“The Santorum folks on here don’t want to hear this, but this is exactly what did happen”
__________________________________________________
They didn’t want to hear it then, and they won’t want to hear it now. I’m bracing for the backlash in 5-4-3-2-1 lol
Lot of folks around here think its some kind of badge of honor to pick the worst candidate who happens to have the right views - that somehow, it’s a sell out if you actually pick a good candidat with the right views - there is some kind of sick attraction to the most obnoxious, petulant, off putting unelectable social conservatives that I don’t understand.
All of the candidates in the field, Paul excluded, would have ended up with more or less the same impact on social issues if elected. Some seem to think its important that we go down in flames with the Akins, Mourdocks, Santorums, to prove how pious we are too. I don’t get it.
I am less concerned with Santorum supporters than Rove’s cynical abuse of the social conservative voting base over the past decade. He propped up Bush in 2004 and several Senate races with all of the marriage amendments and social issue votes to drive turnout. Yes, it worked politically, but it shows that to these political elites, we are all just pawns to get their outcome.
In this primary race, it was relatively clear Romney was a poor option, but also pretty clear there was not a better one out there. I supported Newt, but to think he would have done any better with the fundamentals in this is wishful thinking. He had a major gender gap even among GOP primary voters. It would have been tough with the rest of the voters. As brilliant as Gingrich is, he would have been a tough sell in the general. There just wasn’t a better option in the field. Perry was our only hope. Amazingly, if Huntsman wasn’t such a shlep and ran as a conservative, he probably could have run and won the whole thing. he had a great fiscal record. He’s a major league loser, though.