Three Different Contests, Three Different Winners? What then of ‘Inevitability’ and ‘Electability’?
The Citadel — Charleston, SC – A week ago Mitt Romney based his campaign on two words: Inevitability and electability. He had won Iowa and New Hampshire, the first non-incumbent Republican to do so, and was poised to win South Carolina.
Then he wobbled a little in Monday night’s debate while Gingrich soared. And Rick Perry exited the race, and Gingrich got mauled by the mainstream media in the form of a vindictive ex-wife. Gingrich owned Thursday’s debate, while Romney racked up a trio of gaffes: A brain freeze, calling his Massachusetts health care law “RomneyCare,” and failing again to anticipate questions about whether he will release his taxes. How could he and his team have not seen that coming, and planned a serious response to it?
The gaffes chipped away at his electability without destroying, by pointing out that his programmed approach to the campaign failed to account for the unexpected, the pratfall, the outlying issue that he and his seasoned team had not seen in the road ahead.
And then came the death of his inevitability argument. News broke that he had actually lost Iowa to Rick Santorum by 34 votes. Setting aside the Iowa GOP’s bizarre behavior — informing Santorum that he had won, then going to the press to call the results of their own caucus “inconclusive,” then reversing themselves again and declaring Santorum the winner — the defeat in Iowa rewrote the won-loss record. Romney had gone from reaching for a 3-0 start to the campaign, to a less impressive 1-1, including a loss to a severely underfunded candidate.
And now Newt Gingrich has bashed his way into winning South Carolina by a significant margin. In three different contests across three different states including the first true southern primary, Mr. Inevitable has one win against two losses.
Next, Florida. I wrote after the Thursday debate that Gingrich was on track to win South Carolina, and that winning here might scramble the race in Florida. That state hosts the first closed primary. Romney has led there, by a lot, for a long time. But all of the polls taken there were taken there before this week’s turnaround in Carolina. Nate Silver looks ahead to the Sunshine State and sees signs of trouble for Romney there.
Let’s be honest: The circumstances still favor Romney. Come Super Tuesday, the remaining competitors will need true national organizations to be able to compete, and Romney is the only serious candidate who has that. But Romney is in trouble. He has miscalculated, perhaps fundamentally, by banking on inevitability and electability. To this point, Romney has overlooked the one thing that Gingrich has brought, and which has brought him back: Inspiration. And that may be enough to carry him all the way. It has certainly brought his campaign back from the dead. Twice.
The first State which did not vote for obama went to Newt.
Enough said.
Obama’s dream GOP candidate is Mitt Romney.
Oh please. Romney might lose, but would force Obama to work for his win. Obama can handle Gingrich by turning the MSM loose on his record as speaker of the House of Representatives during the 1990′s. The Republican house ditched him as a speaker because when he was in charge he behaved too erratically and in too ethically challenged a manner to stay in office. This is someone who should be president? We know that Gingrich hasn’t changed since then because his entire campaign staff quit at the start of his nomination run — they couldn’t stand having him as their boss either — and later on his people in Virginia couldn’t gather enough bona-fide signatures to get on the ballot. So there’s the second sign of a bad boss: they end up having to use bad employees.
Good point. While Romney has problems, I think Newt has even worse problems.
The big question now is, will 2012 break SC’s streak of predicting the GOP nominee?
Only time will tell.
Perversely, I’m thinking why not.
Nothing else makes sense this time around.
That Tea Party that everyone keeps dismissing as inconsequential seems to keep having deep consequential impact.
True, that.
“We gotta take these bastards. Now we could do it with conventional weapons, but that could take years and cost millions of lives. No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody’s part!” – Animal House
I wish I’d said that!
This is Ron Paul’s famous Predictions speech from April 24, 2002. This is the original video compiling recent images and video to give his speech a chilling effect.
“I have no timetable for these predictions, but just in case, keep them around and look at them in 5-10 years. Let’s hope and pray that I’m wrong on all accounts. If so, I will be very pleased.” Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM&feature=player_embedded
And why should we listen to the guy who lost all three contests, this time coming in fourth in a field of four; and who, as of the last time I checked, doesn’t even have a campaign presence in Florida, the next primary state?
Face it. RuPaul is irrelevant.
Yes, yes, yes…for the umpteenth time WE GET IT. You don’t like Romney. Good for you. Is invincibility and electability part of the official Romney platform? I can’t seem to recall anyone making those noises other than the media. Of course, since PJ Media is technically alternative media, you get to have some fun smacking that down, regardless. King’s to you, Mondego.
Gee, I guess Tim Pawlenty is “the media.”
Who knew?
If you can’t handle criticism of your favored candidate, I suggest you swear off blogs till after November.
This is a great day for anti-capitalists as our recently discovered anti-capitalist leader, Newt Gingrich, has just hoodwinked the deeply conservative, but easily fooled voters of South Carolina to vote for him.
What if they had known he is an adulterer? Well, the fates rule, heh?
Next step in our anti-capitalism campaign will be to use our duplicitous leader to turn the country against the Constitution. Little does anybody understand Newt’s animosity toward that dument. After that, freedom. Then God (that will be a tough one).
Because that’s our mission. You silly people may think that Romney’s gazillions can overcome our mission and save the country for country club members, fat cat private equity bankers, part-time Cayman Island residents and sitting congressmen, but look out. We have Chuck Norris on our side.
Our Guy did it!!!!! Go Newt
Andrew Sullivan should be REQUIRED to use his real name on PJmedia. Hey mangina, I’m a SC voter – address me directly. I voted for Newt, and you’d like to say . . . . (?)
The Tea Parties of Florida are going to help Newt Gingrich carry Florida and Newt will sweep the Southern States…in the following Southern State elections. His speech after the SC win was Magnificent!
Yes, people forget that Newt is from GA. He has left behind his accent, although I am sure he can put it back on at will. I think that is the main reason he won SC, because he is a Southern boy.
Folks keep saying he is not electable, because independents do not like him, but that is nonsense. Independents do not like Obama, either.
The fact is, Newt would most certainly carry every Red State. Those plus NH and FL make for 257 Electoral votes. It’s not far to go from there. Obama will be playing defense in the Blue States. He’d have to run the table. Not really very likely. If Newt is the nominee, people’s resistance to him will evaporate. Once the other candidates are gone, it’s a done deal.
The same is true of Santorum, should he win. It is not true of Romney, but he would beat Obama, too. Whoever is the Repub candidate will win the general election. It is that simple.
That’s why the Dems in Congress are retiring. They can read the writing on the wall. The professionals all know. We are playing out the drama, but the result is not really in doubt.
If you haven’t heard it already, you should listen to Gingrich’s acceptance speech tonight.
In summary, he said that the race is going to be about two opposing visions: one, a radical Saul Alinsky vision (yes he used the words “radical” and “Saul Alinsky”) that intends to change the country into a European style state of dependency and government control (sadly, he didn’t use the word “socialist”), and a vision of America based on the founding documents, one of independence, freedom and opportunity.
This isn’t just platitudes because it makes a much more profound statement than “the economy is broken” (which, obviously, he talks a lot about as well). The problem with simply talking about the economy is that the marxists are going to rig the economic statistics by September and will make the case that the economy is in a strong recovery, aided by Pravda.
In contrast, Romneys message is that obama is a nice guy who has failed to fix the economy. Mitt will tinker around the edges and do better. End of case.
If Newt can somehow get that message out to the voters, he will win every primary from here on, and probably every state except the blueest of the blue.
Yes, Gingrich’s clear binary frame – that between Obama’s Alinsky govt of govt control and dependence – vs – the American Way, outlined in the Constitution, of freedom, independence and opportunity. …was excellent. It should be the main banner of the election.
Obama’s rhetoric can’t counter this description of him and his agenda. And that’s vital – the GOP MUST describe Obama, rather than Obama describing Himself.
[By the way, Gingrich DID use the term 'socialist'. Maybe once, but he used it; they were probably testing the waters for later use.]
Note how Obama is describing himself – as someone who ‘loves the people’ (his singing, dear god, how manipulative can he get??); and who wants them to love him. As someone who is alienated from the actions of Congress; everything bad that has actually taken place, is due to the actions of Congress. [Or Bush, or the Japanese tsunami, or ATM's.]
Obama lives in an imaginary reality and if his hopes/dreams don’t turn out well, it’s due to those who have inadequately put them into reality. Gingrich is instead nailing a description of Obama’s Front Door – and the description is one that is defined as anti-American: socialist, European statism, debt ridden, making everyone dependent. Vs his American Way: freedom, independence and opportunity.
Quite the clear scenario. He’s telling Americans: Choose. It’s a winning formula.
Pravda’s total efforts will be dedicated to shouting down Newt’s message of American exceptionalism by attacking his character, elevating the character of the man who sings and dances in public, and promising mana from heaven for anybody who is unemployed or who thinks they might be unemployed in the future. They will have an army of statisticians running the numbers until they work the right way.
By november, the obama family will be portrayed as the modern equivalent of Mary, Joseph and Jesus.
The same would happen if Romney is the nominee, except that they would paint him as a wall-street predator instead of immoral.
So the real decision point for people weighing Newt vs Mitt is which one has the better general election message and which one can get it out better.
Yes, I agree that the MSM and the Obama Gang are going to describe Obama as the First Family, aka, Mary, Joseph and Jesus, but my point is that..I’m wondering..if this will work.
After all, Gingrich has already articulated that the MSM are corrupt. And HE is describing Obama as the ‘FoodStemp President’ and his agenda as anti-American, as depriving everyone of freedom and opportunity and making everyone dependent on the State.
My question is: how is Obama going to get out of this description? I frankly don’t think that the baggage that Gingrich carries – his marriages, his fights in Congress etc – will have much effect on the majority of the public.
That is, the Obamas can self-describe themselves as Purity on Earth, and Gingrich as The Fallen Man – and this description won’t override Gingrich’s description of Obama as The FoodStamp President and his own as The PayCheck President.
In fact, Gingrich’s deliberate alignment of himself as fallible, unlike Obama’s assertion of himself as Pure, sets up Gingrich as having more connection with reality… And real people…than Obama’s aloofness, podium preaching and imaginary tales.
Oh I agree ETAB. I’m beginning to think Newt is a once in a lifetime genius.
He’s already neutered the family thing, but there is something more important than that. He has also neutered the marxists’ entire OWS strategy, provided he can win the nomination. How can they argue that he’s a predatory capitalist when he has already maneuvered the dumb-as-rocks conservative pundit class into declaring that he is an anti-capitalist? It’s too beautiful to even contemplate.
But there’s way more than that. Newt has been operating as a one-man show since his Ruling Class advisors walked out about six months ago. It’s just him…unless you count Calistra. All by himself then, he has outmaneuvered that ENTIRE REPUBLICAN RULING CLASS. And make no mistake, they hate him with a blind passion. They thought they had him cornered when the advisor team walked out. They thought they had destroyed him as a politician and as a person when Romney pulled the trigger and nuked him with a dishonest blitzkrieg of ads in Iowa. Then they thought they had neutered him by calling him an anti-capitalist two weeks ago after he had the temerity to challenge Romney’s business ethics. That one sucked in more than half of the knee jerk web conservtives, and it STILL didn’t work. Then they thought they destroyed him with the divorce thing that real people don’t give a shit about. Despite everything, he still got through to South Carolinians that he is the real deal and Mitt is the fake deal. It’s really a stunning accomplishment. I don’t know whether I want him to hire any advisors or not. How can they help him?
This week, RoveRomney’s ruling class assasins are going after Newt’s ethics censure (the 1 of 99 that they could persuade enough toadies to support. Of course, he was acquitted in an actual court of that one…but our congressional betters have their own courts and they would never acquit the guy who almost put them out of business.)
I can’t wait to see how Newt turns that one against them.
It’s like watching a great opera unfold. The more they hate him, the more he soars.
By the way, proreason, what’s the point of your new name? Anti-capitalist?
Glad you asked.
Like Newt, I had the audacity to question whether Romney’s business practices might impact his electability, which means that both of us, after lifetimes of advocating for free markets, have attacked capitalism and become anti-capitalists.
“anti-capitalist” is the scarlet letter we both must now bear.
I think the next theme will be that we have become anti-marriage because if one disagrees with Romney in any way, it turns you you are attacking the roots of conservatism.
Or so the Ruling Class and their apologists have declared.
But I do now feel a little better knowing that Newt and I are in the same stew as the 78% of South Carolinians who voted against Romney.
– for the results commented on by Chris, Ed, Rachel, Larry and Sharpie. In those 60 minutes, they all used the term “Republican Establishment” about as many times to express Newt’s upset of the ordained Romney. So the DEMedia confirm Mitt is the Republican Establishment candidate; why didn’t it help him defeat McCain four years ago?
Because it was McCain’s turn in 2008. He tried running as a conservative, but Huckabee outflanked him on the right, leaving him with nowhere to turn. He vowed to fight on after Super Tuesday, but he soon realized he had no path to victory: there was no way he could get a majority of the delegates given the remaining primary schedule, a brokered convention would leave him in no position to make demands, and even if McCain died before the convention, that would only mean that Huckabee would get the nomination.
Newt’s do-or-die victory in SC is an inflection point in the GOP race, and his win means he will be the GOP nominee… and the next president of the United States. Read my blogpost on the subject for more details.
Let’s be honest: “Let’s be honest” is a terribly overused phrase and almost invariably a gratuitous one. Now, don’t shoot the messenger here. Honestly, I’m just being honest. And let’s be. That. Honest, I mean.
Romney still does not have the Conservative base; they do not trust him with an inch. Furthermore, Romney’s stumbles in the debates coupled with his lack of fire & enthusiasm is killing him. In other words, Romney’s weaknesses are self-inflicted wounds. The people have had enough of the moderate squeamishness. It’s only going to get worse for Romney.
Besides clearly describing the Choice in this election, as that between two ideologies, one that is socialist, European – and one that is about freedom and is American – Gingrich is also describing and thus defining Obama.
With regard to the ideologies, the choice is between an agenda that promotes dependency, government control and European socialism vs the American Way, which promotes freedom, independence and opportunity.
Then, Gingrich defines the presidency, as that of Obama, the Food-Stamp President, vs his, as the PayCheck President.
These are simple binarisms – accurate and deadly. How is Obama going to deal with this?
Remember, Obama doesn’t operate within the real world; he has no connection to his actions; his only reality is in his words. Words. An imaginary realm. He won 2008 on Words: Hope and Change.
He has, so far, divested himself of any REAL results of the actions of his presidency:
Stimulus Results? No jobs? Ahh, Obama doesn’t describe it that way; he moves into the imaginary hypothetical. IF, IF you hadn’t passed the Stimulus, THEN, we’d be in a Depression.
Hmm. Problem. You can’t prove a negative; you can’t prove such a depressing result. So you either accept Obama’s Words (because he’s The Boss)..
Obama does this with everything. He rejects reality and posits hypothetical causes – the Japanese tsunami, ATM’s, …and Congress (ignoring that the Democrats controlled Congress for the first two years!!! of his reign).
So – how is Obama going to deal with not only this clear, succinct binary choice between a Non-European dependency and American Freedom?
And – that description of him as the FoodStamp President?
I suggest he’ll try to create a foreign crisis. War with Iran?
The problems with Romney’s campaign will not deminish. To many, possibly most, in the US RomneyCare=ObamaCare. Romney and his supporters attempt to show a difference only confirm their sameness. People recognise the, none too subtle, difference between a Banker and a Businessman. Both are essential, one of necessity deals more with people. The appearence of Romney being “FORCED,” to release his “DAMAGING,” financials will go unforgotten and probably unforgiven. Had he released that information before it was demanded he could have made the case that he earned every cent, saving companies, and that the money was still in the market creating JOBS! I believe he has been illadvised. If not that he is unfit for the position he seeks.
Newt has another disadvantage; his fellow adulterers provoke sympathy for their wives; but Newt’s current wife was his fellow adulterer; no sympathy evoked there.
It would probably be more reasonable to call Iowa as a tie, which they should have done when Romney was up by 6 votes. That gives Romney a 1-1-1 record, while Newt is 1-2-0, slightly worse, but Newts one win was in a more important state. I am glad the competition continues, since if Romney still wins, as is still likely, he will have to work for it, and will hopefully works the bugs out of his campaign before facing Obama. I dont think Newt will win, since I still think he has too many negatives to offset his one big positive, debate performance.