Regarding Rick Santorum

[TDAS04]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Santorum getting the Republican nomination, but I wouldn't mind too much.  It would practically seal a Democratic victory in the general election.

[MATTROSE94]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Santorum getting the Republican nomination, but I wouldn't mind too much.  It would practically seal a Democratic victory in the general election.

The only states that Rick Santorum would probably carry if he is the Rebublican nominee in 2016 are Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska and maybe Ohio or Iowa depending on the state of the economy.

[Brittain33]

Who knows. Maybe the economy turns 2016 into the election the Republicans thought they'd have in 2012, and even Rick Santorum can win.

[TDAS04]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Santorum getting the Republican nomination, but I wouldn't mind too much.  It would practically seal a Democratic victory in the general election.

The only states that Rick Santorum would probably carry if he is the Rebublican nominee in 2016 are Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska and maybe Ohio or Iowa depending on the state of the economy.

Iowa?  No, Iowa is better than that.  The Dakotas maybe (unfortunately). 

[Bull Moose Base]

Rick's edge in 2016 compared to 2012, if he has one, is that Paul, Rubio, and Christie might actually, openly run to the left of the base on social issues in the primaries instead of waiting for the genital to make the move.

Genital election is a good name for a porno about people who choose to be gay.

Almost certainly, some candidate will emerge in the Republican primaries who opposes a path to citizenship and supports a constitutional ban on gay marriage. Hey, it may even be someone like Michele Bachmann who, in a single debate answer in 2011, supported states' rights to decide marriage laws and a constitutional amendment barring them from doing so. But the less like Bachmann i.e. blatantly implausible a president this person is, and the less appealing to conservatives the establishment favorite is, i.e. if it's Christie a than Walker or Rubio, the more traction the more conservative candidate is likely to get.  That said, I think either Jindal or Cruz, both children of immigrants, could easy outflank Santorum to the right on immigration, and bump him out. While Jindal seems more likely to run than Cruz, I think people underestimate the chance Cruz runs instead or both do or someone not really on the radar takes the spot.

Who knows. Maybe the economy turns 2016 into the election the Republicans thought they'd have in 2012, and even Rick Santorum can win.

People also underestimate the likelihood a bad economy hurts the Republicans even more than the Democrats.

[Brittain33]

People also underestimate the likelihood a bad economy hurts the Republicans even more than the Democrats.

Talk more about that. If the economy stumbles again heading into 2016, I think that "change" is going to be very hard for any Dem to fend off.

[Blue3]

Rick's edge in 2016 compared to 2012, if he has one, is that Paul, Rubio, and Christie might actually, openly run to the left of the base on social issues in the primaries instead of waiting for the genital to make the move.

Freudian slip? Lol. Of course it happens in a Santorum thread!

But yeah, Santorum could definitely be the person that the social conservatives rally around.

[Keystone Phil]

What was Santorum's line about kids going to college? Something unspeakable, right?

Something totally taken out of context. Per usual.

He said Obama was "a snob" for wanting everyone to go to college (even though Obama never said he wanted everyone to go to college).

And IIRC, Santorum has a BA, an MBA, and a JD, so.....

That right there is how his comments were taken ridiculously out of context. "Rick went to college! How could he say going to college is snobby?" Except he didn't say going to college is snobby. Either you people cannot follow simple arguments or you're totally disingenuous. I really can't tell these days.

[Brittain33]

Supposing that Santorum's original point was valid in context—that it's not reasonable to expect everyone in America to succeed in college—well, it takes a special skill set to take a viable criticism and position it so artlessly that it engenders sympathy for your opponent even as your own party disowns your remarks. John Kerry was good at that, too, but not as good as Santorum, who was spinning out comments like this daily when he was the front-runner.

[Indy Texas]

What was Santorum's line about kids going to college? Something unspeakable, right?

Something totally taken out of context. Per usual.

He said Obama was "a snob" for wanting everyone to go to college (even though Obama never said he wanted everyone to go to college).

And IIRC, Santorum has a BA, an MBA, and a JD, so.....

That right there is how his comments were taken ridiculously out of context. "Rick went to college! How could he say going to college is snobby?" Except he didn't say going to college is snobby. Either you people cannot follow simple arguments or you're totally disingenuous. I really can't tell these days.

Whether or not your statement is taken out of context doesn't really matter when your statement was a boldfaced lie. Obama has never said "everybody" needs to get a college degree. He has said that people should be expected to have some kind of post-secondary training to make them employable, whether that's a four-year college degree or an employer-based certification. If Rick Santorum were serious about improving the job prospects of the working-class white folks he is the patron saint of, he should be agreeing with the president. Do I think there is the possibility of an opening for Rick Santorum to win a few states in 2016? Yes. But in order to do that he's going to have to chuck the part of his persona that has him peddling resentment like it was corn dogs at the county fair.

[Lincoln Republican]

If Santorum really does run, he is opening himself up, again, for all the stupid things he has said over the past 20 years.

[MATTROSE94]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Santorum getting the Republican nomination, but I wouldn't mind too much.  It would practically seal a Democratic victory in the general election.

The only states that Rick Santorum would probably carry if he is the Rebublican nominee in 2016 are Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska and maybe Ohio or Iowa depending on the state of the economy.

Iowa?  No, Iowa is better than that.  The Dakotas maybe (unfortunately). 

Your probably right about the Dakotas going for Rick Santorum, although I still think that he would do fairly well in Iowa due to him energizing the Christian Right voters in that state. Whoever the Dems nominate against Rick Santorum would most likely get close to 400 electoral votes and win at least 55% of the vote

[All Along The Watchtower]

What was Santorum's line about kids going to college? Something unspeakable, right?

Something totally taken out of context. Per usual.

He said Obama was "a snob" for wanting everyone to go to college (even though Obama never said he wanted everyone to go to college).

And IIRC, Santorum has a BA, an MBA, and a JD, so.....

That right there is how his comments were taken ridiculously out of context. "Rick went to college! How could he say going to college is snobby?" Except he didn't say going to college is snobby. Either you people cannot follow simple arguments or you're totally disingenuous. I really can't tell these days.

Oh give me a break, Santorum built a dishonest strawman of "President Obama wants everyone to go to college!" and then said that something that Obama (didn't) say was snobby.  Excuse us for thinking that Santorum  isn't a credible  "anti-elitist,working-class hero" (which I know that he wants to be perceived as) when he himself has been a huge beneficiary of higher education (among other things).

And for the love of God, if you agree with Santorum, please elaborate on why you agree with him. Stop being so damn defensive and stop attacking people who don't like your candidate.

[BluegrassBlueVote]

There's a Santorum fan on this forum? That's adorable.

[Keystone Phil]

Excuse us for thinking that Santorum  isn't a credible  "anti-elitist,working-class hero" (which I know that he wants to be perceived as) when he himself has been a huge beneficiary of higher education (among other things).

Which has nothing to do with the subject.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh...this isn't about agreeing with Santorum or not on this subject. What the hell am I supposed to elaborate on here? He thinks it's snobby to think that someone has to go to be successful. I agree. What needs to be clarified? The discussion here is over the idea that Santorum said it's snobby to go to college. He didn't say that. At all. But that's been the misconception from the very second he uttered the comment and it comes from people that simply don't like "my candidate." God, I wonder why...

I think quite a few people here need to get something through their very thick skulls: this isn't about "attacking" people who don't like "my candidate." I've been involved in politics for quite some time even though I'm young. I've liked Rick Santorum from the very start. If you don't think that I've accepted that people don't like the guy then that's your problem. People here need to get the hell over themselves because it takes a massive ego to think that I care to attack you for not liking "my candidate." I couldn't possibly care less. I really don't care to win over a group of guys on a stupid Internet political forum. If I spent my time just attacking people for not liking Santorum, I'd literally have no other posts on any other topic. I have a very long list of better things to do than spend my time dwelling on Santorum haters.

Pointing out when you're wrong about what "my candidate" has said doesn't mean I'm "attacking" you for not liking him. That's nothing more than whining on your part because you dislike that I've called out your misunderstanding (at best) or disingenuous attack (most likely). I'm just one of a very, very small number of Santorum fans here, I'm the most vocal and I've been here the longest so I'm usually the one responding to every ridiculous thing said about him. That might make it seem like I just attack whoever dislikes him but that's not the case

[Brittain33]

Phil, is the fact that Obama never said that, and Santorum was misrepresenting him, relevant?

Or is it ok because you can sort of make his statement defensible if you take it out of that context?

[Keystone Phil]

Phil, is the fact that Obama never said that, and Santorum was misrepresenting him, relevant?

Or is it ok because you can sort of make his statement defensible if you take it out of that context?

How about we do this: admit that it's wrong to make up/totally misrepresent comments by each individual?

It isn't suddenly justified to look at what Santorum said and a) lie about his remarks (Made up quote: "Going to college is snobby") and b) try to make him out to be a hypocrite by pointing out his advanced degrees. Arguably, his detractors have taken it a step further. You know, the usual.

Oh, and for the record, Rick Santorum (Supposed Satan - PA/VA) backtracked on his comments:

UPDATE: Santorum backtracked on this claim during the March 4, 2012, edition of Fox News Sunday after being pressed by host Chris Wallace, the Boston Globe reported. "I've read some columns where at least it was characterized that the president said, we should go to four-year colleges," Santorum said, adding, "If it was in error, then I agree with the president that we should have options for people to go to variety of different training options for them."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/feb/27/rick-santorum/rick-santorum-calls-barack-obama-snob-wanting-ever/


It's probably time for the usual suspects here to do the same on their misrepresentation of Santorum's remarks. Don't worry: I'm not holding my breath.

[Indy Texas]

Phil, is the fact that Obama never said that, and Santorum was misrepresenting him, relevant?

Or is it ok because you can sort of make his statement defensible if you take it out of that context?

How about we do this: admit that it's wrong to make up/totally misrepresent comments by each individual?

It isn't suddenly justified to look at what Santorum said and a) lie about his remarks (Made up quote: "Going to college is snobby") and b) try to make him out to be a hypocrite by pointing out his advanced degrees. Arguably, his detractors have taken it a step further. You know, the usual.

Oh, and for the record, Rick Santorum (Supposed Satan - PA/VA) backtracked on his comments:

UPDATE: Santorum backtracked on this claim during the March 4, 2012, edition of Fox News Sunday after being pressed by host Chris Wallace, the Boston Globe reported. "I've read some columns where at least it was characterized that the president said, we should go to four-year colleges," Santorum said, adding, "If it was in error, then I agree with the president that we should have options for people to go to variety of different training options for them."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/feb/27/rick-santorum/rick-santorum-calls-barack-obama-snob-wanting-ever/


It's probably time for the usual suspects here to do the same on their misrepresentation of Santorum's remarks. Don't worry: I'm not holding my breath.

Okay, let's go through this:

Santorum says..."President Obama wants everyone to go to college. What a snob."

Santorum means...President Obama is a snob for wanting everyone to go to college. Wanting everyone to go to college makes one a snob.

I would argue that you could call someone a snob for wanting every single person in society to have a four-year degree or higher. But you seem to be overlooking the fact that OBAMA NEVER SAID THAT.

What if a Democratic politician said, "[GOP Candidate X] says you're not really an American if you're not Christian. What a hateful bigot!"

Except the GOP candidate didn't actually say that. He made some blithe reference to "America's Judeo-Christian values."

Now, it's not unreasonable to call someone a bigot who thinks Christianity is a litmus test for being a good citizen. However, it is highly unreasonable and over the line to make that statement based on something that NO ONE EVER SAID.

So what if Santorum backtracked? Making a BS statement on the campaign trail and then later "clarifying" in a statement most people are never going to bother looking up on PolitiFact is like when a lawyer makes an inadmissible statement in court, the other lawyer objects and the judge tells the jury to disregard the remark. They can't disregard it. They already heard it.

Santorum makes an outlandish statement and then later on makes a non-apology for telling a blatant lie. That puts him slightly above Michele "Vaccines Cause Mental Retardation" Bachmann on the veracity scale, which is an embarrassing place to be.

Why can't you just admit it was a cheap shot?

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Considering Santorum's base, he could pull it out at least through February, possibly through Super Tuesday if the Midwest and the South manages to fall into his corner. These areas are where a lot of social conservatives actually can win him some delegates, especially with the stronger contenders in the field breaking up the moderate and libertarian factions of the GOP.

That being said, he has no real shot at the Presidency. However, he will be, more than likely, the kingmaker. Whoever he ends up throwing his support behind will win the nod, which means more than likely not Santorum will be a major player all the way through the next presidential campaign (and even the next administration if the Republicans win).

[Keystone Phil]

Phil, is the fact that Obama never said that, and Santorum was misrepresenting him, relevant?

Or is it ok because you can sort of make his statement defensible if you take it out of that context?

How about we do this: admit that it's wrong to make up/totally misrepresent comments by each individual?

It isn't suddenly justified to look at what Santorum said and a) lie about his remarks (Made up quote: "Going to college is snobby") and b) try to make him out to be a hypocrite by pointing out his advanced degrees. Arguably, his detractors have taken it a step further. You know, the usual.

Oh, and for the record, Rick Santorum (Supposed Satan - PA/VA) backtracked on his comments:

UPDATE: Santorum backtracked on this claim during the March 4, 2012, edition of Fox News Sunday after being pressed by host Chris Wallace, the Boston Globe reported. "I've read some columns where at least it was characterized that the president said, we should go to four-year colleges," Santorum said, adding, "If it was in error, then I agree with the president that we should have options for people to go to variety of different training options for them."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/feb/27/rick-santorum/rick-santorum-calls-barack-obama-snob-wanting-ever/


It's probably time for the usual suspects here to do the same on their misrepresentation of Santorum's remarks. Don't worry: I'm not holding my breath.

Okay, let's go through this:

Santorum says..."President Obama wants everyone to go to college. What a snob."

Santorum means...President Obama is a snob for wanting everyone to go to college. Wanting everyone to go to college makes one a snob.

I would argue that you could call someone a snob for wanting every single person in society to have a four-year degree or higher. But you seem to be overlooking the fact that OBAMA NEVER SAID THAT.

What if a Democratic politician said, "[GOP Candidate X] says you're not really an American if you're not Christian. What a hateful bigot!"

Except the GOP candidate didn't actually say that. He made some blithe reference to "America's Judeo-Christian values."

Now, it's not unreasonable to call someone a bigot who thinks Christianity is a litmus test for being a good citizen. However, it is highly unreasonable and over the line to make that statement based on something that NO ONE EVER SAID.

So what if Santorum backtracked? Making a BS statement on the campaign trail and then later "clarifying" in a statement most people are never going to bother looking up on PolitiFact is like when a lawyer makes an inadmissible statement in court, the other lawyer objects and the judge tells the jury to disregard the remark. They can't disregard it. They already heard it.

Santorum makes an outlandish statement and then later on makes a non-apology for telling a blatant lie. That puts him slightly above Michele "Vaccines Cause Mental Retardation" Bachmann on the veracity scale, which is an embarrassing place to be.

Why can't you just admit it was a cheap shot?

Now the whining has gotten even more pathetic. It's not good enough that Santorum backtracked and said he wouldn't have said it if he had it to do over. No, no, no. It's just like your courtroom analogy. Definitely just as serious!




Still waiting on how all of this justifies totally making up something Santorum said and calling him a hypocrite. Again, not holding my breath. Keep avoiding that.

[BluegrassBlueVote]

Excuse us for thinking that Santorum  isn't a credible  "anti-elitist,working-class hero" (which I know that he wants to be perceived as) when he himself has been a huge beneficiary of higher education (among other things).

Which has nothing to do with the subject.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh...this isn't about agreeing with Santorum or not on this subject. What the hell am I supposed to elaborate on here? He thinks it's snobby to think that someone has to go to be successful. I agree. What needs to be clarified? The discussion here is over the idea that Santorum said it's snobby to go to college. He didn't say that. At all. But that's been the misconception from the very second he uttered the comment and it comes from people that simply don't like "my candidate." God, I wonder why...

I think quite a few people here need to get something through their very thick skulls: this isn't about "attacking" people who don't like "my candidate." I've been involved in politics for quite some time even though I'm young. I've liked Rick Santorum from the very start. If you don't think that I've accepted that people don't like the guy then that's your problem. People here need to get the hell over themselves because it takes a massive ego to think that I care to attack you for not liking "my candidate." I couldn't possibly care less. I really don't care to win over a group of guys on a stupid Internet political forum. If I spent my time just attacking people for not liking Santorum, I'd literally have no other posts on any other topic. I have a very long list of better things to do than spend my time dwelling on Santorum haters.

Pointing out when you're wrong about what "my candidate" has said doesn't mean I'm "attacking" you for not liking him. That's nothing more than whining on your part because you dislike that I've called out your misunderstanding (at best) or disingenuous attack (most likely). I'm just one of a very, very small number of Santorum fans here, I'm the most vocal and I've been here the longest so I'm usually the one responding to every ridiculous thing said about him. That might make it seem like I just attack whoever dislikes him but that's not the case

If there's one thing I got from this rant, it's that you totally don't care what people think about Santorum. Totally.

[Indy Texas]

Now the whining has gotten even more pathetic. It's not good enough that Santorum backtracked and said he wouldn't have said it if he had it to do over. No, no, no. It's just like your courtroom analogy. Definitely just as serious!




Still waiting on how all of this justifies totally making up something Santorum said and calling him a hypocrite. Again, not holding my breath. Keep avoiding that.

When did I make up something Santorum said and call him a hypocrite? Find the place in this thread where I made up something Santorum said and called him a hypocrite. I did not do either one of those things and no one else here did either.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Notice he can't name a specific place where he read this and that he won't even have the decency to admit that he was wrong. But, oh, yes, poor Saint Rick. All those mean, snooty smart people with their four-year college degrees looking down their noses at him and the "real" people out in Bumf**k, Central Pennsylvania.

[ShadowRocket]

I think there's a reasonable chance we'll win in Iowa again, but he wont win the nomination.

[Keystone Phil]

When did I make up something Santorum said and call him a hypocrite? Find the place in this thread where I made up something Santorum said and called him a hypocrite. I did not do either one of those things and no one else here did either.

Hey, whoa...if you're willing to say from the jump that it's wrong, there's nothing more to see here. So if you don't believe Santorum said going to college is snobby, aren't calling him a hypocrite and think the people that have said both of those things are wrong, you'll say so. Right? You do that and I'll concede that you weren't making those points in the first place (while other clowns around here still won't own up to it). 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, "Bumf**k, Central Pennsylvania." Glad you aren't feeding right into what Rick was getting at...

[DS0816]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Santorum getting the Republican nomination, but I wouldn't mind too much.  It would practically seal a Democratic victory in the general election.

The only states that Rick Santorum would probably carry if he is the Rebublican nominee in 2016 are Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska and maybe Ohio or Iowa depending on the state of the economy.

More Republicans will be moving to support marriage equality.

Rick Santorum may as well be campaigning on another planet. He's done.

Those states you mentioned. Eliminate Ohio, due to its bellwether status, and Iowa, which also produces margins close to the national number, and the best scenario in the general-election fantasy of Santorum-the-GOP-nominee rests with the Red States Which Don't Care. Alabama. Mississippi. Utah. Wyoming. Idaho. Oklahoma. (Enough!)