Democrats for Santorum

[RandFan]

But I think debating on the silly Santorum social issues rather than the more complicated issues that matter is bad for our country.

But these social issues are impacting Americans right now. The GOP is focusing hard on these issues to the detriment of society. I think we need this debate. For too long the GOP have used social wedge issues and now as the trend of tolerance is shifted I think we need to put them to bed. I think the GOP honestly thinks it can win on these social issues and I don't think they can.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

But these social issues are impacting Americans right now.

The real issues, yes, but not Santorum's framing of them.

For example, it is not an issue that Obama's political ideology might be construed as a non-bible-based theology. Ditto talking about "don't euthanize me" bracelets in the Netherlands (as an argument against "Obamacare"). That's just stupid stuff. Debating that sort of thing would come at the cost of debating actual issues.

 

[RandFan]

The real issues, yes, but not Santorum's framing of them.

For example, it is not an issue that Obama's political ideology might be construed as a non-bible-based theology. Ditto talking about "don't euthanize me" bracelets in the Netherlands (as an argument against "Obamacare"). That's just stupid stuff. Debating that sort of thing would come at the cost of debating actual issues.

I will grant you that.

 

[Distracted1]

The real issues, yes, but not Santorum's framing of them.

For example, it is not an issue that Obama's political ideology might be construed as a non-bible-based theology. Ditto talking about "don't euthanize me" bracelets in the Netherlands (as an argument against "Obamacare"). That's just stupid stuff. Debating that sort of thing would come at the cost of debating actual issues.

I agree that these issues are mostly nonsense that obscure things that the two of us think are more important to the direction of our society. However, if %39 of the voting public (maybe 80,000,000 American adults) think of these things as real issues, then like it or not they are "actuall"issues

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

However, if %39 of the voting public (maybe 80,000,000 American adults) think of these things as real issues, then like it or not they are "actuall"issues

First, I'm not sure I agree with that logic. If 39% of the voters think all species arise by acts of special creation, it wouldn't mean it's an actual issue. (The bandwagon fallacy.)

If by "actual" issue, you define it as what some percentage of voters consider to be important (even if those issues aren't): I understand that one could exploit that percentage of misinformed voters by feeding them more such misinformation, but that's exactly what I think would be bad for the country.

Anyway, I don't believe 39% of voters think that framing Obama's political ideology as non-bible-based theology is a real issue. (And I'm sure they don't think the fear of Obamacare leading to seniors having to wear "Do Not Euthanize" bracelets to avoid involuntary euthanasia is a real issue.)

 

[Puppycow]

Were I still in MI, I would have cast a vote for Santorum, this time not because I prefer him to Romney- but because I think he would be a much weaker opponent to Obma in the general election.

I'm not entirely sure that he really would be a weaker candidate than Romney. I used to think so, but I think there's a case to be made that he might actually be stronger than Romney in certain rust belt swing states.

Even if Romney is the stronger candidate on the national level, what matters is not the popular vote, but the electoral college. So it makes no difference if Obama wins Massachussets with 60% of the vote or 65% of the vote, but it does make a difference if he can win states like Ohio and Michigan.

In a recent USA Today poll, Santorum did better than Romney in the swing states, as well as nationwide. I don't put too much stock in this particular poll, because it's an outlier but I don't think it's necessarily true that Santorum would be weaker than Romney in the general election.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I'm not entirely sure that he really would be a weaker candidate than Romney. I used to think so, but I think there's a case to be made that he might actually be stronger than Romney in certain rust belt swing states.

Even if Romney is the stronger candidate on the national level, what matters is not the popular vote, but the electoral college. So it makes no difference if Obama wins Massachussets with 60% of the vote or 65% of the vote, but it does make a difference if he can win states like Ohio and Michigan.

In a recent USA Today poll, Santorum did better than Romney in the swing states, as well as nationwide. I don't put too much stock in this particular poll, because it's an outlier but I don't think it's necessarily true that Santorum would be weaker than Romney in the general election.

Yeah, either Romney or Santorum would face an uphill battle against Obama. Santorum won't get many independents but could get a strong turnout in the religious right sector of the GOP. (Here in Missouri, I think that turnout could be the difference in the general election.) Romney would lose those voters but might get some independents disaffected with Obama.

At least in terms of the coattail effect, I think more Democratic candidates (other than Obama) would benefit from Romney running rather than Santorum.

Anyway, I think we'll see a pretty steep slide of Santorum's polling numbers about now.