Romney Über Alles
Earlier tonight, one of my fellow members in the Ricochet White House Speechwriters' Consortium asked for my analysis of tonight's GOP presidential debate. Needless to say, I'm hardly in the business of turning down invitations from Peter Robinson.
Like both Peter and Rob, I thought Romney absolutely dominated. If you didn't see the debate, that may sound like testimony to an overwhelming performance. It is not. Simply put, the cream rose to the middle. But given the competition, it didn't have to do anything more.
The sad reality is that Romney won by being merely competent. As I said during our live chat, he was "aggressively adequate." Even in what I thought was his worst moment of the night -- his protectionist response to China, complete with a total misunderstanding of the concept of the balance of trade (and this right after lauding Milton Friedman) -- he probably represented the majority position amongst non-policy wonks. Intellectually, Romney is better than that. Politically, he is not.
Three of the candidates on stage -- Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum -- have never shown any signs of viability and will not be going forward. The others have all taken turns being the conservative alternative to Romney -- and he effectively bested each of them. He was specific where Michele Bachmann was vague and anecdotal. He was fluid where Rick Perry was (we can now say characteristically) halting. He was the one who said real policy-making is complicated while Herman Cain announced it was simple (Cain may have had the better argument there, but Romney very deftly neutralized him).
With the field now almost certainly set, that leaves one man in the anti-Romney batting order: Newt Gingrich. Newt was impressive and authoritative here, as he has been in every debate thus far. On no fewer than three occasions, Romney gave anodyne but perfectly serviceable answers to specific questions, only to have Newt jump in after him, destroy the premise, and give a response rousing in its clarity.
After all the fun we had at his expense earlier this year, it may turn out that Newt is the man best positioned to become the anti-Romney candidate. This should scare Mitt for three reasons: Newt is smarter than him, Newt's first principles are far clearer, and Newt's much better in a fight.
That last bit is the rub though. When the candidates got to ask each other questions, Gingrich pressed Romney on why his capital gains tax cut only applied to people making under $200,000 when that isn't where the majority of capital gains income occurs. Mitt gave a non-answer that could have been destroyed with a follow-up. Newt passed on that opportunity.
Throughout the campaign, Speaker Gingrich has repeatedly stressed the unity of the GOP field against the Obama Administration. All well and good up to this point, and it kept him from getting into unnecessary dust-ups early on. But he now has the opportunity to jump to the front of this pack.
To do so, however, he's going to have to challenge Romney head on. Thus far, we haven't seen signs that he has the stomach for it. Perhaps he's saving this for late in the race, which could be a very savvy strategy. Or perhaps it's just not in him.
Let me note one thing, conveyed with sorrow, in closing. Even though I think Gingrich has the most potential to give Romney a run for his money, I still think that the latter's nomination is near-inevitable without a major disaster. Were it not for Newt's past iniquities -- particularly the ones in his personal life -- this could be a serious two-man race. But that's not the world we live in. As such, I'm left thinking -- as I often do -- that Newt Gingrich may be one of the most tragic figures in American politics.
- Comment (69)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
Re: Romney Über Alles
"The cream rose to the middle."
That, Troy, is beautiful.
Dec '10
Re: Romney Über Alles
Tonight’s debate has removed any doubt that the only difference between the collapse of American hegemony, ending its place as Western civilization’s last best hope, and the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, is that back then, at least, those times were exciting and barbarization interesting.
The tumultuous dislocations and upheaval soon to ensue from the loss of our limited government, free markets, and worldwide banking and financial system surely will echo the devastation of Alaric’s sack of Rome, Attila’s marauding, and civilization’s pitiful retreat to Byzantium.
Yet, here, after an incomplete series of 2-hour debates, the bevy of candidates aspiring to win ownership of the world’s last-standing superpower’s final days has consistently produced only one rivalship: that between torpor and vacuity—appropriately fitting, perhaps, in these times of ours.
An optimist would say no single man should be expected to emerge in the midst of this ominously calamitous foreboding fray, rise above it like a colossus, and to sweep it all away. That optimist is probably right, and those who have organized and participated in these debates are certainly doing their best to convince us of that.
Dec '10
Re: Romney Über Alles
Troy, 13 months is a long time in a country that has a news cycle measured in minutes. Why you would think a man who was a successful Speaker of the House and is now a serious candidate for President is "tragic" is beyond me. This is a example of expectations for humanity so far out proportion to actually that it could only come from someone either ignorant (not you) or young. I think you need to stay tuned for another 10 or 20 years. Unless, of course, you think that Mitt "is the one we've been waiting for". Then I'd reavaluate you not Mitt.
Re: Romney Über Alles
James, your point on playing the long game is well-taken, but let's remember that the game is not quite so long. It may be 13 months until the general election, but it's only about three until the primaries -- my focus here -- get under way. Plenty of time for big changes, but also one month less than the time that has elapsed since Romney announced -- time in which he's managed to stay more or less the front runner, even as new candidates emerged.
As for Newt being "tragic", I mean it in the classical sense: a man of immense talent and capability, with a skill set arguably suited for the White House, fatally flawed because of temperamental shortcomings.
Mar '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
I was out, getting drunk.
The best commentary on such momentous debates is always Stephen Green's drunk blog. Seems like I didn't miss much.
Romney is inevitable? Yawn. Well, better than the syphilitic camel, or Mr Obama.
But Mr Obama is pleased by tonight's debate, I suspect.
Jul '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
One thing about Mr Romney that has merit to me is that he can beat Obama. He has the brains, the look and the toughness to deal with what will be the most expensive brutal campaign imaginable. He knows the tricks and the machinery of the tricks. He has been vetted convincingly to me and his negatives are substantial to me; however, his negatives are far less in comparison to our dismal presidents record.
The media will not be quite as active a participant in Obama's glaring weaknesses and general inexperience being covered up as it was in 2008. In addition, the media will focus the debate extensively on health care and while the Romneycare problem exists as a weakness, the man will be able to appear very informed regarding the problems with health care in general.
If he is the nominee I will vote for him. I do not really like Mr Romney but that feeling is massively trumped by loathing not only our president but his Chicago thugs and social progressives in general. Obama needs to lose in order for our nation to repudiate his ideology. This, to me, is critical.
Jul '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
Troy, I feel bad that Newt's brain couldn't be packaged around a fresh individual with less baggage. I actually feel inspired listening to him.
Feb '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
Romney huh? Not good.
So the GOP front runner is the guy who provided the basis for Obamacare.
Wonderful.
It's like Abraham Lincoln never became president and now, in 1871, we're arguing about the boundary of the new slave state of South California, because the GOP never quite got around to stopping the spread of slavery. And the GOP frontrunner for president in 1872 help draft the border line.
I hope that's not too obscure or offensive. But as far as I'm concerned the GOP has been failing for a long time, and I grow weary of failure.
I will not vote for Romney, period. If none of the other not-Romney candidates are plausible maybe it's time to give poor Newt another look.
Apr '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
Sigh - and I thought this was the year Republicans were finally not going to nominate the next guy.
Edited on Oct 12, 2011 at 1:46amDec '10
Re: Romney Über Alles
David Williamson: I was out, getting drunk.
Romney is inevitable? Yawn. Well, better than the syphilitic camel, or Mr Obama.
But Mr Obama is pleased by tonight's debate, I suspect. · Oct 11 at 11:03pm
Sounds like you made the best choice of the bunch of us. I was busy working while all of this transpired.
While many folks say they needed to plug their noses while voting for McCain, I may need a steady stream of belts starting mid-October to vote Romney-? for the continuing decline of America.
I'll be in my closet rocking a bottle of Jack Daniels to sleep until then.
Feb '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
Peter Robinson: "The cream rose to the middle."
That, Troy, is beautiful. · Oct 11 at 9:43pm
Indeed. But your title - well, let's just say that some of us have an aversion to that expression.
Edited on Oct 12, 2011 at 2:42amFeb '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
Brian Gillis: Sigh - and I thought this was the year Republicans were finally not going to nominate the next guy. · Oct 12 at 1:45am
Edited on Oct 12 at 01:46 am
This has nothing to do with "the next guy" phenomenon.
Romney's performance was significantly above the others. I, like the rest of you, had hoped it was not thus, but after actually watching this debate (first time), it does seem inevitable.
If anyone else had showed himself really ready for prime time, "the next guy" would not have had a chance. This may yet change, of course, but time is getting short and Iowa is getting closer. (I'm still thinking the best non-Romney of the bunch may be Santorum.)
Re: Romney Über Alles
The real problem is that there are no other heavy-weights in the race. Bachmann, Santorum, and, I fear, Cain are not really qualified. Perry is parochial and not quick-witted. He cannot get past the perspective of a Governor from Texas, and he has never informed himself about national (and international) concerns (other than Mexico). Gingrich is damaged goods. Huntsman is a light-weight.
We know of some impressive men. They stayed out, and we are left with the godfather of Obamacare. What one can say about Romney is this: he has done his homework. When pressed on Romneycare, he can lie with the best of them. He is willing to be a demagogue on select issues (China, immigration). He is excellent on defense, and he has plans -- lots of them -- some of them good.
It is early October, and it looks as if he is already the last man standing. We have to hope that he will turn out to be more conservative than anything in his record or public statements suggests. The true believers in our number think that this is the case. I am inclined to believed the evidence. But one never knows with a chameleon.
Apr '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
For what it's worth, I think that you'd describe me as a true believer (although I was very hopeful about Daniels and have been pretty excited about the field in general), and I'm less hopeful that he'll act differently to his record than in accordance with it, minus healthcare.
I think that the healthcare exception is pretty clear; he'll do what he can to get rid of it and we need to have a Congress that makes that possible. I also think that cutting spending and reducing the deficit without cutting core services should be even easier with a legislature that has a <85% Democrat weighting. Likewise the attacks on unions and regulations that he was so good at.
Oct '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
Troy, you highlight my great frustration this election season. Being a bit on the young side, I may be naive in my desire to have a candidate for president who really excites me. Couldn't we right-of-center types just have one contender who really knocks our socks off? If polls on the subject can be trusted we can calculate that there are about 100 million conservative adults in America. Is it too much to ask that out of those 100 million folks we get something better than what we are being offered?
Let's look at our potential champions alphabetically. Bachmann is batty and unpredictable. Cain is great on economic issues but utterly lacking in any kind of foreign policy cred (or even basic knowledge of history or geography). Gingirch is intelligent but stale and transparently ambitious. Huntsman is rather boring and too far left on many issues. Ron Paul looks feeble and is squishy on defense. Rick Perry couldn't articulate the importance of vegetables to a vegetarian and has a, well, squirrely appearance. This leaves us with the ultimately uninspiring Romney. ¿Dónde está Rubio cuándo usted lo necesita?
Jun '11
Re: Romney Über Alles
Cross-posting this comment: Folks who think Newt's baggage is limited to personal matters forget his performance as Speaker.
Edited on Oct 12, 2011 at 5:30amNov '10
Re: Romney Über Alles
Xennady: Romney huh? Not good.
So the GOP front runner is the guy who provided the basis for Obamacare.
Wonderful.
It's worse than that. He also wants to start a trade war with China. It's Herbert Hoover and Smoot-Hawley all over again, and we can pretty much count on FDR if that happens.
I'm with you. Not voting for this guy, no matter what the alternative.
Aug '10
Re: Romney Über Alles
Gingrich's problem is that he is undisciplined. Much like Perry, Newt glides along on his natural abilities but lacks the ability to focus himself to the task at hand. This was again brought to the fore last spring when he went on a 2 week Mediterranean cruise at a crucial time in his campaign formation (and half his team quit as a result).
Romney - while not as intelligent as Gingrich - is extremely disciplined and has enough innate ablility to be successful. Self-discipline cannot be overestimated as a critical factor of success.
BTW, who else lacks discipline? Obama.
Edited on Oct 12, 2011 at 5:49amOct '10
Re: Romney Über Alles
I cannot believe I sit here on October 12, 2011 thinking the same thing.
The man became persona non grata after his dalliance with Nazi Pelosi and AGW...and yet...here I sit, imagining possibly pulling my NH lever for Newt.
Where is the real dittoheadadt, and what have you done to him??
May '10
Re: Romney Über Alles
Yes, that's what we have to hope. And, happily, it's not an unreasonable hope. He's pledged on Obamacare, and he seems both serious and and competent, if not visionary, when it comes to economic questions.
I think it's important that the Tea Party make clear that he's not our favorite, but we'll take him over Obama, while we work to elect more conservative House and Senate members and keep growing the movement.
The work of turning things around will not be done in one term of office. If President Romney can do well enough to prevent total collapse, he'll have done well enough.
I'm sorry that Marco Rubio won't be on the ticket.
Edited on Oct 12, 2011 at 5:50am