If you follow politics in the main stream press, you have probably seen a myriad of articles about how dissatisfied Republican primary voters are with Mitt Romney as a candidate. First there were all the articles about how voters wanted someone other than the candidates who were running. Next came articles about how the base of the GOP was unexcited about Romney and was rejecting him. Now, the latest stream of articles is about how Romney is unable to put away his opposition and secure the nomination. Romney is not Ronald Reagan, and he is not even John McCain who had wrapped up the nomination by this time four years ago.
There is a problem with this whole narrative, however: it is just plain wrong. In a little noticed article on Real Clear Politics, the support for Romney thus far in the primary season was compared to the votes for McCain of four years ago. The results are astonishing for anyone who gets the news from the main stream media. Romney's share of the primary vote is 6% more than McCain's share was four years ago. That's right, Romney is doing very substantially better than McCain did four years ago. The reason why McCain had won by this time in 2008 was that the states were winner take all rather than proportional in awarding delegates as they now are. Also, many states moved their primaries back until later in the season in 2012, so many fewer delegates have been awarded at this point in the process this year.
What does this all mean? First, the stories about how the GOP base has rejected Romney are wrong, not even close -- just wrong. Second, because of the proportional award of delegates, the candidates who have been losing (like Gingrich and Paul) have been able to keep going much longer than would have been the case if they had been shut out in getting delegates in states other than the two which Gingrich won. In 2008, candidates dropped out when they consistently came in second. Third, Romney has not been able to wrap up the nomination yet since no candidate could have done so. Not enough delegates have yet been awarded. Indeed, Romney still may not win the nomination, although the odds of that have gotten very long. Finally, if anything, Romney's chances for full support from GOP leaning voters seems much greater than it was for McCain in 2008.
Put all this together and the truth is that Mitt Romney will make a reasonably strong GOP nominee if he gets the chance. The stories from the main stream media are just wrong.
1 comment:
I agree with everything you said and would add this:
The "Romney is weak argument" is logically flawed. The fact that many Republicans prefer Santorum to Romney, tells us absolutely nothing about how strong or weak Romney will be in the general. If there were a series of polls showing that Santorum voters prefer Obama to Romney (I have seen none), that would be evidence of Romney being weak. But in the absence of that, the reasonable assumption is that the vast bulk of people who prefer Santorum to Romney, nevertheless strongly prefer Romney to Obama. That, of course, is the test of strength, not whether he is the first choice in a primary among certain segments of Republicans.
There will be plenty of time to predict how strong or weak Romney will be in November once the nomination is determined. Those who are claiming he is weak now, are likely to fear that the opposite is the case. In any event, their reasoning is not based on logic.
Post a Comment