Mystery solved. From Yahoo News:

Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani will pick up the endorsement Friday of former GOP rival Tommy Thompson, a one-time Midwestern state governor.

“Rudy Giuliani has shown that he is a true leader. He can and will win the nomination and the presidency. He is America’s mayor, and during a period of time of great stress for this country he showed tremendous leadership,” Thompson, the former Wisconsin governor, said in a statement obtained by the Associated Press.

…

Unclear is the impact of Thompson’s support for Giuliani. On one hand, Giuliani could use the endorsement to try to mollify skeptical Iowans and other Midwesterners who are concerned about his moderate-to-liberal stances on social issues, pointing out that a prominent Republican from their backyards is supporting him.

On the other hand, Thompson left the race because voters weren’t gravitating toward him and he doesn’t bring with him much support in early voting Iowa and elsewhere. He languished in single digits in polls there, and barely registered in national surveys while in the race.

Thompson Thanks Supporters, Exits Presidential Race

Madison - Saying he has ‘no regrets’, Governor Tommy Thompson thanked his supporters Saturday night and officially left the campaign trail.

“I want to thank the people of Iowa who were welcoming and supportive as well as my volunteers and contributors from around the country,” said Thompson. “I have no regrets about running. I felt my record as Governor of Wisconsin and Secretary of Health and Human Services gave me the experience I needed to serve as President, but I respect the decision of the voters. I am leaving the campaign trail today, but I will not leave the challenges of improving health care and welfare in America.”

Thompson, who was elected to serve four terms as Wisconsin Governor and four years as Secretary of Health and Human Services, began exploring a presidential bid last December. Weeks ago, he told supporters and the news media that if he did not do well in the Iowa Straw Poll, he would step aside and leave others to work for the Republican nomination.

“No candidate is more experienced than Governor Thompson and no candidate worked harder; but sometimes the dynamics just aren’t there to bring about a victory,” said Steve Grubbs, Senior Advisor to Thompson’s campaign. “The Governor’s staff was deeply committed to him and to his candidacy. If we could have willed a victory, we would have.”

Thompson will return to the private sector as well as his non-profit work after a brief time off.

“I have very much enjoyed my years in public service and I am comforted by the fact that I think I made a difference for people during that time. I hope to continue working to serve others over the next few years,” said Thompson.

PAID FOR BY TOMMY THOMPSON FOR PRESIDENT

Hat Tip: Reader JayPe

Just in case you were still wondering — an official e-mail update from the Tommy Thompson campaign as reported by Jonathan Martin:

“Tommy Thompson has made it clear that if he doesn’t finish first or second this week in Ames, Iowa, at the straw poll, he will not go on in this race.”

Got it?

We are just three days out from the Ames Straw Poll right now - here are the public strategies of each of the campaigns for this seminal moment in the Race 4 2008:

• Mitt Romney has sent out a direct mailer, set up an 800 number for people to call for free tickets, bus rides, and food, and has set up incentives (like being on the Romney Wall of Fame and getting a free t-shirt) for folks who bring 5 people, knock on 50 doors, make 100 phone calls, or recruit people to ride the Romney buses to Ames. Team Mitt has rented more than 99 air conditioned buses for the event - at least one for every county in Iowa - and the guests on those buses will be treated to free food and a recorded message from Romney. Once at the straw poll, Romney’s tent will be replete with more free food (local Iowa BBQ), local bands, and yes, inflatable bouncy things for the kids. And finally, the Romney campaign is airing this new commercial starting today until Saturday:

• Sam Brownback has at least 45 interns at his Iowa headquarters, most of them with only one job: man the phones. Interns make phone calls to Iowans twelve hours a day, six days a week to try and round up support for the Ames Straw Poll. And recently, they have a pretty unique way of doing it, too: they are calling Iowans who support John McCain and telling them, “McCain has chosen not to participate in the straw poll, and we’d like you to show your support for his values by voting for Brownback.” Officials in the Brownback campaign say their phone efforts have so far “exceeded our internal expectations.” Team Brownback also is recruiting people to be bus captains, that is, to sign up at least 50 people to ride a bus together to Ames on Saturday. They are using a military theme for the campaign, saying that volunteers are joining the “Brownback Army” and anyone interested in going to Ames should call their “Brownback Bus General”. Once at the site, Sam’s tent will be the site of what his campaign calls “An afternoon of prayer and celebration” (the mailer even has the Holy Spirit as a dove and some heavenly beams of light) - a direct appeal to religious conservatives. Norma McCorvey, the Roe of Roe v Wade, will be at Sam’s tent as well, explaining her conversion to the pro-life camp. (Bonus points for anyone who can spot the irony there.)
• Mike Huckabee doesn’t have any sort of transportation organization to get people to Ames, but he is offering free tickets like the other campaigns, and the week leading up to the straw poll he is spending touring dozens of cities in Iowa encouraging people to go there and vote for him. Mike has told reporters that several of Sam Brownback’s supporters have told him they now plan on supporting him at Ames instead because of the recent tussle Sam and Mike had about religious issues, and that he is aiming for a third place finish in the poll (although a 4th or 5th place finish “wouldn’t be a campaign ender” either). Once at Ames, Mike plans on attracting folks to his tent by offering the famous Hope watermelons from Arkansas. Hope watermelons are the largest in the world, and Huck will be displaying 150-pounders at his tent to attract attention.
• Tom Tancredo has 58 buses setup to go to Ames, and he also is offering free tickets and has been spending all his time recently in Iowa rounding up supporters for the straw poll. His campaign is also encouraging supporters to do “door to door literature drops” throughout Iowa leading up to Saturday, with literature, of course, provided by Tancredo’s Iowa office. He is also building what his campaign officially calls “The Army Against Amnesty” to support Tom at Ames.
• Tommy Thompson has buses and tickets available for free to his supporters, and has a non-800 phone number available for folks to call for more information. He is aiming for a first or second place finish at the straw poll; otherwise, he says, he will probably drop out of the race. He has been making his “Common Sense Solutions” tour across Iowa lately, and has really camped out in the state since the campaign began. I could not find any further details of his plans anywhere.
• Duncan Hunter has no organization that I could find anywhere, and is even making his supporters buy their own tickets to the straw poll.
• Ron Paul’s supporters are encouraging one another to promise support to Mitt Romney to secure free transportation to Ames, and then vote for Ron Paul once they get there. The Paul campaign has purchased 500 tickets that they are giving out to “eligible Iowa residents” for the straw poll.

Sunday, August 5
6 days before the Ames Straw Poll
Des Moines, Iowa
ABC 7
9:00 EST — 8:00 CST

I’ll be live-blogging from the spin-room as the sparks will be flying and will get some good pics and coverage for R42008.

“If I don’t win, I’ll be shocked.”

-Tommy Thompson, on his chances at the Ames Straw Poll in 16 days.

Tommy has said if he doesn’t place in the top two in Ames, he will drop out of the race. The race for second place in Ames is going to be the most anticipated story of August. Will Thompson, who has camped out in Iowa since last December organizing a ground game, be able to pull off a second-place finish? Will Brownback, who is courting conservatives hard in the state, be able to overcome him? Will Huckabee, who has said if he isn’t in the top tier of candidates after Ames that he would drop out of the race as well, be able to hold enough townhall meetings and display enough of his charisma to overcome his lack of organization? Will Ron Paul finally be able to funnel internet support into real votes? And where will Rudy and McCain fall when all is said and done?

Once again…. Not that Thompson

GOP presidential candidate Tommy Thompson raised just under a half-million dollars in the second quarter of the year, showing an uptick from the first quarter but well behind the party’s front-runners.

Thompson, a former Wisconsin governor and U.S. Health and Human Services secretary, announced Tuesday he had raised $473,000 from April to June - including a $25,000 loan from the candidate.

In the first quarter, Thompson raised $391,000, which included $75,000 in loans from Thompson.

“We are certainly pleased at the strong growth in our fundraising,” Thompson said in a statement. “We’ve kept our overhead low and maintained a disciplined budget. To date, we’re able to run a campaign equal to that of the better-funded candidates despite the differences in funding.”

On Saturday the Iowa Christian Alliance and Iowans for Tax Relief joined forces to host a Presidential Forum. Attending the event was Tommy Thompson, Mike Huckabee, Sam Brownback, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter.

With any debate or forum where candidates are competing for votes we always want to know who won and who lost. I think the clear winner was a candidate who didn’t utter a word in front of the crowd of nearly 800 social and fiscal conservatives because he wasn’t even invited.

Now I’m sure some of you might think I have to be talking about Fred Thompson. I’m sorry to disappoint, but I’m talking about Congressman Ron Paul. The organizers of the forum didn’t extend an invitation to Congressman Paul; apparently he didn’t me their criteria as a “viable” candidate. I don’t really buy that. I think it was just a snub. Invites were sent to Jim Gilmore and Duncan Hunter, both of whom have little or nothing going on in Iowa.

The Paul campaign capitalized on the snub and used it to motivate their activist. The campaign rented the hall just down the hall from the forum and staged its own rally. I’m told by a reliable source that Paul had about 800 or so people attend his rally. If that’s the case, Ron Paul had as many people at his rally as ICA and ITR had at their forum. I’m also pretty sure that Paul’s 800 person event would be the largest single Republican candidate presidential event of this cycle in Iowa. Ron Paul gained more by getting snubbed by ITR and ICA than if he would have been able to attend their forum. I think all of this makes Congressman Paul the clear winner.

While Ron Paul was the winner of the day, Congressman Tom Tancredo delivered the goods inside the forum. Tancredo’s speech was by far the best received, and is the only candidate who actually asks people to join his cause. “Charge into the breach with me, this is our country, fight for it; this is our flag, pick it up; and this is your country, take it back.” Tancredo was impressive, as was Mike Huckabee, but Tancredo was head a shoulders above everyone else that spoke. Here is how I’d rank the forum participants.

1. Tom Tancredo ? Fantastic Speech on conservatism, I’d love to have the transcript.
2. Mike Huckabee ? Great Speech, just lacked the passion of Tancredo’s masterpiece.
3. Duncan Hunter ? Refreshingly honest and sincere.
4. Tommy Thompson ? Not a fan of his style, but his response and knowledge of the stem cell question was the best I’ve heard from any candidate.
5. Mitt Romney ? Great style but lacked any substance. Romney said “I’m a democrat” before correcting himself. It was a bad crowd to have that slip up in front of.
6. Sam Brownback ? His flat tax or bust stance went over like a lead balloon.

On a different note, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani did not attend the forum. It was no surprise that Rudy would skip the event, but one of McCain’s main Iowa consultants organized this event. Rudy was campaigning in a different state, and John McCain was in Arizona.

McCain gave his campaign a vote of confidence last week after being nagged about his poor performing campaign. In sports if the owner or GM gives a vote of confidence the team’s manager is as good as gone; so is McCain’s campaign. McCain’s national and early primary numbers are in the tank, and he’s now known as the amnesty candidate. To make matters worse for McCain he has invested heavily into Iowa by hiring a bunch of Iowa consultants and field staff. McCain’s Iowa payroll is huge, probably more than Romney’s, if McCain can’t rebound there are going to be a lot of unemployed Iowa staffers and consultants that will be up for grabs very soon.

If you have questions about what’s going on in Iowa drop be an email at iowainsider@gmail.com. I’ll post the best questions and give my answers in my next post.

Not that Thompson.

This one:

Aug. 11 - the Ames straw poll - is a make or break day for Tommy Thompson.

Thompson, a former Republican Wisconsin governor, vowed Friday night that the mid-August day will be the driving force that leads him to become the next U.S. president.

“I expect to come in first on the straw poll in Ames,” Thompson said during a taping Friday night of Iowa Public Television’s “Iowa Press.”

Richard Ross of Conservatives with Attitude has the scoop.

Update: Marc Ambinder says Thompson is staying in. Stay tuned!

Apparently Gov. Tommy Thompson is now reconsidering his participation in the Ames Straw Poll in light of yesterday’s events:

Tommy Thompson said Wednesday in an interview that he would have to “completely rethink” his strategy of using the Aug. 11 Iowa straw poll to boost his dark-horse presidential bid after two leading Republicans said they planned to skip the event.

In past races, the straw poll has drawn heavy media attention and helped winnow the GOP field before the first nominating contests.

But with Giuliani and McCain now pulling out, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is the only top contender participating, rendering the event a potentially hollow political exercise.

Unfortunately for Thompson, the former Wisconsin governor has been building his uphill quest for the nomination around a surprise showing at the straw poll in Ames. Thompson was hoping that, by camping out in Iowa, organizing intensively and knocking off one or two of the top contenders Aug. 11, he’d reap donations, attention and momentum going into the January caucuses.

Asked Wednesday about that strategy, Thompson said: “I’ve got to rethink it now, completely rethink it. We were expecting to beat both McCain and Giuliani (in the straw poll). Now that they’re not in, it doesn’t have as much value, unless I can turn it into something. And that’s what I’m still thinking about.”

In repeated interviews and statements, Thompson has been quite candid about just how much he was counting on the straw poll to change national perceptions that he’s a “second-tier candidate” and to help him raise money.

With Giuliani, McCain, and Gingrich definitely not participating (and Fred Thompson unlikely to do so), the second thoughts of the lower-tier candidates have to make you wonder who exactly be left in the straw poll by the time Aug. 11th rolls around.

??????? Procedurally, I thought MSNBC did an?fairly good?job of not getting bogged down among ten candidates debating. But I thought their questions were substantively mediocre, and the inability of the moderators to get the candidates to directly answer questions and stay on subject (and candidates should not be allowed to use their answer time for issues they want to bring up or in response to previous questions) wasted time and eroded focus.

Former White House advisor David Gergen hit it on the head, I think, in claiming that there was too much discussion of the past and not nearly enough about the future - and that is the fault of MSNBC, I think, and its debate moderators and contributors in questioning the Republican candidates.

Neither entitlement reform (especially Social Security and Medicare), the size and scope of government, judicial appointments, education, the future of the military, affirmative action, the Middle East peace process, nuclear proliferation, geopolitical strategic threats and allies, economic growth, trade, leadership, gun control (in the wake of the Virginia Tech incident), or the contrasts with Democrat approaches to public policy were the focus of questions, which is just irresponsible, it seems to me, in a 90-minute forum such as this. And many crucial topics - such as health care reform and race relations - were only directed to a few candidates for just a brief period of time.

Technology and public participation are terrific, but not when silly and simplistic questions result in them being utilized in such a forum and squeeze out more important and revealing lines of inquiry.

The Bill Clinton question was a complete and utter waste of everyone’s limited time (and I am wondering when we Republicans can move away from our Bill Clinton fixation), and gotcha questions to Mayor Giuliani (about the difference between Sunni Islam and Shiite Islam, which he nailed - good for him) and Governor Thompson (about the exact numbers of dead and wounded soliders resulting from the Iraq War, which he came close to as to the dead but vastly underestimated as to the wounded) were way out of line. I guess we were lucky that questions weren’t asked about the current prices for a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread.

My personal preference would be that more questions?are addressed by all candidates in order to measure differences.

As to the candidates, I thought it was pretty hard to stand out with so many of them on stage.

But the ones I would consider not inviting to the May 15 debate at the University of South Carolina if I was Fox News, in order to make their debate more manageable and substantive and?penetrating, would be Governor Gilmore, Congressman Hunter, Congressman Paul, Congressman Tancredo, and Governor Thompson. I just thought that these candidates failed to impress as presidential, often focusing on the same narrow issues in answering whatever questions were thrown their way, and their fundraising and poll standing simply do not argue well for their inclusion on May 15.

I thought Governor Huckabee and Senator Brownback helped themselves with confident, smooth, nuanced responses that made them look like they belonged in a presidential debate. For me, Governor Huckabee’s rapid, concise, and powerful response to the question about the jettisoning of Secretary Rumsfeld might have been the most impressive answer of the evening.

I thought the three front-runners stumbled at times and did not really separate themselves from each other or significantly help their causes.?Here is my?quick and specific take on them.

I think abortion obviously continues to hang up Mayor Giualini (and if he was pro-life this GOP nomination process might be a foregone conclusion), and his response to the Roe v. Wade question (while?the other nine?candidates enthusiastically agreed it would be terrific if the decision was overturned, the Mayor grimacingly said it would be okay if the decision was overturned or okay if the decision was upheld on stare decisis grounds) and admission that he is for and was a facilitator of?(as Mayor) public funding of abortion made him look defensive and certainly won’t help him with many mainstream conservatives. I agree with the commentators?who claim the Mayor was more subdued than might be expected for a candidate whose strengths are toughness and leadership. The brevity of time allowed in answering simply did not, I think,?help the Mayor flesh out his strengths?as the leader of the New York City?turnaround. And I think it was interesting that the Mayor was the least critical candidate when it came to the administration of President George W. Bush - a brave, risky, and perhaps not completely supportable position.

I agree with those who claim that the Senator McCain attempt to play the tough guy looked forced. His whole demeanor - squinting and tense and poised to pounce - did not make me comfortable. I do think that his focus on out-of-control government spending is effective, as well as his knowledge and understanding and gravitas when it comes to military and international matters. The Senator just looks a bit too old and a bit too desperate up there, to me.

Governor Romney started off rocky, I thought, though part of it was that some of the early?lines of approach?were barbs aimed directly at him (questioning his change of position on abortion and statement that he would not move heaven and earth to find Osama bin Laden) - which was probably unfair (you cannot have questions that only put one or two candidates on the spot). Like the Mayor, he struggles with abortion, though I thought that by the end of the evening he was making a very plausible and coherent case that he simply has changed from pro-choice to pro-life; the question is whether it is a principled or politically expedient change (which voters will have to judge for themselves). I thought the Governor came across at times like the young and eager beaver, which may not be as presidential as he wants to be, and was not able (under the constraints of the format) to emphasize his record of achievement as a public and private sector manager and leader as well as he needs to.

With a potentially smaller field, the candidates having one encounter under the belts (in order to calm the nerves and focus their approach), and the ability of Fox News to be able to learn from what MSNBC did, I am looking forward to the May 15 debate at the University of South Carolina. Oh, and of course we have the Senator Fred Thompson speech to the Orange County (CA) Lincoln Club tonight and whatever response Speaker Newt Gingrich has to all of this, as well.

In addition to the comments of Gergen, the one piece of post-debate analysis I found somewhat compelling was from Dean Barnett, who is usually just way too long-winded for my taste,?over at the Hugh Hewitt web site, as to what the expectations will be for Fred Thompson (although I strongly disagree with Barnett’s?conclusion that Thompson should wait to get in - because of the importance of fundraising in this endeavor, he cannot possibly afford to do that):

“Fred’s got an issue. When he enters, the expectations for him to run a perfect campaign will be impossibly high. At the first debate he participates in, if he does anything less than get all the other candidates to confess that Fred Thompson is the better man, the pundits will label his performance a disappointment.

In short, official candidate Thompson will get no honeymoon. All the other candidates have made a bunch of errors between the start of things and now. They’re learning, at least in theory. Fred’s margin of error will be extremely small.

I say that argues for him delaying his entry until at least Labor Day, maybe longer. Then he’ll have to go only a few months without making a mistake. The flip side of the coin is that he enters now and has setbacks and surges like all the other candidates and hopefully (from his perspective) winds up on top.

But being just another guy isn’t much fun. Just ask Rudy.”

In the first quarter, Tommy Thompson loaned himself $75,000 of his own money to finance his campaign. Now, a campaign spokesman says that Thompson has loaned himself another $50,000 after funds continued to be slow coming in at the start of this second quarter.

This certainly isn’t a death knell for Thompson’s campaign - remember when a certain Mr. Kerry once had to loan his campaign $850,000 one month before the Iowa caucus - but it’s going to be tough spinning this in a positive light. Thompson has publicly declared he is putting all of his hopes on the Ames Straw Poll, and it’s hard to see how he can compete in the top tier with that kind of cash and that kind of trouble fund raising.

Makes one wonder if that $125,000 wouldn’t have been better spent on a Governor or Senate race in 2006…

A few days ago, I wrote this glowing comment about Tommy:

As (I think) the sole Wisconsinite on this site, let me wholeheartedly agree with this. Tommy is beloved in the state by everyone. This time last year, he was toying with running for Governor again against Gov. Doyle (D), he told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that “If I run, I win.” To give you a picture of just how loved he is in the state: Gov. Doyle and his GOP challenger Mark Green were statistically tied 45%-43%. When they polled a Thompson vs. Doyle matchup, the results were amazing, 58% to 30%. For a Democratic incumbent to get 30% in a Democratic state is astounding. So, yes, Thompson as Emperor of Wisconsin would be great.

Out of everyone else, he’s definitely my second choice behind McCain. Granted, Thompson has almost no chance of being elected President, but he would be an amazing choice for Vice President. In a lot of ways, he’s the Republican version of Bill Richardson.

Little did I know that later that day, Thompson said this unbelievably cringe-worthy statement while speaking at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism:

“I’m in the private sector and for the first time in my life I’m earning money. You know that’s sort of part of the Jewish tradition and I do not find anything wrong with that.”

Even though he apologized, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wrote a strong editorial denouncing it. This is huge because the Journal had been one of the bigger boosters of a Thompson presidential campaign (to be fair, they were also big supporters of Feingold as well):

If Tommy Thompson’s presidential run isn’t over, it should be.

And this has nothing to do with his relatively light campaign chest. His remarks about Jewish people and tradition Monday revealed him simply to be ill-suited to the presidency.

Speaking to the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism in Washington, D.C., Thompson said, “I’m in the private sector, and for the first time in my life I’m earning money. You know, that’s sort of part of the Jewish tradition, and I do not find anything wrong with that.”

He later made a feeble attempt to explain the inexplicable. “I just want to clarify something because I didn’t (by) any means want to infer or imply anything about Jews and finances and things,” he said. “What I was referring to, ladies and gentlemen, is the accomplishments of the Jewish religion. You’ve been outstanding business people, and I compliment you for that.”

So an accomplishment of the Jewish religion is business acumen? Surely, a presidential candidate who would represent all Americans would know how hurtful stereotypes are. Surely, such a candidate would know, given this country’s experience with anti-Semitism, that Jews as fixated on money ranks up there among the most hurtful of them.

Gaffes are nothing new to Thompson. But this was said to give him the aura of the average Wisconsin guy. No. The average Wisconsin guy deserves more credit.

Ouch!

Oh Tommy, come on back to the state, we’ll still make you Emperor if you want.

Back in January, I penned a piece analyzing the 1999-2000 campaign season and what it meant for 2000. If you don’t remember, here is the gist of it:

*In 1999, 12 candidates announced they were running for President. In 2007, we will most likely have 13.
*In 1999, 2 candidates dropped out before the Ames straw poll, citing the record-breaking 2Q fundraising of the frontrunners.
*Then, 2 more candidates dropped out after performing poorly in the infamous Ames Straw Poll.
*2 more candidates dropped out by the end of 1999, before the Iowa caucus.

I asked the question who would drop out at which stages in the 2007 campaign, and now it looks like we have one of the answers to that puzzle:

Tommy Thompson… said he will most likely drop out if he does not finish in the top two in the straw poll to be held Aug. 11 in Iowa.

This is a high standard Thompson has set for himself, and one, unfortunately, I don’t think he can meet. The article goes on to point out, as I did in my Power Rankings, that Thompson has virtually lived in Iowa since December, and despite that fact he is gaining no traction in the polls at all. It’s a shame really, since he is one of the three candidates that consistently gets my “acceptable” vote on those GOPBloggers straw polls (along with Romney and Hunter).

Couple this story with the one earlier this year where Mike Huckabee announced pretty much the same thing - saying that if he wasn’t a first tier candidate when September rolled around he would drop out of the race, and you’ve got two of the guys that will not be in the race come 2008.

Myself, Gary Matthew Miller, and syndicated columnist Barry Casselman all made the long trek to Des Moines yesterday for the Iowa GOP’s annual Lincoln Day Dinner. Every GOP hopeful was in attendance save for the undeclareds (Newt & FDT), the waylaid (Duncan Hunter had mechanical problems with his flight), and Ron Paul.

The “Big Three” of Rudy, McCain, and Mitt, showed why they are they are afforded such distinction with excellent speeches.

Rudy opened the evening with a subdued but philosophical and substantive speech which outlined that the Republican Party needs to reach out to voters by emphazing what we are for: staying on offense on the GWOT, maintaining a growth economy, and finding market solutions to our nation’s problems- not what we are against.

Mitt followed Rudy and somewhat tarnished what was an absolutely spectacular speech by pulling a stunt where the first thing he did upon reaching the podium was to invite his wife and son from their dinner table to the stage for a personal introduction to the audience.

The implication of this (considering the fact that he did this immediately after following Mayor Giuliani) was lost on only the most politically obtuse in attendance. The continued attack on Mayor Giuliani (the “My family is better than your family” critique), is really below-the-belt and could serve to injure Mitt’s reputation as “one of the good guys” who is above politics.

Mitt’s speech was spectacular in substance and flawless in delivery though. The most animated of the “Big Three”, Mitt stressed his success in the private sector remarking, “I haven’t spent my life in politics. That’s for sure. I’ve spent my life in the private sector,” Romney said. “If there’s ever been a time that we need to change things in Washington, D.C., it’s now.”

John McCain delivered an emotional and passionate account of the cost of defeat in Iraq, and deserves special commendation for being the only candidate of the 9 in attendance that clearly defended and allied himself with President Bush.

This is perhaps the fifth time that I have been able to see Sen. McCain speak in person. The 1,000 Republicans in attendance made this the largest crowd that I have ever seen him speak in front of, and I wondered exactly how his intimate speaking style would translate to such a venue. In my eyes, none of the emotion that McCain is able to convey in the smaller settings that I have seen him in was lost in the cavernous ballroom. Sen. McCain’s earnestness, strength, and honor really shine through every time I have seen him with a mic in his hand in front of a Republican crowd. It makes me wonder that if he had spent the past 4 years doing these type of events instead of disparaging Republican policy on the Sunday talk shows, that he would now be the frontrunner of a united Republican Party.

The most awkward moment of the night came when Gov. Jim Gilmore angrily chided “Rudy McRomney” as newcomers to conservatism. A remark that was met with uncomfortable silence from the 1,000 or so in attendance while Gov. Gilmore paused for expected applause.

Following the dinner, most of the candidates attended receptions for attendees in the lower level of the hall (Mitt and Rudy were frustratingly absent). The Fair Tax people were also in attendance and earn special kudos for the best spread.

Here’s my photo diary of the events:

Sen. McCain addresses an attendee’s concern…

Then poses for a picture…

Sen. Sam Brownback signs autographs for his fans.

Gov. Mitt Romney and his wife Anne listen to an enthusiastic supporter.

Perhaps the most accessible candidate, Gov. Huckabee spent a great deal of time walking among the crowd, answering every question, signing every autograph, and posing for every picture. Gov. Huckabee also rocked the house with his musical group following the dinner.

The most humorous event of the night for me was the sight of Gov. Tommy Thompson bear-hugging (or perhaps bear-clubbing) fellow R4′08er (and Truth v. the Machine founder) Gary Matthew Miller upon hearing that he is a Spooner, Wisconsin native. If only I had my camera ready at that moment… It would have been a classic!

Now Gary’s a big guy, but Gov. Thompson threw his arm around Gary’s neck like he had some experience taking on “big guys”, which only served to reenforce my opinion of Gov. Thompson as the “Tony Soprano” of the GOP field.

??????? Great report from David Yepsen, the dean of Iowa political reporters, in today’s editions of the Des Moines Register, on yesterday’s annual Iowa Republican Party Lincoln Day Dinner. Evidently back-of-the-pack Republican presidential candidates such as Senator Sam Brownback, Governor Jim Gilmore, Governor Mike Huckabee, Congressman Tom Tancredo, and Governor Tommy Thompson?really went after 2008 GOP front-runners Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney (or “Rudy McRomney” to use the phrase of Governor Gilmore) - claiming they are not conservative, late to the conservative movement, and more celebrity than conservative.

I applaud these back-of-the-pack candidates for holding the feet of the front-runners to the fire. I think their points are well taken - Giuliani, McCain, and Romney have not been consistent and constant conservatives. And I look forward to seeing these candidates engage directly on May 3 when the Ronald Reagan Presidential? Library hosts the first 2008 Republican presidential debate from 5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time on MSNBC, followed shortly thereafter by their debate at the University of South Carolina on May 15 from 9:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on the Fox News Channel.

This campaign?is?going to start getting very interesting.

Being sidelined for the past six weeks allowed me to kind of keep a bird’s eye view on the race for 2008. Many times, it’s easy to get caught up in little things that take on a life bigger than themselves and miss the forest for the trees. Here, then, is my take on what’s changed since I’ve been gone and where we’re at now:

The Republican primary is becoming very, very interesting - much more so than the Democrat one, although I have something to say about that a little later as well. It is getting interesting for several reasons:

1) Fred Thompson - the latest flavor of the month from the “None of our candidates are conservative!” crowd; this guy seems to be hanging on longer (and stronger) than other previous names floated around. Is he going to enter the race? My answer has to be this: presidential races, for almost every candidate, are all about egos. And where else could a one-term senator (plus a two-year special election term) and former lobbyist (for 18 years) go to get his ego stroked like this? Just wait till all those “We want a conservative!” folks find out Thompson is somewhere between Rudy and McCain on abortion…

2) Newt Gingrich - the ego line applies here as well. After all, you don’t divorce your wife and tell her it’s because she “doesn’t look like a President’s wife” and then not run for President, do you? Newt’s hoping to drive his negatives, which are higher than Al Gore’s electric bill, down by doing orchestrated stuff like confessing his sins to Dr. James Dobson (who has also proven what a quack he is in the past six weeks). He’ll jump in around September or October, pick off some sad little Huckabee/Tancredo/Paul/Gilmore supporters, and that’s about it. Then, maybe we can finally close the electoral chapter of the Newt.

3) Romney, Romney, Romney - how could I miss writing about the amazing fundraising numbers that Romney brought in? $8 million more than Rudy! and nearly double Johnny Mac is impressive no matter which way you spin it. And even better than that is the instant name recognition it garnered Mitt. Name recognition as in leading every broadcast evening news show for at least two nights as well as every morning show. And Obama releasing his fundraising numbers a couple days later catapulted Mitt’s name into the headlines once again, as pundits talked about a possible Mitt/Barack matchup. All these interviews and increased exposure have led to Romney’s numbers jumping up into the 20s in Iowa, doubling into the 20s (and a share of 1st place!) in New Hampshire, and nearly tripling in South Carolina. Romney is going to make a game of this thing after all. To keep it up, though, he’s going to have to avoid saying things like he is a lifelong hunter and such.

4) Giuliani - Despite having voiced his support for the Hyde amendment, which would ban public funding for abortion, and his wink-wink-nudge-nudge towards conservatives on “constructionist judges”, Rudy committed a major gaffe in an interview on CNN. He announced that he still supported public funding for abortions - and if that wasn’t bad enough, went on to explain why in a line of reasoning that was a direct poke in the eye of conservatives: that abortion is a constitutional right and as such, the government must fund it. And to pour some more salt in the wound, went on to explain that this whole time he’s been going on about “constructionist” judges, he thinks that good constructionist judges could very well uphold Roe v Wade, setting his social conservative outreach back ten notches. This interview has already drawn the ire of many conservative groups and has caused several bloggers who were sitting on the fence to reject Rudy out of hand. Rudy’s far from being done, however - he still maintains frontrunner status. But he’s got to avoid any more gaffes like this one and hope this doesn’t damage his support from Republicans (many of which still do not - or did not - know he was pro-choice).

5) McCain - Johnny Mac suffered a big setback on fundraising report day, but reports of his campaign’s demise are very premature. John’s got a lot more steam left in him than some folks half his age, if only for one reason: this is his presidency, and he deserves it, dangit! At least, that’s how he feels. And any other year, he’d probably have a case. But presidential and political history is as fickle as a Pelosi commitment to ethics, and the “GOP always nominates the guy whose turn it is” rule seems to be fading fast. It will be interesting to see if his recent focus on Iraq endears him enough to conservatives, who always appreciate a leader who doesn’t need to follow the polls, enough to raise his popularity back up. The story the media seems to be missing, though, is the fact that John is within striking distance in Iowa and leads in New Hampshire and South Carolina.

6) The Should-Have-Run-For-Senate Egomaniacs - Thompson (Tommy) could have helped us keep the Senate in 2006. Instead, he decided to make a longshot bid at the White House which he’ll never win. (He raised a whopping $400,000 in the first quarter.) Gilmore (no financial announcement yet) and Huckabee ($500,000 proud!) would be great Senate candidates in 2008. Let’s hope they realize they also have no shot at winning this thing before it’s too late.

Whew! What a race! On the democrat side, I just have one thing to say — do not underestimate John Edwards. He has led or is tied for first in every poll from Iowa and is tied for second with Obama in New Hampshire. His strategy is very clear - focus on Iowa, let the momentum from that probable victory strengthen his win in Nevada and propel him past Hillary in New Hampshire, and keep rolling through to the nomination. And it just. might. work.

Have at it, folks!

I have always believed tax simplification should be a national priority. Economists will tell you that our current federal tax code is inefficient, wasteful, and impedes economic growth. But with congressional Republicans making nice with K Street lobbyists as a priority under the direction of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in order to raise campaign funds and provide lucrative future careers for ex-congressional members and their staffs, the incentive to scrap a federal tax code where statutory complexity creates the need for lobbyists was not in the interests of enough Republican leaders in Congress to warrant serious legislative consideration.

The recent endorsement of Mayor Rudy Giuliani for president by Steve Forbes, and the Mayor’s subsequent endorsement of tax simplification if not the flat tax itself that Mr. Forbes has fought so valiantly for in the court of public opinion, should remind us of the importance of this issue. And perhaps not coincidentally, it is also our great and good fortune as students and fans of public policy that the Hoover Institution has announced that the seminal work by economics professors Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka that originally erected the intellectual pillars for tax simplification, “The Flat Tax,” is about to be republished in a revised edition next week.

In studying this issue, I have concluded that a consumption (sales) tax is not politically feasible due to the sticker shock it would create among American consumers, though having a ready-made, retail store collection mechanism for our foundational tax system is attractive. Similary, a value added tax, assessed at the various stages of production, is reportedly too easy to raise by legislators and has the ultimate effect of a consumption tax because it is passed on in the form of higher prices until it reaches the ultimate purchaser of products. So the answer to the question of how to create tax simplification may well be the flat tax, though I am open to debating any and all forms of federal income tax simplification.

The question now becomes which Republican presidential candidates in 2008 will make federal income tax simplification a priority? Here is what I have found. Let’s see how these positions are debated and adjusted as the primary campaign proceeds.

Mayor Giuliani now supports tax simplification if not a flat tax, though in all fairness the Mayor called the Forbes push for a flat tax in 1996 a “mistake” and “disaster.” Speaker Gingrich seems to support tax reform that is more growth oriented, though his call for targeted tax deductions does not sound like tax simplification. Senator McCain supports a flat tax. At least in 1996, Governor Romney was against a flat tax, purchasing a series of newspaper ads attacking the idea by then presidential candidate Forbes, though currently the Governor has come out for tax simplification. Senator Brownback supports a flat tax. I cannot discern where former Senator Fred Thompson is currently on tax simplification, though previously he was a member of the Flat Tax Caucus as a Senator and spoke favorably of tax simplification during his tenure on Capitol Hill. Governor Huckabee supports a flat tax. Congressman Hunter supports tax simplification in general, though not necessarily a specific flat or consumption tax; the same goes for Governor Gilmore. Governor Thompson’s position on tax simplification is unclear, though he has a record of cutting taxes in Wisconsin. Congressman Paul favors tax cuts, though his position on tax simplification is unclear. Congressman Tancredo supports a flat tax.

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, which is already scheduled to host a 10-candidate (Brownback, Gilmore, Giuliani, Huckabee, Hunter, McCain, Paul, Romney, Tancredo, and Tommy Thompson are confirmed) or more debate among Republican White House contenders on May 3, 2007, has decided to hold a second GOP presidential debate just prior to the Titanic Tuesday, February 5, 2008, primary election in so many states. This second debate will be held on Wednesday, January 30, 2008, and will be restricted to the top two or three Republican presidential hopefuls at that time, with criteria for selection of the participants and the identity of the media sponsor being undecided as of now.

My political spider sense is going off.

The race for 2008, at least on the Republican side, is often described in terms of how little it can be analogized to the presidential races of recent history. But, as a student of history, and as one who is keenly aware of the frequent, eerie repetitions of history, I just cannot help but see several parallels between this year’s race for the Republican nod and another very recent such contest: the race for 2000. In fact, key developments in recent weeks have pretty much convinced me that we’re about to witness 2000 redux, with an establishment candidate pulling away from the pack for most of this year, only to face his toughest challenge from an insurgent who has yet to surface. Care to delve into the mind of DaveG to discover just how I think things will play out? Read on, gentle reader, read on.

The cast of characters that comprise the GOP presidential field of 2008 bear a striking resemblance to the motley crew from the millennial election. The current incarnations of the candidates from 2000, in my view, are as follows:

Rudy Giuliani as George W. Bush. Both ran as current or former executives. Both were tax cutters. Both sported a pragmatic domestic agenda on issues like education. Both touted a social policy that began and ended with judges — remember that Bush 2000 was pre-FMA and sent messages indicating that the country wasn’t ready to overturn Roe. Both were tough-talking fellows who were distinctly pro-order and pro-defense. Both saw their poll numbers take off during the year before the election (1999 for Bush; 2007 for Rudy), setting each up as the clear frontrunner and establishment candidate. The difference: Bush, a Texan, had as his base voters who also constituted the geographic base of the GOP; Rudy, as a New Yorker, does not.

John McCain as Elizabeth Dole. Like McCain, Liddy Dole was a star of the most recent presidential election’s GOP convention (Dole wowed ‘em in ‘96; McCain in ‘04). Conservatives liked Dole in ‘96, and liked McCain in the early days of ‘00. But over time, conservatives began to grow suspicious of both candidates. Both Dole 2000 and McCain 2008 started out as a co-frontrunner with the eventual GOP leader — Bush in 2000 and Rudy in 2008 — but both saw their numbers go south in the year before the election at around the same time that the eventual frontrunner in each election saw his numbers take off. Both are from red states, but not embraced by red staters.

Mitt Romney as Steve Forbes. Both are smart guys and able businessmen with interesting ideas, yet neither seems capable of consolidating enough support among actual voters to start winning primaries.

Sam Brownback as Gary Bauer. Each is in the race to remind the GOP that it’s the pro-life party. We need guys like them, just not on the ticket.

Tom Tancredo as Alan Keyes. Because somebody has to articulate what Michael Savage’s listeners are thinking. And they’re loads of fun during the debates!

Tommy Thompson as Orrin Hatch. Two guys with impressive CVs who get no respect from the voters.

Newt Gingrich as Jack Kemp. Will the old war horse run or won’t he? The answer turns out to be no.

Dark horse, red-state conservative as John McCain. Now this is where things get interesting. Over the last few days, my spider sense has been going off regarding the attempt to draft Fred Dalton Thompson into the race for 2008. I’ve finally realized why. The race for ‘08 is a carbon copy of the race for ‘00 with one exception: the field lacks an insurgent capable of giving the frontrunner a run for his money once the voters and the media begin to experience fatigue over the current crop of candidates. Remember, it was in July of 1999 that GWB announced his intention to seek the GOP nod, and in just 6 months, everyone was so bored with him, McCain was able to come out of nowhere and nearly knock the frontrunner down from his pedastal. If Rudy continues to lead the field by double-digits, McCain sinks to 10-15 percent, and Romney and the rest flatline, an opening will develop in the summer or fall of ‘07 for a dark-horse conservative to fill the void for a red-state candidate in the race.

That’s what makes all of this so interesting. In 2000, GWB was the frontrunner, the establishment candidate, and the red-state conservative candidate, and McCain, the insurgent, drew most of his support from the northeast, the Great Lakes states, and the west. Presently, Rudy is the frontrunner, and is quickly becoming the establishment candidate, yet the Mayor has his geographic base in the northeast and the west, not in Red America. In other words, in 2000, Bush led the red-staters and the GOP establishment to victory over the northern and western Republicans. In 2008, Mayor Giuliani will be leading a coalition of establishmentarians and northern and western Republicans, with red-staters going along for the ride unless an insurgent arises from south of the Ohio River to fill the McCain role from 2000. This begs the question of whether Bush’s win over McCain in 2000 was due more to his establishment creds or to his geographic base. If the former is true, Rudy should just as easily take down his red state challenger as Bush bested McCain in 2000. If the latter is true, Rudy could be in a real run for his money against the eventual red-state dark horse.

But will such an insurgent emerge? And, if so, who will it be?

A lot of it depends on whether any of these draft movements work. The current movement to draft Sen. Thompson could very well be successful, and the senator could fill the McCain 2000 role with Rudy in the Bush 2000 role. If Thompson decides not to run, a similar draft movement could convince Gov. Jeb Bush or Gov. Mark Sanford to enter the race. Both bring to the table the same creds as Thompson — a combination of credible conservatism and electability — and either could fill the red-state vacuum as the GOP field gradually becomes an army of one, with Rudy miles ahead of the rest of the pack. There is a certain irony in imagining someone like Rudy in the GWB role from 2000 and someone like Thompson in the McCain role, and such a development would put to the test the importance of being the establishment candidate in GOP primaries versus the importance of other factors.

It seems Rudy Giuliani’s lead over his next closest challenger in Republican nomination polls has really taken off, quite similarly to George W. Bush’s after he declared himself a candidate in 2000 (and quite similarly to virtually every other eventual Republican nominee in recent history).? In fact, where once Hillary Clinton was once a sure bet who broadly led her party’s polls in comparison to the tight horserace going on in the GOP, it is now Rudy Giuliani who is the head-and-shoulders-above frontrunner of the two major parties.? His lead over the next closest challenger in the latest Quinnipiac Poll is 22 points, compared to Clinton’s 15 points on her side.? Quinnipiac also puts Rudy at 40%–the second survey to do so in the last?week?(USA Today/Gallup did so as well).

Here’s how the race is shaping up, according to the latest poll:

Quinnipiac University Poll. Feb. 13-19, 2007. N=578 Republican voters nationwide. MoE ? 4.1.
					.
“If the 2008 Republican primary for president were being held today, and the candidates were [see below], for whom would you vote?”
					.
		%	?	?	?	?
	Rudy Giuliani	40