(Idle speculation time here....)
Interesting NYMag article here on the Republican race and its repercussions depending on who wins. I'm sticking with my prediction from last August that Romney will win the nomination, and I think he'll probably (hopefully) lose the election. Then what?
Two factors then push in the same direction in 2016 - the Republicans will turn against the faction that led the way to failure in 2012, and the Republicans strongly favor nominating the "next in line" who was closest to winning the nomination. The NYMag article somehow misses how well Santorum would be set up in '16, especially given the inevitable claim that the Rs failed to be true to their roots by nominating Romney.
Santorum would be an exceptionally weak candidate given demographics, increasingly secular voters outside of the GOP, and increased acceptance of homosexuality. He'll respond to this problem but he would tack slightly, only slightly, to center, de-emphasizing some social issues and maybe even changing a bit on a few. Mostly he'll spend the next four years raising money for himself, creating an organization, and putting deposits in the favor bank among the GOP. He'll defeat a libertarian challenger and someone attacking him from the right.
The Ds won't be that strong, either. The ruling party tends to get tired and accumulate scandals after eight years and will be without an obvious successor, although a 69-year old Hillary Clinton will have set herself up for running by leaving the Obama Administration four years earlier. Balancing that out against Santorum, the Democrats win. Then what?
I've thought for a while that Republicans need to lose consistently before they'll change. Losing this year isn't enough, but it might be in 2016. Hopefully more will have wakened from the Republican opium dream of climate denial. We could see a more realistic Republican party by then. Maybe 2020 or 2024 there will be a Republican President Chris Christie, not nearly as good as a Democrat but not a total disaster.
UPDATE, March 1: might as well add another idle prediction - Ron Paul won't run on a third party ticket. Not for the general reason that this would make trouble for his son, but the specific reason that his son would have to choose between endorsing his father and endorsing his own party, which would be bad for Rand's future. Blood is thicker than libertarianism.
UPDATE, March 7: the Lamestream Media catches on to Santorum 2016. No hat tip but I doubt I was the first to publicly notice it, and Santorum probably thought it through as a possibility when he was still a polling asterisk.
UPDATE, March 1: might as well add another idle prediction - Ron Paul won't run on a third party ticket. Not for the general reason that this would make trouble for his son, but the specific reason that his son would have to choose between endorsing his father and endorsing his own party, which would be bad for Rand's future. Blood is thicker than libertarianism.
UPDATE, March 7: the Lamestream Media catches on to Santorum 2016. No hat tip but I doubt I was the first to publicly notice it, and Santorum probably thought it through as a possibility when he was still a polling asterisk.
