Mitt Romney will be in Sioux Falls, SD February 19 to headline a fundraiser for John Thune. The news has really started the speculation buzzing. Thune is a popular Republican Senator in a fairly conservative state who already has a sizable $6M warchest with few if any real credible Democrat opponents in sight. To make things more interesting, Thune is getting more and more play as a possible 2012 Presidential candidate.
Thune’s campaign manager had this to say:
“Sen. Thune has been through 2 grueling and very expensive Senate races, and if there is one lesson he took away from those contests it’s that you can never be too prepared.”
Nor can you have too few high-profile endorsements, I might add. For Mitt, the very least that happens is he picks up another IOU from a prominent Republican. The facts that that Republican’s home is next door to Iowa and that Sioux Falls shares a media market with the conservative enclave of Sioux City, IA only sweeten the deal.
Will Mitt pop down and visit the state which holds the first caucus of 2012?
Stay tuned.
February 3rd, 2010 at 7:49 pm
Why are they standing so far apart? Just kidding. This is a very buzz-worthy item given the much talk about Thune being a 2012 dark horse.
February 3rd, 2010 at 7:52 pm
Why not have the guy who can raise more money than any other Republican.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:00 pm
@Pablo Who would that be?
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:04 pm
3. Romney, my friend.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:07 pm
3. I see now the way I said that you could not tell that I was talking about Romney.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:12 pm
Romney just keeps up racking up those IOUs. One can be sure that come 2012, he will be looking to cash those in. Having Thune on his side could make a potential opponent into an ally. Smart move.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:22 pm
@Pablo Yeah, a second there I thought you were a little deluded. Now I know you are perfectly sane.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:27 pm
Does this mean that he’s not writing off Iowa?
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Romney Thune would be a heck of a ticket. Again, Romney’s biggest headache is going to be differentiating what he did in MA from what Dems are trying to do nationally on healthcare. I’m not saying he doesn’t hae a legit case, but he needs to get what he’s going to say down now.
My recommendation: admit he “made some mistakes” with the Massachsetts plan. Politicians never admit mistakes, and I think that’s a weakness actually. Romney showing he can learn from the past won’t hurt him, particularly in contrast with Obama, or whom nothing is ever his fault.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:29 pm
8. I hope not. I think that only chance he has at SC, is if he wins Iowa and NH. He can still win without Iowa and SC, but it sure would make it a lot easier.
The next best scenario is if Palin wins Iowa and scares the living crap out of the establishment. It will then be a Romney vs. Palin, an outcome of which I think will be favorable to Romney.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:30 pm
Ugh, sorry for the typos: my screen-reading software is acting up.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:32 pm
9. I think he needs to continue the federalism argument. Conservatism used to mean that the we shrink the federal government and we let states take care of their own problems. At least that was Reagan conservatism. It also happens to be the 10th amendment to the Constitution. This is what Romney has been arguing.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:37 pm
Mitt’s in Iowa on March 29th. Des Moines and Ames I believe.
February 3rd, 2010 at 8:44 pm
Thanks Kavon,
Romney is doing everything that a future candidate would be doing, except attending the SRLC (Southern Republican Leadership Conference). What’s the story there? Have you heard anything?
It has caused me to move Mitt from 100% for sure is running to 80% maybe he is running. I just don’t understand it.
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:08 pm
14. I’ve been wondering the same, especially since I’m attending.
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:17 pm
#14 it will be interesting to see how Mitt does at the SRLC straw poll since he won’t be present. It will be pretty staggering if he does well at all.
I wonder if Mitt had book tour events to attend or some family event he couldn’t miss?
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:28 pm
@Dan I’m not sure if he even invited. Do you have to be southern to be invited to the SRLC?
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:29 pm
@Mark I see Kavon already answered you question, but FYI we are keeping a running tab on the book tour news and dates at MRC at http://bit.ly/RomneyBook
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:30 pm
He was invited. The SRLC website listed him among the invitees.
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:38 pm
The SRLC is being held between April 8 – 11. The latest date listed for Mitt’s Book Tour is March 31st in Nashville, TN. That would give Mitt more than a week to rest up and prepare for the SRLC.
I still do not understand why Mitt is skipping the SRLC. He did extraordinarily well there four years ago. In fact, it was his good showing last time that really helped put him on the national map.
It was supposed to be all Bill Frist. Frist did win the poll, but the fact that Yankee Mitt Romney from Massachusetts of all people, placed a strong second really caused some heads to turn.
So why is he bypassing it this time around?
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:54 pm
Thune seems like a good candidate foe leadership, despite David Brook’s endorsement.
February 3rd, 2010 at 10:08 pm
20. As a Mitt fan, I have to admit that he would not do very well at the SRLC. You really think he is going to come close to beating Huck and Palin in the South in a straw poll. It is the same reason why Palin isn’t showing at CPAC (among other petty reasons). She doesn’t want to get shown up by another Romney victory. I really wish Romney would go to SRLC even if it meant losing bad in the straw poll. He needs to show Southerners that he is competing for them too.
February 3rd, 2010 at 10:28 pm
We welcome Mitt to the convention.
As a matter of fact, he was kindly and properly invited. He said no. Why, who knows? Maybe, he doesn’t like us.
February 3rd, 2010 at 10:47 pm
I have a difficult time believing that Mitt Romney, or any of the top tier candidates would shy away from a major conclave like the SRLC just because they might not do so well in the straw poll. If a straw poll might frighten them, then they have no business running as President.
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:00 pm
I hope he reconsiders and changes his mind? It’s the South for heaven’s sake. We don’t bite. Hard.
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:02 pm
24. You might be right. Just speculation.
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:03 pm
We’ll save him a couple seats, maybe put his book out if he’d like. Please join us, Mitt. Be brave. Let’s put our differences aside and defeat Obama.
Ok?
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:19 pm
I would guess that Thune was the one to make the invitation. Does a guy like Romney beg for chances to come raise money for folks? It would be strange for Thune to be simultaneously plotting a run at the WH and getting too cozy with a guy who likely attracts the same voters. Has Thune invited Pawlenty to fund raise for him? Or anybody else who is being mentioned as a possible 2012 contestant?
February 4th, 2010 at 12:28 am
I bet that is exactly why Mitt isn’t going to the SRLC Convention…he would lose to Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin in the straw poll. BTW, Mike Huckabee said he wouldn’t attend the CPAC event back in December, 2009 before Sarah decided to skip it. Of course I wonder if that is the same reason they don’t attend CPAC.
I also think Mitt Romney is very politically savvy and having a fundraiser for Thune would help give him the money to enter the Presidential 2012 campaign. Mitt Romney wants all the Christian candidates in that race as possible to split votes that would go to Huckabee or Sarah and thus give him more opportunity to win some states he might not otherwise win. I’m sure he wants Huckabee to run so he can win in Iowa (taking it away from Sarah) and maybe South Carolina. Unfortunately, he thinks Mike Huckabee’s showing in Florida last time means he’s not competitive in Florida. Of course Sean Hannity helped in that respect by telling listeners on his radio and TV programs every day that Mike Huckabee wasn’t running in Florida. When Mike Huckabee started campaigning there it was too late because he ran into lots of people who said they thought he wasn’t running. With his lack of finances, he couldn’t get the message out to enough people in Florida to correct that information. He also was looking ahead and visiting states like GA and AL which I’m sure you all know, he placed first on Super Tuesday. Mitt Romney knows what he’s doing with this “help” to Thune. He knows Thune doesn’t give him any competition, so if it can help him with splitting his rival candidates’ vote, why not! What Mitt Romney should be wary of is Rudy Guiliani because he would take Mitt’s votes away. If Rudy would run, he might win NY and that would KILL Romney.
Mitt Romney is trying to get the Independent and moderate voters, so he doesn’t want to go to the SRLC and have to talk about religion to reporters or anybody else. Just like in the VV Conference, he made a speech to the Christians there without mentioning anything about Christianity in his speech. Many people commented about that…but it goes along with what Mitt is trying to do…follow John McCain’s roadmap in 2008 to win the Republican nomination, and that’s to stay away from religious talk because that would turn the Independent voters away from him.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:44 am
29. Strange that a candidate would be expected to talk about Christianity at any time. Isn’t a POTUS Prez of all, not just Christians?
February 4th, 2010 at 1:52 am
Oh the games Romney plays.
You.ve gotta admit he’s a lovable everchanging chameleon. And that counts for something.
February 4th, 2010 at 2:46 am
Vote for Truth,
Your post reminds me of this little exchange of dialogue from the TV show M*A*S*H:
February 4th, 2010 at 4:10 am
S&M Superstars,
Actually, I’ve been following Mitt’s career ever since 1994 when he ran against Ted Kennedy. He really has not changed his stances that much — save for abortion. The idea of him being a chameleon / flip-flopper is mainly just the stuff of urban legend. The problem he has is he tends to stake out positions between the extremes, and his opponents use that against him.
Take Gun Control as an example. Mitt believes strongly in the use of firearms for self-defense, hunting, and sports. He is against so-called assault weapons. So when bills come up strengthening the right to hunt or the right to self-defense, he supports them. If the bills strengthen the ban on assault weapons, he supports them. If a bill comes up that tries to classify revolvers as assault weapons he opposes them. Since he doesn’t support all gun controls all the time, and because he isn’t against all gun controls all of the time, his opponents use that and claim that he flip flops. He does no such thing, but that is the way they paint it.
Gay rights is another. He is for civil rights for homosexuals such as freedom of employment, housing, education, etc. Always has been. He is against same sex marriage. Always has been. However, because he doesn’t support all the homosexual agenda all the time, or oppose all of their agenda all the time, his opponents take that and try to paint him as a flip-flopper.
I could go on through every issue that he has supposedly flip-flopped on. The only exception is abortion. In that he has changed his stance significantly. And even here, his detractors claim that he had a sudden change of heart in 2006, just in time to run for President. Poppy-cock. You can easily trace over time where he has gone from a firm pro-choice position to neutral to pro-life. It has taken a number of years for it to happen, but he has evolved to a fairly firm pro-life position. Is he against all abortions all the time? I’m not sure. I believe he still holds to the exceptions of rape, incest, and the life of the mother; but don’t quote me on that.
So while I will agree with you that Romney is indeed lovable, he truly is no chameleon, no matter what some people say. And in the one issue that he has changed significantly, it has always been in one direction, towards pro-life.
Now ask yourself, if Romney is such a chameleon, panderer, flip-flopper, political opportunist, what have you, why hasn’t he tried to distance himself from MassCare now that Governmental Mandates have become so unpopular? Countless people have tried to persuade him to “admit his mistake” or at least “blame it on the Democrats that followed him”. He hasn’t done it. He has continued to support MassCare in the face of a great deal of criticism from the right. He refuses to disown it. His stance could easily cost him the 2012 nomination, yet he persists in supporting MassCare.
Does that sound like the actions of a political “weather-vane” to you?
February 4th, 2010 at 5:39 am
33. I guess in politics, “the end justifies the means” for people who gratuitously use those labels against Mitt, meaning it’s ok to be dishonest regarding other candidates as long as it might somehow benefit your own. And before the whining starts, yes there’s dishonest painting of Huck and Sarah as well going on out there. Whether that justifies one’s own dishonesty is something only each individual can really decide for themselves. “It’s called campaigning”. Sure. Ok.
February 4th, 2010 at 10:27 am
31. As is your penchant, you see things as you want them to be. I’m not sure if you are that naive or if you really are bearing false witness. If the former, then get out of the dorm room and get a little depth. If the latter, then the consequence should be as spelled out in Deut. 19:15-19.
February 4th, 2010 at 10:48 am
MarK in #33……..Like you, I have been following Mitt a long time and agree 100% with your statement. However, I’m convinced that for a majority of people, the “flip-flopper” meme is just an easy excuse for their real problem.
Case in Point…#29 Vote for Truth….What’s all this Mitt against the Christians garbage talk?
I could go on and analyize that poster’s statements, but it would be a waste of time. The objective folks already know it doesn’t pass the smell test and the other folks are busy with their hands over their eyes and ears.
Maybe “Mr. Vote for Truth” can explain to us which of the candidates in 2008 didn’t claim to be a Christian?
But apparently “Vote for Truth” only thinks Huckabee and Palin are Christians……very interesting…
February 4th, 2010 at 1:26 pm
“If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will.”
(Abraham Lincoln)
February 4th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
I understand some of the points mentioned as to why Mitt is raising money for Thune. IOUs will be useful. But it seems surprising that Mitt is raising money for a possible Presidential bid for a rival. Could this indicate that Mitt isn’t going to run in 2012 (I hope not)? An alternative could be that Thune isn’t running in 2012, but then I can’t see why he is bothering to raise so much money for a re-election that should be relatively straight-forward.
I’m puzzled.
February 4th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
same.same,
In the short term Thune wins with more money in his coffers and being linked to an important GOP personage. Romney wins by being linked to a popular conservative Senator and having face time with him in a state close to Iowa.
In the long term, Romney and Thune could be taking steps to assure that if they DO end up as rivals for the 2012 Presidential nomination, it will be a friendly rivalry. The less nasty the 2012 GOP nomination campaign is, the better.
Perhaps Thune has confided to Mitt that he isn’t the least bit interested in the Presidency in 2012. Romney has a sterling reputation for being discrete about such matters, so it wouldn’t surprise me if he has. Then this fundraiser makes even more sense.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
Thanks for your response marK (I am a Mark in real life!).
I was hoping for an answer like that. I do find it hard to read politicians’ intentions with regards to the presidency. Certainly Romney and Thune make a great team.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:40 pm
We have all witnessed what “Obamanomics” can do for our economy. Red flags are everywhere! Thune and Romney together is appealing. As for missing the SRLC, I am certain Romney has his reasons. Some of the 2007 debates were ridiculous with Bible validity questions, etc.
In my opinion, Romney was by far the most qualified candidate for 2008, and still is for 2012. No one comes close to his sucess in public or private endeavors. By skipping SRLC he avoids Sarah’s rock star status and Huckabee’s religious litmus test.
If GOP voters hope to re-take the WH, they will need independents & tea partyers to solidify behing ONE candidate who can defeat Obama and his left-wing philosophy.
February 4th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Bill:“By skipping SRLC he avoids Sarah’s rock star status and Huckabee’s religious litmus test.”
That smacks of Rudy Giuliani and John McCain pulling out of the Ames, IA straw poll in 2007 when they determined that Mitt was going to win it. I lost a great of respect for them when that happened.
February 4th, 2010 at 6:29 pm
#36, Jerald,
See the Vanderbilt study for one theory on why the flip-flop characterization sticks.
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/news/releases/2008/1/18/vanderbilt-poll-explains-why-romneys-flip-flopper-label-sticks-political-scientist-says-anti-mormon-bias-finds-cover
February 4th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
30. & 36. What’s up with you guys, don’t you read? I said Mitt Romney didn’t make mention of anything Christian when he spoke to the “Values Voter” Convention in 2009, which in case you didn’t know is a Convention about Christians. At the VV Conference before the 2008 primary, Mitt Romney couldn’t say enough references to Christians I guess to make sure the members who would vote for him, would KNOW he was a Christian by his speech. LOL This comment has nothing to do with Christian garbage talk! Is that how you misread and completely fabricated anything Mike Huckabee said during the 2008 primary to justify his bigotry against Mormons??? You just did it to me!!!
Don’t worry, you will see the politics come out eventually as to why Mitt Romney chose to have a fundraiser for Thune. Do you think my suggestion that he is trying to get as many Christians in the 2012 primary to split their vote; therefore, leaving him to come up with the most votes for the “Moderate” to be something he wouldn’t do??? Right!!!
February 4th, 2010 at 7:59 pm
43. Isn’t it convenient to always blame any reason why people don’t like Mitt Romney on his Mormon religion. Who’s hiding behind his religion??? It was sooo convenient for all the Rombots to blame the one statement Huckabee made for Romney’s loss. What a joke! People didn’t like him….he was called Mr. Plastic Man or if you prefer Mr. Phony. Even some of you said he probably feels more comfortable this year running as a Moderate because that’s what he is rather than the Social Conservative he ran in 2008. I have a novel idea, why can’t he just be who he is rather than make up things about himself to pander to the voters he wants??? That’s called being genuine, and Mitt Romney never came close in 2008 to being himself…that’s why he lost.
I have nothing against the Mormon religion, but Mitt Romney is NOT trustworthy. If he thought he could get more votes, he would change to what the voters wanted.
The reason he CANNOT go back against Mass healthcare is because it would support the statements that he is a flip flopper. Just listen to his justifications for that legislation, (which is NOT CONSERVATIVE AT ALL (MANDATES ANYONE)…it’s a joke. If there is anything good about the Romneycare, Romney takes credit, if there’s anything people don’t like, the Dems. changed the law (but of course he signed it, didn’t he). He can’t have it both ways. But as usual Mitt always tries to have it both ways, which is why I will never vote for him. Yes, on paper he would make a great VP for Huckabee, but can you imagine how Huckabee would feel with this backstabber covering his back? It would be like Hillary being Obama’s VP…he knew better than put her in that position.
February 5th, 2010 at 1:41 am
Romney is the most qualified person out there to be President….Let’s not miss it in ’2012!