Call Me GOP

It feels a little slow today as the front pages are overwhelmed with news of Ted Kennedy’s passing, but here’s something interesting from yesterday: Senator John McCain was booed by a highly partisan, home-state crowd in Arizona. McCain defended President Obama, saying he deserved the nation’s respect even if they disagreed with his policies.

“I just believe, my friends, that there is a fundamental difference in philosophy and about the role of government. That is why we have competition for public office and competition amongst parties, and competition about different ideas and vision for the future of America. I’m convinced the president is absolutely sincere in his beliefs,” he continued.

How can we achieve a country where everyone can engage in healthy debates about their beliefs without just trying to shut the other side down?

After three weeks and more than 4,000 votes, our tournament is finally over.  No surprise here: you’ve decided that Mitt Romney should speak for the G.O.P.  He held a commanding lead over all his opponents, knocking out Eric Cantor in the final round by slightly more than 900.

So why Romney?

Many of you have singled him out as the candidate with the best chance of unifying the party in a way the McCain/Palin ticket failed to in 2008. Mike noted that, unlike Palin or Rush, Romney doesn’t “stir up” passion among Republicans, yet he’s often sought after as a voice of reason and intelligence.

In fact, many of you pointed to his patient positions regarding issues such as health care that paint him as a rational, reliable choice. The ideal candidate, you said, is competent, not extremist. For now, while most states identify with the Democratic Party, the G.O.P. must attract independent and crossover voters to grow stronger. The party’s looking for a more moderate leader to take them forward, and it seems Mitt is the man.

Is this an accurate summary of what I’ve learned these past few weeks? What would you add that I might be missing?