While it is still possible that none of the current Republican presidential candidates will earn enough delegates to claim the nomination, it’s becoming clear that the nomination of any of the current field of candidates will cause huge fissions in the Republican coalition. One piece of evidence for this comes from George Will. He uses today’s column to eviscerate Newt Gingrich in the harshest tones, and to compare Mitt Romney to Tom Dewey (who lost to Harry Truman in 1948). Mr. Will advises against nominating either of the two front-runners. Instead, he makes a quarter-hearted pitch for Rick Perry:
Rick Perry (disclosure: my wife, Mari Will, advises him) has been disappointing in debates. They test nothing pertinent to presidential duties but have become absurdly important. Perry’s political assets remain his Texas record and Southwestern zest for disliking Washington and Wall Street simultaneously and equally.
That’s literally all Mr. Will can muster in Perry’s favor. I get the feeling he only mentioned him to keep a degree of harmony in his household. His real pitch is for Jon Huntsman, who he assures us is the most conservative of all the candidates.
I am sure that Mr. Will will find a way to adapt and get onboard if either Romney or Gingrich becomes the nominee. But he won’t do it happily. Romney is too much of a flip-flopper with too much baggage as a moderate. Gingrich has made too many enemies and is too erratic. Rick Perry can’t even present a defensible argument that he’s prepared. Michele Bachmann is too extreme. Ron Paul’s foreign policy is totally indigestible. And Rick Santorum is a cartoon. That leaves Hunstman, who not only served in the evil Obama administration but has been dismissive of the anti-science base of the GOP.
None of these candidates can unite the Republican Party. In fact, all of them will divide it in more or less devastating ways. Just imagine how two different communities would react to potential nominees.
How would Delaware County Republicans, in the Philly suburbs, react to the nomination of a dumber version of George W. Bush, or an egomaniacal Georgian huckster, or a starry-eyed rural Minnesotan wing-nut who espouses ludicrous conspiracy theories? How would they respond to Ron Paul’s pro-life isolationist libertarianism? The truth is, suburban Philly Republicans would bolt.
On the other hand, how would a Southern Baptist megachurch community in North Carolina react to Mitt Romney or Jon Huntsman? I think they’d be somewhat less than enthusiastic. Romney comes off as insincere and opportunistic. Huntsman comes off as dismissive and disparaging. And they both come from a church that openly competes for converts with evangelicals.
Still, Romney and Huntsman would have an easier time getting the GOP base to close ranks than any of these other candidates. They might not be ideal, but they won’t make too many people embarrassed to admit that they’re a Republican. You can’t say that about Bachmann or Gingrich or Perry. And Ron Paul? He’d split the Republican Party so badly they might just go the way of the Whigs.
