Keep an eye on Artur Davis. He’s a former Democratic congressman from Alabama who has always had strong disagreements with his party. Davis is now contributing to National Review Online; first on Ben Nelson’s retirement and now on the GOP presidential primary. This morning he offers this effusive praise for Rick Santorum:
The case for Rick Santorum — and yes, at this juncture, that phrase still feels weird — is that he is a conviction conservative with immigrant, middle-class roots who empathizes with battered places Republicans normally don’t see. If you don’t yet buy it, watch his might-as-well-be-a-victory-speech in Iowa: It was simply the best Republican rhetoric in the last decade.
The former senator powerfully articulated the case that too much entitlement weakens individual resolve; that the working and middle classes can be as endangered by unrestrained corporations as they are by big government; and that revitalizing shattered communities is a conservative enterprise too. He smartly acknowledged that neither party has exactly been preoccupied with the middle class, or the deteriorating relationship between work and reward. If it lacked the poetry and the elegant lilt of Obama’s A game, there was a clarity and directness to it that post-Reagan Republicans have struggled to find.
Davis is also talking openly about switching parties; he no longer identifies with his old party and has criticized the party’s opposition to voter-ID laws.
“I’ve heard some people at the national level encouraging me to run as an independent for my old office,” Davis said, referring to the congressional seat he left to run for governor. But he said his home state makes it more difficult than almost any other state to run as an independent. “Alabama is not friendly to independent candidacies.”
Davis was the only member of the Congressional Black Caucus to vote against Obamacare.
Short answer... no. It's not even under consideration.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDavis was on C-Span with Brian Lamb in a Q&A session. He has good sense. As I remember, he endorsed Obama early when most others were endorsing Hilliary - interestingly, at that time, I saw Obama as the less freedom-crushing of the two.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAbout the only Blue Dog Dems (maybe only - Sanford Bishop is both) who made it through the 2010 election were in the Black Caucus.
And on one vote last summer, where the Dems went mostly with Pelosi, three of four black Georgia Congressmen (all except John Lewis) went with Boehner.
I never understood why Harold Ford, Jr. remained a Dem. He would be at the right of the current Dem party.
I thought both Santorum's and Romney's speeches were too long.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI am a political junkie, but mostly a liberal with some undecided views on abortion. Santorum's speech moved me to tears; one of the few political speeches ( I have watched hundreds) that has ever made me cry.
It sounded incredibly authentic, but it was politically brilliant. He used his own family as an allegory for the American Dream; while displaying many implied contrasts between himself and Mr. Romney. For instance, Mr. Romney's grandfather did not work in a coal mine after fleeing Mussolini; he fled the Mexican Revolution to come back to America. This is after his family had left America because of restrictions on Polygamy laws. Even implicitly comparing Obama's America to Mussolini's Italy didn't feel as heavy-handed as it normally would, because of Santorum's charisma (two words I never thought I'd see together without "lack of" in between, but he proved me wrong)
Mr. Santorum might have a chance because he is a rare breed. He is Catholic, but he won the Evangelical vote. That shows some major crossover appeal. He is too extreme to win a general election in my opinion (he would win fewer states than Mr. Romney would), but he can win the primary by showing the differences between himself and Mr. Romney. He needs to become both the Christian candidate and the middle-class candidate. Given that Mr. Romney is a Mormon worth $250M, that should be achievable.
Mr. Santorum's speech was politically subtle and emotionally heavy. He showed personal differences with the content of his speech, but his speech itself is what should scare Mr. Romney's team. That speech showed an affable, likable, relatable man who is just telling the truth (as in not politicking, even though he was) and speaking from the heart. He is endowed with political skill and has the one ability Mr. Romney lacks; he inspires. When contrasted with Mr. Romney's short version stump speech that even I have seen 35 times, it was an even more triumphant political achievement for Mr. Santorum. The callous timing of Romney's speech right after Santorum's speech ended (even though no victor had yet been determined), so that the media couldn't immediately talk about Santorum, was an obvious move that should garner negative attention towards Mr. Romney in my opinion (although it probably won't).
Unfortunately, this all occurred pretty late at night, and Mr. Romney and his money are about to unleash a crushing wave of negative advertising. If Mr. Santorum can get some money of his own, and Mr. Gingrich attacks Romney to bits, there may be an opening for a Santorum GOP Nomination.
But it isn't likely.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt would help if Senator Santorum got his quotations right. The romantic "song in your heart" is not from C. S. Lewis. He had a more camaradarie and shared interests/values view of friendship (see "Friendship" in The Four Loves).
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse