I’ve started to hang out at Intellectual Conservative. At times they are neither, but at least they present fairly objective viewpoints. An article speculates on why Santorum is the last man standing. I’m less interested in those arguments than his concluding paragraphs:
So the GOP is left with the last non-Romney – whiny, unaccomplished Rick Santorum. He has no executive experience, a less than endearing personality, no sterling political accomplishments in his résumé and is easily painted as an extreme social conservative. Romney will probably eventually prevail – his Illinois victory this week is more of a harbinger than Santorum's two southern victories last week. But if Rick somehow does manage to secure the nomination, it will be a calamity – for the GOP and for the nation. Not only will he lose to Obama, he could jeopardize GOP control of the House and enable a filibuster-proof Democratic majority in the Senate. A second administration with the same parameters as in Obama’s first two years could have dire consequences for America: skyrocketing taxes and spending, Greece-like deficits and debt, Obamacare fully implemented, Cap & Trade, and so much more – gigantic steps toward converting America from a freedom-loving republic into a collectivist, Euro welfare state, impotent in foreign affairs and slavishly dependent on an increasingly tyrannical federal government at home.
Romney is no Reagan. But he is conservative America’s best chance to defeat Obama. And even if he doesn't, the ticket he will lead should retain enough handles on the government to forestall the nightmares outlined above and give traditional America some reason to hang on for a while longer until a Reagan-like savior finally appears.
I agree that Santorum will guarantee an Obama victory. After the 4 part vetting of his REAL record and what the MSM will use against him I am now more scared of a Santorum nomination than a Romney one.
And not because Romney will make a decent conservative President. Paul Weyrich forsaw how evil Romney was after initially endorsing him in 2008. But at least he has a shot to beat Obama.
And what will it get us? …A weak version of Bush #3. Clearly there is no desire to completely get rid of all of ObamaCare or initiate great reform. He will get some corporate tax cuts which will revive a sluggish economy but in 4 to 8 years the GOP will not have cut enough and caved to the emotional terrorism of the left & MSM and some bright Democrat star will likely hold it all against him.
How do i know? Because EVERY President ends up being the same person they were before REGARDLESS of rhetoric. Romney's own endorser (Powerline) admits he gave up on MA fiscal discipline at the end of his 2nd year. In a GOOD economy, he was 47th in job creation and implemented the first broad based government healthcare takeover regardless what he wants to say. Bush 41 could "say" NO NEW TAXES all he wanted, but he did what he does. Bush 43 could "say" how conservative he was but he had the EXACT same record of undisciplined government growth he had in Austin TX. They will be WHO they are.
Paul would cut the hell out of government and ignore Israel and nearly every international threat. Santorum would capitulate to every compromise just as he did as the #3 leader of the Senate which spent about $800 Billion and lost control to the Democrats. Gingrich would pass the items that had the most support first - like repealing Obamacare, NO TAXES would ever be raised, he would be HUGE in international and military matters and likely (again) implement historic cuts and conservative causes with a bunch of mumbling wussies who will later backstab him.
All are better than Obama, but one has to get elected first.
My personal opinion is that the Romney Etch A Sketch episode ensured a brokered convention. The chaos in current events coming will either ensure a 2-1-1 split until then or bury Santorum. Rick’s tongue is proving to be the Tesla coil of catastrophe and certainly can’t be quieted for two more months.
Santorum people won’t settle for Romney and I doubt Romney people will settle for Gingrich. Paul’s people will likely miss the convention due to a late night hash fest in Suite P. It really doesn’t matter what deals the candidates make since Tea Party people didn’t come this far to end up with someone either unelectable or unreliable. I like Newt’s chances in a floor debate or speech to become the nominee.
11 comments:
I simply do not understand why Santorum is winning any states at all. He has no story to tell ... well, he has no truthful story to tell - yet the Newt campaign cannot whip him even in the South.
I can only conclude that the reason is the regurgitated Dem lies from the '90s that Romney, Santorum and Paul regurgitated the Dem lies from the '90s - and today's younger voters don't know that they have been had.
I suppose that the leftist-media-led debates didn't helpmuch either.
Ron Lipsman writes:
"The first three [Romney, Perry and Pawlenty] had robust executive experience, a successful record as such, adequate backing and a reasonable personality. Gingrich is less well-endowed with these qualities, but as the debates revealed, he exhibits exceptional intelligence and creativity. However, Gingrich is also undisciplined and quixotic."
Lets consider some other words as well, Ron. How about charisma, leadership and federal-level experience? Knowing how to find the john is always a desirable thing.
Of course, placing discipline ahead of intellect is also a mistake being made here. Rick Perry is a great guy, but when you get a C average for your time at Texas A&M, fail the test to get into veterinary school and list "yell leader" as the single accomplishment that you can talk about in mixed company - "slow" might be a better description. Pawlenty is an AGW nut who found a gig as Minnesota governor by acting more intelligent than his predecessors - which isn't saying much when you remember one of them was Jesse "The Mind" Ventura. As for Romney he had the silver spoon to begin life. We need only to turn to 19th-century novelist Honoré de Balzac to be reminded that "behind every great fortune lies a great crime." Whatever Mitt needs, the solution seems to be "spend".
Jim, Romney is simply unelectable. See my latest on Suicide by Romneycare. Santorum is at least as able to defeat Obama as Romney, and perhaps moreso, precisely because he isn't neutered on the biggest issue Republicans have: Obamacare.
Like you, I think Newt is the best of the three, but until the electorate discovers this, we're in for tough times. I think that "Etch-a-Sketch" did basically ensure an open or "brokered" convention, in which case Santorum will not get the nomination, but there's a fair chance it won't be Romney, either.
In this sense, I look at Santorum as a viable vehicle to a brokered convention where Newt's smarts will serve him well. I remember, for instance, that at CPAC, apart from Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich got the biggest applause and the most enthusiastic response of any of the speakers. In a brokered convention, the ability to deliver like that could be key.
So if some conservatives wish to remain on the Santorum train for now, I don't mind, because a.) I see him as better than Romney, and b.) because he helps prevent Romney from obtaining 1144.
Just my thinking.
Good article as always. I published some GOP math on my twitpic. All arguments aside, 2 + 2 = 4 and a leopard does not change its spots.
EQUATION #4:
BROKERED CONVENTION = [(PRESIDENT'S CAMPAIGN MONEY / 4 CANDIDATES) /2 MONTHS] = GOP PRESIDENT + RETAINED SEATS IN CONGRESS + NEW SEATS IN CONGRESS = [(ENTITLEMENTS - OBAMACARECOSTS) (OVERHEAD - DEFUNDING) + (GDP REVENUES X ?)]
? what did you say
Hey Mark! (everyone follow @MarkAmerica and subscribe to MarkAmerica.com - GREAT Patriot!)
In answer to your post, I don't see the evidence support that Santorum is more electable than Romney. We have to look at this NOT from a conservative perspective - but from an electoral one.
But let's have an honest debate. I've continued our discussion here: http://www.politijim.com/2012/03/continuing-debate-on-rick-mitt.html
I know I'm wasting my time saying this, but I wish Rick would get out of the race and give his delegates to Newt. He absolutely won't be the choice of either the GOP OR the electorate.
As for Newt, of course, I'm with him all the way. I've already voted for him, donated some money and will continue to do so, as I can.
Newt will have to give the speech of his life at the convention, or at least have some help from Sarah Palin. I hope that is in the works.
Thanks again for all your articles. I do enjoy them.
i undedrstand thyat the feeling is that it is VERY likely for a brokered convention to occur. could someone pleased explain why that is so ? what has changed
Jim - I love your site. You've provided me with so many referenced facts.
Thanks for all you do and please keep it coming. I cite your stuff when I need to justify why Newt is the best candidate for us for 2012's election.
Unknown,
Brokered Convention means no single candidate can get 1,144 delegates to WIN on the first ballot (vote). On SECOND vote - all the "pledged delegates" bound by their primaries are FREED to vote for whomever they think is best. Wheeling and dealing will happen behind the scenes to buy delegates with favors etc. (Romney advantage) but at end of day - a good part will be TRUE conservatives who don't want Romney. And someone who didn't even RUN can make a pitch to jump in whether it be Palin or whomever.
I strongly believe that democrats vote for Santorum because he is an easy win for Obama. The only man who can destroy Obama and make him look like an immature and incompetent man is Newt Gingrich. I want this to go to the convention and let the best to win!
Post a Comment