Where are we going, and why am I in this handbasket?

Richard Miniter asks the question of the year:

In New Hampshire, Romney also spent heavily. More importantly, he was a “favorite son,” a familiar face and voice as a neighboring governor. And, of course, as he reminded voters in the Granite State repeatedly, he owned property in their state. Even so, he won with a less than commanding 39% of the vote.

So why does nearly every pundit and politician think that is the only “electable” candidate, the only one who can beat Obama?

The facts and evidence tell a different story.

Romney has never won a majority (50% or better) of Republican primary or caucus voters. And, two-thirds of the time, he has had to spend vast sums just to claim the number two spot.

Tomorrow’s GOP primary in Florida may change that—but it won’t settle the issue of Romney’s electability.  Romney enjoys leads in polls ranging from between five to 15 points. But he and his super-PACs had to spend more than $15 million in television advertising and millions more in radio spots and targeted mailings. If anything, Romney’s price per vote is rising—an unsustainable model given campaign-finance limits.

Meanwhile, Romney’s heavily negative advertising only drives Tea Party activists and other conservatives from one non-Romney candidate to another. Divide and conquer is a storied strategy; it may well work in Florida. But it doesn’t build votes for Romney. The non-Romney vote–despite millions of dollars, months of media coverage and dozens of debates—remains stubbornly north of 60% among Republican voters. If Romney is going to defeat Obama, he will have to unite the Grand Old Party behind him. So far, there is no evidence in any state that he can do just that.

There may be good reasons to vote for Romney. On the current evidence, electability is not one of them.

Romney needs to present some dramatic reform plans, starting with income-tax cuts and ending pointless government agencies. If he succeeds without these things, the “Reagan Revolution” is dead. That may be why so many Republicans oppose Romney’s candidacy in its current form. They are simply not ready to bury Reagan conservatism.

Fixed that last bit for ya, Richard.

Whether Romney wins the nomination or not, the GOP has already blown it. They’ve taken the energy and enthusiasm generated by the Tea Party movement’s having dragged theirstupid asses (the GOP establishment’s, that is–M) kicking and screaming into 2010′s inspiring win and not just squandered it, but pissed all over it. They’ll be on the other side of a shellacking come November–and they’ve earned it. But at least it’s going to be undeniably clear that Constitutional conservatives have no real home in the Republican Party, and the truly serious ones can finally get about the crucial business of building one for themselves.

We all need to admit at last that there’s just no reason any longer to stay on the plantation and continue tolerating GOP scorn, deception, presumption, and malfeasance. If there’s ever to be meaningful change in America, it won’t be coming from the GOP; in the long run, recognition of certain realities–no matter how unpleasant or difficult they may be–is always a good thing, no?