• Comment (11)

Mitt Romney Is Shoring Up the Republican Base

April 20, 2012 RSS Feed Print

During the Republican primary—wait, is it still going on?—former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's failure to win a Southern state except Virginia (where his chief rivals were not on the ballot), and in particular his failure to win among evangelicals and "very conservative" Republicans, raised considerable doubts about the overall strength of his candidacy.

Let's dispense with the passive voice: I had considerable doubts about the overall strength of his candidacy in this regard.

[Read the U.S. News debate: Is Mitt Romney Vulnerable in the South?]

To be sure, I never questioned whether Romney was going to win the South or a majority of the evangelical vote. Rather, it seemed to me, just a short while ago, that Romney was going to have difficulty motivating similarly-minded voters in non-Southern states to turn out for him in sufficient numbers and with sufficient intensity.

Recent Pew polling data, however, suggests this isn't the case. Romney wallops President Obama among white non-Hispanic evangelical weekly churchgoers 80-16. At First Things, Joseph Knippenberg observes, "In other words, the most religiously observant white evangelicals are more likely—indeed, significantly more likely—than their less observant brethren to say they're going to vote for Romney."

[See a collection of political cartoons on Mitt Romney.]

With the increasing population of Latinos in states like Virginia, Nevada, Colorado, and Arizona, the path to victory for both parties has shifted somewhat. But culturally, the electorate clearly has returned to its 2004 battle lines.

Much can change between now and November. There is renewed fear about a slowing recovery and sluggish jobs growth. But at this point, I have no other commentary to add. Mitt Romney is well on his way to shoring up his party’s base. I was wrong.

Tags:
2012 presidential election,
politics,
Mitt Romney

Reader Comments Read all comments (11)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

bruce b of NV _ Before going into your latest comment, let's take care of a previous matter...

In “Ted Nugent, Hilary Rosen Sheltering Obama from Scrutiny” you wrote “In fact average workers during that period,lost ground, due to stagnant wage increases,and reduced purchasing power". Did not find proof of that in your two links. Prehaps you can quote as I do... For sure, your earlier quote “the economic growth,of which he speakes, benefited, by a wide margin,those on the upper rungs of the income ladder. very little ,if any, trickled down to the folks on main st” __ is NOT substantiated __ ... What he spoke has nothing to do with your two articles...

In the first link it says “Experts point to some of the usual suspects -- like technology and globalization -- to explain the widening gap between the haves and have-nots”

Also says “One major pull on the working man was the decline of unions and other labor protections, said Bill Rodgers, a former chief economist for the Labor Department, now a professor at Rutgers University”

Also says “International competition is another factor. While globalization has lifted millions out of poverty in developing nations, it hasn't exactly been a win for middle class workers in the U.S.”

Also says “While average folks were losing ground in the economy, the wealthiest were capitalizing on some of those same factors, and driving an even bigger wedge between themselves and the rest of America”

http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/index.htm

YOUR SECOND ARTICLE SAID ___ Second says “The latest census data depict a middle class that's shrinking as unemployment stays high and the government's safety net frays. The new numbers follow years of stagnating wages for the middle class that have hurt millions of workers and families

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/12/16/1713834/census-1-in-2-americans-are-poor.html#storylink=cpy”

YOU WROTE __ Don’t see how this, as you wrote, “In fact average workers during that period,lost ground, due to stagnant wage increases,and reduced purchasing power" MATCH UP as proof.

__

As I have quoted before (Reason for recession and high unemployment. Nothing to do with tax cuts for rich):

"It’s important to keep in mind that the recession had nothing to do with the tax cuts. The recession was brought on by destructive federal intervention in the subprime mortgage market, irresponsible funding and securitization of subprime loans by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, unsound Federal Reserve monetary policy, a lack of oversight by the Securities and Exchange Commission, greed and fraud committed by certain large banks and investment firms, and consumers who bought homes they really couldn’t afford."

http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/taxcutfacts.htm

Bill Hedges of MO 5:43PM April 22, 2012

To Bill Hedges of Mo, when you are speaker of the house, you can Claim certain things that others can't. Like being dog catcher, if you're Not dog catcher, you're not going to be positioned to catch a lot of dogs... see it?

Mitt Romney can Only put the Republican Party into the "has been" category of history. That was all Newt Gingrich could have done had he somehow become "popular". Such candidates are a failed relic of the past.

You don't 'get it'..... Ron Paul is the Future..... and the Republican Party is welcome to lead or just get the heck out of the way. Simply that.

America is better than corruption and greed, American is better than bomb and kill. America is the place about which people can dream of a good world someday. Patriots will work until it's here, America the way it's supposed to be. Free. Strong. Peaceful. Prosperous.

"Live Free or Die. Death is not the worst of evils"

-General John Stark-

The facts of history are in the making. My country is not done yet Bill Hedges, no matter Your destructive outlook.

No one but Paul 2012~

John of NY 9:48AM April 22, 2012

Mr Bill,with all due respect,the Newt of the 80's that you often make reference to,has now turned into a financial illiterate. It's difficult to give much credit to his financial acuity,when is campaign is in the hole to the tune of 4 million dollars.

his campaign,at this point,has become a laughing stock.

bruce b of NV 9:13AM April 22, 2012

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo is a Washington-based freelance writer. He formerly worked for House Republican Leader John Boehner, and was a staff writer for The Washington Times.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement