« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Does Emperor Romney Have No Clothes?

For months, we’ve been hearing that Mitt Romney is the “presumptive Republican nominee.” He’s the permanent frontrunner, the “inevitable” candidate, the polished professional running a machine-like campaign. Each stumble by any other candidate has been viewed as bequeathing benefits to Romney, further forging his armor as the almighty invincible candidate.

But is Romney really invincible? Is his selection as the Republican nominee for President really inevitable? Or does Emperor Romney have no clothes?

If you recall the famous Hans Christian Andersen tale, the Emperor parades through the town in a new suit of clothes which are supposedly made out of a magical fabric that is invisible to those who are stupid, incompetent, or unfit for their positions. The townspeople make a great effort to all proclaim how attractive and fine the Emperor’s new clothes are, until a child, too young and naïve to know any better, cries out, “But he isn’t wearing anything at all!”

Isn’t that similar to what we’ve been doing with the Romney campaign? We’re all told how lovely and fine the Emperor’s clothes are professional and well-organized the Romney campaign is. “Experts” tell us that he has the nomination all but wrapped up. Case in point is Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post, who in a post last week dismissed conservative support for Newt Gingrich as “silliness on stilts” and in the next paragraph wrote off Herman Cain’s campaign as a “now-fading mass delusion.”

But is Romney’s campaign really so perfect? More to the point, is hereally such a perfect candidate? Don’t get me wrong: I want to make Barack Obama a one-term president, and that’s the number one goal. So I am not going to turn a deaf ear to discussions of general election viability. But, again, is Mitt Romney really such a strong candidate?

I think I am starting to see some transparency in the fabric of Emperor Romney’s clothes.

For one thing, he’s lost more elections than he’s won (Ran for the Massachusetts Senate seat in 1994, lost; ran for Massachusetts Governor in 2002, won; declined to run for reelection; ran for President in 2008, lost).

There’s the fact that Romney’s place in the polls – both nationally and on a state-by-state basis – has been almost completely stagnant. While a large percentage of the Republican electorate is still undecided, the wild shifts have been from one “Not-Romney” to another. Romney just simply does not have an enthusiastic base of supporters who are working to win him new converts like Cain, Gingrich, and Perry do.

And then there’s the odd habit that the Romney campaign has of trumpeting “pending” or “imminent” endorsements that never seem to materialize.

Just last month, Romney’s consultants were furiously pushing a story that Senator Jim DeMint would be endorsing RomneyNot only was it complete nonsense, the hubris of the move so annoyed DeMint’s people that his official spokesman called the story a “fabrication,” and the head of DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund said that DeMint was “looking to see who wins over the grassroots, and so far Governor Romney has not done that.”

Last week, the story repeated itself, this time with Governor Mike Huckabee. C-SPAN Political Editor Steve Scully posted on Twitter that “Sources indicate” that Huckabee was “set to endorse” Romney. Reaction from Huckabee was swift and vicious. In an email to ABC’s Jake Tapper, Huckabee stated that the story was false:

I am NOT endorsing ANYONE in the primary…Nothing of the sort – the ‘source’ is an uninformed total idiot. Quote me.

…Where do people make stuff like this out of the thing air? …Plain and simple. Someone has more time than brains on his hands.

See Jake Tapper’s tweets regarding this email herehere, and here. “Sources indicate” – anyone else wonder if that was more meddling by overzealous Romney staffers?

Now, the latest blow to The Mythology of Mitt Romney comes this morning from New Hampshire. Romney has heavily invested his time and money in the Granite State, courting voters, Republican leadership, and the newspapers.

And…BOOM:

Fox News | Newt Gingrich to Get Big New Hampshire Endorsement

CNN Politics Political Ticker | TRENDING: N.H. Union Leader backs Gingrich

Gingrich has landed the coveted endorsement of the Manchester Union Leader, the main conservative newspaper in New Hampshire. Considering that Romney was the Governor of their neighbor state and had worked so hard to lobby for their support, the Union Leader knows Romney as well as any editorial board might know a presidential candidate. They clearly found him lacking, and found in Gingrich something that inspired their enthusiasm:

This newspaper endorses Newt Gingrich in the NW presidential primary…America is at a crucial crossroads. It is not going to be enough to merely replace Barack Obama next year. We are in critical need of the innovative forward-looking strategy and positive leadership that Gingrich has shown he is capable of providing.

Joseph W. McQuaid, Publisher, Union Leader

In the Fox News article I linked above, they go so far as to say that ”[t]he endorsement suggests Gingrich has the potential to beat Romney in the New Hampshire primary. This ‘first in the nation’ primary is considered to be a must-win for Romney.”

Ouch. That’s gonna leave a mark.

So, is it possible that Mitt Romney’s nomination really isn’t that inevitable? I find myself feeling like that child, watching a man with no clothes parade down the street while everyone around me proclaims how wonderful his garments are.

Call me young, call me naïve, but from where I stand, the Emperor has no clothes, and Mitt Romney’s nomination is not as inevitable as he would like us to believe.

[Cross-posted at Sunshine State Sarah]

COMMENTS

  • wacowboy

    and I’ve long felt the same way about Mitt. Who decided that he was a good candidate for POTUS? Is it because he was a one term governor?

    • heraklios

      I hope conservatives keep up the fight against this guy. Let’s put our boots on the neck of this slimeball and make him eat dirt for the next two months!

      • ammy

        Let’s make sure Newt gets the nomination. I’m sure team Obama would be thrilled. Gingrich – when put under the microscope will make Romney look like a saint. And why would you want to put your boot on anyone’s neck? Hostile much?

        • esquip17

          Congratulations! I am sure the Obama campaign will appreciate the degree to which you have supported his narrative. Romnney has two fundamental strengths that make him the most qualified for the president. a) Management experience in the private sector, and government experience in Mass. and b) Consistent pro free market advocacy. I am getting so tired of this silly cultural conservative narrow definition. Look, do you want Obama out or not? If you can’t see the conservatism of Romney then I give up. Vote for Obama, maybe thats what we deserve. Free enterprise is the core of the conservative movement and we have a viable candidate in Romney. You like Perry? Great, if he wins the nomination, I’ll vote for him too, but that looks unlikely. Don’t damage the hope we have of taking the White House. The Tea Party was supposed to be a “fiscal” movement based on economics and constitutionality. I am sick of Erickson’s pro Perry absolutism.. He’s going to re-elect Obama with it.

          • heraklios

            As I have explained before, a Romney Presidency would destroy the conservative movement, cause the GOP to lose Congress in 2014 and basically set us back a generation. Many conservatives are perfectly willing to wait until 2016 if that’s what it takes to get a conservative President.

          • therightsknight

            If you really believe that having another four years of Barack Obama are better than Romney then what are your plans for if Romney gets the nomination? Campaign for Obama because that seems better long term for conservatives? I would take anyone over Obama right now, I think the best course if we conservatives get someone we don’t like is to get them elected no matter how we feel about the GOP candidate. Then when they’re in the white house we can call on them to hold onto their conservative promises from the primary. That might seem foolish but it could work much better than Oh I donno, electing someone who is a liberal idealogue. Please stop with threats that Romney will lose the house in 2014, Bush was a moderate conservative and he held it for six years. Stop with all of the fear tactics trying to get Romney knocked off, they are thinly veiled and don’t hold up. The country cannot wait four more years to wait out an Obama term. If we must make compromises then, that is what we have to do, and we can be just as upset at President Romney, as we are with President Obama, but at least he has some conservative principles instead of none.

          • ammy

            I am more than a conservative I am a patriot. I am not willing to see my country destroyed in order to preserve some unattainable definition of perfect conservative. I’m glad you have shown your true colors. No one who cares about America should care about your opinion or seek to follow it. Mitt Romney is not perfect, but he is a decent honorable man and has no more baggage than Newt or the other candidates and in fact, may have less. We would be lucky to have a man of his talent and integrity in the WH and the fact that you would allow America to be destroyed makes me wonder what your agenda really is. Do you hate Romney or hate Mormons or hate America more?

  • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

    Candidates can win with out the Union Leader endorsement but for a guy like Mitt Romney who has tried to create an image of the winning candidate this has to crushing.

    This is good news for Newt and should help his NH organization increase in size. This is also a break for the Union Leader from the RINOs they have endorsed in the past like John McCain and Judd Gregg.

    • esquip17

      Here is a statement that I feel summarizes Romney’s apeal.

      1. “Corporations are people”. How many of us advocates of free markets have been frustrated by the way the MSM distorts issues of class warfare and economic growth. How often have we screamed at the television of newspaper at another pious discussion of ‘fairness’ or lamented the vilification of ‘big business’. With all due respect to small businesses and entrepreneurs, big businesses usually start small and grow based on sound management. Many of the captains of industry are champions of an economic system based on individual freedom and hard work, despite the disdain they recieve in the main stream media.

      The photo of a young Romney shows an enthusiastic confident guy who has experienced success and can help our nation to do the same. If you don’t think this is part of the message of our party then maybe we are not on the same side.

      • heraklios

        to become a politico. The picture of the Bain Capital folks with the dollar bills is exactly what makes Romney unelectable. He is completely out of touch with most Americans, including Republicans. Most Amercians view Wall Street, as well as D.C., as a den of theives, and they probably aren’t far from the truth. Romney made his money by tearing companies apart, laying off workers and destroying communities and lives. Yes, this is how the market works and it may ultimately be for the good. Americans, however, will never like the people doing this dirty work.

        As for us being on the same side, if you support or admire Romney, then no, we aren’t on the same side at all.

        • naraht

          If Romney is the Republican Nominee, who wants to have as the heart of the election “Whose policies would you be better off under, Bain Capital or the US Department of Labor?” The OWS crowd certainly knows which way they’d answer, but I really wonder how much the Tea Party members would go “a pox on both your houses”.

          • esquip17

            I’ll take a corporation over a bureaucracy any day of the week. Corporations are at least bound by the profit motive which requires they add value to society. It’s not always enlightened, but anyone who has dealt with a bureaucracy knows that there is no telling what motivates them exept power.

        • ammy

          Romney understands the market economy in a way that no other candidate does. If you don’t know that then you are seriously uninformed.

          In addition, there is also a picture of Romney helping to dig a root of a fallen tree out of the yard of one of his sons neighbors. You probably haven’t seen that picture. You have a seriously one dimensional picture of Romney and your lack of information is a handicap in your trying to intelligently pick a candidate who can win. Even with Newts rise in the polls the DNC is still focusing on Romney, they know something you don’t – he is by far the biggest threat to Obama. But you have already stated you would rather have 4 more years of Obama. Your hatred is sad.

          • carolynr

            Romney understands market economy. Well…please tell me…with the Big Dig and all that crap…why his state is 47 out of 50th in job creation…AND PERRY’s Texas created “an environment” for the most jobs produced.

            See…I like evidence…then I believe it…and I believe it could happen. Rhetoric is just words…evidence…well..that is FACTUAL.

          • ammy

            Evidence – good, there lots of it. Mass is a very blue state with a predominantly democrat legislature passing very liberal laws – hence it’s position on job creation. Texas is a very conservative state with a conservative legislature – add oil to that and you have a much better economy- add no income tax and it looks even better. All factual.

  • johnconradarens

    were the “frontrunners”. Mondale had 49% rating in the Gallup Poll, Gore was over 55% leading up to the Iowa Caucuses (do we even remember that he ran against Bill Bradley?). Since that time, no one has had, from either party, so commanding a lead in the polls that they could easily be called “presumtive”.

    This makes Romney’s paltry 25% seem tiny-tiny-tiny by comparison.

  • ammy

    Stop focusing on the primaries and look forward to the general. Newt will make a very unappetizing general election candidate and you are doing nothing but helping Obama.

  • http://www.sunshinestatesarah.com SunshineStateSarah

    No, sorry. I’m not willing to just be quiet and refuse to air legitimate critiques of Republican candidates.

    First, I think we have an obligation to investigate and vet these candidates ourselves and pick one based on reality, not what the MSM tells us or what the campaign’s own spin team tells us.

    Second, if there is anything negative on a candidate, it’s not like the media is going to spare them in the general. It’s better to air it out now so it’s old news in Fall 2012. Look at the Florida governor’s race last year – Bill McCollum and Rick Scott beat the stuffing out of each other in the primary, so when Alex Sink tried to attack Scott in the general, everything she said was months old. It was hard for her to get the press OR voters to pay attention to her.

    Third, unicorns aren’t real. Perfect Republican candidates aren’t real either. Everyone running for President has good and bad points. We can whine and cry and rend our garments while we wait for the second coming of Ronald Reagan, or we can back someone who IS actually running, and focus on picking conservative candidates for Congress and Senate (ahem, like www.AdamHasner.com) and get ready to fight like heck for our Republican ticket next November.

    • acat

      don’t make so much noise that you can’t hear what others are saying, eh?

      No, Romney still sucks, and once the cloak of inevitability completely falls apart, he’s done. It lasted *almost* long enough for him to pull it off…

      The question this cat has is whether Newt is really the best guy… Guess we’ll see what Iowa and New Hampshire have to say.

      Mew

      • http://www.sunshinestatesarah.com SunshineStateSarah

        Here’s where I am::

        1) I want to make Obama a one-term president.

        2) I want to make Obama a one-term president.

        3) I want to make Obama a one-term president.

        (yes, it warrants getting listed three times)

        4) I strongly believe that Romney is neither truly conservative NOR that great of a bet against Obama and the MSM. If he’s the GOP nominee, he’ll get my support and vote. Until then…

        5) I’m undecided. Cain’s foreign policy answers have derailed my enthusiasm for him. Can Perry come back? I don’t know. Is Gingrich our best choice? Maybe. I’m fine with either as our nominee.

        • acat

          Perry’s problems seem to be twofold – first, he’s an outsider, and second, he sucks at debate. Perry’s strengths include character, a squeaky-clean “values” record, and outsider status.

          Gingrich’s problems include being an insider, having some “values” problems, and a lingering sense of uncertainty or unease from his time in office. Strengths include a deep rolodex (insider), genius-caliber mind, terrific debate skills, and ruthless approach to reform.

          Seems to me that these two go together better than peanut butter and chocolate. Perry, the charismatic front man, works the rooms and hosts the diplomats while Newt, the wonky songwriter/synth player, dives into each and every department and agency, armed with a rather large scalpel and deniability. (Perry sent me…)

          Mew

          • http://www.sunshinestatesarah.com SunshineStateSarah

            Yep. I could live with that ticket.

          • ammy

            There have been all kinds of whispers and allegations of crony capitalism regarding Perry. That is not squeaky clean.

          • wacowboy

            that have amounted to nothing.

            no affairs, no harassment, consistent pro life, consistent pro 10th amendment.

            I’m totally against crony capitalism, but it seems to be the en vogue charge these days when we want to disregard a 10 year conservative record.

          • gekster

            Or do you just by into the negatism told about Perry.

          • acat

            If you can’t show where Perry has been successfully charged with corruption, you need to retract this.

            Mew

          • bzip

            You need to back that statement up. Now on the other hand Newt has all kinds of allegations of crony capitalism hang over him;

            Newt Gingrich was a lobbyist, plain and simple
            http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/newt-gingrich-was-lobbyist-plain-and-simple

            Newt Gingrich Had Lucrative Health Industry Ties
            http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/newt-gingrich-hit-on-health-care-flip-flops-think-tank/

            Gingrich Said to Be Paid at Least $1.6 Million by Freddie Mac
            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-11-16/gingrich-said-to-be-paid-at-least-1-6-million-by-freddie-mac.html

            Gingrich made big bucks pushing corporate welfare
            http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/gingrich-made-big-bucks-pushing-corporate-welfare

            Report: Gingrich took money from drug lobby while pushing Bush

          • wacowboy

            I think Perry/Newt would make a good team. And personally, I think Newt would be a better VP than P. His experience of passing reforms in congress would lent itself greatly to that.

          • westcoastpatriette

            ,,,

          • maribeth

            Newt walking into a bloated department with a scalpel (that is to say, pink slips or whatever you use to shut down a department). People running around shrieking, “No, you can’t do THAT!” Newt coolly says, “Perry sent me.”

            Priceless.
            ___________________
            Formerly known as “changeforrickperry”