Monday, March 24, 2014

A Republican dark horse?




The other evening I was talking politics with a friend. The conversation turned to the 2016 presidential election, particularly the Republican nominee. My friend was stunned by my mention of a possible “dark horse”—a man beyond the horizon, theoretically and practically. 

My friend urged me to post my thoughts on my blog. OK, for what it’s worth………..

This is not a prediction! Let alone an endorsement. Grounded in reality, it’s merely a not-so-remote possibility that can happen either by the dark horse’s overt campaign to obtain the nomination, or via a draft.

Who’s the dark horse?

Mitt Romney! 

Yes, That Mitt Romney!!

Why?

1.      Mitt Romney has more name recognition than any other potential candidate, having received approximately 61,000,000 popular votes in 2012. And he won them against a then-popular sitting president.

2.     If 61,000,000 voters wanted Romney instead of Obama in 2012, it is reasonable to assume many of them would want Romney against the likes of Biden, Clinton, or virtually any other Democrat. This means that in 2016 Romney would go into the election with a huge inventory of popular votes. Romney’s opponent in the 2016 election would have an inventory of zero presidential votes.

3.     To the extent Massachusetts’ RomneyCare was a deal-breaking negative for some 2012 voters, his 61,000,000 voters apparently didn’t think so. This means that whatever one thinks of RomneyCare, it can now be a positive in a Romney candidacy. Why? Because accepting its premise and existence, on a state (Tenth Amendment) level RomneyCare does what it was designed to do. In other words, for better or worse it “works.” With so many angry voters now accepting the principle of reformed federal health care, the “success” of RomneyCare in Massachusetts could be seen by many voters as a model either for other states or even the federal government. (I oppose it on any level.)

4.     During the October 2012 presidential debate Obama ridiculed Romney about his concern over Russia’s “geo-political” threat. Quoting Obama: “You [Romney] said Russia. Not Al Qaida. You said Russia. The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because . . . the cold war’s been over for 20 years.” (My emphasis.)

Here’s what the more knowledgeable and forthright Romney retorted: “Russia, I indicated, is a geopolitical foe . . . and I said in the same paragraph I said and Iran is the greatest national security threat we face. Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin . . . . ” (My emphasis.) Romney knew more about Russia than Obama had learned in four years as president. Make that 5+ years, now.

5.     Romney is, despite the 2012 slanders, a hugely successful businessman, unlike such as Gingrich, Cruz, Ryan, Santorum, Paul, Palin, J. Bush, Perry, Walker, Kasich, and other possible contenders for the Republican nomination. Like the last five, Romney was also a governor.

6.     Since the 2012 election even many of Romney’s political detractors have acknowledged, albeit grudgingly, that he is a thoroughly decent and honorable man. Which is more than can be said about the people being bandied about as potential Democrat nominees. Pundits tell us that the “nice guy” factor is of utmost importance in elections.

But, one might say, Romney won’t run. Maybe not. Maybe he’d have to be drafted. 

Remember this, however, whatever else Mitt Romney is, he’s a patriotic American with a life of service.

If the bugle sounds, Mitt Romney will answer the call of his country.