Options
A 'Referendum' on Romney
· Monday, January 9, 2012
SALEM, N.H. -- Mitt Romney has been thought for months to have the New Hampshire primary in the bag. But one vote he didn't have locked up until Wednesday was that of Steve Rowe, a Vietnam-era veteran who spent much of the 1970s aboard the USS Saratoga, a US Navy supercarrier. Like a lot of New Hampshire residents, Rowe headed into the final week before the presidential primary still unsure whom to support. It was only the endorsement of another Navy vet -- US Senator John McCain, the GOP's 2008 presidential nominee -- that moved Rowe into the Romney camp.
Rowe showed up early Thursday morning, camera in hand, for a Romney town hall meeting at the Boys and Girls Club here. It wasn't the former Massachusetts governor he wanted a picture of, but the former war hero. "Now that McCain's behind Romney, he'll pull a lot of votes from people like me," Rowe predicted.
That, of course, is what Romney and his staff are hoping. McCain has long been a favorite of New Hampshire Republicans and independents: He crushed George W. Bush in the state's 2000 primary and beat Romney in 2008. And thanks to his brave record as a prisoner of war in Hanoi, McCain -- though a frequent thorn in the GOP's right side -- has retained lasting respect even in his party's more conservative circles. (Which explains why, after endorsing Romney in New Hampshire, McCain flew with him to campaign in South Carolina.)
But there are limits to McCain's influence, even among Republican voters who served in Vietnam.
John Anderson, a nuclear engineer from Pittsburg, NH, was the first on his feet with a question for Newt Gingrich when the former speaker visited Littleton, a town in the White Mountains near New Hampshire's border with Vermont. Gingrich had repeated his description of Romney as a "legitimate Massachusetts moderate," ticking off the issues -- from gun control to health care to judicial appointments -- on which Romney had disappointed conservatives during his term as governor.
"You call him a moderate, and that's being generous," boomed Anderson, a retired Air Force officer who was involved in Operation Ranch Hand against the Viet Cong in 1965. "And as a Vietnam vet, I was pretty upset with a certain person that endorsed him the other day."
Anderson told me afterward that while he deeply admires McCain, he has no intention of voting for Romney, whom he considers too willing to tilt to the left whenever it is politically expedient to do so. "I'm not a Romney-hater," he said. But given Romney's philosophical flexibility, "I do not believe he can take on President Obama."
Every presidential re-election campaign eventually becomes a referendum on the incumbent. No matter who the GOP eventually nominates, voters next November will be deciding whether Barack Obama deserves a second term in office. But the Republican nomination contest has itself become a kind of referendum -- a referendum on Romney. In the "Mitt" camp are those who see in the former consultant and venture capitalist and pragmatic politician the skill set needed to defeat Obama and revive the economy. In the "not-Mitt" camp are those who find it impossible to rally behind a candidate who seems to lack clear and resonant principles.
At the Iowa caucuses, entrance polls showed, Romney handily won the support of voters who cited electability as the most important criterion, while the great majority of those looking for a principled conservative voted against him.
"I'm willing to be another Ronald Reagan if that's what you want me to be," then-Senator Bob Dole unconvincingly promised Republicans in 1995. Dole went on to win the GOP nomination the following year, but the party's conservative core never got enthusiastic about him, and independent voters weren't attracted to a candidate who couldn't even excite his own base.
The case against Romney boils down to the perception that to become president, he is prepared to say anything. The case for him boils down to the conviction that virtually any Republican, even a political weathervane, would be better than Obama. "We cannot afford another four years of this man," a voter in the audience said to Romney at the Boys and Girls Club Thursday morning. "We've got to get him out of the White House."
Before Republicans can take on Obama, they've got to figure out what sort of leader they want to replace him with. "Mitt" may have New Hampshire's primary in the bag, but "not-Mitt" still seems pretty formidable.
© Copyright 2012 Globe Newspaper Company
Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.
Options
Subscribe
Harvard Political Review notes: "The Patriot Post is leading a surprisingly well-organized charge into the world of Internet politics." It's Right. It's Free. Subscribe now!
The Right Opinion
- Jonah Goldberg: Big Business Gets the Hollywood Treatment
- Charles Krauthammer: The Joy of Winning
- Arnold Ahlert: Catholics vs. Obama
- Michael Reagan: White House Website Gone Wild
- Ken Blackwell: I'll Have Another
- Jeff Jacoby: The Peace Process Battered Israel's Reputation
- Victor Davis Hanson: The Bad/Good Idea of Removing Assad
- Michael Barone: Cocooned Liberals Are Unprepared for Political Debate
- R. Emmett Tyrrell: The Great Debate
- Cal Thomas: The Media's Religion Deficit
- Larry Elder: Why Jeremiah Wright Matters -- Still
- Ben Shapiro: First, They Came for Cory Booker
Grassroots Commentary
Policy and Analysis
- Heritage Foundation Insider
- Heritage Foundation Research
- American Enterprise Institute
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- The Cato Institute
- Hoover Institution
- National Rifle Association
- Ludwig von Mises Institute
- Citizens Against Government Waste
- National Center for Policy Analysis
- The Heartland Institute
Our Mission
"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher
The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!























wjmccrindle
This article seems as wishy washy as Romney. Bottom Line:
ANYBODY BUT OBAMAO.
Congress is the key, both houses must be won to counter the marxists of the Democrat Party.
Posted January 9, 2012 at 9:25:15 AM
Richard Ryan
Once again wjmccrindle has put it very well. I also believe that however important ridding the country of Obama, it is critical to the republic to have Republican/conservative control of congress. I also believe that the individual states can also be a large factor in our battle for survival. All that being said; I will support whoever the Republican nominee ends up being.
Richard Ryan
Lamar,Missouri - Birthplace of Harry S Truman
Posted January 9, 2012 at 12:04:01 PM
Daylo
"I was happy that [Ted Kennedy] had to take a mortgage out on his house to ultimately defeat me," Romney said.
That shows a heretofore-unknown meaness about Romney that has surfaced. Is this all a game of monopoly -- bankrupting another "player" on the board?
While I am not, and never was a Ted Kennedy Fan or supporter, this does show a side of Romney that is truly unlikable.
Then there's the news of Romney's arrest in 1982 for his defiance of a Park Ranger. He was told by a Massachusetts Park Ranger not to launch his boat, or he would receive a $50 fine. Did Romney listen? No. He launched his boat and the Ranger arrested him. This arrest was sealed...don't know how it got unsealed, but it has come to light. This puts Romney in another light that I find disturbing.
Above the law...he believes he is above the law. either that or he is a spoiled brat or both. Come on. This is trivial to be sure, but little things put together show a person who believes he is a cut above. I believe we already have someone like that in office, don't we?
Posted January 9, 2012 at 1:44:39 PM
Garry G
I question whether we would be better off with Romney than with Obama. Seriously, what has Romney ever done that is actually conservative, besides occasionally talk like a conservative?
Did he support freedom in healthcare? No! He passed government-controlled Romneycare, which became the template for Obamacare!
Did he support marriage? No! As governor of Mass., when confronted with a court ruling saying current law was unconstitutional, he did not appeal or wait for the legislature to rewrite the law. He folded like a cheap tent and starting issuing gay marriage licenses ASAP (within one week, if I remember correctly).
Did he reduce spending? No! Spending and debt in Mass. increased under his administration.
Did he reduce taxes? No!
Did he ever do anything to support right to life? No!
Romney is no conservative and, as far as I know, has never in his political career done ANYTHING conservative. Why do we think he will somehow change now and suddenly become conservative?
With Obama as president, we can count on most Republican congressman to vote against him most of the time. But with Romney, we may be worse off, because it will be harder for Republican congressmen to vote against a president from their own party. The country will still be bankrupt and strangled by regulations and government micromanagement, whether it is passed by a president with a "D" or an "R" after his name.
As I've said before on this venue, if you want to get rid of Obamacare, don't vote for Romney, because he is not going to repeal it (regardless of what he says).
Posted January 10, 2012 at 3:04:19 AM