Skip to comments.RUSH: WHY SANTORUM SCARES THE LEFT
Posted on 02/29/2012 6:58:18 AM PST by Yosemitest
Why Santorum Scares the Left
February 28, 2012
RUSH: Okay, we have some headlines that are in the Drive-By Media today.
Most of them are about Santorum and how out of touch he is and how what a wacko he is and what a creep, what a fanatic.
I had 'em set aside. I'll just run through the headlines here.
Krauthammer, who I think is not anti-Santorum said something on FOX about Rick losing votes because of the “three something” things? I think one was the JFK so-called comment by Rick?
Krauthammer’s take on the cardboard man is:
“Story line is Romney, slow, steady, unspectacular,” said conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer.”
He doesn’t scare the left, because his ideas are indistinguishable from those of Romney, which are all big government all the time.
I think the GOP establishment thinks they’re even less likely to win with him than with Romney for personal reasons, however, although the truth is that the GOP wouldn’t win with either one of them.
But I guess since Santorum adopted Rush’s idiotic Operation Chaos strategy of trying to get people from the other party (Santorum robo-calls to Dems) to vote for him, he’s Rush’s kinda guy.
It’s simple, the democrats fear the sweater vest!!!!
Santorum scares a lot of people. I am a conservative woman who is an anti-abortion, practicing Catholic and Santorm just does not sit well with me.
If he doesn’t scare the left then why are they trying to kill him now?
Rush is spot on here. This is why they attacked him over the Kennedy speech - saying that he believes his faith is an integral part of him and that he’s not going to coat-check his faith at the door.
Haven’t we been wanting a Catholic to say just that for 50 years now? Say that his faith was more important to him than his politics and that even if he were elected president would stick by his faith instead of what Kennedy did?
Or am I mistaken?
Good news - Santorums up in 8 congressional districts vs 6 for Romney. They are still counting the votes and it’s very close. If he stays up, he wins the delegate count in Michigan, meaning that Romney lost his home state.
I’m a bit shocked that Michigan stuck with Romney. It was close but the Detroit suburbs is what put Romney over - and it was enough to carry him through. 30k votes in Oakland county alone.
Why is Michigan so liberal? If Santorum won in Minnesota - Michigan should have gone for him too.
Santorum cannot defeat Obama. Romney, not being that different from Obama, has a better chance than Santorum. Newt’s my choice, but I’m not sure he could defeat Obama.
God, how did we get into this mess?
“He doesnt scare the left, because his ideas are indistinguishable from those of Romney, which are all big government all the time.”
That’s a flat out lie. Who are you pulling for, Newt? Santorum has a career scorecard from the National Taxpayer’s Union of 76%. Gingrich’s score is 61%. The NTU is not about big governement.
I could support both. Both have inconsistencies in their careers. Newt is a better at communicating. Santorum has a better moral compass which is also important. Both can beat Obama.
It is a mess indeed. Romney will win this nomination. I will have to hold my nose and vote for him, just because a second term Obama will be incredibly dangerous to the survival of our great Republic.
It may be depressing to many in here, but Romney is going to win the primary. Stay away from the election if you must, but I cannot risk another 4 years of Obama. Very troubling indeed, from both parties. sigh.
I'd submit that they're not. For the left, picking on a guy like Santorum is like shooting fish in a barrel. They probably have a template column ripping on social conservatives for things like this . . . all they did was insert Santorum's name into the template and presto.
There are anti Santorum attack ads still running in Michigan this morning. He scares someone.
Santorum scare the left?
He scares me more!
Rush, I hope you enjoy your shark surfing.
Mitt Romney was a moderate governor in Massachusetts with an unimpressive record of governance. He left office with an approval rating in the thirties and his signature achievement, Romneycare, was a Hurricane Katrina style disaster for the state. Since that's the case, it's fair to ask what a Republican who's not conservative and can't even carry his own state brings to the table for GOP primary voters. The answer is always the same: Mitt Romney is supposed to be "the most electable" candidate. This is a baffling argument because many people just seem to assume it's true, despite the plethora of evidence to the contrary.
1) People just don't like Mitt: The entire GOP primary process so far has consisted of Republican voters desperately trying to find an alternative to Mitt Romney. Doesn't it say something that GOP primary voters have, at one time or another, preferred Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and now even Ron Paul (In Iowa) to Mitt Romney?
To some people, this is a plus. They think that if conservatives don't like Mitt Romney, that means moderates will like him. This misunderstands how the process of attracting independent voters works in a presidential race. While it's true the swayable moderates don't want to support a candidate they view as an extremist, they also don't just automatically gravitate towards the most "moderate" candidate. To the contrary, independent voters tend to be moved by the excitement of the candidate's base (See John McCain vs. Barack Obama for an example of how this works). This is how a very conservative candidate like Ronald Reagan could win landslide victories. He avoided being labeled an extremist as Goldwater was; yet his supporters were incredibly enthusiastic and moderates responded to it.
Let's be perfectly honest: Mitt Romney excites no one except for Mormons, political consultants, and Jennifer Rubin. To everybody else on the right, Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama would be a "lesser of two evils" election where we'd grudgingly back Mitt because we wouldnt lose as badly with him in the White House as we would with Obama. That's not the sort of thing that gets people fired up to make phone calls, canvass neighborhoods, or even put up "I heart Mitt" signs in their yards.
2) He's a proven political loser: There's a reason Mitt Romney has been able to say that he's "not a career politician." It's because he's not very good at politics. He lost to Ted Kennedy in 1994. Although he did win the governorship of Massachusetts in 2002, he did it without cracking 50% of the vote. Worse yet, he left office as the 48th most popular governor in America and would have lost if he had run again in 2006. Then, to top that off, he failed to capture the GOP nomination in 2008. This time around, despite having almost every advantage over what many people consider to be a weak field of candidates, Romney is still desperately struggling. Choosing Romney as the GOP nominee after running up that sort of track record would be like promoting a first baseman hitting .225 in AAA to the majors.
3) Running weak in the southern states: Barack Obama won North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida in 2008 and you can be sure that he will be targeting all three of those states again. This is a problem for Romney because he would be much less likely than either Gingrich or Perry to carry any of those states. Moderate northern Republicans have consistently performed poorly in the south and Romney won't be any exception. That was certainly the case in 2008 when both McCain and Huckabee dominated Romney in primaries across the south. Mitt didn't win a single primary in a southern state and although he finished second in Florida, he wasn't even competitive in North Carolina or Virginia. Since losing any one of those states could be enough to hand the election to Obama in a close race, Mitt's weakness there is no small matter.
4) His advantages disappear in a general election: It's actually amazing that Mitt Romney isn't lapping the whole field by 50 points because he has every advantage. Mitt has been running for President longer than the other contenders. He has more money and a better organization than the other candidates. The party establishment and inside the beltway media are firmly in his corner. That's why the other nominees have been absolutely savaged while Romney, like John McCain before him, has been allowed to skate through the primaries without receiving serious scrutiny.
Yet, every one of those advantages disappears if he becomes the nominee. Suddenly Obama will be the more experienced candidate in the race for the presidency. He will also have more money and a better organization than Mitt. Moreover, in a general election, the establishment and beltway media will be aligned against Romney, not for him. Suddenly, Romney will go from getting a free pass to being public enemy #1 for the entire mainstream media.
If you took all those advantages away from Romney in the GOP primary, he'd be fighting with Jon Huntsman to stay out of last place. So, what happens when he's the nominee and suddenly, all the pillars that have barely kept him propped up in SECOND place so far are suddenly removed? It may not be pretty.
5) Bain Capital: Mitt Romney became rich working for Bain Capital. This has been a plus for Romney in the Republican primaries where the grassroots tend to be dominated by people who love capitalism and the free market. However, in a year when Obama will be running a populist campaign and Occupy Wall Street is demonizing the "1%," Mitt Romney will be a TAILOR MADE villain for them. Did you know that Bain Capital gutted companies and made a lot of money, in part, by laying off a lot of poor and middle class Americans? Do you know that Bain Capital got a federal bailout and Mitt Romney made lots of money off of it?
The way the company was rescued was with a federal bailout of $10 million, the ad says. The rest of us had to absorb the loss Romney? He and others made $4 million in this deal. Mitt Romney: Maybe hes just against government when it helps working men and women.
The facts of the Bain & Co. turnaround are a little more complicated, but a Boston Globe report from 1994 confirms that Bain saw several million dollars in loans forgiven by the FDIC, which had taken over Bains failed creditor, the Bank of New England.
Did you know Ted Kennedy beat Romney in 1994 by hammering Mitt relentlessly on his time at Bain Capital? No wonder. The ads write themselves.
Imagine pictures of dilapidated, long since closed factories. They trot out scruffy looking workers talking about how bad life has been since Mitt Romney crushed their dreams and cost them their jobs. Then they show a clip of Mitt making his $10,000 bet and posing with money in his clothes. All Mitt needs is a monocle and a sniveling Waylon Smithers type character to follow him around shining his shoes to make him into the prototypical bad guy the Democrats are trying to create.
Now, the point of this isn't to say that what Mitt did at Bain Capital was dishonorable. It certainly wasn't. To the contrary, as a conservative, I find his work in the private sector to be just about the only thing he has going for him. But, people should realize that in a general election, Mitt's time at Bain Capital will probably end up being somewhere between a small asset and a large liability, depending on which side does a better job of defining it.
6) The Mormon Factor: This is a sensitive topic; so I am going to handle it much, much more gently than Hollywood and the mainstream media will if Mitt gets the nomination. Mormons do believe in Jesus Christ, the Mormon Church does a lot of good work, the ones I've met seem to be good people, and two of my best friends are Mormons. That being said, Mormons are not considered to be a mainstream Christian religion in large swathes of the country. There will be Protestants who will have deep reservations about voting a Mormon into the White House because they'll be afraid it will help promote what they believe to be a false religion. There have also been a number of polls that show that significant numbers of Americans won't vote for a Mormon as President.
Just look at a couple of the more recent polls and consider how much of an impact this issue could have in a close election.
The poll found 67 percent of Americans want the president to be Christian and 52 percent said they consider Mormons to be Christian. Twenty-two percent of those polled said they don't think Mormons are Christians and 26 percent are unsure.
"I do believe they are moral people, but again there is a difference between being moral and being saved," Linda Dameron, an evangelical Republican in Independence, Mo., told the Tribune.
More than 40 percent of Americans would be uncomfortable with a Mormon as president, according to a new survey that also suggests that as more white evangelical voters have learned White House hopeful Mitt Romney is Mormon, the less they like him.
A survey by the Public Religion Research Institute released late Monday also shows that nearly half of white evangelical Protestant voters a key demographic in the Republican primary race dont believe that Mormonism is a Christian faith, and about two-thirds of adults say the LDS faith is somewhat or very different than their own.
You should also keep in mind that if Mitt Romney gets the nomination, Hollywood and the mainstream media will conduct a vicious, months long hate campaign against the Mormon Church. They will take every opportunity to make Mormons look weird, racist, kooky, scary, and different. Would this be a decisive factor? I'd like to say no, but by the time all is said and done, it's very easy to see Romney potentially losing hundreds of thousands of votes across the country because of his religion.
7) He's a flip-flopper. Maybe my memory is failing me, but didnt George Bush beat John Kerry's brains in with the "flip flopper" charge back in 2004? So now, just eight years later, the GOP is going to run someone that even our own side agrees is a flip-flopper right out of the gate? Romney doesn't even handle the charge well. When Brett Baier at Fox pointed out the obvious, Romney's response was to get huffy and deny that he was flip flopping, which is kind of like Lady Gaga denying that she likes to get attention. If Mitt can't even handle run-of-the-mill questions from FOX NEWS about his flip flopping, what makes anyone think he can deal with the rest of the press in a general election?
There are a lot of issues with trying to run a candidate who doesn't seem to have any core principles. It makes it impossible for his supporters to get excited about him because you can't fall in love with a weathervane. Even worse, since politicians tend to be such liars anyway and you know Romney has no firm beliefs, it's very easy for everyone to assume the worst. Democrats will feel that Romney will be a right wing death-beast. Republicans will think that Romney will screw them over. Independents won't know what to believe, which will make the hundreds of millions that Obama will spend on attack ads particularly effective. Ronald Reagan famously said the GOP needed "a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors." That's particularly relevant when it comes to Mitt Romney who has proven to be a pasty grey pile of formless mush.
And puddin hearted “conservatives” like yourself are so terrified of what the democrats might do that your first response is to try and please them.
Moderates are nothing but cowering dogs slinking along behind the democrats begging for crumbs.
Nobody’s trying to kill Santorum. He can take care of that himself.
The problem is that he is exactly as establishment and big-government as Romney, and the social conservative thing was the only thing that he had going for him. But now that’s beginning to wear thin and he simply is not offering an alternative to Romney - because he can’t.
He has to wear the sweaters because he suffers from chronic pneumonia/pleurisy
It is unfortunate that someone with so much education could come off as an inarticulate buffoon as often as he does.
>> “God, how did we get into this mess?” <<
Palin got cold feet! - (I might have too, if I were her)
Hey, I’m a supporter, I like him! I’m just trying to have a little fun, that’s all.
Moderates are nothing but cowering dogs slinking along behind the democrats begging for crumbs.
I was talking about independents, not moderates. Why make this leap? Are you trying to be insulting?
-——I can’t for one moment believe that Santorum scares the left. It’s illogical. If Santorum wins the election, his brand of social conservatism will not play well to the masses. Obama would crush Santorum, especially among independents.——
Believe what you want, but the nation is conservative by a good margin, socially as well as fiscally. The cities and coasts are libertine, but Republicans will never get those votes.
The part that surprised me was Northern Michigan. The only think I can think of there would be absentee voters which broke heavily against Santorum statewide. I was a little surprised at Jackson and Livingston County as well because of the social conservatives there. Could be the absentees there too.
I was actually surprised to see Santorum win Kent county. That’s Dick DeVos territory and I would have expected that one to go to Romney.
Most of our state political operatives have second homes up north. I’m sure they make sure someone lives there to vote and it only takes a few votes to move those elections one way or another due to the sparse population.
Some years back I learned that Debbie Stabenow owned the house next door to me but had likely never laid eyes on the place. I asked a realtor who was selling the place about it. She wouldn’t say who owned it but did say that the owner wasn’t making any money so there was probably a political reason for owning it.
Say Santorum gets the nomination. Okay, great. Social conservatives can be proud. But then Obama goes on the attack, and the big front, of course, will be the Culture Wars. When that happens, anything the media is throwing at Santorum today will sound complimentary in comparison. You Google Santorum yet? That's just a warm-up.
Santorum will get slaughtered among independents. You remark that the cities and coasts are libertine; perhaps, but even among independents on the cities and coasts, there will be more than enough independents demographically to overwhelm whatever social conservative-leaning independents might reside in the rest of the country . . . and come out for Santorum.
The math just isn't there.
Could still come out of this with more MI delegates. Heh. That would really suck for Mitt.
I thought Rick Santorum was supposed to just fold from all the spending directed at him.
He was up big in Kent too, but fell off a little towards the end.
I think we can fight the culture wars and win.
As has been said, the majority of the country is conservative and has clamored for a conservative for a long time. Running Romney vs Obama isn’t going to help us. If we win - we lose because Romney is going to push Romneycare.
Newt - 14 states will have gone by, more than a third - with him winning just one - South Carolina. He’s too far behind to catch up.
So who does that leave? Santorum’s our best chance of beating Obama in 2012 and getting some semblence of a conservative. Santorum has been outpolling Obama in the head to head - and has a chance in the swing states like PA, OH, WI and IA, that are going to be crucial in a presidential election.
Nice dodge there.
Tinkering with the tax code, sabre-rattling at Iran, pandering to Labor ... Are people excited for his proposals or is it all "moral me and family?"
Can't explain his vote for Obama's first Supreme Court pick, Sonya Sotomayor, when Clinton appointed her to the 2nd Circuit--McCain voted NO. With a vote like that, how can Santorum be trusted on judges?
Can't explain how his mighty moral compass allowed him to live in Virginia and use $72,000 in local Pennsylvania school board funds to "home school" his kids. He got into Congress by attacking a Dem who had taken up residency in Virginia. (Oh but the Senate is different he claims.)
Introducing and voting for $550 million extra for Amtrak on top of the $900 million budget? Not just that but he cut a TV ad that he was middle-of-the-road, not fiscally conservative enough for the Bush White House on the issue because you put Pennsylvanian's first.
Can't explain his heading The K Street Project as a Senate leader, with Tom DeLay in the House, to build GOP ties with lobbyists--part of that crony capitalist swamp the Tea Party hates, which is how he landed on his feet after PA voters fired him.
Can't explain why his "Good Neighbor" "charity" spent its money on aides, fundraisers and lobbyists rather than grants. Can't explain why his Leadership PAC gave so little money to candidates. Can't explain the half million dollar mortgage he got from a private bank run by a major contributor while apparently not qualified for their program.
Can't explain Santorum's 18-point loss, the biggest loss for an incumbent Senator in over 25 years.
Is he electable? 18 points is very serious; he lost 61% of women. When reelected in 2000 he still didn't win among women. He won because of a strong turn out with men, mirroring W nationally. Santorum even got into the Senate, and just barely, during Newt's 1994 "Republican Revolution."
When on his own, rather than part of a surge, it's unclear he can win and very clear Democrats know how to clean his clock despite the power of incumbency.
Santorum supporters are very much "see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil" with their guy just because of the "moral me and family" push. He's also a lawyer and career politician.
This is the worst primary I can remember.
Do you have a source for that? I seem to remember him giving a different account to Laura Ingraham.
The source was his own mouth, in 1996, at a fundraiser in Pleasanton, California.
“Santorum: What an absolutely great night!”
Obviously you never compared Rick with Mitt. Kindly do some research. This will get you started:
“In 2003 the Governor refused to endorse the Bush tax cuts, earning the praise of Massachusetts liberal congressman Barney Frank and was even open to a federal gas tax hike.
In 2007, Romney continued to oppose the flat tax with harsh language, calling the tax “unfair.”
“If Mitt Romney becomes president, we may actually have “cap and trade” shoved down our throats. While campaigning for president in 2007, Mitt Romney said that he would support a “cap and trade” carbon tax scheme for the entire world....
I support Cap-and-Trade on a global basis but not the USA going alone. I want to do it with other nations involved and on a global scale.
“Santorum has consistently supported broad-based tax cuts and opposed tax increases either by sponsoring key legislation or by casting votes on relevant bills. Some high profile votes include:
Voted NO on the Clinton tax hike in 1993
Voted YES on the capital gains tax cut in 1997
Voted NO on a cigarette tax hike in 1998
Voted YES on repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax in 1999
Voted YES on the 2001 Bush tax cuts
Voted YES to repeal the Death Tax in 2002
Voted YES to the 2003 Bush tax cuts
Voted YES to extend the Bush tax cuts in 2006”
Santorum is a wuss and voted all along with the GOP establishment. Also, he has no ideas about how to handle anything. Maybe he’ll throw his sweater-vest at the mullahs?
That said, I think the GOP establishment would rather have Romney because they think he wouldn’t alienate Dems with his social policies. However, the fact that Santorum was making robo-calls urging Dems to go out and vote for him indicates to me that Santorum doesn’t plan to do anything that would alienate Dems, either.
Mark Levin said Rick Santorum was one of the most conservative senators in the last 50 years.
Here’s proof that Levin is correct:
“2005 Republican Liberty Caucus Economic Liberties Score 90%
2004 Republican Liberty Caucus Positions 87%
2003-2004 Campaign for Working Families Positions 100%
2003-2004 Concerned Women for America Positions 100%
2005 American Conservative Union Positions 92%
2003 Concerned Women for America Positions 100%
2003 Eagle Forum Positions 87%
2003 National Journal Conservative on Economic Policy Score 82%
2003 American Conservative Union Positions 90%”
More importantly perhaps, is that Rick Santorum is a FIGHTER, who gets things done!
Here’s one of many examples:
“On abortion, he is one of many senators who vote pro-life. The difference is that he is personally responsible for making sure a lot of these votes occur in the first place: He was an architect of the effort to ban partial-birth abortion, a strategy that energized the pro-life movement and allowed it to go on the political offensive.”
The two front runners are Rick and Mitt - time to make a decision.
Good list, and go Rick! I can’t wait to vote for him Tuesday!
Santorum and Romney are front-runners because they’re both big-government and that seems to be what most people, Dem or GOP, want. This is a sad fact, and it will take a lot to shake people loose from their adoring trust in government.
Santorum never did a thing that was not approved by the GOP establishment, and women like him because he comes across as weak and liberal (”compassionate conservative”) in the Jimmy Carter mode. Carter is exactly who Ricky reminds me of, because Carter also ran on his humble sweater, his “peanut farmer” persona, his Evangelical credentials, etc. Carter managed to completely skip the part about being governor of his state, and Santorum has managed to completely skip the thing about being a two-term Senator who was overwhelmingly rejected by his district.
He is also about at the Biden level for inarticulateness.
They did exactly that, quite notoriously, in 1964.
If the rich guys couldn't run the train, if Rocky couldn't get the nod (it was "his turn" -- he'd been up for it in 1960 and threw his support to Nixon instead, in a backroom deal called "the compact of Seventh Avenue"), if he and the Cabots and Lodges couldn't flip the nomination to their backup boy Scranton or an acceptable dark horse (two or three names were bruited in the late going), then they'd just flip off the entire Main Street Republican Party, let them have their nominee, and tell them all to ride the short bus to hell.
Rockefeller berated Goldwater delegates at the Cow Palace during a prime-time "minority report" speech (on national gavel-to-gavel TV coverage) offered him as a courtesy, to lambaste all the Goldwater people, conservatives generally, and the Goldwater delegates in particular as "fascists" and compare them to "Nazis".
"Santorum cannot defeat Obama."
Yeah, I like that one, too. You know, I'll bet Ronald Reagan couldn't beat Obama. Abraham Lincoln couldn't beat Obama, or Teddy Roosevelt, nor George Washington. Just ask the ghost of Eric Sevareid.
“I cant wait to vote for him Tuesday!”
And bring your friends!
My family members are all going to vote for him! :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.