The intuitive case is roughly this.
Assume the ant begins at some point, $ P $, which is some fraction of the distance along the rope. The ant travels at $a$ and the car travels at $c$.
Now imagine a point, $P'$, which is $ \frac{a}{2c} $ percent of the rope's total length towards the car. The ant will clearly travel that distance, given the ant will travel in some period of time $t$ the distance $\frac{a}{c}t$.
This continues, indefinitely, covering points $P''$ etc., until the ant reaches far enough down the line such that the distance between $P^n$ and the end of the rope is less than $\frac{a}{2c}$. At that point the ant will reach the end of the rope, and begin walking on the car (and eventually off of it!). Note, depending on $c$ and $a$ this may be a very long time.
That is because, while the rope continues to stretch indefinitely, the amount each stretch increases the length of the rope decreases over time proportional to the fraction of rope the ant has covered. At 1%, the rope stretching 1km more means the way 'ahead' increases by 0.99km; however, at 99%, the rope stretching 1km more means only a 0.01 km increase in the ant's total length covered. Eventually the remaining distance is less than the amount the ant can cover.
This isn't quite a 'limit' - eventually the ant would in fact walk past the car, assuming it still had the property of keeping the rope's proportion behind it, which isn't practical in a real life example, but this isn't practical either - which is what confuses people. It's similar to the reason why Achilles eventually catches the tortoise when you're running away: you can keep halving the distance between the two indefinitely, true, but time isn't really paying attention to that, it's just going on its merry way. (Of course, that paradox is a bit different, but in both cases the answer is that it does overtake despite the apparent limit problem.)
I find it helpful to think of radial geometry here, as well. You can imagine traversing a circle of 360° at constant radius 1km, it will total 2$\pi$km distance covered to traverse. As long as your speed is positive, you will certainly traverse the entire circle.
Now, turn the circle into a spiral (say, a logarithmic spiral). Traversing a spiral starting at 1km radius, say the point $(x,y)=(1,0)$, and increasing in radius, you would always still eventually traverse that 360°, back to some point $(x,y)=(x,0)$, regardless of the speed at which you travel. Exactly the same problem as the circle, except you're making some points further 'out' than others - but still the same 360 degrees to travel, always traveling along, increasing what degree you're at (at least by a little!).
The second graph here gives a good example of how this will eventually happen. The parameters in the logarithmic spiral below can be manipulated to mimic the speed of the ant and the car. While it clearly may end up being a very long spiral, you can precompute the entire spiral given the relative speed of the car and the ant, and the starting length of the rope. It is fairly clear that no matter what that total spiral length is, given it is finite, the ant must eventually traverse all of it.
(sourced from Wolfram Alpha, searching for "logarithmic spiral")