Posted on 05/22/2015 3:56:32 PM PDT by conservative98
Rick Santorum is not happy about the rules for the first 2016 Republican primary debate, hosted by Fox News, which will limit the number of candidates onstage based on their standing in the polls.
(snip)
Santorum is expected to announce his plans for 2016 on May 27 during a speech in his hometown of Butler, Pennsylvania.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Yeah, I get that, but at the same time, you have to draw a line somewhere. If there are dozens of jokers onstage, nobody could get more than a few minutes of time, and that wouldn’t do the voters any good either.
Ten people seems like a sensible number to me. Though Santorum does have a point that national polls probably aren’t the best way to judge viability.
I have no grudge. My position is nothing personal.
I simply see that certain candidates, who cannot win, every election run long enough to take enough support away from the real conservatives, who could win, and when the conservative candidates are no longer in position to win, these same loser candidates stop running.
You can make of that as you will.
Not much. I was thinking of someone more like a Bobby Jindal.
Santorum thinks having a hissy fit will change Fox’ mind?
That’s why it takes money to get the machine rolling. If he went into this expecting some inexpensive leverage from a debate process, then he wasn’t planning well. Cruz went in early because he understood the benefit of doing so. To win, you have to be able to get votes. If you can’t get votes unless Fox gives you free advertising, you’re in the wrong line of work. No sympathy from me. I’ve seen, and worked with, good people who worked hard at getting on the ballot. The only thing I’d worry about with Cruz is what polling data do they use and how do they use it in setting the ranking of each candidate. Room for manipulation there. But in principle, how else can it be. Here in Illinois candidates have to get x number of valid ballot petition signatures, just to get on the ballot. There has to be some way of finding the people who are generating real interest. So while the system could be improved, the principle is valid. JMHO.
Peace,
SR
Too bad, Rick.
I like the guy. I like his position on many issues.
He also has no chance.
Silencing the opposition is a conservative principle? Since when?
I think giving everyone a fair chance will help bring the most conservative to the front of the pack. As long as powerful people stop some from being heard the people who actually vote will resent part of the decision being made for them. A republic demands that people respect the process.
If conservatives win by cheating and cutting out others then they don’t deserve to win.
The reason conservative candidates have not won the past 2 times is because of the “must vote for the can win candidate” theory. I sat in my caucus next to people who clearly told me they were voting for a candidate that was not their favorite because they thought he could win. Guess what? He didn’t win.
I agree, but I have no worries about Trump running. He’s all talk. If he ran, he would have to open his books and allow people to see how he got his money to run his empire.
Although I would never accuse him of using dirty money, you don’t usually become a billionaire because you are squeaky clean.
I like Jindal. I would love to see how he plays on the national stage. He’s done a great job as Governor.
Silencing the opposition?
You mean in our primary getting rid of the posers and non real candidates, and non-conservatives?
Why are you here if you oppose making the GOP more conservative?
Yeah, but remember, Santorum wasn’t many people’s first choice back then even. He picked up a lot of votes from other conservative candidates who were dropping out after the media started targeting them in succession (or who became victims of the circular firing squad).
I think he only managed to get so many states because he was kind of the last man standing who might have been able to stop Romney. I think we’ve got a more solid slate of candidates this time, so I doubt he will find a similar opportunity.
That is a very cool graphic!!
Aw gee; every 4 years he loves to run and live off donations.
The man needs an image consultant badly. He looks like his mother styles his hair and lays out his clothes for him. It doesn’t help that he is one of those guys that always looks youthful, even in middle age.
If he were running for Governor of a Midwestern state, that would probably work well for him. In a general election for President, I think not so much.
I just hope Fiorina can stay in the field long enough to eventually debate Hillary. So much for the male sexist defense then.
But how many did he win before it was obvious Romney had won the primaries? Santorum hung around and won several states after Romney had won it, and most other candidates had dropped out.
I think Huckabee did the same thing in 2008. But it's how many votes and states did someone win while the primary race was still competitive that really matters.'
It should be fun when there’s nobody for Hillary! to debate....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.