is Rick Santorum running for president?

Quote: pacomartin

I hope that Ron Paul does the decent thing and quits once he is incapable of winning. I also hope that Gingrich will quit before the big set of primaries on 6 June. I think they should give someone a chance at the majority.

Why do you care if Dr. Paul quits? I am one of his supporters and have given him several hunderd bucks which is probably more than my budget allows for, but I would no more vote for Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich than I would vote for Obama, and honestly I have been a Republican my whole adult life but I am not convinces President Santorum would be any better than President Obama. I can't think of one of my Ron Paul supporting friends who feel differently. Even if he dropped out, I'm still wearing Ron Paul t-shirts and the bumper sticker stays on my car. Who do you think Paul's supporters turn to?

Quote: EvenBob

Do you prefer the grape or the cherry Kool Aid? Are
you reading right from the Dem talking points list or
do you have it memorized?

My guess is it is memorized. People stuck in the Obama Cult of Personality are great at chanting the same few points over and over.

As to the primary, it looks as though Romney is going to grind his way to victory, like a team up by 11 points in the begining of the 4th quarter. The upside is that he will have learned how to win a long contest, unlike McCain and Dole who walked to the nomination. His team will have mastered the art of the attack ad, which will be used against them in bulk--another thing McCain never bothered to learn.

Ron Paul will hang around, which is fine. Hard not to like something he says, it is just that his foreign policy is off the charts neither left nor right, just kind of crazy.

Rick will glide to perhaps headding up Health and Human Services. This would be good, he has good views and can shake up things there. Supporters of endless welfare will scream, but they complain about anything.

Newt probably would not take a job in the adminsitration. As Veep he brings little to the ticket as the South will go GOP no matter what. A rising star needs to be Veep, Newt represents the past, not the future, of the party. A shame as he is a thinker.

Quote: WongBo

Though I do not think Obama has been a particularly great president, I think he has been far better than the worst president ever, George W Bush
I think it is great that the republicans can't come to a consensus, that they think they need to run as far to the right

Why should any large party be able to come to an instant consensus? I don't understand why Democrats think it's a weakness that the right is taking their time to argue and debate over who should represent them. It's not per se. Debate on the big issues of conservatism helps all sides grind out their ideas and core fundamentals. And the American Republicans really do need a clear, broad policy, which allows them to offer something different to the Obama platform; as then the Americans might be able to show a clear broad direction to themselves. Is healthcare private or public? Is foreign policy interventionist or protectionist?

Can you "reform" Washington (I doubt it... Romney nor Obama are radical enough to reform it any direction).

An outright rejection of a fiscal and social conservative president would be interesting and set a clear stage for what American Politics could be, as would be a large acceptance of such a candidate.

I suspect though it's more a vague centrists approach, with divisive politics over small differences. That's the worst of both worlds.

Quote: bigfoot66

Why do you care if Dr. Paul quits? I am one of his supporters and have given him several hunderd bucks which is probably more than my budget allows for, but I would no more vote for Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich than I would vote for Obama, and honestly I have been a Republican my whole adult life but I am not convinces President Santorum would be any better than President Obama. I can't think of one of my Ron Paul supporting friends who feel differently. Even if he dropped out, I'm still wearing Ron Paul t-shirts and the bumper sticker stays on my car. Who do you think Paul's supporters turn to?

My comments apply to any candidate (Republican or Democrat) who campaigns after they have no mathematical possibility of winning. The ethical thing to do is to stand up and say I have run a good race, I've made my points to the country and the party, and I want to allow someone to clinch the nomination before the convention.

Quote: pacomartin

My comments apply to any candidate (Republican or Democrat) who campaigns after they have no mathematical possibility of winning. The ethical thing to do is to stand up and say I have run a good race, I've made my points to the country and the party, and I want to allow someone to clinch the nomination before the convention.

I disagree. Ron Paul has a message of Liberty that he wants to get across to as many people as possible. He may no longer have much of a chance of winning the nomination, and at some point he will probably fail to have even a mathematical chance...but that doesn't mean he should drop out. By accumulating delegates and showing up to the convention with them, he can make his message be heard to a certain extent.

Quote: AZDuffman

What is extreme about Santorum? Please cite some statements or positions.

Santorum is now promising to prosecute Hilton and Marriott for offering dirty pay-per-view movies to their hotel guests. I remember the good ol'd days when Republicans respected the Constitution enough to let the free market decide which movies could be viewed in hotels without government interference. If he promised to prosecute fast food chains for selling salty fatty foods with too much sugar, (like NYC mayor Bloomberg) Republicans would speak up, right?

I am very conservative, went to college, graduated with a degree in engineering. And I don't like to choose a party, because I think there are so many different issues that I agree/disagree within the parties about.

First off, covering contraceptive for woman under health insurance should occur if they can't afford it. If a woman can't afford birth control, than she can't afford a child, and as a taxpayer, I would rather foot the bill for the birth control than the child (because you know you will)... There is one thing to say "Hey, I don't think insurance should cover birth control", which is what AZDuffman is saying, and then there is what Santorum said, which sumarized, is that birth control is wrong because it's not natural... Eating anything with preservatives isn't natural...Using synthetic motor oils isn't natural..Just because something isn't natural, doesn't mean it is wrong.

Next we have gay marriage. I'll tell you out right, I am the biggest homophobe you'll ever meet. But not Gay people that act normal towards me. It's the extremely flamboyant "fags" who are overly opinionated, talk like a valley girl, etc. But if two gay people want to get married...fine by me.

As for discouraging students from attending college, I again will disagree with this. If you know "This is what I want to do the rest of my life, and I don't need a degree to do it"..then go right ahead and skip the college experience. If you don't want to attend college, then don't...maybe you will eventually, maybe you won't. But discouraging someone from going to college? That's like discouraging a healthy, married man/woman from going to the gym.

"You want to join a gym? That's a stupid idea. You're already married, no need to be sexually attractive...and you're not unhealthy...no no..You shouldn't join a gym"...

"You don't know what you want to do with your life? Well don't goto college. I mean, you surely won't find any answers their. You should probably try to just achieve somewhere around 50% of your expectations..You know, try to become manager of the grocery store or something..."

I'm a left winged liberal Canadian nut job. Gay marriage has been legal here for years. Most, if not all prescription plans, cover both contraceptives and erectile dysfunction medication. Tuition fees are tax deductible. So are piano lessons, sports programs, and pretty much anything that enriches the lives of our children. Canadians get up to 52 weeks paid (up to $485/week) parental leave for babies. And yeah, we pay higher taxes.

Santorum is conservative - we get it. But most Americans have accepted contraception as a way of life. Gay marraige is still very much a debate in America, and probably should be. And of course, of fu**ing course, we should be encouraging all Americans to attend college, if possible, just to compete with China and India. Just because you get smart in college doesn't mean you automatically brainwash you into a Blue State democrat. But there's a reason why urban centers tend to vote more liberal than the rest of America -- they're generally smarter!!! ;)

The Republicans are missing a down-to-earth candidate that appeals to the broad base -- liberatarian - strong proponent of less government. -- fiscal conversative - agrees not to raise taxes, ever, but to shrink government -- moral conversative -- believes that abortion is wrong, that pornography is backwards, and so on and so forth, but doens't want to turn back the clocks. If Romney could come down to earth and appear to be more common, he would have a good shot at Obama.

The Republicans did have a down-to-earth candidate. Huntsman. But he wasn't a "fire-breather" and wasn't speaking the correct language (tended to agree with scientific findings) and the base wouldn't give him a chance because of it.

Quote: brianparkes

The Republicans did have a down-to-earth candidate. Huntsman. But he wasn't a "fire-breather" and wasn't speaking the correct language (tended to agree with scientific findings) and the base wouldn't give him a chance because of it.

"Didn't agree with scientific findings?" By that you mean he believed there is global warming?

Newt's upcoming book was to include a chapter on global warming, written by my friend, a deeply Christian Republican who happens to be at the forefront in global waming research (and a professor at Texas Tech). In Iowa, in order to curry favor with candidates, Newt promised (and did) take it out of his book. Of course, she learned about it from Newt's press conference. Rush called her a "climate babe".

How can she dare be a Republican, a Christian, AND believe in global warming? Must be some kind of left-winged nut liberal conspiracy.

And that's the problem with US politics today. You can't be a republican and believe in global warming. You can't be a democrat and believe in reduced government. You can't be a republican and believe in health care for all americans. You can't be a democrat and be pro-life... and so on and so forth. Believe it or not, there is a middle ground.

Quote: boymimbo

You can't be a republican and believe in health care for all americans.

We have health care for all Americans and have for decades.

there are currently 50 million americans without health insurance.
yes there is health care if you show up at an emergency room.
thats not the same thing.
if you cant be honest, you cant be taken seriously.

Number of Uninsured Rises to 50.7 Million

Quote: WongBo

there are currently 50 million americans without health insurance.
yes there is health care if you show up at an emergency room.
thats not the same thing.
if you cant be honest, you cant be taken seriously.

Well, the dishonest one is the person who says a person without insurance is "without health care." At least in the 1990s the left would use the correct terminology. Now they act as though the people have no options at all.

Why do you assume a person must have health insurance or "show up at the emergency room?" Go to the "Minute Clinic" at Walgreens, you can get a basic diagnosis for about $50. This is a very fair price. Or go to a bigger clinic, they are around, that has more facilities. Might be $100-500, but still more affordable than the ER. Most doctors would be happy to see a cash customer, might even give you a better price if they are your regular doctor. Keep a credit card for medical use only, pay with it if you are short on green-money.

Lots of options exist. You just have to get the idea that "health care should be free" out of your head and accept that you must pay for what you consume. Obamacare supporters think they are going to get "free health care like they have in Canada!"

Well, as of about 2:15 EDT looks like it is over. Spares me deciding to vote for him or not in the PA Primary this month. While I always liked Rick, his "Obama is better than Romney" line was unforgivable. And Mitt is showing some spunk, telling the college student he isn't looking for the votes of people who want "free stuff." My guess there is Mitt got some influence from Christie, a guy who makes those comments stick as easy as making a cup of coffee.

I do hand it to a guy who went from 1% support to winning several states overnight. All on a shoestring of a budget. My prediction is he ends up as Mitt's Sec of HHS in 2013. To pick him for Veep would not be prudent. Picking a primary competitor has a 6-10 record in modern times.

In case anyone is wondering, the current Intrade market has Obama at a 60.8% chance to win the general election, which would equate to a fair money line of -155.

The field is wide open for Romny's VP. The current front runner is Marco Rubio, but even he has only a 24.5% chance. I rather like Paul Ryan at 7%, which would pay over 13 to 1, if I had an account there.

It will be an interesting election. Obama's approval rating is still in the mid 40s, and no president in April has won reelection when their approval rating was below 50%. On the other hand, Gallup and the major pollsters still have Obama leading Romney, and Realpolitics has Obama winning the general election over Romney, though many states in are a tossup.

Now it's time for the Republican party to gather behind Romney and unite.

Quote: boymimbo

It will be an interesting election. Obama's approval rating is still in the mid 40s, and no president in April has won reelection when their approval rating was below 50%. On the other hand, Gallup and the major pollsters still have Obama leading Romney, and Realpolitics has Obama winning the general election over Romney, though many states in are a tossup.

Now it's time for the Republican party to gather behind Romney and unite.

The Rasmussen site has some interesting graphs. Obama has spiked to 50-51% twice in the past year or so but never maintained it for more than a day or two. He has drifted below 45% and stayed there for longer periods, but whenever he goes to 40% he bounces back to that same band. The "strong" index is a grim picture for him. Strong dissaprove has been far more than strong approve by at least 10% since late spring of 2009. It often shoots to over 20% and his "strong dissaprove" has several times been more than his "simple approve."

IOW, the energy is against him and has been for some time. He has a core base of 40%, but any candidate running for either party has that. My casual observance is that the more he talks the worse the numbers get for him, and when he is "quiet" they drift back up. To me this indicates there is support for "the POTUS" and many people still like him personally, but when he says his policy they are reminded they do not like that. He is kind of like a food you don't like but want to like so you try a bite every so often, then you remember why you don't like it.

GOP will now get behind Mitt. I just told a buddy, "a primary is a contest, not a corrination." If anything it shows Mitt he has to both fight and take the fight to the other guy. I told people all along no way there will be a "brokered convention." That was media filling the news hole. Now the real campaign begins. Wait 2-3 weeks and you will start to see believable head-to-head polls in the general.

Quote: AZDuffman

Well, as of about 2:15 EDT looks like it is over. Spares me deciding to vote for him or not in the PA Primary this month. While I always liked Rick, his "Obama is better than Romney" line was unforgivable. And Mitt is showing some spunk, telling the college student he isn't looking for the votes of people who want "free stuff." My guess there is Mitt got some influence from Christie, a guy who makes those comments stick as easy as making a cup of coffee.

I do hand it to a guy who went from 1% support to winning several states overnight. All on a shoestring of a budget. My prediction is he ends up as Mitt's Sec of HHS in 2013. To pick him for Veep would not be prudent. Picking a primary competitor has a 6-10 record in modern times.

why is Rick quitting b4 the primary of the state he was an elected official for?
didnt he gave a good shot at winning PA?

Quote: 100xOdds

why is Rick quitting b4 the primary of the state he was an elected official for?
didnt he gave a good shot at winning PA?

Probably not as good as was thought. He also has a really sick kid and my guess is he would rather spend the time with family than on an over campaign.

Quote: AZDuffman

Probably not as good as was thought. He also has a really sick kid and my guess is he would rather spend the time with family than on an over campaign.

Romney's been blitzing PA, and Santorum lost PA after he was elected there.

Quote: thecesspit

Romney's been blitzing PA, and Santorum lost PA after he was elected there.

he didn't just lose. he lost by the largest margin in a senate race years in 26 years.

In 2006, Rick Santorum, less than two months before suffering one of the worst losses in Senate history,
was named one of three “most corrupt” Senators by CREW, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Santorum Named One Of Three “Most Corrupt” Senators In 2006

Quote: WongBo

he didn't just lose. he lost by the largest margin in a senate race years in 26 years.

Well you should qualify that by saying he lost by the largest margin for an incumbent in a senate race in 26 years.

He ranks as the 25th worst loss for an incumbent in Senate history.

But for his supporters that doesn't matter. He is considered a man of principal. But even people who like him realize that he is probably un-electable in a general election.

Santorum resigned today. Gingrich and Ron Paul vowed to stay in the race, probably with Romney's tacit approval so they can stay in the headlines.