Originally Posted by Baby Lee
We're in a really surreal time fiscally. It seems as if an exponentially expanding sector of the populace are realizing that our path is unsustainable, but are in turn scared to death that, since we put ourselves on this path long ago, continuing to go down it is the only way to survive.
We guiltily realize that we cannot continue to rely on government entitlements at the level we do. But we also fear that without entitlements there will be no source for our needs.
We're like that sad sack at the blackjack table who know's we lost our shirt, but if we don't continue to play we're going to have to walk out of the casino empty handed.
So we know deep down we need to eat our vegetables, but we're in no mood for the greengrocer president. Give us some more of those free government twinkies, just for a little while longer.
Plus, the liberal chattering class both hate and love the social issues. If a fiscally sound candidate is socially conservative as well, then he's a religious wingnut. AND if a fiscally sound candidate is socially liberal or even moderate in one aspect, then they liberal chattering class pound pound POUND how he's not a real conservative.
'Oh no, Giuliani has gay friends.'
'Oh no, Huntsman believes in global warming.'
'Oh no, Rubio is Mexican or something.'
'Oh no, Gingrich has been divorced!!'
Mind, these are not conservative complaints. THey are liberal taunts.
And the tragedy is that conservatives hear this and get cold feet.
'The cool kids are saying this guy isn't right for us. I don't see it. He seems like a great candidate. But what if I'm wrong? What if we lose with him on the ticket?'
Add to this the ever burgeoning factor that a presidential campaign is not something good people have the stomach to submit their family to, and the Giulianis, Christies, Hunstmans, et al staying out of the race or dropping out early on.
I'm fine with Romney. I've never been particularly enthusiastic about him, but that's more a function of optics. If elected I have faith that he'll do a good job. But getting there, I've seen long ago that his vulnerabilities would be exploited much as they have to date.
He's wealthy. The manner he created his wealth is legitimate but hard to explain to traditional wage earners.
He's a solidly charitable and compassionate man, but his faith structure mandates that he not publicize that fact. So the way is cleared to distribute the narrative that he hoards his wealth and only cares about the wealthy, when the truth is the polar opposite.
He believes that individual, local, community compassion is superior to faceless federal entitlement, but he also believes that those actual acts of individual, local community compassion are private matters. This leaves the conundrum of a powerful message that should be widely applauded, but should not be promoted, just somehow understood. People aren't mind-readers, though.
In sum, I freely admit that he's an unpopular candidate, but fully believe that, if elected, would become a highly popular leader.