Posts Tagged ‘Rick Santorum’

By Rick Santorum

Mitt Romney highlights his business experience in the private sector but tries to hide his economic record in the public sector. He was a failed one-term Governor of Massachusetts, and by any objective measure, he would receive an F for his faulty fiscal stewardship there. Indeed, his economic record would not put him in the ring as a featherweight — let alone a lightweight — in any contest.

As heavyweight champ Joe Lewis once said, “He can run, but he can’t hide.” And in Mitt Romney’s case, past performance really does indicate future results. Here’s a start.

D in Spending when graded against other governors according to the 2005 Fiscal Policy Report Card produced by the non-partisan Cato Institute.

F in Job Creation as the Massachusetts state economy ground to a halt with Romney as its steward and ranked 47th out of 50 states.

F in Entitlements and Growing Government as Romney created a brand new entitlement (RomneyCare) and then mandated that all individuals purchase health insurance and all employers with 11 or more employees provide it.

F in Health Insurance Costs as, according to Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University in Boston, state health expenditures increased by $414 million, private health insurance costs increased by $4.311 billion, federal Medicaid for Massachusetts increased by $2.418 billion, and Medicare expenditures increased by $1.426 billion for a total increase of $8.569 billion in RomneyCare’s first 5 years.

F on Cap and Trade as he appointed litigation-happy environmentalists to key government jobs, flip-flopped on cap and trade, flip-flopped on carbon taxes, and made the following promise about a coal-fired plant: “I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant, that plant kills people.”

F on Wall Street Bailouts as he supported giving taxpayers the Wall Street bailout tab –even though they already paid dearly for the abuses and excesses with their retirement savings losses.
F for Raising Taxes as he increased fees and taxes by over $740 million in his only term as governor.

While Mitt Romney could legitimately argue that he should get an A for consistency, his record of economic irresponsibility clearly shows he cannot legitimately argue that he can fix the economy.

As governor of Massachusetts, Romney supported major regulatory expansions in the healthcare environment almost identical to Obama’s unconstitutional overreach.

Romney’s inability to advance economic freedom while Governor of Massachusetts gives little comfort that he will do so as President of the United States.

However, I understand that healthy families and economic freedom go hand in hand, and each reinforces the other. High taxes and massive overregulation hamper economic freedom. Only Washington insiders and crony capitalists benefit from those policies. That’s why as President, from day one I will focus on giving American families the opportunity to thrive in a vibrant economy.

Each element of my vision is tied together by a focus on economic freedom. Here are 5 of its pillars:

Help working families — don’t punish them — through the tax code: I’ll immediately work with Congress to eliminate the marriage tax penalty and triple the personal deduction for children. I’ll also reduce and simplify the system with just two marginal income tax rates of 10% and 28%.

Unleash America’s energy: I’ll immediately approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. It will provide Americans with thousands of truly shovel-ready jobs and transport ethical oil from our Canadian friends. An American President should never again bow before Middle East interests. I will also immediately rescind all Obama EPA regulations that burden the economy by more than $100 million per year.

Reinvigorate America’s competitiveness: I will eliminate the corporate income tax for manufacturing activity and halve it to a flat rate of 17.5% for all others. I will also purge the crony capitalists in Washington and ensure that every American plays on a level economic field. Our Founding Fathers understood that markets should reward those who actually add value to society, not those who gain through political favoritism and back-room deals. Our Republic depends on a fair market system where everyone has equal footing.

Get spending under control: For the past 3 years, American families have been working hard and living with their means. Is it too much to expect Washington to do the same? I will balance the budget in my first term. My budgets will spend less each year than prior years, and I’ll reduce the non-defense-related federal work force by at least10%. I will also call on Congress to pass a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution.

Repeal and replace ObamaCare: I’ll submit legislation to repeal ObamaCare, and on day one issue an executive order ending related regulatory obligations on the states which was inspired by the freedom offending and health care cost raising RomneyCare. Replacing ObamaCare with the previous system will not suffice. As the father of a large family, I know the trials and tribulations so many undergo when a loved one enters the medical system. I will work with all stakeholders to produce a healthcare system that prioritizes the patient, not the bureaucrats and the moneyed interests behind them.

America’s greatest days can be ahead — if we work together to create an economic system where equal opportunity is provided for all, where everyone’s children can surpass their parents, and where traditional values are rewarded.

We only need the courage to remain true to our Constitution and the principles of freedom and unleash the innovation and potential of the American people.

Dear Rick,

I’m a huge fan of yours. I very want you to be President of the United States.

You are an excellent speaker. Your speeches on caucus and primary nights have been outstanding.

I thought your speech on the night of the Iowa caucuses was one of the best political speeches I can
remember — when you talked about your grandfather’s hands covered with coal dust. You spoke without a teleprompter. And you spoke from the heart.

That was just awesome.

We need a lot more of that.

Of course, you can’t keep giving that same speech over and over again. But stories like that one, that show voters where you come from and who Rick Santorum is are very powerful.

I also love your phrase rebuilding America’s economy “from the bottom up.”

That’s a tremendous theme because a lot of voters are under the misunderstanding that Republicans are for trickle down economics, where the people at the bottom get the crumbs. Your populist “from the bottom” up theme also contrasts well with Mitt Romney’s Wall Street image.

But at times, I think you get trapped by the media into answering horse race and process questions.

Instead of talking about what you want to do for America, you sometimes get sucked into talking about delegate math and your path to the nomination.

Forget all that. And tell your campaign staff and consultants to stop talking about process.

When you are asked questions about the latest polls or the delegate math, pretend you don’t even read the polls or worry about the delegate count.  Just say: “I really don’t focus on any of that. I’ll leave those process and horse race questions for you people in the media to talk about. I just know the more people hear what I have to say, the better I seem to do.  I just figure if people understand my vision and plans for the country, these primaries and caucuses will ultimately take care of themselves. You don’t need a lot of money or an army of consultants and pollsters if you have the right message.”

It’s like a golfer worrying all the time about what his score might be.

Forget the score. Focus on hitting the shot correctly.

And stop hinting that Newt Gingrich should get out of the race.

Newt will do what he wants to do. The more you hint that he should get out, the more likely it is he’ll stay in. You can’t do anything about Newt. Whatever happens there will happen.

Stop whining about the media coverage you’re getting. Of course the media hates you and everything you stand for. Get used to it.

You’ve got to stay focused on what you can do, and that’s get your message out to the voters the best you can.

Forget also about Mitt Romney’s negative ads.

It did not help Bob Dole when he told George H. W. Bush to “stop lying about my record.”

And it doesn’t help you to get down in the mud with Mitt Romney.

Mitt Romney has to go negative because he has no message. He literally stands for nothing.

There’s no there there with Romney. And the voters know it.

He is running a content-free campaign.

Ronald Reagan never talked about polls, or the number of delegates he might win, or anything to do with process or the horse race. Reagan never complained about the media — which was a whole lot worse back then when there was no Rush Limbaugh, no conservative talk radio to speak of, no FOX News, no conservative blogosphere.

But Reagan prevailed anyway.

Reagan always talked about one and only one thing: His vision for the country.

He did not even talk much about his opponents. He would usually say something like: “Some of our Democrat friends say ______________, but we believe_____________.”

He hardly mentioned Jimmy Carter or Walter Mondale.

When he was running against President Ford in 1976 for the GOP nomination, he hardly ever mentioned Ford.

Reagan talked only about his plans for America.

He was the Happy Warrior. Reagan never whined about unfair attacks on him.

So no more answering questions about polls or delegate math. No more getting trapped into answering questions about contraceptives. No more rolling around in the mud with Mitt Romney. No more saying FOX News is “shilling for Mitt Romney.”

Of course they are — always have been, always will.  There’s nothing you can do about that.

Karl Rove is not a political analyst for FOX News and the Wall Street Journal.  He’s a political operative for the Romney campaign and the GOP Establishment.  He’s Mr. GOP Establishment.

Karl Rove is a good man.  But he is what he is.  His candidate is Mitt. Stop complaining about it.

No one cares about this “inside baseball” nonsense anyway. Get out of the weeds.

Talk about the big issues and big themes that voters care about.

Talk about your vision for America.

But overall, you’re doing great.

Ben Hart

Watch Ronald Reagan’s great 1964 “A Time for Choosing Speech” on behalf of Barry Goldwater to see what I’m talking about

This was a speech about big themes and momentous issues — life and death issues, because of the Soviet menace. This was a speech.

And here was Rick’s great speech on Iowa Caucus night

We need a lot more speeches like this one. This is why Rick is connecting with voters.

Below is a screenshot of Nate Silver’s analysis of Rick Santorum’s chances of winning the Alabama and Mississippi primary contests. Silver’s chart appeared on the same day as these primaries.  Silver put Santorum’s odds of winning Alabama at 9%, his chance of winning Mississippi at 2%.

I usually read Nate Silver to see what he has to say.

His schtick, basically, is to use very scientific-sounding statistical analysis and then to make projections — sort of like what Larry Sabato does.

The problem with Silver’s approach is it’s purely statistical.

But critical to any political analysis is:

1) Political momentum (which candidate is gaining momentum and which candidate is losing momentum); and

2) Which candidate’s message aligns best with the electorate — in this case, conservative Republican primary voters in the South.

If you look only at statistical models (absent of just plain old political horse sense) you arrive at Silver’s conclusions.

But anyone who watches politics can see that a) this supposed frontrunner just isn’t resonating with voters: and b) there’s a fast-closing, though under-funded, challenger who is resonating with voters.

When the political winds shift, it’s very tough to change those winds.

Look what happened to Republicans in 2006 and 2008.

There wasn’t much any of them could do who had the misfortune of representing a swing state or district.

The political winds are clearly blowing against Romney right now. But he does have a lot of money. The question has always been, almost from the start, who would be the most credible not-Romney candidate?

Who would emerge as the strongest unRomney?

That’s clearly now Rick Santorum — as indicated by the fact that Mitt’s negative ads are not working against Rick . . . and by the fact that Rick is consistently outperforming the polls.

Santorum has had two key problems he has had to overcome:

1) Money; and

2) The fact that Newt has been siphoning off conservative votes.

Any casual observer could see that if Rick could at least somewhat solve both these problems Mitt would be in deep trouble — as has proven the case.

Mitt’s big problem is that he has a themeless campaign.

He literally stands for nothing.

Who really knows what Mitt believes?

There’s just no there there. And voters know it.

Mitt could not even muster 60% of the vote in Virginia when the only other candidate on the ballot was Ron Paul (who lately has been garnering 5% of the vote when Rick and Newt are in the race).

That’s how weak Mitt is.

The longer this race goes on, the less Mitt’s money advantage  matters — in part because the voters will have a better sense of who Rick is (so ads will matter less); and in part because Rick’s views are far more aligned with the views of GOP primary voters than are Mitt’s.

This has always been the big threat to Mitt.

He has had trouble getting above 40% of the vote in any contested primary or caucus. His vote percentages have been dropping with each passing week, not rising, despite the fact that the GOP field is half the size it was when this race started.

So Romney has been getting progressively weaker with each passing week, while Rick has been getting stronger.

This is like watching a marathon where the lead runner is on the verge of collapse, barely able to move forward at all, with another runner quickly closing from about a quarter mile behind, but looking very fresh.

The question is: Will the collapsing lead runner slow to such a crawl that the sprinting runner dashes past him like he’s standing still in the final stretch before the finish line?

This is what’s happening to Mitt.

Even the most casual observer of politics should be able to see this — should be able to see this is what’s been going on now for about a month.

Nate Silver seems like a nice enough fellow.  I see him on TV and I’ve been reading his stuff now for quite a while.  He sounds very scientific and academic — very New York Timesish.

But to predict on the same day as these primaries that Rick’s chance of winning Mississippi was 2% and the chance of him winning Alabama was 9% suggests that not much of what Nate Silver has to say is worth the time to read.

That’s why I took the screenshot of his chart.  I knew the instant I saw this chart in advance of these primaries that Silver was going to be not just wrong, but humiliatingly wrong.

Here was my own political analysis three days before these primaries >>>

Team Romney is telling the world Mitt’s got a lock on the GOP nomination.

Romney says he’s piled up too many delegates (409) for Rick Santorum (163 delegates) to overcome.  The number they throw out is that Santorum would have to win 63% of the remaining delegates to win the GOP nomination outright.

But hold on a second.

Let’s look at the math a bit closer.

For one thing, Rick’s 163 delegate total does not include Missouri (52 delegates) — a state Rick won the statewide beauty contest vote in a landslide.  Missou’s delegates are officially awarded later in a complicated process.  But Rick figures to get almost all of them.  So that takes Rick to around 200 delegates right there.

Now consider these facts . . .

Mitt Romney has won just 55% of the delegates so far. Less if we count Missouri.  And we’re only one-third of the way through the process.

If Mitt is held to winning just 47% of the remaining delegates, he does not get the 1,144 delegates he needs to secure the nomination.  That’s not much slippage — not much margin for error for Mitt.

Then when you look at the primary and caucus calendar coming up, the terrain does not look so favorable to Romney.

States where Rick Santorum should do well include: KS (40 delegates),  AL (50), MISS (40), LA (46), PA (72), NC (55). WV (31), NE (35), OR (28), KY (45), ARK (36), TX (155), SD (28), MT (26).  (Delegates in parens)

The two big states that look favorable to Romney are California and New York.  But New York awards delegates proportionally.  So Santorum should win a lot of delegates upstate and in the rural areas.

Mitt will win big in Manhattan and wealthy New York City suburbs like New Rochelle and the Hampstons. But does anyone really know how Republican primary voters in places like Brooklyn and the Bronx will vote? I certainly don’t.

And California awards delegates by Congressional district.  So Santorum could quite easily win 40% of the delegates in both California and New York state.  Even if Santorum wins only 30% of those delegates, that’s still not good for Mitt. We’ll give Romney states like New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Utah, Illinois, and perhaps New Mexico.

If you add all this up, it’s tough to see Romney wrapping up the GOP nomination before the end of June, if at all.

Admittedly, Rick also will also have a tough time getting the 1,144 delegates he needs to clinch the nomination.  As Team Romney keeps pointing out, Rick would need to win 63% of the remaining delegates (again, less if you count Missou’s 52 delegates, which Rick figures to win).

Remember, both Newt and Ron Paul have delegates as well — Newt  111; Paul 60.  And Newt will continue to pick up delegates in the deep south for as long as he stays in the race.

So it will be tough for Rick to get the 1,144 delegates he needs to clinch the nomination outright.  But it’s looking almost as tough for Mitt to get to the number he needs.

Also, to say it’s a longshot for Rick to get 63% of the remaining delegates is like saying it’s a longshot for the New York Giants to get 63% of the remaining points in the football game when they’re only half way through the second quarter.  It happens all the time.

Rick will win today in Kansas — will probably take almost all the delegates (40).  That win alone in combination with the 52 delegates he’ll take most of in Missou takes him within striking distance of Mitt.

UPDATE: Rick won Kansas with 53% of the vote. He’ll likely end up with all or almost all of the state’s 40 delegates. The rest of the vote was split between the other three candidates, all far behind. So this will take Rick up to about 240 delegates.

Now we have Alabama and Mississippi coming up on Tuesday, with Rick now having Mojo after his win  in Kansas.  So it’s very easy to see momentum swing quickly toward Rick. Once the momentum swings, it’s hard to stop.

How many times have you watched teams lose football games in the fourth quarter after they go into a “prevent defense” to try to protect a lead?

Happens all the time.

Then if Newt were to have a poor showing on Tuesday in Alabama and Mississippi, it’s possible he’ll either drop out or become a non-factor the rest of the way.  This would leave Rick as the clear conservative alternative to the Massachusetts Moderate.  Newt would then not be siphoning all those votes away from Santorum.

Rick would finally have the one-on-one race with Mitt he really needs to have a realistic chance to win.

Let’s face it. Mitt has been extraordinarily lucky to have two strong conservatives in the race splitting the conservative vote — Santorum taking the lion’s share of the conservative vote, but Newt taking enough votes from Rick to deny Rick key victories.

But Romney, even when he wins, has a tough time getting more than 40 percent.

Romney got less than 60% of the vote in Virginia where his only other opponent in the race was Ron Paul (because Rick and Newt failed to qualify to get on the ballot).

Remember, if Newt had not been in the race the past few weeks, Rick would have won both Michigan and Ohio decisively, probably Georgia as well.  And Rick would be sitting in the catbird seat right now.

This can still happen.  Might happen after this week.

CNN: If Rick Santorum wins the Kansas caucuses on Saturday, as most observers here expect, he might want to thank the voters — and Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.

Romney and Gingrich have essentially ceded the Kansas race to Santorum, abandoning plans to campaign in the state ahead of the contest and instead focusing on Tuesday primaries in Mississippi and Alabama.
“We chased all the candidates out of Kansas!” the former Pennsylvania senator said at a Wichita rally Friday evening, according to news reports.

Not exactly: Texas Rep. Ron Paul campaigned in Kansas on Friday and will continue on Saturday. Paul has yet to win any of the GOP contests this political season, though he could do well in the Sunflower State.

“I think we’re going to have a good win here in Kansas,” Santorum said Friday on CNN’s “John King, U.S.A.”.

Kansas is home to many social conservatives that ideologically mesh with Santorum’s anti-abortion, anti-same-sex marriage, pro-family, pro-religious freedom stances. Those positions helped Santorum barrel to primary victory in the neighboring states of Oklahoma in last week’s Super Tuesday contests, and in Missouri on February 7.

Read more here >>>

Michigan Republican Presidential Primary	PPP (D)	Romney 39, Santorum 37, Paul 13, Gingrich 9	Romney +2
Michigan Republican Presidential Primary	Mitchell/Rosetta Stone	Romney 35, Santorum 37, Paul 8, Gingrich 9	Santorum +2

SOURCE: Real Clear Politics

It looks like Rick Santorum has regained momentum after Mitt Romney took the lead last week.  Santorum is weathering the storm of Romney’s avalanche of nothing but negative ads. Romney leads heavily among those who have already voted, Rick among those who have not yet voted.

Last week Rick was losing support among Tea Partiers and evangelical Christians as Romney’s attack ads caused some to question Santorum’s conservatism.

Imagine that: liberal RINO Mitt attacking Rick for not being conservative enough. But Rick regained the trust of conservatives and evangelicals over the weekend with his solid performances on the Sunday talk shows. Conservatives are moving quickly back into Rick’s camp.

I think Rick might just pull this out. Romney has no message. All he can do his attack with his huge money advantage.

What’s refreshing is the negative ads from Mitt don’t seem to be working as well this time, as they did against Newt. It looks like Rick has staying power with conservatives. We know who the conservative is and who the liberal is in this race.

If Mitt manages to squeak out a narrow victory in his home state against an under-funded candidate in Rick Santorum, that will still be a devastating defeat for Mitt. Delegates in Michigan are awarded by Congressional district.  Whatever the final vote tally, both candidates will likely roughly split the delegates in Michigan.  Romney will carry the suburbs of Detroit. Rick will win everything else.

But also remember what happened in Colorado. Mitt had a big polling advantage there , but Rick ended up winning the state by 6 points. No one gave Rick any chance at all in Colorado. Rick also won by much bigger margins than the polls anticipated in Missouri and Minnesota. So I have a feeling the polls might be under-reporting Rick’s true strength. There seems to be a hidden Santorum vote out there.

I think we just might see Santorum, once again, produce results 10 points better than he’s now polling. He might even make it close in Arizona.

Mitt Romney is attacking Rick Santorum’s vote for George Bush’s ill-conceived “No Child Left Behind” program. But here’s Romney supporting that very program, which he continues to support today.

Rick Santorum, meanwhile, admits his vote was a mistake. He explained that he supported it because it was sold by the Bush Administration as a way to challenge the teachers unions and bring some minimum standards to teacher and school performance.

All but three Republican Senators voted for it at the time. And the three who didn’t were the most liberal Republican Senators. So Republicans were sold a bill of goods by the Bush White House on this.

Santorum now opposes “No Child Left Behind” because of what it’s turned into — an enormous expansion and power-grab by the Department of Education. Santorum calls for repeal of “No Child Left Behind.” But Romney continues to support it, while attacking Santorum for voting for it.

Overall, Santorum had a 90+ percent conservative voting rating from the American Conservative Union, even though he was representing a very Democrat state in Pennsylvania. For Mitt Romney to attack Santorum for not being conservative enough is like Walter Mondale attacking Ronald Reagan for not being conservative enough.

Romney’s hypocrisy and dishonesty on this is breathtaking.

Voters should not reward Romney’s Big Lie.

Have you noticed that Ron Paul never attacks Romney (ever), and Romney never attacks Ron Paul?

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Folks, I want to read to you an e-mail that I sent to some friends dated January 13th. Something took place on that day that caused me to have an epiphany. And I kept it to myself. When I got home that night and I started doing show prep for the program the following day. I composed a very brief e-mail, and here’s what I said. My brother was one of the recipients. He’ll confirm this on Twitter if any of you people doubt me. Snerdley is saying, “Just read it!” He-he-he-he.

I’m just beginning to see huge advantages to Romney if Ron Paul stays in. I can see Romney offering a plum to Ron Paul’s son (every father cares about such things.) I can see Romney offering a plum to Paul’s son and to not run third party to set his son up for the future. If you’ve noticed, Ron Paul never rips Romney, which I know Romney appreciates. In fact, Ron Paul joins the chorus of those defending Romney sometimes.

What I had detected, like an epiphany, all these debates I had never seen Ron Paul attack Romney, nor had I seen Romney attack Ron Paul. I saw Ron Paul attacking everybody else. And, of course, everybody else was attacking — well, not everybody did attack Ron Paul because he’s like the crazy uncle down in the basement. You smile when he opens his mouth, but the guy, folks, I must tell you here, Ron Paul is totally irresponsible when it comes to the subject of Iran and US foreign policy. This notion that we are responsible for Iran getting a nuke and that we can’t blame them because of what we’ve done? He almost sounds at times like Jeremiah Wright, America’s chickens have come home to roost. But Ron Paul is dangerous. They have a nuke because they feel threatened by us. I mean they’re state sponsors of terrorism for decades.

It’s dangerously irresponsible. And because he has the temperament of a lovable old uncle, people kind of wink and nod the other way. Nobody goes after him. But if you’ll notice, that’s not really the point. The point is that there is an alliance between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. This is what I have been remiss in not mentioning. So last night after the debate, I start doing show prep and I see all this stuff in the British press about Romney may be offering Rand Paul the vice presidency and I’m saying to myself, “I know I mentioned this in an e-mail to some of my friends.” I told my brother about it and went and found the e-mail, and that’s the one that I just read to you. (interruption) No, no, no. Look, don’t misunderstand. I’m just stating an obvious.

I’m not being critical here. I’m just pointing out something that is obvious. Romney is never criticized by Paul but Paul has criticized everybody else that has become the most popular not-Mitt of the moment. Last night it was Santorum. “You’re a fake.” Well, I mean this is really cool. Here you go making excuses for it. You did it but now you’re running for president, you wouldn’t do it.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Back to the very beginning here: What is paramountly obvious now… And, by the way, if you are a Romney guy and a supporter, you’re thinking, “This is brilliant, a brilliant campaign tactic.”

Whether it’s true or not that there has been an actual meeting of the minds in conversations and strategy developed between the two guys, it is clear that there’s a hands-off policy between Paul to Romney and vice-versa. Paul does not attack Romney. Ron Paul attacks every one of Romney’s opponents; Romney doesn’t attack Paul. And so last night, we start seeing these stories in the British press. One of them, Toby Harnden, was that Ron Paul would be offered the veep slot. Then another one followed that and said maybe Rand Paul, and then Rand Paul put out a statement saying he would be honored to be Romney’s VP.

And that’s when I said, “Damn it! Damn it, I wrote that e-mail on the 13th of January. I saw this, I knew what was happening, and I didn’t say anything about it.”

END TRANSCRIPT

Hit Play Button Below to Hear Mark Levin talk with Rick Santorum . . .

Features Player

Rick Santorum did and excellent job here with Mark Levin. I liked the line about how it sure is tougher to find a job than a condom in this country. Jobs and the economy is what Americans care about. But the media is obsessed with contraceptives and abortion.