5 Reasons to Support Rick Santorum

Townhall.com ^ | February 24, 2012 | John Hawkins

[Kaslin]

Even though I do like and respect Rick Santorum, I've already endorsed Newt Gingrich and don’t plan on changing over to Team Santorum. Still, Santorum is tops in the national polls, has a chance to pull off some big pre-Super Tuesday wins, and he could end up as the nominee. If that does happen, it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world. In fact, I have no qualms about saying that if it comes down to it, Rick Santorum would be a much preferable nominee to Mitt Romney.

Why?

1) Santorum is the most prominent socially conservative politician in America. The Republican Party is a three legged stool. National security, fiscal conservatism, and social conservatism all hold the party together. Because of the war on terrorism and Obama's profligate spending, the first two legs of the stool have been getting all of the attention lately, but that doesn't mean social conservatism is unimportant. To the contrary, it's a core part of the Republican Party -- and it moves people to the polls. Karl Rove famously said that the election of 2000 was so close because 4 million evangelicals stayed home. Those voters would definitely turn out for Rick Santorum.

Additionally, Catholic voters are an extremely important voting block. In nine out of the last ten elections, whichever candidate won the Catholic vote, won the election. In 2008, for example, Obama beat McCain by 9 points among Catholics. However, now that Obama has unconstitutionally targeted the Catholic Church via Obamacare in a move that has literally been condemned by every Catholic bishop in the United States, we have every reason to think that a Catholic with Santorum's reputation could swoop in, reverse those numbers, and ride the Catholic vote to victory in 2012.

2) Santorum isn't JUST a social conservative. Based on his time in office, the most conservative candidate in the race is Newt Gingrich, although he's gone off the reservation on a number of issues in the last few years, which has naturally given some people pause. Going by his record in Massachusetts, where he raised taxes, implemented Romneycare, backed gay marriages, pursued a multi-state cap and trade scheme, and gave $10,000 to a radical gay group that taught fisting and "water sports" to high school students under his watch, Mitt Romney is a barely center-right politician -- at best. Although Santorum has his flaws, I will at least give him credit for being a conservative across the board.

Santorum's social conservative credentials are beyond reproach and on foreign policy issues, he's a knowledgeable hawk who spent 8 years on the Armed Services Committee and has been sounding the alarm on Iran for years. Fiscal conservatism is not Santorum's strong suit, but even there, he's not quite as weak as you might think.

The National Taxpayers Union said Santorum had the 5th best record out of 50 senators during his tenure in office. On the other hand, the extremely harsh graders Club for Growth said Santorum was above average, but had some flaws of note.

 

On the whole, Rick Santorum’s record on economic issues in the U.S. Senate was above average. More precisely, it was quite strong in some areas and quite weak in others. He has a strong record on taxes, and his leadership on welfare reform and Social Security was exemplary. But his record also contains several very weak spots, including his active support of wasteful spending earmarks, his penchant for trade protectionism, and his willingness to support large government expansions like the Medicare prescription drug bill and the 2005 Highway Bill.

As president, Santorum would most likely lead the country in a pro-growth direction, but his record contains more than a few weak spots that make us question if he would resist political expediency when it comes to economic issues.

Santorum's record isn't as strong on spending as I'd like to see, but he does have a number of proposals that should warm the hearts of fiscal conservatives everywhere including: cutting $5 trillion of federal spending within 5 years, freezing spending levels for 5 years, a Balanced Budget Amendment that caps spending at 18% of GDP, implementing Paul Ryan's Medicare reforms, reforming Social Security, freezing the pay of non-defense workers for 4 years, and eliminating the funding for Obamacare. That is an agenda that should get the blood pumping for fiscal hawks who've been disappointed in the conservative leadership from D.C. over the last few years.

3) Santorum didn't blow the big issues of the last few years. Like all of the candidates remaining in the race, Santorum has made his mistakes. However, the issues he's gotten right are particularly important. Romney supported the McCain-Kennedy amnesty, TARP, Cap and Trade, and Obamacare was based on Romneycare. Those are huge issues that go right off the table if Mitt becomes the nominee. Santorum, on the other hand, voted against McCain-Kennedy, has an A- grade from NumbersUSA on illegal immigration, opposed TARP, voted against Cap and Trade, and opposed Obamacare. Being on the right side of those elephantine issues may be the difference between victory and defeat in 2012 and Santorum has credibility there, while Romney doesn't.

4) Santorum isn't going to get to D.C. and lose his nerve. A lot of candidates talk a good game and then get to Washington, hear the consultants whispering in their ears, get intimidated by the media, and start moving to the Left. Santorum has been around the block and he understands that he's too conservative, too Christian, and too politically incorrect for the media to ever love him. Guys like John McCain and Mitt Romney seem to be under the false impression that if they say the right thing, the mainstream media will eventually warm up to them, but Rick Santorum knows that isn't in the cards for him. Santorum will always be hated by the Washington Post, the View, and the New York Times; so he won't ever feel the temptation to sell conservatives out for a few days’ worth of nice articles. Can you really say the same about Mitt Romney?

5) Santorum is more electable than Mitt. One of the great myths of this election season is that Mitt Romney is a particularly electable candidate. This defies his entire past history and how poorly he's done during this primary season given his advantages; yet it's the primary justification for his candidacy. There's never even a plausible reason offered to explain why Mitt Romney is supposed to be so electable; people just seem to assume it's true because they've heard other people say it. In reality, both Romney and Santorum are probably slightly less electable than average POTUS candidates. Still, another way to put that would be, if you're trying to choose between Santorum and Romney, electability shouldn't be much of a factor (and if it is a factor, you should probably be backing Santorum).

While it's still a little early to take any polling to the bank, Santorum seems to have slightly better numbers versus Obama. The latest polling from Rasmussen has Obama 46% Vs. Santorum 43% and Obama 47% Vs. Romney 41%. Looking at their favorable/unfavorable ratings from Quinnipiac makes things even worse for Romney. Santorum has a 34% favorable rating and a 31% unfavorable rate while Romney has a 35% favorable number and a horrible 43% unfavorable rating.

When you consider that Romney has burned through a staggering amount of money, is down to 7.7 million cash-on-hand, and may have to start self-funding next month to keep his campaign afloat, it's pretty clear that enthusiasm for his candidacy is waning. On the other hand, Santorum will raise more money this month than Romney did last month and unlike Romney, more than half of his money is coming from small donors (50%+ Vs. 12%). What this tells you is that Santorum could draw more volunteers, better motivate the base, and probably raise more money than Romney could in a general election. If the choice is between Santorum and Romney and you're voting based on who's more likely to beat Obama, Santorum is the better choice.

[altura]

Your kind, with the unyielding purity you are so proud of, will doom us against any kind of meaningful legislation against abortion.

Why stop the killing of hundreds of thousands of babies because you don’t like a couple of words in the law.

Those babies lives are on the head of people just like you and you can brag about it if you want to.

I wouldn’t.

[altura]

Heard the rumor that Romney will pick Rand Paul as Veep as a bribe to Ron for his support.

Ron Paul is obviously supporting Romney but it will be so funny if Romney wins and ignores Rand altogether which is exactly what he would do. Ron is a fool if he believes Romney.

[altura]

Oh, your sentiment is right but your percentages are off.

Rape and incest are miniscule reasons for pregnancy and life of the mother almost never applies.

If you passed a law against abortion with those exceptions you would save 90% or more of the babies, not ten percent.

[fight_truth_decay]

Dave Savage's Google Bomb on Santorum's "defining words" cost him votes, how many? difficult to tell not just from the gay community, but their straight social/ business related friends, families, students--can all mushroom.[1]

Other potential voters say they do not like being "preached to" or respectively suggest keeping it to smaller doses and there was no need to keep defending a "white pill between the knee" joke-people want issues that mean something to "only" Them "a working government", a Congress that can get things accomplished, gas prices, national security in that the bad guy fears Americans "can bite" not "whimper" as when Osama bin Laden compared Americans to puppies; jobs, perhaps they want a better one not just settle & taxes.

Santorum's endorsement and [2] defense of Specter [Presidential Bid (1996)]

One can say we don't need those votes anyway--trust me you need every vote you can get, as the anger I saw displayed over the Google Bomb had more people googling the old Savage site [would cost $5M to Freedom to Marry to take down] than Santorum's own campaign site. People remember "dirt" or "the scandal" over the good that person may have achieved. Hate sells.

Obama's crew reportedly sanitized his Muslim Googled searches, one analyst said perhaps Santorum should have sent out Google sanitation workers just in case.

Last Minute tactics-Chicago style:

2004, Obama won the Illinois senate race against last-minute Republican candidate Alan Keyes. Keyes replaced Jack Ryan, who was a very strong & popular opponent of Obama until suddenly a newspaper lawsuit exposed a sex scandal[btw 2 consenting adults married at the time-but ugly divorces are in the moment] in Ryan’s sealed divorce papers to protect their young son.

Which of the candidates benefits most from revisiting a couple of these highly controversial issues ? Who gets the added votes-could be Romney could even be Newt. Paul has loyal steadfast voters not the flip floppers who make the polls move.

[altura]

We are fools to engage Eternal Vigilance. I’ve done so before.

He is that most dangerous combination: a fool who is so self-righteous and unbending he wouldn’t see the truth if we stuck it up his nether region.

And he never gives up. A few months ago I attempted to get him to see reason and swore never to speak to him against about the subject.

I did so today (foolishly) most to show my opinion to the rest of the people on this thread.

He used this argument against Rick Perry who has done wonders in the state of Texas to decrease abortion; i.e. the law that mothers must view a ultra sound picture before opting to abort. That way they at least realize they are doing away with an actual baby and not getting a tattoo or getting their ears pierced which is what the leftists want them to think abortion equates to.

He also defunded Planned Parenthood and other things.

He wasn’t pure enough for E.T. That told me something right there.

[Nifster]

Thanks for the heads up. I always appreciate a word from the wise. Message heard and received loud and clear

[fight_truth_decay]

Rand Paul could pretty much be on “the list”, but think it would likely be a money guy. I sometimes wonder what was Joe Biden picked for? A side kick to the hero, like in the old Westerns? A Chester or Festus character?

[trisham]

He is that most dangerous combination: a fool who is so self-righteous and unbending he wouldn’t see the truth if we stuck it up his nether region.

And he never gives up.

********************************

That's unfair and crude. There are some people who have principles that they will never abandon, and then there are the rest of us. No one can force you to discuss an issue with EV should you choose not to, but to denigrate someone because they refuse to give up their beliefs and values is low indeed.

[EternalVigilance]

Why stop the killing of hundreds of thousands of babies because you don’t like a couple of words in the law.

A better question would be "why allow the killing of any babies just because you choose to ignore the explicit, imperative words of the Supreme Law of the Land"?

"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."

"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

[EternalVigilance]

And he never gives up.

Thanks for the compliment.

[Right Ahead]

Here in Arizona it is going to come down to Santorum and Romney. With just days to go voters need to do everythign possible to make sure Romney loses! So, unless some miracle happens and Newt surges ... I’m voting for Rick Santorum. Besides I have looked at his record at great length and I’m really not understanding all nit picking on it when the very same thing can be said with Newt Gingrich. Both Gingrich and Santorum are the true conservatives - this is the REAL Repubican race. They aren’t perfect but I truly believe either man would do a great job as our next president.

Please encourage next week’s voters - to vote for Santorum so that Mitt is SHUT OUT and the real race can begin between Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.

[EternalVigilance]

Thanks.

[trisham]

No thanks are necessary, friend.

[EternalVigilance]

I’m really not understanding all nit picking

God help us when the equal protection of the God-given, unalienable right to life of the most helpless and defenseless among us is considered "nit-picking." Among self-identified conservatives nonetheless.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

-- The Declaration of Independence

[Elsie]

"NO PERSON shall be deprived of life without due process of law."

Kinda hinges on just what a 'person' is; doesn't it!

[Elsie]

First they came for the Fetuses; but since I wasn’t a fetus...

[Elsie]

I guess he failed to UNDERSTAND the first part of your screen name...

[trisham]

LOL!

[altura]

It’s perfectly fair because his position, if adhered to, would result in the killing of hundreds of thousands of babies.

People will not vote for an absolute law forbidding abortion.

This was proven in Mississippi where they tried to pass a law called ‘personhood.’ The Personhood law basically said that once a conception took place resulting in an embryo, that embryo was a person and anything done to the embryo could be prosecuted the same was as if it were done to any other person.

Mississippi was very pro life and this law was expected to pass easily.

Instead, it was defeated overwhelmingly. Everyone was shocked.

People will not vote for a drastic law and the purists would rather kill thousands, hundreds of thousands of babies than to compromise.

That makes them evil and I will not back down from that.

[trisham]

It’s perfectly fair because his position, if adhered to, would result in the killing of hundreds of thousands of babies.

People will not vote for an absolute law forbidding abortion...People will not vote for a drastic law and the purists would rather kill thousands, hundreds of thousands of babies than to compromise.

That makes them evil and I will not back down from that.

**************************

No one is more pro life than EV. Your charge is disgusting.