These points are largely valid, but it's important to step back a layer to put them in context.Ellis notes Romney collapsed into agreeability during the third debate, and throughout the campaign failed to define himself -- which allowed Obama to do it for him.These events were not accidents or oversights. They came to pass because Romney has no compass. There is no Romney to define, and there never was. Some observers think Romney was striking a presidential pose in the third debate to try to out-gravitas Obama. If fact, Romney was reaching across the asile -- always his instinct. He never saw a deal he wouldn't cut, or a new position he wouldn't move to. When Obama does that, he's being duplicitous. When Romney doesn't stand his ground, it's because he doesn't know "ground" exists. The process is the product, consensus is the process, and friction is always unthinkable.We ought not to let go of the topic without noting that this exact thing happened four years ago. Whether the GOP establishment has the momentum to serve up yet another RINO in 2016 remains to be seen. But it is very possible. One of the key, early signs of impending defeat was the high profile given to Karl Rove throughout the primaries and campaign. That one of the architects of the destruction of the Republican Party under conservative imposter George Bush should have influence showed the necessary housecleaning had not yet taken place. The losers were still running the show. And they lost -- again.
Thank you. Very much on point.I thought that Romney was sitting on a lead in the third debate, but your interpretation rings true.
Post a Comment