Support NeoGAF

[Al-ibn Kermit]

You also share the same religion as the KKK, there are kooks in all walks of life.

The KKK hates Catholics actually. At the peak of their popularity in the 1920's, they focused on being anti-immigration and much of their rhetoric was aimed at Catholic/Jewish immigrants. That those were not "patriotic" religions I would guess.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Late to this thread, but the cognitive dissonance in those Santorum quotes is astounding. The guy is a bigot, and in spectacularly ignorant fashion.

 

[Amir0x]

Late to this thread, but the cognitive dissonance in those Santorum quotes is astounding. The guy is a bigot, and in spectacularly ignorant fashion.

that's really offensive to Santorum. just because he doesn't want black bllllaaaah people on welfare doesn't mean you have the right to call him a bigot

i demand an apology for Santorum

 

[NintendoGal]

I can only surmise that he is drinking the Santorum flavored Kool-Aid.

Aside from that I'm at a loss for words really.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Wait, the religious guy is for divorce?

 

[Zeppelin]

So... does this guy stand a chance of becoming president?

 

[Atramental]

So... does this guy stand a chance of becoming president?

he doesn't have a chance.

Even if he won the GOP nomination Obama would crush him.

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

So... does this guy stand a chance of becoming president?

He has more of a chance than 99% of America. If somehow he does clinch the nomination and ends up running against Obama, he would still get over 40% of the vote. The concern is that if he gets the nomination and if the European economy collapses between now and the election, then he might have a very real chance of getting into the White House.

 

[GaimeGuy]

So... does this guy stand a chance of becoming president?

He's 2nd most likely to receive the GOP nomination, which puts him at 3rd most likely to become president in our political system.

And regardless of how batshit insane he is, he would get at least 40, no, 45% of all votes in November, simply because he has an R next to his name.

So yes, he has a very good shot at becoming president. More than anyone except for Obama or Romney at this point.

 

[Zeppelin]

Hm, okay. It's shit like this that makes it so hard to get a grip on the US of A...

 

[Diablos]

I still think Rick can win, but it's going to be a long, drawn-out process. He's very much the "outsider", at least when compared to Romney.

 

[lenovox1]

I still think Rick can win, but it's going to be a long, drawn-out process. He's very much the "outsider", at least when compared to Romney.

I never understood how Frothy Mix could be considered more of an "outsider" than anyone else. He's been in D.C. since 1995. If you're looking for a party outsider, you're looking at Paul. If you're looking for someone whose not been in the Washington game, you're looking at Romney. That's one characterization of the Frothy Bigot that I've never fully grasped.

 

[Hawkian]

yes please

 

[SouthernDragon]

Well, then, bring it, bitch. I'm not gay, but I'd love to see him try and I'd love to campaign against him even more.

 

[Derwind]

Considering he's pretty conservative, isn't he going against his golden rule? Why does big government decide these things, why not leave it up to the individual states?

And people, he'll freaking do it... the man will go that far... no prez for him hopefully...

 

[Verelios]

And here we go~

This guy just brings the crazy every single time he speaks. Does he not have people doing damage control!? Speech writers!? Common sense!?

 

[Orayn]

Considering he's pretty conservative, isn't he going against his golden rule? Why does big government decide these things, why not leave it up to the individual states?

And people, he'll freaking do it... the man will go that far... no prez for him hopefully...

Government-dictated morality and unrestricted capitalism: The worst of both worlds!

 

[jaxword]

Government-dictated morality and unrestricted capitalism: The worst of both worlds!

Works well for parts of the Middle East.

 

[Derwind]

Government-dictated morality and unrestricted capitalism: The worst of both worlds!

What's his economic policy? Pull funding from non-essential sectors like science, medical research, social programs(Welfare, Food stamps...ect...); Tax breaks for big business; Military spending up the wazoo?

 

[XMonkey]

And here we go~

This guy just brings the crazy every single time he speaks. Does he not have people doing damage control!? Speech writers!? Common sense!?

I've always imagined many of the people working in his campaign genuinely believe the kind of shit Santorum spews is somehow effective and/or a good tactic. How they reconcile that with Michigan slipping through his grasp after he opened his mouth, I don't know.

 

[speculawyer]

Late to this thread, but the cognitive dissonance in those Santorum quotes is astounding.

Yeah, I find it amusing how he, more than any other candidate, gets on a high horse about Iran being a theocracy. The cognitive dissonance just makes you shake your head.

 

[Mumei]

Yeah, I find it amusing how he, more than any other candidate, gets on a high horse about Iran being a theocracy. The cognitive dissonance just makes you shake your head.

He doesn't really have a problem with the 'theocracy' part so much as the "not my religion" part.

 

[Yagharek]

What a spiteful man Santorum is.

 

[MC Safety]

So... does this guy stand a chance of becoming president?

Not electable loon says something bonkers.

That he'd spend a second of thought on a plan to unmarry anyone should tell you how far gone this goofball is.

It's also a sad indication of how the republican party has fallen. When your savior is Mitt "Shit" Romney and Rick Santorum is your backup plan, you can pretty much kiss the White House goodbye -- at least until 2016.

So yes, he has a very good shot at becoming president. More than anyone except for Obama or Romney at this point.

Hahah. No.

 

[XMonkey]

It's also a sad indication of how the republican party has fallen. When your savior is Mitt "Shit" Romney and Rick Santorum is your backup plan, you can pretty much kiss the White House goodbye -- at least until 2016.

If they don't turn towards moderation after they lose this year, they can kiss 2016 goodbye, too. They are not only ignoring the obvious demographic shifts in this country, but actively pursuing immigration policy that will turn off Hispanics completely. They're clinging to a sinking ship filled with old white people.

 

[Monocle]

This cretin's professional ruination would be the brightest jewel in the crown of Lady Justice. I hope he's caught on his knees in a grimy outhouse, gnawing a fat cock.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Yeah, I find it amusing how he, more than any other candidate, gets on a high horse about Iran being a theocracy. The cognitive dissonance just makes you shake your head.

The parallel he made to blacks being considered less than a full person, and not subjecting it to popular opinion, is what really blew me away. That's actually an argument for gay marriage, and he's using it as one for the opposite. My jaw literally dropped open when I read that line. How the same brain can contain those two thoughts at once is just mind boggling.

 

[Puddles]

Government-dictated morality and unrestricted capitalism: The worst of both worlds!

I hate these people so much. Their position is the complete opposite of logic.

What you do with your body is your own goddamn business.

Market failures are very much the government's business.

 

[MC Safety]

If they don't turn towards moderation after they lose this year, they can kiss 2016 goodbye, too. They are not only ignoring the obvious demographic shifts in this country, but actively pursuing immigration policy that will turn off Hispanics completely. They're clinging to a sinking ship filled with old white people.

I'm not sure it's about specific policies or agendas, but rather personalities.

Frankly, the pendulum always shifts. I believe it would shift in 2012 if it wasn't Romney being put up. And, of course, it's not going to budge for the Looney Skip Rooney Rick Santorum.

 

[faceless007]

Considering he's pretty conservative, isn't he going against his golden rule? Why does big government decide these things, why not leave it up to the individual states?

And people, he'll freaking do it... the man will go that far... no prez for him hopefully...

He's not a states-rights, small government conservative. In fact, he's the opposite, and criticizes that wing of the Republican party:

One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a Libertarianish right.

They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down, keep our regulations low, and that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. That is not how traditional conservatives view the world.

There is no such society that I am aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.

 

[Open Source]

There is a difference.

Liberals want big government where it makes sense: addressing societal problems and needs in sectors where the private market is ineffective or produces unacceptable outcomes.

Conservatives want big government where it doesn't make sense: imposing the same set of morals on everybody, regulating what goes into your body, etc.

Federalism is not a big government/small government. It's simply a method of giving different powers to different levels of government.

It's more costly to maintain than a unitary government, but it also allows for increased democratic participation, for localities to customize their government to fit their needs, and for "laboratories of democracy" - experimentation with policy on a small scale that can then be attempted on a larger scale if it is successful.

Despite the benefits of giving power to local governments, the national government must be empowered to protect states and municipalities from violating fundamental rights, to resolve disputes and simplify interactions between states, and to undertake tasks that are necessary for the nation as a whole but that individual states don't have the ability or incentive to undertake.

I'd have to put marriage in the national group, myself, since having marriages that become valid or invalid depending on what state you are in is bonkers.

On a tangent, I would argue that liberals want to forcibly impose their morality on others as well.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

I thought the more attention this fucker gets, the less popular he will be like the other GOP candidates. Or the more attention he gets the less crazy he gets. Neither is happening. How the hell can this guy win any state, is beyond logic? What kind of crazy phenomenon is this?
It´s really sad to see the GOP went so much far to the right and crazy. George Bush was not as crazy as this tool. That says a lot.

 

[Open Source]

Not electable loon says something bonkers.

That he'd spend a second of thought on a plan to unmarry anyone should tell you how far gone this goofball is.

It's also a sad indication of how the republican party has fallen. When your savior is Mitt "Shit" Romney and Rick Santorum is your backup plan, you can pretty much kiss the White House goodbye -- at least until 2016.



Hahah. No.

On the other hand, it should tell you a lot that Santorum can't even win his own party's primary, against a field that is arguably their weakest since 1964.

 

[BocoDragon]

Screw this guy.

 

[marrec]

On the other hand, it should tell you a lot that Santorum can't even win his own party's primary, against a field that is arguably their weakest since 1964.

To be fair, Romney was a better candidate in 2008 and is the best candidate now.

He just has such a terrible stage presence.

 

[XMonkey]

I'm not sure it's about specific policies or agendas, but rather personalities.

Frankly, the pendulum always shifts. I believe it would shift in 2012 if it wasn't Romney being put up. And, of course, it's not going to budge for the Looney Skip Rooney Rick Santorum.

When it comes to something like immigration policy, I don't think it has to do with the personality of the party candidate much at all. If you're for putting up a wall along our entire southern border with the military guarding it, while providing no clear means to improve the legal immigration pathway, you aren't going to win over the Hispanic vote no matter how charismatic you are.

Honestly, the pendulum has been swinging right for awhile even with Obama in office. The hard-right turn the GOP has taken has caused many Democrats (and I would include Obama in this) to look somewhat like the conservatives of just a few decades ago. As we know, even Reagan would be too liberal to run in the GOP today. What we need is the pendulum to shift back to an actual left.

 

[Puddles]

On a tangent, I would argue that liberals want to forcibly impose their morality on others as well.

How so? As in we don't think chronic illnesses or injuries should go untreated, and we don't want to see The Grapes of Wrath re-enacted every time labor is in a weak position in the market? If those are morals, then yes, we do want to forcibly impose our morality.

 

[Alcibiades]

eh, I don't think he would get over 40% in a general election - once the country pays attention they'll realize how crazy his views are...

that said, I don't think he has a chance at the nomination... there are still lots of primaries in the Northeast to take place as well as California... if Romney can run even in all the South and Midwest (which he seems to be doing), then the blue states will put him over the top

 

[MC Safety]

When it comes to something like immigration policy, I don't think it has to do with the personality of the party candidate much at all. If you're for putting up a wall along our entire southern border with the military guarding it, while providing no clear means to improve the legal immigration pathway, you aren't going to win over the Hispanic vote no matter how charismatic you are.

You are missing the point. I'm not sure why you've got a bee in your bonnet about immigration, but it is irrelevant.

People say, "But if this happens ..." And this either happens or it does not.

The pendulum shifts regardless.

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

I thought the more attention this fucker gets, the less popular he will be like the other GOP candidates. Or the more attention he gets the less crazy he gets. Neither is happening. How the hell can this guy win any state, is beyond logic? What kind of crazy phenomenon is this?
It´s really sad to see the GOP went so much far to the right and crazy. George Bush was not as crazy as this tool. That says a lot.

I think the primaries have been having a low turnout so far, because it's only for registered Republicans and obviously they aren't so enthusiastic about any of their candidates. I figure the people who do show up to vote are either the true believers or the ones who's number one priority is getting Obama out of the White House.

Plus the libertarians.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

American politics: Discussing the issues that really matter.

Hahahaha. Good one.

 

[senador]

I used to get pissed at Santorum, now I can only laugh at him.

Teach me.

I'm still pissed. So what if he probably won't win. The fact that a bigot asshole MFer like this is even in the running just pisses me off. We should be passed this in this day and age. He shouldn't have any support, he shouldn't have even gotten close to getting this far. He should have been a joke and died out just like Herman Cain.

Really? Going to use your power as president to undo the lives of a small percentage of couples in the country? What a waste of everything you (Santorum) asshole.

 

[Mortrialus]

What's his economic policy? Pull funding from non-essential sectors like science, medical research, social programs(Welfare, Food stamps...ect...); Tax breaks for big business; Military spending up the wazoo?

"Oh Hai industry lobbyist. What can I do for you?"

 

[XMonkey]

You are missing the point. I'm not sure why you've got a bee in your bonnet about immigration, but it is irrelevant.

People say, "But if this happens ..." And this either happens or it does not.

The pendulum shifts regardless.

Perhaps I am. Maybe you could expand on your remark about it being about personalities and not policy, then.

 

[Open Source]

How so? As in we don't think chronic illnesses or injuries should go untreated, and we don't want to see The Grapes of Wrath re-enacted every time labor is in a weak position in the market? If those are morals, then yes, we do want to forcibly impose our morality.

Yes, I think you have the idea. But obviously it goes beyond the extreme circumstances you describe into more mundane and less obviously necessary areas. And my moral code is most likely right in line with yours - I just draw the line at a different place in terms of where to forcibly take money from others to fund those moral imperatives - the reasons being that 1) economic freedom (keeping your money) should be maintained as much as possible, because economic freedom provides incentives for productivity and thus a society's long-term prosperity 2) dependence on entitlements others takes away those same incentives, whether it's a corporation slumming it with earmarked defense contracts or a person dependent on the social safety net who realizes that the marginal improvement in his life for working hard and educating himself isn't worth the effort and 3) too often entitlements are treated as jobs programs for the agents who deliver the benefits (esp. in education), and thus the efficiency of those programs is compromised.

I'm certainly not in favor of abolishing the safety net altogether and even favor expanding it in some places.

 

[AzureNightmare]

Can't we lock this lunatic away in a mental hospital, preferably one of those sound proofed padded rooms? I can't say gay marriage really jives with me on a religious level, but it isn't my place, nor the government's place to say yay or nay to it. They're human beings all the same and should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want, be it moral or immoral in the eyes of the major religions so as long as it does no one else any harm. To deny them this basic freedom is the anti-thesis of everything that America stands for.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

Not every politician is per definition a hypocrite and/or flip-flopper. But it seems that in American politics your chances of success are bigger if you are though...

Not necessarily (entirely) true. John Carry was crucified by the GOP for being a flip flopper. Hell, the people had even flip flops at the GOP convention.

 

[phosphor112]

It's funny, as a Muslim myself, what I have to say about this is that he can fuck off and leave gays alone.

Don't bring your fascist shit into this country.

 

[Trouble]

Christ, what an asshole.

 

[Izayoi]

Can't we lock this lunatic away in a mental hospital, preferably one of those sound proofed padded rooms? I can't say gay marriage really jives with me on a religious level, but it isn't my place, nor the government's place to say yay or nay to it. They're human beings all the same and should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want, be it moral or immoral in the eyes of the major religions so as long as it does no one else any harm. To deny them this basic freedom is the anti-thesis of everything that America stands for.

Padded? Why on earth would we want to protect him from anything?