Accepting Romney as the eventual nominee

I know. I know. It’s not exactly what a great number of readers here had in mind. But I think it’s a good thing Republicans may be settling in early to Romney as the Republican candidate. There’s talk that a standard win in South Carolina would seal the deal by the end of the month. I think that’s wonderful.

While conservatives may not have found a favorite candidate (consider for a minute that’s because there wasn’t a viable conservative candidate in the field), moving the race away from a long decision process like the campaign four years ago and towards several months of a solid work against Obama is a good thing.

Obama’s appointment changes in the last few days show he’s going to run a campaign based on class warfare and bashing businesses. Romney will counter with capitalism can heal the economy if we stop spending stupidly and bring American jobs home. (Brilliant idea, btw, since there’s evidence manufacturing is finding its way back to the U.S. and there’s not much a union can do to argue with that idea, huh?)

And come November we should have a new president.

I have mentioned in the past it really doesn’t matter so much to me that we turn over the presidency as the congress will hold the the right and at least damage is currently mitigated. But what I think I hadn’t considered is that Romney could manage a platform that might move the country forward. It’s not going to be strictly the conservative platform. Romney’s quick nomination proves the Tea Party as a guiding force nationally is dead, but it will be Republican enough to let businesses start to plan again.

In fact, I argue that heavy curtain is already starting to lift. I’ve seen a little of it over the last three months, and there are even more signs the market is about to break to the upside. As you listen to the candidates’ rhetoric, yes, Romney will still have to talk about how bad the economy is and how Obama’s policies have stifled business, and yes, Obama will have to defend the stimulus is working and his policies are helping, but consider, just for a moment…

This election is already over.


  1. It’s actually very bad for Romney to be the candidate right away, and that’s because fundamentally, he’s not a Conservative, and there are lots of people who don’t like the type of Republican that Romney represents.

    If Romney wins now in a landslide, then when the Convention comes, Romney sets everything in the party platform the Romney way… which will basically set back everything back to the point where the Tea Party pretty much never happened.

    If you have someone like Ron Paul debating Romney, winning delegates… even if Romney eventually wins… it forces the debate about where the GOP is going. And let’s face it… Ron Paul is far more Tea Party than Romney.

    Ron Paul then gets a seat at the Convention, and helps decide the future direction of the Republican party… and that’s a very good thing.

  2. So you’re making that argument from a conservative/tea party point of view? A Ron-Paul-should-keep-running point of view? I’m kind of confused.

    I don’t think it’s so bad to have a moderate GOP platform as we heal from 4 years of Obama. We’ve been left. We have to move center before we move right.

  3. That’s assuming that Romney being President would actually change anything from the status quo. I don’t believe that Obama changed much from the status quo under Bush.

    In fact, from a foreign policy perspective and civil rights perspective, he did things Bush would never have done. He’s signed a bill saying that Americans can be detained without trial. He assassinated an American Citizen without even charging him with a crime.

    And let’s be realistic here about ObamaCare. During the 1990’s, there were plenty of Republicans who threw out the idea of forcing people to buy health insurance through law. This was not some Democrat invention… and Romney did it in Mass.

    Point being… Romney won’t move anything to the center. Obama was Bush’s Third Term, and Romney will be the Fourth.

  4. Why would the market break to the upside and manufacturing return?

    I’ve been told AHA, regulation, deficits, taxes and general uncertainty are killing businesses in this country. Given corporations, and the market in general, are forward looking: Are you telling us that they see a Romney Presidency, repeal of AHA and/or a lifting of all this regulatory “uncertainty” that’s been holding them(it) back?

    I don’t think anyone is banking on Romney beating Obama next November. How can you? His base loathes him, he has great difficulty defining his intentions, and, most importantly, he lacks the firepower to engage Obama on AHA because of its close resemblance to his own plan.

    In addition, economic data, while still bad, are showing an upward trajectory (which is going to benefit the incumbent if it continues into Nov.). Romney needs the economy to deteriorate from here and I don’t think that’s likely to happen.

    I think Romney is the only guy capable of beating Obama but, in the end, they’ll settle for Obama.

  5. Nick, The point is, nail stuff down. The markets hate indecision. I am amused by the concept that Obama was Bush’s third term. 🙂

    J. Strupp – Romney’s base loathes him, but they will vote for him, and fully 1/3 of the American electorate is independent. Romney can win independents since they are disillusioned with Obama now and also no longer have to prove to themselves that they aren’t racist.

    And yes, I see that as the markets recognize Romney as the candidate the uncertainty is beginning to wane.

    Romney neutralizes AHA as a campaign issue at all and lets him redefine the election points. He just can’t do it in the primary because of that grumpy base.

    Any improvement in the economy won’t be seen for several months to the average voter. Year end 401k statements won’t be out until after the election. Yes, you and I are nerds, but most folks don’t pay much attention to the market, just to how wealthy they feel.

  6. Well Cindy, if you want Obama to lose, then you actually want stuff to NOT be nailed down too early. A bad economy (markets in turmoil) will only make Obama look worse. If markets stabilize, and things improve, it can only help Obama.

  7. As far as Obama being Bush’s third term… you find it amusing, but is it wrong?

    To continue my previous thought… Bush the “hawk” never would have gone to war without Congressional approval, and yet thats exactly what Obama did in Libya.

    And let’s not forget that Bush signed Medicare Part D, the Feingold Campaign Finance reform bill, and did all sorts of bailing out.

    Realistically speaking… how are Bush and Obama doing things differently?

  8. Nick
    There’s one easy answer that affects everything Obama does as President. Obama and many of the people around him are incompetent and have little to no leadership ability.

    President Bush was very competent. You might not have liked his decisions and policies but he was a leader, as was President Clinton. They may not have made decisions we always agreed with but they made the decisions. They didn’t vote present.

    To say Obama is Bush continued is ludicrous to me. To say Obama is Carter continued is right on the mark.

  9. Cindy says: The point is, nail stuff down. The markets hate indecision.

    Like the badass honey badger, markets don’t give a sh*t. Stable times, uncertain times, good or bad, markets don’t care.

    “Uncertainty,” is the catch word of whining business leaders regretting that they were ever promoted out of that entry-level accountant’s position they had thirty years ago.

    Intriguing point Nick brings up. That righties may have a bit of trouble digesting the concept of Romney being GWB term 4 is that they can’t fathom that Obama, for all his rhetoric and voting record, is a centrist Democrat.

  10. “Obama and many of the people around him are incompetent and have little to no leadership ability.”

    Eh, I think you’re wrong. Obama has been incompetent on certain issues but he did manage to get some of his agenda accomplished (with the help of Congress of course). AHA, ARRA, total drawl from Iraq and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell being a few. Our intervention in Libya, in general, was successful as well. We were able to remove Khadafi without an actual invasion and our involvement thereafter has been basically zero.

  11. Rolf, why don’t you explain exactly what drives a market so we can all grow rich and ignore each other?

  12. I really like you, J. Strupp, and that’s against my better judgement, but if you think America has totally withdrawn from Iraq then I am desperate for some of what you are smoking.

    The repeal of DADT however, was done without much fanfare, and that’s exactly how it should have been managed. DADT was a Clinton decision if I remember correctly. Bush just ignored the issue.

    We were never in Libya. We simply supported another effort there. Right?

  13. Strupp
    You are confusing whether a specific issue near and dear to one’s self has been passed or inacted, with competence. Interesting that you don’t mention PPACA (Obamacare), but oh yea, Obama’s not mentioning it either.

  14. Cindy
    The Libya reference, “without an invasion”, is a stealth jab at Bush and Iraq even though we had little, to nothing, to do with Gaddafi’s demise. The President sat on the Libyan issue for months doing basically nothing, except filling out his NCAA brackets. It was France who took the lead in Libya and only after the Arab League, the UN, and France took action did Obama tip toward the rebels. And remember, it was Saddam Hussein’s ouster that prompted Gaddafi to voluntarily give up his nuclear ambitions and be more tolerant toward the West.

    Unrelated: My anti-spam word was north. I assume there is one for south also. 🙂

  15. I was being a little sarcastic myself.

    It was nice to see France make an effort on that one, though.

  16. “…if you think America has totally withdrawn from Iraq then I am desperate for some of what you are smoking.”

    Let me clarify: Removal of troops from Iraq was an Obama agenda item which he accomplished.

    “Interesting that you don’t mention PPACA (Obamacare), but oh yea, Obama’s not mentioning it either.”

    Hey I have no problems mentioning it. This was an agenda item that Obama nailed down too.

    Hey all I’m saying is that Obama has, in fact, delivered on some of his promises. Randy likes to throw around the word “incompetence” a lot. I don’t think it holds up in several cases. I heard this same word used to describe Pelosi when she was Speaker. Pelosi was a lot of things, but incompetent was not one of them. You don’t pass something the size of PPACA by being an idiot.

    “The Libya reference, “without an invasion”, is a stealth jab at Bush and Iraq even though we had little, to nothing, to do with Gaddafi’s demise.”

    Give us all a break, Randy. Rebel forces were on the verge of annihilation until U.N. (U.S.) forces started launching airstrikes. We let them walk into Tripoli months later. Obama managed to step aside and let everyone else take the credit. Obama did a fantastic job of walking the political tight rope on this issue. You can bet your boy would have bulldozed through Libya and bought himself another country to babysit all while enraging the locals and costing us another trillion bucks.

    The GOP should focus on the economy and PPACA. They don’t have a leg to stand on in regards to foreign policy in my opinion.

  17. Strupp, if you think Obama “stepped aside” in Libya to let others take the credit, nothing more need be said. Both our opinions have been expressed on the issue. Have a great weekend. 🙂

  18. “why don’t you explain exactly what drives a market so we can all grow rich and ignore each other?”

    I wrote that post to challenge the thought that markets have feelings. They don’t. People do. Kinda getting off the main topic of your post, but I’ll play along.

    What drives a market are perceptions. Those perceptions might be based on data, but they’re still perceptions. That’s why markets are inefficient.

    Grow rich? Disciplined saving, dollar-cost-averaging, diversification. Minimize transaction costs. Don’t get hung up on the market, and ignore what most journalists have to say about it. Most importantly, do something you like, because you’re going out of this life as naked as when you came in.

    Ignore each other? Do that and you’ll grow to be a doddering old fool. Pay attention to the people around you and you’ll become a wise sage. That’s why I bookmark both lefty and righty blogs.

  19. J. Strupp says:

    ….and your guy dropped that pass in the endzone Randy. 🙂 Can’t use the ground to assist in the catch. Helluva try though.