Romney has profited from the temporary rise and spontaneous combustion of Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Herman Cain. No exertion required on Romney’s part.
Enter Gingrich, the current vessel for anti-Romney forces — and likely the final one. Gingrich’s obvious weakness is a history of flip-flops, zigzags and mind changes even more extensive than Romney’s — on climate change, the health-care mandate, cap-and-trade, Libya, the Ryan Medicare plan, etc.
The list is long. But what distinguishes Gingrich from Romney — and mitigates these heresies in the eyes of conservatives — is that he authored a historic conservative triumph: the 1994 Republican takeover of the House after 40 years of Democratic control.
Which means that Gingrich’s apostasies are seen as deviations from his conservative core — while Romney’s flip-flops are seen as deviations from . . . nothing. Romney has no signature achievement, legislation or manifesto that identifies him as a core conservative. ...Charles Krauthammer, WaPo
That's an interesting critique from a deep-inside, blindered Republican. Those blinders become more evident with this:
You play the hand you’re dealt. This is a weak Republican field with two significantly flawed front-runners contesting an immensely important election. If Obama wins, he will take the country to a place from which it will not be able to return (which is precisely his own objective for a second term). ...Krauthammer
"...Will take the country?" No. At "worst," Obama would normalize our politics --remove the heavy weight of ignorance, greed, and incivility we suffered during the Reagan years, a burden that grew insufferable during the Bush years and only increased when Republicans won the House in 2010.
No. What Republicans stand to lose with a second Obama administration is their deadly grip on our nation -- its promotion of poverty, ignorance and vast economic and social disparities. That would do the country nothing but good.
___
Fortunately there's liberal Frank Rich, a real mensch, to counter Krauthammer's stale reactionary comments. Rich gets it.
Nymag's Frank Rich schmoozed with Rachel Maddow last night about how the right-wing media, namely Fox and WSJ, are favoring Gingrich over Romney. It's partly for ideological reasons, Rich said, but "... I think most of all it's a practical decision.. throughout the political world, people really, really don't like Mitt Romney. Forget about his positions, or his flip-flopping... there's something plastic about Romney, something off-putting. And fake. And I think the Murdoch empire wants someone who could win." ...Daily Intel
___
Molly Ball, writing at Atlantic, doesn't find that much difference between Gingrich and Romney. "Going down the list of conservative objections to Romney," she writes, "every one applies equally, if not more so, to Gingrich."
So why are the anti-Romney conservatives flocking to Gingrich? In conversations with Republicans -- some Gingrich backers, some not -- about why he's more appealing than Romney, most acknowledge it basically comes down to style. Gingrich's tone is that of an angry crusader, unlike Romney's placid assurance. And because Gingrich has such a penchant to say whatever comes into his head, his inconsistencies tend to get chalked up to a lack of discipline rather than cold calculation.
As the Daily Caller's Matt Lewis put it:
Gingrich and Romney couldn't be more different. Gingrich questions authority, challenges conventional wisdom, and disputes premises. He also has fun. He is winsome. He can be undisciplined. He enjoys politics, and seems to gain energy from engaging in the battles. Romney, on the other hand, is a consummate "adult." He is highly disciplined. He plays by the rules, accepts reality as it is, and then -- within those confines -- sets about fixing things as best he can.
It's also true that if Gingrich and Romney really are so similar on paper, voters might as well pick Gingrich. Perhaps that's why Romney's camp sees Gingrich as a threat and will seek to highlight the former speaker's personal baggage.
But as Gingrich's current surge enters the closer-inspection phase, many conservatives may discover their infatuation with him is based on equal parts bluster and mythology. In the words of conservative guru Erick Erickson, the RedState.com founder: "The conservative warrior people tend to think Gingrich is, often is not."... Molly Ball, Atlantic
