Rick’s Big Night Rains on Mitt’s Inevitability Parade, But Can Rick Win?

About a week ago, a conservative friend appeared concerned, and by “concerned,” I mean the way I imagine he’d look if he got notice of an audit from the IRS, over the state of the current GOP Presidential field. He told me that he got bummed out after a recent conversation with his engineer son, who like most of us, wants only one thing for Christmas this year: the defeat of the first Alinskyite, race-baiting Marxist currently occupying the Oval Office whose destructive policies are taking this country over a cliff. According to my friend, his son said something like the following: “What the heck is going on? How in the world can we win? I mean, this process never ends, and this Santorum guy is ‘nuts.’ What’s going to happen?” Good question then, and even better question today, after Mitt Romney placed third in both the Alabama and Mississippi primaries.

Time didn’t permit me to ask him at the time what he meant when he said “Santorum is nuts,” but later he explained that his son was unhappy with Santorum “mainly because of the contraception issue that Santorum keeps talking about instead of what my son believes to be much more important issues such as the economy and jobs.  I feel the same way as we can’t get sucked into the libs trying to redefine this election in terms of women’s issues.  We most focus on the deplorable job this idiot in the White House is doing.” I haven’t endorsed any candidate yet, but I suspect that Santorum supporters would respond by saying (1) that accusing him of emphasizing the issue of contraception is like accusing the United States of aggression against Japan in 1942. Obama’s scheming campaign operatives cooked up this whole silly “contraception” non-controversy, and enlisted George Stephanapolous to get the ball rolling at the New Hampshire debate on January 7. Then, having creating a phony “crisis,” they sought to exploit it to enhance the Dear Reader’s sinking political fortunes by incessantly asking the Republican candidates ridiculous questions about states outlawing contraception and (2) Santorum doesn’t spend most of his time talking about contraception. He talks a lot about bringing back manufacturing to this country, and he has been talking about the tremendous danger posed by Iran for years. He does talk about social issues, in part because he is a devout Catholic. There’s another reason, though, and it’s more important for electoral purposes. He recognizes that the idea that the notion of being “socially liberal,” as in pro-abortion, indifferent about the importance of the traditional family v. so-called “marriage equality,” and in step with the secular popular culture, and “fiscally conservative” at the same time is a childish fantasy. If this moronic Sandra Fluke episode proved anything, it’s that. Our country is broke, and our economy is stagnant, yet Obama and his big-government buddies think that someone other than Ms. Fluke, a 30 year-old arrested development case, should pay for her birth control products. So, the traditional family and the traditional values that come with it are essential to stop the hemorrhaging of money that comes with the Nanny state. With the family intact, there’s a lot less need for Obama’s food stamps, Medicaid and the rest of the goodies he wants to use to create a dependent class of voters.

I don’t think my friend or his son would disagree with that latter point, but I think that they fear, like many of you, that the average distracted voter won’t connect those dots and  will allow the Lame Stream Media to define Santorum as a crazed religious fanatic who wants all women barefoot and pregnant (even though his wife is both a nurse and an attorney), and that droves of enraged women will storm the polls to vote for democrats. There’s no question that the LSM will try every trick in the book to get Pres. Sham WOW (Walks on Water) re-elected, but here’s the thing: it doesn’t seem to be working. From Commentary, citing the New York Times most recent poll:

In the head-to-head matchups, Mr. Obama also maintained much of the advantage he had built in the last year among important constituencies, including women, although he lost some support among women over the past month, even as the debate raged over birth control insurance coverage.

Mr. Obama appears to be retaining much of his gains among important demographic groups, erasing inroads that Republicans made in 2010, especially among women. But his falling approval rating in the last month extended to his handling of both the economy and foreign policy, the poll found.

“He lost some support among women” is apparently the New York Times’ nice way of saying Obama’s approval rating dropped 12 points among women during the past month, from 53 percent to 41 percent. Needless to say, the Democratic Party’s “war on women” rhetoric doesn’t seem to be working:


In recent weeks, there has been much debate over the government’s role in guaranteeing insurance coverage for contraception, including for those who work for religious organizations. The poll found that women were split as to whether health insurance plans should cover the costs of birth control and whether employers with religious objections should be able to opt out.

Mitt’s supporters keep trotting out their math-based argument, talking about their delegate lead and the number of states he’s won, as if to say to Santorum and Gingrich, “you guys have no chance. you should just quit now.” The problem is that they are also saying that to Republican voters, who no matter how much Mitt spends, and how many delegates he accumulates, are not convinced. Mitt is coming off like the guy who tells the girl, “Stop this foolishness. You’ve had your fun. Now it’s time to settle down, and you know I’m the guy.” The next sound he hears is the tires screeching as she speeds to freedom.

Math definitely counts, but perhaps passion counts more. Can Rick win? I believe he can, and at least one recent poll suggests he’d have a better chance than Romney to do so. In addition, Dana Milbank thinks Mitt is inevitable, which should give any of his supporters pause.

Illinois will be decisive. If Mitt doesn’t win here, all bets are off.


  1. Having been a long time fan of yours for years, I’m disappointed & surprised you’re falling in line with Limbaugh, Ingraham, Levin & Malkin, who are largely responsible for painting Romney as the wrong choice. They’ve influenced a huge number of Republicans by continual dissing of Romney every chance they get & ranting that he’s “not conservative enough” — nothing less than 110% “pure conservative” is good enough for their pie-in-the-sky values (obsessiveness).

    Romney does indeed have enough of the “right” stuff to put the US of A back on track, contrary to Limbaugh, et al. 

    Santorum comes off as an angry person & does much too much whining. His resume is sorely lacking in experience & business acumen.  He lost all credibility with me when he went public with his ill little girl. He could’ve/should’ve kept that a private family matter instead of using it to evoke sympathy. 

    All these conservative purists, and those who they influence, are putting their obsessive wish lists above what should be the absolute top priority of removing Obama & his ilk from power before they succeed in doing irreparable harm to our country. 

  2. Hi Ron,
    I appreciate your years of encouragement and support for my work, and I don’t disagree with some of what you say; specifically, I think that one of Santorum’s major problems is that he does whine WAY too much about being treated unfairly by the media. He also often conveys the impression that he can’t understand why all his many achievements aren’t recognized, sort of like Rodney Dangerfield, but not funny, and yes, as you say, seeming resentful and angry about it. That’s a major problem, and it would allow Obama and his apparatchiks in the LSM to make mincemeat of him if he doesn’t fix it.

    I don’t throw myself in with people who oppose Romney by saying he’s not “conservative enough.” I have long said on my show, responding to listeners who call and say that Romney is “Democrat light” (they must be listening to those other hosts you mention), that they had damn well better support Mitt if he’s the nominee. Mitt’s problem isn’t that he’s not conservative enough. It’s that he can’t close the deal. Enthusiasm for him is low. In many counties, fewer voters turned out to vote this year than turned out in 2008 to vote for McCain. Plus, his team has really mismanaged the expectations game. On Monday, his peeps made it sound like they expected him to win Mississippi. Cue the sad trombone. Mitt, Mitt, Mitt: under promise and over deliver, Dude! Marketing 101. We realize that we MUST get Obama out of there, and we fear that Mitt can’t get the job done. That’s the bottom line. Do you think he can?
    I think Mitt is a smart, fine man, and if he’s the nominee, I am so there. I think this process will make him better to go up against Sham WOW if is indeed the guy.

  3. I too, would vote for Mitt. That being said I am a bit discouraged with all of th nominees and current representation; this obviously includes democrats. At this point I feel that the entire lot of repesentation is a misrepresentation and I am concerned that no matter who is in office it won’t be to make my life better, but to enhance their and their cronies pocket books. I feel that decisions that have been made in the past decade have not been the best and I even find myself questioning the real intent of those decisions or policies which have been put forth. For me, its simple, I am going with the nominee; not because I necessarily want to but because I have to. My choices are slim and it still makes me wonder if it really is the same old, same old or if there will be real positive changes. What I want to see happen is basic: 1) real national security by not cutting the military budget, but adding to it. This includes NASA. 2) Growth. Its a basic model with basic ideas; use them.

    • Beth, it is TERRIFIC to hear from you here! You are correct. We have GOT to get Obama outta there before he can do anymore damage. You are also right about what would be very desirable going forward: economic growth and a strong nat’l defense. With those in place, the other stuff will take care of itself.
      I love having smart friends. You should call the show some time.

  4. Teri,
    Yes I believe Mitt can win IF he doesn’t become too damaged by those in his own party! Defeating the incumbent won’t be an easy task when half the population are getting freebies & pay no tax. Couple this with the Dem’s expertise in vote fraud, it’s definitely an uphill battle.

    It will be all the more tough if the campaign against Obama can’t begin in earnest until Sept.

    Mitt has some quirks & shortcomings but none that would stop him from successfully undoing some of Obama’s follies & putting the country back on track…domestically & national defense. He’s an astute guy with good experience under his belt.

    I believe Santorum is a political snake-in-the-grass who would command little more respect than Obama. I totally agree with your producer’s assessment.

    I could go on if I could type this stuff on a regular keyboard instead of my iPhone. But couldn’t locate this blog when I tried from my PC. But that may be a good thing!!

    Ron L.

  5. Ron,
    First of all, it’s never a good thing when you can’t find this blog because then you can’t read it and share your great comments, which you MUST do all the time. 🙂

    I am going to use your post as a jumping off point for an election day post, so please make sure that you check back later today, OK?

    Thanks again for your encouragement and support of the show and this blog!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

The Teri O'Brien Show

%d bloggers like this: