Though a man of a very different religious persuasion, Mitt Romney entered the Republican primary season with just this feeling of predestination. This was to be his year. He exuded the confidence of a man assured of victory. No other candidate seemed to have a fighting chance.
Of course, there were flashes in the pan: the Bachmanns, the Cains, the Trumps, the Perrys. All of their antics, from gimmicky tax-code overhauls to calls for scrapping major federal departments, seemed only to emphasize Romney’s almost laughable normalcy. As each of the clownish contenders enjoyed his or her moment in the sun, ever was Romney there, talking jobs and the economy while they spouted about electric fences on the Mexican border and abolishing the entire Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for being too liberal. He was, as the slogan on his campaign bus reminds us, a “conservative businessman” with the measuredness, consistency, and hair to prove it.
Since Newt Gingrich’s rise to the status of Romney’s rival, the story of the Grand Old Party (GOP) primary season has been one of predestination gone awry.
Gingrich’s success could be attributed to the delicate balance he has struck. By explicitly branding himself as the truly conservative alternative to the political chameleon Romney, Gingrich seems to be just enough like Bachmann or Perry to create a splash. On the other hand, his strong debate performances, his experience, and his political shrewdness seem to suggest a truly viable candidacy.
To the extent that the recent history of the Republican Party can be understood as the interplay of insurgency and establishment, Tea Party and country club, then Romney and Gingrich are living out this split. Romney, the successful businessman with executive experience and perfect hair, is, as expected, the “establishment” choice, despite the skepticism of many Republicans about his commitment to conservatism. Gingrich, in contrast, has somehow become the insurgent, or at least the more successful insurgent compared to the blatantly-homophobic Rick Santorum and the libertarian Ron Paul.
The fact that Gingrich, a former Speaker of the House, who can probably work the Washington system better than anyone else, is able to brand himself as the non-establishment candidate shows just how square he really is. Romney is trying to shed his establishment image—hence the bluejeans and plaid shirts—but this may not even be necessary in the long run. His formidable campaign machine would have rolled over Gingrich long ago if it weren’t for the Adelsons’ gigantic donations to the inanely-named Gingrich-friendly “super PAC” Winning Our Future. Further, a sad truth is that the unsavoury aspects of Gingrich’s personal (spousal) history will very likely hurt his chances with the more family-obsessed wing of the Republican party.
Many Republicans seem to be coming to their senses and thinking ahead to the general election. An Obama-Gingrich campaign would be nasty, and would almost certainly result in Republican defeat. Those who condemn Romney for tailoring his views to his current political needs--which he absolutely does, by the way--fail to understand the nature of American politics.
While the primary process rewards extremism, the general election demands moderation, and so the traits that are now drawing so much flak may be Romney’s greatest assets when he inevitably becomes the party’s nominee against Obama. Yes, Romney will eventually win the nomination. But thanks to Gingrich, it will definitely not look predestined.
