The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

President Santorum

By on 2.8.12 @ 11:05AM

As I wrote 18 months ago, back in 2010:

It is folly, if not sheer madness, to think that a former U.S. senator who lost his last re-election campaign in a home-state landslide could possibly turn around and be elected president.

Or at least that’s what conventional wisdom would say. It’s a good thing for Rick Santorum that conventional wisdom, especially in politics, is usually preternaturally stupid. It’s also a good thing for Rick Santorum that he has a history of making absolute fools of the Washington chattering classes. Santorum, the courageously conservative former two-term U.S. House member and two-term senator from Pennsylvania, is openly considering a run for the White House. Conservative leaders and voters are preternaturally stupid if they don’t at least give him a serious hearing…

I wake up this morning to hear pundits and DC activists still discounting Santorum’s chances. Again, they are wrong. The shape of the nomination fight to come is now clear: With Ron Paul continuing to take his minority share of the votes, other conservatives will rally around Santorum rather than Gingrich. Eventually, a weak Romney, without a personal “connection” to voters and without any strongly philosophically committed base, will succumb. Santorum will be the nominee. Obama will overplay his hand attacking Santorum’s allegedly awful remarks about homosexuals. He’ll try to slime Santorum in other ways, too. But Santorum isn’t really vulnerable to sliming the way other candidates are. He’ll win swing states in the heartland and will make a good enough VP choice to shore up weaknesses elsewhere. I haven’t done the state-by-state math, but he’ll end up with about 300 electoral votes to Obama’s 238 or so. Santorum will be the next president. And he’ll govern very, very well.

View all comments (69) |

Dai Alanye | 2.8.12 @ 11:24AM

In states Romney beat McCain by huge margins, Santorum has returned the favor. It's truly amazing. The wailing and gnashing of teeth by Romneyites will now begin.

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 9:32PM

If the taxpayer-voters don't pick the right Republican as their nominee and Obama wins, weeping & gnashing of teeth will be nothing compared to the sucking sou nd of this country going down the economic toilet to destruction!!!!

Gadfly| 2.8.12 @ 11:37AM

It's a nice fantasy, but I think this has about as much chance of happening as the Newt Gingrich, President of the Moon sketch that was on SNL over the weekend.

Santorum is a less charismatic version of Mike Huckabee - all social conservatism, little fiscal conservatism. As Kaminisky pointed out earlier, one of his favorit phrases seems to be "I'm all for the Tenth Amendment, but ..."

Santorum's a better choice than Gingrich, and he's certainly a more convincing standard bearer for conservative principles (at least socially conservative principles). I don't think he's really the person you want in the ring for you as the champion of those values.

Occam's Tool| 2.8.12 @ 11:40AM

From your mouth to G-d's ears, Quin....

Ward Bond| 2.8.12 @ 11:46AM

All Santorum needs is a sense of electability in the minds of the base to be the Republican nominee despite the advantages of Romney's money and organization.

Ward Bond| 2.8.12 @ 11:46AM

All Santorum needs is a sense of electability in the minds of the base to be the Republican nominee despite the advantages of Romney's money and organization.

Anommynous| 2.8.12 @ 11:55AM

I like it.

Rob| 2.8.12 @ 1:02PM

I wonder who might be a good VP choice for Santorum. Perhaps someone with a stronger record of fiscal conservatism? Also, Santorum's family should release documentation that his parents became U.S. citizens before he was born. This is long overdue.

Trinacria| 2.8.12 @ 1:08PM

How about Arlen Spector?

Quin| 2.8.12 @ 3:44PM

Mitch Daniels, Bob McDonnell, Marco Rubio, Luis Fortuno, perhaps Bobby Jindal, maybe Rob Portman, maybe Richard Burr of North Carolina (doubtful), maybe Tom Coburn, certainly Paul Ryan.... all could, under certain circumstances, be good Veep choices.

Anommynous| 2.8.12 @ 4:39PM

I think Santorum needs a governor (executive experience) to balance out the ticket. How about Jeb Bush as veep? I've only ever seen him mentioned as a POTUS candidate, but never for veep. I wonder why.

Susana Martinez is also wonderful.

mjs_pa| 2.8.12 @ 7:37PM

Please no more Bush's!

Maxwell| 2.9.12 @ 8:01AM

I was waiting for someone to mention Martinez as not to much about her is seen or heard here in the RINO state of Jersey.

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 9:35PM

And if the Republican chosen is the incorrect choice, Nancy Pilosi will once again be Speaker and Van Jones will be back in business in DC!!!!!

Ted| 2.9.12 @ 12:16PM

Not Paul Ryan. We need his fiscal knowledge and sanity right where it is in the House. He is far too valuable there to waste on a VP slot. As well, leave Bobby Jindal in Louisiana. He is gaining more valuable executive experience there to round out his admittedly strong credentials. He will be President one day, esepcially as he is only 41.... Bob McDonnell kind of let me down by endorsing Romney. He has been a solid governor in Virginia.

Anommynous| 2.9.12 @ 12:52PM

Well, of course, Newt and Rick aren't on the ballot in Virginia, so if the choice in that state comes down to Mitt or Ron Paul, whom do you endorse?

Trinacria| 2.8.12 @ 1:03PM

Yeah, Quin - you're an insighful genius, and winning 3 meaningless contests in which ZERO delegates were awarded is clearly a major step on the path to Santorum's inevitable election.

What's on the agenda for tomorrow's blog - a follow-up self-congratulatory tome citing Santorum's victory in the Elm Street Elementary School straw poll as further evidence of your extraordinary prescience?

Paul Zummo | 2.8.12 @ 2:32PM

Meaningless contests which Romney nevertheless still contested and sunk money into.

Keep spinning people.

Trinacria| 2.8.12 @ 2:58PM

I carry no brief for Romney; but the fact is that winning a caucus/primary in which no delegates are awarded is about as impressive as being named the best downhill skier in Mexico.

The point? Let's not start planning the party just yet...

Mike 3/505| 2.8.12 @ 4:36PM

But not nearly as cool as being named to the Jamaican Olympic Bobsled team.

Trinacria| 2.8.12 @ 6:14PM

True dat!

MikeG| 2.8.12 @ 9:47PM

These were caucus where the most active social conservatives participated which is the base for Santorum, and probably why Romney skipped them. But I agree that Santorum is ahead of Newt. Maybe Newt should drop out and we have the clear choice between Santorum and Romney.

Dai Alanye | 2.8.12 @ 1:42PM

Tim Pawlenty, Jon Huntsman, Nikki Haley, GHW Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, Dan Quayle -- the list goes on and on. John Sununu, Donald Trump, Pete Wilson, guys with weird names on this very blog.

They all support Romney, yet typical conservative voters can't stand him. This fact alone should tell us something.

Bo Darville| 2.8.12 @ 4:08PM

Right. The typical Christine O'Donnell supporting conservatives don't typically get behind candidates that win anything.

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 9:38PM

Well the truly detestable ones are named Nancy, Harry, Dick, Barney, Chris, Charles, David, Debbie, etc!!!!!!!!

U Dont Want to No Me| 2.8.12 @ 1:43PM

Republican back biting will destroy their election chances yet.

TB| 2.8.12 @ 1:50PM

Is it possible?! What utter joy it would bring me to see Santorum take the oath after the disgusting radical left efforts to smear and destroy him. It still sounds like a fantasy, but a sweet one.

TB| 2.8.12 @ 1:51PM

I do think, by the way, that the argument Santorum is making against Obama is broader and better than the argument Romney is making against Obama.

Bill| 2.8.12 @ 2:19PM

Santorum kicked ass.
Romney is derailed, and will never recover.
Gingrich is fading away.
Ron Paul is DONE. He needs to end his campaign.
Obama is nervous! If Santorum gets the GOP nod, he'll carry PA, too bad for Obama.

djriz1| 2.8.12 @ 2:50PM

The problem with Santorum winning Penn is how he did in his last election there. He didn't get 40% of the vote.

Bill| 2.8.12 @ 3:06PM

GOP carried PA in the 2010 mid-term, including governor, all statewide offices, state legislator, one senate seat, and the congressional delegation with a margin of 12 to 7. Santorum has an edge over Obama in PA because he is the home-boy.

Clint| 2.8.12 @ 8:07PM

We're The Pennsylvania Gun & Bible Clutchin' Conservatives, Who Helped Throw Little Ricky's Ass Out Of The Senate, After He Stepped In The Last Weeks And Propped Up The RINO-CINO Poster Boy,Arlen Specter Against Our Republican Primary Guy, Pat Toomey.

Now, Little Ricky And Specter Have Been Chased Away And Our Tea Party Senator, Pat Toomey Is In.

If Little Ricky Comes Back To Pennsylvania,We'll Throw His Big Government Israel Firster Ass Out Again,

Make Our Day Little Ricky.

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 9:40PM

Speaking of 'ass', are your also going to stuff Ronnie's back into his TOO SHORT SHORTS the next time it falls out in L.J.??????

MikeG| 2.8.12 @ 9:50PM

Clint
You and your pals were brilliant in defeating a conservative, Santorum, and replacing him with a 100% liberal like Casey. Do you undersand what you said? You are glad you beat Santorum and replaced him with Casey. Does that register yet ?

mcr| 2.9.12 @ 6:39AM

Oh, so you would rather PA go for Obama just so you can "stick it" to Little Ricky?? That's right, punish the rest of the country cuz you don't like Little Ricky.

TB| 2.8.12 @ 3:14PM

2006 was a bad year for the GOP all around. If Mittens had run for reelection that year he'd have done no better.

Not including the 2012 race, Santorum is 2-1 in Pennsylvania statewide races, and 4-1 overall. Romney is 1-2 in statewide races, and 1-3 overall (counting the 2008 race as a solitary contest). If Romney had run for reelection, he'd be 1-3 statewide and 1-4 overall.

How does this comparison favor Romney again?

Bo Darville| 2.8.12 @ 4:09PM

So, you're saying neither of them have a chance?

TB| 2.8.12 @ 4:36PM

If 2012 = 2006 , then of course neither of them has a chance. I don't think that's true though.

Bill| 2.8.12 @ 5:31PM

If Santorum runs, Obama is doomed.

Clint| 2.8.12 @ 8:15PM

You Said That About Ricky Perry.

Carry On, Sport.

Bill| 2.8.12 @ 9:32PM

Because Obama is vulnerable, I call it "endangered" species list.

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 9:41PM

Or more probably.....RE-ELECTED!!!!

Sam| 2.8.12 @ 11:42PM

Wonder where Obama will be building that library? ;)

'Course, if that fails, there's always Tupperware. LOL.

Silver Bullet| 2.8.12 @ 2:42PM

QUIN: If I ever were to run for office, I'd want you on my side!!

Sparky| 2.8.12 @ 2:55PM

That's music to my ears, Mr. Hillyer.

Simon Templar| 2.8.12 @ 3:43PM

Quin, as usual, you are pandering, back pedaling, and misleading.

This race is far from over and much danger and stupidity lies ahead. Will you be there for Santorum now that you have supposedly come clean about who you supposedly actual support when he is trashed in the next few weeks. Or will you get all squishy and nervous and throw him overboard as well?

Its a bit childish and sophmoric to start predicting and calling him president when he has not even won the nomination. Is this more about you being right than the actual realities ahead of us?

Quin| 2.8.12 @ 3:47PM

I've never abandoned Santorum, not for 18 months, although as an alternate scenario I thought an effort to recruit Ryan or Jindal was worth looking into. I won't abandon him now.

Simon Templar| 2.8.12 @ 3:56PM

Good, then you will have to fight like hell because there is a long road ahead and it is not going to be easy. The Left is sharpening the knives.

FeFe| 2.8.12 @ 3:46PM

But will all of this earmark hysteria sink Jim DeMint's (R-SC) Senate Conservatives Fund, let alone his chances as VP?

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 4:17PM

Quin, I'll repeat my comments on Ross' blog commentary here, in that I think that possibly this healthcare mandate supposedly attacking religious institutions like the Catholic Church concerning morality issues is a ruse, a diversion, a straw horse if you will. The only true critical issue facing this country currently is the economy and governmental defecits/debt, not these personal moral and religious issues. This country IMHO will not survive four more years of this socialistic destruction of our economy by this current administration. Maybe I'm overblowing the situation, but I don't think that I am! When the discussion by Republican candidates switches from the economy to the personal moral issues involved in healthcare mandates, Obama/Democrats are and will be SMILING ALL THE WAY TO THE POLITICAL BANK from the success of their Rules for Radicals maneuver which could possibly cause Obama's re-election. If you don't think that I've entirely lost it [based on your extensive political knowledge] please respond via a future editorial and do whatever may be in your political power to convince the Republican powers that be to get back on tract of discussing our economy primarily, before it becomes possibly too late!!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 4:17PM

Quin, I'll repeat my comments on Ross' blog commentary here, in that I think that possibly this healthcare mandate supposedly attacking religious institutions like the Catholic Church concerning morality issues is a ruse, a diversion, a straw horse if you will. The only true critical issue facing this country currently is the economy and governmental defecits/debt, not these personal moral and religious issues. This country IMHO will not survive four more years of this socialistic destruction of our economy by this current administration. Maybe I'm overblowing the situation, but I don't think that I am! When the discussion by Republican candidates switches from the economy to the personal moral issues involved in healthcare mandates, Obama/Democrats are and will be SMILING ALL THE WAY TO THE POLITICAL BANK from the success of their Rules for Radicals maneuver which could possibly cause Obama's re-election. If you don't think that I've entirely lost it [based on your extensive political knowledge] please respond via a future editorial and do whatever may be in your political power to convince the Republican powers that be to get back on tract of discussing our economy primarily, before it becomes possibly too late!!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 4:49PM

PSI: The following is exactly what I was referring to above, with Santorum [when asked about the economy] responds concerning the deplorable education in this country [which has no direct connection to economic issues, other than with the elimination of federal education from the budget would reduce governmental expenses, but same will never occur without a huge political fight so it's a moot point IMHO]:
'....Asked how he intends to create new jobs and educate Americans to fill them by reducing the size of government, Santorum basically described the current public-education system as complete failure.“The more government we put in, the less results we’re getting back,” he said, adding that the nation’s primary and secondary education systems have become part of the tangled federal bureaucracy.“We don’t have public schools, we have government-run schools . . . It’s a failure,” he declared. “We need to get the money and the resources and the power back in the hands of teachers and parents.”Santorum went on to blame many of the problems facing the nation’s children on what he described as “broken families” torn apart by financial stress or parents who aren’t at home nurturing and caring for their kids. “We need the government to be on the side of families instead of trying to pull children out of the home and educate them in some sort of separate setting,” he said....'

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 4:58PM

PSII: And the following is an example of Santorum's leading this Republican nomination process possibly into a big box canyon or a dead-end street [and being destroyed by the Democrats in November with Obama SMILING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK]. Remember Clinton's IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID and my IT'S THE DEMOCRATS, STUPIDS please!:

'....In recent days, Santorum had doubled down on the Obama administration's recent requirement that church-affiliated employers cover birth control for their workers regardless of the institutions' religious beliefs.
His advisers claimed that this tact lets him promote his own Catholic faith, cast people of faith as victims and cast Obama as a big-government, power-hungry and anti-Christian leader — all in one paragraph of a speech.
As he began his Tuesday, he told a gathering in the conservative stronghold of Colorado Springs — home base for the Christian group Focus on the Family — that Obama was trampling on their faith."Ladies and gentlemen, it's not just your economic rights," said Santorum, vowing to make the issue a centerpiece of his White House bid. "It's your freedom of religion. It's your freedom of speech."....'

Dai Alanye | 2.8.12 @ 7:59PM

If OF ever learns what paragraphs are and what they are intended to do, I might read his posts. Until then, life is too short.

Oldefarte| 2.8.12 @ 9:27PM

It's called condensation DA......LIVE AND LEARN [from reading the posts of relevant news stories and editorials]; and rmember HE WHO HESITATES IS LOST!!!!!

Oldefarte| 2.9.12 @ 12:19AM

PS-DA: Make sure you read all of the other paragraphed posts here, especially the many that are mentally akin to comic book reasonings [hey, but what the hay, they all know what paragraphs are FER, right?]!!!!!

mjs_pa| 2.8.12 @ 7:39PM

Quin,

Will you be attending Santorum's Inauguration next January?

C Bowen | 2.8.12 @ 8:09PM

Santorum argued against the sitting President George W., that Iraq really did have WMDs.

He should focus on this in his campaign. LOL

realdealtpa| 2.8.12 @ 9:09PM

Rick Santorum doesn't need to be another Reagan, or anybody else. He just needs to be Rick Santorum: conservative.

PCP Smoker| 2.8.12 @ 9:20PM

MR I'll suck Romney's dick, along with the hag Jenn Rubin, is now trying to take cover. Fuck off you creep. Go back to shilling for Romney. And take your cunt with you.

mandas| 2.8.12 @ 10:47PM

Funniest article I have read in a long time!!! President Santorum - hilarious!!
What's your next tip - Patriots to win the Superbowl?

Sam| 2.8.12 @ 11:39PM

That article totally rocks!! You go, Quin! :)

ayrnieu| 2.9.12 @ 1:14AM

Oh, great, another 'compassionate conservative' to poison the brand. Not that I wouldn't prefer dealing with the consequences of that in 2020, to the looming alternative.

schmakt | 2.9.12 @ 12:29PM

This was a nice piece of fiction, thanks! Rick Santorum becoming President would be like getting anally raped by Jesus.

MarkJ| 2.9.12 @ 4:48PM

You're just saying that because a guy named "Jesus" has already done that to you.

janet| 2.9.12 @ 1:15PM

Your words to God's ear.

Ron Monks| 2.9.12 @ 5:43PM

How can Rick explain voting against reducing the deficit and debt...voting with Boxer, Mosely=Braun, Reid, Kerrey, Kennedy and against the conservatives?
http://www.senate.gov/legislat.....vote=00064

Jurgis Rudkus | 2.10.12 @ 1:05AM

Honestly, the idea of a Santorum presidency is repugnant to me, a step toward theocratic fascism. I have no idea why anyone in their right mind would ever vote for him.

Nevertheless, a Santorum presidency would solve one of the more insidious aspects I see of the Obama presidency, which was highlighted in an article by Glenn Greenwald the other day, where he mentions "one of the most consequential aspects of the Obama legacy is that he has transformed what was once known as “right-wing shredding of the Constitution” into bipartisan consensus, and this is exactly what I mean. When one of the two major parties supports a certain policy and the other party pretends to oppose it — as happened with these radical War on Terror policies during the Bush years — then public opinion is divisive on the question, sharply split. But once the policy becomes the hallmark of both political parties, then public opinion becomes robust in support of it. That’s because people assume that if both political parties support a certain policy that it must be wise, and because policies that enjoy the status of bipartisan consensus are removed from the realm of mainstream challenge. That’s what Barack Obama has done to these Bush/Cheney policies: he has, as Jack Goldsmith predicted he would back in 2009, shielded and entrenched them as standard U.S. policy for at least a generation, and (by leading his supporters to embrace these policies as their own) has done so with far more success than any GOP President ever could have dreamed of achieving." (http://bit.ly/AaiMMr)

So even though I can't see a Santorum presidency as anything less than a tragedy, at least he would likely make things more black and white again. And his presidency might even galvanize more people to take action against the capitalist system, which is music to my Marxist ears. :)

More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/02/08/president-santorum

ADVERTISEMENT

The Spectacle Blog

Issa Recovers

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

The Religion of Peace Strikes London Again

Aaron Goldstein | 5.22.13

Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack

Quin Hillyer | 5.22.13

House Judiciary: Constitutional Rights Vital in Wartime

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

U.S. Admits 4 Americans Killed by Drones

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

Colorado Governor Gives “Reprieve” to Murderer

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Steven Crowder: Jesus vs. Muhammad

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Kaminsky’s Corollary to I, Pencil

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Latest Headlines

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

George Neumayr|150 comments

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple|84 comments

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara|64 comments

Restrain the Abusive Administative State

Doug Bandow|23 comments

Disabling American Sovereignty

Iain Murray|13 comments

The Other Gosnells

Jordan Gonzalez|13 comments

Can He Unite Virginia’s GOP?

Carten Cordell|31 comments

Undoing the Brainwashing

Thomas Sowell|26 comments

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.