The American Spectator : A Day to Remember

Text Size

A Day to Remember

By Ron Ross on 2.15.12 @ 6:08AM

The February 7 results were of primary importance.

February 7 may have been the defining date for the Republican nominating battle. Rick Santorum went 3 for 3 in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri. In the latter two he didn't just beat Mitt Romney, he whomped him. If Santorum goes on to secure the nomination, February 7 will be seen as the date he reached critical mass. If you're a conservative the results were encouraging for a number of reasons.

Particularly enjoyable was the comeuppance of conventional wisdom, which took several body blows. For months the pundits have been arrogantly pronouncing the ultimate outcome of a process that would involve numerous twists and turns. The self-appointed experts just knew that Romney's money, organization, and endorsements would assure his ultimate victory. That may still be true in the end, but so far the pundits' predictive model has some serious flaws. Last week's results stunned and surprised the "experts."

Romney has been banking on two main themes: inevitability and electability. He's essentially said, "I should be the nominee because everyone knows I'm going to be the nominee."

The inevitability and electability claims now look like very fragile foundations on which to base a campaign. For them to work you cannot afford to lose more than one or two primaries. On February 7 Romney didn't just lose, he got trounced. To this point he has lost 5 out of 8 primaries. He drew to an inside straight, which is not smart. He made a bad bet. February 7 pulled the rug out from under claims of inevitability and electability.

Among the candidates the word "baggage" is usually associated with Newt Gingrich. It is Mitt Romney, however, who has the heaviest single piece of baggage: Romneycare.

For Republican voters Obamacare is as much of a core issue as the economy. (The two are, of course, closely linked.) Romney's creation of Romneycare as well as his ongoing decision to defend it could prove to be his fatal flaw. It may well be a liability too great to be overcome by any amount of money, organization, or endorsements.

Another major element of Romney's sales pitch has been "electability." That now appears to have been a serious strategic blunder. That emphasis makes sense if your primary opponents are Gingrich or Ron Paul. It's not nearly as persuasive if your main opponent is Rick Santorum. As I write this, Santorum is leading Romney in three of five national polls. In the Public Policy Polling poll Santorum leads Romney 38 percent to 23 percent.

The February 7 results were a clear demonstration of the limitations of money, endorsements, and organization. Romney has an overwhelming superiority in those factors. The results last week demonstrated that core principles and ideology are more powerful than money.

I can't speak for all conservatives, but I think many of us see 2012 as a golden opportunity to put a true conservative in the White House for the first time since Ronald Reagan. We're frustrated that we may squander that opportunity. Nominating Mitt Romney would do just that. We would vote for Romney over Obama in a heartbeat. Sometimes you have to settle. This is not one of those times.

Making sure that Barak Obama is one and done is job one in 2012. If that takes nominating a moderate, we should nominate a moderate. However, if we can defeat Obama and elect a conservative, that is what we want to do and it is something we can do.

Romney is doing his best to convince voters that he is, in fact, a conservative. It's a little late for that now. At this point his only option is to proclaim that he is conservative. Unfortunately for him, he has already proven that he is not a conservative by his actions. A conservative would never have supported government-mandated health insurance. There's nothing truer than "actions speak louder than words." As someone once said, "Your behavior speaks so loud I can't hear what you say." For many conservatives Romney's assets are insignificant and his liabilities are deal killers.

Prediction is a hazardous occupation. Just who Republicans will nominate is still uncertain. Nevertheless, the February 7 results were the biggest step yet in reducing that uncertainty.

About the Author

Ron Ross Ph.D. is an economist who lives in Arcata, California. He is the author of The Unbeatable Market. Reach him at rossecon@gmail.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (34) | Leave a comment

Rocky| 2.15.12 @ 6:27AM

I'm a Reagan Republican. Just don't like Santorum. Voters of Pennsylvania rejected him by
a huge margin. If he wants to run for President, he should first go back to PA and run for Senate or Governor. Romney will beat Obama. Santorum would not.

Henry Calvin| 2.15.12 @ 10:15AM

Illinois voters rejected Lincoln, as I recall.

Al Adab| 2.15.12 @ 11:05AM

If you are correct Rocky, there is no hope. Romnay promises to better manage the welfare state, not to downsize or eliminate it. There is nothing to be gained, no point, in a Romany administration. Already Obie-one is placing his full agenda in our government. Does he know that he will lose, but that Romany will not be enough to reverse these works?

fckewe| 2.15.12 @ 11:27AM

Thank you Mr. knowitall!!! Bullwinkle politics only makes Me laugh harder.

POST American| 2.15.12 @ 6:47AM

---AGAIN---

the CFR-Globalist handover, TREASON
and FINAL EUGENICS OP brought in
by Rockefeller/Acheson/Kissinger in 1972
---saw the immediate drafting in of
a series of OPEN, and even openly
mercenary, adulterers.

-----FORD ----REAGAN and, of course,
McCain and Gingrich were indispensible
fronts for handover cover. It could have
NEVER happened without them.

Perhaps Reagan began to experience
TRUE sobriety toward the end.

Perhaps that's why he, like his cohort
Thatcher ---came down with dimentia.

A cautionary footnote for even the
most deluded of porch 'MAY--SINS'
in this, our 11th hour.

How could ANYONE process that REALITY?

Reality itself cannot bear such monstrous
reality. We are dealing with MONSTERS.

SO, one and all -----stick with the Calvinist
baptised Washington ----and more recently
------------------GOLDWATER-----------------.

NO time for equivocations and squeamishness.

The UNTHINKABLE has ALREADY
been done to us.

-------------------IT REALLY HAS----------------------

TIME TO MOVE

-------------HUAC/ NUREMBERG 2012--------------

"Let's ALL die
-------or LET'S DO IT."
-Thomas Carlysle

You can call me Al| 2.15.12 @ 6:51AM

This 'Anyone But...' mentality is stupid. When the Democrats did it, we got stuck with Obama. If we do it now, we're gonna get stuck with more of the same. The only one who's different, honest, AND right is Ron Paul.

fckewe| 2.15.12 @ 11:29AM

doesn't "Anyone's butt" politics mean you are just a bitch ?

Appleby| 2.15.12 @ 7:35AM

When I was going through my Ayn Rand phase, I decided that I would never vote for someone I didn't want to see as President, regardless of what anybody else told me. I voted for the Libertarian in the Ford-Carter election and my Mama still blames me for Carter's election.

I don't want to see Mitt Romney as President. I just don't.

fckewe| 2.15.12 @ 11:29AM

your mother is an idiot!

She still drinking billybeer?

sipbourbon| 2.16.12 @ 12:26AM

Your mom's a smart lady. Everybody else blames you for Carter's election too. You might have taken it as a lesson. All you dummies that plan to sit at home or vote your precious 'conscience' will reelect Obama. But I guess you can't fix stupid.

Bill| 2.15.12 @ 8:55AM

Santorum's record:
1. voted for raising debt ceiling 5 times, adding to the national debt $3 trillion
2. voted against "Right-to-Work" law
3. voted for the Medicare Part D
4. voted for allowing felons to vote
5. voted for "bridge to nowhere"
Santorum surrendered to his liberal constituents and failed to stand up with the people of PA, and that is why he lost his senate bid by 18 points to a "silly" liberal Bob Casey in 2006.
wanna be the President? You wish!

Von Mises Jr.| 2.15.12 @ 9:15AM

Ignore Bill. He is a troll.

Dr. Ross is absolutely correct about Romney and RomneyCare, and his record of being a liberal Republican.

But the other BIG issue is that a vote for Santorum is a protest vote against the GOP Liberal Establishment. McConnell and Boehner are weak sisters. They are statist that prefer Hobbes "Leviathan" to a pure "Utopian" dictatorship. And the people just want to be left the hell alone by these elitist despots.

Bill| 2.15.12 @ 9:42AM

Ignore Von Mises. He is a "stupid liberal Obama-dog." Gingrich will beat the two RINOs: Romney and Santorum in Super Tuesday.

Von Mises Jr.| 2.15.12 @ 10:50AM

Bill, let me direct you to a book I just read that may help you: W. Stanley Jevons "Elementary Lessons in Logic Deductive & Inductive." You can find it a www.mises.org.
Like I did with my summa cum laude son during college, I will give you a verbal test when you finish.
Until you have something intelligent to say, you are simply wasting our time. Each adjective you used to describe me is the antithesis (know what that big word means) of my positions.

Bill| 2.15.12 @ 11:42AM

Von Mises Jr, I read Mark Levine's "Liberty & Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto" and it opened my eyes. I'm baptized and need no help. I;m a born Christian and conservative.

Von Mises Jr.| 2.15.12 @ 1:00PM

Hey Bill, read "Ameritopia" and you can find out what a moron sckgoo is. He is a "Utopian" that doesn't even live in reality.
Words out he cheated on his ewe. The rumor is it was a shetland pony.

Bill| 2.15.12 @ 2:02PM

Who are you talking about? Be more specific.

Nick| 2.15.12 @ 4:34PM

"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill, yesterday, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:

http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403

You're a moron and a racist, Bill.
GO AWAY!

Von Mises Jr.| 2.16.12 @ 7:54AM

Bill, the sarcasm is not toward you. My last comment was for the sheep sodomite.

fckewe| 2.15.12 @ 11:31AM

Ignore Junior, he can't even pay the rent to live under the bridge long enough to become a troll!

Brooklyn| 2.15.12 @ 7:59PM

Santorum didn't lose because he voted for these bills. He lost because he supported the war effort. Pennsylvanians liked those votes you mentioned. Its a purple state that trends blue. In addition, his party had money and sex scandals. In addition, Casey's father was a sucessful, well regarded PA politician and his son benefitted from that. Santorum backing Spector in 2004 over Pat Toomey angered conservatives, but he did it because Spector as chairman of the Senate Judiciary guaranteed the confirmation of Alito and Roberts to the Supreme Court. Toomey, for all his fine qualities, is not a vote getter. In 2010, in a conservative year, Toomey barely squeaked by in defeating a Congressman who voted for Obamacare, while the conservative candidate for Governor won by 10 points. Santorum can make that up to Toomey and the conservatives in Pa by backing Toomey for reelection when he is President. That is, if the conservatives have enough perspective to see that Santorum is the conservative in this race, and will govern as one, repealing Obamacare, replacing it with a market based system (private medical accounts), cutting onerous regulations for the economy, cutting taxes and following a defense policy of peace through strength. Santorum has held these positions throughout his career.

PGNO| 2.16.12 @ 3:19AM

Brooklyn, thank you. A good post. Put a lot of things in the right perspective. People forget what a minefield it was in 2006 midterms with a White House and POTUS no longer truly leading the nation, rather a POTUS cowering needlessly.

Pennsylvania is a very difficult state. Look at the rampant, negligent, liberal, illogical spending and wanton neglect in the state's capital city, one of the first to have to openly declare bankruptcy.

When conservatives (speaking with clear conservative messages throughout) win in states like Pennsylvania, people should take note. And Rick Santorum has done this.

It is a shame that the Establishment GOP in Virginia has successfully kept him off the ballot for March 6th, Super Tuesday. (Gingrich, too)

The Gremlins are at ever-hard at work to "throw" this election, certainly this primary process to Romney.

Mr. Ross, please do an article here on the travesty of the vote shenanigans in Virginia. The establishment GOP in Virginia is corrupt to the core.

Vern Crisler| 2.15.12 @ 9:25AM

I would vote for Santorum (not for Romney) if he's the nominee, but his biggest problem is that he DOESN'T have baggage. IOW, he lacks experience. I wish that Santorum had run for governor before tackling such a large job as president of the United States.

Bill| 2.15.12 @ 10:37AM

Exactly right. May be a re-match with Bob Casey for his old senate seat in 2012.

Dai Alanye| 2.15.12 @ 9:54AM

Ross has stated the situation clearly and concisely. If you're a conservative, Santorum is the man. He's not perfect, of course, simply the best we've got going this time around, when so many other potential candidates were either deeply-flawed or else didn't seem to have the nerve to go up against The One.

TrueBlue| 2.15.12 @ 3:23PM

Given the tactics of ruination and mud-slinging that we call political elections these days, it's a wonder Santorum is willing to run. It's the main reason we won't get people like Paul Ryan to run for President. When politicians can't find dirt on their opponent they make it up, and the MSM swallows it hook, line, and sinker.

Clint| 2.15.12 @ 10:24AM

" As Rachel Maddow explains in this report, the Ron Paul strategy is to let the caucus results fall where they may, and then ensure Ron Paul delegates are elected to the convention. Because these caucus results are non-binding, it ensures that the votes matter less than the delegates sent to the convention. And right now, the Iowa, Minnesota, and likely Maine delegates will be attending not for Mitt Romney, but Ron Paul. Not for Gingrich or Santorum, but Ron Paul.

The strategy is pretty simple and not secret, as explained by Ron Paul strategist Doug Wead:

WEAD: I watch television and I see them saying Romney has this many delegates and Santorum this many, and as you know, not a single delegate has been awarded from Iowa or Minnesota or Missouri or Colorado or Nevada, and as you point out, we're tracking this at the precinct level, we think we have the majority of them, we think we've won in Iowa, we won in Minnesota, we won in Colorado, and Missouri is yet to be seen. And we think we probably won in Nevada, because we're counting the precinct votes. The only thing that I might add there is nothing wrong or deceptive about this, anybody can stay. Woody Allen says 80% of success is showing up. Our people show up. and they have a right to do that, and they are committed, and so they are running as delegates at the precinct level to the county convention where they will again run as delegates from the county convention to the state convention."

The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.

Al Adab| 2.15.12 @ 11:09AM

The GOP establishment, the office holders; the state and county chairmen and so on have placed their bets with Romney. He is one of them. What the GOP voters want is clearly something different. While the GOP promises to better manage the social welfare state, the GOP voters are asking for someone who will cut it down to size, cease the endless programs, stop the money grabbing taxes, reduce the deficit and debt, stop social engineering and increase the peoples liberty. Is there such a one or is it simply too late?

Pelligrino| 2.16.12 @ 3:08AM

Al Adab, once again, you have nailed it. My states little GOPians are all scurrying about in grave worry that their Establishment guy (who they only like because he'll keep them on the gravy train, while offering a few select some real nice perk jobs in D.C.) is faltering.

And falter he should! Romney is not what the good people of America want. He's false to the core. I know that the author of this piece focused on other aspects of Romney's foibles, but I am waiting on a piece here that tells it like it is: Romney is also not a man of faith.

Ergo: On a whole host of issues there is nothing remotely conservative (American-centric/core values) in Romney.

Al Adab, thanks for doing "watch duty" here. Thanks also to this author, Mr. Ron Ross, a newer voice here, I think.

To the nation and to the Romney 2008/2012 campaigns: WE, THIS NATION, WE CANNOT BE BOUGHT.

Bill| 2.15.12 @ 2:49PM

Anatomy of GOP candidates:
Romney: New England, executive and private sector experience
strength: money
weakness: Romneycare
Santorum: Rust Belt, legislative experience
strength: PA is a swing state, social conservative
weakness: lost his senate bid in 2006
Gingrich: South, legislative experience
strength: great debater, his leadership as the speaker
weakness: women voters, money
Paul: Southwest, legislative experience
strength: libertarianism
weakness: foreign policy
My take: Gingrich, a solid conservative and needs to win the women votes and have money

TrueBlue| 2.15.12 @ 3:25PM

Given that Santorum's only weakness is a loss in a union heavy stte during the election the Dems got a massive majority only to be kicked out a mere two-years later, I don't consider it much of a weakness.