Barack Obama vs Rick Santorum

[Ljube]

I think this is Santorum's realistic minimum. All tossup states go Obama.

[pbrower2a]

I would never vote for Obama, a gorilla sounds better.  Either that, I'd vote third party.

Your racism is showing.

[5280]

I would never vote for Obama, a gorilla sounds better.  Either that, I'd vote third party.

Your racism is showing.

You're twisting my logic here.  Im saying, anybody even an animal can run this country better than the current President.  His performance is lacking, and you turn it into a race debate which it's not.

[Jacobtm]

You're twisting my logic here.  Im saying, anybody even an animal can run this country better than the current President.  His performance is lacking, and you turn it into a race debate which it's not.

I think some Republicans just don't even understand how racist they sound.

You do realize that black people, for centuries, have been caricatured as monkeys and apes by racists, right? You do realize that the neo-nazi/stormfront/KKK people love to call black people monkeys/apes to this day, and frequently call Obama a monkey/ape?.

Comparing the President to a monkey is not even a ''dog whistle'' racist tactic, it's an openly racist tactic, saying that black people are sub-human.

So when you talk about him being WORSE than an ape, you're just speaking the same language as the KKK/Neo-Nazis/Storm-Front people.

[Is Totally Not Feeblepizza.]

LOL, if you're a "libertarian" and you're picking Santorum over Obama, you're probably not actually a libertarian.

My thought as well.

The economy is the biggest issue right now, and Santorum is far more preferable to Obama on economic issues. Therefore, Santorum would get my vote.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

As a right-libertarian/Ron Paul supporter given this Sophie's choice of candidates: Obama every time.

[TheGlobalizer]

LOL, if you're a "libertarian" and you're picking Santorum over Obama, you're probably not actually a libertarian.

This x100000000000.

I hate Obama with uncontrollable disgust, but he's still a far more acceptable candidate to me.

Obviously, I'd vote Gary Johnson, however.

[© tweed]

LOL, if you're a "libertarian" and you're picking Santorum over Obama, you're probably not actually a libertarian.

American right-libertarianism = support of totalitarian private dictatorships.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Obama over Santorum big time.

[hotpprs]

Generous?
Who here actually thinks Obama would beat Santorum in Ohio?
No way, no how.
It's Santorum's back yard, and loaded with Christian conservatives.

Being very generous to Santorum:

Republicans are absolutely bonkers

[President von Cat]

LOL, if you're a "libertarian" and you're picking Santorum over Obama, you're probably not actually a libertarian.

My thought as well.

The economy is the biggest issue right now, and Santorum is far more preferable to Obama on economic issues. Therefore, Santorum would get my vote.

That makes no sense. Nobody is supporting Santorum because he is steadier than Obama on the economy. Its because he represents religious/social issue interests, aka "real conservatism" better than Mitt Romney. And because he is more "like" blue collar voters in the midwest (he doesn't enjoy firing people, he doesn't have "200-some-odd million" in wealth). But that has nothing to do with being able to turn around the economy. Lets not forgot that Santorum was himself a part of big government conservatism that helped caused this economic mess in the first place!

Republicans nominate Rick Santorum at their own peril. It would essentially be akin to nominating a cultural warrior in the midst of a weak economy, when simple logic would call for someone with credible economic chops. The country as a whole will not elect a religious warrior when so much else is at stake.

The fact that Mitt Romney is struggling so much to sell himself on something as simple as economic competence represents what a facking failure of a candidate he has been.

[Is Totally Not Feeblepizza.]

That makes no sense. Nobody is supporting Santorum because he is steadier than Obama on the economy. Its because he represents religious/social issue interests, aka "real conservatism" better than Mitt Romney. And because he is more "like" blue collar voters in the midwest (he doesn't enjoy firing people, he doesn't have "200-some-odd million" in wealth). But that has nothing to do with being able to turn around the economy.

Republicans nominate Rick Santorum at their own peril. It would essentially be akin to nominating a cultural warrior in the midst of a weak economy, when simple logic would call for someone with credible economic chops. The country as a whole will not elect a religious warrior when so much else is at stake.

The fact that Mitt Romney is struggling so much to sell himself on something as simple as economic competence represents what a facking failure of a candidate he has been.

This is all true. But I am not a Santorum supporter in this primary. I disagree with just about everything he has to say on social issues. His fixation with gays, for example, is totally ridiculous and even disturbing at times. But his economic policy--even if he doesn't emphasize as much as he should--is better than Obama's.

[RosettaStoned]

 I'd vote for Rick Santorum over Barry Soetoro any day of the week.

[Wisconsin+17]

Turn the tossups to Santorum, and you have my map. O has the west coast, NE -PA, MI + IL and that's all.

[Comrade Funk]

Obama. Duh.

[President von Cat]

Turn the tossups to Santorum, and you have my map. O has the west coast, NE -PA, MI + IL and that's all.

..and then you'll wake up.

This isn't the year 2000; the country has moved beyond idiot Bible boy candidates. We know what a "compassionate conservative" is, and we aren't interested.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is why you'd take a compassionate Obama? Makes no sense to me. If it's big government you're against it stands to reason that you'd oppose Obama.

[RI]

Compassionate conservatism as a governing ideology died on 9/11 before it even got a chance to be implemented. It's not my first choice, but it would be far better than what the Republican Party typically produces.

[Penelope]

The fact that Obama doesn't have +90% of the vote in this poll is distressing.

[Lief 🗽]

If Santorum wins the nomination I'll probably just vote for him out of respect. The man will have achieved the impossible.

[Lambsbread]

Yeah I changed my mind.

Of the two, Obama.

[Jacobtm]

Generous?
Who here actually thinks Obama would beat Santorum in Ohio?
No way, no how.
It's Santorum's back yard, and loaded with Christian conservatives.

Being very generous to Santorum:

Republicans are absolutely bonkers

Santorum isn't even winning his home state. That's like saying Al Gore should've won Kentucky cause it was next to Tennessee...

Santorum is as much of a retard as Palin or Bachmann, he just had more tenacity than they did. When he is on TV non-stop, people will be appalled by him. Stand him next to Obama, and there is no comparison.

[Chaddyr23]

All I know is my very devout and Christian mother looked at me when she heard Santorum speak and said, if for some reason heaven is full of pretentious rightwingers like him, then I don't want to go there. I think that settles that. Barry all the way!

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

Vote for Santorum and you will get WW3

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Here is my concern right now. From a personal standpoint, Santorum is fine on the issues and I would vote for him over Obama, with ease. The problem is that he continues to drive the GOP down the road to Mike Huckabee. As the GOP becomes more dependent on winning those midwest states, it will become a party of big government and protectionism which isn't conservative in my definition of the term. Santorum himself isn't that bad, contrary to Politico's nonesense, but the problem comes with the rich fiscal conservatives and the libertarians.

The rich fi-cons aren't as generous and don't see a difference really, and the overwhelming focus on the social issues will only make it worse. He can't maintain, more or less restore a balance within the GOP base that is essential to preserve simulteanously competativness in the SW/VA/NE burbs as well as in the upper midwest/interior South. The latter of which, is shrinking, by the way.  The GOP needs to push back against the realignment if it wants to remain a conservative party on both fiscal and social issues. To maintain that, it needs to preserve it's competativeness across the Sunbelt/Suburbs that powered the party in the 1980's. Otherwise politics will necessitate sacrificing one for the other.

Going forward, it is also important to bring Libertarians back into the party. Young Republicans for the most part do not share the same world view as the rest of the party. If party is to have a future it is going to have to back it's way into Libertarian theories and principles. That doesn't mean we should embrace the quackery of Ron Paul and "End the Fed/Stop the wars!!!". It means we should start re-embracing states rights, start to delegating controverisal social issues like Gay MArriage to the states and drop the FMA, take a more balanced approach on foreign policy, etc. Libertarianism shouldn't have to be at odds with social conservatism. The only reason it has become that way is the imbalance in the party and the preferential treatment that wing has received. 

Santorum can't do this. Not sure anyone could as this point, but Rick certainly can't. He has put to much emphasis on antagonizing Ron Paul and re-emphaising his adherence to cultural conservatism at time when advancing that is best served with the silent approach. I sometimes wonder if Conservatives care at all about the long term strength of the movement and whether or not it actually exists in the future. You can't avoid the reality of a more libertarian GOP in the future, unless you are in denial about what is to come. If that move is aborted, I frankly don't see how the GOP or the Conservative movement as we know it survives.