Finally! An interesting case for Gingrich

This is interesting. Red State’s Erick Erickson (a Gingrich supporter) predicts that Obama will win the election.

The fix is in for Romney, which just means when he is crushed by Barack Obama a lot of Republicans will have a lot of explaining to do. Newt may not be able to win. But Romney sure as hell can’t beat Obama either if Newt can’t win. The problem remains — Gingrich supporters intrinsically know this to be so and are happy to die fighting. Romney’s supporters are still deluding themselves.

Well, not being a Romney supporter, nor much of an optimist about any of the four candidate’s chances of beating Obama, I don’t think I am engaged in self delusion. But I am an admitted Gingrichphobe. I think the man’s Rockefeller-on-steroids drug war statist expansionism, his advocacy of the death penalty for victimless crimes, make him the most anti-libertarian Republican yet. It would gall me to have to vote for him, as I have said countless times.

But still… I think Erickson has come up with the best argument in favor of Gingrich yet. If losing to Obama is a certainty, then why not let Gingrich be the one to do it? That way, supporters of his sort of statism will be seen as having had their turn and failing.

What worries me, though, is that all the polls continue to indicate that a majority of Americans would favor a Generic Republican over Barack Obama.

You’d think the GOP could come up with a single generic Republican. Perhaps an avuncular war hero of some sort could be drafted.

AFTERTHOUGHT: Nah, scratch my fantasizing. Republicans (at least, the majority of those voting in the primaries) don’t want to win. Winning is secondary; they would rather be “right.” A pitiful irony, really, because Obama could be defeated by the “right” candidate.