That's a terrific analysis (wish I had written it).
You're leaving one thing out, though, maybe because it's just speculation.
Romney said, during the primaries, "I'm not going to set my hair on fire (to appeal to conservatives)". I believe that Romney, and the Romney faction in the GOP, fear a conservative ascendancy and a sweeping conservative victory more than they fear Obama. Romney's faction never amounted to more than about 35%, but under rules that allowed a plurality "winner" (stupid, stupid, STUPID), they were strong enough to prevail.
This is partly a class problem. Mitt and his crew are just not comfortable with the NASCAR demographic. But I think it also reflects that they are in fundamental agreement with the post-1965 compromises, but believe that they are being badly implemented or that they "go too far".
We believe (I believe) that the post-1965 social and political Grand Compromise contains the seeds of its own destruction, that it CANNOT be properly implemented because it is improper to start with, that it was inevitable that it would "go too far" because that was the intent of its designers.
The problem we have (the reason I believe that Sarah could not have won) is that the People are not ready to fold the tent on the post-1965 arrangements. Politicians, at all levels except a few specific Congressional districts, must lie to the People in order to win elections.
This means that the Democrat, who can lie openly and unashamedly, will usually have an advantage over a Republican who often will be in coverup mode, with an opponent and baying media trying to "out" him as to his true beliefs and true agenda.
I voted for Gingrich, and I would have been much, MUCH happier watching him campaign against Obama. But I acknowledge that, until things get much worse, that overturning the Great Society by a direct appeal to the voters is not possible, and that, therefore, much worse is how things are going to get.
but believe that they are being badly implemented or that they "go too far".... ...it was inevitable that it would "go too far"
Boy, did they ever go "too far" when they enacted Obama care!
I entirely agree with you about Gingrich. It is inconceivable to me the Romney team has not pulled Gingrich in and asked him to be campaign manager emeritus to oversee the entire operation and focus the attack. It is Gingrich who knows how to identify the inevitable excesses, dramatize them, and promote a solution that is both conservative and attractive to everyone. What stops Romney taking this obvious step? One can only chalk it up to ideology or ego if it is not entirely dictated by internal polling data.
There is a companion thread in which a FREEPER asks, why is energy not being emphasized by Romney? I just heard Gingrich yesterday laying out a campaign focused on energy. I cannot believe that Romney's internal polling data tells him not to make this a major issue.
To continue on the theme of energy and apply it to Obama. We all knew before the 2008 election what Obama was going to do to the coal industry and by extension to energy in general, yet the media simply ignored the story to death. So you are right in your long-term pessimism. Things will have to get worse but that raises the issue whether the Republic will survive?
