Or perhaps I should say, live-commenting. I’m watching it here, since I don’t get that channel on TV.
And here’s my first comment — I thought Romney did a good job of deflecting criticism of his Bain record, early on there. What did you think?
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that a record 84 percent of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing, with almost two-thirds saying they “disapprove strongly.” Just 13 percent of Americans approve of how things are going after the 112th Congress’s first year of action, solidifying an unprecedented level of public disgust that has both sides worried about their positions less than 10 months before voters decide their fates.
It has been nearly four years since even 30 percent expressed approval of Congress, according to the Post-ABC survey, and support hasn’t recovered from the historic low it reached last fall.
In the face of the public dismay, House Republicans and Senate Democrats are fashioning less far-reaching agendas for the year ahead, in part to avoid the bitter political showdowns of 2011 and also to best position themselves for the fall elections…
So basically they’ve decided, “The country is right where we want it. No need to do anything else. Let’s sit back and let the voters reward us by re-electing us.”
Some of y’all were urging me to run for office earlier today, although perhaps ironically. Is this the moment for the UnParty to make its move, at long last? That “unprecedented level of public disgust” sounds like a call to arms for somebody, anyway.
We didn’t have to wait long for a release that addressed MLK day more in the style of the Dick Harpootlian we all know:
Fellow Democrats,
On the day that the country and the state of South Carolina celebrate the birth of Dr. Martin Luther King, Republican Governor Nikki Haley chose to break bread with Texas evangelist, David Burton, who has fought to take all reference to Dr. King out of the Texas public schools text books.
He not only disrespects Dr. King, but he uses Jesus Christ to justify every far right position that he can dream up.
Poor judgment and disrespect, two character traits we have come to expect from Republican Nikki Haley, and she has met our expectations once again.
Call her office at 803-734-2100, and tell her that her actions are disrespectful.
If you want to learn more about the man who Nikki Haley believes was worthy of celebrating her Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day with, watch below…
I have to say that I watched that video and didn’t get out of it what Dick said was there. It was too incoherent. See what you think. But at least the world has resumed its normal shape.
In the past 24 hours I have heard heartfelt complaints from three people — my Dad, ADCO’s Lanier Jones and frequent commenter Steve Davis — about being overrun by robocalls and pollsters. Here’s what Steven said:
If Mitt Romney doesn’t control his robocallers soon he’s going to lose my vote. Two calls yesterday and three calls today.
To which I can only say: “Hah! You suckers! I got rid of my landline months ago, and haven’t been pestered by a one of these since!”
I mean… I feel for y’all; I really do…
The Dick Harpootlian we thought we knew.
This probably won’t strike anyone else as ironic, but it’s just weird for me to read something from Dick when he’s in a reverential mode:
Fellow Democrats,
Yesterday was the birthday of a renowned American visionary. He changed the way people look at humanity, and we will never forget his courageous fight for civil rights.
Today we thank Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for teaching us that everyone is equal, and nonviolent methods develop the most admirable outcomes.
He was one of the greatest orators in American history and we will never forget what he did for our country.
Please take this day to offer service to your community; giving back to your neighbor just as Dr. King intended. By doing this, we are allowing his legacy to continue to flourish today and for many years to come.
– Dick Harpootlian, SCDP Chairman
Just doesn’t sound like Dick. He’s widely believed to have only two gears: wiseacre and ticked off. Yet here’s a third…
(My spellcheck thinks I’m misspelling “disses.” Looks right to me…)
Jon Huntsman had been through enough humiliation, what with trailing behind Stephen Colbert in the polls, not getting any bounce from New Hampshire, being called nasty names (like “moderate”!), and then having to face facts and surrender…
But he kept his chin up and quite like a man, giving the nod to Romney and urging all the GOP candidates to pull together like a team and quit trying to eviscerate each other.
And what did he get for it? Dissed, that’s what:
Romney downplays Huntsman support
By Cameron Joseph and Daniel Strauss – 01/16/12 12:12 PM ETMitt Romney’s campaign has been notably slow to promote Jon Huntsman’s endorsement, a sign it doesn’t see it as much of an asset in a Republican primary.
Romney did not join Huntsman to receive his endorsement this morning, and his campaign took hours to mention Huntsman at all on Monday, first promoting an endorsement from Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) and sending out an alert about a South Carolina campaign stop.
Romney’s eventual email on Huntsman was terse and, and a tweet barely mentioned the endorsement. “I salute Jon Huntsman and his wife Mary Kaye,” Romney said. “Jon ran a spirited campaign based on unity not division, and love of country. I appreciate his friendship and support.”
That stands in contrast to Romney’s embrace of Tim Pawlenty’s endorsement. After the former Minnesota governor endorsed Romney in September, Romney named him a national co-chairman of his campaign…
Maybe Huntsman should have just urged the nation to unite around Obama. He might have gotten more respect that way.
Maybe I’ve got my metaphors confused.
On a previous post, I likened Newt Gingrich to a hand grenade with the pin pulled. But I couldn’t remember what you call that clip thing down the side of the grenade that you have to hold in place manually after pulling the pin if you want to hold it without getting blown up. So I Googled “hand grenade parts,” and got this page, which told me it was called the “safety lever.” Fine.
But after I posted my metaphor, I noticed that there was a political ad on the hand grenade page — and it wasn’t for Gingrich. Yeah, it appears to be a Google ad, and therefore is showing up because I, a South Carolinian, went to the page, but still….
You know, I was so busy last night writing about the Huntsman departure from the race that only now has this thought occurred to me: For whom will I vote on Saturday, now that he’s out of it?
That’s a toughie. Let’s look at my options, in alphabetical order:
I was accustomed over the years to being interviewed by national media on the Sunday morning when a presidential endorsement came out in the paper. Today was no different, as a reporter with NBC called to ask me about The State and and its endorsement, prior to interviewing Jon Huntsman today.
I was happy to explain the Huntsman endorsement within the context of the ongoing consensus of the editorial board. I could well have written many of the words that appeared in the paper today. And I told her to remember the one thing I have said, more often than anything else, in explaining what an endorsement is not, and what it is: It’s about who should win, not who’s going to win. We all knew Huntsman wasn’t going to win, just as we knew Joe Lieberman wasn’t going to be the Democratic nominee in 2004. But he should have been.
And Huntsman was the man who should have won the Republican nomination, as well expressed in the editorial:
We need a president who can work within our poisonous political environment to solve our nation’s problems, not simply score partisan points. Someone who understands that negotiation is essential in a representative democracy, and that there are good ideas across the political spectrum. Someone who has a well-defined set of core values but is not so rigid that he ignores new information and new conditions. Someone who has shown himself to be honest and trustworthy. And competent. Someone whose positions are well-reasoned and based on the world as it is rather than as he pretends it to be. Someone with the temperament and judgment and experience to be taken seriously as the commander in chief and leader of the free world.
We think Mr. Romney could demonstrate those characteristics. Mr. Huntsman already does. And we are proud to endorse him for the Republican nomination for president of the United States.
Exactly. And Cindi’s accompanying column (Nina Brook years ago dubbed this sort of pairing “steak and steak”) went on to explain why none of the other candidates would do. All well reasoned.
And The State‘s reward for having done the right thing, and having clearly stated why, will be catcalls from detractors delighted that its chosen candidate quit only hours after the endorsement was published. (This will particularly thrill the ones who truly hate the newspaper, and maintain that its endorsement is the “kiss of death.” So seldom does anything happen to support their erroneous thesis — the newspaper’s chosen candidates win about 75 percent of the time in general elections — that I suppose we must indulge them in having their fun, eh?)
Have you seen the news? It just broke a few minutes ago:
Huntsman Says He’s Quitting G.O.P. Race
By JIM RUTENBERG, JEFF ZELENY AND MICHAEL D. SHEARCHARLESTON, S.C. — Jon M. Huntsman Jr. informed his advisers on Sunday that he intends to drop out of the Republican presidential race, ending his candidacy a week before he had hoped to revive his campaign in the South Carolina primary.
Mr. Huntsman, who had struggled to live up to the soaring expectations of his candidacy, made plans to make an announcement as early as Monday. He had been set to participate in an evening debate in Myrtle Beach.
Matt David, campaign manager to Mr. Huntsman, confirmed the decision in an interview Sunday evening. “The governor and his family, at this point in the race, decided it was time for Republicans to rally around a candidate who could beat Barack Obama and turn around the economy,” Mr. David said. “That candidate is Gov. Mitt Romney.”
Huntsman was right to back Romney, thereby seconding The State’s point that he would be the second choice.
But the nation is worse off for not having Huntsman as an option.
Note the two sides, above and below, of a mailer I received at home.
One of the good things about being a Patrick O’Brian fanatic is that it provides one with so many good metaphors.
For instance… one of the most difficult things for a man of war’s crew in the age of sail was to fight both sides of the ship at once. One way this might occur would be if a ship sailed between two enemy ships and fired with its larboard and starboard guns at the same time. This took not only a very well-trained crew, but a numerous one — remember, it took a lot of men just to keep changing sail and maneuvering the ship, plus twice the usual number of gun crews. Each gun required a crew of several men, and they weren’t much good if they hadn’t had plenty of experience firing live ammunition at targets under all sorts of conditions.
This required a wealthy commander, because the Royal Navy provided a minuscule amount of powder and shot, and the captain had to shell out his own money if he wanted his men to be able to perform well, even to survive, in a fight.
And only a captain with a numerous, well trained crew would attempt anything so taxing as dashing between two enemy ships to fight both sides at once.
Either that, or a very desperate captain.
I suppose you could interpret this mailer I got at home either way. It was sent out by Restore Our Future, Inc., which exists to promote Mitt Romney.
We know he’s a wealthy captain, with a numerous crew. But is he also desperate?
His foes are the ones who should be desperate. They know that if they don’t stop him in South Carolina, they are done for. But he also knows that, and probably just as soon have done with them all.
So he fires both broadsides at once; never mind the cost.
Drat.
To borrow from an SNL skit, this is something you can put under the heading of White People’s Problems.
While others at this conference were out playing golf and having fun, I was sitting here in my room in this Key West resort overlooking the aquamarine water, sweating away over my presentation for the panel discussion tomorrow.
In their longest form, my notes were 1,825 words in length, so I pared and whittled, and got it down so it glittered and shone.
And the upshot? After all the hemming and hawing GOP voters have done over the last few months, Romney has it sewn up.
But then I started looking at these polls Gingrich has been touting today:
ICYMI: Recent Polls Show Newt as
Clear Conservative Alternative in SC
Three recent polls show Newt Gingrich emerging as the clear conservative alternative to Mitt Romney in South Carolina.
An American Research Group (ARG) poll shows Newt Gingrich closing the gap with Mitt Romney to just four points in South Carolina, while support for Rick Santorum has collapsed from 24% to just 7% in 7 days.
The results: Romney 29%. Gingrich 25%. Paul 20%. Perry 9%. Santorum 7%. Huntsman 1%. Other 2%. Undecided 7%.
These polls reinforce trends that show Gingrich emerging as the clear conservative alternative to Mitt Romney in South Carolina.
· Evangelical Support. Gingrich has a commanding lead among evangelical Christians with 40% support compared to Governor Perry with 15% in second.
· Tea Party Support. Gingrich leads amongst supporters of the Tea party 28% to Governor Romney’s 24%.
Meanwhile, Governor Romney is losing his support amongst independents to Ron Paul, suggesting that the Governor’s support amongst independents is not strong, and would be lost to President Obama in the general election.
Poll Results: http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/primary/rep/sc/
This poll from ARG echoes the findings of two other recent polls.
An Insider Advantage Poll from January 11th shows Newt Gingrich in a statistical tie with Governor Romney with 21% support to the Governor’s 23%. Rick Santorum has faded to 14% support, with Ron Paul at 13%, Jon Huntsman at 7% and Rick Perry at 5%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2012/InsiderAdvantage_SC_0111.pdf
A Rasumussen Poll from January 12th also shows Newt Gingrich well ahead of Rick Santorum and Ron Paul with 21% support compared to their 16%. The poll results are available here.
###
And I started to fret. Gingrich has mo. Here we have all these pols from all over the country ready to hear me in the morning, and what if I make a prediction that was completely off? David Yepsen is here. Today, a guy with PBS was asking me on the phone, “Who is the David Yepsen of South Carolina.” I resisted the temptation to say, “You’re talkin’ to him, baby!”
In any case, the actual David Yepsen (he’s the Brad Warthen of Iowa) is here, and I’m about to make a fool of myself in front of him.
So I started making phone calls to Republicans whose judgment I trust in South Carolina. And the very first one I reached said there’s no way this thing is sewn up, that there’s movement and Gingrich is impressing people.
He said he suspects Romney is going to fail in South Carolina for the same reason he failed with our voters four years ago.
Why is that, I asked?
“Because he’s a plastic banana rock ‘n’ roller.”
What does that mean, I croaked?
It means South Carolinians look at him and see a phony.
Oh.
Anyway, I’m scrapping my presentation for tomorrow. I’m going to wing it. Here’s hoping my “winging-it privileges” haven’t been revoked.
When I was traveling with Howard Baker in Iowa in 1980, before the caucuses, it looked like we were going to be iced in at Dubuque. We had flown in earlier in the day. I had been in the second plane, with a couple of guys from an NBC crew. It was a four-seater, and flying in from Des Moines, the pilot only had a tiny patch of windshield, about the size of my hand, that he could see through by constantly squirting alcohol on it. When I got out of the plane, I was trying to button my trenchcoat when the wind caught it like a sail and I started gliding across the frozen tarmac.
Later, I was scheduled to fly back to Des Moines in the “big” plane, which wasn’t all that much bigger, with Baker. We waited in the tiny general aviation terminal for more than an our while the wings of our plane were deiced, then deiced again, and again. Finally, we got in and took off. Someone told me that they only let us go because it was Sen. Baker.
Two years later, I realized that the aviation officials had done us no favors letting us go. I had no idea how very dangerous ice on the wings could be. Until the Air Florida crash.
Thought I should share with you this story by my friend and former colleague Aaron Sheinin, writing in the Atlanta paper. I think this is officially the umpteenth story about South Carolina to put “down and dirty” in the headline.
Here’s the good part:
Brad Warthen, who spent 22 years writing and editing political news at The State newspaper in Columbia, said South Carolina voters are typically “boring” when it comes to presidential contests.
“Even though we are the state that seceded first and would do it again and all that kind of stuff, there is this anti-establishment, anti-government, hyperindividualism thing, but when it comes right down to it, we kind of vote for the ‘boss,’” said Warthen, now a public relations executive who still writes about politics on his personal blog.
The 2012 cycle seemed different, though, until about mid-December, Warthen said. Perry leaped to the top of the polls after joining the race in August. Then it was Georgia’s Herman Cain who enjoyed front-runner status while Gingrich held that role from late November through mid-December.
“Finally, it’s like, ‘Oh, well, we know we’re going to nominate Romney, let’s just get on with it,’” Warthen said…
After I gave that “boss” quote to Aaron, I told him I had been about to say, “in the end we kind of vote for the massa,” playing a bit on our history. But I had decided against it, partly because people might have found the reference confusing. He said he thought that was a good call.
(Here’s what I was thinking when I thought of “massa.” I was thinking of all the poor whites who got suckered into fighting the Civil War by the massas back then. Nowadays, while those same whites’ descendants love to get excited about fringe candidates, particularly the ones who appeal to their sense of personal freedom — which was the same thing the slaveowners played on in 1860 — in the end they go with the candidate who looks most like the master of the plantation. See? People wouldn’t have gotten all that. They would have thought I was saying something about black voters, and gone, “Huh?”)
Wesley and the gang at the Senate Republican Caucus are making sure that you didn’t miss this story:
DMV: 900 Dead People May Have Voted
Columbia, SC (AP, WLTX) — The director of South Carolina’s Department of Motor Vehicles has told the State Law Enforcement Division that more than 900 people who were recorded as having voted were actually dead.
DMV Director Kevin Shwedo told legislators about the issue Wednesday as the U.S. Justice Department questions a new state law requiring people to show photographic identification when they vote in person.
In response, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson asked SLED to review the evidence.
“Director Shwedo’s research has revealed evidence that over nine hundred deceased people appear to have ‘voted’ in recent elections in South Carolina,” said Wilson in a statement. “This is an alarming number, and clearly necessitates an investigation into potential criminal activity. I have asked SLED Chief Keel to review Director Shwedo’s research.”…
First, of all, technically, the dead people didn’t actually vote. So they are innocent in this.
So I am shocked that the GOP senators are using this unfortunate incident to insist that their Voter ID law be reinstated. I mean, think about it — these dead people didn’t do anything wrong, and the senators want to penalize them. Do you have any idea how much harder it is for a dead person to get a picture ID than it is for you and me? I mean, have a heart…
This is the big news in these parts tonight:
The company that manufactures Mercedes-Benz luxury cars unleashed outrage among Cuban-Americans in Miami and other cities on Thursday for using the image of Argentine revolutionary Ernesto “Che” Guevara to promote their vehicles.
While Daimler AG, the German company which controls Mercedes-Benz, quickly apologized for the use of the image in a presentation in Las Vegas this week, the damage was done.
Many Cuban exiles in South Florida who have fled the island since Fidel Castro took power with the help of Guevara in 1959 not only rejected the ad campaign but also expressed disgust that such a prestigious company would use the image of the revolutionary blamed for executions and implementation of communism on the island…
Oh, one other thing. Apparently, Mitt Romney was down this way (remember, I’m in Key West) today campaigning. Sounds like somebody’s taking South Carolina for granted, a little bit.
Huntsman speaks to students at USC.
Yesterday I was so busy running from one candidate event to another that I didn’t have time to write about any of them. I left the last one while Rick Santorum was still talking, and grabbed a late dinner and packed and hit the sack for about five hours sleep.
So here are some brief notes from what I saw out there on Wednesday:
Rick Perry — The event was set for 1:10 p.m. at Doc’s Barbecue — Kirkman Finlay‘s place. Or one of them, anyway. Kirkman was there, as was Sunny Phillips, the ex-blogger (y’all remember the Crunchy Republican? she’s thinking about starting it back up!) who is working for the campaign. So were plenty of media, as mentioned back here.
Perry arrived reasonably close to the scheduled time, then went around and shook some hands among the sparse, late-lunch crowd. Then he went into the back room, which was packed. But it was a tiny room. There were maybe, maybe 30 people in there who were not press. Tops.
He pretty much gave his standard God and Country speech, and it was well-received. But as I said, not many there to receive it. Later in the day, an operative with a competing campaign would claim to me that our own Katon Dawson called Perry in Texas after Iowa and talked him into staying in through South Carolina. Next time I see Katon, I’ll ask him about that. I’ll bet Perry’s wondering about that advice.
Jon Huntsman — He also spoke to a full room, but it was a much bigger one, on the top floor of the Moore School at USC. I’m guessing about 300. Of course, it was mostly students, and who knows how many were assigned to be there? Still, they seemed less bored than such groups often look to be.
The room was stifling, it was so packed. Hard to get in or out. Cindi Scoppe actually got out of the office to attend, and had to stand in the doorway. There were USC faculty and staff types there whom I recognized, but mostly a young crowd. When I arrived, Henry McMaster said he was glad to see somebody else there with gray hair. Thanks, Henry. I guess he couldn’t see Richard Quinn, who was out in the hall. Richard was griping about the play Huntsman’s strong New Hampshire finish had gotten. He and others with the campaign told me about how they had been surging ever since the Sunday morning debate, and the NH result showed it, but analysts were saying Huntsman hadn’t done as well as expected.
For his part, Huntsman talked less about the red-meat stuff he’d been talking about in recent days (term limits, etc.) and concentrated more on wonkish stuff, perhaps because of his academic audience. He talked about congratulating ourselves on what we’ve accomplished in Afghanistan (kicking out the Taliban and al Qaeda, encouraging civil institutions and the like), and getting out. And he talked about the economy, saying banks that are too big to fail are too big — and that government policies encouraged them to be. (OK, that last bit was kind of populist, but he said it in a respectably wonkish way).
He was well, but politely, received. Perry’s tiny assemblage was more into the stuff he was saying.
Mitt Romney — This gathering, which was at The Hall at Senate’s End (former site of Sterling Garden Center), was completely unlike any other I saw on Wednesday. Of course, it was after work, but that doesn’t explain the crowd that I can’t begin to estimate (I couldn’t get to a vantage point to see it all), but I’ll just call it 1,000 people.
This wasn’t a typical, come-out-and-hear-what-this-guy-has-to-say gathering. This was a victory party, and every Republican who wanted to be on the winning team (and that’s a big crowd) was there. Nikki Haley, Curtis Loftis, Ralph Norman, Chip Huggins and all sorts of elected folks, and a lot of people were there to cheer for the presumptive nominee.
The program started late, and a miracle happened: Nikki Haley acknowledged Curtis Loftis — who, after all, was supporting Romney before she was. But she didn’t share the limelight. She and Romney were the only ones I could see — they were on some sort of platform — from where I stood. Unfortunately I got no good pictures, as both my camera and iPhone set exposures automatically, and exposed for the crowd, not for Nikki and Romney, who were over-illuminated by TV lights.
Yep, Nikki basked in that light. And basked, and basked, and basked. I didn’t think she was ever going to let Romney speak, and I wasn’t the only one thinking that. Someone behind me uttered a grunt of irritable satisfaction when she finally started to wrap it up.
Romney, of course, just did what he’s been doing in recent days, talking about that awful Obama fella, who has singlehandedly ruined the economy and given the country’s security away to foreigners. And the crowd ate it up, occasionally making roaring sounds. Like a pep rally.
I had to leave while he was still talking to make it to any of the next event.
Rick Santorum — Things were quieter at the next event. It was a good crowd — bigger than Perry’s; smaller than Huntsman’s. It filled the building out back of the Springdale House on Platt Springs Road. But this was a sit-down-and-listen crowd, very polite and attentive. A number of parents had brought babies and small children. The seats were filled, and the standing room pretty packed as well, with some spilling outside. On the veranda, among others, were Hogan “Chuckles” Gidley and Ted Koppel. Later, I saw Koppel posing for a picture with a fan. (For some reason, a nice lady was also impressed that I was there and wanted to take my picture. I know know why. Maybe she thought I was there as a supporter.) Rusty was there, of course. Rusty was wearing a sweater vest; the candidate was not.
This was a crowd less interested in being on the bandwagon than in hearing the answers they wanted to hear. And in an understated fashion, Santorum provided them. I arrived in the middle of his opening remarks (I would have missed them entirely if I had waited for Romney to finish).
Wrapping up, Santorum did this really effective thing that I’ve never seen before, at least not done this well. Instead of building to a big, rah-rah finish (which Perry had done, for instance), Santorum said something about not really wanting to run for president, having better things to do as a family man, and then said, very quietly, “… but it’s my duty.” The crowd didn’t roar, but you got the sense that they loved him for it.
He talked about three reasons Romney would be weak in a general election: He can’t hit Obama on health care because of Romney care; he’s vulnerable as a Wall Streeter, and he has no more foreign policy experience than Obama himself had.
One woman got up and said she wanted to know his positions on three things: abortion, the family, and Israel. The juxtaposition, the way she said it, caused laughter in the room, even from Santorum. But he politely presented his bona fides on those scores.
In spite of what Ron Paul may say about him, Santorum is pretty hard core on federal spending. He not only wants a balanced budget amendment, but he wants the Constitution to limit the budget to 18 percent of the economy.
I had to leave before he was done, to go pack.
I hadn’t finished eating dinner when an AP alert on my phone told me Mitt Romney had won the New Hampshire primary.
So since then, it’s just been a matter of seeing how they line up behind him.
With 66 percent reporting, Romney has 38 percent, Ron Paul 23 percent, and John Huntsman 17 percent. Which means Huntsman is effectively in second place, since Ron Paul isn’t going to be the nominee. Which was probably about where he needed to be to continue.
Gingrich and Santorum at tied at less than 10 percent. And Rick Perry? Less than 1 percent. He has an explanation for that: “I skipped New Hampshire and aimed my campaign right at conservative South Carolina, where we’ve been campaigning hard and receiving an enthusiastic welcome.”
He and others will be much in evidence henceforth in these parts. Busy day tomorrow. I’m going to try to drop by as many of the following as possible:
Looks like Gingrich doesn’t make it to town until Thursday — when I will be out of town (more about that later).
Here we go again, y’all…
On Monday, I started getting serious about interviewing SC Republicans, both those who have committed to candidates and one or two who are staying on the sidelines.
I arranged to meet fellow Rotarian Rusty Depass before our weekly meeting. Rusty is supporting Rick Santorum, and made sure to tell me that he’s backed him from the start — no post-Iowa bandwagon-joiner is our Rusty.
It’s very much like Rusty not to support Mitt Romney, whom he calls “the successor to Ford, Dole and McCain” — all relative centrists who led the party to defeat in the fall.
And Rusty isn’t looking for a defeat this year. In fact, he surprised me when he explained why he is unmoved by Republicans who say they back Romney because he can beat President Obama in the fall.
“We’re not trying to beat Obama,” he said, which grabbed my attention. “He’s beat. We’re picking a president.”
Really, I said? Other Republicans have sounded far less certain. Some — not for attribution, of course — just come out and say that they’re resigned to a second Obama term, as much as it displeases them. I got the strong impression that some of the people who did not run this year — Mike Huckabee in particular — stayed out for that very reason. In fact, Huckabee was saying it as early as the start of 2010. And I think he was right, to the extent that anything like that can be predicted so far out.
But Rusty definitely doesn’t think so. And he wants “a real conservative,” rather than “some milquetoast moderate leading us to defeat again.”
But why Santorum? It’s not like Rusty is always drawn to cultural conservatives. I can understand why my friend Hal Stevenson — who dropped by our table while Rusty and I were speaking (to tell me what he thought of “Tinker, Tailor”) — is supporting Santorum. But Rusty supported Rudy Giuliani last time. (And we all remember what Alec Sanders said about him: “He supports gay rights. He supports banning all handguns. He supports abortion. His wife kicked him out, and he moved in with two gay men and a Shih Tzu. Is that South Carolina values? I don’t think so.”)
Well, we know why he’s not for Romney — aside from the wishy-washiness, Rusty wants “a real person… I don’t begrudge Romney his money, but he’s hard to relate to.” And he maintains that the others have become such “luminaries” that they’re “hard to talk to.”
There are things he likes about the others. “Newt Gingrich has more bright ideas before breakfast than most people do in a lifetime.”
“I would like to see a debate between Gingrich and Obama, and see him just demolish him.” But “when the debate’s over, people don’t like him.”
And Santorum is likable. Rusty DePass thinks so, anyway.
For more on the subject, go read Rusty’s letter to the editor from last week. Here’s how it begins:
Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania is not only well-informed and articulate, but he is a likeable, dedicated, committed, unapologetic conservative. The one election he lost, which seems to be the only gig against him, was because he refused to budge from his conservative principles, and in a heavily Roman Catholic state, he got beat by the last pro-life Democrat in America. All of which brings us to the practical political considerations of nominating a candidate for president. What do they bring to the table? Except for Santorum, the answer would appear to be nothing.
Rusty’s not a guy to mince words. As he sums up, “We have a country to save, and Rick Santorum is the right man to do it.”
Bud continues to think that I’m just making it up about Democrats being capable of the same kind of pointless, bad-faith partisanship as Republicans.
As I said in a previous thread, Republicans introduced partisanship to South Carolina, by definition. Republicans like to say that before they came along, we had a “one-party state.” But really, it was a no-party state. When there is only one party, it isn’t a party, in the sense that we have in these partisan times. You have factions (the “Young Turks,” the Barnwell Ring, contention between House and Senate, between Lowcountry and Upstate), but you don’t have the foolishness of an idea being rejected or embraced purely according to whether it has a D or an R after it.
Republicans therefore introduced partisanship, and they relished the role. They really, really got into it.
For awhile, Democrats didn’t. They seemed confused. They were so fecklessly live-and-let-live while the GOP was eviscerating them, it was sort of endearing.
But then, Democrats started to learn partisanship from the Republicans, and some of them have gotten pretty good at it.
Want an example? See this release I got a few minutes ago:
Assistant Democratic Leader Jim Clyburn, Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin and State Elected Officials to hold Press Conference to Welcome Mitt Romney to South Carolina
State Senate Democratic Leader John C. Land, III and State Representatives Todd Rutherford and Bakari Sellers to join Clyburn and Benjamin at the State House
Columbia, SC –On Wednesday, Assistant Democratic Leader Jim Clyburn, Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin and State Elected Officials will hold a press conference to welcome Mitt Romney to South Carolina ahead of the state’s primary on January 21st. It’s time South Carolinians get to know the Mitt Romney who has proven he’ll say anything to get elected, admitting this week that he likes “being able to fire people who provide services to me,” pretends to know the fear of pink slips, and misleads voters on his record of job creation.
The central question of this election is who will restore economic security for the middle class. Mitt Romney believes America should join a race to the bottom based on loopholes for corporations, millionaires and billionaires and outsourcing of American jobs. Romney believes that Wall Street should be able to write its own rules again and pursue whatever means necessary to create profits regardless of the consequences for middle-class families.
WHO:
Assistant Democratic Leader Jim Clyburn
Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin
State Senate Democratic Leader John C. Land, III
State Representative Todd Rutherford
State Representative Bakari Sellers
WHAT:
Press Conference Welcoming Mitt Romney to South Carolina
WHEN:
Wednesday, January 11th at 9:45 AM
WHERE:
South Carolina State House
First Floor
Columbia, SC
Note that they are not “welcoming” Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich or Jon Huntsman. There’s a reason for that. The reason is that they believe (as do I) that Mitt Romney will be the eventual nominee. And then just can’t wait for the general election to launch into the partisan back-and-forth.
Give it a rest, guys. There will be plenty of time for this stuff later. We know you’re Democrats. We know you want to attack this guy. But let’s go ahead and have our primary first, OK?
You know what this reminds me of? It reminds me of when I was covering the Democratic National Convention in Atlanta, and Carroll Campbell came to town to crash the Democrats’ party and hold a “truth squad” press conference. I was like, come on, governor, save it for your own convention. But Campbell was an intensely partisan man, who didn’t care to give Democrats a chance to have their say without interrupting. I thought that was completely unnecessary.
Well, this is like that.
Before last week, I confess, I had pretty much ignored Rick Santorum. To me, he was just that former Senate culture warrior who had gotten his clock cleaned by Bob Casey in 2006.
But like a lot of people, I started paying attention to him after Iowa. And you know what? He said some stuff I really liked in the debate Saturday night.
(Meanwhile, I was less than enchanted by some of Jon Huntsman’s statements. For instance, I do wish he’d stop going on and on about term limits…)
My very favorite thing I heard Rick Santorum say was this, in response to Ron Paul:
I’m a conservative. I’m not a libertarian.
Wow. True, not all Republicans are libertarians, but when was the last time you heard one of them stand up and renounce that ideology? And then go on to say… you need to sit down before you hear this:
I believe in some government.
He actually said that! He dares to be a pre-2010 Republican! I just wanted to reach into the TV and shake his hand. Imagine, speaking truth to Ron Paul that way!
Earlier in the debate, he had done something even better. He pointed out that governing and running a business are two different things, and that being a CEO didn’t actually qualify you to be president!
I had gotten so used to Republicans either trying to sound like Mark Sanford or at least being afraid not to sound like Mark Sanford, that these statements were like a balm upon my soul.
And it reminded me — I always have liked the “values” conservatives more than the radical libertarians. (To my ears, “God and Country” sounds a whole lot better than “I, Me, Mine.”) And in general, more than the old school country-clubbers.
Maybe there’s a political future for guys like Bob Inglis yet. I hope so…
