Romney and Newt, Newt and Romney

So, did Mitt Romney have a bad week, or what?

He started it off seemingly completely in command of the Republican Presidential race, in the driver's seat at least, and most people already had him as the de facto winner. After all, not many people had won both the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire, and since it seemed that he had done both, he was off to a historically solid start, and seemed the clear leader, at the very least. He tried to play it off in a cool manner, either, beginning attacks more on President Obama, then on his fellow Republicans, in an apparent attempt to seem "above the fray", and not muddled in party politics, but the apparent Republican challenger to President Obama.

Next thing you know, it comes out that he, in fact, did not actually win the Iowa caucus, and that Santorum had in fact pulled it off. Then yesterday, to close out the week, he loses the South Carolina primary to that man that he just seemingly cannot shake off no matter what he does, New Gingrich. Suddenly, Romney seems to be trailing in the Republican race, and at the very least, he has some serious challengers, particularly Newt Gingrich. Things are not all roses in the Romney camp.

So, what happened, then? So many conservatives are leery of Romney. They seem hesitant, even overly hesitant, to admit that he is their representative, and the clear front runner in the Republican race. So much so, in fact, that he no longer really seems clearly in command. Maybe it is because he is a Mormon, and that is a cause for alarm for conservatives, particularly for those who are born again Christians, and frown upon Mormonism. Perhaps it is because Romney seems too "liberal" in their eyes, having set up a health care program in his blue "heathen" state of Massachusetts. Perhaps it is the fear that Romney is the consummate politician,  that is is so extremely well polished, and tries to play everything too safe, to the point that it is hard to see the real man behind all of that political makeup that he so carefully hides behind at every turn. Perhaps it is a combination of all of the above.

Now good ol' Newt Gingrich is back as the conservative's darling, telling everyone that he represents true conservatism. I heard him (I believe it was on FOX News) the other day, telling the cameras that what America needs is a true conservative like him, and that Romney is a "moderate", thus implying that he is not fit to represent the hard core Republicans. I remember when the word "liberal" became a bad word in this country. Now, in this age of more extremities (refer an earlier blog of mine from just a few days ago to see what I mean by this), even being a "moderate" is not enough, because that word sounds weak and filled with compromise, in an age when the "real conservatives" want to force everything that they desire through, no matter how they need to do it. That is how the country has gotten to be so divided, it seems to me, and how the Republicans in Wisconsin attacked the unions. That seems to be an alarming message, promising more of the same.

What I find particularly egregious with Newt Gingrich is his posturing as some responsible and intellectual, sound politician and esteemed professor of history. Seriously? This is the same guy that loudly proclaimed that wanted to impeach Clinton for having a blow job in the Oval Office (let's call a spade a spade here, because that was really what it was all about, in the end), but who himself had numerous affairs (each of his previous marriages had ended because he was having affairs). He preaches the traditional platform of the party of "family values", yet he himself clearly cannot live up to them. In the 1990's, he preached his "Contract for America", yet he was rightly criticized for being so willing to shut down the government when he could not get his way, which was a large part of the reason that Clinton managed to surge back up in the polls, and eventually won an easy reelection in 1996, after seemingly being dead in the water and unofficially a lame duck President following the Republican resurgence of 1994, largely behind Newt Gingrich himself. .

I think that history just might be repeating itself. Obama seemed to reach almost divine status leading up to his election in 2008, and everyone expected great things from him. Before long, when it was finally discovered that he was all too human, just one man with limitations and imperfections, and that he would not, in fact, wave a magic wand to fix all of the things that were so clearly wrong with the country, Obama was turned into the devil incarnate. People slapped Hitler mustaches on him and seemed to threaten him, almost promising to bring their guns with them the next time they protested in Washington. Much like the "Contract for America", Newt's brainchild, rejuvenated the conservatives in the 90's against the Democratic momentum following Clinton's election, the Tea Party similarly was the shot in the arm the conservatives apparently needed to respond to the momentum that Obama's election generated for the Democrats.

Yet, that is not where the similarities apparently end, I think. Much like Newt's movement in the 1990's, the Tea Party movement which seemed to be such a political force not too long ago has lost much of it's former momentum, to the point that it has become a political liability. Suddenly, as sure as it seemed Obama was towards an inevitable election defeat because his approval ratings seemed so low, he now seems poised to win the election, possibly even handily. Much like Clinton in the 1990's.

If that is the case, then history does indeed seem to be repeating itself. Moreover, how fitting would it be to see Newt as the final candidate that represents the Republican Party in that election? After all, it was Gingrich's cohort, Bob Dole, who won the 1996 Republican nomination, only to lose badly to Clinton. I can think of no better choice to follow in those footsteps, and lose to Obama in 2008, which would almost certainly end his political career once and for all, much like the 1996 defeat ended Dole's political career. Maybe then he can star in male impotency commercials, like Bob Dole did a few years after the loss.

And really, who else do the Republicans have, anyway? They apparently do not like Romney, and they are certainly not alone in that regard. Santorum does not seem strong enough to really pull off that major of an upset, and his homophobic rantings, while perhaps catering to the hard core conservative base, probably alienated most Americans more than anything, and would hurt him in a more general election that is not exclusively for Republicans. Despite wearing his conservative credentials on his sleeve, Santorum hardly even seems capable of making a dent in the Republican race, so how could he hope to win an overall race?

What about Ron Paul? He always seems to be right there, lingering in the background, right? Nobody can likely boast the loyalty of his followers, who border on the rabid. Could he possibly be the next Republican to challenge for the White House? It seems highly unlikely. While Republicans dislike and do not trust Romney, they seem to despise Paul, to the point that his very sanity is put into question. It almost seems like they are rluctant to admit that he even exists, and they quickly try and sweep his presence under the rug, systematically trying to make him at least appear irrelvant, and not a “serious” choice. In fact, it still strikes me as odd that he so doggedly chooses to run as a Republican, since he would likely make more noise, and go much further, running as an independent, down the line. Maybe even he will end up doing just that. But as for his chances of wining the Republican nomination? That hardly seems likely, does it?

So, perhaps it is destiny. Perhaps Newt Gingrich is destined to win the Republican nomination, and then head towards an inevitable defeat by the man he so clearly despises (but is there any other kind of man in Newt's book, other than himself and those few who agree with him on everything?). He is a history professor, after all, so maybe this lesson is something that he would concede: history does in fact seem to repeat itself.

At the very least, even he can likely admit that all of this politial infighting inside of the challenging party trying to win back the White House is not likely helping their overall cause, but hurting it. Right now. All Obama and his team have to do is sit back and let the Republicans hurl insults and stage attacks on one another, doing perhaps irrepreable damage to the reputation of their opponents in the meantime. Whoever emerges as the ultimate winner, Obama will almost assuredly utilize all of the mudslinging arguments later on, and use them against his ultimate opponent, using the words of Republicans themselves against them, and likely to great effect en route to another four years in office, something that seemed almost impossible not very long ago, but that, at least for the moment, seems more and more inevitable, as time passes.