Thursday, March 15, 2012

Mitt Romney Can Defeat Obama. Rick Santorum Can't.

Right now, Mitt Romney is leading the GOP nationally by eight points according to Gallup and up by nine according to Pew Research Polling. According to the Fox News Poll, he's ahead in national GOP match ups and is the most competitive against Obama compared to other GOP match up with the President. A recent Bloomberg/Selzer poll has Romney tied with Obama and Santorum losing to the President by six points.
However, if you're not impressed by the polls, consider the how the 2012 general election will turn out and why Mitt Romney is in the best position to boot Obama out of office. William Tucker, writing for the The American Spectator, explains why Mitt Romney is the best candidate to defeat Obama in this election. Accorrding to Mr. Tucker, the 2012 election will most likely be a replay of the 2008 election and that crucial votes will boil down to the new upscale and highly suburban areas in the East. William Tucker then makes the case why Mitt Romney is the best guy to win these voters:
The answer for Republicans is very clear. Mitt Romney's main appeal is to these upscale voters. In every primary, he has run best in urban and suburban areas. He appeals to people with a college education, he appeals to women, he appeals to the more affluent. These voters are not scared by his Mormonism but they are put off by social issues and are worried about the economy. Romney scores well on all counts.
Rick Santorum is the antithesis. His entire appeal is to voters from rural areas who are already going to vote Republican anyway. He appeals to people with less education who are doing far worse than everyone else and are extremely resentful of those in other parts of the country -- even though no one outside Washington is doing much better. They are passionate about abortion and social issues and want to restore religion to the center of American life. Santorum would win by a landslide in Alabama, Mississippi, Wyoming, and a few other rural outposts but would get slaughtered everywhere else. And don't be fooled by that "I won in Pennsylvania" rhetoric. The last time Senator Santorum ran for re-election in 2006-- after he had picked up the banner of social conservatism and tried to make himself a national figure -- he lost by 700,000 votes, the worst defeat of an incumbent Senator in Pennsylvania history. He wouldn't do any better in a Presidential election.
The choice for Republicans is between making a statement and winning an election. Choosing Santorum or Gingrich will give the Republicans their George McGovern moment, when they can sacrifice electability for principle. And by the way, we can thank Newt for splitting the arch-conservative vote and making it less likely either of these unelectable candidates will win. With candidates driven solely by personal ambition, ego always trumps outcome.
By choosing Romney -- who seems "not conservative enough" only when contrasted with these two -- Republicans will be getting more than just an appealing candidate. They will get an even chance or better of winning the election and taking back control of the Presidency. Compared with four more years of Obamaism, that seems like a pretty attractive choice.
If conservative are truly serious about making Barak Obama a one term President, then Mitt Romney is our best choice to do that. That's why we cannot afford to drag out the GOP primary because the longer we do, the less time the GOP candidate has to start focusing on the national campaign against Obama. Mitt is in the best position, due to his massive organizational structure to take down and large war chest, to take down Obama. Its time that conservatives focus on Obama rather than engaging in a protracted war over which candidate should win the Republican nomination. 
Its time for conservatives across the country to unite around Mitt Romney in the remaining primaries so that we can focus on the real battle of defeating Obama in 2012.  

No comments:

Post a Comment