A.B. Stoddard: Numbers bad for Romney

Mitt Romney is hoping the third time’s the charm, but it’s looking more like a chuckle. 

The former Massachusetts governor’s push for a third presidential run has been met with swift Twitter mockery, and depending on how much ground Jeb Bush has already covered in his early jockeying for staff and donor support, the joke could well be on Mitt.

{mosads}Romney’s view that a fractured and chaotic field would create an opening for him changed seemingly overnight into a surprise challenge to Bush, whom many assumed would have the establishment front-runner space to himself. The news of Romney’s intent — telling supporters they could spread the words “I want to be president” — has left many Republicans uncomfortable at having to choose between the two.

For others, the choice won’t be difficult. Start with Speaker John Boehner, a Bush supporter, who said of the news: “There will be a lot of candidates making announcements in the coming months, I expect, and it’s a very open process. May the best person win.”

Not one GOP senator announced support, and a startling number of Republican donors and office holders around the country were quite comfortable speaking on the record about their reservations, dismissal and  bewilderment over the abrupt news from Romney. He was a nice guy who had had his turn, they said, and has liabilities that aren’t going away.

The only strong statement of support came from Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, who said “Three different Bushes aren’t necessarily a fresh face.”

But unlike the former Florida governor, who has never run for the highest office himself, Romney has failed twice to win the White House, in 2008 and 2012. Indeed, in Romney, Bush finds the one challenger who is actually more stale.

Yet Romney World is promising he has learned from his mistakes, that he will show the “real Mitt Romney” this time and has a new message. The focus, say those close to him, will be foreign policy and an economic message tailored to the poor and working class — a constituency even Romney supporters say he has failed to reach in the past.

Romney reportedly feels he is “vindicated,” would be stronger not having to run against an incumbent and that he can run to the right of Bush. Certainly, Romney can point to Russia’s takeover of Crimea and incursion into eastern Ukraine as evidence that he shouldn’t have been laughed off when he described Russia as “our No. 1 geopolitical foe.” But other GOP candidates won’t disagree with him on Russia. 

And Romney’s plan to run to the right of Bush doesn’t guarantee him a safe haven in the center of the party. He is unlikely to succeed in painting Bush as a dove, or indifferent to poverty, and if Romney maintains his “self-deportation” stance on immigration, he will retain a liability for the general election as in 2012, when he lost Latino voters 71 percent to 27 percent.

As a data guy, Romney should review some numbers as he moves to finalize his plans for a third run — or decide against one. He should start with the comment he famously made about not worrying about the 47 percent of the country that is so dependent on the government safety net, and move on to the 81 percent of voters President Obama won who said in exit polls he was the candidate who “cares about people like me.” Finally, Romney can’t make the case to donors and supporters that he even came close last time, at 206 electoral votes to Obama’s 332.

Winning the presidency is a numbers game, and still wanting the job after all these years won’t necessarily make the numbers add up.

Stoddard is an associate editor of The Hill.