Posted on 02/22/2012 9:59:41 AM PST by SeekAndFind
"Rick Santorum was a sitting senator who, in re-election, lost by 19 points," Donald Trump, a Mitt Romney supporter, said recently. "Then he goes out and says, 'Oh, OK, I just lost by the biggest margin in history, now I'm going to run for president.' Tell me, how does that work?"
Why? Santorum explains it mostly by saying '06 was a terrible year for Republicans. Indeed, the GOP, in the sixth year of George W. Bush's time in office, did lose control of both the House and Senate. But why did Santorum lose so badly?
The biggest policy reason was Santorum's outspoken support for the war in Iraq. By November 2006, the war was going badly and threatened to turn into a full-scale catastrophe. President Bush resisted calls to change course. While Santorum's Democratic opponent, Bob Casey, called for a new policy, Santorum stuck with the president, and with the war. He even made it his primary focus in the last days of the campaign.
The voters clobbered him for it. In Pennsylvania exit polls, 61 percent of voters said they disapproved of the war. Santorum lost among them, 15 percent to Casey's 85 percent. Among the largest subgroup of war opponents, the 42 percent of voters who said they strongly disapproved of the war, Santorum was routed 93 percent to 7 percent. That by itself was enough to doom any hopes for a third term.
Santorum didn't lose just because of the war. The economy was also an issue in Pennsylvania in 2006, and Santorum lost 66 percent to 34 percent among voters to whom the economy was a critical issue. Santorum even ran disappointingly on values issues, his usual strength, splitting the vote 50-50 among those who said values were extremely important.
But it wasn't all issues. Santorum also made personal decisions that came back to haunt him in 2006. For example, even though he owned a modest home in Pennsylvania, he moved his family to a much nicer house in Virginia, leading to charges not only that he had abandoned his home state but also that he had gone native in Washington.
In Virginia, Santorum kept his home-schooled children in a program run by the Western Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School. That cost Pennsylvania taxpayers thousands of dollars a year, and some of Santorum's political opponents demanded that he reimburse the state. "Just pay the money back," Casey said to Santorum in one debate. "You ripped off the taxpayers. Pay it back." Santorum declined, and an adjudicator ruled in his favor, but the school issue highlighted the fact that Santorum had left Pennsylvania behind.
Finally, there was Santorum's personality. In the Senate as well as in his home state, Santorum often struck people as arrogant and headstrong, preachy and judgmental. Even today, he sometimes becomes so involved in an argument that he seems intent more on winning the argument than reaching some sort of useful agreement. Throughout his career Santorum has always maintained that his forthrightness means everyone knows where he stands. Sometimes it means people know they don't like him.
Looking back on 2006 in private conversations with friends, Santorum is said to understand that he sometimes came on too strong for the voters' comfort. The question for today is how much he has changed. There's no doubt he still struggles a bit with the Old Rick: He often seems determined to get the upper hand in disputes that he probably shouldn't be having in the first place.
The reasons for Santorum's defeat are too complicated for a 30-second ad or a brief answer at a debate. He can blame a lot of factors, but in the end he was most responsible for his own fate. Now, if Santorum's presidential campaign continues to soar, he'll likely have to discuss the '06 defeat more. The Romney campaign will point to it as proof that Santorum can't win the White House. Santorum's job is to tell voters -- and prove to them with his actions -- that he has learned from his loss, and that he's a better candidate for it.
Casey Sr.'s tragic death was still fresh on the minds of many voters in 2006. Sort of like Robert F. Kennedy getting elected U.S. Senator from New York in 1964, another horrible year for the GOP.
Eyewitness report from Ground Zero:
- Bob Casey did everything he could to delude and mislead our massive legions of elderly voters into thinking he was actually his late father, a very popular Governor. You always heard about him but rarely ever saw him. I suspect a large number of our older voters thought they were voting for the late Governor.
- He reassured the huge number of Catholic voters that, like his father, he was pro-life, and he would never ever ever ever EVER EVER vote to pass a health care plan which would force us to pay for that. (suckers!)
- He ran around telling all our Seasoned Citizens that the reason they did not have even more free goodies from their Government was that the Eeeeeeevil Warmonger George W. Bush was taking all the money that should have been used to buy their prescriptions and free bus passes, and was flushing it all down a rathole in Iraq.
- The teachers union camped out on the lawn of Rick’s home and documented that he was rarely there. Then they, with massive amounts of help from the mainstream media, built up this big, ridiculous Potemkin Village issue that he no longer really lived in Pennsylvania, and, as a result, was ripping off the taxpayers in his school district for the online schooling of his kids.
- A lot of white, working class Pennsylvanians are just genetically pre-programmed to pull the lever for the Democrat, cause “they’re for the Workin’ Man!”
I realize little of that makes sense if you’re not from around here. Keep in mind this region kept sending a treasonous criminal back to the US Congress for 3 decades, simply because he brought home the pork. For the Workin’ Man!
I should also add that Casey was in some ways atypical of their Senate candidates, in that he was not an uber-Lib from Philadelphia. For years the Dems kept making the mistake of nominating guys like that (Harris Wofford, Joe Sestak, Bob Edgar, et. al.) who were so culturally offensive to white working class voters in other parts of the state, it sent them kicking and screaming into the GOP column.
Casey on the other hand was a Good O’ Boy from Scranton.
Like Slow Joe Biden, they were comfortable with him.
That’s hilariious “virulently anti-gay”? And also “racist”? And people would be “surprised” that he hired a minority?
I guess they would be, if they actually believed the lies told about Santorum.
Had Toomey been nominated and lost we'd have had neither Roberts nor Alito, we'd have had two recordless RINO wimps. Had Toomey been nominated and won - a less sure win than Specter - he wouldn't have chaired the Judiciary committee, one of the other RINO squishes would have and probably wouldn't have gotten, at least, Alito through. It may be the only thing he was good for, but Arlen was capable, when motivated, of getting tough picks through the committee and he paid Rick's price. Specter's pro-abort friends should disown him.
Life goes on, the current year is 2012.
Specter claims the conversation never happened and that he made no deal, and if that is true the end result would have been the same. Regardless, making deals with the devil against Toomey, a true conservative who would have very likely won without this betrayal, is morally bankrupt.
York also misses that young Casey was the son of an endangered species: a pro-life, Democrat Catholic politician, former Governor Casey. A nationally known governor who had been ditched by the DNC as Convention speaker. Catholic dems, who had been uncomfortable with other (spell that pro-choice) democrats felt completely comfortable voting for Casey the Younger. They owed that to his father.
Keep in mind, also, that Carville and Begala were running Casey’s campaign. They gave him the same advice as Obama got: just stand there and look presidential. Fool the people. Santorum used to beat the heck out of Casey in the debates, but Casey just kept quiet.
Santorum was the hardest working senator PA has ever had. He visited all 67 counties every year, was always available. One of the radio stations here in Pgh. plays “Where’s Casey?” He’s just plain lazy.
Also, remember we have one of the highest senior populuations in PA, and they vote. They thought Jr. was a clone of Sr.
Keep in mind, also, that Carville and Begala were running Casey’s campaign. They gave him the same advice as Obama got: just stand there and look presidential. Fool the people. Santorum used to beat the heck out of Casey in the debates, but Casey just kept quiet.
Santorum was the hardest working senator PA has ever had. He visited all 67 counties every year, was always available. One of the radio stations here in Pgh. plays “Where’s Casey?” He’s just plain lazy.
Also, remember we have one of the highest senior populuations in PA, and they vote. They thought Jr. was a clone of Sr.
I agree with most of what you say; I don’t believe a word the lying snake known as Specter says. I do not believe, however that the end justifies the means; Specter has been a blight on this state for so long, I would have loved to seem him go down in flames to a real conservative... it could have triggered a real change in mindsets about conservatism among the young and uninformed here in PA, who in principal are open to these ideas. Also, like many PA Pubbies, Santorum loves big government as long as it is for his pet causes. I do appreciate his taking a stand on moral issues, but he is not a conservative, and will not stop government from growing. I like him better than Romney or Newt, but he is no conservative... Paul actually is conservative, I have supported him for decades, but due to the hate here, I won’t say any more about that...
Make that $72,000, a nice bit of change. Regardless of the technical legality, this representative of the People ripped his local Pennsylvania taxpayers off. But, of course, Santorum's a lawyer-politician is well skilled in abusing the spirit of the office while hewing to its legal bounds.
Add this "me first" behavior to the enrichment of aides and lobbyists, rather than actually doling out grants via his "Good Neighbor" charity (only 38%), the appalling lack of "leadership PAC" funds that ever made it to candidates (18%). He has considerable baggage and the Pennsylavia press know it well.
He helped give us Obama's first Supreme Court nominee, Sotomayor, by voting to confirm her Circuit Court appointment from Bill Clinton. What about his insanity of personally introducing and voting for a half-billion over-and-above the $900 million Amtrak budget.
There's a host of other very questionable things that helped Pennsylvania voters decide to fire him by a huge margin.
A real conservative must look at Santorum and ask, what's so great about this guy? Looking deeper than his religious rhetoric, what's he really all about? How would he truly govern?
Reference:Santorum amendment to Transportation funding bill; Bill S.Amdt.3015 to S.Con.Res.83 ;vote number 2006-052 on Mar 15, 2006
The loss was personal. He was toxic. Any fair reading of his record shows why he still is.
Did he say after losing, “You won’t have Rick Santorum to kick around anymore”? :) just askin’
RE: Did he say after losing, “You won’t have Rick Santorum to kick around anymore”? :) just askin’
Speaking of Richard Nixon ( who said the above ), he LOST to Kennedy in 1960 and then went on to lose the next election in 1962 running for governor of California ( this inspite of HUGE name recognition ).
Those who point to Santorum’s 2006 defeat as the end of his political career would probably have written Nixon off as a has been as well. You know what happened next.
It was Ben Nelson and the “Cornhusker Kickback” that gave us Obamacare. His was the last vote. His was the capitulation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.