Few Delegates, No Win: Santorum’s trifecta a ‘moral victory’

It’s almost as if Dr. Seuss scripted this week in the 2012 Republican presidential campaign.

The children were perplexed by the Cat.

“When is a win not a win,” it asked. “How to you lose by winning, and win by losing? And what is the popular definition of ‘santorum?’”

“The last question is not appropriate for children,” Sally said, annoyed by the Cat’s riddle. “You should know better.”

Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum swept the caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota, along with the non-binding primary in Missouri. According to the Associated Press, that means 52 delegates, putting him in second place behind former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney. The only problem is — beyond some initial good press and a bump in fundraising — the Tuesday sweep means fairly little for Santorum’s long-term prospects.

Indeed, it might have meant the end of them.

Back in Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg’s The Patriot-News ran with a story today that says this week’s election results put Romney even closer to locking up the GOP nomination. By overtaking former U.S. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Santorum effectively split the anti-Mitt vote going into the next contests. So, while strutting optimistically in a cowboy hat in Plano, the social conservative in the race might have just thrown Texas to the “Massachusetts moderate.”

Robert J. Vickers writes that the Romney advisers would, “be better served by letting Santorum be and keeping the hard-line conservative anti-Romney contingent divided. With Romney’s decided advantage in fundraising and substantial ground organization, he’s well situated to fend off the expected challenge from Gingrich on Super Tuesday.”

That’s not to say Romney came away unscathed. By suffering three embarrassing losses, the real effect might be on his general election match-up. Voters are notoriously skittish about voting for a candidate perceived as weak. Or even worse for the entire GOP slate, they may stay home.

So, Is Santorum SUPERBAD after three wins this week,  or could the ultimate winner of Tuesday’s contests be President Barack Obama?  Wouldn’t DAT that some SHIZ??? What is your take…

 

 

by J.L. Mann Cromer, Jr., who served as the only true independent member of the South Carolina General Assembly from 1990-1998. Currently, he is a general practice attorney in Columbia, S.C., concentrating in probate and estate planning, criminal defense and personal injury law.

With Wes Wolfe. He wrote for 11 newspapers in five states and is the marketing coordinator for ACEC Virginia.

Posted in Legal Advice

18 thoughts on “Few Delegates, No Win: Santorum’s trifecta a ‘moral victory’

  1. Chad Hunt on said:

    I don’t consider myself a conservative, in fact, in my industry that’s frowned upon. I do have to wonder how thick he is. I mean, it’s not all about ppolicy. Sometimes it’s just about your manhood and how you use it.

  2. Polly Thompson on said:

    Rick Santorum is the kind of person who gives Catholics, men and parents of severly disabled children a bad name. His victories in these, frankly minor states, gives many moderate Republicans the impetus to go vote for Romney. His uber-out of touch stance on birth control (as debunked by Kathleen KENNEDY Townshend) is just shameful. Frankly, running for President is pretty self centered no matter who it is, but to do so with a child whos life is so fragile is just distasteful. He appeals to nuts and freaks. Despite being a lifelong Democrat (who did work for a REAL Republican in the US Senate) I say GO ROMNEY! Although in all honesty, the cruel side of me (most of me) would give a kidney to see Santorum debate Obama. I would need Depends to keep the couch dry!!!!

    • Polly Thompson on said:

      And that was in NO WAY anti Catholic!!! Many people I care about deeply are Catholic.

  3. Terri Mostiller on said:

    Definition as stated in the “Urban Dictionary”

    1. (n.) A frothy mix of lubrication and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct certain unsanitary activities. Some sick people would google for more information. Etymology: Savage Love, 5/29/2003

  4. Donna on said:

    I still feel like he is “whining’ personified. That is why I dubbed him “Rick “what about my needs’ Santorum” after the Sat Night Live skit from years back. I don’t think his wins mean anything for him, but agree they probably mean something good for Romney and ultimately President Obama. President Barack will be “ba-rack” again. Goofy play on his name, but its been a long day.

  5. Donna on said:

    Should the name of your article be “how you lose by whining?” Just sayin’

  6. The Monzzz Aaayyy on said:

    Vote for McLovin!

  7. The Monzzz Aaayyy on said:

    So these three states, with low voter turnout, voted en masse for a nutjob. The real story is, that even in these conditions, Ron Paul cannot win. He couldn’t win a race against a car with square wheels. Why is Ron Paul still in the race? Purely ego. But why else. He can’t even win over the nuts of his own PARTY.

  8. May May on said:

    Super SAP! (Sorry Ass Politician). He would get his rear end handed to him in the real world!

  9. Lisa Jones on said:

    I support Rick Santorum. Our nation cannot “afford” 4 more years of Obama socialism. The GOP has to put up a candidate that is a clear, stark contrast against Obama. If people are stupid enough to vote for Obama again, we as a nation deserve what we get…and it will not be positive, judging what has already occurred during the Obama regime.

    • Steve Douglas on said:

      Call President Obama a “socialist” and instantly disqualify your credibility.

  10. Andrew Williams (GO DOGS!) on said:

    If the GOP race is a sick joke, the punchline is Santorum.

  11. Andrew Williams (GO DOGS!) on said:

    It takes a lot of nerve to speak out against gay anything while wearing a sweater vest.

  12. Buford Pusser on said:

    Rick isn’t as bad as some might think…I for one believe this country needs someone to pound the moral hammer…The system is broke up and as long as Barry Osama is painting the White House in leopard print and having beers with “dignitaries” we’re all going to hell in a rocket ship.

  13. Chris Tina on said:

    I agree completely with what Polly said…I can add as a Roman Catholic that Rick Santorum is the kind of retrograde troglodyte freak who gives our church a bad name. His bigotry (against gays and lesbians, liberated women, immigrants and a whole host of others) is just one of many things that make him anything but Christian. And I had to cover a speech of his last year where he basically used his disabled daughter and dead son as fodder for a political platform. If the GOP nominates him, the Obamas can start redecorating the White House bathrooms for another four years…

  14. James Hartman on said:

    Watch out for the daily communicant. He or , she is doing it for a reason, usually because they know they need it. I am tired of all this holier than thou rhetoric. We are trying to run a nation, not some aescetic cult. I would like to see all these phonies desist wearing their rightiousness on their sleeves. This particularly so of Sactum Santorum. Enough. How are you going to save the country from bankruptsy, constant wars, financial bribery to dictators, congress members who lie, cheat and steal exempting themselves from the laws that bind the rest of us, indeed from civilized conduct. What about “occupy Wall Street”; the 99% are not entirely wrong. Forget Rick and all the goody goody claptrap. Let’s get someone with guts, determination and the courage to refrain from osculating the posteriors of every whacko evangelical and gets down to business.
    There, I’ve said and I’m glad. The comedy is over!

    • Steve Douglas on said:

      Amen brother!

  15. James Hartman on said:

    Excuse me,”bankruptcy”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>