I’ve never been able to get past the fact that Rick Santorum, as a U.S. senator, not only endorsed liberal Republican Sen. Snarlin’ Arlen Specter over conservative Rep. Pat Toomey in that 2004 U.S. Senate race in Pennsylvania, but actively and enthusiastically campaigned for him. And yet Santorum has the cheek to now claim he’s the only principled conservative in this presidential race?
Puh-lease.
His entire campaign has consisted of incessantly ankle-biting each and every one of his fellow GOP opponents while delusionally suggesting he’s the most electable despite the fact that when he last ran for re-election in 2006, he lost by a whopping 17 points.
And then there was Thursday night’s debate in which Santorum tried to explain his vote against a national right-to-work law that would have freed millions of American workers from the clutches of anti-Republican/anti-conservative union bosses in states currently suffering under forced unionism.
Santorum says he simply voted the way the people of his state wanted him to vote - but if elected president…well, then he’d support such a law. So he was against right-to-work before he was for it? So much for principled conservatism.
To demonstrate just how absurd this defense of the indefensible is, to follow Santorum’s “logic” to its natural conclusion, if the citizens of his state supported taxpayer-funded abortions on demand right up to the time of delivery, Santorum would vote for a national bill to do the same thing as a U.S. senator, but would oppose it as president.
Absurd.
Let’s face it: Santorum’s win in Iowa was a fluke. Perfect storm. Right place, right time. And he over-performed in New Hampshire entirely because of the bounce he got from the Iowa fluke (he still lost). But anyone not drinking the Kool-Aid knows he can’t win the GOP nomination – especially after his pitiful performance in South Carolina, a stronghold of social conservatives who are supposed to be his base of support.
Indeed, if I read the exit polling correctly, I believe that self-described evangelical voters went with Gingrich over Santorum by a 2-1 margin in South Carolina. That means it’s the evangelical “establishment” that’s supporting Santorum, not evangelicals themselves.
And if Santorum stays in the race beyond South Carolina, it’ll be Arlen Specter déjà vu all over again. It’ll be Rick Santorum’s ego and ambition helping to nominate a moderate Republican, Mitt Romney….the same way Mike Huckabee helped give Republicans John McCain four years ago.
Look, if Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich is the GOP nominee, I’m voting for Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich. If it’s Mitt Romney…we’ll talk. But if it’s Rick Santorum, I walk. And I’m not alone. Republicans, ye be warned.
(Disclaimer: I’m a paid adviser to Winning Our Future PAC)
SOME POST-SOUTH CAROLINA OBSERVATIONS
- Newt Gingrich is the living embodiment of the old saying that those who say something can’t be done ought to get out of the way of those who are doing it.
- His gracious post-primary speech in South Carolina was as close to an acceptance speech at the nominating convention as you’ll see.
- The GOP “establishment” will come after Gingrich with everything they’ve got now, but it might be too little, too late. What could they possibly tell grassroots Republicans about Gingrich now that they don’t already know – and are willing to look past?
- For those who say Gingrich is not electable in the general election, I’d suggest that Barack Obama makes him very electable – just as Jimmy Carter made the “unelectable” Ronald Reagan electable.
- And don’t think Newt doesn’t know it. Thus his remark Saturday night that “Barack Obama is so weak that he makes Jimmy Carter look strong.”
- Look for the media and Romney to continue following Santorum’s lead in making Newt’s middle name “Erratic” – similar to what was done to Reagan in 1980. As Peggy Noonan recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal, in 1980 Carter “tried to paint Mr. Reagan as an angry cowboy with crazy ideas. You don’t want that guy with his finger on the button.”
- For all the pain Herman Cain went through over the sex scandal stuff, it probably helped Gingrich weather his ex-wife’s last-minute political IED with Republican voters who have had enough of that stuff.
- In picturing Gingrich or Romney going up against Obama in the fall, I think Republican primary voters are moving towards Gingrich because…they don’t mind losing so much as they mind forfeiting. They want a knockout, one way or the other, not a split decision.
- Conservatives are being told they have to nominate GOP moderates who don’t offend and upset independents. But they’ve tried that with Dole and McCain…and that didn’t work out too well. Why think Romney would do any better?
- And finally….boy, does it look like Florida made the correct decision in telling the RNC to take a flying leap and move their primary up into January. Sure, they lose half their delegates and are gonna get crummy hotel rooms, but so what? Florida is now THE pivotal state in the GOP nominating process.
WHY FLORIDA MATTERS MORE THAN OTHER EARLY STATES
Adam Smith of the Tampa Bay Times explained this week why Florida’s January 31 primary means more than the three other states which went before it in the GOP’s presidential selection process. Here are his arguments to that effect:
- Size. Nearly 40 percent more voters turned out to elect the mayor of Jacksonville last year than turned out for Iowa's caucuses this month.
- Closed primary. Florida will be the first contest in the nominating schedule where only Republicans can vote.
- Early votes. Already, more than 118,000 Republicans have voted in Florida's presidential primary by absentee ballot - nearly as many as voted in the Iowa caucuses. By Jan. 31, more than one-third of all votes may already be cast.
- Hispanic votes. Florida is the first state in the contests with a significant number of Republican Hispanic voters, a slight majority Cuban-American but also many Puerto Rican and other Hispanic voters, too.
- Issues. The size and diversity of Florida make the issue matrix for candidates more complicated...Florida is essentially several different states in one.
FAMOUS LAST WORDS
“He's likeable. I would never beat (President Barack) Obama in a personality contest. But the presidency is not about likeability. The presidency is about are you capable of doing the job?" – Newt Gingrich on CNN, 1/20/12
“The oft-derided and consistently under-estimated House speaker (Newt Gingrich) has now bested Jesus in his sheer number of resurrections…” – Walter Shapiro in the New Republic
“Most football fans have learned to hate the 'prevent defense,' a strategy that is employed when a team holds a lead late in the game. In theory, the strategy involves being willing to yield short completions to the offense in an effort to prevent a big gain. In reality, it seems to yield plenty of short completions - but also its share of big gains as the offense takes advantage of the soft coverage. . . . Mr. Romney's prevent defense has allowed Mr. Gingrich to drive to his 30-yard line." – Nate Silver of 538
No comments:
Post a Comment