SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Has Romney Finally Put Republican Elites at Ease?

POLITICS FEBRUARY 28, 2012

Has Romney Finally Put Republican Elites at Ease?

BY ED KILGORE

Mitt Romney—and, for the moment at least, the Republican Party—dodged a bullet tonight as he narrowly won his native state. Of course, it shouldn’t be an afterthought that he also won Arizona by a landslide, capturing all the 29 delegates it’s rewarding this year. The last few days, though, were filled with growing talk in Republican insider-dom that a Romney loss in Michigan would provoke a serious search for a late-entry candidate. And whether or not these would-be kingmakers actually did come up with a White Knight willing to take the plunge, the discussion alone could have been fatal to the inevitablilty/electability house of cards on which Romney’s campaign relies. Now Romney is back on track for the nomination, for the fourth time by my count. But he’s not out of the woods quite yet, unless Rick Santorum handles his loss poorly or begins to lose his financial backing.

Next week’s ten Super Tuesday contests remain a bit of a trap for Romney. He should win easily in his home state of Massachusetts, and will only face Ron Paul in Virginia. But in Ohio, Santorum has built a robust and steady lead in recent polls. And in the South, where Newt Gingrich remains a threat, his super PAC seems to be spending its latest infusion of money from Sheldon Adelson on strident anti-Romney attacks ads rather than any effort to  hold off Santorum. Romney’s biggest threat is if, as with the Arizona/Michigan primaries, all the media attention focuses on the competitive states rather than total delegates: He could win a plurality of delegates on Super Tuesday but still “lose” in media perceptions if he falls short in  Ohio and the contested southern states. If Romney does lose significant states on Super Tuesday, the most significant factor will be whether the GOP elites panic like they did after Santorum’s three-state sweep on February 7 and his subsequent rise in the polls—or if, instead, insiders begin to look at cumulative delegate totals, bank balances, and the declining feasibility of a late entry and figure that Mitt is “inevitable” again.

Is there anything in the pattern of votes last night that illustrates the likely direction of public opinion in the GOP electorate? It’s hard to say, particularly since the Michigan vote was skewed by Romney’s native-state status—and Santorum’s sizable crossover vote, some of which was clearly tactical. (According to the exit polls, Santorum beat Romney 53-17 among the 9 percent of primary voters self-identifying as Democrats, and ran just behind Mitt among the 39 percent calling themselves “moderates or liberals.”) But one distress signal for Santorum is that he lost among his fellow Catholics in Michigan, which some pundits are already attributing to his ill-advised criticism of John F. Kennedy’s position on church-state relations.

Expect an unusually intense spin cycle over the next 48 hours over these results. Aside from polls (both national and of the March 6 states), there is actually another contest prior to Super Tuesday: a caucus-with-straw-poll in Washington state on March 3. There’s also a just-announced candidate “forum” (the format is unclear) that same evening on Mike Huckabee’s Fox News show; Romney, Santorum and Gingrich have agreed to attend (no word yet on Ron Paul). A Public Policy Polling survey on February 21 showed Santorum with a healthy lead over Romney in Washington, with Paul running a relatively strong third. Don’t be surprised if whoever wins there calls it a harbinger for Super Tuesday.

So what can we learn from last night’s results? Romney’s wins banished the wolf from his door, and he again seems the likeliest nominee. It didn’t hurt that he won two major states despite a universally panned series of campaign gaffes (such as his Cadillac count) and mistakes (notably his decision to deliver a major speech at a nearly empty Ford Field). But he’ll only be free of the wolf entirely if he can win a series of primaries without another unexpected setback, and reassure his elite supporters that he won’t limp into the end of the campaign trail still begging the GOP’s conservative base that they can trust him to take on Barack Obama with the savagery and ideological rigor they demand.

Ed Kilgore is a special correspondent for The New Republic, a blogger for The Washington Monthly, and managing editor of The Democratic Strategist.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 9 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

9 comments

I live in Washington state. According to the article, we will shortly have a caucus with straw poll. Should I attend? Should I attend with straw and chicken droppings on my boots? If I attend, oh TNR masters, what should be my TNR zombie voter task?

- skahn

February 29, 2012 at 12:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Saturday, March 3, at the local high school. Should I go for it?

- skahn

February 29, 2012 at 12:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If I attend, oh TNR masters . . ." That's nice. I like a bit of respect.

- ironyroad

February 29, 2012 at 12:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think a candidate other than Romney would put the Republican elites at ease. That's why they'll probably lobby for Christie as the V.P. on the ticket. Would he be another Cheney in the White House--the actual president? Probably not. Romney is much more of a thinker than G.W. Bush. He might actually consider the downside of invading a foreign country before he pulls the trigger, so to speak.

- magboy47.

February 29, 2012 at 12:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If I lived in VA. I would be downright pissed that both Gingrich and Santorum were not on the ballot. Suppose if Romney had gotten trounced in Florida and then everything collapsed, than people in VA would only have Paul to vote for? And don't tell me nonsense about rules, they could easily have written a bylaw that any candidate who polls above 3% nationally would automatically be on the ballot instead of the bs of getting and verifying a ton of names. skahn, I say go for it, just watch out for angry teenagers. Vote for Gary Johnson.

- blackton

February 29, 2012 at 10:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There's a new line out on Romney now, which is I think a smart one: that he is who he is, campaign warts and all, who he is and that he's going to stop trying to sell himself as an empathetic connector with people but as an he is who he is Mr. Fixit who sells competence at fixing things and not great visions or narratives for America. I said before here somewhere weeks ago when Santorum was leading in Michigan and before he imploded on his caveman view of things Catholic and Kennedy and contraceptive and college that Romney was gonna' win Michigan. I keep thinking he's going to win the nomination and then move somewhat more to the middle and give Obama a hell of a fight that I wouldn't call the outcome of now. Too many externals and contingencies.

- basman

February 29, 2012 at 1:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The first two scheduled televised debates in March among the Republican Presidential candidates have been canceled. The discomfort could be growing.

- Doug12

February 29, 2012 at 2:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hah. I think they don't want us to see these guys on TV. That's bad actually. The people have a right to know what the GOP is trying to sell.

- Sophia

February 29, 2012 at 3:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thank you for the suggestions. I have not been paying as close attention to the GOP candidates as I should have, so I did not even know who Gary Johnson was. [Responding to blackton's comment.] Although libertarianism strikes me as not very practical; it has an emotional appeal for me. Also, as Johnson was, in fact a governor; he does seem to have some experience with practical politics. I would prefer a non-religious believer as my candidate, but I guess I can accept a "non-practicing Lutheran" (which may be a "beard" for a non-believer). In any case, I just spent the morning doing volunteer work for the local Lutherans, though they know I am a [polite] non-believer. We all have to make compromises.] I just asked my Lutheran neighbor (who tells me he is a life-long Republican) what I should say on his behalf if I attend the Republican caucus. He said, "Tell them to stop acting like spoiled brats." My wife (who is very liberal) looked askance at me when I said I was planning to attend. However, she and I are 80% incompatible despite being married for 46 years. Probably the other thing I will say at the GOP caucus (if I say anything) is to ask them to support the coming legalization of homosexual marriage in Washington State, so I can make an honest woman of my daughter and so my granddaughter can be a flower girl at a wedding. However, South Whidbey Island is very liberal, so for all I know I will be the only person at the caucus and I will end up talking to myself. Not that much different than posting comments at TNR. Maybe I should join a church. Or go to synagogue or something.

- skahn

February 29, 2012 at 3:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close