Category Archives: Elections

Here’s a shocker for you: People whom Romney has supported are supporting him in return

I have always, according to everyone else, underestimated the role of money in politics. It bores me, so I don’t attach the importance to it that everyone says I should.

But for all you folks who are so much more world-wise than I, here’s a tidbit to gnaw on:

Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC and its affiliates states have lavished close to $1.3 million in campaign donations to federal, state and local GOP politicians, almost all since 2010. His recipients include officials in the major upcoming primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina, and in three southern Super Tuesday states where he was trounced four years ago.

In New Hampshire, a U.S. senator, a congressman, 10 state senators and three executive councilors shared $26,000 in donations from Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC in 2010 and 2011 combined. All 15 have showered Romney with endorsements leading up to Tuesday’s primary

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley came out for Romney last month – a year after his Free and Strong America PACs funneled $36,000 to the Tea Party darling’s 2010 election bid. And 19 state and Washington, D.C., lawmakers in three Super Tuesday states – Georgia, Tennessee and Virginia — are backing Romney after his PAC poured a total of $125,500 into their coffers for elections held in 2009 and 2010.

Make of that what you will. Me, I’m like, Yeah, I knew that they were supporting each other. So what do I care about the money? But that’s me. I’m cynical about cynicism; I think it’s all overblown.

It’s as over as it can get without being over

How’s that for hedging, Yogi Berra style? Hey, I’m not going to get caught out on a limb again like I did with my prediction, the day he announced, that Rick Perry was going to win it all (all, that is, except the presidency). Hey, how was I to know he suffered from chronic brain freeze? (OK, actually, I hedged that prediction, too — but nobody remembers that.)

This time, I’ve been more cautious. All during the holidays, I kept getting these vibes that made me feel like this year was not as freaky as I thought it was, and that things were starting to take their customary shape.

All during the fall, even very late fall, I was puzzled. I didn’t know what to tell people who asked me how the GOP presidential nomination process was going in South Carolina. Likely Republican voters were just jumping from candidate to candidate like restless frogs moving from one lily pad to the next.

I knew that the party nationally, and in SC particularly, had been having an identity crisis ever since 2008. The usual patterns didn’t apply, as we saw with the victory of Nikki Haley over more normal Republicans. It didn’t look like the Tea Party was going to be that much of a factor this time, but it was hard to say.

I even started to believe that this time, for once, South Carolina might not go for the eventual nominee. Which would greatly reduce the SC Mystique in the national party.

But then, things shook out to the point that the familiar pattern asserted itself. After all that running around and flirting, SC Republicans started flocking to Mitt Romney. The pattern here has been to go for the establishment guy, and this year that guy was Romney. Last time, he was the Last Conservative Hope for the right, the last chance to stop the establishment candidate of 2008, John McCain — who, for his part, had been the outsider candidate in the previous contested GOP primary, in 2000.

I heard the pattern described well on NPR Friday:

You know, one thing about this race – for all its weirdness and twists and turns – it still is following the traditional form for a Republican primary. There is an establishment candidate. There are some conservative alternatives. Usually the establishment guy wins; that seems what’s like what’s happening this time.

And the guy who came in second last time – because the Republicans are still a hierarchical party, despite the Tea Party – is first this time. It happened with McCain. It looks like it’s happening with Romney. And the other thing, it looks like Republicans, as Bill Clinton used to say, fall in line instead of falling in love. Yes, Romney has weaknesses but they haven’t – conservatives have not been able to find an alternative.

Yup. And that’s what’s about to happen in the Palmetto State — whatever happens in Iowa and New Hampshire, SC is the place that says, “Y’all settle down, now — here’s your nominee.”

I’m late in writing this. I should have said it on the last day of 2011, when I read that Warren Tompkins had jumped aboard the Romney bandwagon.

All the other GOP establishment types had declared themselves early — Alan Wilson, Henry McMaster, Mike Campbell and John Courson for Huntsman, Bobby Harrell for Perry, etc. — but Warren had hung back. Warren is the Tessio of GOP endorsers in SC — he’s the smart one, who backs the most likely horse.

When I saw he’d made that move, I said to myself, Self, Warren is seeing the same stuff you’re seeing — and then some.

But I didn’t utter the words “It’s over” until Friday, when I said in a Tweet responding to the latest poll numbers:

It’s over. Unless, of course, it isn’t.“@postandcourier: SC GOP voters like Romney best,… CNN/Time poll says. #scpolhttp://ow.ly/8kBBS

Notice the hedge. I’m being smart. I want people to call the “Tessio of SC bloggers.” No, wait — he got whacked. How about, “The Clemenza of SC bloggers.” That would be more like it.

Today, I’ve been talking to a number of SC Republicans to get their thoughts on the race. I started my day over breakfast with an activist who has not declared for a candidate, even though he sees the writing on the wall. His first words to me were, “It is so over.”

I’m inclined to agree.

The Boston Globe’s endorsement of Huntsman

Huntsman in South Carolina in August.

The Boston Globe‘s endorsement of Jon Huntsman was strong, particularly in the way the paper set the scene and explained what was at stake (something most of the candidates have failed to do):

DISSATISFACTION WITH the economy, expressed in spasms of anger toward Wall Street and Washington; the dashed hopes of many who believed that Barack Obama’s election would create a new spirit of unity; and genuine uncertainty about Democratic health care reform – all of these have created an historic opportunity for the Republican Party. Just three years removed from a Republican administration that was roundly judged a failure, the party has a chance to renew itself – to blaze a path to bipartisan action on the budget, to introduce market-based solutions to health costs, and to construct a post-Iraq War network of alliances to promote global economic strength, knowing that true security comes from both peace and prosperity.

So far, Republican presidential contenders have shown little awareness of this opportunity. Far from promoting bipartisan unity, the GOP candidates have even abandoned Ronald Reagan’s “11th commandment” (“Though shalt not speak ill of another Republican”), shattering the party’s customary internal unity in an electric storm of name-calling and accusations. Rather than compare creative policy solutions, the candidates have vied for meaningless titles like “true conservative.’’ Rather than outline a vision for a safer world, they’ve signaled a return to Bush-era posturing and disdain for allies who don’t blindly serve American interests…

Then, there is the reasoning presented for Huntsman himself:

With a strong record as governor of Utah and US ambassador to China, arguably the most important overseas diplomatic post, Huntsman’s credentials match those of anyone in the field. He would be the best candidate to seize this moment in GOP history, and the best-prepared to be president.

Huntsman governed Utah as a clear conservative who nonetheless put the interests of his state ahead of ideology. He delighted right-wing supporters by replacing a graduated state income tax with a flat tax. Strong economic growth put Utah in the top five in job creation during Huntsman’s tenure, while he gave tax credits to companies developing solar energy. He offered a sweeping school choice plan, and joined the Western Climate Initiative, which set goals for reducing greenhouse gases.

When the national economy fell into recession, some Republican governors made a show of rejecting federal stimulus money on ideological grounds; sensibly, Huntsman took the money. While he endorsed the notion of a federal stimulus, he also offered a credible critique of the way the Democratic Congress had structured the plan. Then, when Obama offered him the post of ambassador to China, Huntsman accepted. Other Republicans, such as New Hampshire’s Judd Gregg, couldn’t bring themselves to accept entreaties from a Democratic president. Huntsman did. It attests to his sincerity when he vows to lead in a bipartisan spirit.

Serving as ambassador to China, the largest economic and military competitor to the United States, is a deeply meaningful credential. Notably, Huntsman’s nuanced foreign-policy vision of economic and strategic alliances stems from his time in Beijing. While other candidates point toward Cold War-style rejection and isolation of China, Huntsman promises deeper engagement. But he had the courage as ambassador to walk among protesters, drawing the ire of repressive Chinese authorities…

Now watch as Republican partisans dismiss the endorsement as worthless because it came from a “liberal newspaper.” Which to an intelligent person should be irrelevant, of course — either the endorsement shows wisdom or it does not. This one does, and that fact that partisans will dismiss it is further testimony, as if we needed any, to the distortions partisanship causes to the human mind.

A person free of such handicaps, an person with a penetrating, unfettered mind, can see that Huntsman has presented himself as the most serious, least desperate candidate. Even in small things: The Huntsman ad that I embedded here on the blog a few days ago shows a perspicacity, a discernment, a seriousness that no other candidate has either been able, or has dared, to show. A 30-second ad is a pathetic thing upon which to judge a candidate. But the tragedy of this nation is that so many voters base their judgments on so little. And it says a lot about Huntsman that he can pack more meaning into such a medium.

As The Globe says, Romney comes next in this regard, but his desperation to pander, to stoop to conquer, means he falls far short of Huntsman. And of course, The Globe knows Romney far better than I do.

Gingrich insists: Employment glass is half empty

I was wondering this morning how the GOP field was going to react to the awful news — from their perspective — that the unemployment rate has dropped to the lowest level in three years.

Newt Gingrich didn’t make me wait:

Gingrich Response to December Jobs Report:
We Need a Reagan Conservative

Hanover, NH – Newt Gingrich made the following statement today in response to this morning’s report of 8.5% unemployment for the month of December 2011:

“Three full years into the Obama presidency, and there are still 1.7 million fewer Americans going to work today than there were on Obama’s Inauguration day.

“Today’s new December unemployment figure doesn’t capture the full scale of the tragedy: almost 24 million Americans still unemployed, working part-time for economic reasons, or discouraged from looking for work.

“The Obama experiment has failed, and it is time to look to proven solutions that have successfully empowered job-creators in the past.

“Ronald Reagan enacted historic income tax rate cuts, a stronger and more stable dollar, regulatory reforms, and spending controls. Three years into his recovery, Americans had created about 9.5 million jobs. When we took control of the House in 1995, we moved quickly to balance the budget, reform entitlements, and make the largest capital gains tax cut in history – three years later, 8 million more Americans were going into work every day.

“Now more than ever, America needs a Reagan conservative in the White House.”

###

Now, before you laugh too hard at his desperation to find a dark lining in a silver cloud… Newt definitely has a point. More than one, even. I can attest to the fact that there’s plenty of pain out there. Someone very close to me lost his longtime job just this week — along with most of the people in his office. And there are no statistics telling the story of the tons of people who remain profoundly underemployed, compared to the jobs they had before September 2008.

But still… Newt mentions Reagan here. Does anyone doubt that, if Reagan were in the White House now, Mr. Gingrich would be insisting, vehemently, that we embrace the good news in the report? I don’t.

I don’t know whether the policies President Obama has pursued have helped improve the economy or not, and I’m suspicious of anyone who claims to know.

But good news is good news. And Obama looks more like a two-term president than ever. And some of the candidates who did not get into this race — Huckabee, Barbour, Christie — are probably quietly congratulating themselves right now.

Haley & Loftis agree on ONE thing: Romney

Maybe Mitt Romney is a uniter after all, if he can get Nikki Haley and Curtis Loftis on the same team:

Friends,

This week I was honored to speak before several grassroots organizations, including groups like the Greenville Tea Party and the Lexington County GOP.  These folks took time out of their evenings to gather because they care deeply about our state and nation.

Their gracious reception reminded me well of the hard work, tenacity, and assistance these good folk have given to me during my campaign and tenure in office as your State Treasurer. Being with these heartfelt conservatives fills me with renewed energy to represent them and makes me determined to work harder and longer on their behalf.

I am impressed at the respect and deference that my brothers and sisters in the conservative movement have shown me. As State Chairman of Mitt Romney’s campaign, I can tell you that there are six qualified candidates in this race and my friend Mitt will certainly not get every vote, but the ability of the most conservative members of the movement to listen and discuss Mitt Romney is impressive, and gives me hope that our nominee, when chosen, will unite us in our efforts.

The latest poll, released today, shows Governor Romney in the lead here in South Carolina. This reaffirms my heartfelt conviction that most voters believe that Mitt is the man to send Barack Obama back to Chicago.

Be Well,

Curtis M. Loftis, Jr.

Last seen at each other’s throats over… oh, I forget what it was about, but it was bitter — the gov and treas have come together over Mitt. Now if they can just get their aforementioned Tea Party friends to go along

Is it possible that Perry has dumbed his message down even MORE, just for li’l ol’ SC?

OK, so Rick Perry, who was not just on the ropes, but collapsed in his corner — his corner man’s arm cocked back ready to chuck the towel into the ring — before deciding to make one last comeback in South Carolina, has come up with a TV ad just for us.

Everything’s riding on this, mind you…

And here it is, in its entirety:

“Values” Script:


Gov. Perry: “As the son of tenant farmers from the West Texas town of Paint Creek, I learned the values of hard work, faith and family.


“I took those values with me when I served our country as a pilot in the Air Force. I returned home to farm and ranch with my father and married my high school sweetheart. The values I learned served me well as Governor of Texas, and will continue to guide me as President.


“I’m Rick Perry and I approve this message.”

Or, to be even briefer, Ah’m a regler feller, vote fer me.

Yep. The guy who has lowered trite saynothingism to the crudest of art forms, who has spent a fortune boring us in Iowa, has dumbed it down even more. Just for us.

Do you feel insulted? I feel insulted. I feel more insulted than I’ve felt since “Tinker, Tailor” didn’t come to Columbia as a mainstream commercial release (although I do hope to get to Nickelodeon this weekend).

Come, on Rick — show me there’s something there! Give me something to agree with, or disagree with. I mean, really — do you think South Carolinians are so dumb that they haven’t even absorbed the fact that you’re running as a good ol’ Southern boy?

Time’s a wastin’, boy. If you’ve got something to tell us, tell us. Otherwise, run along on home.

“Chuckles!” Where you been at, man?

That's "Chuckles" Gidley in the background, during a 2006 editorial board meeting. See how he got his name?

I was delighted to see this passage in the paper this morning:

Santorum will boast of his focus on the Iranian threat to peace while other lawmakers were fixated on Iraq. He will brag that during his 12 years in the U.S. Senate, he never voted for a tax increase and pushed for a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
And he will note he did those things while representing Pennsylvania, a sometimes liberal state, without “giving up his conservative principles,” according to Hogan Gidley, Santorum’s national spokesman.“He did not have to morph and change himself to win elections,” Gidley said, a not-so-subtle jab at GOP front-runner Mitt Romney’s record while governor of Massachusetts.
Hogan Gidley! Chuckles! Where you been at, man?

My calling him “Chuckles” dates from when he was handling Karen Floyd’s campaign for state superintendent of education. I’ve seldom had a campaign aide glower at me in quite that way before. Karen hated the camera, but at least she smiled for it now and then.

All in good fun. Chuckles likes his nickname. At least, I think he does. Of course, I once forgot that he was executive director of the state Republican Party, so I might have forgotten his opinion of the nickname, too…

Why stump for Romney in NH, rather than SC?

Speaking of releases from the SC Democrats, they just put out the above video, with this comment from Dick Harpootlian:

Instead of rolling up her sleeves and getting to work on South Carolina’s problems with jobs, education, and taxes, Nikki Haley is jetting to New Hampshire to play politics and mingle with the national press and pundits. It’s clear Nikki Haley is already done with all of us here in South Carolina and is planning her national political career. I hope she’ll bring us back a t-shirt that says “Nikki went to New Hampshire and all I got was this lousy tee shirt (and a lousy Governor).”

Aw, come on, Dick! The T-shirt gag has been done to death, and you just used it awkwardly to boot.

Anyway, the conclusion I draw from the video is that the Dems are driving to drive a wedge between our governor and her Tea Party fans, who are already less than enchanted with her over her support of Mitt Romney.

Beyond that, I find myself wondering — if she wants to campaign for Romney, why doesn’t she do it right here at home, with our primary coming up on the 21st?

Could it be because she’s worn out her welcome with many of the voters Romney needs to charm down here, while she still continues to get a free ride, and hagiographic coverage, from the national media — thereby making her more valuable far from home?

I don’t know. I doubt Mitt is that hip to the situation in SC. But it would be interesting if that’s what his campaign is thinking.

Ex-GOP candidate boasts of high ACLU rating. No, really.

Seeing as how I’m old enough to remember the epithet, “card-carrying member of the ACLU,” I was a bit taken aback by this release from erstwhile GOP presidential candidate wannabe Gary Johnson:

GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON TOPS OBAMA, PAUL ON ACLU CONSTITUTIONAL REPORT CARD
Liberty Watch Scorecard

January 3, 2012, Santa Fe, NM — Former New Mexico Governor and presidential candidate Gary Johnson ranks highest of all major presidential candidates in a “Liberty Watch” report card just released by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU report ranked candidates according to their positions on issues of civil liberties and adherence to the Constitution.
Johnson ranked higher than both President Obama and Texas Congressman Ron Paul in the ACLU Liberty Watch ratings. The report card included candidates’ positions on issues ranging from immigration to gay rights to a woman’s right to choose.
On the ACLU Liberty Watch website, ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero said, “Republican-turned-Libertarian Gary Johnson scored even better than Paul, Huntsman and Obama, earning four and three torches on most major issues. They stand in stark contrast to the other major GOP candidates, three of whom — Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum — didn’t earn a single torch in any of the seven major categories.”
The full Liberty Watch Report Card can be viewed at www.aclulibertywatch.org.

There’s an explanation. It seems that over the holidays when I wasn’t paying attention (OK, I admit I never was actually paying attention to Gov. Johnson, but last week I was like in negative Johnson-attention mode), the candidate gave up on running as a Republican, and is now seeking the Libertarian Party nod.

Which explains a lot.

Before, he was a Republican. Now, he’s more down on the two-party system than… well,  than an UnPartisan. Dig the fund-raising pitch on his site:

Everybody says they want a viable alternative to America’s two-party chokehold.
Everybody — Meet Gary Johnson.
The two-party is over.
See what I mean?

The Huntsman Girls, tonight on Pub Politics

I emailed Wesley yesterday to let him know I would be available if he needed me this week or next on Pub Politics (which would me my unparalleled eighth appearance on the show). He said he’s let me know if he needed me.

Since then, he’s been distracted by the demise of the candidacy for which he was working.

But that didn’t prevent him from lining up a show with considerably more appeal that I could bring:

Did you know that the human body produces its own supply of alcohol naturally on a continuous basis, 24 hours a day, seven days a week? Did you know that the world’s oldest known recipe is for beer?

And did you know that the Huntsman Girls are going to be our special guests this week on Pub Politics? Meet Wes and Phil and the girls at Pearlz Oyster Bar in the Vista this Thursday, January 5 at our usual time, 6pm. We’ll chat politics and partying to celebrate Phil’s birthday.

The Huntsman girls – Mary Anne, Liddy, and Abby – the eldest three children of presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman are most notable for their recent viral YouTube videos. Mary Anne, 26, is a concert pianist and works on the fundraising side of her father’s campaign, Abby, 25, works in broadcasting and handles media with the campaign, and  Liddy, 23, is a recent college grad recruiting young voters.

You can follow them on twitter @Jon2012Girls or check out their YouTube videos where they mock a Herman Cain ad or offer up their own rendition of a popular Justin Timberlake song.

McCain endorses former rival Romney

Mitt Romney got a nice boost on his way to being the winner of the New Hampshire primary, if not the nomination:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, endorsed former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney for the 2012 Republican nomination in New Hampshire on Wednesday.

The endorsement brings two old rivals together, and marks a potentially crucial boost for Romney coming off a narrow eight-vote victory in the Iowa caucuses Tuesday night.

McCain, who won the New Hampshire primaries in both 2000 and 2008, said he wanted to “make sure we make Mitt Romney the next president of the United States of America.”

“New Hampshire is the state that will catapult him to victory in a very short period of time,” McCain said after being introduced by Romney. “That’s why I’m here.”…

So now we have a united front between last election’s standard-bearer and the candidate who was his main rival by about this point in the campaign in ’08.

This is particularly interesting in light of the fact that last time, Romney was the last hope of Jim DeMint and others on the party’s right wing as they tried to stop McCain, seen as the candidate of moderation and bipartisanship. This time, Romney is the one all the right-wingers want an alternative to. Go figure. I guess it’s just another testament to Romney’s legendary, um, flexibility.

I wish I’d been there for the announcement. I would have asked McCain whether he knows where the Navy went

Look out, SC! You’ve been chosen as site of the GOP Götterdämmerung

Perry. Rick Perry...

Yikes! I didn’t expect this. Perry just faked everybody out. After sounding (and looking) like a loser last night, and mumbling about going home to lick his wounds and reassess (with New Hampshire a week away), suddenly Rick Perry tweeted this out:

And the next leg of the marathon is the Palmetto State…Here we come South Carolina!!!

Oh, and the above picture was included with the Tweet. I think he’s trying to give a James Bond impression. Like he just climbed out of that pond, and he’s going to take off that wetsuit-looking thing and have a tux on underneath or something.

Here’s what National Journal is reporting:

WEST DES MOINES, Iowa –- Just hours after announcing via Twitter that he would be continuing his presidential bid in South Carolina, Texas Gov. Rick Perry blasted Iowa’s caucus process and blamed it for his fifth-place finish.

“This is a quirky place, a quirky process to say the least, and we’re going to go into places where they have actual primaries and there are going to be real Republicans voting,” he told reporters. “Not that there aren’t real Republicans here in Iowa, but the fact it is was a pretty loosey-goosey process and you had a ton of people who were there that admitted they were Democrats voting in the caucuses last night.”

Sshhh! Don’t anybody tell the governor that we have open primaries here, and don’t register by party! Let it be a surprise!

More from National Journal:

The governor announced that he would be returning to Austin on Tuesday night to reevaluate his campaign after getting only 10 percent in the Iowa contest. But barely 12 hours later, he arrived at a final decision while on a run through Raccoon Creek Park. “And the next leg of the marathon is the Palmetto State … Here we come South Carolina!!!,” he  tweeted, alerting people to the decision…

Though Perry declined to elaborate exactly what that path forward is, South Carolina is rich in both evangelical voters and veterans — two key groups for Perry. He said he felt “comfortable” with the state, its people and their values…

What does it all mean, Mr. Natural? What will a last-ditch, back-from-the-dead Alamo-style stand by Perry look like on our turf — with Romney anxious to sew it up, Santorum eager to prove Iowa was no fluke, and Gingrich desperate to save what’s left of his candidacy?

I think this is where the GOP Armageddon will take place. Everybody (maybe even Huntsman) assumes that Romney will win N.H., and then the real free-for-all happens here.

Fasten your seat belts, folks.

So long, Michele Bachmann…

OK, now that she’s made her exit speech, we are reminded of two things:

  1. Just how useless the Iowa Straw Poll is — she mentioned having won it — as if we didn’t already know.
  2. That the country is probably better off without her leadership.

I base the latter on her hyperbolic explanation of why she ran. She explained that Obamacare “endangered the very survival of the United States of America.”

So, in our lifetime, that makes two existential threats to our country: The Soviet Union, and a health care plan that is a timid, pale shadow of that provided in practically every other advanced nation in the world.

You know, I’m thinking it would be great if the GOP would now concentrate on finding a nominee who knows what a real threat is. Because the most critical part of the job description is, after all, commander in chief. Maybe that process began in Iowa last night.

The painting to which the ex-candidate referred: "Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States," by Howard Chandler Christy.

With a Mormon and a Catholic leading the pack, let’s pause for a few words from John F. Kennedy

On the morning after the photo-finish in Iowa, The New Yorker is waxing deeply philosophical:

What will be more telling, perhaps, is how the Republican candidates, in the primaries and caucuses to come, address the ideals and most personal beliefs of others. A party whose base has increasingly been oriented around the interests of politicized evangelism finds itself with a tie between a Mormon and a Catholic. (The “entrance polls” in Iowa, like many others so far, showed one set of numbers for those identifying themselves as “evangelical or born again,” and one set for those who do not.) One has been left to wonder how much of a factor Romney’s religion has been in his troubles with Republican voters. (They have so many non-sectarian reasons to suspect him that it’s hard to tease out.) In the 2008 election, as Hendrik Hertzberg noted at the time, Romney attempted to ingratiate himself by drawing a circle around the followers of organized religions generally, while casting aspersions on those who led a secular life. Santorum, meanwhile, has made religious beliefs about matters such as family planning and romantic relationships cornerstones of his political program.

We are more than a half century removed from John F. Kennedy’s campaign to be the first Catholic President. In a speech that he felt he needed to give, at the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, he said,

For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew—or a Quaker or a Unitarian or a Baptist.

Watching his speech on the subject now, one is struck not only by his words but by the expressions on the faces of the people who are listening—really listening, it appears, to words thoughtfully spoken…

This has not been the spirit of the speakers or the audience in the dozen or so debates so far. What will we see in the six scheduled for January alone, not to mention the ads that will air in the weeks and months ahead? What will the candidates, and their surrogates, have to say about each others’ religions? Or about people who have no religion at all, and—one hopes this won’t need to be said—are no less faithful citizens for it? (Kennedy, in a crucial phrase, spoke of the right to attend “or not attend” the church of one’s choice.)…

$1.65 per vote vs. $113 per vote

The first figure is what Rick Santorum spent; the second reflects the Mitt Romney outlay. Michael Li of Texas figured it this way, about the time most of the votes were in last night:

Wow. Paid media $/vote so far: Santorum $1.65, Bachmann $8, Romney $113.07, Gingrich $139 Paul $227, Perry $817.

If those numbers are right, it sounds to me like the Texans particularly got ripped off, especially Perry.

But we should keep the two numbers in the headline above in mind as we go into upcoming contests in which Romney is assumed to have an advantage because of his bigger warchest.

Frankly, I still think that stands him in good stead. Santorum’s had a long time to do retail politics in Iowa, he’s going to need money to build on this momentum in places where he is less organized.

Or will he? There’s always the wild card of free media, of which he will be getting a lot. Of course, that can cut both ways. Up to now, he’s been scrutinized no more deeply than his sweater vests

Should Santorum skip N.H., head straight here?

That was the buzz at the Big Round Table at the Capital City Club this morning, fed by Preston Grisham, lobbyist and veteran of SC GOP campaigns. This is where the more fertile ground is, and maybe he could get up and running fast enough here, whereas there’s no time left in New Hampshire, with the primary six days off.

It makes sense.

Interestingly, the Republican Grisham was thinking along the same lines as progressive columnist E.J. Dionne, who was already speculating yesterday morning that a win in Iowa positioned Santorum particularly well in South Carolina.

Of course, mix into that the fact that Gingrich is preparing for a serious stand here, and you’ve got a battle.

Also… and I probably need to deal with this in a separate post… I’ve got the feeling that Romney might sew it up here. I need to give Warren Tompkins a call…

What IS going on today, indeed?

Wesley Donehue, who yesterday was as harried as a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs, seemed to have suddenly downshifted this morning, Tweeting at 8:35 a.m.:

So, what’s going today?

As it happened, I was wondering the same thing myself.

Wesley, you see, is working with the Michele Bachmann campaign, at least for the moment.

Rep. Bachmann has scheduled a press conference in Des Moines for 11 our time, and speculation is that she will drop out of the race — seeing as how Iowa was a place where she really needed to do well (remember the hometown bit?), and she came in 6th. A distant 6th, with only 5 percent of the vote.

She’s already cancelled a planned trip to SC, which I was asking Wesley about yesterday.

Meanwhile, Rick Perry is also reassessing. And the tone in which he said so pretty much said “loser,” precluding his proceeding onward with any of the necessary fire that his campaign has not had since, what, August?

Anyway, I wish the best to Wesley, whatever happens next.

In the Des Moines Register tonight, Obama has the loudest voice

I’ve been checking the Des Moines Register website tonight, and I can’t help being struck by the way Obama bought up the front-page ad space so as to dominate coverage of the Republican caucuses tonight. No matter who is momentarily ahead as Paul, Romney and Santorum vie to break out of a tie, Obama’s message plays bigger than anything else, all night.

Interesting…

Got a nice note from E.J. Dionne this morning


I appreciated E.J. taking the time to point something out to me...

So we’re entering the stage at which national media are about to start paying attention to what is said in South Carolina. So it is that I got a note from E.J. Dionne this morning. After praising this “poetic” passage in my blog earlier: “What fools the calendar doth make of us, even when we know better.”

… he went on to say,

OK, but still, does it have any impact? Huck wouldn’t have come within 3 points of McCain without Iowa — and Fred Thompson probably made the difference.
But you are right about our being fools. Original sin and all that.
Warmest EJ

He’s got a point. Especially about the Original Sin thing. But then, E.J.’s a smart guy. And a Catholic.

Yes, if Santorum wins Iowa, this is fertile territory for him. Being a values guy and all.

As for Iowa… My dismissive statements may be based in what I wish were true. As in, “Iowa shouldn’t matter, so I’ll say it doesn’t.” I wrote a column urging everyone to ignore Iowa four years ago. Then, when Obama won there, I started hoping it DID mean something — only to see him get body-slammed in N.H.

As I’ve mentioned here before, my baptism in national politics came when I covered Howard Baker in Iowa in 1980, for my Tennessee newspaper. Since I was covering it, Iowa took on  disproportionate importance in my mind. When Reagan lost there, I was eager to pronounce his candidacy over. We know how that turned out. My prejudice also arises from the fact that, as a voter, I am barred from participating in a caucus. I’d have the same problem, of course, in a primary state with party registration. Fortunately, we don’t have that here in SC, and our primaries are open.