It seems my confidence in Romney for 2008 may have been uninformed. David Brooks points out today some serious problems the man has – including a stand on immigration that makes him Tancredo’s choice and therefore not America’s:

Earnestly and methodically, he has appealed to each of the major constituency groups. For national security conservatives, he vowed to double the size of the prison at Guantánamo Bay. For social conservatives, he embraced a culture war against the faithless. For immigration skeptics, he swung so far right he earned the endorsement of Tom Tancredo.

…

And what Romney failed to anticipate is this: In turning himself into an old-fashioned, orthodox Republican, he has made himself unelectable in the fall. When you look inside his numbers, you see tremendous weaknesses.

For example, Romney is astoundingly unpopular among young voters. Last month, the Harris Poll asked Republicans under 30 whom they supported. Romney came in fifth, behind Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain and Ron Paul. Romney had 7 percent support, a virtual tie with Tancredo. He does only a bit better among those aged 30 to 42.

Romney is also quite unpopular among middle- and lower-middle class voters. In poll after poll, he leads among Republicans making more than $75,000 a year. He does poorly among those who make less.

If Romney is the general election candidate, he will face hostility from independent voters, who value authenticity. He will face hostility from Hispanic voters, who detest his new immigration positions. He will face great hostility in the media. Even conservative editorialists at places like The Union Leader in New Hampshire and The Boston Herald find his flip-flopping offensive.

There a millions of people who should be President in this country (and for me Romney is now off that list). But there is probably only one or two right now who are conservatives and who could win. With Romney now out of the picture from an electability stand point, that leaves Giuliani and McCain.

Which is perfect. They are the only two who have seen the ugliness of terrorism and war upfront and persona. They know we must stand up to evil but also know the cost it will require. I still think facing down terrorism is the most important job for the next President. George Bush has come very close to ending Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda movement. The Next President will have to continue the work to stamp out Islamo Fascism and bring other choices to the Middle East region. We cannot afford to backslide and lose the progress we have today which was so dearly paid for.

Romney is just not the answer. He could run some numbers for the next President and give false hope to the Tancredo-ites, but I don’t think he is the best option out of the top 3 candidates. In fact, this is an important wake up call to the GOP – they are not admired right now in America, as Brooks notes:

Romney has turned himself into the last gasp of the Reagan coalition.

That coalition had its day, but it is shrinking now. The Republican Party is more unpopular than at any point in the past 40 years. Democrats have a 50 to 36 party identification advantage, the widest in a generation. The general public prefers Democratic approaches on health care, corruption, the economy and Iraq by double-digit margins. Republicans’ losses have come across the board, but the G.O.P. has been hemorrhaging support among independent voters.

There are fond memories of greatness. There are memories of the heady days before the far right stabbed El President Jorge Bush in the back (and ended their control of Congress). But right now there is lack of support for the old GOP model, the angry GOP which seems to be just the flip side of the angry far left. The independents have rejected party loyalty to both parties, now they look for those who are not tied to the party lines (and overheated rhetoric), but to individual principles. Principles are what will sell in 2008. Strong, heartfelt principles will be were America rallies this year.