Posted on 09/15/2011 11:04:30 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
GOP regulars claim the "electability argument" will deliver the Republican nomination to Mitt Romney. They say things like, "Mitt Romney can win the general election by appealing to the middle. Rick Perry can't win in the suburbs of Philadelphia and Milwaukee."
Simple enough -- but wrong. Romney's no stronger on this front than Perry, the frontrunner in the polls. The core reasons: Perry's support among the party's base, and his strength on the key issues of the economy and job creation.
Based on what we know today, next November's election will be decided on the economy and as a referendum on President Obama's first term. The recent debates have confirmed the GOP nominee will be either Perry or Romney. Significant late entrants into the field are extremely unlikely -- the field is set.
Full disclosure: I recently personally contributed to Perry's campaign, though I opposed him on last year's Texas gubernatorial primary -- and will readily support whoever wins the presidential primaries.
That said, I believe he's objectively the stronger general-election nominee. The GOP primary electorate seems to agree, according to a CNN-ORD national poll released on Monday. Asked which candidate "had the best chance to beat Barack Obama in the general election," registered Republicans gave Perry 42 percent and Romney 36 percent, with the rest of the field (including Sarah Palin) taking 27 percent.
How can this be? Consider what the general election will look like.
Facing a terrible and deteriorating economy and falling approval ratings, President Obama has only one strategic choice: Use his massive financial advantage to go negative -- to make centrist voters fear or hate the Republican nominee.
This path will depress independent turnout, as negative campaigns always do, increasing the power of both party's bases. For a recent example, look no further than 2004.
Facing similarly low approval ratings, the Bush-Cheney campaign immediately branded their opponent a flip-flopper and outside groups ran the damaging Swift Boat advertisements. The result: President George W. Bush won re-election -- by a margin of only 60,000 votes in Ohio.
In other words, Obama's strategy increases the general-election importance of the fact that the GOP base trusts Perry -- and decreases any edge Romney would have with independents.
Then there's the jobs issue. Romney certainly has a deep understanding of international markets and how the private sector works. But as governor his private-sector job-creation record pales next to Perry's 10-year record.
And Perry can present two models to the country:
* A Texas model with 1,000-plus people moving each day to the state has created more private-sector jobs than the other 49 states combined since the economic recovery began. Texas also plugged a huge biennial budget deficit earlier this year without raising taxes, while protecting its $6 billion rainy-day fund.
* A Washington, D.C., model with 9.1 percent unemployment and 25 million people either unemployed or underemployed -- and more Americans on food stamps than ever before. Plus, discretionary spending has jumped 30 percent, creating the two largest single-year deficits in history and leading to trillion-dollar annual deficits for the next decade.
He can ask, "Which model do you want?" This sharp contrast can cut through the president's diversionary attacks.
Romney, meanwhile, will have to spend precious time and energy explaining RomneyCare, dealing with unfortunate and bigoted questions about his Mormon religion and trying to energize a depressed Republican base that views him suspiciously.
Perhaps in a normal year, the more moderate candidate would be the more electable one. But in these times, the GOP needs bold colors, not pale pastels, to win.
*********************
Matt Mackowiak is a Washington- and Austin-based Republican consultant and president of Potomac Strategy Group, LLC. Matt can be reached at matt@potomacstrategygroup.com.
But Perry IS better than Obama and he IS more electable than Romney. Your “kind of crap” is what gave us Obama.
Why educate people you can’t legally employ? Kinda crazy
The concluding paragraphs are spot on. The campaign can be shrunk down to “which would you choose? - massive debt and unemployment under Obama or lower unemployment and fiscal sanity under Perry?” There are a ton of independents and perhaps even some Democrats who can be won over by that question.
It’s a trick question, however, as the U.S. legislature is far more liberal and obstructive than the Texas legislature and the debt is far more crushing than anything Perry has faced.
And yet we all know what we’ll get with Obama. In my opinion, any Republican can win the economy argument. It’s just that Perry will win it even moreso.
And he work to wipe out ObamaCare.
Not to forget too, Perry has been pushing back against (and on the receiving end of attacks and more are on the way) the EPA, trial lawyers and Big Education. So once in the White House, he'll make good use of the bully pulpit, the veto pen and he will fill cabinet positions with people who hold his views.
His big platform points - Don't spend all the money. Have a fair and predictable tax and regulatory policy. And don't allow over suing.
Or another way he puts it, go after over regulation, over litigation and over taxation.
Kay Bailey Hutchison.
How about she declares as a candidate first?
Romney’ll pro’ly interest a few of the less-stupid lazy Obama people, but Romney ain’t a sing-songy cadenced (when he wants to), media-worshiped, “first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” so the lazy stupid Obama voters Romney poaches likely just won’t bother to vote. Flipside, RomneyCare’ll lose him some of the conservative base. Perry: not so much baggage.
Better question: Why should we assume either is electable?
One of the good things the Gardasil debate is going to do is take the sting out of the claim that he’s “anti-science”.
Thanks. I’m happy KBH is out of the Senate, but when I think of Texan liberal women, two names spring to mind - that silver-haired nasty former governor and that equally nasty but fake Texan the DUmp loves, Molly Ivans.
I don’t know, Perry might wear these.
http://thunderwearholsters.com/personal.htm
Almost like magic...
The recent debates have confirmed the GOP nominee will be either Perry or Romney. Significant late entrants into the field are extremely unlikely -- the field is set.
Full disclosure: I recently personally contributed to Perry's campaign, though I opposed him on last year's Texas gubernatorial primary .....
Translation: Former Kay Bailey Hutchison supporter desperately wants Sarah shut out of the race and thinks Perry is an acceptable substitute RiNO candidate.
His idea of a "Grand Compromise" that will make "everybody" in the GOP happy? A Romney-Perry ticket. The Judas-horse scenario that Alan Keyes predicted five, six months ago.
It looks like establishment GOP is beginning to realize that Gov. Perry is the better candidate than Romney in the general election.
Wrong. The Establishment is trying desperately to focus attention on those two candidates exclusively, to shut out a real conservative who would challenge their death-grip (McCain, Dole, Poppy) on the GOP.
Thankfully, both are safely deceased.
Why would he do that?
His business-mogul backers would love to dump their employee healthcare plans -- so would the entire Fortune 500. Howell Raines told us that before the 2008 election, that those guys had done a backroom deal with the Dims to break American healthcare so they won't have to pay for it anymore.
Business-news stories have been full of rumbles about polls of employers lining up to dump their plans.
Obamacare works just fine for them. It does the ONE THING they want. It makes private employer-paid healthcare plans go away.
So why would Rick Perry work to undercut this plan to dump people off their insurance plans? It's what Bidness wants! It's what his 200 big-bucks political contributors want! And you are going to get over that?
Yes, that is the better question. I have just returned from Tampa where I got to meet 5 of the candidates and actually speak with each of the 5 for at least 30 seconds and that's quite a long time in a receiving line.
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker Newt, is the only one who could wipe the floor with obama's head in debates, but he's not going to be the nominee and he's not electable. Newt has sold us out too many times and I told him that, along with telling him he has my prayers that he will be able gain some traction so that he can last a good long while. Like the unannounced Sarah Palin, Newt understands the media game and tries to put a stop to our candidates' infighting.
Michele Bachmann is as gracious, serious, knowledgeable, and kind as she is beautiful and I think she's as electable as Romney and Perry. Romney comes across more serious than Perry, who's a very nice, fun and personable guy.
Governor Perry kissed me on my right cheek, so I'm all in for Perry. /s.
I hope you’re right. If Romney is the candidate, I’m simply not going to vote. I see little difference between Romney and the Dems, and I think he’s a very autocratic, controlling, big-government person (like Obama).
Debates? Well, it would be unusual, considering debates during Presidential campaigns have historically involved announced candidates.
It does sound like a possible idea for a reality tv show; "Debate Rick Perry!" Sarah Palin has had some experience with reality tv, so I'm sure she could get picked as a contestant.
I’m not quite sold on Perry yet. On the other hand, from the comments here at FR, it looks like the Palin supporters also see Perry as the strongest challenger of the candidates in the race — hence their focus on bringing him back to earth to clear a path for her grand entrance.
The “boots” ought to be kicking down the doors...
Show us your papers, capitalist swine !
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.