Why Conservatives Would Vote for Romney
Feb 4th, 2008 by Micah Tillman | 6 Comments |
The choice for Republicans is now, for all intents and purposes, between McCain and Romney. McCain isn’t a conservative, and Romney is trying to act like one now (even though I don’t think anybody thinks he was one before he decided being one was the way to get elected).
Today, Kathryn Jean Lopez (editor for National Review Online), who will be voting for Romney, wrote an article suggesting that McCain would get further with conservatives if he would stop pretending he was a conservative.
And that made me ask, “If McCain’s problem is that he’s pretending to be a conservative when he isn’t, why are conservatives going to vote for Romney? Romney has the same problem.”
I think the answer is that Romney actually pretends his new conservative positions are his own, while McCain says that the next time he works on the “immigration issue,” he’ll secure the border first — not because that’s the way he thinks it should be done, but because “we [i.e., himself and his fellow politicians] learned” that that’s the way normal (i.e., lowly) Americans demand that it be done.
In other words, McCain seems to look down on conservatives — while going along with them when he has to — but Romney acts like being a conservative is what he wants to be. They may be both faking their conservatism in general, but — at least on the border issue — Romney is actually showing conservatives more respect. (Imitation is the sincerest flattery and all that.)
Such a bizarre situation.
(Mark Levin argues that the reason Romney’s fakeness (my term, not his) is more palatable than McCain’s is that Romney has admitted he’s changed positions, while McCain doesn’t. That sounds like a more general [and therefore more appealing] theory than my own, but I like mine better because it’s mine.)
It is not entirely bad that politicians have to at least “pretend to be conservative” to get the GOP nomination but its lots better when they actually are conservative (e.g. Reagan). Senator McCain has a history of working against conservatives on campaign finance, immigration, tax cuts, immigration, judicial appointments and energy policy. This is not easily forgotten or set aside. Governor Romney has positioned himself against Senator McCain on these issues and provides conservatives a more favorable choice.
[...] Micah Tillman wrote an interesting post today on Why Conservatives Would Vote for RomneyHere’s a quick excerptThe choice for Republicans is now, for all intents and purposes, between McCain and Romney. McCain isn’ta conservative, and Romney is trying to act like one now (even though I don’t think anybody thinks he was one before he decided … [...]
Astute analysis, Micah. I agree that what most conservative voters would like to see is sincerity. I think conservative Republican voters could stomach a moderate candidate, if he simply admits that he is a moderate. Beyond that he must stand by his record with conviction and integrity.
I still intend to vote of Alan Keyes in the primary. I am seriously considering voting for Ron Paul if he runs indpendently or for the Libertarian Party’s nominee.
As I’ve been arguing over on Renaissance Guy’s site (see the comments to Coulter on Clinton), it’s not difficult to find issues on which McCain and Romney are not terribly conservative. However, I think Romney’s a consistent economic conservative, his signature issue, and John McCain is more conservative than anybody on his signature issue, national defense. They may not be true conservatives, but they’re certainly not leftists. (Indeed, I’m going to argue that John McCain is so conservative, he’d be at home in the Roman Senate.)
Once upon a time, there were conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans. For a variety of reasons (mostly gerrymandering) , both of those have gone, more or less, the way of the dodo. I’m not convinced this is a good thing for the country. I’m pretty sure Eisenhower couldn’t get nominated in the modern Republican party (maybe not Nixon either for that matter, though that’s probably no bad thing) and I still haven’t figured out how Bill Clinton got nominated by the Democrats (desperation after being out of the White House for 20 of the previous 24 years, I guess, and the man’s consummate political skills).
As a consequence of this, we’ve got this weird situation where moderates and independent thinkers have to pick a party and, no matter which party they pick, they will be loved by their opponents and hated by their allies. And we wonder why there aren’t many thoughtful, independent thinkers in politics.
Well put… this is why I voted for Huckabee in the Iowa Caucus. I just wish others had done the same. The thing is that when you compare actual records and not rhetoric… McCain is more conservative than Romney. Again this is based on deeds, not words which mean a lot more as far as I’m concerned.
I do not trust Romney. At least with McCain I would know what I am getting. I woudl prefer Huckabee over both of them, but that doesn’t seem likely short of a miracle.
While he wouldn’t be my first choice, I can trust McCain on Iraq, the War on Terror and National Security. He has also has a pretty solid pro-life voting record. Let’s also remember that if he didn’t help bring together the “Gang of 14″ on judges, then Alito and Roberts may not have made it to the Senate floor for a vote. They would have been filibustered.
Shane, or the Republicans would have invoked the “nuclear option” and got rid of judicial filibusters entirely which means they would have lost the right to filibuster themselves if there is a Democratic President and Congress.
I have no idea why McCain and the Republicans in the Gang of 14 take so much heat for that. It was a very well-judged compromise which got the Republicans everything they wanted (all the affected judges either withdrew voluntarily or were confirmed by the Senate) without having to nuke the filibuster.