Santorum Out! Romney Still Hasn’t Won Convention – UPDATES

April 10, 2012 By

News so new there’s nothing to link to yet! Check back!

Michael Brendan Dougherty at Business Insiderquick analysis and a tweet: “Really, Santorum played the game way above his head for much longer than anyone expected. ”

Santorum gave a shout out to the twitterverse and also, I think, sweater vests. Best tweet so far, from Peter Suderman.

“… this presidential race is over for me and we are suspending our campaign effective immediately.” – Santorum

I suspect his daughter Bella’s health was a consideration in his ending it, but Howard Fineman says not

Within the twitterverse, I see — immediately — people wondering if Mitch Daniels or Chris Christie would consider jumping into the race. Mitt Romney may have the delegates, but he does not, apparently, have the convention.

UPDATE: “As a Catholic, what do you think?” Someone just shot that question my way. Well, “as a Catholic” I was never that thrilled with Santorum, who always struck me a bit too much like the flip side of Barack Obama: easy to annoy, too quick to think of “government” solutions and a trifle sour. I took some guff from fellow-Catholics who were so delighted to see a Catholic politician actually espouse their values that they went all-in on him early. I understood where they were coming from, but their feelings seemed (to me) too similar to those expressed by Christians when it comes to cinema — they’re so happy to see a movie that reflects their values (or at least respects them) that they overpraise it to the skies, only to build up expectations that cannot be met and ultimately lead to disappointment. Santorum had his strengths and his weaknesses, like any other politician, but his Catholicity didn’t mean much to me.

I don’t especially need a “Catholic” president. I need one whose competency is obvious, whose ego is not over-the-top and who understands that the presidency requires an ability to balance his/her abiding principles with the reality that the presidency belongs to the whole country, not merely one faction.

I seriously don’t know if it’s possible find such a person, anymore, let alone elect him or her.

A Romney spokesman says: “We’re all wearing sweater vests today.”

Gingrich: “I am committed to staying in this race all the way to Tampa so that the conservative movement has a real choice. ”

Romney: “[Santorum] has proven himself to be an important voice in our party and in the nation.”

Ron Paul Spokesperson: “Dr. Paul is now the last – and real – conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.

Here’s Santorum’s full remarks — note, he does not mention Romney:

YouTube Preview Image

Why I am a Catholic: a New Top Tier

Bristol Palin’s Blog “No matter who you support for President in 2012, you have to admire how Sen. Santorum champions life…”

Mark Shea:

It really does make me wonder in what sense we live in a democracy when we all know ahead of time who the party elite have chosen and are perfectly aware that all attempts to defy that elite will result in defeat.

I had the same sensation in 2000. That sensation only increased when, a few years later, I had a conversation with Dale Ahlquist (who used to be a lobbyist in DC) and he recounted sitting in a bar on K Street shortly after Dole’s defeat and a some GOP mucky muck came in and said, “It’s settled. It’s going to be George W. Bush in 2000″.

Your illusion of actual choices in our political process is strikingly out of sync with how things actually are, I fear.

Hot Air: Running updates

Filed Under: Uncategorized
About Elizabeth Scalia
  • dry valleys

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/10/rick-santorum-drops-out-2012-race_n_1415372.html

    It now seems the circumstances are sad and hopefully not to become tragic as they did for David Camoron. All people of good will must extend their sympathies to Santorum.

  • Pingback: A Brand New Top Tier UPDATED | Why I Am Catholic

  • http://ycrcm.blogspot.com/ Young Canadian RC Male

    Unless you folks really band together in the reaminig states and give a wallop to Romney and Gingrich and vote Ron Paul, you will have no viable alterative to Obama. I dread another 4 years of him for all of you, especially for Catholics, and worse I bet his ethichal and spritual poison will pour into our country north of the 44. Is just the start of the (great?) Chastizement?

  • doc

    Romney will beat Obama. Ron Paul? Really? Mr. 6% himself? Santorum lost because he was too much a social conservative to win the liberal states, which Romney did and will continue to carry. Not sure why Newt or Paul are hanging around at this point. Rick got my vote, if not my state. He gave it a good shot and overachieved. It was a race well run.

  • http://jscafenette.com Manny

    Santorum is a good man. He ran better than I expected. I agree with Anchoress, he’s not my cup of tea. He’s got no smile to him and you can’t be president with no charm and smile. I wish him the best. Now let’s get together and defeat the person who has been and will continue to be a threat to freedom and religious liberty: Barack Husein Onbama.

  • SKay

    ” Now let’s get together and defeat the person who has been and will continue to be a threat to freedom and religious liberty: Barack Husein Onbama.”
    I agree, Manny

    Cardinal Burke comments about the Obama mandate.
    http://www.lifenews.com/2012/04/10/catholic-cardinal-a-sin-to-cooperate-with-obama-mandate/

    We WILL have a choice in November.

  • David K. Monroe

    Regarding Mark Shea’s comment: This is unnecessarily pessimistic. Romney, being the once-upon-a-time “conservative alternative” to John McCain (Remember that? I do.), was the clear frontrunner from the beginning. If you keep running for President and you’re not completely insane and/or incompetent, you’ll have advantages of familiarity to the public and skill in running a campaign, and that will help you get the nomination if you’re persistent. Also, do people forget that we just had a bunch of primary elections here, were everyday schlubs like me actually got to cast ballots? If The People gave Mitt Romney such a plurality of delegates that it doesn’t make sense for other candidates to stay in the race, then that’s reality and you can’t blame the “Republican Establishment” for foisting him on us. The attitude that election results are somehow illegitimate if they don’t satisfy me personally (whoever “me” may be) is ignoble and needs to be avoided. That way lies madness.

  • Thomas R

    Of course I can blame, at least partly, the “Republican Establishment” for foisting him on us. Even now he barely gets over 40% of the Republican vote and he tends to lose against Obama in head-to-head. He won in many states because he could just blow people away money-wise. There were several times he was below Gingrich or Santorum, but his winning was still seen as a bit of a fait accompli because had the establishment and the money.

    True if he had a disreputable private life or some view that the voters saw as completely despicable “money and the establishment” wouldn’t be enough. So it’s not a total explanation, but it’s almost certainly a big part of it. Because there’s not much, or anything, different about him than in 2008 when rank-in-file conservatives didn’t even really want him despite the love he got from conservative journalists or leaders.

    But anyway I came here to say I’m thinking of writing the hostess, Elizabeth Scalia’s, name in this year. I don’t think you’ll win, but you’re pretty cool.

  • David K. Monroe

    In my opinion, it is entirely meaningless whether or not Romney won a clear an overwhelming majority in every primary. All that means is that we have a hotly contested primary season, and there’s nothing wrong with that. In the primary, you can vote for whatever visionary or statesman or whacko or cartoon character you want, and it won’t tip the balance of the Supreme Court or raise your taxes or gut programs you think are OK or fund programs you think aren’t. What remains to be seen now is whether Republicans will actually come together and support Romney if he is indeed the nominee, or if many of them will choose to sit out the election and give us four more years of President Obama. If you think that’s a fine prospect, well then, by all means, write in Elizabeth and be ready to welcome Obama back to the White House.

  • doc

    David is correct. One reason there may have been an unsatisfactory slate of candidates is that Republicans know the corporate media will be combing through their lives and will use anything they can if the candidate is considered a threat to the Democrat. One example of this is the governor of Indiana (who really was the establishment favorite). Mitch Daniels had gone through a separation or a divorce before reuniting with his wife. His family knew that any humiliating aspect of that period of his life would’ve been used by the corporate media to ruin him, if possible. He chose not to endure that gauntlet. Romney had been through the process once already and had learned some lessons from 2008. He worked hard to bring Republican power brokers into his camp. They weren’t all there from day 1. Those who say they’ll refuse to vote for the nominee if it isn’t their guy are ignoring the vast differences between these 2 parties. The behavior and policies of Obama’s cabinet heads and “czars” alone should prompt us to vote for the Republican nominee. And of course, there are judicial appointments as well to consider.

  • Thomas R

    Actually it does matter David. Most every candidate has better numbers among his party at a similar point in their campaigns. That’s according to Gallup. JFK had similar ratings at this point, according to Gallup, and won but I don’t see a Republican President similar to Romney’s situation.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/153839/Romney-Santorum-Santorum-Exits.aspx

    And I’m not advocating anyone write things in or go Third Party. In fact I’d reluctantly say that if you’re in a swing-state you should probably vote for Romney. Even if you’re in a state that’s “swung” once in the last twenty years I might say you should probably vote for Romney. I’m in a state that’s went for every Republican, except Goldwater, from 1940 to today. Romney will win my state no matter how I vote. And for someone like Mark Shea, who I don’t agree with much when it comes to politics, Obama will win Washington state no matter who he supports or votes for.

    Despite how it might sound I’m slightly reluctant to vote write-in or Third Party. Granted I did it in 2004, but I argued against Shea on this matter. I think it may not change elections, but it marginalizes yourself. It’s like a kind of dropping out of society. But if the situation or person is truly intolerable to me I’m not voting for them. This is simply my choice, it’s not a part of a larger agenda. If one feels they must vote for a major party candidate than definitely vote for Romney.

  • David K. Monroe

    Well Thomas R, I think you agree with me more than you disagree with me. We can compare polls all day but in the end, the choice for Republicans is either to vote for Romney or welcome Obama back to the White House. Whether or not Romney improves his standing among Republicans between now and November is going to have a lot to do with just how eager Republican voters are to let Obama return to the White House. Polls aren’t meteorogical reports, they can change if peoples’ attitudes change.

  • SKay

    Every vote will count. There needs to be a decisive victory otherwise Bush -Gore will look like a picnic.
    There is a reason why Holder is using the justice department to fight voter ID and it is not to protect the integrity of the vote.

  • doc

    Skay, this is why Hugh Hewitt’s 2004 book, “You Have to Beat Them So Bad They Can’t Cheat” is still relevant. If I didn’t get the name exactly right, I came close. Democrats’ voter fraud will be greeted with media silence, if not outright attacks on the whistle-blower.