DeMint demurs on endorsement in South Carolina primary

posted at 10:50 am on January 16, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

So much for conservative consolidation.  After a congress of conservative activists bestowed its blessing on Rick Santorum as their endorsed consolidation candidate, the most prominent conservative in South Carolina will take a pass on endorsing anyone:

One of the most sought-after South Carolina politicians said Monday he would not endorse a candidate ahead of the Palmetto State’s primary.

Sen. Jim DeMint, who has offered praise to all of the candidates in the field, said in a statement, “I do not have a favorite in this race and I will not endorse a candidate.” …

“I’ve gotten to know each of the candidates over the past year and they are all far superior to Obama,” DeMint said. “My view reflects what I’ve heard from Republican voters across South Carolina who remain divided in this race.”

DeMint would have been a big get for any candidate in the GOP field, given his high regard among conservative voters. Many of the contenders have met with the senator in person, looking to gain his backing.

Indeed they did, and a DeMint endorsement would have reverberations far outside of South Carolina, too.  So will his non-endorsement.  Tony Perkins hoped to get conservative voters to focus on a single alternative to Mitt Romney by gathering 150 leaders of the family-values movement to make their own endorsement.  Rick Santorum won that battle on the third ballot, and could have hoped to gain some votes from the columns of Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich, if not pressure them to pull out of the race.  Instead, the non-endorsement that follows on the heels of Perkins’ efforts will encourage the other candidates to remain in the race, and takes at least a little of the wind out of the sails of the endorsement of Santorum.

This doesn’t help Mitt Romney directly, of course, especially since DeMint endorsed Romney in 2008.  The lack of a DeMint endorsement in 2012 will help fuel conservative skepticism over Romney’s bid in this cycle.  However, to the extent that a non-endorsement slows or prevents conservative consolidation in South Carolina, that does nothing but boost Romney’s chances of winning the primary in the Palmetto state and threatening an early end to the Republican nomination fight.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Tells me that he doesn’t think that Romney has this wrapped up…at least in SC.

txmomof6 on January 16, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Not sure if that’s a big deal at all. He said he likes all the candidates and doesn’t have a favorite. It would be hard to endorse anyone in that frame of opinion and reference.

hawkdriver on January 16, 2012 at 10:54 AM

DeMint is a smart man – he knows how (and when) to use leverage.

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 10:54 AM

… and an early end of Tea Party grassroots efforts for the GOP nominee.

michaelo on January 16, 2012 at 10:56 AM

There’s plenty of time for DeMint to endorse Romney after he’s won South Carolina. No problems.

cicerone on January 16, 2012 at 10:58 AM

It’s a smart way to acknowledge Romney’s strong chances of victory without alienating the supporters of the two or three True Conservatives left in the race.

KingGold on January 16, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Santorum is the only conservative in the race – IF “conservative” leaders truly want a conservative nominee, then they should endorse Santorum and help him win.

Pork-Chop on January 16, 2012 at 10:59 AM

All this says is that DeMint is a phony who wants to endorse Romney but knows it will piss off the Tea Party, so he decided to stay mum about it.

Aizen on January 16, 2012 at 11:00 AM

If we could deem someone into office as the Democrats seem to think they can Santorum would be an excellent choice.

Speakup on January 16, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Tells me that he doesn’t think that Romney has this wrapped up…at least in SC.

txmomof6 on January 16, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Agree

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Hmmm. Two of strongest voice in the conservative movement, Palin and DeMint, decline to endorse anyone. What does that say about the field and the problems with it.

ConservativePartyNow on January 16, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Tells me that he doesn’t think that Romney has this wrapped up…at least in SC.

txmomof6 on January 16, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Hope you’re right. But it could also mean that he does think Romney has it wrapped up, but still can’t bring himself to actually endorse him. If he thought he could stop Romney with an endorsement of a rival, perhaps he would.

Again, I hope you are right about this.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Demint Demint

He’s two Demints in one. (Sorry)

2007
Then in February of that year DeMint explained on Fox News that Romney should do for America what he had done for Massachusetts with health care: “Well, that’s something that I think we should do for the whole country.”

Which Demint are we talking about?

CW on January 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Hmmm. Two of strongest voice in the conservative movement, Palin and DeMint, decline to endorse anyone. What does that say about the field and the problems with it.

ConservativePartyNow on January 16, 2012 at 11:01 AM

That this is far from over and this is a fluid race?

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

That is because DeMint likes Ron Paul, but his Theocracy Loving supporters would never accept anything less than a Rick Theocracy Man Santorum endorsement so he just bowed out

the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Pork-Chop on January 16, 2012 at 10:59 AM

A right-leaning statist is still a statist.
No thank you.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 16, 2012 at 11:03 AM

You might call it “conservative consolidation” but I call it influence peddling. I have and always will have problem with elected officials telling me who is “best”. Besides, with this group I don’t think they can say it with a straight face.

Cindy Munford on January 16, 2012 at 11:03 AM

That this is far from over and this is a fluid race?

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

And possible that one of them may jump in the race still.

ConservativePartyNow on January 16, 2012 at 11:04 AM

With a wink and a nod Demint has signed off on Mittens. Shame really.

Bmore on January 16, 2012 at 11:04 AM

DeMint is a smart man – he knows how (and when) to use leverage.

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 10:54 AM

We don’t need anymore “smart” men…we need men who are committed to conservative ideas.
This “leverage” cr@p is exactly that, we need men that will stand up and state what they believe, and if happens to support someone who doesn’t win, big deal.

A leader takes lead, and that is what is wrong with out party, the political system as a whole, everyone is “smart” and trying to out do, or “leverage” the system, instead of just getting out and leading.

Glad you think being clever is so worthy, I prefer someone who is a leader by being honest, committed to conservative ideals, and is man enough to take the lumps if he makes an error…

right2bright on January 16, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Hmmm. Two of strongest voice in the conservative movement, Palin and DeMint, decline to endorse anyone. What does that say about the field and the problems with it.

ConservativePartyNow on January 16, 2012 at 11:01 AM

It says they are not sold on the person who is in the lead…they know that the wrong person is being forced down our throats, but they are too loyal to the RNC to do anything but sit down and keep quiet.

right2bright on January 16, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Two of strongest voice in the conservative movement, Palin and DeMint, decline to endorse anyone. What does that say about the field and the problems with it.

ConservativePartyNow on January 16, 2012 at 11:01 AM

I think it says that they have more respect for us voters than the other politicians who jumped in to endorse.

Endorsements are given wayyyyyy too much authority and power. Most of it is back-scratching.

beatcanvas on January 16, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Glad you think being clever is so worthy, I prefer someone who is a leader by being honest, committed to conservative ideals, and is man enough to take the lumps if he makes an error…

right2bright on January 16, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Good passion – perhaps a little naive in the world of politics – but I get your point – 100%

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 11:08 AM

It’s ok, really. It would be better to have a non-conservative, Mittens, than a so called ‘social conservative’ in Santorum. I do not want a Bush 2.0 and screw up conservatives in the future more than it already is. Everyone knows Romney is not a conservative; it will certainly be bad for us to nominate him but not as bad as it would be if we got Santorum.

LaughterJones on January 16, 2012 at 11:09 AM

After recent Romney wins in IA and NH, and a (so far) apparent lead in SC, no endorsement is a de facto endorsement. He just doesn’t want to say it because his head is telling him one thing and his heart has stuck its fingers in its ears saying “Na na na na, I can’t hear you!”

rogaineguy on January 16, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Endorsements are given wayyyyyy too much authority and power. Most of it is back-scratching.

beatcanvas on January 16, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Yup

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 11:10 AM

All this says is that DeMint is a phony who wants to endorse Romney but knows it will piss off the Tea Party, so he decided to stay mum about it.

I totally agree with this statement

gerrym51 on January 16, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Remember everyone – the POTUS is one branch – we also have to win the Senate and the House.

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Rino. He would rather not offend lil McCain.

Southernblogger on January 16, 2012 at 11:11 AM

We don’t need anymore “smart” men…we need men who are committed to conservative ideas.
This “leverage” cr@p is exactly that, we need men that will stand up and state what they believe, and if happens to support someone who doesn’t win, big deal.

A leader takes lead, and that is what is wrong with out party, the political system as a whole, everyone is “smart” and trying to out do, or “leverage” the system, instead of just getting out and leading.

Glad you think being clever is so worthy, I prefer someone who is a leader by being honest, committed to conservative ideals, and is man enough to take the lumps if he makes an error…

right2bright on January 16, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Very well said, R2B.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Good passion – perhaps a little naive in the world of politics – but I get your point – 100%

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Naive because we accept who we get and we (at least some) honor those…calling out the weak leaders is our duty.
Naive because we, or some, assume that is how it is, that is how it always will be, so don’t try to change…hence we have: Dole, McCain, maybe Mitt, all the ones that conservatives don’t want, but because we allow other “clever” people to be in control…my naivete comes from thinking that other conservatives feel the same, but the poles and elections speak differently.

right2bright on January 16, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Remember everyone – the POTUS is one branch – we also have to win the Senate and the House.

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 11:11 AM

If Romney is the nominee, all of my efforts will be focused on the House and Senate. (But yes, I’ll still vote for the guy.)

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:14 AM

right2bright on January 16, 2012 at 11:13 AM

I don’t disagree – honestly I don’t – but the field is the field – we can’t wish for someone who is not running.

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Endorsements are given wayyyyyy too much authority and power. Most of it is back-scratching.

beatcanvas on January 16, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Yup

jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Double Yup, Yup Yup.

Bmore on January 16, 2012 at 11:14 AM

DeMint either supports Romney or Ron Paul, both in secrecy out of fear of his base, 90% of which are Tea Party conservatives, and the other 10% which only care about war-hawk/neocon policies.

Aizen on January 16, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Endorsements mean little this time around. A grilled cheese sandwich will beat Obama in 2012.

gasmeterguy on January 16, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Aizen on January 16, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Ron Paul for President!…of IRAN.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 16, 2012 at 11:21 AM

To all who keep calling Santorum a “statist”, I’m wondering if they think that the House and the Senate have any control at all? They do make the laws. We’ll be in much better shape if the Republicans get control of the Senate and pass some laws or budgets that help us get spending under control. I believe Congress is the place to start for the repeal of Obamcare. I believe Santorum will cooperate with and encourage that — regardless of how much money lobbyist gave him, etc., or whether he voted for “No Child Left Behind”. I’m not sure what Romney will do with Obamacare though and he does not strike me as someone to stand on principal. We need a strong person with integrity as our president. To me that is either Perry or Santorum—don’t know if they have much of a chance, though.

LL1960 on January 16, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I don’t CARE who he endorses or not!

Can’t anyone think on their own anymore and make up their OWN minds?

I suspect some wishful thinking in this reaction.

Let’s fight it out and go in and vote OUR consciences.

WHY is that now some old quaint idea?

golfmann on January 16, 2012 at 11:23 AM

LL1960 on January 16, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Santorum voted against right-to-work legislation while he was in the senate.
He IS a statist.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 16, 2012 at 11:24 AM

All this says is that DeMint is a phony who wants to endorse Romney but knows it will piss off the Tea Party, so he decided to stay mum about it.

Aizen on January 16, 2012

Excellent summation and conclusion, sir.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 16, 2012 at 11:24 AM

DeMints endorsment didn’t help Romney last time now did it.

steel guy on January 16, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Santorum voted against right-to-work legislation while he was in the senate.
He IS a statist.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 16, 2012 at 11:24 AM

ALT, I am still a Perry supporter – like you, to the bitter end – so this is not an argument for Santorum. But his explanation for this vote on right to work is very convincing to me.

For those who haven’t heard him on this, Santorum argues that the federal law would have trumped state law on this matter, and he believes that RTW should be a state matter, not a federal matter. Given this, and given that as a Senator he had an obligation to represent his state (which was opposed to the federal legislation), he voted against it.

It’s a classic federalism argument.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:31 AM

I can’t imagine this matters as much as is claimed, much like most endorsements.

changer1701 on January 16, 2012 at 11:35 AM

I could care less who he endorses. I think for myself and myself says it doesn’t matter because healthcare repeal WILL BE OFF the table. Neither party wants it repealed because it gives them too much power and there’s no way they’re going to let that go. Good luck with whoever.If it’s Romney, there isn’t really much difference between him and Obama. They both think they’re entitled to the position.

noneoftheabove on January 16, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I think it says that they have more respect for us voters than the other politicians who jumped in to endorse.

Endorsements are given wayyyyyy too much authority and power. Most of it is back-scratching.

beatcanvas on January 16, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Yes. Governor Palin said during her interview with Judge Jenine on Friday night, that she’s not given an endorsement because she realizes that the negativity attached to her name would be transferred to any candidate she endorsed and add more chaos to their campaign.

From reading some of the ‘hair-on-fire’ comments here at HA after her husband endorsed Speaker Gingrich, I’d say she’s right.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 11:37 AM

I guess with Huntsman out of the race, I’ll hope for Perry to get one more chance at a campaign revival so he can stop Romney. Newt is too divisive and Santorum makes you dislike him the more of his record you see.

Aizen on January 16, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Most of the Unions draw their considerable power from FEDERAL LAW, not state law, thus the FEDERAL LAW needs to be changed, or abolished in order to give the states back the power

Santorums claim that he did it because of states rights is completely false and disingenuous.

the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Present!

ConcealedKerry on January 16, 2012 at 11:38 AM

DeMint is a smart man – he knows how (and when) to use leverage.
jake-the-goose on January 16, 2012 at 10:54 AM

And just as importantly, when to stay out of a mess to avoid having to clean egg off one’s face.

whatcat on January 16, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Hey, i just read on both the daily beast and Mediaite that Mrs. Santorum lived with an abortion doctor for 7 years. sshe left this abortion docter when he did not want to have more children(he was 40 years her senior) shortly after this she married Santorum. who knew

gerrym51 on January 16, 2012 at 11:39 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 16, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Romney signed Romneycare—I’m not sure, but I think it has an individual mandate. I’m not familiar with the right-to-work legislation you speak of, but of the two, I find Romneycare to be more harmful—because it was used as a basis for Obamacare (or so I am told). I would go for Perry, but it looks like he is too far behind.

LL1960 on January 16, 2012 at 11:40 AM

“Conservative” should be broken down into “fiscal conservative” and “social conservative”. Santorum is a social conservative, but he is not a fiscal conservative. He would be a disastorus republican candidate in the general, trying to win on social conservative values while the nation now has a debt greater than its GDP.

Kaffa on January 16, 2012 at 11:43 AM

A real profile in courage. Looks like DeMint talks a good game but is really just a calculating attention whore. He can endorse Romney and be a winner but damage his conservative credentials or he can back one the others who will get crushed showing he has little real power. So he takes a pass, smart but gutless.

jnelchef on January 16, 2012 at 11:46 AM

After recent Romney wins in IA and NH, and a (so far) apparent lead in SC, no endorsement is a de facto endorsement. He just doesn’t want to say it because his head is telling him one thing and his heart has stuck its fingers in its ears saying “Na na na na, I can’t hear you!”

rogaineguy on January 16, 2012 at 11:09 AM

He should be sticking his finger, way back in his throat!

KOOLAID2 on January 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM

LL1960 on January 16, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Not that I support Romney, I dont, but that is a dead horse. People need to be able to separate a STATE program from a FEDERAL program

I have no problems with the STATE doing it, I have a big Problem with the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT doing the same thing.

STATE’s can experiment with different things, things their populations want, the FEDERAL government should not

That is the biggest underlying problem, no one can seem to separate a STATE issue from a FEDERAL issue,.

the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM

DeMint was sent to Washington by his people to do a job.

I suggest he do his JOB or they throw his A$$ out too.

See how simple that is?

Thank you.

golfmann on January 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Most of the Unions draw their considerable power from FEDERAL LAW, not state law, thus the FEDERAL LAW needs to be changed, or abolished in order to give the states back the power

Santorums claim that he did it because of states rights is completely false and disingenuous.

the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:38 AM

I’m not sure I understand your comment. There are 22 right-to-work states right now.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:49 AM

I sure don’t fault DeMint for not endorsing anyone. They’re all losers IMO!

GFW on January 16, 2012 at 11:50 AM

There’s plenty of time for DeMint to endorse Romney after he’s won South Carolina. No problems.

cicerone on January 16, 2012 at 10:58 AM

DeMint would be using Romney’s endorsement strategy then.

Midwestprincesse on January 16, 2012 at 11:50 AM

After a congress of conservative activists big-government lovers bestowed its blessing on Rick Santorum as their endorsed consolidation candidate, the most prominent [lip service] conservative in South Carolina will take a pass on endorsing anyone:

Dante on January 16, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Speaking of conservative consolidation…

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/16/activists-say-pro-santorum-vote-was-rigged/

Hostile Gospel on January 16, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Yeah I saw that. According to two separate witnesses most of those folks voted for Santorum hoping Romney would select him as a VP…and that Romney’s team insulted the evangelicals calling them bigots.

“When the case was made that Perry was the only candidate who actually understood the Constitution and the power of the 10th Amendment, the only one who was not a big government guy, the most successful governor in the country who has a rock solid record of job creation and conservative judicial appointments – they just didn’t care. I want that to sink in.

These conservative leaders really do not care about jobs, people hurting like the Great Depression, America’s economy falling into an abyss….

When asked one-on-one why they were going for Santorum when they knew he had no money, no organization, and stood not a ghost of a chance to win the nomination, the truth came out:

“If we unify behind Santorum, it will force Romney to pick him as his running mate – for he’ll know that’s the only way to get our support in the general (election in November).”

That’s the slimy deal behind this. They’ll go for Romney if he goes for Santorum on his ticket. Should we call them Judas Conservatives?

We suspected this all along: Santorum is a stalking horse for Romney. A vote for Santorum is a vote for Romney. Folks in South Carolina need to know this…” – Dr. Jack Wheeler.

The Wall Street Journal called him “the originator of the Reagan Doctrine”. The Washington Post called him “The Indiana Jones of the Right”. Izvestiya, the organ of the Soviet Communist Party, called him an “ideological gangster”

http://www.tothepointnews.com/

And this…

“There was a decidedly sympathetic view toward Rick Santorum going into the meeting. He has been one of the leading advocates for socially conservative views. They like him on that. I was, frankly, stunned that even when some of the people chosen to speak objectively about the field pointed out that this will be an election about economics, the crowd really was focused on social concerns…

The Romney advocacy did more harm than good and I think the biggest story to come out of this event has to be both the hostility between evangelicals and Team Romney and the absolute endorsement for “Not Romney.”

If you are reading this from the media, I think the story you should tell is that Mitt Romney will probably become the nominee of the Republican Party with even less good feelings between evangelicals and him than John McCain had.

The problem for Team Romney is that the distrust of Romney is overwhelmingly about his record and shiftiness, but the Romney campaign fundamentally believes it is about his religion. When Team Romney concluded the pitch (read from an iPad seemingly without a passionate delivery) with an admonishment to not be an anti-Mormon bigot, it was game over. Several of the attendees felt like the Romney campaign was almost implying that they’d win without evangelicals and would expect everyone to line up when it was over even without Romney reaching out.

Note to Team Romney: when you are in a room full of Christian leaders like those who were in that room and who have all long been attacked by the left as bigots, it is unwise — no, it is damn foolish — to accuse them of being anti-Mormon bigots, something too many Romney supporters have descended to as the only possible explanation for daring to not get on board with Romney.

What gets me is that given Rick Santorum’s polling in South Carolina, his funding and campaign apparatus, the admonition from one influential person that Santorum doesn’t have the campaign to run for President, etc. separate reports suggest a number of people present decided to vote for Santorum not to beat Romney, but to be Romney’s running mate — something that most likely will not happen.

At this point, a vote for Santorum really does help Mitt Romney, but few are willing to acknowledge that…”

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/16/the-evangelical-vote/

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 11:52 AM

I’m not sure I understand your comment. There are 22 right-to-work states right now.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Right the Federal government forced unions on the states, now states are having to create new laws and regulations to counter act the federal law they are forced under

That is the reverse of what should happen, the Federal Law need to be changed, then if a state WANTS forced unions then they can pass a law for that,

the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:52 AM

DeMint was sent to Washington by his people to do a job.

I suggest he do his JOB or they throw his A$$ out too.

See how simple that is?

Thank you.

golfmann on January 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Where in the job description is “must endorse”?

katy the mean old lady on January 16, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Hey, i just read on both the daily beast and Mediaite that Mrs. Santorum lived with an abortion doctor for 7 years. sshe left this abortion docter when he did not want to have more children(he was 40 years her senior) shortly after this she married Santorum. who knew

gerrym51 on January 16, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Uh….is Mrs. Santorum running for president? This is good old fashioned gossip.

balkanmom on January 16, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Yes. Governor Palin said during her interview with Judge Jenine on Friday night, that she’s not given an endorsement because she realizes that the negativity attached to her name would be transferred to any candidate she endorsed and add more chaos to their campaign.

From reading some of the ‘hair-on-fire’ comments here at HA after her husband endorsed Speaker Gingrich, I’d say she’s right.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 11:37 AM

She said that. But she said it in a loose “60-70% of the voting public don’t like our candidate so why should I hitch my horse to any of these candidate’s wagons” type of way. :) I agree. There is no need for her to go down in the train-wreck that will be 2012 politicking.

I am convinced now more than ever that the GOP needs to go through a political death in order for the Establishment to be taught that the people truly mean what they say.

Midwestprincesse on January 16, 2012 at 11:54 AM

“Conservative” should be broken down into “fiscal conservative” and “social conservative”. Santorum is a social conservative, but he is not a fiscal conservative. He would be a disastorus republican candidate in the general, trying to win on social conservative values while the nation now has a debt greater than its GDP.

Kaffa on January 16, 2012 at 11:43 AM

It just goes to show how far the GOP has drifted away from Reaganism, that now there needs to be a distinction between social conservatism, fiscal conservatism, and foreign policy conservatism.

As you correctly pointed out, Santorum is not a fiscal conservative, but, then again, neither are Romney nor Gingrich. Perry and Paul are both strong fiscal conservatives, but Paul is a libertarian on most social issues and foreign policy. If you consider immigration a social issue (since it affects lifestyle changes), Perry isn’t really conservative on that, either, based on his record.

Essentially, Perry is the most “conservative” of the bunch going by today’s standards, but Paul would be the best “traditional” conservative if his foreign policy just wasn’t so “out there.”

Aizen on January 16, 2012 at 11:55 AM

That is because DeMint likes Ron Paul, but his Theocracy Loving supporters would never accept anything less than a Rick Theocracy Man Santorum endorsement so he just bowed out
the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Agreed! Ron Paul is the best candidate out there to go against the White Obama:)

Capitalist75 on January 16, 2012 at 11:55 AM

A “state issue” vs a “federal issue” on Obamacare? So, it’s Ok for the government to make you buy a product. The only argument is which level of government can make you do it? This is a conservative argument for Romney! I repeat. We are so screwed.

Kaffa on January 16, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Right the Federal government forced unions on the states, now states are having to create new laws and regulations to counter act the federal law they are forced under

That is the reverse of what should happen, the Federal Law need to be changed, then if a state WANTS forced unions then they can pass a law for that,

the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Thanks for the explanation. You make a very valid point.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Who the heck cares who DeMint endorses? The State newspaper in South Carolina over the weekend endorsed Jon Huntsman.

SC.Charlie on January 16, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Looks like DeMint is as uneasy about the field of candidates as many of the rest of us are. He endorsed Romney last time, but not this cycle? How come?

Scriptor on January 16, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Uh….is Mrs. Santorum running for president? This is good old fashioned gossip.

Its true and i find it ironic.

gerrym51 on January 16, 2012 at 12:01 PM

That is because DeMint likes Ron Paul, but his Theocracy Loving supporters would never accept anything less than a Rick Theocracy Man Santorum endorsement so he just bowed out
the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Agreed! Ron Paul is the best candidate out there to go against the White Obama:)

Capitalist75 on January 16, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Sincerely hope you’re just trolling, y’know, trying to provoke a few comments, and don’t really believe this nutty paranoid Theocracy stuff.

Scriptor on January 16, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Its true and i find it ironic.

gerrym51 on January 16, 2012 at 12:01 PM

I find it ironic that you’re on a conservative site talking about conservatism yet you’re carrying on about someone’s personal life.

That’s the opposite of conservatism.

Midwestprincesse on January 16, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Lots of clairvoyants here opining on what DeMint is thinking. Seems to me he was pretty clear: “I do not have a favorite in this race.”

Syzygy on January 16, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Why would anyone expect DeMint to endorse a Christianized Socialist like Santorum? That would destroy his reputation.

If Evangelical Social Conservatives wanted conservatives to coalesce around a non-Romney candidate, they needed to pick someone way less toxic to fiscal conservatives than Santorum.

joana on January 16, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Lots of clairvoyants here opining on what DeMint is thinking. Seems to me he was pretty clear: “I do not have a favorite in this race.”

Syzygy on January 16, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Seeing as DeMint’s staffers have went to work on Romney’s campaign and since DeMint has endorsed him in the past, it’s safe to say that DeMint is in the Mitt column.

Midwestprincesse on January 16, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Midwestprincesse on January 16, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Romney-mormon-bad

Romney-abortion flip flopper-bad

you see the irony

gerrym51 on January 16, 2012 at 12:12 PM

A “state issue” vs a “federal issue” on Obamacare? So, it’s Ok for the government to make you buy a product. The only argument is which level of government can make you do it? This is a conservative argument for Romney! I repeat. We are so screwed.

Kaffa on January 16, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Under the Federal Constitution this is correct, That states were given huge amounts of power (and the citizens in those states responsible for crafting limits on that power in their own state constitutions or systems of governments they choose)

So in the Current Debate is not what state XXX choose to do, but what is proper for the federal government.

No it is not a “Conservative” argument, it a the CONSTITUTIONAL argument.

the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Looks like DeMint is as uneasy about the field of candidates as many of the rest of us are. He endorsed Romney last time, but not this cycle? How come?

Scriptor on January 16, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Bingo. Mittbots are dancing around that question like a Maypole.

katy the mean old lady on January 16, 2012 at 12:14 PM

However, to the extent that a non-endorsement slows or prevents conservative consolidation in South Carolina, that does nothing but boost Romney’s chances of winning the primary in the Palmetto state and threatening an early end to the Republican nomination fight.

I could understand why corporate media is pushing this meme even the financial industries who have invested a lot of $$$ in Mitt Romney. The truth is South Carolina isn’t a lock for Mitt Romney.

Dr Evil on January 16, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Looks like DeMint is as uneasy about the field of candidates as many of the rest of us are. He endorsed Romney last time, but not this cycle? How come?

Scriptor on January 16, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Bingo. Mittbots are dancing around that question like a Maypole.

katy the mean old lady on January 16, 2012 at 12:14 PM

As I recall DeMint isn’t running for reelection in 2016, so it’s not like taking this position is going to hurt him. A man with nothing to lose is very dangerous ;)

Dr Evil on January 16, 2012 at 12:19 PM

I think the real reason he’s not endorsing anyone is because in 2010, the NRSC endorsed RINO’s in the senate primaries and got burned because of it. I think DeMint doesn’t want to make the same mistake in the presidential primaries.

GeorgiaBuckeye on January 16, 2012 at 12:22 PM

DeMint was sent to Washington by his people to do a job.

I suggest he do his JOB or they throw his A$$ out too.

See how simple that is?

Thank you.

golfmann on January 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM

A Senator’s job is to represent his state in the United States Senate, not necessarily to endorse one Presidential candidate over another. DeMint’s voting record in the Senate is impeccable from a conservative point of view.

DeMint’s refusal to endorse anyone sends enough signals to the Republican electorate. Romney is not conservative enough, Gingrich has too much baggage, Santorum is unelectable, Ron Paul is a crackpot, so DeMint will let the primary voters decide for themselves and back the eventual winner for November.

In 2008, then-Governor Crist of Florida endorsed John McCain, which helped McCain secure the nomination, but what happened to Crist thereafter? DeMint doesn’t want to go down THAT road!

Strangely enough, we haven’t heard an endorsement from South Carolina’s other Senator, Flimsy Graham. Why not?

Steve Z on January 16, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Seeing as DeMint’s staffers have went to work on Romney’s campaign and since DeMint has endorsed him in the past, it’s safe to say that DeMint is in the Mitt column.

Midwestprincesse on January 16, 2012 at 12:11 PM

If DeMint’s staffers have gone to work on Romney’s campaign, it means they like Romney.

If DeMint endorsed Romney in 2008, it shows that he favored Romney in comparison to others running at that time.

Neither fact leads to the inescapable conclusion that DeMint is currently “in the Mitt column.”

Syzygy on January 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I’m not sure I understand your comment. There are 22 right-to-work states right now.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Right To Work legislation is working it’s way through Union states.

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 12:30 PM

That is because DeMint likes Ron Paul, but his Theocracy Loving supporters would never accept anything less than a Rick Theocracy Man Santorum endorsement so he just bowed out
the_ancient on January 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Agreed! Ron Paul is the best candidate out there to go against the White Obama:)

Capitalist75 on January 16, 2012 at 11:55 AM

David Duke agrees and he’s endorsed Dr. Kookoobananas too!

workingclass artist on January 16, 2012 at 12:32 PM

In 2008, then-Governor Crist of Florida endorsed John McCain, which helped McCain secure the nomination, but what happened to Crist thereafter?

Steve Z on January 16, 2012 at 12:24 PM

He ended up being a cheesy attorney for a cheesy law firm and makes even cheesier TV commercials.

Better than he deserves if you ask me.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Strangely enough, we haven’t heard an endorsement from South Carolina’s other Senator, Flimsy Graham. Why not?

Steve Z on January 16, 2012 at 12:24 PM

That is odd I would think he would jump on the RINO bandwagon along time ago.

Graham is strong on the defense issue….recently because Romney is campaigning in South Carolina he started bringing up that the country needed a strong military.

Graham unlike DeMint will probably run for reelection. He’s probably being politic there was a backlash toward Haley after she endorsed Romney.

Dr Evil on January 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Oops, my first time to mistake the strike for the quote button. Does this make me a bona-fide card-carrying member of HA now?

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM

In 2008, then-Governor Crist of Florida endorsed John McCain, which helped McCain secure the nomination, but what happened to Crist thereafter?

Steve Z on January 16, 2012 at 12:24 PM

As I recall, it wasn’t so much his endorsement of McCain as his eagerness to get next to Obama, and subsequently fleeing the Republican party, that led to his disgrace.

He ended up being a cheesy attorney for a cheesy law firm and makes even cheesier TV commercials.

Better than he deserves if you ask me.

Flora Duh on January 16, 2012 at 12:33 PM

True dat.

Syzygy on January 16, 2012 at 12:44 PM

The lack of a DeMint endorsement in 2012 will help fuel conservative skepticism over Romney’s bid in this cycle. However, to the extent that a non-endorsement slows or prevents conservative consolidation in South Carolina, that does nothing but boost Romney’s chances of winning the primary in the Palmetto state and threatening an early end to the Republican nomination fight.

The DeMint silence will only fuel conservative skepticism among wing-nuts and ideologues. The rest of us–the real conservatives–see that Mitt Romney has proven he is the best candidate in the race and we’ll support him. The “best candidate” means he prepared for the campaign, and has the best organization, money and organizers. Honestly, the so-called conservative ideologues can weep, wail and gnash their teeth all they like, but facts are facts. Let us be REALITY-BASED about this campaign; we’re going up against one of the most ruthless politicians ever on the other side. We do not have time for luxuries like the ones being indulged in daily at this site and others.

Do you want to win in November? You need organization and money to do it. Gingrich doesn’t have it; Santorum doesn’t have it; Only Mitt Romney’s got it. Deal with it.

mountainaires on January 16, 2012 at 12:46 PM

A “state issue” vs a “federal issue” on Obamacare? So, it’s Ok for the government to make you buy a product. The only argument is which level of government can make you do it? This is a conservative argument for Romney! I repeat. We are so screwed.

Kaffa on January 16, 2012 at 11:57 AM

The issue in my mind is exactly the one that you raise. While states may have the power and authority to impose a mandate, I think that such a mandate is a direct assault on the principles of personal autonomy and liberty. I don’t think that a governor who fights to impose such a mandate can be trusted to uphold such principles in other contexts.

Just Sayin on January 16, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Workingclassartist:

Thanks for that RedState update, lol. It’s a good thing to see Erickson admitting that the “conservative coalition” is dead and/or dying. James Dobson, wow; can you say DINOSAUR boys and girls? These people only HURT the GOP; time for them to go! I’m heartened to see how their influence is waning, particularly since they ARE bigots and didn’t want to vote for Santorum because he’s a CATHOLIC, which in their dark brains is no different from a Mormon! It was a really tough choice for them, I’m sure; it took them 3 votes to settle on the Catholic!

This is an election about the economy. We don’t need an ideologue who’ll spend as recklessly as Obama because it’s for a good “social” program we want to force down everyone’s throats.

Good riddance to these high priests of maliciousness and ruin. Let the GOP get back to their roots. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, LIBERTY, and INDIVIDUALISM.

mountainaires on January 16, 2012 at 12:58 PM

After a congress of conservative activists bestowed its blessing on Rick Santorum as their endorsed consolidation candidate, the most prominent conservative in South Carolina will take a pass on endorsing anyone:

LOL.. call them what you want Ed, it doesn’t change their stripes. Granted, Santorum is the preferred candidate of the religious right but he is not a fiscal conservative. He too is about redistribution of wealth, he just has a different method for taking my income and giving it to his selected winners.

Texas Gal on January 16, 2012 at 12:59 PM

“Deal with it”? Spoken like a true bot. I would be rich if I had a nickel for how many times we heard this with Obama supporters. Neither party is for this country. (Bangs head on keyboard, remembering 08 and thinking that the GOP and it’s followers were actually sane, my mistake)

noneoftheabove on January 16, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Rick Santorum has said: “I fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican Party and the conservative movement.”

Sen. DeMint says: “I’d like to see a Republican Party that embraces a lot of the libertarian ideas.”

Not surprisingly, Santorum has spent most of his political career promoting big government. Not surprisingly, DeMint has spent most of his political career fighting it.

Some Republicans today continue to insist that libertarianism isn’t really conservatism. The Republicans who say this are generally the same people who felt comfortable calling George W. Bush conservative. Some of these Republicans still believe this of Bush, even though the last GOP president was one of the biggest spenders in American history, second only to Obama.

These same Republicans now often say they want to protect conservatism from libertarian influence. But there can be no conservatism without libertarian influence. This is nothing new.

Probably the most popular and cited history of American conservatism, George H. Nash’s book The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America, begins in 1945 — and it begins with libertarianism. Titled “The Revolt of the Libertarians,” the second paragraph of Nash’s first chapter states, “For those who believed in the creed of old-fashioned, classical, nineteenth-century liberal individualism, 1945 was especially lonely, unpromising, and bleak. Free markets, private property, limited government, self reliance, laissez faire — it had been a long time since principles like these guided government and persuaded peoples.”

Chronicling the intellectuals who tried to rectify this bleakness, Nash begins his history with two men — economists F.A. Hayek and Ludwig von Mises — and explains how these two libertarian heroes kick-started the American conservative movement. Few actually used the word “conservatism” in 1945, a term that began to gain popularity when Russell Kirk’s book “The Conservative Mind” was published in 1953 and with the founding of William F. Buckley’s National Review in 1955. Nash notes that even Kirk, who later had his own squabbles with fellow National Review writer and libertarian Frank Meyer, was first inspired by both Hayek and Mises, writing to a friend that these men represented a “great school of economists of a much sounder and different mind.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/13/jim-demints-libertarian-lesson/#ixzz1je57o2lm

mountainaires on January 16, 2012 at 1:03 PM

The DeMint silence will only fuel conservative skepticism among wing-nuts and ideologues. mountainaires on January 16, 2012 at 12:58 PM

You are familiar that it’s liberals who refer to the far right as wing-nuts right?

Dr Evil on January 16, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2