McCain v Obama: Economics & Taxation

Next we will look at the distinctions between McCain and Obama on economic policy and leadership.

Much has been made during the Republican primary process about McCain’s admission that a personal understanding of economics is not his strong suit. Appropriately so. However, it’s not hard to look at the general approach to economic policy that characterizes the two parties, as well as the voting record of McCain vs. Obama on economic issues.

Since Barack Obama had the most consistently liberal vote in the US Senate last year, we should consider the general liberal/progressive view of taxation and economic issues. Because the liberal political philosophy focuses on large-scale government solutions to problems, which costs money, liberals are often forced/pressured into increased taxing to pay for these programs. They will generally vote against tax cuts. And they generally prefer to really crank up the taxes on the “wealthy” and you hear "class warfare" rhetoric from liberals constantly (think of John Edwards' "two America's" lines).

McCain voted against President Bushes tax cuts early on, but says it was because legislators were not willing to cut expenses at the same time. Overall, though, he has a record of preferring tax cuts and avoiding tax increases and has made such a pledge if he becomes president.

And on the other side of the ledger he's one of the best Republicans around at working to limit government growth and spending and deficits. He could be one of the best Presidents ever in this very important ongoing effort.

Occasionally you will note that I am still in mourning over Mitt Romney. The economy was and is his strong suit. McCain doesn’t have any particular personal advantage or skill in this area, but his principles are strong and generally market oriented. The liberal agenda I don’t believe to be particularly good for the economy. However, either person as president will get advice from people who are more skilled and knowledgeable than they are.

I see this as a matter of tax policy as much as anything as well as "larger government" vs. "limited government" and I strongly prefer McCain’s approach to Obama's.

McCain v Obama: War on Terror

Now let’s tackle what will be one of the two top issues which will define the differences between the two parties and between the two candidates this fall: the War on Terror, including it’s Iraq component.

Both candidates say, for the record, that protecting Americans and the world from the assaults of terrorists is important. That’s where the agreement ends. The differences begin with the overall assessment of the level of importance and priority that should be assigned to this conflict.

Since Obama has shown exactly zero inclination to differ from his party on this issue, I will present his side based not only on Obama’s own statements, but the general position of Democratic Party leaders.

For Democrats, I believe it is fair to state their position on the problem this way: “Although 9/11 was a national tragedy, and radical Islamists certainly would like to harm us, we don’t believe it represents a mortal threat to the United States; in fact, we would not even call it a “war” because that just invites conflict and causes people to hate America more than they already do. It’s not worth all the blood and treasure we have spent on the conflict so far. There are other, more pressing priorities for us: stopping global warming, reducing poverty, giving everyone health care and expanding other government entitlements.”

For Republicans and John McCain, I would state it this way: “On 9/11, it became clearer than ever that we face a threat in radical Islamic jihadism that has the potential to destroy much of what America is and represents in the world. They are by nature a cult of death, and intent not so much on building something positive, but rather destroying Western society and particularly the United States. They have shown no signs of self-restraint in what they are and would be willing to do to achieve their aims. If they had a functioning nuclear bomb in their hands today and the capability of detonating it in downtown Manhattan, they would do so in a heartbeat. They have a global network with the determination and patience and resources to potentially achieve their aims. If the United States is not willing to lead the world in a focused and determined way to root out these terrorists and bring them to justice, we will with certainty be hit again and again, and it will have serious long term consequences for the cause of freedom and security in the world.”

Where Barack Obama has said that his principle goal would be to get us out of Iraq within a year as his main priority, John McCain has said that his goal would be to continue to learn and adjust so that we may be more effective and able to win in Iraq and achieve our aim there of having a stable ally, able to maintain its own internal security, and with a functioning representative democracy in an area of the world that has never had this before in its history.

Barack Obama has placed himself in a position where if things continue to improve in Iraq, it proves him wrong. That is, if America succeeds, he loses. Why would he not instead focus on how we can best succeed there, instead of how we can cut our losses and leave as soon as possible?

Obama’s position also has the practical effect of demeaning the tremendous physical and emotional sacrifice and courage of our soldiers, sailors, and airmen in Iraq. After all they have done, and with things improving and the achievement of our goals a real possibility, why would he be so willing to give those things up – just to avoid further sacrifice? And his position also has the practical effect of emboldening our enemies. Say you are an anti-American jihadist in Iraq. Would you not feel great satisfaction and joy to know that if Obama wins, it will just be a matter of a relatively short time before you will have freer rein and before you can gleefully proclaim to the world that you beat the Americans? And you would be able to plan and strategize with more certainty…just lay low, let the Americans leave, then attack. Why would a potential president of the U.S. do this? Why would they not at least say, “look, we would like to reduce troop levels and I believe we can…we will simply demand that the Iraqis take up the slack, but we will be vigilant and change these plans if the situation warrants it.”

John McCain will be as strong as President Bush in the prosecution of the war, but I suspect will be wiser and more sure in his approach. He has been willing to criticize tactics in Iraq and the general war on terror, and his criticisms have in retrospect been pretty much spot on. He certainly would not give the terrorists any comfort should he be elected.

McCain v Obama: Leadership

The third area of contrast I would present between McCain and Obama is in what we know about their leadership ability. I think it’s fair to say that the summation of all Obama’s resume of high-level leadership experience is this: he has run some effective political campaigns and been elected to office. He has served as a leader in the Illinois state legislature, and is just into his second term in the U.S. Senate. That to me is a fairly thin portfolio for the person who would be leader of the free world. (I will avoid here the temptation I feel to regret the fact that we lost out on the candidate with the strongest and most compelling leadership experience resume: Mitt Romney…[sigh]…)

However, I will give him this aspect of leadership ability: he is inspiring and can capture an audience. This is one very important element of leadership, but of course not the only important element.

John McCain, in contrast, has been a leader of men in the military, has also led many successful political campaigns, and has been a political leader of a number of political causes. And although there are a number of those political causes which I personally disagreed with him on, there’s no question he has a lot more political courage than most, as he has shown a willingness to take on both political friends and political enemies for those causes. If you want a President with political backbone, who is willing to stand on principle rather than polls and popularity, then John McCain is clearly your man.

Barack Obama has not shown a similar inclination to act on principle rather than party, in that he has been perhaps the most consistent party-line and liberal vote in the Senate, as evidenced by his ranking as 2007's "most liberal senator" based on a liberal think tank ranking. If it really has been his principles rather than party affiliation that have led to this record, then he certainly is not in the American mainstream in his beliefs and policies. As conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer noted in a Jan 13^th 2008 article: “The freest of all passes to Obama [from the media] is the general neglect of the obvious central contradiction of his candidacy—the bipartisan uniter who would bring us together by transcending ideology is at every turn, on every policy, an unwavering, down-the-line, unreconstructed, uninteresting, liberal Democrat. He doesn’t even offer a modest deviation from orthodoxy.”

McCain v. Obama: Communication Skill

[Quick note: I should have said this from the start of this series of posts just to make it perfectly and forthrightly clear: I do not favor one of these candidates over the other based on their race, their gender, their age, or their particular religion. I would favor one over the other only due to differences in policies, ability, skills, and character. If Condoleeza Rice was running for the Republicans, I would vote for her in a second. If Senator Harry Reid (a Mormon, and current Senate Majority Leader) were running for the Democrats, I’m sure I wouldn’t vote for him. For the Democrats, “identity politics” based on voting for or against someone based on whether they are a member of “your racial/gender group” has been an issue (particularly in this primary season, it seems). For Republicans, gender and race and age don’t seem to matter so much, but apparently for some, their religious affiliation does (i.e. for some who voted against Romney at least in part due to discomfort with his being Mormon), though these appear to be a fairly small minority.]

[UPDATE: Based on input from a friend, let me clarify also that I don't mean to impugn Democrats or Republicans as a whole in the above statement; I was really more thinking of this campaign season along with some of the recent histories of the parties where some of these group identity issues have played a role. This point has been made by numerous mainstream media sources and bloggers based on exit polling.]

Now let’s consider the differences between John McCain and Barack Obama in communication skill. Despite all the advantages I see for McCain compared to Obama, this is an area where Obama has a crushing advantage. Obama is compelling to listen to. His rhetoric is inspiring. McCain too often sounds like…well, a stodgy old Senator. I’m not saying McCain can’t be compelling too, because he can be. But hand it to Barack…he’s very good in this area.

However, there are two issues I have here. 1) At least so far, Obama hasn’t said very much. That is, he says the same things over and over and over. It is great stuff, but once you’ve heard it a time or two, it becomes less compelling. 2) Action is needed, not just words. I do not agree with the criticism suggested by Hillary Clinton and other Obama critics that it’s “just words” or that words don’t matter much. As Obama rightly suggested in response, words can mean a lot and are very important. However, words alone do not cut it. It’s one thing to inspire people as John Kennedy did with “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” It’s another thing to do something or act on that inspiration.

What you really want is someone who can say the words that inspire and in a way that inspires, but who can then also translate it into effective action. That is, you want a Ronald Reagan who could say “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” but could also build up the military and a more focused and strong foreign policy to cause the Soviet Union to implode internally which in turn led to that wall coming down.

Unfortunately, we don’t appear to have a Ronald Reagan running this year. You have Obama’s inspiring words but with almost nothing to show for it, and you have McCain’s more limited ability to communicate and inspire, but with significant practical experience in getting things done in Washington. Since we only get one of the two, you decide what’s more important.

Obama's Religious Background

One of my friends on my e-mail list asked me to look into the e-mail rumors that have made the rounds regarding Barack Obama's religious background and affiliation. The claim/statement suggests that Obama was born Muslim and retains that affiliation, and suggests that he avoids pledging allegiance to the United States and would take the oath of office on the Koran rather than the Bible.

What I've found suggests this is not true. For details, click here. What appears to be the case is that Obama's father (for whom he is named) grew up Muslim in Kenya, though by the time he met and married Barack's mother at the University of Hawaii he was not a practicing Muslim, and in fact was more agnostic. Barack's mother (white and from Kansas) was also pretty much agnostic, though she had sort of an anthropomorphic fascination with the variety of world religions and taught this sort of intellectualized religious background to Barack as a child. Barack's father left his mother and they divorced when Barack was 2. Later, his mother married another Muslim man, which is why Barack lived for a time in Indonesia. Indonesia is of course a predominantly Muslim nation, but his mom picked his schools more based on the quality of education than their religious affiliation, so he also attended a Catholic school for a couple of years. He then was sent back to the U.S. to live with his maternal grandmother.

Barack himself appears from my reading to have accepted, along the lines of his mother, more of an intellectual view of religion. Obama as a young adult also apparently struggled with his racial identity to a degree, and I think began to identify more and more with the African American community. He made his place and his early political career in the Chicago area.

It appears that as he became more involved in the African-American community in Chicago, he saw how important the Christian churches had been to the black community historically, and also how involved they are today in striving to address the social problems of poor inner city blacks. This seemed to deepen his respect and feeling for Christianity, and he identifies himself as a Christian, or as he puts it, he says he is now "rooted in the Christian tradition." Certainly he has stated that he does pledge allegiance to the United States with his hand over his heart regularly, and he would take the oath of office with his hand on a Bible.

What I don't know is how involved he is in his church on a formal basis, or what his private religious practices are, but at least he claims to be a believing Christian.

The one other aspect of his religious affiliation that does trouble me somewhat, is that the pastor of the church he has belonged to in Chicago (Rev. Jeremiah Wright) has made statements saying that their "theological perspective starts from the vantage point of Black liberation theology being its center." This is a link to their web site discussing this issue here. Despite their explanation, any time someone centers their ideas on a racially exclusive basis, it bothers me. I haven't heard Obama speak to this point directly, so I don't know for sure what his own thoughts and feelings on this are. I imagine he would not condone these views, but it's strange to me that he would attend and affiliate with a church and pastor like this.

McCain v. Obama: Experience

Now that it is shaping up to be a competition between John McCain and Barack Obama, let’s start contrasting the two candidates. This will be the first of a number of looks at points of contrast between the two.

Here is a brief outline of a few of the contrasts we will look at:

• Experience
• Communication
• Leadership
• War on Terror
• Economic Leadership
• Role of Government
• Proud to be an American
• Identity Politics
• The Constitution and the Courts

Let’s begin with one of the more obvious differences between the two: their age and experience. Clearly there is some advantage and certainly much enthusiasm, about having a young and vibrant candidate like Obama. It’s the enthusiasm of a new approach, new verbiage in the sound bites from the candidates, etc. This is the appeal of Barack Obama. You can see it and sense it in the noise level and appearance and size of the crowds at Obama rallies. He talks about inclusion, hope, and enthusiasm to tackle new and old problems alike.

The contrast in style to both Hillary Clinton and John McCain is quite dramatic, and I think it certainly works against them.

John McCain, on the other hand, embodies experience and battle-tested wisdom. Where Obama’s main claim to personal hardship is having grown up largely without his father being a part of his life, John McCain endured and suffered as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. McCain has served his nation, laying his life on the line serving in the military, and since then has continued to serve in public office, with all the personal sacrifices that demands.

Obama can talk about and debate America’s role in the world. McCain can often speak from experience, which can be a very powerful thing.

Obama's career in total is: served for years in the Illinois legislature, and now one term as U.S. Senator. McCain's career includes about three decades of work in Washington, including a long stretch in the U.S. Senate.

So there it is: youthful enthusiasm without experience, or aged wisdom, battle-tested. Since the former looks better on television and in sound bites, what will American's seek? What will you or I seek?

McCain Nears Goal, Obama on a Roll

John McCain won in Wisconsin and Washington state, pushing his delegate totals close to the number needed to secure the nomination. If you include Romney's delegates, who he has asked to support McCain, he is over the top.

However, if you want an indication of how the "Republican base" is still feeling about McCain, just look at the results from Washington. Romney, despite having pulled himself out of the race, nearly beat Huckabee for second place there, and if you combine the totals of the two, they had nearly as many votes as McCain did. McCain clearly has a lot of work to do.

Obama continues his roll. Technically Hillary can win in Texas and Ohio and still win the thing, but my sense of it is she is sliding and I suspect will lose one or even both of those, and the thing will swing to Obama.

We should have a pretty fair sense in the next week or two if I'm right here, then it will be "game on" between McCain and Obama.

Bush 41 Adds His Endorsement

McCain continues to work on establishing unity in the Republican Party to support him this fall. The elder and former President Bush added his endorsement yesterday. These are good steps and needed.

These things take time. I still feel at present that I don't particularly like John McCain, but of the available options see him as our best option for strong leadership at a time of great national peril.

Clinton is a disaster. Obama is likable and great at the sound bites. Unfortunately thus far is almost a hollow shell in terms of showing us any substance or specifics. How do you choose a guy for president who isn't willing to be specific about anything or tell us precisely what he would do in the White House? As McCain suggested, platitudes just don't cut it when we're talking about the leadership of the free world. This isn't, or shouldn't be, a popularity contest.

Marvelous Statement from K-Lo

I add my "amen" to this article by Kathryn Lopez of the National Review:

"What a breath of fresh air the Romneys on the public stage have been. Way too often in pop culture, men are portrayed as dopes; think about just about any sitcom. The dad/husband is portrayed as a doofus. What’s wrong with having somebody in public life who’s like Mitt Romney — a capable, experienced executive who loves his country and also happens to be a God-fearing father and husband? That’s not a bad thing for Americans to see. Forgive him for being easy on the eyes.

And I’ll go one step further. I worry about a political culture that is a little too suspicious of a scandal-less, all-American-gee-whiz-this-is-the-American-dream-in-overdrive package. We should be glad that good people — who, while well-off, are not without their share of painful crosses — are willing to subject themselves to the ugliness that politics can inflict. We should be grateful that good families will make the sacrifices necessary to serve — and make those sacrifices with no guarantees they’ll succeed."

Romney's Endorsement of McCain Today

Governor Romney threw his support behind Senator McCain today, in another gracious and honorable act that I think reflects favorably on his character. The NY Times article on this is quite good.

During this campaign (as well as previous ones), I believe we have seen John McCain's weaknesses quite clearly...and I won't pretend that I'll forget them. But I also recognize three things. One is that he does have significant strengths. Two is that nobody is perfect and we need to be able to be forgiving at times even in politics. And three is that, as I reviewed in the post below, there are at least two issues that I consider of the utmost significance to our nation, which the election in November will impact on greatly: the War on Terror, and the Supreme Court. And on these two points, the difference between John McCain and the Democrats is vast.

If it were not for this last point, I would consider other options, since McCain has certainly shown himself to be non-conservative, even liberal, in some key areas. But this is not the time for that. Those issues are too important.

On a different note, I also believe that this is another part of Mitt Romney's process of building the support he will need to make another run--a successful run--for the White House in 2012. Political parties are not perfect, but they are powerful. It is the way we in America join together in a cause with others, even though we do not all agree on all points. It allows us to help important changes to occur, and to be able to unite behind our national leaders. Romney recognized, more than any other Republican candidate, how important this principle was and is. It is a principle that Reagan understood well. The "Reagan Coalition" of fiscal/economic, social, and national defense conservatives is based on this principle.

Romney's dedication to this important coalition building helps McCain and the Republicans now, and in turn should help him when he runs again for the presidency.

Obama On Specifics?

From the Captain's Quarters today. So true...

McCain vs. the Democrat

There are a number of conservatives (or as I like to refer to us, "Romney Republicans") I've heard from recently who are considering what to do as we start to shift our focus to the general election and the contest vs. whichever Democrat wins their nomination.

Some have suggested that we "sit out" this election or even vote for the Democrat this election. The rationale is that McCain has in most ways shown himself to have liberal tendencies as well as temperament problems towards people who oppose him. The thought is that it would be better to have a Democrat in charge and have to take blame for the problems that would arise from their liberal policies, rather than have that blame assigned to a Republican president who pursues similar policies.

That would be a fairly compelling argument, but I'm increasingly confident that I will not only vote against the Democrat but for McCain.

Here is my rationale in a nutshell. 5 words: "War on Terror" and "Supreme Court." The argument some are making as described above is based on "short term pain for long term gain." However, the War on Terror and Supreme Court are two issues that would mean that a Democrat in the White House would instead mean "short term pain and long term failure" that would be incredibly costly to the United States.

Take the War on Terror. Of all the differences between the two parties right now, perhaps nothing is more dramatic that the issue of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the General War on Terror (GWOT). Obama and Clinton have both said essentially that they will retreat in Iraq. McCain has been one of the strongest supporters of our efforts to adjust and win there. In my opinion, retreat in the face of terrorists will dramatically multiply our struggles in the GWOT going forward, and will increase our risk of future successful terrorist attacks on American soil. The cost of having a Democrat in the White House right now could be devastating in terms of the negative effects of retreating, and this impact could take years to try to reverse and cost us greatly over the long term.

Then the Supreme Court. Because there are only 9 justices, and they serve essentially for life, the impact of even 1 or 2, much less 4 nominations can last for years, even decades. The next president could have this many nominations to make. If a Democrat makes these, you can guarantee liberal nominations will be made. If McCain is making them, while we may not trust him as much right now as we would have Romney, he has committed to nominating justices "like Roberts and Alito" who have been good nominations for conservatives. Most certainly we would be better off by far than having a Democrat make these nominations.

Just on these two issues, I think we should support McCain for this fall.

That said, it also points out just how critical it will be for us to support Republicans for Congress and the Senate this fall. This will be critical.

McCain and Obama Win Potomac

Guess it's appropriate for two Washington insiders (i.e. Senators) to win the Potomac Primary!

That pretty much cinches it for McCain.
It gives Obama his first small lead vs. Clinton in delegate count and also momentum, though it's not over yet for the Dems.

What to Do With Your Vote Now?

For those of you living in states that still have a primary vote scheduled, here are a few thoughts from evangelicalsformitt.org which I like: basically vote your conscience, though there are some thoughts on the issues involved.

If it were me, I still would vote for Romney for what that would say on my position. But I understand the arguments for doing other things with your vote at this point.

Leader of Conservatism

According to this article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, there have been meetings of conservative leaders going on with the aim of establishing Romney as the leader and "face" of conservatism, just as Reagan became that in the 70s and 80s. I like where they are going with that.

There is some talk about what kind of role Romney might have with McCain as things go forward, but my own opinion is that it is relatively unlikely that there is a formal role to play there, nor is it particularly desirable. That said, it would be helpful for Romney to have some specific position to keep his visibility up. Perhaps a role as leader of the Republican Party or something like that. I'm not sure what elected position he would be able to go after, so a party or group leadership position may be best. And he could continue to play a role in the private sector.

Potomac Primary

Tomorrow there is voting in Virginia, Maryland, DC. For the Dems, I think Obama's looking good there.

For the Republicans it's likely McCain, although it's interesting that there remains a very strong anti-McCain vote and since McCain is considered the "guaranteed winner" overall, his supporters are not always as motivated to show up at the polls. I think that's why Huckabee did so well in the round of voting on Saturday.

It's extremely unlikely to change the outcome overall but does continue to demonstrate McCain's weakness among conservatives. I think he's working to try to overcome that but he has a lot of work to do there, in my opinion, and it remains to be seen if he can even do it.

The one area where McCain can gain the support of conservatives is if he continues to make firm commitments about appointing justices similar to the type President Bush has. Because most certainly any Democrat would appoint liberals. That would be the one thing (OK, along with remaining firm and vigilant in the War on Terror) that would motivate me to support McCain over any Democrat.

Too Little, Too Late

To add to the sad sense that conservatives were too late in uniting their support behind Romney, the CPAC (conservatives conference) still voted him their favorite for president even after he had dropped out and there was pressure to show support for McCain. Ah, well.

Perhaps there were too many uncertainties and too much division early on to overcome, but in retrospect the "complaints" given about Romney by his critics seem small and insignificant compared with the strengths he offered.

We're in for a season of increased focus on the Democrats since the Republican race is essentially over now and the Democrats' race is not. Soon I'll post an initial look at the Democratic candidates.

Watch this introduction of Governor Romney at CPAC this week:

From Evangelicals for Mitt

This is a terrific e-mail from David French, one of the originators of Evangelicals for Mitt.

"I had just returned from late dinner at our dining facility here at FOB Caldwell when I saw the email: Mitt was dropping out of the race, and he was announcing it at CPAC. I’ll be completely honest with you: I choked up a bit. I immediately thought back to the first real meetings of “Evangelicals for Mitt,” when a few dear friends put pen to paper planning how political amateurs could actually reach out to our fellow evangelicals in a way that could make a difference. I thought back to the frantic two months before the Memphis Southern Republican Leadership Conference, when Nancy and I moved from Philadelphia to Columbia, I started a new job, and began an intensive effort to impact the Memphis straw poll — without an ounce of help from political professionals. I thought back to the idea for this blog, born during our “victory dinner” after the Governor’s surprise second place showing.

When we started this blog, it grew in exactly the way we hoped. We hoped and prayed for readers, and we got them—first hundreds, then thousands, then tens of thousands. We hoped and prayed that Christian and conservative opinion leaders would read EFM and consider our arguments, and that happened. Not only did we solidify relationships with Christians and conservatives we already knew, we formed new friendships and — on more than one occasion — had a chance to impact the debate at the national level.

Over the last two years, we have gotten to know two wonderful people better than we ever thought we would. I have said this before, and I’ll say it again: all too often, as we get closer to people—even to friends—their flaws become more apparent, and there is more to forgive, more to overlook. With Mitt and Ann, the opposite is the case. The closer we have come to that wonderful family, the more we have seen their virtues—how a husband and wife raised five wonderful boys even as Mitt’s career grew ever more demanding and Ann was rocked by a horrible illness; how they respond to adversity—personal or professional—not by throwing their hands in the air in despair but by working optimistically to solve problems and restore hope; and how they just do things the right way, with dignity, grace, and good cheer.

And Mitt Romney did things the right way yesterday. The Governor was correct. A time of war is simply not the time to pursue a campaign that cannot be won. There was enough bitterness in the Republican coalition already, and a race all the way to the convention would only exacerbate that bitterness and create wounds that would not heal. As much as I disagree with John McCain politically, he is an American hero, and it says something good about my party and my country that his courage in the worst possible circumstances (courage I can scarcely comprehend) would earn him his chance to lead. There are worse things than being led by a hero.

But there is something else that happened as we blogged—something that was unexpected and wonderful. I truly believe that this little blog generated one of our nation’s few truly amicable, truly respectful ongoing Mormon-evangelical dialogues in the country. To our LDS readers, your letters, your patience with some of our misconceptions about your faith, and—ultimately—your friendship mean more than you can know. Just yesterday, I was down in the mail room of FOB Caldwell looking at packages arriving from across the country, many of which I knew came from my Mormon friends, and I was just overcome with feelings of gratitude. I think God has had a purpose in our conversations and our emerging friendships that go beyond this presidential campaign. I don’t know where this will all lead, but I’m thankful we started down this path.

As for EFM . . . I don’t know what’s next. I want Mitt to run again, and I do not yet know if I can support John McCain this November. I have grave differences with him on issues of real substance. But I have other, quite pressing things to attend to in my own life. Right now, God has called me to serve my country here in Iraq to the best of my ability. And when I return, I do know that the work of conservative Christians attorneys in defending the constitution will be more vital than ever, but beyond that . . . Who knows what the future holds?

But for now, I’m content to say thank you to Mitt and Ann Romney. Thank you for your love of our country. Thank you for standing for the principles that will cause our country to endure and prosper. Thank you for living lives of grace, integrity, and dignity.

Thank you for doing things the right way."

David A. French

Forward Operating Base Caldwell
Diyala Province, Iraq

Upcoming Votes

Romney has only "suspended" his campaign. That means he won't be actively campaigning but does not mean that he won't still be on the ballot in upcoming states.

I think it will make a statement going forward the more votes Romney still gets. It may affect things this year, and it should definitely be a statement for future races, such as in 2012.

Just a thought as we figure out our way forward and try to secure our footing.

New Conservative Leadership

To me there's little question that Republicans just lost their best candidate and leader in the race for the White House. But what's done is done for now. Even Romney's former opponents such as in the Huckabee camp recognize the strength of his speech at CPAC yesterday. Looking to the future, I think there is a very, very good chance we will see Romney again in 2011 in the run for the 2012 presidency. Keep your support of him in mind as we go forward.

I still don't see any real chance of Huckabee stopping McCain now, and so we will have to reformulate going into the fall. More to come on this, but leave any comments here as we consider this.

Romney Speech Response

Romney is indeed suspending his campaign. This appears even more tragic to me after listening to his speech today to the CPAC. One of the best speeches on behalf of conservative values I've ever heard...on par with some that Reagan gave.

The explanation of his decision to withdraw was, in a nutshell, that despite disagreements with McCain on a number of issues, they fully agree on the importance of staying strong and on offense in the War on Terror. He believes that by withdrawing, it will allow the party to unite and therefore face the Democrats from a stronger position in the fall. Unsaid, but suggested, was the fact that McCain has established a lead such that it would be extremely unlikely for him to win the nomination, and therefore his continuing the campaign would not change the outcome but could well deepen divisions in the party and weaken us for this fall's elections.

I can understand his rationale here, and I respect his decision. It is also much more honorable an approach by a long shot than Mike Huckabee's.

There remains a number of very important questions in terms of how things go from here. What will John McCain say to conservatives later today in his speech, and how will he say it...what will be his tone? When he does secure the nomination, who will be his VP pick? And what will he announce as his priorities in the general election?

The answers to these and other questions will be very important to me. I would like to find a way to support the Republican nominee. There are many reasons this would be very important. But if John McCain chooses Mike Huckabee as his VP selection, that may simply be too much for me to handle. There's simply no place for religious bigotry in our national politics as far as I'm concerned. I want to have a conservative on the ticket, but someone who hasn't encouraged division based on religion. I can't vote for the Democrat, and I would certainly support Republicans running for the House and the Senate...but I don't know that I could pull the lever for that ticket. Above all right now, I hope it doesn't come to that.

Here is a video of the last part of his speech:

Romney to Suspend Campaign

Romney is about to speak at the Washington-based Conservative Political Action Committee convention. Word is that he will announce the suspension of his campaign. We will have to digest this. Not sure what to think of it right now.

And After Further Reflection

We are clearly to a point where things are relatively simple in terms of the primary process from here on.

(1) The opportunity to stop John McCain is small but does exist. But the power to influence this lies now in the hands of the voters of just a few states: Washington, Kansas, Louisiana, Virginia, Maryland, and DC are the principles over the next week. If they vote strong for Romney, the race will be rejuvenated. If they don't, there is no real change in momentum which lessens the chance for success going into the next big ones which are on March 4th: Ohio and Texas along with the smaller Rhode Island and Vermont.
(2) Therefore, if you or anyone you know can vote in or help with the primaries in these states, that's where the action lies and you can do what none of the rest of us can now.
(3) Barring such a significant change in momentum, it will be unlikely that Romney could amass the delegates for the nomination.
(4) Cooperation with Huckabee and his supporters would be the other path to victory, but seems very unlikely as we've discussed. Still, should his supporters in the remaining states to vote be willing to vote for Romney and conservatism over their candidate, it could shake things up.
(5) The one other issue I see is that even if Romney doesn't gain a lot of momentum, he and Huckabee could still gain enough additional delegates to deny McCain the outright win. That would require a brokered convention, which would certainly be decided for McCain but may allow conservatives to extract additional assurances and commitments from McCain going forward. And would there be a chance of Romney as VP or in a McCain cabinet? Maybe. And if so, it could be a launching point for a run in 2012. All speculation here, of course, but interesting to consider.
(6) If we are not able to stop McCain from becoming the nominee, then my opinion is that we need to reformulate our strategy to pursuing conservative principles. It may involve finding "pressure points" to try to ensure that McCain fulfills whatever promises and assurances he may make to conservatives. It will certainly require an invigorated effort to support Republicans for Congress and the Senate this fall, as they will become our principle means of both stopping the liberal agenda and finding opportunities to pursue the conservative agenda. This may be challenging without having a nominee we fully believe in for president, but we will find a way to do it.

Bottom line: we're not dead yet in the nominating process, and if in the short term we have some setbacks and discouragements, we will simply press forward in new ways for the longer term. Never, never, never give up, right?

Initial Morning-After Thoughts

First off, it wasn't a bad night for Romney...but it wasn't as good as I hoped, either. The major disappointment was California. I'm not sure yet what exactly happened there and why the polls seem to have been quite wrong leading up to the vote yesterday.

Delegates are still being assigned, so we don't have solid totals yet, but it looks like McCain has topped 600, a little over half what's needed for the nomination. Romney will probably end up a bit shy of 300, with Huckabee around 170.

What that means in practical terms is that (1) it's certainly not over, and upcoming states voting this Saturday and next week will need to have their say, and possibly the states after that, but (2) it also means it will be very hard to stop McCain now. The reason still being: Huckabee. If all conservatives united now to support Romney, they most certainly could defeat McCain.

What's also clear is that there were regional differences in support. McCain primarily succeeded in the northeast, Romney in the West, Huckabee in the South, and there was a mix in the Midwest (Missouri, Illinois for McCain, Minnesota and North Dakota for Romney).

I'm still unsure what to say about the relative lack of Romney support in the South versus the strong support for Huckabee. I've already seen some differing opinions, but--although I hate to admit it--I think the likeliest theory is Southern evangelicals in too many cases still being swayed by their discomfort with Romney being Mormon. I'd like to be persuaded otherwise because this requires taking a dim (but realistic?) view of their motives. It's also possible that Huckabee's class warfare attacks on Romney's business background and wealth were a factor, or Romney's "Yankee manners" as opposed to Huckabee's "Southern style." In any case, I do respect the commitment many Huckabee supporters have for their candidate, but think it's unfortunate as they may be cutting off their nose to spite their face. Both before and after yesterday, I think there's no question realistically that of the two men, Romney has the decided advantage over Huckabee in being positioned to overtake and stop McCain.

There is a very strange dynamic going on between Huckabee and his supporters and McCain v. Romney. By all accounts, Huckabee's supporters are largely conservative, and in particular are social conservatives who care deeply about issues like pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-family, Supreme Court nominations, etc. And yet there can be little question that of the remaining Republican candidates, McCain is the most liberal.

So the question is...why in the world would Huckabee and his supporters be working so hard to block and criticize Romney to the benefit of McCain? West Virginia was a prime example, where McCain and Huckabee supporters joined to stop Romney, who otherwise had demonstrated that he had significantly more support than either of the other two. This threw the WV delegates to Huckabee. Had Huckabee supporters thrown in with Romney instead of McCain, they could have given Romney those votes, but more importantly denied them to McCain. Again, who is their real opponent here and why?

Even at this date, I would think it would be wise for Romney to talk to Huckabee about gaining his support. Certainly if the two combined their delegates and worked to stop McCain, there would be a reasonably good chance of their doing so.

I continue to be very turned off by McCain's tactics in this campaign. He lies, dissembles; he's turned taking too much offense into an art form. He gives very little solid rationale to his positions...the economy being a prime example where much of what he does say about it means little to nothing and tends to confuse rather than clarify. He is making classic "backroom" Washington-style deals, and you know that what success he's had so far is due largely to the "party powers" arranging things to his benefit, rather than McCain's own strength as a candidate. He still comes across to me as an grumpy pessimist rather than a forward-looking optimist.

So where do we go from here? I don't know yet though I'm sure things will clear up as the day goes on. Obviously it's not over, so we take the fight to the states voting this Saturday and next week. The residents of those states will have one more opportunity to stop McCain when we Super-Tuesday-ers couldn't quite do it.

All the Way to the Convention

The Results

West
• California (173) – Called for McCain; this is the great disappointment of the night by far.
• Arizona (53*) – McCain wins, though the margin less than you would think for his home state.
• Utah (36*) – Romney dominates! I LOVE UTAH! We don’t mess around…serious smack down for McCain! 90% for Romney...just 5% for McCain.
• Colorado (46) – Good win for Romney; solid percentage over McCain: 60% to 19%. Much thanks goes to our (Utah's) neighbors to the east.
• Montana (25*) – Another big western win for Romney!
• Alaska (29) – Romney wins another western state. Just wish we could have swept the West including California and Arizona...

Western Midwest
• North Dakota (29) – Called for Romney! A big win!
• Oklahoma (41) – McCain takes it. Not unexpected.
• Minnesota (40) – This I believe is the most surprising win for Romney on the night. Huge! Thank you Minnesota!

Midwest
• Illinois (70) – I was hoping for the upset, but not…goes for McCain.
• Missouri (58*) – Goes to McCain in very close race. Along with California the two most disappointing results of the night I think.

South
• Alabama (48) – Huckabee wins as expected here.
• Georgia (72) – For Huckabee, but McCain and Romney were not far off the pace.
• Tennessee (55) – Goes for Huck, though again the other two were not far off.
• Arkansas (34*) – Huckabee wins his home state as expected.
• West Virginia (30) – The joke of the day (see post below)…for Huckabee on a backroom deal.

Northeast
• New York (101*) – McCain as expected.
• Massachusetts (41) – Romney as expected.
• New Jersey (52*) – McCain as expected.
• Connecticut (30*) – Reasonably close but goes for McCain.
• Delaware (18*) – Also reasonably close but goes for McCain.

Total that gives 9 states to McCain, 7 to Romney, and 5 to Huckabee today. If West Virginia hadn't been jobbed, it would be 9, 8, and 4.

Also an interesting, though not encouraging thought for Republicans: 6 of the 9 states McCain won were "blue states" in 2000 and 2004 and very unlikely to go for the GOP this year.

Results Coming In

The one surprise so far to me is that Huckabee is winning many of the Southern states. I figured he would win a few but he's doing better than I thought.

Outside of that, it's pretty much as expected with McCain doing well in the northeast and a couple of centeral/southern midwestern states plus Arizona and Romney doing well in Massachusetts and the northern midwest and looking good as we go west.

I'm still trying to process the meaning of all this data, but the thought does occur to me that Huckabee could possibly be helping Romney get past Super Tuesday intact, in that McCain will be more limited in the number of delegates he will get today, especially if Romney can win California (results are just starting to come in from CA) and much of the rest of the West. As long as McCain is not too far ahead, then we will have to look ahead to the upcoming states, and it won't be over yet.

On the other hand, since McCain and Huckabee have tipped their hand and we know they are in collusion, a "brokered convention" would seem likely to go to the McCain-Huckabee ticket that I strongly suspect is already pledged. That is, if conservatives will put up with that. If this view of things holds through the rest of the counting tonight, the story line for Romney may be the need to consolidate conservative support through the remaining primaries to prevent the moderates/liberals in the party from taking the nomination this way.

McCain + Huckabee Sittin' In a Tree

McCain and Huckabee have spent a lot of time denying that they are colluding and coordinating against Romney. Turns out they were lying.

How do you feel about that?

And why would Huckabee support a candidate who is the most liberal of the remaining candidates for the Republicans, when he says he cares about conservative values?

Just Cast My Vote for Romney!

And it sure feels great! Y'all get out there and do the same. Persuade anyone that's persuadable while you're at it!

Also, in early reporting on the state Republican convention in West Virginia, it looks like Romney has a significant lead at this point.

UPDATE: If there was any doubt before, there's no doubt now that Huckabee is carrying McCain's water. The two are in collusion. Romney got over 40% of the first round of votes in WV. When it became clear McCain could not win, the McCain and Huckabee supporters colluded to defeat Romney 52% to 47%. Romney is essentially running against both candidates. So get out there and vote...it's more important than ever. Do you want a nominee who would pull this kind of thing?

SUPER TUESDAY

The day has come and the time is now...let's give 'em what we've got!

(1) The trend to Romney in the past several days has been strong
(2) Our ability to assess that strength via polls is poor at best.
(3) So we give it 100% and see how the chips fall...
(4) Word of mouth will work better than anything else today.
(5) And get 100% of Romney supporters out to the polls as soon as possible today. Sacrifice to make this happen!

More to come as we move through this critical day.

Check out this link on Romney's 36+ hour straight drive, working hard right up to the start of vote-casting...

And From RedState...

The Trend is Real: Conservatives Rally

Erick at RedState:

By the way, I'm thinking Romney wins California tomorrow and I suspect he'll win more states, if not more delegates, than McCain. I don't think McCain's team has reacted with serious aggression to the trend of conservatives rallying to Romney.

The trend is real -- conservatives are rallying to him.

Update from Hugh Hewitt

"Huckabee voters across the country are indeed coming to Rush's conclusion that "a vote for Huckabee is a vote for McCain."

Romney credits talk radio with helping to lead his comeback after his narrow loss in Florida. While it is difficult to overstate Rush's influence on American conservatives, and while all of the talkers have audiences that do indeed listen intently, the real reason behind the Romney surge is the incredible connectedness of center-right voters and the sheer amount of data they take in. The talkers just opened the spigots on the information, much like they did when the audience killed the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill in the spring and summer. Rush sets the menu for more than 20 million people, and the rest of us for smaller but still very large audiences. But the listeners decide what to order.

Once the score was clear after Florida --a McCain or Romney nomination-- the Republican base quickly began to rally to Romney because the Republican base cares deeply about the issues that bind the Reagan coalition --tax cuts, originalist judges, free markets, and of course the value of unborn life and traditional marriage.

A vote or McCain or Huckabee is widely understood as a vote for a long eclipse of that agenda. The turn to Romney led by Rush and then Sean, Laura, Mark Levin et al was simply the widespread and widely broadcast recognition of the choice in front of conservatives.

California is among the most wired of states, with a Republican base used to communicating around the dominant MSM represented by the Los Angeles Times. The big shift to Romney coincides with Arnold's and Los Angeles Times' endorsement of McCain and underscores just how weary the Golden State GOP is of accommodation to political elites.

But this election is about much more than affection or admiration for candidates. It is about the ideas behind their desire to lead, and Romney's ideas are Reagan's. Romney came to some of those convictions later than long-serving Republicans in the party and beyond, but he's where they want him to be, and he's not going to abandon these ideas upon entering office.

In Georgia and throughout the evangelical precincts of the south and the west, the Huckabee vote is dwindling because evangelical voters don't need to make any more statements. The evangelicals need a political leader who can win and who will work towards the goals they want, not agree with their theology. The prospect of a McCain candidacy and an Obama presidency has clarified things in a wonderfully abrupt fashion for them. Most of them have no desire to look back in a few years and see themselves as the Perot voters of 1992. They are flowing to Romney because they really do care about the culture they see in decline and McCain's indifference to it. They know that Huck has no chance of winning the nomination. A gesture isn't enough in these circumstances."

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/

"How big is the rally to Romney? Big swings in short times have marked Campaign 2008, and an almost impossible-to-quantify-in-terms-of-impact new dynamic from the new media's role has overtaken MSM's ability to forecast results much less determine outcomes.

Here are three polls from California: Reuters-CSpan/Zogby has Romney up 8 points. Rasmussen has it tied. SurveyUSA has McCain up 3.

All three show a tremendous rally to Romney as do polls from Georgia, Missouri and Tennessee. The Huck voters are switching to Romney in order to make their vote count and to keep the GOP committed to a conservative agenda, but McCain has enormous Beltway support and an MSM force-field around his record. Rush et al have been vocal throughout the day as they were last week, and will continue to be tomorrow, and Romney's campaign has gone straight on McCain on the immigration issue in California.

Romney's decision to return to Long Beach airport tonight for a final rally to compete for the minutes on local television underscores how the Golden State, for the first time in years, will have a huge say in the nomination for both the Dems and the GOP. If Romney can win in the home of Reagan, he will have a great chance at leading the party of Reagan in the fall, regardless of how the Rockefeller Republicans vote in NY."

[Me again: keep reading below for more of today's posts]

Review of Today's Main Posts Below

A summary of 4 separate posts below for today:

(1) A little motivation served up hot for ya…

(2) Movement to Romney in California, Colorado, Arizona, Tennessee, Georgia…

(3) Responses to Concerns About Romney

(4) Conservative Rapid Response to Raise Romney Over McCain

Also of note: Romney appears to be only about 4 delegates behind McCain now after the Maine vote. Now he just needs a strong showing tomorrow! If so, it will not be over...

A Little Motivation Served Up Hot for You

From evangelicalsformitt:

I have to admit...I've been a little demoralized. My Romney yard sign got blown over in the harsh winds the night of the Florida vote, and it took all the energy I had to put it back up. The winds came again, and it's currently lopsided outside my house.

But this afternoon, I found myself in downtown Columbia with several other people cold calling Tennessee voters. Yes, you read that right.

Now, for those who don't know, I guard my phone number like a cocaine addict guards her stash. When I visit churches, my pen stops mid-air when the visitor card has a "phone" blank. When a department store clerk asks for my number before ringing me up, I politely refuse. And when I fill out most forms, I simply leave it blank.

So I appreciate privacy more than the typical person, and I loathe to interfere in other people's personal time.

Yet, there I was: with a phone, a voters' list, and a mission to cold call voters on a Saturday night.

I did all I could to procrastinate, but eventually I had to dial the numbers.

Mostly, things were fine - polite, but awkward. I did have a few wonderful conversations, talked to some Romney fans, and was hung up on more than that weird guy in my high school physics class.

Then, I called a woman who politely told me she'd already voted for Huckabee. (Early voting will steal a great number of former Fredheads' votes.) But in the background, I hear a man yelling, "I'M NOT VOTING FOR MITT ROMNEY," accompanied by several pejoratives.

I'd had it. About the fifth time someone hangs up on you, something within you hardens and you become more strident than it's actually wise to be. Please forgive me, Romney campaign, for going off-script.

"Ma'am, will you ask your husband if he's man enough to talk to me directly?"

He wasn't. I heard yelling -- he supported Sen. McCain.

So, I'm not sure what overcame me. Actually, I think I do. It was the same sense of urgency that caused me to accuse a sweet Pentecostal preacher today of voting for Hillary when he said he was voting for Huckabee. It's the same passion that makes me blog at midnight on a Saturday night, and the same insane commitment that made me pick up that phone in the first place.

"Well, he's welcome to vote for McCain if he wants to, but you tell him I think he's scared of me."

You know how you anonymity allows you to be meaner than you normally would be?

"I'm not scared of her," I heard.

"It seems to me he can't defend his own choice."

Well, I was feeling pretty smug til the lady said, "Wait -- did you say your name was Nancy French?"

"Yes, ma'am," I said in a small voice.

"The author?"

She'd read my book.

I was caught!

Anyway, if you want to do something, join the "Call at Home" program and volunteer Monday to call some last-minute voters. It will be uncomfortable, you'll make mistakes, and you may even persuade someone to vote for Mitt.

In the morning, I'm going to go out to the yard, push my yard sign down into the cold ground, and do everything I can possibly do to get Gov. Romney elected.

And I promise -- I'll try not to trashtalk any McCainiacs or sweet Pentecostal preachers.

-- From Nancy French on evangelicalsformitt.org

"Never give in! Never…never…never…never…in nothing great or small, large or petty; never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."
-- Winston Churchill, 29 October 1941

And [Super Tuesday] shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that [casts his vote] with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in [America] now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon [Super Tuesday].

-- King Henry V, Shakespeare (with slight variation!)

Signs of Romney Rising

There are quite a number of signs of Romney surging strong in the past couple of days.

- A poll in Colorado shows Romney establishing a solid lead there for the caucus Tuesday.

- Polls in California show Romney rising, including one where he leads by 8 points.

- Polls in Tennessee and Georgia and Missouri show Romney coming on as well.

- Perhaps the biggest shock of all, Arizona has tightened and is conceivably within reach – McCain’s own home state! That would be HUGE.

- As we’ve noted, the national number by Rasmussen show a virtual tie between McCain and Romney now.

And let's not forget that he has already won in Michigan, Nevada, Wyoming, and Maine showing great support in multiple regions of the country!

But more is needed folks…MORE IS NEEDED…and less than 24 hours to do it in…

Responses to Concerns About Romney

Having interacted a fair amount with some Huckabee supporters the past week, and noting the take of the mainstream media, let me take a shot at listing some commonly expressed concerns about Romney, and how I would respond to those concerns. I should say that I could go into them in great detail with documentation, but I give you just my summary here.

“Romney is a flip-flopper and has changed his positions for political purposes from the time of his run for governor to now. He’s not really committed to conservative causes—it’s all just talk.”

- This is a tired argument, and really not that hard to address. First, prior to his run for governor of Massachusetts, his political views were not well known or documented. Second, when he ran for the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts against Ted Kennedy, and when he ran for governor, he went on record with a number of positions. On social issues it’s true he was moderate at best, but in every other case they were conservative positions, and it was his economic policies that were the real focus of his campaign for governor. The pro-life issue is instructive, as he basically said “look, I’m personally against abortion, but this is a heavily pro-choice state and this is the law of the land, so I will leave the issue alone and not try to change it.” As governor, he did just that, including working against expansion of access to abortion in the state. And on another major social issue, Romney was a true hero in combating changes in the definition of marriage to include “gay marriage.”

- Now that he is running a national campaign, he is able to and has defined his positions which are down the line conservative. Note that when he made pledges in his run for governor, he kept them. He has made pledges as part of his campaign for the presidency. He will keep them. He has shown nothing but trustworthiness when he has given his word.

“Romney is not really committed to the pro-life and pro-marriage/family causes important to many social conservatives.”

- Again, see above. But also, look at this link regarding his work to protect marriage here.

“Romney is just a typical rich guy, out of touch with the average person and he’s trying to buy the election but it isn’t working because he’s spent much more than other candidates and still isn’t the leading candidate.”

- Romney is a rich guy. Since when, especially among Republicans who believe in the free enterprise system, did it become a bad thing to succeed based on hard work, skills, and ability? That’s what America is all about! Certainly Ronald Reagan believed in this, and traditionally conservatives do as well.

- As Romney himself has said, if so many of his friends are willing to give to his campaign and ask others to do the same, how could he refrain from sacrificing his own money in the cause? He’s done so because he believes he can do the job well, and to give America a choice based on what he can offer.

- Romney began the campaign with very limited name recognition. A significant portion of the money spent has been just to increase his visibility. Romney began without a “natural base of support” of any significant size, which is in contrast to his major competitors, who all had name recognition and/or a natural base of support of significant size.

“Romney isn’t a natural politician so he can’t win in November.”

- True, he has limited experience in politics, and especially national politics. Isn’t that one reason we want him? As he says, are we going to solve problems that have been debated but not solved for years, just by sending Washington insiders back there just to sit in different seats?

- Plus, he is developing this skill. You could see it developing in Michigan and since then. He’s becoming better, and his campaign has made smart adjustments as they’ve gone along.

“Romney won’t be able to attract the moderates and cross-over Democrats needed to help beat the Democrat in November.”

- Romney nearly beat Senator Kennedy, a liberal icon, in Massachusetts and did win the governorship there. He certainly understands moderates and even liberals and this gives him a leg up on persuading many to join him. We shouldn’t underestimate him in this area.

“Romney’s will be handicapped by being Mormon.”

- This seems to be fading as an issue as people have been able to listen to him, consider and digest this issue. He has won a majority of evangelical voters in some states and a number of significant conservative religious leaders have come to his defense. In a year in which the four leading candidates are a black candidate, a woman candidate, a Mormon candidate, and an “old guy” candidate, Americans have shown they are willing to vote for the best candidate regardless of issues of race, gender, specific religion, or age.

Consider this video segment from a black conservative religious leader:

Rev. Chip Murray:

Conservatives Uniting

It has been remarkable who strong and fast and hard conservatives have come to Romney’s support and defense in the past week. The prospect of McCain as the Republican nominee has done an amazing job at focusing the mind in this regard.

Just a partial list of these conservative ‘endorsements’ is impressive:

- Rush Limbaugh

- Sean Hannity

- Laura Ingraham

- Lars Larson

- Mark Levin

- Kathryn Lopez

- Former Senator Rick Santorum

- Former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert

- Joe Scarborough

These folks and others are working tirelessly this week to get conservatives united and onboard with Romney. This has been a truly remarkable and urgently organized effort. Let’s add our voices to the mix!

Conservatives: Speak With One Voice!

From Hugh Hewitt:

It Took Two Weeks In The Spring Of 2007 To Defeat McCain-Kennedy. It May Take Less In The Winter 2008 To Defeat Just McCain

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 10:18 AM
We have had exactly three days since Rudy threw in with McCain, the clearest signal yet to values voters that their agenda will not be the agenda of a McCain campaign.

The fight against McCain-Kennedy in the spring and summer took about two weeks to first organize and then gather overwhelming strength.

The battle against Harriet Miers (yes, I backed the president on the losing side of that one so I recall it well) took a week or so longer.

But once the conservative voice begins speaking as one or nearly one, it is very effective, and that began to emerge on Thursday after the Reagan Library debate.

When Rush declared on Thursday that a "vote for Huckabee is a vote for McCain," the focus became very, very clear for conservative voters --who heard it.

That message has been repeated a few times by others from Laura Ingraham to Mark Levin and most of us in between, as well as by folks like Rick Santorum and Denny Hastert. Messages take a while to get delivered, but they eventually get there. McCain is using endorsements from the political elites like Arnold and Rick Perry to blunt the new media, and MSM is pushing back with an "inevitability" narrative that is nonsense even as realistic assessments give McCain a great advantage going forward.

But the picture is very clear and voters see it: McCain or Romney. Huck doesn't have a shot, an thus a vote for him is a vote for McCain.

Romney doesn't even have to spend much more money to communicate this or the crucial differences between him and McCain on taxes, the First Amendment, judges, climate change, and especially illegal immigration. He now has the new media on board and amplifying his message. If there is movement towards Romney on Tuesday, he has many incentives to stay on through St. Paul, and especially through Ohio and Texas in early March. He gets more earned media every day from here on than any candidate has enjoyed on the GOP side since the campaign began. That's a huge force multiplier and it is just coming to bear on the race.

A Huckabee voter on Tuesday could have a lot of reasons for sticking with Mike, but one of them cannot be protecting the legacy of Reagan or the platform of the GOP as it has existed since 1980.

Maine Goes For Romney

It's official: Maine voters have given Romney a surprising and dominating win in their state, and in addition a boost in the arm to conservatives and Romney supporters everywhere. Thank you, Maine! Please consider what more you can do to help in the next 3 days.

Also of note: more Maine Republicans came out to caucus (primarily in support of Romney) since Ronald Reagan's first win in 1980. An indication of conservatives becoming instantly and highly motivated to stop McCain?

Tied and Gaining Nationally

Since Florida, the Rasmussen polls nationally have shown McCain with not much change but Romney with an uptick which has pulled him into a tie with McCain nationally, each with 30%. This is good, but it's the state-by-state races as below that will matter most on Tuesday.

Your Personal Executive Summary

3 days remain until most of us have the chance to have our say in the nomination process. I have such a sense of urgency with so much at stake. Normally I don’t have this sense of urgency until we are facing the Democrats, but this is an unusual year. I believe, as has been said, that this is a fight for the heart and soul of the Republican Party and for the future of the conservative cause in America.

I am much more pro-Romney than anything else, but I feel like I have to address as much what I’m against right now as what I’m for. Time is short.

In John McCain, we have a man who has been strong on the war on terror. Unfortunately, that’s about the only nice thing I can think of to say about him. Can you think of any other conservative cause he has contributed significantly to? And then think of all the things he has fought for on the other side—working with liberal senators like Feingold (in restriction of free speech), Kennedy (amnesty for illegals), Edwards (boon for trial lawyers), and Lieberman (unilateral pollution caps that only Americans will pay for and will do little to clean up the environment). He seems to delight in sticking it, not to Democrats and liberals, but to conservatives, and has shown a serious mean streak in doing so over the years.

Because of this, many conservatives are prepared to “sit this one out” rather than put a man who has championed liberal causes more than conservative ones in the White House with a “Republican” label to his name. The danger is not only of losing the presidency, but of suppressing the conservative vote enough to lose seats in the Senate and the House, which would significantly weaken our only protection left against liberal legislation. It could also deeply divide the Republican Party and require rebuilding that could take years…and this at a time when we are already in it to the hilt trying to stop liberals from further changing America from its traditional values and roots.

So, at this crucial time, let me give you somewhat of an “executive summary” of where we stand today:

(1) After Florida, we must say that nearly across the board McCain has a slight advantage. However, the way this 21-state Super Tuesday sets up, that slight advantage could well become an unstoppable one if we don’t gain support for Romney now.

(2) Mike Huckabee and his supporters are key to what will happen on Tuesday and beyond. For some reason that I can’t quite fathom, Huckabee has been supporting McCain against Romney, despite the fact that most Huckabee supporters are strong conservatives who abhor John McCain’s liberal accomplishments and mocking of conservatives many times in the past.

a) Huckabee’s supporters have been committed to him, but there are some that recognize that, if their support of their candidate could be deeply damaging to the conservative cause they might consider their options, even in support of Romney. There are a couple of examples I’ve mentioned here and here.

(3) As in the post below, there is some encouraging news out of Maine, where Romney looks like he may get the win in the caucuses there today!

(4) Before I go over the status report of all the Super Tuesday states, may I just highlight the importance of a few states: California, Illinois, Missouri, Oklahoma, Colorado and Georgia I think are 6 critical Super Tuesday “swing states” and may I also say that if Romney supporters in Arizona could pull off the surprise, it would be massive in importance. And since Alabama is a second home for us, nothing would please me more than a win there!

(5) Here is the list of states voting on Tuesday (yes, it is long!) and a short review of what the optimistic chances are in each state (yes, you who know me, I am natively optimistic but I’ll try to be reasonable). An ‘*’ means the state delegates are winner-take-all. The other states divide the delegates in some way.

West
• California (173) – A real battleground which could well be divided down the middle, but Romey has a real chance to get significant delegates here.
• Arizona (53*) – McCain expected to win in his home state, but Romney has good support there. A Romney win there would be unexpected but HUGE.
• Utah (36*) – Romney likely to win. The LDS population and the fondness we hold for him due to his work at making the 2002 Olympics successful give him strong support here.
• Colorado (46) – A close one, but some recent polls give Romney an edge. This would be a critical one to help Romney turn things around against McCain.
• Montana (25*) – Polls suggest Romney has gained support in Montana, again would be a critical win.
• Alaska (29) – No good polling there. This is the one state where Ron Paul hopes to win or do well, but I’ve seen reports from Alaska suggesting that Romney has really come on strong there. They hate McCain due to his siding with the Democrats against drilling for oil resources in ANWR in northern Alaska.

Western Midwest
• North Dakota (29) – Again no great polling that I’ve seen, but there are suggestions Romney has real support there and could win. This is one of those “off-the-radar” states that could really help Romney.
• Oklahoma (41) – McCain has a lead in polls, but it’s not insurmountable. This is one of the “swing states” if you will in this Super Tuesday vote, and a Romney win would be amplified greatly in its significance.
• Minnesota (40) – Very much like Oklahoma in that McCain has some lead in polls and is expected to win, but a great outpouring of support for Romney there would be like a bullhorn to the nation.

Midwest
• Illinois (70) – I consider the two “birthplaces of the Republican Party” to be Abraham Lincoln’s Illinois, and Ronald Reagan’s California. Expectations are for McCain here, but again it is not an insurmountable lead in the polls. Maybe this birthplace of the Republican Party can be the lead in the rebirth of the party!
• Missouri (58*) – McCain has a small lead, but recent polls have shown a tightening, almost a 3-way tie between him and Romney and Huckabee. Missourians for Romney! Again, a swing state that would be huge.

South
• Alabama (48) – Huckabee has a definite lead. This looks like a long shot but again, we’re not talking about 20 point leads here. At least McCain is not so strong there, but a shift from Huckabee to Romney might make a difference.
• Georgia (72) – Polls have showed a real tightening, with a situation not unlike Missouri. Georgia has a lot of delegates. Even a relatively small shift of Huckabee supporters to Romney in Georgia could make a big difference.
• Tennessee (55) – McCain has more of a lead here. Situation otherwise like Alabama. It’s the divided vote of conservatives that could give it to McCain, so again much is in the hands of Huckabee supporters in the next 3 days.
• Arkansas (34*) – Huckabee unlikely to lose his home state, although he does have his own opposition in the state.
• West Virginia (30) – Not much polling there, but it does appear to be leaning McCain. See the discussion of Tennessee, because I think the same could be said of WV.

Northeast
• New York (101*) – This one of only a couple of states where I have a hard time seeing McCain lose. This is in large part due to Giuliani’s endorsement and his support among Republican insiders and moderates.
• Massachusetts (41) – Polls have shown Romney with a large lead in his home state, so hopefully a big win there and significant delegates.
• New Jersey (52*) – The discussion here is identical to New York.
• Connecticut (30*) – Haven’t seen much polling there. The assumption is that McCain will win there like NY and NJ, but until we know otherwise, why shouldn’t Romney win there? They’ve been able to observe the turnaround of Massachusetts in their region under Governor Romney and may see and appreciate the strengths he offers.
• Delaware (18*) – Polls have suggested that courageous Delaware may buck the trend of NY/NJ, etc. and vote for Romney. This would show some regional support in New England for Mitt.

(6) I’ve recently posted a couple of other things if you would like to scroll down to review…especially about an event in Illinois.

(7) Finally, later tonight I will post a review of what I think are the principal concerns of voters who have not yet embraced Romney, and in particular Huckabee supporters, and see if we can’t work those out. Again, I keep saying this but I sure wish we had more time to discuss and work out differences, but the moment of decision is fast approaching. Let’s do what we can!

Thanks all!