The Problem with Rick Santorum
Rick Santorum is the See ‘n’ Say candidate for President. Point the arrow, pull the lever, and you’ll get two minutes/five minutes/twenty minutes of heartfelt bromide, on whatever topic the arrow points to.
Maybe “bromide” is too strong a word, but it’s the one that comes to mind whenever Santorum is speaking. Because no matter what the topic is, he always sounds sincere, earnest, very well rehearsed, and without any consideration of importance. Santorum might be talking about anything — the deficit, war with Iran, sodomy, birth control, various forms of igneous rock, the history and proper use of the dreidel — it just doesn’t matter. The arrow inside his head lands on a subject, somebody pulls his lever, and off he goes.
A candidate has got to pick a message and stay on-message, or the media will tear him apart with distractions. That’s part malice, part boredom, I suspect — but mostly just reporters looking for good copy. What what’s better copy than a candidate who can be made to spout off on anything at any time? (“Hey, Jake — I bet you ten dollars I can get him to talk for two minutes about proper tire inflation.”)
This isn’t just a matter of a personal dislike for Santorum’s persona, either — although I do have plenty of that. America’s mind is made up on birth control, and we’re for it. America’s mind is made up on sodomy, and we’d like to keep it in the bedroom and away from the podium. That Santorum can get tangled up in losing crusades is a very strong signal that he lacks the focus to win a general election. It signals that he lacks, in a very fundamental way, the ability to prioritize and pick his battles. I wouldn’t let Rick Santorum near the levers of real power, any sooner than I’d give a set of steak knives to a coked-up spider monkey. In short order, we’d wind up with a bloody mess.
You want the general election to become a national referendum on birth control and blow jobs? Then vote for Rick in your primary. I know the Democrats and the Mainstream Media (but I repeat myself) would just love that. But if you insist, I’ve saved up enough “pull the lever” jokes to get us through November.
Great post
Santorum is a very weak and uncharacteristic candidate who was almost completely ignored until all more savory choices where destroyed in Romney/PAC/MSM/candidate x-fire attacks. Basically, he’s still here because nobody bothered to even look at him, let alone slander.
With his hollow record of accomplishment, zero leadership experience, whining demeanor, and loser’s aura in the wake of getting trounced by 19 pts last time out (as an incumbent!), Obama will paint him as a religious kook and CUT HIM TO SHREDS in November. Since the Left would love for him to be the nominee, you’re not hearing a peep from them, but you know the the progs would have a field-day with Ricky.
I didn’t just fight for three years, day in and day out just to hook up our wagon to a lame horse like this.
If Newt’s third comeback (pending) doesn’t materialize in time, maybe we can get Palin or somebody else to step up at the convention… but no Santorum, please
Steve, you drunkblogged that Santorum was “slimey”. No? We know your feelings.
Isn’t the beef about “Free” mandated contraception? Not that contraception is somehow banned or out of reach?
Here’s what you missed, Tim: The point.
It doesn’t matter if Santorum is right or wrong on any particular issue. In fact, I agree with him on a great many things. The problem — my point — is, that Santorum has no filter and no ability to stay focused or on-message. In fact, I have no clue what his message might be, because he’s speaking about everything, all the time. What are his priorities? I dunno, because he doesn’t seem to have any.
That makes him a walking disaster. Terrible in the general election, and maybe even worse in the unlikely event that he made it to the White House.
What, exactly, do you agree with him on?
He’s to the right of Attila the Hun on social issues, which you’ve pointed out do not belong in this (or any, for that matter) election. He seems to be pro-union (at least anti-right-to-work). He’s voted for increases to the minimum wage. And he absolutely doesn’t get the Tea Party or libertarianism at all. He has specifically called out libertarians and slammed the movement/philosophy based on total red herrings and false dichotomies. Multiple times now.
He has given me zero confidence that he can either win the White House or, if he does, bring a small-gov/FiCon mandate to governing this country. Which we desperately need.
Romney is by no means my favorite candidate. And he looks like a weather vane in a twister at times. But at least he has business sense to him. And I think he’s aware enough of the huge economic and fiscal issues with which we are dealing that they’re a priority to him. Santorum? Not as far as I can tell.
If I’m missing something, Steve, please enlighten me. But Santorum not only doesn’t represent anything we, as libertarians, can agree with, he appears to be actively opposed to them.
He might have the best tax plan out there. And… I forget the rest.
Santorum isn’t actively anti-American, unlike the current occupant of the White House. Though he does seem very weak on Natural rights theory.
Problem being, the Fascist-Democrats are going to portray him as someone who wants to ban contraception and lock up gays. Look what they did to Sarah Palin, when they didn’t have any video or audio of her saying things. With Rick, they have that. That’s going to turn off the entire middle.
And how does a sitting Senator lose by 18 points? 5-10 points I could see, but Rickless didn’t just lose Philadelphia.
Yes I agree Santorum has his problems. But Romney`s baggage will be exposed by team ZerO with which they will twist him into a Pretzel over and over! Hell he was for just about everything ZerO was for! Cap-in-trade Romneycare even ran as a Progressive against Teddy Kennedy! No wonder Soros sees no difference Romney and ZerO! Romney is a bigger frigging loser and ZerO`s favorite choice!
That’s a very good evaluation of Santorum. I pretty much agree with most of it, except I think I like him a little more than you. He sounds good a lot of the time, but it’s when he gets to the social issues that he loses me. Personally, at a time like this, the social issues ought to be low priority. They’ll have to take care of themselves in time. And if Santorum is chosen to run against Obama — he’s gonna lose sooo badly.
What a dream for the Dems he’ll be — as you said — the whole election will be about … well, you said it.
What Republicans need to do — one of the main things — it seems so obvious (but they don’t get it somehow) is to focus on what the Dems are going to push most strongly as their message — and go directly after that (in addition to formulating a strong Republican message). People need inspiration —
a vision. That the only thing that will beat out “bread and circuses.”
If I recall correctly, some vocal members of “the base” went ballistic when Mitch Daniels said that social issues should be put on the back burner till we get a handle on finances. There are simply too many people who don’t understand the need to prioritize. Like Stephen, I think Santorum is one of them.
The Dims NEED the election to be all about sexual issues, because it’s the only way to fire up the 18-29 vote (aside from promising free college to the 18-24 crowd)and get them to turn out.
Republicans will never win another election in the history of ever until they stop taking the bait, and answer with something like “Everything else this administration has screwed up, the state this nation is in right now, and all you want to talk about is sex?”
Of course, you are absolutely correct, Stephen.
Except, as the Custer of the Non-Romney’s …after this, there is only Romney.
In the “I completely lack focus and discipline” tournament, Santorum is a piker compared to Gingrich.
If you like your politicians strident, undisciplined, off message, and easy to dislike…we have a treasure trove, a veritable feast of fanaticism for you.
Ron Paul, who visits the nether regions of sanity on a regular basis, but doesn’t quite live there, the Newtonian Implosion which frequents Jurassic and moon colony orgies of the mind…a sort of diva, hissy fit time traveling adventure. Santorum, who will have union workers checking genital use, like a TSA on steroids.
That leaves Romney. Lenny, from of Mice and Men who clomps around trying not to strangle the Republican brand, but he can’t help himself. A political oaf who simply doesn’t know any better on the one hand…and you don’t want your neck to be on the other hand.
And, voila…the Stupid Party has given you a menu that you can stare at and stare at…and it makes you less hungry, because no matter how many times the waitress comes back to your table, you still aren’t ready to order.
Santorum was such a brilliant choice…we waded through Bachman, Perry, Cain, Trump, Gingrich and three Kardashians before we settled on Santorum as the “perfect” non-Romney.
The real issue, is that None of the Above has the actual vote of nearly 70% of those opposed to Obama. Flitting from futile of the month isn’t getting us any closer to turning back the overthrow.
Nor will it ever.
Are you going to order the lutefisk and durian sandwich today?
“That leaves Romney. Lenny, from of Mice and Men who clomps around trying not to strangle the Republican brand, but he can’t help himself.”
Now THAT is funny! Maybe I’m a hopeless idealist like the old man who lost his dog in that story, but I still believe we can get the Rabbit Farm if Lenny–er–Romney gets the nomination and can pull an “it’s the economy, stupid” out of his hat and stay focused.
Stephen,
For all Rick Santorum’s faults, He seems to be running a stable campaign with a positive message and vision which the voters find appealing right now. If he was un-filtered and un-focused shouldn’t Romney or Newt be ahead not Santorum? He’s the only candidate that can swing a Nixon to China moment concerning the Social Issues. If he is able to to do that, will the Indpendents and Libertarians give him another look? This might sound strange but getting walloped in 06 has made him a better candidate and more humble. But if he goes off message and starts picking fights in matters which aren’t a top priority (which I admit it can happen) to our country then Romney can claim electablity mantle and return to front running status.
If Santorum wants another look from libertarians, he should stop using the l-word as though it tastes like feces.
Lesbians? I don’t think Santorum ever had any chance at their vote anyway…
OH! _that_ L-Word.
Your article and this reply is very sound advice (except for that part about America has made up it’s mind on sodomy, I’d like to see that…on second thought nevermind).
Do not expect the SoCons to give up their views on the issues important to them, especially abortion. But if they were smart they would frame the issues in terms of Federal government overreach. As Richard Fernandez recently wrote, there is not enough money for the Federal government to control everything that Obama wants it to control. Reduce the size of all government and the libertarians get most of what they want.
But that is up to whoever the eventual Republican nominee is to make that argument.
This. In a nutshell, there is actually a lot of overlap between desired outcomes for libertarians and a certain segment of SoCons. Many SoCons I know (or know about) are no different than their counterparts on the Left, in that both groups are social engineers. It’s simply a matter of what they want to engineer that is different.
But some of the outcomes desired by a smaller subset of SoCons are achievable by simply embracing libertarian approaches to small government. Don’t want public funding of Planned Parenthood? Great. Don’t want free distribution of condoms at colleges and universities? No problem. Want abortion to be a states’ rights issue? Seems pretty clear to me. RvW is bad law. I believe (reluctantly) in the right of a woman to choose. I just don’t believe it’s sanctioned by the Constitution. Let the states fight it out on their own.
Get the government out of our private lives. But that’s all aspects of our lives. SoCons have no more right to dictate morality to me (and spend my money) than Flaming Liberals.
Stay. The Hell. Away.
Operation chaos in favor of Santorum?????
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/02/16/leftists_launch_operation_chaos_effort_to_boost_santorum
You know, when you hunt certain types of big game, you send other folks out along your flanks to make lots of noise by ‘beating the bush”. If you do it right, this tends to make the game move towards you and your well placed guns. You dont expend so much energy chasing down game that is working within its own territorial advantages and you get better shots and take better trophies. Its a nice strategy because if you know the psychology of the animal you are hunting you can play on their fears to your advantages.
Smart animals, older ones that have seen this sort of tactic done before, will simply hunker down and wait for “the beaters” to move past. It takes discipline, but it generally works out for the best. It sure as hell works better than responding with a stampede.
I got to tell you folks, I feel increasingly like we are being driven into someones guns. We are so afraid of every little noise out in the dark that we are moving ‘hither and yon’ based on all sorts of half assed nonsense. We are taking council of our fears.
This…never…pays…off.
Folks, in simple terms, we are being baited. We are being treated like herd animals because that’s how we are responding. I’m sorry, but when I see us responding to every little thing with absolute panic, I think its time to take a moment and consider just exactly what it is we are responding to and why.
No matter who the candidate is, I will feel much better about our chances when I see that we arent running around in sheer panic about every little thing. Right now, my issue isnt Santorum, Romney or anyone else. Its the sheer panic of the Conservatives, who while publicly certain of their superiority, are also just as convinced that they are about to fail. Those two things cannot both be true. If you believe in Conservative ideas, then you must also believe that we will win because we know that small government works. We might take awhile getting there, but we have to believe that we will win, else, why fight at all?
We Conservatives are now speaking the language of victims rather than the language of victors. We are being programmed to lose and we are helping the other side do it. We are being psyched out to lose the game before we even step on the field. This must stop. We must be optimists we must see a positive future and work towards it. We cannot give into our fears of what might happen.
Panic and its mutated stepchild pessimism, is not leadership. Do not contribute to it.
This race leaves those of us with a libertarian bent in such a quandary. A sitting president who implements nouveau socialist policies vs. either a corporatist or a social conservative who believes in the limitation of state power except in those areas in which he really believes in the righteousness of his cause, in which case the state needs to dictate every aspects of our lives (The definition of a social conservative). What is a thoughtful third way guy to do?
As a political observation your point is right on SG. Santorum lacks focus and direction. Unfortunately, my biggest beef with him is exactly in those areas in which he does reserve some extra passion relative to the remainder of his positions. If he has a focus, it has to be said that it is in the area of social conservationism. It is the very thing that frightens me the most about him. Why are we always faced with the choice between discerning the lesser of two really bad evils or someone who could never hope to win (Paul)? I am sick of sending messages and I won’t throw my vote away any more. My kingdom for the resurrection of Goldwater.