Mitt Romney Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, now Romney's Target: Besting Romney In Polls, A Family Man who resounds with Blue Collar Voters, and one who can school Romney in the debate arena - without using a teleprompter - image Politco.
Rick Santorum is a nice guy, and one knows the old epitaph – “nice guys finish last” – well, that’s not always the case. First, Santorum must survive the “Romney Attack Machine” – legendary in politics since he began to run for the Office of the President in 2006. A combination of PAC’s and the campaign itself, Romney focuses on each rising candidate in turn; unleashing a barrage of negative advertising that is often misleading. With Rick Santorum, who is as squeaky clean as they get – Romney has gone the fiscal conservative anti-pork in the Senate Route. From The Boston Globe: “Romney Looks to Squelch Santorum’s Late Rise”, speaks to the tactics employed by Mitt Romney in order to maintain his alleged front-runners position.
The problem is the headline is also misleading – if anything, Santorum had an early rise, and has maintained momentum in states that were not partially Romney friendly, winning Iowa, besting Romney in a very close race. Gingrich took the state of South Carolina, and had been under attack by Romney since his polling numbers showed he was besting the former Bay State Governor. Money might not buy votes, but it sure can make your opposition look bad, and by default, one might get a win. The problem with this philosophy is that the public soon becomes aware of a pattern – and if it were just one candidate, that would be possibly overlooked, but every single candidate that stands to best Romney – that becomes habitual.
The fact of the matter is that there are several candidates that are equally compelling and that currently there are no real front-runners, given the very low delegate count and 5 states weighing in – one might also note that until Super Tuesday, on March 6th of this year that the front-runner will not be established. It is where the opportunity exists for one candidate to amass enough delegates should they win the majority of the states, to claim that mantle. It appears Romney may have the same difficulties he had in 2008 when he spent most of his energy on demonizing Mike Huckabee, former Govenor of Arkansas
Now that Romney’s calling out Rick Santorum as a spendthrift, instead of thrifty Rick, there appears to be hundreds of articles available pointing to the fact that when it came to Pork, Romney had no problems taking Federal Funds – in fact he embraced it to the point where John McCain went to bat against the millions requested to support the Salt Lake City Olympic Games. Understanding that the Olympic Games are a host nation’s responsibility – and that Romney, as the CEO actively sought and fought for federal funds, his pork laced attacks on Rick Santorum fall a tad flat.
Nowhere is this more evident than in an article from the Desert Sun found on Newsbank (a fee based newspaper archive).
In an article from the Desert News: Avaialbe at Newsbank.com:
Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT)
September 20, 2000
Edition: All
Section: Wire
Page: A01
Topics:
Index Terms:
News
McCain vows to wage war on S.L. 'pork'
But Romney says he's confident funds will come
Author: Lisa Riley Roche and Lee Davidson, Deseret News staff writers
Article Text:
WASHINGTON -- Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., vowed Tuesday to kill any bills with "pork-barrel" spending for the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics.
But Mitt Romney says he is confident needed federal funds still will come.
"I'm expecting the funding we need to host the Games," the Salt Lake Organizing Committee president told reporters in Sydney Wednesday. "I'm quite confident."
But in Washington, D.C., McCain was vowing war.
"I will filibuster and do everything in my power to delay any more appropriations bills that have this pork-barrel spending for Salt Lake City," McCain said. He was specifically attacking a treasury appropriations bill that contained a Secret Service request for $14.8 million to improve law enforcement communications for the Games.
"The Olympic Games, supposedly hosted and funded by Salt Lake City, which began in corruption and bribery, have now turned into . . . an incredible pork-barrel project for Salt Lake City and its environs," McCain told the Senate.
McCain complained that numerous Utah road, transit, sewer and other projects have been been quietly tucked into appropriations bills through the years -- with the excuse that they are critical to the Olympics -- without the normally required "authorization" through separate legislation.
"Instead, they are stuck into an appropriations bill without scrutiny," McCain said, adding he will do everything possible to block funding for any more "unauthorized" projects.
Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, told the Senate, "I know of no funds in the 2001 bill that are yet to come before us that have not, in fact, been authorized in the appropriate procedure."
McCain said a U.S. General Accounting Office report he formally released last week projected that the federal government will spend $1.3 billion on the Utah Games, far more than the $609 million it spent for the Atlanta Games in 1996 and the $75 million spent for Los Angeles in 1984.
He said host cities increasingly use the Olympics as an excuse for pork-barrel spending.
Bennett, however, said all but $254 million of the $1.3 billion would have gone to Utah anyway through projects such as rebuilding I-15 and constructing the new TRAX light-rail system, which would have proceeded without the Olympics but not as quickly.
Romney said that since he took over SLOC in early 1999 he has tried to make it clear that light rail and the I-15 reconstruction are not needed for Salt Lake City to host the Games.
He said Wednesday he resisted pressure from former Salt Lake City Mayor Deedee Corradini to sign a letter stating light rail was essential to the Games.
After meeting with congressional leaders, Romney said he realized such a statement could jeopardize SLOC's chances of getting federal help. "I thought it was very important that we not overstate in any way what was an Olympic project and what was not," he said, adding that Corradini came around to his way of thinking.
Romney's predecessors were more willing to go along with state and local officials in claiming that the big-ticket transportation projects were needed.
McCain does raise some legitimate points, Romney said, especially questioning what role the federal government should play in staging the Olympics.
Unlike other countries that provide government funding for the Games, the U.S. government's financial responsibility has never been clear.
What the Salt Lake Games need from the federal government is money for buses and park-and-ride lots, as well as projects such as the road to Snowbasin, site of the Olympic downhill and super giant slalom courses.
Federal funding is also key to providing security at the Games, as well as staging the Paralympics that follow for the world's disabled athletes.
Some $77 million in transportation funds are still needed from this session of Congress, Romney said, calling the appropriation crucial to the Games.
"If it did not get put in place, I would question our ability to host the Games," he said. "I believe our requests in Washington are appropriate."
Romney also said inclusion by the GAO of light rail and I-15 costs as Olympic funding is "absurd." Although I-15 and light rail will be used during the 17 days of competition in 2002, Romney said, "$1 billion wasn't spent to get ready for the Games." The actual amount of federal funds going toward the Games will be closer to about $250 million, Romney said.
Meanwhile, Bennett told the Senate an increase in federal spending for the Olympics in Utah over previous Games is appropriate -- because threats are increasing and the Games are becoming more complicated. "As the Olympics get bigger and bigger, with more and more nations, more and more athletes, and more and more opportunities for international terrorism, they become a bigger and bigger problem for the federal government," Bennett said.
Meanwhile, Romney said he spent several days in Washington lobbying for the final funding request before coming to Sydney last week. He also said he has congressional and White House support.
"We're less than a year and a half away," Romney said. "That's no time to change horses midstream."
E-MAIL: lee@desnews.com; lisa@desnews.com
Copyright (c) 2000 Deseret News Publishing Company
Record Number: 0009200155
Romney needs to stop the negatives while playing the victim every time someone fights back – it will not win him hearts and minds, and it will not win him the nomination – that contest appears to be developing on its own between Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich heading into the Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri contests this week. Santorum, according to polls, is in a good position to do well in all three states, and to break the Romney as front runner myth prior to Super Tuesday. In addition Romney is no longer the one who is best positioned to beat the President in the fall – Santorum is – this according to Rasmussen Polling and of course, subject to change. Romney has been seen in this light from the beginning, a combination of name recognition and the foregone conclusion that he will be “the front runner”. This has been blasted in the news, by the GOP Elite, and may account for the low voter turnout in the primary and caucuses to date. If Romney is pre-ordained to be the winner, why bother to vote? (Fox, CNN discussions)
That is Rick Santorum’s biggest challenge, to help the voters understand that he is a viable alternative, and those contests today will establish that fact. One can, therefore, anticipate Santorum under blazing attack by Romney should he take even one of the 3 states, let alone 2. In addition there is the vitriol from the left labeling him as “religious” – stick in the word “Christian or Catholic” and one understands that the game is on, and Santorum is now seen as a viable threat to Obama – not Romney.
What to watch for in the next debate then? Santorum receiving questions based on social issues rather than his rather strong positions on the economy, specifically manufacturing, as well as foreign policy and national defense. Of all the candidates, Santorum and Gingrich have the strongest showings is past debates on these specific issues, with Ron Paul taking the lead on economics. Should the moderators at CNN allow Santorum and equal stage with equal topics, he stands a chance of besting both Romney and Gingrich. With Newt Gingrich, who has risen from the ashes in the past, one can look at the race as between Santorum and Gingrich – both battling to unseat Romney from the artificial throne upon which he is currently seated. Romney, who does not give a speech without a teleprompter, (sound familiar), is up against the best in the orator business, especially when it comes to Gingrich, and Santorum, who studied under Gingrich, has found his footing in the debate arena,. However, it will depend a great deal upon the behavior of the candidates, should Gingrich continue to attack Romney, it will open the door for Santorum to take the high road, once again, and this scenario is far from unlikely. Moreover, Santorum is seen as most likable by the GOP voters in poll after poll, and with Romney’s inability to reign in his attacks, should he turn up the heat on Santorum in the debate arena, let alone in the primary states via advertising, that will be the final straw for those who are sick and tired of the personal and over the top policy attacks – and Romney’s bid.
There are a few remaining primary debates: courtesy of www.2012 presidentialelectionnews.com:
February 22, 20128pm ET on CNN
Location: Mesa Arts Center in Mesa, Arizona
Sponsor: CNN and the Republican Party of Arizona
Participants: TBD
March 1, 20128pm ET on CNN
Location: Georgia
Sponsor: CNN and the Georgia Republican Party
Participants: TBD
March 5, 2012Air time TBD on NBC
Location: Reagan Library in Simi Valley, CA
Sponsor: Reagan Library, NBC News and Politico
Participants: TBD
March 19, 20129pm ET on PBS
Location: Portland, OR
Sponsor: Oregon Public Broadcasting, NPR, PBS, The Washington Times and the Oregon Republican Party Participants: TBD
No comments:
Post a Comment