On Iowa, Romney, Santorum, and Paul
January 04, 2012
– Comments (52)
Last night, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum finished in a statistical tie for first place in the Iowa GOP caucus vote. While Romney's strong finish wasn't surprising, Santorum's sudden rise in popularity will have many empty suits and skirts in the Dead Stream Media (DSM) scratching their hollow craniums. Ron Paul finished third, a few percentage points behind. While this isn't the stunning victory his supporters had hoped for, he still managed to more than double his support from his 2008 finish of 9.93% of the vote. Not bad for a fringe candidate that many 2008 political experts predicted would have no real impact on the future of American politics.
If it's true that Romney's strong showing in Iowa bodes very well for his chances to win the Republican nomination, then the biggest winner of the Iowa GOP vote was Barack Obama. But before I get into why Romney has no chance in the general election, let us try to understand where Rick Santorum came from. Then I'll attempt to paint his certain fall from grace as quickly as it will happen in real life.
How Santorum Won (yes, that's a win)
There were a combination of factors at work that propelled Santorum to his strong showing. I'm going to start with what I feel is the most important. I like to call it the RedState.com voting bloc. There is a strongly committed group of neoconservative voters that exhibit a similar level of passion as the hardest of hard core Paulbots. They probably don't view themselves as "neoconservative" and perhaps quite a few of them don't even know what that means, nor could they trace the history from Kirzner to Buckley to Cheney to Limbaugh, but they nonetheless unshakably agree with the ideological arguments presented by neoconservatives. Their home on the web is RedState.com. Their home on the airwaves is Limbaugh, Hannity, and Levin. They watch FoxNews and turn it off when Napolitano and Stossel come on. They hold up Ann Coulter as a paragon of the intellectual 21st century American woman. They have their fingers crossed for Sarah Palin.
It's been a tough 4 years for the RedState gang. They became energized behind George W. Bush's so-called leadership in thrusting America into two failed wars and the never ending war on anything that looks terroristy. In 2008, they rallied around Mike Huckabee, propelling him to a commanding Iowa victory. When Huck's evangelical army couldn't carry on that momentum, they threw their might behind Guiliani. When he turned out to be a womanizing career politician that couldn't beat a fringe nobody named Ron Paul in the GOP debates, they settled on McCain. McCain promised to keep their sacred war in Iraq going for 100 years if need be (Constitution, be damned!). They were overjoyed when he hired the Alaskan sweetheart to stand next to him on the campaign trail. The only way McCain could have become more appealing to the RedState faction would have been to name Danica Patrick as Vice President. Unfortunately for RedState, and thankfully for the rest of us, John "Bomb Iran" McCain was completely out of step with the independent vote in America. They were already tiring of the war, they were angry over the bailouts that he (and Barack) had vocally supported, and they viewed him as 4 more years of Bush. In other words, he was exaclty what RedState wanted. Yes, by 2008, the neoconservatives were already out of step with Independent voters. Their base was shrinking.
The Joke's on EVERYONE
Santorum's Iowa victory is highly amusing. The RedState voters have become even more polarized and out of step with mainstream American thought than they were in 2008, when they were banning Ron Paul supporters from their forums for debating too intelligently. They are ready to latch on to anyone not named Mitt and especially not named Ron Paul. The hatred of Paul goes back a few years and is by no means a recent phenomenon. I don't know who fired the first shot, but it may have been Paul himself when he delivered a scathing speech on the history, ideas, and disastrous effects of the neoconservative movement on the House floor in 2006 (?????) That speech highlighted the chameleon political affiliations of the movement, e.g. siding with Moynihan and the Democrat Establishment in support of the Vietnam War. Paul also traced the history of the leadership and their views on foreign and economic policy. As I have pointed out in my blogs on a couple of occasions, reading neoconservative columnists like David Frum and David Brooks espouse economic ideas that resemble classical Communism makes you wonder how the gang ever found a home among Republican voters so quick to salute the American flag and so eager to remind pesky libertarians how a strong national defense purpotedly defeated the great Communist threat.
There is no doubt that 2012 has been a difficult year for the RedState faction. The opposition to America's foreign policy and growing domestic police and surveillance state has steadily climbed. The RedState party has found it harder and harder to rally behind a decent candidate. There was the flirtation with Michele Bachmann. That was followed by the rise of Perry. After his disastrous debates, they jumped onto Herman Cain's 999 wagon. Cain, the former Federal Reserve board member and ultimate Establishment insider, tried hard to paint his candidacy as an "aw shucks, I'm just a regular fella" routine, but he was way too stupid and promiscuous to pull it off. He collapsed more quickly than he ascended. Along came The Newt, everyone at RedState apparently forgetting his epic corruption, promises broken, infidelity, and megalomaniacism. After a few scathing ads from Romney and Paul reminded voters that he's about as Establishment as it gets, it looked like Ron Paul might actually get enough reluctant RedState converts to do the unthinkable, win Iowa.
Dropping Like Flies
And then Bachmann and Gingrich imploded, and the DSM took their best shot Ron. Michele was really done two months ago, but nobody told her remaining support. Still polling around 8-10% as the Iowa vote neared, Bachmann's campaign derailed with defections and absurd charges of bribery, followed by Michele's knee jerk reaction to fire her political director for honesty. This coincided with The Newt's rapid fall from favorite status. These events left RedState voters in a state of confusion. Do they do the unthinkable and vote for Ron Paul, or perhaps the slightly less detestable Mitt Romney? It's unclear whether the surge in support for Santorum over the last week was driven first by disaffected RedStaters or the Media (Un)Elite. It doesn't really matter anyway. The day before the election Rush Limbaugh threw his support behind Santorum, with no real explanation except that he wasn't that "kook" from Lake Jackson, TX. It's also unclear whether or not some reluctant RedStaters were deterred by the relentless media attacks on Ron Paul for his newsletters, but it did appear to stop his momentum. The confluence of events was the perfect storm to lift Santorum to a victory in Iowa.
Rick, We Hardly Knew Ye
But who is Rick Santorum? I'm not convinced that anyone who voted for him even knows. After all, his candidacy is a joke. Not only is he corrupt, but as far as nutcases go, Rick blows all previous nutcases (Perry, Bachmann, Huck, The Newt, Fred Thompson, Cain, Trump, and on and on) right out of the water. He is the nuttiest of the nuts, the wackiest of the wack, and probably the single most out-of-step-with-mainstream-America human being on the planet. And now, thanks to RedState desperation, he is a top tier candidate for the Republican nomination. How delightful! The DSM likes to mock Ron Paul for his so-called unelectability, but what will they say about RickRoll? He's about as electable as Coach Sandusky.
The Irrelevancy of the Neocons
The truth is that the RedState faction and their neoconservative leadership represent an ever shrinking and less relevant group in American politics. I am just going to be frank. Some of their ideas are laughable and some are downright crazy. Among the craziest is their fanatical belief that Iran is trying to acquire a nuclear weapon in order to wipe Israel off the map and install a global caliphate.
The Iranians Are Coming!
Let's set aside for the sake of brevity whether or not translations of Iranian proclamations and writings indicate that Iran actually wants to do these things and assume that the Rickster is correct. Iran is going to nuke Israel. Last time I checked, Israel had around 300 nuclear weapons, more than enough to respond in kind. No nation has ever used a nuclear weapon against another nuclear capable nation, because that is suicide. However, it's not because Iran might be suicidal that America (and Israel) is leaning towards war. It is because of the economics of violence. When a country raises its capability of self defense (e.g., through acquiring nuclear weapons), the cost of intimidating, cajoling, persuading, and forcing them to comply with the mandates of foreign powers skyrockets. This is a law of intervention. As the power of the defense rises, the cost of intervention rises. The Western powers, namely America and Israel, would like to continue to fight on the cheap. That's the secret to the Iran war propaganda.
Even crazier is the line often repeated that Iran wishes to install a global caliphate. I've heard this asinine suggestion repeated by Sean Hannity, the RickRoll, Ann Coulter, and Michele Bachmann, and quite a few others. My answer to that is "So Freaking What???" My history books tell me that the Soviet Union, the most powerful military the world had ever seen (at least from 1945-1970'ish) had roughly 10,000 nuclear weapons and all the global domination aspirations a Lindsey Graham could ever dream. Yet their sphere of influence rarely extended past Eastern Europe. They couldn't even control Castro and his rambunctious little Cuban commune. Yet, according to neoconservatives, I am supposed to be shaking in my boots if Iran gets just one nuke, as they will surely use it to impose Sharia Law all over the world, even... in my own neighborhood! My how Simi Valley, California will be different with a mosque on every corner!
I'm scared. Somebody hold me.
Support the Troops, By Voting Ron Paul
Finally, the real nail in the coffin for the neoconservative faithful, and the most delicious aspect of the entire RP vs. Neocon debate for many of us, is the paradox between the foreign policy rhetoric of Santorum and pals compared to the support they receive in turn from the Active Duty military. The general RedState feeling toward the military is one of reverence, God Bless the Troops, and awe for the supposed might of the American war machine, despite its paucity of actual victories. Ron Paul is seen as "soft" on national defense (really, it's National Offense) and "left of Obama" on war, is if all political ideas can be expressed in linear terms. To show their appreciation, the US Active Duty military showers the GOP with donations and shuns Ron Paul.
Oh, wait. Actually it is the opposite. The top three donors by organization to RP's campaign are the US Army, US Air Force, and US Navy. His military donations compared to Rick Santorum should be a national joke. Through three quarters in 2011, Ron had garnered over $113,000 in donations, while Santorum's total was so tiny I can't even remember if he had over $1,000. Santorum supports the troops, he says. However, just like every neocon and RedStater, he sure doesn't listen to them.
I Don't Ask For Much
Ah to be a debate moderator for one question! I'd ask Rickety Racket, "Mr. Santeria, if your belief that Ron Paul's foreign policy ideas are dangerous and a threat to our national security is correct, and your belief that America must remain aggressive to combat every threat in the War on Terrorist-looking-stuff is correct, then why is Ron the overwhleming, almost unanonmous choice for the Republican nomination among the Active Duty military, at least as judged by their pocketbooks?"
And as a follow up, "do you ever worry that completely rejecting and discounting the opinions of the Active Duty military, while at the same time constantly sending them into harm's way, might cause serious problems for national security that could include defeat on the battlefield or possibly even a military coup?"
I would just enjoy watching the Rickster try to explain to us why the military's opinion on national security is meaningless while he decorates every other sentence with effusive praise for that same military.
(And yes, after Ricky Ricardo drops out of the race a month from now, the same line of questioning would work just fine on The Face Guy of the Republican Party.)
I think it is rather obvious which hard core faction is out of step with mainstream Americans, and it ain't Ron Paul's.
Face Guys Up Front, Rude Dudes In The Back
That brings us to the Face Guy, Mitt, or should I say the bridesmaid to Baracks' 2012 wedding (ok, renewal of the vows with America- this analogy was a stretch). I'm going to put out some simple math for everyone. We know that Mitt's supporters (these are people you will never actually meet because Mitt inspires people to the level of "meh... whatever") can be swayed to vote for just about anyone, especially if it means the difference between winning and losing the general election. After all, to be a Mitt supporter, winning the election is all you can really care about. His history as a Progressive welfare statist, Wall Street lackey, and consumate insider can't be endearing qualities stealing the Republican voting base's heart. It's all about winning.. .duh.
But that's not how the Paultards roll. They put principle ahead of winning, and have done so for 4 years at least. Even as the base of support for Ron has swelled, the new additions over this last cycle have proven to be just as committed to the cause of liberty over the state as the 2008 base. I'm just one person, but I think I have the pulse of the liberty movement. In overwhelming numbers they will not compromise and cast a vote for Romney "just to win." They see clearly that a Romney victory wins nothing and hence, is pointless. That's anywhere between 8-15% of the likely national Republican base, plus another 10% or so Independents and Democrats that are committed to Ron that won't cross over. That's the death of Mitt Romney.
So let's hope that the Republicans voting for Mitt can do simple math. They'e not going to win, making their support for Mitt pointless. Their only hope is to rally behind Ron Paul. That being said, if your idea of an election is a game to be won, then your probably not politically conscious enough to recognize the value of Ron Paul or accept the reality that Mitt cannot win.
2012 may or may not be our time, but our time is coming. In the meantime, let's have some fun watching the dying RedStaters as they attempt to come to grips with their increasing irrelevancy.
David
RSS Headlines
Fool UK