PEOPLE USED TO GETTING WHAT THEY WANT VS. ROMNEY

I'm struck by the discrepancy in reactions to Mitt Romney's presidential moves.

From the GOP elites:

Leading the anti-Romney charge was the voice of the GOP establishment wing, the Wall Street Journal editorial page. “The question the former Massachusetts Governor will have to answer,” the newspaper wrote, “is why he would be a better candidate than he was in 2012... The answer is not obvious.”

The Journal’s owner, News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch, piled on: “He had his chance, he mishandled it, you know? I thought Romney was a terrible candidate.”

From the Republican rank-and-file:

Mitt Romney is leading yet another GOP presidential poll....

The new poll from Townhall and Gravis Marketing shows Romney tops among Iowa Republicans with 21 percent of registered voters. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is the second-highest-polling candidate with 14 percent....

Well, the folks in the Republican rank-and-file may be narrow-minded, paranoid rage junkies, but they're still ordinary people -- they're not used to having things go their way 100% percent of the time. Rupert Murdoch and the fat cats who are The Wall Street Journal's target market expect more out of life -- maybe they knew the presidency was out of reach in 2008, the way Murdoch knew he'd have to pay some small price when the phone-hacking scandal hit, but except in those moments when circumstances are really against them, they expect to win all the time. They think it's their due.

The 2012 election was supposed to be winnable. Fat cats aren't used to losing winnable fights. Losing that election wasn't a disappointment to the fat cats -- it was flat-out unacceptable. Fat cats expect to win every winnable battle. And given the way society is constructed, that's not an unreasonable expectation.

So no wonder they hate Romney -- to them, losing wasn't an option.