The Candidates
h/t Hotair
However I have studied in particular the agenda and national security language of Governor Mitt Romney and I do personally believe that at this stage he has best understood the parameters I am concerned about: that is the threat of Jihadism, the human rights crisis in the Greater Middle East and the need for a confrontation of Jihadism within the US Homeland. Governor Romney, by my academic and analytical parameters has been able to draw a counter-Jihadism doctrine which can best determine the danger, identify the threat and direct national resources into the confrontation.
In addition I have had the chance to learn that the Mitt Romney policy on the Middle East will particularly focus on containing the Iranian and Syrian regimes, standing by and defending democracies in Israel, Lebanon and Iraq and promoting human rights in the region.
This is why at this stage I would recommend to the Republicans to vote for Mitt Romney in the primaries as first among equal colleagues.
This analysis and recommendation represent my personal views and do not represent the views and opinions of the NGOs and institutions I belong to.
At this stage may aim is not to engage in a debate about primaries but only to inform all those on my lists of my views regarding the national security and war on terror agendas of the candidates from both parties.
Best regards
Dr Walid Phares
Walid Phares is an author of two seminal works on Islamic Terrorism, Future Jihad and The War of Ideas. He’s also a Fox News terrorism analyst.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Walid is a professor at the national defense university where I am getting my M.A. in counter-terrorism. This endorsement really surprises me. Brett S. care to elaborate? You’ve had him for class.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Romney out McCains McCain!
Honestly, I knew Romney had better policies regarding the War on Terror, but try telling that to a McCain fan.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Rudy loses badly today, I am with Romney, but you guys have got to stop with these silly, insignificant endorsements.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:51 am
All I can say is I am blown away. Rudy and McCain are BY FAR more qualified to deal with national security issues than Mitt Romney. I mean what does Mitt plan to do..convert them to mormonism? I will have to email Walid to figure out where hes coming from on this.
This endorsement doesnt matter much bc Mitt will never beat any of the Dems, so its kind of a moot point. Interesting nonetheless.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:52 am
#4 That’s low, you must be a real scumbag.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Dr. Phares understands the dangers we face and is a smart man
to endorse Romney.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Joe M,
It’s not an insignificant endorsement. Future Jihad is one of 5 books or so that I have on my bookcase on the War on Terror/Islam. The guy is one of the most knowledgeable people in the field.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Actually, most of the best GWOT advisors are with Rudy.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:58 am
#8 I will admit that Rudy does seem to “get” the war on terror, though he didn’t seem to at first. Still, that’s something I like about him.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:58 am
#4 hahaha
January 29th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Metro,
But that will change tomorrow as many of Rudy’s staff/supporters will jump to Mitt after Rudy drops out, just like so many of Fred’s did.
I’ll still look you up and buy you a drink next time I’m in L.A. but the writing is on the wall and even though the candidates might want to endorse JMac, their grassroots people know who the remaining conservative is after their guy leaves.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:00 am
#9 Though he didn’t at first?????????????
Rudy GOT the war on terror back when most didn’t. Pre-9/11. When he kicked Arafat out of the UN 50th celebration.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Some of you guys may be too young to remember, but NOBODY did anything like that ever before 9-11.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Insider Advantage just put up a poll with McCain up one, but they’re still polling Dems and Indies.
It’s gonna be close today.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/docs/InsiderAdvantage_MajorityOpinionFLGOPFinalPrimaryPoll-01-29-08.html
January 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
It was impressive stuff Metro, and it’s a shame that Rudy didn’t convert that sanity and passion to this campaign. I’d much rather this were a Romney/Rudy race right now.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Mccain-31
Romney-30
Huck-15
Giuliani-13
Paul-2
Other-2
Undecided-7 ????
That’s a lot of undecideds
January 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
#12 “though he didn’t SEEM to at first”
At the beginning, he was making statements that sounded like we should be treating this like a crime problem. I’m think when he got together his presidential team, or possibly before when more facts came out about terrorists, he was able to put together a better policy. This wasn’t a big issue before 9/11.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:05 am
“That’s a lot of undecideds”
Yeah, in a race this close it is.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:06 am
bjalder26, oh no, oh no no no. Please don’t speak of what you don’t know.
He made a statement encouraging people not to blame all Muslims, at a time when there were some random attacks on Muslims.
He’s made it crystal-clear from the beginning he understands Islamic extremism.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Matt, you know why he didn’t fight real hard at the end?
Because slimeball Romney had a bunch more ads in the can aimed at Rudy’s skeletons.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Metro everything wrong in the world isn’t b/c of Romney
January 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am
I want to pitch a theory here, and get some reaction:
Lets say that, whoever wins (Romney or McCain), if they only win by one or two points, does that get overshawdowed by a poor showing for Giuliani, which may include a dropout?
January 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Fundamentally, I’m a Republican because I believe in meritocracy above all.
The GOP is about say F you to the most qualified candidate it has had in a century.
And I am about to say F you to the GOP and go back to ignoring politics like I did when Clinton was in office.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am
let me clarify that with “political world”
January 29th, 2008 at 10:09 am
This has nothing to do with Romney and everything to do with McCain Derangement Syndrome. It’s a sad day for Republicans when they vote against one of their own instead of voting for someone because they like them.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:10 am
sampo, because McCain is the biggest traitor in American politics, perhaps?
January 29th, 2008 at 10:11 am
With the endorsement of Phares, add another 1st-rate intellectual to Mitt’s supporters. Matt’s right about the significance of this…..Phares has as much GWOT-cred as anybody. Mitt will probably give him a very high-level position in his administration.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Perhaps Dr. Phares is impressed with Mitt’s ability to understand, demonstrate, and practice the ancient art of taqiyya better than the enemy?
January 29th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Metro,
I know a few Massachusetts voters that could convincingly argue otherwise.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:13 am
This is interesting. From Rasmussen: “Among Huckabee supporters, 87% have a favorable opinion of McCain. Only 52% have a favorable opinion of Romney.
Among Giuliani supporters, 82% have a favorable opinion of Romney. Just 61% have a favorable opinion of McCain. “
January 29th, 2008 at 10:13 am
This is interesting. From Rasmussen: “Among Huckabee supporters, 87% have a favorable opinion of McCain. Only 52% have a favorable opinion of Romney.
Among Giuliani supporters, 82% have a favorable opinion of Romney. Just 61% have a favorable opinion of McCain. ”
From their national polls
January 29th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Tarheel, thanks. Not as large a fraction of Rudy’s support would go to McCain as many people think.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:14 am
someone made a point that romney will lose to democrats. i think any gop candidate will have a hard time beating the dems next year, but in my opinion, romney is just as well qualified, i think better, to beat ether hillary or obama.
nobody mistakes this is a ‘change’ election, whatever that means. everybody hates washington. romney is an outsider that has run as a change agetn, a turnaround artist. he has the record to back it up and its compelling. he also has the ability to rally the whole gop coalition which mccain can’t really do.
most importantly he takes the terror issue from the dems, the economy issue, and health care. he has the resources, can raise money, and brawl with the best of them. he has shown he will fight and fight hard.
his poll numbers against hillary have gone up every month all year and now he is within 5 or so of her.
the dems worry about romney becuase he is an outside with experience. hillary is an insider with experience, so is barack. he also is the only candidate who has done something on healthcare without raising taxes and without growing government. wqhether it worked or not is still open for debate, but either way, it scores him political points.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:15 am
“The most qualified candidate?”
um, ok. lol
January 29th, 2008 at 10:15 am
“Among Huckabee supporters, 87% have a favorable opinion of McCain. Only 52% have a favorable opinion of Romney”
Interesting? Yes. Surprising? Not at all. Maybe it had to do with Romney supporters raising holy hell that the only reason Huckabee won Iowa was because Evangelicals voted for him because of his religion - and then disingenuously explained away the massive and lockstep Mormon vote for Mitt in Nevada.
And, you know, Mitt’s negative advertising probably contributed too.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:15 am
i agree iwth trahell and metro. i think rudy’s support if he were to drop out spreads out between all three remaining candidates. i think most go to mccain probably, then romney a fair amount, and then a small fractioni to huckabee.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:17 am
“think most go to mccain probably, then romney a fair amount, and then a small fractioni to huckabee.”
Yep. That’s probably the right order.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Mitt versus the dems…
http://sonsanddaughters.townhall.com/
January 29th, 2008 at 10:19 am
It depends on who wins Florida. I think Rudy’s supporters have enough reasons to like and dislike both McCain and Romney, that momentum will be key. Probably the winner of Florida gets a plurality of Rudy supporters.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Speaking of endorsements, this comes from the conservative American Spectator, word on why McCain received the endorsement of Martinez and Crist;
“The Prowler reported Monday he’d been told by a consultant who’s worked for both Gov. Crist and Sen. Martinez that: “It finally got to the point for the both of them that they just got fed up with the constant harassment. They weren’t going to endorse Romney, and under the right circumstances, one or both of them might have chosen to sit the primary out, but the Romney people just made it intolerable.”
Aggressive, obnoxious stupidity. None of the other candidates like Mitt Romney. This is an indication why.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:21 am
#40 Why does that not surprise me?
Everybody hates Mitt Romney. But 1/3 of Republicans can be fooled into thinking that won’t matter in November.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:22 am
PA,
Hahaha. Why does that not surprise me? Got a link?
January 29th, 2008 at 10:23 am
“Aggressive, obnoxious stupidity. None of the other candidates like Mitt Romney. This is an indication why.”
Forgot to put the last sentence in quotation. That is from the American Spectator, not from me.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Someone at Fox endorses Romney? That’s a new one, isn’t it?
January 29th, 2008 at 10:26 am
ONE OF THEIR OWN?!?!?!?! well, he might be a Repbublican, but he is not anything close to a conservative:
-Supports allowing illegal immigrants to stay here and recieve citizenship
-Opposed the Bush tax cuts based on class warfare
-Declared war on free speech, and wrote a law that hurt Conservative issue groups
-Wants to close gitmo and give additional rights to terrorists
-Wants to enact tree-hugging/environmentalist policies
-Opposed a federal marriage amendment
-Opposed drilling in ANWR
I can go on, but I think you get the point.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:28 am
“None of the other candidates like Mitt Romney. This is an indication why.”
Ultra successful in terms of profession, business, children, marriage, personal hygiene, and campaigning - everything they are not.
Those might be the other indications.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:32 am
One of my favorite moments of blogging was an email I received from a friend who had forwarded to Walid Phares something I had written. He wrote back and said I was very well informed and impressive. I was pretty happy.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:33 am
I guess I am bragging, but oh well.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Yes bjalder, I am in fact a huge scumbag. I will give props to Mitt for this get. I still cant believe that some of you guys think Mitt is a good candidate though. Hes so unlikeable and he continues to hurt the GOP brand. McCain, on the other hand, is liked by almost everyone, which would be helpful in trying to re-unify this country.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:36 am
McCain, on the other hand, is liked by almost everyone
…on the NYTimes Editorial board.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:41 am
-Supports allowing illegal immigrants to stay here and recieve citizenship
(like Bush)
-Opposed the Bush tax cuts based on class warfare
(because of spending/proposed his own. How’s that 9 trillion dollar deficit affecting the value of YOUR dollar–at the gas pump maybe?)
-Declared war on free speech, and wrote a law that hurt Conservative issue groups
(co authored by Fred Thompson. like Bush who signed it, but not before praising it)
-Wants to close gitmo and give additional rights to terrorists
(like Colin Powell)
-Wants to enact tree-hugging/environmentalist policies
(Like Teddy Roosevelt)
-Opposed a federal marriage amendment
(Like the Vise President and about half of all Republicans)
-Opposed drilling in ANWR
(like 6 other Republicans, maybe you should chase them around with torches and pitchforks too. Anyway, this oilfield has enough reserves to fuel the worlds oil needs into the spring of this year. no that’s not energy independence, no that’s not even a step in the right direction)
January 29th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Brett S.
“I will have to email Walid to figure out where hes coming from on this. ”
Let me explain to you where he is coming from.
His popularity in the scholar and TV arena comes from the fact that he is the terrorism commentator on Fox, which is connected to ClearChcnnel Company, which is at least partially owned by Bain Capital, which Mitt Romney is or was significant part of.
Save your e-mail.
BTW, I could write same thing about Rush Limbaugh.(For those who wonder why Rush Limbaugh is not endorsing anyone, but hyperventilating when he talks about McCain and Huckabee)
January 29th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Hey Jason, who are those anemic approval ratings working out for Romney? How about that unfavorable rating that’s higher than Hillary Clinton?
January 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Maybe no one respects Romney because Romney doesn’t respect voters? It kind of reminds me of when Jon Steward said to Romney, “Life doesn’t begin at conception, it doesn’t begin at birth, it begins when you decide to run for president.”
January 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Not sure Sampo.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am
#50
January 29th, 2008 at 11:01 am
#35,
It wasn’t the Mitt Followers who raised Cain about the evangelicals voting for Huck. It was the media. Also, even though Dick Morris keeps promoting this notion that the Mormons in Nevada voted lockstep for Romney, it is false. Around 3500 voted for a democrat, and others voted for various republican candidates. The truth is that only 70 some percent voted for Romney.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Linda, check the exit polls. 95% of Republican voters went for Romney, and about a quarter of the turnout said they were Mormon. 3% of the Democrat voters were Mormon, and the sample size was so small that not a single Dem candidate registered over 0%.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:20 am
MirekChicago - I’m with you man! It’s a conspiracy…Romney had this all planned out years ago…he was going to persuade Bain Capital to buy out ClearChannel so he could use all the conservative radio talk show hosts as his puppets to put down the other candidates and prop himself up…because they all know they will lose their jobs if they speak ill of Romney, because he’s on the board, you know…It makes perfect sense to me, especially when I’m taking my happy pills and in my white pajamas in this white padded room. I just have to look out for the evil leprechauns out there. They control the internet you know, the Federal reserve, and they are working on taking over the world…mwa ha ha ha ha ha…
January 29th, 2008 at 11:24 am
John McCain is running to be Bill Clinton’s B****. The oppo file is 3 feet tall on his personal life. Did you all hear the Manchurian code? “Hillary and John will have a very boring campaign.” = John will do exactly as we tell him or we will blow his pretensious and illusory reputation for honor to holy smithereens. We will out his personal indiscretions (not talking about his divorce) as well as Cindy’s personal indiscretions. And then after he loses, he will have no power and no way to fleece the country.
Now be a nice little lap dog, John
BTW, i guess this goes opposite of some lame post above about how likeable John is. NOT!
January 29th, 2008 at 11:29 am
I don’t think John McCain has a particular reputation for being likable. He has a legacy of ill temper. He has burnt a lot of bridges. I find him quite sullen, whiny and snarky at times during the debates.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Latest approval rating poll (Gallup):
McCain:
Favorable-59
Unfavorable-29
Romney:
Favorable-32
Unfavorable-42
Dems fav/unfav
Obama: 59/32
Clinton: 50/46
January 29th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Huckabee fav/unfav
38/36
No matter how much money Romney spends to make himself look good, American does not like him.
January 29th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
#63 Hmm and to think he has gotten the most votes by the people as well as the most delegates. Those people must not be part of America.
January 29th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Dr Phares is a scholar and an expert who was very clear in stating that he is expressing his view on the national security discourse of Governor Mitt Romney. He was clear in saying that he is not discussing any other field, including economics or social affairs. He made one powerful and clear point regarding how to define the enemy and thus how to strategize against it. Voters select their candidates on various grounds: economy, social, politics, environment, religion, and national security. Some even select on sheer hatred of one candidate with no grounds at all. This is democracy at work, with its sophisticated people and its light headed ones. They will all be voters.
Phares said that based on what is posted and published, and on what the candidates openly stated, the most advanced discourse is Romney’s so far. If other candidates would make an effort to enhance their rhetoric, then experts would notice this and recognize it. This is what Phares wrote in his email to his lists.
Also, one has to read Phares comment on the Democratic candidates. he looked at the agendas (posted on the web) and drew conclusions that we can all draw. Now, it is true that a group of national security experts rushed to endorse Giuliani first. They based their move on the fact that Giuliani was the Mayor of NY when 9/11 occurred. And it is true that a number of military experts rushed to support McCain mainly because of his heroic experience in Vietnam. But in Phares’ logic there is a difference between the great role politicians have played in moments in their lives and the actual agenda and strategic choices candidates have adopted. Romney developed an understanding that matches the Jihadi threat. Even if Mitt wasn’t shot down over the skies of Vietnam during the Cold War or even if he didn’t happen to be the Mayor of our beloved New York on 9/11. It is about how to confront the enemy in the future. And on that one Phares read from the available material available and recommended Romney. He wrote that all 4 main Republican candidates are equal in terms of understanding the threat, but Romney was first among equals just because he did his homework on the essence of the war and didn’t leave it to the general wording of just a threat coming from “radical Islam.” The American public at this time need more precision, clear visions and plans. The old style, even with all the good sentiments, isnt enough anymore.
I suggest you read the full text of Phares note and see where he is coming from. But in elections time, unfortunately, precisions in measurements regresses.
January 29th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
#58,
I saw the statistics I wrote somewhere and can’t find them at the moment, so I can’t dispute what you say. Even if 95% did vote for Romney, it is not a surprise because his policies are conservative and represent what they believe in (even with him saying he was pro-choice when he ran for Mass, you can look at his record and it is strongly for life and for traditional marriage). Thompson might have also been a good choice, but he really was unelectable, and Huckabee not only doesn’t represent their views in most areas, but his anti-mormon rhetoric has turned them off.
I will tell you that the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (mormons) does not allow politics to enter the churches and would never promote a candidate or let one speak in the churches. Other than a couple of national issues the leadership got involved in such as the marriage issue, they always have each bishopric read a memo over the pulpit telling people to inform themselves on the issues and to vote for someone who holds their values. They specifically tell people not to use the congregation phone lists for purposes other than church issues.
January 29th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
You finally got it Bill. I’m glad there is two of us. I felt so lonely.(But, please cut down on laughter. People may think you are kooky.)
January 29th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Walid Phares recommendations covered all the main candidates from both Parties. He pointed out that the two democratic candidates have posted agendas not identifying the enemy. He showed that the leading Republicans know who the enemy is but are too general in defining who the actual forces are. He simply noted that Romney’s identification is the clearest and can serve as a reliable frame to shape the counter Jihadist strategies, still lacking. This is -I believe- why top expert Phares recommended Romney, but by being very clear that his recommendation is about the Romney definition of the enemy. I think Phares acted like a “Jedi” in the War of Ideas, with extreme wisdom. His letter is very specific and scientific. I feel Americans want to know who among the candidates “understands” the type of enemy we’re facing and what to do about it. Americans love the life “stories” of their candidates: Woman, ethnic minority, war hero, Mayor during a disaster, Pastor, and what have you. But now, what Americans want to see is someone who represents the normal and average American and who can calmly lead the defense of the nation without Hollywoodian fireworks. Phares is worried about the future not the past. Is it going to be four years of chaos and “that’s my past this is who I am,” or is gong to be “that’s the enemy and that’s how we are going to defeat it.”
January 29th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
But who is this “idiotista” Debbie Schlussel who claim beign an expert and an activist and writes like a first grader? Why does she post her photo on her web site and spread hatred about Mitt Romney? She writes about Hezbollah and the Islamist Terrorists as if she knew what she was talking about. She doesn’t know a thing about the Middle East and can’t speak the languages and sell herself as a commentator. She has not one serious writing about these topics, only blabla and hear say. Typically a Detroit street talk. The most ridiculous posting was when she was trying to criticize top expert Walid Phares, inventing hilarious stories that no one can check of course. She was mad because he considered Romney’s speech on the Jihadists as the best. She hates Romney for some reason, possibly about a profit she didn’t make from his campaign in Michigan. And now she lashes out in a vulgar way against the best experts America has in the field. She really need some intellectual and maybe social rehab..and still I couldn’t get what was her web site photo about?
February 2nd, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Check this great article by Walid Phares posted today.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24808