creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Roger Simon
Roger Simon
25 May 2012
Businessmen Make Lousy Presidents

My experience with vulture capitalism is limited. A vulture could not make even a snack out of my capital. I don'… Read More.

23 May 2012
Is Mitt Romney Count Dracula?

In the end, it won't be about who raises the most money. It won't be about who ate a dog or kept one on the … Read More.

18 May 2012
Poll Results Are “Massaged” Before They Are Released

I promise you this is not another one of my columns about how polls suck. Point One: You already know polls suck.… Read More.

Falling in Like With Mitt

Share Comment

Republicans fall in line, and Democrats fall in love. Thats how the old saying goes.

Three years ago, Democrats fell in love with Barack Obama. Today, after nine major Republican debates and before anyone has cast a single vote, Republicans seem poised to fall in line behind Mitt Romney.

And why shouldnt they? In debate after debate, he has proven himself to be the least bad candidate on the stage.

The candidates who surge after him, or even in front of him, in the polls always seems to come to a bad end.

Michele Bachmann? By the time reporters had learned how to spell her name correctly, she had disappeared from serious contention.

Rick Perry? Well, Texans understand brands. They burn them into cattle. And after the CNBC debate Wednesday night, when Perry was unable to remember his third talking point — hey, he got two out of three, cut him some slack! — he forever branded himself the Oops Candidate because oops is what he was forced to reply after racking his brain for an answer after several agonizing, live-TV seconds.

Herman Cain? Well, Cains problem can be summed up easily: Are the Republicans willing to nominate a candidate who almost certainly will lose to Obama next November? And are they willing to nominate a candidate who could bring down a few crucial GOP Senate and House candidates along with him?

The rest of the field is ... the rest of the field.

Newt Gingrich is extremely adept at demonstrating haughty disdain during these debates.

My colleagues have done a great job of answering an absurd question, he said with his patented drollery Wednesday night after the other candidates were asked about health care.

It got a laugh. But Marie Antoinette probably got a laugh after she (legend has it) said, Let them eat cake.  And all that got her was the guillotine.

Drollery, disdain and haughtiness are not usually what Americans end up looking for in a president. Likability is what they look for, and Gingrich radiates likability with all the power of a 25-watt bulb.

Cain was the likability candidate, but he ran into a funny thing on his way to the White House: his past.

No fewer than four women have accused him of sexual misbehavior, two of them publicly, and while in the past candidates like Bill Clinton and Arnold Schwarzenegger rode out such accusations, Cain is no Clinton and no Schwarzenegger.

He is a former businessman and professional motivational speaker with a goofy 9-9-9 tax plan and more baggage than Samsonite.

True, he could win Iowa. He might even win South Carolina.

But as soon as Cain wins a major caucus or primary, the Republican establishment will recoil in horror. The rank-and-file, the pooh-bahs, the big money guy and even some tea partiers are going to sit up and say: Whoa. This guy was good for a few laughs, but are we really going to put him up against Obama?

Sure, unemployment may stay high. Sure, the economy may stay lousy. But the Republicans are a risk-adverse party. The last time they took a real risk on a nominee was Barry Goldwater in 1964, and he lost to Lyndon Johnson by 22.6 percentage points.

No, the Republicans almost always nominate the next guy in line (George W. Bush was a legacy next guy in line), and Mitt Romney, by default, fills that bill.

Once again Wednesday, his debate performance was calm, dignified and always taking the correct Republican line.

Markets work, Romney said. When you have government play its heavy hand, markets blow up and people get hurt.

One could look at our most recent financial collapse and conclude the opposite: that markets dont work when greed and incompetence run rampant on Wall Street and the government does nothing to correct or contain that until complete ruin is at hand.

But that is not the Republican answer. And Romney always gets his answers correct. (Note to Rick Perry: Try writing the answers on your cuff. It probably worked in high school.)

Has Romney flip-flopped? You bet. But soon that will seem long ago and far away.

I'm a man of steadiness and constancy, Romney said during the debate, citing not his stand on the issues, but his 42 years of marriage, which resulted in five children, and his 24 years at Bain Capital, which resulted in his becoming filthy rich.

The Republicans dont have to fall in love with him. They just have to learn to live with him.

And what other choice do they have?

To find out more about Roger Simon, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
I, personally, find Dr Ron Paul to be the last truly honorable candidate out of the lot, and you don't even mention him once? Why?
I'm curious why you would discuss all these other clowns, that everyone knew would dissipate as time went on, but you don't acknowledge the great success of Dr Paul. Even if you disagree with some of his views, the idea that you are censoring him altogether because he is not the status-quo is unethical, in my humble opinion sir.
He has been elected over and over again for his consistency and virtuous, Constitutional loyalty. (And seeing as you mention marriage, he has been married much longer then corporate Mitt).
Not that polls are all knowing, but several have shown Dr Paul as the only candidate that would hold any ground against Obama.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Truth
Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:42 AM
Wow.I never looked at it that way.. Why do you choose to not mention Dr. Ron Paul. He's attended all the debates, and seems to be more consistent than any of the other potential candidates? Now that I think about it, he barely ever gets mentioned in anything whether it be news reads, radio feeds, or the television reports. Is there fundamental reasoning that you share, with among the rest of the media to choose to ignore Dr. Ron Paul? He's clearly visible on the podium along with the other potential candidates ..I think Perry even turned to Dr. Paul for the right answer on that question he flubbed..that's Dr. Paul right?


Comment: #2
Posted by: Dame
Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:40 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Roger Simon
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

13 Apr 2012 Ask Dr. Politics!

21 May 2010 A Dose of My Pharmacy's Medicine

6 May 2010 A Problem We Can't Ignore