Gingrich Just Can't Help Himself

Even after a resounding 15 point defeat in Florida, Gingrich just can't help himself.

A few comments about Gingrich's post-election speech from the NR Online chat:
"this must be the most grandiose speech on the occasion of sweeping defeat ever"
"Newt Gingrich is here to unleash our spirits."
"newt's final argument: i won't sing"
"And on the Seventh Day, President Newt rested."
"If Gingrich had won, would ANY part of his speech tonight have been different?"
"Think bigger, electorate! Bigger! BIGGER!"
"Newt, Sunday, on why he's trailing among women: "I have no idea." Tonight: "Let's talk about the power of ideas."
"Newt says the Power of People will overcome the Power of Money. It's a shame they let Romney's money vote like that."
"newt's disingenuous class warfare continues"

What a pompous big head that guy is.  My goodness.  Thank heavens Romney won and won big...

Also this was interesting from ABC News exit polling in Florida: “As a further indication of his general appeal, basic favorability toward Romney as a person far outpaces that of Gingrich. About three-quarters of Florida primary-goers have a favorable opinion of Romney, while only slightly more than half say so about Gingrich.”

Gingrich Gone Postal

OK, so I'm seeing a whole flurry - nay, a freakin' BLIZZARD - of lies and distortions flying from Gingrich's mouth this morning; clearly trying to have an influence on the election in Florida without giving Romney and his team time to respond and set the record straight.

Spread the word out there - none of us should fall for this or let our fellow citizens fall for these either.

To see this flurry and some quick responses, you can look at the Corner (National Review Online).

Here's a short reading list:

- Gingrich tries to claim that all votes not for Romney are specifically against Romney and not him personally.  Convenient.  Turns our there are a lot more anti-Gingrich voters than anti-Romney ones.

- Gingrich tries to defend his work as a supposed "historian" for Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae ($1.6 million for this...really?) and bash Romney's work at Bain Capital.  Turns out most people don't buy Gingrich's line on this.

- One of a number of last second charges from Gingrich is the Romney opposes kosher food in rest homes.  Hmmmmm.  Not hard to see this charge is false.

Romney Stronger Than You Think

Romney is polling strongly against Obama recently, especially given the early stage of the contest...Romney is even or better across the board and in key swing states. Check this article.

What underlies this?  Campaigns and polls are complex with many variables, but I found this interesting and I suspect related: in a recent Gallup poll, Romney is seen as more sincere and authentic, a better leader (more presidential), and more likely to be an effective manager of government, than Gingrich or other competitors.  Read about that here.

Judge a Man by the Woman...

This is good stuff...

Getting better every day...

It's nice to see polls showing trend for increasing support of Romney both in Florida and nationally.  This is critical right now.  I hope Romney wins tomorrow, and I hope substantially, because if so, then by the end of February it may be possible to start to turn the attention to the fight to bring Obama down.

But, part of bringing Obama down will be Mitt Romney and his team continuing to work as aggressively as they have to make him a better candidate, aimed to target Obama's weakness, find answers to any of Romney's own real or perceived weakness, develop really strong and effective answers to questions and challenges sure to come from the Obama machine, and find ways to connect ever more powerfully with the various groups in the Republican coalition and with independents.

Romney has gotten better with time, and he needs to continue, even accelerate, this process.

"Newtist Moon Colony"

Loved coming across this question today: "So, how would you feel about the U.S. pursuing a Newtist Moon Colony in the next decade?"  Too funny...

Strong Debate Moves Ball Downfield

Mitt had a strong debate last night both in his own defense and in pointing out some of Newt's problems.  It was a good time for a good performance, but still several days to go before the Florida primary vote.  If you are a debate geek, or even a wannabe debate geek (ok, even if you aren't either), check out this interesting debate analysis.  Good stuff.

One point that will require a more thorough analysis (and probably repeated analysis)...Romney's history and position on the Massachusetts health care law ("Romneycare") compared with Obamacare, and whether Mitt can make the strong case for repeal of Obamacare.

On the one hand, it is true that Massachusetts required citizens to buy into some form of insurance, not unlike the Obamacare requirement that many Americans dislike, even detest.  On the other hand, Romney makes the point that it's one thing in our federal system for a state to do this - another thing entirely for a one-size-fits all universal federal requirement.

What may be missed in some analysis I've seen (including Santorum's hits on Romney in the debate last night on this issue) is that while Romney may not be in a position to come in as the "knight on a white horse" on this issue and take the pure case to the country on that aspect of health care law (mandated health insurance purchase), he can otherwise be a very powerful voice on the subject if he chooses to and communicates well and clearly.  He clearly understands the subject, and can argue that some goals of Obamacare are worthy but the approach is wrong.  In particular he can voice the powerful argument that not only should it not be a universal federal solution, but that it will break the national bank if pursued.  There must be a better alternative, and he needs to have a plan and be able to argue it powerfully.

Fight to the Banner in Florida

If we had no access to national and state polls in this Republican race, we could have a pretty decent idea what way things are trending by watching the ANGRICH and how hot and flustered and furious he acts.  So, Romney must be trending upward based on Newt Gingrich's fury at various real or perceived slights by the Romney campaign in the last 2 days.

Gingrich's life, personality, and even his poll trends in the past year, are simply an erratic roller coaster.  On the uphill rush side of it, he can move and motivate people - like what happened in South Carolina.  But it's a tempestuous rush and does not seem to inspire a lasting or stable political position.  Romney, in this regard, seems the anti-Gingrich.  He's much more stable and reliable, and seems to naturally take the long view of things.  That suits me great, and I see it as a necessary ingredient to a truly successful presidency that strengthens our nation.  It seems to me, it's exactly what we need at this time in our history.

With the final Florida debate set for tonight, and realizing Newt is likely to go nuclear during the debate with rage at Romney, let's keep perspective on this.  I want a nominee to face Obama who has created sustained success in the course of his career and life...not one whose life and career is a roller coaster - as often a laughingstock as inspiring.

One little anecdote from yesterday that brought a smile to my face.  It occurred during Mitt's interview on a Spanish language television channel in Florida:

"...Ramos asked Romney if he'd call himself the first Mexican-American president. "Your father was born in Mexico. So the question is, are you Mexican-American?" It wasn't clear if Ramos was joking, serious, or baiting Romney into saying something stupid. But Romney handled it pretty well. 

“I would love to be able to convince people of that, particularly in a Florida primary," he replied. "But I think that might be disingenuous on my part."

"So you wouldn't call yourself Mexican-American--even though he's Mexican by definition?" Ramos continued. 

"I don’t think people would think I’m being honest if I said I was Mexican-American. But I would appreciate it if you could get that word out.”

Vote Romney on Poll

Before you do anything else, VOTE HERE for Mitt as the most trustworthy candidate...

Time to Regroup

Well, I feel like I need a little time to consider the reasons why Newt was able to rise in the last week and win the SC primary, with Mitt taking second.  So, more to come on that.  As with all these results, the media will undoubtedly overreact - it's what they do.  That said, it does complicate the overall primary process - there is not likely to be a rapid conclusion to the process in the near future.

For now, let's just say that it's time to fight hard for Florida and for the Romney campaign to retool and reconsider their approach to presenting Romney and his strengths and history to voters; also to consider how to manage real or perceived weaknesses.

Do not despair, but renew the fight...this too shall pass.

Gingrich Might Be Fun, But a Disaster

Since Newt is the upswinging candidate of the moment, let's take a quick pause before SC votes tomorrow to say this: Newt Gingrich can be fascinating in both ideas and style - it's even fun to listen to or watch him much of the time.  BUT...his entire personal and political history is one of instability and rocky relationships.  In isolation, the thought of a Gingrich-Obama debate has a definite appeal.  But the campaign will not be debates in isolation and sound bites on the campaign trail.  Gingrich, I predict, would be body-slammed from many angles by the Obama machine.  No matter who the nominee is, there are no guarantees and the task will be mighty, but let's not put our candidate with the most baggage out there to be beaten like a piñata, please.

Romney has a tremendous record to run on, and a relatively straightforward one compared with Gingrich's crazy history.  Romney needs strong support, and now is the time to give it.  Let's work together on this people...let's get the word out...

OK...Not the Best Day...But...

Gotta love roller coasters...er...political campaigns.  Just as Romney had been on a pretty sustained upswing, we have a series of rough days.

First, at the South Carolina debate on Monday, all the candidates were, of course, going after Romney...hard.  That's not new, but it seemed like Mitt was not quite prepared to handle a couple of the charges/issues.  In particular, he got challenged to release his 2011 tax returns.  I think tax returns for candidates typically should not be important, but the fact is candidates need to avoid appearing evasive or like they have anything to hide.  Fair or not, let's just say that entering the political arena I think you give up a lot of personal privacies the rest of us like to enjoy.  I say, get it out there and even though there will be headlines that may be negative at first, they can be responded to and run their course.  Again, I say this but am firmly of the opinion the tax returns change nothing about Romney's basic strengths and advantages as a presidential candidate.

Then Gingrich has tried to regain his footing and has done so to some degree.  Then we found out this morning that after officially certifying the Iowa caucus results, it turns out Santorum actually won by some 30 votes.  Again, either way pretty much a virtual tie, but still not great news for Romney in terms of perception.  Then today, Perry dropped out of the race and endorsed Gingrich, which along with Sarah Palin sort of suggesting the same gives Gingrich a possible boost.

So, what does it all mean?  In terms of the race in South Carolina, I think it likely tightens things up, though I'm still very hopeful and think that Romney should pull it through in the end.  In terms of the basic strengths and weaknesses of the remaining candidates, I think it means really nothing important.  However, I do think we've seen a couple of lines of attack against Romney that should be seriously and directly addressed by him and his campaign going forward.

He has been successful and relatively wealthy...that's not going to change but needs to be presented as the positive it is.  Don't we want someone effective and successful to help tackle our nation's problems?  And yet, we need to see more and ongoing evidence that Romney understands and can connect with a wide variety of people across the nation.  He needs to find effective ways to connect his work at Bain, SL Olympics, and Massachusetts with the broader story of America and what we need right now at this point in our history.  And I do think he needs to find more direct ways to connect with the underlying anxieties in the country about the direction Obama has been taking us.  We need to know how much better off we will be once a President Romney gets the chance to reverse the damage Obama has done and get us out of this paralyzed slide and back on the path to rapid growth.

Talk to family and friends today and tomorrow, let's push for a win on Saturday, and we'll go on from there.

Need Mitt to Subdue the Regulation Monster

Wow, oh wow, could we use a President Romney.  I've been reading through a compilation of Romney's economic plan/proposals...let me just put it summarily this way: beyond the tremendous budget deficit problems we have, there is a whole monstrosity of complex, conflicting, inefficient regulations the federal government imposes that has gotten a whole lot worse under Obama.  If there is one area that Romney is hands down more prepared to handle compared with any of his competitors for the presidency, it is this.  Romney is the ONLY one of these candidates that I believe capable of truly reigning in this out of control regulatory apparatus, making it more sane, more efficient.

This may seem a mundane issue to many...and I guess it is...but it's tremendously important to our economy, and a President Romney I believe fully capable of unleashing the American economy back into rapid growth.  Let's keep our eye on the ball here: the media and his competitors attacking Romney right now are focusing on all the wrong things...minutiae.  Let's battle back hard...

A Little Momentum?

It does feel good sometimes when you expect something good to happen and you start to see it unfold that way.  By no means can we predict the future from here with certainty, but as the Republican field slowly thins and voters become gradually more comfortable with Romney, he is indeed rising in the national polls.  It appears he's in the 37-40% range nationally - much higher than Gingrich, Santorum, and the others.  South Carolina - it's on you.  Let's hope for good things come Saturday.  If so, we may be able to start to shift some attention to the larger challenge ahead: replacing Obama.

The Competent, Effective, Responsible Candidate

What a topsy-turvy campaign this has been so far.  Maybe it's time for me to take a crack at a few questions/issues that have been brought up about (or thrown at) Romney this past week.

First, let's look at the Bain Capital issues and Romney's record in the business world, and how that relates to the type of candidate Republicans and Americans generally might be looking for.

In another post I may look again at the issue of health care reform plans as it relates to Romney and the campaign.

ROMNEY THE BUSINESSMAN: In all the various accusations and catch phrases being thrown around about Romney's record at Bain Capital, the one you will not see Romney accused of is being ineffective or incompetent.  Keep that in mind.

So the "charges" as I understand them come down to this: the business of Romney's company (Bain Capital) was to buy or invest in companies that were failing.  These were companies that had either been mismanaged or encountered other business challenges that had led them to the brink of failure.  Since these companies were in tough straits, a company like Bain could come in and say "look, we can help bring money in to the process of trying to save this company, but we also are going to bring in business expertise to help refocus the company, make adjustments in terms of assets (including human assets, aka jobs) and process, etc. so that this company can survive, grow, and succeed.  The Democrats, now strangely joined by his Republican rivals, are trying to label this process as "corporate raiders" or "vultures" or whatever else they come up with.

So here's the thing: THESE WERE COMPANIES THAT WERE FAILING, HEADED FOR DISASTER.  If they weren't, there would not have been an investment opportunity that Bain Capital would be interested in.  If they weren't failing, they would be definition be succeeding and would not need the help of a company like Bain.  If a company fails, guess what happens to the jobs within that company?  Poof.  Right?  So Bain comes in to try to help these companies turn from failure to success.  It didn't always work, but it worked significantly more often than with Bain's competitors.  Which is a way to say that Romney was more effective and successful in this endeavor than many others in his business.  Keep that in mind.

Each company's situation would be different.  Sometimes to save a company, sales of some divisions of the company or other assets would help the rest of the company to refocus and succeed.  Sometimes the companies were bloated with too many employees given the level of revenues the company then had and the labor needs of an efficient organization.  Sometimes jobs were lost in the short term but the company started to succeed and rehire, adding many more jobs than were lost.  Bain's purpose could be said to be to succeed itself and get a return on investment for it's own investors, but it was also in Bain's interest to make the businesses, assets, and investments they made more valuable but helping those failing companies to turnaround and succeed.  It's what Bain did.  And by all reports I've seen, it's what Bain - and Romney - did well.  Keep that in mind.

Is this really rocket science?  I guess I can understand people who just don't want to think through the process being influenced by the labels of "raiders" and "vultures" thrown by Romney's opponents.  And of course the Democrats would be expected to make such accusations.  That's a form of class warfare filled with suspicions of free markets that have been a staple of Democrats for decades.  But Republicans?  Oy.

What I take from this is that Romney and his team need to work to educate and communicate with people about exactly what his business record is.  This should be easy, but in subtle ways I think it's a challenge.

I think there are specific ways to do this, but also it can play into a theme for team Romney.

The specific approach is to take specific companies and specific individuals employed or even formerly employed by these companies but who were then successfully employed elsewhere, and tell some of their stories along the way.  Most people may not be interested in the esoteric discussion of business and its cycles, but they will understand and identify with the process when it's told in story form.

There's also the summary approach - by itself not enough but still helpful - which is to note, as Romney has, that though some specific jobs were lost, in the long run many more jobs were gained in the process.  That's the story of America - ongoing change, failures not defeating us but making us stronger, and in the net analysis, growth and success at the end of the day.  If Romney and his team can tie the process at Bain to the history of America, that will help tremendously.

And this can all tie into an overall theme, which is simply that Mitt Romney is very effective, very competent, successful at what he sets his mind to.  He helped Bain and its companies succeed.  He helped the Salt Lake Olympic Games succeed.  He helped Massachusetts succeed.  And he can get America turned around and back on the road to success in the world and for Americans.

To Romney's Defense...Mike Huckabee

I have to admit I haven't always had the highest regard for Huckabee based on the last election cycle, but he's on my good list again for an excellent defense today of Romney and his work at Bain Capital.

Here’s Huckabee’s full statement from his e-mail newsletter:

Romney has come under a lot of fire for Bain Capital’s investments in some companies that were then scaled down with layoffs to become profitable. That’s been demonized thoroughly by the media as corporate raiding, But it’s surprising to see so many Republicans embrace that leftwing argument against capitalism. It’s terrible for the workers who lose their jobs, and nobody likes to see viable companies looted and destroyed. But if downsizing can turn around a failing company, then at least it prevents all the jobs from being lost, and it sets up a stronger company that can grow and start rehiring. The term for this among people who aren’t hostile to capitalism is “creative destruction.” Bad companies have to die to make way for stronger companies, in the same way that old trees fall over to make way for new trees. The other alternative, the Obama way, is to use vast amounts of taxpayer money to prop up companies that are failing in the marketplace. Sometimes, with a big enough cash transfusion, they survive, like GM. Other times, all the money in the world can’t stop them from going belly-up and losing all their jobs, like Solyndra. But at least when a company that’s bought out by investors goes bankrupt, the money that’s lost was voluntarily invested, not taken from taxpayers at gunpoint.

New Hampshire Rocks for Romney!

Congratulations to Mitt Romney on what appears to be an excellent win in New Hampshire today.  The first non-incumbent Republican to ever win in both Iowa and New Hampshire.  That's impressive.

And from what I've seen so far of exit polls, there is little but good news for Romney.  A few points:

- There was a question as to who the voters who were still undecided in up to the voting time would go for.  Romney got more of these voters than any of the other candidates.  That's despite all the other candidates constantly attacking Mitt all week long.

- Romney did best among all major groups: "moderate" "somewhat conservative" and "very conservative."  The ability to appeal to conservatives as well as moderates and independents is critical to being able to beat Obama in November.

- Romney not only appears likely to get somewhere in the upper 30s to low 40s percentage of the total vote in a divided field with still a high number of candidates, but a majority of the voters say they would feel satisfied with him as the nominee.  For the other candidates, majorities say they would not feel satisfied with the other candidates as the nominee.

- Some really bad news for Jon Huntsman: of those that voted for him, more than half would vote for Obama over him if he were the nominee.  That suggests he was pulling in more liberal independents to vote for him - hardly a likely path to success in a Republican race.

Rich Lowry of the National Review talks more about how broad this victory was for Mitt; worth the read.

Gingrich, unfortunately, continues to embarrass himself with his conduct.  It's too bad, because we need him to help with the effort to help unseat Obama in the fall, and he risks compromising his ability to do so if he keeps this up.

More to come as we get the final results...

Dixville Notch + Harts Location = Romney!

Won't mean much to the final tally, but thank you to Dixville Notch and Harts Location, the first two New Hampshire towns to vote in the primary.  Let's keep Romney rolling!

'Authenticity'

While we wait this day out in anticipation of actual voting tomorrow in New Hampshire, let's take a moment to consider the fact that I hear only a limited number of criticisms leveled at Romney by his opponents, but they just like to repeat them more frequently and with a higher pitches to their voices.

In fact, I can consolidate almost all the criticism into maybe five issues: (1) Is his past performance in the private sector and as governor really as good as he claims?  (2) Questions about authenticity - whether labelled as flip-flopping or changes in statements/positions over time.  Largely the underlying suggestion is that Romney is just taking positions based on poll-testing, a la Bill Clinton.  (3) Romneycare and its relation to Obamacare.  (4) He's not perceived as an "exciting candidate" by some.  (5) Questions on just how "conservative" or "moderate" Romney actually is.

Let me know if you think there have been criticisms outside these five, but I think that pretty well encapsulates most everything I hear argued against Mitt.

We can spend more time looking at these in depth in other posts, but here let's keep it brief.

[1] First, I hear criticisms that his work in the private sector, mostly with Bain Capital, got rid of more jobs than were created.  Second, I hear Romney's governorship in Massachusetts criticized, either because he was relatively moderate in his politics as governor, or because he only served one term and did not run for re-election, presumably because the polls were not very strong for him at the end of that term.

Reasonable people can differ in their assessments of his performance in these areas, but my take is simple.  Until recently, few people criticized his overall performance at Bain for good reason...he did a good job there.  His job was to take bad companies that were bloated and hemorrhaging money and headed for failure, and make them effective and efficient - in a word, SUCCESSFUL.  He did that with a greater degree of success than most, which is why he gained some degree of fame for this.  Firing poor or unnecessary employees is part of making a company better.  But the idea is those people and resources "cut" will be picked up by other companies.  In other words, Romney was responsible to make those companies successful if possible.  It was not his job there to be responsible for the entire economy and the entire job market!  Eventually, those companies he made successful grew and have produced far more jobs than were lost in the process of turning them around.  Want to see what leaders of the companies he helped think of him (hint: it's really positive).

I would highly recommend taking a moment to read this discussion about Romney as a successful capitalist/business man.  We should CELEBRATE that about him.  The Club for Growth issued a strong statement in support of Romney's business record, and critical of Gingrich.

In terms of his performance as governor, from what I've read he was considered by the residents of Massachusetts to have done a good job.  Would he have had a challenge if he had run for re-election?  I don't know.  Maybe.  But so what?  To me, Mitt was just doing what all of us do along the course of life - see where he's been, where he is, and where he wants to go.  You make a decision.  Heavens, if he was "scared" of a tough campaign, why would he be running for president now?

And one other thing on the topic of Mitt's past performance record.  Notice they haven't yet criticized him for his work on the Salt Lake Olympics.  You know that they would, if they could.  That was a huge, complex job, and he handled it very, very well.

[2] On the 'authenticity' question...first let me say that I think we sometimes we have higher expectations of other people, and particularly politicians, than we have of ourselves.  The point being...I expect reasonable people to have some shifts in their thinking over time.  Again, saving the specifics for another time, I think Romney has had a general trend over time to more conservative positions on some issues.  The concern people have, I think, is wondering if this is simply driven by political calculation rather than a considered intellectual process.  When I listen to and read Romney on the issues, I find a very smart, nuanced intellect. As with all politicians, I think at times his position on a very specific bill or question can be influenced by public opinion, but only within the bounds of his well considered principles.  Let me give an example on immigration policy.  He was recently quoted as saying that if he had the bill presented to him, he would veto the DREAM act of Congress that provides for access to schools and other things for immigrants even if they are here illegally.  So the media and others jumped on this, trying to claim he is anti-immigrant.  In his response it is clear that he is anything but anti-immigrant, but he does think that illegal immigration needs to be dealt with in order to make the process/system work, and that adding incentive to people to come illegally is not wise policy.  What he would want to do is work out a process that slows illegal immigration, opens up new pathways to legal immigration, and make a system that simply works better for all involved.  That, to me, is a smart, practical, perceptive approach.

The funny thing to me with the claim of Romney being less than authentic - he just strikes me as one of the most authentic, loyal, dedicated people I've seen in politics.  His whole life suggests an overall steadiness that I think should be recognized.

[3] On Romneycare vs. Obamacare...again with more detail being saved for another day, I think it's pretty easy to explain.  First, there is a huge difference between a "one size fits all" federal policy vs. a state by state policy.  Romney's position has been and is that states should design their own solutions to helping people have access to medical care.  He has said he would start overturning Obamacare from day one as president.  Second, reasonable people can and do differ on what is the best approach to helping people have access to medical care services.  I think we all know that without insurance or some other means of pooling resources, medical costs can in many cases "break the bank" of a person or family's finances.  So, the goal of finding a better system is worthy and I think most everyone would agree with it...it's an issue of what approach.  In Massachusetts (aka "Romneycare"), the idea was to use some tax breaks and other means to help people be able to get a private insurance plan that meets their needs.  It has ended up being within the projected cost to the state, despite Democrats in the state legislature adding more benefits to the plan than Romney wanted.  Most of the people in Massachusetts did and still do like the program.

[4] The "not exciting" argument is a little bit strange to me.  Of course, who wouldn't like someone they feel is "exciting" if it comes to that, but really we've had plenty of "exciting" presidents that we feel have done a poor job.  I bet most people, when it comes to it, want an EFFECTIVE president, and that's more important to them than excitement.  I think Romney is plenty comfortable to listen to, but if he's not naturally going to rile up the average person - well, to me that's just not a big deal one way or the other.

[5] Considering in 2008 Romney was considered one of the more conservative candidates in the Republican field, it's funny now to hear him described as more moderate, considering his positions haven't changed much if at all since 2008.  Conservative groups have picked him first many times in the past.  Point being, Romney isn't extreme, but he's plenty conservative and approaches things from that perspective.  So, there you go.

Just a few thoughts...more to come on future dates.

Romney takes hits, still rises...

Romney took some of the expected swings from the angry Gingrich and the striving Santorum at the two NH debates yesterday and today, but appears to be more than holding his own.  Check out the rolling averages just now from Real Clear Politics:

Getting close to New Hampshire...let's see how things shake out...

Mid-Point to NH then on to SC and Florida...

In digesting as much news and media as possible over the past few days, let's just say that media and bloggers are ALL OVER THE PLACE as to how to interpret what has gone on and is going on in the Republicans nomination battle.  I've seen what I consider reasonable opinions and "news" as well as plenty of stuff that...what's the kindest way I can put it?...is really, really out there.

First off, I think we are seeing what I thought we would after Iowa...a bounce not just for Santorum (which the media has been all over), but for Romney as well.  Romney is now polling better both nationally and in key upcoming states such as New Hampshire and South Carolina.  Some national polls have him at or above 30% among likely voters (I've seen one close to 40%), which kind of blows out of the water the supposed "25% ceiling" some ridiculous commentators have tried to hang on him.

And Romney has it right: while the other candidates are working to tear into him and each other, Romney is focused on what really matters, which is beating Obama and ousting him from office.

New Hampshire voters: you have a big responsibility on your shoulders.  Fair or not, Romney is expected not only to win in your state, but to win sizably.  Please work to make this happen - it could make all the difference.  South Carolina: you'll be up next and the first state where Mitt hasn't been expected to win.  Support him and give him that win, and combined with a win in Florida we could finally be on our way and be able to turn our full attention and resources to beating Mr. Obama.

Let the Battle Begin!

It's time, now that we've started seeing actual votes counted in the 2012 election cycle, to dedicate more attention and effort to the critical campaign battles ahead.

First, let's take a broad view of the field.  Barack Obama has been an astounding failure in most areas of his administration.  Take a look at his promises not only in the election cycle of 2008 but during the economic and fiscal policy battles of 2009-2011.  Then take a look at reality.  Unfortunately, our nation and our trajectory have been significantly worse off than his rosy forecasts.  Even more unfortunately, the president's policies have often made things much worse than they needed to be.

The Republicans are still working out a candidate field and a nomination process that has been very unusual, at least in my political lifetime and awareness.  Some in the media seem convinced that the difficulty among Republicans in falling in line strongly behind one candidate is a sign of weakness and lack of enthusiasm.  I don't believe that's the case.  The perceived lack of enthusiasm I see as simply different subgroups of Republicans and independents mulling over options, perhaps hoping for the "perfect candidate" but aware that we will have to pick among the good, there not being a "perfect."  At some point, there will be a coalescing effect, and then the perception of enthusiasm will pick up notably.  So, don't be fooled that way.  A whole lot of people are anxious to move away from the Obama path and back to a hopeful America, a stronger and growing economy, and a move away from the brink of financial disaster where Obama and his policies have taken us.

A couple of comments about the results of the Iowa caucuses last night.  First, it is an important first mini-step for Mitt Romney.  Second, it gives some legitimacy to Rick Santorum - though that should not be confused with any kind of certainty that he will show this well anywhere else.  Third, it shows that Ron Paul will not win the nomination, but that smart Republican candidates will at least try to learn from his appeal to young voters with libertarian tendencies, and see what can be done to build connections with this group of voters as part of the Republican coalition seeking to replace Obama.  Fourth, the other candidates in my opinion have no chance to win the nomination, and they should use good sense and judgment in terms of the kinds of attacks they use on fellow Republicans.  They can only do harm, but little to no good, if they undercut the eventual nominee.  That's not to say they can't make criticisms and comparisons - that part of the process can make the eventually nominee stronger, more vetted.  But they should, in my opinion, be fair and reasonable as they do so - otherwise they may unfairly tag their nominee with unnecessary baggage in the minds of voters needed to win in November.

Forget the often repeated talk about Romney having a "national ceiling around 25% support" as that is a misleading, even false view.  Romney has that 25% as a floor or base.  Does it need to expand?  Certainly. But that's what will naturally start to happen as the overcrowded Republican field starts to narrow.  In national polls against Obama recently, they have Romney beating Obama in a theoretical race by as much as 5-6 points.  THAT is more like the support we would start to see in the polls if Romney starts to move toward the nomination.  Compare that to Ron Paul, who despite a strong showing in Iowa shows all the signs of having that be his high water mark.  No, Republican voters are not yet settled on Romney, but they are increasingly more comfortable and familiar with him, and if he continues strong that attachment will strengthen and grow.  It will need to if we want Obama replaced.

Much more to come on positions and comparisons.  One week to New Hampshire, people!  Let's start paying close attention...