At this moment, my fabulous readers, it appears that Mitt Romney
has by and large sewn up the Republican nomination for the
Presidency; having won the Wisconsin GOP primary, the former
Massachusetts governor has gathered 646 delegates for the party
convention to be held in Tampa this summer --- far more than his
closest rival, former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is a distant third, and last
your diligent Peasant has heard he is thinking of suspending (read:
ending) his campaign. the unsinkable Molly Brown of American
politics, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul is in fourth place and is stubbornly
sticking around. Romney needs just over 1,100 more delegates
and at this point, the mathematics are solidly in his favor.
You recall that I, your favorite Peasant, remarked in this blog that
although Sen. Santorum has been quite forthright on the social
issues of concern to conservatives, he has said comparatively
little of the economic issues which have a tighter grip on the
attention of not just conservatives but just about everyone.
As important as the social matters are, as they affect the quality
of our society, the economic challenges that we as a nation are
confronted with are a matter of our nation's life and death. The
biggest concern that most Americans, regardless of their political
persuasions, have is what will be our economic fate; will we have
raging inflation, will our taxes continue on their rocket ride (espe-
cially if the incumbent president should defy the odds and win
another term), will jobs make a comeback or will they continue
to die off or move overseas? Sen. Santorum learned the hard way
that although Americans, especially conservative Americans, still
care about the social state of affairs of these United States, they
have to focus on their very survival; their --- our --- survival is
inextricably entwined with the economy and its health. And the
economy's health is precariously weak.
Gov. Romney has had a mixed record on economic matters as
the Bay State's top elected government official. Although he had
handcuffed the rise and proliferation of taxes, he did institute a
health care plan which is eerily similar to that which President
Obama had zipped through Congress and signed into law. And
it didn't help his cause when Romney claimed that his plan has
no individual mandate, unlike Obama's plan, when analysis
revealed that it in fact does. But Romney concentrated on the
money matters with a business-like approach, and that is what
won over many Republican voters in the primaries and caucuses
held thus far. In addition, Romney has garnered the support of
143 present or past Congressional members and six incumbent
governors. Many of these Republican officials, by the way, are
staunchly conservative; Arizona's no-nonsense governor, Jan
Brewer, is in the Romney camp. So is U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio,
the Tea Party favorite who defeated incumbent establishment
elitist Gov. Charlie Crist and a Democrat opponent to win one
of the Senate seats from Florida. They haven't watered down
their conservatism one bit, but they recognize that our attention
and energy must be focused on the economic plight of our
country, and therefore they are supporting the GOP candidate
that is best demonstrating that focus.
Your beloved Peasant certainly has reservations about this man,
no doubt about that. But I fervently believe that Mitt Romney at
his worst is still streaks better than Barack Obama at his best.
Besides, Romney has considerable business experience; he had
been a major contributor to the success of Bain Capital, and invest-
ment firm which he had been with for years and whose clients he
helped achieve their financial goals. And let's not forget that he
took over a financially hurting and operationally dysfunctional U.S.
Olympic Committee and restored it to robust financial health and
sound operational order. Obama was, as we all know all too well,
a "community organizer". A nebulous job with a nebulous title.
What is a "community organizer" when he's at home?
While Mitt Romney is posed to coast to the Republican Convention
in Tampa and the party's presidential nomination, he would do well
to do the following: One, he thinks of and checks things he has said
and done in the past thoroughly before disavowing anything. Recall
the video footage that your researching Peasant posted here a few
weeks ago showing Romney's "oops" moment re: RomneyCare.
This sort of thing will trip him up in debates with Obama. Two, he
adheres to his tough talk on the economy and related issues (i.e.
taxes), and that he listens carefully to taxpayers, as well as
business owners and managers of big AND small businesses!
It is small businesses which employ the majority of the U.S.
workforce). Romney should also listen to us Tea Party folks, as
we are the ones who have begun a new revolution in favor of more
reasonable tax rates as well as less taxes, paired with dramatically
less federal spending. Three, and this will be make-or-break, he
must empathize with those who don't make nearly as much
as himself; these people are the vast majority of our populace
and have been hit harder and knocked to the curb more violently
than those in Romney's economic strata. In the 1950s, Adlai
Stevenson routed twice by Dwight "Ike" Eisenhower in two
presidential elections largely because he couldn't empathize,
let alone identify with, the average wage-earner and his economic
difficulties for the lavish wealth that he was enveloped in. Romney
should study Ronald Reagan's way of communicating with these
folks, as he was able to make that vital connection with them in
order to show that he understood them and their problems and
was thus able to win their support; basically, Reagan listened to
people. It would behoove Romney to do the same.
The election, and the fate of our country could very well depend