It seems to me that the MSM is exaggerating the scope—if probably not the significance—of Romney’s victory in Illinois. The late deciders broke even, and the Romney saturation of the media market in Chicago wasn’t opposed at all by Santorum. It’s like Rick went into battle without an Air Force.
But, to repeat myself, it’s Rick’s lack of support among Catholics that will keep him from being a serious contender for the nomination. Here’s an explanation I got through email from a prominent Santorum supporter.
I don’t think the foreign policy thing is driving it: it’s too peripheral an issue in the campaign and the real Porcher/Anti-War strain among American Catholics isn’t huge. It’s got to be the cringe factor—-basically, the Catholics who have “made it” in America (as evidenced by their joining the Republican Party) have separated themselves culturally from the views of the great unwashed. Their views of the social issues track with the country club (except, perhaps, for abortion, about which a president can do little); so voting against the Catholic Santorum is a badge to show “how far they’ve come,” in American terms.
I think this distinguished expert underplays the wisdom in voting against the cringe inducer. It’s not just that Republican Catholics are all bourgeois and stuff. (They are.) They want the Catholic presence in public life to be prudent and responsible. It is true, though, that Republican Catholics are less likely to “vote their faith” than Republican evangelicals. And Rick’s undeniable Christian authenticity means less to them as a factor in choosing a president.
