Posts Tagged ‘tommy oliver’

“Mitt Romney poured twice as much of his own money into his campaign than he received from all outside donors combined in the final months of last year, according to new campaign finance reports,” reports Elana Schor in a release titled New finance reports show Romney’s fundraising fell short

Romney, scrambling to knock John McCain from the frontrunner’s pedestal in the Republican presidential race, spent $18m from his personal fortune during the fourth quarter of 2007.His contributions from other sources during that period totaled $9.1m, as listed in financial records that all campaigns were required to release by today […]

Team Romney itself attempts to mitigate by attenuation their crashing contributions, and increasing use of Romney’s vast personal fortune, by framing their ongoing financial disaster, and fantastically low ROI for their every campaign dollar, in a larger context:

BOSTON, Jan 31, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ — Today, Romney for President announced it reported over $27 million in total receipts for the Fourth Quarter, ending December 31, 2007. The Campaign again opted to raise no general election funds and reported $9 million in primary contributions. The total receipts include Governor Romney’s loan of $18 million.

For the entire year, Romney for President had total receipts of $90 million. In the past month, Governor Romney’s message of conservative change in Washington has resonated with people across this country. Governor Romney has won three states, placed a strong second in another three and had a strong showing in South Carolina […]

Here is the problem for Team Romney: the larger context that Team Romney wants you to consider only casts in sharper relief

(a) just how much the Romneys have spent for so little, and how little Romney’s competitors have spent for so much


(b) just how drastically Romney’s receipts have declined relative to his spending—hence, Romney’s self-financing.

Tommy Oliver of, however, points out that Romney has “tie[d] Fred Thompson for 3rd place this quarter in contributions.”

yours &c.
dr. g.d.


… “Strict Federalism. Romney says that a “one-size-fits-all approach is wrong,'” writes the estimable Tommy Oliver quoting the person of his serene and most-high majesty, the aloof and imperious Willard Milton Romney himself, in a post titled, appropriately, Mitt Romney’s Social Distortion

That he would say “one-size-fits-all” when making a statement about Roe vs. Wade, but then turn around a support the Human Life Amendment, is very unlikely, at least on that date.

What happened? Only Governor Romney really knows, but it’s a direct contradiction that dates from 2007, not 1994 or 2002. Other than saying he wouldn’t overturn the platform in his ABC interview, he didn’t say that he would support a Human Life Amendment. If he has said that since, it easily could have been a political calculation … etc.

Just so. This is normally where we would insert unflattering remarks about Kevin Madden. But not today. Today we want to salute the man for his heroic efforts to clarify what cannot be clarified. It cannot be easy trying to be Romney’s communications director. Here was our far less thorough or refined take on this issue:

Romney’s Madden: Romney wants it both ways on the question of abortion and the prerogatives of federalism

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

P.S. Whatever happened to Social Distortion? We used to love that group. Good times.

“Klein hits on the prime issue regarding Romney and the NRLC. Romney, for all his business skill, is too good of a salesman. People watch his debates from 1994 and 2002 and don’t just see someone promising to uphold the law, but someone who is not only persuasive, but passionate and convincing. Now, fast forward to this year, you have Romney passionately and convincingly arguing for the pro life cause,” writes the estimable Tommy Oliver as he attempts to divine the intentions of the NRLC board of governors in a post titled National Right to Life Committee to Endorse Fred Thompson, Here [be] why ...

eye of, OTOH, speculates on the meaning of the endorsement itself in a post titled NRLC goes with Fred Thompson

… It has been conventional wisdom for a while that Romney and Thompson are fighting over the same voters. You can expect the mailboxes and phones of those voters to light up with detailed explanations of why Mitt Romney is not the right man to be president, or at least our nominee. From a very credible outside group. I have long asked who is actually going to attack Romney. We have our answer. In the end, this will move numbers.

On a deeper level, though, one wonders if this is a split in the conservative movement. With so many people going so many different ways, a shatter seems inevitable. There are a number of endorsements left, but you almost wonder if this is a direct challenge to James Dobson. Does Dobson dare to come out now, challenging NRLC and setting up a deep split? After all, Dobson actually can move votes and money, as can NRLC. But if the ultimate goal is to stop Rudy, then perhaps they need, at least, implicit agreement.

The other question is what happens if Romney really fights for this turf. Can he undermine the interest groups? Can he go back to his pragmatic self after his strange rightward lurch[?] …. etc.

Team Romney has failed at every task it set for itself—e.g. it has failed to secure its right flank, and it has failed to consolidate the religious right. It clings tenaciously to its “early state” strategy, but this move by the NRLC—a move that “has juice” according to eye, as it comes with money, volunteers, and organizational resources on the ground—could effectively open another front for Romney in Iowa and even New Hampshire, especially if it forces Dr. Dobson’s hand.

Fascinating, wouldn’t you say? Why, it’s almost as if Romney faces a rival who has mastered the art of dividing his opposition. But no, this couldn’t be. A far simpler hypothesis: Romney has failed, and continues to fail, to make his case.

but still

how hizzoner brings the fight to Romney—Romney caught in a punic pincer

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

P.S. Also see:

Giuliani can win without S.C., campaign says—yes, OK, this is true on its face, but here is what the campaign is not telling you—they are active in the early states, including SC, only indirectly, as evidenced above. To understand the former Mayor of NYC, you need to understand the Byzantine character of NYC politics and the art of balancing players off of one another. Romney, the data-driven, linear-thinker, now faces his point-for-point antithesis. Romney has no idea what he’s up against.

“Creating the aura of inevitability can sometimes come back to haunt you,” observes the estimable and expansive Tommy Oliver in a post titled Romney’s Strange Day

Governor Romney’s had one of those days. First, he unveils an economic plan, which gets more attention for it’s weird title than it’s details. Secondly, He commits a gaffe while campaigning today in South Carolina. By itself, it’s no big deal, but more on that later.

Finally, Romney lost an endorsement that he apparently never had in the first place. Now, for the record, I don’t like to dwell upon the mishaps of the competitors of my preferred choice for the GOP nomination, but when your competitors like to dwell on your missteps, it’s part of the fun.

Romney apparently jumped the gun by announcing an endorsement from Dr. Bob Wilton last week … etc., etc.

This follows on the heels of Team Romney’s Weekend from Hell:

Team Romney’s weekend from hell—will it prompt Romney to reflect and review?—history would predict: probably not

yours &c.
dr. g.d.