Wednesday, February 08, 2012
The sweater vest man has returned and right now he might want to wear a spiffy three-piece suit because he’s back in the center ring.
Rick Santorum’s three state sweep Tuesday night has nothing at all to do with collecting delegates. It has everything to do with grabbing the spotlight and showing America that he’s the guy to take on and beat Obama.
If we’ve learned anything from this crazy GOP primary race it’s that voters are looking to choose a candidate who can beat the president. Let’s not complicate it and get into all of the crosstab polling data. That’s it plain and simple. Who can beat Obama?
Santorum’s speech was a two-pronged hit. He was able to draw clear distinctions between him and Mitt Romney but he also pivoted to Obama and made the case why he’s the best candidate to beat him. Santorum may lack Mitt Romney’s money and vast organizational infrastructure but if his message (or Gingrich’s message) begins to truly resonate in the hearts and minds of voters, then Romney is in a world of trouble.
When I say message I don’t necessarily mean Santorum’s vision for America. Obviously that’s important but the message that really needs to stick with voters is one where GOP primary voters begin to think to themselves, “Hey, you know what? I think Santorum really can beat Obama.”
Santorum’s victories on Tuesday will be a seed in a plant that could begin to grow wildly.
The Brody File loves food analogies so let me put it this way: Mitt Romney is beginning to turn into Mr. Peanut Butter and Jelly. In other words, voters are looking for a nice cold cut sandwich with all the toppings but haven’t been able to find that person yet.
So what do you do when you can’t get a fantastic sandwich? You go in the cupboard and get the old standby: Peanut Butter and Jelly. Santorum (and Gingrich) are trying to be that amazing cold cut sandwich, and Tuesday evening Santorum added a few more toppings.
Sunday, February 05, 2012
Watch this week's Brody File show below.
We take a close look at how evangelicals voted in the first big primary month, and how Mitt Romney attempts to mix business skill with empathy.
Sen. Jim DeMint also talks about the Tea Party's influence in this year's race, and more.
Follow us on Twitter @TheBrodyFile.
Click play to watch this week's episode of The Brody File. See a list of previous episodes here.
Thursday, February 02, 2012
The oy-gevalt line of the campaign spoken by Mitt Romney:
"I'm not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I'll fix it."
Read more here.
So Mitt Romney doesn’t care about poor people? I’m sure that’s not exactly how he feels but that’s not the point. There are three major problems with this line.
First of all, from an evangelical standpoint, has Romney revealed how he really feels about the role of the federal government when it comes to taking care of the poor? It appears that he is saying that the federal government (not local and state governments) have a responsibility to provide a safety net for poor people. Yet the conservative Christian viewpoint tends to be that the poor does need help but that it should be provided by the individual not the government.
Indeed, the Bible commands that we are to take care of the poor but the “we” isn’t the government. Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council once told me the following: “When Jesus encountered the rich young ruler he told him to go and sell all that he had and give it to the poor. He didn’t tell him to give it to government and let the government redistribute it. It was his responsibility.”
Thus, it’s a legitimate line of inquiry to find out more about how Romney views the role of the federal government when it comes to its responsibility to poor people.
Secondly, this is yet another example of Romney’s penchant for making glaring mistakes on the campaign trail (Remember, “I like to fire people”). Pretty soon (if not already) a narrative will begin to form about Romney that he actually isn’t as electable as many think because he has a tendency to put his foot in his mouth. Not only that, these types of comments play into the stereotype that Romney is a rich guy who just can’t feel people’s pain.
Finally, Romney is starting to sound like he’s playing the class warfare card a little bit. He doesn’t play it the way Obama does but some of what he’s doing is similar. He talks a lot about helping the middle class, which makes sense because that’s where his political bread is buttered, not to mention a vibrant middle class is needed for a sound economy.
Yet we’ve heard Romney say repeatedly how he’s not worried about the rich and that under Romney’s vision, people making fewer than $200,000 would get a capital gains tax cut. That makes it seem like Romney may be open to some sort of compromise on taxes for people making over $200,000.
And of course now we have this comment about the poor. I’m not sure if that’s going to go over well in conservative circles either.
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
In the end it wasn’t even close. Mitt Romney’s decisive win in Florida made the following clear:
• Organization and money count. Romney and his Super PAC outspent Gingrich 4 to 1 and they also were better able to organize an early get out the vote operation. You can have a good message but if you don’t have cash and the people to execute it, then you’re in trouble. Romney has plenty of cash and plenty of people to help him.
• Negative advertising works. Voters complain about it but most of them are influenced by it.
• Romney can get feisty if he needs to. Nearly 10 days ago Romney was behind here in Florida because of Gingrich’s momentum coming out of South Carolina. The campaign saw the potential for his campaign to begin unraveling fast. Yet Romney came out swinging at the two Florida debates. We saw a very different Romney. He was very aggressive as he hit Newt repeatedly. Quite frankly, a little more of that would serve him well throughout the campaign
As far as the evangelical vote, Gingrich barely won it over Romney (38 percent to 36 percent). What we’re seeing is that even though evangelicals seem to prefer Gingrich and Santorum over Romney, they also want to beat Obama just like every other Republican. Therefore electability and competency matter to evangelicals, too.
Plus, there are plenty of evangelicals who will vote for Romney based on what they believe is his ability to turn the economy around. Also, don’t forget Romney comes across as wholesome with his “Leave it to Beaver” family, so that plays well with evangelicals, too.
So far in this primary season, what we’ve seen is that the evangelical vote has been a little all over the place depending on the state. There really hasn’t been one candidate who has been able to lock down a strong majority of evangelical support. Look at the numbers below:
Evangelical Numbers:
Iowa:
• Santorum 33%
• Paul 19%
• Gingrich 14%
• Perry 14%
• Romney 14%
• Bachmann 5%
New Hampshire:
• Romney 31%
• Santorum 23%
• Paul 21%
• Gingrich 13%
• Huntsman 9%
• Perry 1%
South Carolina:
• Gingrich 44%
• Santorum 22%
• Romney 21%
• Paul 13%
Florida:
• Gingrich 38%
• Romney 36%
• Santorum: 19%
• Paul 5%
These numbers suggest that evangelicals are sophisticated voters who look at a variety of factors when going to the polls. Each of these remaining candidates has strengths but they also have flaws when seen through an evangelical prism.
For example, if evangelicals saw Santorum as a guy who could really beat Obama, then his numbers would be way higher. If Gingrich had less baggage, his numbers would be even bigger. And if Romney would engage the evangelical community more rather than tepidly dance around them like they have cooties (he’s hardly done any evangelical type events), then he would have a lot more evangelical support than he does now.
So where does this race go from? This will be a good month for Romney (read: Michigan and Nevada) and also for Ron Paul (read: Nevada, Colorado). Both of these candidates did well in those states in 2008 and should do so again.
Romney’s challenge will be to ride that fine line between driving an optimistic message that focuses on the future and not letting up on Gingrich. Romney would love to pivot to a General Election strategy, but Gingrich has come back from the dead twice and Romney doesn’t want to see it again a third time.
As for Gingrich, his path is long and arduous but there is at least a path. He needs to somehow convince Santorum to get out by March 6 (good luck with that) and hope and pray that Sheldon Adelson (Gingrich’s Super PAC money friend) comes up with even more series dough.
With some southern states voting as part of the March 6 Super Tuesday, there is some hope for Gingrich. But he has to somehow make sure that the “Romney is inevitable” drumbeat doesn’t get too loud in this month of February. If it does, the money will dry up quickly.
For Rick Santorum, the strategy is simple. Hope Newt implodes and then be ready to catch the falling debris as the Romney alternative.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
So if you were Newt Gingrich why wouldn’t you stay in the race? What’s your incentive to get out?
Party unity? The GOP establishment hates him. A position in the Romney administration? Right. He’ll be standing by the phone. Unite so the GOP can defeat Barack Obama? That doesn’t make sense to do so at this point since Romney still needs another thousand delegates or so. Plus if Gingrich can somehow stay focused and relevant through March 6 (Super Tuesday), he has a decent shot at winning a bunch of delegates.
Stay in the know. Get The Brody File Weekly:
Also, don’t forget if he can convince Santorum to get out, the complexion of the race changes, as will the sheer numbers of the political GOP pie.
A couple other factors to consider: Gingrich is 68 years old and has already been Speaker of the House. What does he have to lose? Absolutely nothing.
Lastly, if Gingrich really does feel that Romney is a “Massachusetts moderate,” then just based on principle alone it makes sense to stay in the race because he truly believes he is the conservative alternative. Why concede that principled stance with such a long way to go?
Friday, January 27, 2012
After watching the debate Thursday night, I had one question: Did anyone see Newt Gingrich? Have police put out an APB on his whereabouts because he may have been on stage last night but that doesn’t mean that he was there.
The Gingrich that conservatives have come to know and love at these debates didn’t show up. He had a few small moments but you could tell that he is struggling between going on the attack and playing Mr. Nice guy. It’s like he is his own debate consultant telling himself to stay positive and not let Romney get under his skin so he doesn’t come across as angry. It’s not working.
Stay in the know. Get The Brody File Weekly:
The magic of Gingrich has been to let loose and let the chips fall where they may. But now, with so much more riding on the outcome of these debates it seems like he’s trying to pick and choose his spots rather than just being Newt. That’s what got him in the final four in the first place.
The fact that he originally chose not to go after Romney on the Swiss bank accounts issue was a moment of weakness for Gingrich. You can’t rail on Romney on the trail and then come up lame on the debate stage. Furthermore, he made Romney look even better because it gave Romney a chance to essentially say, “Man up” and don’t run and hide.
Nothing was really working for Gingrich last night. Even when he tried to play the liberal media card against Wolf Blitzer (suggesting that the moderator shouldn’t be asking questions about transparency and tax returns) Blitzer threw it back at Newt by telling him that Gingrich was the one to bring it up so it’s fair game. Good point.
Additionally, Gingrich even tried calling for a “truce” last night which suggests to me that he’d rather not talk about Romney’s finances as long as Romney stops talking about his involvement with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. For Newt that tradeoff would probably be a plus at this point.
The other thing I noticed was that Gingrich always lets Romney finish his answers which may earn him points for politeness but when you are being bombarded time after time with a kitchen sink full of opposition research you can’t afford to let him rattle each one of those items off in 30 or 60 second chunks. It begs for interrupting but Gingrich doesn’t go there. Instead, he collects his thoughts and then tends to give some sort of generic intellectual point about Romney’s criticism.
In short, Gingrich is at times morphing into FOX News analyst rather than fighting back hard against Romney. Newt wins when he fires up conservatives on the issues. That’s his strong suit and Romney can’t match him in passion and rhetoric. But Gingrich loses when he has to defend himself against the barrage of criticism coming his way and makes it even worse for himself when he doesn’t offer strong rebuttals.
These last two debates in Florida have shown us that Mitt Romney is up for the fight. His all but secure nomination has been severely challenged by Gingrich and instead of shrinking, Romney has instead shown an intense spark. In the past Romney’s debate performances were always solid but lacked oomph.
Not anymore. What we are witnessing is the “4th Quarter Romney” who is bringing his “A game” when it matters most. That should give conservatives more confidence that he’ll be better able to deal with President Obama in the fall if he makes it that far.
My sense here is we’ll see an uptick for Romney in the polls down in Florida after this debate. Gingrich can win Florida, but he’ll need major backing from evangelicals and the Tea Party to do it. However, Rick Santorum was again impressive last night. He’s establishing himself as the credible alternative to Romney or Gingrich. His best hope is that Gingrich implodes and the base stays lukewarm on Romney.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
A little post-game analysis by Brody File Executive Producer Dana Ritter:
This was not Newt's night. He's generally a rock star at debates, and even though tonight was the 19th GOP debate, (Yes, really. Is it just me or does this primary process feel like a season of American Idol? We are finally down to the ones who can really sing, and just when you thought one was the best, someone brings it hard and changes your mind?) Newt seemed a little off his game. And Mitt Romney brought his A-game.
Stay in the know. Get The Brody File Weekly:
In the past, Romney has gotten good debate grades because he rose above the other candidates and attacked President Obama instead. Tonight, he came out swinging, right at Newt Gingrich, and he didn't miss. He zinged him on immigration, on job creation, on colonizing the Moon (for real), on going state-to-state making expensive promises, while we're in a spending crisis.
At one point, Newt was given the opportunity to bring an attack on Romney in person that he had levied elsewhere, and Mr. Debate one-liner punted, saying the debate stage wasn't he place for that. For Gingrich, the debate stage has been where he wins Tony awards, but tonight, he appeared to have some stage fright, or stage reluctance. It just wasn't there for him, and it made Mitt Romney look like a successful attack dog.
That could help Romney as he goes forward because GOP voters this time around like a good debater. The debates have weeded out other candidates, and if Romney is able to continue to show he can bring his A game, that could help convince voters that he will do just that against President Obama in the general election.
Now, I can't forget the other guys, I know that. I thought Rick Santorum had some good moments when he pointed out the problems he has with Romneycare and Obamacare. He generally does a good job differentiating himself from the other candidates. But, sometimes he looks a little angry. He had been doing better at that, but tonight, he got a little angry again. At one point, Romney even said, "It's not worth getting angry over," or something like that.
And Ron Paul, well, he challenged everyone to a 25-mile bike ride in the Texas heat to prove that his ripe old age of 76 isn't overripe. Not sure how I feel about that. Perhaps it would be a little more entertaining than a 20th GOP primary debate.
The real Brody File, David Brody himself, will be up and at 'em in the very wee hours of the morning (dark and early) to share his debate insights with you. So that's all from me right now. I'm hoping David is getting some good sleep and doesn't delete too much of my meandering analysis.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
In a one-on-one interview with The Brody File, Newt Gingrich says God is in control of events and explains that he prays before major speeches and debates.
“I think I had an epiphany in that sense of Christ coming into my heart, in my 20s, and I felt born again. I think it’s a very deep part of me, and something that leads me, for example, to pray before every major speech and before every debate.”
As for God being in control of events he tells me, “It’s always God’s will. That’s a point that my wife reminds me of regularly.”
The interview was done Tuesday morning in Tampa, Fla. Watch the clip below along with the full transcription.
Mandatory Courtesy: CBN News/The Brody File
Stay in the know. Get The Brody File Weekly:
Before all you Newt haters take shots at him just remember that forgiveness is a central tenet of Christianity. Evangelical Christians had the model of forgiveness displayed when Jesus Christ entered this world. You can judge Newt if you want but you really don’t know his business with God. Plus, evangelicals understand that nobody is without sin and that true contrition is an affair of the heart. God knows our hearts. We don’t.
If you want to understand specifically why many evangelicals are flocking to Newt (excuse the pun) read my detailed analysis here.
Newt Gingrich on Jesus and Catholicism.
David Brody: A lot of evangelicals, when they have their born again experience, they talk about an epiphany. I know it wasn’t an epiphany for you. What was the conversion for you like? It was a kind of process?
Newt Gingrich: I think I had an epiphany in that sense of Christ coming into my heart, in my 20s, and I felt born again. I think it’s a very deep part of me, and something that leads me, for example, to pray before every major speech and before every debate, because I really feel it. I gradually became Catholic, and then made the decision.
And I think it was about eight or nine years of going to the Basilica, supporting Callista, being absorbed by the Mass, beginning to be fascinated with the Eucharist, and communion and the unique role it plays in the Catholic experience, and just feeling the community, if you will. It’s a remarkably absorbing community, and created a sense of fellowship, and of comfort, and of being able to relax in a way that I had never experienced before in my life.
Newt Gingrich on God’s Will:
David Brody: And God’s role in all of this? Where you have been in this presidential race, to where you are today?
Newt Gingrich: Look, it’s always God’s will. That’s a point that my wife reminds me of regularly. I’ll say, ‘We should go do X,’ and she’ll say, ‘If it’s God’s will.’ She’s very Midwestern in the sense of don’t count your chickens until they’re hatched. Like primary night in South Carolina, which looked good on paper, the polls looked good, and I stopped for a minute on the campaign bus late that afternoon and thought, you know, whatever God wants, we have to think through what it means, and how we live it out, because I don’t ask for victory, I ask for God to let me understand whatever happens. And I’ve found that that has guided me through most of my life.