Take on SC? That my contention of the primary proces being a silly if not pathetic parade of mindless populism, transparent rationalizations of blatant idiocy and the mad feckless rush of the masses towards the ideological equivalent of a baby's soother was both correct and wrong - correct because the what, twenty? thirty? percent swing in voter sympathies in the course of a mere few days seems to have almost entirely been predicated on the shallowest of understandings, the most superficial of perceptions concerning the issues and the candidates' respective suitabilities thereof - wrong because Romney looked flat footed and unprepared if not indeed confused when challenged by Gingrich on Bain Capital and his taxes - his inability or unwillingness to mount an impassioned defence of his success in the private sector while at same time casting Newt as an inconstant, hypocritical and politically toxic excrescence of Washington baffles - it's not enough to claim surprise that a supposed fellow conservative would be foolish enough to launch an attack that seemed taken right out of the Michael Moore Little Red Book of Left Wing Demagoguery - everyone knows Obama will be coming hard with this class warfare populist crap and Romney's complete failure to defend the ramparts made him look unfit for the looming battle - therefore in need of more primary boot camp.
Although I guess that's not necessarily true - the Romney battle plan may have been to run against Obama rather than his primary foes and thereby stay clean and above the silliness - possibly they calculated that was the best case scenario for a win and they'd ride such a plan out for as long as it was working but if and when it started to look to be falling short they'd go to approach number two - which I assume we're going to see rolled out now - and if that's the case it allows one to keep faith in Romney as being not only savvy and competent and prepared, but also up for a fight - of course if Gingrich wins Florida the savviness of such a strategy will be open to harsh criticism.
Unfortunately of course it could also just as well be something else manifesting itself here - ie that the republican base and environs are so awash in fear and loathing of Obama and the liberal agenda he represents that they have very little patience for rational arguments - they want blood - and they'll clamor to whomever promises it to them, doesn't matter how trite, manipulative or compromised by delusion the promise is - Bachman promised blood and they ran to her, then Cain, then Gingrich - but since the presence of Obama is key to this emotional need for an ideological cleansing, electability becomes a deciding factor - Romney only becomes tolerable for these people when the credibility of the not-Romneys' electability gets stretched so thin as to be unsustainable - but give them the slightest pretext to believe in the promise again and they will run to it like starving dogs. Bain and Gingrich's histrionic debate performances supplied the pretext. And so the question becomes: did Romney try and stay above the fray and run against Obama etc etc because that was a smart strategy? or because he underestimated and possibly even entirely missed the level of irrationality at play here and is now unwilling or maybe even incapable of fighting the fight now being forced upon him?
Guess we'll find out over the next few weeks - either Romney effectively defends his private sector success and in doing so exposes Newt as the dangerous charlatan that he is, or... well... Mitch Daniels is giving the GOP response to Obama's SOTU speech tomorrow - still remains for my money the best man for the job.
