Subscribe to The Spectator

Friday 10 February 2012

Latest issue

Buy the current issue

Jobs at Telegraph

Mitt Romney & the GOP's Nationalist Rump

Thursday, 6th August 2009

The great thing about Mitt Romney is that he's so darn subtle. Hence the title for his new campaign* book: No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. Gee, I wonder what that means?

Romney must be considered the front-runner for the 2012 Republican nomination if only because other would-be candidates have either ruled themselves out (Huntsman), shot themselves in the foot (Palin, Stanford Sanford. [Thanks commenters]) or remain incapable of setting the heather alight even when armed with a can of gasoline (Pawlenty). And since front-runners have won every Republican nomination since 1988 (McCain was unusual in as much as he was a front-runner who slipped and was nearly lapped before staging a comeback which relied heavily upon everyone else demonstrating their inadequacy before the Senator from Arizona could remind voters for a second time of his own short-comings), one would do well to pay attention to what Romney is up to.

If this new book is anything to go by, it seems that Romney remains determined to pander to the Republican party's base. In some senses that makes sense. Their votes count too. But the trouble is that he's tried this before. Perhaps practice makes perfect and Romney has been reprogrammed to be more convincing when he panders. Maybe. He could scarcely do worse than last time, even if I remain unconvinced Romney has mastered that whole Being a Human Being** thing that's generally considered quite useful.

Theoretically the times should suit a technocrat such as Romney. Healthcare and budgets are things he understands. He is a fixer and a solver of problems. This ought to give Romney a significant advantage in the race for 2012. 

Which makes it interesting that tedious stuff to do with policy and the things that actually have an impact on "ordinary" people's lives is precisely what Romney is not "writing" about in this book. The left realised some time ago that red meat for the base and the kind of emotional rhetoric that sends the true believers home happy is not enough to win national elections. The American right persists in believing otherwise.

Then again, the GOP is increasingly a nationalist, not a national party. The title of Romney's book acknowledges this. Who are these people apologising for being American? Well, Barack Obama obviously (if absurdly) and by extension all those who voted for him. Race has something to do with this, but it's importance is not the whole drama. The rise of the people who tell the census that they're American-American pre-dates the Obama era, even if we may expect Obama's presidency to exacerbate the alienation felt by white southern and Appalachian men.

That alienation responds to emotion, not policy. It's nationalism - or, if you prefer, its definition of patriotism - is instinctive, suspicious and belligerent, keenly aware that there are sell-outs and traitors everywhere. This, then, is the crew Romney is pandering to. Maybe he is right to do so, perhaps he needs to do this. Either way, it's a sad commentary on the state of the modern conservative movement.

Just to be clear: the notion that Obama has been scurrying around the globe grovelling and apologising on behalf of the United States is utterly absurd. As candidate Obama said over and over again, he owes everything he has to the United States. It was America, after all, who gave his father the chance to come and study in the US. Without that there is no Barack Hussein Obama, far less a President Obama. 

Nor can it be said that Obama's foreign policy views diverge much from the American mainstream. They are, for the most part and at bottom, pretty conventional. Certainly there are few areas in which Obama's views would have been considered extreme in, say, the time of the George HW Bush administration. Nor, needless to say, has he staffed his administration with radicals.

Still, that's by-the-by. Romney's little book - and it is bound to be terribly small - wrestles with a straw man. Sadly that's only to be expected these days. The GOP has, for the time being at least, decided to double down on nationalism amidst an atmosphere of festering resentment. Denouncing your opponents as un-American isn't serious politics, nor does it seem likely to be sufficiently persuasive in serious times. But at the moment, that's where the GOP is at.

The polls may fluctuate and they may report unhappiness with aspects of Obama's policies (no surprise there) but if you can judge a party by titles of the books it buys then you'd be hard pressed to see how the Party of Angry White Men is going to win back the Presidency on the back of a campaign fuelled by nationalist resentment.

*Technically it's a pre-campaign, quasi-book, but you know what I mean.

**Not only that, he's also a dog-torturer.


Filed under: Americana (459 more articles) , GOP (304 more articles) , Obama (355 more articles) , Romney (60 more articles)

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article  |  Email to a friend  |  Permalink   |   Comments (28)

Post this entry to:   del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Comments Post comment

ndm

August 6th, 2009 5:43pm Report this comment

The GOP is not fomenting Nationalism so much as White Nationalism. This is a tragic end for Mitt Romney who was pretty highly regarded as a technocratic Governor of Massuchusetts (Matthew Yglesias confesses to having voted for him).

And sticking to flaming Scottish metaphors, the GOPs most fervent supporters are more into the fiery cross than "setting the heather alight."

MattF

August 6th, 2009 6:27pm Report this comment

Richard Nixon's overwhelming ambition provoked respect and fear, but Romney's provokes pity-- I'm not sure why. On a whim, I googled "poor Mitt" and got 11,000 links.

Vern

August 6th, 2009 6:39pm Report this comment

I can't actually tell if you've read the book from this or if you've based the entire blog on the title.

William

August 6th, 2009 8:00pm Report this comment

Yes,every one has their own opinion and has different ideas but the problems is no president ever attack,critic,against,blame, and apology for America people like Obama in the history of America.They love America and protect America,only Obama is the opposite side to America people.Obama said: The Bush administration was the dark and painful era in U.S history,the true is not dark and painful America people but dark and painful for the terrorist and America enemies,because they can't lift up their head and they are in the hide.look Obama forgot the 9/11/2001 why he wants to release the detainee,they are America enemies,they kill America people,they were war with America,why Obama wants to release them and will prosecute Bush administration? or Obama is at their side,because he link to Mr. Ayer. By law if Obama linked to Mr.Ayer,he did not qualify for the presidency. Bush love America and he was protect America people in U.S and around the world.Mitt's Book "No apology,for America greatness,ext" is an excellent Book why you are attacking him or what happen to you? because Mitt love America but Obama attack,against,critic,blame America,so he apologized to America when he knew his mistake,so sad,so sorry,America.All America 43 president have never attack,critic,and blame America like Obama did,why Mitt stand up to protect America,because he love America,he is true America leader,he has good vision for America,he is a strong leader,a smart leader,an experience leader,an export economy leader, he is the hope of America now, and he will come to save America,in his leadership,he will lead America to prosperity,so America will lead the world like Reagan did again.Mitt is the right man in the right job,the right person for the right place,and the right leader for the right country.

Eric

August 6th, 2009 8:30pm Report this comment

The fact that William calls the statement: "America isn't perfect", as an "attack,critic,against,blame, and apology for America" is a perfect illustration of the point that a good 20-30% of Americans will vote for the candidate who waves the flag and rattles the sabres the hardest, and demonize anyone else.

JohnMcC

August 6th, 2009 8:32pm Report this comment

Just a little linguistic comment, since I agree that the Repubs are a dwindling rump of the US electorate and that Romney is a robotic Yankee and thus certain not to light any fires. (On top of that whole Mormon thing which will seem strange, I guess, in the UK but is definitely a big deal down here in Dixie).

My comment: Wouldn't someone planning to "set the heather alight" be armed with PETROL? I think a TIN of PETROL? I can affirm that it would ring truly on my ear if someone armed with a "can of gasoline" were going to 'burn down the barn' or 'set a hayfield on fire'.

Or has British language usage become Americanized to the extent of a 'can' of 'gasoline'?

porkbelly

August 6th, 2009 9:17pm Report this comment

Obama's history of anti-Americanism is long and well-documented - Romney is hardly attacking a straw man here. Unfortunately for him he will have a difficult time criticizing Obama's catastrophe of a healthcare plan without bringing up his own disastrous attempt at socialized medicine in Massachusetts. And being a member of a religion as bizarre as Mormonism doesn't help either - most likely the next Republican standard-bearer will be someone below the radar today (he will have to be given the ongoing efforts of the MSM to destroy Obama's potential opponents).

cat

August 6th, 2009 9:20pm Report this comment

I adore the dog story. I can't look at Romney without thinking about how he treated his own animal. Poor dog! No vote for Mitt from me. I won't buy his book either.

ndm

August 6th, 2009 9:42pm Report this comment

William writes:

-- By law if Obama linked to Mr.Ayer,he did not qualify for the presidency.

Don't you just love these laws?

Verity

August 6th, 2009 10:31pm Report this comment

ndm is a well-known lefty Coffee House troll.

John McC - The main Coffee House writers, and Alex Massie, have all spent time in the US and think that showing an easy familiarity with American usage ("dumbing down", for example headlining a recent CH blog) somehow elevates them and makes them look more "in".

James Forsythe once wrote in one of his blogs something about Westminster Village, which he referred to as "inside the Beltway". Oooooooooh! So exciting!

I wish they would stop it. So far as I know, the only Britishism American journalists and bloggers have adopted are moonbat and wanker. As the Americans, and therefore James Forsythe and Alex Massie would say, "It figures".

Sideon Galanter

August 6th, 2009 11:07pm Report this comment

Mitt Romney. It's so cute. He's trying so hard to be liked and trusted, but the fact of the matter is that he is first and foremost Mormon, which means he pledged faith and fealty first to the LDS corporation, and second, he's flip flopped on positions more times than Cher changes costumes at her concert.

The pro-gay politician who backtracked and was reminded that Mormons hate gay people should really look in the mirror and examine what his values really are, since he only seems to figure it out based on where he lives based on what office he's running for.

Verity

August 6th, 2009 11:58pm Report this comment

Other GOP candidates "have shot themselves in the foot (Palin ...)".

2012 and President Palin with the First Dude by her side.

Shep

August 7th, 2009 2:29am Report this comment

Verity --
"Gone missing" has seeped into American English as well. "Git" is starting to make an appearance as well.

Hal

August 7th, 2009 2:44am Report this comment

Mitt Romney's father, George, was a moderate Republican governor of Michigan and a serious contender for the Republican nomination for president in 1968. His religion was barely mentioned back then. In the years since, as the GOP has become more theocratic and more Southern, Mormonism has become an almost crippling liability for Mitt Romney. Not that I like the man, but this is the wrong way to sift through a (rather thin) group of possible presidents.

We need a new opposition party.

Beefeater

August 7th, 2009 3:24am Report this comment

Congratulations, Massie, on
sneering a course through the dangerous doldrums of post-election, pre-campaign American party politics. You can get off your rowing machine now, and take your dog walkies.

Jane Doe

August 7th, 2009 3:48am Report this comment

A few have already mentioned Romney's Mormonism, and I wanted to add one of the reasons why this is a dealbreaker for him.

The Evangelical right consistently and vehemently teaches its various members that Mormonism is an evil, non-Christian cult. These same Evangelicals form a strong base of the Republican party. They may even agree with Romney's platform, but they are so entrenched in their religions, they will never vote a Mormon into office.

Additionally, as someone already said, Romney would be a Mormon first and a president second. He has already promised, via covenents, to give all he has to the Church. He repeats this covenant every time he goes to one of the Mormmon temples as it is part of the temple rites.

People who know little about Mormonism have no idea how binding these "covenants" are, and they should know Romney WILL follow the Mormon Church's prophet's counsel, regardless of whether he is president or not. He literally believes he has promised God to do so.

Katherine

August 7th, 2009 4:36am Report this comment

It's, um, Sanford. No 't'.

Rhoda Klapp

August 7th, 2009 8:44am Report this comment

Yet not a word about what the democrats are doing, alienating more and more of the American public with their profligacy and incompetence. Pelosi and Reid are going to do for Obama. Then the voters other than the democrat base will switch to the Republican ticket because there is no choice. Come the election the GOP will put up a platform to bring in those votes. Or talk the talk, anyway.

Let's see first how much damage the dems can do to themselves in 2010. Right now their leaders are saying ordinary people trying to express their views at town hall meeting are GOP plants. Or a mob. This is the beginnings of a paranoia that will mean they have even less contact with the folks than they do now.

As I've said before here in reponse to ludicrous GOP-examining by the owner, it doesn't matter what the GOP does right now. It's the ability of the dems to cock things up which will be the decider.

Parma Violets

August 7th, 2009 12:45pm Report this comment

The Democrats thought that they could win an election purely based on the Republicans' incompetence in 2004, Rhoda. So did the Tories in 2001 and 2005. It never, ever works. You need more than an incompetent opposition to win an election - you need a viable candidate.

Rhoda Klapp

August 7th, 2009 1:23pm Report this comment

Parma Violets, I agree with you. But the democrat failure is a pre-requisite. Given that, the republicans know what to do. Whether they can or will is another question. Obviously they have to field a good candidate, and that doesn't mean one selected to appeal to the base (whatever that really is) but one who can appease the base but with broader appeal. We cannot know who that will be right now, but I'd bet on someone not mentioned so far, most have too much baggage to enthuse a new bunch of supporters. Are there any hispanic women?

dearieme

August 7th, 2009 3:33pm Report this comment

Re Americanisms: "doubling down" is particularly grating, because to bet more is surely more naturally "doubling up".

MEG

August 7th, 2009 3:59pm Report this comment

"Which makes it interesting that tedious stuff to do with policy and the things that actually have an impact on "ordinary" people's lives is precisely what Romney is not "writing" about in this book."

Bottom line: you haven't read the book because it doesn't come out until next March. You are making assumptions on content based on the TITLE.

Also, I assume by "Stanford" you are referring to Mark Sanford?

Conservative Cabbie

August 7th, 2009 6:22pm Report this comment

Alex

"And since front-runners have won every Republican nomination since 1988 (McCain was unusual"

one in six is hardly an instructive ratio, too small a sample size.

I'm a little surprised that you left Mitch Daniels off your list of GOP hopefuls. A good bet with presumably long odds.

Have you actually read Romney's book? I'd imagine a review would be difficult without actually doing that.

And as for un-american, the only people using that phrase at the moment are the Democrats talikg about the protests of American citizens.

Bill

August 7th, 2009 7:54pm Report this comment

Who said anything about Obama? Certainly not Romney, or his publisher, in announcing the book. I'm thankful there are still political leaders like Romney willing to make "the case for American greatness." The fact you rush to defend Obama's inept foreign policy is amusing, and suggests the President has some vulnerabilities in this area.

rollzone

August 7th, 2009 9:03pm Report this comment

hello. the failure of the demoncrats is inevitable. our system is having issues within itself. politics have devolved into personal revenue source generation. bipartisan lobbies and special interests are demons.

Niemsters

August 8th, 2009 3:25am Report this comment

I think it's funny when people TRY to make Mitt Romney look stupid. This is a guy who has been sucessfull at EVERYTHING he has done. Obama has proven himself to be dishonest and wreckless with tax payers money. Race has nothing to do with it. If you think differently you're the one tha'ts probably a racist.

Gus

August 11th, 2009 9:01pm Report this comment

:You greatly overestimate the intelligence of the American voter. People love being pandered to and told that their country is great and, in fact, can do no wrong. It makes them feel part of something important and virtuous. All the easier for the plutocracy to pick their pockets.

Ben Stevenson

November 17th, 2009 6:45pm Report this comment

"Romney must be considered the front-runner for the 2012 Republican nomination "

This ignores current opinion polls, which put Mike Huckabee in the lead.

"Twenty-nine percent (29%) of Republican voters nationwide say former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is their pick to represent the GOP in the 2012 Presidential campaign. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 24% prefer former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney while 18% would cast their vote for former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin." -- Rasmussen, October 16, 2009

"The poll finds that 71 percent of Republicans questioned say they would seriously consider voting for Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and 2008 GOP presidential candidate.
Sixty-five percent say they would seriously consider voting for Romney..." -- CNN, November 5, 2009

"A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Saturday and Sunday puts the preacher-turned-politician, who is also a host of a weekend talk show on Fox News Channel, at the top of a list of prospective GOP contenders." -- USA Today

Obviously there is a long way to go, and no-one is even officially standing for election yet.

Post comment

Back to top

Cartoons

Tag Cloud

Search this blog

Alex Massie's blog archive

sponsored links

Spectator recommends

Spectator classifieds

THE PRESENT FINDER

1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk

OLIVE BRANCH FLORISTS

Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844

RUFFS Bespoke Signet rings

62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk