Worried about Mitt Romney?

My Man Mitt.com ^ | 2/25/07 | Justin

[RightSideRedux]

5 Solid Reasons not to be!

[RightSideRedux]

POSTED HERE

There has been a lot of jive-talk in the blogosphere (can I say jive-talk?) about Mitt Romney having a bad week. I indicated to a few people last week that he has the endorsement edge and probably the money edge as well; he organized a robust South Carolina team and a very solid Georgia team.

"Oh," I say in realization, "you mean he had a bad week in the blogosphere?!" Here are the facts of where we stand and why I'm not worried (and I'm not worried for different reasons than those that help Dean Barnett sleep well.

1) Nobody but political junkies are paying attention to the election right now. - Accoding to a Pew Research Report just 24% of Republicans are paying attention to the 2008 race right now.

2) The early polls reflect name recognition not voting decisions - For example, in late February 2003 Joe Liberman was leading the Democratic contendors.

3) Romney is better positioned than past candidates at this point in the race. Let me draw you a picture:

For the dark horse candidates at this point in the race (especially pointing out Governors from small states) Carter was at 1% in 1975; DUkakis 1%; Clinton 2% in 1992. Even McCain stood at just 3% in 1999. Once again, name recognition does not a primary make.

4) Romney has STRONG favorability ratings among voters who have heard about him. A recent Quinnipiac poll clocked this number at 83%.

5) How about what really matters - the KEY primary states? - Let's take Iowa and New Hampshire:

Romney's polling at this point is even more impressive when you consider that his December 2006 numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire were 6% and 9%.

In short, this is a historically excellent start for a no-name small-state governor running for President.

[JLS]

Interesting but:

1. Romney is not running in the Dim primaries.

2. All your comparisons are to Dims except McCain who lost.

Other than that you are correct, it is very early and only time will tell who gets in and how it shakes out.

[XR7]

So, we're supposed to be excited?

[RightSideRedux]

The comparison to the Dems is showing dark horse small-state governors at this stage in the primary race. It's a pretty standard comparison.

I can't help you to BE excited (although I am) but I can help you avoid the pitfalls of getting down in the dumps.

[geo40xyz]

Look at WHO he compares himself with!!! The only person worst is a live clinton.

Will NEVER EVER get my primary vote.

[kjo]

Exactly. By definiton I cannot vote for ANYONE who was once Governor of Taxachusetts.

[Mr. Brightside]

My wife asked me this morning over breakfast, "So who do we have running for president next year?"

I told her of our likely choices.

She said, "You mean we don't have ANY conservatives?"

[tiger-one]

Yes we do, DUNCAN HUNTER .... remember his name and tell her the next time you have breakfast together...which soon, I hope.

[RightSideRedux]

You sound a bit wacky there. These a polling comparisons in specific states. The grunt of this effort is to show that Romney is ahead of the curve on polling numbers.

[Mr. Jeeves]

I like him, but Romney is probably destined to be Giuliani's VP selection. ;)

[arthurus]

In previous years the primaries were not stacked at the front. The dark horse could afford to lose one or two as he moved up and the front-runners didn't do so well as expected or required. There is no testing a candidate through the string of primaries this time. He has to get it all at the beginning. That's like hanging weights on the dark horses and tying two hooves together.

[Mr. Brightside]

You are correct. But we were only talking about tier one candidates.

[proudpapa]

In recent years, Massachusetts has provided the dem's with an endless supply of losers.

I don't know why we would want to compete with them for their losers.

If Romney was a bit more conservative AND we knew that he wouldn't be 'gored' in Massachusetts, I could support him.

Unfortunately, Massachusetts will NEVER vote GOP in 2008 and Romney is NOT a conservative.

[MadelineZapeezda]

You are correct. But we were only talking about tier one candidates.

I don't understand you. You post on a thread about the underdog/dark horse candidates and you dismiss Duncan Hunter for not being a tier candidate?????

[MadelineZapeezda]

Should be tier one candidate,( oops)

[RockinRight]

Newt, if he'd run.

[tiger-one]

I agree with Madeline. Why shutout the only real conservative, for talking purposes???