Everyone hates Mitt Romney. You should too. Why? Because, among the Republican presidential candidates, he's the most disliked.
This extremely sound bit of reasoning comes in today's edition of the New York Times courtesy of reporter Michael Luo whose evidence that the other candidates think this is based on some good old-fashioned arm-chair psychology. Let's take a look:
At the end of the Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire this month, when the Democrats joined the candidates on stage, Mitt Romney found himself momentarily alone as his counterparts mingled, looking around a bit stiffly for a companion.
The moment was emblematic of a broader reality that has helped shape the Republican contest and could take center stage again on Thursday at a debate in Florida. Within the small circle of contenders, Mr. Romney has become the most disliked.
With so much attention recently on the sniping between Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama on the Democratic side, the almost visceral scorn directed at Mr. Romney by his rivals has been overshadowed.
The irony is perfect. Here we have an article whose entire premise would never be applied to the Democratic presidential candidates and Hillary Clinton stating that the media is unduly focusing on Democratic anomosity.
Think about it. Anyone who's watched the Democrats debate knows that Hillary Clinton is easily the most disliked candidate, even back after Iowa when Barack Obama seemed to have the upper hand. Her high negative ratings among the general public would be perfect grist for a fair-minded newspaper looking to provide balanced coverage of the presidential race. Looking back through the Times archives, I didn't find a single article on the race this year that talked about the public's highly negative view of Hillary Clinton, much less the other Democratic presidential candidates.
This is the New York Times, after all so we shouldn't be surprised. Moving on, we see surprisingly little discussion of the theory that perhaps the reason the other candidates are attacking him more is because Romney has positioned himself as the "middle conservative," that is, the one least annoying to all segments of the Republican voter base:
Mr. Romney’s campaign contends that the hostility is driven by the fact that he has aggressively sought to win the early primaries, setting himself up as the chief antagonist, first, to Mr. Huckabee in Iowa and then to Mr. McCain in New Hampshire.
Mr. Romney continues to be a mountain in the paths of both men, as well as Rudolph W. Giuliani, to the nomination.
A spokesman for the Romney campaign, Kevin Madden, said, “I think it’s largely driven by the fact that everybody’s taught to tackle the guy on the field with the ball.”
More than likely this is the correct view. Politics is not simply schoolyard fighting; candidates attack each other for very specific reasons. You saw it clearly in the strategy that Fred Thompson formulated against Mike Huckabee, seeing him as his closest competitor for Southern moral conservative voters. You can see it as well from the John Edwards campaign who are smart enough to realize that attacking Hillary Clinton for being insufficiently liberal is far easier than trying to pin down Barack Obama to say something substantive.
Leave it to the New York Times which is ever looking to paint Republicans in electoral shades of doom to conveniently skip these facts.
