Sunday, November 18, 2007

MITT ROMNEY

The Anti-Romney Calls - Does the Cost Point To a Suspect?

Suspects in the mystery of who was behind the anti-Romney push polling/"message research" calls are like rear ends - everybody's got one. What nobody has, until the New Hampshire Attorney General starts spitting out subpeonas like a Pez dispenser, is evidence.

Erick Erickson suspects a well-meaning friend of Romney, acting independent of his preferred candidate. Soren Dayton notes that Western Wats has worked with some folks in Romney's circles before. Then again, Western Wats had worked for the Tarrance Group, which has done work for Giuliani. Then again, if you wanted to frame a rival, you would seek out a firm that had done work for your rival before...

My old campaign source, Middle Cheese, who's now with the Romney camp (and up a few more slices from his previous rank, but we'll keep the nickname because we're conservatives, and we like tradition) offers his two cents:

Fred Thompson's Communications Director blasted the anti-Romney "push-polling" in New Hampshire and Iowa as "robo-dialing bigotry." But my sources on the Romney campaign said that the calls were conducted "live" (by people), not by recorded prompts.  Robo-calls probably run about a nickel a call.  The live call costs are much higher, depending on the length of the call.  They probably average 35 to 50 cents a call.  The robo-calls are cheap, and could be paid for by a few renegade former Brownback supporters who hate Mormons.  By contrast, depending on the volume of calls, live push poll interviews can get pricey — and only affordable by the other campaigns or 527 groups flush with cash.  To date, the volume of calls in Iowa has been low— so its hard to tell if the renegades or the campaigns and their supporters running 527 groups are behind them. The McCain, Thompson, and Guiliani camps vehemently deny any responsiblity for these recent push polls, and for now, they are probably telling the truth.

First, it's both Iowa and New Hampshire, no? So that would boost the cost even higher, and make the likelihood of a bunch of renegade supporters of anybody less likely. On the other hand, I find a hard time buying the idea that any campaign would consider playing this card worth the risks. If and when the New Hampshire Attorney General names someone, I suspect we'll find somebody with deep pockets, a relatively new desire to play in the political game, and little concern about long-term relationships in the GOP.

11/18 12:22 PMShare