You are guilty of a colossal mis read of the tea leaves. Let me take a stab at clearing it up for you:
I would be that many Newt supporters (outside the FR universe) know that outside of being more reliable and more vocal on social issues, Santorum is no more conservative than Romney and understands far less about economics.
No misread here. Forty percent of Newt’s supporters had Mitt Romney as their second choice. Compared to Romney, RINOs look conservative. If they can even imagine voting for the father of Obamacare and the provider of $50.00 and free abortions, I can only imagine what else they would support.
Romney is a democrat. Since that 40 percent chose Romney, and not none of the above, I guess those Newt supporters don’t have a problem with that.
At best Romney and Santorum are tied on economic prowess. Romney certainly doesn't understand not to hike fees and taxes, not to means test Social Security, not to tie the minimum wage to inflation, not to stick with a progressive tax, and of course MA was 47th in job creation under his tenure. Santorum is arguably not much better on economics, but few Republicans could possibly be worse.
How could Romney be "vocal" on social issues? He's got nothing to say that Republicans who are pro-life and anti-gay marriage would want to hear.
Santorum lead the charge on welfare reform in the Senate as a freshman Senator. He opposed the individual mandate that Gingrich and others were proposing as an alternative to Hillarycare. He has voted for a balanced budget amendment. He favors tax cuts.
Romney, on the other hand, gave us the original version of Obamacare, raised taxes and fees $700 million in Massachusetts and that state is facing mounting debt due to RomneyCare.
I'd say all that makes Rick far more conservative.
Unlike Romney, Rick isn't like to sellout conservatives on tax increases. His advisers have already floated the idea of a VAT tax.
You make assertion without data. Mitt’s main economic asset is being born into the Lucky Sperm Club.