Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
From Bill's column in today's--or, if, like me, you're on Pacific time, tomorrow's--Wall Street Journal:
If Mr. Romney could speak about ObamaCare the way Mr. Santorum does—not simply as a policy disagreement but as a threat to our freedom—he'd be locking up the nomination.
Instead, here we are, plodding on to Tampa. Count me among the conflicted: those who wish that these issues had a sunnier, more disciplined champion—and who thus calculate that Mr. Romney, notwithstanding his own weaknesses, has the greater chance against Mr. Obama this fall. The perfect candidate, alas, chose not to run, as all perfect candidates are wont to do.
Even so, there is something about watching Mr. Santorum, outgunned in both staff and money, disdained by a media that literally cannot comprehend what he is saying, disliked by many in his own party and loathed by the opposition for the same thing—his beliefs—well, there is something admirable about a man who takes it all and refuses to be silenced.
Count me among the conflicted, too--but also among those drawn to the sheer sweet stubbornness of Rick Santorum.
- Comment (22)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
I'm sure that Mitt Romney is eager to adjust the spreadsheet numbers on the fiscal train wreck that is America. Good for him. But I sense, Rick Santorum worries most about the self-indulgent lost souls that caused the problem in the first place.
America worked before, because the moral foundation was solid, and it can't work if the moral foundation is crumbling beneath us. If we could fix the foundation problem, the rest kind of takes care of itself. I don't know if that's the President's job directly, to fix wounded souls, but I admire Santorum for understanding the core problem.
The problem is that we've lost our way. Just adjusting the numbers on the spreadsheet won't be enough. It never is. Greece is a disaster because it's Greece--not because they made a mistake and put the decimal point in the wrong place.
Mar '11
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
If Mitt Romney could address Obamacare with half the fervor of Rick Santorum, this would have been over long ago. Unfortunately, Captain Tapioca doesn't really see what is wrong with the underlying premise. The Tenth Amendment makes very poor cover for "why did you do that?" The "will of the Massachusetts people" doesn't improve matters either: if I wanted to be subject to that, I'd live there.
Apr '11
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Adjusting the numbers on the spread sheet is all that matters. I don't expect it will ever happen, but if the federal government lived within the means that, let's say, a 15% flat tax rate would provide, the problems and unintended consequences caused by the welfare entitlement state, the education-teachers union complex, etc., would be marginalized. A fiscally sound, limited central government would, in the aggregate, allow citizens to behave in a manner more consistent with free market principles and increase their control of community education, welfare, etc. Just as a government which controls people's lives undermines their morality, free market principles and self reliance lead to an increase in individual morality.
May '10
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Getting ready to vote here in Illinois on Primary Day. Sheesh...looks like Rick got a nice sunburn for his PR visit. Romney's sharpening his message nicely...let's get this over with and go on to beat Obama.
Edited on March 20, 2012 at 12:13pmFeb '12
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
A moderate Republican is going to be bashed just as hard as a more conservative Republican. That's the lesson of the Bush years and the 2008 campaign. Bush was only halfway conservative, if that, but the left went after him as if he were their arch-enemy. And McCain was about as moderate a nominee as the GOP tolerates, and he was downright gracious toward Obama in some respects instead of campaigning against him vigorously, but McCain was also vilified.
Any Republican will be vilified by the undiscerning, vituperative left. So we might as well put up a more conservative Republican who will make conservative arguments and enact more of the conservative agenda.
May '10
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
I wouldn't call it stubbornness. I'd call it toughness. But his greatest virtue is that he sees the truth of what's happening and is unafraid to draw honest attention to it, even though it means enduring so much scorn and ridicule, including from his own side.
Edited on March 20, 2012 at 2:01pmMar '12
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Mr. McGurn makes great points, but he's wrong about one thing--this race is locked up. Romney is, if anything, gaining momentum.
Jun '10
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
You better tell Romney (and his PAC,) because if it's all locked up, he's wasting a lot of money advertising in a primary that's already won.
Mar '12
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
etoile, do you have any serious doubt that Romney will be the nominee? Really?
Edited on March 20, 2012 at 3:17pmFeb '12
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
It's that kind of attitude from Romney and some of his followers - "The nomination is ours; don't bother competing" - that inspires hard feelings among the supporters of the other candidates. It is the same attitude of the mainstream GOP leadership who have favored so-called moderates over conservatives in every election for decades.
I've had quite enough of being told whom to vote for.
The party told me I had to vote for Dole and for GWB, and no one else should bother competing. Dole lost, and GWB, who was not more than 50% conservative, barely won (both times).
The party told me I had to support Crist and that Rubio had no chance.
And the party is still playing the same game.
Electability is impossible to determine, I've come to realize. Anything can happen in politics. The unelectable candidate today is being sworn in tomorrow.
I vote for the candidate who best represents my views, period.
Apr '11
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Leporello
It's that kind of attitude from Romney and some of his followers - "The nomination is ours; don't bother competing" - that inspires hard feelings among the supporters of the other candidates. It is the same attitude of the mainstream GOP leadership who have favored so-called moderates over conservatives in every election for decades.
I've had quite enough of being told whom to vote for.
The party told me I had to vote for Dole and for GWB, and no one else should bother competing. Dole lost, and GWB, who was not more than 50% conservative, barely won (both times).
The party told me I had to support Crist and that Rubio had no chance.
And the party is still playing the same game.
Electability is impossible to determine, I've come to realize. Anything can happen in politics. The unelectable candidate today is being sworn in tomorrow.
In 2000, for 46/50 states, the party was saying to vote for Bush (50% conservative, barely electable) over McCain (I don't know the scale you use, but <50% conservative) and Keyes (>50% conservative, utterly unelectable). Did you disagree? In Florida, Romney backed Rubio over Crist.
Apr '11
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Keith Preston: Getting ready to vote here in Illinois on Primary Day. Sheesh...looks like Rick got a nice sunburn for his PR visit. Romney's sharpening his message nicely...let's get this over with and go on to beat Obama. · 3 hours ago
Edited 3 hours ago
If you've missed Romney's reinvigorated assaults on Obamacare, Keith's text links are essential reading for an understanding of the race, and particularly for an understanding of the weakness in McGurn's conventional wisdom peddling (something I have never thought of a McGurn column before, and dare not repeat to my wife, who esteems McGurn above all other American pundits).
Feb '12
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
James,
I'll offer my thoughts, and then you are welcome to have the last word.
The picture you draw is highly skewed.
First, if the party hadn't lined up behind Bush by the summer of 1999, before the campaign even began in earnest, any number of other candidates might have run. But the party wanted to pre-empt the competition and pick the winner for the rest of us. Heaven forbid the polloi do the choosing.
Second, there were many more candidates in the 2000 race than Bush, McCain, and Keyes - e.g., Forbes, Alexander, and Bauer. (There is no way you do not know this, given your encyclopedic knowledge of recent elections, so I'm not sure why you're pretending those were the only choices.) Forbes, Alexander, Bauer, and the rest did not receive much support, but how much support might they have gotten if the majority of GOP leaders hadn't pre-emptively selected Bush for the rest of us? Impossible to say. And, again, who else might have entered the race if Bush hadn't been the pre-selected?
You are engaging in ex post facto justification of the endorsements of Bush.
Edited on March 20, 2012 at 3:50pmApr '11
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
etoiledunord
You better tell Romney (and his PAC,) because if it's all locked up, he's wasting a lot of money advertising in a primary that's already won. · 39 minutes ago
The money isn't being spent on the substance of victory (which appears to be already there), but on the perception of victory. The media would far rather be covering the Santorum-Romney race than the Obama-Romney race.
Santorum's attacks have now shifted from a policy focus to an ad hominem one. He's sloppier and less disciplined than he was before. Newt's running negative ads in states long after their primaries are completed. It's important for the general that those voices are muted, and a good use of money to do so.
Apr '11
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Leporello:
First, if the party hadn't lined up behind Bush by the summer of 1999, before the campaign even began in earnest, any number of other candidates might have run......
Second, there were many more candidates in the 2000 race than Bush, McCain, and Keyes - e.g., Forbes, Alexander, and Bauer. (There is no way you do not know this, given your encyclopedic knowledge of recent elections, so I'm not sure why you're pretending those were the only choices.).....
You are engaging in ex post facto justification of the endorsements of Bush.
I had thought you'd meant the weight of the party during the primaries, rather than before. I agree that the '99 support had an unquantifiable impact. You're right that I knew there were more than three. This is why I said "for 46/50 states"; the first 4 had a Forbes option, and theoretically Bauer and Hatch.
The analog to the establishment support at this moment, though, when no new entrant could arrive, is to the mid-primary support for squashing McCain, which was a call that I'd imagine you'd endorse.
My support for Bush over McCain was not always retroactive.
May '10
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Stubborn to a fault. The man has a hard time maintaining focus on the issues that are most important, which also happen to be the issues that will get him elected:
Feb '12
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Santorium's stubborn stance is called "courage of commitment," something alien to most of the political world.
While others waffle and pander, he plods on. There must be an "unseen hand" holding him up for a reason; we need to keep listening.
Mar '12
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Leprello, I have no idea what you're reading. I haven't told anyone who they have to vote for, and I haven't really heard any other Romney supporters do that either. I pointed out that it is unrealistic to characterize this race as anything but a fait accompli. Vote for anyone you want to. Mssrs. Santorum and Gingrich can compete as long as they want. I'm just pointing out that it's become a quixotic mission for the most part. That you won't accept that says more about your ability to assess plain realities than it does others trying to force you into anything.
Edited on March 20, 2012 at 7:45pmAug '10
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
Love it.
He is doubling down on the culture war thing, more power to him.
All the proof I need that he is not for me.
I understand the religious conviction against compromising with evil.
Once that evil is politicized and the accompanying religiopolitical fervency intensified, political accommodation becomes sinful and resolute culture warriors become righteous heroes.
Fine. Get your votes.
Get folks all whipped up, every day St. Crispin's Day. Then either run in a general election on some internet age version of Prohibition consistent with your rhetoric, or go silent and hope it all dies down.
Count me out.
Oct '11
Re: Bill McGurn's Appreciation of Rick Santorum
There's definitely stubbornness happening. In Santorum, and in ABR voters.
Romney has been framing Obamacare as an assault on freedom for a long time.