The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Romney and the Rest

Text Size

Romney and the Rest

By Ross Kaminsky on 4.12.11 @ 1:00PM

Let me put on my big surprise face: Mitt Romney is running for president.

In a video released yesterday, Romney made the announcement that just barely failed to put me to sleep with its utter lack of surprise in style or content.

To clarify, though my opening comment may have seemed a little snide, Romney is and will be a strong candidate. Yes, he has some serious weakness, particularly RomneyCare. His religion could also be a problem, though I suspect that risk to him is over-rated. More importantly given the nature of Republican primary voters is Romney's relatively moderate (and changeable) past views on social issues, including abortion. It remains to be seen whether Iowa or New Hampshire GOP primary participants will take him at his word that he's really pro-life now.

Unfortunately, and it's a problem for all Republicans, not just Romney, having to play to the right on social issues is a negative when it comes to garnering independent voters in the general election. Romney's more moderate past, especially if he's not too fervent during primary season, could thus benefit him in the general election if he were the nominee, if unaffiliated voters believe that if he's pro-life at least it's not likely to be front-and-center of his political agenda if elected.

It's an age-old debate which we won't solve today, but Romney's candidacy certainly highlights both the benefits and perils to Republican candidates of being strong social conservatives.

Much has been made in recent days of the result of a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, which had Mitt Romney leading a large GOP pack with 21 percent support. Mike Huckabee and Donald Trump were roughly tied at 17 percent. More from WSJ: "House Speaker Newt Gingrich got 11%, just ahead of former Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin's 10%. Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, considered a strong contender by political handicappers, remains largely unknown, with just 6% support. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota had 5%, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum 3%, and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour with just 1%."

My take is quite different. I don't think Trump is a serious candidate, and I hope he isn't because he's not just wrong but dangerously wrong when it comes to foreign trade. I don't think Huckabee or Palin will run, essentially for the same reason: they have it so good right now with wide media exposure and huge incomes that it would only make sense to run if their egos dominated everything else. While anyone who's been a governor and who has been a serious primary election candidate for president, much less on the ticket for vice-president, certainly has an ego, I think their egos will be satiated enough by being on TV and making multiples of what they'd make as president and being able to have a life that they won't jump in.

Betting odds on InTrade.com show people whose money is where their mouths are basically agree with me: Romney is trading aroud 27 percent to be the nominee. Pawlenty is a distant second at 15 percent, and then there's nobody else in double digits.

Mitch Daniels (probably my favored candidate right now, though Romney's money-raising ability makes him impossible to dismiss as perhaps whom I should favor) is around 8.5 percent. Michele Bachmann is, somewhat remarkably and probably stupidly in terms of the real odds, trading just over 7 percent. And that's more than Trump, Huckabee, Palin, Barbour, and Gingrich, who range (in that order) from 5.5 to 3.5 percent.

I think those odds are close enough to right except for Bachmann. To be clear, Bachmann is extremely smart, principled, and good-looking, all things which are very helpful to candidates. She's Sarah Palin with brains and real-world experience (Bachmann has a law degree and a prestigious LL.M., also known as a Masters of Laws degree in tax law. Her husband, Marcus, whom I've also met, has a PhD) But I simply think she's unelectable at this time as she's too easy to portray as shrill and extreme. I'd vote for her in a second for senator, but for president I'm just not sure...and I'm fairly sure the country wouldn't elect her.

While with what we know today, I'd be thinking that Romney and Daniels are the two most serious candidates, neither of them is someone who will really stoke the fire of the GOP base or of independent voters. With that, I hope that someone else rides in, someone with intelligence, experience, and who oozes competence even if not charisma (ala the advice of Charles Krauthammer.) The bad news is that I still can't imagine who that person is. The good news is that it's still early.

View all comments (44) | Leave a comment

LiveFreeOrDie| 4.12.11 @ 1:16PM

Allow me to sum up your article using your first and last sentences:

"Let me put on my big surprise face: Mitt Romney is running for president."

"The good news is that it's still early."

Enough said.

Occam's Tool| 4.12.11 @ 1:19PM

Who could that charismatic competent fellow be?

Allen West. Marco Rubio. Herman Cain. John Bolton.

Warrior| 4.12.11 @ 4:01PM

We may have found some common ground. I would support Herman Cain.

Mike Rogers| 4.13.11 @ 12:01PM

All great people. Two of them should fulfil their elected functions for at least two years. One would strike terror into our enemies, but may not strike a chord with the voters unless he gets a lot more publicity.
That leaves Herman Cain - great experience, great character, great speaker, leadership, and catching fire with anyone who sees him.
Mr Kaminsky, take a look around - there are good people out there.

Rogue Elephant| 4.12.11 @ 1:26PM

"Romney and Daniels... neither of them is someone who will really stoke the fire of the GOP base or of independent voters." i.e., NEITHER CAN BEAT OBAMA. There's a good reason for that. Neither embodies the principals and leadership necessary to avert the looming fiscal crisis and help put the US on the road to recovery.

These two need to go away and stop plaguing us with their narcissistic monomaniacal delusions of grandeur.

WL| 4.12.11 @ 3:13PM

You got that Right...
Well Said!!!

RJ| 4.12.11 @ 1:34PM

Last time, Romney was the candidate who would say whatever his audience wanted to hear. His positions are "flexible." In addition to RomneyCare, his other big problem is that he too often says something stupid. For example, when a reporter questioned him about his sons having no military experience, he should have said he was the candidate, not them. Instead he said they were demonstrating their patriotism by supporting his campaign. With clinkers like that, and a sense that he is insincere in his positions, the media will chop him up in a general election against Obama.

Brian72| 4.12.11 @ 1:35PM

So, Bachmann is Sarah Palin with brains.

What a stupid comment.

Condescending, and quite jerky.

Your comment about ego is also rather insulting.

Maybe someone would like to serve the country, rather than their own ego.

You misread Palin badly here.

Dai Alanye| 4.13.11 @ 9:46AM

Bachmann brainier than Palin? Based upon their utterances, I've come to a different conclusion. It isn't degrees or husband's accomplishments that count but raw political skill and instincts.

Having said that, I prefer that Palin wait, preferably becoming Interior Secretary under Rick Santorum.

PattyMor| 4.12.11 @ 1:39PM

No Mitty, you are the "ruling class" establishment Republican candidate. With Romneycare under your belt, you are the "perfect" candidate to tinker with Obamacare; not dismantle it. So as the Valley Girls would say, "You Are So Yesterday".

We need a solid conservative to lead us out of the wilderness the debt burden, and the stiffling big government.

Chuck| 4.12.11 @ 1:52PM

W's brother is a coming.

Grzmlyk| 4.12.11 @ 4:00PM

I can only quote King Lear when contemplating Jeb Bush's winning the nomination:

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO MORE BUSHES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

God, I hope everyone in that family goes sterile so that future generations are unburdened by "compassionate conservatism."

WayneFarmer| 4.12.11 @ 6:14PM

No more Bushes!

NoLib| 4.12.11 @ 10:41PM

No more Bushes--EVER!

Dan| 4.12.11 @ 2:01PM

NO!

Romney is NOT and never will become a "strong candidate." He's a TREMENDOUSLY flawed politician and candidate, and he NEVER garnered more numbers in the last go round, than he had when he began.

Moreover, Mormonism hangs around his neck like a damn millstone.

The Republican, Protestant base isn't much keen on selecting a Catholic, let alone a Mormon.

NoLib| 4.12.11 @ 10:50PM

If Romney were a true Reagan Conservative, I'd vote for him in a heart beat.

It's his RINO politics not his religion that ruined Mitt's candidacy for me.

Mike Rogers| 4.13.11 @ 12:20PM

I have nothing against Mormons, and a lot against Romney - it's the policies, stupid.

pat| 4.12.11 @ 2:58PM

i would for Bachmann in a heartbeat. She represents everything that is right about the conservative movement right now. however, since the repubs will work against HER i will go with the party candidate although i am an independent. the dems are so far out of my way of thinking they might as well be aliens from another solar system/ i cant related to them in the least.

its a shame that a phony like obama can be prez but someone as competent as Bachmann still hits all kinds of glass ceilings, whether inside or outside of the party system. we really havent advance as far as the intelligentsia folks, whether conservative or liberal, think we have.

the country is being driven into the ground by backroom wheeler dealers an intellectuals who simply dont want to see reality for what it is.

morals, economy, security, its all integrated & inter-DEPENDENT, and yet we are fractioned on everything. whether to the left or right.

really....

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.12.11 @ 3:06PM

Most people won't care about Romneycare one way or the other. It's a state run program. It states want it fine. It shouldn't be federal and Romney can defend that all day long.

WL| 4.12.11 @ 3:15PM

I am so darned sick of Romney and Daniels....
What has Romney done to REALLY help our cause for the last two years....I can't even put it into words how much this guy bothers me.
Daniels...what a joke.

Mr. Squish and Mr. Squishier need to just get outta here.

tonypal| 4.12.11 @ 3:46PM

Kaminsky is certainly entitled to his opinion, no matter how absurd. As I've gone through life, I've found that when people need to demean others, it's usually a cover for their own shortcomings. In fact, that's something that ought to be learned by the time you get to high school. So perhaps Mr. Kaminsky is much younger than we all think, thus earning him a much needed break from all the criticism here. By the way, I wonder if he knows jharp.

Dan Pet| 4.12.11 @ 5:55PM

EXACTLY. What has Romney done except take the easy road in endorsing safe candidates, lining his pockets and laying low as to not cause any waves. The author sounds equally loathesome by suggesting that he should back Romney because he is able to raise so much money. If that is the standard why not just back Trump who doesn't appear to need to raise any at all. What a ridiculous statement and his treatment of Palin is HORRENDOUS. When he becomes a mayor and a governor, then he can talk about REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE.

WL| 4.12.11 @ 3:17PM

And this Kaminsky clown.......

What a door knob. Why don't you keep your Palin opinions to yourself...

You insolent useless twit.

Jehu| 4.12.11 @ 3:36PM

The most important thing in politics, particularly Presidential politics, is the ability to connect with voters. Ideology is of secondary importance at best. Most people just don't identify with Romney at all. He's a rich Mormon with no personality. It's not going to sell in the Republican primary and it wouldn't be a great profile in the general election either.

Right now the field is pretty barren. We just have to hope something happens to improve it.

raven| 4.12.11 @ 3:43PM

Romney spent more money for fewer votes than any candidate in history in 2008. He'll do about the same or worse in 2012.

Anyway, it's all pre-game show noise right now and means little.

Clint| 4.12.11 @ 4:30PM

We Tea Party Patriots are watching and noting which GOP Fops are Badmouthing The Tea Party Co-Favorite Sarah Palin.
The Tea Party will purge The GOP again, with a Second Wave in The 2012 GOP Primaries.

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.

Walk The Talk On Tax Day.

Tom| 4.12.11 @ 4:58PM

The LAST thing the Republican Party needs to do is elect a Northeastern liberal like Romney. He is one candidate I absolutely refuse to vote for. If it means a second Obama term; so be it.

NoLib| 4.12.11 @ 5:04PM

Me, too. Let the Democrats field the liars and fakes.

Oldefarte| 4.12.11 @ 5:36PM

The comment about Bachmann being a PALIN WITH BRAINS is an asinine statement. Do you think that we now have a BUSH WITH BRAINS running the country at present? With Obama's stimulous and healthcare idiotic and socialistic legislations, that's your idea of brilliance [and BRAIN power]??????????

Paul| 4.12.11 @ 5:41PM

Bachman is the one we should be supporting. In the end I think she could be the VP.
I will never vote for Romney or Huck.

George S| 4.12.11 @ 5:44PM

All hail the independents; bow to their wisdom, for these are the people who voted in record numbers to elect Republicans to a House majority and several hundreds to state legislatures. Yet, if they hear the word "abortion" they lose their collective minds and go back and vote for the same socialist juggernaut that terrified them in 2010. If that's the way they think, then they shouldn't be allowed to vote. If that's the way the Ruling Class thinks they think, then they shouldn't be allowed to govern.

The plain truth is that people are downright scared of the Obama agenda, yet Republicans cannot see that and recede back to the "fear of the independent" playbook.

Enough of trying to please the undecideds. Whoever runs must take Obama down with no deferential treatment whatsoever; he is an enemy to our freedom and must be defeated. If the Republican nominee doesn't share that view, he will lose. Plain and simple.

God Is Truth| 4.12.11 @ 6:35PM

George, your remarks regarding independents & The Ruling Class establishment of The Stupid Party are dead on the money. These two groups of voters along with the left prevent conservatism from taking root election after election & don't learn their lesson. Thanks for putting it in words better than I ever could. God bless!

Clint | 4.12.11 @ 7:07PM

And The RINO-CINO Clowns Gave Us The Serial Traitor to Conservatism John McCain, of McCain-Feingold, McCain- Kennedy, McCain-Lieberman, Gang of 14, Opposing Bush Tax Cuts of 2001 & 2003, & Tarp.
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.

We Walk The Talk On Tax Day.

Clint| 4.12.11 @ 6:04PM

"The Winston Group has done perhaps the most extensive polling among voters who identify themselves as Tea Partiers, and found that "57 percent of Tea Party members called themselves Republicans, another 28 percent said they were independents, and 13 percent were Democrats. Two-thirds of Tea Party members identify as conservatives but 26 percent say they are moderate and 8 percent described themselves as liberal."

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.

Walk The Talk On Tax Day.

God Is Truth| 4.12.11 @ 6:23PM

Mr Kaminsky, you know where you can stuff this column sir, especially that demeaning comment directed at Sarah Palin. It kills me how Stupid Party establishment idiots like yourself Mr. Kaminsky will go out of your way & bend over backwards to take a slap at Palin every chance you get. You have no class sir & I believe you have a personal problem regarding Palin. Get help. If the estalblishment of The Stupid Party including you Kaminsky, think they can convince this conservative to go for RINOs like Romney or Daniels through sexist trashing of Palin they & you are both nuts.

PhilipJames| 4.12.11 @ 6:23PM

All I can say to this really stupid commentator, you are more like a dumbinsky, not a kaminsky. How do you get this gibberish? Were you on a deadline and decided to retread some old talking points to fill in the space?
Mr. Kaminsky, I will bet you $100 right now (we can arrange for someone to hold the money in trust) that Sarah Palin is actually smarter than all these other dolts you trot out as potential candidates and that if she choses to run, she will wipe the floor with all of them.

Ken (Old Texican)| 4.12.11 @ 8:12PM

Ross,
you hurt my feelings.
I'm a pretty bright guy who has run not one but two fortune 500 size companies (international).

When you write that Sarah has no brains and no real world experience...it makes me just want to kick your ass.....twerp.

It is pencil-neck geeks like you that keep our very best from even running.

Sarah has more brass in her little finger than you have between your legs. Tuck your knees together and protect your little squishy ones......twerp.

Sarah| 4.12.11 @ 8:29PM

Herman Cain.....

NoLib| 4.12.11 @ 10:42PM

Palin/West 2012

martin j smith| 4.13.11 @ 7:52AM

First off we need a NEW FACE on the Republican line. Romney is a loser as were all of the 2008 gang.
I want someone who actually WANTS TO WIN. Not play nicy nicy with Obama. No--someone who is willing to confront Obama on his policies and his agenda. Someone who is articulate and has the guts to take reasonable risks. I would even entertain the possibility of Trump as a LAST
RESORT because Iike his big mouth.

howeecarr| 4.13.11 @ 9:03AM

Which Romney are we going to get this time? The Rockefeller Republican who ran against Ted Kennedy in '94? The non-drinking version of Bill Weld who ran for and won the Mass. Governorship in '02? The suddenly fire-breathing social con who tacked Hard Right once he got a case of Potomac Fever '06-'08?

His one term as Governor here was largely ineffectual (unless you consider RomneyCare a "success.") He is the ultimate political chameleon. Mitt doesn't happen.

Trinity31| 4.13.11 @ 10:27AM

If the Republicans nominate either Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich, Santorum or Palin it will be the end of the party -- for 2 reasons: first, none of them can win against Obama, which means that ObamaCare will stay, and will guarantee the death of the party. Second, the Tea Party will bolt to a new party, thus accomplishing the same thing. New blood, new passion, new ideas, and a new base are needed; those five can provide none of those.

Paul| 4.13.11 @ 1:41PM

Your comment is ridiculous and makes no sense. Palin is part of the Tea Party; why would they bolt because of her nomination? I also believe she'd beat the Bamster in 2012.
You are a moron.

john dubose| 5.2.11 @ 10:48PM

This great land has a much wider spread of opinions than many of the folks that post here seem to realize. Even with the tea party, the Republican nominee will need a lot of charisma and some sort of centerist message to win. When you vote in the primary think about that.