Mr. Frothy Mix
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
santorum seems to actually be riding a real surge. can he ride it all the way to the nomination?
What a fun general THAT would be. |
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
|
My one hope is that if Santorum wins the nomination, "Frothy" will become the next trendy name.
|
Anonymous
|
If he got elected, I'd be crying, but it might make me smile to see the following Wikipedia Entry:
Santorum Disambiguation: 1. President of the united states Rick Santoum 2. Discharge produced by sexual activity |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
| I think Santorum is their strongest candidate; it worries me a little that people think he's ridiculous. Fortunately, he won't get the nomination. |
Anonymous
| Reassure me that he has no chance of actually getting elected President. I mean, his stance on contraception alone would kill his chances... |
Anonymous
I would love to hear your reasons for this. I have alwys believed the bible-beating wing of the Republican party to be unelectable on a nationwide basis. And virulent homophobia really doesn't make a good campaign platform for a general election, as well as it might play to the religious right. |
Anonymous
| 50 50 |
Anonymous
| Even as fucked up as the U.S. is today, I have a hard time believing we'd elect someone who believes that contraception should be illegal... |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
I don't usually spend much time on this kind of speculation and I read little about it, but I'll give you my 2-bit analysis. I meant "strongest of the four" - not sure if that was clear. Paul is far too socially liberal and isolationist for the right and far too economically conservative for the center. Newt is an obvious dick. Few obvious dicks have been elected president, and I don't see it against someone as smooth as Obama. Romney is far stronger than either of them, but it's become pretty clear that his base doesn't like him. On top of that, he's shockingly awkward, clumsy, and gaff-prone, given all of his campaign experience. He comes off as a child or a boob compared to Obama. That doesn't mean he wouldn't have a chance, but he has big problems. Santorum is passionate and generally eloquent without seeming arrogant. On personal charisma - which probably decides 10-20% of the vote - he's by far the strongest of the four, IMO. On policy and history, his religious stuff may be offensive to some of us, but I think it's overall a plus. That's what Romney and Newt are trying to imitate. The economic conservatives have always been willing to overlook the social extremism as long as their interests were promoted, and vice versa. He's got that W combo - credible enough as socially and economically conservative that each faction of the Reps will vote for him. I think his main negative is that he's a better bogeyman for the Dems, and that could decide it, given that Obama offers so little to vote for. |
Anonymous
I can sort of see your point. Romney has a huge negative in that he is not authentic, and no one can be sure if he has any central principles. Also, Romney's "I'm here to fix the economy" schtick won't be an asset if unemployment continues on its current downward path. If the economy improves, he looks more like one of the rich guys who tanked us to begin with. Santorum is nothing if not authentic. He's a regular guy. But I think the question is whether his brand of social conservatism has a broad enough appeal anymore. I think it's a loser. The country has changed a lot in the last ten to fifteen years, and it isn't a shift to the right on social issues. |
Anonymous