Ouch: Former ‘Americans for Rick Perry’ Iowa Operative Joins Team Santorum

Posted on | October 11, 2011 | 38 Comments

When it rains, it pours, and with Rick Perry slipping into third place in the latest Gallup Poll, the deluge of pain comes pouring down. Here’s a press release that’s got to have Team Perry on suicide watch:

SANTORUM EXPANDS IOWA CAMPAIGN STAFF
Experienced operatives join Santorum campaign

Verona, PA – Former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) announced the additions of Sheila Murphy and Kip Murphy to his Iowa campaign team to coordinate campaign operations in Southwest Iowa and to advise in the area of statewide field operations.
Prior to the Iowa Straw Poll, Kip Murphy worked as part of the “Americans for Rick Perry” organization helping to lay the groundwork for an entrance into the presidential race. However, since that time, both the Murphys have selected Rick Santorum as their choice for the GOP nomination, citing both Santorum’s substantive policy stands and his campaign style and strategies.
Sheila Murphy said, “I am excited to join the team of the hardest working candidate in the GOP field. Senator Santorum’s relentless campaign energy has set him apart. Senator Rick Santorum understands that Iowa Republicans are looking for a candidate who is conservative in both word and deed and he is working tirelessly to bring this message to all corners of Iowa. I am confident that Iowa voters will see as I do that Rick Santorum is the complete conservative- strong on every issue- solid in every way. This will resonate with Iowa voters and drive the campaign to victory at the caucuses.”
Kip Murphy said, “Senator Santorum has not taken any Iowa votes for granted. He has not just campaigned in the major media markets, but has visited the rural Iowa counties and talked to all Iowa voters. Senator Santorum appreciates the important role Iowa plays in the nominating process and has taken his conservative message straight to Iowa voters. I am looking forward to helping Senator Santorum transform this hard work into victory at the Iowa caucuses.”
Senator Santorum said, “Sheila and Kip are among the hardest working activists in western Iowa. They have proven to be super-organizers and well respected conservatives in a critical part of the First-in-the-Nation caucus state. I am looking forward to working with both Sheila and Kip as we move to victory in the Iowa caucuses.”
The brother and sister consulting team are originally from Nebraska where Kip Murphy served as Statewide Field Director for the Nebraska Republican Party and as Field Director for the Lee Terry for Congress Campaign. Sheila Murphy served as Statewide Field Director for Victory 2000 for the Nebraska Republican Party.
Sheila Murphy is currently the Republican Chairwoman of Harrison County. She previously served as campaign manager for Brenna Findley’s 2010 campaign for Iowa Attorney General and as political director for Rod Robert’s 2010 gubernatorial campaign.
Kip Murphy previously served as Victory director for the southwest Iowa field office of the Republican Party of Iowa, as well as field director for the Rod Robert’s gubernatorial campaign and numerous campaigns throughout Iowa and the Midwest.

These are both experienced Iowa operatives, one of whom formerly supported Perry, joining a campaign that raised about $600,000 in the third quarter. That’s what you’d call a “hint.”

Remember that Perry began his campaign with a gigantic diss to the Iowa GOP, skipping the Ames Straw Poll to make his announcement with his buddies in South Carolina. (According to the official transcript, Perry’s Aug. 13 announcement speech began, “Howdy. Thank you, Erick.”) Nobody figured dissing Iowa would really hurt Perry much, back when he was on top of the polls — leading Mitt Romney by as many as 19 points in early September — but now?

Perry’s in single digits in New Hampshire, and Santorum’s held more events in Iowa than any other candidate in the field, including Bachmann (who practically moved to Iowa this summer). What happens if former front-runner Perry finishes third, fourth or even fifth in Iowa, then goes to New Hampshire — with an aura of defeat already dogging his every step — and gets beaten silly again?

Perry’s got $17 million in the bank, so it’s probably way too soon to make some kind of “no path to victory” statement, but . . . Dude.

Anyway, it’s good news for Santorum to have Sheila Murphy, a county party chairwoman, calling him “the hardest working candidate in the GOP field.” Last Tuesday, I said Santorum was overdue for his “flavor of the week” moment. He just made a $30,000 radio ad buy in Iowa, and there’s a debate tonight in Hanover, N.H., so we’ll see if he can make something happen.

Category: Election 2012, Iowa, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum

Comments

38 Responses to “Ouch: Former ‘Americans for Rick Perry’ Iowa Operative Joins Team Santorum”

Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 9:28 am

Rick Perry can survive till South Carolina. If he does there he has a chance, but that is a big if. Perry is almost certain to come behind Romney and Cain in Iowa and New Hampshire. My impression of South Carolina is it does not give a rat’s ass about New Hampshire or Iowa. But they will care about poor debate performances and statements about immigration that they disagree with.
Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 9:36 am

I am curious if Santorum can build any momentum. My problem with Rick is he is easily derailed by social issues and the ghey thing and does not focus on the economy. He is not that good a politician (sorry, losing his state the way he did was poor politics and not taking care of issues the majority of people care about at home).

I think the TARP attack on Cain is revealing of poor character…on Santorum’s part. If Rick was against it before the vote, I would have more respect about the attack. But Santorum said nothing before TARP was voted on. Rick did not oppose it. Opposing it after the fact is easy.

And while I do not agree with Michelle Malkin on every issue, she was very vocal against TARP before the vote. She made her position clear.

Rick Santorum endorsed Arlen Spector. Rick Santorum if he was a senator in 2008 would have voted (I predict) for TARP. He would have gone along with George Bush’s recommendations.
Tennwriter
October 11th, 2011 @ 9:51 am

The across the board Conservatism is what I think we as a Nation need.

A lot of people alleged that Huckabee was good on social issues, and bad on fiscal. (He counterpunched by pointing out the classism inherent in the GOP Party, a problem Palin ran into as well. He also denied this.)

There is rather a large chunk of Conservatives who might be willing to give Dr. Ron Paul a shot, if they were not scared about his foreign policy plans, and his support of Israel. (The counter is that cutting off all foreign aid would benefit Israel more as its disproportionately tilted Arab, and Wilsonianism=Bad.)

The Governator of California stands as a constant rebuke to the naifs that think you can be an effective fiscon without being a socon. As CA circles the drain just keep on saying ‘what the GOP needs to be successful is for the socons to shut their yaps.’ Say it loud enough, and it might distract you from the vast sucking sound of jobs and taxes leaving CA. (The counter is ‘we’re really mean and smart, you big dumb socons’).

A Socon is largely Libertarian in practise, if not doctrine. 80-90% Libertarian. They are also hardcore supporters of Israel (NOTE to RP….you can’t get the Presidency w/o the Socons, and you can’t get them if they think or suspect you’re dissing Israel.), and firm believers in protecting America although they are persuadable about the tactics (Nation-Building, Effective Whack A Mole, Serious Borders, or WARRE!! w/ the last most congenial to their natures.) It is also true that our most pressing financial problem is not Mathematical, but Moral. We know roughly what to do. We need the Courage and Vision to do it.

So when I see RSM announce an across the board Conservatism in the person of Santorum, I am heartened. We do not need a Candidate who is less than fully Conservative.

Santorum/Cain 2012
Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:00 am

The math/budget problem we are facing (H/T to Don’t Tread 2012 over at Althouse for this):
* U.S. Tax revenue:
$2,170,000,000,000* Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000* New debt: $
1,650,000,000,000* National debt: $14,271,000,000,000* Recent budget
cut: $ 38,500,000,000Now let’s remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a
household budget.* Annual family income: $21,700* Money the family
spent this year: $38,200* New debt on the credit card: $16,500*
Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710* Total annual budget cuts:
$385

Our problem is spending. There is no way to tax our way out of this. And the nominee who can effectively explain this in the general election debates and during that race should win against Obama.

If it turns out to be Santorum, fine. I doubt he can do it. Rick gets distracted too easily on red herring issues. But whether it is Romney, Cain, Santorum, Perry, or whoever (other than Huntsman), I want them to focus on this message in the general election.
Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:01 am

* U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000
* Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000
* New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000
* National debt: $14,271,000,000,000
* Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000
Now let’s remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a household budget.
* Annual family income: $21,700
* Money the family spent this year: $38,200
* New debt on the credit card: $16,500
* Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
* Total annual budget cuts: $385
Tennwriter
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:30 am

Well, Joe, they’re not red herring issues. You want it to be all about the $, but as I explain even the $ is primarily moral. And its not like most people don’t get the debt problem. They get it.

What we lack is gumption, not persuasion.

And maybe Santorum would have gone for TARP, but he seems to have been one of the few who slammed it CLOSE after the fact. I could be wrong there.

So….Cain -3 and Santorum +1 on the TARP issue.

Plus its fine for Santorum to slam Cain over TARP.
Tennwriter
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:32 am

I would like to see Santorum’s response to ‘why did you endorse Specter?’
ThePaganTemple
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:33 am

1. He lost Pennsylvania in a year when being a Republican was a political kiss of death, in a state where Democrats far outnumber Republicans, or at least did at that time. The fact that he won the state to begin with says far more in his favor than the fact that he lost re-election to his THIRD term in 2006.

2. Social issues are important to him and at that time were important to his base. He didn’t neglect anything else that I know about. I’m sure he can walk and chew gum at the same time.

3. Rick Santorum held no political office at the time TARP was being debated.

4. Santorum endorsed Specter for the simple reason Specter endorsed him, which was a major reason Santorum won his office to begin with. The same reason Sarah Palin endorsed John McCain for his re-election to the US Senate. It’s called gratitude and basic human decency.

5. You don’t “predict” the past, but TARP was a bi-partisan initiative at any rate.
steve benton
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:44 am

A vote for Herman Cain is a vote for Mitt Romney. If you think Herman can win, you are completely off your rocker. You are voting to make a statement that you aren’t racist.Guess what? No one thinks you are racist with an IQ over a regular household appliance.This is yet another Christine McDonnell moment that we will regret. As Jerry Jeff Walker says so well:

“Pissing in the wind, betting on a losing friend

Making the same mistakes, we swear we’ll never make again

Pissing in the wind, but it’s blowing on all our friends

We’re gonna sit and grin and tell our grandchildren”

Only we won’t be grinning when we tell our grandchildren we had a chance to save our country, and we got snookered into Mitt Romney.
Daily Pundit » Raaaacism, Or Common Sense: Can Cain Be the GOP Nominee?
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:03 am

[…] Ouch: Former ‘Americans for Rick Perry’ Iowa Operative Joins Team Santorum : The Other McCain When it rains, it pours, and with Rick Perry slipping into third place in the latest Gallup Poll, the deluge of pain comes pouring down. Here’s a press release that’s got to have Team Perry on suicide watch: […]
Anonymous
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:04 am

I’m just asking (I do not mean this as a rhetorical question): let’s say, hypothetically, that Santorum had a good chance of winning Iowa, but minimal chance of winning the GOP nomination; would it be beneficial for an Iowa-based political operative like Kip Murphy simply to align himself with the ultimate winner of the Iowa Caucuses, even if that candidate proceeded to not win another contest, especially since his former “employer” now might have little chance of wining Iowa and is looking weak in general? I.e., to would extent might it help Murphy’s career, especially on a local/regional basis, to do well on the home turf, versus align himself with someone who translates better on a national scale?
Anonymous
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:22 am

Excellent back and forth, Joe v. ThePaganTemple. I’ll be a yellow belly and conclude that you’re both right!
Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:28 am

ThePaganTemple, I doubt Santorum could win his own state in a general election now. That is not a good sign.

The fact that he won the state to begin with says far more in his favor than the fact that he lost re-election to his THIRD term in 2006.I respectfully disagree. It is hard to get elected the first time, it is easy to get re-elected. To lose after two terms is a very bad sign. I recognize 2006 was a bad year for the GOP, but he did not lose in a squeaker, he lost in a landslide. That is because he is not a good politician. You do not have to betray your principles to keep the folks at home happy. He did not do that. He completely lost independents and must have lost a lot of Republicans too. And no, the social issues were not the primary issues for Pennsylvania (they are important, but not to the extend Santorum focused on those issues). Sorry, but 20 points is 20 points.
Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:31 am

Steve: Do you think Santorum can win? Really? I recognize that Mitt wants to use Cain as a stalking horse for taking out Perry. But that is only going to work to a point.

I know that if the choice was Cain and Santorum, Cain is a stronger candidate.
Thomas Knapp
October 11th, 2011 @ 12:02 pm

The self-hating closeted gay Opus Dei member bloc may be big enough to provide Santorum with campaign staff … but is it really a big voter bloc in Iowa?
Anonymous
October 11th, 2011 @ 12:03 pm

The problem is that Romney’s track record shows he won’t cut the spending, and he”ll give the Copperheads bipartisan cover. That’s how it works people.
McGehee
October 11th, 2011 @ 12:16 pm

It’s starting to look like Herman Derangement Syndrome is on the rise.
Quartermaster
October 11th, 2011 @ 12:44 pm

It may have been “human decency” to endorse snalin’ Arlen, but it was an act of stupidity and it signed his political death warrant in 2006. There was simply no interest in re-electing him at that point.

That was bad politics as well. It was particularly bad when Arlen changed parties and still lost.

Reps need to realize that being conservative usually mean electoral success. pretending to be one, then not being one is the kiss of death. Santorum may actually be a conservative, but he was a dumb politician. Probably still is.
Quartermaster
October 11th, 2011 @ 12:47 pm

The neocons want to ignore the moral dimension to our fiscal problems. The two can not be separated. The GOP establishment would also like to ignore the moral dimensions, but they care only about being in power. The country can go to hell as long as they are the ones that can dispense power and favors.

As Buchanan put it so well, “they are just two wings on the same bird of prey.”
Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 12:49 pm

You never know Tom, he might have joined for the cheap drinks at the Knights of Columbus!
Quartermaster
October 11th, 2011 @ 12:49 pm

That’s a pretty silly post Tom.
Tennwriter
October 11th, 2011 @ 1:05 pm

Thomas,
That was extremely rude, and uncalled for. It shows ignorance and/or desperation along with bigotry.
Edward
October 11th, 2011 @ 1:41 pm

Well.

1. Rick Perry is done; stick a fork in him. No conservative I know liked that “heartless” schtick of his. Personally I’m willing to listen to a cognizant argument about illegal aliens. I’m absolutely and unconditionally unwilling to be demonized by some schmuck who is attacking me, using liberal Democrat tactics no less, even while he has his hand out for donations.

2. Santorum? meh. Or as Bill the Cat would put it: “Ack! Ack! Ack! Thppppppttthhhh!”.

3. Herman Cain? I’d prefer if he were a gov of a state first. But being picky this year is looking to be a bad idea. His 9-9-9 plan is interesting but frankly I have grave reservations about putting in a national sales tax because we can all see how that can be abused.

4. Jon Huntsman. Really. Does anybody care?

5. I would be much more impressed by any particular candidate if someone would come out swinging on why we had a $2.2 trillion dollar budget in 2000 and now a $3.8 trillion dollar budget in 2011 … and why that is so. I would be more favorable to a candidate who voiced the question as to what exactly the federal Dept of Education actually does. Or the federal Dept of Labor … because labor seems to be the least of what comes out of there.
ThePaganTemple
October 11th, 2011 @ 1:58 pm

I don’t agree with the sentiment behind Tom’s post but he gets points for being pretty hilarious.
ThePaganTemple
October 11th, 2011 @ 2:02 pm

South Carolina is big on national defense, and this year, as far as the economy goes, the big issue is Boeing. If Perry can sell himself as sufficiently strong in guarding the Texas border, he might recover some lost ground there. His jobs record is probably second to none, so that can’t hurt him.
ThePaganTemple
October 11th, 2011 @ 2:10 pm

There’s a lot more Democrats though, so its not the piece of cake it usually is for a Republican even to get re-elected, and especially while being such a staunch social conservative. Basically, he won those first two time by winning independents and conservative Democrats, and by reassuring moderate Republicans. The one issue that hurt him more than any other thing wasn’t his social conservatism in general, it was one thing in particular-the Terri Schiavo fiasco. That cost him. It especially cost him in terms of those moderate Republicans in the Philly area who tend to go squishy. Then he lost the independents and the conservative Democrats, to a self-described conservative Democrat. Add all the Republicans who probably didn’t even bother to go to the polls, and its easy to arrive at a perfect storm of 20%. Times are different now. Half of those people probably don’t even remember who Terri Schiavo was. But they haven’t forgotten Barak Obama, and they won’t forget how he openly supported the Occupied Wall Street Movement practically in the same day the Occupied Philadelphia hipsters were marching through the streets of Philly carrying a Soviet flag.

This doesn’t mean I’m a Santorum supporter, by the way. I’m just saying, don’t count him out, and don’t underestimate him.
Thomas Knapp
October 11th, 2011 @ 3:50 pm

It was meant to be, Quartermaster.
Thomas Knapp
October 11th, 2011 @ 3:57 pm

Tennwriter,

Hmmm … five things.

1) Rude: Yep. But not nearly as rude as what’s-his-name’s Google bomb. I didn’t exactly break any new ground.

2) Uncalled for: Guilty. I work on spec.

3) Ignorance: I don’t think so … but then I wouldn’t, would I? I can’t say I’ve been a constant, close Santorum-watcher for the entire run of his taxpayer-teat careerism, but I’ve generally tried to stay informed about what he’s up to.

4) Desperation: Not a chance. I don’t give a tinker’s damn whom the GOP nominates, or who wins next November, until and unless I place an actual bet on the outcome. It’s all horse race from where I sit.

5) Not sure where you’re going with the bigotry bit, but mea culpa. Gay-baiters annoy me and piss me off. Seeing gay-baiters taken seriously as presidential candidates makes me ashamed of America.
Adjoran
October 11th, 2011 @ 4:46 pm

Wow, a couple activists who COULD HAVE been on Santorum’s team from the start, since he was running long before Perry, jump from Perry to Santorum in Iowa. And Santorum raised $600 grand for the quarter?

So maybe Santorum pulls a huge upset and finishes third in Iowa, where does he go from there? Nothing in NH, no organization to speak of in SC or NV, Florida is a mighty big and expensive state with multiple costly media markets to cover. So he gets a nice ribbon and goes home with honor, having fought the good fight.

Perry may or may not be able to repair the self-inflicted wounds. Normally he would have that chance, but the incredible over-hyping of his entry raised expectations so high that his performance looks like a failure. Attacking Romney or Cain won’t do it: he MUST look and sound intelligent and self-assured, and good natured, starting NOW.

Cain better brace himself. He has too few staffers to compete yet, and his rise will increase attention. We’ve seen him gaffe already on mosque zoning, muslim appointments, Palestinian “right of return,” and saying he couldn’t support Perry because of a rock Perry’s father painted over decades ago.

The man was a talk radio host. Do you think anyone has him on tape saying something outrageous?
Tennwriter
October 11th, 2011 @ 5:28 pm

1. So you’re saying Kip Whats-his-name did a Google bomb that was worse than what sounds like a deranged Lefty attack?

3. I’m not from Iowa, but I’m a Baptist and proud heterosexual, so I guess I’m the opposite of a closested gay self-hating Opus Dei, and yet somehow I think Santorum ain’t bad. So yes, ignorant about his base of support.

4. I have a theory. Certain folk are terrified of socons getting nominated because once a socon wins big, it makes the laughable fiscon arguements even more obvious tripe. So they get desperate. The anti-socon league is very fragile, and they cannot withstand too many defeats.

5. I’m assuming you’re a socon hater, and most of them are pretty bigoted.
ThePaganTemple
October 11th, 2011 @ 6:12 pm

Newt’s starting to look better and better every day.
Joe
October 11th, 2011 @ 7:55 pm

The economy in Texas is actually rocking. There and North Dakota.
Thomas Knapp
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:02 pm

Tennwriter,

I don’t hate social conservatives. I’m just no more interested in giving them political power over my life than I am in giving such power to Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer, and for the same reasons.
Thomas Knapp
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:04 pm

TPT,

Now that is a scary idea.
ThePaganTemple
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:38 pm

Most social conservatives aren’t nearly that bad. Granted, there are some who are a little full of themselves, but for the most part, they are not interested in having power over your life. They especially don’t want the government to have power over your life, they want you to live it as you see fit. So long as you’re a responsible member of society, why should they care? A small, limited federal government wouldn’t have the capacity to exercise power over people’s lives to begin with. That’s kind of the point.
Tennwriter
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:03 am

By freakish happenstance, the vote comes to to your one vote (like that movie)….Santorum or Obama?

And for most Libertarians it has to be hate, because you can’t get from their stated principles to their over the top response to socons. When the typical socon is 80% Libertarian, a screeching cry of ‘theocrat statist!’ seems a bit much.

And yet I sense you think comparing Santorum to Pelosi is reasonable. One respects the Constitution, the other does not.
Thomas Knapp
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:52 am

Tennwriter,

No, it does not come down to my one vote for Santorum or Obama.

First of all, I no longer vote.

Secondly, if I still voted, I wouldn’t vote Republican or Democrat.

I like to think that if someone put a gun to my head and told me I had to vote for Obama, I’d tell them to pull the trigger.

I like to think that if someone put a gun to my head and told me I had to vote for Santorum, I’d grab the gun, shove it in my mouth, and pull the trigger myself.

But I also believe in credit where credit is due. Santorum was on the right side of the matter of the murder of Terri Schiavo, so kudos to him there.

I disagree with you that Santorum respects the Constitution any more than Pelosi does. They just have different areas in which they prefer to ignore or oppose it (although there’s some overlap, notably on immigration, on which the Constitution not only fails to enumerate a federal power, but specifically forbids one).
Zilla of the Resistance
October 12th, 2011 @ 6:49 am

Thanks for providing the best coverage of the campaign season, Stacy, if it weren’t for you, few would know that anyone but MittRick Perronmney was running at all!
Linked here:
http://zillablog.marezilla.com/2011/10/im-getting-root-canal-hooray.html