Inauguration Day has passed, and it is coming up to three months since the election. In all that time nothing has been heard from the GOP Establishments candidate Mitt Romney.
For better or worse, traditionally the losing presidential candidate has had, if not in a position of having a legislative capacity like e.g. John McCain, a moral or leadership position as "titular head" of the party. From Mitt Romney there has been nothing.
The GOP rank and file, and the blogosphere on the right is, rightly, in a funk. Not only did the party lose what could have been a winnable election, but the left has been particularly vicious in its crowing.
What makes this loss particularly painful, is that all those Republicans who held their noses and voted for Romney have been thrown under the Establishments bus in a most disdainful manner.
Romney by his silence when, if he was really the leader he set himself up as, he has had ample opportunity to address major issues, is an insult.The fiscal cliff situation, for example, could have been addressed and he could have to have tried to lift the spirits of the rank and file with leadership and fighting talk.
But of Romney the only thing known is that he is in balmy climes and has taken a major role in the Marriott hotel chain.
There is nothing further that can be said about this man whose disdain for the common man is made manifest by his utter desertion of them.
It would have been far better if, as I did (my New York vote didn't matter and I voted down-ticket), instead of holding their collective noses and voting for Romney, who did his best to negate that voting support by running an appalling campaign, millions of rank and file Republicans had stayed home.
Those non-voters, added to those who did stay home (which was in the millions) would have led to a massive defeat for the GOP Establishment (whose candidate of course lost anyway).
If that had happened the total rejection of the Republican leadership would have shown that a line in the sand had been drawn and that, never again, could a "moderate electable centrist" be foisted on the party.
Thus in the next presidential election the Establishment wing would have had to stand aside. Then, even if there were a multiplicity of candidates, they would be from the right and the terrible factional campaign which allowed Romney to win plurality after plurality would not happen again.
If in 2012 there had been a voters strike, the Establishment would have got the message that if, by fixing the conventions rule in their favor, or creating another factional split, they succeeded in foisting another Romney they would, again, go down to a massive defeat and probably take the congressional candidates with them.
Further, a voters strike would have stiffened the backbone of Boehner, and the current congressional team as they, if they had any sense, would have seen the 2014 writing on the wall.
Nothing compliments Romney more than his welcome departure and his only legacy will be "never again". And hopefully, if the rise of a third party is not on the establishments agenda, a genuine conservative candidate next time.