Obama/Santorum map

[platypeanArchcow]

If someone as right-wing as Reagan

...well to the left of today's Republican orthodoxy...

and someone as left-wing as Obama

...well to the right of Bill Clinton, who was already a moderate...

[Thomas D]

Obama 340-198

[pbrower2a]

Rick Santorum has big problems. He is an authoritarian populist, which will play well in most of the South -- in places that President Obama did badly in in 2008.

Santorum is a compassionate conservative and big government populist. He is like socially conservative Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton is more conservative in style than in substance. These days "compassionate conservative" is an oxymoron.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nobody remembers his tenure in the Senate and it won’t be relevant. Why would ties to George W. Bush be relevant? They are only relevant to those who still have disdain for George W. Bush and those people are not Santorum’s constituency.[/quote]

Dubya gets connected to the economic meltdown of Sep 2007- Feb 2009, the most dangerous economic downturn since the Sep 1929 - Sep 1932 sequels of the Great Stock Market Crash. For a year and a half the economic meltdowns were remarkably similar. Dubya is connected to bungled wars and disasters of foreign policy and to ugly anti-Americanism that appeared in unlikely places. Rick Santorum has a Senate record as a stooge and enforcer of Dubya, and it can't be forgotten. If it has to be brought again into the open it will be.

It is difficult to resurrect a political career that goes sour for a reason. To be sure we have known of many politicians who revive their careers after some defeat, but such defeat is little more than a wave election -- and not scandal. Abuse of power is one of those scandals that practically ends a career.  

Recent polls suggest that Rick Santorum would fare badly in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.  He is behind in Missouri and North Carolina, if within the margin of error.

I am not saying Santorum will win Florida, Pennsylvania or Virginia. Are you saying Obama will win North Carolina and Missouri?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Very well. Certainly better than McCain. Unlike Obama, he can connect with those voters.

[/quote][/quote]

As a rule I don't assume that things will happen until they do unless there is overwhelming precedent for my assumptions. But at this stage, any Republican will have a difficult time defeating President Obama.

Even  that has its risks. In 1992 I assumed that Bill Clinton was going to lose because he wasn't going to win Texas.  

[Stranger in a strange land]

Guys, Santorum is not going to win Pennsylvania: he's too far to the right and lost his last election there by 18 points. Remember also that Santorum can't raise anywhere near the funds that Romney can, so Obama could probably outspend him by 2:1 or more, even with SuperPACs and the Koch brothers brought into the equation. With Romney, spending would probably be close to parity.

[Del Tachi]

Santorum is no more socially conservative than GWB was, and Santorum is also the most neoconservative of all the current GOP candidates in terms of foreign policy.  Santorum is the "compassionate conservative" running this time around; as such, I believe that he could do at least as well as Dubya did in '04. 

[Stranger in a strange land]

Santorum is no more socially conservative than GWB was, and Santorum is also the most neoconservative of all the current GOP candidates in terms of foreign policy.  Santorum is the "compassionate conservative" running this time around; as such, I believe that he could do at least as well as Dubya did in '04. 

Dubya left office with approval ratings in the 20s, and soured the American people on compassionate conservatism and interventionist foreign policy. Also, the national election map has changed: NV and CO in particular have become more Democratic.

Also, social conservatism won't be the vote-getter it was in 2004: public attitudes towards gay rights in particular have shifted considerably, and Santorum fights the president on this issue at his own peril.

[pbrower2a]

Guys, Santorum is not going to win Pennsylvania: he's too far to the right and lost his last election there by 18 points. Remember also that Santorum can't raise anywhere near the funds that Romney can, so Obama could probably outspend him by 2:1 or more, even with SuperPACs and the Koch brothers brought into the equation. With Romney, spending would probably be close to parity.

Rick Santorum can win the Republican primary in Pennsylvania. It's not the Republicans of Pennsylvania who have a problem with him; it is independents and Democrats who will find him objectionable.  They won't give him problems until the general election.

Here's an interesting line, though:

307,415   26,531 8.63%   54.15%    45.52%    0.32% 166,476 139,945    994 

Want to guess what it is?

1. The nationwide popular vote for the 1808 Presidential election.

2. The split of the popular vote in California in 1900.

3. The split of the primary vote in Texas in 2008.

4. None of the above.

It is #4 -- how South Dakota voted for President in 1972. George McGovern got 45.52% of the popular vote in the state of South Dakota, and that was his fourth-best state. President Obama didn't do as well in South Dakota in 2008 as McGovern did in 1972.

381,975   32,130   8.41%    44.75%    53.16%    2.09%   170,924   203,054    7,997

But South Dakota was the fourth-strongest state for McGovern. As an illustration of how out of touch McGovern was with America as a whole, here is how he did in Pennsylvania:

4,592,105 917,570   19.98%    59.11%    39.13%    1.76%   2,714,521 1,796,951  80,633

That was awful, but it was better than America as a whole.

Barring major changes in the political realities of America between now and November, I predict that Rick Santorum will get results between those of McGovern 1972 in South Dakota (which were adequate for a Democrat in most years, but horrible for a Favorite Son).  ... and those of McGovern in 1972 in Pennsylvania. The Favorite Son effect holds for someone well-respected in his own state, and not for someone ill regarded. George McGovern was well-regarded in South Dakota in 1972 for bringing home the fiscal pork.

Rick Santorum got defeated in Pennsylvania in 2006 -- and Pennsylvanians are going to know why.  I see no reason to believe that he has learned much from his defeat. He abused power when Dubya was President, and if Republicans could tolerate that -- others can't. The dirt that came out on him in 2006 will come out again.   

[Smash255]

Santorum is no more socially conservative than GWB was, and Santorum is also the most neoconservative of all the current GOP candidates in terms of foreign policy.  Santorum is the "compassionate conservative" running this time around; as such, I believe that he could do at least as well as Dubya did in '04. 

The reasons you gave is the reason why he will get ABSOLUTELY DEMOLISHED, Obama will win Independents in a LANDSLIDE.

[Smash255]

The northeast becomes comical.

[NHI]

D: 412
R: 126

I'm probably being too nice to Obama, but the fact is Santorum can't beat Obama.

[California8429]

If someone as right-wing as Reagan

...well to the left of today's Republican orthodoxy...

and someone as left-wing as Obama

...well to the right of Bill Clinton, who was already a moderate...

LOL

[President von Cat]

Santorum is no more socially conservative than GWB was, and Santorum is also the most neoconservative of all the current GOP candidates in terms of foreign policy.  Santorum is the "compassionate conservative" running this time around; as such, I believe that he could do at least as well as Dubya did in '04. 

Social issues will not decide the 2012 election.

If the economy is doing well enough to the point where it isn't even an issue, then the Democrats have already won. An incumbent governing over a good economy will never be tossed out over social/religious issues. NEVER.

[Indy Texas]

Santorum is no more socially conservative than GWB was, and Santorum is also the most neoconservative of all the current GOP candidates in terms of foreign policy.  Santorum is the "compassionate conservative" running this time around; as such, I believe that he could do at least as well as Dubya did in '04. 

Social issues will not decide the 2012 election.

If the economy is doing well enough to the point where it isn't even an issue, then the Democrats have already won. An incumbent governing over a good economy will never be tossed out over social/religious issues. NEVER.

I agree, and this is why I think this election is almost unwinnable for Republicans.

Scenario 1: Unemployment>8%, Santorum as the nominee
Santorum campaigns on God-guns-and-gays issues. People vote with their wallets in a poor economic climate. Advantage Obama.

Scenario 2: Unemployment>8%, Romney as the nominee
Better off than with Santorum, but the attacks Romney has received are very similar to the ones that will be used against him in the general election and he hasn't been able to get people to buy his "I'm filthy rich but I really do care" line (and this is in a primary of a party that's supposed to like filthy rich people). Advantage Obama.

Scenario 3: Unemployment<8%, Santorum as the nominee
Obama can now say "I said I'd fix the economy and I kept my promise." The momentum on social issues - Santorum's area of expertise - in this country is running more in the Democrats' direction than the Republicans' (i.e. Planned Parenthood rhetorically castrating the Susan G. Komen Foundation; more states legalizing civil unions and same-sex marriage). Advantage Obama.

Scenario 4: Unemployment <8%, Romney as the nominee
Romney's whole rationale for being president falls apart if the economy continues to recover this year. The issue on the next burner after the economy is foreign policy, and Romney can't say he killed Osama bin Laden. Advantage Obama.

[Adam Griffin]

[pbrower2a]

Santorum is no more socially conservative than GWB was, and Santorum is also the most neoconservative of all the current GOP candidates in terms of foreign policy.  Santorum is the "compassionate conservative" running this time around; as such, I believe that he could do at least as well as Dubya did in '04. 

Social issues will not decide the 2012 election.

If the economy is doing well enough to the point where it isn't even an issue, then the Democrats have already won. An incumbent governing over a good economy will never be tossed out over social/religious issues. NEVER.

Republicans had their chance, such as it was, to defeat Barack Obama on social issues in 2008. If they couldn't do so then, then hey can't now. Americans have gotten used to the President and his style. 

[TeePee4Prez]

Guys, Santorum is not going to win Pennsylvania: he's too far to the right and lost his last election there by 18 points. Remember also that Santorum can't raise anywhere near the funds that Romney can, so Obama could probably outspend him by 2:1 or more, even with SuperPACs and the Koch brothers brought into the equation. With Romney, spending would probably be close to parity.

OH BUT he SOOOOO needed Bob Casey to flip the seat Dem. I'm convinced Chaka Fattah would have made it a tie and even Bob Brady would have won the seat by 12.  I would LOVE for Santorum to get the nomination just as much as Phil.  Flip some R seats back to Dem in the State Houses and US Congress is all Santorum would do here.  Say do the Dems have good candidates in PA 6, 15, and 16 yet?


Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-8) should be BEGGING his buddy Santorum to dropout right now!

[Fuzzybigfoot]

Maybe?