It’s a tough Valentine’s Day. My man left me last week.
Or so I have been told by countless readers dancing on the presidential-prospects grave of Mitt Romney since he suspended his campaign during a speech in Washington, D.C., a week ago. My “Ken doll” has “melted.” I, a “Mitten,” must be brokenhearted.
As it happens, I’m fairly certain no woman on the masthead of National Review has ever commented on Mitt Romney’s looks. But so the silliness goes: A woman who’s into Romney for president must have a crush on him. What other possible reason could there be?
There are, of course, little things called issues (and, in fact, it was an actual policy issue that strikes at the heart of our very humanity that first turned me on to Romney’s leadership skills). But I’ll play along here, and discuss the issue of Romney’s appeal beyond his particular policy stands. Because there is, in fact, something there.
The frequent criticism during the campaign was that there was something a little too perfect about Mitt Romney. Something had to be fake. Sure, there were the policy evolutions/conversions. Maybe you bought some, or even all, as legit (I did). But then there was still too much to take beyond that, wasn’t there? The looks. The hair. And then the family. He adores his wife as she does him. Who has it that good?
His sons, his daughters-in-law, and even some of his grandchildren were all a part of the campaign — and not in a mere photo-oppy kind of way. They were a part of the campaign the way any loving family would want to be involved in something important going on in the life of another family member.
My reaction has always been: “What’s not to like?”
Does that make me — as Rush Limbaugh playfully put it after a string of female Romney fans called into his show — a smitten Mitten?