For months, the Democrats have been hammering Mitt Romney. His inconsistencies, flip-flopping and record in business and politics have all been highlighted in what many observers saw as the Obama campaign’s preparation for a nasty general election campaign against the man they assumed would be the Republican nominee.
But with polls showing Romney losing ground and Newt Gingrich assuming a sizable lead in the Republican presidential race, one has to wonder why the Democrats are still obsessing about Mitt. Even more curious is their latest blast at the former Massachusetts governor that, as Politico reports, attacks him for even thinking about going negative about Gingrich. By doing so at a time when Romney can no longer be considered the inevitable nominee, the Democrats may be betraying their preference in an opponent.
Part of the explanation could be that the Democratic campaign machine has become so used to attacking Romney every time he breathes they haven’t even thought about easing up on him as he starts to lose ground.
It could also be that, like some Republicans and Romney supporters, they don’t believe the Gingrich surge is real, though anyone who has taken a good look at the raft of polls in the last three weeks showing the former Speaker’s steady rise in both national and state surveys must concede this is no bubble.
But it could also be that they don’t want to take any chances. The Democrats have concentrated their attacks on Romney specifically because, like many Republicans, they saw him as the most electable GOP candidate. Romney presented a genuine threat to Obama’s re-election because of his appeal to independents and the center of the spectrum. While the rest of the Republican field presented easy pickings for opposition researchers, Romney was different. That’s why the Obama campaign appeared ready to stoop to anything to besmirch him. Back in the summer, reports emerged of an Obama campaign plan to brand Romney as too “weird” to be president. Given that the squeaky-clean Romney has lived as conventional and square a life as anyone can imagine, that seemed to be a clear attempt to play into anti-Mormon prejudice.
So perhaps, the Democrats want to do their best to ensure that Romney doesn’t overcome Gingrich’s lead. Though Newt’s fans have convinced themselves that his debating skills will vanquish Obama next fall, Democratic strategists are licking their chops at the prospect of running against the man who shut down the federal government in 1995 and who has generated more goofy quotes and positions than anyone else in public life in recent memory. Looked at in that context, the Democrats’ crocodile tears about Romney getting tough with Gingrich must be seen as the ultimate in opportunism.
It’s far from clear Republicans will listen to any attack or attempt to highlight Gingrich’s record. But no matter what the Democrats say, Romney does need to try to remind GOP voters of what they’re in for if Gingrich becomes their nominee. While it is unlikely Republicans will care what the Democrats think, their recent statements about Romney amply illustrate who they prefer as an opponent.
I get the point that the Democrats make no secret about whichever candidate they prefer the Republicans run most likely based on who they think they can stomp … at any given time. So what? Who would have thought Carter could win — or Clinton — over incumbents? The candidate who wins the nomination is going to have to rise above the insane loathing of the MSM, the unrelentless elitist hatred of the entire mainstream newsmedia that will not rest for even a moment. Newsweek bragged the media was worth 10%? 15%? to the Democrats. Whether it's Romney or Gingrich or some unconsidered dark horse, the Republican candidate will have to rise to a higher level than they have ever even imagined to win. You think it's a matter of picking Romney? And that's all? No. The pick is only the first step in what Democrats will do next. I get that Sarah Palin in pretty generally despised at Commentary and Contentions — but it's a very good example of what the MSM has managed to do to your minds …
yeah, there's not much "betrayal" about it. it's pretty obvious Newt Gingrich would have a much harder time beating Obama than Romney will. of course they'd love to run against him. n nif only Mitt could be the nominee but Newt could do the debates–I'd love to see him destroy Obama–oops sorry that was a violent tea-partying thing to say. Sarah Palin made me do it.
I feel sorry for you neo-conservatives. You should really start to prepare yourself for the ultimate defeat. At least with newt it will be entertaining.
I think it is likely the Dems want Gingrich to be the nominee, but I don't think that should be a major cause of concern for those not committed to Romney. This might boil the whole thing down to the true essentials that surrounds the fog of the electability issue: n n"Romney presented a genuine threat to Obama’s re-election because of his appeal to independents and the center of the spectrum. While the rest of the Republican field presented easy pickings for opposition researchers, Romney was different." n nThe reason I wanted to see a Gingrich vs Clinton battle last presidential election was the fact that each galvanized the opposition – because each was viewed as embodying the core values of their respective parties – and what dedicated members of each party hated about the other. So, an election cycle with those two at the head would involve a knock-down-drag-out fight to define which direction the voters wanted to take the country. To the left or the right. n nThat is why conservatives today should not shy away from Gingrich in light of how much opposition the left is likely to blast him with if he wins the nomination. They should not shy away from the heat the media and Dems will bring like they did in the mid-1990s when the Republicans took the House or like they did when the announcement of Palin for VP threatened to take away some of the female vote in what was going to be a close election. n nI also think the right of center liberals in the Republican party who are trying so hard to focus attention on electability are really covertly (perhaps subconsciously) fighting to define the core of the Republican party. They aren't saying, "We believe this/that conservative, Tea Party-affable candidate has the right ideas about policy — we just don't think he can win." What they really mean is "The Republican party is too conservative and out of tune with the bulk of American voters to win the presidency." n nSince that was not true of Bush or Reagan, despite the fact the Dems and media tried to demonize them both as too far right to be worthy of election, I find the whole electability argument a distraction. n nIf "moderates" in the Republican party like Romney's policy ideas, they should work hard to promote them as a means to promote him. They should argue openly and clearly that the Republican party is too conservative and needs to reform toward the middle. n nThat would be more honest than hiding behind the electability issue and obscuring things. It is creating a muddle in the discourse about the nomination. It is taking away from a focus on ideas. n nI wanted to see a Gingrich vs Clinton match up last time around, because I thought that match up would cause the focus to be about ideas. I think that will happen now with Obama vs Gingrich because the public can be more clear about what Obama stands for after 3 years of evidence to work with. The media can't bury those three years like they did the bulk of Obama's past last time. n nI don't know if Romney as the nomination can highlight the fundamental differences the two parties have concerning how the nation should function and what direction it should go…
Honestly, I wish the people at Commentary would come out directly in favor of Romney and advocate for his policy ideas and him as the man for the job instead of the daily, multiple doses of attacks on whoever his latest primary rival is. Support the man by affirming him if he is the candidate of uniform preference at the site…
They treat Romney just like they treated McCain — until they get the nomination and they turn the nominee into a monster.
Iggy Autry, n nI don't see why you are so upset. The people at Commentary clearly just want to beat Obama. They clearly have issues with Newt, but would vastly prefer him to the current president. So if they are favoring Romney, it is purely because they judge him the better candidate to beat Obama. What is so bothersome about that to you?
What is troubling for Gingrich supports, I'd think, is the number of long-term conservative pundits who are also speaking out now against his getting the nomination. n nThose attacks either mean Gingrich is not viewed as representing the core of the Republican party – or – they don't believe a candidate running on the core values of the party can win against Obama this election cycle…
Team Obama 2012 will, likely, use classic Alinsky tactic of Have Not versus Haves some time called class warfare. Mitt Romney is a perfect target. How many mansions does Mitt Romney have?
OK, so the widespread assumption is that Romney would be stronger than Gingrich against Obama. And this assumption is based on…? n nSure, sure, Gingrich has "baggage." Sure, he could be fairly described as a Washington, DC insider. Sure, he's said some things that could variously be described as bombastic, grandiloquent, goofy, etc. Against the 2008 Obama, he might have had trouble. Bu against the 2012 Obama? Perhaps, just perhaps, people would be less interested in what Newt was up to in 1999 and more interested in the incumbet president's dismal record of failure. SAnd is it really true that Romney could make the case against Obama better than Gingrich could? I have my doubts on that score. n nThe Gingrich surge may yet fizzle out. I must say, however, that I've been impressed by both his comeback from near-political oblivion and his recent performance as a candidate. His present lead may partly be due to conservative disaffection with Mitt Romney. But credit where credit is due: Gingrich is a skilled politician and campaigner. Maybe Commentary should cut him some slack.
Newt's appeal is in his passion and contrast to Obama; Mitt, to many on the right, is too much like Obama. In this volatile political environment, Newt actually stands a chance of winning the Republican primary as well as the presidency. His strength is his no-nonsense talk … a fresh departure from the endless doublespeak of this administration. Mitt's strength is his inoffensiveness and appeal to the center, he could win as well but we'd miss the satisfation of seeing Newt take Obama to school in the debates.
So in essence it boils down to this: GOP rank and file are supposed to hold their nose and vote for Mitt because he is the most electable. But the GOP elite cannot be asked to hold their nose and vote for Gingrich because they don't like him. n nSounds like the elite want the rank and file to STFU.