website statistics

Archive for the 'Mitt Romney' Category

Barack Obama and Wikipedia are More Alike Than You Think

Published by William Beutler on January 12, 2009 in Barack Obama, E-mail, Mitt Romney, Online Fundraising, Swag, Tech Blogosphere, Website Design, White House '08, White House '12, Wikipedia and William Beutler. 15 Comments

I don’t know if most readers here would think that Wikipedia’s best-covered politician and Google’s best-listed website are all that similar, but I don’t think you can write it off entirely.

My reason for thinking so began after Mickey Kaus checked his e-mail inbox late last week, and asked:

Will Obama ever stop asking me for money? Or is it all fundraising, all the way out? … Not only is he still milking his supporters for money, he’s doing it in an obnoxious way, no? “Join us at the inauguration” turns out to mean “pay for other people to party at the inauguration you’re not going to”!

He’s got a point there. I’ve been on Obama’s list for more than a year now — my first post of 2008 was about how Obama’s campaign sent the year’s first campaign e-mail that New Years Day wee morning hours — and I’ve been getting (and half-paying attention to) them ever since. Here is my unofficial count (and anyone is welcome to do a recount) of the e-mails “Paid for by Obama for America” I have received in 2009, followed by that ubiquitous red button:

  • Join us at the Inauguration, Jan. 3, Obama for America
  • Our first guest, Jan. 6, Michelle Obama
  • Be there for history, Jan. 7, Bill Clinton
  • Deadline: Midnight, Jan. 8, Barack Obama
  • Re: Midnight deadline, Jan. 8, David Plouffe
  • Your call to service, Jan. 12, Michelle Obama

It’s a permanent campaign, all right.

He’s not President of the United States yet, I’ll give him that. But you would tend to think his fundraising goals have been satisfied — especially since his campaign let departing staffers have an extra month’s paycheck, plus their laptops and BlackBerrys (and a tip of the hat to Research in Motion’s PR department for getting reporters following AP style to not spell it “Blackberries”).

And you know what this reminds me of, as it might not remind most inside the Beltway? It’s not altogether unlike Wikipedia’s constant fundraising. As recently as December, Valleywag criticized the Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales-led on-site (always a banner across the top) fundraising drive mostly for being annoying and evidentiary of Wales being a poor leader of the website with the most comprehensive description of Regional variations of barbecue.

By early January, however, it turned out that Wikipedia had beaten its 2008 fundraising goals to the tune of $6.2 million. In the interests of disclosure as well as narrative, I’ll say that I donated as much to the Wikimedia Foundation this winter as I’ve donated in any one instance since Hurricane Katrina. So with that said, as I’ve been editing Wikipedia recently, I have often noticed this banner at the top of each article:

And what happens when you click on it? You come to a page with a letter of thanks from Wales. It looks like this:

Okay, so maybe Valleywag has a point about Wales as the public face of the website with the most informative biography of Portland, Oregon home furnishings salesman and television pitchman Tom Peterson.

And then, your eye drifts down the page to see this:

The permanent campaign, indeed.

P.S. I haven’t even mentioned that also this afternoon, Mitt Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC was asking $100 for this:

Don’t even get me started.

More of Romney, Less of You

Published by William Beutler on October 8, 2008 in Barack Obama, Democrats, E-mail, Fundraising, Hillary Clinton, Internecine Battles, Joe Biden, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Republicans, Sarah Palin, White House '08 and William Beutler. 6 Comments

We’re now in the final thirty days of an election cycle that began nearly two years ago, and while many think they already know how it will end, no partisan operative can afford to think that way. What happens in the next four weeks will determine the outcome of the next four years, so everyone on each side is pulling as hard as they can in the direction of their party’s candidate… right?

I thought so, until this dropped into my inbox a few hours ago:

Wow, Limited Edition Fleece Blanket? This must be my lucky day!

Seriously, what on Earth is Mitt Romney doing asking Republicans, who could give money to John McCain’s campaign the RNC, to give it to himself instead? If you’re a committed Republican, what’s the most responsible thing to do in the next few weeks: Give money to put television ads on the air in Michigan Iowa, or add this comfy blanket with snazzy carrying straps to your collection of campaign-branded political paraphernalia?

But wait, it gets better. Did you see the last line of the e-mail in the image above? Here it is again, for those of you who dislike squinting:

It is more essential than ever that conservative candidates and organizations have the resources they need to get their message out to voters, and that is why I am writing to you today.

I think we can safely consider this Romney’s retaliation against McCain for picking Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Updated, minutes later: Wow, what timing — as I was writing this very post, another e-mail landed in my Gmail account. And it looks like someone else had the same idea:

What’s her excuse? Romney did it first?

P.S. At least Romney got a crummy, non-prime time speaking slot at the RNC. Hillary can’t say that.

Bloggingheads.tv: The Week in Twitter

Published by William Beutler on August 11, 2008 in Barack Obama, Beltway media, Bloggingheads.tv, John McCain, Metapost, Mitt Romney, New Media Strategies, Online Campaigns, Republicans, Seriously, Technology, Twitter, Web video, White House '08 and William Beutler. Closed

Late last week I made my third appearance on Bloggingheads.tv with Bill Scher of Liberal Oasis; we talked about the politics of Twitter, whether #dontgo is a genuine movement or not, whether Obama is underperforming or overperforming, how to understand the different types of voters, why McCain’s “Celeb” ad was a success, veepstakes and the pointlessness thereof, including my favorite theory on why McCain will choose Romney. Check it out:

I might as well get this out of the way: I am not actually about to eat the viewer. It just looks that way.

The Great Wright Hope

Published by William Beutler on March 18, 2008 in Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Religion, Rhetoric and William Beutler. 4 Comments

Mike Turk puts some numbers to a thought I’d had rolling around my head since shortly after the controversy over the incendiary remarks by Obama’s former pastor went big-time last week:

First, consider the results of a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll conducted last week. The survey results indicate that since December the number of people who believe Obama is a Muslim jumped from 8% to 13%. That’s a 62% increase in only three months. How many “middle of the road” Americans received the “Obama is a Muslim” e-mail from friends and either read it or passed it to someone else? Now pretend your Obama and the “whisper” campaign is that you’re really a dirty terrorist in hiding. Anything that focuses the public attention on your twenty year membership is a Christian church may be a very, very good thing.

Whether this is correct or not, I suppose we’ll find out in a few weeks. However, I’m skeptical that it’s much of a victory to replace the incorrect impression that Obama is a Muslim with the correct impression that his closest spiritual adviser has a fierce anti-American streak.

Consider the Romney campaign’s unsuccessful attempt to win over evangelical voters. After all, Mike Huckabee all but swept the Southern Republican primaries where their votes figured prominently. Romney could probably tell you that simply believing in God and Jesus Christ isn’t always enough.

Which leaves me with this question: Could “black liberation theology,” to which which the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Chicago’s Trinity church adhere, become the focus of whispers and speculation and suspicion? I think it’s quite plausible, and I find the prospect fairly troubling. It would surely be ironic if the Obama campaign produced a wider rift between black and white Americans.

Obama’s slowness to deal with the Wright time bomb, and muddled initial response, is somewhat like Kerry’s inept response to the Swift Boaters’ allegations. With his speech today, going on over my shoulder in the background, however, he’s trying to address it head on. This suggests Obama recognizes how divisive Wright’s rhetoric and his own apparent tolerance thereof can be, to his own campaign at the very least.

I’m agnostic, so to speak, about Obama’s campaign in general. (Not so much in the general.) But in this task I hope he succeeds.

There are Two Things Wrong With this Picture

Published by William Beutler on February 11, 2008 in Barack Obama, Blog Consultants, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Republicans. Closed

F7 with Huckabee and Romney and Obama

If the question doesn’t make sense, then read this:

At Rightroots, we have built a way for Republicans to rally behind their new nominee right out of the gate. We’re asking all Republicans to donate online to the new nominee next Thursday, February 7th. …

On February 7th, we’ll set up a page on Rightroots for you to give to the nominee and show you our community’s results in real time. …

If the nominee is McCain, we still have to do this. His campaign especially is running on fumes financially, but they’ve shown they can be effective with an even a small amount of money.

You can’t read the fine print on the screen shot above (well, you could if you squinted) but here’s what’s relevant:

The Super Tuesday primaries are over and February 7th is here. On Tuesday, Senator John McCain established himself as the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, with Governor Mitt Romney and Governor Mike Huckabee winning primaries and caucuses throughout the nation.

Please give generously to the major Republican candidates who remain active contenders for the nomination…

It’s fair to point out that Romney did not officially suspend his campaign until a few hours after the page went live, but it’s also fair to point out that by February 6, McCain was the only realistic nominee. Also fair, Romney was still there as of the last revision of this post. My own initial coverage of the February 7 effort was quite favorable, so I would be derelict if I failed to follow up and say that anyone who bought into the initial pitch — let alone gave money — should feel misled.

CPAC: I Exit the Room, Romney Exits the Race

Published by William Beutler on February 7, 2008 in Metapost, Mitt Romney, Republicans, Tech Blogosphere and Twitter. Closed

I’ve lived in Washington for a good half-decade now, but today is the first time I’ve attended the event that everyone who asks “Where’s the conservative Yearly Kos?” should remind themselves of, CPAC. Luckily for me, this year New Media Strategies secured three-day passes to the event, and even luckier, this year it’s just across the bridge (in Woodley Park) from me (in Adams Morgan). But this is about where my luck ends.

I hopped a cab with the author of CQ’s Ground Game and made it to the Omni Shoreham a little after 10:30. In the Senate Room, I picked up my designer neckwear designating me as a “CO-SPONSOR,” then started looking for the Regency Ballroom in hopes of seeing Vice President Cheney’s 11:00 a.m. speech. I wandered around the labyrinthine Omni Shoreham for fifteen minutes before finally finding a short line leading up to the ballroom. The inertia of said queue informed me that I wasn’t getting in, while the avalanche of Romney signs, placards, stickers, thunder sticks and foam “mitts” informed me that I would see Mitt Romney speak.

That was fine; I was at CPAC to schmooze and even get a little work done between speeches. So I located an aisle seat, ejected my trusty MacBook Pro out of my backpack and sat down to get some typing done. I wasn’t able to get online, however. The free wifi at the Omni wasn’t taking, and AT&T’s EDGE network wasn’t available in the basement. Little did I know, @briandevine, my colleague referenced in the last post, was sending me this Twitterdirect message:

bloggers are saying you have a really good chance of watching Romney drop out at this speech

Alas, I didn’t see it until earlier this evening. And at 1:00 p.m., as Romney’s seemingly generic speech continued, I glanced at my pass schedule to see Mark Steyn was to speak in the Ambassador Ballroom starting now. So I folded up and made for the door in a hurry. At two checkpoints I was told, like the freshmen in Dazed and Confused:

If you leave, you can’t come back.

My response was more polite but no more apprehensive. And after a few more minutes of peripatetic perlplexedness, I realized the Ambassador Ballroom was in fact directly across the hall from the Regency Ballroom, and was the room where I’d spied an overflow crowd watching Romney projected on a large screen.

As soon as I went back upstairs to figure out where to go next, the tweets started flowing. I think the first was from Dave Winer, RSS inventor and not exactly a political blogger:

Romney is withdrawing. Giving speech at conservative group in Washington.

Damn.

Later, I rationalized my foolhardy decision to bolt the ballroom: If I’d seen Romney drop out of the race, I would have witnessed history, of a kind. I was never a supporter — obviously, or I would have remained. Meanwhile, I am a big fan of Steyn’s — his monthly obit feature in The Atlantic was my favorite part of that magazine while it ran.

Skipping out early, on the other hand, gave me a story to tell, and now I’ve told it.

The February 7th Sign or: Stop This Train, I Want to Get On

Published by William Beutler on January 31, 2008 in Barack Obama, Blog Consultants, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Online Fundraising, Republicans, Twitter, White House '08 and William Beutler. 3 Comments

Patrick Ruffini has announced a new Rightroots-branded initiative called February7.org. The premise is simple: Republicans are likely to have a presumptive nominee by the morning after the morning after Super Tuesday (Tsunami Tuesday for you First Read fanboys and girls). This primary has not been as ugly as the Democrats’, but it has been ideologically dispiriting, mostly featuring candidates who fell short of conservative ideals. An early fundraising push could help rally the GOP while the Democrats are still fighting amongst themselves.

That nominee is most likely to be John McCain, while Ruffini has switched his support from “Rudy to Romney,” as he put it Tuesday night. Therefore, the most likely scenario is he will have to grudgingly switch again in about a week. If the move is a painful one for many, better then to get it over with. But there’s more to it, as he explains in the announcement on his own site:

You can probably tell that I have strong views about this nomination contest. Win or lose, I’m equally convinced of the importance of getting behind the eventual winner. A nation at war cannot afford Hillary or Obama in the White House. …

Beyond just showing support for our nominee, we’re doing this to help solve a concrete strategic problem for our Party during the month of February.

The simple fact is that when it comes to contributions from others, our candidates are broke. They’ve spent it all on Florida. No one is up on TV in any February 5th state, while Hillary and Obama have money to burn (I saw Clinton ads in California last weekend). Based on the fact that they have money to play with and have held a fundraising advantage throughout the cycle, there is a chance they could start pummeling our candidate with negative ads right away.

If we fundraise the same old traditional way — with fundraising events and direct mail early and banking on Internet enthusiasm late — we will lose. There is no way we’ll be able to get the money when and where we need it. On the Internet in particular, contributions come in late, often too late for the money to be spent effectively. We’re hoping to help frontload some of this money so that the candidate can use it against Hillary/Obama right away. When it comes to giving, early is the new late.

Well said. But for my money, the best part of the website is that one can toggle between “Stop Hillary” and “Stop Obama,” not unlike a blog that lets you change the background color:

Stop Hillary at February7.org             Stop Obama at February7.org

Please notice that no “Stop Edwards” version was created.

P.S. I first heard about this through a Twitter account Ruffini set up last week: Twitter.com/February7. I followed the account back, but of 111 users Ruffini followed, only 13 followed it back. That 11.7% rate would be terrific if it was direct mail, but it isn’t that. Twitter marketing has been the focus of much discussion over the past year, but here is some evidence that the medium strongly favors established personalities — Ruffini is one, but @February7 is not. And setting up new Twitter accounts is fun, but not all that effective.

Meg Whitman’s Trial Balloon, Or Mitt Romney’s?

Published by William Beutler on January 28, 2008 in Mitt Romney, Republicans, Tech Blogosphere and White House '08. 3 Comments

Saturday’s Los Angeles Times, released to the web on the evening of Jan. 25, outlined recent developments that could propel retiring eBay CEO Meg Whitman into the Republican primary to succeed term-limited Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2010:

As she prepares to depart from EBay after a decade at the helm, Chief Executive Meg Whitman appears to be investigating a new career — in politics.

eBay logo smallWhitman has talked with top Republicans about the possibility of a run for California governor in 2010, according to three operatives who have had discussions with her. Whitman is said to be asking detailed questions about the logistics of a run and the effect she could have as governor, according to the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to reveal the conversations. …

The source close to Whitman, however, downplayed the seriousness of the conversations, saying that Whitman was still new to politics and that California Republicans, not Whitman, were the ones driving the discussion.

“This thing has come to her,” the source said. “She hasn’t given it all that much thought. It’s not, ‘I’m going to run. Give me a game plan.’”

The tech blogs reacted quickly, and with enthusiasm. Valleywag went with “eBay ex-CEO considers run for California governor” and Mashable asked: “Could Meg Whitman Be The Next Governator?”

It only took another few hours before Mashable returned to the subject with “Meg Whitman NOT Running For Governor, After All.” Valleywag, whose reporting claims to knock down this rumor, this time floated another: “Meg Whitman quashes governor rumor, but could she serve under Romney?”

So that’s what this is all about! is what I first thought upon reading this. Now, if you think I’ve been holding back mention of Whitman’s role as a finance co-chair for the Romney campaign on purpose, you’re right. I have no evidence, let alone proof, that this story was pushed on the LAT by Romney’s camp. But I’m thinking it.

Meg Whitman, Mitt RomneyeBay is one of the few survivors of the dot-com era, one of the great business success stories of the Internet, and Whitman has been on board since it went public in 1998. Before that, she worked with Mitt Romney at Bain & Company. Her professional credentials make her “supremely well qualified” for the job, quoth Henry Blodget, and in fact this is something she has in common with Romney.

Her Republican credentials, however, are thin. The Times reports she only recently changed her party registration from “decline to state” to GOP, and
Whitman’s politics are assumed to be moderate. Very possibly she is too moderate for the California GOP, especially one annoyed by Schwarzenegger’s “post-partisan” policies, but then Tom McClintock is probably too conservative for the state. This reminds one of Romney as well, although in a less salutory manner. Romney has been a Republican since 1994 at the very least, but if we believe him that he was an “independent during Reagan-Bush,” not much longer than that.

Now, the California primary arrives on Feb. 5, and the RealClearPolitics polling average puts Romney in solid second place, albeit solidly behind John McCain. Whitman is fairly popular in the Valley, as the blogs cited above indicate. If she is considering a run for governor, that could reflect well on Romney. (I’m undecided whether to trust Valleywag’s reporting; other news outlets have yet to follow suit, but the life cycle of a trial balloon is usually longer than 24 hours, so we’ll see.) If she is not considering a run, then even better! If you’re in the California primary, this is just the time to float the idea of a respected Bay Area businesswoman as a member of your cabinet.

Or if she ran for governor and won, Whitman could be the first of what one might eventually have to call “Romney Republicans.” It’s obviously way too early to seriously start talking about such a thing — but do you really suppose that Romney’s supporters haven’t already?

Josh Marshall’s Readers Are… Not So Bright

Published by William Beutler on January 2, 2008 in Advertising, Campaigns, Fred Thompson, Iowa Caucuses, Mitt Romney, Seriously, Television, White House '08 and William Beutler. 7 Comments

This end of a post at Talking Points Memo today made me laugh:

If Romney loses Iowa after having spent $1.8 billion there and then loses in his backyard in New Hampshire he’ll be in bad, bad shape. The horrid press over the following few weeks would likely kill him.

(ed.note: I had meant the reference to Mitt’s $1.8 billion in spending in Iowa to be an obvious bit of sarcasm at Romney’s expense. But it seems Romney’s efforts to buy the Republican nomination have become so notorious and proverbial that many readers are asking if it’s really true. So, no, I believe his spending is well below $1.8 billion. But he wants it really bad and there’s still a day left. So who knows.)

$1.8 billion sounds plausible? Using what counting system?

Elsewhere on the web today, a Des Moines-based WFAA reporter says Romney has spent $4 million on TV ads; also today, Fred Thompson [disclosure] aide Rich Galen writes in a column for CNS news,

according to the Professional Guessing Class, [Romney] may have spent upwards of $8 MILLION here

If Romney has in fact spent $8 million, which doesn’t sound like a bad guess, then he would have to spend 225 times that in order to spend $1.8 billion. CNN says all the candidates combined have spent $40 million on TV ads; I’d be surprised if there was a billion dollars worth of TV time to be had in Iowa in an entire year.

If Romney really dropped that much money in the state, Iowa could practically retire, and hey, maybe accede to another state or system its coveted first-in-the-nation status. Which would probably be a good thing for everyone. Except, of course, Iowa.

P.S. For example, see this from First Read:

MOUNT PLEASANT, Iowa — A woman who famously switched from volunteering for Clinton to Obama has changed her mind… again. …

“Probably I’ll caucus for Richardson,” she said after Edwards spoke. “My guess is he won’t be viable, and then I’ll probably scoot right over to Edwards.”

Are Iowans really so serious about their vote? Or are they spoiled and self-indulgent? In another state, I’ll bet voters would not feel so entitled, political observers would not ascribe such mythical status to their choices, and just maybe, subsequent states would have a bigger say in the primary process.

Alas, as my former Hotline colleague Reid Wilson explains, attempts at reform might be about as easy to properly implement as the Fair Tax.

P.S. After some consideration, I actually wish I had called this “Josh Marshall’s Readers Are… Not So Good With Numbers.”

Richelieu is to Mike Murphy as…

Published by William Beutler on December 1, 2007 in John McCain, Mickey Kaus, Mitt Romney, White House '08 and William Beutler. 2 Comments

Did Mickey Kaus just out the Weekly Standard’s pseudonymous Campaign Standard blogger Richelieu as GOP consultant Mike Murphy? Given Mickey’s usual tongue-in-cheek phrasing, this is as close to an accusation as he’ll get without (disclosable) proof1:

**–I think this argument was made by Weekly Standard’s Richelieu. Or maybe it was consultant Mike Murphy. I get them confused sometimes! … 7:09 P.M.

Richelieu wrote the Campaign Standard’s latest post at 12:14 p.m. on Friday; there’s no response yet from him nor any contributor to the blog. (Bill Kristol, Richard Starr and others write for it, but Matthew Continetti is listed as the editor and his caricature is featured at the top. Nice work.)

To be fair, I haven’t read enough Richelieu to recognize one of his arguments, though I’m aware he’s been hitting Huckabee lately. And I haven’t paid enough attention to Mike Murphy’s “Meet the Press” comments, other than those about Fred Thompson2.

But Kaus wouldn’t be the first to make the insinuation. On September 27 a Ramesh Ponnuru post at The Corner said, and I quote in its entirety:

The Standard has a new campaign blog. My guess is that “Richelieu” is Mike Murphy.

Why would Murphy want to conceal his involvement, if indeed he is Richelieu? Possibly because he was a top strategist for McCain in 2000, was more recently a consultant to Mitt Romney, and wants to avoid having to comment on them publicly. But Murphy has been on “Meet” twice this year in a recurring panel featuring Bob Shrum, James Carville and Mary Matalin. Maybe it’s different, appearing on a talk show and writing blog entries. It’s no different ethically, but a nom de plume would allow him to write more frankly. On the other hand, he wrote a column for The Hotline from 2003-04 called “Backseat Driving” under his own name. On the other other hand, none of his former clients were running for president then.

To reiterate before hitting “Publish,” I’m not saying Murphy is Richelieu. If he’s not, that could be pretty interesting, too. Keep an eye on the Campaign Standard.

P.S. Of possible relevance: Murphy was, briefly, a producer on CNBC’s briefly-appearing “Dennis Miller” talk show which, I might add, I always thought was underrated. Left-wing FAIR, kind of a forerunner to Media Matters, hit Murphy at the time for producing the show while serving as a consultant to Gov. Schwarzenegger. Also possibly relevant: Kaus sometimes appeared as a guest on the show’s “Varsity” roundtable.

1 Unless maybe it’s John Edwards.

2 Non-”Standard” standard disclosure.