Over the last few days, I have been pondering the pre-selection of Mitt Romney by the MSM and the usual Republican establishment types as the "inevitable" nominee and as the "most electable." Of course it seems like we go through this pretty much every election. It was this same two groups that anointed John McCain, Bob Dole, George H.W. Bush and Gerald Ford as the Republican nominee. And for pretty much these same reasons.
Of course in 2008 they first anointed Rudy Giuliani, who never even made it past the first few primaries, so they had to take a mulligan on that one. And this year, the MSM has been pushing for John Huntsman, and I strongly suspect that the same Republican establishment would be delighted to see him make a late run and claim the mantle of GOP leadership going into the upcoming election against Barack Obama. But barring that, they seem to have united around Mitt Romney.
Of course the Republican establishment holds Ronald Reagan out as a hero and a Republican icon now. But back during the primaries in 1980, they were opposed to Reagan, as George H.W. Bush was the "most electable" because of business experience and broad background in the federal government. Ronald Reagan was just a governor after all, and had no foreign policy experience to speak of.
But in an unusual year, 1980, when the country was faced with a real sense of crisis, Republican voters bucked the MSM and the Republican establishment and picked Reagan, who was regarded by a good many people as somewhat of a loose cannon and a bit of a flake, especially compared to Bush.
And the rest is history.
Has our current sense of crisis advanced past the point where the American people will be guided by their love of routine and their fear of real change? Could this be another year like 1980 when the people look past the recommendations of the establishment interests and choose something bolder?
Here is an excellent article on the myth of the electability of Mitt Romney, which discusses these matters further.
In reply to:
Of course in 2008 they first anointed Rudy Giuliani, who never even made it past the first few primaries, so they had to take a mulligan on that one. And this year, the MSM has been pushing for John Huntsman, and I strongly suspect that the same Republican establishment would be delighted to see him make a late run and claim the mantle of GOP leadership going into the upcoming election against Barack Obama. But barring that, they seem to have united around Mitt Romney.
Of course the Republican establishment holds Ronald Reagan out as a hero and a Republican icon now. But back during the primaries in 1980, they were opposed to Reagan, as George H.W. Bush was the "most electable" because of business experience and broad background in the federal government. Ronald Reagan was just a governor after all, and had no foreign policy experience to speak of.
But in an unusual year, 1980, when the country was faced with a real sense of crisis, Republican voters bucked the MSM and the Republican establishment and picked Reagan, who was regarded by a good many people as somewhat of a loose cannon and a bit of a flake, especially compared to Bush.
And the rest is history.
Has our current sense of crisis advanced past the point where the American people will be guided by their love of routine and their fear of real change? Could this be another year like 1980 when the people look past the recommendations of the establishment interests and choose something bolder?
Here is an excellent article on the myth of the electability of Mitt Romney, which discusses these matters further.
In reply to:
