Sadly, it looks like Willard Romney's triple-hitter in MD/DC/WI this weekend has cemented his status as the nominee-in-waiting, at least in the eyes of the media. This means that we won't have Rick Santorum to kick around much longer, especially if he manages to lose his home state of PA a few weeks out.
But could it be -- could we be lucky enough -- that (assuming Willard loses the general) Rick Santorum will emerge as the "next-in-line" candidate in 2016, thereby automatically becoming the odds-on favorite to win that year's nominating contest?
Follow me over the orange iCloud-thing.
The Republican party has a bizarrely predictable habit of nominating the white man whose "turn" it is to represent the party. Witnesseth:
1976: Ronald Reagan primaries Gerald Ford and loses. Wins the next primary in 1980.
1980: George HW Bush runs again Reagan in the primaries and loses. Wins the next contested primary in 1988.
1988: Bob Dole runs against Bush in the primaries and loses. Wins the next contested primary in 1996.
2000: This one might be the exception -- Dan Quayle, the last sitting Republican VP, runs in the primary but ends up withdrawing and supporting W, the choice of the money men who run the Republican party.
2000: McCain runs against Bush and loses. Wins the next contested primary in 2008, despite the fact that he is basically viewed by the Republican base the way most liberal Democrats view Joe Lieberman.
2008: Romney runs against McCain and loses. Looks poised to win the 2012 primary.
Assuming that Santorum ends up falling short to Romney (which looks increasingly likely), will he be set up to be the "next-in-line" candidate in 2016, and therefore the frontrunner for that campaign season? Or will 2016 be a repeat of 2000, in which Republicans, desperate to retake power after two terms of a Democratic president, coalesce around a purportedly attractive candidate who isn't as obviously nuts as Santo? (In other words, could someone like Chris Christie or Marco Rubio play the W to Santorum's Quayle)?
Honestly, even taking into account the Republicans' recent lurch even farther to the right, I can't imagine the powers-that-be allowing Santorum to get the nomination in '16, a year when they'll be far more likely to actually win the general election. This is doubly so considering that big name Republicans -- including Christie, Rubio, Mitch Daniels, and Bob McDonnell -- are likely to throw their hats into the ring.
At the same time, if Romney loses to Obama, the cries from the Erick Ericksons of the world are likely to be that "We nominated someone too moderate!" This was the claim made by Teabaggers after the 2008 election, and it caused the (very destructive) clown show that we've witnessed over the last three and a half years. If history repeats itself after a "moderate" (snort) Romney loses to Obama, Santorum might just have a shot at the gold ring in 2016.
Which is actually kind of terrifying.