For the past week, it’s been all the rage among pundits across
the political spectrum. No, not wondering whether First Lady
Michelle Obama is indeed an “angry black woman” but rather
pontificating on whether former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney
is “the least electable” Republican candidate or even simply
“unelectable.”
Some say that Romneycare, the Massachusetts state-run
intervention into health insurance which was largely the model for
Obamacare, makes Mitt Romney an
ineffective opponent to take on President Obama’s signature
“achievement” — an achievement that the majority of Americans has
consistently wanted repealed since its inception.
Others argue — perhaps from wishful thinking — that
Romney’s Mormon religion will be held against him (interesting how
it’s usually liberals saying this will be a problem among
conservatives) or that his work at Bain Capital (and the now famous
picture
of Romney and partners posing with money) will do him in. Some
worry that Mitt Romney will not inspire enthusiasm, that he will
struggle to get Republicans to contribute cash, man phone banks,
and otherwise participate in the grassroots ground game critical to
winning a major election. And everybody knows that Romney has
changed his position on a range of issues from abortion to health
care to gays in the military.
Other candidates, including Newt Gingrich, Jon
Huntsman, and Rick Santorum are calling Romney unelectable —
going after the “most electable” theme that has been a key early
selling point for the Romney candidacy even if not made overtly by
Romney himself. According to Associated Press
exit polling during the recent New Hampshire primary, of
primary voters who said that their “most important consideration
was finding a candidate who could defeat President Barack Obama in
November… Romney won 62 percent of their votes.”
In short, the web is ablaze with articles discussing why
Mitt Romney’s electability is a myth. Color me skeptical of the
current “unelectable” fad.
I understand all the arguments against Mitt Romney. I
would add another: his aggressive anti-free trade rhetoric
regarding China is ill-advised economic nonsense.
But there is something about the “he’s unelectable” craze
that resembles wishful thinking and attempts at political
hypnotism. Romney’s Republican primary opponents and Democrats who
still expect him to be the nominee are waving the pocket watch in
front of our eyes and saying “he can’t win, he can’t win…,” hoping
beyond hope that if we hear it enough we’ll come to believe
it.
Romney has more than a few things in his favor, not least
the public perception that he is a man who understands the economy.
Recent attacks on Bain may dent that shiny electoral vehicle, but
they won’t total it. And his achievements in “saving” the Salt Lake
City winter Olympics are a non-partisan feather in his
cap.
Romney seems distinctly presidential. And although Willard
Mitt Romney has a patrician air about him, coming from a prominent
and successful family, he comes across as likeable in a way that
John Kerry never could. (And Kerry married his wealth, twice, while
Romney earned his.)
Important in the theoretical world of electability, and in
the real world of ever-increasing numbers of
independent/unaffiliated voters, is that many of the areas that
trouble conservatives — and cause Newt Gingrich to call Romney a
“Massachusetts moderate” — allow Romney to appeal to the vast
middle of America in a way that more intensely conservative
candidates would struggle to match. It will be difficult for the
left to credibly portray Romney as “extreme,” one of their favorite
tactics against Republicans.
And still all of this misses — surprisingly for what the
question of electability really means — the fact that the
Republican nominee will be running against a president with a
record. It’s a record of failure and incompetence and corruption
and near-tyranny so all-encompassing that it allows Jimmy Carter a
sigh of relief as he considers his own presidential
legacy.
It is the reason that Charles Krauthammer, when asked who
should be the Republican nominee, said “someone dull and competent”
because this election “must be about Obama and Obama-ism” for
Republicans to win. Of Republicans who are or were likely
contenders for the presidential nomination, only Indiana Governor
Mitch Daniels embodies “dull and competent” better than Mitt Romney
does.
Channeling Krauthammer, the focus on President Obama’s
disastrous record — rather than the lamentations of
perfection-seekers — is what comes through in the data as being in
the minds of most Americans:
Pollster Scott Rasmussen
finds that “former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is the
only GOP contender that most voters view as having a chance against
President Obama. Fifty-three percent (53%) of Likely U.S. Voters
think Romney is at least somewhat likely to beat the president in
November. “
That view of electability is turning, albeit with obvious
if waning reluctance, into electoral support.
A Quinnipiac University
poll released last week had Mitt Romney three points ahead of
Barack Obama in the key early primary state of Florida. And
Romney’s favorable/unfavorable rating is better than any of the
other candidates asked about in the poll — including Barack Obama.
A CBS News
poll released the same day as the Rasmussen data shows Romney
two points ahead of Obama nationally, making Romney “the only GOP
candidate to hold a lead over the president in a hypothetical
head-to-head matchup.” And a Saturday poll of South Carolina
Republican voters shows Romney with massive 21-point lead over his
closest rivals in the Palmetto State in the face of the most
aggressive attacks yet faced by the Romney campaign.
To be sure, many polls show Obama ahead of Romney
nationwide, but Romney leads every other Republican versus Obama
with the RealClearPolitics
average of recent polls having Obama ahead of Romney by less
than two percent, as compared to leading Newt Gingrich by 9 points,
Rick Santorum by 7 points, and Ron Paul by 5 points.
In political betting,
after a week of intense assault by his Republican opponents and
Democrats alike, Mitt Romney’s odds of winning the South Carolina
primary, the Florida primary, and the Republican nomination have
each climbed slowly upwards (to roughly 85 percent, 95 percent, and
87 percent, respectively.)
Furthermore, the anti-Bain onslaught has not dented
Romney’s betting odds of winning the presidency itself, now
standing just over 42 percent — a remarkably high number so early
in the nominating process and against an incumbent president who
won an overwhelming victory just three years ago.
Pundits and politicians of all political stripes keep
telling us that Mitt Romney is not electable — or at least not as
electable as we think. But the data simply doesn’t back them up.
Furthermore, and I say this with the utmost respect to those
talented political writers who are also on the “least electable”
train, there’s a fair bit of projection going on:
Principled conservatives (and libertarians like me) wish
that firm commitment to principle were the key factor in
electability, especially having been through the last decade. In
fact, it is barely a factor at all, at least during these days of
extremely high unemployment and economic insecurity. People want
results more than they want the candidate who is most right — in
any sense of the word.
This may not portend well for our republic’s long-term
prospects. But in the short term, for those who believe that our
nation, and perhaps the world, can’t afford another four years of
Barack Obama, it is hard to be as troubled by Mitt Romney as some
others are.
Do Republicans really need the “most principled” candidate
to be motivated to help him beat the most imperfect president in
modern American history?
One clue to the answer is the Romney campaign’s $24
million fourth-quarter
haul — nearly doubling his closest Republican rival. Few
things are more important measures of electability and enthusiasm
for the candidate than hard, cold campaign cash.
Perhaps fortunately, the public is not listening to the
chattering classes who are saying that Mitt Romney can’t pull the
Republican train to victory. Instead, they’re taking a closer look
at Romney — policies, religion, Bain Capital and all — and saying
“I think he can. I think he can.”
