At least one conservative is very optimistic about the upcoming election

A couple of days ago, I asked you all to make your predictions about the upcoming election. Your responses ranged from a belief that Romney will win a clear victory, to a belief that Romney will win a squeaker because of entrenched interests and voter fraud, to a belief that those same entrenched interests and voter fraud will propel Obama to another four year term. I think each one of you has the potential to be right.

However, for sleeping peacefully at night, I should have asked Paul Rahe this question. Fortunately for me, Rahe didn’t wait for me to ask (he doesn’t know I exist), but simply tackled the subject on his own. He believes that Romney will have an overwhelming victory in November. Although he respects those conservative pundits who predict a squeaker (or worse) he says that he believes that they are operating within an outdated paradigm, much as happened when serious thinkers entirely missed the Soviet Union’s collapse.

Rahe thinks that the outliers — i.e., the optimists — are the ones on track, because they are the ones who appreciate that this is not an ordinary election, because Obama was not an ordinary candidate, especially during his first two years, when he had a Congressional majority. For the first time, voters have seen the socialist behind the curtain, and the response was Tea Parties, 2010 election sweeps, and lines at Chick-Fil-A. Those of us closely tracking the news may be missing the fact that ordinary men and women do not like what the Democrat party has become.

The election, then, is Romney’s to lose. What would be nice, though, is if Romney won the election, not just by a hair (because he failed to lose it), but by a wide, spectacular margin, one that completely repudiates both the creeping Leftism that began in the 1960s and accelerated thereafter, as well as the blatant Leftism that let out a terrible roar in 2008. To that end, Rahe offers Romney some advice, all of it good, and most of it involving Romney playing offense, not defense:

If Romney wants to win really, really big, there are three things that he needs to do. First, he needs to tie his argument for paring back the administrative entitlements state back to first principles – back to the origins and purpose of government – and he needs to assert the necessity to return to limited government. What I am saying here is that he needs to occupy the moral high ground, to defend free enterprise not only as efficient but as right and just, and to criticize “spreading the wealth around” and taking from Peter to pay Paul as shameful and unjust. Politics is ultimately about justice, and justice should be his theme.

Second, he needs to force Obama to make errors. To this end, he needs to get under the President’s skin. He did this to Newt Gingrich in Florida, and it worked like a charm. Obama is even vainer than Newt, and he cannot stand mockery. Moreover, he hates Romney with all the resentment that phony intellectuals ordinarily harbor for successful businessmen. The gentler the mockery in this case, the lighter the touch, the more devastating it will be. Romney’s theme should be that the poor fellow is just not up to the job and that he should be left free to spend all of his time doing what he really enjoys — playing golf. The SuperPACs may be able to carry the ball on this.

Third, when the debates come, he should do a Newt Gingrich. When one of the pundits asks a really stupid question that is of interest only to the credentialed elite (and this is inevitable), he should disembowel the man, asking him how he could waste the time of the American people on a matter of this sort when we are on the verge of a second recession and millions are looking for work. In the debates, the trick is to show strength – and nothing shows strength like a dramatic gesture of this sort. He might even find an opportunity to do this to Obama himself. It would be a knock-out blow. At some point, Romney needs to set aside his natural caution and timidity and go for the jugular.

I actually thinking Romney is capable of doing all of the above.  While he is undoubtedly a very nice man, he’s shown in the business world and in the political arena, that he will indeed go for the jugular.  My only real concern is that the stakes are so big that Romney will panic and play it safe.  I can only hope that his life experience will assure him that this is not the time to be a wimp.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Yankee Bruce says

    I seem to recall following the 2008 election cycle several states had discussed changing their laws to ignore the vote of their citizens and cast their electoral votes to whoever won the national popular vote.  Don’t remember if any states actually implemented such a system, but I know it was discussed.  

    These are the kind of things that worry me concerning this election; the progressives are adamant about remaining in power to continue to guide us to a “more enlightened” society.   

  2. Duchess of Austin says

    I think what most of us want to see is the opposite of the “nicey nice” campaign that John McCain ran the last time.  I believe that McCain is of the old school of thought that one needs to be polite to an opponent and do things by the book.  Well….that school of thought has closed and it’s my opinion that Romney needs to come out swinging. 
     
    I want him to take it to Obama.  In. His. Face.  It will have a two fold effect (IMO).  First, it will force Team O to make errors.  Second, it will put Obama on the defensive.  I want Romney to say something to the effect of “ok, regarding tax returns, if you want me to put out mine, then I will when you release ALL of your college records.”  To me, this is a nobrainer.  I want him to wipe the floor with Obama on his dismal record, instead of playing defense on issues that don’t mean squat to most of us.  I want him to pre-empt the “big bad Republicans are coming for your right to an abortion” argument by saying it first that he will have much bigger fish to fry in his first term and that social issues like abortion rights will be safe…I have no problem with him saying that he doesn’t necessarily approve of abortions but he won’t be gunning for women’s health rights at this time, because there are much more important issues to deal with in a first term.
     
    I want him to hammer Obama on things like the 500 million paid out to a company that went belly up within MONTHS of receiving the money (Solyndra) and to emphasize that although alternative energies are a great idea, we’re just not to the point where they are economically feasible…yet.  Leave the door open, yes, but make it clear that it’s a pipe dream at this moment in time.
     
    I want him also to take it to Obama on that legislative sh*t sandwich…well 2 of them.  The “stimulus” that didn’t stimulate anything, and Obamacare.  The only thing bipartisan about Obamacare was the *opposition* to it.  Romney wasn’t my ideal candidate because of his own involvement in state mandated health care, so I don’t think he is in much of a position to hammer Obama on that, but there are plenty of other issues that he CAN take it to Obama on.
     
    No more matching funds and NO Mr. Nicey Nice Guy.  It doesn’t work and it will ultimately make Romney look weak in the eyes of the voters.  Nobody really likes an indecisive squish. I certainly don’t.  Show some backbone!  Let us (the voters) see that you are not afraid to go toe to toe with someone that we *know* plays dirty!  (see Obama’s previous record on sleazing his opponents off the ballot)
     
    Show me some aggression!  Show me a MAN who can make tough decisions and go toe to toe with an opponent who hits below the belt, not an indecisive, metrosexual squish who is too in touch with his feminine side!  Politics ain’t beanbag and I want to see some serious and heavy duty punching!  Give Team Obama the giant black eye they so richly deserve.

  3. says

     
    D. of A.!!  PLEASE tell me you have a contact in the Romney camp!  Please, Oh Please.
     
    Wonderful prescription…now let’s watch and see what Mitt does with it.
     
    If he’ll treat Obama the way he treated Santorum and Gingrich, all will be well…….

  4. jj says

    There are reasons, too numerous to enumerate, for why a conservative should be optimistic.  Regrettably, they’re logical, grounded in reality, intelligent reasons.  Are we dealing with a logical, grounded in reality, intelligent electorate?  Wouldn’t it be lovely to think so! 

  5. Charles Martel says

    I say we Bookwormers spring for a bottle of good whiskey, find a comfortable private booth in a nice bar, and have Mitt sit down with Duchess of Austin for a little heart to heart. It would do our boy well to hear what she has to say.

  6. Duchess of Austin says

    I wish I had an in with Mitt’s Team.  In a perfect world, his team reads this blog and may respond to what an average conservative thinks they should do.  I’d love nothing more than to lay it out to them and then (hopefully) watch them take Obama apart, piece by piece.  BTW, I’m not the only conservative who is tired of squishes and thinks ole Mitt should take it to Obama and put him on the defensive.  If the comments I’ve seen on other blogs could be extrapolated, most conservatives think he should go on the offense.
     
    We’re dealing with the schoolyard gang here, and when I was coming up, the only way to deal with a bully was to stand up to him.  Yeah, you may get your nose bloodied for your efforts but chances are the bully would move on to greener and more passive pastures.  These days, children are encouraged to “rat out” the bully, or whine that they’re being bullied, thereby making the situation worse for all concerned.  I’m sick and tired of the passive/aggressive direction our society is going in.  What ever happened to encouraging kids to fight for themselves? 
     
    Bullies don’t just exist in the schoolyard and if you don’t learn to deal with them early on, you never will.  Team Obama knows that if they are aggressive enough, most folks will back down and that lesson was reinforced for them by John McCain.  Blech!  I’m sick of it!  Time to put your dukes up, Mitt.  Punch Obama in the nose, even if its only metaphorically!  Make me believe you have a backbone!

  7. Gringo says

    So far Romney  and  other Pubs have done a better job of fighting back than was done in 2008.
    1) Dog in a crate became dog on a plate.
    2) Attacks on Rush labeling Fluke a slut resulted in attacks on Bill Maher for calling Sarah Palin and others  c*$%s.
    3) Team Obama’s attempt to label comments on “You didn’t build that” as “lies” were pretty much demolished by pointing out that it is not a lie when in fact Obama DID say that. Moreover, the “context” was even worse for Team Obama when the whole speech was looked at.
     
    Can we do better? Yes
    Should we , as the Duchess of Ham Sandwiches  cum Lutefisk suggests, take the attack to the Demos? Yes.

  8. says

    The Left is only the most recent advancement of the same evil seen fighting human progress since the inception of man’s imagination. Yet at the same time, people wish to ignore this fact and pretend they’re just another democratic party that should have their say in the light. It’s not the light they operate under… 

Leave a Reply