Posted on 11/21/2007 7:07:01 AM PST by JRochelle
I thought that I was going to have a nice quiet Thanksgiving. Perhaps not.
Erick Erickson at Redstate (disclosure I too contribute to Redstate) has uncovered some more information on the Mitt Romney phone scandal. Leon Wolf, another Redstate contributor who today endorsed Mitt Romney, also pointed out that this happened previously (described then) when Leon was on the Brownback campaign.
The basic facts are that a Romney staffer, Marshan Roth contacted the Salt Lake Tribune, identified herself as "leaning towards Romney", and told her story:
Marshan Roth, of Fairfield, Iowa, got a call on Wednesday night. It started out like a regular poll, she says, but then asked positive questions about Sen. John McCain and delved into disparaging things about Romney. She was asked whether she knew that Mormons have ‘baptized thousands of dead people’ and that the Book of Mormon was more important than the Bible to Mormons. ‘It was sick. It really was. It made me just furious,’ says Roth, who is leaning toward backing Romney. ‘If you didn’t know enough about McCain, you’d think he was the white knight coming in on his charger saving the world and that Mitt Romney was tantamount to the devil
Erick points out that Roth receives $500/month from the Romney campaign.
Similarly, Rose Kramer, another Romney staffer who describes herself as "a supporter," told a McClatchy reporter her story:
Rose Kramer was at her Dubuque, Iowa, home, waiting for the TV show ‘House’ to start at 8 p.m. Tuesday when a pollster called and started asking her about John McCain. After a few polite questions, the caller started saying unflattering things about Mitt Romney. Kramer, a Romney supporter, got so angry that she missed the opening of her show. ‘I was still ranting at my husband,’ she said.
Rose isn’t just a supporter. She is a staffer, making $1,000/month. She is also a co-chair of Romney’s Iowa Faith & Values Steering Committee.
It doesn’t stop there. Rose told a different story to Real Clear Politics:
Rose Kramer, an Iowa voter who backs Romney, told Politics Nation the call, which she received around 8:30 p.m. on Wednesday, began with typical screening questions on whether she planned to caucus and if she had caucused before. After an initial ballot test — on which she says Romney’s name was listed last — the pollster offered five questions about John McCain, all of which she characterized as ‘glowing.’ Kramer said she asked the caller whether he was working for a campaign; he said no, his was an independent research group.
First, when Rose talked to McClatchy, it was Tuesday 8pm. With Real Clear Politics, it was 8:30 on Wednesday. She lied to one of the reporters.
Second, in both (all three?) cases, the Romney staffers highlighted the McCain questions. It seems to me that the Romney campaign was deliberately pushing the McCain angle.
Third, either the staffers didn’t disclose their relationship to the reporters or the reporters didn’t disclose it in their stories. My money is on the staffers, something that, as Leon pointed out before, Romney consultants in Iowa have done in the past.
This raises several questions:
First, is there any evidence that this poll contacted anyone in Iowa who was not a Romney staffer or supporter? If not, is there any evidence that the calls actually occurred? Could this be a story manufactured by the Romney campaign? After all, Western Wats only seems to talk through another Romney official, Justin Hart.
Second, were they directed by either Boston or Des Moines to deliver these messages? If so, were they told to hide their relationship with the Romney campaign?
Is Romney auditioning for FEMA Administrator?
UPDATE: Jonathan Martin had reported a non-Romney supporting phone call recipient.
You still have paid campaign staff posing as "leaning voters" hiding their campaign affiliation from the press.
LOL.
At least 3 Romney supporters, 2 of whom we know are paid staffers were called.
The calls were made. I won’t dispute that.
The Romney supporters were called to ensure that the media would find out. Simple as that.
The initial reports suggested that a couple of Romney supporters or staffers were among the few people who claimed to have been push polled.
I have mentioned on earlier threads that I had seen that said.
Sure enough, here’s the confirming details.
I don’t think there’s any doubt about what happened, any more. Legal proof? Not unless the NH DA decides to act. Proof good enough for voters? Yes, I think so.
You could say that everybody does it. This kind of crooked push polling has often been practiced in the past. But there are two or three disturbing things about this:
1) Romney has a lot of sleazy campaign pros on his staff. He hired these guys, and he must know what kind of players they are.
2) This push poll fits perfectly with one of Romney’s major campaign themes, that has been constantly repeated. What it amounts to is that you must vote for Romney or you are probably an anti-Mormon bigot. So, prove you aren’t by voting for him.
3) Romney himself stepped forward immediately into the middle of this fight and bashed McCain, screaming about anti-Mormon prejudice, although McCain instantly said that this kind of things was WRONG.
Maybe his campaign workers skillfully manipulated him. But he was as fast off the block with his prepared speech to the media as bill clinton was with his speech blaming Rush and the militia and the vast right wing conspiracy for the OKC bombing. Clinton knew what was coming, and was ready to go with it. It turned his campaign around.
Romney isn’t clinton, and push polling isn’t as evil as blowing up a building full of kids and office workers. But it’s still a dirty trick. Hardly fitting for a guy who poses as Mr. Morality himself.
sounds like a practical joke which has gone phenomenally well.
I read it. He ignores a great deal of information in order to say that it’s a mystery. Sure, it’s a mystery, if you ignore most of the details that have already come out.
Those things are true about Mormonism.
And there are many other really odd beliefs. (Koloff, spirit babies, God's spirit momma, etc.)
However, my major concern is that a Catholic candidate doesn't swear allegiance to the pope, that a Protestant candidate doesn't swear allegiance to Billy Graham, and that a Mormon candidate doesn't swear allegiance to the head Apostle in Salt Lake City.
I might point out that Hillary Clinton, a very liberal Methodist, also has some extremely unacceptable beliefs: reimaginining God (she used the word "reimagine" in the last debate, and it instantly hit me) as a goddess, a gaia, or a whatever. They reject the OT & NT as the word of God. They reject the actual resurrection.
They swear allegiance to the world socialist movement.
Posted on the 19th, before the paid staffers story.
ping
“I’m somehow getting the image of Mitt following in his father’s footsteps, tearfully withdrawing from the campaign.”
First, he must use the word “brainwashed”.
Example: “My staff members were BRAINWASHED! by the McCain
campaign.
Exit stage left...
“ethodist, also has some extremely unacceptable beliefs: reimaginining God (she used the word “reimagine” in the last debate, and it instantly hit me) as a goddess, a gaia, or a whatever. They reject the OT & NT as the word of God. They reject the actual resurrection.
They swear allegiance to the world socialist movement.”
Great points. A lot of people want Romney’s Mormonism put off limits for discussion, but Hillary’s religious convictions I’ve always thought needed to be fair game too - they are political.
LOL, you're not Protestant, are you? Billy Graham, admired as he is, has no more authority over Protestants than the man in the moon.
Remember "Borking" and how proud the Liberals were of their creation? They liked it so much that they've used it many times since. Unfortunately, it could be very effective if it was not responded to forcefully. Remember how outraged Conservatives were with the injustice of it all?
As it was then, the same is true now; with "Borking", facts are irrelevant. Perception is everything. Talk up the circumstantial evidence that fits your theme, downplay the total lack of any hard evidence (remember: "it's the seriousness of the charge!"?), and whether the attack fails or succeeds, when the truth comes out, mumble something about "well, it certainly seemed like something was wrong..." or ignore the fact that your story was exposed for the petty political attack it was and then never talk about it again.
It was disgusting, underhanded and despicable when the Democrats did it, and it is every bit as disgusting, underhanded and despicable when its alleged Conservatives putting it to their use. The truly tragic difference is, the Liberals had enough common sense not to target one of their own. But this is neither the first nor will it be the last such attack the Romney camp has come under. As Mitt gets closer to the nomination, expect more charges like this and worse. And then, if he gets the nomination, it will start all over again with the professional Borkers of the Clinton campaign and their attacks will make these look like Romney pep rallys. So, if anything, these attacks are preparing him for the onslaught the Clintons will unleash, further enhancing his ability to and probability of beating Sen. Clinton.
Actually, it isn’t that the clintons are ‘good enough to get away with it’, it’s that the media is so far up the sinkEmperor’s butt that they give the sleazy clintons all the cover they need to protect their sleaziness.
Actually, I am a protestant...an ordained Methodist elder to be exact, so I know what I’m talking about when I slam the Methodists.
So far as using BG’s name, it was to make the sentence shorter than saying: “the respective bishops, bodies, conventions,etc. of the various denominations”
BG is a widely recognized name of a protestant leader.
Fixed
Facts is facts....
Perhaps not. But, we do know that several Romney staffers ran to the media, and lied through their teeth. "Leaning toward Romney," lol. The "victim" scam is something I'd expect from a liberal, and that does not help Mitt Romney, with his shakey record on core conservative issues. Liberal is as liberal does, I guess.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.