With Mitt Romney’s inevitability blown, GOP faces dilemma in picking nominee
The South Carolina primary results have conclusively blown a hole in Mitt Romney’s inevitability strategy.
They’ve also presented Republicans with something of a political dilemma as they contemplate their 2012 presidential nominee.
Do they rally around their most conservative elements – and risk broader general election appeal – by backing either Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum?
Or do they nominate Romney, who may have the GOP establishment support and organizational advantages to win a long primary campaign, but who still hasn’t shown an ability to connect to the hearts – on top of the minds – of the electorate?
Santorum won by one-tenth of a percent in Iowa. Romney won by 16 percent in New Hampshire, where he had an undeniable homecourt advantage. And now Gingrich has prevailed in South Carolina, a neighbor to his homestate of Georgia but also the battleground where the darkest elements of his private life were laid bare for public evaluation.
Despite that body blow, he ended up winning by about a dozen points.
Meanwhile, Ron Paul placed fourth after finishing with Santorum and Romney in a virtual three-way tie in Iowa, and second in New Hampshire. He made it clear he is no longer running a national campaign.
The Texas congressman said he will largely skip the next state to vote, Florida, and concentrate on smaller states as he tries to preserve his campaign budget while picking up delegates.
For his part, Gingrich reveled in the winner’s trappings.
He spoke last and used his prime-time network audience to deliver his previously little-heard stump speech – as well as stage a Shermanesque march through the “elites’’ in the media and Washington-to-New York corridor.
“The American people feel that they have elites who have been trying for half a century to force us to quit being America and become some other kind of system,’’ said Gingrich, who opened a lead in South Carolina after blasting a CNN debate moderator for asking him about allegations he requested an “open marriage’’ between his second and third wives.
“People completely misunderstand what’s going on: It’s not that I am a good debater; it is that I articulate the deepest-felt values of the American people,’’ he said.
Despite that bold statement, Gingrich tried to show humility by embracing Santorum, Paul, and Romney – in that order.
“The four of us, we are proof that you can come from a wide range of backgrounds and in America, you have a chance to try to make your case no matter what the elites think in New York and Washington,’’ the former House speaker said.
He then shifted his attack to President Obama.
“If Barack Obama can get reelected, just think of how radical he can be in a second term,’’ said Gingrich.
His audience interrupted his remarks with frequent chants of “USA, USA, USA.’’
Gingrich said a general election matchup between him and Obama would feature a choice between a “historic America’’ rooted in the Declaration of Independence, and “a brand-new, secular and European-style bureaucratic system.’’
Santorum, in his remarks, took advantage of his time in the spotlight to cast himself as the true conservative choice in the race.
But during a CNN interview beforehand, the former Pennsylvania senator broke down the results.
“The great narrative of this is three days ago, there was an inevitability in this race. Mitt Romney was 2-0 and was soon to be 3-0. And I took Iowa, Newt took South Carolina, and it’s game on again,’’ he said. “And I can’t be more excited for the opportunity now to see this campaign go on.’’
Santorum said rather than softening up the eventual nominee for Obama and the Democrats, “that nominee is going to be sharpened by steel.’’
In his speech, Romney gamely congratulated Gingrich but soon cast him as a demon of capitalism and unelectable against the incumbent president.
“Our party can’t be led to victory by someone who also has never run a business and never run a state,’’ the former Massachusetts governor said, drawing an implicit contrast between the incumbent president and former House speaker.
Accusing Obama of attacking the free enterprise system, he added: “We cannot defeat the president with a candidate who has joined in that very assault on free enterprise.’’
Sounding a populist tone despite being a multi-millionaire, Romney declared: “When my opponents attack success and free enterprise, they’re not only attacking me; they’re attacking every person who dreams of a better future. He’s attacking you. I will support you. I will help you have a better future.’’
But he didn’t stop there.
“If Republican leaders want to join this president in demonizing success, and disparaging conservative values, then they’re not going to be fit to be our nominee,’’ he said.
The problem for Romney is that voters have not emotionally bonded with him.
So, when debate challenges and income tax questions revealed a political brittleness, there was only a thin reservoir of support upon which to draw.
Going forward, Romney has to hope that momentum swings back in his favor, Gingrich wilts under greater scrutiny from the elites he abhors, and the most damaging attacks – over his Bain Capital record, in particular – are behind him.
Only then can Romney’s fund-raising and organizational advantages overcome his current challenges.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com