I am one of those folks, who while agreeing with most of what Santorum stood for, felt he'd be a poor candidate for Prez.
And now he's in 2nd place to the guy whose supposed to have been the sure winner, Mitt Romney (who I basically was/am for...).
Here's an excellent column from the Journal's Dan Henninger on the attraction of Senator Santorum.
Excerpts below, but hit the link - it's only 14 paragraphs.
What Mr. Santorum has discovered in this campaign is that for a large number of voters, a connection has surfaced between Barack Obama's economic policies and the issue of personal freedom. The potency of the latter is what's new, and a vulnerability for this presidency.
******
Rick Santorum has linked these concerns about the status of personal freedom directly to ObamaCare and beyond that to the broader policy legacy of Obama administration.
His 35-minute speech in Cuyahoga Falls touched an array of subjects that drew applause. But at the halfway point, when he tore into ObamaCare, his mostly working-class audience exploded into applause and cries of "Rick! Rick! Rick!"
Mr. Santorum didn't get this response by discussing health-insurance exchanges and guaranteed issue. He told these people that ObamaCare "is usurping your rights. It is creating a culture of dependency. Every single American will be dependent on government, thanks to ObamaCare. There is no more important issue in this race. It magnifies all that is wrong with what this president is trying to do." His call for repeal produced the explosion.
he finishes his column by saying Santorum should stay in the race; a little surprising since you'd expect the journal to lean toward the businessman, Romney.
Rick Santorum should stay in the race, repeating from now till summer the perverse link between the ObamaCare mandate and the American idea of freedom. It looks like the best argument the GOP nominee will have for a win in November.
Comments