There's a reason why in 2006 Rick Santorum was not re-elected to the Senate in his home state. From those friends of mine from Pennsylvania who have expressed an opinion on why that happened, uniformly they say it was because he was too extreme and strident, particularly on social issues. In fact, tbey opine that he has no chance of winning the GOP nomination in Pennsylvania and certainly would not carry his home state in a General Election.

Their reasons might be an oversimplification of his electoral defeat, but Santorum lost by over 700,000 votes, receiving 41% of the vote to his opponent's 59%, the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent senator since 1980 and the largest losing margin for any incumbent Republican senator in history. The people of Pennsylvania had somehow reached a conclusion on whether they wanted Santorum to continue as one of their elected representatives. They spoke loudly.

Now he has become a significant factor in the Republican presidential primary. His stump speeches reflect his harsh and narrowly opinionated position on many issues, calling into question whether they really represent the beliefs of a majority of Americans.

I guess we'll find out whether he can prevail in the upcoming primary elections, gaining his party's nomination.

But I think two things are predictable...

• Santorum's social positions are very likely far removed from the majority of Americans, the plurality he would need to be elected as President.

• If he were to be elected, his starkly conservative positions will almost certainly result in his inability to provide effective leadership to the Congress, which is a far more centrist body on almost any issue than Santorum espouses. The result would likely be another four years in political bickering and absence of any effective governance.

It's not that I'm a huge Romney supporter. But I would like to see some willingness on the part of the Congress to seek some middle ground and begin again to actually govern the country. With Rick Santorum, even if he were to be elected, it seems to me that there woiuld be little chance of that happening.

Knowing the solid following that our extremely Leftist president has, why do you think it out of the realm of possibility that someone far to the oppposite end could also have a great following and be elected?

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

Knowing the solid following that our extremely Leftist president has, why do you think it out of the realm of possibility that someone far to the oppposite end could also have a great following and be elected?

It's simply a matter of numbers. Are there more liberals ranging from committed progressives to liberal-leans, minorities, unemployed people, women of child-bearing age, women in general, environmentalists, educators, parents of children, etc., than there are staunch fiscal and social conservatives? I purposely picked the various segments of voters I've used because Santorum has offended, frightened or threatened each of those groups with his proposals and positions on issues recently.

In the General Election, it's purely a matter of numbers. If Santorum's election results nationally are anything like his most recent effort at election in Pennsylvania, there'll be a lot of disappointed people who opposed Barack Obama's re-election.

Is Santorum's selection to be the GOP candidate and his ultimate election to POTUS "out of the realm of possibility"? No, but there's a huge difference between "possibility" and "probability". You have to ask yourself whether Santorum's positions reflect the needs and desires of a majority of American voters? Listen to his positions on issues, particularly social issues, and ask yourself whether a majority of Americans across all parts of the country and all economic and social strata might agree with him. If the majority do, he'll be elected. If not, he won't. It's all in the numbers.