An open question to "electability" types / professional pundits / GOP establishment
What is it about the last 3 years — and in particular, in the wake of the 2010 elections — that makes you think you can massage and finesse the GOP base into accepting and supporting a Romney nomination?
A reminder to those getting caught up in the horse race aspect of 2012: Mitt Romney supported an individual mandate; Mitt Romney’s staffers helped Obama craft ObamaCare; Mitt Romney doesn’t see Social Security as a Ponzi scheme — and has joined the left in demagoguing those on the right who do; Mitt Romney feels the pain of the Occupy Wall Street movement; Mitt Romney believes humans are responsible for climate change — and that climate change is a concern. It follows, then, that Mitt Romney believes government must do something about climate change; Mitt Romney still defends TARP; Mitt Romney’s core beliefs are anyone’s guess — but he has nabbed the endorsement of Denny Hastert, and a guy who endorsed Mike Castle (but refused to sign on to the law suit a collection of states brought against ObamaCare); Mitt Romney has been running for President for 6 years, and he still can’t get more than 30% of Republicans to back him.
Why, then, are we told his nomination is inevitable? What is it about Romney that has the GOP establishment desirous of his being named the nominee — so much so that they are tinkering with the primaries to try to get him over as quickly as possible?
Why? What is the mood of the country, as they see it — and why is Romney a salve?
These aren’t just rhetorical questions. I honestly want to know.
Would Romney have the political will to root out ObamaCare like, say, a Michelle Bachmann would? Would Romney move to repeal Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley, as would Gingrich? Would Romney press wholesale reform of the tax code like Cain would? Would Romney be willing to take on entrenched regulatory agencies and bureaucrats to ensure states rights, like Perry would? Would Romney try to strengthen families and preach individual responsibility, like Santorum, or is he more likely to offer government solutions — then tout the “coverage rate” for “children” (without acknowledging either the costs or the attendant decreases in quality of care)?
If anything, Romney appears to be the antidote to conservatism, not its representative.