Don't Fear: It's Mitt Romney!

Of all the politicians currently seeking the Republican nomination for president, Mitt Romney is the one who I've come think of as the candidate who is most likely to both win the nomination yet proceed to lose against Barack Obama in the general election. His deep pockets, strong organization, and high recognition among voters let him hit the ground running -- he has been the frontrunner for the Republican nomination from day one. Although recent entrant Rick Perry has been leading Romney in the latest few polls, the newest kid on the block often polls well...the Texas governor will need some strong debate performances to maintain this momentum. If he doesn't, I think it's likely the polling will put Mitt right back on top again; after all, that's where he's been in most of the polls conducted over the past couple of years. Indeed, I have no problem imagining Romney beating Perry or Bachmann or Paul; it is his chances against President Obama that I wonder most about.

With the president's approval ratings continuing to weaken and the economy mired in a state of ugly stagnancy, Obama ought to be the type of opponent that Republican candidates would want to face head-to-head in a general election. That they likely don't relish this matchup against the incumbent more has much to do with Obama's Romney-like qualities: he's a smooth speaker, incredibly well-funded, and supported by an extremely strong campaign organization carried over from 2008. Obama and Romney have something else in common, of course: both were executives who became associated with health care reform plans that instituted individual mandates requiring the uninsured to purchase health insurance in order to avoid fines. Obama as president signed 2010's Affordable Care Act into law which remains his major legislative achievement thus far into his first term. In 2006, Romney as governor of Massachusetts signed an Act Providing Access to Affordable, Quality, Accountable Health Care. While Romney publicly opposes the ACA, he has not repudiated the Massachusetts bill, arguing instead that it was the right solution in Massachusetts though it wouldn't necessarily be a good fit for other states. While this point of view may appeal to states' rights supporters, Romney has essentially been forced to defend the concept of the individual mandate which is probably the most disliked aspect of both Obamacare and Romneycare. While the other Republican candidates have the rhetorical room to attack the individual mandate as an affront to personal liberty, Romney is now too linked with the individual mandate to criticize it too deeply. For all his stated dislike for Obamacare, Governor Romney is philosophically defending an important aspect of the legislation whenever he argues the individual mandate was necessary and helpful in Massachusetts. Obama's first term has not brought major change apart from health care reform -- I have no doubt that a President Romney would have sought to extend the Bush tax cuts, reform the financial sector in some way as a response to the mortgage crisis, and find Osama Bin Laden, for instance. Romney's inability to effectively attack Obama on health care seems incredibly damaging to his general election prospects given that the president has not really gotten all that much done in his first term.

This line of thinking is so convincing to me that I have to admit I've wondered from time to time why Mitt Romney is even bothering to run in 2012. Despite his popularity, he seems like exactly the wrong candidate at the wrong time -- he'd seemingly be in a stronger position running in 2016 or 2020 when Obamacare will probably not be such a volatile campaign issue, particularly if he continues to age well. Watching Mitt's early debate performances, however, has given me a different understanding of his campaign strategy and made me realize he may not be such a pushover in a general election after all. As the frontrunner, he has had the luxury of not having to attack his fellow Republicans. Instead, he has squarely focused on the economy -- he is trying to be the type of business, employment, and growth-friendly candidate that Barack Obama cannot be because the economy has been so bad during the Obama presidency. While other Republican candidates have gained much media attention for making controversial statements (Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain in particular), Romney has been better able to control his message which happens to be tailor-made for an underemployed, financially stressed electorate. He wants to appear safe and nonthreatening -- he wants people to be able to "Vote for Romney, vote for jobs!" even if they have some philosophical differences with the Republican Party or even if they think Barack Obama wasn't such a bad president apart from his economic policy or lack thereof (they might even LIKE the ACA!). While Romney may be forced to be much more aggressive in the next few debates due to the Perry surge, his measured campaign so far has clearly been tailored more towards moderates and not to strong conservatives. In a general election, there are several factions in the Republican party who may not turn out to vote for Romney in large numbers -- however, he may actually be able to steal some former Obama voters who are deeply worried about the economy. When you consider that the president has also alienated powerful factions in his own party because of his relatively moderate approach to governing, that Romney-Obama matchup doesn't sound like such a foregone conclusion after all. The Romney campaign, however, will outright require a bad economy to succeed (an odious thing to bank on!) -- if the unemployment and growth pictures brighten, Mitt will have a much harder time differentiating himself from President Obama. Even if circumstances do favor Romney, the former governor will face a difficult balancing act between on one hand trying to assuage the fears of conservatives who dislike his record and on the other hand trying to use that same record to attract disaffected Obama supporters who would not normally vote Republican. Perhaps the most interesting thing about a Romney-Obama race is that it would very much be about picking the lesser of two evils for many voters -- both conservatives and liberals could be sorely tempted to vote for a third party candidate or stay home on Election Day since Romney and Obama both have records of disappointing their bases.