Filibuster CartoonsTitle: Santorum the Horrifying (click to view)
Date: January 5, 2012
Had eight Iowans had slightly different thoughts Tuesday night, we’d all be reading headlines right now about the unstoppable juggernaunt that is Rick Santorum. Instead, we’re only reading about how the former Pennsyvania senator is now Mitt Romney’s worst nightmare. Either way, he's the man of the moment, but that still doesn't mean he's a man worth caring much about.
Santorum’s rise as the leading not-Romeny seems to lead a great deal of credence to the idea that there is absolutely nothing other than random sequence determining who gets to be the Republican frontrunner on any given week (it almost makes a Jon Huntsman surge seem possible). As
Dick Morris noted in a column yesterday, Santorum is notable mainly for all the things he lacks: money, a signature issue, any sort of strategic geographic relevance, ideological distinctness, notable debate performances, or a natural demographic base. He is, in short, simply “Mr. Republican,” in the blandest, most unremarkable sense; a cookie-cutter conservative who has taken the expected right-wing position on every standard issue, while distinguishing himself on none. That's may be enough to get a brief turn in the spotlight, but it's still pretty sandy ground in which to plant the victory flag.
If you’re some manner of urban hipster like me, chances are your primary awareness of Mr. Santorum comes as a result of his unfortunate feud with noted sexpert Dan Savage, whom, as I
noted in an earlier toon, has been waging an aggressive campaign of e-bullying against the senator for several years now. In the Savage-verse, this is justified on the basis that Santorum is supposedly a uniquely bigoted, homophobic member of the Christian right, who likens homosexuality to bestiality, and so forth. As I noted at the time, however, Santorum’s views on the gay issue, small-minded and ignorant though they may be, are actually a great deal more moderate and nuanced than his "Fred Phelps Jr." Internet reputation alleges. If anything, Santorum’s views on homosexuality are really best described as “cautious.” His true foe is bestiality, pedophilia, and polyamory; deviations which he views as increasingly difficult to legally prosecute in a world in which same-sex sodomy is declared a constitutional right.
Yet Santorum also has gay friends (a claim which Dan Savage considers
brain-explodingly impossible, which probably reflects his limited interaction with Christians),
has pitched himself to gay voters, and
even in his most infamous, damning interview declared that he had “no problem with homosexuality” (since he was equally opposed to legal protections for
heterosexual sodomy, too). In any case, his presidential powers to affect any of this are decidedly limited. Sodomy is, in fact, a constitutional right thanks to Lawrence V. Texas, and same-sex marriage is a state matter. It baffles me that Santorum remains so demonized for his strong views on what are essentially non-issues in this campaign cycle.
The disproportionate demonization also masks the fact that Santorum is, as
David Brooks noted in his editorial today, essentially a “compassionate conservative” moderate in the George W. Bush mould. His signature issues in Congress have been fighting poverty and protecting the middle class, and he’s remained a strong critic of unchecked individualism as society’s supreme organizing principle.
Ron Paul has called him a “very liberal” on economic issues for some of his spending votes, and he certainly lacks big money support. His grades from groups like the Club for Growth have been, at best,
tepid endorsements.
It’s for these reasons — as opposed to his fairly irrelevant views on social issues — that I imagine the Santorum surge is likely to be a one-state phenomenon. At best, he can aspire to the status of a Mike Huckabee/John Edwards-style also-ran, who stays in the primary long after victory for the other guy is all but ensured, just to give some thin veneer of democracy to what has long ceased to be a competitive race.
As his campaign moves forward, Santorum will almost certainly fail to transfer his weak momentum to next week’s New Hampshire primary, where religious populists like him tend to play much worse than secular wonks like Mitt Romney. The farm will thus have to be bet on South Carolina the week after, but with Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, and Rick Perry all intent on staying in, too, the not-Romney vote will likely be split once more. If Santorum could make any sort of convincing case that his Iowa near-win was the product of anything other than the freakish, random mood swing of the moment, he might have some convincing narrative to structure his attack ads around, but as it stands now, there’s very little he can say about his conservatism or not-Romneyism that his competitors can’t say just as loud.
In another time, in another race, being Mr. Bland Generic Republican might have been enough to squeak though a crowded primary, but this particular contest already features someone remarkably well-cast for the role of "winner by default." Santorum has been largely ignored by the mainstream media narrative until now, and while it’s tempting to believe this press arrogance is coming back to bite them, sometimes candidates go ignored for good reason.
CKA Super Elite 
CKA Elite 
