Dianne
02-24-2012, 03:07 AM
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/73234.html
Last week, the Obama campaign made what seemed, on its surface, like a startling announcement: They were steering some of their opposition researchers, who had been mostly trained on Mitt Romney, to a rocketing Rick Santorum.
The announcement was factual — the campaign is, indeed, busy beefing up its dossier on the former Pennsylvania senator, thanks to his recent trio of wins and surprising strength in Michigan. It was also a bit of classic campaign jujitsu designed to further degrade the standing of an already wounded Romney, the man Team Obama still thinks will be the eventual GOP nominee.
“Circumstances have changed,” said Stephanie Cutter, Obama’s deputy campaign manager, referring to Santorum’s sudden relevance.
But more than anything, the shift revealed a genuine sense of befuddlement within Democratic circles over how to deal with the once-unthinkable possibility that Rick Santorum — you know, the guy who lost his last Senate race by 18 points — could actually be their opponent in November.
That’s the Santorum paradox, Democrats say: He’s too dangerous to ignore — yet impossible to take seriously.
“I’ve been playing this little game with my friends. It’s called ‘Guess which seven states Santorum can win,’” said veteran Democratic strategist James Carville, who thinks Santorum’s stances against abortion, contraception and stem cell research make him a no-sale to women voters in all parties.
“Here’s the seven. OK, there’s Utah, Idaho, a Dakota, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama. What’s that? Six? Okay — Texas? … Wait. I’m not 100 percent sure he can win Texas.”
Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a liberal Democrat who had a decent working relationship with the conservative Santorum, predicted that Obama would win more than 350 electoral votes — maybe even 400 — in a matchup against Santorum.
“It’s a runaway, and there is virtually nothing Santorum could do to change it,” Rendell said. “I don’t think he’s ever had a shot.”That kind of cockiness is a luxury Obama’s campaign simply can’t afford to project — especially if Santorum manages to upset Romney in Michigan next Tuesday, the state of Romney’s birth and a critical test of both candidates’ capacity to woo working-class voters.
Purple Strategies, a bipartisan firm, released poll results Wednesday of the dozen states most likely to decide the 2012 election. Santorum trailed by Obama by 2 points while Romney was down by 4 points. Among independents, Santorum led Obama by 2 points but Romney trailed the president by 3 points.
“Since September, we have tested President Obama against Rick Perry, Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, and now Rick Santorum,” Doug Usher, the managing partner for research at Purple Strategies, wrote on The Huffington Post. “Of all of these candidates, Rick Santorum is the only one to outperform Romney (albeit by a small margin) against President Obama in Purple America.”
Last week, the Obama campaign made what seemed, on its surface, like a startling announcement: They were steering some of their opposition researchers, who had been mostly trained on Mitt Romney, to a rocketing Rick Santorum.
The announcement was factual — the campaign is, indeed, busy beefing up its dossier on the former Pennsylvania senator, thanks to his recent trio of wins and surprising strength in Michigan. It was also a bit of classic campaign jujitsu designed to further degrade the standing of an already wounded Romney, the man Team Obama still thinks will be the eventual GOP nominee.
“Circumstances have changed,” said Stephanie Cutter, Obama’s deputy campaign manager, referring to Santorum’s sudden relevance.
But more than anything, the shift revealed a genuine sense of befuddlement within Democratic circles over how to deal with the once-unthinkable possibility that Rick Santorum — you know, the guy who lost his last Senate race by 18 points — could actually be their opponent in November.
That’s the Santorum paradox, Democrats say: He’s too dangerous to ignore — yet impossible to take seriously.
“I’ve been playing this little game with my friends. It’s called ‘Guess which seven states Santorum can win,’” said veteran Democratic strategist James Carville, who thinks Santorum’s stances against abortion, contraception and stem cell research make him a no-sale to women voters in all parties.
“Here’s the seven. OK, there’s Utah, Idaho, a Dakota, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama. What’s that? Six? Okay — Texas? … Wait. I’m not 100 percent sure he can win Texas.”
Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a liberal Democrat who had a decent working relationship with the conservative Santorum, predicted that Obama would win more than 350 electoral votes — maybe even 400 — in a matchup against Santorum.
“It’s a runaway, and there is virtually nothing Santorum could do to change it,” Rendell said. “I don’t think he’s ever had a shot.”That kind of cockiness is a luxury Obama’s campaign simply can’t afford to project — especially if Santorum manages to upset Romney in Michigan next Tuesday, the state of Romney’s birth and a critical test of both candidates’ capacity to woo working-class voters.
Purple Strategies, a bipartisan firm, released poll results Wednesday of the dozen states most likely to decide the 2012 election. Santorum trailed by Obama by 2 points while Romney was down by 4 points. Among independents, Santorum led Obama by 2 points but Romney trailed the president by 3 points.
“Since September, we have tested President Obama against Rick Perry, Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, and now Rick Santorum,” Doug Usher, the managing partner for research at Purple Strategies, wrote on The Huffington Post. “Of all of these candidates, Rick Santorum is the only one to outperform Romney (albeit by a small margin) against President Obama in Purple America.”