Romney/Santorum Ticket

Mott the Hoople

Mott the Hoople

Sweet Jane
If you think about it objectively this makes a lot of sense. I doubt that Rick Santorum has the resources, even with continued wins, to take the GOP nomination. However, there's a lot to be said for Romney choosing Santorum as his running mate.

#1. Santorum would appeal to the base and southern conservatives.
#2. Santorum would appeal to many Catholics.
#3. Santorum would appeal to many midwestern working class conservatives.
#4. Santorum is a savy politician and he meets the one threshold Sarah Palin did not. He is qualified to be President.
#5. Santorum speaks very well on blue collar bread and butter issues. He comminicates and relates to working class people far better than Romney does.
#6. Santorum would appeal to evengelical Christians.
#7. Santorum has more foreign policy experience then Romeny does.
#8. As a former Senator Santorum would be very usefull in advancing any legislative agenda.
#9. Santorum is very charismatic and telegenic and that plays very well in the modern era of media driven sound bite politics.

I see a lot of upside to Santorum as a running mate. Romney appeals broadly to moderates and independent voters and Santorum appeals strongly to the base while also being qualified to be President. I think the two of them would make a very formidable team.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
If you think about it objectively this makes a lot of sense. I doubt that Rick Santorum has the resources, even with continued wins, to take the GOP nomination. However, there's a lot to be said for Romney choosing Santorum as his running mate.

#1. Santorum would appeal to the base and southern conservatives.
#2. Santorum would appeal to many Catholics.
#3. Santorum would appeal to many midwestern working class conservatives.
#4. Santorum is a savy politician and he meets the one threshold Sarah Palin did not. He is qualified to be President.
#5. Santorum speaks very well on blue collar bread and butter issues. He comminicates and relates to working class people far better than Romney does.
#6. Santorum would appeal to evengelical Christians.
#7. Santorum has more foreign policy experience then Romeny does.
#8. As a former Senator Santorum would be very usefull in advancing any legislative agenda.
#9. Santorum is very charismatic and telegenic and that plays very well in the modern era of media driven sound bite politics.

I see a lot of upside to Santorum as a running mate. Romney appeals broadly to moderates and independent voters and Santorum appeals strongly to the base while also being qualified to be President. I think the two of them would make a very formidable team.
Click to expand...

This doesn't take into account that santorum is barking mad. He lost his 2006 Senate bid by 18 points and that was "...the largest losing margin for an incumbent Republican senator ever."

Pennsylvanians didn't vote him out because of partisan politics only, but because he always comes across as smug, sanctimonious and judgmental. Not to mention the hypocritical ways he played the system in his climb up the ladder.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ks-with-ricks/2012/01/02/gIQARLdIWP_blog.html
 
christiefan915 said:
This doesn't take into account that santorum is barking mad. He lost his 2006 Senate bid by 18 points and that was "...the largest losing margin for an incumbent Republican senator ever."

Pennsylvanians didn't vote him out because of partisan politics only, but because he always comes across as smug, sanctimonious and judgmental. Not to mention the hypocritical ways he played the system in his climb up the ladder.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ks-with-ricks/2012/01/02/gIQARLdIWP_blog.html
Click to expand...
Those are strikes against him in getting the Top Job. That doesn't mean he wouldn't be a quality VP pick. As a Democrat I don't want a cultural conservative like Santorum as President either but that doesnt' mean that he doesn't have a lot of appeal as a VP candidate. As I pointed out. He balances out Romney with the base, particularly in the south and rural midwest. I don't think Santorum plays well at all on the NE, the Great Lakes Region or the West Coast at all but Romney holds his own there. Santorum has his strong points and what I'm pointing out is that they compliment Romney's weak points very well.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
If you think about it objectively this makes a lot of sense. I doubt that Rick Santorum has the resources, even with continued wins, to take the GOP nomination. However, there's a lot to be said for Romney choosing Santorum as his running mate.

#1. Santorum would appeal to the base and southern conservatives.
#2. Santorum would appeal to many Catholics.
#3. Santorum would appeal to many midwestern working class conservatives.
#4. Santorum is a savy politician and he meets the one threshold Sarah Palin did not. He is qualified to be President.
#5. Santorum speaks very well on blue collar bread and butter issues. He comminicates and relates to working class people far better than Romney does.
#6. Santorum would appeal to evengelical Christians.
#7. Santorum has more foreign policy experience then Romeny does.
#8. As a former Senator Santorum would be very usefull in advancing any legislative agenda.
#9. Santorum is very charismatic and telegenic and that plays very well in the modern era of media driven sound bite politics.

I see a lot of upside to Santorum as a running mate. Romney appeals broadly to moderates and independent voters and Santorum appeals strongly to the base while also being qualified to be President. I think the two of them would make a very formidable team.
Click to expand...

Um... HELL NO.

Santorum does not belong anywhere on the ticket.

Go Romney/Rubio or if you really want to send the social conservatives into a frenzy... go Romney/Johnson (if Johnson would consider it) or Romney/Whitman or Romney/Fiorina

Meg or Carly would wipe the floor with Biden in the VP debates, they would appeal to moderates in both parties. If the economy stays where it is at, Romney can take Obama and have a great VP in the wings for 2020. :)
 
Santorum/Rubio

Santorum delivers TeaParty votes.
Santorum delivers Social Conservatives.
Santorum delivers Pennsylvania.
Rubio delivers Conservatives.
Rubio delivers Florida and probably Michigan and Ohio.
Rubio delivers Latino vote.

The combo would also do well with moderates and independents.

I know that Santorum gets a bum rap with Liberals as being some out-of-touch radical rightie, but he has been a man of conviction and principle, and a fundamental understanding of how our founding fathers intended our society to govern itself. One area he needs to stress, is the fundamental connection between conservative social values and fiscal policies, because I think much needs to be said there. We don't need to make the election about abortion, guns and gays, but we don't need to shun our moral conscience either. If we allow it, the Democrats will gladly make the election about social conservatism, because they are running from an abysmal record and fledgling prosperity. The key for Santorum would be to defuse these attempts by articulating a strong message on why we need more state involvement on these issues, where the people can decide for themselves. We don't need to run from our moral viewpoints, or alter them to give some kind of 'appearance' to moderates. We have every right as individual Americans, to embrace our religious and social opinions, without governmental interference, and certainly without ridicule and mockery, and made to feel shame for it.

But for me... Romney/Rubio would work too.
 
Superfreak said:
Um... HELL NO.

Santorum does not belong anywhere on the ticket.

Go Romney/Rubio or if you really want to send the social conservatives into a frenzy... go Romney/Johnson (if Johnson would consider it) or Romney/Whitman or Romney/Fiorina

Meg or Carly would wipe the floor with Biden in the VP debates, they would appeal to moderates in both parties. If the economy stays where it is at, Romney can take Obama and have a great VP in the wings for 2020. :)
Click to expand...

Eh, I watched Whitman run for Governor of Calfornia. While her business record is impressive she's not all that impressive as a political candidate.
 
Dixie said:
Santorum/Rubio

Santorum delivers TeaParty votes.
Santorum delivers Social Conservatives.
Santorum delivers Pennsylvania.
Rubio delivers Conservatives.
Rubio delivers Florida and probably Michigan and Ohio.
Rubio delivers Latino vote.

The combo would also do well with moderates and independents.

I know that Santorum gets a bum rap with Liberals as being some out-of-touch radical rightie, but he has been a man of conviction and principle, and a fundamental understanding of how our founding fathers intended our society to govern itself. One area he needs to stress, is the fundamental connection between conservative social values and fiscal policies, because I think much needs to be said there. We don't need to make the election about abortion, guns and gays, but we don't need to shun our moral conscience either. If we allow it, the Democrats will gladly make the election about social conservatism, because they are running from an abysmal record and fledgling prosperity. The key for Santorum would be to defuse these attempts by articulating a strong message on why we need more state involvement on these issues, where the people can decide for themselves. We don't need to run from our moral viewpoints, or alter them to give some kind of 'appearance' to moderates. We have every right as individual Americans, to embrace our religious and social opinions, without governmental interference, and certainly without ridicule and mockery, and made to feel shame for it.

But for me... Romney/Rubio would work too.
Click to expand...
That ticket would possibly win Florida, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina....and that would be about it. Obama would win by the biggest land slide since Reagan/Mondale.

And uh no Dixie. Obama will run pretty much on conservatives utter incompetence at governence. This election will be won or lost in suburbia and they ain exactly forgotten the total disaster that was the Bush Presidency. That still hangs around Repelicans neck like a lead doughnut.
 
Superfreak said:
Um... HELL NO.

Santorum does not belong anywhere on the ticket.

Go Romney/Rubio or if you really want to send the social conservatives into a frenzy... go Romney/Johnson (if Johnson would consider it) or Romney/Whitman or Romney/Fiorina

Meg or Carly would wipe the floor with Biden in the VP debates, they would appeal to moderates in both parties. If the economy stays where it is at, Romney can take Obama and have a great VP in the wings for 2020. :)
Click to expand...
I would seriously consider voting for a Romney/Whitman ticket. I like her a lot. She's no wing nut. Rubio would be iteresting too. He has less skeletons in the closet then Santorum but he also has less experience and doesn't have the national level constituency that Santorum is building.

Yea I like that idea. Mitt Romney and Christine Whitman.

Fiorina? Naa she's another business exec who makes the mistakes of thinking that being succesful in business will translate into success in politics. I respect the hell out of her as a business person but as a politician she's a neophyte.
 
Dixie said:
Santorum/Rubio

Santorum delivers TeaParty votes.
Santorum delivers Social Conservatives.
Santorum delivers Pennsylvania.
Rubio delivers Conservatives.
Rubio delivers Florida and probably Michigan and Ohio.
Rubio delivers Latino vote.

The combo would also do well with moderates and independents.

I know that Santorum gets a bum rap with Liberals as being some out-of-touch radical rightie, but he has been a man of conviction and principle, and a fundamental understanding of how our founding fathers intended our society to govern itself. One area he needs to stress, is the fundamental connection between conservative social values and fiscal policies, because I think much needs to be said there. We don't need to make the election about abortion, guns and gays, but we don't need to shun our moral conscience either. If we allow it, the Democrats will gladly make the election about social conservatism, because they are running from an abysmal record and fledgling prosperity. The key for Santorum would be to defuse these attempts by articulating a strong message on why we need more state involvement on these issues, where the people can decide for themselves. We don't need to run from our moral viewpoints, or alter them to give some kind of 'appearance' to moderates. We have every right as individual Americans, to embrace our religious and social opinions, without governmental interference, and certainly without ridicule and mockery, and made to feel shame for it.

But for me... Romney/Rubio would work too.
Click to expand...

santorum delivers Pennsylvania?

Ha, I don't think so.
 
cawacko said:
Eh, I watched Whitman run for Governor of Calfornia. While her business record is impressive she's not all that impressive as a political candidate.
Click to expand...

I would want her on the ticket for her business acumen. I could care less if she is a run of the mill political candidate that has no clue about economics/jobs/business. If I wanted someone like that I would look no further than our current President and his moronic VP.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I would seriously consider voting for a Romney/Whitman ticket. I like her a lot. She's no wing nut. Rubio would be iteresting too. He has less skeletons in the closet then Santorum but he also has less experience and doesn't have the national level constituency that Santorum is building.

Yea I like that idea. Mitt Romney and Christine Whitman.

Fiorina? Naa she's another business exec who makes the mistakes of thinking that being succesful in business will translate into success in politics. I respect the hell out of her as a business person but as a politician she's a neophyte.
Click to expand...

MEG Whitman... not Christine??

Carly and Whitman are both political neophytes. I could care less. We have seen what we get when those 'politicians' with no business acumen get elected. We end up with Bush and Obama. Two of the most economically inept Presidents our country has ever seen.
 
Superfreak said:
I would want her on the ticket for her business acumen. I could care less if she is a run of the mill political candidate that has no clue about economics/jobs/business. If I wanted someone like that I would look no further than our current President and his moronic VP.
Click to expand...


Yeah, the last "MBA President" worked out GREAT. Business acumen doesn't translate to understanding of effective macroeconomic policy.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Yeah, the last "MBA President" worked out GREAT. Business acumen doesn't translate to understanding of effective macroeconomic policy.
Click to expand...

So did the last LAWYER. I am not talking about who has a fucking degree you moron. I am talking about being SUCCESSFUL RUNNING A BUSINESS.

We can quite clearly that a LACK of business acumen most certainly doesn't translate to understanding effective macroeconomic policy. I would be more than happy to bet the knowledge of Whitman on macro issues is far superior to either Bush or Obama. It is quite clear neither of those two buffoons has a clue.
 
Superfreak said:
So did the last LAWYER. I am not talking about who has a fucking degree you moron. I am talking about being SUCCESSFUL RUNNING A BUSINESS.
Click to expand...

The last LAWYER was pretty damn good, wasn't he?


Superfreak said:
We can quite clearly that a LACK of business acumen most certainly doesn't translate to understanding effective macroeconomic policy. I would be more than happy to bet the knowledge of Whitman on macro issues is far superior to either Bush or Obama. It is quite clear neither of those two buffoons has a clue.
Click to expand...

I never suggested that a lack of business acumen translated into anything. And maybe Whitman is whip smart on macroeconomic policy, but it's got little to do with her "business acumen."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top