Santorum shakes it up
Peter Hoskin 9:18am
Consult the soothsayers again, and rewrite the forecasts: the race for the Republican nomination has taken yet another turn. No-one much talked about Rick Santorum after he was retroactively awarded victory in January's Iowa caucus, as most pundits' attention had already moved on to Romney and Gingrich. But last night this disregarded politician triumphed in all three votes: the caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota, and a primary in Missouri. The Colorado victory was a particular shock, given how easily Romney won there in 2008.
Team Romney might be tempted to dismiss last night's results, not least because the Missouri primary is ‘non-binding’ (the awarding of delegates will be determined at conventions later this year) and because of the overwhelming financial firepower their man can bring to bear on the next round of votes, including ‘Super Tuesday’ on 6 March. But I reckon this is more significant than that. What it does is further exacerbate one of Romney's main problems: the sense that he is not the winning sort. This is the man who lost to McCain who lost to Obama, and now he cannot rally anything like enthusiastic support from the conservative base. He may still be the favourite for the nomination (odds of 1/6 with Ladbrokes, against Santorum's 6/1), but there is increasingly something insipid, something limp about his position.
Romney's solace now is not just his heavy campaign machinery, but also the chance that Santorum and Newt Gingrich will split the ‘Anyone but Mitt’ vote between them. Just as the Republican vote hasn't swung behind the frontrunner, neither has it swung behind any one of the alternatives. There is now talk that Gingrich erred in not focusing on last night's contests (he's out and about in Ohio), now that they have catapulted Santorum back into the headlines. But the main conclusion to be made is simply this: nothing is a foregone conclusion.
Previous
Axstane
February 8th, 2012 9:48am Report this commentFrom what I see and hear Mr. Santorum is the only candidate who is not significantly flawed. He has the misfortune not be as rich nor as loud as his two rivals either of whom would be horrendous Presidents.
and I'll go to bed at noon
February 8th, 2012 10:11am Report this commentI can't stand Romney and would love to see Obama beat him soundly in November, but I think "the man who lost to McCain who lost to Obama" is a spurious point. By that measure, Ronald Reagan in 1980 was "the man who lost to Ford who lost to Carter".
DavidDP
February 8th, 2012 10:19am Report this commentNasty piece of work. You can do far better, America. Live up to your dream!
Jeremy
February 8th, 2012 11:28am Report this commentI watched the speech. Santorum appears to be a reasonably competent performer - by American standards - and he has a measure of youth on his side, but I cannot say that I like the sound of the politics.
There are, apparently, 1.5 million children in America who are obliged by their circumstances to queue for food every day.
Do any of these candidates have anything at all to say to them?
THOMAS KNIGHT
February 8th, 2012 11:34am Report this commentIs this really the best the United States can manage?
Santorum is clearly unfit to govern, borderline delusional on some topics (belief in science would appear to be completely optional in his America - though this plays well with 'low information ie totally stupid voters, even in the USA there aren't enough of them to make him president.
Gingrich may well have the brainpower but has a disastrous temperament and a record that Obama would love to run against ... and again is happy to turn his back on science in pursuit of the votes of dimwits.
Ron Paul is the only man left talking sense. This lot will never elect him though as he's not religious and enough and, worse, his critique of the big government/gun-totin'/warmongering Bush years is too accurate and therefore too painful.
Jon Huntsman was the only credible candidate but of course was completely unelectible for that reason. An early exit was inevitable.
And Mitt ... what a loser. Obama must be rubbing his eyes, after a terrible three years, can't believe his luck up against this pack of muppets and their pathologically dumb supporters.
Maybe there's something in that study about Right wing attitudes drawing in the stupid after all ...
I S
February 8th, 2012 5:14pm Report this comment'Nothing is a foregone conclusion' - Here's one. Obama is a certainty for a second term.
tony hatfield
February 8th, 2012 6:19pm Report this commentcould someone post the electoral college votes to see just how much santorum has 'shaken up the race' after the mo. vote.
Redneck
February 8th, 2012 8:43pm Report this commentMr Hoskin
It's bizarre isn't it? Like watching a hideous car crash; I never would have predicted it either! Like Thomas Knight, I am very interested in Mr Paul. I have tried to read his transcripts rather than rely on "interpretation": makes a lot of sense to me.
Interesting article about him in the American Conservative: implying he was being aggressively blocked. What are your thoughts?
Frank P
February 9th, 2012 2:10am Report this commentRomney will eventually win the GOP nomination and have a charisma transplant in the very large shape of Chris Christie as a running partner. But whether that means an Obama defeat is very dubious. The Septics just don't get the power of covert socialism and the entire MSM are in the tank for Obama. Even Fox, I'm afraid, but it's more subliminal with them. Soros got Beck removed. Beck was the only one who really got it, he has the data, but unfortunately his bizarre style of presentation tends to discredit the facts. America largely seems oblivious to the neo-Marxist network that infests every nook and cranny. Four more years of their man in the Offal Office. It serves the Republicans right for failing to persuade a real firebrand with a squeaky clean pedigree to lead them. But what did we do to deserve it?
Craig Strachan
February 9th, 2012 3:51am Report this comment"nothing is a foregone conclusion"
Other than the inescapable conclusion that any one of these Republican rubes will lose to Obama in November.
Back to top