The 'Inevitability' Vote (Thomas Sowell on Romney)

Creators Syndicate ^ | March 16, 2012 | Thomas Sowell

[jazusamo]

Many people may be voting for Mitt Romney because of the view in some quarters that he is the inevitable Republican candidate for President of the United States and the candidate with the best chance of beating Barack Obama, rather than because they actually prefer Romney to the other candidates. Inevitability has a very unreliable track record. Within living memory, totalitarianism was considered to be "the wave of the future." During the primary season, people should vote for whomever they prefer, on their own merits, not because pundits have pronounced them inevitable. Regardless of what the polls or the pundits say about Mitt Romney's chances of winning the Republican nomination, the conditions that made him the front runner in the primaries are the direct opposite of the conditions for the general election. The biggest single reason why Governor Romney is the front runner is that he has had the overwhelming advantage in money spent and in "boots on the ground" running his campaign in states across the country. Romney has outspent each of his rivals — and all of his rivals put together. His campaign organization has been operating for years, and it has put his name on the ballot everywhere, while neither Santorum nor Gingrich had a big enough organization to get on the ballot in an important state like Virginia. In the general election, President Obama will have all the advantages against Romney that Romney currently has against his Republican rivals. Barack Obama will have boots on the ground everywhere — not just members of the Democratic Party organization but thousands of labor union members as well. Incumbency alone guarantees the president plenty of money to finance his campaign, not only from enthusiastic supporters but also from businesses regulated by the government, who know that holders of political power demand tribute. And the mainstream media will give Obama more publicity than Romney can buy. How does anyone ever defeat a sitting president then? They do it because they have a message that rings and resonates. The last Republican to defeat a sitting president was Ronald Reagan. He was the only Republican to do so in the 20th century. He didn't do it with polls. At one point during the election campaign, President Jimmy Carter led Ronald Reagan with 58 percent to 40 percent in the polls. So much for the polls that so many are relying on so heavily today. The question is not which Republican looks better against Barack Obama in the polls today, before the general election campaign begins. The question is which Republican can take the fight to Barack Obama, as Reagan took the fight to Carter, and win the poll that ultimately matters, the vote on election day. The biggest fighting issue for Republicans is ObamaCare. Can the author of RomneyCare as governor of Massachusetts make that an effective issue by splitting hairs over state versus federal mandates? Can a man who has been defensive about his own wealth fight off the standard class warfare of Barack Obama, who can push all the demagogic buttons against Mitt Romney as one of the one-percenters? Rick Santorum, and especially Newt Gingrich, are fighters — and this election is going to be a fight to the finish, with the fate of this country in the balance. Mitt Romney has depended on massive character assassination advertising campaigns to undermine his rivals. That will not work against Barack Obama. Even a truthful account of the Obama administration's many disastrous failures, at home and abroad, will be automatically countered by the mainstream media, 90 percent of whom voted for Obama in the 2008 election. It is truer in this election than in most that "it takes a candidate to beat a candidate." And that candidate has to offer both himself and his vision. Massive ad campaigns against rivals is not a vision. Some, like President Bush 41, disdained "the vision thing" — and he lost the presidency that he had inherited from Ronald Reagan, lost it to a virtual unknown from Arkansas. The vision matters, more than the polls and even more than incumbency in the White House.

[loveliberty2]

Thank God that Sowell has a newspaper column for reaching the "masses" who are able and willing to read the wisdom of a truly great American intellectual.

Each, and all, of us, however, must find whatever means we can utilize to expose as many potential voters as we can reach with a glimpse of the "vision" America's Founders had for this place on the globe.

Their vision was for a place were Creator-endowed human beings, reacting to the call of the Supreme Being in their own consciences, and being aware of what they called "natural law," could live together with one another in "peace, liberty, and safety," (Jefferson's First Inaugural) under a system of self-government, whose elected "People's" representatives would be "bound down by the chains of the Constitution" (Jefferson again) they framed and adopted in 1787.

Love and respect for their unprecedented work and sacrifices have motivated millions of America's finest to join the founding generation in being willing to sacrifice their own "lives, property, and sacred honor" across these 200+ years.

Today, with the so-called "progressives," there is no "vision" for liberty--only a utopian dream of equality in misery under a political elite throughout the globe.

Here is an excerpt from a late-19th Century essay, which can be read at the Liberty Fund Library here.

"Freedom is the most valuable of all human possessions, next after life itself. It is more valuable, in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health; but good laws, justly administered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the only thing that law can secure. Law cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of equality, all that law can do is to secure fair play, which is equality of rights but is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Individualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with that Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we may, is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, and that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the abnegations of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove." EDWARD STANLEY ROBERTSON

Today is the day in America when the battle of ideas between Freedom and Socialism must be engaged by competent, knowledgeable spokesmen and spokeswomen who are presidential candidates.

That is why the topic of this thread is so very important to freedom lovers everywhere.

[Marguerite]

“The biggest fighting issue for Republicans is ObamaCare. Can the author of RomneyCare as governor of Massachusetts make that an effective issue by splitting hairs over state versus federal mandates?”

Romney has ZERO credibility, the days he says he will repeal Obamacare. Other days, he says he only will repeal parts of it, or he’ll hand waivers to friends, or he will not repeal it at all... With Romney I one never knows what Romney II would say the next day ...

[Still Thinking]

My recommendation for a WrongMe campaign slogan:

"Romney: Isn't it time to give up?"

[jazusamo]

Thanks for the link on Newts thoughts on brokered conventions.

If preventing Romney from the nomination takes a brokered convention I would hope Newt’s dream comes to pass. Over the years this would be the absolute best time for that to happen, Romney must not get the nomination.

[smoothsailing]

Stephen Hayes at the Weekly Standard has a commentary on the subject...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2860503/posts

It looks like it might just be the only way of denying Mittens the nomination.

[Patton@Bastogne]

"We have to frankly break the back of the secular-socialist machine, elect people committed to representing the American people, and then methodically rip the system apart."

~Newt Gingrich, 2012

====== NEWT GINGRICH'S GREAT 2012 CAMPAIGN SPEECHES ======





CPAC 2012 Speech -- Newt Gingrich, U.S. President Elect

CPAC 2012 Speech -- Sarah Palin, U.S. Vice President Elect



Nancy Reagan (1995) : Ronnie turned that Torch over to Newt



NRA Second Amendent Speech -- Newt Gingrich


U.S. Energy Independence in 2012 -- Speech

U.S. Energy Independence in 2012 -- Newt Gingrich


"America's Space Renaissance" in Florida !

Newt Gingrich -- Vision for America in Space Again



Why is Newt Gingrich So Angry ?

Newt Gingrich : South Carolina Victory Speech (2012-01-21)

Newt Gingrich : Christmas Day in 1776 George Washington's "Victory or Death"



Newt Stoutly Defends the Second Amendment (Right to Bear Arms)

Newt Gingrich – Constitutional Removal of Radial-Liberal Federal Judges



Newt Slams an "Increasingly Radical" EPA



Newt Defends Israel and Shows how the Palestinians are an "Invented" people !

Newt Warns against the Proposed 9-11 NYC Islamic Mosque and Islamic Sharia Law

Gingrich Compares Radical-Isalmics Muslims To Nazis

Newt Gingrich On The Threat Of Radical Islam

Newt Gingrich – America’s Defense of Judea-Christian Ideals and Defense against Islamic Fascism

Gingrich: Aggressive Prosecution of Radical-Militant U.S. Muslim Groups



Newt Gingrich: Response to CNN’s John King “Divorce Question”

Newt Gingrich to Juan Williams: Americans Want Paychecks, Not Food Stamps

Gingrich BLASTS Chris Wallace for his "Gotcha" Questions at Iowa Debate



Newt Destroys Ron Paul's Foreign Policy Vis-à-Vis Killing Osama bin Laden



Gingrich: My Credential Is 4.2% Unemployment

Newt Slams Obama's Stupidity on the Keystone Pipeline

Gingrich attacks Federal Reserve (Bernanke and Geitner) Deception and Corruption

Newt Discusses Job Creation and Dismantling Federal (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac)



Newt: No American President Should Bow to a Saudi King

Newt Gingrich: Super PAC Committee Is Washington's Dumbest Idea




=============================================



.

[GOPJ]

Romney has outspent each of his rivals — and all of his rivals put together. His campaign organization has been operating for years, and it has put his name on the ballot everywhere, while neither Santorum nor Gingrich had a big enough organization to get on the ballot in an important state like Virginia.

In the general election, President Obama will have all the advantages against Romney that Romney currently has against his Republican rivals. Barack Obama will have boots on the ground everywhere — not just members of the Democratic Party organization but thousands of labor union members as well.

Always interesting - thanks for the ping.

[Bobbisox]

BUMP TO THE TOP! Thomas Sowell nails it again.

I love to read his articles. It is now up to Louisians to bring Newt back to the top. I hope and pray Mr. Newt can somehow show Santorum is not the most conservative alternative to Romney.

Mr. Newt is magnificant, and it would be a real shame if we lose this opportunity for such a fine President. EAGLES UP MR. NEWT!

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I never understood why we wrote off and ignored our best conservative spokesman. Here he nails Obama as an outright Communist who will destroy this country. We need him again.

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/alan-keyes-the-truth-about-obama/4ac40525253bfd565eae4ac40525253bfd565eae-727761945991?q=alan+keyes&FORM=VIRE7

[Paved Paradise]

Yeah, just stay home, Vlad. Nothing like impaling oneself. I have been supporting Santorum. When Newt/Rick/Mitt gets the nomination, I’m going to GLADY pull the lever for whomever is on the GOP ticket. No matter what flaws you want to pull out, there is NO way any of them even come close to the buffoon we have now. Time to grow up.

[Paved Paradise]

That’s “GLADLY.”

[reaganaut]

You party over principle types are the reason the GOP has gotten so liberal that they are pushing a socialist (Romney).

I will stand on my principles, because the GOP has already left me.

[Paved Paradise]

You are a fool. I’m not a “party” over “principle” person. I’m someone who thinks Obama is going to turn this country into a living hell...and it’s well on it’s way. People who put on airs about having principles always crack me up. You think you have more principles than the rest of us. Sure you do. Meanwhile, you might as well just vote for Obama. Then you can sit at home and kvetch about how everyone else has ruined things for you, when all along it’s folks like you who will sit back on their principled haunches and allow the destruction to take place.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

You party over principle types are the reason the GOP has gotten so liberal that they are pushing a socialist (Romney).

Did you include me by mistake. I don't remember saying anything to indicate that.

However, now that you have brought it up, why would you consider yourself morally superior because you will sanctimoniously sit home and help elect an anti-Christ, anti-American, Communist all on the basis of what you consider to be "principle?" Do you not believe in the lessor of evils?

The reason the party has gotten so liberal is because the leaders foolishly chase the illusive and mythical mushy middle by softening our conservative approach. However, a rino is better than a Communists. Don't you agree?

[reaganaut]

Did you include me by mistake. I don’t remember saying anything to indicate that.

- - - -
No, I included you because you included me.

I will not vote for Romney EVER. I won’t stay home, and I never said I would. I will vote down ticket, but it is the GOP’s fault and I will no longer support a party who doesn’t represent me. As a Christian AND a Conservative, I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR MITT. The GOP is self destructing, that isn’t my fault.

Why would you go to the polls and vote for an anti-Christ, anti-American, Communist all on the basis of what you consider to be “principle?” (Romney). Romney IS A COMMUNIST just as much as Obama and the GOP elite knows a lot of you will bend over and take it. I did for McCain and NEVER AGAIN.

[reaganaut]

I’m not a “party” over “principle” person

- - - -
If you vote for Mittens, yes you are. Romney will be NO different that Obama...mark my words.

I can not vote for either. But I am sick of the GOP shoving RINOs and socialists down our throats.

[Paved Paradise]

Okay...so did you campaign (work) for the candidate you wanted? Did you donate money? I always DO something. I don’t just squeak away. Meanwhile, you have no idea that Mitt Romney is going to be the SAME as Obama. Meanwhile, although Mitt was not MY choice, nor is he MY favorite by any stretch, I think he is vastly different from Obama. Vastly. For one, he’s NOT a lefty. And that’s as different as night and day.

[Paved Paradise]

P.S. If it’s between Mitt and Obama and Obama wins, your NO vote is as good as vote for Obama. I’m sure the Left, the Media, and all who are on Obama’s side are just gleeful in knowing that there will be people like you.

[Paved Paradise]

If you think Romney is a Communist, you really need to recheck the definition. Sheesh.