Posted on 10/18/2010 9:26:56 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
It's two weeks before the 2010 elections. Which means now's a fine time to start obsessing about the 2012 campaign.
The next presidential race will unofficially begin on No. 3 -- the day after the midterm elections. It's possible we may not know the outcome of all the critical House and Senate races by then, and these races could determine which party controls the House and Senate. But once most of the 2010 votes are counted, the politerati will quickly pivot toward the next big thing. So let me get an early jump and tell you this: watch out for Mitt Romney.
I'm not predicting he'll be the winner in the GOP's wide-open 2012 nomination face-off, which could be wild and wooly (and paradisiacal for political journalists). But though Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who was vanquished in 2008 by John McCain, is often discounted by the commentariat in the pre-preseason chatter, there are plenty of reasons for Mittiacs to be hopeful.
First, the obvious liabilities. He's a Mormon who has flip-flopped on social issues, trading his more moderate views for getting-right-with-Republican-primary-voters stances, and as governor he signed into law a health care reform plan inconveniently similar to what President Barack Obama and the Democrats enacted this year. To sum up, he's a mandate-embracing political opportunist. In 2002, he declared he supported abortion rights. In 2008, he proclaimed he was an abortion opponent. He's made 180s on gay rights and gun control. But each of Romney's flips (or flops) were in the direction of the GOP's base. And, to take a cynical but perhaps pragmatic view, his deftness in shifting on these fundamental issues is a sign he might just be able to sidestep his health care problem. (Conservatives have called on Romney to apologize for RomneyCare; Bay State Republicans defend the original legislation and claim the subsequent Democratic administration in Massachusetts ruined the program.)
As for Romney and God, evangelical Christians, who make up a hefty chunk of GOP primary voters, can be rather suspicious of Mormonism. Amy Sullivan in The Washington Monthly in 2005 dissected Romney's religious roadblock, noting that that as recently as 2004, "Mormons were specifically excluded from participation in the National Day of Prayer organized by Shirley Dobson (wife of James Dobson, leader of the conservative Christian organization Focus on the Family) because their theology was found to be incompatible with Christian beliefs." No doubt, Romney's opponents will do what they can under the table (if not above it) to whip up anti-Mormon sentiment. But given that Romney has become quite familiar to GOP voters, it's possible the Mormon bite may not sting so much.
What Romney has going for him is this: the economy. There's no telling what the political weather will be like in 2012. (On January 20, 2009, who foresaw such a dramatic change in the political mood as the one the nation has experienced in the past eighteen months?) But it sure seems that the economy is not improving quickly and that hard times are likely for the next few years. Of the current GOP 2012 wannabes, Romney talks the economy the best. His ideas are not much different from the usual Republican fare--cut taxes (including those on the rich like him), cut regulations, and you know the rest. But as a former CEO (who could play a former CEO on a soap opera), Romney sounds like a guy who understands business. And if voters sour on Obama's government-can-help approach, they may well turn toward a business-knows-best message (even if the nation is in a slump because of greedy corporatists who rigged the financial system in their favor and screwed the rest of us). Can Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee, or Newt Gingrich come across as more knowledgeable on the nitty-gritty of the economy?
Until recently social conservative voters have dominated the GOP primaries. But if these voters are hurting because of the lousy economy, they may be less inclined to base their votes on a candidate's consistent commitment to their favored social causes. Romney's flip-flops may be sufficient -- if these voters are seeking someone who can lead on economic matters.
Romney also has experience in his favor. In the last 13 elections -- going back to Nixon-Kennedy in 1960 --10 of the GOP nominees have been candidates who have previously run for president or vice president. Palin and Huckabee both were national candidates in 2008 (though Palin, a prisoner of the McCain crew, earned no experience overseeing a campaign of her own). Other potential GOP contenders have no first-hand idea what running a national presidential campaign truly entails. This includes Haley Barbour, Mitch Daniels, Mike Pence, John Thune, Rick Santorum, Pawlenty and Gingrich. (Feel free to add Donald Trump into this mix.) Romney, good CEO-type that he is, undoubtedly learned much from 2008 that will give him a leg up in 2012.
In 2008, Romney finished third place in the Republican delegate vote count, slightly behind Huckabee. But he was the second biggest vote gatherer in the field, bagging 22.1 percent of the GOP primary and caucus vote, while McCain attracted 46.5 percent. This time around, Romney starts with a bigger bloc than Huckabee, and with the economy in a shambles; his candidacy has more of a rationale than a Huckabee rerun. And then there's the 800-pound grizzly in the room: Palin. Should she run, she and Huckabee would be in a death-cage fight for the social cons (and any evangelicals who are anti-Mormon). If they split that group, Romney will have an opening.
Romney is no Tea Partier. But he has the chameleonesque talent to figure out how to tailor his sales pitch -- downsize government, rev up the free market -- to appeal to this libertarian-leaning slice. At the same time, he will be able to go after those non-Tea Party Republicans who yearn for a candidate who's not so yahoo-ish. (I'm assuming there are still Republicans of that stripe.) And he'll have enough money to run. These days, Romney is spreading around a lot of his political cash, supporting 2010 GOP House and Senate candidates. (He also turned his recent book on foreign policy into a bestseller by asking conservative organizations to purchase thousands of copies in exchange for Romney speeches. How underhanded -- or savvy.)
To bag the nomination, Romney will have to walk a fine line -- so will any GOP candidate (except maybe Palin, who will rise or fall as a moose in a china shop). Are there too many pitfalls for Romney to straddle? Perhaps, but the same can be said for any in the GOP potential-POTUS pack. One of these very imperfect candidates is going to win -- despite his or her much-detailed imperfections.
Again, this is no prediction. I try to eschew that form of punditing. Days after Christine O'Donnell won the GOP Senate primary in Delaware, Chris Matthews tried to bet me on air that she'd win the general election. I foolishly said, who knows? Instead of, "You're on -- one thousand dollars." I do believe the punditerati is unwisely shorting Romney at the moment. But, please, don't invest in him on my advice.
I read the name “David Corn” and stopped readinbg at that point.
LOL.
At least they’re consistent in what candidate they want the most!
Why don’t you worry about you’re socialist pinko friends David. The right does not need advice since they seem to be pretty strong right now. Why don’t you give the left some cheerleading for Obummer. He needs it desperately right now.
I'm sorry, I know we have some great Freepers from Massachusetts, but anyone who wins there has had to make unforgiveable compromises of principle.
I just don't expect Mitt to ever totally repudiate his track record.
Dream on. He wasn’t in the fight when it mattered. Which means he doesn’t matter.
He’s not even in the running.
Well, the right let them choose McCain so they’re back for more.....
They will gladly ‘help’ us pick the biggest loser possible.
David Cornhole is one of the more despicable, truly rat-faced scumbags alive today, and his "Stifle Palin" screed will gain in volume as its coherence rapidly, and rabidly, deteriorates in the weeks and months to come.
One of the most impressive features arguing heavily in favor of Sarah Palin winning the Primary and becoming the GOP candidate of record for the 2012 General Election will be the aberrant psychoses that the mere mention of her name will engender among the slavering, salivating Dembicile hordes who will amass against her.
Anybody, and I mean anybody, who can generate this level of apoplectic rage in the Dembicile dementiacs is worthy of a vote, even were they not the best candidate on any number of other fronts. As luck would have it, however, Sarah Palin is also that best, most qualified person on all those other fronts, and that is certainly the yummy cream cheese frosting on this lovely, already rising-in-the-oven cake called "Election 2012".
Get yer popcorn ready, this show is about to start.
;-)
No more MSNBC approved GOP presidential candidates please.
Although a RINO, I have the impression that Romney would do what the base wants him to. But I really can’t trust that to chance. I want someone (an honest someone) who runs on conservative and founding/constitutional principles, believes them to core of their being, and will be trusted to act in all manners true to those principles concerning both public and secret affairs ... like Reagan.
Your impression of Romney is completely different from mine. Rather than do what “we the people” want, what I expect from Romney is — gays in the military no more DADT, the enactment of ENDA which he supported, govt sponsored use of embryonic stem cells, re-packaged Obamacare also known as Romneycare, neglect of the military, RKBA betrayal by some form of gun control, raising of fees and new mandates, liberal judges planted throughout the federal system, and nationalization of gay marriage. In other words, what Romney did for Massachusetts, he’ll do for the whole country!
You might be correct. I was being a bit more subtle about how I feel about him, and the point is that he can’t be trusted to do what we want even if he started sounding like Thomas Jefferson. And he has back pedaled on alot of things, including health care mandates. Has he had his ‘come to Jesus’ moment and realized how wrong it would be to do the same things at the Federal level one does at the state level and has he realized the true value of federalism? I don’t really think so. But even in the 2008 cycle, when he was running for the nomination, the read between the lines speak was more like ‘I’ll be whatever you want if you just elect me.’
That’s just not enough for me. We need a true believer not a doppleganger.
This will get interesting as time passes. I dont see Romney getting the nom due to the tidal wave of conservatives taking a stand. The RNC is changing from the ground up and the Bush/McCain/Romey/Rove network is crumbling. I can invision a storming of the next RNC convention.
The huckster and his cult will try to muccy the water but that wont last long either.
My guess it will be Barbour or Palin. Palin most likely.
If you’ve heard him backpeddling at all on Romneycare, you’ve heard a lot more than I have. Even if he said he had a ‘come to Jesus’ moment, I would not believe him. His ‘you have to elect me if you want to know exactly what I’ll do’ statement sounds too much like a threat to me. The man can’t be trusted. He lies when the truth would better serve him. He and Obama have a lot in common.
I like Sarah. I have no doubt that she believes what she says. I am a little reserved though because believing in something is only the first step. The next ones are being able to turn those beliefs into results. She is good because she isn’t a seasoned politican, but I think that also detracts from ability to get things done without being shoved through the political ringer by things beyond her control.
Additionally, the Federal govt is a huge bureaucracy and I think the job requires excellent upper management skills to get it focused on the right things and doing what it should be doing. I question whether she has the skills to manage that. I don’t really think she does, so whomever her chief of staff might be would be really important information to have and would likely make the difference for me in the primaries.
If the GOP runs Romney in 2012, Obama will be re-elected with a 30 something percent plurality. Romney will finish third, behind some presently unknown independent.
Immediately, the GOP will begin its final and irrevocable descent into electoral oblivion.
The Palmetto Scoop reported:
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romney’s former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.
"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"
"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"
"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"
"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"
"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"
Poor sport spoiler Romney doing what he does best:
Novak: "Fred Thompson drop-out rumors traced to Romney campaign"
Huckabee got support last run because there were no good options. We had a Congressman (Congressmen never win the Presidency) conservative in Duncan Hunter, and Thompson who didn’t run hard enough to have a chance, and Huckabee, Romney, and McCain. Huck won’t get much support if there are one or more conservatives running who stand a chance in my opinion. (and I’m a guy that likes Huckabee and his show . . . not a basher at all).
Mitt is the wrong guy as well, and I hope that people realize it. Putting in socialized medicine in Mass. shows that Romney is not good for the economy and his alleged strength on economic issues is bunk. Socialism doesn’t work. Armand Hammer was a successful businessman and a Marxist. Hell, Gore is making a mint with his green business crapola. There a plenty of businessman Democrats and Mitt is one of them.
Who will be blamed?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.