Romney is the moderate we’ve been waiting for …
Consider the damage if Mr. Romney, whom at least a plurality of Republicans regard as their most electable candidate, ultimately lost the nomination because of Bain. The party, left with a nominee whom Mr. Romney had beaten twice, would be angrily split, its enthusiasm gone. Or consider if Mr. Romney is nominated but is weakened by the Bain attacks. That’s more likely, and it too would be divisive.
Mr. Romney bears some of the blame for the awkward situation. Candidates for president normally build their campaigns on a big idea. Mr. Gingrich’s is that he would crush Mr. Obama in debates and win the election. Mr. Perry’s is that he would extend the economic success of Texas to the entire nation. Mr. Romney’s is himself, the man whose skill at economic revival was on display at Bain. This is an invitation to attacks.
What Mr. Romney needs is a bigger idea to deflect attention from Bain. He’s treated the economy as susceptible to his personal care. That’s insufficient. A bold plan for economic growth, especially a controversial plan with sweeping tax reform, might work. But if not that, then at least do something that dwarfs Bain—and do it soon.
Romney and “bold” just don’t go together. Certainly not at this point.
So? Shut up and vote. Jeff responds to the idea that conservatives simply have no choice, because BEAT OBAMA is what matters at this point.
Which, yes (because the Supreme Court can’t take any more Obama appointments), BUT –
If you enter into a negotiation with the opposition already aware that in the final analysis you will accept whatever candidate they give you (because you find the alternative, in this case, Obama, to be even worse) — that is, if you show your hand at the outset — they’ll give you who they want, relying on your resignation, your capitulation, and, ultimately, your support.
What you want doesn’t matter. And it will never matter. Because you’ve told them that they have your vote no matter what — which allows them to pursue their own interests while counting on you to enable them election after election after election after election.
As I argued at the dinner table last night, those who oppose Romney, and the idea that you must take the shit sandwich given to you by the Republican establishment, view this situation as losing more slowly. Jeff has repeatedly made this point.
Losing what? Well, society. The idea that things cannot be changed – the size of government, the spending,ect – means we will meet the same fate as the Romans. But a lot quicker.
What HAPPENED to the Tea Party?