By DAVID BEILSTEIN
Michael Tanner, over at National Review, here, got on the good foot — probably worried — about President Obama’s modest post convention bounce. While I still think Obama is facing defeat, Tanner makes some good points — seemingly backed up by Rush Limbaugh. Now, Limbaugh is seen by many, even conservatives, as a hot bag of air, bombastic, — an entertainer.
All true. But Limbaugh’s political analysis is often more right than wrong. You can watch what Limbaugh had to say, here.
I’ve never been convinced Mitt Romney is a conservative. My support, what little there is, is not based on that. Nor do I like the Republican Party. I’m a classical liberal, libertarian. The Republican Party (and much of the popular conservative movement) is far too progressive for my blood. I spent a good deal of the primaries throwing bombs at Romney and the Republican Party in general. However, I think Obama is a disaster — a wrecking ball of immense proportions, and needs to be fired. The basic problem of not using more strident, ideological ammunition by team Romney, as it were, will make this election much closer than it need be.
Limbaugh’s comment that Mitt Romney is not running a conservative campaign only makes Romney’s march to Nov. 6 more difficult — and I agree with Limbaugh here. However, I also would say, given the choices in the GOP primaries, Romney was the most plausible candidate. That’s not good in terms of the country, it will, however, probably defeat Obama.
But I’m still feeling Michael Tanner’s tempo in his piece. Romney has to slide out of the technocratic, policy wonk mode, and run a campaign copied prestigiously from the Reagan campaign of 1980. Government is the problem, folks. And the greater the contours of that truth become expressed by the Romney campaign, the bigger Romney’s victory.
The less so, the less Romney’s victory, or worse, defeat.
In a recent poll, almost 53% of Americans chose “leave me alone” verses over 30% respondents echoing “give me a hand”, in terms of their view of the federal government. So, if Romney chose to tack toward Reagan winds, the more positive response he will get.
If Romney loses, Limbaugh is probably right in some form. That’s the end of the Republican Party — and! It will be a good thing, too. For it will illustrate, sadly, the Republican Party has no answer to a radical leftist hoax, on top of the fact, that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, is beatable, and unpopular.
The idea the Romney campaign is not going after ObamaCare more aggressively, given its unpopularity, is unfortunate. Such a course, too, would add more than a few points to Romney’s standing in the polls and deliver a much easier victory.
Tanner illumines this well. The Romney campaign is going to have to offer more — if it deems to rise to a resounding victory, that Obama is simply a nice guy whose done a bad job. No, in stark terms, team Romney needs to illustrate Obama’s policies — arising from specific ideological premises, are a wrecking ball to not only personal liberty, but also substantial economic growth and America’s fiscal security.