What the heck is a Santorum?

So I saw Mitt beat Santorum by 8 votes in Iowa. I can honestly say I know less about this guy than I do about the Kardashians...which is saying a lot since my policy on anything Kardashian is active and proactive avoidance.

Is Santorum the real deal or just the flavor of the month? I'm starting to think that the conservatives in the party are practicing the politics of "anyone but Romney" which I can kind of understand.

 

I liked Mike. So if he starts leading I wonder if his campaign funding will get a boost? Anyhow I hate, hate, hate to admit it, but I'll likely be voting for Romney. I just want anyone at all other than the ass clown we have now and maybe, just maybe a fiscally conservative House can then get something done assuming Mitt is smart enough to play ball which I think he is. The man is like a wind sock, he'll point whichever way the wind blows.

 

He's been getting a major financial bump lately. This strong finish will definitely help matters.

It's also important to remember that there is a strong anti-Romney contingent in the GOP. As the minor players start to fall, look for the support to swing to Santorum.

Romney will win New Hampshire, but I think Santorum has a strong shot in South Carolina.

If Santorum wins there, all bets are off.

 

With Sen. John McCain endorsing Romney may further connect with the anti-Romney contingent /sentiment …

 

No crap...I cannot stand John McCain. I may have to reconsider my support for Mitt then.

 

Bachman has dropped out, Perry has gone back to Texas to "reassess" his campaign. At the same time, some of the key (aka wealthy) conservatives that encouraged Perry to run and built up his war chest (he actually has more money in his war chest than Mitt Romney) have called an invitation only meeting to determine who they are going to support now. My suspicion is that they think Perry is too damaged and are going to throw all of their financial backing behind Santorum.

After getting absolutely brutalized by Romney's SuperPAC, Newt Gingrich has turned into a suicide bomber and is going to do EVERYTHING in his power to destroy Mitt Romney, even if it damages/destroys Newt in the process.

Perry does have the power to wage a decent war even if his backers switch to Santorum, but he has to be worried about burning too many bridges. Defying his backers and losing could cost him their support when he runs for re-election to governor. If I were representing Perry's backers, I would feed him some line that if he threw his support to Santorum, I would give him extra help in his Gubernatorial election, and perhaps throw him some support for the NEXT presidential election. But if he goes against us, not only will we not support him in this presidential election, we may support an opponent in the Governor's race.

Even if Bachman, Gingrich, AND Perry throw their support behind Santorum, his only hope is that enough people hate Romney so much that they are willing to seriously risk losing to Obama if it means that Mitt Romney is not the nominee.

Make no mistake, Santorum is FAR FAR FAR weaker against Obama than Romney. The ONLY reason why he looks so clean now is because no one has gone after him. This guy has a ton of skeletons in his closet, along with policy ideas that are completely at odds with the direction the majority of Americans are going towards. You want to invigorate Barack Obama's base? Nominate Rick Santorum.

Now Mitt can still win this. For all the talk, Santorum is basically going after the Huckabee votes. At the same time he has more baggage, and less charisma than Mike Huckabee. Mitt, on the other hand, is going to get his voters AND the McCain voters. If he can stay focused, and let his superPACs do the dirty work, he can lock this up.

What about Ron Paul? IMHO, Ron Paul's third place finish HELPS Mitt Romney. When you look, you realize that Paul does not draw votes from Romney. He does, however, draw votes from Santorum and other conservatives. Surprisingly, Ron Paul got the second highest number of Evangelical votes in Iowa. A strong Ron Paul might continously chip away votes from Santorum, especially after all of the ads about Santorum's history with lobbyest and pork-barrell spending come out.

 

Not really … outside an incredibly few local elections, the Libertarian ticket is in essence an end to nowhere when it comes to actually winning at the ballot box. Just ask the prior (1988) Libertarian Party presidential candidate and current Republican U.S. Congressman Ron Paul. Nice idea though (Libertarian presidential candidate nomination seeker Gary Johnson); however the LP is just not a viable option in a national election. Conversely, apparently the GOP establishment can’t or won’t field a conservative candidate against, IMO, the should be most vulnerable sitting President since the inept Jimmy Carter.

 

If I were Romney, I would have told McCain to keep his Charles Keating Five (e.g., Lincoln Savings & Loan) and FOX News mouth shut regarding his (McCain) pledge of support. On the other hand, what was McCain promised? :shhh:

 

ROFL. Wow. That's funny right there.

 

Oh, no problem, the Keating Five vs. Tony Rezko will be an interesting debate.

 

I predicted all along Romney would win Iowa. He will win NH and will be the nominee and the GOP will once again be a centrist Party. Hopefully then, the Tea Party and the like will join the Constitution or American or Conservative or Libertarian or...parties.

 

Unfortunately the stakes get higher every election cycle it seems.

 

Right now, Santorum just doesn't have the financial backing to make a serious go of it, and it's a bit late in the campaign to start serious fund raising from scratch.

The Republicans have to keep their eye on the main goal; beating Obama in November. Romney offers the best chance for that.

 

My observation is based upon historical record (e.g., longer-term) of, in this instance, the probability of a Libertarian Party candidate having any realistic chance being elected President whatsoever. No I can’t foretell the future (be it short or long-term), but I can and do recognize third Party candidates’ dismal historical election record as regards U.S. presidential election results, e.g., Millard Fillmore (Whig Party 1850-1853) was the last third party candidate elected president. Would that qualify my previous comment as being based on the long-term? Nevertheless, perhaps you’re right as regards minor party strategy, e.g., leverage attempt with the major parties or spoiler at best … yet historically; third party nominees are highly unlikely to be electable standalone candidates.