The Undorsement

The Concord Monitor's anti-endorsement of Mitt Romney makes for some pretty good reading:

Add it all up and you get Mitt Romney, a disquieting figure who sure looks like the next president and most surely must be stopped . . . When New Hampshire partisans are asked to defend the state's first-in-the-nation primary, we talk about our ability to see the candidates up close, ask tough questions and see through the baloney. If a candidate is a phony, we assure ourselves and the rest of the world, we'll know it. Mitt Romney is such a candidate. New Hampshire Republicans and independents must vote no.

This makes me wonder why you don't see "undorsements" like this more often. In a multi-candidate field, this sort of thing -- who shouldn't win -- is often a more salient question than is the who should win issue.

Comments

This undorsement seems like a pretty accurate reflection of the current GOP doldrums. There's very little enthusiasm among Republicans for any particular candidate - it's all more about what candidates each faction doesn't want nominated.

Posted by Ned | December 23, 2007 5:26 PM

"This makes me wonder why you don't see "undorsements" like this more often."

Laziness. In the average primary you'd have to write half a dozen or more undorsements, but one endorsement will do.

Posted by ~~~~ | December 23, 2007 5:31 PM

Matt and James Kirchick agree on something. And the world has yet to explode. I'm surprised.

Posted by Minipundit | December 23, 2007 5:45 PM

The claim that he engages in "anti-immigrant rhetoric" is not only false, it's straight from the WSJ/U.S. CofC/Dem Party/MattY/Mexican government playbook. Perhaps if someone has an example that isn't simply spin they can post it. Otherwise...

Posted by TLB | December 23, 2007 5:51 PM

Beyond the rather silly next president thing it's pretty telling that they focus in on the phony factor. He's the Mount Everest of phoniness according to Josh Marshall and that seems about right.

On the other hand a phony would seem to be the perfect president now. The system has been honed to produce such a phony who of course is stinking rich and telegenic, and it's a phony we deserve.

Mitt is a perfect corporate man. That's why we shouldn't totally discount him. Bush was the imperfect corporate man. His sympathies were right but the execution was off a bit. He actually believed all the crap he preached. He lacks the self awareness that Mitt and corporate men do.

What is the perfect corporate man. The purest expression was the tobacco execs before congress when they all lied about their knowledge of addictive nature of nicotine. They were lying. The committee knew they were lying. The execs knew the committee knew they were lying. Everyone understood they had to lie. That's simply how the world works. No penalty accrues to such liars. They are rewarded.

Posted by rapier | December 23, 2007 5:52 PM

Better a phony than Benito Giuliani. The thing is Romney is so transparent a phony- it almost makes him endearing.

Posted by Trevor | December 23, 2007 8:31 PM

Writing an undorsement in a multi-candidate field seems kind of pointless. Assuming that anyone's vote is influenced by these things - who knows - you're basically dissipating the effect of your "endorsement" because even if some people listen and decide not to vote Romney, their vote will just be split between a bunch of other candidates, and Romney won't be hurt enough.

This is a bad story for Romney just because it's so unusual. But if media outlets started doing this on a routine basis, you'd probably rather get an undorsement than have one of your opponents get an endorsement.

Posted by Jason C. | December 23, 2007 10:13 PM

Obama's strength is that he has a terrific personality and shows lots of potential -Romney could counter that by being a successful Governor and a wildly successful businessman - But he chose to be something else. He seemes so hollow, but that can't be - He cannot be what he seems to be, otherwise he would not have been so successful up to now.
We met folks who know him from his HBS days and they speak highly of him and describe a man who bears zero relation to the candidate on the stump.

Posted by Comment | December 23, 2007 10:42 PM

Mrs. Clinton also displays an image that is far worse than what people who know her have described.
Frome what we know from testimony, Rudy is pretty much the mixed character than he shows on the stump - Rudy has a truly good sense of humor (despite the bad Christmas ad) and he is an interesting person. He's also an asshole and an egomaniac and that comes accross - Some people like that about him, but from what we know about Rudy , we suspect he has little respect for those in the media who like his tough image. He probably thinks they are losers. And he's right.

Posted by Comment | December 23, 2007 10:48 PM

My question is, why start now with Romney? From a liberal standpoint, I don't like him just as I don't like the whole lot of crazy torturing homophobic weirdos, but he doesn't weird me out as much as Giuliani or make me embarassed for my country as much as Huckabee. I personally trust Romney more with power than Bush because then you would just get the evil without the evil and the pure incompetence. Why start now and not when Bush was running in 2000? Considering that the campaign that Rove ran for Mel Martinez was so nasty that a major Floridian paper withdrew its nomination for him for the Republican primary for the Senate, it's not like they wouldn't have been able to find slimy campaign tactics that would make supporting Bush too dirty to consider.

Posted by Reality Man | December 24, 2007 1:50 AM

Romney could counter that by being a successful Governor and a wildly successful businessman - But he chose to be something else. He seemes so hollow, but that can't be - He cannot be what he seems to be, otherwise he would not have been so successful up to now.
We met folks who know him from his HBS days and they speak highly of him and describe a man who bears zero relation to the candidate on the stump.
Posted by Comment | December 23, 2007 10:42

I think Romney has been ill-served by advisors that want him to pander so much to the religious right and other demographics that in the end, Mitt Romney, hugely respected as an ethical businessman with brilliant talent and possessing a spine - now comes across as an opportunist who believes in nothing but the poll data telling him what to say to each group. Who lacks a spine and is inauthentic.
Pity because he has the tools to be a great leader. Has been such a leader in other venues. Far above nutty Rudy, lazy Fred, God's own mouthpiece Pastor Huckleberry, and old school treacherous John McCain in brains and potential.

(And light years above the track record of Hillary!, slick John, and "I learned the world from being a 6-year old living overseas" Obama. A track record of executive experience with excellent, sometimes stellar success. If you doubt Hillary's claims of being Co-President, and most people with common sense do, none have a history of proven executive experience)

But unless he finds where he lost his spine and scrotum, he is a doomed candidate.

Posted by Chris Ford | December 24, 2007 10:04 AM

Chris Ford is right about Romney. He's the most experienced, most talented manager of large organizations in the race, but running as a faux social conservative has been hurting him. He needs to stop worrying about the competition and the religious right, and start running as himself. Let Giuliani and Huckabee trip on their baggage. Romney can use Tancredo's endorsement of him as a trump card against the pro-amnesty McCain. Fred is too lazy to put up serious competition.

Posted by Fred | December 24, 2007 10:16 AM