The single biggest point of advocacy from the pro Mitt Romney folks has been his electability and the premise that a moderate, or middle, electorate would find him appealing. A recent poll shows the exact opposite to be true. The more people get to know Romney the less they like him.
Herein lies the obvious problem. The reality is showing not only is Mitt Romney becoming more and more toxic to conservatives, which can clearly be shown by the ever-increasing lack of energy as he gets closer to a nomination goal, but he is also presenting a horrific personality narrative toward independents, and moderates.
The establishment GOP has pinned their hopes on Romney, doubling and tripling down by trying to wildly disenfranchise any opposition. That part is working well. They are so entrenched with “it’s his turn” they have lost sight of the original goal. The GOP are forcing a candidate upon people who, quite frankly, are not going to support him.
If something does not change quickly, and if the GOP continues pushing this narrative forward, they are guaranteeing Obama a second term.
The painful reality is in every area, town, county, or precinct where Romney wins the voter turnout is lower than 2008; a clear sign of a disenfranchised electorate. Conversely in every area that he loses the turnout is higher than 08′, a clear indicator of strong opposition to annointment by the establishment. People are in tune to the manipulations now, and are well able to form their opinions outside of the mainstream media.
Combine the inability to attach ideologically or emotionally to the working man/woman, with the baggage of a life surrounded by detachment and failure to accept responsibility, and what you end up with is a non-electable candidate.
Saying “I don’t control my investments via blind trusts” to explain why you have offshore bank accounts is not a working point of advocacy. The average Mom/Dad, Grandma/Grandpa, or even voter cannot relate.
Saying “I don’t know the attack ad you are talking about” while the sound bite “I’m Mitt Romney and I approve of this message” is running in the background appears ridiculous.
Claiming that you are “under attack” from Gingrich or Santorum when the reality of exactly the opposite is glaring in the face of an intelligent electorate, does nothing to endear you with principled voters.
Flip-Flops are the least of the issues with Romney. Most people can dismiss their concern on that point around the principle of “people change their opinions”. But, claiming outright that you understand the pain of Americans while stating “foreclosures should be allowed to run their course”, and “I’m not worried about poor people” does nothing to reflect that you have any leanings toward any average American understanding.
Being a CEO is little in the way of qualification for being President of the United States when contrast against the central tenant of being President: Leadership, not profit. Mitt Romney might be intellectually a very astute business person with the keen skill of creating wealth from capitalistic opportunity, but that alone does not automatically make him qualified for executive political office. In fact, quite the opposite is true when you recognize “corporatism” and not “capitalism” is the primary skill set of such a person whose historical business model includes the use of government intervention as a tool to attaining company wealth.
We are heading over a cliff with this candidate set up as a principle agent for all that can be achieved with freedom and individuality. The free market principles of conservative ideology that would allow the capitalistic economy to grow are not a part of Mr. Romney’s resume. Indeed the most significant portion of his accumulated wealth, he claims no control or influence over, was gained upon the backs of a dispatched and disregarded workforce as well as a taxpayer who had no input into supporting his endeavors.
Here is the latest article about his perception amid the electorate:
[...] questions focused on Romney’s wealth, his low tax burden and, relatedly, his ability to connect with average Americans. Notably, 52 percent in this poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates, say the more they hear about Romney the less they like him – double the number who like him more.
Based on his roughly 14 percent tax rate on 2010 income of about $22 million, the public by a broad 66-30 percent says Romney is not paying his fair share of taxes; even nearly half of Republicans say so, as do half of very conservative Americans. The public by 53-36 percent, a 17-point margin, thinks Obama better understands the economic problems people are having. Obama leads Romney by 55-37 percent in trust to better protect the interests of the middle class, and remarkably, by 10 points, 52-42 percent, in trust to handle taxes.
While the situation may be unusual given Romney’s particular wealth- and tax-related vulnerabilities, competitiveness on taxes can be a telling indicator. Mike Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry trailed on taxes in 1988, 2000 and 2004, and lost. Clinton and Obama led on taxes in 1992 and 2008, and won. (The record’s not perfect; Clinton trailed on taxes in 1996, and won anyway.) (read more)