Rick Santorum Concedes to Mitt Romney, Allows Party to Unite

Rick Santorum, largely for family reasons, has suspended his campaign. It comes just at the moment when it became clear that continuing on would be fruitless. Romney has the money, organization, and delegates to make a Santorum comeback unrealistic.

Kudos to Santorum for fighting so valiantly for so long despite being outgunned by candidates with more money and better organizations. More than just that, Santorum also deserves a thumbs up for leaving the race at an appropriate time while another candidate who I will not mention by name still fights on for nothing but his own ego.

Had Santorum’s daughter not fallen more ill, maybe he would have continued to campaign, but I choose to believe he was ready to put his own personal goals aside and do what was best for his party and nation–which at this juncture is to allow Romney to focus on campaigning against President Obama.

Get ready for a nasty presidential campaign! We’ve already seen Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC concoct some absurdly offensive assertions against Mormonism. We’re going to see the wealthy vilified like we’ve never seen before. This won’t be pretty, and to overcome such obstacles, Romney will have to earn the support of those who were firmly behind Rick Santorum. There’s no doubt that this GOP nomination process has been a trying one and the party has grown somewhat divided. Some Santorum supporters have grown so attached to their candidate and so upset with Romney about his campaign’s attacks on the other GOP candidates that they refuse to support him. Some, like @CatholicLisa, have insisted they will not vote for Romney in any circumstance, saying he’s the same as Obama, but that doesn’t seem to be the overall sentiment.

Will they fail to support Romney when his name opposes “Obama”? If so, the party is in bigger trouble than anyone thinks. It’s more likely though that Obama will be enough to energize not only his own base, but the Republican base too and those who have been weary of Romney will get on board.

What could give Romney a huge edge is the timing of gas prices. Obama’s biggest weakness may be his failure to find and support economically feasible energy in America. His need to placate the environmentalist movement in his party has kept him away from nuclear power, clean coal, and new oil pipelines. If gas prices surpass and sit above $4.00 in November, it will be extremely challenging him to convince Americans that he isn’t at least partially at fault.

Regardless of what lies ahead, it is good to move forward from the primary season. We will now have a little slow spot when the inevitable will happen–Mitt Romney will collect the rest of the delegates he needs and the real campaign between two very different paths for our country will begin.

For an interesting take on the decision America now faces, check out this video that contrasts the fundamental philosophies of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street Movement. It’s worth your time. Please leave your thoughts in the comments below. Thank you for reading.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Rick Santorum Concedes to Mitt Romney, Allows Party to Unite

  1. I’m sure you will issue an apology to Chris Matthews given that it was Lawrence O’Donnell making those comments. 🙂

    • One could argue that any group of people who promote hatred toward other groups of people without provocation is a cult. Personally I don’t care what religion the candidates are as long as they don’t promote hatred. The Republicans in the race do use religion to promote hatred so I would never vote for them. Paul is about the only one that doesn’t use religion in that manner. If they stopped attacking gays, and now women, they could probably get a heck of a lot more voters. But they just won’t let it go.

  2. I don’t think the GOP’s reluctance to force people to pay for the birth control pill makes them anti-women any more than their reluctance to pay for prophylactics makes them anti-man.

  3. I had a feeling when I made that post you would pick out the part about women to respond to. And your response shows the exact problem with the argument. I’ve said it before and still believe it: we should pass a law that says that if you have a penis, then you cannot make decisions or laws about women’s healthcare. So here are a few things to think about.

    In the recent discussions about abortion and contraception for women, the “panels” have been made up entirely of men who don’t really know about or understand women’s healthcare issues.

    About contraception: birth control pills are used to treat a variety of menstrual disorders including amenorrhea (absence of menstruation), dysmenorrhea (abnormally painful menstruation) and hypermenorrhea (abnormally Menstruation is the periodic shedding of the lining of the uterus, causing bloody vaginal discharge.heavy menstrual bleeding). They may also be prescribed to treat a number of other conditions, including polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), hirsutism (abnormal hair growth) and endometriosis. In addition, birth control pills may be taken to regulate irregular menstrual cycles and to help in the transitional period prior to menopause. In addition to preventing pregnancy and treating various medical conditions, birth control pills also offer women a number of significant health benefits, including a decreased risk of colorectal, ovarian and endometrial cancers.
    (http://crooksandliars.com/2008/07/17/jack-cafferty-viagra-is-for-a-medical-condition-birth-control-is-a-lifestyle-choice)

    Insurance companies cover viagra. I bet plenty of congressmen are getting it on their government healthcare plan. Even Catholic Churches that started this fight against contraception say they would cover viagra.
    (http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/13/146822713/why-catholic-groups-health-plans-say-no-to-contraceptives-yes-to-viagra)

    Abortion is an important part women’s rights to make decisions about their body. It is interesting that over the past year there have been more anti-abortion laws passed by Republican states than ever before.
    (http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2011/07/13/graph-states-enact-record-number-162-of-anti-abortion-laws-in-first-half-of-2011/)
    Note that the graph was only 1/2 way through 2011.
    If we are going to pass laws against abortion, let’s also pass laws against vasectomies.

    As a general rule, Republicans are against abortion because they want to protect the unborn baby that is in a woman’s womb. But once that baby is born, they generally don’t want to take care of it because they fight against things like welfare and gay adoptions. Here is another law we should pass. If we pass a law against abortion, then everyone that opposes it should have to adopt 1 unwanted child. I’m being sarcastic of course, but it really should be up to the mother to make the decision, or at the very least, up to women to make laws about that decision.

    In conclusion, I’m wondering why Republicans, particularly Santorum, have made such strong cases for this type of stuff during a Presidential election year. You know that they have chased away many women that would have voted for them if they had just shut up about it. And don’t blame the media for it because Santorum proudly brings it up on his own. It seemed like when economic numbers showed improvement (# of jobs created, unemployment falling), their fight turned to social issues, and those fights will cost them the election.

  4. Thank you for the long comment. I don’t fully understand the Catholic opposition to birth control, as I am not Catholic, but I respect their religious freedom. As such, I don’t think it is proper for the government to force them to pay for something that they think is wrong. It is akin to you owning a business and being forced to offer employees a service that you as the business owner morally objects to. Mitt Romney has held much more moderate social views than Santorum anyway.

    As far as abortion…I don’t want to get to into it, but I will say this. Why should any American be able to kill anybody who has a heartbeat and can feel pain? Your arguments on this topic must be science oriented, not emotion oriented.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s