Hunter Baker As I write at 9:30 p.m. Central Time on Tuesday, Governor Mitt Romney has been projected as the winner in both the Arizona and Michigan primaries. With these victories, he has blunted the most potent attack on his campaign thus far.
Prior to last week’s debate, Rick Santorum was building up a powerful head of steam as perhaps the most serious challenger for the mantle of the “anti-Mitt” candidate in a campaign full of pretenders with feet of clay. However, at that debate Santorum stumbled badly and failed to realize that he simply could not defend his practice of attaching earmarks to bills (even if that practice is fully defensible). One cannot convince an audience hostile to earmarks of the righteousness of the practice in 30 seconds or less. At multiple points, Romney (who bears a tremendous natural load of suspicion that he is a big-government moderate) was able to rouse the crowd against Santorum, who ended up sounding like a man who loves government programs as long as they align with his worldview.
Advertisement
Based on his showing on Tuesday night, the damage to Santorum’s campaign was not huge. But it was enough to cost him Michigan — and winning in Michigan would have been a devastating blow to the idea of Mitt Romney as the front-runner or the inevitable candidate. Romney’s losing in Michigan (his home state) would not have been akin to Superman’s losing a fight in the Fortress of Solitude, but it would have been close.
Santorum still has a good chance to do well on Super Tuesday, but he won’t be in the contest stalking a wounded Mitt Romney. Instead, Romney has shown again that while he has been a weak front-runner, he has anything but a glass jaw. Romney just keeps learning, keeps doing his homework, and fights nasty when he has to do so. The former governor described himself as resolute. He may not have been so in his various positions over the years, but he has absolutely demonstrated that quality in his pursuit of the nomination.
Jay Cost There were two big take-home points from Tuesday night. First, Romney is most certainly not the majority choice of his party. He won just 41 percent of the vote in Michigan, compared with 39 percent four years earlier. This is not the sign of a party electorate that is flocking to him, and it is unlikely that Romney will start winning an outright majority of voters any time soon (at least outside New England).
Second, he has nevertheless positioned himself almost smack dab in the middle of the GOP electorate. He does best among “somewhat conservative” voters, quite well among moderate and liberal voters, and holds his own among “very conservative” voters. This makes it extremely difficult for any candidate to defeat him, for the remaining voters are basically split between Romney’s left and his right.
Thus, while Romney does not seem likely to surge to the nomination, it has become extremely difficult to see who in this field can ever defeat him. Romney has managed to win the middle 40-49 percent of voters in New Hampshire and Florida, and now Arizona and Michigan. If he can do it again next week in Ohio, that should effectively be the end of the race.
Burt Folsom Jr. Governor Romney, after trailing in most polls, came back to edge Rick Santorum in Michigan. It was a must-win for Romney, to keep his campaign credible. Romney grew up in Michigan, and won decisively in the Detroit and Lansing areas. Santorum did well in rural Michigan, which is likely to go Republican in November anyway. (For example, Ottawa County, the most Republican county in the state, went strongly for Santorum — and will again go strongly Republican in November.) Romney did well with tea-party voters, Catholics, and those who list the economy as their main concern. In his victory speech, he ignored his rivals and stressed the weaknesses of President Obama. With his recent tax proposals — lower corporate-tax rates and no death tax — he is staking out a more clearly conservative position that may help him on Super Tuesday next week.
— Burton Folsom Jr. is professor of history at Hillsdale College, and co-author (with his wife Anita) of FDR Goes to War.
And your example of a "not squish" is a man who asked his "fellow Democrats" to vote against his fellow Republicans? The man who became the eptitome of Arlen Specter, switching parties and voting against his own stated principles...
Or the man who went around the country promising billion dollar projects to each and every town in the country?... and take us all to the moon, while claiming fiscal conservatism?
The steady, sure, strong, moral, honest, and RESOLUTE man won.
Doesn't make sense to call Romney a "winner" when he outspent Santorum by about four or five to one, and only beat him by three percentage points. He only squeaked through in a state where he originally expected to -- and was expected to -- blow out the opposition. Romney is a RINO, whom Obama will take to the cleaner's in November. His new found 'conservatism' isn't to be trusted, and conservatives know it. If we're going to get four more years of the Termite-in-Chief, I'd rather it be done with a candidate who offered a real choice than a guy who, at best, is a closet big government moderate. As for Santorum's pitch to Democrats, he was only doing what any Republican candidate will absolutely have to do in November to even have a prayer of beating Obama. It's politics, Bunkie, and like Mr. Dooley said: that ain't beanbag.
A lot of insightful commentary. Although Quin, really? I know you don't favor Romney but that's no need to be so negative, he did well tonight and deserves congratulations.
I have to agree with many of the comments on here. While it's important to pursue the base, the base alone cannot win an election. Romney is the only candidate that is thinking beyond the primary to the general election. There is a lot to like about Santorum, I agree with most of his positions and applaud him for having the courage to take a stand. He would make a good President. Romney would be a better one only because Santorum is too divisive. He gets off-message too easily and instead of trying to unite people around him spends too much time trying to separate the "wheat from the chaff". That can be a good thing in many instances, however, in politics it is more important to unite people around common cause and have a big tent rather then spend so much time trying to find out who the "true believers" are.
Jay Cost's anti-Romney bias (has it become some sort of loyalty test at Weekly Standard?) has prevented him from noticing that Romney actually got very close to a majority of Republican votes in Michigan last night (48%) although Cost is right that Romney lost badly in the crucial Michael Moore demographic. Romney also got more votes in 2012 than 2008.
Well, that was interesting. Still apologizing for Santorum and how he can do better if he really tries! The guy has a real problem if he thinks getting Dems to vote for him to protect their guy, Obama, to rid himself of a rival is not right and shows a side of Saint Rick that is quite tacky. So if you take that possible 5% away from Santorum's numbers, he did not do as great as this article implies. By the way, you are not 7th grade girls, you are jounalists. It becomes trite to overuse popular words like awsome - your trite words are inauthenic, robotic, boring, plastic, etc when describing Romney. Find some new words. Also, fiscal conservatism and social conservatism are two different animals. As for Catholics, well for the most part are not idiots and know who will serve them well and those that embarrass them.
I was wondering how Limbaugh and the Faux News crowd was going to spin the two victories Romney achieved last night - now I know after reading most of the above briefs, with the exception of John Fund and Hugh Hewitt. I believe Hugh Hewitt wrote it best, and as for not saying anyone is going to have huge momentum coming out of these two victories, that is bovine excrement (I am borrowing the expression from a smarter NRO commentator than myself).
We keep hearing that Romney is the Establishment candidate, but how is that so? When Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham, Fox News, Hot Air blog are all against Romney 24/7, I am curious to know where Romney pulls from besides Catholics? The story is always told that no one is excited about Romney, how true can that be, when he keeps winning and winning?
You're right Mark..Romney, no matter what he does, just never gets a break. Despite the fact that Dems responded to Santorum's call to come out and vote for him, Romney won. When gingrich was running false, malicious ads against Romney, Romney was focusing on Obama and get flak for not responding to gingrich's lies; when Romney did respond, he was criticized. He needs to just stay steady..Juan Williams was frantically trying to show that Romney really didn't win--it was obvious that Juan was frantic, along with Obama and the Dems, that Romney would run against Obama...well, Romney IS going to run against Obama...and he will beat him. Romney needs to stay on message, keep his focus on Obama, the economy, jobs...and just brush off any nasty things that gingrich throws at him...Santorum has crossed the aisle to stand with Obama, Pelosi and the Dems against one of our own...he has lost my vote and my respect.
Limbaugh, Levin, Ingraham et al are not the Establishment. There is a Republican Establishment, but there is no Conservative Establishment. Romneybots are intentionally distorting and blurring the two thoughts to confuse the party base. Ann Coulter, Mitt's Stepford wife, has been shrieking this distortion for several weeks.
The Republican Establishment is comprised of state and national party leadership and areligious professionals (politicians, lawyers, lobbyists, money managers, bankers, accountants and business executives) within the party who fund, support and populate the GOP apparatus. They are more likely to belong to a country club than the Kiwanis Club. They are generally less conservative - especially on social issues. The Republican Establishment are a minority within the Republican voting base, but will sell heaven and earth to maintain control of the party.
And yes, even this group isn't excited about Romney. The Establishment only supports Mitt as a means to an end - to maintain control of the party, or at least to deprive party control from the unwashed masses within the base. Their lack of enthusiasm for Mitt is also why the Establishment is most open to a late primary entry by such conservative stalwarts as Jeb Bush, Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels.
Enjoy your plurality win in Mitt's moderate home state (his third "home" state of the campaign thus far), Romneybots. I'll be more impressed when Mitt wins an actual Republican state without a heavy Mormon influence.
The "verdict" from Michigan should alarm the GOP and Romney, and please the Democrats.
Even after the mass exidous from the Detroit Metro area over the last few years, they (Liberals) can still control the state from Detroit. I'm not saying Dems voted and swung this election, as our local papers are proclaiming. In fact, results appear to show just the opposite. The Democratic/Liberal stronghold of Michigan is "Detroit", but it was my understanding that the cross-over vote would be for Santorum. Romney easily carried the Metro Detroit area, once again proving Detroit's population remains high enough to compensate for the rest of Michigan.
Again, the two things we learned yesterday:
1) Romney is NOT viewed as the Conservative.
2) Michigan (I don't know why we are so stupid) will go for Obama in November. As goes Detroit, goes MI, and neither Cons nor the GOP have the votes to break that hold - even should they Coalesce.
My advice to the GOP, cut Romney loose and make this a race between Gingrich, and Santorum. (ok..... and Paul.) They'll improve their chances of securing the Presidential and Senatorial power they seek. Mitt voters would likely swarm to Santorum and I'd think leadership could live with a free-spending So-Con. The only folks left unhappy would be the Fi-Cons, and you have a better chance of convincing us to cut our throats for Santorum than for Romney in the Fall.
Will they do this? Of course not! It's only going to get uglier until August. Conservative opposition will harden (not only against Romney, but the Party) as they continue to shove Romney down our collective throats. The longer this goes on, the less likely Republicans will heal in Tampa, and the more likely a good amount of Cons leave the GOP.
I respectfully disagree, the "establishment" is shoving Santorum on us. Who are these mysterious establishmentarians that rig elections? To hear Limbaugh talk about Romney being the establishment pick makes me think of King Leonidas climbing the cliff in the 300 and at the top he gets his orders from the establishment! Limbaugh is the establishment. Levin is the establishment. Hannity is the establishment. You simply can not credibly build a case that Santorum is a conservative and Romney is not. Either they both are or they both aren't. I would submit to you it is the latter, but that's just me. There's only one guy the "establishment" blacklists.
Are you out of your gourd? the So-Con's are always going to vote, and always going to vote Republican. The Cross-over to Satorum will be non-existant, He has nothing what-so-ever to to offer them. Romney has a much better chance of keeping turnout up.
Hell, you won't find enough women to vote for Santorum to populate a baseball team.
There has been plenty written (even here on NRO) about the So-Con boycotting of the past few general elections. They're no longer allowing themselves to be taken for granted and they're no longer providing legitimacy to the process by their participation.
As a Democratic voter, I'm cool with this outcome, even if not "as good" as seeing Pope Ricky win Michigan. Like Capt. Kirk, I don't believe in the "no win scenario" when it comes to your Republican primaries.
Either it was going to be an unelectable candidate like Gingrich or Santorum. Somebody who was so polarizing that it would guarentee (not just "conceivably advantage") the President atleast 35, if not 40 states and put maybe all but 5 in the "swing state" column.
Or as it seems, if the RNC and the Big Money Boys got their way, it was going to be Romney. Somebody who essentially has to "buy the election" because fully half of his own Party can't stand the man and (likely, rightfully so) expects him to "sell them out" and "go moderate" once he has the Nomination locked up. Therefore creating an historic situation where a political Party nominates somebody that a huge segment of that Party not just opposed for the Nomination, but actually loathes.
A loathing and dispiriting that will be quite obvious to the Moderates and Independents. Who will think to themselves "If these Republicans don't like Romney that much, why should I?"
Obama opts out of public financing. First time anyone had done it since it came into existance. Eliminates many spending limitations. Spends $730 Million
McCain decides to go with public financing, limiting himself as all candidates have (Democrat and Republican) since it was invented. Spends $333 Million
These numbers are from OpenSecrets.org.
Obama spent more than both candidates combined in 2004 ($717 Million)
Not busting Obama on this (because it was smart) and I think McCain was naive (although I voted for him). But two things.
1. Let's remember who bought the last election.
2. It will only work once, because now that the Republicans know the gentleman's rules have been thrown out, they will come out bare knuckle. Don't know if Obama will win or lose. I think it will be close either way. But he is going to get bloody this time.
keep talking about the %'s Romney won. It is about the economy. Santatorum is running on social isses. So will Obama Get the gov out of my life and get me a job.
