Romney Reboots (National Review Pimp Fest)

National Review ^ | October 19, 2009 | RAMESH PONNURU

[greyfoxx39]

In the early stages of the undeclared race for the Republican presidential nomination, Mitt Romney is the frontrunner. The former governor of Massachusetts has the best-developed national network of supporters of any of the potential candidates. He is the one doing the most party-building across the country; of his potential rivals, only Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty comes close. He is the one to whom other Republicans are most likely to turn for answers on economic policy, and on many issues he is the only one giving them. When the auto companies came to Washington only Romney had a plan (“Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check,” he wrote in the New York Times).

He knows more about a larger range of policy issues than most of the other Republican candidates. All the candidates can, presumably, say something plausible about Afghanistan; not many can give a credible answer to a question about the role mark-to-market accounting rules played in the financial crisis, as Romney recently did in an interview with me.

A Republican strategist with no ties to Romney recently heard him speak and came away impressed by how much better a speaker he has become. “His stump speech has gotten very, very good. It’s very honed.” In a recent Rasmussen poll, Romney narrowly beat Sarah Palin as the candidate Republican voters most favored. Even the narrowness of that win may work to his advantage. Romney is not so far out in front that he has to worry about meeting high expectations. Nor has he ever made himself the center of attention. Thus he has avoided much criticism and kept voters from getting bored with him. He has been detached and analytical rather than angry.

-SNIP-

 

Romney’s current and former consultants tend to agree about what he did wrong last time. They do not fault the flip-flops. But “inauthentic” is a word that often comes up. “It’s a matter of emphasis,” says one former adviser. “He emphasized issues that didn’t fit his profile. The volume, the way he presented them, didn’t fit with who he is.” This adviser cites Romney’s attacks on McCain and Giuliani over their support for an amnesty for illegal immigrants. Another ’08 veteran agrees that Romney was badly positioned but mostly blames reporters. “They wanted to write the Mormon story and the abortion flip-flop story. And then in Iowa when the marriage issue [came] up, you [had] to talk about it.”

These Romneyites do not believe that the governor should abandon his conservative positions on the social issues.

 

-SNIP-

 

Yet it is extremely difficult — more difficult than many people realize — to capture the Republican presidential nomination from the right in the modern era. The politics of religion largely account for this difficulty. The movement candidacy always runs a risk of being destroyed by an evangelical candidacy. No movement candidate can win without strong support from evangelical voters. But an evangelical candidate running on the basis of his religion can win a lot of votes from his coreligionists, and thus block the movement candidate’s progress, without being able to win the nomination himself. As Huckabee showed in the last race, the evangelical candidate need not be well-known or well-funded to play this role. Pat Robertson played it in 1988. (Pat Buchanan splintered the movement in a slightly different way in 1996.)

Romney’s problem was not that he is a Mormon. It was that he is not an evangelical. A strong plurality of evangelicals “would have backed Huckabee against anybody — Mormon, Buddhist, or Catholic,” says another former Romney adviser. “They were voting for one of their own.” To attribute Romney’s loss in Iowa to anti-Mormon prejudice from evangelicals, he says, is like attributing Romney’s victories in Utah and Nevada to Mormons’ hostility to people from all other faiths. But this adviser reaches the same conclusion as his colleagues who blamed anti-Mormonism: Romney should not spend as much time and resources on Iowa next time.

-SNIP-

Earlier in the interview, he spoke about his primary campaign and McCain’s general-election campaign in 2008. “I heard something from [former HHS] secretary Mike Leavitt which has stuck with me. . . . He said he was watching the ABC Wide World of Sports years ago with the surfing championships. The commentator said that to win the surfing championships requires a person of extraordinary skill and a good wave.” Few have ever doubted that Mitt Romney is a person of extraordinary skill.

[Will88]

The McCain/Palin ticket was up ++10 pts. (in some polls) days prior to the election. So rather than helping the GOP, backstabbing RomneyTeam attacked Gov. Palin and her children to throw Election2008.

I just have to respond to that nonsense. Yep, they were up after Sarah was picked and after the conventions, but Juan McCain totally blew it after the financial crisis broke, and after his pathetic debate performances, and he agreed with Obama on cap and trade, no domestic drilling (states had to agree to offshore per McCain). McCain was a pathetic candidate, and needed no help from any quarter to blow his chances of winning. Only you Romney haters fail to recognize that.

[Diogenesis]

What is nonsense?
You agree that the GOP was up in the polls until the
attacks on Gov. Palin.

Also, I like Romney. Like many who worked for him in
multiple states, we were deceived. Of course, that would
not bother you, who supports Romney on each of his
flip flops, right?

[pepperhead]

Good point. And to this date Myth hasn’t done anything to make me believe he wouldn’t go back to his gun grabbing ways if he thought it would get him enough votes. The same thing can be said about abortion and just about any other issue. I think it is obvious that Romney will say whatever he has to say to get elected.

[Beagle8U]

If you think this is a snake pit you should ask JimRob or the the Mods to remove your account,asshole!

[BibChr]

Guess that’s why people pour out to hear him speak, he has more invitations than he can handle, and his book “Going Rogue” was #1 long before it was even published.

Oh, wait. That’s not Romney.

That’s... that’s... help me out here....

[Beagle8U]

Why did GHW Bush lose his 2nd term?

Read my lips, screw the NRA!

Just before the election he went on TV and tore up his NRA lifetime member card. Said he wanted nothing more to do with the NRA. The turd got his wish!

Both he and Dole got no NRA endorsement and were slaughtered in the election.

[greyfoxx39]

Guess that’s why people pour out to hear him speak, he has more invitations than he can handle

...AND he has 926,000 followers on Facebook....oh...wrong....Romney has 80,589....that "Going Rogue woman is the one with 926,070.

[Cicero]

Occasionally there’s a good piece in The Corner.

But for the most part, the National Review does more harm than good. Their stupid love affair with “electable” Mitt was one of the reasons we got stuck with Juan McCain in the last election. Because people decided that even Juan McCain was better than Mitt.

Time to pull out the few remaining good writers and throw the whole operation in the trash.

[BibChr]

But he’s ##1 !!! He’s unstoppable! Juggernaut! Swarmin’ Mormon! Get on board while you still can, train’s pulling out!

[greyfoxx39]

But he’s ##1 !!! He’s unstoppable! Juggernaut! Swarmin’ Mormon! Get on board while you still can, train’s pulling out!

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

A candidate who alienates a signififcant enough portion of the electorate due to
religion is a weak candidate. If that makes Evangelicals say they would not vote
for the candidate under any circumstances, you need a different candidate. In this
case there is an additional factor, previous pro-abortionism. Even weaker. If the
candidate's wife has attended Planned Parenthood fundraisers, even weaker still.
If the candidate comes across like a bland stuffed-shirt millionaire unfamiliar with
the lives and financial situation of most Americans, he's got some problems.

Doesn't matter how unfair such perceptions are, they stick.
To try to deny these factors as real weaknesses is delusional.
No candidate needs to start out with a religion problem.

[euram]

“Romney is not so far out in front that he has to worry about meeting high expectations. Nor has he ever made himself the center of attention. Thus he has avoided much criticism and kept voters from getting bored with him. He has been detached and analytical rather than angry.”

Romney is, in fact, almost invisible. When he stumped for Christie in NJ he drew a “crowd” of FIFTY, and drew DOZENS to a rally in VA for McDonnell. Mitt’s book, due out next year, is available at Amazon for pre-release order, and is #261,496. So, I’d have to say he has done a great job not drawing any attention.

Naturally, he hasn’t gotten any criticism, for the simple fact that the gop elite and their elite media allies want him to get the nomination. That’s why they write stuff like this. That’s why they also trot out every Romney operative they can to smear Palin.

[greyfoxx39]

No candidate needs to start out with a religion problem.

Mitt's main "religion problem" is the fact that anyone who disdains his candidacy is immediately portrayed as a "religious bigot", especially here on FR. 170 years of mormons playing the "persecution card" is still evident.

I wonder if Ramesh thinks he is helping Mitt with Evangelicals with this article?

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

That's still a problem.
Nothing would delight liberals more than to see a fight in the GOP over
Mormonism between fiscal conservatives and evangelicals.
Even if you accept the frontrunner status there's not enough of a need
to take that risk. They have to find another candidate.
It's doubtful his numbers show a large following throughout the electorate
nationally. A religion problem combined with suspicions among social
conservatives about past pro-abortionism is a problem.
Signing over checks to Planned Parenthood is what is called a flag.

[Jewbacca]

Gag, Myth Romney = 2 term Obama.

I will NOT vote for Myth.

[sionnsar]

A Republican strategist with no ties to Romney recently heard him speak and came away impressed by how much better a speaker he has become. “His stump speech has gotten very, very good. It’s very honed.”

Gee. They said the same thing about Obama.

I've been a subscriber to National Review for almost a quarter-century now, but I doubt I'll renew. The return of Florence King doesn't make up for the decline elsewhere since Buckley's departure.