#DNCEconomy: Romney's wrong economic answers

Given Mitt Romney's business record as an outsourcer and tax avoider, and his desire to continue the failed economic policies of George W. Bush, President Obama should be 20 points ahead in the polls right now, not struggling to stay even.

By Chip Somodevilla, Getty Images

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

By Chip Somodevilla, Getty Images

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

At a time when the wealthiest people are doing phenomenally well, Romney's plan to provide more tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires is dead wrong.

At a time when we have lost more than 56,000 factories and 5.3 million decent-paying manufacturing jobs since 2000, Romney is wrong in pushing for more unfettered free trade, which will make it easier for large corporations to throw American workers out on the street and ship American jobs to China and other low-wage countries.

At a time when millions of Americans continue to struggle through the horrendous recession caused by the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior on Wall Street, Romney is wrong to believe we need more deregulation of too-big-to fail financial institutions.

In order to win support from the American middle class, it is absolutely imperative that the president provide a strong agenda that speaks to their needs, and that makes clear he will fight to win those proposals against the right-wing extremists who now control the Republican Party. Here is some of what the president should advocate:

1) The president must make it clear to the American people that he will not cut Social Security. Social Security has not added one penny to the deficit because it is funded by the payroll tax. Social Security has a $2.7 trillion surplus and can pay out every benefit owed to every eligible American for the next 21 years.

2) Obama must tell the American people that he is not going to balance the budget on the backs of the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. The deficit was largely caused by Bush's two unpaid-for wars, tax breaks for the rich and the Wall Street-caused recession. The president must reduce the deficit by asking the wealthiest people in this country to start paying their fair share of taxes, by ending enormous corporate tax loopholes and by taking a hard look at wasteful military spending.

3) Given that real unemployment is 15%, the president must propose a major jobs program to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure (roads, bridges, water systems, waste water plants, airports and railroads) and, in the process, create millions of good paying jobs.

4) The president must accelerate his efforts to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel and into energy efficiency and such sustainable energy sources as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass. This would not only address the planetary crisis of global warming but also create jobs.

5) The president must call for real Wall Street reform that ends the largest unregulated gambling casino in the history of the world, and that demands Wall Street invest in the productive economy.

Columns

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes a variety of opinions from outside writers. On political and policy matters, we publish opinions from across the political spectrum.

Roughly half of our columns come from our Board of Contributors, a group whose interests range from education to religion to sports to the economy. Their charge is to chronicle American culture by telling the stories, large and small, that collectively make us what we are.

We also publish weekly columns by Al Neuharth, USA TODAY's founder, and DeWayne Wickham, who writes primarily on matters of race but on other subjects as well. That leaves plenty of room for other views from across the nation by well-known and lesser-known names alike.

6) The president must support a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, the disastrous U.S. Supreme Court decision that allows corporations and billionaires to buy politicians.

Bernie Sanders is the independent senator from Vermont.

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

Romney's Fund-Raising Outpaces Obama's Again in July

The fund-raising machine behind Mitt Romney and the Republican Party once again bested President Obama’s effort last month, raising $25 million more in July than the president and his Democratic allies did.

Mr. Romney and the Republican National Committee raised $101.3 million in July, his campaign announced Monday, as Republican donors rallied behind their presumptive nominee with the national convention only a few weeks away.

The president’s campaign announced on Twitter on Monday morning that his July fund-raising topped out at about $75 million. “Every bit helps,” the campaign tweeted, noting that 98 percent of the contributions were under $250.

Mr. Obama’s advisers have all but conceded the money race to Mr. Romney. Fund-raising e-mails from the campaign have taken a more urgent tone over the summer, repeatedly warning supporters of the financial advantage that the Republicans will hold going into the final weeks of the presidential campaign.

More detailed information about the July fund-raising has not yet been released by the two candidates. All campaigns are required to report their fund-raising to the Federal Election Commission by Aug. 20.

But the Republican figure keeps Mr. Romney and his party on pace to bring in $800 million for the cycle, the target set by Mr. Romney’s team in April. Roughly a quarter of the Republicans’ haul, $25.7 million, came in donations of under $250, as Mr. Romney worked to increase his appeal among small donors.

The campaign, the Republican National Committee, and a joint fund established by the Republicans to raise presidential campaign cash ended July with $185.9 million in cash on hand. They did not disclose what proportion of the money would end up in Mr. Romney’s campaign coffers, which can only accept $5,000 from each donor every election cycle, and how much to the R.N.C., which can accept 10 times that amount from each donor.

The strong fund-raising puts renewed pressure on President Obama to bring in more cash and underscores the near-certainty that Mr. Romney will remain financially competitive with an incumbent whose fund-raising prowess has long been a hallmark.

While Mr. Obama steadily raised more than Mr. Romney in 2011 and early this year, he has also spent far more, amassing a campaign tab of more than $400 million with the Democratic National Committee through the end of June.

Follow Michael D. Shear on Twitter at @shearm.

View the original article here

Ann Romney's R�sum� Includes More Than 'Stay-at-Home Mother'

Has Ann Romney ever worked?

Even as Republicans and Democrats argue over whether stay-at-home mothers should feel insulted by a Democratic strategist’s  comment that Mrs. Romney “never worked a day in her life,” a review of the record shows that Mrs. Romney has, in fact, worked outside the home at various stages of her life.

It’s not clear if her labor was paid or not; whatever pay she might have earned was certainly not enough to sustain a large family. But like most women who identify mainly as mothers, her life cannot be summed up in a single phrase.

Growing up in Michigan, Mrs. Romney pitched in at her father’s company, Jered Industries in Troy, as she has recalled on the campaign trail in February. The firm manufactured heavy machinery for the maritime industry.

As an adult, Mrs. Romney turned her talents as a chef into something of a small business in Massachusetts. She and a friend held cooking classes for local foodies, according to her son Josh, who described the sessions in a 2007 interview with The New York Times.

Beyond that, Mrs. Romney has held a number of posts with Boston-area charities and advocacy groups. She was, for example, a director at Best Friends, an organization focused on inner-city girls, and a volunteer instructor at the Mother Caroline Academy, a multicultural middle school in Boston.

Those stints, however intensive, time-consuming or lucrative, appear to belie the sweeping declaration by the Democratic operative, Hilary Rosen, that Mrs. Romney “never worked a day in her life.”

Ms. Rosen’s remarks on Wednesday night have touched off a lively debate over what qualifies as women’s work, especially as the presidential campaigns zero in on female voters.

A spokeswoman for Mitt Romney’s campaign, Andrea Saul, said: “The issue is not whether Ann has spent time working outside the home. Of course she did other things besides raise a family, including volunteering her time for causes that she cares about.”

“The real issue,” Ms. Saul said, “is that women make different choices regarding family and careers, and they should be supported no matter what decision they make.”

View the original article here

Religion, Race and Romney's Road Ahead

Beyond our post yesterday on whether Newt Gingrich is siphoning votes from Rick Santorum, three other fascinating areas emerge from the exit polls and other recent survey data on the Republican presidential contest. The subjects: Religion, race, and Mitt Romney's apparent inability to light a fire.

First, religion. With the Alabama and Mississippi primaries approaching, the question will be starker than ever: What is it with Romney and evangelicals?

The answer is twofold: First, exit poll results demonstrate that the belief structure of many evangelical voters leads them away from Romney, a Mormon. At the same time, the data are variable enough to suggest that this doesn't reflect flat rejection of Romney by evangelicals - rather, a preference to look elsewhere, given another option.

Generally, it's a clear problem for Romney. He lost evangelicals by 19 points in Tennessee, 18 points in Michigan, 18 points in Iowa and 17 points in Ohio, while winning non-evangelicals in those states by 18, 18, 12 and 15 points, respectively. In Georgia and South Carolina, Romney lost evangelicals by 32 and 22 points, while running about evenly among non-evangelicals. In Florida and Arizona, he ran evenly with his closest competitor among evangelicals, while winning non-evangelicals by 27- and 36-point margins.

Combining results across all states in which we've had exit or entrance polls, Romney's done 19 points better among non-evangelical than among evangelical voters. It's among the few most consistent gaps in his support profile across the 2012 contest to date.

A related result underscores the reason: Evangelicals are vastly more likely than other GOP voters to say it's very important to them to support a candidate who shares their religious beliefs. In the eight states where that question has been asked, Romney's won a mere 19 percent of these strongly religion- focused voters.

This does not bode well for Romney in Alabama and Mississippi; evangelicals accounted for 77 and 69 percent of voters in the 2008 GOP primaries there, among their highest proportions anywhere. And with Santorum and Gingrich on the ballot this year, they do have elsewhere to go.

But the last point is a key one, because where evangelicals don't feel they have elsewhere to go, they've been more accepting of Romney. As I noted yesterday, he won 62 percent of evangelicals in Virginia, where the only other choice was Ron Paul; it's the first and only state where he actually did better among evangelicals than among non-evangelicals. In our ABC/Post pre-election polling, moreover, few evangelicals have ruled out Romney entirely, and many instead cite him as their second choice.

If Romney prevails for the nomination, then, the likely question won't be whether he wins white evangelicals against Barack Obama - but the extent to which he can inspire them to turn out.

RACE - Then there's race. The sentence above pivots from "evangelicals" in a discussion of the GOP primaries to "white evangelicals" in a discussion of the general election. That's because, in the Republican primaries, it's almost redundant. In states for which we have exit and entrance polls, 91 percent of Republican voters to date have been white. If we exclude two states, Florida and Arizona, that goes to 96 percent.

While that's typical for Republican primaries, it runs contrary to the increasing racial diversity of the nation's electorate more broadly. The share of whites in general election for president has declined from 90 percent in the 1976 to 74 percent in 2008. Obama lost whites by 12 points in 2008, about the average for a Democratic candidate; he won the election on the strength - and increasing size - of the minority vote.

It's a point worth considering, not just for the 2012 general election but for the future of the Republican Party beyond. If minorities by and large are not participating in the party's primaries, will they tune into its candidates later? Given the country's demographic trends, it increasingly matters.

AND THE FIRE - Finally there's the related question of Romney's ability to light a fire under his voters. His campaign's appropriately been described as lackluster. One interesting example is Romney-friendly Vermont. Independent voters surged to the polls there Tuesday, increasing their share of the state's GOP primary electorate from 23 percent in 2008 to 40 percent this year.

But they did not turn out for Romney: Seven in 10 Vermont independents showed up to vote for someone else. And in general elections, independents customarily are the quintessential swing voters.

Romney campaign officials pushed back this week by pointing out that his favorability rating in national polls is no worse than Bill Clinton's was at this time in 1992 - yet Clinton turned those views around sufficiently to win his party's nomination, and then two terms in office.

It's true enough - but with a cherry-picking alert. In ABC/Post data, Clinton at this point in 1992 was seen favorably by 39 percent of Americans; Romney's currently seen favorably by 35 percent, about the same. But one thing to note is that March 1992 was a month and a half after the first controversy over Clinton's sexual escapades had erupted, the Gennifer Flowers affair. Romney's favorability is 4 points lower without any such scandal. Romney's unfavorable rating, moreover, is 14 points higher than Clinton's was then, scandal and all.

The number of Americans who see Romney favorably is lower than it was for any leading presidential candidate at about this point (in winter or springtime ABC/Post data) in 2008, 2004, 2000, 1996 and 1992 alike. Of all those candidates - both George Bushes, Clinton, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, John McCain and Obama - only one was underwater in approval, as Romney is now. That was Hillary Clinton, who ultimately did not prevail.

This in no way predicts Romney's future. But it means he's got his work cut out for him, for sure. The question: Whether the turnaround skills he learned in business will work in politics, too.

Also Read

View the original article here

Gingrich steals Romney's cloak of electability as president (Reuters)

COLUMBIA, South Carolina (Reuters) – Newt Gingrich didn't just beat Mitt Romney in Saturday's South Carolina primary, the former House speaker kicked away one of the main pillars of his rival's election campaign.

Exit polling data shows Gingrich convinced voters he would be the toughest Republican opponent against President Barack Obama in the November general election.

Electability - Republican campaign-speak for a candidate's ability to beat Obama - had been one of Romney's top selling points until Saturday.

Conventional wisdom was that the former Massachusetts governor's emphasis on jobs and the economy and his perceived appeal to independents would help him against Gingrich, who is often seen as erratic and divisive.

But Gingrich's combative style in debates resonated with voters keen for a heavyweight debater to take on Obama, who is grudgingly respected by Republicans as a formidable campaigner.

This may also be helping Gingrich's message on the economy gain traction, exit polling data showed.

South Carolina's Republicans rated the ability to beat Obama as a candidate's most important quality, an exit poll on CNN showed.

Forty-five percent of voters said that was the main attribute they sought in a nominee. Of that group, 51 percent voted for Gingrich compared to 37 percent for Romney.

Twenty-one percent of South Carolina voters said the quality that mattered most to them in their candidate was that he had the right experience.

"It is electability, and that is measured in your ability to effectively debate and prosecute your case against Obama," said Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak.

Exit polls also showed that for 63 percent of South Carolina voters the most important issue was the economy. Gingrich won this group by a margin of eight percentage points over Romney.

The attraction of Gingrich as an anti-Obama candidate may be the factor that increased his ratings on other issues like the economy, Mackowiak said.

Attacks on Obama in recent weeks, including dubbing him "a foodstamp president," endeared Gingrich to voters in a state with unemployment of almost 10 percent.

OLD TIMER WITH EXPERIENCE

"He is an old timer with a lot of political experience. He's the only one who can beat Obama," said Jim Walters, a retired marine owner in the town of Aiken.

Gingrich slammed Obama as "truly a danger to the country" in his South Carolina victory speech and promised to bring down Obama in a series of long debates.

A master of the sharp turn of phrase who talks in big broad sweeps, the former House speaker was the clear star of the more than 20 Republican debates in recent months.

He left Romney floundering, particularly during two televised contests in South Carolina this week where the millionaire former executive stumbled over questions about his personal finances.

Republican voters in South Carolina, a conservative state with a taste for rough and tumble politics, lapped it up.

"I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that people really want to see Newt debate Obama," Mackowiak said.

"It reminds me of gladiators. You see an amazing gladiator have a string of victories in the middle of the Coliseum so you really want to see him go up against the biggest, baddest gladiator there is."

In a sign that Gingrich's well-documented marital infidelities might have created a problem with female voters, exit polls showed Gingrich held an advantage over Romney of 16 points among men but only 9 points among women.

(Editing by David Storey)

View the original article here

Romney's $20 Million IRA: A Lousy Investment? (Time.com)

Mitt Romney may have made the classic IRA mistake: holding low-tax investments inside a tax-favored account. His IRA strategy isn't clear, of course. Romney continues to guard his personal finances. But details are trickling out, and even if it turns out that Romney's traditional IRA is built right for him, the securities he holds in it serve as a valuable reminder that not all investments belong in a tax-favored account.

Romney's IRA is valued at between $20.7 million and $101.6 million, according to The Wall Street Journal. That's an extremely wide range that the Journal found in Romney's latest financial disclosure report, filed in August. His IRA produced income between $1.5 million and $8.5 million last year.(MORE: Cash Back: Banks Battle for Your Rollover IRA.)

So he's not like most of us, financially speaking. But he is exactly like us in that he has limits on how much he can contribute to an IRA, or to a 401(k) plan that can be rolled into an IRA. Given those limits it's remarkable that he has been able to amass such wealth in a tax-deferred account.

For most of his years at Bain Capital, the annual IRA pre-tax contribution was capped at $2,000 and the annual 401(k) pre-tax contribution, including employer match, was capped at $30,000. Other limits are in force today: $5,000 for an IRA ($6,000 if you over 50); $16,500 for a 401(k) ($22,000 if you are over 50).

Assuming Romney was maxing out pre-tax contributions, as should anyone who can afford to do so, he still would have needed extraordinary returns within his tax-deferred accounts to build such a big balance. He must have been investing in stocks and other high-growth potential vehicles, which produce a capital gain.

Here's the rub: The max capital gains tax is just 15%. That's what Romney would pay in federal tax upon selling his stocks from a taxable account. Yet when Romney begins taking distributions from his IRA, as he must in his 71st year, the money will be subject to federal income tax at rates of up to 35%. That tax-rate disparity is why it often makes sense to hold stocks in a taxable account and things like real estate investment trusts, rental properties, bonds and other income-generating investments in an IRA or 401(k). This is especially true for the wealthy, like Romney, whose net worth is about $250 million. Rich people have ample resources to max out tax-deferred vehicles with bonds and hold their stocks in a taxable account -- all while maintaining a desired asset allocation of, say, 60% stocks and 40% bonds.(MORE: More Fees, Fewer Branches as Banks Cope With Lower Profits.)

This doesn't necessarily work with limited resources. If you only save in a 401(k) and must stretch to get the full company match, you're probably better off with a mix of stocks and bonds in that account. Stocks also make sense in a tax-deferred account with at least 20 years before distributions begin, according a study by T. Rowe Price. And holding stocks in your IRA won't hurt if your income tax rate will shrink when you begin to take distributions.

But, in general, it makes sense to add low-tax investments like stocks (even dividends get taxed at a max 15%) to a taxable account and income-generating investments to a tax-deferred account -- especially with fewer than 10 years to retirement. A presidential candidate probably knows that. But thanks, Mitt, for the reminder.

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

See the Cartoons of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:

View the original article here

GOP rivals turn Romney's jobs record against him (AP)

By KASIE HUNT and CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Kasie Hunt And Charles Babington, Associated Press – Mon Jan 9, 10:42 pm ET

NASHUA, N.H. – Mitt Romney's Republican rivals accused him Monday of exaggerating his successes and coldly laying off thousands of workers while heading a profitable venture capital firm, an effort to turn the presidential front-runner's biggest asset into a liability.

The heightened focus on the firm Bain Capital threatens to slow Romney's cruise-control campaign because it goes to the heart of his No. 1 appeal to voters: the claim that he knows far more than President Barack Obama about creating jobs.

Romney's takeover-and-restructuring firm "apparently looted the companies, left people unemployed and walked off with millions of dollars," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said on NBC's "Today" show. A group friendly to Gingrich is preparing to air TV ads of laid-off workers denouncing Romney.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry joined in. He cited South Carolina companies that Bain bought and downsized, and he practically dared Romney to ask for voters' support there in the name of easing economic pain. "He caused it," Perry said in Anderson, S.C.

Romney points to thousands of jobs created at companies that Bain bought, invested in or restructured. But he struck a discordant note Monday, just as attention to the Bain jobs history was spiking.

Speaking of insurance options before a New Hampshire audience, Romney said, "I like being able to fire people who provide services to me."

He remained favored to win Tuesday's New Hampshire primary. But his rivals might improve their hopes of halting his momentum in South Carolina's Jan. 21 primary if they can persuade voters that his jobs legacy is not what he claims.

Thanks to millions of dollars from a Las Vegas casino owner who supports Gingrich, TV ads in South Carolina will try to do just that. Like many attack ads they are emotional, one-sided and not subtle. They show angry victims of layoffs from Bain-controlled companies, according to excerpts shown to reporters.

"We had to load up the U-Haul because we done lost our home," a woman says.

On the campaign trail, Romney rarely mentions his four years as governor unless asked. But he constantly touts his time in the private sector, asking voters to trust his instincts and experience in creating jobs.

The claims rely on Romney's career at Bain, a Boston-based private equity firm that poured investors' money, and Bain executives' expertise, into more than 100 companies in the 1980s and `90s. Some of the companies thrived and expanded. Some took on unsustainable debt and went bankrupt. Some became leaner or were broken into various parts, shedding jobs and improving profits.

In a recent debate, Romney repeated his claim that the Bain-run companies netted a total increase of 100,000 jobs.

Studies by The Associated Press and other news organizations conclude that the claim doesn't withstand scrutiny. That alone, however, hardly suggests Romney was an unsuccessful business executive. He became wealthy, a hero to many entrepreneurs, and the leader of the much-praised 2002 Winter Olympics.

The 100,000 jobs claim comes from activities at only three companies, all of them successes: Staples, Domino's and Sports Authority. However, it counts many jobs that were created after Romney left Bain in 1999. And it ignores job losses at many other firms that Bain invested in or took over.

The Wall Street Journal, which examined 77 businesses that Bain invested in during Romney's tenure, concluded Monday that the record is mixed. Twenty-two percent of the companies closed down or filed for bankruptcy reorganization within eight years, "sometimes with substantial job losses," the Journal reported.

"Bain produced stellar returns for its investors," the paper reported. But 70 percent of the profits came from 10 deals.

A separate AP analysis found that at least 4,000 workers lost their jobs at 45 companies bought by Bain between 1984 and 1994, according to company reports, news releases and news coverage. The tally probably is higher, because it does not include other jobs lost in bankruptcies and other store and factory closings.

Like any venture capital company, Bain's main purpose was to generate profits for investors, not to create jobs. So it is easy for political campaigns to find dazzling success stories and heartbreaking plant closures in the company's history.

A new 28-minute film, "King of Bain," portrays Romney as a profit-driven predator. A pro-Gingrich super PAC bought the film and plans to use excerpts for the attack ads in South Carolina. The group says it will post the entire film online.

Gingrich's struggling campaign has been helped by $5 million given to the super PAC by casino owner Sheldon Adelson.

Obama's campaign aides have long considered the Bain record to be Romney's weakest spot, more damaging than his much-discussed flips on abortion and other issues.

Romney told reporters Monday in New Hampshire that the attacks from Gingrich and Perry surprised him.

"Free enterprise will be on trial" in the 2012 election, Romney said. "I thought it was going to come from the president, from the Democrats, from the left. But instead it's coming from Speaker Gingrich and apparently others, and that's just part of the process. I'm not worried about that."

Romney's record at Bain has both helped and hurt his political career for nearly two decades. Bain was a pioneer in the often lucrative practice of "leveraged buyouts," which involve heavy borrowing against the assets of a just-purchased company, and sometimes aggressive restructuring. Romney's role there is generally lauded in corporate circles.

But in his unsuccessful 1994 Senate bid, Democrats ran ads featuring a worker who lost his job after Bain bought and restructured American Pad & Paper.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the deal generated $102 million in investment gains. But Ampad filed for bankruptcy protection in 2000.

___

Babington reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Stephen Braun in Washington and Brian Bakst in South Carolina contributed to this report.

View the original article here

Mitt Romney's rivals pile on the pejoratives (AP)

MANCHESTER, N.H. – Timid, an unreliable conservative, a defender of the status quo. Rivals of Republican front-runner Mitt Romney can't find too many bad things to say about the former Massachusetts governor as they try to put the brakes on his steamrolling campaign.

Romney had harsh words of his own, but for Democratic President Barack Obama, whom he called a "crony capitalist" and "a job killer."

Romney was heavily favored to win Tuesday's New Hampshire primary, so much so that he was campaigning for a second day in South Carolina, where voters weren't due to cast primary ballots for two weeks. He was appearing Friday with South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and Sen. John McCain, the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, two local favorites who have urged conservatives to support Romney as the GOP's nominee.

Rick Santorum, who pulled within a handful of votes to place just behind Romney in Iowa's caucuses, was likely to find a welcome audience among South Carolina conservatives and so remained in New Hampshire to try to maintain the momentum he earned from Iowa. Jon Huntsman, who bypassed Iowa to bet his campaign on a good finish in New Hampshire, was showing off an endorsement by The Boston Globe, Romney's hometown paper.

"Don't settle for less than America needs," Santorum asked those expected to vote in New Hampshire's first-in-the nation primary. Without saying so Thursday, he and the other candidates appeared to share a common objective — hold down Romney's vote totals in New Hampshire, then knock him off stride in the first Southern primary of the year.

Romney benefited handsomely from having several rivals split the vote in Iowa, where his winner's share was roughly 25 percent.

"Gradually you are going to see we have a difference of opinion about which will be the last conservative standing," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told reporters Thursday as he campaigned in New Hampshire. "But I think you'll eventually come down to one conservative and Governor Romney and he'll continue to get 25 percent."

Also vying to emerge as Romney's chief rival were Texans Ron Paul and Rick Perry.

"We can't afford to have a status quo president," Huntsman said in Durham, N.H. "We can't afford to have a coronation for president."

Huntsman made hay out of winning the Globe's endorsement. It was the second time Massachusetts' largest newspaper had snubbed Romney ahead of the New Hampshire primary.

Gingrich unveiled a new television commercial aimed at voters in New Hampshire and South Carolina that cited one review of Romney's jobs program as timid and nearly identical in part to the president's.

"Timid won't create jobs. And timid certainly won't defeat Barack Obama," the ad said.

Ironically, in a year in which polls show the economy is overwhelmingly the top issue for voters, the first two contests are in states with low joblessness — 5.7 percent in Iowa and 5.4 percent in New Hampshire.

That all changes a week later.

South Carolina's unemployment was 9.9 percent in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, worse than 41 other states and more than a full percentage point higher than the national average.

Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator, managed to criticize Romney and most of the other Republicans in the race in the space of a few sentences.

"I've never been for government-run health care," he said in a swipe at both Romney and Gingrich. "I'm not for no regulation, I'm not a libertarian," he added, a jab at Paul.

Yet he also fielded pointed questions from his audiences — something that he said happened regularly in Iowa, when he campaigned with little or no media coverage for months.

In Tilton he was pressed for his views on gun control, given his endorsement in an earlier campaign for former Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, who favored restrictions. Santorum responded that he is committed to the rights of gun owners.

Later, in an appearance before college students in Concord, he was asked about his opposition to same-sex marriage, which is legal in New Hampshire. "So anyone can marry anyone else?" Santorum said, swiftly turning the conversation to polygamy. "So anyone can marry several people?"

The crowd objected and tried to talk over him.

"Stop. This is not participatory. We're not going to do this. I'm going to ask the question," Santorum said, growing testy.

Santorum's aides say he had raised $2 million on the strength of his Iowa showing. The campaign sought to show momentum by announcing the support of a New Hampshire tea party leader and Catholicvote.org, an online organization, as well as another state senator and the chair of the conservative think tank Cornerstone.

Gingrich sought to set a high bar for Romney. "It's probably one of his three best states, but we'll see whether he gets a majority here," he said.

In the ebb and flow of the campaign, one-time national front-runner Gingrich was hoping to reverse a slide that landed him in fourth place in Iowa.

Paul was absent, after a third-place finish in Iowa. He is scheduled to arrive in New Hampshire on Friday, in time to campaign and participate in a pair of weekend debates.

Perry, who finished fifth in Iowa, is bypassing New Hampshire to try and resurrect his chances in South Carolina. Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann dropped out after a last-place showing in Iowa.

___

Associated Press writers Brian Bakst in St. Paul, Minn.; Philip Elliott, Kasie Hunt, Shannon McCaffrey and Holly Ramer in New Hampshire; Jim Davenport in Columbia, S.C.; Beth Fouhy in New York; and David Espo in Washington contributed to this report.

View the original article here

Analysis: Romney's play-it-safe strategy at risk (Reuters)

BOSTON (Reuters) – Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is running a disciplined campaign focused on slamming President Barack Obama and promoting his own skills, but pressure could mount for a more aggressive approach as his poll numbers worsen.

This week a trio of opinion surveys showed Romney trailing Texas Governor Rick Perry, who jumped into the 2012 race less than two weeks ago and generated a blaze of mostly favorable publicity.

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and venture capitalist, has been the nominal front-runner among Republicans so far, partly reflecting his name recognition after finishing second to John McCain in his 2008 run.

Romney's second White House run, launched in June, has been designed around almost daily attacks on Obama. His campaign appearances have been relatively scarce and balanced by a heavy fund-raising schedule.

"We've stayed focused on talking to people about why Governor Romney is the best alternative to President Obama on the most important issue facing our country: jobs and the economy. That's what this race will be about," said Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul.

The Romney campaign issues regular videos on the theme "Obama Isn't Working," which highlights high unemployment. It mocked the president's recent bus trip through the Midwest as a "Magical Misery Tour," complete with tie-dye T-shirts available for a $30 campaign pledge.

Romney has led most polls among the Republican challengers this year, but with numbers well below levels that create a sense of inevitability.

Both Gallup and Public Policy Polling on Wednesday issued national surveys of likely Republican primary voters that showed Rick Perry holding a sizable lead.

"So far he (Romney) has really played it safe. I really think that strategy can't continue with Rick Perry in the race," said Krystal Ball, a Democratic strategist and former Congressional contender in Virginia.

"If Romney is going to stay in the game, he has to take more risks."

TOO EARLY FOR PANIC?

Political scientist Charles Franklin said it was too early for Romney to panic about Perry, but his campaign needs to stay on its toes.

Romney has been polite but distant in talking about Perry. In New Hampshire, this week he termed the Texan "a very effective candidate ... maybe when the field narrows down to two or three we'll spend more time talking about each other."

"So far, the Romney strategy to not be reactive to the 'flavor of the week' is smart. But it's only in hindsight when we know if someone was a flash in the pan or not," said Franklin, a professor at the University of Wisconsin.

Indeed, the 2012 Romney campaign has been shaped by a different dynamic from the wide-open 2008 race: running against an incumbent with low approval ratings who has left many of his previous supporters disappointed.

His strategists believe voters will respond positively to Romney's business pedigree as the polar opposite of Obama.

As the leading moderate among Republican contenders, Romney also might hope that his opponents simply beat each other up.

"My sense is that Romney's strategy is based on the assumption that Bachmann, Perry and others, even Rick Santorum, will fight it out among themselves," said Donna Robinson Divine, professor of government at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts.

"Then, Romney will be able to claim that he is focusing on the real issue -- capturing the White House. It has been a sound strategy. Whether he has to change it at this point is unclear."

Divine said the danger is that Romney's campaign could lose control of the message; this week's pro-Perry opinion polls could be the start of such a trend.

The Gallup survey had Perry with 29 percent support among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. Romney was at 17 percent, down 6 points from a month ago, with Texas Congressman Ron Paul at 13 percent and Bachmann at 10 percent.

"The polls create a certain narrative that could force Romney to change tactics," said Divine.

As voting in the 2012 primaries draws closer, Romney's campaign might need to acknowledge a shift in the electorate with a sharper tone, said Ball.

In polling, Romney does better among independent leaning Republicans and moderates, but they don't typically vote in big numbers in primaries," she said.

Even compared with 2008, Republican voters are more conservative, largely because of the emergence of the Tea Party that was so influential in the 2010 mid-term elections and in the recent fractious debate over raising the U.S. debt limit.

"I think Mitt Romney really has to do some soul searching about what the Republican party is. at this point in time," Ball said. "The Republicans are looking for someone to get aggressive in attacking Obama."

Ultimately, though, strategists think Romney, who has a large campaign funding warchest, will be ready for hand-to-hand combat if he needs to.

"I suspect if he sees Perry approaching some kind of tipping point, Romney will engage him," said Divine.

(Additional reporting by Jason McLure; editing by Christopher Wilson)

View the original article here