Will the Republican voters make the same mistake as they did in 2008? Nominating an unelectable.
That would be foolish. Look at the facts deeper. Vet him. Decide if he can win the critical independents rather than just the right of the right.
LARGEST DEFEAT, LEAST POPULAR OF ALL 100 SENATORS
"In the November 7, 2006 election, Santorum lost by over 700,000 votes, receiving 41% of the vote to Casey's 59%, the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent senator since 1980 and the largest losing margin for an incumbent Republican senator ever." (Wikipedia)
SurveyUSA polling taken right before the election showed that Santorum was the LEAST POPULAR OF ALL 100 SENATORS, with a 38% approval rating and a net approval rating of -19%. Survey
Cannot win independents, critical to winning the election!!!!
Controversial remarks, judgmental, righteous, government control - See "least popular of all 100 senators"
His famous "man on dog" remarks (see below)
“Santorum was putting an emphasis on the cultural issues, which didn’t sit well with independent,
suburban swing voters in this state,”
Does not know how to govern or run anything.
He will be shredded by the Obama machine.
2006 Highest lobbyist and lobbyist family contributions of all members of congress; 40% more than
next highest in Senate
Every other Tueday morning, he held legislative briefing meetings for lobbyists.
After the loss, he made large sums from organizations he benefited with legislation.
"President Santorum, an honest man who honestly holds strong views that reflect maybe 5 percent of the American population. Electing Santorum would put the presidency in the hands of a man who proudly identifies with a tradition of using state to power to persecute dissenters, of whom, should he ever reach the presidency, there would be many."
Mr. Santorum is a very good speaker and a man of strong religious beliefs. A good man. An excellent orator. But not right for the office he is running for. He has zero experience running anything - and the Presidency is not a place for "on the job training. (See Qualifications To Be President.)
His record has been one of putting too much emphasis on cultural issues, making remarks that can seem extreme, righteous, and/or judgmental. At times, it seems that he wants to impose his beliefs on others.
This likely contributed to his being the least popular of all 100 senators in 2006, per a Survey.
While his positions and controversial remarks and strong emphasis appeal to conservatives and evangelicals, it is likely that they will alienate independent or swing voters (when they really look at him in any more depth). Without getting a large number of those voters, the election cannot be won.
His dealing with lobbyists and running biweekly meetings for them and his receiving over $500,000 from lobbyists in 2006 (a number 40% greater than the second highest senator) will likely be an issue. After his loss he received large payments for "consulting" from organizations that were grateful for the legislation he promoted for their benefit.
He simply is not qualified to do the actual day to day job. And we've seen what happened by hiring an unqualified person for President. Not a good mistake to repeat.
Besides that, we need a person who can get results and improve things - and only a person with experience and great past results can do that!
(Don't be taken in by his claims of virtue, as he does mudslinging, fibbing, and negative ads himself. He recently "robocalled" Democrats to come vote for him in the Michigan primary, the first known incident of that type in history. This could have made about a 3.5% difference in the primary, but the idea is that it is a Republican primary where they are selecting the Republican nominee.)
2006 record loss
Santorum’s last race -- an 18-percentage-point defeat in 2006 bid -- raises questions about his appeal to independent voters who could help decide the national election in November, as well as to Republicans who will determine who gets the party’s nomination.
Santorum’s loss was “the largest defeat by a Republican United States senator seeking election or re-election in modern Pennsylvania history,”
“Santorum was putting an emphasis on the cultural issues, which didn’t sit well with independent, suburban swing voters in this state,”
Opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights do have appeal in Republican primaries, and have contributed to Santorum’s recent rise. A Pew Research Center for the People and the Press poll of Republican and Republican-leaning voters conducted Feb. 8-12 and released yesterday found Santorum edging out Romney for the nomination.
High powered lobbyist - and dealing with lobbyists while a senator
While campaigning for president, Santorum portrays himself as the candidate of the working class who grew up as the grandson of a coal miner. Opponents of the former senator accuse him of being a Washington insider unable to fix a system he helped design.
“He became a high-powered lobbyist,”
While a senator: At his biweekly Tuesday morning meetings, Santorum would share information about the legislative agenda and field questions from lobbyists briefed lobbyists. See K Street Project, below.
In 2006, Mr. Santorum led all federal candidates in contributions from lobbyists and their family members (more than 40% greater than the second place senator).
Made millions of dollars after he was voted out of office, doing "stealth lobbying." He worked with organizations whose benefit he had fought for while a senator.
Accusations of Hypocrisy
Santorum’s 2006 loss came after he was accused by Democrats of being hypocritical for moving his family to suburban Virginia, yet still claiming a property tax deduction and tuition reimbursement in Pennsylvania. The school district where his Penn Hills home was located paid $55,000 to reimburse the on-line eduction of his children through the state’s Cyber Charter School program, according to the Pittsburgh Post- Gazette. The state repaid the district in a legal settlement after a Democratic school board member challenged the reimbursement.
It was an issue that resonated with voters and echoed charges Santorum raised when he won his initial race for the U.S. House in 1990 by attacking his opponent for having moved to Virginia and lost touch with Pennsylvanians.
Santorum’s political image was also a factor in his unsuccessful campaign.
After starting his career as a fiscal conservative who emphasized lower taxes and government spending, Santorum had by 2006 become as well known for his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.
And eventually his famous "man on dog" comment
He caused a stir in 2003 when, during an interview with the Associated Press, he made graphic comments while discussing his views about homosexual acts. He said they were wrong, along with “other, what I would consider to be, acts outside of traditional heterosexual relationships.”
“In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever, to my knowledge, included homosexuality,” Santorum said in the April 7, 2003 interview, according to a transcript released by the AP. “That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be.”
“The radical feminists succeeded in undermining the traditional family and convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness,” Santorum wrote, in a passage that was interpreted by some critics as a suggestion that women shouldn’t work.
“The impression that people have -- the moderate and swing voters have -- is that he’s too conservative for them
He is "not a believer in birth control." The socially-conservative candidate said birth control harms women.
"I think it's harmful to women; I think it's harmful to society," Santorum said in this interview found by the Washington Post.
Santorum's statements in 2006 were not an anomaly. He has expressed a similar sentiment more recently. In October, while he was in the throngs of campaigning in socially conservative Iowa, Santorum gave an interview with an evangelical blog where discussed the "dangers" of contraception.
"It becomes deconstructed to the point where it's simply pleasure," he said of contraception. "And that's certainly a part of it--and it's an important part of it, don't get me wrong--but there's a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special."
Santorum went on to say that it's not just a moral issue, but a public policy issue, too, indicating the government has a role in contraception policy.
"I'm not running for preacher. I'm not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues," Santorum said. "These have profound impact on the health of our society."
Earmarks, big government spending
Developed a reputation for his robust use of "earmarks," those measures slipped into expansive spending bills that provide money for home-state projects.
Santorum also advocated big government programs in education and transportation and benefits for low-income people while in Congress.
"I've voted toughly over the years to cut spending and to rein in entitlements," he said recently - but his actions and record belie that claim.
In 2003, Santorum was a leading advocate for extending Medicare prescription drug benefits to seniors, a measure that conservative critics branded as a massive entitlement expansion that would run up the federal budget deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars. He now says the vote was a mistake.
Santorum also voted for a massive highway bill in 2005 that was stuffed with earmarks, including the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska.
He fought food stamp cuts in 2005 and has pushed hard to get more federal money for Amtrak and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which provides fuel aid to the poor. Both are programs popular in Pennsylvania but considered by many conservatives to be examples of a bloated federal government.
Santorum worked to extend subsidies in 2005 for Pennsylvania's dairy farms. The $1 billion, two-year national program paid dairy farmers when milk prices dropped.
A prolific "earmarker" who sought billions of dollars in wasteful spending.
In February 2006 Time Magazine described a synthetic-fuel tax-credit amendment that Santorum added to a larger bill as "a multibillion-dollar scam" that benefited "a small group of the politically well connected."
He favors a constitutional abortion ban and opposes abortion even in cases of rape.
He juxtaposed same-sex marriage with pedophilia and bestiality during an interview.
Catholic church abuse
He again agreed with the premise that it was "no surprise that the center of the Catholic Church abuse took place in very liberal, or perhaps the nation's most liberal area, Boston."
“Diversity creates conflict. If we celebrate diversity, we create conflict,” Santorum told the audience in Ottumwa.
THE K STREET PROJECT
In 2004, he met with other senators to discuss Glickman’s hiring as chief executive officer of the movie industry group, which is one of the most coveted trade association posts because of its salary of about $1.3 million and access to Hollywood’s biggest stars and studio heads.
“We talked about making sure that we have fair representation on K Street,” Santorum told the newspaper Roll Call in 2004. “I admit that I pay attention to who is hiring, and I think it’s important for leadership to pay attention.”
At his biweekly Tuesday morning meetings, Santorum would share information about the legislative agenda and field questions from lobbyists, said Norquist, who attended one of them in 2002. He estimated there were 30 to 40 Republican- leaning lobbyists.
A year later, Santorum disavowed the project during his 2006 re-election race as he faced fire from Democrats who said it was part of a “culture of corruption.”
“We don’t have a K Street Project,” Santorum said, according to a Washington Times report in January of that year.
Santorum earns two Pinocchios for denying his connection with the lobbyist initiative and one of its primary leaders.
Behind the sweater vests, the faith and family, and the self-definition as a congressional reformer lies another Rick Santorum. This Rick Santorum favors big business, curries favor from lobbyists, and helped to bind the Washington influence industry to the Republican Party while serving in Congress..
CLAIM HE WARNED OF MELTDOWN AND BUBBLE
"In 2006, I went out and authored a letter with 24 other senators asking for major reform of Freddie and Fannie, warning of a meltdown and a bubble in the housing market," the former Pennsylvania senator he said. "I stood out, I stood tall and tried to get a reform, and we couldn't do it."
The letter, in other words, warned of the risk Fannie and Freddie might pose to the financial system if they couldn't cover their obligations.
Did he warn of "a meltdown and a bubble in the housing market," Rated false by Politfact.com