The Best of Both Worlds

One area in which I suppose Mitt Romney is less hesitant to identify as a proud Mormon is when it comes to fundraising. This neat little tool lets you get maps of where the different contenders are raising money, and you can see Romney's below:

Click around on the original site and you'll see that he's clearly the only candidate who's raking in significant funds from Utah and it looks like an important source of money for him. Meanwhile, though, he's also just nabbed an endorsement from a key official at Bob Jones University and if a Mormon's good enough for BJU then why shouldn't he be good enough for the rest of the evangelical community?

Comments

http://bloggingheads.tv/video.php?id=336&cid=1932

Posted by southpaw | October 16, 2007 9:41 AM

I hate to go all Beavis and Butthead here, but I do find it rather amusing that the most fundie of 'Christian' colleges and universities has the acronym BJU.

Posted by low-tech cyclist | October 16, 2007 10:12 AM

if a Mormon's good enough for BJU then why shouldn't he be good enough for the rest of the evangelical community?

Because these are the same ignorant people who don't know that Catholics are also Christians. But seriously, Romney has the one quality that the Sociopathic Conservatives are looking for in a candidate: he's a witless dupe who will do anything to bask in the glory of being "President of The United States". Like Bush and Reagan, Romney will be a great front man for them, he'll sell his soul to them for the White House and because he knows nothing about economics or foreign policy, they can talk him into pretty much anything. His staff will be filled with people who will do underhanded, possibly illegal things and when they get caught, he has "plausible deniablity".

It would be another scam perpetrated against the American people by the unamerican, democracy hating, Neoconservatives.

Posted by The Other Brian | October 16, 2007 10:59 AM

Why don't the Nordakers like him? Do they know something we don't?

Posted by cw | October 16, 2007 11:02 AM

I stil think that Romney's chances for winning the Republican nomination are being seriously underrated. Yes, he does poorly in national polls, but he is leading in three early primaries/caucuses--Iowa, New Hampshire, and Michigan (where of course his father was governor). If he wins all three--and Thompson continues to falter--he will be in a good position to portray himself as *the* alternative to Rudy for those who think even a Mormon is better than a "baby-killer"... (The fact that Romney too was once pro-choice doesn't matter. The right-to-lifers love converts, no matter how phony their conversion.)

Posted by David T | October 16, 2007 11:11 AM

"Why don't the Nordakers like him?"

It should be perfectly obvious to even the most casual observer why the Nordakers don't like him.

One question though...

What's a Nordaker?

Posted by Njorl | October 16, 2007 11:14 AM

Considering Utah is the only state with an over 50% approval rating for Bush, I'd love to hear some of Romney's speeches in that state. Every where else he tries to distance him self from Bush (as most have except Rudy) but I'd be curious how he threads that needle in Utah.

Posted by Fred F. | October 16, 2007 11:48 AM

I hate to go all Beavis and Butthead here, but I do find it rather amusing that the most fundie of 'Christian' colleges and universities has the acronym BJU. - low tech cyclist

This thought just occured to me too. It might be very interesting to become involved with a graduate of BJU, eh?

Posted by DAS | October 16, 2007 11:58 AM

Why don't the Nordakers like him?

There's only five of them; two of them have already donated to McCain, one is the token liberal (Dennis Kucinich, $500), one of them is only four years old, and the fifth one hasn't donated to a politician since Taft.

Posted by ajay | October 16, 2007 12:11 PM

What's in Eastern lower Michigan? A Mormon splinter sect?

Posted by An Outhouse | October 16, 2007 1:11 PM

Romney grew up in southeast MI. Went to my high school.. I'm very ashamed.

Posted by me | October 16, 2007 1:14 PM

The thing with Romney is that he is probably closest to what the Republicans want on policy.

Rudy - pro Open Borders, pro-gay, questionable values and associates. Most values, other than "being strong, saving NYC then All of America on 9/11" (just ask him) don't jibe with Republicans.
McCain - Old. Pro Open Borders. McCain-Feingold. Known as a treacherous Senator like Spector, willing to backstab Republicans for personal ego reasons.
Thompson - Has the right values, but is a lobbyist and DC insider.
Huckabee - All the values and stuff the Base craves, except he went Open Borders and never put together a national organization. Great VP pick. Record of raising taxes.

What Romney is doing is doing a slow, painful courtship of Southerners. "You have nothing to fear from Mormons who share your family values." Just as JFK had a painful courtship to convince them he wasn't a soldier in the Army of Rome. His wooing is slowly working. He is winning over key religious conservatives every week as a man who lives by Their Values.
His national strategy is coherent...build up creds in early primary states to show the more people see of him, the more likely they are to vote for him.

Convince voters that Giuliani is a NYC media creation they are just waiting to tear down in scandal to help their beloved Hillary and they have a mountain of dirt waiting...and someone that says once the Supreme Court decides on any issue, anyone who believes otherwise (like on Roe) is out of luck and Rudy is a guy just waiting to appoint the next Souter or Sandra Day O'Connor.

Convince voters that Thompson is not serious, that he has no intent to give 100% of himself to the Presidency.

Convince voters that McCain is yesteryear's hope with a new Mexican accent.

Huckabee is not being hit by Romney people. Huckabee is the perfect VP. The effort by Romney, McCain, Rudy is to frame Mike Huckabee as a great VP choice..

Romney has to correct his own "too slick, slightly goofy" image. He has to show more naturalness and ease in debates, talking. He also has to recognize that he cannot be too "Club for Growth", too tax-cut crazy, too corporatist to get typecast that way and lose the moderate and independent vote.

Posted by Chris Ford | October 16, 2007 1:38 PM

A rare non-insane post by Chris Ford.

Posted by Ben Cronin | October 16, 2007 2:52 PM

What's in Eastern lower Michigan? A Mormon splinter sect?

Probably just a bunch of people who remember that Romney's dad was governor of Michigan.

Posted by guineapigfury | October 16, 2007 2:55 PM

Nordaker is what a citizen of Eastern Montana calls (or maybe used to call) a citizen of the great state of North Dakota.

Posted by cw | October 16, 2007 3:10 PM

I'm pretty astounded that Gravel only has $425 from his home state of Alaska. I mean, granted, it is Alaska, and it is Mike Gravel, but surely he should be able to do better than one dollar for every thousand residents.

Posted by Adam Villani | October 16, 2007 8:59 PM