mitt's moolah
Former Missouri Senator Jim Talent will be an advisor to Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign, overseeing "all domestic policy development."
I continue to be impressed by Romney and his campaign. Earlier in the week the WSJ ran a piece about Romney's fundraising prowess.
Romney and his team have exploited these lesser known campaign laws, legally and above board. They're just smarter than other candidates and I salute them for it.
The critics are just sorry they didn't think of it first.
I continue to be impressed by Romney and his campaign. Earlier in the week the WSJ ran a piece about Romney's fundraising prowess.
"Because he doesn’t hold federal office, Romney became subject to the federal rules only after he set up a presidential exploratory committee earlier this month. Until then, his team took advantage of a little-noticed gap between federal and state law. While most states limit political donations, about a dozen don’t. Romney’s political team set up fund-raising committees in three of those: Michigan, Iowa and Alabama. During that time, his political action committees raised $7 million."Cha ching!
Romney and his team have exploited these lesser known campaign laws, legally and above board. They're just smarter than other candidates and I salute them for it.
The critics are just sorry they didn't think of it first.
posted by Kent at 11:28 AM
3 Comments:
If Giuliani continues to streak ahead in the polls, I would be in favor of consolidating support behind him. What about the all-star ticket of Giuliani for Prez with Romney as VP? I know it’s early, but that's my dream ticket at this point. Who would win a debate on the substance and philosophy of issues? Hillary/Obama or Guiliani/Romney? That’s a high school football team against an NFL team.
I've been discounting John McCain for six years, but suddenly I see him as the GOP's candidate in '08.
Am I drunk? Perhaps, but only because a part of me believes the GOP rank and file is going to look hard at Rudy and Mitt, but they'll be scared away by Giuliani's Liberal social positions and Romney's glaring inconsistencies.
If that happens, McCain might get the nomination by default, because of his 'conservative' label and because of Nancy Reagan's seal-of-approval.
Unfortunately, there are many, many Republicans (like Tony Perkins) who would rather lose an election than embrace a candidate they disagree with on some issues, a candidate that can actually win, like Giuliani or Romney.
I don't think McCain wins the Presidency because of questions about his temper, concerns over his health and age and his all-too-cozy relationship with Hillary. I think is the type of guy who wouldn't attack Clinton from the stump because she's a girl. It would be a generational thing for him.
There are going to be those in our party that will not vote for certain candidates as 'a protest.' I have no respect for these people. Politics is a game and like any game, in my opinion, you play to win or you don't play.
I compare it to the California GOP's conundrum with Arnold Schwarzenegger a few years ago. Everyone knew he was a closet Liberal, but we wanted to win so we voted for him, while the ideologues voted for Tom McClintock.
If Republicans want to keep the White House next year, we had better make the corporate decision that we are going to unite behind the strongest, most electable candidate. Period.
I couldn't agree more. Victory is more important than strict adherence to ideology.
On the other side of the aisle, if Democrats apply this lesson they could possibly win the White House by unifying the Cindy Sheehan far left with the supposedly more hawkish and pseudo-centrist Hillary Clinton contingent of thier party. Here's to hoping that the various Democratic canditates continue leapfrogging eachother to the left -in an effort to look more and more anti war- thus abandoning the more moderate Dems who were so integral in the '06 elections.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home