it will be Romney as the nominee

There’s this:

‘“Today’s abysmal jobs report confirms what we all know,” Romney said in a statement. “The White House has turned the audacity of hope into the audacity of indifference.”

He also took a swipe at the president’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, who earlier this week said “People won’t vote based on the unemployment rate.”

“The average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers,” Plouffe said at a breakfast organized by Bloomberg News.

“If David Plouffe were working for me, I would fire him and then he could experience firsthand the pain of unemployment,” Romney said.’

The “audacity of indifference” remark is mildly amusing, but I think Romney’s final remark about firing Plouffe is rhetorically risky, given Romney’s reputation as a heartless corporate downsizer.

But the larger point here is that, 16 months ahead of the election, despite a full boat of Republican candidates, it’s already being treated as an Obama-Romney race, which is exactly what I think it’s going to be. And that’s probably a good thing– even if Romney were somehow to win, we wouldn’t have to groan in agony and place revolvers to our heads as we would if someone like Bachmann or Santorum were somehow elected President.

My main objection to Romney is still his personality. Recently someone joked: “Romney is the picture you get when you buy the frame,” and I’ve been laughing out loud about that off and on for 5 days whenever I remember it.

One of my family members (they’re all loyal Democrats) was saying the other day that the Republicans would be fools to nominate anyone but Romney, and I think that’s true. But I still have Obama pencilled in for a second inaugural speech in January 2013, barring another Great Depression. A terrorist attack won’t lose it for him, I don’t think– he’s now covered with the bin Laden thing.