Over at Commentary/Contentions Peter Wehner makes the point that it is the nominee not the field that matters in regard to current discussions over a weak Republican field. http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/28/weak-gop-candidates/ Wehner is being far too literal here. The weak field complaint isn’t anything like a collective score measurement or even an average.
Earlier in the day on the same site an upcoming column by George Will was brought out. In it Will says of Romney:
“Romney, supposedly the Republican most electable next November, is a recidivist reviser of his principles who is not only becoming less electable, he might damage GOP chances of capturing the Senate: Republican successes down the ticket will depend on the energies of the Tea Party and other conservatives, who will be deflated by a nominee whose blurry profile in caution communicates only calculated trimming. Republicans may have found their Michael Dukakis, a technocratic Massachusetts governor who takes his bearings from “data” … Has conservatism come so far, surmounting so many obstacles, to settle, at a moment of economic crisis, for THIS?”
That neatly sums up Romney, but when you a look for an alternative to him among the other candidates you come up empty. If there were a viable alternative Romney would be getting blown out, instead he looks inevitable. That’s what’s driving the weak field meme, not whatever it is that Wehner is addressing.
No comments:
Post a Comment