. . . has, I think, become a moral imperative for Republicans.
Pete, of course, is right that what went wrong with Santorum is that he campaigned with the lack of discipline and general self-indulgence of a loser at a crucial moment. Now we’re not talking Newt-level self-indulgence, but more than enough for Romney to look good by comparison. It wasn’t Santorum’s stand on any particular issue, but the way he presented himself. His “social conservativism” was attractive to Republican primary voters. The unsurge was almost entirely over deep doubts about that guy’s electability.
Today’s polls include the shocker that Romney is within 4 in TN, where Santorum was up 20 a very little while ago.
So if I were a betting man, I might put some money on Romney coming close to a race-ending sweep. Romney has even surged to second im GA. I hope I’m wrong here, by the way, and I’m not voting for Romney (or, of course, Newt) in GA. But just like last time, my vote, sadly, seems to be have reduced (like Pete’s) to an ineffectual protest.
In any case: Subsequent surges by Santorum or Gingrich, which might be, for the sad reason Pete gives, almost inevitable, will be too late to keep Mitt from getting the delegates he needs.
So no brokered convention. No Jeb or Mitch to save us. So we gotta love the Mitt, and there are, as they say, some good things there.
