The EFM Feature

Jonathan Martin and Dan Hirschhorn have a story in POLITICO this morning casting the choice between Gov. Romney and Gov. Perry as follows:

Choice A: The Hippocratic oath strategy — first do no harm. Under this approach, the party would nominate the safe-but-not-sexy Mitt Romney to keep the election focused as much as possible on Obama and to have a better chance to appeal to swing voters and independents.

Choice B: Go big. Given the nation’s economic troubles and the vast majority who believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, pastels just won’t cut it. Bold, bursting differences between Obama and the GOP standard-bearer are a must. By this scenario, Perry, the tough-talking, job-creating machine, would be Ronald Reagan to Obama’s Jimmy Carter.

They later say, based on polling, that “many in the base don’t think they have to settle to win.”

Guess what?

I agree.  Because in my judgment, Messrs. Martin and Hirschhorn’s piece misunderstands the choice confronting conservatives today–and not because they’re lousy reporters, either.  It’s because many of us misunderstand it, too, and that comes through when you listen to us.

Here’s the deal, friends.  I’m all for going big or going home.  The scale of the fiscal disaster our nation faces is so massive that we have no other choice–kinda addressing it is little better than not addressing it at all.  Either way, my kids are screwed.  So let’s go big.  But doing that inexorably leads not to Gov. Perry, but to his rival.

Why?  First of all, because it simply is not the case that Gov. Perry is significantly more conservative than Gov. Romney.  What is the case is that he’s cockier and comes from an infinitely more conservative state, with an infinitely more conservative legislature.  Social Security is a great example of this.  If you read beyond the headlines, both men agree (as anyone who can add must) that Social Security is insolvent and must be reformed big time.  They even agree that current recipients should continue to experience the program basically as it is.  What’s the difference?  Again, Gov. Perry is cockier.  Not only can he not resist launching verbal broadsides that make folks where I grew up (the Philadelphia suburbs) nervous; he clearly relishes it.  Gov. Romney, on the other hand, prefers a good spreadsheet to a good scream.

Secondly, Gov. Romney is more capable than Gov. Perry of leading the kind of radical renewal this country’s finances need.  The proof of that is not just in his record from Massachusetts, but from his larger career–and if we’re such principled conservatives, obviously we should give significant weight to private-sector experience.  Gov. Romney has spent his whole career taking troubled enterprises and turning them into profitable ones (showing a rate of return of 113 percent), and taking good ideas and turning them into success (his most notable success being an investment in Staples when it was just a concept).  Gov. Perry, on the other hand, took over an enterprise called Texas that was already on the right track.  Don’t get me wrong; he deserves credit for not derailing it, and I think he even accelerated it a bit.  But that’s a vastly different skill set.  The one we need, in a go-big kind of way, is the one Gov. Romney has.  Those spreadsheets are good for something, after all.

Let’s be honest:  Far too often, conservatives–and particularly evangelicals–go for the candidate whose rhetoric makes us feel good, not necessary the one whose policies will do good.  That is why so many of us are flirting hard with Gov. Perry.  Heck, he leads prayer rallies.  Unapologetically!  And remember the last governor of Texas?  He also ran for president, and when he showed he wasn’t afraid to use the word “Jesus” in the process, we swooned.  Not only that, if we really want to air our dirty laundry, we need to confront the fact that the first modern candidate who began to mobilize evangelicals was none other than President Jimmy Carter in 1976.  He, too, sounded like the biggest Christian in the room.  How’d that work out for us?

There is a bright side, though.  In 1980, we got our acts together and dumped President Carter for a divorced ex-actor from California who was accused of not going to church enough and whose wife hung out with an astrologist.  Some might call that settling.  I would call it smart, and a recognition that the people we find in politics are all imperfect.  If we quit looking for a Conservative Messiah and falling for the guys who sound good, we can elect one who actually does good and who turns this country around–just as we did with that divorced ex-actor, Ronald Reagan.

About Charles Mitchell

EFM's resident Yankee, Charles Mitchell, works in the non-profit arena in his native Pennsylvania. He and his wife, Charissa, live near the state capital of Harrisburg with their daughter, Adeline, and are members of a congregation of the Presbyterian Church in America.

Comments and Discussion

Evangelicals for Mitt provides comments as a way to engage in a public and respectiful discussion about articles and issues. Any comment may be removed by the editors for violating common decency or tempting flames.

8 Responses to I Want Capable, Not Cocky

  1. David Walser says:


    Good analysis. Allow me to add: Perry’s not a conservative, he’s a populist with a conservative streak. Like other populists with conservative tendencies, Perry’s too willing to use government power to obtain the “right result” even when that requires ignoring the rule of law.

    Last election, Evangelicals flocked to another populist in conservative clothing, Governor Huckabee. Huckabee still advocates using government power to control our diet — it’s for our own good, never mind what freedoms are trampled in such a good cause. This election, Evangelicals seem to be flocking to Governor Perry — despite the fact Perry has shown he’s willing to use an executive order to get the “right result” when the legislature fails to act.

    Give me a true conservative: a man who understands the proper role of government and who will fight to keep government within its proper bounds, even when that might give us the “right result”. In this race, the true conservative is Romney. Perry’s the populist.

  2. Rex says:

    I couldn’t agree more.

    Perry is more about OPTICS.

    Romney is more about SUBSTANCE.

    The economy is in such a mess, and heading further once all of that printing-press money takes hold and generates more and sustained inflation. Perry does not have the mental horsepower to understand the problem and deal with it. Romney is clearly the stronger choice.


  3. Sharon Morris says:

    I agree completely with your article. He is pro-life, he is for a constitutional law for marriage between a man & woman, he is for abolishing Obama’ health-care, he is against cap & trade. I could go on & on. I am having a hard time understanding why Rush Limbaugh & Fox news are doing every thing in their power to make sure he does not get in. If Huckabee & John McCain hadn’t gained up on him in the last election, I think we would have had President Romney instead of Obama & we would not be in the mess we are in today. The hatred some in the Republican Party
    have towards Mormons is the only thing I can think of for not voting for him. Also he is for a border fence & against illegal immigration.

Leave a Reply to Sharon Morris Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>