The World in 2012 Cassandra
South Carolina's primary
"Romney or suicide"?
Jan 20th 2012, 18:56 by J.A.
WILL the voters of South Carolina in tomorrow’s Republican primary add momentum to Mitt Romney’s quest to be the GOP presidential candidate? Or will they spoil that measured progress by giving a boost to Newt Gingrich (the conventional wisdom being that neither Rick Santorum nor Ron Paul will be in the top two)? Cassandra’s hunch is that, whatever tomorrow’s result, Mr Romney will eventually be the nominee—but in the meantime there will be lots of entertaining exchanges between the candidates that verge on the insulting or the scandalous. This is partly because Mr Romney, a member of a religion considered by many Americans to be a heretical cult, is a wooden-mannered multi-millionaire paying lower taxes than ordinary voters. And it is partly because the intellectually brilliant Mr Gingrich is a much-married hypocrite (he was calling for Bill Clinton’s impeachment while simultaneously indulging in an extramarital affair) who has become rich through activities more-or-less identical to the lobbying that he affects to despise. But most of all, of course, it is because American politics is a hardball game. At which point, Cassandra recommends that you watch this video of Mark Penn, formerly an adviser to both Bill and Hilary Clinton and now CEO of Burson-Marsteller, giving his thoughts in December at the World in 2012 festival in New York. Doubtless, he may be biased, but he’s surely right when he talks of the importance of the independents. And I rather like his notion that for the Republicans it must be “Romney or suicide”.
This blog accompanies The World in 2012, our almanac of predictions for the year ahead. The blog is named after the mythological Cassandra, who was cursed by Apollo to make prophecies that were accurate, but disbelieved
Advertisement
- Americas view | The Americas
- Babbage | Science and technology
- Bagehot's notebook | British politics
- Banyan | Asia
- Baobab | Africa
- Blighty | Britain
- Buttonwood's notebook | Financial markets
- Cassandra | The World in 2012
- Charlemagne's notebook | European politics
- Clausewitz | Defence, security and diplomacy
- Democracy in America | American politics
- Eastern approaches | Ex-communist Europe
- Free exchange | Economics
- Game theory | Sports
- Graphic detail | Charts, maps and infographics
- Gulliver | Business travel
- Johnson | Language
- Leviathan | Public policy
- Lexington's notebook | American politics
- Multimedia | Audio, video and videographics
- Newsbook | News analysis
- Prospero | Books, arts and culture
- Schumpeter | Business and management
Most commented
- Will the euro survive 2012 intact?
- Japan's immigration control: Gulag for gaijin
- The Republican nomination: Live-blogging the Republican debate
- Newt Gingrich: Newt and the "food-stamp president"
- Hungary's travails: Budapest vs Brussels
- Charlemagne: And then there was one
- The South Carolina primary: The slog begins
- Taiwan’s elections: It’s all right, Ma
- Israel and Palestine: Toddling to talks about talks
- The Republican nomination: Red-meat delivery
Over the past five days
Most recommended
- Internet regulation: Black ops
- Technological change: The last Kodak moment?
- Newt Gingrich: Newt and the "food-stamp president"
- Daily chart: Winners and losers
- Rioting in Romania: The battle of Bucharest
- Civilian drones: Difference engine: Unblinking eye in the sky
- Japan's immigration control: Gulag for gaijin
- The visible hand
- Mexico's drug war: Working together
- The euro zone crisis: France goes soft-core
Over the past seven days
Advertisement
Subscribe to The Economist's free e-mail newsletters and alerts.
Subscribe to The Economist's latest article postings on Twitter
See a selection of The Economist's articles, events, topical videos and debates on Facebook.
Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Doubtless, he may be biased, but he’s surely right when he talks of the importance of the independents. And I rather like his notion that for the Republicans it must be “Romney or suicide”.
Naah, not possible... and it's unthinkable that the author of this little screed might be... :-)
Doubtless, he may be biased, but he’s surely right when he talks of the importance of the independents. And I rather like his notion that for the Republicans it must be “Romney or suicide”.
Naah, not possible... and it's unthinkable that the author of this little screed might be... :-)
Romney & Newt - the dream team. Beauty & the Beast. Little Lord Fauntlroy & his street fightin', knuckle duster carrying bodyguard.
Could be a good buddy cop movie. Willard Whitey & Nasty Newt. "Cover me, I'm going in to take out the black guy."
Mr. Penn is a discredited has-been..His opinions hold less sway than say some of the more studied and informed imports from Across the pond like Tomansky Bashir et al!
The southern religious voter is trading on fear and 'presumed conservative values', that are more talk than actual behavior! The racist element has reared its' ugly head to the surprise and embarrassment of most Americans! No longer covert but in your face...With code words and all! More than a dog whistle but an attack attempt to take the USA back to the rule of the OLD white male rule!
Despicable!
I want Gingrich to destroy the Yahoo GOP he created in 1995. I'm sorry he will not get the chance.
@ bamps -
Gingrich seems to be doing a pretty good job of it right now, by being his utmost and absolute yahoo-ish during a series of presidential primaries and caucuses, and right smack in the middle of the national spotlight.
Go Newt.
If this were Gilligan's Island, the problem with Newt is he is getting
Marianne: Monday thru Friday
Ginger: Saturday and Sunday
Mrs. Howell's Bottomless Purse PAC: 8 days a week.
What qualifies Mark Penn as worth listening to? By all accounts he was a disaster in the last election particularly because he seemed not to understand our political system or the voters.
What, exactly, qualifies Newt as "intellectually brilliant"? This seems an unnecessary abuse of the concept of brilliance.
People need to stop saying/typing this crap.
In this context, what "intellectually brilliant" means is that -
You can take an accusation that under normal circumstances would tank a presidency, such as that you mistreated an ex-wife, and -
Go into a rage of affected righteousness, attack the messenger, throw red meat to a crowd of dissafected voters, wrap yourself in a cloak of victim-hood, throw sand in the eyes of everyone around you, and claim that YOU, YOU MY FRIENDS, ARE THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN TAKE US DOWN THE PATH OF RIGHTEOUSNESS TO THE HOLY LAND, AMEN!
To the point where no one can remember what the original question was, but he seemed sincere and it was all-in-all a pretty good show, so like whatever.
Faedrus, "so like whatever"? Up till now I've always thought that you were a well read, intelligent, knowledgeable poster; Whose post I respected, sometimes even more so when I disagreed, But really "so like whatever" are you really a "valley girl" hiding under the guise of a quite intelligent poster?
Cambre, thanks much for the kind words. Actually, "so like whatever" is just a joke.
It's basically meant as code to acknowledge that part of the human condition, which knows what's right and good and just in the world, and yet bails out at times when things get difficult.
Essentially, it's an acknowledgement of St. Augustine's prayer, "Please God, make me good, but not just yet."
Regarding the comment, I believe most understand that Gingrich is attempting to distract the audience when he attacks the media, and that to some degree he is working to play the audience.
However, many conservatives also feel that they are mistreated by what they perceive as a left-leaning media.
So, they cheer Gingrich on when he makes such comments, although I believe that deep down many of them know better. Hence me closing the comment the way I did.
Thank you again for the kind words.
Faedrus, I'm sorry to have perverted your ending, but I could not pass up the opportunity to show my appreciation for your various competent post, amongst the sea of mediocrity and outright idiocy that I find my self reading here, that you not only comment intelligently on the article (like this one) and other post, but you also carry on the discussion in a manner that opens up new lines of thought. For that, and the few others like you, (whether I agree with or not.) I'm thankful.
Faedrus, concerning your comment, on your post. It may just be my own cynicism, but I feel that you may be giving greater credit to both, the average conservative and American liberal, and their understanding, than they deserve.
Apparently, the blogger thinks "intellectually brilliant" means being able to extemporize on a subject according to one's own political interests.
Newtonian Distortion: Charming bald face lies told by a big fat hypocrite.
Are you sure that your not talking about Ross Perot in the '92 election?
At least Newt is unlikely to leave the party and run just to try to cause Romney's failure out of spite; so the likely winner will lose by pulling votes away from the party candidate.