I’ve always been of the opinion that the idea there is such a thing as a Republican “establishment” is something of a myth. The GOP hasn’t really had anything approximating a ruling elite since conservatives nominated Barry Goldwater and booed Nelson Rockefeller off the stage at the 1964 Republican National Convention in San Francisco. The idea that Wall Street honchos or intellectuals running national magazines have any power over Republican voters and the party apparatus is based on a misunderstanding of how contemporary American politics works. The only thing that approximates an establishment is the family who produced two U.S. presidents during the course of a 20-year period encompassing the end of the last century and the beginning of the current one: the Bushes.
So the announcement yesterday that the elder George Bush is endorsing Mitt Romney comes as close as anything can to verifying one of the media’s favorite clichés about the Republican establishment’s role in the 2012 race. Given this mythical establishment’s lack of actual power and the resentment that the mere idea of its existence can conjure up among the party’s grass roots, it is doubtful the 41st president’s seal of approval will help Romney all that much. But what the Bush statement does do is make it clear exactly whom the GOP’s royal family doesn’t like: Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry.
When President Bush praised Romney as someone who wasn’t a “bomb thrower,” it’s not exactly a secret that he was thinking about Newt Gingrich. Bush and other GOP moderates disdained Gingrich as a radical troublemaker during the Reagan administration and considered his scorched earth tactics as House Minority Leader during the first Bush presidency to be contemptible.
Though Bush also said that he “liked” Rick Perry, the blood feud between the Texas governor and his son’s political camp is also no secret. Had there been any affinity between Perry and the Bushes, the latter might have avoided any endorsements.
It is doubtful any endorsement these days carries all that much weight. Bush 41 had a similar profile to Romney during his political career. Like Romney, Bush came from wealth, flip-flopped on abortion and was unreliable on the key economic issue of his day (substitute his “read my lips” switch on raising taxes for Romneycare). So it’s not likely that Tea Partiers and social conservatives, most of whom never had much use for George W. Bush’s father in the first place, will be swayed by his support for Romney.
But in the context of a crowded GOP field with a gaggle of unsatisfactory candidates vying for the affections of a limited universe of social conservative voters, Romney can survive the unflattering comparison. Yet if Bush 41’s seal of approval does help convince some wavering middle-of-the-road Republicans and moderate conservatives to forget about Gingrich or Perry and go with the more electable Romney, it won’t hurt him.
hmmm, so far, the media is saying "Bush endorsement", which is a double-edged sword because 43's legacy still enrages an incredibly broad swath of the electorate, especially all of fiscal conservatives, d and r. n nSounded like a "yes, but" endorsement to me, as in "yes, but Rick Perry is also a good choice if you really want leadership that instills confidence, instead of the Harvard Romney who makes you anxious every time he opens his mouth, and will never publicly state that Jewish apartments in Ramat Shlomo and Gilo are NOT settlements." Actually, although I think Bush41 was a fine president, I doubt he would say that last bit either. Do Country Club Republicans still miss those "no Jews or dogs allowed" signs and housing restrictions (Darien? Bronxville?) that I remember well into the 1970's?
I think Romney is the man to defeat Obama. You can't have someone too right wing in my view because people don't like them.
Romney is an unpricipled jerk whose positions on everything are identical to the man he seeks to unseat. His vision for the presidency is HIM as president nothing more…no wonder both shrubs like him.
I tend to find 'unprincipled jerks' tend to be people who go around calling other people 'unprincipled jerks'.
Romney is the choice of the Republican leadership because, unlike many rank & file Republican voters, they truly understand what it takes to win a national election over an incumbent president. n nThey know that Mitt Romney can win. They know that Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul can't. n nEnd of story.
I'm a tea party guy and I'm all in for Mitt!
Bush said that this was not an official endorsement, but I guess this author cannot read very well. Bush simply said what most of us with reason are saying. Our best choice to make Obama a 4 year "Occupy The White House" movement is to get behind Romney. I too am Tea Party and I personally endorse Romney, but any Republican will have my vote against Obama.
Romney is the choice of the GOP elite. nOK… By a show of hands, who did not know this six months ago?
I think you might have some sort of a point, but you sound like an idiot so all your credit is thrown out the window. He might be a flip flopper, but one thing he is consistent on is giving states more power. He has my vote.
I will never give my vote to the coreless flip flopper this time. I was fooled in 2008 and supported Flip back then but GOP/Rove crammed the insane one on us. Snope romney dog and see how he treats his animals, to top off the flip flops. Not going to happen. Occutard in chief can just stay where he is, no different than Flip.
It's official. This traditional GOP voter and conservative American will cast my vote for someone other than Mitt Romney if he is the eventual candidate on the GOP side. I will not this cycle or ever again cast my ballot for another GOP moderate. We were told over and over again the last 25 years that if only the GOP faithful would give them the house, Senate, and white house they would get done what we had been waiting for. Didn't happen and as long as the usual suspects are in control it never will. I have never voted for a Dem except for Zell Miller her in GA, but I am strongly considering casting my vote for Obama. I will not vote for the Dem "lite" like Romney, W, McCain, Dole, Geo. HW Bush, or anyone else. They head in the same direction as a man like Obama
It's official. You stupid or you liar. Because I can't get quite as conservative as I want, I'll vote for the liberal?
After the voters have had their say in the primaries, and after the horse-trading at the convention, it'll once again be up to voters to enable Obama to screw up America for four more years, or vote him the hell out of the Oval Office. n nNote "voters, voters, vote" above. Quite frankly, I don't care who endorses who, and on top of that I have NO patience for whiners who say they'll either withhold their vote from Romney (or whomever), because he's not conservative enough, or flat out threaten to vote for Obama. Obama needs to be voted out of office (there’s that “vote” word again) for more reasons than this Web page allows me to post. n nIf you don't get that, you need to get yourself educated. n n
Solyndra, Beacon Power, cozying up to the lawbreakers of OWS, the much-vaunted stimulus package that was supposed to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent–but didn't, Obamacare and CLASS, the screwing of the Chrysler bondholders, “shovel-ready” jobs that were not as shovel-ready as he hoped they’d be (he said with a chuckle), positioning the NLRB so that union workers could shaft Boeing, failure to throw the book at the New Black Panther Party for Election Day misconduct, Operation Fast and Furious, the idiocy of attempting to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in federal court, nonsensical promises about Guantanamo, the infamous Apologizing for America tours…and on and on and on.
Absolutely correct. I voted Constitution party last time out of principle and many of us Tea Party people effected change two years ago. We now have to decide if we want four more years of "Occupy White House" by Obama and try to hold him back through Congress or take the White House with Romney and give him a Congress that will hold back spending before it even gets to his desk to begin with. With Obama's executive orders flooding out there, energy is set to leap in price again for another 4 years. Romney is not perfect, but then again nobody is. We must remove Obama period, no make that exclamation point!
Evidently, the Establishment is the Republican Party and the others are What? You are a Republican or you are a Democrat or you are just not affliated with one of the two major parties. The far right seems to have a whole different agenda than the Republican Party. I disagreed with their McCain choice in 2008, I helped start our local Tea Party (I left when they started their "praise the lord and pass the ammunition" populist nonsense) but now I have a suggestion. You need to start your own party and then you will not have to deal with Republicans. It is not elite to disagree with the far right. I want this President OUT and back in Chicago, the economy addressed and work to be done. I have no desire to punish, embarrass, call Obama names – history will handle that. I want to win and Romney can do it and the idea that he is just like Obama is silly. They don't need voter ID, they need Voter IQ. I am not the elite, I am just out of work!
By 'Republican Elite', you actually mean almost every Republican holding elected office. Romney is a no-brainer, and everyone who understands elections knows it. That's why Romney has over 60 major endorsements by all the biggest names, while Newt the new Nixon has 10 no-name congressman from Georgia and Perry has a few of the same from Texas. Romney got lucky running in a year when no one else was electable.
The RINOs and the Demos play good cop/bad cop with the American people. The constants are a Treasury Secretary from Goldman Sachs, open borders, and loss of civil liberties.
I wouldn't consider the endorsement of any Bush as a positive thing, though it is most certainly telling.
If you really believe that, please do us all a favor and don't vote