Posted on 11/21/2007 7:07:01 AM PST by JRochelle
Hmmmmm.
Does anyone actually think Mitt Romney authorized this? I don’t, its too stupid, and like him or not, he’s a smart man.
Said the ("I've known Romney for 30 years") shill who delights in posting every negative Fred article that can be found, ROTFL!
Here are the facts -- paid Romney staffers contacted newspapers about this "push poll" and lied about their campaign affiliation referring to themselves as "leaning" Romney voters.
Regardless of who made the (lame) calls, those facts reflect very badly on the Romney campaign.
Despite the many "independent" sleaze attacks that come from Romney supporters and staffers, Romney has always remained lily-white pure.
Either he's exceptionally good at getting people to lie and cover for him, or he's a horrible judge of character and is kind of clueless.
He hired Warren Tompkins who has all but admitted he engineered the 2000 push poll against John McCain in South Carolina. His campaign staffers "coincidentally" received these phone calls.
His supporters keep touting his magnificant management talent....so, which is it? Is he "smart" to hire "dirty tricks Tompkins", or does he not have control over his low-level staffers?
Either way, given the problems President Bush has had with HIS staffers, (Powell, McClellan), we don't need another "experienced manager".
So, what are you saying? The McCain campaign should have been able to conduct the push-poll without Romney staffers finding out?
You created this thread. You didn't excise the update. But your subsequent commentary blows off the new information as if it shouldn't color your conclusion. Why not? The author of the piece thought it was necessary.
Actually, Romney is the only one who stands to use this to his advantage. Julie Annie's people wouldn't make it a point to call Romney staffers to get this in the headlines, even if the staffers were plants, because such plants would be too many loose ends, to much risk for a breakdown and confess moment. Romney's staff putting this together to 1) divert attention from his liberal history, 2) give him a story regarding Mormonism upon which he can make an opening statement just before Thanksgiving, then 3) make follow-up speech regarding the 'unAmerican' nature of questioning a man's fitness for office based upon his religious convictions. The Romney campaign is sleazy because their candidate is a sleazy politician, as he proved by turning into a liberal to get elected in Massatwosh!ts, but he has his Mormon minions pleading he was never 'pro-abortion' while he was protecting abortion in that state. This man is bill clinton with a nicer family! Is the GOP ready to slide that far down into the morass?
I’m, um, “leaning towards” #1. After all, these are clearly not professional campaign staffers, given the meager sums they are receiving. But I find it plenty odd that the author of this article didn’t did into the religious affiliations of these people. Could well be overzealous “Mormons for Mitt”. Or maybe not. But it would be nice to know, seeing as how the questioning they reported as inappropriate was all about the Mormon religion.
His campaign has thousands of workers, suggesting he’s hired every one of them personally doesn’t fly.
That said, I do agree its his responsiblity, and they should be fired.
And I’m hardly suggesting he’s ‘lilly white pure’. I don’t have a favorite in the race quite yet.
You mean this update? That someone has reported a recipient of this so-called "poll" that was not a Romney supporter or staffer? That's a pretty thin thread to hang your hopes upon.
I don’t think going ‘no experience’ is a viable hiring strategy under most circumstances, and certainly not in politics.
Guess you missed the /sarc
Single incidents are one thing. A repeated pattern of "individual" efforts disavowed by the campaign implies either shoddy control of staff or more central involvement than is let on.
‘Single incidents are one thing. A repeated pattern of “individual” efforts disavowed by the campaign implies either shoddy control of staff or more central involvement than is let on.’
Not enough evidence to support anything beyond a couple of staffers, low level at that, talked among themselves and took a risk.
Not saying you might not be correct here, just noting there are a few other plausible scenarios.
How Romney addresses this will tell us a lot.
That’s just this incident. This isn’t the first time the Romney campaign has had to deal with a “rogue” staffer causing problems.
I don’t think so either. I think the most likely scenario is some call center employee independently adding to the poll script, out of some personal religious or political conviction. These “staffers” are clearly part-timers, amateurs, given what they’re being paid. They may well have felt the urge to make noise about the calls, believing they had been more widespread than they really were, but did not feel they should identify themselves a campaign workers when they weren’t speaking on behalf of the campaign, with official endorsement of what they were saying.
I think thats the more likely explanation as well.
Letes see how Romney handles it.
I’m leaning toward #1 also. Romney would have to be beyond stupid to authorize something like this.
Has there been a statement from Romney today about this? Any sort of denial? The only denial I’ve seen from the campaign was yesterday in the Herald where his manager said that neither he NOR HIS SUPPORTERS had anything to do with it. Clearly the second part’s not true. McCain’s campaign and Guiliani’s campaign are both categorically denying any involvement.
Romney needs to get to the bottom of this posthaste and get the whole story out there. Because, regardless of whether he authorized this or not, it was dirty politics on his behalf, and at the very least some paid supporters need to be fired.
Apparently you didn’t hear the immediate response Romney gave in which he called the polling questions ‘unAmerican’ in nature. The set-up was precise, the response pointed ... but the rest of the story wasn’t expected to get out so the staffers thought they could lie about ‘leaning toward Romney’. Look for another ‘prepared speech’ addressing the unAmerican behavior of questioning a candidate’s fitness to serve based upon his religious convictions. There have been numerous efforts by Romney supporters to characterize Ike as a JW and other candidates regarding their religious affiliations. The Ike characterization is just as stupid and sleazy since it is basically false but convenient to twist.
Hmmm, as we suspected: fake-hate-crime
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.