Mitt Romney: Why the Republicans lost and may continue to lose

The fanfare is officially over. After hundreds of thousands of phone calls, tens of millions of tweets and billions of dollars spent on campaigning. America decided to stick with President Barack Obama.

In the hours after his victory speech, many both domestically and internationally are making huge sighs of relief to see the 44^th President re-elected, despite a clear victory in the all-important Electoral College.

Yet, for a long time, many Democrats feared the worse. Many influential commentators believed that Obama was on the verge of becoming the first Democratic President to serve one-term since Jimmy Carter. Perhaps he should’ve been.

Obama has already highlighted his desire to finish what he originally set out to do. It is true this is made easier by the fact that he no longer needs to be concerned about his re-election prospects and can ‘get on’ with the so-called job. However, for many ordinary Americans, the idea of getting the job done may appear vacuous and non-evident. For all the rhetoric Obama promised in 2008, much of his ideals and promises lie dormant. The audacity of hope became the absence of anything.

The economic legacy inherited by the Obama administration was far from healthy. Increasing unemployment, a chaotic financial system as well as dealing with two long-term wars and an ever increasing public debt. For any President arriving into White House, any sort of political legacy would need to be put to one-side whilst dealing with the bigger issues. Yet Obama chose to deal with healthcare.

There are arguments to be had about healthcare in general in America. Whether you agreed with George W. Bush extending Medicare or the universal cover provided by Obamacare. But why was this his focus? Why did Obama fail to create the jobs he said he would create? Why was the stimulus seen as the only answer to solving America’s crisis?

Some complain that the Republican majority in the House of Representatives made things impossible, but other Presidents had managed to deal with this before (Clinton springs to mind).

No incumbent President had ever gone into the polls with such poor unemployment figures and approval ratings. So the question is how did the Republicans lose it?

The wrong message

There’s no doubt that Mitt Romney was the best out of a bad bunch, but it shouldn’t deflect from the point that he is a more than competent candidate to become President. A successful businessman, family man, and politician with an excellent record as Governor, Romney was a capable of winning.

Yet, perhaps the Republicans forget the most important thing about politics. Elections are about winning. For too long the candidates slung mud and created an unhealthy portrait of each other. Commentators point at the fact that this allowed Obama to spend his campaign money during the election, but money fundraising wasn’t an issue during the election for either side.

The problem was that we saw the Republicans for what they really were and it was a right-wing party that did not reflect the rest of the electorate. Politics is tribal, but surrendering the centre-ground can be ill-afforded in any election. The GOP may have targeted the blue collar and the religious vote, but its policy towards immigration, the economy and women saw it ostracise a huge proportion and increasingly important section of the electorate: Hispanics and women. Suicidal when one looks at the make-up of the swing states.

For now, the debate will quickly move on as Obama tries to deal with the impending issue of America’s fiscal cliff but the question for the Republicans really remains where do they go next? Was Romney a failure because he wasn’t conservative enough or was it that the party is too right-wing?

2016 will see two new candidates from each side fight again. Even if the Republicans decide to lead with a woman (not Palin) or even a Hispanic, what’s more important is that they sort out their politics, otherwise they won’t be elected any time soon.

Mitt Romney: A rock and a hard place.

Mitt Romney is now confidently sauntering towards the Republican Presidential nomination as he comfortably beat his nearest and fiercest opponent Newt Gingrich in the Florida primary. Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, appeared last week to be making a serious challenge after winning the South Carolina primary. However, a series of setbacks including some effective negative advertising campaigns has seriously undermined his bid to challenge Barack Obama for the Presidency in November. The other candidates Rick Santorum and Ron Paul both failed to make double digits.

The results reflected the amount of money spent on campaigning. Both Santorum and Paul spent nothing in Florida taking fewer than 350,000 votes. According to CNN, Romney outspent Gingrich by 5-1 and crucially takes all 50 votes from the Florida delegates.

After his victory Romney reflected that he hoped to return to Tampa in August to be officially confirmed as Republican Presidential nominee. Perhaps most importantly, he added that he hoped that it will be a time for all Republicans to reunite behind him.

This is where the issue lies. At his State of the Union address, President Obama set out his agenda on how the election will be fought: fairness. He believes that the positioning of the Republican delegates places his party in a better position to speak to ordinary Americans.

We have already discovered that Romney pays 13.9% income tax on over $21 million whereas Gingrich received a $1.6 million advisory fee from the insolvent mortgage lender Freddie Mac. It is a tactic that may easily play into the hands of Mr Obama, who will also be glad to see a growing economy and lowering unemployment. A few months ago, Republicans were certain Obama would be a one-term president, now they're not so sure.

The ultimate problem for the party is that they still have an identity crisis. Similar to the Left in Britain, there is still an ongoing argument on where the party should be positioned. This was reflected in the votes, where four out of ten Florida voters thought Romney was not conservative enough (Washington Post). Much of the debates are dominated by issues regarding immigration and ‘European-style socialism’. Although no Tea Party backed candidate is running, their spirit is evident.

Yet it would be unwise to pander to such ideologies. Nearly 40 per cent of Americans declared themselves to be independent voters and many of the issues raised by Tea Party members do not function in the day-to-day lives of ordinary Americans. It could be a vote loser.

Romney will most likely win. His message is more consistent, he is better organised, he looks more like a leader; but it may not be enough to take him to the White House. If not, then what do the Republicans do?

The Tea Party's budget

Over the weekend, the town of Ames, Iowa held a straw poll to see who would lead as the early contender for the Republican Presidential nomination in next year’s election. Out of the ten candidates who put their names forward, it was the fiery Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, who won the poll slightly ahead of Texas’s Ron Paul. Historically the result has been insignificant, in 2008 Mitt Romney won here only to lose the caucuses to Mike Huckabee and the eventual candidate John McCain. So as the electioneering and rhetoric begins are we still any closer to understanding what the Republicans will bring and whether they will make a challenge to President Obama.

The debacle over the American debt crisis was an embarrassment to the American economy leading to its credit downgrading from Triple A status to AA plus by the ratings agency Standard and Poor (S&P). It highlighted the toxic brinkmanship within Congress, particularly from the Republican controlled House of Representatives but also reflected on President Obama’s weakness to negotiate. Many critics say that the continuous sluggish growth, high unemployment and ineffectiveness of the stimulus package has meant that a well-packaged economic policy from the Republicans could pose a threat to Mr Obama in next year’s poll.

Yet the Republicans will continue to struggle until they are able to compensate over the power struggle held by the Tea Party. Vice-President Joe Biden allegedly called them ‘terrorists’ in the budget negotiations over the budget ceiling. Though strong in its meaning, perhaps he had a point. During the Presidency of George W. Bush, the budget ceiling rose on five separate occasions, two full- scale combat missions launched and Medicare extended, all at a great cost. Under Obama: operations have ended in Iraq and heightened in Afghanistan (partially in Libya), extensive reforms of healthcare to the poor, young and unemployed and at the same time no tax rises. Yet the Republicans see the raising of the debt ceiling as outrageous. America has a cultural issue of spending and consumerism that needs addressing, but the political wrestling over a possible default showed how unrealistic the Tea Party is behaving.

The Republicans will continue to sneer at the liberal elite that hold sway within the Democratic Party and enforce its tough talking on anti-abortion, gun control, evolution, loose interpretation of the Constitution and water fluoridisation, yet its fiscal and economic policies continue to fall out of line. Romney, the Mormon former Governor of Massachusetts, extended health care and introduced real term tax rises; yet this is a policy he isn’t talking about because it bears resemblance to that of Mr Obama’s. Mrs Bachmann, a trained tax attorney, has credentials but appears to be playing to the crowd that desperately loves her social conservatism and doppelganger, Sarah Palin. Rick Perry, the Governor of Texas (a la George W. Bush) and newcomer into the race, has cleared the State’s debt and has kept taxes low (though critics will point to high oil prices) though whether he can adapt his methods to the entire country is another question.

These polls have no real significance and ultimately play a role in raising funds for the candidates. The tough talking will continue to flourish between all candidates, yet until one of them can conceive a viable economic plan then it isn’t worth listening.