Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-07-2012, 07:50 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,771 posts, read 104,726,020 times
Reputation: 49248

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Onions View Post
Why?

Well, maybe it won't happen. But what probably will happen in 2012 is that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee and Rick Santorum will finish as the runner-up. And what happens to runners up in GOP nomination battles? They go on to win the nomination 'next time'.

Ronald Reagan was the runner-up in 1968, and against a Republican incumbent President in 1976. The next time the race for the nomination was open, in 1980, he won it.

George H.W. Bush was the runner-up in 1980, then won it the next time the race for the nomination was open in 1988.

Bob Dole was the runner-up in 1988, then won it the next time the race for the nomination was open in 1996.

John McCain was the runner-up in 2000, then won it the next time the race for the nomination was open in 2008.

Mitt Romney was the runner-up in 2008, and will probably win the nomination in 2012.

The only break in this trend was in 2000, when the previous runner-up (Pat Buchanan, in 1996) did not win the Republican nomination. But he didn't seek the nomination -- he just wasn't in the race.

There is a trend here, and a strong trend. No doubt there will be a lot of "No way! Rick Santorum will never be the nominee!". But then, the same thing was said in 2005, 2006, 2007 about John McCain. The same thing has been said about Mitt Romney these past three years. All trends come to an end eventually. But this may well be Santorum's trial run. Next time, he'll have a better understanding of how to run a nomination race, as well as a pre-existing infrastructure of aides, supporters and volunteers.

If Romney loses in November, keep a close eye on Santorum's posturing.
I just can't see that happening, There are too many great new faces on the horizon for the party. Santorum is getting a lot of attention because many just can't handle the thought of Romney for a couple of reasons: If Perry had not screwed up the debates so badly or if Cain had stayed in you wouldn't see the Santorum surge. I am not saying either would have gotten the nomination, I am saying Santorum would not be where he is. At least that is how I see it.

Nita
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-07-2012, 07:56 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,771 posts, read 104,726,020 times
Reputation: 49248
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
I sincerely hope the whole gang returns for a sequel in 2016 - Santorum, Cain, Bachmann, and of course Gingrich and Perry! Add in Palin, Christie and Jeb Bush then call this movie "The Gang Who Can't Shoot Straight, Part II"!!!

.
you can hope all you want, but you know it isn't going to happen. Chrisie and Bush, very possible and either could get the nomination and probably be elected. Who will the Democrats put up in 2016, Reed or maybe NP? How about any one of the congress that went under in 2010 or wait: how about Jerry Brown or Bill Richardson?

Nita
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, MD
3,236 posts, read 3,938,163 times
Reputation: 3010
It won't happen, he's more like Pat Robertson, who was 2nd place in 1988 to GHW Bush. Just a lunatic fringe candidate. The 2016 Republican nominee will be someone who wasn't in the race like Sarah Palin, Chris Christie or Mitch Daniels. There's no real heir apparent unless wide load Jeb gets in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 03:54 PM
 
732 posts, read 1,045,931 times
Reputation: 2738
You people here are such "geniuses". You call yourselves political junkies?

Santorum is a joke, a nut, a member of the lunatic fringe. Yeah, right. It seems people used to say those things about Reagan too. Remember? He blamed trees for air pollution. He wanted God back into the classrooms. He was a war-monger, He was senile. He made "Bedtime For Bonzo" for chrissakes! Carter was absolutely drooling over the prospect of running against this nutcase. We all know how that story ended.

Like him or hate him, Santorum is a young, vigorous candidate with a strong message who can deliver it with a powerful stump speech. He won 2 statewide elections in blueish-purple Pennsylvania running as a strong social conservative. Only a talented politician could do that. He was crushed in 2006 because the country was Bush weary and the Dems threw a ton of money against him as he was the most hated Republican in America other than George W. They also found the perfect candidate in Bob Casey, son of the popular governor and strongly pro-life himself. All of these events converged to cost him his seat.

Go ahead and laugh at the idea of Santorum in 2016. He may very well have the last laugh. After 4 more years of entitlement happy Obama, with more crippling debt, more government encroachment in every part of our lives and more illegals streaming through unprotected borders, Santorum's message may start having some appeal.

Oh yeah, the great group of candidates awaiting the GOP in 2016? You mean, the fat blowhard Christie, who wouldn't last 2 months on the campaign trail without insulting everyone in sight. Or Jindal, who comes across so fey he's an embarrassment to his own family. Jeb Bush? Really? Like the country is really wanting to go back to alternating dynasties. Call Hillary Clinton and find out how that worked out. Mitch Daniels? Who the hell even knows where Indiana is in this country? Voters are superficial as hell and when's the last time America elected a bald president?

I suspect with those "superstars", Santorum may be around for awhile.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 04:12 PM
 
Location: West Egg
2,160 posts, read 1,955,066 times
Reputation: 1297
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
I just can't see that happening, There are too many great new faces on the horizon for the party. Santorum is getting a lot of attention because many just can't handle the thought of Romney for a couple of reasons: If Perry had not screwed up the debates so badly or if Cain had stayed in you wouldn't see the Santorum surge. I am not saying either would have gotten the nomination, I am saying Santorum would not be where he is. At least that is how I see it.

Nita
Your personal incredulity at the prospect is irrelevant.

If, if, if... they always have excuses.

"Next time it'll be different, just you wait and see!"

OK. I'll wait.
Did that after GHW Bush and you served up ... Bob Dole.
Did that after Dole and you served ... well, someone who got elected President, but getting a Republican to even mention the name 'George W. Bush' these days is all but impossible.
Did that after GW Bush and you served up ... John McCain.
Did that after McCain and you're about to serve up ... Mitt Romney.

"But rest assured, next time there won't be any "ifs"! We'll finally get our act together!"

LOL, yeah, OK, roger that ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 04:14 PM
 
Location: West Egg
2,160 posts, read 1,955,066 times
Reputation: 1297
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhenomenalAJ View Post
It won't happen, he's more like Pat Robertson, who was 2nd place in 1988 to GHW Bush. Just a lunatic fringe candidate. The 2016 Republican nominee will be someone who wasn't in the race like Sarah Palin, Chris Christie or Mitch Daniels. There's no real heir apparent unless wide load Jeb gets in.
Wrong -- as I pointed out in my original post, Bob Dole was the clear runner-up to Bush in 1988 (with over 2.3 millions votes, to fewer than 1.1 million for Robertson).

Oh, and about Bob Dole?

THE NEXT TIME THE NOMINATON WAS OPEN, HE WON IT!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,528,322 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sco View Post
I am asking you what you think. Do you really believe that Santorum will be able to beat the A team GOP candidates that are all but guaranteed to run in 2016?
What if the ones you've got now ARE the A team?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 05:10 PM
Sco
 
4,259 posts, read 4,918,464 times
Reputation: 3373
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
What if the ones you've got now ARE the A team?

That is simply too scary to even consider.

If the best the GOP has is a religous nut that desires to be Ayatollah, an ethically challenged serial adulterer, a flip floppy dbag that doesn't excite his own party and an elderly gold standard nutter faux libertarian with racist skeletons in the closet than we will be living under DNC one party rule for the forseeable future.

Reason will prevail and we will get a legitimate candidate in 2016 like Rubio, Christie or Jeb Bush.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 05:16 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,218 posts, read 22,361,490 times
Reputation: 23853
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnotwhoyouthinkiam View Post
Considering that both parties ACT ON THE SAME PLATFORM but say some different things.. I can see this happening.

Either way, I think Rick knows he'll find a good paying job in the meantime b.c of his name exposure.
Santorum doesn't need a good job. He does quite well right now, by owning a lot of rental properties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2012, 09:25 PM
 
Location: CHicago, United States
6,933 posts, read 8,493,093 times
Reputation: 3510
He seriously could be the nominee in the future. Obama will win in 2012. The GOP is moving to the far right, quickly. They making the John Birch Society of the 1960s look like moderates. Santorum is attractive to the group. I'd put my money on him 4 years from now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:23 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top