A “libertarianish” case for Romney?

A loss to Christian populist, er, Republican candidate Mike Huckabee tonight, coupled with a poor showing in New Hampshire, and Mitt Romney can kiss his presidential ambitions good-bye. Other than a bad case of Mormonism, Romney appears to be the most competent and traditionally conservative presidential candidate on the Republican side — sans the folksy and so-far irrelevant Fred Thompson.

Why Romney? On the excellent The Volokh Conspiracy, various "libertarianish" professors were asked to pick their favorite candidate. Brad Smith, former member of the Federal Election Commission, states his case for Romney here. And I think it’s a persuasive argument for the few hundred small-government conservatives left out there. Matt Welch at Reason magazine isn’t convinced. And really, who can blame him? Though Smith’s argument, I think, addresses the issue of why, when it comes to expansion of government and basic infringements on economic freedom, there is a difference.

The other arguments can be found here.

(As a libertarian-ish person myself, I’ve taken a fleeting and purely romantic fancy to Ron Paul – despite what I find to be objectionable foreign policy positions.)

cross-posted at Gang of Four