GOP Gets In Its Own Way
Gary Gerard,
dumbhoosier.com
I am pretty sure Mitt Romney will be the nominee for the
Republican Party and will run against President Barack Obama
in the November general election.
The sad thing is how contentious this presidential primary has
been among Republicans. They’ve literally savaged each other
for months and it’s not even close to being over.
I really don’t see this as a good thing. I mean, all the
candidates are going to be broke by the time the primary is
over. Meanwhile, President Obama sits back, loads up his war
chest and gathers a ton of ammunition to use against the
eventual nominee in November.
Seems to me lots of Republicans have failed to heed that
age-old adage, “Keep your eye on the prize.” The prize,
obviously, is the presidency.
Seems like lots of Republicans have completely lost sight of
that. If somebody like Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul or Rick
Santorum would happen to be the nominee, Obama would crush
them in the general election. Seriously.
I think Romney is the only one of the four who has a chance
against Obama and that’s precisely why lots of Republicans
don’t like him. He’s just not right-wing enough for them.
Well, whether you like it or not, there are political
realities. One of them, which has been borne out election
after election over the years, is that elections are won or
lost in the middle ground of the electorate.
Nobody wins an election pandering to the extreme positions of
their party. It just doesn’t happen. The fact that Romney is
more moderate than the rest of the field makes him a stronger
candidate against Obama than the others. Not a weaker one.
And it’s not like if Romney’s the nominee he will alienate the
hard right. They’ll hold their nose and vote for him because
the hard right absolutely can’t stand Obama.
That’s not some crazy speculation on my part, it’s a political
reality. And it’s a political reality that seems to be totally
lost on lots of Republicans.
Ask yourself, how did Obama win in 2008? Did he promise a
bunch of off-the-wall far-left stuff. Of course not. He
promised to end the wars, close Guantanamo, balance the
budget, end the Bush tax cuts, end the warrantless
wiretapping. All that stuff was center-left stuff. Now, of
course, he didn’t do the first one of those things, but he got
elected saying those things.
The one thing he promised that came as close to being far left
was that he would bring us health care. But left or not, that
was extremely popular across the entire political spectrum in
the face of rising health care costs and lots of people being
unemployed.
But I can assure you that if Obama would have got up on the
stump and told voters he was going to raise taxes and run
year-over-year trillion-plus-dollar deficits. If he would have
said he was going to enact massive bailout packages, federal
mandates and expansion of government, he would have never been
president.
The only way a politician can get elected is by pandering to
the middle, or pandering to the issues most popular with the
majority of voters in the moment. But that’s not principled,
you say.
Duh. Since when have politicians been principled? Oh, I know,
Ron Paul is principled. Perhaps. And he’s consistent, too. Yes
he is. Consistently whacky. But here’s a flash. The guy
doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Fiji of becoming
president. But I digress.
The farther candidates try to impress the far right of the
Republican party, the least likely they are to win the voters
in the middle – the ones they desperately need to win an
election.
Santorum is a perfect example. His faith-based rants, while
admirable, annoy everybody but the most conservative voters.
The contraception thing? Seriously? How many female voters,
and men too, for that matter, do you suppose his position on
that issue drove away? And his stance on abortion – absolutely
no exceptions for even rape, incest or to save the life of the
mother?
Even if you agree with those positions, you have to know that
a candidate holding them charges up a few on the far right and
risks losing the vast middle.
I agree that the contraception issue is more about government
intrusion than it is about contraception. That the government
–- via Obamacare – shouldn’t be forcing people to do things
against their moral compass. But the masses won’t get that.
Especially when the other side keeps reminding them it’s all
about contraception. The Dems are loving this.
I’m pro-life, too. But I think Santorum’s all-or-nothing
approach alienates tons of voters.
I am not suggesting that candidates need to cash in all their
principles. Those are important issues – for another time.
What I am suggesting is that there is a lot at stake in this
election and Republicans need to keep their eye on the prize.
Win the White House, then take on those issues.
Making this election about social issues like abortion,
contraception, gay marriage, immigration or guns is a total
loser for Republicans.
What this election needs to be about is economic issues like
jobs, taxes, government expansion, deficit and campaign
finance. Those issues are winners for Republicans. That’s
because those issues attract a wide range of voters, not just
those on the right. A vast majority of Americans agree that
government is too large, the deficit too high, there aren’t
enough jobs and there’s way too much corporate and union money
and influence in politics.
If Republicans stick to those issues, hang the blame for the
current mess on Obama’s policies and propose reasonable
solutions, their nominee will have a fighting chance in
November.
If they keep talking about issues like contraception, they
hand the election to Obama.
Archives
|
