Political Animal
Blog
Yesterday I said it, you said it, pretty much everybody said it: after the unpleasant surprise of losing the Minnesota and Colorado caucuses to Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney and his Super PAC would methodically begin to unleash the advertising equivalent of the Firebombing of Dresden on poor Ricky in upcoming primary states like Arizona, Michigan and Ohio. It sure worked to cut Newt Gingrich down to size in Iowa and Florida, and it appears Mitt will maintain the kind of financial advantage over Santorum and Gingrich needed to achieve command of the airways wherever he chooses.
But interestingly, there are a few Republican voices out there suggesting that Mitt does not truly have the freedom to treat Santorum like he treated Newt. Why? Because conservatives opinion-leaders tend to like Ricky, and they don’t much like Newt, who has been honking them off one at a time for decades. Moreover, Gingrich’s serial surges in the polls frightened some conservatives into thinking he might romp to the nomination and then lead the party to a defeat of biblical proportions. At a minimum, conservative leaders will not cooperate with a trash-Ricky effort, and they might even push back, suggests columnist Matt Lewis:
One appealing attribute is that Santorum is somewhat of a wonkish intellectual type. This appeals to conservative pundits who fear the tea part set might nominate someone who would make them look like a rube to their cosmopolitan friends. As the Washington Post’s in-house Romney cheerleader, Jennifer Rubin, wrote, Santorum “is a well-educated man who cites (without pretense) everyone from John Adams to C.S. Lewis. He’s someone who thinks it important to know things — and know them in detail if you’re going to run for the presidency.”
And consider National Review’s infamous editorial, tearing down Gingrich (and Bachmann and Perry). That same piece praised Santorum as “an effective legislator” and included him among the candidates who “deserve serious consideration….”
Romney must tread lightly when attacking Santorum. And he won’t be able to count on the help of his willing accomplices in the conservative media this time around…
Additionally, there’s pretty strong anecdotal evidence that Mitt (and for that matter, Gingrich) have been overdoing the visigothic attacks on each other, benefitting Santorum, who personal favorability ratings have remained high even as Mitt’s and Newt’s have sagged. Mitt gets a pretty strong hint today from the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal:
The former Massachusetts Governor also isn’t winning friends with his relentlessly negative campaign. He first chopped up Rick Perry by running hard to the right on immigration. Then his attack ads tore apart Newt Gingrich in Iowa and Florida—in part because they revealed truths about Mr. Gingrich’s prodigal politics on Freddie Mac and other things.
Now his political team’s instinct will be to dig into its oppo research and savage Mr. Santorum. This may get Mr. Romney to 50.1% of the GOP delegates, but he’d be a weaker nominee for it. The low GOP turnout in early primary states is one sign of his weakness. What Mr. Romney needs is to make a better, positive case for his candidacy beyond his business resume.
In any event, even if Santorum gets relatively kind treatment from Romney, it’s unlikely the same will be true of Gingrich, for whom Ricky’s sudden burst of success is an existential threat. You can expect to hear a lot from Newt and his Super PAC about earmarks, Medicare Rx, the national right-to-work bill, and other of Ricky’s heresies. So long as Adelson’s still writing checks, Gingrich has little or nothing to lose.
Facebook
Twitter
Hedda Peraz on February 09, 2012 10:13 AM:
Sadly, "a defeat of biblical proportions" is a given.
-Unless we can find our needle in the Tampa haystack.
windshouter on February 09, 2012 10:13 AM:
Note that the most obvious attacks on Mr. Santorum are essentially that he was Republican Senator. If you wind up in that position, you have taken a lot of positions on issues that can be criticized and you will have spending and earmark problems. Mr Romney can attack Washington culture, but his instincts to go all out on Mr. Santorum could well cause problems with those Republicans who have
similar histories and plan to be in Washington after 2013.
That is, the obvious lines of attack attack the heart of the institutional Republican party whom Romney needs now or in the future.
Anonymous At Work on February 09, 2012 10:17 AM:
A big reason for the GOP elites to shelter Santorum from the negative money-bombing by Romney is that Santorum's negatives, as far as the GOP/tea party base are concerned, is that Santorum was the GOP elite's point man in the Senate for Tom Delay's little corporate-bribery projects. Jack Abramoff will either be in the TV commercials or just a small step beyond them (and so related that news coverage will mention him), which is NOT good for the GOP Congress-critters hoping to retain the House and pick up the Senate.
In fact, writing this, if I were a GOP elite, I'd consider keeping the House to be almost as big a priority as winning the House. The Democrats, especially in the Senate, aren't so ruthless to ignore Senate rules, which means that the GOP can obstruct nominations. Therefore, the House is needed to keep the Democrats from governing.
T2 on February 09, 2012 10:17 AM:
Lewis calls Sanitarium a " wonkish intellectual type" ? My take on him is that he's a typical smart-mouth frat guy who thinks he's very clever and smart but is really just a jerk. One thing he can't hide from....he was elected once and then soundly voted out of office after one term. What does that tell you?
Danp on February 09, 2012 10:17 AM:
One appealing attribute is that Santorum is somewhat of a wonkish intellectual type.
I never heard that before. I hope Matt Lewis didn't fall for an Onion headline.
kishin on February 09, 2012 10:19 AM:
Break out the beer and pass the popcorn! This should be fun to watch.
T2 on February 09, 2012 10:26 AM:
to address the point: Santorum is an actual loser as a politician. And so is Gingrich-thrown out by his own Party. Romney is a loser...one term and out as Gov, the losing to the McGrouch in 2008. So, a group of losers running to lead a loser Party. Very appropriate. However Santorum is much closer to the ideal TeaBagger than Gingrich, and as such Romney will face a backlash from the Bags if he goes after Santorum. The set up here is that if the Baggers dump Newt for Rick down South (where Newt expects to sweep) then he will be in pretty good shape. Down South, they don't like Yankees, and Romney is a Yankee. If the Baggers unite, it will be behind Santorum.
gifgrrl on February 09, 2012 10:27 AM:
"...in part because they revealed truths about Mr. Gingrich’s prodigal politics on Freddie Mac and other things."
OMG! Not the truth! No! No! No!
jpeckjr on February 09, 2012 10:36 AM:
Anything that makes Romney a weaker nominee is fine with me.
To the WSJ: The low turnout in the Republican primaries and caucuses is a sign of the weakness of the entire field, not just Romney.
But like I say, a weak Republican field is fine with me.
Kathryn on February 09, 2012 10:40 AM:
Mitt in trouble again as he has no positive or better case for his candidacy other than his discredited business background. It's mind blowing that after running for president for the past four years, he is such an awkward tongue tied sap. Predict major fail at CPAC festive, hope I'm wrong. Does he have incompetent staff or is he incapable of learning? Don't you just love how voting to raise the debt ceiling is now standard right wing attack?
Rick's rise is sure to bring out the worst in Newt, how.dare the junior partner outshine the Speaker. I guess Newt's ego blinds him to how thoroughly unlikable he is.
p.s. Check out Gail Collins in NYT today, she reports Church unwilling to compromise by allowing employees at hospitals, etc. to be directed to other places to obtain contraceptives while avoiding paying themselves.
Diane Rodriguez on February 09, 2012 10:40 AM:
Matt Lewis' "wonkish intellectual" comment is pretty standard pabulum. The desperation is like an 18 year old virgin trying to get his clothes off as fast as he can in a free-for-the-day cathouse. The great irony is the last thing that Santorum supporters want is an intellectual. They want a man who will tell wimin, gays and librals how to conduct their sex lives.....babies, babies, babies. And by the way, nothing but missionary will do, ‘cause Lord knows we are taking pictures (for educational purposes only of course.)
I'm pretty confidant history will bear witness that this group of Republican candidates are the most pathetically unqualified bunch in contemporary times. On the bright side, it is the vestiges of the old brigade ( read stereotypical white guy) holding on for dear life in a changing world.
berttheclock on February 09, 2012 10:48 AM:
@T2, careful what you write about Rick or he might unleash his old WWF buddies on you. Rick, once, represented the WWF and made the argument they should be exempt from federal anabolic steriod policies because pro wrestling was entertainment and not a sport. Hmmm, pro wrestling and the RepuG primaries. So much in common.
hells littlest angel on February 09, 2012 10:51 AM:
In the kingdom of complete fucking morons, the mildly retarded man is king. Only by that measure is Santorum a wonkish intellectual type.
berttheclock on February 09, 2012 10:53 AM:
@Kathryn, but, the Church will go to any length to protect priests who are pedophiles, either in the US or in Ireland.
dalloway on February 09, 2012 10:57 AM:
Santorum is actually the best candidate for both Republicans and Democrats. For Republicans, he channels all their medieval thinking on social issues, especially with regard to women, and for Democrats, he's a candidate Obama will crush in the general election, which will demonstrate once and for all how Republicans' lurch to the far right is slowly but surely removing them from any credibility on the American political scene.
John in TX on February 09, 2012 11:06 AM:
The Murdoch Street Journal says: "What Mr. Romney needs is to make a better, positive case for his candidacy beyond his business resume."
And there's the rub. Romney can't make a "better, positive" case because he has none to make. It simply wasn't written into the operating system he's running. This waxen simulacrum of a human being is like most of the 1 percent: a highly neurotic, control-freak sociopath who's only "achievements" in life were made possible by the family's money. Just like Shrub before him, if not for the gold-plated ladder provided by the family name Mitt would be working on a used car lot or as an assistant night manager at Pay Less Shoes. He simply feels he deserves the Presidency; he doesn't actually have any ideas about what he'd do once there. (And as we all know, any "beliefs" this blundering animatronic mannequin has are likely to simply change with the direction of the wind.)
SecularAnimist on February 09, 2012 11:11 AM:
The fact that Matt Lewis can call Santorum a "wonkish intellectual" and Jennifer Rubin can call him a "well-educated man" while Santorum runs around the country expressing disbelief in biological evolution and calling anthropogenic global warming a "leftist hoax" says everything that needs to be said about the abject degeneration of American "conservatism" from a political ideology into a crackpot cult.
T2 on February 09, 2012 11:28 AM:
"it is the vestiges of the old brigade ( read stereotypical white guy) holding on for dear life in a changing world." So true Diane, so true.
Sgt. Gym Bunny on February 09, 2012 11:29 AM:
I don't think Mitt should resort to moneybombing Santorum. I think Mitt's campaign aides should resort to some immature pranks that you know jerk-face Mitt would probably wanna do to that lil' sh!t Rick. Like leaving flaming piles of pooh near the entry vestibules of the sites Rick happens to be campaigning at. It's not the big-dog treatment Newt got, but the appropriate belittlement fitting for that lil' dweeby, sweater-vest wearing goober. And it wouldn't generate bad publicity for Mitt without doing likewise to Santorum. Problem solved!!!
SadOldVet on February 09, 2012 11:53 AM:
What Mr. Romney needs is to make a better, positive case for his candidacy beyond his business resume.
Sorry 'bout that WSJ... There ain't no there there!
srw3 on February 09, 2012 12:11 PM:
Rick, man on dog, Santorum as wonkish? Really? He has the intellectual heft of a 5 year old pouting in the corner. PLEASE, PLEASE let Little Ricky win, PLEASE!!!!
CDW on February 09, 2012 12:26 PM:
I have gone out of my way to tune out the clown show to the extent possible given the way it dominates the blogs, so I am flabbergasted to read that Santorum is a "wonkish intellectual". My impression of him filtered through a haze is just the opposite. That explains why Ed Schultz, reporting from Iowa (I think it was) said that he was impressed with Santorum.
Back to der mitt - sounds like there's nothing for him to do but let gingrich do his dirty work for him. So sad.
Robert Chapman on February 11, 2012 12:17 PM:
Nice article from Mr. Kilgore. I can agree that Santorum has a coherent and identifiable political philosophy. I can also agree that Santorum offers some rays of hope from the conservative side, specifically his willingness to legitimatize industrial policy. Santorum's offer of a tax holiday to American firms re-patriating American jobs seems a little despearate, but at least Santorum recognizes the government has a legitimate role in the economy.
After that, why should Democrats or moderates or progressives care about what happens to Santorum in the GOP primaries?
It is clear that the GOP nomination process is bought, signed and sealed by the Romney forces. The primaries Tuesday night showed Romney has zero appeal among the GOP rank and file, yet these ELECTIONS will not affect the selection of any delegates.
The GOP delegate selection process is a money driven, exercise to maintain the power of the GOP machines and their bosses.