Former Colorado Governor Bill Owens endorsed Romney on Hugh’s show on Thursday.
Hugh stated that he would not endorse Romney even as he placed Mitt at the top of his rankings, which he described as being akin to pre-season NCAA football rankings before any games are played. Hugh ranked the candidates thus:
1-Mitt Romney
2-Rudy Giuliani
3-Sam Brownback
4-Tommy Thompson
5-Duncan Hunter
6-John McCain
These rankings were made during a monologue in which Hugh described Mitt as the strongest candidate and Rudy and Sam?as fine candidates, either of which could well be the nominee, and good ones. And while most of the monologue focused on McCain’s recent Vanity Fair and Bill Bennett Show?interview implosions, the fact that so prominent a conservative as Hugh Hewitt thinks so highly of former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson and California Congressman Duncan Hunter, surely gives them needed boosts in their quest for credibility in their respective campaign quests.
However, despite Hugh’s general disdain for a McCain candidacy, he did praise the Arizona Senator’s “full-throated” warning to the Mullahs.
#quot;One man with courage makes a majority.#quot; – Andrew Jackson
January 7th, 2007 at 7:31 am
I think Hewitt’s hatred for McCain may be clouding his judgement just a little. To rank McCain below Brownback? Even below Duncan Hunter? Come on. Hewitt does a lot of “cover his you-know-what” qualifying about his rankings so maybe even he doesn’t quite believe it. Maybe this list is not where he thinks the candidates stand at this early point in the campaign, but simply just how Hewitt himself feels about each one personally. If that’s the case, it’s a pointless ranking that means about as much as the ranking of GOP candidates by Democrats in the MSM.
Also, Gov. Owens didn’t exactly come out full swinging for Romney. In fact, he made sure that was clear. What he said was that he wants a winner, and he thinks Romney is one. But he also thinks McCain is a winner, and an acceptable candidate. That’s an important part of the interview…
Owens: I think that Mitt Romney’s a conservative, and I think he can win. But I also like John McCain. I’m not being political here. I’m not one of these anti-McCain people. I want a winner, and somebody that’s going to be with me 80% of the time, both of them would be, and I’m for Romney, but not against McCain.
I think what Owens says is how most in the GOP feel. McCain is an acceptable candidate, but there are others out there as good or maybe better. I think we’re fortunate in 2008 to have so many good, qualified Conservative candidates out there (and I include Romney, McCain and Giuliani in that group).
One other thing: I’m a little skeptical of the thoughts about the current field of candidates by a guy who is writing a book about one of those candidates. Hewitt’s goal is to sell books. Nothing wrong with that. But it skews any objective thoughts – good or bad – he has of Romney or any of his opponents. (Would we ever expect him to say “Romney’s ideas aren’t any good and he’d make a bad president. Now read my book about this 4th ranked candidate.”) Being subjective would be ok too, except that Hewitt himself stresses in the same article how open he is to the other candidates. I don’t believe him, I just don’t put much faith into his opinions anymore.
January 7th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Well, Owens has joined one of Romney’s advisory boards, so I think it’s safe to say that did, in fact, constitute an endorsement.
January 7th, 2007 at 7:59 am
Yes but my point is that Owens hasn’t come out against McCain the way Hewitt has done (or wishes he did). Hewitt has a obvious dislike for McCain that I think affects his overall judgement. Owens may be on Romney’s team, but he’s not supporting Romney at the expense of everyone else, and seems to go out of his way to say that he doesn’t hate McCain but in fact would be ok with a McCain candidacy. This early in the campaign, that’s an important point to make.
January 7th, 2007 at 9:28 am
Hewitt’s good judgment compels him to dislike McCain based on McCain’s statements, policies, votes and actions since 2000.
January 7th, 2007 at 9:38 am
I disagree, although I love your reasoning. After all, my good judgement compels me to dislike Hilary based on statements, policies, votes and actions since 1992, but I wouldn’t place her in 6th place below such Democrats as Denis Kucinich and Wesley Clark. You can disagree with someone, even dislike someone, but still remain realistic of the situation. Thinking McCain is in worse shape than Hunter tells me that Hewitt needs to reexamine his thinking process.
January 7th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Hugh characterized his list as akin to pre-season picks in sports, not as a present day snapshot of who would win if the election were held today. He takes the same attitude I did when I issued my first “power rankings” here at Race 4 2008. See link below.
Given that elections are held only after campaigns, and not “today”, power rankings serve a different purpose. Essentially what Hugh is doing is predicting who will win on Election Day 2008.
I wrote this in August when I placed Mccain 12th! (Let’s ignore the pre-macaca Allen!):
http://race42008.com/2006/08/19/power-rankings-20-continued-gamecocks-turn/
1. George Allen
Allen is the most reliable candidate on conservative base issues across the board, which is hard to achieve as a Senator. He maintains an executive attitude being an ex-governor, and as such, has been solid in his support of executive power in war. He is a likeable southerner, like Clinton and Dubya.
2. Mitt Romney
Romney is also reliable on most issues with proven executive leadership ability in the bluest of states. I suspect that his fate will be determined more by the success of his health care experiment than his Mormon faith.
3. Rudy Giuliani
Great leadership results in a time of war and in making NYC a livable city in peacetime. He inspires confidence.
4. Newt Gingrich
The smartest ideas guy conservatives have in public life. Has been the closest to what most Americans want to hear about the war than anyone. He handles the liberal media better than anyone. He articulates the Reagan message and abides no liberal known fact nonsense. Strong on border security forts.
5. Mike Huckabee
Seeing him speak in Spartanburg, SC last year convinces me he has what it takes on the war and he is very inspirational speaker and quick on his feet.
6. Sam Brownback
Fine man. Doesn’t inspire confidence.
7. Bill Frist
The poster child for why senators rarely win.
8. Tom Tancredo
One issue ain’t enough
9. George Pataki
Terrible speaking voice
10. Condi Rice
Only chance would be a draft.
11. John McCain
Better than Hagel.
12. Chuck Hagel
January 7th, 2007 at 10:36 am
I meant 11th Place, Jake
But I hope that my August ratings lends insight into Hugh’s thinking prcess. He is picking handicaps to win, not the current situation.
January 7th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Hugh Hewitt was flat-out wrong about the mid-term elections, and responded by blaming the GOP’s losses on John McCain. And if I remember correctly, he downplayed Rick Santorum being voted out by arguing that it would finally make him available for a spot on the SCOTUS. I’d be more interested to read Rush Limbaugh’s 2008 rankings.
January 7th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Rush has hinted he likes Romney, Newt and Giuliani. I suspect he likes Newt the best. I am a 24/7 member and have been a regular listener since the early 90s when I was democrat but always have enjoyed the show and have increasingly agreed with him until I had the conservative epiphany in 2000.
Its harder to predict a year 6 congressional election that presidential elections obviously.
I picked Allen pre-macaca and had Romney 2nd.
I now think Giuliani will be the nominee, for what its worth.
January 7th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
I was being facetious, Gamecock
January 7th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
You completely negate your credibility when you put Duncan Hunter ahead of McCain. That’s a guy with a vendetta not a serious ranking…
January 7th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Caucus C
My rankings, and Hugh’s are not present day snapshots of who would win today. They are predictions, ods, if you will. I think McCain has next to no chance of winning the omination, hence…
January 7th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Thanks Hunter
You bagged more prey!
DeVineLaw
January 7th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Although I consider McCain a serious contender, I think Hewitt’s point here is that there are many conservatives that have serious problems supporting McCain. That can’t be ignored. McCain’s credibility was bolstered significantly by the independents in the 2000 primaries. You must have support from the conservatives to win the primary. I don’t know what it is with McCain, just seems as if there are many Washington insiders who dislike the man. Must have burned too many bridges or something.
I do think Romney is a strong candidate with greater potential than what many give him credit for. He is conservative. He has major accomplishments to tout. He has organization, money, and the endorsements are starting very early. Furthermore, the man is an excellent speaker. I’ve not seen or heard anyone speak or articulate as good as Romney does since Regan.
I’ll be interested to see what other conservatives come out with. It is still early, but for now – it is Romney by default.
January 7th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
I’ve not seen or heard anyone speak or articulate as good as Romney does since Regan.
Oh, the irony.
January 7th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
What a boob.
January 7th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Gamecock,
I think McCain has next to no chance of winning the omination, hence…
Hey there. I unfortunately can’t let this one go unanswered. If McCain is so reviled by conservatives, why is he consistently either first or a close second in every 2008 poll? He polls ahead of Rudy in South Carolina, for heaven’s sake! Even after everything that happened there in 2000…
I understand that you very much dislike McCain. There’s nothing I, or McCain, can probably do to change that, but it’s another thing to deny the reality that McCain enjoys significant support within the Republican base. It’d be like me ranking Mitt Romney below Duncan Hunter. I don’t really like Mitt at all, but I can definitely understand his strength within the base and his impact on the rest of the contenders.
January 7th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Oh the embarrassment! I typed that up fast without any proof-reading. I am relatively new to this sort of thing. I hope the board can accept the point despite the incorrect grammar. It is pretty funny..
January 7th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
What I am saying (and addmittedly grossly overstated) LJ (and thanks for chastising me so gently!) is that I don’t think he will win the nomination.
more later!
I seem to have the Seinfeldian ElaineBenesExclamationPoint disease.
Let us pray.
January 7th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Gamecock,
Hehe, no problem. I figured that’s what you meant. I look forward to seeing what you say about my recent post on Rudy.
January 7th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
There are things I am just not seeing here. Maybe the problem is the fact that I am a dyslexic kindergarten drop-out, but I just don’t see a Romney ‘juggernaut’. He can’t break 6-8% nationally so how can he be leading anyone’s poll. Frankly, the way it looks to me, Hewitt would put the Ghost of Saddam in a top ranking if he pandered right the right way.
January 7th, 2007 at 9:05 pm
haha, cwpete, don’t worry about it. It happens; i wasn’t making fun of you, I just thought it was ironic seeing as you were discussing articulation and speaking skills =)
January 7th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Hugh who always lambasts the media for not acknowledging their bias has really stepped off an ethical cliff. He says he is not endorsing Mitt but writes a rave book, admits he was on the fund raising list, defends every move Romeny makes and comes up with this screwy rating. He should be honest like some at NRO, say he is backing Romeny and get on with it.
January 7th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Most definetly a bit premature. By the way, how on God’s green earth does Hewitt rank Hunter ahead of Huckabee?
“1-Mitt Romney
2-Rudy Giuliani
3-Sam Brownback
4-Tommy Thompson
5-Duncan Hunter
6-John McCain”
January 7th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Peter is right. The whole thing is laughable. Remember Hugh was the guy who defended Harriet M. for the supreme court.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:26 am
Latest Rasmussen poll, Romney loses hugely to every democrat in the general election.m
January 8th, 2007 at 10:28 am
Romney polls now just as a generic Republican against a known Democrat. With the GOP unpopular today, of course he loses to the Democrats in polls. It’s meaningless.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:52 am
Mark, you are right. Once people figure out all his flip flops he’ll do a lot worse.
January 8th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Highly unlikely Virginian. Virtually every person I’ve heard of who’s encountered Romney personally, or had substantial exposure to speeches he’s given, has come away very favorably impressed. Massachusetts voters are antipathic towards him for reasons entirely unrelated to his accomplishments, personableness, or charisma; they dislike it when their Republican governors flee the state. Fortunately they’ve fixed that this go around by electing a governor who’ll cause the state (the people) to flee him. Everywhere else, Romney plays significantly better with increased exposure.
January 8th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Which is why, from what I’ve read, he’s in the process of pulling in a tremendous amount of money in his first fundraising drive today. Don’t be surprised if he triple’s Giuliani’s first effort.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Polls are always meaningless when your candidate is doing poorly.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Polls are also meaningless when they’re taken prior to serious campaigning, debates, or public exposure.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Perhaps, Gormley, but I think the bigger question is the context that polls exist in. I was a huge McCain supporter (and still admire him a great deal) until Romney won me over. And McCain always performed, and continues to perform, well in national polls of potential Republican nominees. But even then, I was aware that the poll hid significant weaknesses in McCain’s Republican position. They reflected on the one hand, name recognition, and on the other hand, a aura of electability. They did not reflect anything about what the other 70% of voters thought of McCain, or the extreme animosity I’d witnessed towards him in the Republican rank and file. So when I considered McCain’s standing, I took into the consideration context factors such as those. When I view Romney’s candidacy at this juncture, I consider similar context factors. But in his case, virtually every piece of context favors his future rise. News stories about him have been overwhelmingly negative thus far, and have harped on his Mormonism. There’s virtually no reason for a reasonable person to expect the public to like Romney: yet. The poll then reflects the effects of a concerted attempt by the MSM to derail his candidacy, and a general lack of name recognition. It does not reflect the fact that he has a history of winning over moderates and liberals. And it reflects virtually nothing about his actual accomplishments, or history. I would say this about men like Huckabee and Brownback as well. They’re currently in a position where there national perception can only improve. The difference between the 3 candidates is, Romney is coming into this election cycle with a fundraising apparatus that dwarves the other two. It is safe to say that the Business community loves governor Romney. Therefore, he has the means to turn the potential into the actual. I’m extremely reluctant to say the same about the other two.
January 8th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
I agree that large numbers of the Republican rank and file hate McCain. But it will take two years for Romney to get to Giuliani’s and McCain’s level if he ever gets there. It is always good to start with popularity. Polls can change but they are not meaningless.
January 8th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Brownback is about to go after Romney as seen by his press release today and list of Mass. Right to Life supporters. The drip, drip drip of more flip flop revelations, the specter of old news footage running on the ever accessible YouTube and the inevitable parade of “disappointed” staffers and activists will be too much for Romney to overcome I think. Eventually it will get down to McCain and Rudy.
January 8th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
That’s the most retarted list I’ve seen on the 2008 election.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:55 pm
Virginian,
I’ve seen that information regarding the Mass. Right to Life supporters backing Brownback. Brownback is Catholic right, most of the Right to Life conservatives are probably also Catholic – Right? Could it be a religion thing?
It is way too early to draw any definite conclusions at this point. It is all fun & games for now..
January 8th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
I don’t think it has anything to do with religion. I think Romeny pitched himself as their true and faithful friend and when the explanation of his Mr. Toad wild ride through social issues got out they got suspicious and mad. That I think is what is going on. I bet you a nickel the same thing happens in Iowa.