Mark Wilson/Getty Images
No, it's not just the sweater vests (or, as we call them over here, tank tops).
I've been guilty of underestimating Santorum, as most of us have. I still think he's likely to lose, but he's got a decent-sized chance of overturning the front-runner. Just as the human body will develop antibodies that are perfectly designed to neutralise a particular virus, it may be that the GOP race has thrown up a candidate whose strengths intersect lethally with Romney's vulnerabilities.
Michael Sokolove is a New York Times reporter who spent time with Santorum in 2005 in the course of writing a profile of him. He came away with a sense that, whatever else he is, Santorum is not your average politician:
When I was with Santorum, in Washington and on a campaign swing in Pennsylvania, I observed that his staff didn’t call him Senator, as most of the 100 titans in that august body like to be addressed. They called him Boss or Rick. I could ask him pretty much anything, and he would answer. One thing I particularly appreciated was that if I inquired about some seemingly outrageous statement he made in the past, he didn’t deny it or try to frame it in some more palatable way; he would actually expand upon it. He had the courage of his convictions.
At this point, you might want to think about Mitt Romney and ask yourself if that last phrase is one people associate with him. Or if maybe that's the inverse of the phrases most associated with him.
Here's Sokolove again:
Santorum really does have “real-guy” cred in a way that no one else in that field does. When he talks about working people, you feel he actually knows some of them. He has conviction. He says what he thinks, no matter how possibly alarming his views may be, and repeats the same thing the next day and the next.
Again, consider the Romney. A man whose regular guy credentials are on a par with those of Mr Burns.
Then, of course, there is the question of ideology. Republican voters are in the mood for a true-red conservative. Santorum may not be a small-government guy (he's actually more of a Bush-era statist) but on the most emotive parts of the Republican agenda - social issues - all his signals flash red.
In short, Santorum's character, his personal style, and his politics might have been designed to expose Romney's weaknesses in the eyes of this electorate.
The big advantage that Romney still has over Santorum (in terms of voter appeal) is on electability. But then again:
Mr. Santorum can also make a credible claim to challenging Mr. Romney on electability. Mr. Santorum’s current unfavorable rating among all voters is 11 points lower than Mr. Romney’s, 36 percent versus 47 percent. Their favorable ratings are roughly equal: 30 percent for Mr. Santorum to 29 percent for Mr. Romney.
That's from Nate Silver. In fact, as Mr Silver has pointed out elsewhere, Santorum may be the most rational choice for the Republicans, given the current field. Arguably, he has a better balance of conservatism and electability than Romney. Plus, they just like the guy more. So why not go for it?
As I say, I still think Santorum will lose. I also think that no more candidates will enter the field, and that Romney will secure the nomination.
But the exciting thing about this race is that I may be wrong on any or all counts.
(By the way, does anyone else keep thinking Jerry Seinfeld is running for president?)
Comments