August 11th Fox News Iowa presidential debate **live commentary thread**

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

So your point is that Santorum is clearly very unpopular in the state but only trailing by two (while everyone else trails by more an Romney is barely ahead) isn't good enough? Please stop posting.

To add insult to your already horrendous "analysis," you think Obama will coast to victory against Santorum or anyone else that isn't Paul. Someone needs to wake up.

Only trailing by two because, again, he is FROM Pennsylvania. The fact that he is still beating some opponents against Obama is just a testament to relatively weak opposition and the fact that his debate performance wasn't aired at the time. The fact that he isn't beating Romney in his home state (or at least coming marginally close, say, within a couple points distance) says something about him, and it isn't positive.

No, Obama will not "coast to victory" against anyone who isn't Paul, he will coast to victory against Santorum (Palin and Perry too if they ran and won the nomination). I would love to see you explain how a campaign running primarily on the issues of being against abortion regardless of circumstances (20% of the public or so supports this view, almost all dedicated Republicans), being pro-war (30% of the public supports this view, primarily Republicans) and being against almost all of the things the Tea Party stands for (which has increased voter turnout in favour of Republicans) is a winning campaign. Obama could probably let Santorum beat himself.

Paul has benefits from stronger support with normally Democratic or neutral demographics, which is a bonus, but just about any other Republican short of ARGUABLY Palin could outperform Santorum with incredible ease.

[Keystone Phil]

He isn't trailing because he's from here, ass. Plus, if he's so terribly unpopular, he would trail by more!

Santorum isn't running a race mostly based on abortion or the wars. Further proof of your ignorance. Save us both some time and don't continue this.

[TheGlobalizer]

Phil, you jumped the shark on Santorum a long time ago.

His numbers are microscopic outside of PA, and he's losing PA.

I know you like him, but arguing that he's a strong candidate is just willful blindness.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

He isn't trailing because he's from here, ass. Plus, if he's so terribly unpopular, he would trail by more!

Santorum isn't running a race mostly based on abortion or the wars. Further proof of your ignorance. Save us both some time and don't continue this.

...No, he is performing better because he is from Penn. thus meaning that people probably at least have an idea of who he is and some might be motivated to back the "home team". Rick Perry is pretty well detested across Texas, but he was a governor and his views had more of an effect on the daily lives of Texans, meaning he actually was polled to lose Texas to Obama.

Not running mostly on abortion? Bull. Did you pay any attention to his announcement? He practically screamed that he was running because he figured that big government social conservatives needed a candidate, followed by a nice touch of anti-gay bigotry.

You still have yet to explain what circumstances could lead to Santorum's views, which are considered "absolutely nuts" by about 70% of the American electorate, triumphing over Obama short of a bomb destroying the Democratic Party apparatus and mass lynching of Democrats.

[Keystone Phil]

Phil, you jumped the shark on Santorum a long time ago.

His numbers are microscopic outside of PA, and he's losing PA.

I know you like him, but arguing that he's a strong candidate is just willful blindness.

Dude, you're a Gary Johnson fan. You lose. Don't talk to me about supporting a candidate when you support a joke fad candidate. And you have the nerve to talk about microscopic support for other candidates to say that they aren't credible. Good one.

I didn't argue that he is a strong candidate. I'm saying he isn't as weak as he is being portrayed. If he's horribly unpopular here, he would get blown out of the water in polling. He isn't. He's barely trailing and so are others.

Do me a favor and stop putting words in my mouth.

[Keystone Phil]

...No, he is performing better because he is from Penn. thus meaning that people probably at least have an idea of who he is and some might be motivated to back the "home team".

Truly idiotic. He's so unpopular here yet he's doing well because he's from here.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

America is going to vote against Santorum because of his views on abortion when unemployment is through the roof, consumer confidence is in the toilet, etc. (those are the reasons for a GOP victory. I'm sorry you haven't been paying attention as I and others noted this countless times). Yeah. Ok. And you talk about Santorum focusing too much on abortion! Pot, meet kettle.

[TheGlobalizer]

Dude, you're a Gary Johnson fan. You lose. Don't talk to me about supporting a candidate when you support a joke fad candidate. And you have the nerve to talk about microscopic support for other candidates to say that they aren't credible. Good one.

Dude, I admit Gary isn't going anywhere, and I didn't attack Santorum's "credibility", whatever that is, I attacked his electability.  You lose.

I was wrong -- you're not just willfully blind about Santorum's chances, you're willfully blind about every political analysis that doesn't fit into your warped fantasy world.  You're in pbrower-land.

[Mr. Morden]

There should be a "caption this" contest on this picture:

[Keystone Phil]

I was wrong -- you're not just willfully blind about Santorum's chances, you're willfully blind about every political analysis that doesn't fit into your warped fantasy world.  You're in pbrower-land.

You've been around here for how long? Clearly not long enough.

I don't say that Santorum is favored. I don't think he is likely to win the nomination. I've said this time and time again but because it doesn't fit the joke that Phil is a blind Santorum supporter who thinks he'll win everything, it is ignored.

I'm not going to accept "analysis" that states how horribly unpopular Santorum is in his home state then concludes that he's doing so well because it's his home state! If anything, if he's so unpopular, this being his home state works against him because people are very familiar with him! That's what I'm rejecting here. That isn't "warped fantasy land." I'm not dismissing analysis that says Santorum won't win the nomination and/or the General; I'm dismissing idiocy from one particular poster who is using conflicting arguments to prove one point.

And, yes, you attacked his credibility. In this case, it's the same as his electability. You're saying that his support is so microscopic that, in terms of his chances of winning, he isn't credible.  

[TheGlobalizer]

You've been around here for how long? Clearly not long enough.

I've come and gone for quite a few years.  Barring the Santorum man-crush, I've generally found you to be level-headed.

I don't say that Santorum is favored. I don't think he is likely to win the nomination. I've said this time and time again but because it doesn't fit the joke that Phil is a blind Santorum supporter who thinks he'll win everything, it is ignored.

I'm not going to accept "analysis" that states how horribly unpopular Santorum is in his home state then concludes that he's doing so well because it's his home state! If anything, if he's so unpopular, this being his home state works against him because people are very familiar with him! That's what I'm rejecting here. That isn't "warped fantasy land." I'm not dismissing analysis that says Santorum won't win the nomination and/or the General; I'm dismissing idiocy from one particular poster who is using conflicting arguments to prove one point.

Santorum is relatively unpopular in his home state, compared to a number of candidates in their home states.  Paul is similar in TX, but he's much better than MOE nationally, because he's a national candidate.  If Santorum can't scrape together even 2nd place primary polling in PA, what's his path nationally?  It's not that he's "unpopular" -- it's that he's known and still can't beat 14% in a primary poll in his own state.  He's a conservative that is simply not the sort that most in the GOP identify with today.  I'd say the same with Paul -- but he has a historical timeliness, and again, the national presence, to overcome some of that.  And he's much less poisonous in a general than Santorum.  There is just no rational way to project Santorum winning against Obama, barring an epic collapse.

And, yes, you attacked his credibility. In this case, it's the same as his electability. You're saying that his support is so microscopic that, in terms of his chances of winning, he isn't credible.  

Semantics, but fine, I'll let you have that one, as it's not material to my point.  Yes, he is not credible from an electoral perspective.  At all.  He's a niche candidate for a GOP that doesn't exist anymore.  All Obama has to do is just keep saying "He equates homosexuality with pedophilia and bestiality...what a hateful man...I'm a uniter, not a divider" and he wins, even if he burns the country to ground from now to November 2012.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

There should be a "caption this" contest on this picture:

"Silly Tea Party and Mormon lovefests. Tee hee."

[Badger]

I'm only fifteen minutes into the debate but I decided to comb through this thread as a break. I just had to respond to this gem...

Wait, did Santorum really just boast his electoral history?

If he wants to look at a decent record, look at Paul, someone who can win reelection...

Rick Santorum was elected to the House in a Democratic district by beating a seven term incumbent in 1990. The Democrats redistricted in 1991 and gave him an even more overwhelmingly Democratic district in 1992. He won again...with 62% of the vote that time.

Wrong. There was nothing "Democratic" about the 1980's 18th district. I assure you it was the definition of "swing". I don't know the PVI offhand of the 1990's version of what was split between Murphy's district and Hart's, but Santorum faced a nonentity in 1992 (an airline pilot with no political experience if I recall), and the fact Murphy and Hart represented most of his old district throughout the 90's should tell you it was hardly "overwhelmingly Democratic".

[Keystone Phil]

  If Santorum can't scrape together even 2nd place primary polling in PA, what's his path nationally?

What's any Republican's path? Pennsylvania isn't needed to win.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because he isn't portrayed as a serious candidate by the media because everything begins and ends with "LOL HE LOST BY 18%!"

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's no rational way for Santorum to win...but he's not unpopular and within striking distance in a state that you'd likely classify as lean Democrat. Ok.

Also, there's no rational way for Santorum to win...but the guy who everyone (aside from the Paul fanatics) agrees sounds like a crazy uncle is viable against Obama. Again, ok.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sure, that makes sense. "I'm a uniter, not a divider" is going to resonate when this man is easily one of the most polarizing Presidents ever (just like Bush). "Santorum is hateful...just ignore unemployment, the second global economic crisis and all of that other stuff and re-elect me."

If you think people are voting anything other than their pocketbooks next year barring some unforeseen disaster, you're crazy. That Obama strategy you spelled out above will be trashed even against someone like Santorum.

[King]

There should be a "caption this" contest on this picture:

Pawlenty: "Vice Presidential candidate over here.  Any takers? Anyone? When's Rick Perry showing up?"

[Keystone Phil]

Wrong. There was nothing "Democratic" about the 1980's 18th district. I assure you it was the definition of "swing". I don't know the PVI offhand of the 1990's version of what was split between Murphy's district and Hart's, but Santorum faced a nonentity in 1992 (an airline pilot with no political experience if I recall), and the fact Murphy and Hart represented most of his old district throughout the 90's should tell you it was hardly "overwhelmingly Democratic".

Nothing Democratic about it...except for that seven term Democratic Congressman that Santorum had to beat.

Doug Walgren's electoral history in the 1980s 18th district...

1982 - Re-elected with 54%

1984 - Re-elected with 63%

1986 - Re-elected with 63%

1988 - Re-elected with...yeah...63%

That's hardly a "swing" district. It was agreed that Santorum's win in 1990 was a huge upset. The district after the 1991 redistricting was worse. That "non-entity" that Santorum faced in 1992 must have been a pretty good candidate to make it out of a competitive six-way primary. That non-entity, by the way, wasn't some airline pilot with zero political experience; it was this guy -  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Pecora. Hardly a non-entity. Hardly a political novice.

And Santorum was succeeded by Mike Doyle after the 1994 elections. It isn't the same Doyle district as now but it was at the very least a Democratic leaning district. He won it by about ten points in 1994 and by a 56% to 40% margin in 1996.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Phil, I always liked you, and your post are almost always sensible, but your a bit too much in love with Rick Santorum....I think you may actually be him!

[t_host1]