Mitt Romney: The Devil You Know
posted at 1:39 pm on October 13, 2011 by Karl
For a man the establishment (including the GOP establishment) seems desperate to annoint the inevitable Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney has problems. In the past two months, Romney has gone from putative front-runner to being beaten first by Rick Perry (Rhetorically-Challenged Texan Who Reminds You of George W. Bush), and now by Herman Cain (Unelected Businessguy With a Tax Plan). Although Romney’s best asset in the campaign may be his prior experience running for president, he remains stuck in a polling range, despite getting easy treatment from the media and his rivals. Romney remains The Devil You Know, as more GOP voters rush from one The Devil You Don’t Know to another. His apparent strategy is to wait out the opposition; it’s a strategy with a downside.
After all, the basic knocks on Romney are well-known: He’s a RINO and inveterate flip-flopper. Romney’s flip-floppery is part of a tradition of establishment candidates making peace with grassroots of the party. But the polling suggests that the grassroots aren’t buying it, perhaps because — in contrast to 2008 — Romney really isn’t pandering much for 2012. Instead, Romney is tring to win by saying as little as humanly possible.
Take, for example, this week’s Bloomberg/WaPo debate… please. The broad consensus was that Romney gave a bravura performance, and the conventional wisdom is these debates matter more than ever (despite Romney’s consistently good debate performances not moving his numbers). Beyond telegenics, what did Romney give voters as a reason to support him?
The debate touched on Romney’s 160-page economic plan. Indeed, Cain’s supposed challenge to Romney focused on its length and supposed complexity (which was not much of an attack, as it gave Romney a chance to tout his supposed plan). The reason the word “supposed” appears three times in the last sentence is that Romney’s 160-page document is more a plan to have a plan than a plan:
If you make it through the entire document, you’ll even run across a handful of real, if mostly underdeveloped, policy proposals: establishing a hard cap for regulatory costs, lowering the corporate tax rate to 25 percent, eliminating the estate tax, repeal ObamaCare and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street regulation bill, In the course of [160] pages, it’s hard for even a master consultant like Romney to avoid proposing anything at all.
However, it’s not for lack of trying. Romney’s 160-page “plan” spends one page on entitlement reform. It praises Paul Ryan’s efforts, but states Romney’s plan will be different. How different? We can only guess. Romney, in the “plan” and the debates, offers a “cut, cap and balance” approach overall — but from where are the cuts going to come? On this point, Romney’s shameless attacks on Perry over Social Security and equally shameless defense of RomneyCare offer no comfort to the grassroots that he would spend any political capital tackling the primary drivers of our exploding debt. According to the “plan,” “In the long run, Mitt Romney will pursue a conservative overhaul of the tax system… The approach taken by the Bowles-Simpson Commission is a good starting point for the discussion.” Bowles-Simpson contemplates historically high taxes and retaining ObamaCare (which Romney says he would repeal, not that anyone believes him). Romney’s actual plan remains anyone’s guess.
Granted, when the economy is bad enough — as it was in 2008 — a candidate may be able to win mouthing platitutdes at debates. But as bad as the economy is today, it is not currently melting down as it was right at the outset of the 2008 general election campaign. And what if a similar crisis did erupt? IMF advisor Bob Shapiro recently warned Europe could melt down worse than 2008 in the next few weeks; although US banks have been dumping Euro sovereign debt, the public does not know how much US institutions are exposed via credit default swaps. Pres. Obama opened his most recent presser worrying that a Eurozone implosion could push us back into recession. Not unlike Romney, European governments mostly have a plan to have a plan — and even then, Germany will be lucky to escape recession. Yet Romney dismissed all of this as a “hypothetical” during his near-universally acclaimed debate performance and made clear that he has not thought of any alternative to another TARP-like solution to any future crisis.
Romney is so confident he will be the nominee that he wants to avoid saying anything that might be held against him in a general election. But to get enough GOP voters to commit to him, he may have to commit to something, and be prepared to defend it against Democrats, instead of sounding more like one himself.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
So tired of the self-righteous phonies and hypocrites:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/02/05/rush-limbaugh-endorses-mitt-romney/
swamp_yankee on October 13, 2011 at 3:17 PM
Funny, I got almost the same response from a Romney supporter at Patterico. However, pointing out that Limbaugh favored Romney over McCain four years ago doesn’t address any of the points made in the post. Moreover, I’ll note that I dinged Perry just yesterday, so I’m an equal opportunity critic.
Karl on October 13, 2011 at 6:53 PM
The Social Security garbage makes me like Romney more.
Yeah, Perry pandered to the base. He’s real good at talking tough and pretending he’s honest. But when push came to shove, he backed down. All bluster.
In 2012, no candidate is going to win calling SS unconstitutional and that it should be returned to the states. And that’s its like a “disease” a “ponzi scheme” “a monstrous lie”.
After calling it all those tough names, Perry ultimately joins Romney and says it needs to be strengthened.
Really strengthen and unconstitutional ponzi scheme?
Mike Lee in UT, Rand Paul in KY and Jim DeMint in SC all ran in very conservative states last year, and not one called for privitizing SS. Not one. Because they are afraid in deep red states. How in the world are you going to win purple states then.
You cant. Its freaking yahoo bluster. Its phony. Its sickening. Romney is by far the superior candidate. And he is plenty conservative.
swamp_yankee on October 13, 2011 at 9:16 PM
4 years ago Romney couldn’t beat McCain or Huckabee for the nomination & now he’s the best the GOP has to offer?
Romney is a Progressive, or a Federalist at best.
This one party rule has to stop. We need a choice other than “at least he’s not as bad as Obama”.
batterup on October 13, 2011 at 10:12 PM
Will Romney slow down the massive growth of government that has occurred so far during Obama’s term?
Sure, he’ll slow it back down to the somewhat slower growth of the Bush II era, which was already far too much.
Will Romney make any of the major structural changes that need to be made to reduce the size & control of the government bureaucracies?
Nope, he’ll make a few decorative changes around the edges but when some popular crises happens he’ll be making speeches about creating some new Dept of Crises to deal with it.
He won’t even push to repeal PPACA. He’ll probably push for some changes, but let’s be honest: he’s a big government Republican.
clancy_wiggum on October 13, 2011 at 10:30 PM
A “not as bad as Obama” is worse, because the bleeding still continues to the republic, just so slowly that nobody cares and nobody demands it be stopped.
It’s time for those folks to do a “lot of reaching across the aisle the other direction and get this heap tilting back in the right direction. I know it never has gone that way, and won’t since we don’t have a candidate that gives a damn to do anything but “reach across the damn aisle” the left way
Noelie on October 15, 2011 at 10:07 AM