Rick Santorum clearly is a social conservative, but not so clearly a fiscal conservative or smaller government conservative.
One of Santorum’s selling points is how he has conducted himself this campaign season. While he attacks hard, he has not gotten personal or rattled.
We’ll see.
Santorum did not have several million dollars in attack ads dumped on him in Iowa, or $15 million in Florida. Santorum has not had the pro-Romney media seek to distort his history the way they lied about Newt’s Reagan history, or have the Romney campaign dredge up everyone who ever had a gripe with him.
When Romney ran a small ad buy of attack ads against Santorum in South Carolina, Santorum was upset:
Republican Rick Santorum complained bitterly Monday that a political action committee that supports presidential rival Mitt Romney is lying about his record. He called on Romney, the front-runner in the nomination race, to ask the group to edit or remove its advertisements from the air before Saturday’s pivotal primary in South Carolina.
“He has a long track record of sending out his henchmen … to go out and not talk about himself but try to spread disinformation,” Santorum said at a news conference Monday.
Santorum even raised the topic of the attack ad at a debate.
In short, Santorum has not been tested in any meaningful way, largely because he has not been viewed as a serious national threat to Romney.
The one time Santorum was tested in a small way with negative ads in South Carolina, he reacted like Newt has reacted. Can you imagine how Santorum would have reacted if he faced what Newt faced?
There is every sign that Santorum’s attack-free honeymoon is about to end. The Romney campaign has rolled out Tim Pawlenty for an anti-Santorum conference call, similar to what was used against Newt as a precurser to a large ad dump:
It’s hard to know how strongly the Romney campaign will go after Santorum. Everything will be driven by internal polling as to whether Santorum represents more than a localized problem.
Santorum’s days in Congress were described by critics as making Newt look like Miss Manners.
We may find out if that’s true, very soon.
Update: Ed Morrissey, who recently endorsed Santorum, is expecting negativity from the Romney campaign.
And, the argument (h/t HotAir) that Santorum is doing better than Romney versus Obama and on favorability ratings also does not take into account that Santorum has not been attacked by anyone in any significant way so far.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I completely agree, I actually just wrote this morning on my own blog (http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/2012/02/why-shift-by-conservatives-to-rick.html):
Right now, because Rick Santorum has generally escaped much criticism in the media it appears that he would be a much safer candidate than Newt, one who could survive the carpet bombing of negative ads that will inevitably come from Romney once Rick is viewed as a threat to them. But this is an illusion as I don’t think any candidate with any actual record could escape unscathed from Romney’s attacks. Ad markets have been deluged with so many negative ads by the Romney team that their tactics practically meet the threshold to be considered brainwashing. Just think about what Newt has actually been attacked for. He has been attacked for an ethics charge related to the tax exempt status of a college course he taught (oooh, run for the hills!), something even the IRS decided did not hold water. He has been attacked for, as a private citizen, consulting for a politically unattractive client, Freddie Mac (If it was Iran, I would understand, but a publicly traded company that even Romney was invested in? Come on.). He has also been attacked for sitting on a couch for a commercial with a liberal democrat and actually promoting green energy (the horror)! All of these issues have been completely blown out of proportion by the Romney machine and the media and have nothing to do with Newt’s very conservative record while in office.
I’m sure some people would argue that if they had anything on Rick Santorum, that they would have used it already. Not really. The Romney machine and its allies in the media establishment only attack when they see a threat to their candidate. I seem to remember a time when the very same people who are vilifying Newt today were cheering him on for his witty answers in various debates. The difference at the time was that they were trying to take down Rick Perry and Herman Cain and thought Newt had no chance. Just wait until they set their sights on Rick Santorum. There will be wall to wall ads about his involvement in the K Street Project, his endorsement of Arlen Specter (who became a Democrat and helped usher in Obamacare), his “leadership PAC” (which gave a paltry 18% of its money to candidates and spent the rest on everyday expenses for Rick Santorum), his scam of a charity and his numerous “gaffes” which will help sour his appeal among women and independent voters (he blamed the church’s child molestation scandal on Boston being liberal, he equated homosexuality with bestiality and he said radical feminism is to blame for the decline of the American family). Then of course is his record which is more liberal than Newt’s. He voted against NAFTA, against Right to Work and for steel tariffs, as well as various earmarks (especially in election years). If you don’t think the Romney attack dogs won’t find enough fodder in Rick Santorum’s record to vilify him to the same extent that Newt has been vilified, think again. Remember, there was a time that even Newt had the highest positive intensity score in the entire field. Things change. In a few months, after the establishment is done with him, Rick Santorum’s image as a straight shooting conservative family man will turn into one of a corrupt religious zealot who is only interested in his own advancement.
One reason I liked Newt (besides that Rick and Mitt are not fiscal conservatives) is that, of all, he can take a hit. Romney and Rick have shown consistently that they get butthurt when anyone criticizes their record…and for good reason.
The only reason that Rick is still in this race, is because he got the Not Romney bounce right before the start of the Primary.
OHHHHHH Ricky, I’d hardly knew ye. Now it will be your turn to squeal like a pig and beg that the carpet bombing ends.
But alas, as you stand by there and applaud the nuking of Newt, you will burn they bridges of escape.
Did thouest think you would be Romney VP maiden in waiting?
(maniacal laughter). Sure Ricky…sure. A maiden to be sacrificed to the God of superpac.
It’s amazing how many people Romney has as his “VP in waiting”. Pawlenty, Bachmann, Rubio, Santorum, etc. All have helped in with the hopes of being his VP candidate.
I’m more amazed how at easily all those people have been to sell out and carry water for Romney.
Romney’s supporters paid off Pawlenty’s campaing debt. Check it out on Google.
That’s pretty typical for primaries.
Santorum IS attacking Newt.
I just saw one of his TV commercials on the air this morning. I’m in Minnesota and the caucus is tomorrow night, so there are political ads running all the time now.
I plan to caucus for Newt tomorrow night.
Santorum has simply slid under the radar as Romney took out everyone else. Santorum is not a fiscal conservative by any means and has not been a big supporter of the tea party in the past. It will be interesting to see, as Romney turns his attack machine on him, how he holds up. I guessing he doesn’t have the strength that Newt has had in the face of the vicious, expensive barrage of attacks coming his way.
I have a feeling Rick is going to regret piling on Newt. Not only will he not get the nomination, he won’t get VP either. Should of took half a loaf Ricky, when ya had the chance and gone out with some respect and gratitute from the conservatives. Now you are just a spoiler with nothing to show for it.
“Now you are just a spoiler with nothing to show for it.”
Amen.
ACTUALLY, Romney’s campaign has sent out three Anti-Santorum attacks in the last 24 hours:
Romney attacks Santorum – http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/06/romney-turns-guns-on-santorum/
So, now Rick won’t feel left out of the fun and games.
Wonder if the teams of nasty little Romney elves will be given their ugly adjective list and typing points. They have been so busy madly typing away smearing dung on Gingrich for months now, it would give them a change of scenery.
Wonder if their ammo comes directly from Romney? Or his sons?
As I meet them on the blogs, I try to let them know how poorly their nastiness reflects on them, their candidate and their religion…or what it reveals about them all.
Truly, when a candidate has no other argument than lies, smears, personal attack, slander, money, shell and power games, we know that the candidate has no real argument or merit.
This seems like a positive development. This will force Rick to fight back at Romney, and possibly do some damage to Romney and boost Rick’s campaign. The other scenario is that it quickly ends Rick’s campaign and then finally it will be Romney vs. Gingrich head to head.
Before Ann Coulter lost her mind she predicted that Republicans would be stupid to make Romney their nominee because he would lose to Obama. I guess she decided to join them instead of fighting them.
Ann, the Romney Cult-her, must think we are lemmings because she keeps trying to get conservatives to go off the clift with her.
Really? Quelle surprise. Professor Jacobson, do you mean Romney might unfairly attack an opponent? Lie about him, even?
And now that it might be Santorum? Maybe we’ll learn something about how the shoe feels when it’s on the other foot.
And Tim Pawlenty might help? T-Paw? Will be Romney’s henchman?
It makes me think of John Hinderaker.
For anyone who hasn’t read Power Line (which is probably not many among the readers here), John Hinderaker is an intellectually honest, genuinely brilliant online writer who is a leading light in the internet-powered new media.
He is a lawyer in the Twin Cities and he researches and writes original analysis that puts the New York Times to shame for its honesty, clarity and continuity.
(If someone makes a mistake on Power Line, which is rare, it’s acknowledged immediately. If someone changes a policy position, it’s acknowledged. There’s no rabbit-hole phenomenon on Power Line. There’s continuity of thought. It’s very refreshing and good for the mental health of the reader.)
And John Hinderaker does all this IN HIS SPARE TIME.
John Hinderaker endorsed Romney a few months ago. Before Iowa, I think.
And I think maybe he is wondering with the rest of us, about now, whether this is the way American politics ought to be conducted.
Romney’s campaign is a dark and twisted caricature of what an American political campaign ought to be. Suppression of voter turnout. Distortions, lies. Money money money money is all that matters. Carpet-bomb the landscape with negative ads.
“IT’S NOT ABOUT WINNING ANYMORE, IT’S ABOUT DESTROYING NEWT GINGRICH, SAYS ROMNEY STAFFER TO BUZZFEED” http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/romney-staffer-its-not-about-winning-anymore-its-about-destroying-newt-gingrich/
ROMNEY “WARPATH” NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/us/politics/the-calculations-that-led-romney-to-the-warpath.html?_r=1
“The size and enthusiasm of Mr. Gingrich’s events scared supporters of Mr. Romney, who had struggled to build similar audiences. Local activists backing Mr. Romney complained that his Boston team was too regimented and slow to meet the challenge.”
And because this is just exactly what Obama will do, Romney would lose to Obama. Here’s some analysis on that topic: http://markamerica.com/2012/02/05/why-mitt-is-desperate-to-force-newt-out/
John Hinderaker is incalculably better than this. John is an example of what’s good and brilliant in America, that will be empowered in the technology revolution Glenn Reynolds describes in his book, An Army of Davids (which, BTW, is excellent and well worth reading.)
John HInderaker is an example of right with the virtually unlimited potential for our future, released from the gate-keeping, stifling effect of the old MSM and empowered by the new community of the new media.
Also, because John wrote favorably about Tim Pawlenty, I think John thought Tim Pawlenty was better than this, too.
The Army of Davids is not in service to yet another Terminator machine of destruction.
The American People deserve better than this. “We the People” deserve better than this.
.
Wow, and I thought I was a fan of John’s writing.
John is just flat out wrong in his support of Romney.
Who knows.
Maybe he’ll come around….
Hmm, you keep saying that Santorum is not a small government guy (and that’s pretty much true), but the implication is that Newt is. He’s not. The only small government guy still in the race is a lunatic, so I’m going with the one whose favorite president isn’t a raging nanny state progressive and who doesn’t (or to the point of your post, hasn’t to date) become unhinged because he’s not doing well (Newt’s temper tantrums are wearing very thin, and I simply can’t imagine him as president. We already have a whiny angry man-child in that office.). Anyway, I’ll take Santorum on foreign policy, the border, the economy, the 2nd and 10th Amendments, and TSA over a dinosaur park on the moon (yes, that last part is me being all over the top and hyperbolic. heh).
Sadly, dinosaur parks on the moon is less crazy than some of Newt’s real ideas. Local amnesty panels anyone? Facepalm.
Besides, nothing says big government like being for a federal healthcare mandate, as Newt was. Yes, Newt now realizes the error of his ways, but who knows what “great” idea he’ll have for us next time? I don’t want a president who passes big ideas, only to say “whoops” after his term is up.
Better to have a candidate that just denies they were bad ideas in the first place (Mitt and Rick).
And let’s not forget his “let’s get on board with the Global Warming hoax and bankrupt America” brainstorm. That was a good one.
[…] it’s on to plan B for Team Mitt. Their plan: Raise Rick Santorum’s profile by attacking him albeit only […]
some things do wilt under heat.
I guess Santorum was not on the list for VP.
If Romney is now turning his guns on Santorum, that must mean that Santorum is now the biggest threat to a Romney candidacy.
It’s time for Newt to step down for the good of the party and throw his support behind Santorum.
I actually think one reason that Romney is turning on Santorum is because he senses blood, and is going for the fast easy kill.
And I believe there is same serious payback to be unleashed on Rick because he shoved Romneycare up Mitts backside in that debate.
Romney seems to be a terribly petty person, and one that follows up relentlessly on any grudge he has.
Mitt knows Rick is actually very vulnerable right now, regardless of the polls. And since Rick went all “shame on you” to Newt for reacting to vicious attacks from Mitt, he’ll look like a hypocrite and an even bigger crybaby than he tried to make Newt out to be if he complains.
Should get ugly.
That makes no sense. Romney WANTS both Newt and Santorum to stay in the race. That way they continue to split the not-Romney vote, making it easier for Romney to win.
Exactly. Romney fears that Santorum could win both MN and MO tomorrow. And that combined with being behind Obama by seven in the latest Rasmussen is NOT GOOD for Willard.
I think many are looking at Santorum the wrong way. Right now Newt looks done (again). Romney is just a couple wins away from inevitability. I still see him as practically inevitable.
Santorum could be the perfect tool for improving Romney a little more (especially on healthcare) before he locks away the nomination. Even if there was just one non-Romney, whoever it was, I doubt they would suddenly be pulling 50%+. There are too many strong feelings about these terribly flawed candidates. We should want this to go on as long as possible by any means necessary. I’m sick of hearing absolutest rhetoric about one candidate or another, the chances of one of them being make or break are practically nil, and even if there is someone who would be best in the fall, the chances of a correct prediction from someone who thinks they know are even smaller.
So in your opinion, Gingrich, who leads Santorum in every catagory should step down so the weaker less qualified candidate who lost his last elections by a landslide, supported Arlen Specter and the bridge to nowhere?
Good thinking there Hawkings.
That “Miss Manners” article is almost 15 years old and, even discounting it substantially on the basis that it was written by a liberal hack, the substance of it is consistent with what I remember hearing about Santorum in those days as being very much NOT the nice guy or principled conservative some people would like to portray him as now.
He’s an ultramontane religious conservative and has no real commitment to individual liberty. No thank you to Rick.
Remember how Mark Levin couldn’t recall Newt’s involvement in the development of Supply Side Economics??
Well…take a look. Good read here:
Gingrich’s Connection to the Supply-Side Revolution Confirmed
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briandomitrovic/2012/01/30/gingrichs-connection-to-the-supply-side-revolution-confirmed/print/
“In his first months in office, in early 1981, Reagan actually dithered on moving on his tax cut. He conceded to watering down Kemp-Roth, and he actually had to be convinced by Democrats that the top rate of the income tax had to be taken down all at once, instead of in phases.
Smelling blood, in spring of that year Democrats started to offer alternatives to Reagan’s tax cut, in the form of smaller, more “reasonable” tax cuts. Crucially, these did not index the tax code against inflation, as the Reagan bill would soon propose and has been a beloved staple in the tax code since indexing came into effect in 1985.
In stepped – Newt Gingrich. Gingrich, a second-term Representative, led an “Economic Recovery Working Group” in the House whose purpose was to show “what each member can do to help the Reagan tax cut” against its Democratic alternatives.
The group gave daily briefings and issued strategy memos on how to get the job done in the House. “Emphasize that the Reagan program is a real tax cut; and that the O’Neill/Rostenkowski program will mean a real tax increase for most Americans by 1984” was the gist of one memo. This particular point is the one Reagan would seize on in the famous chart (designed by Entin) that he presented to the American people in a televised address in late July, which closed the deal in Congress.
The free-market movement, and the history of economic theory in general, is littered with examples of grand ideas that got nowhere or were misapplied in practice. F.A. Hayek’s free-market reforms remained nothing but ideas for generations; Milton Friedman’s monetarism was bungled by the Nixon administration.
The supply-side revolution was something different. It had real follow-through in the political process, let alone the economy. It is the furthest thing from idle to speculate that had people like Newt Gingrich not acted in 1981, we would have had the alternative tax cut that would have been unrecognizable from any of Jimmy Carter’s tax shavings of the 1970s. The 1980s would have followed up the 1970s as a uniquely problematic decade in our economic history.”
This is where I get confused at people insisting that Mitt’s “business acumen” makes him better able to deal with the economic issues in DC.
Newt has done more, and in that DC viper pit, that to me, illustrates the weakness behind the “we need a businessman” as President meme. He actually has accomplishments that matter. Mitt made money. Making money is terrific, but it doesn’t make one qualified to be the President of the Untied States.
People seem to forget that business men are enemies of capitalism. Adam Smith knew it. Do you think our first MBA POTUS did such a great job? Why is there any reason to think Mittens can do any better. Besides, people give POTUS far too much credit when the economy is doing good, and not enough when it tanks.
It really is ridiculous. And so many “smart” people are parroting the lines: Romney is the private sector guy, Romney is the outsider.
Romney is the establishment’s guy. That’s all you need to know.
I no longer believe Ann Coulter has lost her mind. I think she knows exactly what she’s doing and saying, and that her intentions — like the establishment’s — are essentially twofold.
I think Ann and a good part of the establishment GOP realize Romney is a turkey and will lose to Obama. (Ann is not stupid, and has already basically said this.) At the same time, they believe that all of the current candidates will also lose, but that the slim odds of a Gingrich or Santorum win (both of whom are wild cards and could excite the base in ways Romney never could) are far more frightening to their longer term plan. This plan is the key. Romney, a useful stooge with lots of money, is simply the tool to achieve it.
Coulter (and some of the others) have gone all in for Romney both because another Obama term sets up Christie or Jeb Bush for 2016 and offers an unparalleled opportunity to sink the tea party and grassroots by scapegoating them for Romney’s loss.
It’s a golden “twofer”.
Once Romney is the nominee, and as he crumbles under the Obama/media assault and predictably loses, I expect the loss to be prepped and spun weeks in advance as the failure of an embittered and suicidally “purist” grassroots to rally the base for Romney. The tea party — not Mitt Romney or the establishment — will be blamed and defamed for another Obama term. The goal here is the demoralization and fracturing of the tea party and its end as a putative power broker, and the re-emergence of a solidified and emboldened establishment. Romney is their sacrificial goat to this cause.
They will TRY to do this, sure. But they will fail, and probably miserably. They are FORCING Romney on us. If he gets the nomination THEY OWN HIM.
They can’t force RINOs Christie or Jeb on real conservatives any more than they can push Romney a Democrat/liberal on us.
I can’t get enthusiastic about Newt anymore.
Why not? The last straw was that robocall essentially accusing then-Gov. Romney of religious bigotry because he supposedly wanted to force Holocaust survivors to eat non-Kosher meals. That kind of charge is pandering to voting niches at its worst unless it is 100% accurate, which it isn’t. It’s among the dumbest things I’ve ever heard in a Presidential campaign, and I’ve been watching them since 1972. If you’ve ever wondered what spaghetti being thrown against a wall to see if it sticks sounds like, play the audio of that call.
Don’t get me wrong, I wish someone — other than Ron Paul, of course — would take Romney out because he’s got nothing but “I’m not Obama” going for him. As things begin to look like they’re getting better (even if they really are not), if he can’t present a clear contrast between Obama and himself, the argument against Romney would be “Why change horses in mid-stream?” I also don’t think Romney could survive a debate about healthcare with Obama because he doesn’t have a cogent, logical reason why O-care is evil while R-care is OK. And while Romney accurately says Obama doesn’t know how the economy works, he punts every chance to demonstrate how he knows, opting instead to fight on BHO/DNC/OWS turf about re-building the middle class in the Republican primaries!
While Newt would provide that needed contrast, the MSM will hunt for molehills to turn into Mt. Everest (e.g., how much VP candidate Sarah Palin’s wardrobe cost the RNC as if taxpayers were being billed for it), and he regularly gives them a club to beat him over the head with as he addresses the concerns of fringe voters from each state.
Hey Prof,
I am sure this is interesting to some people, but lets face it, aside from bring a spoiler to the conservative movement, Santorum’s candidacy at this point is nonsense.
You what would be awesome, is maybe some hard hitting comparison of the various candidates plans from tax rates to space policy. Thats where Newt shines the most. we quibble about the attack ads and everything but we forget about how great and forward some of Newts ideas really are, especially compared to the other candidates.
I wish someone would point out that although Romney says he would only be paying 0% under Newts plan, thats only true to the extent that it eliminates the double taxation on corp earnings so he is still paying 15% on the underlying returns. That and if he still feels like he is swindling the country, he is still free to pay the higher marginal rate.
When Ron Paul says Newt only balanced the budget with SS mixed in, 1) that by any sane means is still balanced because, but 2) was still way more balanced than anything Ron has put forward even in theory since Ron has only proposed deficits in his actual plans. Ron Paul doesn’t have the political skills to deliver on any of his promises.
How about Newt’s actual space plans? Wow, they are so realistic, they can actually work. there is a revolution going on in getting into space led by SpaceX amount others that could se the cost of access drop to an amazing $50 / lb! If the government would get out of the way in the development of propulsion technology, we can seriously start thinking about what a large scale lunar colony would look like.
New is a giant on that stage. Someone who puts together a vision that can be achieved. He’s not some small mined managerial chimp like Romney whose presidency would be run from the polling office, and trying not to upset the dems too much. Vision and leadership are what people are craving today, and this petty bickering in the party is keeping people from seeing it.
via DirectorBlue:
Question: But is that just ignoring the reality of the campaign? [Romney] has gone negative, it’s working…
Gingrich: So the “reality of the campaign”, to use your words, is that [Romney] has gone negative and it is working. And what I am asserting to you is that, over time, I don’t believe the American people will approve of a campaign which actually suppresses turnout.
I think it’s amazing that if you look in Florida, every county that I carried in Florida had an increased turnout; every county that Romney carried in Florida had a decreased turnout. Now that should sober every Republican in the country.
If the only way Romney wins is suppressing turnout, how’s he going to do that in the fall?
If the only way he wins is outspending someone five-to-one, how’s that going to apply to a campaign against Obama, who’s going to outspend him?
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2012/02/newt-gingrich-how-romney-won-should.html
Exactly!
This is a terrific point, and it shoots a hole in the equivocation meme.
Newt versus Romney – experienced viking versus strong viking – guess who wins?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sp1mzx5O4ao
“See to your friend. He was a brave man.”
Romney may have the muscle and money, but he lacks the experience and perseverance.
Newt Certo!
So . . . .
“Caucuses are non-binding. That means the results from Tuesday’s GOP straw poll won’t bind the delegates at the Republican National Convention.”
Now . . . .
“PPP says Santorum’s lead in Minnesota and in Colorado, which also holds its caucuses on Tuesday, can be attributed to two factors: likability and the fact that no other candidates are attacking him.”
Exactly – “No other candidates are attacking him”
Which Explains . . . .
‘In Colorado 68 percent of voters see Santorum favorably. In Minnesota, 72 percent of voters view him favorably – the highest of all the candidates.”
Well no kidding.
“Wins for Santorum in Minnesota and Missouri would make it clear he’s a more viable alternative to Romney than Gingrich and give him a lot of momentum for the road ahead,” the firm reports.
No it doesn’t. Santorum hasn’t been rung through the ringer. His record shows he is a big govt statist. He had a taste of Romney’s attack machine in SC and he didn’t like it much and complained, which no one accused him by saying he was whining.
What a farce. Newt Certo!
An alternative to Drudge:
http://badblue.bitnamiapp.com/trendr8.htm
Weird looking link, but it is legit.
Newt Gingrich 360
A Place for Newt Gingrich Supporters and Volunteers
http://newtgingrich360.com/group/michigan?xg_source=activity
Explore Newt Gingrich’s Contract With America
Part 1: Legislative Proposals
Repeal Obamacare
Return to Robust Job Creation
Unleash America’s Full Energy Production Potential
Save Medicare and Social Security
Balance the Federal Budget
Control the Border by January 1, 2014
Revitalize Our National Security System
Maximize the Speed and Impact of Medical Breakthroughs
Restore the Proper Role of the Judicial Branch
Enforce the Tenth Amendment
Part 2: Day One Executive Orders
Eliminate the thirty-nine White House “Czar” positions
“Mexico City Policy” of Respect for Life
Restore conscience clause protections for Healthcare Workers
Respect Each Sovereign Nation’s Choice of its Capital
End the Attorney General’s Assault on the States
The Keystone Pipeline
ZZZZZZ
Senator Santorum, and Speaker Gingrich need to bow out and let Americans express the great love most of us have for Mitt Romney.
I think Governor Romney’ support is much stronger than it appears. Romney’s voters don’t even vote in the primaries because they know that Mitt will win, and they are waiting for the election that counts.
While the elites may say people are not excited about Romney, the truth is that people love him. His family, and those who know him best love him. As Americans get to know the real Ronmney, they will flock to him as never before.
People always underestimate Mitt Romney, and forget what a fighter he is. The fact that he managed to make so much money will endear him to Americans. It is no wonder Trump and Romney forged an alliance.
There will be two dangers Mitt faces when Americans get to know him: one, overconfidence, and two, there is a slight chance that a cult of personality around Mitt. Most people fail to realize that Romney is actually quite charismatic, and once the others stop stealing his limelight that charisma will break out. JFK and The Beatles were not big stars at first, and needed the kind of boost Romney will get when his rivals fall in line and let Mitt be Mitt and lead us the way he has been trained by The Mormon Church to lead since he was born.
Without the Obambi cult like problems, there is really a sense in America, I feel, that Mitt Romney was chosen for this moment.
This is satire, right?
RIGHT?
My thoughts exactly!
Hehe
Well this has livened up the thread.
Mitt has great comic potential .
Bring it on .
Palin supporters were accused of being members of a cult of personality as recently as last summer, but I don’t remember any Palin supporter penning any comment about Sarah as over the top as this.
Come on, this has gotta be a joke, and you’re going to come out and yell “Gotcha,” right?
I’m an unabashed Romney man (or Mittbot, if you prefer to call me that), but this post makes even me a little uneasy. One of the many reasons why I support Romney is because he doesn’t have any cult of personality surrounding him. People support him because they believe he is the strongest choice to go up against Obama, because he has the personal and professional achievement to successfully govern the country. But, nobody thinks of him as a transformational figure, or “The One” or a “Light Bearer” or any other vapid, gushing moniker applied to Obama. Nobody thinks that about Romney. Right?
Or, maybe I’m wrong. Spooky…
Good grief! Could you possibly be more obsequious?
Here is all the dirt that anyone questioning Santorum will ever need. C. Edmund Wright gives us Rick’s own “50 Things You May Not Know About Rick Santorum.” which includes many very un-conservative things that he did or sponsored.
As pointed out in the Thinker article, Rick wanted to be thought of as a moderate, very unlike his ultra-conservative “wardrobe” of today. No I am not referring to the sweater vest, but he did not wear one in 2006.
“I think many are looking at Santorum the wrong way. Right now Newt looks done (again). Romney is just a couple wins away from inevitability. I still see him as practically inevitable.”
How many times was McCain done?
Let the primary play itself out.
[…] I got a robo call from Team Romney slamming Santorum… I agree that it’s over… […]