McCain made his national security leadership pitch well, though he was kind of dogged about it. I suppose they are all tired. He got some sniping against Mitt flipping positions, but I have to say McCain has changed positions as well after some thought. Immigration being one, the Bush tax cut being another. And I would certainly welcome it, as would most Republicans if he admitted campaign finance "reform" was a mistake.

So who knows? I don't know if Mitt did well enough to overtake McCain, but independents going for Obama may do the trick. Apparently they are 44% of NH voters.

Labels: LDS Mormon Romney, mike huckabee, mit romney, religion

SALEM, N.H. -- John McCain, who happily volunteers he doesn't know much about economics . . .

McCain stood before a line graph showing the increase of the alternative-minimum tax, a low-budget campaign's alternative to the PowerPoint presentation Mitt Romney uses when talking about economic policy, a subject McCain has said he feels he is unknowledgeable and that filling the void would be a priority when selecting a vice-presidential nominee.

Like Mike Huckabee, who joked recently that he "may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night," McCain suggested to reporters Monday that American consumer culture offered a short cut to expertise. "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should," McCain said. "I've got Greenspan's book."

CASPER, Wyo. — Mitt Romney’s attention to Wyoming paid off Saturday as he won most of the 12 presidential delegates at stake in the state’s Republican county conventions.

The former Massachusetts governor won six of the first eight to be selected Saturday. Fred Thompson and California Rep. Duncan Hunter, who both also visited Wyoming, won one apiece, meaning no other candidate could beat Romney.

Labels: Wyoming caucuses

CASPER, Wyo. - Mitt Romney grabbed the early lead in Wyoming's Republican caucuses Saturday as the state had its brief moment in the political spotlight sandwiched between attention-getting contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The former Massachusetts governor gained the first four delegates while California Rep. Duncan Hunter won a fifth.

Romney easily led the overall vote with more than 50 percent. Hunter was second with 21 percent and Fred Thompson, who hadn't won any delegates, was third with 17 percent. Results were expected throughout the day.

Labels: Wyoming caucuses

In an interview with www.MainstreamLibertarian.com, New Hampshire State Rep. DJ Bettencourt just confirmed his endorsement of Mitt Romney for President. He had allowed his name to be placed on a List of NH Romney supporters two weeks ago. Now Bettencourt has fully backed up his previous name-listing with a full-fledged endorsement.

Rep. Bettencourt serves as Chairman of the New Hampshire Conservative Alliance, a group that includes strong Anti-Tax and libertarian-leaning Republicans. Bettencourt was strongly supported by the Republican Liberty Caucus, a libertarian group, in his election in 2006 to the Legislature.

Last summer Bettencourt was moderately supportive of John McCain for President. He had attended a couple McCain functions, and allowed the Campaign to list his name on McCain's Straight Talk Committee. He did caution them at the time that it did not constitute a full outright endorsement.

But McCain's pushing on immigration late last summer started to trouble him.

He also told ML that McCain's positions on economic issues such as taxes are less firm than Romney's, and that was part of the reason for his move away from McCain.

"For me, economic issues are most important. People have problems with Romney on social issues. They are of secondary importance to me personally. I think he is the only one with experience as a businessman and understands how it works," said Bettencourt.

Bettencourt also said that Romney was a "strong Fiscal Conservative," who was very good on tax issues. He mentioned his low tax record as Massachussetts Governor.

On the other candidates Bettencourt commented:

"No question Ron Paul serves my priorities on economics identically, but the problem is we need to get a candidate who has a chance to win."

On Giuliani, "Rudy is a guy whom economically we have agreement."

And on Huckabee, "He is not a friend of libertarian principles."

*Note - Representative Bettencourt will be a guest on a special edition of "Libertarian Politics Live" Pre-New Hampshire Primary, Monday night at 7:00 pm cst.

1. Obama gave Mitt the best lifeline he could have asked for


2. Fred gave him his second best life line


3. The mere fact that 60% of independents favor Obama is trouble for McCain and the other fact that independents are anti-war is even more troubling


4. Despite the local newspaper love fest for McCain, we have local radio’s taking him on.


5. The National Journal was reporting on POTUS 08 that Rudy is starting to put money in again in New Hampshire in hopes of derailing McCain since a McCain win is now worse than a Romney win.


6. New Hampshirians don’t care too much about Iowa results.


7. We have two more debates between now and the New Hampshire Primary. It was the New Hampshire debate in 1979 that really knocked the wind out of George H.W. Bush

"Huckabee took 14% of the vote and came in fourth in the Iowa caucus among non-evangelicals according to the NBC Republican exit poll. Huckabee's principal voting block was female born-again Christian Republicans living in non-urban rural areas with a population below 10,000. I dearly love such people, but demographically in the country at large there aren't that many of them.When Huckabee moves out of caucus Iowa and into primary state America, he's going to get killed."

Michael Medved just said that is a lie, and that the majority of evangelicals voted against Huckabee. This is were Medved lies with statistics. You see, evangelicals split their votes among Huckabee, Romney, McCain, and Fred Thompson. So perhaps a "majority" of evangelicals did not support Huckabee, but what Rich Lowry said above. Huckabee came in 4rth among non-evangelicals.

But who cares? Why point this out? Am I offending Evangelicals? Well it all has to do with the story line. Medved is going on and on about how wonderful Huckabee is, and how positive Huckabee has been, and that Huckabee has not gone negative.

Huckabee is negative. Huckabee:

• Called Mitt Romney a liar on many occasions. Saying Mitt Romney is "dishonest and desperate"
• Said Mitt Romney is disparate (see above)
• Suggested that Romney should commit suicide (Google it)
• Huckabee's campaign manager said he would like to knock Romney's teeth out
• Huckabee has continued to leave posts on his website for over a month now that say that "Mitt Romney worships Satan" and is a "piece of Mormon Garbage". Their are hundreds of these comments on Huckabee's website, which is a clearning house of anti-Mormon information
• Said that Mitt Romney is lying running for president, and that he would lie once he became president
  

And Medved has the audacity to go on and on about how positive Huckabee's message has been.

Michael Medved, how are citizens supposed to pick a president? Who ever is the nicest? IS that how we should pick who is president? There is a song that says, you got to be cruel to be kind. It is much NICER that mitt Romney kindly point out that Mike Huckabee pardoned 1,033 people, 12 of whom were convicted murderers, than to have the Democrats release cruel and humiliating heartfealt interviews with the families of these victims, destroying Mike Huckabee and any future that he had.

Mitt Romney is not making this personal. Mike Huckabee is calling Mitt Romney names, saying he isn't a liar, and Huckabee's website says that "Romney worships Satan". Mitt Romney is doing what campaigns should be about: issues. Michael Medved is destroying our ability to reason by saying that being nice is more important than fighting it out and seeing who and what is correct, and who is the last man standing.

This is the time for us to "fight it out" in the war of ideas. If you go to Brittan, and you go to the house of commons, their is none of the "I would like to turn the time over to my esteemed colleague" stuff that you have in the US Senate. They have a nock down drag out fight, and that is what we need to figure out who is best qualified to take on the democrats.

Not a mean spirited fight. But a respectful, but honest discussion of the issues.

And the Ironic thing is that that is exactly how Medved treats his guest. I would like to listen to the Michael Medved show if he could never point out problems with what his guest were saying, like he wants Mitt Romney to never point out problems with the other candidates.

This morning I got in contact with Congressman Lamar Smith's office and asked why he is supporting Mitt Romney for President. Here is his response.

Mitt Romney is a good man and he has the values, the experience, and the ability to be a great president. Character always counts. Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann, have raised five boys. That alone may qualify him to be President! He knows what family values are all about.

Mitt Romney has earned a reputation for unquestioned integrity. He has always conducted himself with honor and decency.

And he has established a record of success in every area – public, private and non-profit. He has a history of solving problems and coming up with solutions when no one else can.

As Governor of Massachusetts, he reversed the state’s financial decline and balanced the budget every year of his administration. He turned deficits into surpluses and created 57,000 new jobs. Think what a record like that could mean for our country.

Governor Romney championed education reform. He supported merit pay and more math and science courses in high school, and made public colleges more accessible. He recognizes that better educational opportunities enable the next generation to prosper. Imagine what a record like that could mean for America’s students.

Along with education, a top priority of the American people is health care. Governor Romney persuaded a Democratic legislature to enact a law that provides health insurance to every
resident of the state. He accomplished this through the private sector, without a government takeover and without raising taxes. Think what it would mean to each American family to have a workable solution to the looming health care crisis.

Mitt Romney also has an impressive record in the private sector. He founded an investment company that helped launch hundreds of successful businesses. In other words, Mitt Romney
knows how to manage a large business and create jobs, something he has been doing all his life. Those talents will benefit our country too.

In the non-profit arena, Mitt Romney left a successful business career and became President and CEO of the 2002 Olympics when it was in disarray. In his three years at the helm, he erased a deficit, organized thousands of volunteers, and implemented unprecedented security measures after the 9/11 attack. The 2002 Olympics was considered the best ever held in
America.

As a candidate for President, Mitt Romney is the nominee our Party needs in 2008. He can unite the conservative coalition and help the Republican Party across this country from California to Maine. Frankly, if a conservative Republican can be elected in liberal Massachusetts, he can be elected anywhere!

We can make a difference in this election. We can help determine the direction of our country. We can pick the person who should win because of his values, character and experience --
and who will win because of his electability.

Mitt Romney is a good man; he will be a great President. Let’s give him our enthusiastic support.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) has represented the 21st District of Texas since 1987. He is the Ranking Republican Member of the House Judiciary Committee.

Labels: Lamar Smith

We have countries around the world splintered and broken because too many people are only able to support leaders of their particular religion. Yet Laura Ingraham said this morning that we should not be upset at Huckabee because he won in Iowa.

This is a very interesting take! The Republican electorate turned out in record numbers and revealed in the Fox entrance polls that they were looking for a candidate that “shared their same values.” Of the 115,000 people who turned out, 60% were Evangelicals, a good deal higher than the state average.

Is it very hard to decide which of the following values were most important to this group? Choose one:

1. Hard working, disciplined, and smart (graduated in top 30% of Harvard Law class and top 5% of Harvard Business School class) and successful at turning around ventures of all types, public as well as private.


2. Shares my religious beliefs.

Huckabee’s campaign denies that Evangelicals played a significant role, yet entrance polls showed that 46% of the Evangelicals went for Huckabee. Huckabee of course had summoned his supporters to caucus, telling them to “Hijack your church’s bus!” Hijacking probably was not necessary, given that pastors across the state had already been tutored in a conference call by prominent Evangelicals Tim LaHaye, Rick Scarborough, and Michael Farris, all having publicly endorsed Huckabee. Finally, Huckabee told his blogger supporters: “You are doing the Lord’s work!” (Comments on Huckabee’s Web site are notably hate-filled and bigoted beyond belief…)

The double standard that prevails should be alarming. One can only imagine what would happen if several key leader of the LDS Church publicly endorsed Mitt Romney and then organized a conference call to “get people out to the caucuses!” It should be clear that even if Mitt’s name were not mentioned, the press would be all over this!

Religious bigotry and empty populism solve no problems, and any politician who bases their campaign on these principles does a disservice to the electorate that they attract, as well as to the society in which they live.

It is important to remember that 66% of Iowa Republicans would seem to agree, given that they did not succumb to Huckabee’s divisive messages and voted for someone else.

Mike B.

Update:

Charles at Evangelicals for Mitt laments: "They decisively rejected EFM's message that values, not theological particulars, are what matters in a presidential election."

While the overall results are indeed disappointing, we should be at least slightly encouraged that 54% of the Evangelical Republicans in Iowa were NOT influenced by Huckabee's populist appeal and the bigoted sub-text of his message.

The first thing that political consultants look at when evaluating a local election is turnout. The question for the candidate is: does big turnout help or hurt you? In this case, big turnout hurt Romney, big.

There's no getting around the fact that second place in Iowa is not where Mitt wanted to be. Word on the ground is that we got out almost everyone we expected to get out to vote. But there were nearly 30,000 more people voting the GOP caucus compared to the caucuses in 2000. Those votes went overwhelmingly to Huckabee.

Patrick Ruffini noted last week that Romney's ground game may not help his with the odd beast known as the Iowa caucus, and it didn't. In a regular primary election (like New Hampshire) poll watchers can glance over the voter lists for each precinct and find our who hasn't voted yet. They phone those names back to HQ and make a call to remind them. No such luck with a 6:00PM caucuses. In other words, in a simple ordinary primary election there's room to "stoke the fire" in real-time. Not so in Iowa.

Bottom line: Mitt did a great job getting out the vote, Huckabee did better. Huck did better not because of his organization but because he successfully sold his populist brand of conservatism to Evangelical Christians.

Two other factors are complicit in the Romney loss: the big field and the timing. Thompson, McCain and Paul pulled in double digit percentages in the results. That certainly didn't help. And the December Huckabee surge was bad, Bad, BAD for Romney. All year, the Romney campaign had successfully batted down McCain, Rudy, Brownback and Thompson in the early states. No such luck with Huckabee with the twelve days of Christmas bearing down. Of course, the 5 days to New Hampshire doesn't help any.

The Good News

Still, Romney got two of the three things he wanted last night:

1. Oh well, we lost. Woulda loved that win. Bugger.
2. McCain came in fourth with Thompson holding his own. McCain can't run the tables in New Hampshire bragging of a 4th place finish.
3. Obama won. Which means fewer independent vote will cross over to vote for McCain in New Hampshire.

As a senior Romney official told me last night: "no where on God's green earth is there another place where 60% of the vote is made up of Evangelical Christians. Not even in South Carolina." Yes, Huckabee will get a bump but can he pull out a double-pump boost in New Hampshire? I'm not convinced.

Iowa hurts, but my money is still on Romney.

OK, Ok, I won't play that game tonight! Fair is fair, Romney had the floor wiped with his behind. Unfortunately, Romney lost, and he lost by not a small margin.

I am not happy about this, although my Des Moines made McDonald's McFlurry has certainly lifted my spirits.

I won't even spin it, this is a problem for Romney. While I can still envision many scenarios where Romney wins (even one without a NH win), everyone on the site agrees life would have ben better had Mitt won tonight.

So I say congratulations to Huckabee. You won. You earned it. No excuses.

To Romney I say, you're the best candidate. You're no longer are the front runner in my mind, but I think you still have the chance here to win, and I hope you do.

And then I sit down to the news that Huckabee wins on the strength of evangelicals? Hello? Testing - 1-2-3. Is my mic not on?

For some reason, Charles, I'm not even upset. I know, I know -- it's quite inexplicable, after all my posts about the Huckmeister's antics. However, it might be because Huckabee is not marginally unacceptable, he's totally unacceptable. For some reason this makes it better -- I have faith some of the people who've watched
silently from the sidelines will pipe up and say, "No more."

Heck, I have faith that truth will prevail. Call me old-fashioned, but I simply refuse to believe that a guitar playing, weight-loss touting former preacher who's as conservative as Jimmy Carter can sustain this act.

"M" (my friend, the incredible Romney volunteer) says the rural corn field evangelical vote went overwhelmingly for Huckabee. Apparently, that's the theme of the night. As "X" says below... the Romney camp did what it needed to do... Huckabee just brought out the evangelical vote in a larger percentage.

Spoke with "X" (senior Romney official). His thoughts: "Here's the deal. We turned out our people... we expected to get what we got. Huckabee and his brand and style and just pulled out the evangelical vote which made up the difference."

"Bottom line. There is no where else on Gods's green earth where more than 50% of the voters are Evangelical Christians... even in SC its 40% but not 50%."

"We got 2 of the 3 things we wanted tonight. Obviously, a win would have been great. But having Fred match or beat McCain was one of our goals."

"Lastly, we really REALLY wanted Obama to win. With Obama finishing strong and taking momentum to New Hampshire the independent vote will not cross over to John McCain."

In my mind there's a real chance to grab a victory in New Hampshire and come out on top. I can't see how Huckabee can go on from here with no money, no organization and no built-in base to count on.

Romney is still the guy to beat as I see it.

Labels: iowa, mitt romney

Labels: iowa caucus

You might recall that the Romney campaign ran the tables at the FRC Value Voters poll in the media, despite the narrow victory over Huckabee by 40 votes. Will we see the same thing tonight?

Remember, the Romney press machine successfully churned the narrow straw poll victory into a press coup. If Romney edges out Huckabee by a sliver look for the Romney campaign to squeeze everything they can out of the win.

If Romney comes out in second, look for the same.

I'll say it again. The Bush administration has failed, Failed, FAILED to win the information war which is why we need someone who understands the new media and understand what it means to "flood the zone".

Hey folks. I've been away with family weddings and vacations but I'm back in action tonight.

Let me set up the cast of characters for you to guide us through Iowa:

First, Jason Bonham, leaving wife and children to trod through Iowa following Romney embedded with the press. Jason will no doubt be making his own updates throughout the day but I'll pitch in and throw an audible via proxy for him from time to time.

Second, my best friend, we'll call him M. He is showing me up big time by leaving his 5 kids to spend 3 days in Iowa and 4+ in New Hampshire. M is from Virginia but will actually be giving the pro-Romney speech at a caucus location in South East Iowa. He'll give us some excellent insights as the night proceeds.

Third, Romney campaign staffer. We'll call him "Scooter" (just because). Scooter will give us the perspective from the home base and keep tabs on the unexpected for us.

Fourth, Romney campaign staffer in Iowa. We'll call him "X" - a highly prized consultant to the Romney campaign with good knowledge of Iowa.

OK... here's our first report:

Jason - is down at the Marriott Hotel with other press folks waiting for the fireworks. He saw Amanda Carpenter right after her Ed Rollins experience. Apparently, there's even more to the what Ed had to say about Romney and family. Yuck. Ugly. Jason must be tired but I think he's having the time of his life.

M - Last I spoke with "M" (my best friend from Virginia) he was in a car with other Romney supporters making stops at various caucus locations, dropping off people to make the Romney pitch to the local crowd. Yesterday, he said HQ was overflowing, packed with people. "M" tells me that the area captains for Team Romney are jumping off the walls. These are the folks who are in charge of the geographical regions in Iowa. Apparently, the amount of support they have gotten to help them in their efforts is literally overwhelming.

Scooter - I asked "Scooter" in Boston about one of my favorite topics, push-polling. The timfoil hat theories that other campaigns are pushing seem to be falling apart since its apparent that the NH AG will not have a report ready before next Tuesday. "Scooter" will be shooting up to New Hampshire to meet Romney tonight after the caucus.

"X" - This top Romney consultant tells me that he feels great. In his opinion, Huckabee has completely outsourced his GOTV efforts, relying on the Fair Tax and Homeschool crowds. One reporter indicated that the Huckabee phonebank was full of 13 year olds compared to the serious non-outsourced volunteers who (like "M" above) have come from all over the country to help out.

All of these sources tell me it will be a nail biter but that they feel the Governor can really pull it out in the end.

More soon!

Labels: mike huckabee, Rush Limbaugh

Today I spent all day at the Romney HQ manning the phones calling voters all over Iowa. We ran into voters who told us they had gotten calls from people stating they represented the Romney campaign and when the voter disclosed they planned to vote for Romney, the caller then asked to take a few minutes to outline Romney's policy positions. The caller would then provide a litany of misleading statements like how Romney planned to raise taxes and why, etc.

Labels: iowa caucus

Caucus Day is finally here, and I couldn't be more pleased. I have my blue shirt, red tie, and Mitt Romney campaign sticker on, I have a full schedule for therapy, and I get off work an hour early so I can go round the neighborhood and pick up septigenerian and octogenerians and take them with me to our precinct tonight. For a political junkie, it's like having the Super Bowl in your backyard.

Last night I spent some time over at the county headquarters for Des Moines County (which happens to be nowhere near Des Moines, Iowa) and made some phone calls to Republicans in Burlington, helping them know where their precinct is and counting potential votes. It was so much fun that I called Shauri afterward and asked her if there was anything else I could do to help our county (she's the county chair for Henry County). Indeed she did have a stack of tasks for me. She's been working very hard for the campaign. Yesterday she was able to get more people to change their votes when she followed up on the calls she made almost a month ago. She reported though that there are a lot of people who still haven't made up their minds about who they will support, and aren't even bothering to do the research on the candidates to see what their positions are.

Labels: iowa caucus

I'm at Headquarters today in Urbandale, Iowa with the volunteer force. We have had an AMAZING response from people all over Iowa and across the country coming together to make calls. Bill Hemmer (sp?) of Fox News was here and just blown away. He had just come from the Huckabee office, and said that most of his volunteers were 13-year-old girls making calls. So, he was impressed by the quality of our volunteers.

Yesterday we had pep talks from Ann Romney, Gentry Collins, Doug Gross (former candidate for Iowa Gov) and others. It was an inspirational day, and we're making thousands of phone calls. We are optimistic, but working like it all depends on us (because, in many ways, it does)...

So, things are going great. Anything else you want to know?

Labels: iowa caucus

Huckabee Cut Crime and Taxes?

January 2, 2008

The truth is that violent crime was higher at the end of his term than when he took office, and he raised taxes more than he cut them.

Summary

In the run-up to the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, Huckabee is running a TV ad featuring graphics that claim he was "tough on crime" and "brought Arkansas' crime rate down," and that he "cut taxes over 90 times as governor."

In fact, the violent crime rate was higher at the end of his tenure than it was the year he took office. And the tax cuts he claims credit for were minor compared with the large increases he approved, which included an increase in the state sales tax.

Governor Romney's tax policy should make a libertarian's mouth water. It begins with the no-brainers -- make the Bush tax cuts permanent, eliminate the estate tax, and nix any increase in social security taxes. In addition, Romney has proposed substantial reductions in the corporate tax rate, where the United States rate is now one of the highest among the Western democracies, and in individual income tax rates, across the board. He has proposed eliminating all taxes on dividends and interest for those earning less than $200,000. One of Governor Romney's most important yet overlooked proposals is to make all spending on health care premiums and medical expenses tax deductible, an initiative that will do much to rationalize health care markets by putting individual coverage on the same plane as employer-provided health plans.

Of course, it is one thing to have an agenda, and another to deliver. Both Romney and Rudy have shown an impressive ability to make headway on tax and spending issues in the face of overwhelmingly liberal legislatures and political cultures deeply attached to high levels of regulation and taxation. Despite a generally admirable voting record, Senator Thompson lacks the executive experience of Governor Romney and Mayor Giuliani, and it is difficult to name any issue, during his eight years in the Senate, on which he took the lead in promoting smaller government. The one bill which he played a critical role in passing was the odious McCain-Feingold legislation.

Governor Romney is a man who knows how to get things done, from his success in business, to turning around the Salt Lake Olympic Games, to running a remarkable campaign for President that most observers thought was totally improbable just two years ago. Halting and reversing the growth of government requires more than just the right views -- it requires the right abilities. Governor Romney has those abilities.

The worst outcome in tomorrow’s Iowa caucuses for the stock market and economy would be victories by Mike Huckabee and John Edwards.

Both are anti-business, anti-Wall Street, and anti-CEO. They would employ government regulation, and perhaps taxes, to work against free-market forces.Both are anti-trade.

Both are tax-and-spend. (Governor Huckabee has tried to inoculate himself against the tax charge with his Fair Tax national sales tax idea that would go nowhere in Washington.)

The key point is that Edwards and Huckabee are the left-wing populists in the campaign on economic policy. Their victories would send up a red-flag warning signal to a stock market already beleaguered by worries about an economic slowdown and the ongoing subprime credit problem.

Labels: Larry Kudlow

If the Reagan coalition is to be torn asunder, major credit for its dismantling would have to go to Ed Rollins, who, after engineering President Reagan’s spectacular reelection campaign in 1984, has spent most of his time supporting candidates who were at odds with one part or another of the Reagan coalition...

While adamantly pro-life and opposed to gay marriage, Huckabee has struck a populist cord on economics. He is hostile to free trade, promoted across-the-board tax hikes, and more than doubled Arkansas’s state budget, from $6.6 billion to $16.1 billion. His proposal to extend state-funded college scholarships to illegal aliens was defeated in the Arkansas legislature. Huckabee is the only GOP candidate to refuse to endorse President Bush’s veto of the Democrat’s bill to vastly expand the S-CHIP health-care program and he supports the discredited cap-and-trade system to limit global-warming. And the liberal National Education Association of New Hampshire has found something they like in Mike Huckabee and gave him their endorsement.

Well, I can assure you he's wrong on one point and predict he's wrong on another. This Reagan coalition means a lot to me and to most people I know. Perhaps, Mr. Rollins is suggesting it doesn't mean a lot to him, given that his political clients since the days of Ronald Reagan have included the independent Ross Perot and liberal Republicans like Michael Huffington in Reagan's beloved California and Christine Todd Whitman in New Jersey. Having spent my life around movement conservatives, I can tell you, we still care about uniting these various conservatives into a strong coalition.

Then, I'll predict he's wrong in his epitaph: "it's gone." In fact, I think it will coalesce in the coming five weeks as Republicans select a president and then turn their considerable energies toward defeating their Democratic opponent next fall. But regardless of whether he's right or wrong, I'm disappointed to see Mr. Rollins throw in the towel on such a compelling coalition. It may just be that his current client cannot unite the three legs that make up this conservative stool – but I believe there is a candidate who can.

A year and a half ago, I concluded Governor Mitt Romney was the most qualified person to run for president from either party in my lifetime and decided to support and help him as a volunteer.

As an evangelical Southern Baptist and a social conservative, I like the leadership Governor Romney provided our movement in defending traditional marriage between a man and a woman and in opposing embryonic stem cell research. I believe his values are consistent with mine in every way, whether or not his theology is.

As a fiscal conservative I like the fact that Governor Romney understands that the money we send to our state and federal governments is our money, and "not their money," as he told Governor Huckabee in one of the candidate debates. Fiscal and anti-tax conservatives will like his record on not raising taxes and fighting, even against great opposition, to reduce the size of government. He decided on his first day as governor to leave office with a smaller, more efficient state government than when he arrived and managed to do just that.

And as a national defense conservative I like the fact that Governor Romney as supported the President's plan to help Iraq and to give General Petraeus and other military leaders a chance to work their plans and strategies in a complex situation. I like that he understands the threats that radical Islamic jihadists pose to our security, the importance of securing our borders, and the need to equip our men and women in service with the tools they need to succeed on our behalf.

In all three areas, I like the fact that Mitt Romney has a history of surrounding himself with bright, talented, capable, experienced men and woman who can help him make wise decisions. That is what a leader does and he has done it time and time again.