Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Rudy and John and Fred! Oh my!

The Real Sporer is not often surprised but today I received a bit of unexpected news. After sitting in the Polk County Courthouse during a trial all day, I returned to find my telephone ringing off the hook ……… and it wasn’t about the trial.

Of course, I too am baffled at the logic that would lead to the conclusion that the Ames Straw Poll would not have benefited their respective candidacies. Under what circumstances could speaking before the largest gathering of Republicans in the history of the party, not the Iowa Republican Party but the entire national Republican Party, before a global television audience in the first state to actually vote for nominees, not help a candidate?

The people who attend the Straw Poll not only almost all attend the caucuses but they are the precinct leaders who drive the caucuses. The 30-40 thousand attendees in Ames this August are going to have five months to ponder the Giuliani/McCain absences.

It will be difficult for Iowa Republicans to forget the following from the Giuliani state chair Jim Nussle:
“Certainly, if you're part of the party you want to raise as much money as possible, and making the straw poll significant is to your advantage. So there's a reason why they would do it. Others, candidates, who want to use it as a way of making their own candidacy legitimate, will want to make sure their participation or their position at the straw poll is significant. So I understand why people are trying to make the this significant.”

The problem with Jim’ Nussle's logic is the first sentence-“if you’re part of the party”. The question that immediately comes to mind is of what party is the Giuliani campaign a part? Does Jim think that a huge turnout of non party voters will appear at the caucuses and swamp the regular Republicans who usually attend the caucuses? While possible, such an unprecedented occurrence would appear highly unlikely. Far more likely is that the confluence of both resentment and disinterest will simply dismiss the Giuliani campaign by caucus night. The entire Nussle statement is even more dismissive of Iowa Republicans so it is difficult to imagine that the Giuliani campaign is seriously intending to compete in Iowa. So don't be surprised when you hear more of the same as the Caucuses grow more imminent.

The McCain decision is both more and less surprising. A McCain Iowa pullout has been long anticipated by much of conventional wisdom. The Senator crashed in Iowa in 99/00 and burned many bridges in the process so a willingness to embrace the first good excuse to avoid our state isn’t all that shocking.

But McCain seemed to be taking Iowa more seriously this time around. His Iowa team is top flight, with a long history of success all over Iowa. I have been personally assured that McCain is sticking it out to the caucuses by high level McCain people, people in whom I have complete trust. However, can we trust the McCain Washington people to tell the McCain Iowa people the truth? That remains to be seen. The McCain exit was certainly more graceful, and he has the benefit of being able to blame Giuliani but in the end he will conspicuous by his absence and every other candidate will spend every day between now and January reminding the Iowa voters of the McCain 99/00 experience-essentially creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The ultimate problem that both Giuliani and McCain have demonstrated by today’s action is the dismissal of the importance of the Republican brand. They aren’t just running for President, they are running to lead the Republican Party. Regardless of what they say, dismissing a party event of the magnitude of the Straw Poll sends a bill board sized message that both candidates feel that party leadership is not a particularly significant aspect of their campaign strategies. Should either receive the nomination they may well find themselves wondering why the same Republicans they rejected fail to rally to them when they do need Iowa’s seven electoral votes.

Of course, in the next seven days Fred Thompson’s formal announcement of participation in the Straw Poll would put this all in better perspective.


Still trying to be like Ted said...

Sporer-what took you so long to get on this story?

You think some bullshit like a trial should interefere with your journalistic obligations?

Get on it Papa Bear.

defeating john Mcquisling is priority number one said...

John Petain found out that jihadis and illegals could not vote for him so there was no way he could win.

Angry and Insulted! said...

What happens Ted, if Thompson also decides to jump out of the straw poll? It would seem that such a development would almost kill the straw poll entirely. While its true that the other campaigns are not yet talking about pulling out of the straw poll, one can only wonder how they can justify the nearly $1,000,000.00 price tag on viable participation in the national media regards the event as a "2nd tier" event and ignore it? It's a very real prospect when you consider that there would seem to be high probability that within the next 2 or 3 weeks, 3 out of the top 4 candidates will have officially announced that they will forego participation in the straw poll. Without the big media circus, the value of the straw poll will be highly diminished for the other campaigns thus making it a difficult expense for the other campaigns (especially the 2nd tier) to justify.

As an Iowa Republican, I'm highly concerned that the straw poll, long our biggest, and best attended fund raiser will be turned into a million dollar loss rather than a multi-million dollar fundraiser. Please tell us that RPI has a contingency plan in case the straw poll falls apart as a result of McCain and Rudy's decision to take a piss on Iowa republicans.

Their decision to screw over Iowa is both upsetting and insulting! This makes 2 times that McCain has decided to slap Iowa Republicans in the face ... I find it hard to imagine how any Iowan would have the nerve to go to caucus for him after a move like this. I can now say that regardless of the primary outcome, I will NEVER vote for either Rudy OR McCain in the General election. I would encourage other Iowa Republicans to take a similar stance against this highly insulting move on the part of the two "national front-runners." I would also encourage every Iowa Republican who has signed up to serve as a county chair or precinct organizer for both McCain and Giuliani to call their respective headquarters and resign!

After a move like this, I think its our job as Iowa activists to tell these two campaigns that they are no longer welcome in Iowa!

Anonymous said...

The stupid thing is that they think there is no connection to people who go the straw poll and the caucuses.

Nussle displays his ignorance by claiming that this is a little selfish party. It is strategically stupid on every level.

It's the people that go to the straw poll that drive attendance at the caucuses. They are the uber volunteers. They are the phone bank volunteers. They are the yard sign installers. They are the literature drop walkers. They are the door knockers. They are the precint captains. They are the ones that hold house parties. They are the ones that spread the message to others. They are the recruiters for campaigns. They are the ones that make the difference.

I get the idea that Nussle has never lived in Iowa and worse than that, hates the Iowa Republican party .

Anonymous said...

I go to the straw poll for the free food and entertainment.

Anonymous said...

Ted, quite frankly, I hope you and your fellow State Central Committee members would sent a very clear message to the Giuliani and McCain camps:

"If you don't want to support the Iowa Republican Party at the Straw Poll..then don't bother to ask Iowa Republicans to support you in the caucuses.."

RPI puts on the Straw Poll for two reasons..1. Fundraising..2 More importantly, its the biggest Republican Party event in the country the year before the election.

If I were Jim Nussle..or Marlys Popma..or Greg Ganske, Dick Johnson, Ed Failor Jr, Karen Slifka..etc...all these well known Republican leaders who are working for or endorsed either McCain or Giuliani..I'd resign IMMEDIATELY.

Like Chuck Laudner implied earlier today in a media interview..Giuliani and McCain are basically kicking RPI in the nuts.

I sure as hell would not want to work for a candidate that's going to show that kind of respect to the Republican Party in Iowa.

Need people be reminded in the case of McCain this is the SECOND time he's insulted Republicans in this state...and yet people are still supporting the guy? Doesn't make a damn lick of sense to me.

The real Ted Sphincter GOP said...

What we have here is further proof that the Iowa Caucuses are sliding into the backwater of politics.
The straw poll was nothing but a fundraising event where candidates brought out of staters and other candidates paid for prime spots for their tents knowing that the GOP sheeple either vote for the first or last campaign sign they see.
At least McCain and Rudy won't be throwing bad money after bad money. They can wait until these "Contenders" weed themselves out.
Romney will have a " Brainwashed" moment.
The Thompson twins have too many skeletons
and as for the creationists, they are receiving a lesson in survival of the fittest! No Ark for you!

That leaves Newt whose ethical,family and moral lapses truly represents what the GOP has become!

Enjoy this one boys don't forget to get your picture taken with the big boys now as they won't be returning your calls.because next election cycle old Iowa will be as irrelevant in politics as it is in everything else.

defeating john mcquisling is priority number one said...

I don't give a shit about the party. I just wanted to see McQuisling and Rudy the drag queen get beat in the straw poll.

An idea! said...

I've got some pitchforks and torches in my garage. What say we gather on the front steps of RPI this evening and run John McAmnesty and Rudy "the baby killer" Giuliani out of Iowa for good!?

Anonymous said...

McCain and Rudy are saying that they don't intend to be the leader of the party - the entire party. They just want to be President for their own personal power needs. The President is the head of the party and they just told the party to go F themselves, we don't need you or your stinking party. That's the message.

If they think that they are going to be able to get the very people to whom they just said - I don't care about you or your state or that you are trying to turn the state red from blue - to volunteer for their campaigns, they are crazy.

We still have to live here after these Elvis's have left the building. We still have to clean up the debris they leave behind.

Saying you won't do the straw poll, but you will do the caucuses is like the democrats saying they support the troops, but hate the war.

It's a phony line of logic when Rudy and McCain say it too.

Cedar Waxwing said...

I'm afraid of the future ramifications of this foolish decision by Rudy and McCain..

This will only give ammo to the other states who want to take away Iowa's First in the Nation status.

McCain's going to be in Iowa this weekend.. I hope that Republican activists show up at the events and literally shame the man.

the national blogs agree - rudy and mccain are unprepared to compete in iowa said...

RealClearPolitics HorseRaceBlog

By Jay Cost

June 06, 2007

That Was Subtle, John

I guess the senior senator from Arizona was looking for a chance to extricate himself from Ames, which he did shortly after Giuliani withdrew.

Was that more subtle, less subtle, or as subtle as Hillary Clinton's vote on the Iraq supplemental last month?

Well - now we know that it must be Romney that both Giuliani and McCain are afraid of in Iowa.

This will diminish the value of an Ames victory, which now will now almost assuredly go to Romney. But I would disagree with Chris Cillizza, who argues on The Fix:

With three out of the four frontrunning candidates likely bypassing the straw poll (only former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney remains committed to it), the ultimate results will carry nearly no significance.

It also sets up a break with tradition, as no candidate in the past three decades who has skipped the straw poll has gone on to win the Iowa caucuses.

The test of Ames is a test of organization, right? So, if McCain and Giuliani are dropping out, what does that imply? It implies that they do not expect to have the organization to compete with Romney in advance of Ames.

Thus, Romney wins Ames - and reaps its principal benefit, proof of organizational supremacy - regardless of whether Giuliani and McCain actually compete.

His win might not mean as much insofar as it will not be as splashy when it actually happens, and it will not give him as much of a boost in the polls (was Ames going to do that, anyway?).

However, the message sent to political elites and Iowans alike is precisely the same: Romney is ready to compete with his opponents, and his opponents are not yet ready to compete with him.

There are still a lot of benefits accruing to Romney, even if they are not as plentiful as they otherwise would have been.

And, what is more, if his benefits have diminished, his costs have diminished at least as much. Think of it: Romney gets the advantage of strutting his organizational stuff without spending nearly as much money to do it.

So, the benefits are a little less, for sure. But so also are the costs. I think this might net out on the positive side for Romney.

Like I said, I am feeling bullish about Romney of late. He leads our polling averages for both New Hampshire and Iowa.

If he wins both of those primaries, and finishes at least in second in Nevada, the whole nation will have a week to sit and stew on these developments before Florida.

I have been a skeptic, but there is something about his campaign that both the Giuliani and McCain campaigns seem to lack.

Real ted Sphincter GOP said...

Give it up folks! This is Iowa's last Hurrah! Go out and thank the candidates for all the money they spent here because the the Goose is dead and there will be no more Golden Eggs.
it was a nice cottage industry we had here and by rubbing shoulders with the Big Wigs Old Chuck Hurley, Teddy the Terrible and Steve Deace felt like Real Men.

Oh well now they will have to get real jobs. Maybe they and all those young Romney workers will volunteer to fight the Terrorists by joining the Army. Oops I forgot one needs courage and a sense of duty to serve their country.

Anonymous said...

I think the Iowa employees of both campaigns should immediately step down from the Rudy and McCain campaigns.

They are participating in the continued destruction of the iowa party. They live here too don't they? Or, are they now just completely 100% political hacks that only care about what they earn for a living rather than what they cared about when they first began.

They've lost their Iowa roots. They don't care about the party either. They just care about their $10,000 a month salaries.

This will be their last hurrah in Iowa with volunteers. I don't think Marlys, Ed, Chuck etc are going to find the people on those famous lists of theirs to be very cooperative next time they come a calling if they willingly participate in this murder.

Do the right thing guys. Do you care about the future of our party or do you just love McCain so much that it's worth it to you?

still tyring to be like ted said...


did you have you you colostomy bad shake for breakfast today? it sounds like you did.

let's see, Deace is the hottest DJ in town.

Sporer is President of a downtown law firm.

Hurley runs one of Iowa's largest in state PACs.

So to you I say, fat drunk and stupid is no way to go through life.

Who's got your back Papa Bear.

Anonymous said...

If someone knows how to grab and link the latest Iowa Poll, I wish they would do it.

As I recall, Romney was leading. This appears to be an attempt to lower expectations and to watch Romney and the other Camps spend down their campaign accounts.

Money is a great equalizer, in the end, and unless I'm wrong, Romney had a comfortable lead in the fund raising department, as well.

I am still undecided as to who I will support and I find this really, really troubling.

I, too, think this is the beginning of the end of the Caucuses. I am totally stunned that people I've respected for years are advising these people.

I'd really like to hear what Marlys and Jr. have to say about this.

At this point, the only absolute we know is that Jim Nussle has no intention of running for office again.

Steve Deace said...

Maybe it's just me, but this is evidence the process works and that there still are some salt-of-the-earth Iowans left.

The media has been trying to pick your party's nominee from the beginning. In fact, they're trying to pick both party's nominees. That's because they're Leftists, and Leftists hate the Clintons. They stomach them only because they have to. Sort of like how you people tolerate McCain.

Hillary is a Clinton, which is synonomous with whore and sellout. And the MoveOn.orgers know it. They see vitriol against Bush and know the GOP has a tough hill to climb next year. So they think this is their chance to turn the country dead left. But they also know they can't do that with Hillary. Sure, she's more liberal than us, but she's still a Clinton. That's why Obama gets all the favorable coverage and they're on their knees begging Gore to get in. They're true Leftists, and the Leftists think that next year is their best chance to slip one past the goalie.

On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani is a media invention. The beltway people loved him because he was their kind of Republican -- he got rid of homeless folks (which limousine liberals loathe), put more black folks in jail (another group limousine liberals can't stand), and cut their taxes without making them feel guilty. Plus, he allowed them to kill babies with reckless abandon and become the infanticide capital of America, moved the ball down the field for the Sodom and Gomorrah crowd, and fought for open borders. This is a dude that sued the Clinton administration because he thought their immigration policy was too tough.

The only reason Rudy is viewed so favorably is because no candidate, not even Obama and Gore, gets the favorable media coverage he gets. And that's because the media is hoping and praying (to Buddha or Gaia, of course) they can sucker you into making him your nominee, because they know "moderate" (and Rudy gives moderates a bad name) Republicans never win the presidency campaigning as who they really are. They need to lie to people like Dubya has done, and then reveal they're the wolf in sheep's clothing years later.

Iowans smelled that out, and that's why Rudy's not coming back here. Despite cries from the media that he's the frontrunner, he's not even going to compete in the biggest GOP event of the year. What does that tell you? It tells me that you people are smarter than the media.

As for McCain, nobody -- and I do mean nobody -- has done more damage to conservatism than he has. McCain-Feingold, speaking out against the gay marriage amendment, originally against the repeal of Roe vs. Wade as recently as 2000, the ultimate sellout of conservatives with the gang of 14, and the ultimate sellout of America with this immigration scam. Ted Kennedy wakes up at night wishing upon a star he could get away with what McCain has gotten away with.

Iowans aren't stupid, and despite the fact he's still having a luncheon for conservatives (apparently the gullible ones or the ones who just want a free lunch) at Des Moines Chrisitan High School on Saturday, he's toast. Despite the fact he paid thousands of dollars per month to buy the loyalty of some long-time Iowa activists, the state isn't going for it, proving yet again that Iowans are smarter than the average bear.

This isn't about Iowa being irrelevant, this is about Iowans not wanting to choose the lesser of two evils any more. This is about Iowans taking a long look at Rudy and McCain and saying return to sender. This is about Iowans doing what the process calls them to do. The elites, though, don't like that.

The elites don't like it when you're not "inclusive" (see that as homosexual and illegal-alien affirming), the elites don't like it when you're consistent, and the elites don't like it when you don't take their spoonfed, watered-down Greg Ganske-like candidates.

Next in line is Mitt Romney. He has great ads, he looks great on TV, and he seems polished. But his record has more holes in it than the charred remains of Saddam's sons.

And this has nothing to do with his Mormonism. Do I believe in the same Jesus that Mormons do? Nope. Do I believe what Mormons believe is true? Nope, because if I did -- guess what -- I would be a Mormon. But you know what, Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson were great presidents, and they didn't believe in the trinity, either.

This is not about Mormonism, but rather Mitt's cafeteria Mormonism. He was to Mormons what Tom Harkin and Tom Vilsack are to Catholics until about 16 months ago. The record he had until recently on homosexuals, abortion, and illegal immigration couldn't have gotten him elected in Utah, let alone the presidency. That's why he was in the People's Republic of Massachusetts.

Is that coincidence or a sincere conversion? You make the call. Me, I'm tired of taking leaps of faith with candidates, only to be disappointed. I'm tired of falling for the banana in my tailpipe.

Until 16 months ago, Romney was proud to be more pro-gay rights than Kennedy -- even to the point of thinking the Boy Scouts should have to allow homosexuals.

Until 16 months ago Romney was pro-abortion on the basis of what his mother taught him and because a family friend allegedly died in a back-alley abortion. Now, not on the basis of the slaughter of 50 million babies but on the basis of embryonic stem cells, he's staunchly pro-life?

Less than 16 months he was for giving illegal aliens a path to citizenship, now he's not? Just a year ago he said the GOP should pass the McCain-Kennedy compromise or be prepared to be viewed outside the mainstream. Now he's Minuteman?

He claimed to be a lifelong member of the NRA and a hunter, yet no state he's ever lived in has a hunting license with his name on it. Maybe he didn't inhale, either.

We could go on and on. The book on Mitt's flip-flops is a long one.

I know someone I greatly respect like Jay Seculow is supporting him. And I can understand why, because if you're Jay and you think the top tier is really the top tier, Romney doesn't represent the lesser of two evils. He represents the lesser of three evils.

Ask yourself, beyond the image does Romney have the record to match the rhetoric? Ask yourself, could Romney's spotty record of consistency really stand up to the scrutiny of the Clinton War Machine?

You already know that Rudy and McCain can't win, that's why you vetoed them in Iowa. Now it's time to look closely at the next so-called media annointed front-runner.

The only way the Republican Party wins any national referendum in this country is by articulating a clear, conservative contrast to the Left. To do that you have to have a consistent record, or at least a weak opponent. Hillary has weaknesses, but she's not a weak opponent like John Kerry. So you better have the consistent record.

Does any of the so-called top tier have that consistent record? If you're honest with yourself you know the answer is no. Romney's proxy in Iowa is Doug Gross, who ran one of the weakest gubernatorial campaigns of the 20th century, and was on the same side as Tom Vilsack in taking away your private property rights. What does that tell you?

Conservatives, this is a chance to take your party back in Iowa from people like Mary Lundby, Doug Gross, Chris Rants, Libby Jacobs, Dan Clute, Pat Ward, Jim Nussle, etc. who don't share your principles. They're political hacks who just want to cash the check at your expense. They view you as sheep, how much longer will you allow them to get away with that? How much longer will you take half a loaf when you have the numbers? How much longer will you allow these folks to take the Des Moines Register editorial board and David Yepsen (whom I respect, but has obviously decided to become a homosexual advocate) more seriously than you?

This is your chance to make a statement that you won't get fooled again. Seek out the folks who really share your values, and tell the elites to stick it where the sun don't shine by voting your conscious. Be the winnowing fork Iowa is designed to be. Don't just stop at Rudy and McCain. Finish the job.

After I write this folks will attack me emotionally and call me names. That's cool. I didn't leave the Republican Party, it left me. I didn't go independent because I don't believe anymore in conservatism, it's the philoshophy that I believe best matches up with a Biblical worldview. I left the GOP because the people running it don't agree with conservatism in case you hadn't noticed. They agree with selling out and cashing the check, all under the banner of a big tent.

But will the haters put their names on their words like I do? Are they willing to stand by what they say in public? Do they have facts to say I'm wrong?

I think we know the answer to that, too.

Please feel free to pass this along to anyone else you think might be interested.

Rudy and McCain have LOTS in common with Hitlery said...

hey sphincter - (how appropos that you choose that moniker)

If what you say is true, why do you take such glee in Iowa losing it's value in national politics?

Are you a self hating Iowan like Vilsack, who made a deal with the devil (Hitlery) to make Iowa irrelevant in Democrat politics?

Hitlery knew she couldn't compete here either so she hooked up with Vilsack to give her cover. She could explain Vilsack beating her. SHe can't explain anyone else beating her. Thus, the recent coordinated leak of the famous memo to Hillary recently about not competing in Iowa.

As additional insurance, she got Vilsack to go along with changing Iowa's 1st in the nation slot in the Democrat party. I'm still shocked that Vilsack would do that to his own party.

Vilsacks payoff, besides having Hillary payoff his debt? He believes he was promised the Vice Presidency for his loyal service to the Clintons. He rolled over, you might say.

Kinda sounds like the deal Algore made with the same set of devils. It didn't work out well for him either.

the numbers don't lie - McCain is free falling - Welcome to Iowa Fred! said...

New poll from Quinnipiac shows significant movement for Fred:


Giuliani 31 (-7 vs. last poll April 26)
Thompson 14 (+9)
McCain 10 (-5)
Romney 8 (+1)
Gingrich 7 (+1)
Undecided 21 (nc)

more national opinion on McCain's free fall said...

Romney touted the "good news" that his opponents dropped out while campaigning in New Hampshire yesterday, reports The Politico's Jonathan Martin.

Later Romney's campaign leaked an internal Iowa poll showing him leading Giuliani and McCain by more than 17 percent.

"The decision of McCain and Giuliani to not participate in the straw poll may ultimately damage their chances in the caucuses in January.

In the short term, though, they are able to avoid an embarrassing and near-certain loss to a candidate who is still polling in the single digits in some national polls."

Here's the internal memo from Romney - This is why they aren't playing in Iowa - They already lost said...

Romney camp touts Iowa lead in internal poll

On the heels of the news today that Rudy Giuliani and John McCain won't participate in the Ames Straw Poll, emerges an internal survey from Mitt Romney's campaign showing him with a wide lead in the Iowa race.

According to the poll, obtained from a Romney aide, the former governor leads Giuliani by 17percent and McCain by 20 percent.

In a May 31st memo highlighting the numbers, Romney strategist Alex Gage writes that his client has "gained 14 points in the past two months while all of the other major candidates have lost ground or remained stagnant."

Romney pollster Jan van Louhuizen sampled 402 likely Iowa caucus-goers from May 29-31. The survey had a margin of error of 4.9 percent.

The breakdown was:

Romney: 29
Giuliani: 12
F. Thompson: 10
Gingrich: 10
McCain: 9
Huckabee: 7
Other candidates: 11
Undecided: 12

In a March poll conducted for the campaign, it was:

Giuliani: 24
McCain: 17
Romney: 15
Gingrich: 15
Huckabee: 7
F. Thompson: N/A (he wasn't included in the survey)
Other candidates: 9
Undecided: 13

"It is clear from the data that this movement is attributable to the campaign’s strong presence in Iowa—the combined effect of our advertising, the Governor’s travel schedule, and our superior grassroots organization," touts Gage.

Now, internal polls are always to be taken with a grain of salt. But as overly large as Romney's lead may seem, keep in mind that the Register poll, with a similar sample size, had Romney up 12 percent. That was taken from 5/12-5/16.

It's possible that the emergence of the immigration issue could've sunk McCain's numbers further between that period and the end of last month, when this survey was taken.

Also, including Fred Thompson in this internal poll and not the last one in March clearly helped Romney.

Both McCain and Giuliani saw their numbers chopped in half with Thompson in the mix.

Romney aides have been making the case today that the decision of McCain and Giuliani to back out of Ames was a decision that they had to make. The sort of numbers reflected in this poll, they argue, revealed the depth of their challenge.

The decision of McCain and Giuliani to not participate in the straw poll may ultimately damage their chances in the caucuses in January.

In the short term, though, they are able to avoid an embarrasing and near-certain loss to a candidate who is still polling in the single digits in some national polls.


Anonymous said...

Giuliani and McCain have said that the war in iraq has been mis-managed, and that is why the war hasn't gone very well.

Personally I think that if they can't manage and organize their own campaign and choose to skip the Iowa straw poll because things don't look very good for them, how can they expect to have the expertise to manage a war.

They are in a war with several other candidates and it looks like Governor Romney's CEO/Management and organizational skills in Iowa have shown who should be the next President.

If giuliani and mccain can't manage a campaign there is no way they could run a country and I certainly wouldn't want one of them to manage a war!

Anonymous said...

Ted - with all this news, you definately need to reset the poll.

calling Fred and Newt! said...

Hey Fred and Newt - we have a couple of speaking spots that just opened up. How do you feel about addressing an audience of 25,000 to 50,000 republicans who might just turned on enough to want to volunteer to get folks to caucus for you?

This news definately positions you for a big jump start to a late starting campaign.

getting back to the real reason for all this - the bumper sticker war said...

NATO officials say they have caught Iran red-handed, shipping heavy arms, C4 explosives and advanced roadside bombs to the Taliban for use against NATO forces, in what the officials say is a dramatic escalation of Iran's proxy war against the United States and Great Britain.

"It is inconceivable that it is anyone other than the Iranian government that's doing it," said former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant.

Real Ted Sphincter GOP said...

The dems have nothing to do with the straw poll. It is our own party leadership that is making Iowa a political Backwater.
Then you have Deace advocating a return to the Reformation calling Chris Rants a moderate and you wonder why the major candidates avoid a fund raiser for the local chapter of the "short bus politicos"

Gee A lawyer, a DJ and a Lobbyist, now those are honorable professions that we should listen as the voices of reason

This is why the Iowa GOP has lost it's way. It is populated with the folks that used to be put away in Cherokee, Mt Pleasant, Independence, Clarinda mental Health Institute. Time to take your meds and remember when you were a contender!

I love the empty threats of how rudy and McCain will regret not coming to Iowa. The candidates having to come to Iowa is about as much fun as a prostate exam from Rev Haggard.

Seeing the photo Ops of the candidates hugging the Iowa Faithful reminds me of all those fake heartwarming hugs that the "Special Olympic "volunteers give to those "special" atheletes. Steve, chuck and Little ted love your medals don't you boys!

WOW! Where's my debit card. said...

Fred Thompson raised $220,000 from his Web site after being up for only 18 hours.

Anonymous said...

The poll also showed that 22% thought Romney won Tuesday night's debate, while 18% felt Giuliani did and only 11% thought McCain did.

55% of those surveyed oppose the comprehensive immigration bill, and 58% said they are in favor of the surge of military troops in Iraq.

Anonymous said...

sphincter - take your head out of your sphincter. It's been up there too long. Your thoughts are irrational.

Anonymous said...

What delusional idiot keeps saying that there will be 30-50,000 Republicans in Ames on August 11th? I didn't believe this with Rudy and McCain in it, and now with those two out and more to drop over the next two weeks, they won't be able to break 5-10,000 Romneyites. Mormons, do your duty!

Still pissed said...

Sphincter – Do you really think that Rudy or McCain can win the General Election in Iowa (or any other state for that matter) when self-important douche-bags like yourself call the people who do the heavy lifting on the ground “short bus politicos” or “special Olympic volunteers?” It seems more likely that the ill will you’re creating, all but ensure a 4 or even 5th place finish for Rudy and McCain in Iowa on January 14th. Moreover, its also safe to bet that this move has pissed of enough core Iowa Republicans to pretty much guarantee Iowa’s 7 electoral votes would go blue in November 2008 and Hillary Clinton can start measuring for drapes in the oval office if Giuliani or McCain wins the GOP primary process.

In my estimation, dealing with President Hillary for 4 years before we can nominate a good leader for the GOP and try again is MUCH better than spending 8 years under the self-righteous, stuck-up, morally bankrupt standard barer of the Republican Party. I’ve got some tomatoes sitting out in the sun on my front porch so they will be nice and rotten when I’m ready to start throwing them as Rudy and McCain when they bring their circus acts back to Iowa later this summer. I would encourage everyone else to do the same ... . After all, nothing tells the national media how much Iowa hates a candidate then the photo of Rudy with rotten produce all over his jacket.... Time to crawl back into the crimeinfested liberal hell-hole you crawled out of Mr. Mayor!

Real Ted Sphincter GOP said...

Dear still pissed;
it doesn't matter where Mc Cain or Rudy place in our caucus. Iowa doesn't count anymore and the top candidates know it. When Romney and the 7 dwarfs realize that all those Big States who moved up their primaries have a bigger payout than Iowa then they will shift their spending quicker than dirt.
After seeing the cream of the candidates most GOPers would prefer to have Fred Thompson? Gee an actor and former lobbyist will be the perfect leader!
There are a lot of foot soldiers standing down for this one until the Iowa GOP expunges it's leadership and quit sucking up to the evangelicals and start seeking some moderation.

Don't fear Hillary her parents were Republicans when the GOP wasn't the party of perverts, opportunists, and morons!

We've known edwards to be untrustworthy for some time now said...

The dynamic performance by John Edwards in Sunday's Democratic presidential debate, assailing his competitors for the nomination, got high marks from political reporters, Republican politicians and left-wing activists.

But not from the Democratic establishment. Once their great hope for the future, Edwards now is massively unpopular among party regulars, who neither like nor trust him.

Edwards is a moron, B. clinton is a pervert and Hilster is an opportunist said...

Edwards has not worn well with party colleagues.

Campaign consultant Bob Shrum was enthusiastic about Edwards after working on his 1998 Senate victory in North Carolina and unsuccessfully advised Gore to make him his 2000 running mate.

But Shrum chose Kerry over Edwards as his 2004 presidential client. In his newly published memoir, "No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner," Shrum explains: "I was coming to believe he wasn't ready; he was a Clinton who hadn't read the books."

Edwards is an opportunist said...

During the 2004 primaries, Democratic activist James Carville was enchanted when Edwards shifted his centrist posture to a populist depiction of "Two Americas."

Carville told me -- and then repeated it on CNN -- that Edwards was the best stump speaker he ever had seen. When I asked him this week whether he still thought that was true, Carville replied: "Maybe he's not as good now."

In fact, Edwards's populist rhetoric sounds about the same today as it did three years ago. The big change is his performance away from the podium. Seldom has a presidential candidate undergone a trifecta like Edwards's this year -- reports of the $400 haircut, a $55,000 honorarium from University of California at Davis for a speech on poverty and the $500,000 hedge fund salary -- without his campaign imploding.

mrs edwards is a moron - an the meanest potential first lady ever said...

Such mishaps appear to be of Edwards's own making rather than accidental, as was suggested by the scene after the New Hampshire debate. Edwards's wife, Elizabeth, entered the spin room Sunday and took issue with passages in Shrum's memoir. She claimed Shrum misquoted her husband as saying of gays during his 1998 campaign, "I'm not comfortable around those people." At that same time, an Edwards aide attacked Shrum's honesty. Answering a book account of a nine-year-old encounter is not a good approach for a presidential candidate.

iowa democrats are morons for backing edwards - the opportunist candidate said...

The ardor for a politically accident-prone Edwards has also cooled in the labor movement, where an endorsement from the Change to Win coalition led by Andrew Stern and James P. Hoffa is now far less likely than it was in December.

Hoffa reportedly still regards Edwards as the most pro-labor presidential candidate but doubts whether he can be nominated.

So Edwards must rely on true believers who will brave the bitter Iowa cold in the dark of night to attend caucuses. That's the kind of voter impressed by Edwards lashing out at Obama and especially Clinton on the war.

Iowa Democrats in 2004 pulled back from catastrophe at the 11th hour and abandoned Howard Dean when they contemplated the impact of a Dean victory. Party leaders hope Iowans will take a similarly hard look at John Edwards.

morons and perverts and opportunists oh my! said...

the stupidest question at the democrat debate was "how would you use Bill Clinton (RAPIST PERVERT)in your administration?"

Well, gee, the party of personal corruption thinks their impeached president who is also a convicted perjurer, rapist, mysoginist, and serial womanizer, who cheats on his wife to this very day, ought to be the UN Secretary General!

What a bunch of perverts, morons and opportunists.

sphincter - is this the rectum hole from which you emerged? this sounds like you talking said...

It seems we (WSJ) weren't the only one to notice that the New York Times buried news of a foiled terror plot against John F. Kennedy International Airport on page 37.

A pair of Times readers submitted questions about this to Suzanne Daley, the paper's national editor, who is doing a "Talk to the Newsroom" question-and-answer series this week. Here is Daley's explanation:

Here's the basic thinking on the J.F.K. story: In the years since 9/11, there have been quite a few interrupted terrorist plots. It now seems possible to exercise some judgment about their gravity. Not all plots are the same.

In this case, law enforcement officials said that J.F.K. was never in immediate danger. The plotters had yet to lay out plans. They had no financing. Nor did they have any explosives.

The attitudes expressed by Daley and the Times editorial board are quite typical of elite liberal thought.

They share a premise that the threat of terrorism has been greatly exaggerated.

But on closer analysis, there is a contradiction, one that reveals why liberal thinking on terrorism is dangerous not only to American national security but also, in the long run, to liberal ideals.

Every time law-enforcement authorities announce that they have stopped a terror plan, we hear Daley-like pooh-poohing from the left: The plot wasn't really that serious, it was nowhere near being carried out, the suspects were just a bunch of losers, that sort of thing.

(The battier Bush-haters add that the announcement is a publicity stunt to stoke public fear or serve some political purpose.)

If this portrait of law-enforcement efforts is true, then the Times's blithe assurance that the criminal-justice system is sufficient for dealing with the terror threat is utterly fatuous, is it not?

Thee Times's ideas are well within what passes for the mainstream of the Democratic Party.

this was worth repeating. the ny times provides them their talking points- they never stray said...

(The battier Bush-haters add that the announcement is a publicity stunt to stoke public fear or serve some political purpose.)

and we wonder why we call them unpatriotic self-loathing americans said...

Would the American people accept the idea that serial mass murder on our own soil is just the price we have to pay to preserve some abstract concept of liberty--that is, that the Constitution is a suicide pact after all? We doubt it.

It is much more likely that the political system would find it impossible to resist public demands for much harsher antiterror measures, probably involving genuine curtailments of civil liberties. There is no reason to think that liberal politicians would resist such demands. After all, Woodrow Wilson restricted free speech during World War I, and Franklin D. Roosevelt interned tens of thousands of American citizens during World War II, cheered on by then-Gov. Earl Warren of California. In both cases the Supreme Court ratified the president's excesses.

By overreacting to imagined civil liberties threats today, American liberals may be setting the stage for future overreactions in the other direction.

Anonymous said...

You should “care” what happens in our caucus in Iowa. New York and California are total lost causes for the GOP, in New York the Republicans are virtual clones of Rudy and yet even inspite of their liberal beliefs the New York Republicans hold 0 Seats in the US Senate, and only 20% of seats in the US House … Bush lost there 17% in 2004! We have NO chance to win there! California is a similar state of hopelessness for the GOP. There Bush lost by 11%, we hold no US Senators and only 34% of US House seats … Why the FUCK would ANY candidate in their right mind bypass the Midwest in favor of these states? It’s like divorcing your wife because the beautiful and TOTALLY unattainable woman down the street winked at you as this morning. Sphincter, all you’re doing here is showing this collective party what a moron you are.

and yet, hillary and bill fully embraced and supported berger, when kerry fired him. said...

On May 17th, Sandy Berger, President Bill Clinton's National Security Adviser, voluntarily gave up his law license and with it the right to practice law.

That is a stunning move for an accomplished lawyer, one of the nation's most influential public officials. Someone should take note. In fact, everyone should.

Berger previously entered a deal with the Department of Justice after he was caught stealing and destroying highly sensitive classified material regarding the Clinton Administration's handling of terrorism issues.

That deal allowed him to avoid jail time, pay a modest fine, and keep his law license. It also allowed him to avoid full explanation of what he had taken and why he had taken it.

What information was worth risking his reputation, his career, and his freedom to keep hidden? And who was he risking that for?

do even democrats want to have these criminals in office again? aren't you tired of clinton scandels said...

Recently, the Board of the DC Bar, which had granted Berger his license, began asking those questions. There was only one way to stop that investigation, to keep from answering questions about what he did and why he did it, to keep the Bar from questioning his colleagues in the Clinton Administration about what had been in the documents Berger destroyed.

Berger took that step, surrendering his license, and stopping the investigation.

Ordinarily, anyone who has spent the time, effort, and money needed to master one of the "learned professions" fights with the utmost determination to keep his license. That is not merely a ticket to practice your chosen profession - it is also a badge of honor and accomplishment. Ask any doctor or lawyer, any architect or CPA, any professional at all, what it means to give that up.

That Berger didn't fight speaks volumes.

hillary is NOT divorced from bill. they are joint tenants in their evil house of absolute power said...

President Clinton designated Berger as his representative to the 9/11 Commission and related hearings, which gave Berger special access to highly classified documents in the National Archives relating to the Clinton Administration's handling of al-Qaeda and similar terror threats.

Berger got around rules requiring that the documents only be reviewed with Archives' employees present, purposefully stole documents, destroyed them, and lied about it all.

When caught, he first blamed Archives employees for misplacing the documents, then admitted having taken them inadvertently (this is the point at which he cut the plea deal), and finally acknowledged what was obvious from the facts that were emerging - he intentionally removed and destroyed documents.

why did berger make a deal with the devil clinton? only clinton benefited from this corruption. said...

Now, however, it is clear that there was nothing innocent or inadvertent in Berger's conduct.

He has something to hide and, whatever it is, he was terrified that at least some part of it would come out of a non-criminal hearing before the Bar.

With no possible criminal charges to face, he could not have claimed a right against self-incrimination.

He could no longer get away with saying that he took documents accidentally, took them only to prepare for up-coming hearings (why, then, take five copies of one memo?), or didn't intend to destroy them. He would, in other words, have had to say more than he has so far.

We don't know with any certainty what is missing, which papers exactly are gone, or what notes - and whose notes - may have been on them. Berger's lawyer asserted that the 9/11 Commission had copies of all the material Berger stole and destroyed.

But if that is so, why would Berger risk so much to destroy it and be so keen today on avoiding any real inquiry into what he did?

now here's your culture of corruption said...

The most likely explanation is that the material Berger destroyed points to a terrible mistake by Berger himself, by President Clinton, or by both.

In dealing with al-Qaeda, did they overlook a critical piece of information or miss a chance to stop 9/11?

Did the Administration's failure to take a more aggressive posture encourage al-Qaeda's later attacks?

When Fox News' Chris Wallace raised the possibility that Clinton's Administration might have done something more to prevent 9/11, Bill Clinton went into an inexplicable rage on national television. Wallace touched a nerve. So did the DC Bar.

Knowing what information Berger destroyed also might alter views of the current Bush Administration.

Was the early support from both Bill and Hillary Clinton for going to war against Saddam based on something we don't know yet that was available to insiders in the Clinton Administration?

Was it something that could come back to haunt Hillary and ruin her chances of winning Bill's third term?

where are the 9-11 widows when you need them? said...

Whatever it was, it's likely that what Berger destroyed could have helped us understand what led to the most tragic terror attack in our nation's history and perhaps also help us decide what course - and what Chief Executive - will best to protect our future. The fact that Berger has been able to avoid revealing that information is a scandal of its own.

The only person who knows what information was lost is Sandy Berger. And he isn't talking.

billary - what did you know and when did you know it? said...

The story doesn't interest the Democrats in Congress, who prefer spending time investigating why eight political-level appointees were fired -

The Sandy Berger story doesn't interest the mainstream news media. The media elites, so keen in other settings on the people's right to know, don't want to know about this.

Maybe if this story involved a Karl instead of a Sandy . . .

Maybe some day someone will step back and wonder why a successful lawyer like Berger would take so drastic a step as surrendering his law license just to evade questions.

Someone will ask what could have been so terrible that it was worth that price to keep it hidden. Someone will decide that it's important to know what Mr. Berger is hiding.

Because, in truth, it could affect us all.

Real Ted sphincter GOP said...

They are starting to bypass us because out of 300 million folks in America, we are less than 3 million. They are starting to bypass us because Iowa GOP loyalists have veered into evangelical delusions of importance or greedy opportunists. The money trail no longer leads here and it is all about money. Hell, Steve Deace, the worlds biggest bandwagon jumper has bailed knowing that he can't make any money by being a republican. he would rather be a mormon talking to the Archangel Moroni than break bread with the GOP. When a rat like that bails then soon Chuck Hurley will be taking the next cloud to Raptureland.

What you are seeing is the GOP itself descending into it's own little civil war full of little sects who all believe they are the chosen ones. I myself can't wait until the moderates of the party come back and show all you jihadists how to run a party and actually provide our country with candidates worthy of our votes.
And by the way goobers, my nom de plume is in honor of the ring master of this flea circus!

Anonymous said...

Giuliani Thompson Romney McCain
June 23 17 15 14
May 25 14 14 17
April 29 13 11 16
March 35 9 16
February 31 9 18
January 29 9 20

Giuliani surged in February and March, then fell back as Thompson's name appeared on the list.

The lead he has now is anything but commanding.

Thompson, who raised his first money yesterday, clearly is competitive.

Romney has been on an upswing, but of limited scope.

McCain has been falling.

Anonymous said...

sphincter - did you forget to take your preparation H today for your throbbing hemmorroid of a brain. your post is illucid.

it's not the straw poll that's the problem. it's mccain that is the problem. said...

June 07, 2007

McCain loses an SC county chair over immigration

Despite his best case for the immigration compromise -- and he made a good one at the debate the other nignt -- the unalterable fact is that the issue is right now a major problem for the McCain campaign.

To wit, one of the first tangible signs of the damage it's doing, as supplied by Romney's camp:

Subject: RE: TIME TO CALL RADIO Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 22:15:22 -0400 From: David Nix To: 'Adam Temple' CC: Mike Gibbons


Please consider this my resignation as Aiken County chair for McCain. I am too far from him on the Amnesty Bill. I was hopeful that he could keep his nose clean this time around, but he can’t read the pulse of the American citizens.

Please pass my regrets on to Henry McMaster.

David Nix
Aiken County

Adam Temple is McCain's South Carolina press secretary. The e-mail was in response to a plea for McCain county chairs to call into talk radio stations and make the pitch for their candidate. Nix, evidently, is very unhappy about the "Amnesty Bill" because the guy he cc'd, Mike Gibbons, happens to be a reporter for the Aiken paper. Henry McMaster, btw, is the state AG and a big McCain supporter.

real ted sphincter GOP said...

It's okay anonymous, just keep repeating "Iowa GOP is Important. We select the president" Those that bypass us will suffer"!
Just keep doing that. The rest of the nation could care less.

I am just trying to get you prepared for the near future when the candidates quit pandering to the yokels and fly right over us!

Just as you bypass Otley and Eddyville on your way home to Ottumwa!

Anonymous said...


You need to get a grip on reality here.

You want to make childish it somewhere else.

Iowa IS important...Let's look at the race state by state right now..

Rudy--has little to no organization in Iowa...not playing well w/ conservative voters..

--Rudy doing extremely poorly in South Carolina...

--McCain potentially down in the single digits in Iowa.

--McCain starting to lose grassroots support in S.C...

I'll make a bet right now.. McCain and Rudy's campaigns are DOA. No way either one of them win the nomination.

realtedsphincterGOP said...

The most that can happen is that Iowa weeds out some of the pretenders. Iowa is not a kingmaker just a Detassler!

After 2010 Census we lose another electoral vote. The law of diminishing returns says that if any candidate shows a sizable lead here that all the other candidates pull their money and staff for those states that have moved their primaries closer to our caucus. We will become as relevant as those precincts in New Hampshire where all 20 registered voters vote by 7:02 am and the networks send a guy to report on the rubes!
it would be better to invest our effort with none of these guys at the most we will be picking the next Alf Landon or Tom Dewey! Bush/Cheney has wrecked the party!

ha ha ha ha ha! The Democrats are homophobic! said...

A former staffer for the Democratic National Committee has filed a lawsuit against the organization, claiming he was the victim of discrimination because he is gay.

Donald Hitchcock, who was a gay outreach adviser for the committee, filed suit in Washington against the DNC, Chairman Howard Dean and two party officials, charging that discrimination was behind his firing on May 2, 2006.

Anonymous said...


I think you need an enema...

business leaders are developing high school curriculum because the isea has failed to teach said...

This week in the Business Record:

New conference to bridge gap between education, business

It would be impossible to sum up everything students should learn in a Business 101 course. Still, business leaders believe there are basic skills educators could incorporate into their lesson plans that would better prepare students for the working world.

That is why 18 Greater Des Moines companies have agreed to participate in a first-ever conference called "Preparing Today's Students for Tomorrow's Careers."

The four-day conference, aimed at high school teachers, will give participants an opportunity to meet with Central Iowa business leaders and learn about the skills they're looking for in candidates.

this is how D's deal with budgets said...

The state auditor is saying that the Iowa Legislature is spending too much money and has issued a review of Iowa's new $6.29 billion budget, which increased state spending by 10 percent from last year and created a $300 million deficit.

David Vaudt said this might mean that the state may have to increase taxes and cut spending if the economy slows down.

The auditor also warned that the shortfall is growing, and given the spending increases already built into law, it could cause the state to be $700 million over budget next year.

The Real Sporer said...

Well, the warrior returns from another day of battle to find our readers quite active today.

Yes, reader, we have a very good contingency for this opportunity-it was not entirely unanticipated.

Steve Deace said...

Rudy is pulling out of the Texas straw poll, too.

defeating john mcquisling is priority number one said...

Methinks McQuisling and Rudy the Rockette know that straw polls are tests of support. They have none, so they aren't going to play.

For Rudy, the straw poll would be a real "drag."

real Ted Sphincter GOP said...

Nothing to see here! folks just go along we knew this was going to happen! pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. I am the wise and powerful Sporer!!!!

Please mommy, the big boys won't play with us Iowa Hicks anymore!

Just the the big mutant mormom and he wants to convert us and marry my daughters!

i thought the war on terror was a bumper sticker, john said...

Today, as a result of what George Bush has done, we have more terrorists and fewer allies," Edwards said at a news conference. "There was no group called al-Qaida in Iraq before this president's war in Iraq."

Anonymous said...

So what happens if Rudy gets fed up with the GOP game and decides to go independent?

Anonymous said...

Newsweek's Fineman, on Giuliani's not competing in the IA straw poll: "That is part of the calculus. Rudy is saying, you know what, Iowa is loss for me anyway, I think he's saying.

Whatever I get there, I get. Maybe it's a tactical mistake, but that's what he's doing" ("Hardball," MSNBC, 6/6).

Anonymous said...

CNN's J. King: "Giuliani's own supporters are very disappointed in this.

His campaign said it is a question of resources, they promise they still will compete to win in the Iowa caucuses. ... But by skipping the summer straw poll, they have not only caused a bit of a morale crisis among their own supporters in the state, they have many Republicans, especially social conservatives in Iowa, saying Rudy Giuliani has made a tactical decision to all but give up on Iowa.

Again, the Giuliani campaign says, no, but he's going to have to prove that over the next coming weeks because he has disappointed even his own people out there" ("Situation Room," 6/6).

Anonymous said...

GOP pollster Frank Luntz was on "Hannity & Colmes" to talk about a focus group he did on the GOP debate. Luntz: "I've never seen any group turn on somebody like they turned on Senator McCain.

And that's because this issue of immigration is so powerful, so destructive, so divisive, and John McCain is on the wrong side of that issue" (FNC, 6/6).

Anonymous said...

Sphincter.....a mental hospital, maybe something you ought to think about.

real Ted Sphincter GOP said...

Ah yes the old Communist russia solution, When the communist gov't couldn't justify their actions, they immediately committed dissenters to the asylum. See how dysfunctional the GOP Has become! Your tactics mirror those of a corrupt system.

All I am saying is that the Iowa GOP is acting like some fat homely girl who was jilted out of her dowry! You are all whining because the big boys have rejected your shakedown(straw poll) to pad the coffers.
If you want to make the poll in September relevant then limit it to registered republicans within Iowa to prevent stacking by the Pat Robertson and Steve Forbes types.
Make it a legit measure and maybe they will come back. The truth is the Big Boys don't need Iowa anymore as all the primaries have moved up in dates and our influence means nothing. with the mega primaries happening one week later, no one will be talking about the Caucus within 48 hours

Just think if Rudy and Mccains camp just starts printing some of the typical comments made on this blog? Just think of the sympathy they could generate for themselves!

The Real Sporer said...

Mr. Sphincter;

I rarely respond to the comments, the objective isn't for me to argue with the readers.

Unlike your typical commentary your last post isn't just silly-it's objectively factually wrong.

Please describe the rules of the straw poll for attendance and voting that cause you to believe its rigged for any candidate or group or ideology? Can you?

If you cannot then you should reflect on the wisdom of opining so harshly on a subject about which you have either no or inadequate knowledge from which to form opinion or belief.

the front runners are afraid to appear in iowa because it will expose their campaign weaknesses said...

June 08, 2007
See Rudy and John Run
By Patrick Buchanan

In July 1861, the Union Army marched out of the capital to meet the Confederates forming up at Manassas. Washingtonians packed picnic lunches and followed to enjoy the rebel rout.

By nightfall, the Union Army was straggling back to the city. Stunned and panicked spectators had already returned to report the defeat of Gen. McDowell's forces.

What the First Battle of Bull Run meant was that the rebels were stronger and tougher than anticipated, and Mr. Lincoln's war was not going to be easy or short.

In Republican presidential politics, the Iowa straw poll, held the August before the January caucuses, serves the role of Bull Run.

It is the first major skirmish of the presidential season and registers the appeal of a candidate to the nation's first voters, the strength of his organization and the extent of his financial resources.

Thus, it is a stunning development that Rudy Giuliani, then John McCain, just pulled out of the Iowa straw poll on Aug. 11.

What seems to have happened is this.

Having spent less time in Iowa than McCain or Mitt Romney, with an organization regarded as feeble compared to theirs, Rudy feared a crushing defeat on Aug. 11 that would have destroyed his aura as front-runner. Rather than be humiliated, he elected to forfeit the game.

That left McCain nothing to gain on Aug. 11, but a lot to lose.

Now, he could not claim to have defeated Rudy, his main rival, but he would risk an embarrassing loss to Romney, who leads in many Iowa polls and whose organization is said to be the strongest in the state.

Bottom line: Mitt Romney is now the favorite to win the Iowa Caucuses in January, eight days before New Hampshire.

And recall: John Kerry's three-point victory in Iowa in 2004 propelled him to victory in New Hampshire and virtually every other primary save South Carolina and Oklahoma.

There is a real question today whether Rudy, whose liberal stance on gay rights and right-to-life is anathema to most Iowa Republicans, will even play in the caucuses. Why risk a death blow to his candidacy in what may be one of Rudy's weakest states?

McCain has to consider whether he, too, wants to risk a defeat there in January, which could be fatal to his candidacy, or whether he is not better advised to await Romney in New Hampshire, the way he did George W. Bush in 2000, when McCain -- wisely, it turned out -- ducked Iowa altogether.

Anonymous said...


The withdrawal of Rudy and McCain not only dims their luster, it puts pressure on Romney to run up the score on Aug. 11 and show intimidating strength.

And it presents an opening for a second-tier candidate -- former Govs. Mike Huckabee, Tommy Thompson and Jim Gilmore, Reps. Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul, and Sen. Sam Brownback -- to break out of the pack.

Whoever now runs second to Romney in the straw poll -- especially if he can put distance between himself and No. 3 -- will begin to attract attention from the media and see his contributions increase.

The McCain-Giuliani cop-out will cause Fred Thompson to review his strategy.

But the Iowa Caucuses have always been important, and often crucial.

Jimmy Carter's victory led to the nomination in 1976. Kerry's victory led to the nomination. George W. Bush's smashing victory in the Iowa straw poll of 1999 and follow-on triumph in the caucuses propelled him through defeat in New Hampshire to the White House.

Mitt Romney has been robbed of a triumph over his two main rivals on Aug. 11. They evaded the trap he had set.

But in running Rudy and John out of Ames, Romney has shown real strength, and must now be the favorite to take Iowa in January and probably is the man to beat in New Hampshire.

Bob Waters said...

Which is why, Ted, we need Fred Dalton Thompson as our nominee in 2008.

Hope to have you on board!

Anonymous said...

Pray tell, Ted, what is your contingency plan?

Anonymous said...

I think Rudy and McCain are doing the smart thing. How did this event help them at all?
Please give me some examples of how the straw poll has helped any campaign in the last 8 years, during which the straw poll has become such a hoopla (it's wasn't in 1988).
1996: Dole and Gramm tied, or more likely Gramm won. Lamar Alexander came in third. What was the relevance???
2000: Bush won after being a candidate for less than 2 months. Forbes came in second, and Elizabeth Dole third. Relevance???

The party people are pissed because they are going to lose their fundraiser. It has nothing to do with Rudy and McCain dissing Iowans.

Anonymous said...

Look at the caucus results there Rudy/McCain anon staffer....

1996--Dole won the caucus...Gramm a close second..with Alexander 3rd.

2000--Bush came in late..but got a solid organization on the ground quickly and put together a winning organization to the Straw Poll..

You guys SHOULD want to come to the straw poll and compete to WIN..If you guys came into Iowa..put forth the effort to build an organization..get the people there to support you and win....that carries over caucus time.

You guys are going the Dean route in 04..thinking you can win the caucus by default because you think you're the "most popular".

Guess what happened to Dean..he got his ass handed to him and finished 3rd! That with the Dean scream killed his candidacy and Kerry took the Iowa win..and ran to the Dem nomination easily.

I wouldn't expect some out-of-state staffer to understand what REAL grass roots politics is out here in Iowa.

Real Ted Sphincter GOP said...

Dear Ted
The straw poll is open to anyone who has the money to put down to vote. Gee sounds like the old Southern Poll Tax. In the past there were always out of state supporters of what ever candidate bused ( Forbes)in so that skews the true any validity what it does is give some fringe candidate some notice if he can stack the deck enough (Pat Robertson)

Back in 2000 there was much discussion on how one particular candidate got a prime booth spot as he was a Georgie come lately with a lot of cash.

Admit that the straw poll is just a fund raiser!

It is also time to admit to the sheeple that this is the caucus last hurrah!

I do have to give you compliments that you allow an open forum on this site.