Jan 01 2008
Romney Unelectable, Not The Answer
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.
If the Dems maintain or increase their numbers in congress he will have to be a person able to hold together moderate dems along with the guys on our side to counter what would possibly be a veto proof majority otherwise. Because Harry and Nancy will push for possibly even worse than they put up this year if that occurs but with even great inside politics pressure on the blue dog dems, they still have their voters to answer to and they are on egg shells already and the far left types want their hide now and would want it even more then.
I will have to be someone who can take the GWB style hatred which will get transferred and who won’t wait forever to find a veto pen.
Happens every time. The Republicans win control, the far right starts thinking it runs everything and then bam! the Republicans go under. Until the next time.
The two serious candidates with the highest negatives are Hillary Clinton at 49% and Romney at 47%. In think it is the partisanship that gives both of them the bad numbers.
I was disappointed in Romney’s change on immigration. I know he is trying to appease that part of the party, but considering the fact that Tancredo polls behind Ron Paul…is it worth the effort? The hardliners make a lot of noise, but as of yet they have not won any elections.
And that is what a run for the White House is all about:winning.
I remember when the Frosts came forward and supported the S-CHIP program and certain people felt like stalking them and publicly humiliating them was the way to go. They thought that people would agree with that. Well people don’t agree with stuff like that. The message was Democrats care about kids. Republicans care about stalking the parents of sick kids. Republicans need to learn how to keep things rational. They can fight an expansion of a health care program without acting like a bunch of loons. But they got together in their echo chambers…they were all over the right wing blogs…and convinced themselves that this is how most Americans look at things.
It is not, that kind of behavior is killing the party, it drives Independents away in droves and makes anyone who has ever had a really sick child think Republicans are heartless and money grubbing.
Romney has tried to do both. He has pushed a mandatory health program in Mass., while at the same time he is trying to endear himself to the people who could care less if other people can afford health care.
AJ: Romney backs Bush’s Iraq policy and he is a brilliant business man. I think you’re underestimating him. Anyway, some are saying that if Giuliani wins the primary he is looking at your beloved Huckabee for vice president. That’s enough of a turnoff for me to vote with someone else.
So far for me it’s Romney.
I like Romney just fine, but why is it awful for Huckabee to question Bush’s foreign policy but ok fine for Romney to ally himself with Tancredo who accused Bush of selling America out to Mexico?
This is the problem, too many people in the base have not been loyal to Bush. The only reason they care about the things Huckabee is said is that a lot of the right agrees with a strong foreign policy position. If Huckabee had gone after Bush on spending and immigration instead he could have been just as nasty as he wanted and no right wing blogs would have cared.
And who are the “some” who say Giulliani is thinking of putting Huckabee up as VP? From what I hear it is the anti Giulliani people who like Huckabee because he is an Evangelical. The revolt of the social conservative and all that. It is possible of course, in fact those two might balance a ticket, but it is still strange.
That is the problem, there is too much speculation.
Terrye: I follow Dick Morris play-by-play analysis and blog (www.dickmorris.com) … and he has said it.
Here we go again.
The country (dems and repubs alike) wants the ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION stopped and reversed.
So please stop the disinformation.
The country really appreciated what Tom did, not the other way around.
Romney’s problems are not happening because of Tom or because he supposedly is “tough” on illegal immigration, which he is not.
So, pleeaaaase….
Dbostan,
The country told Tancredo to take a hike – that is no support.
And yes, people want the issues resolved and now blame those who tanked the last two chances to get reform. That is why Tancredo has been rejected. He brought gridlock and overheated anger.
And he is gone. Good riddance.
Tancredo was ‘rejected’ because he’s a one-issue candidate.. no more or no less.. it isn’t because of his immigration stance.
Vince,
Keep telling yourself that…..
It simply means it will take a few rounds of electoral losses before reality sinks in.
Here in VA all the hardliners on immigration went down. There’s a pattern there for those with willing to look.
Klimit:
He may be right, but Dick Morris is not exactly an authority on Giullani.
I think it would help Republicans a lot if they would stop slapping each other around and try to come up with a strategy to keep Hillary out of the White House.
Vince:
Tancredo was rejected because people thought he was a loon.
The whole point that the hardliners keep missing is that yes the country wants the problem of illegal immigration dealt with. But the right is not dealing with it, they are demagoguing the issue for their own political purposes. Believe it or not there are people out there who do not look at the issue like Malkin or Tancredo who are more interested in solutions than they are in grandstanding.
For instance, the hardliners just hated Lindsay Graham for his stance on this issue. However, it was Graham {with Democrat Evan Bayh} who introduced a bill into the Senate making the smuggling of illegals into this country a felony. A bill like that had already passed the House by a huge margin. There was no great desire on the part of the Senate to stop this. There was not great desire on the part of Democrats to protect the smugglers. The truth is most people want to deal with the problem and hardliners just refuse to accept that. They think they are the only ones who care. The American people do not feel like they need someone like Tancredo calling the shots on this.
What people don’t want is amnesty.
What people dont trust is the govt.
What people suspected with the comprehensive bill is that the Democrats would get their way regarding Amnesty and then next year or sometime rescend the security portions of the law
And gee.. what did the Democrats do ? They did just that with the fence.
The Democrats are willing to do nothing to enhance the country’s security. They want the illegals to come.
People are not happy about this.. witness what happened to Hillary when she dipped her lying toe into the illegal immigrant issue.
And which way have the GOP candidates moved in the course of campaign? They all moved TOWARDS tancredo’s position not away from it.
I’m not sure what the point you’re trying to make with Graham.
And i dont know what solutions you think unindeitifed “hardliners” are opposed to
Terrye:
That’s true. It’s was just his opinion. And if you read his blog or play-by-play he is always stating Republicans need to be able to beat Hilliary (who he is an authority on) and he thinks that man is on Giullani. I just like Romney better. But Giullani is next up on my list.
I don’t understand why AJ thinks Romney is not presidential … if terrorism is his number one issue than Romney should be at the top of list: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071219/D8TKQETG2.html.
Vince:
What people do not want is amnesty???So does that mean that the hardliners are going to round up and deport 12 million people? Oh but then they say that mass roundups are out of the question, so what does that leave? Oh yeah, just enforcing the laws.
What people want is a realistic solution to a long standing problem. Most people support a guest worker program. Most people support giving some of the illegals an opportunity to gain legal status. That is what most people want.
The idea that all of America is just frothing at the mouth at the idea of some illegal who has been here for 20 years getting some sort of legal status is just nonsense. People want the border secure and they want to know who is here and they want the dangerous people gone.
Believe it or not, just ignoring millions of people is a sort of amnesty too.
So the hardliners know that rounding up all those people is impossible and yet they refuse to allow anything that could be construed {by them} as amnesty….therefore they have stuck to the status quo, build a fence and bitch a lot.
The truth is if you gave the Tancredos the option of dealing with this problem to the satisfaction of the majority of the American people OR keeping things the way they are and using the issue to beat other people over the head with, they go with the second option.
That is why Tancredo is out, that is why the Republicans lost in 2006, that is why illegal immigration was a wash in VA in recent elections. They just refuse to accept the fact that they do not represent a majority of the people.
And btw Vince, not all the Democrats are what you say when it comes to issues like this. That is why Pelosi could not get her agenda through.
I have mentioned that my Congressman and my Senator who are both Democrats and they do not vote the way you say Democrats vote on this. I do not doubt that there are people in the Democratic party who are far more liberal on this issue than I am, but the truth is there are plenty of Democrats who are more conservative on this issue than you give them credit for. And there are Republicans who are far more moderate on the issue than Tancredo is. That is why is does not work for Republicans the way the right thinks it will. It is not that black and white.
“It is not that black and white. ”
Yes I know that.. but these are blog comments and not a doctorate thesis, so i type in shorthand.
“What people do not want is amnesty???”
The people who crashed the Senate phone system.
“So does that mean that the hardliners are going to round up and deport 12 million people? ”
Straw man.
No, it is not a straw man. If you are going to make an issue of amnesty then you should be able to discuss what to do with all these people. That is not a straw man at all.
And the point is, they could put the Senate on speed dial and clog the system, but they can not win the Senate in an election.
So, they raised hell and demanded that something be done about immigration, Congress responded, the hardliners had a fit, called McCAin and Kyl and Bush traitors, killed the bill and put us right back where we were.
That is not a plan to fix things, that is a stunt to get attention.
Fixing this problem will require time, patience, compromise, resources and an honest desire to make things better.
After being called a traitor and an open border fanatic by people I had the temerity to disagree with…I have lost faith in the hardliners. I think this is more stunt than statesmanship.
Now, if Romney gets the nomination, I will vote for him. But I think that a lot of this is just posturing.
>No, it is not a straw man. If you are going to make an issue of amnesty then you should be able to discuss what to do with all these people. That is not a straw man at all.
No I dont have to suggest what to do with all these people in order to oppose one of the suggested solutions.
In the meantime the border COULD be getting sealed.. but the forces of multiculturalism cant’ have that. They must hold security as their hostage to get their political agenda implemented.
Anyone willing to play games with our security by erecting obstacles to border security automatically makes me disinclined to support whatever it is they’re looking to do.
And hiding behind terms like hardliners is a good way of obfuscating who you think you’re fighting with.
Principles are what will sell in 2008. Strong, heartfelt principles will be were America rallies this year.
How about the principle that illegal immmigrants are illegally here causing havoc with social services, law enforcement, education and health care systems!
One political party and some of the other are willing to sell out our country for the votes these will bring.
For the Dems its’ all about votes after all since when do they care if voters are legal they have gotten felons voting rights and have had dead men voting for years.
Ditto with drivers liscense issue. Its about getting the votes. I don’t know about VA AJ but I know Iowa and a large majority are tired of a dissproportionate number of illegals showing up in the crime statistics every day and of them taking over our schools and social services. McCain doesn’t get it he is just pandering for votes.