| The short answer is yes, I think he will. And in the end, I think that will bode well for Obama's reelection. Here's the long answer. Remember the Iowa Straw Poll? I mentioned then that it might be likely that the winner would lose the nomination because of the poll's bad track record, and implied that winning had something to do with buying tickets. The winner of the CPAC straw poll also lacks a decent track record, and winning there also has to do with buying votes. Mittens bought the CPAC straw poll on Saturday. But we know that Mitt bought the Iowa caucuses, and the Florida primary, and these are things that normally don't get bought outright with actual dollars. There is a question about whether he also bought Maine, but since it's proportional, there is still a caucus left to vote and it's a small number of delegates...it doesn't really matter. (Not to mention when all is said and done, it will likely be a Romney-Paul tie in terms of the number of delegates.) Romney's certainly got enough money of his own, plus contributions and Superpacs to buy a lot of primary contests. It's penny wise and pound foolish for him to do so, but there probably is no other way for him to win the nomination. So let's flip forwards a bit. It's late August in Tampa. The weather is muggy, people are inconvenienced, the 99% are outside protesting, and getting arrested with lots of press. The GOP hoi polloi doesn't really want a brokered convention leading to selecting as their nominee anyone new. They don't want that because it will truly infuriate the teabaggers. Even if it's their darling Fat Boy Slim, they want to have a say in who the nominee is: they detest the establishment more than the far left ever could. So the "brokering" involves giving Ron Paul some things he wants in the platform, and a favourable speech position. (And yes, he'll have enough delegates that they may well have to deal with him.) Either Rick or Newt will be gone by August, and the remaining one will reap the loser's delegates (unless they both drop out and all delegates go to Paul.) Either of them is much easier to deal with as they're not ideologues to the extent Paul is one. Remember two things: - Elections are won in the middle.
- Politics is a game of horse trading for what people want, and everyone wants something.
How will independents feel about voting for a Republican candidate who is worth THAT KIND of money? Will they believe that he'll do anything other than find ways to make the rich richer? That, by the way, was one of McCain's problems in 2008: not everyone who elected Obama voted FOR Obama, some honestly voted against McCain. A lot of people in the general will look at where they were in 2008, where they are now, where they could have been had Obama NOT been elected, and will think "A Republican pandering to the rich? Not again. This guy bought the primaries, he won't buy my vote int he general." Then there is the issue of who wants what. They don't call Mittens "multiple-choice Mitt" for nothing: he's come out on 3 sides of most issues. At the convention, when the platform is drafted, he'll have to fall in line with the Republican framework or risk alienating a lot of core GOP voters. This will be hard in the general since he'll be standing against things he previously stood for, and standing for things he previously stood against. The Republican platform will be to the right of actual Mitt, but will synch with 2012 Mitt. And unlike the Democratic platform, which is fluid, the GOP MEANS their platform. Think "debates" between Mitt and our President. Obama and his team have had (and will have) tons of time to study what gets Mittens off his game, and where the inconsistencies are. Whoever is moderating will certainly ask "Governor, in 2010, you said "A", and now you're saying "Not A". Which is how you really feel?" It won't be pretty. Finally, the meme will eventually come around to what we've been saying here at DCW all along: the GOP tried to be more "open" and "transparent" by copying the Democratic system. It doesn't work for them. |
.jpg)