Reason 99-B why Romney is the best 2012 Candidate: Electibility

John Hawkins calls Mitt Romneys delectability a myth and breaks it down into 7 reasons why.

Mitt Romney was a moderate governor in Massachusetts with an unimpressive record of governance. He left office with an approval rating in the thirties and his signature achievement, Romneycare, was a Hurricane Katrina style disaster for the state. Since that’s the case, it’s fair to ask what a Republican who’s not conservative and can’t even carry his own state brings to the table for GOP primary voters. The answer is always the same: Mitt Romney is supposed to be “the most electable” candidate. This is a baffling argument because many people just seem to assume it’s true, despite the plethora of evidence to the contrary.

Jon Zeigler counters with his own list but in particular noting:

To be clear, it is not that there is no merit to any of his seven points. A couple of them are actually valid. What is so astonishingly silly about his analysis is that its entire premise is completely and fundamentally flawed.

Republican primary voters are not evaluating Romney’s “electability” in a vacuum. They are judging it instead in comparison to the relative electability of their other current options. And there is absolutely, positively, zero doubt that of the candidates who will be on the ballot (or in the case of Virginia, not so much), Mitt Romney has by far the best chance to beat President Obama in 2012.

So while Romney does clearly have “issues” in this department (for instance, I agree that being a Mormon will hurt more than help), to call his electability a “myth,” is like playing poker and mocking a hand of three Aces when your only other option is a pair of deuces.

Yes, the Romney “hand” can be beaten, but unlike those presented by everyone else in the race, at least it has a decent chance of winning.

The poker analogy is important in another way. Many grassroots Republicans I speak to (as well as most of the commentators I see/read) don’t seem to realize that a presidential general election is much more like a poker game where most of the cards have already been dealt, than like a football game where the opening kickoff has yet to happen.

We already know that, barring events almost impossible to conceive, all of the “Not-Romneys” will get beaten, perhaps badly, by Obama. The narratives have already been written, minus the minor details and the final score.

Newt can’t suddenly unload his massive baggage, Paul can’t change the fact that he isn’t at least a bit nuts, Perry can’t delete his “Oops” moment and the parallels to Bush 43, Bachmann can’t get rid of her “crazy eyes” or her gender,Huntsman can’t pretend he doesn’t despise the base, and Santorum can’t erase his statements on gays from Google or suddenly find some gravitas.

Leave a Reply

Using Gravatars in the comments - get your own and be recognized!

XHTML: These are some of the tags you can use: <a href=""> <b> <blockquote> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>