After days of Mitt Romney and his advisors insisting he will win his home state of Michigan, today’s too-close-to-call polls are clearly taking a toll on his nerves. Romney lashed out at the right wing today, and again accused Rick Santorum of trying to hijack the election with dirty tricks. AP reports:
Mitt Romney says he’s struggling with the Republican Party’s right wing in Michigan because he’s unwilling to make “incendiary” comments. He also accused rival Rick Santorum of trying to “kidnap” the presidential nominating process with automated calls urging Democrats to vote in Tuesday’s primary in Michigan.
Speaking to reporters hours after the polls opened, Romney suggested his rivals are making headway with the GOP base because they are willing to say “outrageous things” that help them in the polls.
Romney says he’s not willing to light his “hair on fire” to try to earn support.
However you feel about Santorum’s robocall outreach to Democratic voters, Romney’s comments scream desperation. He needs to dial it back a notch. If there was any mistake his campaign made during the past week, it was making unequivocal statements about Romney’s certain victory in Michigan. But there’s nothing he can do to fix that at this point.
Unless, of course, Romney’s indignant tone isn’t a sign he’s gone into panic mode, but instead a sign that he’s been reading David Brooks this morning. According to Brooks, the real problem with RINOs (Republicans in Name Only) is they shrink from a fight with the right-wingers and pretend to be more conservative than they really are in order to get elected:
Leaders of a party are supposed to educate the party, to police against its worst indulgences, to guard against insular information loops. They’re supposed to define a creed and establish boundaries. Republican leaders haven’t done that. Now the old pious cliché applies:
First they went after the Rockefeller Republicans, but I was not a Rockefeller Republican. Then they went after the compassionate conservatives, but I was not a compassionate conservative. Then they went after the mainstream conservatives, and there was no one left to speak for me.
So maybe Romney’s just trying to take a stand for RINOs everywhere by pushing back against the conservative base. Of course, that ignores the obvious reason why Republicans are forced to tack right during primaries – because the conservative base is the one voting.
Brooks is right, and we can only hope Romney listens to him. The conceit of the right wing that it alone in the Republican "base" should be easily dismissed. At best, nationally, it represents about a third of the die hard Republican primary electorate and perhaps 10 percent of the general electorate. And it has not increased or decreased much over time. In 1992, Pat Buchanan attracted 23 percent of the total primary/caucus electorate — and Buchanan was widely seen as an underfunded scribbler who wanted to make a point.
Sorry, Alana, the Santorum GOP will be, like it or not, all about opposing contraception for married people, prenatal testing, abortions in cases of rape and incest. It will be the culture war GOP and the Dems and the media will be happy to fight on those grounds. If you think this is a loser for the GOP in the general, it's right to be concerned.
Here’s James Taranto making the case in the Wall Street Journal: n nThis column has recently become skeptical of the view–nearly universal on the liberal left but common as well among conservative elites–that Rick Santorum is “unelectable” or far less likely than Mitt Romney to defeat President Obama in November. A new USA Today poll reinforces our skepticism. n nThe survey, conducted by Gallup, included two samples of registered n nvoters: 1,137 from a dozen “swing states”. . . n nThe findings: Santorum leads Obama in the swing states, 50% to 45%, and nationwide 49% to 46%. This gives him an edge of three percentage points over Romney, whose swing-state lead is 48% to 46% and who ties the president nationally at 47%.” n n
Jeff Bell, author of the just-released book The Case for Polarized Politics, takes on the myth that “social issues” are what cost the GOP the election: n nIsn’t an elevated debate on social issues in the fall a formula for Democratic victory? n nRecent history says no. n nIn the six general elections since Ronald Reagan, social issues became prominent in the fall campaign twice: in 1988 (furloughs, Pledge of Allegiance, membership in the ACLU) and 2004 (same-sex marriage). n nThese also happen to be the only two post-Reagan elections when the GOP won a majority of the popular vote. n n
One can cherry pick polls like Taranto, so here's Georgia, where we have Romney winning over Obama by seven and Santorum by 4. McCain won by 5, I believe, so Romney is doing slightly better, Santorum slightly worse. Neither result is encouraging, sine a GOP candidate to be winning nationally needs to be winning Georgia by double digits. n nIf Santo is nominated and subjected to a Obama's war chest (and the MSM) this will be a culture war election and I think that is a loser for the GOP. Social moderates and Libertarians are not going to vote for a Catholic theocrat like Santorum.
It's not a hijacking if you slip your own neck into the noose. BOTH Romney AND Santorum are their own worst enemies, but they're so out-of-touch with the way things really are "out there" in the world they are utterly clueless, if not downright delusional. A sad state of affairs for Republican politics. When did the GOP hand the reigns over to the lunatic fringe? Probably when the Republican base turned crazier than outhouse rats, and we can all guess what the impetus was drove them slobbering in this direction. Like I said, a sad state of affairs.
The same people who expected Christine O'Donnell to become a Delaware senator expect Santorum to become an American president.
Romney may be desperate, but he's not paranoid. there's been a push to get Democrats out to vote for Santorum NOT because they like him, but because they want to block Romney from getting the nomination. they can't stand Santorum! but they know he can't possibly beat Obama, so they're voting for him. n nand the "smart" pundits on TV are wondering why these very liberal people are going for Santorum, and what could it mean? is his appeal broader than they thought? my goodness! n nthe liberals I work with at the U were all planning to vote for Santorum today, precisely because they know he could never beat Obama. and yeah, even in flyover country we can think strategically. I know: I was a Democrat in 2004 when I voted in the GOP primary for John McCain purely as a vote against George W. Bush.
Funny – Romney isn't the one that begged DIMS to vote for him in a GOP Primary, is he!