Now that it’s down to two people, it’s time to really think about electability.
To really do it, we need Michael Barone, but people like ourselves can at leat least sketch out some themes:
- “character” won’t mean a hill of beans. It might be important in a Nixon/Kennedy type race where the candidates were idealogically similar, but not this year when so many peole believe the country is in desperate straits and when the contrast in the parties is so extreme.
- Newt will win the traditional Southern and Western red states hands down. But will Romney? It seems to me that he would be at risk of losing some of the less conservative red states.
- Romney will probably do better than Newt in traditional blue states, but can he actually win one? Not likely.
- The biggest issue is who will win the swing states like Pennsylvalia, Florida and Ohio. This is where Barone’s expertise is required. The way I see it is that the question is whether Newt’s ability to frame obama as a dangerous person will be more persuasive than Mitt’s assumed ability to offend fewer people.
All of the nonsense about who is more conservative will be a tiny factor. So will Newt’s personal foibles. What person who would normally vote for a republican is going to vote for obama because Newt was irresponsible 20 years ago? That attack simply won’t stick. But the ethics censure might, and they might be able to paint Newt as an idealogue. On the other hand, Romney’s cutthroat capitalism and Mormon religion are definitely going to be negatives in the general election. He’s an attractive guy, but I just don’t believe he has a powerful enough personality to counter those factors.
But the key thing is how the swing states will view Newt vs Mitt, and the biggest issue will be their ability to inform the public about just how dangerous obama has been and will be.
The Ruling Class doesn’t want you to think about these things.
