“There were a few times when we were filming it when I wondered whether I was out of my mind,” says John Brabender, Rick Santorum’s strategist. “I had Mitt Romney roaming around with a gun.” He chuckles as he says this, amused, as are many politicos by the campaign’s latest television ad. The puckish spot casts a cackling Romney look-alike as a Santorum stalker. “It was fun to do,” he says. Even funnier was “how Fox News blindsided Romney during an interview, asking him to sit there and check it out, then comment.”
Watching a tense and smiling Romney fail to offer a sharp rebuttal was revealing, Brabender says. They had struck a nerve. Romney may have the cash advantage but from Brabender’s perspective, Team Santorum is slowly erasing Romney’s aura of inevitability, his supposed claim to the GOP throne. A montage of a fictional Romney shooting mud, playfully entitled “Rombo,” is an important part of that process. “The better ads are stories,” Brabender tells me. “You need a beginning, middle, and an end. People don’t pay attention to the ads where everything, negative or positive, is thrown in the mix.”
Brabender, a fast-talking media consultant who has worked with Santorum for over two decades, says the GOP presidential race has now become a storytelling contest, not merely a battle of contrasting ideas. As his candidate rises, and Romney scrambles to sustain his front-runner status, Brabender wants to remind conservatives that Santorum may be the underfunded insurgent but he’s not the one airing “stale 30-second ads.” He wants voters to think about Romney’s negative tactics, to mull whether they’re appropriate.
“If they see a Romney ad attacking Rick Santorum, I want our [“Rombo”] ad to be in the back of their mind,” Brabender says. “I want them to ask themselves whether they think that kind of thing is presidential, whether it brings the party together. Instead of inspiring us, he’s beating people up?”
Brabender conceived the ad a week ago after reading a Romney press release following Santorum’s victories in Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri. “They put this statement out there, basically saying that these races don’t really matter. That’s insulting to the people in those states. But it was a line they had that really got to me. They declared that they’d still be the nominee because they’re better organized and have more resources. Gee, I thought, that’s another way of saying I’ll win because I have more money than the other guy.”
“There is a reason that Romney’s unfavorable ratings are starting to skyrocket,” he says. “Tone and temperament matter. People see our ad as a response to his negative attacks. Santorum will not become a punching bag.”
I've been checking out the right-conservative blogs today. Are Romney and Santorum aware of the angst that's beginning to take hold in the Republican electorate? There's a growing feeling that neither is up to the job of defeating Obama.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney, thinking he will win because he has more money than the other guy, is simply expressing traditional Republican thinking. What Romney did to Gingrich is what the Bush campaign did to Kerry. Using lots of money to spread lies is pure Republicanism.
I didn't leave the Republican party. The Republican party left me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBush lied about Kerry? In what way, as a flip-flopper? The party didn't leave you. You were never there in the first place.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat lies did Bush spread about Kerry?
If you think Kerry would have made a good President, you can hardly say the Republican Party left you.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJust talked to my brother-in-law in MI. Some interesting insights:
- The "Rombo" ad got a ton of free airplay in MI on the news, etc.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse- Romney is now spending $1 million + PER DAY in ads in MI; almost all of it negative
- The sense is that Romney is overplaying it, and it will likely backfire, and backfire badly.
Different strokes for different folks, as they say. I'm not a Romney fan and have always liked and admired Rick Santorum, but I like and admire him less after watching this ad. It makes a mockery of one of the most important campaigns of my lifetime and is demeaning to a fellow Republican. It's one thing to criticize Romney, but quite another to ridicule him. What the Santorum campaign views as entertaining and fun, I view as mean-spirited and idiotic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAgreed. I also have to believe that if the tables were turned and Romney had produced a similar type ad ridiculing an opponent like this, the media (and a decent chunk of the general population) would have a fit.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh, please. This was as soft and playful an advertisement as imaginable.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAre Republicans even remotely interested in defeating Obama? Or are Republicans interested merely in "moral victories" of the sort Santorum offers? Beyond staunch social conservatives, Santorum has no traction. He positively frightens social liberals of all stripes, and is weak on economics -- meaning he doesn't wow fiscal conservatives. The man who can beat Obama is the man who can convince enough social liberals and fiscal conservatives alike that he's the better one for the job. Santorum will go down in flames, vs. Obama. Mark my words. Again, if this is what the Republicans want, they are welcome to give it a shot. Just don't be surprised when we wind up watching Obama smiling on TV the day after the November election. Santorum guarantees it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI see why Santorum lost his reelection in Pennsylvania. This is the most childish ad I have ever seen. I actually thought I could vote for Santorum if he were the nominee, but I just can't see this guy being the president. Figures a guy named "Bra bender" would do this for an idiot who thinks contraceptives are bad for women. I imagine every guy reading this will ask their girlfriend/spouse about contraceptives. Stop demonizing women who have sex with their husbands and use contraceptives. The SantoruMANs are losing it. Do not lump women who enjoy life, love their husbands and don't have more children than they can afford with women who have abortions on demand.
Digusting of Santorum. He is a loon, He is making Ron Paul look electable. Romney is the only adult in the room, and the children are throwing spitballs at him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis ad is to blunt the coming scrutiny of Rick's record, which he knows is full of holes, and is not all that conservative. He wants the story to be about Mitt's scorched earth negative campaigning, rather than his own lackluster past. He's going to try to play the same game Newt played--call Romney a moderate, mean, rich guy. And he's going to be about as successful at it.
So, should we allow negative campaigning only on one side? People seem to be fine with the negative campaigning Rick is doing. The truth is that Rick needs to be scrutinized as much as Mitt has been. After that, the voters can decide. But this idea that Mitt should just bend over, and allow Rick to continue to lie and accuse while sustaining no counter attacks is just silly.
Romney is going to do what he has to do, and he'll have to live with being big mean Mitt. He has plenty of time to recover from the negative campaigning.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse“I want them to ask themselves whether they think that kind of thing is presidential, whether it brings the party together. Instead of inspiring us, he’s beating people up?”
This from a guy who ran an idiotic (thanks, Jenna), unfunny ad mocking another Republican candidate in a juvenile way. I'm asking myself 'who does this insipire?' Does this type of ad "bring us together" as a party, or is it just more material for the Daily Shows of the world to use against Republicans? Don't put up this type of ad and then whine about negative attacks. If you put this up, you deserve the attacks.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGreat points. If this is how Santorum responds to some relatively mild roughing-up from Romney, he'll implode when the Obama Team plays real political hardball with him. Santorum's wife and children will be Obama supporters by the time they're done working him over.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat if Romney offered the VP to Santorum to lose? I'm pretty sure he'd take it. He might not have the legs to compete through California, and he's not going to get the caucus votes if those go to Paul.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFor Santorum to act like a victim and complain of attack ads when his opponent Romney is up against not only Santorum, Gingrich but Obama's campaign spending millions to attack him it really comes across as weak and pathetic.
No other president as ever played such a huge roll in an opposing party's primary as Obama has attacking Mitt Romney.
And Romney never complains, he just soliders on trying to get his message out and show his competitors dismal records.
Also now not only is Obama helping Santorum attack Romney, the Daily Kos is going to get Santorum, the big juicy softball, tothe nomination because he knows that once Santorum's personality gets fully vetted on the national stage, it ain't going to be pretty for the Republicans.
Let's face it Republicans, Santorum hadn't caught fire for some very good reasons. His enraged, petulant, indignant santimonous personality leaves a lot to be desired.
And the more his extreme social views that he believes are important public policy issues come to light the worse that personality gets.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"His enraged, petulant, indignant santimonous (sic) personality leaves a lot to be desired."
Have you ever actually watched Santorum speak? From your comment, it's hard to believe you have. It'd be like a Santorum supporter (say, me) describing Romney's personality as crocodile smiling, teeth-gritting, morally vacuous, ideologically empty cynicism.
I don't think that would be a very charitable description of the man, no more than yours of Santorum.
As far as catching fire, Santorum seems to be beating Romney in some polls right now, both nationally and in some key swing states. So, that's another problem with your comment.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI didn't think it was mean. I thought it was funny. And I will vote for the Republican nominee.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney asked for it and so did all the people who jumped on board early and shouted to the rest of us that Romney was the only candidate who was electable. Based on what? Polls taken from the constantly shifting masses of people with no convictions other than to try to read the prevailing winds? How reliable is that? I think the shifting polls tell us.
Remember Romney's interview with Bret Baier? It was awful. He clearly expected that Bret was going to help usher him into office and was genuinely surprised and angered that he was asked any probing questions. It was like he already thought he had a lock on the election. What kind of presidential candidate is that? THAT is who was supposed to be most electable against Obama and the media machine that backs him? I'm sure a lot of Republicans experienced second thoughts at that moment.
Throughout the early debates, Romney's answers were smooth and avoided risk. He didn't overwhelm or underwhelm, he simply sailed through as though he merely needed to run the time out. But, we're not in the final moments of a game we're winning; we're approaching what will be a no holds barred contest. A good leader is not enough; we need a warrior who is sure of the ground he stands on and also willing to battle the other side. Otherwise, we don't get past the election to lead. That is why, even with all his faults when in a leadership position, Newt won in SC after demonstrating his capacity to take it to the opponent (Obama and the media machine).
In the debate after SC, Romney shifted tactics. And, one of the things he did - addressing Santorum about Romneycare - was he showed just how dismissive and mean he can be. Not mean as in take it to our opponents, but mean as in targeting something petty to hold onto his leadership position. Santorum brought up Romney's signature governing accomplishment - Romneycare - which parallels the Democrat accomplishment that we are determined to repeal. And, Romney's response was to take a slap at Santorum's demeanor. Because he knew some consider Rick's angry demeanor his Achilles Heel. Well, Rick's demeanor is beside the point. With the passage of time - whether he is elected or not - people will eventually forget Rick's demeanor. But, we will not forget every single step this nation has taken toward socializing healthcare or the people who accomplished them.
If we cannot repeal Obamacare, we're done. It permanently alters the relationship of each citizen to the federal government, making every citizen (and every intermediary person and institution) dependent and subordinate to it. Rick - and WE - have every reason to be angry about it. A person who isn't has no business seeking the Presidency.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh please, this is not 'whining' - in fact it makes its point with humor (note the music)
Against Obama, I expect Romney or Rick (whoever wins) to repeatedly make the point that Obama's attacks against them are an attempt to avoid talking about his record. That needs to be said often. If it can be done with humor too - all the better.
Once more we ask the Romney team - what is it that says we should vote FOR you. All I have seen is that his dad took him to the Detroit auto shows as a kid.
Newt is hated by a lot of people, and negative ads against him, especially with the Freddie Mac tie, worked well.
Rick is not hated - in fact he is liked far more at the present time than Romney is. Negative ads against votes that almost the entire GOP Congress made and Bush signed, will have less an effect, if any.
Looking forward to the debate next week.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCan you see that this ad is an attempt to avoid scrutiny of his own record?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse