The American Spectator : The Going Gets Tough

Text Size

The Going Gets Tough

By Robert Stacy McCain on 4.2.12 @ 6:08AM

Santorum fights on against the odds — and against the media.

Even as you read this, Rick Santorum’s presidential campaign is going all-out to win the Wisconsin Republican primary. It’s important to make that point up front, because if you permit yourself to be hypnotized by media coverage of the campaign, you will helplessly succumb to the belief that the fight for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination is all over but the shouting. There are many people who want to convince Republican voters in Wisconsin and elsewhere that Mitt Romney is the “inevitable” nominee, and not all of them are in the paid employment of the Romney campaign or his super-PAC.

Between the official campaign and its allied “Restore Our Future” super-PAC, pro-Romney forces have unloaded more than $3 million in advertising in Wisconsin, but what they’ve spent attacking Santorum is dwarfed in value by the network airtime devoted to promoting the message of Romney’s inevitability. It is remarkable to observe how this appeal to bandwagon psychology has actually intensified since Santorum won the March 24 Louisiana primary by a whopping 22 points. Despite the overwhelming size of Santorum’s victory — he got 49 percent of the vote to Romney’s 27 percent in Louisiana — it was immediately dismissed as an irrelevant fluke, and the TV reporters and commentators quickly returned to talking about Romney’s advantage in the delegate count and the front-runner’s lead in the Wisconsin polls.

Despite everything that has happened in the campaign so far, despite last week’s endorsements from Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Rep. Marco Rubio, the fact remains that Romney has received barely 40 percent of the votes cast in Republican primaries and caucuses to date. And while the Real Clear Politics average of Wisconsin polls shows Romney leading by seven-and-a-half points, the results in Tuesday’s primary may be much closer than that. Even a Rasmussen Reports poll taken Thursday, showing Romney ahead by 10 points in Wisconsin was actually good news for Santorum, since a March 21 Rasmussen poll had shown Romney up by 13. Furthermore, Santorum has a history of out-performing the polls, going all the way back to Iowa, where he won the Jan. 3 caucuses without ever having led a single poll in the Hawkeye State. The same was true three weeks ago in Mississippi, and last week in Louisiana, Santorum out-performed the RCP poll average by more than 9 points. This puts the recent Rasmussen poll in Wisconsin in an interesting light. Three days before Louisiana voted, Rasmussen had Santorum at 43 and Romney at 31 — a 12-point margin that was exactly 10 points off the actual result. If Rasmussen is that far off in Wisconsin, it’s a dead heat.

Santorum has kept up a rigorous campaign schedule in Wisconsin with four events Saturday, five events Sunday and five more events scheduled today. Volunteers across the country are calling Wisconsin voters as part of the Santorum campaign’s phone-from-home program and, in an e-mail to donors sent Sunday, campaign manager Mike Biundo pointed to a new poll showing Santorum tied with Romney in North Carolina. Pollster Tom Jensen noted, “More and more conservatives are unifying around Santorum as the alternative to Romney.” The most obvious reason for that is last week’s implosion of the Newt Gingrich campaign. After losing Alabama and Tennessee March 13, Newt’s weak third-place finish in Louisiana marked the effective end of his presidential bid.

In fact, as Ralph Z. Hallow of the Washington Times reported, Gingrich actually met with Romney in New Orleans the morning of the Louisiana primary, although Newt denied having made any deals with the former Massachusetts governor. Financial woes forced Gingrich to lay off much of his campaign staff last week and, although March fundraising reports are not due at the Federal Election Commission for another two weeks, it is expected the former House Speaker’s campaign will report substantial unpaid debts. That may lead Newt to strike a deal to endorse Romney in exchange for help in paying off campaign bills, much as former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty did after his early exit from the GOP field in August. The possibility that Gingrich might support Romney is also indicated by favorable remarks about Mitt made by Newt’s super-PAC backer, Las Vegas casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, who last week admitted that Gingrich is “at the end of his line.”

Of course, a Gingrich-Romney alliance would be deeply ironic, given how Newt spent months insisting that Mitt — a “Massachusetts moderate,” as Gingrich often said — would be unsuitable as the Republican nominee against Barack Obama. When Gingrich was atop the national polls, he more than once suggested that Santorum should drop out and support him, because stopping Romney was such an urgent necessity for conservatives. Newt doesn’t seem to feel that necessity is so urgent now that Santorum is the last man standing against Romney. Yet the head of Gingrich’s super-PAC — to which Adelson’s family donated more than $16 million — still sees a gloomy prospect if Romney should win the GOP nomination. Longtime Gingrich aide Rick Tyler last week told Politico “if Mitt Romney is the nominee we will lose in the fall,” and said with Romney as the nominee, Republican chances of winning back the U.S. Senate “are dramatically diminished.” However, according to the New York Times, “Party elders are discussing ways to help characterize Mr. Romney as the presumptive nominee… well before he reaches the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination.”

This push for an early end to the primary season brings us back to Rick Santorum and Wisconsin and the media’s relentless drumbeat about Romney’s “inevitability.” In an interview yesterday on Fox News, Chris Wallace began by asking Santorum, “Senator, do you feel pressure now to get — or added pressure to get out of the race and give Mitt Romney a clear shot at Barack Obama?” Santorum responded with a sports analogy, referring to the epic comeback Kansas made Saturday against Ohio State to earn a spot in the NCAA basketball title game. “Look, I mean, this race is not even at half time,” Santorum told Wallace. “We haven’t even selected half the delegates yet. Governor Romney is not halfway to the magic number and, you know, we look at the calendar ahead, and we feel very, very good about where we are going.” Despite that reality, Santorum said, “every question I get is, ‘When are you getting out?’ I mean, the whole narrative has been in Romney’s favor from the beginning of this race and he still isn’t even close to closing the deal.”

Win or lose in Wisconsin, Santorum said, he will fight on. After Tuesday’s vote, when Maryland and the District of Columbia also hold primaries, there will be a three-week breathing spell before the next round of primaries on April 24. If Santorum needs inspiration for the campaign ahead, he could look to Green Bay Packers legendary defensive end Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila, who endorsed him Sunday and said, “Football taught me a lot. One of the game’s greatest lessons is that we play to win, and we play until it is over.” And as another Green Bay football legend said, “When the going gets tough, the tough get going.”

About the Author

Robert Stacy McCain is co-author (with Lynn Vincent) of Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party (Nelson Current). He blogs at The Other McCain.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (70) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Jack in Wi.| 4.2.12 @ 7:34AM

I met Vince Lombardi. Santorum is no Vince Lombardi. Neither is Gingrich or Romney. The 3 stooges of the Republican party are going to lose to a fool like Obama. No to war. No to bailouts. No to the the Bush clan.

benny havens| 4.2.12 @ 8:00AM

A great picture of Vince, Forrest Gregg and Jerry Kramer. I believe that was the “Just a lot of grabbing out there” game. Those were the days when men were men. Not like the pussy candidates of today.

Rick Santorum ain’t got it. You notice, he can’t look people in the eye when he talks to them. That should tell you something. And I’m not a Romney fan. I will be handing out clothes pins on election day.

Dai Alanye | 4.2.12 @ 12:27PM

"can't look people in the eye..."

Balderdash! I suspect the accurate interpretation of this superficial remark is that Santorum doesn't stare into the TV camera when interviewing, and is instead looking at the questioner.

Santorum speaks directly to more individuals, and puts more thought into his remarks to them than the other candidates combined.

benny havens| 4.2.12 @ 2:16PM

I beg to differ. When in a greeting line and someone asks a question, he doesn’t stop to discuss the topic. He continues to walk along the line all the while talking and not looking at the questioner. I believe it’s because he makes up crap as he goes along. He is the consummate used car salesman, in my humble opinion.

If meaningless had a name| 4.2.12 @ 8:02AM

So...this week will be the same as last week and the week before that.

And the week before that.

Jack in Wisconsin sets his alarm clock for 5:55 a.m. so that he can be the VERY FIRST to post. And not just in one selective article in which Jack has a particular interest or subject matter expertise, no, no. He must post in five or six articles. Every day.

Sorry -- the alarm clock is set for 4:55 a.m. As you are Central Time, no? If you are really in Wisconsin.

Oh, that's even more pathetic.

What a dull life you lead.

Yet...you'll be here tomorrow doing same. And Wednesday, Thursday....

You have no hobbies, no interests, no friends? (who might keep you up the night before late so that you cannot rise at 4:55 a.m.?)

Jack in Wi.| 4.2.12 @ 8:20AM

I don't set my alarm. I don't even have one. My body is used to getting up at this time and going to work. It is the habit of a lifetime. You should try it. As Ben Franklin said. " Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise. "

DTOM| 4.2.12 @ 10:21AM

Jack,

Had the radon in your basement checked out yet?

The only beneficiary of an early decision in the Republican primary fight is OBAMA, people!

Say Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum meet in a bar, have several too many and decide, 'aw, what the hell, Mitt wants this so bad we should just go home.' And they do.

The next morning, OBama, whose only detectable strategy is savaging and submarining his opponent has an extra four months to plant stuff, make stuff up, tell lies, get pictures of Mitt's New Manse in California with its automobile elevator that Mitt's building right now, during the campaign. Deciding on Romney today helps OBAMA, not Republicans, conservative or otherwise.

Keep them guessing - let's run this primary race out to the end according to the rules, the way HONEST (I can't believe I'm typing this!) politicians should.

If you give them an extra four months - they can dribble the poison out and so not appear to "go negative." If they don't know who to attack until July, they'll have to do a huge smear campaign in very short order - which, of course turns, off those fickle, can't-win-without-'em independents.

So let's just keep up the pre-arranged primary schedule and not let the pro-Obama, pro-Romney forces cause us to leave our game, our senses, our principles, and LOSE in NOVEMBER!

Get it?

God Lord, I hope so.

Don't Tread On Me!

Or is following the agreed-on rules too straightforward, too respectful of the rules and core principles for you moderate Republicans?

Sheesh!

PJ| 4.2.12 @ 10:58AM

Makes sense to me!

We all know darn well that Obama is out to fight dirty. His people are lining up in their positions: the Black Panthers, Farakhan, Axelrod, Soros, & the rest of "the usual suspects."

gearjammer| 4.2.12 @ 6:44PM

LATEST GALLUP-republicans too conservatve for women. Females give O a lock on all swing states. Have a nice day,

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 7:45PM

LATEST FROM GEARJAMMER- Wrong, as usual:

http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....r_gap.html

Why are you on a conservative website repeating the lies of the Lame-Stream Media?
O'Romney is McLame 2.0.

One if by land...| 4.2.12 @ 11:24AM

Sounds like you have been going to bed and rising early for no reason then.

Dave Williams| 4.2.12 @ 2:00PM

I can't speak to your health or wealth, but your repetitive, Paul-bot, Nazi posts indicate you've COMPLETELY missed the boat on wisdom.

Jack in Wi.| 4.2.12 @ 7:24PM

Ron Paul is the only candidate who would have changed anything for the better. All the rest are more of the same, more wars, more foreign aid, more inflation and bankruptcy, more bailouts and tax cuts for the rich, more taxes and cuts in Social Security and Medicare for the rest of us.

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 7:48PM

Don't worry, Jack-boot.
You'll always have your fond memories of Hitler and the nazi regime to fall back on, won't you?

Occam's Tool| 4.2.12 @ 5:52PM

Along with supporting the raping of little girls. The habits of a lifetime.

SaintVince| 4.8.12 @ 3:06AM

Meaningless, funny as s*it! I've noticed the same thing and find it HIlarious that someone else did too. I can only imagine, someone in their underwear (summer in WI) or in their GB Packer sweatpants (winter in WI) sitting by their computer at 4:45am waiting for the next article to come up, standard reply cut and ready to paste into the comment box to be "first" at something in their lives.

Fred Farkel| 4.2.12 @ 1:15PM

You are full of more sh!t than a Christmas turkey, Jack. Are you sure your real name isn't Waldo?? You've been everywhere and know everybody. How come I don't know you??

Occam's Tool| 4.2.12 @ 5:55PM

Beating Obama in the fall and having Ron Paul relegated to retirement will thrill me and piss off Jack. All three good outcomes, as Jack is a supporter of those who rape little girls.

Alan Brooks| 4.2.12 @ 7:45PM

Santorum said the GOP establishment is in a panic about him. No way.

Pseudo-Intellectual| 4.2.12 @ 7:59AM

Santorum is doing alot of harm to the party. He thinks we'd be better off with Obama than Romney. Santorum is the one who brought contraception into the campaign, which the Democrats love....Mr.Sanctimonious if the one who afflicted us with Arlen Specter, the pro-abortion 60th vote for Obamacare. Go away, Rick.

Dai Alanye | 4.2.12 @ 12:31PM

Pseudo-pod is misinterpreting what Santorum said, which clearly had to do with the perceptions of voters, not Santorum's own opinion. People ought to pay more attention to what is said, not soak up media propaganda and distortions like so many sponges.

Ted| 4.2.12 @ 2:06PM

"Santorum is the one who brought contraception into the campaign..."

That's a lie, and you know it. Obama and Sebelius brought a religious freedom issue into the campaign and tried to dress it up as a contraception issue.

Romneycare stinks| 4.2.12 @ 8:11AM

It is good that Santorum is sticking it out. Good for him. Good for us that he does. His efforts have genuine merit and yield.

The worst thing that could occur to the nation is Romney getting this GOP nomination. Sure, he'll then go on to beat Obama (and many of us will help Romney do the same --- because we need Obama and the czars gone), but he will not right the course of the nation.

I am glad Rick Santorum is showing this resilience. I'm sure his supporters in Wisconsin are a superb group of folks. I'll be voting for him in a few weeks time.

Appleby| 4.2.12 @ 8:45AM

Romney is Not One Of Us. Every time he tries to "make a joke", he proves this by laughing about his father closing factories and throwing people out of work, or moving these factories to another state and "ha ha ha" now he's asking the state his Dad left high and dry to vote for him, "ho ho ho." He doesn't think $300,000 is a lot of money. And he just doesn't resonate with people who are clinging to the edge of the cliff by their fingernails. His answer appears to be: fire those people; move their jobs to another state or country; and make jokes about it.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.2.12 @ 9:07AM

Santorum is to blame for ruining his opportunities. About 50% of the time when he opens his mouth he inserts his foot.

The problem for Santorum is that he endorsed and voted for a federal health care plan that dwarfs Romneycare.

In the general election that would be hard for him to explain. If anything, the media and AMSPEC have been taking it easy on Santorum on that issue.

If anything Santorum was a dismal failure in the Senate and his own state wouldn't re-elect him.

Now we are supposed to believe he's the genuine article and the evil media is keeping him down.

No, the blame is all Santourm's.

Dai Alanye | 4.2.12 @ 12:37PM

Stalin insists on lying with facts by comparing Romneycare in one state with Plan D in the entire fifty states. Is it a lack of mathematical facility or simply an urge to distort so as to patch a holey Mitt?

Whether Plan D was a good idea or not, it has one unusual characteristic -- it has been one of the few government entitlements, perhaps the only one, to come in under-budget.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.2.12 @ 9:02PM

Let's review your logic.

One person's program is over 50 times bigger than another person's program and concerns health care. Yet in your mind that's somehow an unfair comparison. Well, their records are all we have to go on.

Santorum complains about Romenycare's top down social engineering. It's dubious to state it's somehow unfair to show that Santorum's program he endorsed is only 50 times biggers. It's not a question of one state against 50 states. It's a question of their records. And Santorum's stinks by Santorum's own measures.

As far as Part D, not Plan D, of Medicare coming in under budget that's because the number of people who were projected to use it was about 20% more than the actual number who signed up. The actual numbers are 98% of elderly who signed up compared to 77% of elderly who did sign up. So the reduced costs were from lack of use, not any significant cost savings. However, future costs of Part D are expected to explode to the upside.

You bring up an interesting point though. Romney is the only one who hasn't voted for bigger government at the federal level and doesn't depend on a federal paycheck for existence out of all the candidates.

As far as your logic that it's not fair to compare the two programs you have to contact Santorum. He's the one making the comparison when he attacks Romneycare. That leaves him open for all his big government votes which cost the taxpayer far more.

Although you imply that somehow it's good when a government program is under budget it shows the falsity of most posters here who claim a mantle of conservatism. Federal central economic planning is never good.

If you have a complaint about comparing the two programs take it to Santorum.

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 3:42PM

Mr. O'Stalin,

The only person putting their foot in their mouth on a regular basis during this election season is the "severely conservative"O'Romney.
He is the Joe O'Biden of the GOP!

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.2.12 @ 9:03PM

That's really stupid.

Nick| 4.3.12 @ 1:52AM

What a well thought-out argument, Billy.
I think NOT!

"I'm not concerned about the very poor."
"I like being able to fire people who provide services to me."
"I'm Mitt Romney—and yes Wolf, that's also my first name."
"I have some friends who are NASCAR team owners."
"I get speaker's fees from time to time, but not very much."
"I like cars."
"I love this state. The trees are the right height."
"I'm severely conservative."
"Anne drives a couple of Cadillacs."
"I believe in an America where millions of Americans believe in an America that's the America millions of Americans believe in. That's the America I love." ?!?!?!!!!!

Yeah, this loser is going to beat President Downgrade.
And monkeys might fly out of my backside!

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.3.12 @ 7:32AM

Now that you have had your say, what purpose did it serve? Not much.

Nick| 4.3.12 @ 6:08PM

Gee, Billy, such a passionate defense of your candidate.
(eye-roll)
It's not my fault that O'Romney has NO positive attributes.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.4.12 @ 8:04AM

There are dozens of quotes from Santorum that are stupid. Once again, what's the point?

The only point is once again that Santorum has run a poor campaign and loses because he is a loser. And now through the magic of a few articles he becomes thew winner nobody noticed somehow.

If that makes sense to you stop crossing the streets by yourself.

Nick| 4.4.12 @ 6:39PM

Again, O'Romney supporters have nothing positive to say about their pitiful candidate, and only insults for their opponents. Just like liberals.

Which makes sense, since O'Romney is really a liberal, not "severely conservative", as he falsely claims.

And, the point is that O'Romney is the GOP version of Joe O'Biden. Did "Gaffe-tastic" Joe win the democrat nomination? Answer: No. Even the stupid democrats were smart enough not to nominate the idiot O'Biden.

The GOP, it seems, will not be as smart. As you constantly prove on these threads, Billy.

Also, if Mr. Santorum had said things as stupid as O'Romney even once, or twice, let alone "dozens," you would have listed them.

All you have are your bogus assertions and lies. Just like the O'Romney campaign.

Bill| 4.2.12 @ 10:15AM

Romney is unstoppable. He'll win MD, DC, WI,..............all the way to the Tampa........carrying the torch of Ronald Reagan. I "wish him nothing but the best of him."

The American Hitman| 4.2.12 @ 10:52AM

"carrying the torch of Ronald Reagan" whom he repeatedly denounced. Yep, the Gipper would be very proud of the inventor of socialist healthcare in America.

Al Adab| 4.2.12 @ 1:01PM

Great Bill:
Romney keeps winning delegates from places that will never cast an electoral vote for the GOP nominee. Is there a point to that? Could Santorum deliver the PA electoral votes in November? What about Ohio, NC, VA and FL? The electoral count in '08 was 365 to 173. The four above have 74 and PA adds 20 more. Where will the others come from?

Al Adab| 4.2.12 @ 1:02PM

typo, 75

Bill| 4.2.12 @ 3:34PM

Great Al Adab,
In order to reach the magic number 1144, Santorum ha to win 70% of the rest of delegates, and to me, it's not plausible. Budget Chairman Ryan endorsed Romney because Romney is the inevitable candidate, and not a pro-union guy (unlike Santorum), and will fight to protect the free enterprise. Santorum will surrender to the big labors, saying, "PA is a pro-union state, and bluh........." Also, the clock is ticking, it's April. The candidate must raise $, and It ain't be enough time if GOP decides to go through a brokered convention. It happened 1976, and we lost. Let's hope Romney wins the nod and defeats Obama in a landslide.

Al Adab| 4.2.12 @ 4:00PM

My point Bill is not delgates but electoral votes. Those are what count. Does the GOP have a candidate, a potential nominee, who can deliver enough dchanged states to secure election? I don't see it.

Romney may be strong in blue state, he may be competitive in blue states, but it does not matter if the GOP loses them by 2% or 15%, a loss is still a loss.

Bill| 4.2.12 @ 4:54PM

Hi Al Adab,
I understand that Romney is not perfect, neither Santorum is, a pro-union big-government republican. I miss Rick Perry, Mitch Daniel, Paul Ryan, Harley Barbour.................

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 3:43PM

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

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

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

Bill| 4.2.12 @ 4:51PM

Nick, you're a the worst liar i've seen in my life. Pathetic liberal!

RCV| 4.2.12 @ 5:01PM

I can vouch for the fact that Nick is not a liberal. Good guy, but not a liberal.

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 5:42PM

Thanks, RCV.
You're a good guy too.
For a liberal, that is! Ha-ha! (Just kidding.)

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 5:40PM

They're your words, Billy the Bigot. Not mine.

If you can't live with your racist rants, GO AWAY!

MikeN| 4.2.12 @ 12:00PM

So many errors in one column. Marco Rubio can't hold two offices at once, nor be in two places at once. He is either a Florida Senator, or a Wisconsin Congressman. Make up your mind.

And where is the reference to Kansas Ohio State in those comments. He just mentions halftime. It wasn't even an epic comeback by Kansas.

Russel| 4.2.12 @ 12:33PM

My common sense , supported by Rush , agrees we keep the enemy aiming wildly at random targets and wasting ammo. But today when a poll comes out that under 50 women have flipped from Rom to zero , I get pissed - at Santorum . No one , including independents , wants him except some evangelicals or a delusional fool . He appears to be staying in just to spite Romney . It should be time we all get together and form a strong line . So , it's a conundrum .

Dai Alanye | 4.2.12 @ 1:02PM

No one wants Santorum... except for true conservatives, of course, which is why despite vast resources Mitt can't close the deal.

Saying that only evangelicals support Santorum is like saying only Mormons and big-money types support Romney. Although when I think about it...

No, the problems Romney has are due to no-one but Mitt. He's never been a strong campaigner, has won only one office out of all his tries. and cannot connect with voters. The man is weaker than Al Gore, for crying out loud! How anyone can consider him a probable winner in November astounds me. Without his fortune he'd have difficulty running for mayor of Wasilla.

Al Adab| 4.2.12 @ 1:04PM

Romney and his wing of the GOP have opposed the Conservative Movement since its inception. Why should we reward them now? Can he deliver the necessary electoral votes to pull out a victory in November? Who could?

Les| 4.2.12 @ 12:43PM

Romney will win Wisconsin easily. They have very few evangelicals compared to Iowa,Minnesota,Michigan or Ohio. Many more Catholics(% wise,as well as many mainline protestants,mainly Lutherans. Remember the people Santy said were not Christian.).
They are also not very much into the race,as the recall set for June is getting all the attention.

JASmius | 4.2.12 @ 12:59PM

You describe RS's inability to see the handwriting on the wall, and willingness to subordinate the interests of his party and his country to his own self-centered ambition, as if it's a noble thing. A lot of us view his obsessive, destructive monomania very differently.

Les| 4.2.12 @ 1:42PM

Santorum's bowling may help him with the Polish vote.

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 3:46PM

You sound like Chris Matth-spews, Les.

Bill| 4.2.12 @ 2:32PM

"Pro-union" Santorum is sinking and never will get the nod.

universal mind| 4.2.12 @ 4:53PM

Pro-abortion, pro gay marriage romney will lose to obama.

Bill| 4.2.12 @ 4:58PM

"Pro-union" Santorum cannot win MI, OH, IL,.................may be PA, you never know.........'cause he supports big labors over the free people and the free enterprise-the core values of fiscal conservatism.

David| 4.2.12 @ 2:53PM

Yep, opportunistic Newt. Always, always out for himself. It is one thing for him to support Mitt over Bam Bam, but it is a very vindictive act to support Mitt over Santorum.

Newt is envy personified. If he can't get the f_cking nomination, which he believes he would get if not for Santorum, then he sure the f_ck isn't going to let Santorum have it. He would rather have Mitt win which will ensure a Bam Bam win in November.

To all you crazy Newt supporters: Now you know why very few people who Newt worked with in Congress supported him. Now, you Newt lovers (of which I was one), Newt is going to hand the nomination to Mitt when 75 - 80% of you would rather have Santorum.

See just how f_cking vindicative Newt is???

RCV| 4.2.12 @ 3:15PM

Robert McCain's cheerleading for Santorum is getting embarassingly silly. Romney picks up the crucial endorsements of two of the GOP's stars this week -- Rubio and Ryan -- as he is poised to wrap things up, but wait! Santorum is endorsed by .... Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila of the Green Bay Packers!!!!

Santorum may limp along for a few more weeks, but when he's beaten (again) in his own state of Pennsylvania, even he will have to face reality. Of course, even then, Mr. McCain will cheer him on, unless he picks up Herman Cain's banner again.

Pathetic...

universal mind| 4.2.12 @ 4:41PM

Are you aware that romney as nominee would not only give obama another term, but also deminish our wins in the senate & house?

RCV| 4.2.12 @ 4:59PM

That may be so, but reality is reality.

Ira| 4.2.12 @ 3:27PM

KGB hasn't played for the Pack for years.

universal mind| 4.2.12 @ 4:38PM

I understand that romney is four more for obama because the right can't fight obama with a moderate. But I just now figured out (since you pointed to it) that romney losing will cause a great decline in our winning of Senate & House seats too.

So who is the GOP working for?

I'll fight. Like a conservative & with Santorum.

We the people have to take America back.

Storm| 4.2.12 @ 5:02PM

Thank you RSM for an excellent article!

*566 does NOT equal 1144!

I still have NOT voted!

*this # is not firm

Bill| 4.2.12 @ 5:18PM

R-Resolute
O-Organization
M-Money
N-Natural
E-Energetic
Y-You asked for me

You welcome!

Nick| 4.2.12 @ 5:44PM

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

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

Sam| 4.3.12 @ 1:05AM

RSM, another round of thanks for this article. You and Quin are the only reasons for visiting this website. Of course, more colorful and hilarious stuff can be read from your other blog (comments section when you said):
http://theothermccain.com/2012.....qus_thread
"Actually, I'm still holding out hope that Romney can be stopped. If that proves a forlorn hope, however, I think we might actually do a series of DoomCons:

DoomCon I: How F--d Are We?
Immediately after Romney clinches the nomination, we will gather to discuss the dim prospects for defeating Obama with this clueless dilbert as the GOP nominee.

DoomCon II: Yeah, We're Hopelessly F--d
During the Tampa convention, we will gather to re-affirm that, despite all the hype from the GOP's publicity machine, we are in fact still doomed in November.

DoomCon III: See, We Told You We Were F---d
In late October, once the polls show Romney losing by an insuperable margin, we will re-convene to remind everyone that we predicted this incipient wipeout for the GOP.

DoomCon IV: Why Didn't You Believe Us When We Warned You We Were F--d?
On Wednesday, Nov. 7, our final event will involve naming the names of the eminent idiots who claimed, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Mitt ever had a snowball's chance in hell."

Please livestream as these DoomCons promises to be more entertaining than the GOP convention and general election...

afvallenineenweek | 4.3.12 @ 11:32AM

Great article Robert , anyway let elections begin !

Latest Headlines

Back in the Fray

Kyle Peterson|96 comments

The IRS Immigration Fraud Scandal

Jeffrey Lord|99 comments

Obama’s Climate of Intimidation

Matthew Sheffield|56 comments

Whither Suburbia?

Steven Greenhut|24 comments

The Woman Who Wrote Liberty Valance

Bill Croke|31 comments

Not Super, But Pretty Good

Aaron Goldstein|19 comments

The Loss of Trust

Thomas Sowell|32 comments

Foreign Policy as Farce

Jed Babbin|88 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Thoughts on New U.S.-Taliban Peace Talks

Aaron Goldstein | 6.18.13

Thank You, Bobby Jindal

Matt Purple | 6.18.13

Buzzfeed Faces $3.6 Million Lawsuit for Copyright Infringement

Kaylin Bugos | 6.18.13

Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder

Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13

Pro-Life is Smart Politics

Rich Lizardo | 6.18.13

Gerson, Wehner, and the Losing Old Ways Crowd

Jeffrey Lord | 6.18.13

Are Young People Souring on Obama?