Is Rick Santorum's campaign over?

  • maxferguson

    Posts: 321

    Feb 21, 2012 3:12 AM GMT
    There is a PILE of shit happening in the world today that any American politician should be crapping themselves over, whether for practicality or popularity.

    1.) Iran - Personally, I don't think it matters whether Iran has nuclear weapons. But that's another story. If you're an American politician, you ought to be loud and clear that you think Iran has nuclear weapons and will not hesitate to use them. This seems to be a non-issue compared to other more trivial things in Republican debates (and on Obama's radar).

    2.) Greece - Reagan and Gorbachev had 4 meetings. That's "all it took" to end the cold war (well, lots) but in comparison, there have been over 16 Greece bailout summits, and they still can't get their act together. You can bet your ass Christine LaGarde (sp?) will come knocking on the Whitehouse's door selling $200B worth of Girl Guide cookies. No one has spoken to how they intend to respond to that.

    3.) Debt - No one has event touched deficit spending or priced their promises yet. And Santorum is looking forward to Super Tuesday.... why?

    4.) Energy Security - Re-routing the Keystone was an easy and effective fix. I agree, it should not go over environmentally sensitive areas. But our oil sands are expanding, the Chinese are snapping up properties like nothing else, and the EU is considering reclassifying the environmental status of bitumen from Alberta, threatening exports to some degree. Much of Europe is no longer receiving oil from Iran. Iranian/US military action seems like a realistic possibility -- how much more oil can the US bring in from Saudi Arabia if the straight of Hormuz closes? What plan does any politician have to gravitate towards the security, proximity and stability of Canadian oil?

    5.) Employment -- when will the gov't stop paying the wrong people? Did you know that 1/4 American children depended on food stamps in 2011?


    MANY MORE....
    My point is that all of this affects the average American a hell of a lot more than anything else. Meanwhile, Santorum, Gingrich and even Romney (who seems to be the one who wants to keep his hands clean) are peddling miniscule issues like Obama's faith, who is more conservative, etc... The latest headline, and the one that prompted me to write this:

    "Santorum calls Obama health program bad for marriage"

    (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/21/us-usa-campaign-santorum-health-idUSTRE81K02A20120221 )

    I understand his concern, but I don't think I've heard any of the Republican candidates (with the exception of Paul) speak about the same issue more than once. Can you imagine how this would play out in the oval office? None of these candidates (again, excepting Paul, and not even that much) is "Presidential" enough to recognize what could be landing on their potential desk on the proverbial "Monday morning."

    My big questions: When will American voters realize that none of the shit they've head about affects them as much as the above (and others... that list is not exhaustive)? When will the candidates realize it?

    Thoughts?

  • maxferguson

    Posts: 321

    Feb 21, 2012 3:34 AM GMT
    I should clarify my subject title: I don't mean over as in formally over. I mean over as in, has he cultivated a support base out of non-pressing issues? What happens when those issues start getting talked about? His support base, for lack of better terms, becomes irrelevant preventing him from winning anything meaningful. He can watch his poll numbers go up and down on what he talks about that week, but what happens to his poll numbers when he talks about things that are more important in the short run (i.e., Iran, debt, etc...). These poll numbers only reflect what happened last week, and that's why they change so much.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2012 3:36 AM GMT
    I'm afraid that the American Public will not wake up until they become very uncomfortable in large numbers, then we'll end up with the public buying into one of these wedge issues as the answer to their problems because they are so damned easily distracted. The uninformed public are like sheep.

    When I've traveled to Europe I always made it a point to talk to the locals every chance I could and I was always amazed at how well informed they were about world and US Issues. Then I come home and the damn locals don't have even a clue in comparison. Its scary !!!
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3271

    Feb 21, 2012 4:27 AM GMT
    maxferguson saidThere is a PILE of shit happening in the world today that any American politician should be crapping themselves over, whether for practicality or popularity.

    1.) Iran .......
    My big questions: When will American voters realize that none of the shit they've head about affects them as much as the above (and others... that list is not exhaustive)? When will the candidates realize it?

    Thoughts?



    I agree with you, it is a reality though that certain issues get you airtime. Unfortunately they are the hot button issues.

    Ron Paul has been pretty consistent on his economic view, even through the debates.

    As for the Republican landscape during the primaries they are not really worried about convincing the base to vote R , instead of D. ( thats a given) they are trying to steer the vote. So by design the issues seem trivial and ripe for demagoguery
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 21, 2012 4:42 AM GMT
    For his base, social issues matter a great deal. These are the same people who are likely to believe that President Obama is a far-left Muslim who created social upheaval with his radical policies. So anyone who stands in contrast to this perception of our President is going to win them over. Santorum fits that bill, not Romney. As long as Santorum keeps giving them that reassurance, he'll have nothing to worry about.

    When Santorum is pressed on the issues you listed, he is likely to give the answers his supporters want to hear. All that matters to them is that he is not Romney.
  • maxferguson

    Posts: 321

    Feb 21, 2012 4:52 AM GMT
    [quote][cite]realifedad said[/cite] I'm afraid that the American Public will not wake up until they become very uncomfortable in large numbers"

    This is right on the money. The issues I mentioned affect everybody unilaterally. They don't care about what niche voter group you belong in. Everybody needs money, Iran (from the context of gathering political capital) doesn't discriminate into voter groups, the EU doesn't, nobody but the niche voter groups themselves divides themselves into those groups. Theoretically, if you are an American citizen, there are very, very few actions the government could take that would affect a unique voter group exclusively. The gov't cannot make legislation for a specific religion, race, etc... it can make legislation that targets a certain economic class, but those groups aren't fixed or choice -- you can change groups. (cough* Donald Trump, Lehman employees, lottery winners, etc...).


    Many of those problems are literally external threats to the U.S. and would affect everyone roughly the same (compared to something like Prop icon_cool.gif. Although it's not logically true that there is a single optimal solution for all U.S. citizens as a homogenous group, since everyone has unique interests that are affected differently, but it is true that the government can only do so much. Looking at Iran for instance, the U.S. can really only do one thing at a time. If it does two things at a time then those two things become that one thing. Since everyone's individual interests are different from one another (even if only slightly), the outcomes of a single stroke decision on a key issue like Iran has different outcomes for every U.S. citizen (even if only slightly). However, when citizens band together in those small niche groups, their interests with respect to a certain issue are truly homogenous and command the attention of politicians. That way, the whole group's interests are more readily addressed and it was worth them banding together, since the outcomes were the same for everyone in the group. Does anyone know if that's a sort of social/statistical bias?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2012 11:54 PM GMT
    maxferguson saidI should clarify my subject title: I don't mean over as in formally over. I mean over as in, has he cultivated a support base out of non-pressing issues? What happens when those issues start getting talked about? His support base, for lack of better terms, becomes irrelevant preventing him from winning anything meaningful. He can watch his poll numbers go up and down on what he talks about that week, but what happens to his poll numbers when he talks about things that are more important in the short run (i.e., Iran, debt, etc...). These poll numbers only reflect what happened last week, and that's why they change so much.


    Yes, he has created a support base of non-pressing issues. Good. I hope his campaign makes it all the way to the convention...along with Romney, Gingrich, and Ron Paul. I hope they all make it to the convention. No clear winner all the way through. Division. Fratricide. Cannibalism.

    What a Grand Old Party that would be!

    dnnrprty.jpg

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2012 12:25 AM GMT
    GAMRican saidYes, [Santorum] has created a support base of non-pressing issues. Good. I hope his campaign makes it all the way to the convention...along with Romney, Gingrich, and Ron Paul. I hope they all make it to the convention. No clear winner all the way through. Division. Fratricide. Cannibalism.

    What a Grand Old Party that would be!

    dnnrprty.jpg

    Santorum as the Republican Presidential candidate would be Heaven-sent. He'd be ripped to shreds, and Obama would waltz into his second term. So let's cheer on the fundamentalists, Teabaggers and right-wingers here, who are championing him. And with Santorum at the head of the ticket, Republican losses in the House & Senate would be guaranteed. YAY!!! icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2012 12:50 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    GAMRican saidYes, [Santorum] has created a support base of non-pressing issues. Good. I hope his campaign makes it all the way to the convention...along with Romney, Gingrich, and Ron Paul. I hope they all make it to the convention. No clear winner all the way through. Division. Fratricide. Cannibalism.

    What a Grand Old Party that would be!

    dnnrprty.jpg

    Santorum as the Republican Presidential candidate would be Heaven-sent. He'd be ripped to shreds, and Obama would waltz into his second term. So let's cheer on the fundamentalists, Teabaggers and right-wingers here, who are championing him. And with Santorum at the head of the ticket, Republican losses in the House & Senate would be guaranteed. YAY!!! icon_biggrin.gif


    Those teabaggers are coming after you

  • maxferguson

    Posts: 321

    Feb 22, 2012 2:44 AM GMT
    creature saidFor his base, social issues matter a great deal. These are the same people who are likely to believe that President Obama is a far-left Muslim who created social upheaval with his radical policies. So anyone who stands in contrast to this perception of our President is going to win them over. Santorum fits that bill, not Romney. As long as Santorum keeps giving them that reassurance, he'll have nothing to worry about.

    When Santorum is pressed on the issues you listed, he is likely to give the answers his supporters want to hear. All that matters to them is that he is not Romney.




    I agree, they are important to his base, but his goal is to win the Republican nomination and eventually the presidency. A base that stands on a foundation of non-pressing issues will not win him either. They will make him feel good, and boost his numbers in certain states, but they won't win him enough. To win enough, he would have to appeal to a larger number of these groups, and to do that successfully, he will have diversified his image just enough that they will cling to the next most agreeable candidate