Romney's Less than Super Tuesday

I've been reading The Corner this morning. There are a number of anti-McCain conservatives that post there so I wanted to learn how they viewed Super Tuesday.

I find it interesting that a number of them have decided that southern conservatives can't vote for a Mormon. None of the posts I read had any data to support that but they seem to think that was the only reason someone could vote for McCain or Huckabee.

I don't think there is only one reason.

I think a lot of conservatives look at Romney and see a fake. No matter how many times Rush, Hannity, Dobson and the rest try to slam McCain and build up Romney, voters still see a guy who flipped on so many issues that they can't believe what he says and who he is.

Just this week, he flipped again on gun control. In December on Meet The Press, he said he would sign an assault weapons ban, but when being interviewed by the gun loving Reynolds on PJ Media, he says he would not sign any gun control legislation. The man does know his audience.

If he had campaigned as the expert on the economy from the start, he might have gained a more solid base, but he tried to become the social conservative. He not only doesn't have a history of being a social conservative, he has a history of being moderate to liberal on the issues.

It is very hard to see how Romney can stop McCain now, and he doesn't do well in what people would call red states.

The talk radio pundits are trying to push a bad product and the people ain't buying.

Right wing off the deep end

I've always been amazed at the coordination of the right wing noise machine's message. And right now the meme they are pushing is McCain is so terrible,they would rather see the democrats get the White House and be responsible for the resulting carnage so the conservatives can ride back into DC on their white horses in 2012. That seems to be the united message of Rush, Sean, Ann, NRO and such. Though I believe there are some on the right who are not yet prepared to go along with that strategy. They have hope that Romney can still win or at least force a brokered convention.

I wonder what all of the reasons are for such a strategy. I can think of afew:

1) Rush, Fox News and such are seeing their ratings drop and figure that ratings would jump with a democrat in office they could attack.

2) They are seeing a base audience that is disillusioned after Bush. The right wing noise machine has had to "rally around our guy" a number of times over the past 7 years and they are losing their audience because they've had to go against their past "principles". With a liberal in office (hence why they like to label McCain as a liberal), they can go back to their tried and true formulas.

3) Access to power. McCain doesn't listen to them. He seems to think Tim Russert is more important to talk to then Rush. These guys want access for several reasons, and don't like being shut out.

4) Some might actually sincerely believe... Who am I kidding? It's always about power and money.

5) #4 might be too cynical. Some might have been reading from the right wing talking points for so long they have become fanatics. Think of them as being like the 14 year old boy in Pakistan who has only gone to school at a radical madrasah. That boy believes the lessons he has been told to such a level that blowing himself up for the cause seems reasonable.

Rush and his ilk now think that any compromise of their positions is treasonist. Yesterday I listen to Rush condemn McCain because he reached has reached across the aisle in order to get things done. That's how our government is supposed to work!!!

In their quest for purity, they are demonizing any who stray. This explains their contempt for Congress since a legislative body can only work through compromise. This also explains their love of a strong and growing stonger executive branch.

I don't consider these pundits to truly be conservatives. Conservatives value the Constitution and do not seek to undermine it. They value the wisdom of the Founders. They understand the value of checks and balances and the need for compromise.

The Zelig candidate

I realized I didn't do a great job explaining what I think the key is to Romney's appeal to the right wing noise machine: he makes them feel they are being heard.

Access to power is the dream of most pundits. Actually having influence is almost too much to ask for.

Take a look at Romney's platform. This platform could almost have been written by the reactionary pundits that pose as conservatives. By that, I mean Rush, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and such.

So while Romney seems to listen to them and take their positions, McCain and Huckabee stick to their own philosophies.

It would be one thing if I felt that Romney was sincere, but I do not. YouTube has allowed me to watch too many Romney speeches from his past career to buy what he is selling now. He is like Zelig from the old Woody Allen movie. He morphs into whatever he needs to be in order to fit the situation.

He has packaged himself to be the candidate of the right leaning pundits and got them to spread the word. And even better, they act as his attack dogs.

McCain and Huckabee don't follow all of the orthodoxies, so the pundits don't like them.

I wonder how Romney will govern once he no longer needs them.

Romney as Clinton?

I think I've finally figured out why Rush, Sean, Ann and the rest are pushing so hard for Romney versus McCain.

I took some time to look at Romney's website. If only he would have chosen to be born again, he would be the perfect dittohead. His platform is a tailored fit to what the most popular conservative pundits have been asking for.

Why do I say "Romney as Clinton"? All through the '90's, we got to hear how poll driven Clinton was. This was normally part of an attack on Clinton. This was to make us see how Bill had no big vision, but would just deal with problems as they appeared, after consulting his poll data.

In some ways, that was Bush's 41 style as well. If you remember, GHWB struggled with the vision thing.

It appears that Romney is the same type of character. In Massachusetts, he needed to be a liberal on almost all social issues, so he was. For the presidential primaries, he needed to tack way to the right, so he did.

He would probably make a great Cabinet Secretary since someone else would provide him the vision, but I'm not sure he has what it takes to be the president.

Why Rush, Sean and the rest have decided to believe this current edition of Romney is real is a topic for another day.

Rush's GOP

It's impossible to talk politics with people and not run into listeners of Rush. I don't have a problem with Rush. I've listened to Rush, on and off, for years.

The issue is with the people who listen to him and actually think Rush is informing them.

That's not Rush's job. His job is to entertain you long enough so he can deliver you to his advertisers. There is nothing wrong with that. It is what most of print, radio and TV is for. And Rush is very good at it.

The problem I have is with people who think that Rush is doing any more than entertaining propaganda.

You can recognize the signs of the "Rush informed" shortly into a conversation. The earliest sign is the typical reactionary rants about the liberal media. I think conservatives like to use this old line as often as possible because it makes people feel any other sources of information that contradict the conservative host are not to be trusted. And it makes the listener feel they are getting to real information. No better way to feel superior than that.

The "liberal media" rant then allows Rush to build up a straw man of the opposing view which he can then knock down. Rush's listeners who don't seek out alternative views (and no, Sean Hannity is not an alternative view) feel they have just seen liberal views defeated by the incredible logic of Rush. If Rush had to truly defend his arguments instead of battling straw men of his own creation or the occasional over matched caller, then we would have a show I'd enjoy a lot more.

When you find yourself talking to a Rush listener, you will find them giving Rush's arguments that worked well against his straw men. These arguments can sound very good unless you have any real information about the opposing view. If you have that information, it is easy to cause a Rushovite to sputter since they don't normally have any way to respond to new arguments.

I do this for fun just to see them try to come up with an answer to a question harder than what Rush was willing to tackle. It is very rare for them to rise to the occasion.

The key to understanding Rush's appeal is that he usually avoids challenging his listeners. Challenging their preconceived notions would make them uncomfortable and uncomfortable listeners might tune out. Rush needs to stay within the framework his listeners are comfortable with and add enough humor to keep it from getting boring.

This framework is reactionary and populist, but it makes millions of people feel secure in their ignorance and just makes Rush millions.