I felt silly Tuesday night listening to TV ramifications of Rick Santorum's surprise showing in the Iowa caucuses. Surprise my foot! He spent the entire year there and got 25% of the vote. The only winners were the pundits who now have something new to talk about. He is just the most recent in a long line of yet to be housebroken aspirants to reach that figure. Granted, this was a caucus, not just a poll. But none of these Tea Party types will ever become president or, in my view, even their party's nominee to top the ticket. The people with the money who pull the party's strings want to win and the only candidate with a credible chance of doing that is Millard Romney,* who will become the nominee.
The Republican establishment has learned a lot since 1964 when the radical right gave them Barry Goldwater. It's one thing for these people to be heard at the convention and quite another to nominate a candidate of their choosing. Of course voters in primaries and caucuses have something to say. But look at what the party's high command did to Newt Gingrich, the most credible threat to Romney, when he got hot. A ton of Super PAC anti-Gingrich money suddenly poured into Iowa, without Romney fingerprints thanks to Citizens United. John McCain received similar treatment opposing W in 2000, and he was an electable candidate, possibly too electable.
Much has been said about the problems the Tea Party has caused Republicans by pushing their candidates for elective office too far to the right in fear of primary challenges. This cost them Senate seats in Delaware, Nevada and Alaska. But on balance the connection has been working much to the party's benefit. It regained the House majority, much of the Senate and, what may be most important, governorships and state legislature majorities that have led to drastic changes in the rights of labor, predominantly Democratic voters and the usual partisan redistricting following the 2010 census.
And what have the Tea Party folks received from the GOP in return? At this point mostly rhetorical support on issues on which they both agree. But now they are asking for something tangible, a presidential nominee who meets their approval. Here the plot thickens because none of their choices are electable. Push is coming to shove and we know who's going to win.
In spite of being taken to the cleaners, most of the Tea Party people will vote for Romney against Obama. But probably not as overwhelmingly, absent the enthusiasm that turned the nation inside out in 2010. The energy is now coming from the other side. As the nominee Romney will be hurt by the ill will he has engendered in intra party competition. Then there's a reasonable possibility of a third party which would work against Republicans. The day may soon come when the Grand Old Party will rue having enlisted this gang of ruffians.
*I know he is referred to as "Mitt" Romney. But I don't know of any president whose given name was modified other than by tradition, "Jimmy" for James Carter and "Bill" for William Clinton. Could our 13th president have been referred to as "Mitt" Fillmore?
The Republican establishment has learned a lot since 1964 when the radical right gave them Barry Goldwater. It's one thing for these people to be heard at the convention and quite another to nominate a candidate of their choosing. Of course voters in primaries and caucuses have something to say. But look at what the party's high command did to Newt Gingrich, the most credible threat to Romney, when he got hot. A ton of Super PAC anti-Gingrich money suddenly poured into Iowa, without Romney fingerprints thanks to Citizens United. John McCain received similar treatment opposing W in 2000, and he was an electable candidate, possibly too electable.
Much has been said about the problems the Tea Party has caused Republicans by pushing their candidates for elective office too far to the right in fear of primary challenges. This cost them Senate seats in Delaware, Nevada and Alaska. But on balance the connection has been working much to the party's benefit. It regained the House majority, much of the Senate and, what may be most important, governorships and state legislature majorities that have led to drastic changes in the rights of labor, predominantly Democratic voters and the usual partisan redistricting following the 2010 census.
And what have the Tea Party folks received from the GOP in return? At this point mostly rhetorical support on issues on which they both agree. But now they are asking for something tangible, a presidential nominee who meets their approval. Here the plot thickens because none of their choices are electable. Push is coming to shove and we know who's going to win.
In spite of being taken to the cleaners, most of the Tea Party people will vote for Romney against Obama. But probably not as overwhelmingly, absent the enthusiasm that turned the nation inside out in 2010. The energy is now coming from the other side. As the nominee Romney will be hurt by the ill will he has engendered in intra party competition. Then there's a reasonable possibility of a third party which would work against Republicans. The day may soon come when the Grand Old Party will rue having enlisted this gang of ruffians.
*I know he is referred to as "Mitt" Romney. But I don't know of any president whose given name was modified other than by tradition, "Jimmy" for James Carter and "Bill" for William Clinton. Could our 13th president have been referred to as "Mitt" Fillmore?
No comments:
Post a Comment