Romney's the one because, um . . .

Husband Pundit on Ramesh Ponnuru's arguments for Romney:

Just skimmed this, but it looks deeply, extraordinarily weak. Seems to boil down to 1) He'll be better than Obama and 2) He's Electable!

If President Romney were to do an about-face on carbon caps, the right to life, or taxes, he would be going to war with the vast majority of his party. The fact that conservatives do not regard him as the leader of their movement tightens this constraint on him. A Republican president with more capital among conservatives would be able to deplete it.

He's better because he's not really a conservative, so he will have to be more conservative than a conservative! [Pundette here: This is very like Michael Gerson's "Having flipped, he could not flop without risking a conservative revolt." Seriously.]

Romney’s public positions and his political interests both suggest he would govern as a conservative, albeit a cautious one. Many conservatives want more than that from a president, more than executive experience and public agreement with them on the issues. They want a president who shares their convictions and instincts, who will actively seek occasions to advance their views, and who will take political risks for them. They are right to want these things, for the most part, and there is no guarantee Romney will deliver them.

All right then!

Governor Romney’s political career may not reflect the ideal balance between conviction and calculation.

That's one way to put it.

Hope you noticed husband's adverbial tribute to Newt at the top.

Most recent posts here. Twitter feed here. Amazon store here.