Now that I’ve recovered somewhat from sleep deprivation and finally feel comfortable with the overwhelming environment of CPAC – with its multiple events and appearances by conservative leaders – I’m feeling I can relax, sit down, and focus on some blogging. Unfortunately, I’ve got a whole day’s worth to catch up, while juggling all of today’s events.

For a newcomer, having various politicians constantly present throughout the day is exhilarating. The day began with Jim DeMint introducing Marco Rubio. After Rubio’s speech, DeMint also gave follow-up comments. I was greatly anticipating hearing Rubio but was detained in the long line to obtain credentials. I’ve heard that his speech was great. I certainly enjoyed Demint’s follow-up comments. DeMint clarified his controversial statement (which he took a lot of fire for): “I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don’t have a set of beliefs.” DeMint stated that he would rather have 30 Marco Rubios than 60 Arlen Specters.

A short while later, I recognized Mike Lee (from my home county) who is running against Bob Bennett (R-Utah) for his senate seat. I was eager to see someone from my home state, so I introduced myself and chatted for a bit with Lee and two of his staff. While I was still pondering the oddity of seeing someone from back home, I walked into the hall and saw Utah Rep. Rob Bishop (1st) being interviewed by Moe Lane of RedState. I waited. After his interview, I introduced myself and we talked as he and a staffer found their way back to the main floor. Bishop mentioned that Utah should be getting a 4th seat in the House soon. I asked him about the process of drawing the boundary lines for the districts and about what we might do to win the 2nd back for the Republicans. He seemed optimistic that Utah might soon have four GOP Reps.

Doug Hoffman, from the narrowly lost NY-23 race, was also in the hall (he was to speak later in the evening during the dinner ball). He will be running again for the seat in November (the special election was only to finish out the term). He will be running on the Conservative party ticket, but is very likely to earn the backing of much of the Republican party as well. He’s a very genuine and ‘smiley’ guy. Hoffman seemed quite pleased that I recognized him.

In the afternoon, we were enlightened with Leader Boehner (who I thought did quite well), and Wayne LaPierre from the NRA. LaPierre had an extremely well prepared presentation which included lots of video showing liberal attacks against gun owners and their rights.

I took some time later to walk through the co-sponsors’ Exhibition Hall, walked by ‘Radio Row’, and generally strolled the grounds. This hotel is HUGE and has numerous conference room, ballrooms, halls, etc. Spread over several floors, it’s quite a maze!

Later in the evening, I went to the XPAC lounge for the free food (insert smiley face!) and stayed to see Stephen Baldwin moderate a little Q&A with Andrea Tantaros and Sarah Huckabee, daughter of, and campaign manager for, Governor Mike Huckabee. The prepared questions for them were very odd: How has sexism affected your career? What effect would a potential Sarah Palin race vs. Hillary Clinton in 2012 have on women’s role in politics? I think the second question wasn’t a very fair question to ask Sarah H. given the possibility of her Dad running in 2012. One funny thing – I was standing near a small table, finishing my food (before the Q&A), when Sarah H. walked up, set down her bag, and joined me at the table – while she was prepping. Surprised to suddenly see her and recognize her, I congratulated her on her upcoming wedding in the Virgin Islands. Surprise lit up her face as she replied, “Wow, news spreads fast.”

Besides Governor Romney’s speech, the clear highlight of the day was the surprise appearance of Vice-President Dick Cheney. While typing away, I was vaguely listening to Liz Cheney’s speech when suddenly the lounge BURST into cheers. Some folks got up and ran out of the lounge onto the balcony of the main ballroom. Cheney entered to thunderous applause, to which he warmly responded, “A welcome like that almost makes me feel like running for office again… But I’m notta gonna do it.”

But Nate, what about Romney’s speech? It was awesome. So awesome that I’m going to write more about it in a separate post (hopefully later tonight). Just a pre-cap: It was second best speech I’ve ever heard him give; second only to his Faith in America speech. They are very different speeches -given under different circumstances – and comparing them is akin to analyzing remarks given in a class reunion setting as opposed to a court room setting.

Now, with multiple interruptions, I’ve finally finished my rough draft and I’m just going to publish. I will re-read and add photos as I’m able. Otherwise, I’ll never get this post off. So much for being able to focus!

~Nate G.

I was not aware that Senator Scott Brown was going to be at the ‘Bowling w/ Mitt’ event, so that was a pleasant surprise. When I arrived (about 30 minutes late), even though Governor Romney was speaking passionately and had raised the volume of his voice so the crowd could hear him, I was boxed out of the crowd and could not hear what he was saying. A few minutes later, he introduced Senator Brown who also took a few minutes to speak. Approx 110 in attendance – a lot of people to fit in the small area that was reserved. I believe they expected a couple dozen less than that.

The bowling alley was dark, so it was a challenge to get good pictures with the slow shutter speed. Still, we have a few interesting shots.

Click here to see all 14 pictures on our Facebook page!

~Nate G.

Addendum: Before the fundraiser Romney also stopped by the grounds at CPAC and said hi to the volunteers. Twitpic here. Story from Ambinder here.

UPDATE from Rebel Ross ~

Twitter is an interesting animal. Buzz comes and goes. Important things like Romney’s new book, often take back seat to the stuff of tabloids such as the ‘airplane incident’. Twitter has been all a-quiver with remarks about Romney the incident. Some of them funny, some thought-provoking, some rants. And some who should look into facts before they spew their ignorance onto the interweb. Below are some of the most interesting from the past day. Actual tweets are in bold, my remarks in plain un-bolded text.

@bjflanagan: Unruly passenger took a swing at Romney; folk hero status imminent – Oh, the stories that will be told!

@thenote: @KevinMaddenDC tells us (on good authority) that Mitt Romney’s hair stayed in place during plane kerfuffle – Of course it did, but what’s a kerfuffle?

@PoliticalMath: Does anyone else smile to think of Mitt Romney flying coach to the Olympics? –

@DESUDESIGN #mitt romney was seated in economy? really? – Yes, really. I even read once that when he sold his home in Utah last year and moved his things to California he rented and drove the U-haul himself.

FauxNewz GOP calling 4 Peace-monger Romney’s termination from…whatever it is, precisely he does at this moment in time. – What, precisely, Mitt Romney is doing at the time is slowly and methodically helping conservatives take back the country a la McDonnell, Christie and Brown.

@bostonist: Romney Induces Rage Even at 30,000 Feet – Can’t Boston news get anything right? They weren’t at 30,000 feet. The flight hadn’t taken off yet.

@geeksthenewcool Does anyone else think that Mitt Romney looks like a 50-something version of Jack Shephard from Lost? He could be his dad. It’s eerie. – Mitt Romney must look good for being nearly 63 YO to be considered a 50-something. And what does this have to do with the airplane? Oops, my bad.

@Hakuh Guy Totally Tries to Punch Mitt Romney, on a Plane Like, totally. Dude.

@hambypcnn Envisioning Mitt’s airplane scrape reminded me of this classic moment from the campaign: Romney vs. AP’s Glen Johnson http://bit.ly/dfbU4u Lucky Glen Johnson. He was in a lot more danger than the “unruly passenger” on the plane was.

@UsaNationNews: Mitt Romney assaulted on airplane; Carefully disheveled hair rushed to Mitchell/Sassoon Clinic for tests. – My favorite tweet.

@johnlmyers44 http://bit.ly/bsFLPx No matter what you might think of Romney, Who hasn’t had issues with people who think that airline seats are recliners?

@goybear Ex-prez GOP candid. Romney had a man take a swing at him while flying “economy” in AirCan. 1st class & business also wanted a piece of him. – LOL

@calzone The best part of that news story though is that Mitt Romney wasn’t attacked by a passenger for being Mitt Romney. It’s all incidental. – Yes it could happen to you too. Anyone of us could be attacked at anytime by and ‘unruly passenger’.

@robenfarzad someone apparently decked Mitt Romney yesterday on a Vancouver-LAX flight – “Apparently” you don’t look too much into the details. No one was “decked”.

@10thousandhangs If Mitt Romney tells you to put your seat in an upright position, you DO NOT get mouthy I foresee a new grassroots group: Flight Attendants for Romney.

@Caprice2009 Someone hit Mitt Romney on a air liner. Nothing makes sense. But, it is clear we are fed up with our politician. They have become thieves. – Obviously this person thinks the ‘unruly passenger’ was mad that Romney was a politician. And how is Romney a thief? He took no salary for Olympics, no salary for Governor, all profits from his book will be donated to charity, and is taking no speaking fees for his upcoming book tour speeches.

@JFD8 (This one is a poem so I’m going to format it differently)

When Romney asked him 2 adjust
His seatback a passenger fussed
But Mitt, ever coolly
Can tame the unruly
By moussing so hes never mussed

@fracmeister Romney “attacked’ on airplane… turns out it was some jerk. I hope they throw all jerks off planes who dont sit up during takeoff! – Your right! We should petition Reid and Pelosi to make a law against jerks on planes. They’re not doing anything better at the moment.

@kathrynlopez when i heard about the romney plane incident, i had flashbacks to the florida primary. – I still have nightmares about that every so often.

@ronmwangaguhung @thenote: Mitt Romney’s sober, even-temperament in the face of a possible assualt proves he cannot possibly win the GOP nomination – How do you figure?

@twin66: Note Romney was in row 15….earned his own wealth…Pelosi, Reid, Biden chartered planes on my dime… – More like ‘chartered planes on my life-savings.’

@RomBot That fool was lucky Romney didn’t Judo Chop his head: http://bit.ly/dwLfr8 – I was not aware that Romney was a Judo expert, but if the RomBot says so, I must believe.

@HercGigancock Someone tried to punch Mitt Romney, and was this close to living the American dream. – Have we digressed so much that the American Dream has evolved from ‘wanting to be independently wealthy’ to ‘wanting to punch a wealthy person’? (If I can’t have it….)

@LiberalLaugh #Romney didn’t hit the guy back?! WEAK ON TERROR! – Yeah, I want a real hot-head when dealing with terrorists.

@Shady_Milkman: So I was on a plane in Canada when Mitt Romney goes all flight attendant on me asking me to lift my seat, so I took a swing at him – So it was the milkman….

@MFXD Did not feel well this morning. Being unemployed is a struggle. But then I woke up to discover that someone punched Mitt Romney in the face. – Go back to bed – Romney was not punched in the face. Don’t worry the Government will come find you and give you a job, somehow.

@Gwindybrown Wonder if attacker reads HuffPo? – You’d have to be drunk to read HuffPo. So yes, it’s very possible he was.

@thenote Well Romney even has better plane sense than Schumer. – Yes he does. Here’s the story regarding Schumer.

@LessThis Less returning your seat to its upright position. More Mitt Romney fisticuffs.

@reverendadam Sounds like Romney wisely kept his Mitts to himself. – The ‘unruly passenger’ would have surely been sMITTen to the ground.

@Zaloomination Bush dodged a shoe & #Romney dodged a punch…is #Palin next? – Palin dodges bullets everyday from the media.

@jcbouvier Mitt Romney gets some gruff over reclining seats in First Class out of Vancouver…nearly has to adjust hair – ‘Nearly’ is correct. ‘First Class’ not so correct.

~Nate Gunderson

(H/T: Race42012)

Gallup: Just off the top of your head, which Republican would you most like to see as the party’s candidate for president in the 2012 election?

Republicans and Republican-leaning independents: Romney!

OK, so everyone didn’t shout ‘Romney!’ in unison, but he did win the largest percentage. It is interesting to me that this was an open-ended question and no answers were suggested to respondents. One commenter at Race42012 makes an excellent observation:

This is best a measurement of the awareness of registered voters, where almost 2/3rds either don’t know or don’t have a clue. Of the 1/3rd who “may” be listening, Romney receives 44% and Palin 34%. No one else garners as much as 10%.

Also of note from the Gallup report is a little tidbit that speaks volumes of Romney’s electability in both the primary and general elections:

Whereas conservative (15%) and moderate or liberal (14%) Republicans are about equally likely to mention Romney as their preferred nominee, Palin is much more likely to be mentioned by conservatives (14%) than by moderates and liberals (3%). Conservatives generally outnumber moderates and liberals by about 2 to 1 within the Republican Party.

And lastly:

At this point, Romney and Palin can be considered the early front-runners for the GOP nomination, a position that has proven advantageous in most past Republican nomination campaigns.

My last thought: Did anyone notice Scott Brown’s name up there in 4th place above some who may actually run for office. This brings two thoughts to mind. One, very little people are actually paying attention this early in the game as Scott Brown will certainly not be running in 2012, nor will McCain (#3) for that matter. Two, as much as I like Scott Brown, isn’t it extremely premature to judge his qualification for the top office? Don’t many of us Republicans complain that Obama was an unknown entity when he began to run just two years into his first term as Senator? Let’s give him some time to prove his meddle, and not give into the mania of the day.

~Nate Gunderson

(Note: This is this my own analysis of things as I see it. I do not represent Romney’s PAC in any way, nor have any connection to them. But I am available for hire should they ever call on me. No, I kid.)

With the last bit of fundraising data in (the total number of donors to Romney’s PAC), we can now make a proper evaluation of the fundraising abilities of the 4 most-likely-to-run GOP candidates and their respective PAC’s. One major problem is that there are so many uncommon denominators in the results that there is no easy indication of a clear winner, nor of a clear loser.

First let’s look at the raw numbers. Before anyone gets too excited about it, you should recall that T-Paw’s PAC was only in operation in the fourth quarter, plus other variables that I will explain.

(*** Disbursed=expenditures COH= Cash on hand $ to Cand.= money given to GOP campaigns for office)

Review of performance:

Mitt Romney Mitt Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC, is the most cut and dry scenario we have of the four. His PAC was intact for the entire year. He didn’t have distraction or obligations that others did. The numbers here tell the most of the story. He raised money very well, and he notably spent more also. The story here that is not told in the numbers is even though most of the would-be GOP nominees gave about 2% to other GOP candidates for office, Romney’s impact on behalf of other GOP candidates can arguably claim to be the highest as he has had time and means to hold many fundraisers for them. A fundraiser bringing $200,000 (as some did) is of lot more value than the max $5000 his PAC can contribute directly to them. A few of the unseen benefits of Romney expenditures include items of great reward: freedom to travel as necessary to endorse, raise funds, do media appearances and speeches, and otherwise keep his name and face out there. Plus he is able to maintain he excellent campaign team through to the next election cycle, which is virtually the same team that helped propel Senator Scott Brown to victory.
Mitt Romney’s Grade: a (solid) B+ Romney raised the most (from the highest number of donors) and has the most cash on hand, but with his network and relative freedom that would be expected. Expectations are the only reason I don’t score him higher.

Sarah Palin SarahPAC didn’t quite pull in as much as the FSA-PAC, or from as many donors, be she certainly didn’t focus on it much because of a number of factors: SarahPAC didn’t form until a couple months into year (she was still Governor of AK at the beginning of ’09), she focused some fundraising efforts on her legal funds rather than her PAC, and much focus of the year went to writing and touring for her new book. Even so she has a healthy amount of cash on hand that she’ll be able to disperse of more liberally (to conservatives) as we go throughout 2010. Also her star power is a huge asset at this time. She may not have raised as much, but it won’t matter as she can use some of her own new found wealth to more than compensate for a relatively small difference in total number of dollars raised.
Sarah Palin’s Grade: B- With a little more focus on her PAC she should be able rival Romney’s numbers. The decision to focus on that is hers to make. With her new contract with FOX News, I’m not sure if that will happen. But then again the net benefit of being on FOX may be more than any funds she can raise… unless her contract brings her to the point of over exposure. I believe there is some risk in that.

Tim Pawlenty T-Paw and his Freedom First PAC got a much later start than the rest but it has impressed with his good-sized catch. The high average dollars per donor shows that he does have at least some ties and connections that will be vital should he decide to run (I’m sure he has already decided.) Even so, one should not make that mistake of thinking that since he only had 1 quarter to raise funds that $1.3 Million x 4 = $5.2 Million for the year. Certainly as some donors begin to max out ($5000 max contribution) that rate cannot be continue to be sustained. One way to be certain is to see where we are at the end of June 2010, where it will be easier to compare apples to apples. One other item that limits his current freedom is that he is still a sitting Governor whereas the others are merely former Governors and are free to move about.
Tim Pawlenty’s Grade: A- Sometimes it’s not how much you’ve raised, but how you did compared to expectations. I expected some, but not that much, especially given his lower name recognition.

Mike Huckabee HuckPAC is a little harder to grade than the others for the reason that- yes, he’s got some boots on the ground, but does that make up for the relatively low fundraising? Huckabee also has a distraction with his show on FOX. That kind of weekly exposure should be a boon to name recognition, which it is as evidenced by him being right at the top of most polls, but it all needs to transfer into some increased ability to raise funds. Huckabee did great on meager funds in the 2008 election, and it may turn out similar for him in the 2010 primary, but such a plan would not work in the general election. Raising more funds will be a must for him at some point in the future.
Mike Huckabee’s Grade C+ In comparison to the amount that T-Paw raised in one quarter, and to Romney’s 3 times average dollars per donor, the fundraising is unimpressive. BUT… 16,000 donors is a very good number. I would think to give a lower grade otherwise.

Newt Gingrich: Newt? Hey, he doesn’t have a PAC. Yes, but many are quick to point out that his 527 (American Solutions for Winning the Future) raised $6.4 Million. That’s more than the others put together! … Yes, but a 527 group is a totally different animal. It does not have the $5000 donation limit that PAC’s have. They are also limited in that they cannot directly support (or oppose) candidates for office …. just for clarification.
Newt’s Gingrich’s grade N/A Apples to apples… Besides my guess is that he will only tease and hint at running, but will not enter the fray.

Result: Yes, in my opinion the winner by a slight degree is T-Paw, mostly because of the ever present “expectations”. Time will tell if his fundraising is sustainable. If it is, welcome to the top-tier.

~Nate Gunderson

One other note: we should see the low percentages of money given to other campaigns go up as we get closer to the 2010 elections. The year 2009 was more of a ‘fill up the treasure chest’ type of a year.

FEC filings (for you data geeks): Free and Strong America PAC, SarahPAC, Freedom First PAC, HuckPAC

Our newest team member Dave P. has been busy helping us fill our static pages with excellent content. These pages are located permanently in the drop-down menus at the top of the page. Here are some of the pages he has completed:

On the Issues >> America’s Culture and Values
On the Issues >> Immigration
Resources >> Books by Mitt Romney >> Turnaround

As we continue to complete these pages we hope you will use them as a reference for friends and family who’d like to learn more about Mitt Romney and why he should be our next President. Thanks Dave – keep it up!

~Nate G.

Reminder: We also have a page with all the info on Romney’s new book – review, introduction, and tour dates. http://bit.ly/RomneyBook

Click here to see where you can buy the book and for updated info on the book tour.

Transcript of Mitt Romney’s audio introduction of the book:

Running for President of the United States is an extraordinary experience. New profound friendships are unquestionably the greatest reward. They will last a lifetime. And there were moments of laughter, such as when Ann got up from a collapsed stage in Dubuque Iowa, dusted herself off and later ad-libbed, “Well, I fell on dubutt in Dubuque.” There were times of exhilaration. Winning the Michigan primary, the state where I was raised and where my dad had served three terms as Governor was one of them. Then there were the inevitable ‘lessons learned’. My dad, George Romney, use to say of his 1968 presidential campaign that it was like a mini-skirt: short and revealing. Mine was a little longer, but just as revealing.

I’ve run for office three times, losing twice and winning once. Each time when the campaign was over I felt I hadn’t done an adequate job communicating all that I intended to say. Some of that is because debate answers are limited to 60 seconds, ads are 30 seconds, and lengthy position papers are rarely read at all. This book gives me a chance to say more than I did during my campaign.

That being said, my interest in writing the book goes back well before my political life. My career in the private sector exposed me to developments abroad, and conditions at home, that were deeply troubling. At the same time, I saw that most of us were not aware of the consequences of blithely continuing along our current course. We’ve become so accustom to the benefits of America’s greatness that we cannot imagine any significant disruption of what we have known.

I was reminded of a book I had read when I was in France during the late 1960’s. Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber was a journalist and a business person, and from his perspective he became convinced that France and Europe were in danger of falling far and irretrievably behind the United States. His book, The American Challenge, stirred his countrymen to action and helped to galvanize Pan-European economic and political collaboration. While I am sufficiently realistic to recognize that this volume is highly unlikely to have as great an impact as did his, it is my hope is that it will affect the thinking and perspectives of those who read it.
Thus, this is not a collection of my positions on all the important issues of the day. In fact, a number of issues that I care about are not included. This is not a policy book that explores issues in greater depth than do scholars and think-tanks. I treat topics in a single chapter that others have made the subject of entire volumes. Nor is this an attack piece on all the policies of the Obama administration. Criticism is unavoidable, however, with policies which I believe are the most harmful to the future generations of America.

This is a book about what I believe should be our primary national objective: to keep America strong, and to preserve its place as the world’s leading nation. It describes the course I believe we must take to strengthen the nation in order to remain prosperous, secure and free. There are some who may question the national objective I propose. I make no apology for my conviction that America’s economic and military leadership is not only good for America, but also critical for freedom and peace across the world. Accordingly, as I consider the various issues before the nation, I evaluate our options largely by whether they would make America stronger or weaker.

In my first chapters I consider geo-political threats and lessons from the history of great nations of the past. In subsequent chapters I describe domestic challenges to our national strength and propose actions to overcome them. My final chapter is intended to provide a means for future Americans to gauge whether we have been successful in setting a course that will preserve America’s greatness throughout the 21st century. It describes, as well, the source of my optimism for America’s future.

These are difficult times. Homes have lost value, nest eggs have been eroded, retirees have become anxious about their future, and millions upon millions of Americans are out of work. Inexcusable mistakes and failures precipitated the descent that has hurt so many people, but even as we endure the current shocks we know that this will not go on forever. We know that because America is a strong and prosperous nation the economic cycle will eventually right itself, and the future will be brighter than the present. While I will touch upon today’s difficulties my focus is on the growing challenges to the foundations of our national strength. How we confront these challenges will determine what kind of America, and world, we will bequeath to our children and grand-children. This is a book about securing that future of freedom, peace, and prosperity in the only way possible: by strengthening America. A strong America is our only assurance that prosperity will follow hardship, and that our lives and liberty will always be secure.

The strength of the nation has been challenged before: at its birth, during the civil war, in the peril of world wars. It is challenged again today. In our past Americans have risen to the occasion by confronting the challenge honestly, and by laying their sacrifice upon the altar of freedom. We must do so again.

Though Teddy Davis makes good points, I don’t buy into the fact that Romney is “next in line”. It’s true that has been a pattern in the past, but that doesn’t necessarily dictate what’s going to happen in the future. I agree with Sarah Palin’s statement the it’s never anyone’s “turn”. Becoming the nominee for the party is something that is has to be earned. I’m glad to say Mitt Romney is taking all the proper steps to put himself in good position to win the presidential primary, should he decide to enter the race (and he will.)

From Davis:

… he’s played is really smartly since the 2008 election. He has moved around the country, campaigned for other Republicans, earned a lot of good favor by doing that, and looks to be in a really solid position going into 2012.

~Nate Gunderson

Watching President Obama’s State of the Union speech tonight? Why not make it a little more fun by joining us on chat to discuss the speech, or even playing Bingo to win some prizes?

The chat party will be hosted on our permanent chat page: click here for the link.

Below are 4 different Bingo boards to download and print to play along with us. Here is an image of card #1:

All downloads are PDF files:
Click here to download Card #1
Click here to download Card #2
Click here to download Card #3
Click here to download Card #4
Click here to download Card #5

I’ll give you a hint, don’t pick card number 5. Numbers 1-4 are the same but with the words in different orders.

Bingo Rules: the first five to get BINGO will get a MITT ’12 bumper sticker. To verify your Bingo leave a comment on this post. State which card number you have, and which were the five phrases that you got for Bingo. Be sure to yell BINGO! on the chat first. We will verify the first five. Good luck and have fun!

~Nate G.

UPDATE: AP and FOX call it for Brown, Coakley concedes, and the Massachusetts Miracle is complete!

Chat with Scott Brown fans right here all day while we share the live news, updates, exit poll returns and results! We will also post updates of the big news items. Check back with us throughout the day!

Updates start right below the Chatbox.

[THE CHAT BOX HAS BEEN MOVED BACK TO THE SIDEBAR, IT ALSO HAS A PERMANENT HOME HERE]

Update 14 (11:00PM by Ross): Mitt introduces Brown for his victory speech and receives a curtain call to chants of “Mitt Mitt Mitt”. The Massachusetts Miracle is complete and now we just need to put the pressure on to get him seated.


Update 13 (9:32PM by Nate): COAKLEY CONCEDES, THIS RACE IS OVER!!
Fox and AP call it for Brown. Current tally: 52-47 for Brown. 87% of precincts reporting.


Update 12 (9:12PM by Ross): Mitt on Hannity embodies the feeling of all of us by saying “This is monumental. This is epic!”

Update 11 (8:55PM by Nate): 53% for Brown, 46 for Coakley – 40% of precincts reporting

Update 10 (8:25PM by Nate): POLLS CLOSED 20 MINUTES AGO. First results: 52% for Brown, 47 for Coakley – 4% of precincts reporting

Update 9 (8:15PM by Ross): From rasmussenreports: Among those who decided how they would vote in the past few days, Coakley has a slight edge, 47% to 41%. 22% of Democrats voted for Brown. That is generally consistent with pre-election polling.

Update 8 (6:10PM by Nate): From HotAir: Coakley press release complains of voter fraud. The problem is the release is dated ….. YESTERDAY?
ALSO:

• High School conducts exit polls. Results: Brown 57% Boakley 42%
• The Hill: Gibbs: Obama ‘not pleased’ by closeness of Mass. election
• U.S. News: Scott Brown Fueled by Independents’ Anger at Liberal Arrogance
• CBS News: Scott Brown Win a Health Care “Stop Sign?”

Update 7 (4:31PM by Nate): HOW DID WE FORGET THE SCOTT BROWN VOTER BOMB?

Update 6 (4:30PM by Nate): More Brown/Coakley headlines:

• Politico: Coakley Adviser already pointing the finger at DC Dems
• Interesting: Case Study in New York Times Bias, Coakley/Brown Edition
• Video: Mark Williams of the Tea Party Express discusses their mobilization of volunteers nation-wide to GOTV for Scott Brown

Update 5 (3:55PM by Nate): Good Scott Brown election reads:

• Chris Cillizza handicaps the race: What to Watch for in th Massachusetts special election
• WSJ: Why There Won’t Be Exit Polls in Massachusetts
• Examiner.com: Scott Brown race excites volunteers from Washington
• RCP video: Coakley’s Office Throws Out Reporter They had a right to, but still it is interesting.

Update 4 (3:25PM by Aaronius): Mitt Romney to provide Massachusetts special election coverage on Sean Hannity tonight at 9PM EST – Tune in!
Also, Eric Fehrnstrom, a senior advisor to both Scott Brown and Mitt Romney, gives us some juicy insight regarding the dynamics of this special race over at National Review Online.

Update 3 (2:15PM by Nate): Scott Brown vs Martha Coakley Exit Polls Intrade update: Brown 83.5; Coakley 20.0 (Intrade is an online prediction “stock” market. Tends to be very accurate since people are actually betting real money.)

Also, “Why is this woman handing out absentee ballots?”

Update 2 (2:00PM by Nate): Exit Polls

• Boston Globe mistakenly calls the elections for Coakley.
• Politico reports that there may not be many exit polls because this basically wasn’t race until 2 weeks ago. It did not give polling organizations enough time to prepare.
• #MASEN, Scott Brown, Martha Coakley, Massachusetts, are all in the top ten trending topics on twitter, in that order. #MASEN stands for MA Senate.



Update 1 (11:30 AM by Aaronius): Morning Joe Video: Romney (this morning) on Massachusetts Race

Analysis on Election Morning
MITT ROMNEY

Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007; candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008

Scott Brown is a strong candidate who ran a good campaign. As recently proved in New Jersey and Virginia, good candidates win. But Brown’s victory was more than a rejection of the liberal Obama agenda.

Brown won in Massachusetts, the bluest of blue states, an accomplishment that could not have been possible absent extraordinary voter passion about the issues, in particular Obamacare, the economy, terrorism and federal spending.

Massachusetts health care is not perfect, but 98 percent of our residents are insured — a feat that, unlike Obamacare, came with no new taxes, no Medicare cuts, no “public option” and no trillion-dollar price tag. It’s little wonder that Massachusetts voters gave a thumbs-down to a federal health-care takeover. In electing Brown, they also repudiated the president’s policies of ineffective stimulus borrowing and treating an enemy combatant to the legal defense rights normally reserved for citizens.

This victory was a repudiation of the arrogance of Washington’s aspiring neo-monarchists who believe that government is wiser than the people of America.