Total Pageviews

Friday, January 6, 2012

Obama v. Romney and The Enthusiasm Gap

In 2008, when Obama won Iowa and he gave his acceptance speech the roar of the crowd drowned out the Senator for the first few words of his speech.  He didn't even talk for a number of minutes, he just clapped and smiled while the crowd went nuts.  Throughout his primary campaign, Obama supporters fainted in his presence, Obama-laden products sold out instantly, the enthusiasm was at a fever pitch. Obama aroused the nation, and in fact the world.

This time around, nobody expects that Obama will be able to match that feat, but compare and contrast the enthusiasm surrounding Obama in 08 with the enthusiasm surrounding this years winner of the Iowa Republican Caucus, Mitt Romney.  One can't even contrast because there is no comparison.  Romney backed into the Iowa caucus and won, but let's face facts: the enthusiasm behind him is low.  But the even stranger thing is that the Republican party is energized.  In 2010 the Tea Party coalition formed around the various protests throughout the country.  Thousands, perhaps millions of Republicans re-branded themselves as Tea Party Republicans.  This energy and enthusiasm led to historical gains in the the House and Senate for the Republican Party.  The energy and enthusiasm for Republicans is there, but Romney is unable to tap into it.

Perhaps its his tin-man, stiff-suit, all-business sort of personality.  Or maybe its the flip flopping on abortion, health care and gay marriage.  Its probably a combination, but this cocktail creates an image of a man without a core.  A man that doesn't stand for anything and lacks convictions.  This may or may not be true, but this is the image he portrays.  All politicians flip flop, but the ones with character and core principals can overcome it i.e. Ronald Reagan. And this lack of conviction has damaged Mitt and left him without a loyal following.

Look at Ron Paul.  His policies may teeter on the edge of lunacy, but he portrays conviction, steadfastness and principal stances on every single one of them.  Ron Paul says what he believes and believes what he says, no matter how unrealistic it may be.  And as a result Ron Paul has a cadre of core supporters that would ride with him to the very end of any election no matter what his chances are.  The same can not be said for Mitt, who says whatever he has to in order to please the person he is talking to at that particular moment.

Enter Rick Santorum.  He has a lot of knocks against him for his extreme views on Iran and social values, but one thing about Rick is that he has been consistent since day one.  Rick was a Tea Partier before there was a Tea Party.  Rick believes what he says and says what he believes no matter how unpopular it is at the time.  Though Ricks views are extreme, they are not as unpractical as Ron Pauls.  And if Rick can learn to tone down the social values stuff and harness his economic analysis and criticisms, he may gain popularity.  Rick is the grandson of a coal miner who immigrated to the U.S. from Italy and worked for the American Dream.  A huge contrast to the golden spoon childhood experienced by Romney.  Rick can deliver a killer speech, he can hug a baby with sincerity and he can look you in the eye and tell you something and you know he believes it.

Rick may not win in NH, and it may be too late for him after that, but he has tapped into the Tea Party enthusiasm that Mitt Romney will never be able to touch.  Rick has core, and he has character, even if his stance on the issues may be extreme.

The Republicans now have a choice to make.  They can choose to create enthusiasm amongst the base, by drafting Rick Santorum, or they can let the enthusiasm gap fade, make a grab for the middle and just hope that the dislike of Obama brings Rep's out to vote for Mitt. At this point, its most likely gonna be Mitt. But I wouldnt count Rick out.

Also, the Reps went for the center grab with John Mccain in 08' and we know that turned out. If the Reps do buy on Mitt, I can see a bad case of buyers remorse setting in shortly after.

We know the full potential of Mitt Romney, but we dont know what the possibilities are for Santorum.  It will be fun and fascinating to see how it plays out, but one thing is for certain: neither of those candidates will be able to reach the fever pitch that Obama did in 08.'  Im not saying that there arent Republicans out there that could do it, but Im pretty sure they chose to sit this one out. Perhaps it was the images of the 08' campaign dancing in their head that scared them away....


4 comments:

  1. I missed these Purple State posts. Welcome back.

    I just think this post gives Santorum too much credit and unfairly knocks Romney for doing what all politicians do, flip-flop. We all know Rick makes a big deal out of being a social conservative, but he arguably has not been consistent on social issues from day one. He vigorously endorsed pro-choice Senator Arlen Specter and Republican pro-choice governor of New Jersey, Christine Todd Whitman. Rick obviously made these endorsements because that's the game you play to keep your own political career intact. But a guy who really does believe in the importance of consistency in social values should have no problem refusing to endorse a pro-choice politician. If Rick really does stand for pro-life values, he would have refused to endorse Specter and Whitman. It would have been unpopular within the party establishment, but it would have done a lot to prove the authenticity of his values.

    As for Rick capturing the tea party enthusiam - all Romney has to do is play Santorum's 2004 commercial in which he endorsed Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey. Specter is the tea party's public enemy number one, and Pat Toomey is Mr. Tea Party right now. Mitt should play that video on a loop to neutralize Rick's tea party support.

    And if Mitt is successful in neutralizing Rick's tea party support, I don't know where that leaves the tea party. What I do think is that the tea party dislikes Obama so much that even if Mitt is the nominee, most tea partiers will not sit out the election. They will suck it up, head out to the polls and vote Romney just to get Obama out. That is, unless Romney botches his VP nomination by not picking Christie or Rubio.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I myself can't believe I'm supporting Romney for President, but sometimes you just have to support the guy who has the best chance of winning. It's fun to be a purist, but right now I'm putting purity on hold in favor of the Republican who has the best chance at the White House. Romney is obviously that guy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good point on the Repub's '08 strategy of going to the center and nominating McCain. That strategy failed for many reasons. Sure, '08 just was not the Repub's year. All the momentum was with the Democrats. That aside, McCain was an awful candidate and had zero electability. He never had a prayer, even without the economic collapse.

    What gets me is how all of a sudden, those on the right are up in arms about how we can't nominate Mitt because he's too moderate. I want to know why this argument wasn't being made back in '08 when we were nominating John McCain? Why was it okay to nominate a RINO in '08 but it's unconscionable now. And Mitt is actually more conservative than McCain.

    The tea party makes less and less sense to me everyday.

    ReplyDelete