Replies

"Any Republican who wins election in a state that has not had one single county vote Republican in a Presidential election since 1988 is no Republican."

Mitt Romney's record of fiscal and social conservatism in Massachusetts working with an 85% Dem Legislature (see my tagline) is more impressive by far than the record of Republican Gov. Rick Perry in my home state of Texas with a Republican Legislature. That's why Romney is such a remarkable figure in U.S. politics.

"...(the reason he looked so polished during the debate was because he rehearsed his fake answers through the whole thing)..."

Romney has a history of excelling in debates where the format is unscripted and adversarial. The format of last week's MSNBC/Politico GOP debate, with so many candidates on stage and little time to respond, is actually a setting where Romney is least likely to stand out. This is a man who can hold his own very well with 40 Senior Fellows at the Hoover Institution in a 90-minute exchange on Middle East foreign policy.

Talk radio host Hugh Hewitt interviewed professor of military history and noted author Victor Davis Hanson who observed Mitt Romney's ability to discuss Middle East foreign policy at length with experts at the Hoover Institution:
Hugh Hewitt: What I like is that he’s a voracious reader, not only your books, but things like The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright, Mark Steyn’s America Alone. I think this is pretty rare these days, to find curiosity at that level, and at that sort of voracious appetite for information. What do you talk about with him?
Victor Davis Hanson: Well, we talk about history just like you and I talk about. We talk about foreign policy, he talked about the plan or the effort to democratize the Middle East, the shortfalls, the problems, the liabilities, and you know what? He came to the Hoover Institution and got in front of 40 senior fellows. And in that room there were Nobel Prize winners, a lot of egos, too. And he held court with them, and there were a lot of hostile questions, and he went for an hour and a half, head to head, with these people. When he walked out of that room, I think everybody was impressed with him. He didn’t pull any punches, and he could argue and was as logical as any Hoover fellow, and I was more impressed with him than I was with my colleagues.
^{(The Hugh Hewitt Show, March 13, 2007)}

For another example, FReeper Obilisk18 provided this research regarding Romney in debates:

"Indeed. I've been searching Lexis Nexus a bit recently, and I ran into some information that supports this wholeheartedly. Some key quotes from a Herald article on the final 2002 debate between Romney and Shannon O'Brien (a fine debater): “Nearly 44 percent of likely voters said they watched the debate. Among that group, Romney holds a 7-point lead over O’Brien, while voters who didn’t see the televised clash back O’Brien by a 5-point margin.” And then most illuminating this: “Among independent voters who viewed the debate, Romney holds a whopping 63-19 percent lead. Romney’s lead among independent voters who said they didn’t watch the debate is at 10 points, the same level as five days ago.” That’s a 34 point swing. 34 points. In one night. There are barely words to describe the depth of that shift. Get Romney before the American people, against a Democratic opponent, and you’ll be weeping with joy."

(Pssst. Over here.)

At the risk of dragging that other thread over here, take a look at this new one.

I think Romney made a fan out of Joe Scarborough. This info on Romney's debate performance and his passing muster with the Hoover Institution is something we haven't heard much about just yet.

I'm not ready to grant that Romney walked away with the Reagan mantle. But Scarborough makes some good points here, probably the best writing on the debate outcome that I've seen so far.

"Indeed. I've been searching Lexis Nexus a bit recently, and I ran into some information that supports this wholeheartedly. Some key quotes from a Herald article on the final 2002 debate between Romney and Shannon O'Brien (a fine debater): “Nearly 44 percent of likely voters said they watched the debate. Among that group, Romney holds a 7-point lead over O’Brien, while voters who didn’t see the televised clash back O’Brien by a 5-point margin.” And then most illuminating this: “Among independent voters who viewed the debate, Romney holds a whopping 63-19 percent lead. Romney’s lead among independent voters who said they didn’t watch the debate is at 10 points, the same level as five days ago.” That’s a 34 point swing. 34 points. In one night. There are barely words to describe the depth of that shift. Get Romney before the American people, against a Democratic opponent, and you’ll be weeping with joy."

That is a remarkable account, one that should be considered more widely.

The Bush machine, both W. and Jeb, are quietly lining up behind Romney. This is a good example why. I also see Coulter, Levin, Hewitt, Victor Davis Hanson and others either for him or very open to him and urging others to consider him seriously. Some of these are still keeping their options open on a Fred Thompson run which is smart. Too early for us to pick yet anyway.

Not bad for Romney. An indication of the possibility that he might at least carry MA for us.

Very unlike the Rooty faction which (falsely) claimed so many times that the leftwing mayor would carry NYC against Hitlery as the polling evidence continued to mount that Rudi couldn't beat Hitlery or Obama or Edwards in NY and that the voters there liked their new mayor better and think he would be a much better candidate than Rudi for the Republican nomination.

You just don`t get it——we need stupid nominees from states like Wyoming (nice place but)to defeat the Rats and their pals in the MSM. Romney is to smart, to capable, and he doesn`t even own a M-60!I`ve heard he likes tacos and once read a whole book that didn`t even have pictures.