2008 is a year in which the Democrats should be able to win a Presidential election with one hand tied behind their backs. There is a stalled economy, a housing crisis, an unpopular war and an even more unpopular Republican President. All this speaks to a Democratic landslide come November. Yet, they seem to be imploding. Why?
I like to call it the Mitt vs. Hillary factor. Through Super Tuesday, we had two very close primary election contests on our hands. On the Republican side, it was a battle between Mitt Romney and John McCain. On the Democratic side, it was Barack Obama vs. Hillary Clinton.
Romney’s Concession
After Super Tuesday, Mitt Rommney sensed he could only win at the cost of the Republican party and pulled out of the race, lending John McCain his support. This gave McCain a boost in a number of ways. It unified the party. It gave McCain more time to raise money. It gave McCain time away from a grueling campaign season to re-fuel for the general election. And it allowed McCain to focus on his Democratic opponents rather than his Republican colleagues. In conceding, Romney summed it up this way:
“Even though we face an uphill fight, I know that many in this room are fully behind my campaign.” You are with me all the way to the convention. Fight on, just like Ronald Reagan did in 1976. But there is an important difference from 1976: today… we are a nation at war.
And Barack and Hillary have made their intentions clear regarding Iraq and the war on terror. They would retreat and declare defeat. And the consequence of that would be devastating. It would mean attacks on America, launched from safe havens that make Afghanistan under the Taliban look like child’s play. About this, I have no doubt.
I disagree with Senator McCain on a number of issues, as you know. But I agree with him on doing whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq, on finding and executing Osama bin Laden, and on eliminating Al Qaeda and terror. If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.
This is not an easy decision for me. I hate to lose. My family, my friends and our supporters… many of you right here in this room… have given a great deal to get me where I have a shot at becoming President. If this were only about me, I would go on. But I entered this race because I love America, and because I love America, I feel I must now stand aside, for our party and for our country.”
Romney’s Reasoning
His concession speech made a few important points that I highlight in red.
First, he was fully aware that Ronald Reagan’s challenge to Gerald Ford at the 1976 Republican Convention cost the Republicans the White House that year. He does not want a repeat of that bloody internecine battle in 2008, using the War on Terror as a compelling reason why.
Second, he tries to lay testimony to his authenticity as a person by recalling his policy differences with John McCain, while demonstrating that he stands shoulder to shoulder with him against the Democrats. He means to say that he is an authentic person and not a flip-flopper. That’s why he battled hard against McCain. Yet he goes on to cite his similarities to McCain, especially on the War on Terror (not just Iraq — notice he cites Osama Bin Laden on purpose). These are much greater.
Third, he points to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the Democrats as the true common adversaries of the Republicans.
Fourth, he is a fighter who doesn’t bow out easily. But, he is a loyal, honorable man. He needs to stand aside for party and country.
Romney: Conclusions to Draw
I happen to think Mitt Romney is a flip flopper. I think he changed his positions on Abortion, national defense, health care and a ton of other issues to mollify the Republican base. He tacked right for political expediency.
Yet, his concession was brilliant. It demonstrates that he is truly loyal to his party. But, more than that, it re-casts him as an honorable and decent man to the Republican base, where some had seen him as a flip flopping Mormon in sheep’s clothing.
Romney could have soldiered on, looking to exploit McCain’s weaknesses (his consideration of joining the Kerry ‘04 ticket, his maverick anti-establishment tendencies, his alleged affair and alleged lack of family values, etc.). This would have fractured the Republican party and weakened McCain as a general election candidate.
If John McCain becomes President he owes it to Mitt Romney, pure and simple.
Hillary Clinton: By Comparison
Hillary Clinton’s campaign stands in marked contrast to Mitt Romney’s. She has stayed in the race against Barack Obama, attacking him in a way that weakens whoever becomes the Democratic presidential candidate.
My analysis of the four points I made regarding Romney’s concession applied to Clinton is as follows:
First, she should be aware of the damage Ted Kennedy did to the Democratic party in 1980 by contesting all the way to the convention. Like Romney, she has had ample opportunity to bow out, especially after the Potomac Primaries. Yet, she apparently is too self-interested to do so.
Second, Hillary Clinton, like Romney, has suffered from a perception that she is not entirely honest or forthcoming. Her campaigning has highlighted this fact, the Tuzla tale being the most egregious example of her misrepresentations. I hope she can soon demonstrate, as Romney has, that she has a moral core that rises above self-interest.
Third, she has often attacked her Democratic colleague Barack Obama, while in the same breath praising the presumptive Republican nominee John McCain. Her statements about McCain’s and her years of experience versus Obama’s lack thereof was chilling. From where I sit, such disloyalty immediately disqualifies her from the race; she lacks the personal qualities befitting a President.
Fourth, she is a fighter who does not bow out easily. That is very admirable as a quality for a potential President. Yet, the contrast to Romney’s decency in standing aside is striking.
A last note: having released her tax records, we realize that the Clinton’s made $109 million over a seven year period. They could well afford to finance much of their own campaign (as could John McCain, whose wife Cindy is estimated to be worth $300 million). Yet, they have not done so. This is yet another contrast to Mitt Romney.
Conclusion
Ultimately, I am left feeling a lot more positive about Romney, who I had considered a flip flopper with no moral compass. I am left feeling enmity toward Hillary Clinton that I never had before this election cycle.
Related posts:
