provide….

    Dana (b4a26c)

  16. Just FYI, it was reported today that Obama raised $32 million in the month of January, which is the reportedly the largest amount raised in one month by a presidential candidate who still faced a primary challenge. Obama’s campaign manager said the campaign attracted 170,000 new donors.

    JayHub (0a6237)

  17. my question is: was he planning on throwing these elections until this was published? you’d think that ad campaigns would be thought out a bit farther in advance…..

    redc1c4 (48a20b)

  18. If they’re going to have public financing, they should make it mandatory to participate in the spending limits during the primaries if the candidates want the public money for the general election–most candidates can’t afford to pass up that funding for both rounds, and it will get rid of the game-playing in this area. Other types of game-playing, of course, will remain.

    M. Scott Eiland (b66190)

  19. Sorry for the cryptic name, but as this is a political post (on work time), I don’t want to post under anything but a cybername.

    The way I look at it is that if the Republican party nominates McCain, I might not vote Republican for the first time in 12 years. I most certainly won’t vote for Clinton, but I won’t vote for McCain either. When looking at a Presidential candidate, one of the first questions I must ask myself is, “is this the person I want negotiating with foreign powers?” I am concerned with the image that our President sends to the rest of the world, particularly the free world, and McCain would only worsen our international image in my opinion.

    Though I have never been rich, I disagree with him on campaign finance. Though I am not a member of the “Christian Coalition,” I disagree with his dismissiveness of them in 2000. He seems to like them now though, so much for “sticking to his convictions.” Though I agree with needing comprehensive immigration reform, I believe he is pandering when he talks about it.

    He was not the leader I wanted in 2000, and nothing has changed since then.

    Romney had to work hard to earn any of my confidence as a leader. I found his “I am a Mormon and I’m Okay” speech lackluster. But he has worked hard and has convinced me that despite our policy differences, he is who I desire. I believe that if he and I were to discuss policy, we could come to some compromise. With McCain, it would by either his way or the highway.

    Unlike Morrissey, I would be excited to support Romney.

    Someone Patterico Will Talk to Tomorow Night (babcd1)

  20. SAY NO TO McCAIN! John McCain is a traitor. He actively subverts The Constitution of the United States of America and he has traded the welfare of our entire nation for his own self-gratification.

    McCain is a Democrat… NO! He’s worse than a Democrat because he is so utterly dishonest that he refuses to call himself what he is: a freaking creep who has been “Fixing” Washington for decades. He is a Hillary Clinton impersonator and he is so immoral that he gladly surrenders ANY principle in his zeal to grab the ankles for the Democrats.

    AND NO! JOHN McCAIN CANNOT WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION.

    Dr Lead Based Pain (fd2917)

  21. I am no John McCain defender, but I don’t want to see anyone on this site calling him or any other candidate a traitor. That is absurd and I won’t tolerate it.

    Patterico (0ebbec)

  22. Since my first two choices are now out, another reason in addition to the disaster preparedness principle within the Mormon religion why I can see Romney would be an effective War President, he is the only candidate running who calls the enemy by their name: Islamic fascists.

    Takes some brass balls to openly confront that PC crowd.

    syn (95c574)

  23. well kidz, its looking like McCain, like it or not. although not my 1st or 2nd choice, i’ll still vote for him as theres no doubt for me thats he’s far superior to either clinton/obama. McCain will probably lose some conservative votes but the question then becomes, can he pull in enough independ/dems to win?

    james conrad (7cd809)

  24. considering the dem field, i say yes, yes he can.

    james conrad (7cd809)

  25. McCain has been too consistently on the wrong side of everything except the war on terror. Immigration, border security, 2nd amendment, spending, small government, judicial nominee’s, etc. When I hear the liberal lawyers that I work with crowing about how they will be happy with any of the three Democratic nominees, and they are talking about Clinton, Obama and MaCain, I just know we are sunk as a country.

    Since my two favorites are out, I will vote for Romney. If MaCain wins the nomination, I don’t know what I will do except that I refuse to vote for McCain. I won’t sink that low.

    I think the biggest problem we have with elections in this country is that a handful of liberals control most of the MSM. They then decide who will get air time and coverage which goes a long way to deciding who gets to be in the general election. There is simply no way that any candidate could buy enough air time to compete with all the free publicity provided by the MSM to the more liberal candidates. In effect, the MSM is the biggest lobbying special interest involved in our elections process.

    Jay Curtis (8f6541)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2940 secs.