CPAC Straw Poll results.

Romney wins CPAC straw poll.

(The results are in Power Point format. Sorry if not everyone is able to view the link.)

Saturday 3-3-07, 4:45 pm


  1. To be fair, most of the voters were students, and many of those students were brought in on a “Romney for President” Bus.

    He did have the best performance out the speeches that I saw however.

  2. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Interesting that Giuliani’s numbers were as high as they were, especially compared with historical numbers…

  3. Oro Valley Dad says


    Fair enough. But why didn’t the other campaigns think to bus in a bunch of students? It does show a certain amount of organization and effort and that is a good sign for Romney.

  4. Remember Howard Dean got his big momentum early on from young bloggers. That was a very smart move on the part of the Dean camp to think outside the conventional attitude and behavior. But, in the long run it was not enough to keep his position in the party rankings. Romney’s folks did pull off a good one if bringing in bus loads of college kids affected the outcome.

    Time will tell if Romney has “the stuff” to maintain or if this was just a lucky break.

  5. kralmajales says

    I think that Romney is going to have a tough time of it folks. He will have to do well in the bible belt of Iowa. He SHOULD do well in New Hampshire given that his state of governorship shares the media and morning commute of most in New Hampshire.

    Here is how I see this play out. He doesn’t win in Iowa and has to fight between Guiliani and McCain (who will probably win Iowa). Then he SHOULD do well in NH…expectations will be high for him to do well there. He will lose to either a Guiliani or a McCain with momentum. And then…he is out of the race…just like that.

    He might, might, salvage his campaign for a few more weeks if he works really hard in Nevada, but McCain will be there to meet him and beat him.

    Then the fun begins when they all swoop down to South Carolina, which Lindsay Graham is working very very hard for Sen. McCain.

    I do hope you all nominate McCain. I don’t think he can beat even Hillary Clinton with his stance on spending more of our tax money on Iraq.

  6. kralmajales says

    Ok…there is no post about this anywhere, but I have to ask you all what is up with the “firing” of Arizona District Attorney Paul Charlton? This story is gaining some momentum and I would like to know how local republicans feel about a man with the reputation of Charlton being asked to resign by the administration. This guy is Republican thru and thru, is honorable, and I haven’t heard peep out of you all or Kyl or McCain.

  7. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    You probably haven’t heard a peep because this is a website of conservative pro-lfers who mostly focus on pro-life issues and, given its importance, things like the presidential race. So its just not an issue we are tracking…

    Back to the topic at hand… Anyone get the feeling that Romney is this year’s Phil Gramm?

  8. kralmajales says

    You don’t think the firing of a good Republican who fought terrorism, drugs, and border crime for years…for no reason…a good Arizona Republican thrown to the wind is not a conservative issue?

    Anyway…you are right…not the right post. But it is an issue worth talking about.

  9. kralmajales says

    On Romney…as I said before…I agree. He is this year’s Phil Graham…but for a few things. A governor, not a Senator…massive ties to business around the country which could help for fundraising, but a much more liberal record than Graham ever had.

    Remember, Romney was Governor of a very liberal state. His policies on healthcare (nearly socialized) will continue to come to light…along with others that will roast him.

  10. kralmajales says

    Ok…let me make Charlton a little more relevant for you. What position has John McCain taken on the forcing out of a good, conservative Republican prosector, with a stellar record, that he himself helped put up and confirm?

    That Presidential enough for you?

  11. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Nope, its not… And its not the wrong post, its the wrong blog… There are tons of them out there, I’m not sure which you should be targeting, but there really isn’t much of a pro-life angle to it…

  12. Oro Valley Dad says


    The fate of Paul Charlton has been covered by Hot AZ It Gets. STS is correct that this is a pro-life, conservative blog. As such we are not interested in someone just because he is a Republican. Further the contributors to this blog write about what they know and what interests them. Since it was covered by another blog there is not much need for us to re-cover the story unless we have a particular interest or insight, which we apparently do not.

    I occasionally cover the border because I live in CD 8 and have spent some time hiking and camping along the border region of Southern Arizona. Conversely, since I know nothing about the town council of Flagstaff I tend not to write about that subject.

  13. Mike Triggs says

    I don’t think I have ever heard anyone call Iowa part of the Bible Belt.

    McCain skipped Iowa in 2000 which was probably his biggest mistake of that campaign. It just goes to show in a shortened political season you have to play to win everywhere.

    Having been in on the early organizing for George HW Bush in 1978 and 1979 I know first hand how a little known candidate can upset Goliath (we did it with Reagan) in Iowa. Full time candidates such as Rudy and Mitt will do well there. I just don’t see John McCain campaigning in all 99 counties….and that’s what it takes to win in Iowa. Mike Triggs (former Pocahontas GOP County Chair)

  14. kralmajales says

    Hey Mike:

    Iowa, like Indiana, Illinois, Missouri etc. is the heartland of America and I have heard it called the Bible belt for its conservative values on social issues. I would especially think that would be true in the Republican caucuses. Yeah, I think McCain skipped the Iowa caucuses when he ran last because of this very point. That he would not do well among social issues conservatives. He chose NH as an entry point because it would fit with his straight talking, maverick, moderate Republican image.

    However, as many of you know more than me, he has tried to start shifting his positions to fit the mold of social conservatives and I am sure won’t be as afraid of running in Iowa…or South Carolina.


  15. kralmajales says

    Oh…and I apologize for missing the fact that this is a pro-life blog. I mistook it for a conservative blog overall and that is what the old mission statement says up on the right.

    I was tweaking you all a bit here because I think McCain backed Charlton if I am not mistaken. Isnt that a bit of a concern to some? For instance, the link I went to above claims he was fired for not giving the death penalty (although I see no evidence of that at all). If that is the case, why did McCain support such a person in the first place? On the other hand, if he is being hung out to dry, shouldn’t McCain do something or say something ot back the man he helped confirm. A conservative Republican who clearly served this state well?

    I thought this relevant because you were talking generally about Presidential poltics. I think this is quite relevant and opens a little window into John McCain.

  16. Anything, if given enough time, could be tangentially related to presidential politics. But to try and connect those dots in an effort to get conservatives to pile on McCain over the Charlton issue just isn’t worth the effort. Your clear attempt to use it as a wedge issue in an effort to discredit either McCain or other conservatives,…well we aren’t biting.

    History is full of party hard liners who have gone one way or another, out of line with the center of their party. Sandra Day O’Connor was believed to be a strict conservative but turned out to be much more moderate. Such is the nature of the beast. People of like minds will be who they are, and given any set of circumstances their particular responses may be very different.

    That prerogative is the stuff of real presidential politics. Given a certain set of circumstance how have or how would each candidate respond? And just what is the most important issue in the minds of each voter? After all, electability is the final goal or we will have a Dem president who has no connection to the conservative agenda. Is it overall security; home and abroad….meaning defense and crime? Or is it social values, such as pro-life and gay marriage? Is a candidate’s long held stand on issues as important as a candidate who had morphed based on the changing political landscape? What about someone who has made their own way, but not always in a straight line? Does small government mean the government’s interest ends at the front door and how we live our lives is our business as long as no one else’s right are infringed? The economy,….is a recession in the future? Who can’t remember the debacle that were the Carter years? These are the questions of this conservative.

  17. Joe Baby says

    I don’t think McCain has “shifted his positions to fit the mold of social conservatives.”

    If anything, he’s ignoring his recent political activities and trying to highlight his past record as a conservative…and he’s sprinkling an occasional bit of outreach, such as speaking at Liberty U.

    But by avoiding things like CPAC (and the AZ State GOP Mtg.), he’s avoiding prime opportunities to address conservatives.

    In short, he’s in trouble.

  18. McCain has no chance in Iowa, as he is against ethanol subsidies (a stance that I believe he is right on.)

    Romney also has a strong chance in Nevada against McCain and Giuliani as there is a large percentage of Mormons in Nevada (thus the reason why Harry Reid does well in Nevada).

    Calling Romney’s health care plan “socialism” is just plain ignorant. The main design of the plan was precisely to head off socialized medicine and still give the consumer a choice in how they wished to be covered (as long as they were covered), and which doctor they wanted to see. It may not be perfect, but it is certainly better than HillaryCare which is where Massachusetts was headed without intervention. Fortunately, we will get to see what happens there before trying it anywhere else. Much like the more socialistic TennCare was allowed to fall flat on its face.

    And finally, the executive branch has the right to hire and fire district attorneys as they wish, Cinton fired all of them but one when he took office. I’m pretty sure that there was an idealogical reason behind it, but that is the prerogative of the executive , he doesn’t have to answer to anyone about it, and never has.

  19. kralmajales says


    Are you a Romny fan? I agree that he might do well in Nevada due to a large Mormon base. Would you expect him to do well here for the same reason?

    No…Romney is not a Clinton on healthcare…he is still a Republican. And…I don’t much like Hillary Clinton. But to say that his healthcare program wasn’t a government based system that entangled government into healthcare is way off base. I am just arguing that there are many in your party that will not like it a bit when they start to take a look at it. When they look at the rest of his liberal trangulating record in Mass., they will be less excited than before. My opinion.

    As to the firing of Charlton, I think you all are clearly circling your wagons on this one because you are being attacked by Democrats on it. Charlton was an excellent prosecutor, an excellent public servant, and he got fired, it appears, because he went sniffing around Renzi.

    You can say all you want that Presidents have a right to fire US Attorneys. They do and for any reason. But that doesn’t make that reason palatable or right. It also doesn’t mean that he wasn’t deserted by his party and the persons that helped get him that job.

    I am sure some are not biting. I would like to hear from some of you principled persons on why it was a bad idea for them to roost a good Arizona republican and call him light on the death penalty for no reason.

    That goes to character folks. And if John McCain has nothing to say about it or Kyl…I think it goes to their character and their character for office.

    I am interested in the hearings tomorrow when Charlton finally gets to speak.

  20. kralmajales says


    Given all that you said, who do you support so far and why? If I may ask.


  21. I’ve not made a commitment to any candidate, but I was very interested in the 2002 Olympics, as the company I worked for at the time was an official sponsor. I have followed Mitt since there. I am more familiar with him than the other non-McCain candidates.

    In Arizona, only about 5% of the total population is LDS, in Nevada it is closer to 8%. However, the number of active political representation is probably a lot higher than the 8%, even more so in Nevada than Arizona. I would wager this is especially true in relation to the Republican party and primary. I would guarantee that Romney’s grassroots organization in Nevada as of right now is greater than McCain’s based on this factor alone.

    Keep in mind, however, that not all Mormons are in the Romney camp, but they could well be pushed there should other candidates try to make too much of Romney’s religion.

    As far as Mitt’s health plan, it was great idea for Massachusetts. It remains to be seen if it would be effective for Arizona, or the country as a whole.

    And as far as Charlton goes, there are too many people involved in any possible Renzi investigation to fire Charlton because of that alone. I doubt that the real reasons will ever be brought to light to be honest with you, and sometimes, I am OK with that.

  22. kralmajales says

    Nice post Framer!

    I like your rationale about Romney. It is interesting. An assumption could be made that McCain as a Westerner and as a Senator from a nearby state might do well there…BUT…that is an assumption and LDS voters might vote for and organize for him there. Still…McCain money, McCain name rec., and arguably the most conservative of the top 3.

    If that is the case…then wow…McCain might just really be toast. A loss in Nevada would hurt him big time, especially if you are right about his appeal (or lackthereof) in Iowa. I just still wonder just who would win there though if not him. I mean, Guiliani is tough on crime, America’s mayor, but are social conservatives and caucus voters (the bravest of the brave who come out in snow) going to be ok with his pink dress on Saturday night live, the ditching of his wife and bringing in a lover soon after, and moving in with two gay guys? Not to mention his support for gay marriage and his pro-choice stances. That leaves conservatives with Romney and McCain. McCain is pro-life, no question about that, but has been wishy washy as a conservative and has angered some along the way. Enough to get roasted in South Carolina last time.

    So then there is Romney…well…he was pro-choice but now claims he wasn’t or changed his mind. Was pro-gay rights until he took on the Mass. Supreme Court. But then there is his liberal record in Mass.

    Like the demos, ya’ll have a difficult choice here.

    McCain will probably get the nomination if social conservatives dominate the primaries as I think they will. He has been tough on the war, is the most conservative on abortion and gay rights, and he has the fundraising machine of Bush.

    I think Romney is gone if he doesn’t win New Hampshire…for sure…and I am not sure he will with Guiliani there.

    Last, I think McCain has set a fire wall in SC. I bet dollars to donuts if he gets the nomination Lindsay Graham will be his VP. I would wager in Vegas on that one.

    Best all.

  23. I bet both Guiliani and Romney both end up outraising McCain and spending that money in a more effective fashion. The old school network that McCain is depending on really isn’t that efficient. Better to have it than to not have it though.

    Right now, Guiliani has the momentum, but he may be peaking too early. For Romney to have a chance, he needs to secure the endorsement of Newt Gingrich or Jeb Bush. If he were, by some miracle, able to obtain both, the race is over. If McCain can stay strong enough to keep either endorsement from going to Romney, he is in a very good position.

    But enough giving this stuff out for free on a competitor’s blog. . . 🙂

  24. Oro Valley Dad says

    Competitor? We link to you guys all the time. And all this time I thought we were on the same side!

  25. Well Kral, as I said…I have too many questions without real answers. I understand the drive and appeal of Giuliani but I am having a hard time getting past his pro-choice position. Romney carries a history of flip-flops but yet I believe he is a man of integrity. McCain, geez louise, where do I start!? Yet, I do respect his service and believe he is not the great evil some have suggested. So, there you have it.

    What I do know is this; I will support and work very hard to elect whoever runs against Hillary, Obama, or Edwards, and very, very hard for anybody who runs against Gore.

  26. OVD,

    Yeah, we were friendly until you started to get more hits than us 🙂

    Now you have a big bullseye on your back.

  27. Oro Valley Dad says

    Started to get more hits? When did we not get more?

    We will still link to your site because you have been doing some great coverage on the National Committeeman race and early lineup for CD 8.

  28. kralmajales says

    Love the rivalry folks. I read both blogs so there! As to hits, it depends on two things. 1. Upon which of you says something just so terribly intelligent. 2. When you all make me mad.

    Ann…nice thoughts. It does look like a tough choice for conservatives in this bunch honestly. That is something that really interests me here. Which one will come out of the pack with the most support from conservative party primary voters?

    I will say this. I think among all of your candidates, conservative or not, Guiliani would have the broadest appeal. If it were him versus Gore…well…I would be voting Guiliani…despite the fact that your party has really lost me over the past 6 years. Frankly, it will be a tough one for me between him and Hillary…a vote for her would only be because I don’t want to reward Republicans for the past 6 years.

Speak Your Mind


judi online bonanza88 slot baccarat online slot idn live situs idn poker judi bola tangkas88 pragmatic play sbobet slot dana casino online idn pokerseri joker123 selot slot88