Mitt Romney’s critics are pointing out right now that the candidate who claims to be the frontrunner and the most electable is still unable to get more than a quarter of Iowa Republicans to back him. They’re right about the fact that social conservatives and Tea Partiers simply can’t abide him, but in a six-way race, the idea that a top three finish (right now, he’s in a virtual tie with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul) is some kind of defeat is a misreading of his situation.
The greatest danger to Romney’s hopes of winning the nomination was for one of his conservative rivals to break out from the pack. So long as the various not-Romneys are fighting each other, the actual Romney wins. So no matter who comes out ahead in this three-way tangle, the fact that there is no single rival for him in the top tier constitutes a strategic victory for him. Even so, his own inability to do better than the same 20-25 percent he’s had all along doesn’t make him look good. That’s why a first place finish would be sweet for him no matter how narrow the margin of victory. And a third-place finish will feel like a defeat.
For those who went to high school before the great cultural revolution struck full force, Romney is like the most popular guy who reliably ran for Student Government President. Good looking, got along with the teachers, got along with the jocks, managed the school store in his part time, ran the right clubs, dated the prettiest cheerleader, and right now he's running second to that new guy who washed out of the junior varsity team last year and just ahead of the nerd co-president of the AV club with a pocket protector and a well-thumbed copy of "None Dare Call it Treason."
“They’re right about the fact that social conservatives and Tea Partiers simply can’t abide him, …”
Not their ideal candidate, or even their first choice of the actual candidates, sure. Don’t trust him, okay. But ‘can’t abide him’? Are any of those not going to *enthusiastically* vote for Romney against Obama?