May 4, 2011

Romney Loses One NH Supporter, Gains Two Others

  3:30 pm

Bruce Keough led Romney’s New Hampshire steering committee in 2008, but when he was asked to join Romney’s 2012 team he declined. Afterwards, he ran to Mother Jones to explain why he isn’t re-upping with Romney:

Keough says Romney’s wishy-washy political identity and inability to stake out firm, consistent positions as a candidate were the reasons for his decision to cut ties with Romney. “He struggled with that in the last campaign,” Keough explains, “and to some extent I think he’s still struggling with it.”

That news was tempered a bit by the Romney campaign’s announcement of two new supporters in New Hampshire — former House Speaker Doug Scamman and his wife, former state Rep. Stella Scamman. Both worked against Romney in 2008 as they supported Rudy Giuliani. Politico describes the two as a “power couple” in New Hampshire politics and notes that their endorsement was highly sought after, explaining that “The Scammans’s New Hampshire farm has become a regular campaign stop for Republican presidential primary candidates.”



by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

*Wives, too 😉


Matt C,

Is Keough going to work for Huntsman, Pawlenty, or Daniels?


Craig, Keough said he's leaning towards either Pawlenty or Daniels.

Craig's Purple Handbag

Earth shattering stuff that Keough said about Romney. The only folks who don't recognize those faults in Romney are his supporters who wear blinders a mile high and a mile wide.


Keough didn't get Romney a win in 2008. Funny that he ran to Mother Jones to air his grievances. Are there any other sources that say Romney wanted him back? Maybe they offered him a demotion and he got offended. He is auditioning for the other teams now.


Seems like Keough has an ethics issue. You can disagree with someone you work for but you have an obligation to act professionally. Any candidate who now picks up Keogh should question Keough future loyalty.


# Craig's Purple Handbag Says:

May 4th, 2011 at 3:43 pm

Earth shattering stuff that Keough said about Romney. The only folks who don’t recognize those faults in Romney are his supporters who wear blinders a mile high and a mile wide.


Yea right, self serving argument. Like Romney backed off of his Health Care plan in Massachutes. No? so maybe not so wishy washy.


# Matt C Says:

May 4th, 2011 at 3:38 pm

Craig, Keough said he’s leaning towards either Pawlenty or Daniels.


They would be stupid to pick him up. If he turned on Romney, he is just as likely to turn on them. His political career is over.


Mother Jones?!?

That was the gist of the first few comments over at HotAir, as well -- hardly a pro-Romney site.


I hope TPAW does not get him...going to Mother Jones is a horrible thing to do. ROMNEY is better off without him.

BlueGrass State of Mind


Has this site previously announced the endorsements in NH of Gov Romney by former Executive Councilor Ruth Griffin (Huckabee in '08), Jeb Bradley (neutral in '08) and current Executive Councilor Ray Burton (neutral in '08). If not, then the Headline should read "Romney loses 1, Picks up 5."

Also, Keough has been basically absent in NH politics for the last decade since he lost the GOP Gubernatorial primary a few years back. Other than backing businessman Bill Binnie (the most leftward of all NH GOP Senate candidates in 2010) he has spent his time working on his private business.


MOTHER JONES???? Why not just run to HuffPost to air your grievances?

Still Hurting

The large majority of politicos are mercenaries, though not necessarily unprincipled mercenaries. They have to find a new job every election cycle. Candidates routinely rehire those who performed well and pass over those who did not. That leaves the politico as something of a disgruntled former employee. The professional ones shut their mouths and move on to other campaigns. The ones that run their mouths tend to have short careers.

I'm OK with people changing horses, on either side of the employment relationship. I'm against people taking pot shots.


I agree, this guy is slimy.

Still, if the establishment is souring on Romney and looking to go with Daniels, I could see them putting him up to it.

Very similar things have been done to Governor Palin on a regular basis. Let's just say I recognize the handiwork.


Somebody tell me why the establishment would want a guy who wants to raise taxes? Don't get me wrong, Daniels is acceptable to me, but I can see why he's a no-go in the general. If you agree to raise taxes, where does Daniels actually disagree with Obama?


So which way would be "best" for the Romney detractors? Some say that he "wasn't good enough/popular enough to stick around for more than 1 term"

and others that say "look how buddy buddy he was with Ted Kennedy" (the most beloved politician in that state for decades).

Then you get TPaw and Huckabee supporters saying how they were able to "

do great" in their respective blue states w liberal state legislatures. it better to win the praise and support of the left/blue bloods? or is it good to get in - clean up as much mess as you can during a term knowing that the conservative moves that you will attempt will not be seen as acceptable to the liberal public and you will probably only have that one term to do it in?

I'm not trying to be snarky - because I think Obama had a similar view point w/ his tactics (except to the other end of the spectrum). I think he wanted to badly to get his policies in place and enact as much liberalism as he could once in office that he did it to what very possibly could be to his detriment of a one term run. Mass is bluer than blue. The country, in general, is right of center.

Just some food for thought.

Just food for thought.

BlueGrass State of Mind


That "quote" about Daniels wanting to raise taxes (agreeing w/ Obama) was debunked on this site by various commentors within minutes of it being brought up. Drop it.


In Presidential politics, loyalty is everything..... I mean, come on.... who would hire him now?

If he gets hired by one of the other candidates, then I would be suspicious that he was put up to this.


Koch is neutral, not with Mitt Romney

Koch Bros waiting for the rill dill? (spoken with an Alaskan accent)


16. Slimy? Don't you support the queen quitter?

Nuff said!


18 - I have thought of that with regard to Obama. It does seem like Democrats and Obama saw the first two years of the administration as an opportunity to force their ideas into law. It failed miserably for them. The Democrats have nearly lost all their power in Congress and Obama has terrible ratings. I hope it was worth it for them.


22. Are you saying staffers who talk about candidates behind their backs are not slimy?

Okay. Nuff said is right.



If Palin is the "rill dill", then we are in quite a pickle.


19 So one day Daniels is for a VAT and consumption tax and the next day he's not. Now who's wishy washy? I like Daniels. I think he's got some great ideas. But he's going to meet consultants who are going to tell him that he can't win if he keeps putting those ideas out there. Same thing happened to Romney. I don't blame these guys. They want to win. You can't make changes if you don't win. So if Daniels is in like we think he is, I'd watch out for more reversals and "that's not what I meant" when asked about his previous comments. Its easy to appear neutral when you're not running. Once you put you're hat in, you'd better be prepared. Romney, for all his flaws, has been in the game for 5 years. He knows what he is doing. Let's see how Daniels deals with the limelight.


21 sort of misleading headline. The story says that Koch is waiting to choose who to endorse. Your headline implies he opposes Mitt, which is untrue. Koch supported Mitt in 2008. The big money knows Romney is the guy who is going to return us to the White House and usher in pro-growth policies.

BlueGrass State of Mind


This is what is most pressing in this country right now? Screw the unemployed. Screw those getting their homes foreclosed. Screw those paying $4 for gas. Screw our kids and grandkids and the debt we are piling up for them.

We need a College Football Playoff, damn it, and Uncle Sam will make you do it!


It's all Romney this cycle. No real contenders.




27. I didn't write the headline

But why wait if Mittens is his man?

Because he's not.


The fact is most of the big money is on the sidelines yet.

It's still early and too early to think about 'front runner' status.

The campaign hasn't started yet. Once it does everything will change.




Yes because by then, Palin will announce she's not running. So her supporters will have to find someone else.


29.Liz Says:

May 4th, 2011 at 6:07 pm

"It’s all Romney this cycle. No real contenders."

Hey, Liz :)

You said that exact same thing in Iowa '08!

At least you're consistent. Consistently wrong.



Well, technically, Huck isn't a contender yet.



Rasmussen might be right. It won't be one of the big 4. It won't be Trump either. It could be down to Pawlenty and Daniels.



From a pretty good pollster..

UNH/WMUR New Hampshire 2012 Republican Nomination Survey

•Mitt Romney 36% (40%)

•Donald Trump 11% (3%)

•Rudy Giuliani 7% (10%)

•Mike Huckabee 6% (7%) Woo-hoo! Huck leads all Social Conservatives again! 😉

•Sarah Palin 4% (6%)

•Michele Bachmann 4%

•Tim Pawlenty 2% (7%)

•Haley Barbour 1% (1%)

•Rick Santorum 0% (1%)


Craig, Im not accurate either so I could be awesome. I just hope Bachmann is behind TPAW or else I'm going to throw a fit.


Which Craig are you? I'm confused.


Smack is now reaching for the JACK DANIELS!!!.....Suffolk better have some decent numbers for TPAW...


I don't think any GOP candidate is safe. Mike Huckabee winning Arkansas might be the only thing safe now.

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

Tweets by @Racefour

Search R4'16