Mitt Romney scored spectacular numbers in Frank Luntz’s focus groups. (See previous post, The Forum is Over, Who Won?) He withstood withering condescension from his rivals, tough questions from Chris Wallace, all after a full campaign day. Romney has campaigned harder and for longer than all of them. Romney was seated in the middle, and he was in the middle of every exchange.

He stuck to his guns and fired several good shots of his own. He let almost no charge go un-rebutted and pivoted to offense effectively on many. As far as debating tactics, poise and execution are concerned he won.

That said, he has a heckuva job ahead. The Union leader has been pounding Romney. Huckabee’s win and attacks on Romney in Iowa left alot of bruises. Romney’s strategy always included wins in Iowa and or New Hampshire – and now he’s running 2nd to the McComeback Kid, MAC IS BACK! John McCain

Could tonight turn the corner?

(more…)

HuckaBOOM!
Comes the Revolution?
Christian conservatives do not explain the whole Mike Huckabee win.
His authenticity and populist message struck a chord with heartland middle income and blue collar values voters.
That populism will now be expanded to emphasize fair trade, a tough but compassionate approach to illegal immigration reform, and the “fair tax” (replace income taxes with a 23% sales tax)
These will be among the things Huckabee will use to cast himself as the outsider against John McCain (ironic since McCain is often criticized as a maverick, but he was the chairman of the senate commerce cmte) and Mitt Romney who he has already cast as too rich to be able to connect with average folks.
McCain had an edge in NH against Romney, in a three way race including Huckabee, McCain may be even more strenghtened now.
Obama’s big win will inspire independents in NH…bad news for Rudy Giuliani who was counting on Indies for a respectable first primary showing.
Money matters.
Romney looks even worse having outspent Huckabee 10-1 in Iowa. Huckabee will enjoy a fundraising windfall now and the press will be huge, But Romney is a mult millionaire and willing to keep spending “for the long haul.”
Giuliani, McCain, Thompson all have cash problems. Not so Mitt.
Romney and Huckabee aides agree tonite was an anti washington message, and they note Obama’s change message is part of that.
Huckabee knows NH is far more secular than Iowa or South Carolina. Earlier this wk, Huckabee aides routinely said if they won they would next emphasize SC. That will shift now as they embrace the magnitude of tonites win and make a renewed effort in NH…
As one aide put it “this is a big wave, we can surf anywhere now.” That may be overconfident but with two debates this weekend and a record of strong debate performances, Huckabee knows a moment is at hand.

Paraleipsis…..look it up:)

FOX News was the first to obtain a copy of the whole ad:

Voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina will be talking about this story right up until they vote. They are sophisticated and saturated by election news and devour this type of oddity like a prime rib at Des Moines’ Iowa Beef Steakhouse. Say what you will, but know this strange move WILL get attention.

The back story:

On Saturday afternoon Huckabee cleared most of his Sunday schedule and aides refused to explain. It was a mysterious, suspicious move but aides refused to confirm it was to cut new ads. Early Sunday morning after one live shot pointing out that taking the last Sunday off before caucus without explanation would irk Iowa caucus goers, Huckabee aides immediately copped to a day in the studio for new ads.

They were to be tough “rebuttal ads.” The final DVD’s were printed for shipment to Iowa TV stations at 1:00am Monday morning. There was dissent in Huckworld. Some wanted to attack. Others didn’t.

What many Hucksters envisioned was an ad denouncing Romney’s attacks but rather than returning in kind, pledging more positivity. What came out was a straight up hit on Romney, and many instantly thought it was too much, mean. Like Romney.

To be fair some of Huckabee’s attacks have been far more personal than Mitts of late. Huck admits he was in to negativity himself on the stump recently.

Family members reminded Huck he had never run an ad like that in Arkansas. Iowa aides warned it would turn people off. Huck made the call. BUT a deal was struck with those favoring the attack: run it in the news conference – proving it’s existence, and delivering the message.

Monday morning I was triple tipped. First: it was back off the negative counter attack reporting, its not happening. Then I was re-tipped: Romney’s gonna be stunned, its tough. Then re-re-tipped: some people think its a bad idea.

An hour later the governor told a packed news conference he was halting the ad, but would play it for us. Reporters burst into unapologetic guffaws of laughter – skepticism code: day-glow red blinking neon! The idea that at this late date, having called Romney dishonest, disingenuous, ruthless, and various other goodies, he would suddenly swear off negative campaigning was too much for most.

Then the debut of the ad went haywire. They hit play, video rolled with no sound – it was recording in the cameras but there was silence in the room for reporters, abort.

Restart: audio in the room but not to the cameras, rewind. The third do over had no audio to the room or the cameras…The tiny speakers on the laptop played for those of us within a few feet. NOBODY RECORDED A USEABLE VERSION OF THE AD AT THE NEWS CONFERENCE.

Huck said they were not distributing it but told reporters repeatedly it had been sent to TV stations around Iowa to run at noon.

So now Huck is embarrassed (IS HE?) that the ad he never wanted you to see (and said would only be shown in that news conference room) is all over the place. (see the front page of Foxnews.com.)

Some will say they planned it this way: to look like he’s taking the high road by pulling the spot, while getting more news coverage for the attack message than he could ever afford to buy.
But they also knew it would look bad to reverse course…indecisive-disarray? Unpredictable under pressure?

If he loses this will be one of many causes. If he wins this will be a defining moment written about for years. With the exception of the revered Des Moines Register poll Huck was trending down and Mitt trending up for several days.

The campaign knew they had to do something dramatic to stop the slide and change the dynamics. They knew it had to be good to break through on New Years eve. Winning campaigns always take risks and always need luck. They rolled the dice.

This was certainly different and if Huckabee pulls out the caucus win, his aides all say this will be a big part of the reason why. Huckaboom? Huckabust? Less than a hundred hours to find out.

Gloves off doesn’t cover it. More like knives out and sharpened for the stretch run.

Mitt unleashes another attack ad on Huckabee citing Condi’s “ludicrous” line (though not perhaps as she meant it). One of Huckabee’s new ads calls his “opponents” (wonder who) “desperate and dishonest” but he wants a real debate, you know, for the kids.

http://mitt-tv.mittromney.com/?showid=728418

Romney had a gift under the tree (a grenade?) for McCain in the form of a NH ad on taxes and immigration. But did he bring a knife to a gunfight? McCain ad responds with a blistering recitation of editorial opinions on Mitt (phony? ouch) that the governor thinks is (at least) a step over the line.

http://mitt-tv.mittromney.com/?showid=728416

Huckabee puts Pakistan and illegal immigration together and comes up with a stew that may have a little too much salt. He also defended McCain’s honor in light of Mitt attack ad. Enemy of my enemy?

And Rudy wants to be part of the conversation (didn’t anyone notice the 9/11 ad?) but since he is not a player in the early states he is having a hard time.

Dems still debating Pakistan. Did Axelrod cross the line? Obama says it is HRC’s campaign’s fault. Does HRC know anything more about foreign policy that what she learnt at tea time?

Check out the blow by blows at:

Embed’s Blog

It’s a whole new race.

It was not that long ago that republicans were arguing about pardons and democrats were debating statements made in kindergarten.  And yes polls still suggest that republicans are seen as more serious about security than republicans

The Iowa Republican caucuses are a toss up. Mike Huckabee’s arrived. Mitt Romney’s not gone. BUT today Romney, who may well win, laid claim to victory in second. It’s hardly an original strategy, in the EXPECTATIONS GAME that is “the first in the nation.”

Sen Clinton has personally apologized to Sen Obama for remarks by her New Hampshire campaign chairman Billy Shaheen, the husband of Gov Jeanne Shaheen, who said yesterday that Obama’s past drug use could be used against him by Republicans in a general election. Shaheen  apologized for bringing up the drug issue, and the campaign immediately disavowed his comments.

Now, New Hampshire spokeswoman Kathleen Strand says “Sen. Clinton personally apologized to Sen. Obama this morning, and reiterated that this was not anything that came from the campaign or that we condone.” She confirmed that the apology took place at Washington’s Reagan National Airport as the two left the nation’s capital for a Des Moines, IA presidential debate.

After the AP reported that the Clinton campaign was preparing for a possible loss in Iowa by building a firewall in New Hampshire, two new polls show Obama pulling into a dead heat. A new WMUR poll has Hillary leading Barack Obama by a single point, 31-30. She once led the same poll by 20 points. And Rasmussen Reports actually has Obama ahead in the Granite State, 31-28.

Meanwhile, a new survey from Republican polling outfit Strategic Vision shows Obama ahead by 8 in Iowa, 33-25.  But a Rasmussen poll shows Hillary leading 29-26, confirming what everyone already knows about Iowa — it’s just too close to call.

To add insult to injury, the NY Daily News reports that Bill Clinton is so worried about the campaign’s recent performance that he’s taking a much more active role, and there are rumors of an impending staff shake-up — rumblings that were denied by Sen Clinton herself yesterday.

Our own Major Garrett reports that the Clinton campaign “exhibits increasing annoyance at what it regards as a ‘free ride’ for Obama from the political press corps and feels beseiged as it has to bat away incessant questions about declining poll numbers in early battleground states and accounts of deepening turmoil at the highest levels of the Clinton campaign.”

The Clinton folks are trying to end that free ride, pushing newly-surfaced voter questionnaires filled out by Obama that they believe underscore their contention that Obama is either too liberal, too inconsistent, or too unelectable — or all three.

Barack Obama’s campaign had a big New Hampshire endorsement to announce today; they won the support of Carol Shea-Porter, a freshman congresswoman, and the second  of two from the Granite State to back Obama. To roll out the endorsement, the campaign announced a 2pm conference call with the congresswoman — giving reporters about an hour’s notice.

Just about a half hour later, Hillary’s campaign announced their own 2pm conference call on electability — giving us less than 2o minutes warning.  On that call, Rep Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) took a shot at Obama for changing some of his  liberal positions laid out in a 1996 questionnaire obtained by the Politico, just because he’s running for national office. “I don’t frankly understand a candidate that seems to think he can offer one position in the early stages of his career, and then as he reaches the level of a national election, he can change from one position to the next,” she said.

But other than that direct response to the Politico piece, participants didn’t have much news to offer — leading reporters like yours truly to wonder why they held the hastily assembled call in the first place. Sen Evan Bayh (D-IN) talked about Hillary’s electability among moderate Republicans and Independents in the heartland, while Rep Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH) stressed her appeal to women all over the country, who she said would come out in force in a general election.

Asked whether a new poll showing John Edwards performing best against Republican candidates meant he, not Hillary, was most electable, spokesman Phil Singer pointed to another poll in which most respondents called Hillary the most electable Democrat. But Edwards’ camp shot back with a memo with Democrats (mostly Edwards supporters) from red states cringing at a possible Clinton nomination’s effect on their reelection efforts, and praising Edwards as someone who could help down ticket Dems across the country.

After spending about a week on the campaign trail attacking Barack Obama over Health Care, Social Security, and his commitment to women’s rights, Hillary Clinton has gone back to emphasizing what she would do as president.

Gone are the frequent mentions of Obama by name, or even the veiled slaps at “some of my opponents” who have health care plans that won’t cover everyone. She’s even gone back to a line her husband used when he campaigned for her in July, saying it’s great to be a Democrat because there are so many fantastic candidates that “you don’t have to be against anyone.”

It could be because she’s been more focused on organizing Iowans to get to the caucuses — campaigning with her mother and daughter last week to ask experienced supporters to “buddy up” with first time caucus goers and make sure they get to their precincts on January 3rd. Or it could be because the attacks earned her a lot of negative press and some negative feeling among Iowans — and didn’t reverse a general downward trend in the polls in Iowa, New Hampshire, and nationally.

Asked whether she’d given up the attacks because of sinking poll numbers, Sen Clinton told reporters that she would continue to draw distinctions with her opponents throughout the rest of the primary season. Watch what she had to say.done

As ABC’s Jake Tapper reports, even if those “contrasts” have stopped coming from Hillary’s mouth, they’re still flying through the mail.