Not sure if this is a common occurrence or not but I found this funny. Way to stick to your budget, Rick. The sad part is people are actually giving him money. :huh:

https://www.ricksantorum.com/stillneedhelp/

I donated -$10.

http://www.ricksantorum.com/spending-cuts-and-entitlements-reform

Spending Core Principles

• Live within our means so that...

Derped.

Donate a nickel and he'll probably end up losing money with the credit card processing fees.

justincredible;1180927 wrote:Not sure if this is a common occurrence or not but I found this funny. Way to stick to your budget, Rick. The sad part is people are actually giving him money. :huh:

https://www.ricksantorum.com/stillneedhelp/

It's pretty common. Still funny 'cause it's Scrotorum though.

Yea john Glenn has like 4 mill or so in campaign debt from years ago

I can tell a lot of OC posters are very young.

This doesn't mean squat. This happens all the time with so many past candidates it isn't even funny.

Generally the debt gets ignored, forgiven, and/or is picked-up at least in part by the taxpayer.

Santorum is just another in a long line of Repubs and Dems who had their sights on the WH and failed. Running for POTUS ain't cheap boyz.

Get your jollies off because it happens to be Santorum all you want, but it's not unique and is bound to happen again with yet another politician we're sure to hate.

believer;1181221 wrote:I can tell a lot of OC posters are very young.

This doesn't mean squat. This happens all the time with so many past candidates it isn't even funny.

Generally the debt gets ignored, forgiven, and/or is picked-up at least in part by the taxpayer.

Santorum is just another in a long line of Repubs and Dems who had their sights on the WH and failed. Running for POTUS ain't cheap boyz.

Get your jollies off because it happens to be Santorum all you want, but it's not unique and is bound to happen again with yet another politician we're sure to hate.

My bad.

I met Santorum back in '00, at a buddy's wedding in Altoona, PA. His (senator?) campaign wanted to use a clubhouse, which my friend already rented for the rehearsal dinner. Seemed like a greasy figure, always smiling.

Manhattan Buckeye;1181526 wrote:Seemed like a greasy figure, always smiling.

I bet he's a politician?

Still laugh when I remember people thinking Santorum would be a major party's nominee for President. Those were a fun few months.

Just my opinion but Santorum was never a serious candidate - he had no platform to build on. He couldn't run on his experience as a private industry success (Romney) or a public rep that actually made a difference (Gingrich). That said, considering we have President Choom right now all bets are off.

Manhattan Buckeye;1182282 wrote:Just my opinion but Santorum was never a serious candidate - he had no platform to build on. He couldn't run on his experience as a private industry success (Romney) or a public rep that actually made a difference (Gingrich).

Completely agree. Never had a realistic shot in hell. But he attracted an extreme fringe of the party, and all of a sudden people started latching on to him because he "wasn't Romney."

Manhattan Buckeye;1182282 wrote:Just my opinion but Santorum was never a serious candidate - he had no platform to build on. He couldn't run on his experience as a private industry success (Romney) or a public rep that actually made a difference (Gingrich). That said, considering we have President Choom right now all bets are off.

I actually liked Santorum, a few votes in the Senate notwithstanding, but in the back of my mind I did wonder at times if he was in over his head. The crazy part is if Newt had any sense about him and had dropped out before Super Tuesday Santorum would've won Michigan, Ohio, and maybe some others, and he and Romney would still be duking it out right now.

As for the campaign debt, yes it is common, I remember reading somewhere that Hillary still has debt from her '08 campaign.

jhay78;1183767 wrote:As for the campaign debt, yes it is common, I remember reading somewhere that Hillary still has debt from her '08 campaign.

It's definitely common, but never has there been this much emphasis on the deficit for an election, so to not practice what you preach does come off as suspicious to some. While I find it amusing, I don't really care that much.

The nation has about 5 Trillion in debt from the 08 presidential campaign.

http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?&pageType=politics&catid=57417679&feed_id=3&videofeed=39&nb_splitPage=3

Not all campaigns are riddled with debt. Obviously I know Paul isnt winning. He is getting delegates and laying the groundwork for a true conservative party in the near future.

Hilary Clinton still owes from her campaign from 2007-08.
Hope this helps.

pmoney25;1183998 wrote:http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?&pageType=politics&catid=57417679&feed_id=3&videofeed=39&nb_splitPage=3

Not all campaigns are riddled with debt. Obviously I know Paul isnt winning. He is getting delegates and laying the groundwork for a true conservative party in the near future.

It better be the near future he is nearly 77 yrs old.

I dont mean him but his supporters and younger politicians he is influencing. He has just layed the groundwork.

believer;1181221 wrote:I can tell a lot of OC posters are very young.

This doesn't mean squat. This happens all the time with so many past candidates it isn't even funny.

Generally the debt gets ignored, forgiven, and/or is picked-up at least in part by the taxpayer.

Santorum is just another in a long line of Repubs and Dems who had their sights on the WH and failed. Running for POTUS ain't cheap boyz.

Get your jollies off because it happens to be Santorum all you want, but it's not unique and is bound to happen again with yet another politician we're sure to hate.

I'm sorry, but this is the kind of attitude that has allowed canidates like Santorum to win political office. Canidates that can't even run a campaign on a budget propertly and then win a political office and screw us over. The "it's ok, it happens all the time" attitude is not helping.

pmoney25;1183998 wrote:http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?&pageType=politics&catid=57417679&feed_id=3&videofeed=39&nb_splitPage=3

Not all campaigns are riddled with debt. Obviously I know Paul isnt winning. He is getting delegates and laying the groundwork for a true conservative party in the near future.

The only canidate that would know how to stay within a budget is Dr. Paul.

pmoney25;1184052 wrote:I dont mean him but his supporters and younger politicians he is influencing. He has just layed the groundwork.

I am hoping that he leaves a lasting impression with the younger generation. Sadly, most of the generation in power seem to think it is ok to pass the debt on to the next generations to come.

believer;1181221 wrote:This doesn't mean squat.

It's not unique, no, but when someone builds their campaign on fiscal conservatism, it DOES mean squat that they can't even run their own campaign without doing so on credit.

Newty Patooty did the same thing, and now he owes a certain Northeast Ohio company a hefty chunk of change that he doesn't seem too rushed to pay.

believer;1181221 wrote:This happens all the time with so many past candidates it isn't even funny.

And we wonder how we got into the economic mess we're in. We elect people who run campaigns on a credit line, and then we're shocked and amazed (or at least appalled) when they run the country the same way.

believer;1181221 wrote: Generally the debt gets ignored, forgiven, and/or is picked-up at least in part by the taxpayer.

In the case of someone who doesn't win, it's usually the former. Sort of a "we don't want to pay, and I dare you to drag us to court" mentality.

believer;1181221 wrote: Santorum is just another in a long line of Repubs and Dems who had their sights on the WH and failed. Running for POTUS ain't cheap boyz.

Which is why you either need Goldman-Sachs and other big business donors (Romney), a slew of avidly loyal fans (Paul), or a personal fortune you're willing to spend on it (Perot). Credit shouldn't be the option of choice, and it DEFINITELY shouldn't be ignored or shrugged off by anyone who:
(a) considers themselves a fiscal conservative, and
(b) professes to hate hypocrisy.

believer;1181221 wrote: Get your jollies off because it happens to be Santorum all you want, but it's not unique and is bound to happen again with yet another politician we're sure to hate.

Like I said, he's not even the only GOP candidate this year who ran his campaign on IOUs.

jhay78;1183767 wrote:I actually liked Santorum, a few votes in the Senate notwithstanding ...

I'm assuming you mean at least some of the 51 bills he sponsored or co-sponsored in the 2003-2004 session -- going a perfect 51-for-51 on bills that would increase spending.

Don't get me wrong, he seems like a nice, family-minded guy. The whole "gay-marriage-is-a-threat-to-the-American-family" thing aside (which spawned Lewis Black's famous "Gay Banditos" schtick), he seems like he'd make a nice neighbor. So I guess I "like" him from that standpoint.

jhay78;1183767 wrote:... but in the back of my mind I did wonder at times if he was in over his head. The crazy part is if Newt had any sense about him and had dropped out before Super Tuesday Santorum would've won Michigan, Ohio, and maybe some others, and he and Romney would still be duking it out right now.

Oh the horror ...

ts1227;1183794 wrote:It's definitely common, but never has there been this much emphasis on the deficit for an election, so to not practice what you preach does come off as suspicious to some. While I find it amusing, I don't really care that much.

If it became an "I'll pay it back over time" problem, I still would find it hypocritical, but I find it even more so when he's now asking fans to help him with it.

Skyhook79;1184031 wrote:It better be the near future he is nearly 77 yrs old.

And debt-free from this election, so I'm told.

dwccrew;1184306 wrote:I'm sorry, but this is the kind of attitude that has allowed canidates like Santorum to win political office. Canidates that can't even run a campaign on a budget propertly and then win a political office and screw us over. The "it's ok, it happens all the time" attitude is not helping.

Naturally, I agree with this.

dwccrew;1184306 wrote: The only canidate that would know how to stay within a budget is Dr. Paul.

Welll, I don't know about Romney, as he has the personal finances to pay off any debt he has incurred. Plus, he has some DEEP pockets, including Goldman-Sachs, paying for a lot of his campaign, it seems.

Of all the criticisms I have of Romney, and there are a TON, this isn't one I'm knowingly able to make at this very moment.

dwccrew;1184306 wrote: I am hoping that he leaves a lasting impression with the younger generation. Sadly, most of the generation in power seem to think it is ok to pass the debt on to the next generations to come.

I hope that doesn't continue. If it does for much longer, the American dollar will go the way of the Russian ruble from a couple decades ago, and we'll be riding the same train of economic collapse. Sure, our train is later, but the stops have all been the same.

O-Trap,

I never said I like or agree with ignoring campaign debt.

While I agree that any candidate who campaigns & lectures on fiscal prudence in government affairs should practice what he or she preaches, I'm simply stating that it's nothing new. The folks who are jizzing their shorts over Santorum act as if this is something unique to Ricky. Hardly.

Nevertheless, running for POTUS is very expensive. If there is any "justification" to it, it is the argument that without the spending (and I suppose the subsequent "debt forgiveness") our political system could/would come to screeching halt.

Call it a "cost of doing business" or at least an unfortunate costly offshoot of running a two-party representative democracy.

O-Trap,

I never said I like or agree with ignoring campaign debt.

While I agree that any candidate who campaigns & lectures on fiscal prudence in government affairs should practice what he or she preaches, I'm simply stating that it's nothing new. The folks who are jizzing their shorts over Santorum act as if this is something unique to Ricky. Hardly.

Nevertheless, running for POTUS is very expensive. If there is any "justification" to it, it is the argument that without the spending (and I suppose the subsequent "debt forgiveness") our political system could/would come to a screeching halt.

One could also argue that without it or forcing POTUS candidates to "pay their bills" automatically reserves that domain to the uber-rich.

So let's just call it a "cost of doing business" or at least an unfortunate costly offshoot of running a two-party representative democracy.

O-Trap,

I never said I like or agree with ignoring campaign debt.

While I agree that any candidate who campaigns & lectures on fiscal prudence in government affairs should practice what he or she preaches, I'm simply stating that it's nothing new. The folks who are jizzing their shorts over Santorum act as if this is something unique to Ricky. Hardly.

Nevertheless, running for POTUS is very expensive. If there is any "justification" to it, it is the argument that without the spending (and I suppose the subsequent "debt forgiveness") our political system could/would come to a screeching halt.

One could also argue that without it or forcing POTUS candidates to "pay their bills" automatically reserves that domain to the uber-rich.

So let's just call it a "cost of doing business" or at least an unfortunate costly offshoot of running a two-party representative democracy.