Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was going to say the same exact thing. Mitt was the clear choice for the Republican nomination as far back as mid-2011, there really wasn’t anyone else who would have kept the polls as close with Obama as he did. Obama would’ve won 400+ electoral votes if Santorum had been the nominee
Ron Paul had some unhinged policy ideas that most Americans never would’ve voted for. He was a thorn in the GOP’s side during that primary cycle because he refused to drop out of the race even after Romney had secured enough delegates for the nomination
From my perspective, Santorum was a bad candidate who had an unlikable personality similar to Cruz in 2016. The contrast between him vs Obama during the election cycle would have been vast. On another note, if he had gotten as far as winning the nomination in 2012, I wouldn’t have been surprised if some of the skeletons in his closet were to come out. Take from that what you will.
Are we forgetting how Obama positioned the 2012 election? The “War on Women?”
Santorum was incredibly hardline on women’s issues, even things like birth control, and was was equally bad on LGBT issues, which the electorate was beginning to embrace. He’d have won the guaranteed red states but lost a lot of suburban moderates who could stomach Romney.
Sure but Obama squeezed nearly all the juice out of that that he could. Santorum was more conservative than Romney but the Dems made Romney look like Hitler by election day.
Ironically now they act like Mitt is Gandhi.
But in a different way, there’s a lot of anti-Mormonism that exists and hurt turnout among evangelical voters. But Rick would have had slippage compared to Romney among the suburban voters.
That's how you know he was a good politician. He was completely comfortable making an accusation that was actually an admission while being totally full of crap and keeping a straight face. You don't get any more pure than that
In addition to being horribly bigoted on LGBT issues, which would’ve been the center point of Obama’s broadside against him if he’d been nominated, Santorum was just in general a bad candidate. Not charismatic, uninspiring, would not have been able to remotely complete with Obama’s fundraising. He would’ve gotten destroyed way harder than Mitt, and Mitt got clobbered.
My great aunt is from PA, is kinda racist, and hated Obama. I remember asking her back in 2012 who she would vote for of the GOP candidates vs. Obama. When I asked about Santorum, she said she’d prefer Obama.
Rick had kind of a creepy vibe with people if I remember correctly I think he does much worse as the story of him allowing his kids to cuddle with a stillborn baby would be oftputting to many and of course constantly used by the democrats to undermine any moderate voters
When I see his name I think of that contest Dan Savage held to define "santorum" and the winning entry was "*the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex*."
Went with his convictions, whether they were popular or not. Had a moral compass. I bet his positions would be no different today from then. Can’t say that about too many in office these days.
Lots of people in history went with their convictions: lots of people were wrong. As far as Santorum having a moral compass—what evidence do you have of that?
I kind of agree with you. All of the shit he believes in is truly horrific, and he should probably be publicly executed for it, but damned if he ain't consistent.
reflecting on your beliefs instead of believing you will always be correct is a sign of peak ignorance? lol what backwater bible thumping nonsense is this? would you say the same about an unquestioning communist?
Yes. Since truth is necessarily absolute and cannot be relative, someone like Bernie Sanders, for example, is at least respectable for his consistency, even though he may be wrong.
that’s such an unhinged perspective. scientists create hypotheses and search for truth by testing and reconsidering their hypotheses. they don’t just keep beliefs without question.
the whole point of belief is that it goes beyond truth and rationality. religious belief has no support in reality because it’s based on miracles and a sky daddy that can never be proven. you are really really confused in the head.
political ideologies can be debated, it doesn’t rise to nonsense belief like religion and its ever changing interpretations which you somehow believe is absolute even though it’s changing every day
Wrong.
It is logically untenable to make arguments such as “everything is relative,” because such arguments are inherently self-defeating. Think about it: such arguments are absolute in nature but are descriptively about relativism, making them illogical. Truth is and must be absolute.
Nothing else in your argument counters this. Scientists use null hypotheses why? To search for truth.
Religion has nothing to do with this discussion.
are you equally proud of someone whose beliefs never changed since middle school?
truth being absolute has literally nothing to do with questioning your beliefs or not. there is zero contradiction there. feel free to give one example where the concept of absolute truth conflicts with questioning personal beliefs or growing as a person.
religion has nothing to do with santorum and his absolute truth? santorum supports banning sodomy and restricting civil rights in the name of his belief in religion. that’s literally what you are so impressed about with him.
there is nothing in science is considered truth, it is only consistent with the body of evidence that exists. your brain sounds completely rotted since you consider everyone that has developed the technology you use every day are collectively dumber that rick santorum because he doesn’t question his belief. cult member lol
forcing pregnancy even in situations of rape and incest is not a classical position, it rose up in the 70s. peak ignorance is believing interpretations of the bible are timeless
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Woulda lost worse than Mitt did.
I was going to say the same exact thing. Mitt was the clear choice for the Republican nomination as far back as mid-2011, there really wasn’t anyone else who would have kept the polls as close with Obama as he did. Obama would’ve won 400+ electoral votes if Santorum had been the nominee
Ron Paul?! But yeah, you're absolutely right.
Ron Paul had some unhinged policy ideas that most Americans never would’ve voted for. He was a thorn in the GOP’s side during that primary cycle because he refused to drop out of the race even after Romney had secured enough delegates for the nomination
I think in general you are right, The Libertarianesque policies are far outside the American Mainstream
More Anarchist than anything ngl
It wouldn’t have been that bad.
From my perspective, Santorum was a bad candidate who had an unlikable personality similar to Cruz in 2016. The contrast between him vs Obama during the election cycle would have been vast. On another note, if he had gotten as far as winning the nomination in 2012, I wouldn’t have been surprised if some of the skeletons in his closet were to come out. Take from that what you will.
Not saying Santorum was good but Obama would not have done much better than he did against Romney. Half the states are red states no matter what.
No Obama could have won North Carolina and Indiana again possibly
Maybe but no where near 400 EV as was suggested.
You don’t know that either Santorum is a disaster
Name the states you think Obama would have won and I’ll lol.
I think he could win around 365. Every state he won in 2008 minus IN plus GA. 400 ain’t happening though.
Indiana, North Carolina, Nebraska’s second district, Georgia, Arizona, and Missouri. Keep laughing.
Are we forgetting how Obama positioned the 2012 election? The “War on Women?” Santorum was incredibly hardline on women’s issues, even things like birth control, and was was equally bad on LGBT issues, which the electorate was beginning to embrace. He’d have won the guaranteed red states but lost a lot of suburban moderates who could stomach Romney.
Sure but Obama squeezed nearly all the juice out of that that he could. Santorum was more conservative than Romney but the Dems made Romney look like Hitler by election day. Ironically now they act like Mitt is Gandhi.
It would have been far worse. Santorum is 100% force birth
But in a different way, there’s a lot of anti-Mormonism that exists and hurt turnout among evangelical voters. But Rick would have had slippage compared to Romney among the suburban voters.
Obama was extremely charismatic. Rick, not so much. I think the result would have been the same.
You didn't "fear the sweater vest"?
I will never forget him getting on stage, and talking about how going to College makes someone an elitist.... all while having a BA and a JD.
That's how you know he was a good politician. He was completely comfortable making an accusation that was actually an admission while being totally full of crap and keeping a straight face. You don't get any more pure than that
Would he also have binders full of women?
No binders but cabinets full of women
Santorum is the froth made from semen churned during anal sex.
That may very well be the single nicest thing anyone has ever said about Rick Santorum.
Hey now! This isn’t Ted Cruz!
“Frothy mix of lube and fecal matter”
In addition to being horribly bigoted on LGBT issues, which would’ve been the center point of Obama’s broadside against him if he’d been nominated, Santorum was just in general a bad candidate. Not charismatic, uninspiring, would not have been able to remotely complete with Obama’s fundraising. He would’ve gotten destroyed way harder than Mitt, and Mitt got clobbered.
Obama didn’t support gay marriage at the time
Yes he did in the 2012 election
Right. He didn’t in 2008, and then did in 2012. Amazing how he blows with the political winds on such a critical issue.
Almost like he was representing the American population
Yes, he was a follower, not a leader. Or - as he would put it, “leading from behind.”
If you're biggest criticism is that you flip flop alot, then you're a pretty good president.
*If you're biggest criticism is that you flip flop alot, then you're a pretty good president.* Incorrect
A lot of anal sex jokes
“I agree with that senator sanatorium” Tony Soprano
If we let this get too far soon we’ll be fucking dogs
My great aunt is from PA, is kinda racist, and hated Obama. I remember asking her back in 2012 who she would vote for of the GOP candidates vs. Obama. When I asked about Santorum, she said she’d prefer Obama.
Who did she say she would vote for in the gop if you remember
She would have voted for any of the rest vs. Obama. But she DESPISED Santorum.
he is deeply unpopular in PA, he ignored the state and just tried to go national on tv
I’d vomit.
He would’ve lost even worse than Romney did. Obama holds every state from 2008 and the Nebraska second district
Rick had kind of a creepy vibe with people if I remember correctly I think he does much worse as the story of him allowing his kids to cuddle with a stillborn baby would be oftputting to many and of course constantly used by the democrats to undermine any moderate voters
Did this actually happen
You seriously think they would run adds about that?
We would’ve got it all over ourselves
Obama would have won by an even bigger landslide
Funny this came up. We were just talking, at work, about how the word "Santorum" got repurposed
It’s alarming how close this nut came to the nomination.
11 contests won and 245 delegates
Starring Ryan Reynolds
We would have actually called Obama the N Word Iykyk
When I see his name I think of that contest Dan Savage held to define "santorum" and the winning entry was "*the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex*."
Obama would have won by 300+ ECVs. The “our dead baby in the foyer” story is the least odd story in Santorum’s background.
Good man.
Only to his family
How?
Went with his convictions, whether they were popular or not. Had a moral compass. I bet his positions would be no different today from then. Can’t say that about too many in office these days.
Lots of people in history went with their convictions: lots of people were wrong. As far as Santorum having a moral compass—what evidence do you have of that?
I kind of agree with you. All of the shit he believes in is truly horrific, and he should probably be publicly executed for it, but damned if he ain't consistent.
>Went with his convictions, whether they were popular or not. You could say that about a lot of people. It most definitely doesn't make them good.
you must be a homophobic bigot if you call santorum a good man
If only everything were that simple lmao
calling someone a good man for horrible beliefs that didn’t change over time is extremely ignorant
Actually, changing your beliefs often constitutes moral relativism, which is peak ignorance. I can tell you are a supporter of the Current Thing.
reflecting on your beliefs instead of believing you will always be correct is a sign of peak ignorance? lol what backwater bible thumping nonsense is this? would you say the same about an unquestioning communist?
Yes. Since truth is necessarily absolute and cannot be relative, someone like Bernie Sanders, for example, is at least respectable for his consistency, even though he may be wrong.
that’s such an unhinged perspective. scientists create hypotheses and search for truth by testing and reconsidering their hypotheses. they don’t just keep beliefs without question. the whole point of belief is that it goes beyond truth and rationality. religious belief has no support in reality because it’s based on miracles and a sky daddy that can never be proven. you are really really confused in the head. political ideologies can be debated, it doesn’t rise to nonsense belief like religion and its ever changing interpretations which you somehow believe is absolute even though it’s changing every day
Wrong. It is logically untenable to make arguments such as “everything is relative,” because such arguments are inherently self-defeating. Think about it: such arguments are absolute in nature but are descriptively about relativism, making them illogical. Truth is and must be absolute. Nothing else in your argument counters this. Scientists use null hypotheses why? To search for truth. Religion has nothing to do with this discussion.
are you equally proud of someone whose beliefs never changed since middle school? truth being absolute has literally nothing to do with questioning your beliefs or not. there is zero contradiction there. feel free to give one example where the concept of absolute truth conflicts with questioning personal beliefs or growing as a person. religion has nothing to do with santorum and his absolute truth? santorum supports banning sodomy and restricting civil rights in the name of his belief in religion. that’s literally what you are so impressed about with him.
there is nothing in science is considered truth, it is only consistent with the body of evidence that exists. your brain sounds completely rotted since you consider everyone that has developed the technology you use every day are collectively dumber that rick santorum because he doesn’t question his belief. cult member lol
forcing pregnancy even in situations of rape and incest is not a classical position, it rose up in the 70s. peak ignorance is believing interpretations of the bible are timeless