The Case for Gingrich’s Electability

weeklystandard.com ^ | 12/31/2011 | Jeffrey H. Anderson

[TBBT]

It’s an article of faith among many Republicans that Mitt Romney is the most electable candidate in the GOP field. But it’s not clear that this assertion is actually true. In fact, if one were going to design a Republican opponent tailor-made to President Obama’s liking, that opponent would be uniquely vulnerable to Obama’s main rhetorical thrust (making class-warfare arguments), uniquely unsuited to take clear aim at Obama’s least popular action as president (spearheading the passage of Obamacare), and uniquely strong in states that are unlikely to matter in the general election race. In all three of these ways, Romney is made to order for Obama — while his chief rival, Newt Gingrich, is not.

None of this is to question Romney’s potential appeal to moderate voters. Nor is it to deny that Gingrich has more baggage and would be easier for Obama to try to vilify as a “conservative extremist.” But there is more to winning over moderates than simply running the most moderate candidate, and the truth is that no one really knows whether Romney or Gingrich would pose a more powerful electoral challenge to Obama.

[TBBT]

In the same vein... Obama vs. Generic Republican and Obama vs. Republican candidates are generally worthless at this point - for various obvious reasons. They serve as establishment/media tool to push one candidate of detract from another - nothing more.

[Jukeman]

I’m not convinced there is any truth to the electability of Romney.

[david1313]

This article is spot on. If anyone is voting Romney because they believe he is most electable they are wrong. The one that Obama wants to run against the most is Romney, they have been working on this for over a year. The 99% vs. the 1%, ring a bell? Obama vs Romney, Obama wins.

[Utmost Certainty]

In fact, if one were going to design a Republican opponent tailor-made to President Obama’s liking, that opponent would be uniquely vulnerable to Obama’s main rhetorical thrust (making class-warfare arguments), uniquely unsuited to take clear aim at Obama’s least popular action as president (spearheading the passage of Obamacare), and uniquely strong in states that are unlikely to matter in the general election race. In all three of these ways, Romney is made to order for Obama — while his chief rival, Newt Gingrich, is not.

Exactly, times a million. Why do so many not understand that Romney will LOSE to Obama in 2012, precisely for reasons like this?

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks TBBT.

[VanDeKoik]

You cant tall that type of stupid anything.

If you listen to the only people that go on camera in support of Mitt, they can barely articulate an actual reason to back him outside of how “electable” he looks.

[CainConservative]

Yeah. Since day one, Axelrod and Obama have schemed with the MSM to give Romney basically the kid gloves treatement.

Their nightmare one-on-one opponent: Huck, Pence, Newt, Rubio, Perry, Bachmann, Palin, or Ryan.

Let’s give them DOUBLE hell. Let’s give them Newt/Rubio!!

[muawiyah]

Romney is NOT electible. He cannot get the Republican voter base behind him ~ his best showing has been 23% in questionable polls biased in his favor.

If a Democrat wants Democrat policies he'll vote for the real thing ~ not a watered down Republican.

The proven technique is to HOLD YOUR PARTY'S BASE and PEEL OFF A FACTION FROM THE OTHER PARTY.

I've suggested that the best way to do this is to take an experienced and generally successful politician (e.g. a Gingrich) who has also been successful in business (e.g. a Gingrich ~ something like $120,000,000 in the bank) and see if he can attract a major Democrat faction.

Currently with only 55% of youth between 19 and 29 employed (and 45% UNEMPLOYED) that's the faction to tag.

The Democrats have nothing to attract unemployed young people just starting out in their careers. Holding a Wagu barbeque really isn't going to do it I'm so sure.

[RC one]

Romney is the one the liberals want to run against and it isn’t because they think they can beat him, it’s because they don’t really care if they don’t...because he’s a liberal. If he gets the nomination, they’re in a win/not really lose too bad situation.

[RC one]

He does have great hair though, you have to admit. Bet he gets pedicures with John Kerry too.

[nathanbedford]

But there is more to winning over moderates than simply running the most moderate candidate,

[BCrago66]

The article point to the possibility of a reverse Bush v. Gore should Romney get the nomination. Because of Mitt’s appeal to some independents & Republican squishes, he may rack up enough votes in states that he would lose anyway - e.g., NY, MA, CA - to win the popular vote, while Obama gets 270 electoral votes & a 2nd term.

[CGalen]

Yup!

[ez]

Newt scares the bejeebers out of the left AND the establishment for a couple reasons. One, he knows where all the skeletons are buried, on the left and the right. Two, because of what they done to him back in the nineties... false ethics charges, misquotes, fake stories of divorce papers and deathbeds...having him achieve the power of the Presidency might be just the recipe for a little PAYBACK. I hope they wet themselves those backstabbing bastards.

[muawiyah]

If you won over all the "moderate democrats" and all the "moderate moderates" and the "moderate independents" and the "moderate republicans" you'd have about 15% of the vote and your opponent would have 85%.

For all practical purposes there are NO moderates. Never have been. Never will be.

[USS Alaska]

Why do so many not understand that Romney will LOSE to Obama in 2012, precisely for reasons like this?

That's nutz, a pile of dog shit could beat obummer in 2012 even with the whores and pimps of the msm kissing his halfrican, mooselimb, skinny ass for the rest of the year.

That miserable, slimy, corrupt, communist prick couldn't get re-elected in a one candidate race.

I'd have said what I really think about obummer, but I always feel more Christian on the eve of the New Year, and therefore will go gently on him.

FUBO

[newheart]

Romney saw all those polls that showed Obama losing to the “generic” Republican and decided to become that guy.

In fact that is all he is. A generic Republican. Nothing of distinction, no baggage, no long-held core principles other than a commitment to do whatever his advisors say he has to do to win (classic VC attitude)—poll-driven positions and poll-driven strategy.

What Mitt fails to understand is that Ronald Reagan did not win simply because he had good hair and a nice smile.

[Jukeman]

Quite true and well stated.

[jdub]

Unfortunately, any woman who has ever been cheated on is going to have to be a rock-ribbed conservative to pull the lever for Newt. For most, nothing else will matter.

[Utmost Certainty]

That's nutz, a pile of dog shit could beat obummer in 2012 even with the whores and pimps of the msm kissing his halfrican, mooselimb, skinny ass for the rest of the year.

That's a rosy assessment (lol), but overly optimistic IMO. There are too many bought off constituencies to make it an easy election. And if Republicans fail to offer a contrasting alternative to the status quo, they will absolutely lose. It's not like the public is that excited about the GOP—many increasingly blame them for the present situation, since they failed to deliver on what got them elected in '10. The way the situation is going, odds are that Republicans won't take the Senate, will lose the House, and get their ass handed to them by Obama in '12.