First State Politics has a rundown of Romney's night in DE.

Political columnist Charlie Cook and Stuart Rothenberg pick Hillary and Mitt as the two likely nominees.

Of Clinton Cooke says:

Cook described Clinton’s campaign as one of “Prussian efficiency,” more like Richard Nixon’s campaign in 1972 and certainly “more organized than any Democratic campaign that I’ve ever seen.”

But Clinton also has a liability – 46-48 percent of Americans “won’t vote for her no matter what. If she were a stock, she’d have a very narrow trading range. There’s no room for error. She’s cautious and she doesn’t make mistakes.”

Pretty fair diagnostic of Clinton. My diagnostic would trade the word "efficiency" for "vomit." But there is no need to go there right?

But this is beginning to fit a pattern, IMO. Romney is seen by many as the eventual nominee- think GOP insiders poll from a month ago. If it were to turn into a Romney/Clinton match up I am pretty convinced Romney would take it in a landslide. For certain Clinton would bring out the daggers, but the Anti-Clinton machine is already operating in full gear. Besides all we need to do is ask Clinton where all of her husbands bodyguards?

InsiderAdvantage national poll: 1,000-Republican voters surveyed for their presidential preferences.

Poll conducted May 30 and 31.

Rudy Giuliani - 28%

Fred Thompson -19%

Mitt Romney 17%

John McCain -16%

Mike Huckabee- 4%

Sam Brownback -3%

Duncan Hunter- 2%

Ron Paul - 2%

Jim Gilmore - 1%

Undecided/Don’t Know -8%

I'm not finding the previous results (if any) from this firm. Still, 17% in a national poll (and ahead of McCain again) is about as good as it's been for Romney.

Now that the entrance of Fred Thompson into the Presidential race seems inevitable, I want to state a few of the reasons why Romney is clearly the candidate to lead America, and to some extent, why we should all absolutely vote for him over Thompson (I have attempted to do this as respectfully as possible while recognizing I am still an advocate. Besides, Thompson would make a good VP for Romney to run with, although a lot of people would probably consider him too Dick Cheney-esque):

Leadership: In addition to his tremendous success in the private sector, Romney has demonstrated great capability as the leader of the Salt Lake City Olympics and as the Governor of the state of Massachusettes. He has the desire to get things done and it is equalled by his abilities. He is a natural leader. Thompson has represented his state as a Senator, but running a Senate office is not equal to running a state. Thompson decided he didn't want to be in politics shortly after 9/11 and instead pursued his acting career. He plays leadership roles normally, but he is typecast in that role, after all. Where Thompson is reluctant, Romney wants the opoprtunity to fix problems and help America face a new generation of challenges.

The Family: Romney is a family man in spirit, in practice, in public and private. His relationship with his wife is the kind that people should aspire to have. Those who have doubts about the strength of marriage in the world should gain hope from watching Mitt with Ann. Having lived through the Clinton years, I am proud to say I care about a man's personal relationship with his wife. I think it is the clearest demonstration of what type of person they are. In addition to Mitt's personal life, he has been a leader among leaders in defending the family from attack by those who want any commited relationship to be elevated to the level of traditional marriage. He has forcefully and artfully advocated for the fundamental rights of children, both unborn and born, to not be used as research material and to have the benefit of both a mother and father in their life. He has placed his personal values on the line as it were, and stood up over and over again for family values. Much has been made recently about the fact that Thompson divorced his first wife, was a bachelor for many years, and then married a much younger woman. I don't want to belabor the points made that Thompson is not the spokesperson for stemming the erosion of values in the country and world. My point is that Romney clearly is the candidate for those of us who want to have a standard bearer on the issues related to family and life.

Healthcare: Romney succesfully implemented a market based health care reform in Massachusettes that saved the state from socialized medicine while helping to insure the uninsured. Thompson doesn't seem to have any relevant experience in this area other than his lobbying efforts. The democrats are quickly making health care a centerpiece of their campaigns. We need Romney to articulate a better way than Hillarycare or Obamacare. Romney is the person to do that. His experience and understanding of the issues involved will help us save our medical system from those who think the federal government will run it better.

Foreign Relations: Romney has quickly shown his ability to master issues of international relations as well as thinking about solving them in creative ways. He has articulated with great ability the threat that Iran and Jihadists pose to the entire world. He has recently outlined his vision of foreign policy that would help America be a world leader through strength. Thompson did humorously bash on Michael Moore recently. I should add that Thompson has been invovled with some non-governmental organizations that focus on foreign policy.

Electibility: As a prosecutor, I often think about what the main points of attack will be from my opponent. Romney's main weakness seems to be from prejudice and ad hominem argumentation. On the issues, Romney will beat whoever he opposes on the democratic side. He is more qualified, more articulate and has a better vision and common sense about problem solving than all of them. You will see flip-flop style attack adds. You will see people arguing he is just another hawkish religious nutcase like Bush 43. But this will not compare to the bashing Thompson is going to take. Why? Two things I would exploit if I were a democratic strategist. First, Thompson's vote to impeach President Clinton in the Senate. In short, I would paint Thompson as just another Newt Gingrich Repubican who attacked the President we all so loved despite having his own serious character flaws. Second, Thompson's endorsement of attacking Iraq without provocation. In fact, there will be good video of this incident that will be used. Now, this second attack depends on how unpopular the war in Iraq is at the time of the election, but I think we can fairly expect it to continue to be on people's minds. Of course, the dynamic is much different whether Clinton, Obama, Edwards or some other person is the candidate.

The Economy: Romney has had a tremendously successful career in business. He has effectively ran and helped to fix many national and international businesses and his ability as an executive has been proven in this field. The economy is going to be very important in the next election and Romney is the person to articulate conservative principles and to help make sure we are competitive in the global market. Thompson has no business experience, unless you consider lobbying on behalf of businesses to be experience. Simply put, there is no comparison between Romney and Thompson on economic issues.

There is much more that could be said but it is clear who the best candidate is. People may vote for Thompson for a variety of reasons: such as sentimentality about a southern straight talker, a preference for a Church of Christ member, personal fans of Law and Order. People may vote against Mitt Romney for a variety of irrational reasons. Resume to resume though, Mitt Romney is the strongest candidate to lead America at this time when we are confronted with Jihadists intent on destroying us, we are facing stiff competition from India and Asia, the democrats are pushing a nationalized health care system, and the family is under attack. Romney brings fresh and innovative ideas to solve a new generation of challenges and I am proud to continue to say he is My Man Mitt.

Winthrop University and ETV Poll.

Numbers look good for Romney:

Undecided	29.9
Giuliani	18.6
McCain	14.4
Romney	11.7
F. Thompson	6.4
Gingrich	3.4
Brownback	1.5
Hunter	1.1
Huckabee	0.8
T. Thompson	0.8
Hagel	0.4

He's coming along!

First this 2 weeks ago:

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

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

O'REILLY: All right.

MILLER: I'm a Rudy guy.

And now this:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

MILLER: Staples office stores.

O'REILLY: Yes, the office stores.

MILLER: Romney was there at the beginning of that.

O'REILLY: OK.

Video Here. Hat tip reader Glen.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Time’s Joe Klein writes today about how “disappointing” Romney’s campaign is:

But there isn't the slightest hint of courage or conviction in his stump act. It's a candidacy for the era before 2001, before things got serious. And his success or failure will be a reflection of how serious the electorate is in 2008.

Apparently Klein admits the unseriousness (if that’s a word) of a particular presidential era prior to 2001. Now, however, we need a “serious” candidate – someone dark, brooding, and most of all angry. This isn’t the time for someone with optimism and a sense of humor. We need someone who will agitate and irritate, yell and scream, and generally follow the Al Sharpton/Howard Dean school of politics. No, Klein, I think the American people have rejected that type of candidate again and again – even in the Democratic party.

But what about Romney’s courage and conviction? It’s certainly a hard thing to quantify and is a qualitative assessment. So, I would ask, what do the people who are seeing him think? About the only indicators I know of are polls and endorsements. As people have become acquainted with Romney his poll numbers have increased. Romney also is not lacking for endorsements (although always willing to accept more). So what is it that Klein sees that so many others do not? He faults Romney for being too light on substance and heavy on style, making a jab at Romney audiences: “And because he doesn't dwell on [policy], his audiences don't.” But it’s hard to see how that is so when Romney has been so forthcoming on policy proposals (the most recent found here on MMM). Such criticism is not founded on fact, but on fantasy.

Labels: endoresements, policy, Polls, Time magazine

Apparantly Amnesty Sam, the man who won't talk about the surge or immigration, has time to bring up evolution. In a NYTimes Op-ed he goes into a lengthy discussion about evolution, which I didn't even bother to read.

Doesn't this guy have anything better to do? Do we need to make this about evolution. Are we bing attacked by militant paleolithic caveman? Are our borders being infiltrated by millions of illegal amoebas?

Now lets contrast this with Romney essay at www.foreignaffairs.org.

C'mon Sam, you want to be taken seriously? Discuss the issues of the day, not the Scopes Monkey Trial.