I pick up The Financial Times to go with breakfast and there we have a story on the editorial page about Mitt Romney. I even think this is supposed to be a positive account, but allow me to quote:
Mitt Romney’s credentials for the White House are good. But as Americans will be reminded at at his nominating convention in Tampa this week, there is a problem with the Republican Party he leads.
Detractors, including many Republicans, will worry his persona remains too aloof and his attempts at interaction with people too weird.
Given Mr Romney’s limited campaign skills, there may be reasons to doubt he will be able to transcend his image as a heartless corporate raider.
Mr Romney has been forced to abandon his common sense positions to get the nomination. These include fiscal pragmatism (he signed the pledge), a practical approach to illegal immigration, moderation on issues such as abortion and acceptance that global warming is partly man made. In each case, Mr Romney has submitted to prevailing – and hardening – Republican theology.
If it goes well the convention ought to showcase Mr Romney’s executive skills. It may also shine the light on the growing anti-enlightenment dimension of the party he leads. The moral of the story is this: were he required to work with a Democrat-controlled Congress, Mr Romney could make a good president. But if he had to dance to the ‘starve the beast’ tunes of Paul Ryan’s congressional peers, all bets at sensible governance would be off.
Why bother with The Guardian when you can get all this in the premier financial paper of Europe.