A little (disturbing) something to think about

[eclectic_boy]

Posit: Rick Santorum has now done enough to establish himself as a credible candidate that, even though he will lose the nomination to Romney, he will now be the "next in line" automatic frontrunner for 2016 (or 2020).

Discuss.

Comments

[sildra.livejournal.com]

I really, really hope not. The political discourse in this country has shifted too far to the right as it is.

As for plausibility... it's hard to say. This time around, before the primaries started people were talking about all these new people who were the likely candidates--Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, etc.--and none of them ended up even running. I think there are people who are currently more active in politics than Santorum (who hasn't held elected office since 2006) who, if they chose to run, would get more establishment support in the way Romney is getting right now. But you never know who's actually going to run until the election season starts.

[reldnahkram.livejournal.com]

Two words: Chris Christie.

[jere7my.livejournal.com]

That's one word twice. And a tie.

[irilyth]

I don't think the Republican Party can unite behind evangelical bigotry, and that's what Santorum brings. He just doesn't have any appeal to the neocon/hawk/whatever or libertarian wings of the party. (And if the party contracts to the point where the evangelical bigots are a majority, they won't be able to win a general election.)

[creed-of-hubris.livejournal.com]

or he might merely net a lucrative Fox News contract.

[eclectic-boy.livejournal.com]

Now that has a certain plausibility to me... but I think he's too much of a true believer, with too much of a sense that he can change the world, to limit himself to that. Huckabee, even Palin, I thought of as willing to trade in their ticket in the Presidential Lottery for a sure-thing Fox job. But my instinct is that Santorum won't be satisfied until he's the nominee, or at least gets defeated more handily than he's being right now.