Rethinking Romney.

Rethinking Romney.  Several posts back, I ventured my early endorsement for a 2016 Republican ticket.  I thought then, and I think now, that the name of the game is “WIN”.  If you do not win, you cannot make policy.  Based on that imperative, I believe that the best Republican chance for winning the 2016 presidential contest is the team of Rubio and Ayotte.  Personally, I would prefer a more seasoned candidate, but Rubio has a compelling life story, has been very involved in national leadership for several years now, and has not been reluctant to put forth thoughtful and detailed policy statements that make a lot of sense.  Ayotte is a bright, intelligent former prosecutor with a good record of accomplishment.

Having said all of that, I am intrigued by the continuing speculation of Romney running again.  I am old school enough to lean towards the position of once you’ve had your chance and fail; you step aside and let someone else take a shot.  However, many of my old school philosophies have been found wanting over the last few years and perhaps this is the time to mothball another one.  The last time he ran, I thought Romney was exactly the right man for the right job at the right time.  Like many others, I find it punishing to think of what might be like today if he had won.  If, in fact, one believed he was right for the job last time around, you could argue that he is even more right for the job this time around.  But as much as I admire Romney and his resume, I have two serious reservations about running him again.

Obama won the first time around on hope and change; pure emotion and theatrics.  I am still not sure how he won the second time around, but it must be attributed in large part to low-information voters who consider neither performance nor reality when pulling the lever.  As serious as this nation’s problems are and as pathetic as the current administration is, I still fear that a sufficient number of low-information voters could be energized once again to support a Democrat.  The plain and simple fact is that when they are given a fairly level playing field, the Democratic Party knows how to win elections.  There is no proof that the Republican Party has yet figured out the value of unity and turnout technology.   The youthful image and the obvious energy that a Rubio/Ayotte ticket would bring with it would no doubt blunt much of the image politics that we see today.  They are far better equipped for this type of contest than Romney.

Secondly, the stakes for the Republican Party winning the 2016 Presidential Election could not be higher.  Although the election is still in its early stages, a review of the potential Democrat nominees would indicate that the one that carries the Democrat banner into 2016 will be liberal….very liberal.  If this country goes into another 4-to-8 years with a liberal Democrat in the White House, after the carnage we have seen and realized under Obama, I fear there may be no going back to the land that many of us love and cherish.  It will be a memory.  Because of these high stakes, this might not be the best time to shelf the conventional wisdom of lose once and you are out.  If Republicans took a chance with Romney again and lost, the second guessing would be endless and the nagging thought would persist about how great an idea it was to run him a second time.  This possibility argues strongly for going with a new candidate; a candidate that exudes energy and charisma; a candidate with conservative fiscal policy and moderate social policy; a candidate that will have the courage to risk political capital on bipartisanship and tackle the big problems that our nation faces.  Romney may still be the best man for the job; but I continue to believe that Rubio and Ayotte give Republicans the best chance to win.