What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
Politico has this morning leaked a brutal paragraph from George Will's upcoming Sunday column on the subject of Mitt Romney's candidacy.
Romney, supposedly the Republican most electable next November, is a recidivist reviser of his principles who is not only becoming less electable, he might damage GOP chances of capturing the Senate: Republican successes down the ticket will depend on the energies of the tea party and other conservatives, who will be deflated by a nominee whose blurry profile in caution communicates only calculated trimming. Republicans may have found their Michael Dukakis, a technocratic Massachusetts governor who takes his bearings from ‘data’ ... Has conservatism come so far, surmounting so many obstacles, to settle, at a moment of economic crisis, for THIS?
I've seen sharper criticism of Romney come from our own Peter Robinson and Paul Rahe, but neither of them to my knowledge belongs, or aspires to belong, to the nebulous Beltway Establishment. What does it mean when the quintessential establishment pundit savages the establishment candidate?
For starters, it means Team Obama is heaving a big sigh of relief.
- Comment (80)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
It means that Chris Christie, et al, made a complete blunder by staying out of the race. The real race is for the 77% of the primary voters that Romney will never get. Had they looked at the Romney campaign as essentially static under all conditions, they would have realized that his money and organization were just paper tigers.
Dec '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
On the contrary: I believe this column is causing a great wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and rending of garments on the part of Team Obama. I believe they really, really wanted to run against Romney, whose nomination would dampen the enthusiasm of the Republican base and whom they could pummel with a class warfare assault. Of all the GOP candidates, Romney is the one most reminiscent of the last guy Obama beat.
Oct '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
My thoughts exactly!
Dec '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
K T Cat, Christie doesn't care whether he could have beaten Romney for the nomination. Not only does Christie not want to give up his governorship, he's ecstatic at the thought that Romney will be our next President. He's said so.
Dec '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
I agree with Stuart. Romney offers a clear choice to the electorate. It becomes a choice between Obama's fantasy representation of himself and the caricature the left has been making of Republicans for the last century. This is the choice Obama and company wanted the electorate to face.
Jul '11
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
It'll only cause that rending of garments if we finally get a credible conservative in the race. In my opinion, there still is none. But with Bill Kristol and now George Will on board (not to mention Peter Robinson and Paul Rahe), I continue to hold out what, I admit, is likely to be a vain hope that SOMEONE in the Ryan, Daniels, Pence, Jindal, Thune, McDonnell, Rubio, Christie et al. crew will get in. No candidate is perfect, but (1) which of these would not be better than anyone currently in the race, and (2) which wouldn't immediately get the support of the party?
We need more people like George Will to speak out about this. Come on, Republicans, wake up! It can't be too late! Do you really want to go into the biggest election in our lifetimes with Mitt Romney? He's been running for five years and he still can't get more than 20% of us to like him.
Edited on Oct 28, 2011 at 12:26pmSep '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
OK, pick someone else. I certainly got the feeling that people dropped out of the race or stayed out because of Romney's alleged organizational and financial advantages. I think that was a mistake. They should have just tried to win the 77% that won't vote for the guy, of which George Will seems to be one.
Edited on Oct 28, 2011 at 12:19pmNov '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
Looks like my fellow Ricocheteers have given up on my man Herm Cain. Bummer, I still love the guy. People say he can't with the presidency, but I don't agree, and he'd bring conservatives to the polls in droves.
Jan '11
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
I respectfully disagree. He's anything but a clear choice. Romney is a political cipher. He's a man for all interests, whatever they may be at the time and place.
And, whatever you believe him to be, you've got your work cut out for you if and when you try to reconcile what you believe him to be, and what he has shown himself to be. Romneycare is his scarlet letter - and it's writ large on the minds of conservatives - of whatever stripe. Is is so difficult for people to understand the lessen of Dole and McCain?
Romney, as the Republican nominee in 2012, would be a validation of Santayana's admonition: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Edited on Oct 28, 2011 at 12:27pmDec '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
I haven't given up on Cain. Or Perry. Or even Gingrich.
But they still have much work to do to finish earning the nomination.
Jan '11
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
Jul '11
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
I sort of feel like this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7vtWB4owdE&feature=related
Dec '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
At this rate, we might end up with people wanting to draft Sarah Palin!
As Booker T. Washington admonished his fellow Southern Blacks at the Atlanta Convention, "cast down your buckets where you are" - accept the fact that wishing for what we don't have is a waste of time and that our task is to turn what we do have into something worthwhile.
Edited on Oct 28, 2011 at 12:35pmAug '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
Still waiting for that anti-Perry post, Diane.
Nov '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
A.J. Chianese: But with Bill Kristol and now George Will on board (not to mention Peter Robinson and Paul Rahe), I continue to hold out what, I admit, is likely to be a vain hope that SOMEONE in the Ryan, Daniels, Pence, Jindal, Thune, McDonnell, Rubio, Christie et al. crew will get in. No candidate is perfect, but (1) which of these would not be better than anyone currently in the race, and (2) which wouldn't immediately get the support of the party?
We need more people like George Will to speak out about this. Come on, Republicans, wake up! It can't be too late! Do you really want to go into the biggest election in our lifetimes with Mitt Romney? He's been running for five years and he still can't get more than 20% of us to like him.
OK, so let's launch a Ricochet letter writing campaign. Someone collate a bunch of addresses for our preferred candidates and post them over on the member feed. I see no reason that we couldn't each write to all the possible candidates, begging each to run. Maybe one would listen?
Mar '11
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
I sympathize with your wishes but once MOST of these persons entered the race we would see their warts and we would wish they were more perfect. I would never support Christie because of his support of the Global Warming, I mean Climate Change, zealots. Daniels has been squishy on important issues and exhibited a tendency to panic when he dropped out of the race. Ryan voted for many of the big spending bills during the 2008 panic. I think I love Jindal but would have to hear more from him. I do love Rubio and West, not sure about Thune. (continued)
Dec '10
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
Anon
I respectfully disagree. He's anything but a clear choice.
I knew at least one person would take the bait. Read the rest...
He's not a choice in the bold colors sense Reagan spoke of. He is, however, the ideal choice for the democrats because his malleability of positions provides a perfect canvas for the dems to project their caricature of republicans.
Mar '11
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
(con't)
But I frequently repeat this old rhyme in my head:
As a rule, man's a fool.
When it's hot he wants it cool.
When it's cool he wants it hot,
And always wants what he ain't got.
Jul '11
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
But again, no one's perfect. The point is, which wouldn't fit the definition of "electable conservative" better than anyone else currently in the race?
Tennessee Patriot
I sympathize with your wishes but once MOST of these persons entered the race we would see their warts and we would wish they were more perfect. I would never support Christie because of his support of the Global Warming, I mean Climate Change, zealots. Daniels has been squishy on important issues and exhibited a tendency to panic when he dropped out of the race. Ryan voted for many of the big spending bills during the 2008 panic. I think I love Jindal but would have to hear more from him. I do love Rubio and West, not sure about Thune. (continued) · Oct 28 at 12:41pm
Re: What Does It Mean When the Establishment Pundit Rejects the Establishment Candidate?
A.J. Chianese: It'll only cause that rending of garments if we finally get a credible conservative in the race. In my opinion, there still is none. But with Bill Kristol and now George Will on board (not to mention Peter Robinson and Paul Rahe), I continue to hold out what, I admit, is likely to be a vain hope that SOMEONE in the Ryan, Daniels, Pence, Jindal, Thune, McDonnell, Rubio, Christie et al. crew will get in. No candidate is perfect, but (1) which of these would not be better than anyone currently in the race, and (2) which wouldn't immediately get the support of the party?
We need more people like George Will to speak out about this. Come on, Republicans, wake up! It can't be too late! Do you really want to go into the biggest election in our lifetimes with Mitt Romney? He's been running for five years and he still can't get more than 20% of us to like him. · Oct 28 at 12:18pm
Edited on Oct 28 at 12:26 pm
Many of the state filing deadlines are upon us, though. The hour is late.