The Winding Road To The Republican Nomination For President

Politicians are in it to win, that's what matters most to them--Hell, they may not even know who they are any longer. If Romney wins the nomination and loses the general election, that will be a fairly reliable sign that no "mainstream" Republican will make it in 2016. You'll get an outsider, like Reagan. Most people don't think of Reagan as an outsider, but he was. He was a Democrat for most of his life, and a president of the Screen Actors Guild (very left wing, until Tailgunner Joe came along). He turned Republican to run for governor, and was backed by some Orange County boys. He definitely was not a party insiders as far as either the California or the national Republican powers were concerned. Most people don't remember that he ran for the nomination in 1976, and lost to Gerald Ford.

Jimmy Carter was an outsider when the Democrats were in disarray--so was Clinton. I strongly suspect that in the event that Obama is re-elected, a Republican dark horse will come along in 2016, someone no one--not the party establishment, nor the far right ranters, nor the tea baggers--was looking for.

Why on earth would he do that when he requires the votes of not only the people who voted for him in the GOP primary but the people who voted against him in the GOP primary?

The general election won't be Romney vs. Gingrich, it'll be Romney vs. Obama. He has to stay to the right to win that.

"Real" Mitt with no primary campaign could maybe win the election. But in the primary campaign he's been "severely conservative" Mitt, which doesn't leave him a lot of good options. Does he prove himself a liar? Or stay his current "severely conservative" course?

He won't be competing against Gingrich in the general election, he'll be competing against Obama. Keeping the base (who will never vote for Obama but might stay home rather than vote for him) is much more important to him than pandering to the independent/ moderates (who might vote for him or might vote for Obama).

He's backed himself into a tough spot.

Before Mitt can even get a chance to run against Obama, he has to win the GOP nomination. The logical strategy is to do whatever it takes to win the first step and deal with the challenges of the next step once you get there.

I think his strategists sit around and worry about exactly this "walking the line" problem all the time. They need to weigh winning the GOP at all costs against the potential damage it does in the general election. Luckily for them the general public has a very short attention span, so within a month after the end of the GOP process it'll be a brand new game. And I think we'll see a brand new Romney at that time.

I also think that the general election Romney will be much more representative of the "real" Romney. The base that both parties need to impress are not the fringe elements, but the independents.

I think the real Romney is slightly right of center, just as Obama is slightly left of center.

And I think it's going to be a very close election (which Obama will ultimately win).

I think that's really naive. Even if people have a short memory, it's very, very easy to put together clips of Romney saying many things that he'd just said in the months previous and make a killer ad out of it. Especially since that would play into several existing weaknesses; that he has no core convictions, that he flip-flops, that he's a slick salesman with no "there" there, that he's really one thing pretending to be another.

Additionally, there are people who will be genuinely convinced by him in this run-up, and who will then see him turn his back on that.

There won't be instant mass amnesia.

Note, I'm not saying at all that Romney can't win the general election. He can -- but purely on how the two campaigns (Romney + Obama) are being run so far, it would be about outside factors like the economy tanking again or other things that aren't even on our radar.

Romney will of course pivot to the general election, yes, but he just can't afford to be "a brand new Romney."

Obama and Clinton battled it out in a long difficult primary season but their policy differences were slight. Obama did not have to change much at all once he actually got the nomination.

This is correct. The problem with the narrative Ros was pushing is that conservatives and republicans ARE paying attention right now, due to their primary. They already don't trust Mitt; if he tacks to the center after the nomination (which will be tough to do in just 10 weeks, compared to almost a year of primary campaigning) he'll show them that they were essentially correct: that he was lying to them to win their votes. That's going to go over like a lead balloon with the voters he desperately needs to come to the ballot boxes to the maximum extent possible.

Check the RCP electoral map -

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

They have PA still listed as a toss-up, but it's overwhelmingly likely that they will go for Obama this cycle - he's up there by an average of 5 points on Romney and PA has voted Dem for president in every election for the last 20 years.

That puts Obama at a projected 247 EV's. He has MANY different paths to victory at that point - winning OH and any other state wins it for him. Winning FL alone wins it for him. There are a variety of smaller states he could win in combination and win the whole thing.

Romney, on the other hand, needs to win almost ALL of the remaining states in order to win. He could win both OH and FL and still lose the whole thing. I just don't see how he can afford to lose ANY support at this point and have a hope of winning; and repudiating things he's told his base during the primaries will do exactly that.

I really recommend that people check out republican weblogs and read the comments people leave regarding Romney. Much of the base simply can't stand the man, and the fact is that his wins have been in liberal states that for the most part Obama is going to win this Fall. I mean, look at Romney's performance in the south: he's lost every southern state other than FL. That's not a recipe for a huge amount of support from your base.

Cycloptichorn

sozobe says:



Absolutely true. Just ask those of us from Massachusetts. For 16 years he ran for office here, telling us he was a moderate-to-progressive Republican. He hadn't ever won office anywhere else. Eventually enough people believed him to elect him governor. Almost immediately his views "evolved", i.e. flip-flopped, againtst everything he'd said he was for, as he started thinking now he'd actually got into office somewhere he could make a credible run for president. He was wise not to run for governor again here. Had he tried, he'd probably have been repudiated as badly as the people of Pennsylvania repudiated Rick Santorum when he ran again for Senate. If he tries it again on a national scale, there will probably again be Massachusetts truth squads dogging his footsteps. We don't forget.

Good afternoon. I am enjoying reading the comments on this topic. Two thoughts:
Pew is out today with a looong poll they did (people-press.org/2012/3/14).
There are something like six sections of data with the first one breaking down support for Romney and Santorum. Subsequent sections cover the general election: Obama vs ________. Interesting but not perhaps directly relevant except to Repubs who are voting on the basis of the electability of a Repub vs Obama.
Secondly, Cyclo, a few pages ago challenged the notion that Romney has the nomination. I was an early believer that we might end up with a contested convention, but I backed off.
I was boning up today on the rules for the Illinois primary next Tuesday (3/20).
There is a lot less here then meets the eye. The names of the candidates will be on the ballot but that is simply a non-binding beauty contest for the benefit of the media.
The state has 69 delegates. And voters in each of the 18 districts will be selecting 2-4 delegates who will appear on the ballot along with who they
prefer. So the choice might read:
Soz (Mitt); Roger (Newt) etc.
54 delegates will get selected but they are NOT bound to any candidate.
12 more delegates will get picked in a gathering on June 9th but they also will also be uncommitted. The final 3 delegates will be from the state party.
leadership

Note - I do believe that Romney is still by far the favorite to win. And that he likely will have all the delegates wrapped up before the election. BUT; if he doesn't, or if it's extremely close, it's entirely likely that the convention will be open and you will begin to see vote-switching and deals made. Especially if Romney loses more high-profile contests to a guy who basically has no campaign money, no commercials and no staff.

Cycloptichorn

By the way, the idea that there's no underlying racism pushing the GOP vote against Obama is and always has been a total joke -



Cycloptichorn

What's important to note is that Santorum won't be running a full slate of delegates in the Illinois primary -- there will be at least congressional district where his name appears on the ballot but where he doesn't have any delegates listed.

It's an unusual situation for Illinois to have a primary that actually matters. We usually have the primary in March (in 2008, the state moved it up in order to benefit Obama -- he doesn't need the help this year, so the date moved back to March). By this point in most primary races, the nominee has already been picked, so Illinois will be in the unfamiliar position of having a primary that people from outside Illinois will be watching.

Although the temptation is strong to cause havoc by casting a vote in the Republican primary, the fact remains that, for many local races, the only election that matters is the Democratic primary. So that's the ballot I'll be requesting on Tuesday. Any suggestions on whose name I should write in for president?

And this is why the proportionality rules were changed to begin with. To keep the later states involved in the selection process. Now lots of the same folks who didn't like the fact that their states didn't matter are complaining that there's no clear choice yet and the candidates have to focus on each other rather than the general. Can't please some folks no matter how you try....

Anyway, I'm still undecided if I'm going to vote in the R primary on Tuesday. I'm really tempted, but the Dem contest for the 10th district is pretty hot.

I heard someone in the Stewart/Colbert double (MacKinnon?) say that Newt will persist because any delegates he can grab give him leverage to be included in 'President Santorum's' cabinet. So the count to watch is Romney vs (Santorum+Gingrich)

Of course he'll have a cabinet. He'll want to stay away from the closet.

Puerto Rico will have a winner take all Republican caucus on Saturday. 23 Republican delegates will be selected. In PR in November, voters will cast ballots on whether they favor seeking statehood. Non-binding.
Santorum campaigned there today and probably did not gain much support when he declared, wrongly, that "...To be a state in the U.S., English has to be the main language."

The good news for Republicans, PR doesn't get to vote in the general election.

The "urgent message" robo calls from the Romney for President campaign are starting to piss me off. One more and I'll decide to vote in the Republican primary for Santorum.

I seem to recall Diane running into a similar reaction when she was doing live calls for Obama.

I had two yesterday and five so far today. Tomorrow may push me over the edge.

Politico reports on spending in IL: Romney and his Pacs: $2.5m vs $.5m for Santorum and his Pacs.
Do you have party registration in IL as we have in VA? I, a Dem, am not called by the Repubs.

Gallup is reporting that Republicans are less enthusiastic about voting for Romney than they were McCain -



Cycloptichorn