Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

Why Writing Off Romney a Year Ago Was Foolish

Conventional wisdom wasn't so wise: Steve Kornacki

By John Johnson,  Newser Staff

Posted May 29, 2012 3:25 PM CDT

(Newser) – Mitt Romney will reach the magic delegate number in Texas tonight to clinch the nomination, and you'll be forgiven for stifling a yawn. But while his victory is a foregone conclusion at this point, Steve Kornacki at Salon looks back to just a year ago when it was anything but—at least as conventional wisdom had it. That was when Rick Perry began making noises about entering the race, Romney's health care reform in Massachusetts dominated coverage, and the candidate himself was having trouble staying ahead of Donald Trump and Herman Cain.

Perry, of course, turned out to be a disastrous communicator, Romney put to rest the health care critics by attacking ObamaCare while "spouting gobbledygook to claim he'd done something completely different in Massachusetts," and the fringe candidates faded. What's more, the Tea Party had pushed things so far to the right "that there really was never going to be an alternative to Romney who was both ideologically pure and credible as a national candidate," writes Kornacki. Romney was never a sure thing, but it's now clear that it was foolish to sound the death knell. The lesson for 2016? "If a front-runner seems wounded and vulnerable, don’t write him or her off until there’s a truly credible alternative on the stage." Read the full column here.

Mitt Romney speaks during a campaign rally at Alice Pleasant Park on May 29 in Craig, Colorado.
Mitt Romney speaks during a campaign rally at Alice Pleasant Park on May 29 in Craig, Colorado.   (Getty Images)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
My TakeCLICK BELOW TO VOTE
19%
9%
3%
43%
0%
26%
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 20 comments
Twiny
May 29, 2012 7:32 PM CDT
"The Tea Party had pushed things so far to the right "that there really was never going to be an alternative to Romney who was both ideologically pure and credible as a national candidate," writes Kornacki." Translation; The Teabagger candidates and the candidates that sucked up to the Teabaggers came off looking so fucking batshit crazy that Romney started to look like the only sane one of the bunch. It will be Romney's own party that sinks his candidacy this fall when the Teabaggers desert him in droves because he's not 'conservative' (read crazy here) enough.
cheongyei
May 29, 2012 5:36 PM CDT
 While I will be voting Libertarian, I do see Romney as about twenty times more presidential than the purple-lipped / pointy-eared Kenyan Marxist, and at least twice as presidental as the likes of Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann, Santorum, McCain, Bush, Daniels and the rest of the field that fell by the wayside.
nick
May 29, 2012 4:21 PM CDT
This proves nothing more that in a clown competition, the smartest clown, the cleverest clown, the funniest clown, the dumbest clown, the most horrendous clown, or even the most liked clown doesn't always win. It's the clown, with all the above traits, who spends the most money bashing the competition, that will win. Wanna bet me $10.000?  
 

NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Timelines   |   POPSUGAR Tech   |   Business Insider   |   HuffPost Entertainment   |   NewsOne