POLITICS JUNE 14, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size

Mitt Romney is known already for his flip-flops and equivocations, but he only very occasionally says something that you know he can’t believe. That moment came toward the end of last night’s Republican presidential debate at St. Anselm’s College in New Hampshire. The moderator John King asked Romney whether, in retrospect, John McCain or Barack Obama had made the better choice of vice president. Romney didn’t answer the question. Instead, Romney, who had displayed a bemused grin, as if he were listening to a daffy child, when one of his rivals spoke, declared, “Any of the people on this stage would be a better president than President Obama.”
The first full-scale Republican presidential debate had to be a disappointment even to the most committed voters. Issues were rarely joined. The only candidates who looked like they could win the nomination and perhaps even be president were Romney and former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, but Pawlenty looked for the first hour like an actor from a community theater suddenly cast in a starring role on Broadway. If this debate and the recent Boston Globe poll is any indication, Romney is going to have to stumble badly not to win New Hampshire. And if he wins New Hampshire, he could be a good ways towards winning the nomination.
New Hampshire fits Romney’s candidacy. There is a vocal, but small religious right. In the 2008 Republican primary, Romney, John McCain, and Rudolph Giuliani—none of whom were favorites of the Christian right—amassed 80 percent of the vote. Pat Buchanan did win in 1996, but as an economic protest candidate. Republican voters will probably be overwhelmingly concerned with the economy and jobs. And the infusion of independents, who will not be distracted in 2012 by a competitive Democratic race, will probably pitch the electorate on economic issues somewhere to the center-right rather than the far right. In the Globe poll, a majority of likely Republican voters backed raising taxes on Americans making more than $250,000 a year.
If there is a social issue that stirs the New Hampshire voters, it is the kind of patriotism that McCain evoked in 2000 and 2008. In the Globe poll, likely Republican primary voters opposed cutting military spending by 58 to 38 percent and speeding up withdrawal from Afghanistan by 63 to 31 percent. Romney has tailored his own message to these voters. His announcement speech on June 2 in Stratham was a paean to “America’s greatness.” And in the debate, he distinguished himself from his rivals by opposing a quick withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Through the two hours, Romney generally seemed sure of himself. He only appeared peeved when he was asked twice about his opposition to the auto bailout and his prediction that it would mean the death of the auto industry. Romney supporters have told me that he will say almost anything on issues that he doesn’t care about, such as abortion or gay marriage, but that he is careful not to overstate his position on economic issues. That was apparent in the debate when the moderator pressed Romney for his position on the debt ceiling. Unlike Representative Michele Bachmann, who stated her willingness to vote no on the debt and everything else, Romney carefully put his position in conditional terms. Republicans should support raising the debt ceiling if Democrats agreed to spending cuts. He would not frame his response as a threat.
As a former governor, Pawlenty has some credibility as an economic policy-maker, but his pronouncements in the debate, like his earlier speech at the University of Chicago, seemed thin and somewhat vague. Perhaps the most interesting thing he said was that while he liked Paul Ryan’s budget, he would introduce his own Medicare plan. He became more eloquent in talking about God and religion and abortion. That will serve him well in Iowa, but not in New Hampshire.
It was difficult to take the other candidates seriously. Representative Ron Paul is back, but without his opposition to the Iraq war to win over younger voters. Now it’s mostly crackpot monetarism. (He wants to revive manufacturing in the United States by strengthening the dollar.) Bachmann likes to play up her role as a rightwing gadfly in the Republican congress, but she lacks Palin’s charm and sexual charisma. Gingrich looks like a grouchy Howdy Doody and is unlikely to last until New Hampshire, unless he plans like Alan Keyes to make a business of running for president. Santorum only stirs when God and sexuality beckon. And Herman Cain can be disarmingly candid—yes, we need food safety laws, he admitted (Bachmann and Paul would have said no), but we also need to screen Muslims very carefully before appointing them to government.
Romney, of course, has serious weaknesses as a general election candidate—like George H.W. Bush, he appears most at home with the country club set—and he will certainly have trouble convincing social conservatives in the South and parts of the Midwest to vote for him. As of this debate, however, he looks like he is in pretty good shape. Pawlenty will have to figure out how to operate on the big stage to challenge Romney. Or someone formidable will have to get into the race.
The Republican presidential primary electorate is not as rightwing and provocative as the mid-term electorate. It’s doubtful that the electorate could turn to the presidential equivalent of Christine O’Donnell or Sharon Angle. As a recent Fox poll revealed, 73 percent of Republicans nationally think it is “very important” that the Republicans nominate someone who can beat Obama, while only 53 percent thought it was “very important” that they agree with the nominee “on most major issues.” That’s a result that at this point has Romney’s name written all over it.
John B. Judis is a senior editor at The New Republic and a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
25 comments
OK, why does Bill Clinton, for instance, have charisma, while Sarah Palin has some new thing called "sexual charisma"? Sex appeal is very often part of charisma, somthe qualifier is just weird.
- floydsm8
June 14, 2011 at 4:22am
I don't know, maybe cuz Bill Clinton didn't, you know, WINK INTO THE CAMERA DURING A TELEVISED DEBATE
- Curran1
June 14, 2011 at 5:56am
Romney/Christie looks ever more likely for the #GOP... Unless Romney turns to Rubio or Bachmann for a running mate.
- hkaye
June 14, 2011 at 7:08am
Romney/Christie looks ever more likely for the #GOP... Unless Romney turns to Rubio or Bachmann for a running mate.
- hkaye
June 14, 2011 at 7:08am
1) Romney needs a new hobby other than continuously running for the GOP nomination - he will even lose "looks Presidential" if Rick Perry jumps in, 2) Santorum has something important to say about the importance of manufacturing in our economy, and 3) Gingrich was the only thinking person on that stage (not that he has a chance, but at least he does NOT rely on talking points instead of actually answering the questions. When Jon Huntsman, Jr joins in (and I do think Perry might as well), THEN we might have a debate, assuming CNN is not the host. Bachmann won re-election handily in 2008 and 2010 with the absolute highest voter participation - pretty impressive for a former tax attorney - why is "...Palin’s charm and sexual charisma..." the sole benchmark that John Judis (you sexist weiner) can come up with?
- K2K
June 14, 2011 at 9:04am
Just about anyone can catch Romney. All they have to say is "RomneyCare!" and his approval drops 5 points. But HOLDING Romney, that's a different story. With all the roller-coaster-ride of the Republican Primary so far, the nuts come out of the woodwork, have their moment in the sun, then fade. But Romney is always chugging along behind. The real question is, at what phase will the roller-coaster be when the first actual primaries are held -- in February. And that's almost impossible to predict.
- AllanL5
June 14, 2011 at 9:04am
"As a recent Fox poll revealed, 73 percent of Republicans nationally think it is “very important” that the Republicans nominate someone who can beat Obama, while only 53 percent thought it was “very important” that they agree with the nominee “on most major issues.”" How many of us have been saying this very thing for the last several years? Republicans care about being in power above all else. When they're not in power, they're not happy. All the bull about taxes and spending and welfare is just that. When they are in power, they're content to let the morons in charge do whatever they want. Case in point: Shrub and Co., 2000-2006.
- GSpinks
June 14, 2011 at 9:30am
Who can catch Mitt Romney? I dunno. What does the CDC say?
- miceelf
June 14, 2011 at 10:21am
The old woman in a wheel chair being pushed over a cliff should be able to catch Mr. Romney. I know this from reading "Romney Death Watch".
- Doug12
June 14, 2011 at 10:49am
"Gingrich ....is unlikely to last until New Hampshire, unless he plans like Alan Keyes to make a business of running for president." I do believe Newt's perpetual candidacy has been his bread and butter for a number of years already. That he really doesn't want the job is abundantly clear; but he's found a comfortable way to make a living.
- Haole45
June 14, 2011 at 11:51am
Romney's weakness may be his inability to realize when he doesn't have a good response. When he wanted to capture the gun vote he said that he shot squirrels as a kid. When he wanted to defend Massachusetts health care reform, he said that Massachusetts did not impose its health care on other states. These statements hardly address the concerns of the constituency with which he currys favor.
- Nusholtz
June 14, 2011 at 12:17pm
...Who can catch Mitt Romney? I dunno. What does the CDC say?... Get over and stay at Bloggingheads, you blog slut :-)
- basman
June 14, 2011 at 12:17pm
basman. ;-)
- miceelf
June 14, 2011 at 12:31pm
GSpinks: "Republicans care about being in power above all else." Maybe that's usually the case. But they may not constitute a majority of those who actually vote in primaries--witness O'Donnell and Angle in the Delaware and Nevada Senate races last cycle. (Or Golisano in the NY governor's contest.) So I'm not so sure about the Republican primary voters coalescing around someone reasonable. Also, while 73% of Republicans may think it's important to nominate someone who can beat Obama, that poll didn't ask whether they think a Bachmann-esque candidate could beat Obama. Maybe a lot of them think some like her could actually win (epistemic closure is a powerful thing), in which case that 73% number wouldn't be a big boost for Romney.
- dsimon
June 14, 2011 at 1:29pm
The issue between the GOP establishment and the base is that the latter believes that the country is just panting for the opportunity to turf that uppity black guy with the socialist agenda and the birth-cert problem out of the White House, where he only arrived because ACORN stole the election, while the former know it's not quite like that out there in the real world. Their task is going to be explaining that to the base and not scaring the independents.
- ironyroad
June 14, 2011 at 1:52pm
Do you really believe that that's what they believe; or are you drowning in your own side's talking points? Honestly!
- basman
June 14, 2011 at 5:07pm
A significant percentage of the base believes exactly that (obviously with some variety), basman, as poll after poll has indicated. Of course, the base is very far from a majority of Americans, but it's a goodly slice of the Republican Party in places where it matters. The establishment's problem is to milk the base's energy and loyalty while not scaring off independents during the election season. It is neither a new nor indeed a specific Republican problem, that's true, but the off-the-radar intensity of the anti-Obama feelings does create a new situation of sorts.
- ironyroad
June 14, 2011 at 5:56pm
Speaking of cringe inducing moments, TPaw sidetracking a question to first launch a obviously rehearsed expression of gratitude to the father of serving sailors. It was embarrassing. Since Romney had already expressed gratitude, but not in a cloying way and since he was the first to speak to the questioner it was appropriate, TPaw was just pathetic in his "look at me being authentic and appreciative"
- blackton
June 14, 2011 at 6:01pm
Latest news: Huntsman cometh.
- hkaye
June 14, 2011 at 7:39pm
You know, I'm even less impressed about Huntsman's outsider chances than I was a month ago when his name first bubbled to the surface. Huntsman's only plausible path is to the 2016 nomination, predicated on the following assumptions: 1. Huntsman does well enough in 2012 to get brownie points from the commentariat and manages to bank some name recognition. 2. Romney does well, but is ultimately weighed down by his health care record, his pandering or any other personal shortcomings. 3. A full-on Tea Party-approved candidate is the ultimate Republican nominee, who loses in spectacular fashion to Obama in November. 4. The Republican party, come 2016, is now gunshy of the radical base, and the party insiders make a decision early to push a less-extreme moderate conservative, with appeal to independents and some sort of national name recognition. Step forward, Governor Huntsman... If Romney is the 2012 nominee, which I think is going to firm up early - then the whole plan falls apart.
- jcovell
June 14, 2011 at 9:10pm
Aw shucks, should have read before jumping in: Chait made basically the same argument at 3:08pm: http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/89986/huntsman-crowd-romneys-turf
- jcovell
June 14, 2011 at 9:21pm
I think you are deprecating the base, tarring it with the loud voew of nuts. Would you hold for analogously extreme characterizations of the Left's base?
- basman
June 14, 2011 at 9:43pm
No. There are of course extreme wingnuts on the Left, but they play next to no role in the Democratic Party -- or at least no role as significant as their equivalents do in the GOP. That was very different back in the late sixties and seventies, of course, but the party came out of that stage. Now the Republicans are the ones with the loony fringe (and it's not acting like a fringe, it's acting like a center). Again, maybe you're skeptical -- but where's the counter-evidence? I'm not inventing stuff. Poll after poll has confirmed it, including many cited here on TNR.
- ironyroad
June 14, 2011 at 10:05pm
Wow, blackton, if Pawlenty really managed to seem less authentic than Romney, that's not a good sign.
- miceelf
June 15, 2011 at 9:11am
funny how this only got coverage in the UK: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8575956/Barack-Obama-there-are-days-when-I-say-one-term-is-enough.html irony: both NH and SC have open primaries for the GOP, which makes them far less dependent on "the base". Also, the GOP seems to have finally adopted proportional delegates instead of winner takes all. do not underestimate Huntsman before you hear him speak. like at Liberty Park, New Jersey on June 21 for his announcement, just in time for the national 6pm news. and, if Rick Perry jumps in, then Romney even loses the "looks presidential" slot.
- K2K
June 15, 2011 at 10:10am