"Mummy, what does 'santorum surging' mean?"

So far the US Presidential election is just dull.

Compared to recent contests this one just hasn't caught fire. On the Democrat side the euphoria from when Obama was first elected has now died down as even his most ardent supporters realise he can't walk on water and isn't going to deliver endless change they can believe in. But he's basically unopposed for his party's nomination. (Yes pedants I know there's probably a few non-entities who've managed to get their name onto the odd primary ballot paper but that won't make a difference.) The last incumbent President in such a position who went on to lose re-election was Herbert Hoover back in 1932. That should give Obama comfort until he remembers that Hoover fell in harsh economic times - and no Obama can't simply magic away the world's economic problems. We're not in Doctor Who!

On the Republican side we have the return of Mitt Romney and the succession of "stop Romney" candidates, and all it's done is reinforce perceptions of the Republican Party as full of nutters. Now just because I'm a British Conservative doesn't mean I should automatically cheer on anyone from one of our "sister" parties around the world - you don't see many Conservatives cheering on Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel at the moment despite their parties being founder members of the IDU. The nuttier wings of the Republican Party are not ones that should be copied here. But they can at least make things exciting - and at the moment that hasn't happened. Instead it's one long dull fest.

Of course there is the occasional moment of humour, especially with Rick Santorum. For there is a not very nice meaning for "santorum" and if he pulls off an early primary win a lot of people will be searching for more information on him.

So why are journalists so keen to write that "Santorum is surging"?

These are NOT our natural friends

There's a lot of matters where I am in strong disagreement with Tim Montgomerie but that's what healthy debate does for you. But there's one matter where he and I are very much in agreement and that is the way the fringe nutters in the US Republican Party do so much to damage the cause of conservatism with their rampant bigotry and naieve view of the world. Tim highlights this again in his post CentreRight: The Ann Coulter problem and shows the following picture of car stickers being sold at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC):

Well okay a few are bearable (e.g. "Proud Republican" and "Mitt Romney for President") but the bigotry and personal abuse is such that I almost feel sorry for Hillary Clinton - and that really takes some doing. If stickers like the racist "Press 1 for English, Press 2 for deportation", the homophobic "Republican Women like Men" or the sexist "KFC Hillary Special - 2 Fat Thighs, 2 Small Breasts, ... Left Wing" (or a T-shirt comparing the landmark abortion Supreme Court ruling with the Holocaust) appeared alongside those for any significant British politician, they, their party and the very ideology would be rightly crucified from all sides. That wouldn't be any "liberal bias" (and the US right needs to learn what "liberal" really means), that would be the ordinary, decent humanity of the vast majority rejecting twisted bigotry.

Now you may thing that this is just the product of an extreme fringe. But it's a very popular fringe with Ann Coulter having no remote counterpart in terms of popularity or outspokeness (or the ability to leave Jeremy Paxman gobsmacked) on the right in the UK. Tim is right to clearly and openly distance himself and others from this extremism.

Why we should not automatically support the US Republicans

It'll be a short while before I catch up on everything in the blogosphere, but one post that has caught my eye is Caroline Hunt: Why I Find It Hard to Like Republicans. Calling spades spades, she sees briefly sets out what's wrong with many of them, especially Ann Coulter. It's well said!