THE STUMP FEBRUARY 10, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
[Guest post by Thomas Stackpole]
In the wake of Santorum’s bolstering victory in Colorado Tuesday night, where he carried the state by 5 and a half points, Michael Moschella of the Truman Institute, started circulating the theory that one of the deciding factors was the cluster of military personnel in the areas that Santorum carried (veterans make up 19 percent of the population in El Paso County, against a national average of 10 percent), and raising the inevitable question: Does Romney have a problem with veterans?
Moschella argues:
El Paso County is home to Colorado Springs and a top “military bastion” county in America. According to Wikipedia, El Paso County’s population surpassed Denver County in 2010, making it the most populous county in CO. The last Democrat to win it was LBJ.
So why does this matter? I think its noteworthy that Rick Santorum won El Paso County last night by a 16 point margin, 47-31, greatly outperforming his narrow victory in the rest of the state.
The next results will come from Maine, Michigan and Arizona. I’ll be checking to see if this trend continues in heavily military communities like Sagadahoc County Maine, home of the Bath Naval shipyard. Maine’s veteran population is 138K out of a total of 1.3 million citizens, and according to ME State Rep Alex Cornell du Houx, the veteran share of the overall vote is 17%. I imagine this will be even higher in the Republican primary.
If it does continue, this could pose a pretty big problem for Romney on Super Tuesday, with major military communities in VA, OH, OK, and GA expected to play a significant role in the Republican primary vote totals.
Romney's shilling on the military front comes across, not shockingly, as programmed and inauthentic. You might recall his blunder from the 2008 campaign when, in response to a question about why his sons weren’t serving in the military, he replied: “One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping to get me elected, because they think I’d be a great president.” This time around, he makes sure to interject in virtually every stump speech, often in jarring segues, a request that all the veterans in the audience raise their hands, followed by words of fulsome gratitude.
This isn’t a new problem for Romney, and if the coverage he’s receiving in veteran news outlets is any indication, it hasn’t gone away. A 2007 Gallup poll on the favorability of presidential candidates among vets notes that, “Veterans' affinity for Republican candidates is clear, with only Romney not rated substantially more positively than negatively by this group.” Respondents who were veterans felt slightly more positive about Romney than negative--a similar breakdown to Obama and John Edwards. While this might not lead us to start sounding alarm bells, it’s worth noting that it doesn’t bode well for him that he was running near even in a traditionally Republican population. The study goes on:
Overall, 49% of veterans identify with or lean to the Republican Party, compared with 41% who are Democratic in their political orientation. Among non-veterans, the figures are essentially reversed -- 50% Democratic and 39% Republican.
But veteran status can transcend political orientation. This is especially evident in ratings of McCain, who is rated more positively by veterans than non-veterans of the same party affiliation. Specifically, 63% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who served in the military rate McCain favorably, compared with 51% of Republicans who did not serve. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, 43% of veterans and 35% of non-veterans rate McCain positively.
While the Romney-specific data is a bit musty at this point, it seems fair to assume that party divisions haven’t shifted too drastically since then, and what new data we do have reflects Romney as the second choice among military types. A New York Times chart of exit polls from South Carolina found that Gingrich scored 39 percent of both vets (identified as 21 percent of respondents) and non-vets. Romney carried 32 percent of veterans and 27 percent of non-vets; and Santorum did slightly worse, with 16 percent of the vet vote and 18 percent on the non-vet. It would seem that Santorum took the lion's share in Colorado. But realistically, if this is a problem, it won’t really hit until the general, when a lukewarm GOP base fails to show up, and Obama’s hawkish record will make a hard target for the guy who spent the Vietnam era in France. As Alec MacGillis has already noted, “I love the smell of croissants in the morning” just doesn’t have quite the same ring.
12 comments
Well done, Thomas
- Tristan
February 10, 2012 at 1:18pm
The "I love the smell of croissants in the morning" post concentrated on Romney's lack of Vietnam service. Although the families of candidates should be off limits, I find it galling that Romney is so gung ho on continuing the war in Afghanistan ad infinitum while also beating the drums for war in Iran and his 5 strapping, military age sons stand in the background applauding. And Mittens, you're welcome.
- dubyadoubte
February 10, 2012 at 1:28pm
But...but...but, Romney served heriocally in the trenches of Wall Street, vanquishing the poor workers in the companies he looted. Aren't Pirates considered warriors? And aren't warriors considered patriots? And aren't Patriots great Americans? Therefore Mitt Romney is a great American Patriot, warrior. And sometimes the croissants he had were stale. Have you ever had to have a Continental breakfast? très horrible, un cauchemar
- blackton
February 10, 2012 at 2:37pm
This all makes perfect sense, and really makes me wonder if Romney is not the guy with a real chance to beat Obama in the general election. Then again, he could nominate someone with strong military bonafides that doesn't also scare away the moderate wing of the GOP. I'm not sure who that would be, but it could happen.
- GSpinks
February 10, 2012 at 2:42pm
@Gspinks - well the name Petreaus has been batted around a bit. Not that I see him accepting by any means, but it would make republicans across the country collectively wet their pants in glee. And fine, Blackie, I'll compromise. When Mitt the Pirate puts on an eyepatch and starts referring to the female electorate as wenches and discussed the deficit in doubloons rather than dollars, I will totally reevaluate my opinion of him. Let no one say I cannot be moved.
- Tristan
February 10, 2012 at 2:51pm
Love it, Tristan.
- Curran1
February 10, 2012 at 3:02pm
@Tristan -- with Johnny Depp as his running mate?
- shellski
February 10, 2012 at 4:02pm
I don't know -- David Petraeus has been Obama's commander on the ground in Afghanistan and also his appointment to the top seat at the CIA. Whereas the former can be regarded as a senior military slot that in a sense has to be filled by the most qualified and most appropriate officer available, the latter is really a position of choice that the nominee has to accept from the president. It would be difficult for Petraeus to become Romney's running mate and come out swinging against a president he accepted a senior post from only a year or so ago.
- ironyroad
February 10, 2012 at 4:22pm
I always thought that military veterans highly value decisiveness, candor and courage in their leaders, whether military or civilian. The only times in which Mitt Romney has displayed any of those attributes is in dealing with soon-to-be unemployed workers.
- wildboy
February 10, 2012 at 4:43pm
Stop tempting me (a long-time and deeply ingrained pessimist) to be optimistic that the Republican Party (at least for the next election) is creating the "perform storm" of self defeat.
- skahn
February 10, 2012 at 10:30pm
Tristan: do not tempt the Romney who will say anything to anyone :) Besides, Romney is a Locust Capitalist (vultures at least wait for their dinner to die). Pirates are far more respectable. About Colorado Springs? yes, high number of vets, but also ground zero for Evangelicals - Dobson's HQ. The USAF academy had some issues (not lately) with non-christian cadets being uncomfortable with the proselytizing... Gingrich was an Army brat, which he has turned into an advantage with veterans.
- K2K
February 11, 2012 at 11:57am
During the 2004 campaign, then Governor Romney said that John Kerry should come clean with the American people re his military service. Kerry was a terrible candidate but his Vietnam service was 100% legit. The Romney criticism was especially precious because as noted here, Romney avoided the war while supporting it. Just like George and Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Dan Quayle, Tom DeLay, Phil Gramm, George Allen, Saxby Chambliss, Dick Armey, to name a few. As noted in the comments, Romney is hell bent on staying in Afghanistan into perpetuity and on fighting a war with Iran, all while his 5 strapping sons stay far away from the conflicts. Final point, the pseudo-patriotism of much of the right really troubles me. "Support the troops" and just let them keep getting killed as the US empire stumbles along. It's well past time to reign in the empire and bring all the troops home and focus on problems here, but while we do that, it's time to truly take care of these troops coming home. My bet is that one of the first budget cuts we would see under a President Romney would be to veterans' benefits.
- jeffclark4
February 12, 2012 at 3:51pm