Thanks to our brand new R4′08er Aron for mentioning this nifty political quiz in the comments!

Not only does it attempt to peg your political philosophy, it also matches you up with the 2008 presidential candidate who best matches what you believe!

For the record, here’s what it says about your pal, DaveG:

You scored the following on the PoliticsMatch questions:

* Personal Score: 55%
* Economic Score: 76%

Based on the above score, you are a Conservative-Leaning Libertarian.

Indeed I am. But be wary of the site’s attempt to match up your views with the various candidates. You may get some surprises. For example, in my case, Rudy is my second-best match. First is none other than Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback! Ahhh!

Feel free to leave your results in the comments section!

Steve Bainbridge echoes my feelings on Fred Thompson — that on paper, he’d make a darned good Republican president:

Here’s why I’m happy:

* The last President I really liked also was a former actor
* Lifetime 86 rating from the American Conservative Union - solid but not rigidly conservative.
* Lifetime 5 rating from Americans for Democratic Action, so he’ll really annoy the far left.
* Unlike say Hillary or Romney, he hasn’t been planning to run for President ever since s/he got elected President of the 9th Grade class and the senior football players ran his/her underwear up the flagpole, as illustrated by his famous comment that “After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood.”
* “With iris traditional Southern values, his common-sense reform goals, and his folksy demeanor, “Ol’ Fred,” as the senator sometimes refers to himself, puts a populist face on a party struggling with an elitist image. Factor in Thompson’s media savvy, and you have the makings of a political icon. You have, in fact, the makings of another Ronald Reagan.” (Link)
* Unlike Romney or Edwards, he doesn’t look like a combination of a ken Doll and a local TV weatherman. “Americans are easily starstruck, and Thompson, frankly, looks the part of a president.” (link)
* He bugs James Dobson, who bugs me.
* There’s the Kung Fu case for him.
* He’s got a great voice, which will be perfect for things like the SOTU.
* He smokes cigars.

I think what the professor is saying is that Fred Thompson is both a real person and a real conservative, and considering that most politicians are neither, he’s a breath of fresh air. But over the past few months, I’ve grown more and more hesitant to make him our nominee, as I just don’t think he’s got the fire in the belly to win the general election. My evolution on the subject of FDT took place as I began to listen to the senator’s speeches, at which point I realized that Fred Thompson the politician is not, in fact, the dude from Days of Thunder or Law and Order. And absent that charm and larger than life personality, what’s left other than just another southern senator who will probably remind non-southerners of Bush, whose approval rating is currently under 30 percent? As such, I’m beginning to agree that Thompson may be another Wes Clark:

I don’t have time to write a long post on this, but I wanted to get this out there before someone else beat me to it: Fred Thompson is to the Republicans in ‘08 as Wes Clark was to the Democrats in ‘04. In other words, the highpoint of his campaign will be the day he gets in the race, because once he’s a serious candidate–and not just the fevered daydream of a dissatisfied base–voters will realize he’s not all that. Remember, you heard it here first. And if Thompson doesn’t flame out and actually goes on to win the GOP nomination and (gulp) the White House, well, forget I ever wrote this.

Now before you flame me, Thompson supporters, consider the analogy in its appropriate context. In 2004, Democrats were looking for a Scoop Jackson liberal — an unapologetic leftist who was also tough and convincing on foreign policy. On paper, Wes Clark fit the bill. Once he hit the stump, it became clear his political instincts were nonexistent, and he fizzled. But his CV kept him in the race long enough to ensure that a significant portion of the anti-Kerry vote was kept from John Edwards, ensuring that the frontrunner won the day. In 2008, Republicans are looking for a Reagan conservative — an unapologetic conservative who is also able to communicate conservatism to swing voters and win moderate and centrist votes. On paper, Thompson fits the bill. But if, as I suspect, he hits the stump without bringing along his on-camera persona, he will fail to energize anyone except for the “Rudy McRomney” types. Like Clark, he won’t be able to actually win any primaries. But also like Clark, he has the potential to help the frontrunner, in this case, Rudy, by ensuring that no single conservative alternative emerges to face him in the later primaries. It wouldn’t be hard to imagine Rudy winning a series of 40% pluralities in the later primaries against Romney and Thompson, with the remaining 60% divided evenly between the latter candidates. In this scenario, Romney plays the Edwards role from 2004 and McCain, like Lieberman, never gets the McMentum going in Iowa and New Hampshire and is forced to drop out early.

For those of you who need an Ames Straw Poll primer, may I humbly suggest this piece I penned last month as a great place to start.

All the debating, inter-campaign turmoil and decision making of whether or not to compete at Ames this August will come to a head on June 15, just a little over two weeks away. That’s when the bidding takes place for the real estate outside of the event center — you know, the piece of land that candidates have to set up tents, music stages, even carnival rides, and hand out campaign flyers/buttons/hats/DVD’s, etc.

In 2000, George Bush won the bidding and paid $63,000 for the real estate closest to the front door of the event - obviously the best location, if you’ve got the cash for it. My guess is the price for that piece of land will be above six digits this time around.

But what this means is folks like Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani, whose campaigns have publicly been speculating about skipping the straw poll, will have to decide by June 15 if they want a spot there. And if they’re going to compete, they’re going to want a spot. When the bidding is over that day, candidates will have until June 25 to cut the check to the IA GOP, and the checks are nonrefundable. So two weeks from now, we will know who will be competing at Ames and who won’t be.

My hope is both Rudy and Fred choose to compete. My prediction, however, is that just Thompson will. Thompson will have lowered expectations going into the event since he has had far less time to prepare and get a ground organization going in Iowa, and lowered expectations are good things - because when they are beaten, it equals positive press time. Giuliani will take the safe road and not risk his candidacy on the social conservatives who show up at Ames - and I can’t really blame him for that. Out of any candidate, he has the most to gain and the most to lose from the straw poll, and by sitting it out he will be able to avoid those extremes.

So what are your predictions? Who’s in? Who’s out? Who will win the bidding for the chunk of land by the front door? And who ultimately will win Ames? We’re roughly 70 days away now…

He’s coming along!

First this 2 weeks ago:

O’REILLY: What about Romney? What do you think of him? He’s pretty slick.

MILLER: Yeah. You know what? I like Mitt Romney, but I do kind of like what McCain said, that he doesn’t, you know at least McCain I’m not voting for John because I think he’s a little old. But McCain sticks by his guns. Romney has sort of slid it around a little. When you look that good and you slide it around a little, there’s a snake oil salesman vibe about him that might be a little weird for me.

O’REILLY: All right.

MILLER: I’m a Rudy guy.

And now this:

O’REILLY: …Now, Mitt Romney according to a Rasmussen poll is up to 16 percent. Your guy, Rudy, is at 25. It looks like Romney’s getting some traction. What do you think about that?

MILLER: Well, I’m wondering at the TIME photo you’re showing. I don’t remember, but that must be them sort of aping the notes on an old TIME cover with his dad, George.

Listen, I am a Rudy guy. I’ve often said that. I’m going to introduce the mayor at an L.A. fundraiser later tonight. I think that Rudy, as far as terrorism goes, is just entering his peak killing years. And that’s why I’m for him.

But I must say that Romney is a pretty smooth customer. I think he’s done great in the debates so far. And I think his plan, and it’s a pretty smart one, is to lever the whole heist with Iowa and New Hampshire. Old school stuff. Spend some money there. Do some local ads. Put your bass widgeons on the ground. Shake some hands.

Then later in the summer you go out to Ames for that straw poll. Bus people in, or hay cart them in, or whatever they have to do. Show some muscle and then beat these guys in the second quarter earnings.

O’REILLY: But you’ve got a very how important in this world is Romney’s appearance? Which, I mean, you can’t get more presidential looking than Mitt Romney.

I mean, look, if you were to make up a guy, this would be the guy, you know, that looks presidential. He’s got the jaw going on, the little gray thing in there. And I think that means a lot in America.

MILLER: Well, I do, too. But when you back it up with the fact that he’s competent, too. He ran a pretty tight Olympics. And you know, this is the guy who invented Staples. And I think he understands a step-by-step business plan. And I think the Staples thing is going to come out as adversaries best keep their head up, because it will be death by a thousand cuts with Romney. It will be a very…

O’REILLY: Staples, the Staples department store? Is that what you’re saying?

MILLER: Staples office stores.

O’REILLY: Yes, the office stores.

MILLER: Romney was there at the beginning of that.

O’REILLY: OK.

I hope Kavon doesn’t mind the posting of a press release, but I think this one is pretty good.

A NEW GENERATION OF GLOBAL CHALLENGES: THE ROMNEY VISION VS. THE OBAMA VISION

Globe”We are a unique nation, and there is no substitute for our leadership. Our future and that of generations to come depend on our resolve to move beyond the divisiveness in Washington today and unite America and our allies to confront a new generation of global challenges.” Gov. Mitt Romney (Gov. Mitt Romney, “Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

In The July/August Issue Of Foreign Affairs, Gov. Romney And Sen. Obama Lay Out Their Visions For How America Should Solve A New Generation Of Global Challenges:

Click Here To Read Gov. Mitt Romney’s Vision.

Click Here To Read Sen. Barack Obama’s Vision.

The Romney Vision: Confront Radical Islam Globally, Truly Transform Our Foreign Policy

Gov. Romney Stresses The Importance Of Winning In Iraq And Defeating Radical Islam Globally. “The congressional debate in Washington has largely, and myopically, focused on whether troops should be redeployed from Iraq to Afghanistan, as if these were isolated issues. Yet the jihad is much broader than any one nation, or even several nations. The jihadist threat is the defining challenge of our generation and is symptomatic of a range of new global realities.” (Gov. Mitt Romney, “Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Gov. Romney Will Truly Transform Washington’s Foreign Policy Practices And Capabilities. “We need to fundamentally change the cultures of our civilian agencies and create dynamic, flexible, and task-based approaches that focus on results rather than bureaucracy. For every region, one civilian leader should have authority over and responsibility for all the relevant agencies and departments, similar to the single military commander who heads U.S. Central Command.” (Gov. Mitt Romney, “Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Gov. Romney Will Increase The Military By 100,000 Troops And Commits Specific Funding To Do So. “[W]e need to increase our investment in national defense. This means adding at least 100,000 troops and making a long-overdue investment in equipment, armament, weapons systems, and strategic defense. [W]e are going to need at least an additional $30 $40 billion annually over the next several years to modernize our military, fill gaps in troop levels, ease the strain on our National Guard and Reserves, and support our wounded soldiers. The next president should commit to spending a minimum of four percent of GDP on national defense.” (Gov. Mitt Romney, “Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Gov. Romney Believes We Must Become Truly Energy Independent For Our National Security. “We need to initiate a bold, far-reaching research initiative an energy revolution that will be our generation’s equivalent of the Manhattan Project or the mission to the moon. It will be a mission to create new, economical sources of clean energy and clean ways to use the sources we have now. It will be good for our national defense, it will be good for our foreign policy, and it will be good for our economy.” (Gov. Mitt Romney, “Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Gov. Romney Believes We Must Revitalize and Strengthen Our Alliances. “The inaction, if not the breakdown, of many Cold War institutions has made many Americans skeptical of multilateralism . . . But such failures should not obscure the fact that the United States’ strength is amplified when it is combined with the strength of other nations. [W]here institutions are fundamentally incapable of meeting a new generation of challenges, the United States does not have to go it alone. Instead, we must examine where existing alliances can be strengthened and reinvigorated and where new alliances need to be forged.” (Gov. Mitt Romney, “Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Gov. Romney Believes In A Bright Future For The World And Opportunities For American Leadership. “We are a unique nation, and there is no substitute for our leadership. The difficulties we face in Iraq should neither cause us to lose faith in the United States’ strength and role in the world nor blind us to the new challenges we face. Our future and that of generations to come depend on our resolve to move beyond the divisiveness in Washington today and unite America and our allies to confront a new generation of global challenges.” (Gov. Mitt Romney, “Rising To A New Generation Of Global Challenges,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

The Obama Vision: Disengage From Iraq And The War On Terror, Re-Engage Via Diplomacy

Sen. Obama Calls For A Retreat From Iraq By March 31, 2008, Ignoring Terrorists’ Own Statements That Iraq Is The Central Front In The War On Terror. “Iraq was a diversion from the fight against the terrorists who struck us on 9/11, and incompetent prosecution of the war by America’s civilian leaders compounded the strategic blunder of choosing to wage it in the first place. The best chance we have to leave Iraq a better place is to begin a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces, with the goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008″ (Sen. Barack Obama, “Renewing American Leadership,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Sen. Obama Advocates Economic Engagement, Security Assurances And Diplomatic Relations With Iran. “Our policy of issuing threats and relying on intermediaries to curb Iran’s nuclear program, sponsorship of terrorism, and regional aggression is failing. [W]e must show Iran and especially the Iranian people what could be gained from fundamental change: economic engagement, security assurances, and diplomatic relations.” (Sen. Barack Obama, “Renewing American Leadership,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Sen. Obama Blames America For Carbon Emissions, And Calls For Enacting A Cap-And-Trade System. “As the world’s largest producer of greenhouse gases, America has the responsibility to lead. While many of our industrial partners are working hard to reduce their emissions, we are increasing ours at a steady clip by more than ten percent per decade. As president, I intend to enact a cap-and-trade system that will dramatically reduce our carbon emissions.” (Sen. Barack Obama, “Renewing American Leadership,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Sen. Obama Paints A Dreary Picture Of The Pursuit Of Liberty Across The Globe. “People around the world have heard a great deal of late about freedom on the march. Tragically, many have come to associate this with war, torture, and forcibly imposed regime change.” (Sen. Barack Obama, “Renewing American Leadership,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Sen. Obama Sees A World Of Floods, Famine, And Fighting. “Without dramatic changes, rising sea levels will flood coastal regions around the world, including much of the eastern seaboard. Warmer temperatures and declining rainfall will reduce crop yields, increasing conflict, famine, disease, and poverty. By 2050, famine could displace more than 250 million people worldwide. That means increased instability in some of the most volatile parts of the world.” (Sen. Barack Obama, “Renewing American Leadership,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007)

Not entirely sure why folks waste money polling New York, but here are the results:

Siena College New York GOP Primary
Without F Thompson and Gingrich
(trend lines from April)

Giuliani - 52% (47)
McCain - 14% (16)
Romney - 7% (8)
T Thompson - 4% (-)
All others - 2% or less
Undecided - 17% (16)

With Fred Thompson and Gingrich:
(no trend lines available)

Giuliani - 50%
McCain - 12%
F Thompson - 8%
Romney - 7%
Gingrich - 7%
Undecided - 15%

Survey was done May 18-25 of 174 registered Republican voters, and has an MoE of 7.4%.

As you can see, a tiny sample size with a huge MoE. However, it is interesting to note with that in mind that Thompson seems to draw his support equally from Rudy, McCain, undecideds, and third-tier candidates at this point, without moving Romney’s numbers.

Some general election matchups, showing New York assuredly blue at this point regardless of who either party nominates:

Siena College NY General Election Matchups

Clinton - 52%
Giuliani - 39%

Clinton - 54%
McCain - 36%

Clinton - 57%
F Thompson - 29%

Obama - 50%
Giuliani - 40%

Obama - 50%
McCain - 33%

This part of the survey was of 620 registered voters and has a 3.9% MoE.

For a reference point, Bush lost NY by 10% 25% in 2004 and 11% 18% in 2000.

[UPDATE: Woah, my numbers were off. I was accidentally looking at CA on my little chart of election history instead of NY. Yes, I have a chart of election history. And yes, I am a nerd. Thank you.]

Republican Kansas Senator and presidential hopeful Sam Brownback, in an opinion piece?appearing in today’s New York Times, has wisely taken the opportunity to qualify his previously expressed disbelief in evolution.

[D]uring the first Republican presidential debate, the candidates on stage were asked to raise their hands if they did not “believe” in evolution. As one of those who raised his hand [Mike Huckabee and Tom Tancredo being the others], I think it would be helpful to discuss the issue in a bit more detail and with the seriousness it demands.

The scientific method, based on reason, seeks to discover truths about the nature of the created order and how it operates, whereas faith deals with spiritual truths.

People of faith should be rational, using the gift of reason that God has given us.

If belief in evolution means simply assenting to microevolution, small changes over time within a species, I am happy to say, as I have in the past, that I believe it to be true.

Many questions raised by evolutionary theory like whether man has a unique place in the world or is merely the chance product of random mutations go beyond empirical science and are better addressed in the realm of philosophy or theology.

Ultimately, on the question of the origins of the universe, I am happy to let the facts speak for themselves. There are aspects of evolutionary biology that reveal a great deal about the nature of the world, like the small changes that take place within a species.

Whether this?will allow Brownback, a candidate currently languishing between one and two percent in national polls, to recast?himself as?more palatable to the masses, or appealing to a socially liberal frontrunner in need of a running mate who would?bring ideological and geographical balance to the ticket, remains to be seen.

From the hardest to spell polling organization out there:

Quinnipiac GOP Primary in Pennsylvania

• Giuliani - 28% (29)
• McCain - 11% (17)
• F. Thompson - 10% (6)
• Romney - 9% (5)
• Gingrich - 8% (10)
• All others - 1% or less
• Undecided - 23% (21)

Survey was done May 22-28 of 575 Republicans, and has an MoE of 4.1%.

Giuliani seems to have leveled out his poll numbers after dropping from 43% in March to 29% last month. That, plus the fact he remains in first place after such a large drop, is good news for his campaign. McCain continues to face declining poll numbers, and nearly slips into third or fourth place in Pennsylvania. Romney and Thompson are both up 4 points.

Oh, and Ron Paul increased his support in PA by an order of infinity - from 0% last month to 1% now.

On the Dem side, Gore was included which renders this poll useless. In case you were wondering, though, Gore polls second behind Hillary, and in front of third place Obama.

More numbers from Q:

Favorable/Unfavorable Ratings

• Giuliani - 53/28 (57/22)
• McCain - 44/28 (48/24)
• Romney - 20/17 (13/13) - 62% haven’t heard enough to form an opinion
• Thompson - 25/11 (23/10) - 63% haven’t heard enough to form an opinion

PA General Election Matchups

• Giuliani - 47% (47)
• Clinton - 43% (43)

• Giuliani - 45% (45)
• Obama - 40% (41)

• Clinton - 45% (43)
• McCain - 43% (45)

• McCain - 42% (41)
• Obama - 41% (43)

• Clinton - 50% (47)
• F. Thompson - 36% (36)

• Obama - 47% (45)
• F. Thompson - 32% (33)

Giuliani’s net favorability fell from +35 to +25, McCain’s from +24 to +16, Romney’s went slightly up from even to +3, and Thompson’s from +13 to +14.

Former FBI Director Louis Freeh is set to endorse Rudy Giuliani at a press conference to be held later today:

Louis Freeh, Democrat Bill Clinton’s FBI director, is going over to the other side in a big way today - endorsing Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani, the Daily News has learned.

The high-profile endorsement is a boon to the former mayor, whose views on security and terrorism can only benefit from having an international lawman like Freeh in his corner, experts said.

“Any endorsement that lets Rudy talk about fighting crime and terrorism is good for him,” said GOP consultant Dan Schnur. “And if Giuliani and [Hillary] Clinton are the nominees, you can be sure that Louis Freeh ends up in the front row of every debate, just to try and knock her off her game.”

Freeh’s defection to Team Rudy is part of a gradual transformation by the former top G-man from one-time friend of the Clintons to outspoken critic, blaming the former President for raining scandal down upon the White House, and for being soft on terrorism in the years before 9/11.

“Until 9/11,” Freeh wrote in his 2005 book, “My FBI,” about America’s counterterrorism efforts, “we lacked the political leadership and more important the political will to do what had to be done.”

…it is Freeh’s get-tough approach to crime and terrorism - he has long advocated expanding U.S. intelligence gathering around the globe - that will likely take center stage at today’s planned endorsement.

It’s a message that certainly fits with Giuliani’s recent rhetoric on the presidential campaign trail, where he often argues that Democrats want to go back to playing “defense” on terrorism, while Republicans understand the importance of playing “offense.”

The official announcement will come at a press conference to be held in Times Square.

Race 4 2008 is proud to announce the addition of our newest writer, Aron Goldman. Here’s more about him:

Aron Goldman is a 36-year-old owner of an international Miami-based computer company that has been a leading wholesale supplier of retail computer and consumer electronic businesses in the Caribbean, Central & South America, and Africa since 1996. Although Goldman started out as a journalism major at the University of Maryland, he graduated from the university in 1993 with a degree in psychology. Growing up 10 miles outside New York City in affluent Bergen County, New Jersey, Goldman’s political philosophy was built on a socially liberal but fiscally conservative foundation.

In 2004, Goldman successfully negotiated with the British Foreign Office the re-opening of the previously evacuated southwestern part of the Caribbean island of Montserrat, a UK colony which has been plagued by volcanic activity since 1995.

Goldman has also had some unique opportunities the past few years working for a major news network, reporting from Miami during Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma, and in February 2007, he covered Super Bowl XLI as a reporter; writing segments and conducting interviews.

Most recently, four of Goldman’s questions that were submitted for the MSNBC/Politico GOP debate were asked of the Republican presidential candidates, including the controversial evolution question.

Aron can be reached at aronscott@msn.com.

Thanks for coming aboard Aron! I know that you will be a great addition to our little project.

From stateline.org comes a list of current Governors who have endorsed 2008 candidates - including two I missed somewhere along the line:

Mitch Daniels (IN) has endorsed John McCain and Don Carcieri (RI) has endorsed Mitt Romney.

All total, 6 out of the 22 current GOP Governors (soon to be 21 after November) have endorsed a 2008 candidate - with McCain getting 3, Romney landing 2, and Huckabee brandishing 1. Complete endorsement lists are below the fold.

(more…)

In an interview with Rolling Stone, Grover Norquist opines that social conservatives are far more natural members of a grand “Leave Me Alone” coalition than some of their self-proclaimed leaders indicate. Money quote:

What brings social conservatives to the Republican party is not some list of 20 things that James Dobson would like to see. It’s a much lower threshold. Social conservatives are best understood as a parents-rights movement. They don’t like guys throwing prophylactics at their kids in public schools. They don’t like their faith being made fun of, they want to be able to send their kids to private schools or home school. They are worried about raising their kids in their own faith and being left alone. On the abortion issue, pro-lifers need the same thing the chamber of commerce wants: serious judges. If you promise them that, credibly, you can have their support.
…

If 40 percent of the GOP base truly had Dobson’s 20 point test then a candidate such as Huckabee should be one of the frontrunners. He’s not, and that’s why I think my analysis is the correct one. The press is going to want to talk about and solicit quotations from self-appointed leaders about how unacceptable certain of these candidates are. I don’t think that translates. You have to convince people that one of these candidates would work actively against their privacy zone on faith and childrearing. And I’m not sure that anyone of them is going to fail that test.

In less than a year, we’ll find out just how many Americans who self-identify as social conservatives want first and foremost an intrusive state that advocates a certain brand of morality, and how many so-cons just want to be left alone to govern themselves in accordance with their personal faith and values.

So say the two latest polls out of the State of Alaska:

With the latest poll showing her approval rating at 89 percent, Gov. Sarah Palin may now be the most popular governor in the nation.

A recent public opinion poll taken by Ivan Moore Research showed both Republicans and Democrats in favor of the state’s first female governor. The poll comes just two weeks after a separate poll taken by Dittman Research gave Palin a 93 percent approval rating.

While political polling numbers can fluctuate week to week, Palin’s numbers have consistently been extremely high, putting her near or at the top among the nation’s governors, according to Jennifer Duffy, an analyst at the Cook Political Report, a Washington, D.C.-based research group that closely follows state politics.

“She is only the 14th person in the nation to take out an incumbent governor in a primary. That’s about the hardest thing you can do in politics, so she was starting from a good point,” Duffy said.

Palin beat then-Gov. Frank Murkowski in last August’s Republican primary before winning the general election in November.

“In a lot of ways that was the race, so she started in a good position,” Duffy said.

The Ivan Moore poll surveyed 500 people throughout the state on the governor’s performance as well as her Alaska Gasline Inducement Act. Fifty percent of those asked said they thought Palin’s gas line law would increase the chances of a North Slope pipeline getting built to transport natural gas to the Lower 48. Twenty-one percent of respondents said the gas line law was flawed.

Only 5 percent of those asked said they thought negatively about Palin’s work in her six months as governor.

Alaska’s Sarah Palin and Minnesota’s Tim Pawlenty remain the two greatest GOP success stories of 2006. Both were able to run as conservatives and win in the west and the north — regions that largely abandoned the GOP last fall — despite a national tectonic shift against Republicans due to the trio of incompetence, corruption, and unpopular positions on key issues, such as Iraq and stem cell research. And now Palin is the nation’s most popular governor. She’s young, effective, and nearly as sexy as Dick Cheney, if that were possible. If anyone should be on the eventual nominee’s shortlist in 2008, it’s her.

In their never-ending quest to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, as they are so apt at doing, the three leading Democratic candidates have now all announced they plan to raise taxes if elected President.

John Edwards wants to raise taxes by approximately $120 billion - and that’s only to give health insurance only to the uninsured.

Today, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have announced they would like to raise taxes by similar amounts. Barack wants to give government health insurance to the uninsured as well (quick, cancel your health insurance in case one of these two guys wins!), and Hillary, as noted below, wants us to become the “we are in this together” society and get the government further into the business of redistributing wealth.

Ever since Walter Mondale announced that he would raise taxes if President, the American people have wisely rejected candidates that will cost them a lot more money. Even Michael Dukakis told the American people he would raise taxes “only as a last resort”… which I suppose puts Hillary, Obama, and Edwards to the left of Dukakis on this issue.

And keep in mind that this $100 billion tax hike is just for one program - and one that won’t even benefit 85% of the American population. Any other increased spending these candidates announce from here on out will require additional tax increases.

2008 should have been a fairly easy year for Democrats to keep control of Congress and win the White House, what with Bush fatigue and party fatigue eating at the Republicans. However, they are doing their darndest to make sure they lose.

I rarely swear. I think I’ve said maybe a dozen “bad words” in the past 10 years. However, when I read this article, I almost let out a few expletives simply because of how downright scary Hillary Clinton’s vision for America is:

Clinton: Shared Prosperity Should Replace ‘On Your Own’ Society

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an “on your own” society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.

“I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together’ society,” she said. “I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none.”

“There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed,” she said. “Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies.”

(Emphasis mine.) Okay… say it with me now… “socialist.” That’s all Hillary is - a dyed in the wool socialist. (And by the way, Hill, a “free market” that is laden with government regulations isn’t exactly “free” anymore…) So much for individual responsibility. So much for being an agent of change in your own life. So much for rewarding individual success. So much for the individual! A “shared prosperity” society isn’t what America needs. This is what Europe has, and what is tearing apart and destroying the fabric of their countries. Perhaps Hillary should run for President of France in their next election…

This reminded me of the latest news from Russia that I heard this weekend, where the federal government of Russia seized control of two of the nation’s largest oil fields, kicking out capitalistic companies under the guise that they were not producing enough oil and they were violating environmental regulations. Government takeover of the economy is socialism en route to communism.

It gets better. Delivering the speech at a college, she says:

“We have sent a message to our young people that if you don’t go to college … that you’re thought less of in America. We have to stop this,” she said.

Maybe she ought to get together with Barack and figure out how to get all those drunken black criminals off the streets and into gainful employment. (Note: read the linked article before accusing me of racism.)

This is one frighteningly scary woman. The even scarier part is that she is the least liberal of the three frontrunners for the Democrat party…

From “advisers” who are “close to the campaign” - according to Politico.

1. The red pickup truck will be back.

Organizers say the red pickup truck that was a hallmark of Thompson’s first Senate race will begin showing up in Iowa and New Hampshire as an emblem of what they consider his folksy, populist appeal.

2. He will announce on the 4th of July or on that weekend.

Fred Dalton Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race over the Fourth of July holiday…

3. He will make the formal announcement that he is running from Nashville, TN.

Thompson’s formal announcement is planned for Nashville.

4. He will most likely skip the Ames straw poll, citing a lack of time to organize for it.

Similarly, several Thompson advisers are urging him to skip the Iowa Republican Straw Poll in Ames on Aug. 11, since his campaign will have such a short time to prepare. Instead, Thompson could campaign 30 miles away in Des Moines at the Iowa State Fair, which will be taking place at the same time.

Very interesting… so you tell us - what do these revelations mean for the campaign in general? Is the red pickup truck a good idea? Is skipping Ames a good idea? Will Ames even matter if Fred and Rudy both skip it? Discuss away.

According to CBS and the AP:

Fred Thompson, a former Tennessee senator and “Law & Order” actor, will take a step toward a formal presidential candidacy next week, several officials with knowledge of the plans said Wednesday.

Thompson will form a “testing the waters” committee, which will allow him to begin raising money and hiring staff without officially committing to a White House bid. The creation of the committee, to be called “Friends of Fred Thompson,” will be paired with the start of his first major fundraising push.

The articles say Thompson will announce the exploratory committee possibly as early as this Sunday, in time for him to hold a one-day campaign fundraising event, a la Mitt Romney, on June 4th to kick off his fundraising efforts. Also, more rumors of when he will officially announce he is a candidate:

Thompson is discussing plans for a campaign swing through various early primary states in late June, and is considering several options for a formal announcement should he ultimately decide to enter the race. They said that one scenario under discussion, among others, would have him officially announce his candidacy over the July 4 holiday.

Newt Gingrich does not mince words:

Newt Gingrich is one of those who fear that Republicans have been branded with the label of incompetence. He says that the Bush Administration has become a Republican version of the Jimmy Carter Presidency, when nothing seemed to go right. “It’s just gotten steadily worse,” he said. “There was some point during the Iranian hostage crisis, the gasoline rationing, the malaise speech, the sweater, the rabbit” Gingrich was referring to Carter’s suggestion that Americans wear sweaters rather than turn up their thermostats, and to the “attack” on Carter by what cartoonists quickly portrayed as a “killer rabbit” during a fishing trip “that there was a morning where the average American went, ‘You know, this really worries me.’ ” He added, “You hire Presidents, at a minimum, to run the country well enough that you don’t have to think about it, and, at a maximum, to draw the country together to meet great challenges you can’t avoid thinking about.” Gingrich continued, “When you have the collapse of the Republican Party, you have an immediate turn toward the Democrats, not because the Democrats are offering anything better, but on a ‘not them’ basis. And if you end up in a 2008 campaign between ‘them’ and ‘not them,’ ‘not them’ is going to win.”

…

Not since Watergate, Gingrich said, has the Republican Party been in such desperate shape. “Let me be clear: twenty-eight-per-cent approval of the President, losing every closely contested Senate seat except one, every one that involved an incumbent that’s a collapse. I mean, look at the Northeast. You can’t be a governing national party and write off entire regions.” For this disarray he blames not only Iraq and Hurricane Katrina but also Karl Rove’s “maniacally dumb” strategy in 2004, which left Bush with no political capital. “All he proved was that the anti-Kerry vote was bigger than the anti-Bush vote,” Gingrich said. He continued, “The Bush people deliberately could not bring themselves to wage a campaign of choice” of ideology, of suggesting that Kerry was “to the left of Ted Kennedy” and chose instead to attack Kerry’s war record.

The only way to keep the White House in G.O.P. hands, Gingrich said, would be to nominate someone who, in essence, runs against Bush, in the style of Nicolas Sarkozy, the center-right cabinet minister who just won the French Presidency by making his own President, Jacques Chirac, his virtual opponent. Sarkozy is a transforming figure in French politics, Gingrich said, and he suggested that the only Republican who shared Sarkozy’s “transformative” approach to governing was, at that moment, eating a bowl of oatmeal at the McLean Family Restaurant.

“What’s fascinating about Sarkozy is that you have an incumbent cabinet member of a very unpopular twelve-year Presidency, who over the last three years became the clear advocate of fundamental change, running against an attractive woman” the Socialist leader Ségolène Royal “who is the head of the opposition,” Gingrich went on. “In a country that wanted to say, ‘Not them,’ he managed to switch the identity of the ‘them.’ He said, ‘I’m different from Chirac, and she’s not. If you want more of the same, you should vote for her.’ It was a Lincoln-quality strategic decision.”

…

Gingrich has been criticized lately by some conservatives most notably DeLay for spending too much time reaching out to center-right voters; he advocates modernizing the government rather than making it smaller. (Gingrich and DeLay barely speak; their relationship came apart in the late nineteen-nineties, when Gingrich suspected DeLay of engineering an attempted coup.) It is true, Gingrich said, that he wants to bring the center into a coalition with the right, “because I want to give the right power. The right can have power only by being allied with the center.”

That, Gingrich said, was Rove’s mistake. “I think he didn’t understand the second-order effect of base mobilization. The second-order effect is that you drive away the center because you become more and more strident at the base.” What you end up with, he said, is cases like Schiavo’s, and the feeling that Republicans risk alienating “America’s natural majority.”

My emphasis on all counts. Naturally, I find Newt’s ideas refreshing, and not just because many of them basically mirror my own post-election rants on this blog from late last year. I think Speaker Gingrich is correct that the Sarkozy model absolutely must be employed by the eventual GOP nominee given the continuing unpopularity of all things Bush. We Republicans are very lucky that no sitting vice president will be running to head the GOP ticket, as such an occurrence would basically guarantee a Democratic victory 18 months out. And while the Speaker likely fashions himself as the American Sarko, I of course have other ideas. As Salon put it recently, It’s Sarkozy Time!

Despite the ostensible existence of a web site implying that Rudy Giuliani is an acceptable candidate for pro-life interests (and I have not visited it because any site making such a claim is a fraud in my view), large swaths of religious and social conservatives are not buying it and are mobilizing to prevent the Mayor from wresting the 2008 Republican presidential nomination away from their cause and purging social and religious values from the GOP agenda in the near term.

Rebecca Sinderbrand of The New York Observer reports that the conservative blog Free Republic has become hostile territory with respect to the Giuliani candidacy and now contains a Giuliani Truth File section.

David Brody of The Brody File is reporting on his site that not only are religious and social conservatives mobilizing against Giuliani and vowing to bolt the GOP and create a third major party should the Mayor win the Republican presidential nomination, but that some family members of firefighters who died as a result of the 9/11 terrorist attack on New York City are also mobilizing against the Giuliani run to the White House.

The bottom line seems to be there are at least as many social and religious conservatives and New York City residents who oppose the Mayor than support him. For better or worse, the Mayor is a very divisive candidate. It will be interesting to watch his campaign proceed.

Defying recent poll movement, here is a bright spot in your day if you are a McCainiac:

American Research Group GOP Iowa Caucus

• McCain - 25% (26)
• Giuliani - 23% (19)
• Romney - 16% (14)
• Gingrich - 8% (8)
• F. Thompson - 6% (13)
• Brownback - 3% (1)
• All others - 2% or less
• Undecided - 10% (13)

American Research Group GOP New Hampshire Primary

• McCain - 30% (29)
• Romney - 23% (24)
• Giuliani - 21% (17)
• Gingrich - 4% (4)
• F. Thompson - 3% (7)
• All others - 1% or less
• Undecided - 16% (14)

American Research Group GOP SC Primary

• McCain - 32% (36)
• Giuliani - 23% (23)
• F. Thompson - 13% (10)
• Romney - 10% (6)
• Gingrich - 6% (6)
• All others - 1% or less
• Undecided - 11% (12)

On the Dem side, it’s Hillary, Edwards and Obama in that order in each of the three states.

For your comparison: the last four Iowa polls had McCain at 16, 16, 18, and 19%; Giuliani was at 17, 17, 18, and 18%; Romney was at 16, 19, 20, and 30%; and Fred Thompson was at 9, 9, and 10%. The ARG numbers seem slightly off from those, but make of them what you will.

Likewise for New Hampshire: the two other polls done in May show Romney with 30 and 32%, McCain with 19 and 22%, Rudy with 19 and 23%, and Fred with 6 and 11%. The only one of those that looks close is Rudy’s.

Either ARG has picked up some recent, major movement, or these polls may end up being outliers. We’ll have to wait and see what the other polls have to say.

SoCons for Rudy Giuliani, a new Pro-Rudy advocacy group, had their official launch yesterday. Who are SoCons for Rudy?

We are voters who care deeply about the societal issues of life, family, and community. We have come together to support a candidate for President of the United States who we feel is most qualified for the position and who will be a leader in protecting the core values that make our country great.

We feel that Rudy Giuliani is the candidate around whom social conservatives should coalesce. His commitment to strict judicial constructionism, reducing abortions, preserving traditional marriage, keeping America strong and secure, ensuring safer and cleaner neighborhoods, better education for our children, and the dignity of hard-work, self-sufficiency, and personal responsibility, is exactly what we need in a leader at this time in history.

Please head on over and give SoCons for Rudy a look.

Governor Romney said today he would decline his salary were he elected:

speaking with reporters, Romney said he would likely follow the example he set while governor, when he declined his $135,000 annual salary. The president of the United States is paid $400,000 annually.

“I haven’t really thought ahead that far,” Romney said at first. “There are some questions I haven’t forecasted, perhaps because that would seem presumptuous of me.”

Then, he added: “I presume I would take the salary and then I would donate at least that amount - or more - to charity.”

It should be noted Romney declined a salary as Governor and as CEO of the 2002 Winter games.

Romney also said this:

I wouldn’t disqualify somebody by virtue of their financial wealth or their financial poverty,” Romney said after ticking off his public service work. “I would instead look at their record, what they’ve done with their life and whether they can make a difference, whether the things they have learned will enable them to be an effective leader.”

It will be interesting if other candidates who could do the same (Giuliani, Clinton, Edwards, F. Thompson) will.

In today’s online edition, The Prowler reports at The American Spectator that Oklahoma Republican United States Senator Tom Coburn, arguably the toughest spending and budget hawk in Congress, is contemplating getting into the GOP presidential field. We’ll see.

Here is the latest Rasmussen GOP update:

• Giuliani 25
• Romney 16
• McCain 15
• Thompson 12

This week, Giuliani is followed by Romney at 16%, McCain at 15%, and former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson at 12%. While Romney’s one-point edge over McCain is statistically insignificant, it’s worth noting that McCain had a six-point advantage over Romney just two weeks ago.

A look at the Trend lines:

Escaped slave and former Sudanese refugee Francis Bok spoke at the opening of Sen. Sam Brownback’s Iowa campaign headquarters Friday.

Mr. Bok was forced into slavery at the age of seven and remained in service to his Arab master until his escape ten-years later. While in forced servitude, his slavemaster once told him, “You want to know why no one loves you and why you must sleep with the animals?… I make you sleep with the animals… because you ARE an animal…”

He now works for the American Anti-Slavery Group (AASG) and has written an account of his experience entitled, “Escape from Slavery: The True Story of My Ten Years in Captivity–and My Journey to Freedom in America“.

International abolitionist groups estimate that nearly 30 million human beings remain in slavery across the globe.

It is truly inspiring to meet a man like Francis Bok, who despite the hardship that he has had to endure, has dedicated his life to fighting for the rights of others. In a day when the word “hero” is thrown around so lightly, it was an honor for me to meet the real article in Des Moines on Friday.