MITT ROMNEY was
not our first choice for the Republican nomination for president of the
United States, but he was one of two candidates who stood head and
shoulders above the rest of the field as sensible, experienced grownups
with a history of making things work rather than pursuing ideological
fetishes.
We wish he were not so willing to blend in with the
political culture as the Republican Party races further right, from
seeming at times to repudiate his signature success as Massachusetts
governor to playing footsie with the anti-intellectuals who don’t
simply disagree that anything should be done but dismiss the
overwhelming scientific consensus that the earth’s climate is changing,
and that human beings are playing a role in that change.
But we take comfort in the fact that Mr. Romney always has been less
interested in philosophy than in problem-solving. As The Washington Post
summarized the views of his friends: “obeisance to ideology would
impose a rigidity that would inhibit Romney’s real talent, which is
forging new ways to fix old problems.”
He has demonstrated that talent to dramatic effect, from making a
fortune rescuing companies (and dismantling others) as a
private-equities investor to turning the floundering, scandal-ridden
Salt Lake Olympics Games into a financial success. He led Massachusetts
out of financial crisis, and pushed through a landmark health reform
that was seen as the conservative answer to growing demands for a
government-centered program, until it became the model for President
Obama’s reform package. If there’s anything we need in Washington, it’s
more problem solving and less ideological purity.
We
initially endorsed Jon Huntsman in Saturday’s presidential primary
because he demonstrates the qualities we need in a president. With Mr.
Huntsman’s withdrawal, we are endorsing Mr. Romney, because of our
continued belief that he can be what we
need in a president: Someone who can work within our poisonous
political environment to solve our nation’s problems, not simply score
partisan points. Someone who understands that negotiation is essential
in a representative democracy, and that there are good ideas across the
political spectrum. Someone who has a well-defined set of core values
but is not so rigid that he ignores new information and new conditions.
Someone who has shown himself to be honest and trustworthy and
competent. Someone whose positions are well-reasoned and based on the
world as it is rather than as he pretends it to be. Someone with the
temperament and judgment and experience to be taken seriously as the
commander in chief and leader of the free world.
What we need now
is for Mr. Romney to fulfill his potential, beginning with this
evening’s debate. We are encouraged by his focus on America as the land
of opportunity, but he needs to avoid using his newly inspiring
rhetoric to dodge legitimate questions about his political and business
history. He needs to demonstrate that he can maintain his composure in
the face of what likely will be the harshest attacks yet.
Mr.
Romney made clear during a discussion with our editorial board that our
nation’s problems will not be solved without a president who is
committed to working across the political aisle. He’s right about that,
and we feel sure we’ll hear more of that in the general election. But
he will have far more credibility then if he starts acting like he
believes it now. The Republican Party needs a leader who can pull it
back from the brink, reminding voters and other candidates alike that
passing ideological litmus tests is not a virtue and that negotiation
and compromise are not sins, but rather the essential building blocks
of a republic. In fact, that view of politics and government is what
our nation needs. We will be looking for Mr. Romney to provide it.