Newt And GOP Establishment Panic

Last night's GOP debate in Tampa may have been entertaining or even, for some, cathartic, but these theatrics hardly matter... and for normal people it was just a boring episode in a reality show that is starting to wear a little thin. The Republican Establishment long ago decided it was Romney's turn, and they don't care how much foot-stomping and breath-holding there is among the Republican base, it's all fixed anyway. The GOP is the Big Money party, and Big Money says "Mitt," so Mitt it will be-- or, if Newt succeeds in making him seem just too implausible, another cut-out hack just like him, a Mitch Daniels or something manufactured like that. But Newt? That's not going to happen.

They don't like him. They don't trust him. They know he would not just lose to Obama but would dash any hopes they have for taking the Senate or even holding the House. Newt Gingrich is toxic. Yesterday, before the debate, Michael Crowley at Time tried explaining Republican Newtophobia:

“The Establishment is right to be worried about a Gingrich nomination,” the winner of the South Carolina Republican primary declared Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press. “Because a Gingrich nomination means that we’re going to change things, we’re going to make the Establishment very uncomfortable.”

The Republican Establishment, such as it can be defined, is uncomfortable, alright. It is likely to re-mobilize, as it did in Iowa last month, to deflate his candidacy before Florida’s Jan. 31 primary, in which a victory could turn Newt from an upstart into the likely nominee. Establishment money will flow to pro-Romney SuperPACs. Establishment pundits and politicos will enumerate (again) Gingrich’s flaws and foibles.

But the Establishment isn’t striking back for the reasons Newt claims. In reality, Gingrich’s platform does almost nothing to threaten the Establishment’s core interests. It’s his candidacy that has the GOP powers that be gnashing their teeth. But as he tries to keep Mitt Romney from mounting a comeback after his South Carolina humiliation, Gingrich’s anti-Establishment pose might be the best thing going for him.

Before going any farther, it’s worth asking who this ‘Establishment’ really is. That’s tricky, but let’s stipulate that it roughly consists of a couple of hundred Republicans. They include the party’s most powerful (and wealthy) Washington lobbyists; its senior members of Congress; marquee television and newspaper pundits; and a gaggle of elected officials, financiers and all-purpose operators around the nation. More specifically, Newt’s key Establishment adversaries include the lobbyists Wayne Berman and Ron Kaufman, columnists George Will and Charles Krauthammer, elected GOP big shots like Chris Christie and Nikki Haley, and party elder statesmen like former President George H.W. Bush.

No one on that list is particularly threatened by a Gingrich presidency, at least not beyond the usual cost of backing the wrong candidate. Certainly not much in Newt’s past record suggests as much. Yes, as a Congressional back-bencher in Congress in the 1980s, Newt was impatient with his party’s more moderate, deal-making leaders (notably including Bush). His 1994 Contract With America did call for Congressional term limits, an idea despised by Washington lifers of both parties.

But since then, Newt has inarguably lived the good life of an Establishment man. As House Speaker he made no serious effort to take on the culture of Washington. Instead, he oversaw an expanded alliance between K Street lobbyists and congressional Republicans. And after he left Congress–purged by his colleagues, not for threatening their interests but for botching the politics of Bill Clinton’s impeachment–he settled comfortably into a life of lucrative speaking and influence-peddling.

What about his current platform? On Meet the Press, Gingrich detailed the case this way: “We’re going to demand real change in Washington, real audit of the Federal Reserve, real knowledge about where hundreds of billions of dollars have gone. And I think if you look at a lot of these guys, they have really good reason to worry about an honest, open candidate who has no commitment to them, who has no investment in them. And I think they should be worried because we intend to change the Establishment, not get along with it.”

Given that scores of Washington Republicans are already on record as supporting a Fed audit, Newt’s one specific argument above isn’t very persuasive. So what about the rest of his platform? Well, he favors huge tax cuts-- probably the Establishment’s top priority. He wants to cut regulations, slash entitlements, and kill off ObamaCare-- all sure fire applause lines at the American Enterprise Institute. True, his radical plan to rein in “activist judges” has drawn withering reviews from some certifiable Establishment men. But that’s not enough to explain the strong opposition to him in the sitting rooms of McLean, Virginia, which has become to the Republican Establishment what Georgetown once was to the Democratic elite (and where, incidentally, Newt himself lives). The bottom line is that Gingrich has more in common with Ross Douthat than with Ross Perot.

To the extent Newt threatens the Establishment, it’s because of his electability-- or lack thereof. The GOP’s mandarins see Gingrich’s nomination as a sure way to blow their chance of deposing Barack Obama. They see Gingrich as the political equivalent of a Fukushima nuclear plant worker, with polls showing him to be lethally irradiated by his negative approval ratings. Whereas Mitt Romney is running about even with Barack Obama in head-to-head polling, Newt loses by double-digit margins. Sure, those numbers could change if Gingrich beats Romney and wins the nomination, with all the accolades it entails. On the other hand, his grandiosity syndrome may kick in, as it has before, and render him a laughing stock. Hence the many Establishment Republicans now saying things like, “Newt means losing 45 states.”

In yesterday's Wall Street Journal, the unsigned lead Review & Outlook piece about the Republican Establishment's panic attack bitched that Republican nominees since Reagan have been "tongue-tied or timid" and that at least Newt knows how to put on a good show. Romney, they wail, is too cautious and "befuddled."

As for the GOP establishment, such as it still is, Mr. Gingrich's re-emergence is likely to cause a panic attack. They don't believe he is electable. Our advice would be to relax and let the voters decide. If Mr. Romney can't marshal the wit and nerve to defeat the speaker, then he isn't likely to defeat Mr. Obama.

If GOP office-holders had a better candidate, they should have rallied behind one to get into the race, and they still could if the primary contest drags on without a clear winner. In any case the record of elected GOP politicians in picking nominees is hardly inspiring.

Well... there's always this if they don't want Newt: