Richard M. Nixon rose fast and young, became a national figure while still in his 30s, a senator at 37, Ike’s running mate and his vice president at 39. His loss in 1960 to a political talent the size of John Kennedy’s was not a disgrace, but his later loss, in his home state to the lesser known and undistinguished Edmund (Pat) Brown, was a humiliation that ate out his soul. He sat out the contentious 1964 season, and in the wreckage that followed began to rebuild. Under the radar, he campaigned for Republican candidates, who made remarkable gains in the 1966 midterms. Two years after that he became president in a three-way race in a very bad year for the country. Four years after that, he won in a blowout, losing only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia to his opponent. He was on track to becoming a respected world leader, when a break-in took place in a Watergate building. As the investigation wound on, he took every step possible to ensure his destruction. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Rick Santorum, like Nixon, rose fast and rose younger, reaching the Senate in the l994 blowout at age 36. Twelve years after that, he received his great smackdown, turned out by the son of a beloved ex-governor, in a 700,000 vote, 18-point rout. Like Nixon, he was mocked as a loser and a reject. Like Nixon, he fought to come back, and he did. Under the radar, he worked on the Iowa caucuses. But with a big lead heading into the Michigan primary, as he was about to break out as the leading contender, he undermined himself. He became abrasive, self-righteous and shrill. He lost Michigan, and the three big states after, and the roads that had opened began to close off.
Santorum hung on with his influence waning and his power base melting away. Pressed to drop out, he dug in still further, railing at “moderates,” and even suggesting his goal was a deadlocked convention, which would leave only two months to counter Obama. His model was Reagan’s run against Gerald Ford 36 years ago, and his goal was to “pick up the pieces” after Romney had lost. But his hand was far, far weaker than Reagan’s, and his role as spoiler would have left party leaders more willing to shun him than to follow his lead. ‘There will come a point where he completely writes himself out of a future,’ as one of them said.
At the same time, Santorum was facing a potential loss in Pennsylvania. The campaign intended to erase or bury the loss of 2006 was now grinding toward a second disaster, which would not alter the verdict but harden it further.
“There’s no happy ending in the Pennsylvania primary for Rick Santorum,” said one Pennsylvanian, noting that the bad memories had been pushed aside by his showing, but he “risks returning to that story line if he loses his home state.”
There was no happy ending, but there was one less unhappy, and the train stopped just short of the precipice. Perhaps people can learn, after all.
Examiner Columnist Noemie Emery is a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and author of “Great Expectations: The Troubled Lives of Political Families.”
