The Buzz

WILL GOP BAIL ON ROMNEY?

by on Mar.15, 2012, under Uncategorized

WILL GOP BAIL ON ROMNEY?

By Scott I. Williams

Communications Director, 5th District Democrats

The old man from Kansas is still mad about it. Bob Dole is still angry that his Republican party abandoned him in 1996, when it opted to save its control of Congress and let Bill Clinton take the election.

That was almost two decades ago. However, what happened then – party elders bailed on Dole and opted to put money where they felt it was best spent – could happen today. It’s simple economics. Don’t put your money behind a loser.

As Republicans find themselves faced with the increasingly unpopular option of backing Mitt Romney – a candidate that many people flat out dislike – they also will be looking at an even tougher choice. Should they give in to fate and admit that they do not have a candidate who can beat Barak Obama? Should they, instead, throw their effort into making sure they hold the House, and, perhaps, win the Senate?

It’s not a new strategy for Republicans. They did it in 1964, too, when they deserted Barry Goldwater in the face of overwhelming odds.

Already, some Republican stalwarts are bailing out. Michael Steele, former Republican Party chair, admitted on MSNBC as Super Tuesday results were rolling in, “They are just not buying what Romney has been selling.”

That quintessential Republican columnist, George Will of the Washington Post, writes: “[T]here would come a point when … conservatives turn their energies to a goal much more attainable than … electing Romney or Santorum president. It is the goal of retaining control of the House and winning control of the Senate… [C]onservatives this year should have as their primary goal making sure Republicans wield all the gavels in Congress in 2013,” according to Politico .

Sure, there is still a race going on. Rick Santorum thinks he can win, against the odds. So do, apparently, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul. No one ever said Republicans were good at facing reality.

Talk is fading that Mitch Daniels or Chris Christie or Jeb Bush (or Sarah Palin!?!) might come in as a white knight to save Republicans’ hopes for the White House.

Sure, I am future-tripping a bit, here. The Republican establishment might all jump on the Romney bandwagon and he’ll sail through the remaining primaries to nomination, without a brokered convention. Yeah, and the earth will turn backwards tomorrow.

Let’s look at the Romney-Dole comparison a little more closely. It was 1996 (a leap year). Hamas and Israel were fighting. The Greek government was in turmoil. Osama Bin Laden declares jihad on Americans in Saudi Arabia. A whole boatload of Republicans squabbled over their presidential candidacy. At one point or another, Dole, Steve Forbes, Richard Lugar, Phil Gramm and Lamar Alexander, Alan Keyes, Bob Dornan, Pete Wilson, Arlen Specter, Colin Powell, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Morry Taylor and Pat Buchanan were among early presidential possibilities.

Dole won the free-for-all and wound up trying to unseat Clinton, a hugely popular president. Dole had plenty of experience in the federal government – something Romney does not have. And he got crushed by Clinton, 49 percent to 41 percent.

So how is Romney supposed to fare any better? He just got crunched in the Deep South. If Romney can outspend his main opponent 10-to-1 in Ohio and still only beat Santorum by a hair, if Romney can only win the most important state on Super Tuesday by a slim margin, how can he possibly beat a sitting president who is winning in the polls without even launching a serious campaign?

The answer is simple: He can’t. Even this far into the primaries, Republicans are looking for an alternative. Why? Because Mitt Romney is a loser. He has no pizzazz, no soul. He campaigns like a web mop, yesterday’s leftover mashed potatoes.

Already, Romney and the party have alienated women, Hispanics and many Independents. After Super Tuesday, add to that the fact that the blue-collar vote, conservatives and evangelical Christians are torn. The vote in the Deep South for Santorum only reinforced that trend.

Republicans are only agreed on one thing: Their main guy cannot win. To expect the big Republican money to keep supporting him all the way to the November is flying in the face of history.

 

See: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73541.html , http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73541.html,

 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73716.html#ixzz1oSfguUqz

 

 

:, , , , , , , , , , ,

9 Comments for this entry

  • Sulema
    March 29th, 2012 on 8:28 AM

    All’s fair in love and war.

  • getting rid of a sore throat quickly
    March 29th, 2012 on 8:13 AM

    Howdy! Do you use Twitter? I’d like to follow you if that would be okay. I’m absolutely enjoying your blog and look forward to new posts.

  • wissou
    March 26th, 2012 on 1:24 AM

    Hmmm. I’m not a great fan of Gingrich (I like his intelligence, and his ‘say what I think attutide’ – but not his past politics). However, I look at the present field and keep thinking he’s the best of a poor set of choices. Otoh, I’ll vote for ALMOST and GOP candidate over our ‘present’ President.

  • Rwan
    March 25th, 2012 on 1:31 PM

    Ron Paul is right on about smaller omnervgent and I do believe he would drastically cut useless, bloated omnervgent programs. I do however have serious reservations about his stance on foriegn policy. I can’t believe his implications that America is responsible for 911 as we are sticking our noses in the business of other countries. Yes, we need to stop being the world’s policeman however he went too far. Terrorists are responsible for 911 and that is it. Ron Paul hooked up with Barney Frank to form a committee to cut budget defense ..Nobody with a brain or a heart should ever hook up with a sleeze like Barney Frank.. 11 out of the 14 advisors picked by Ron and Barney are linked with George Soros. What is wrong with Ron Paul??? Once, I liked him alot, but his approach for foriegn policy is out of wack.

  • kili
    March 25th, 2012 on 2:39 AM

    I think Huntsman has to be the unrepentant mteorade to have a chance. He’d have to hope that rank and file Republicans who don’t like the direction the tea party is taking them go out and vote for him in primaries. But Romney is already filling that role so it’ll be hard from Huntsman (though Romney is doing more to try to have it both ways).Huntsman would be a good VP candidate, but VP choices don’t do much to help (though some like Eagleton in 1972 who McGovern dumped, and Palin in 2008, can hurt a candidate). Romney-Perry could be a strong ticket. Romney-Huntsman would be a strange ticket they’re too much alike (but then again, so were Clinton and Gore). Perry at the top of the ticket would be weaker, but he definitely would need someone like Huntsman. If the fight between him and Romney for the nomination gets bitter, Huntsman might be Perry’s top choice. I don’t think Bachmann, Gingrich or the others really have much of a chance. Though I did like a Politico headline the other day: Bachman Turnover Drives Questions. (Gee, did she say I was just taking care of business you ain’t seen nothing yet! )

  • Eleonore
    March 17th, 2012 on 11:07 AM

    Romney has not even started to campaign in PA YET!!!
    Two weeks before the Michigan primary, Santorum was leading by double digits
    Two weeks before the Ohio primary, Santorum was leading by double digits.
    The Republican politicians in PA are worried about their own political futures……….And, after the clobbering/loss that Santorum had in PA……..Plus, the “NUTTINESS” that can be used to describe his campaign…..The Republicans in PA do not want anything to do with Santorum.

    • Romel
      March 25th, 2012 on 8:41 AM

      Jason, of the half that pay taxes, a much smaller gtncereape will actually vote again for anybody. The newness and the shine has worn off Obama, even if the Samuel Jackson`s ( I voted for him because he was black ) repeat that action there will be considerably less turnout , he simply has not given the inner city base the free cars,cash, etc. over and above what they already get. His radical base is publicly dissing him, his large donors are publicly saying not this time’ I think he loses to anyone running. The bigger problem is, do the American people lose if Romney, Santorum, Paul, and in some respects, Gingrich win? Yup! If we don`t completely flush out Congress, it will be same old, same old.

  • Kip Sarzynski
    March 16th, 2012 on 5:59 AM

    Do you have a Facebook Page? I want to subscribe

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!

Visit our friends!

A few highly recommended friends...

Archives

All entries, chronologically...