Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Does Santorum think the voters are dumb by saying he is above the dirty politics of Mitt and Newt?
January 30, 2012 | Ralph Mitchell

Posted on 01/31/2012 7:14:20 PM PST by mitchell001

Tonight after the Florida Primary results were posted, Rick Santorum spoke from Las Vegas, Nevada. He said that he was staying above the fray, above the mud-slinging between Romney and Gingrich. We all know the only reason that he has not been hit with much mud from Romney or Gingrich is that his lower position in the primaries. He boasted that he was more positive than the others. However, since Gingrich is a mortal threat to Romney, Romney started the NEGATIVE ads against Gingrich. Gingrich had to counter with negative ads toward Romney or drop out of the race. Santorum is really playing the role of a Newt spoiler. To add insult to injury, Santorum is running negative, untrue ads against Gingrich in Nevada and Colorado. Santorum has now officially exposed himself to a possible relentless negative campaign with the Gingrich team. I know that Santorum has been the darling of the media and the sentimental favorite, but now he is playing for keeps from now on. Santorum must now be exposed to the same serious ad attacks which have had serious effects on the fortunes of the other candidates.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: gingrich; romney; santorum; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

1 posted on 01/31/2012 7:14:26 PM PST by mitchell001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

Meanwhile he is running negative ads in Iowa and Colorado.

They all do it and I am all for it as long as the ad represents the truth and does not spin it. For instance, showing Mitt Romney clearly saying that he was NOT a conservative is a valid ad and proves Newts point. Showing Mitt saying he is for Gun control is valid. Mitt ran ads claiming that Newt resigned in disgrace and that’s just factually wrong but the geriatric voters in Florida are too dumb to search for the truth.


2 posted on 01/31/2012 7:20:13 PM PST by klimeckg ("The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

See this post I made about Santorum: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2731419/posts

For those who want to attack me, note the date on the post. It was back in June. You just need to know to read the political games going on.


3 posted on 01/31/2012 7:27:39 PM PST by JimWayne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: klimeckg

I don’t see much difference from Newt to Mitt.


4 posted on 01/31/2012 7:28:17 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: klimeckg
They all do it and I am all for it as long as the ad represents the truth

Forget about that. This is a war and there is an old saying that 'the first casualty in war is the truth.'

5 posted on 01/31/2012 7:29:24 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001
I guess he does think we are stupid. I watched his speech tonight, and was even more disgusted with him. At some point, the hypocrisy should become evident: he spent about 80% of his speech criticizing the others for infighting, talking about how he is above that. Really? Didn't you just basically do the same thing, Rick?

It seems like in Rick's book criticisms of one’s opponents is only OK if he's the one doing it. Blech.

6 posted on 01/31/2012 7:31:59 PM PST by KJC1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

I wish you good luck on saying ANYTHING negative about that little man, I was berated by most of the freepers when I tried to point how devious he is.

In time, they will know.


7 posted on 01/31/2012 7:34:15 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KJC1

I thinl Newt should get out and support Santorum as the true conservative in the race.


8 posted on 01/31/2012 7:35:04 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
I don’t see much difference from Newt to Mitt.

Then you are either dumb, ignorant or a liar.

Which is it?
9 posted on 01/31/2012 7:35:23 PM PST by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

Newt needs to answer this question. He says that he could not concentrate during the last debate because Romney was lying too much and the audience was all Romney supporters. Well does he honestly think it will be different with Obama. I was very disappointed in his debate and if he can handle Romney how is he going to handle Obama. He does very well when he is winning but if he has any pressure, he cannot handle it. Very strange.


10 posted on 01/31/2012 7:35:49 PM PST by napscoordinator (Go Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Let the flaming begin.


11 posted on 01/31/2012 7:36:42 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

If Romney beat Newt by a “landslide” 14 points, Newt OBLITERATED Santorum by an embarassing 20 point spread. Rick is delusional.


12 posted on 01/31/2012 7:38:12 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Thanks for the post about Rick Santorum’s RINO actions in his past. Since he endorsed Mitt Romney last time in 2008, I agree with you, Santorum is a stalking horse for Romney, maybe in exchange for a VP spot.


13 posted on 01/31/2012 7:38:12 PM PST by mitchell001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Nice, substantive and may I say constructive criticism designed to change hearts and minds. More?


14 posted on 01/31/2012 7:38:30 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

I agree. Santorum is the most conservative and he has been largely neglected even here.


15 posted on 01/31/2012 7:39:28 PM PST by Jane Austen (Boycott the Philadelphia Eagles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
I don’t see much difference from Newt to Mitt.

Let's start with abortion:

Do you as a conservative pick:

a.) The politician who both while in office and out of office has always been pro-life?

b.) The politician who, with the exception to the run-up to the 2008 and 2012 POTUS nominations has been hard left-wing in his support of abortion, including providing for easy access to $50 abortions in his Health Care plan that he still supports?

1 guess as to which one is a.) and which one is b.)
16 posted on 01/31/2012 7:40:09 PM PST by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ez

You make an assertion (Rick is delusional) without data to back it up. By your logic, Newt should concede to Romney.
Please, I know there’s better.


17 posted on 01/31/2012 7:42:05 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
Yea, I get it, but Newt really doesn't need to lie, he just needs more money to run more ads that have a good message. But if he did, Romney deserves it! I can't stand anyone that governed Massachusetts. Lived there for 12 years and experienced their tyranny.

I would run ads that have Goeorge Soros saying Romney and Obama are the same. I would runs ads that have Obama saying that Obamacare was taken right from Romney Care.

“Why Vote for Romney when we have Obama?

18 posted on 01/31/2012 7:42:20 PM PST by klimeckg ("The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
By your logic, Newt should concede to Romney.

How do you figure?

19 posted on 01/31/2012 7:44:14 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

“I thinl Newt should get out and support Santorum as the true conservative in the race.”

Pardon me if Newt doesn’t take the advice of people that believe something that damn stupid.

I have more respect for Paul supporters.


20 posted on 01/31/2012 7:44:44 PM PST by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Newt was carpet bombed all week, and still got one out of every three voters to vote for him. Santorum had his best debates and the advantage of staying above the fray while the other two hacked away at each other, and could STILL only manage to garner 13%. In a four way race, shouldn’t 25% be the benchmark? Rick is delusional based on staying in the race based on his Iowa “win” , for which he camped out in Iowa for a year to get.


21 posted on 01/31/2012 7:48:07 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

Your post doesn’t make any sense. You claim that Santorum stating he is above the fray is BS, and then describe why he actually is because Newt and Mittens are solely in a cage match to the death with heavy doses of negative adds hitting the airwaves. Why didn’t you economize and just state you hate Rick Santorum? Why not the same venom towards Ron Paul who has been running adds hitting Newt, yet mysteriously laying of Mittens?


22 posted on 01/31/2012 7:48:17 PM PST by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Better, but let me ask; are you a single-issue voter? If so, you can count on the party to disappoint again. Santorum has been a practicing, faithful Catholic much longer than Xavier-come-lately Newt and has pro-life credentials at least as good. Gingrich’s only advantage is two friends who will bankroll a super PAC. That’s a game at which Mitt is better. Mitt’s primary campaign, and Mitt’s are modeled after Clinton in 1992; act like the presumptive nominee and some folks will treat you as such.


23 posted on 01/31/2012 7:48:29 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
Nice, substantive and may I say constructive criticism designed to change hearts and minds. More?

Well, since you've been here throughout the primaries, you've already seen all the factual evidence to contend a nonsense post like there is no difference between Newt and Mitt, but since you want to act stupid, let's start with post #16.
24 posted on 01/31/2012 7:49:30 PM PST by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Rush told us today that Romney is the second choice for Santorum voters, not Newt Gingrich.


25 posted on 01/31/2012 7:50:37 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

Newt made a strategic mistake after SC going after Mitt. What he should have done was spend all of his money going after Santorum’s big government voting record and his “small ideas.” If I was Newt I would work hard to bring Santorum down to single digits in NV so he will suspend asap, before Rmney builds too bog a lead to overcome in a two man race.


26 posted on 01/31/2012 7:51:22 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ez

We have no national primary. Florida is one state only and lost half their delegates. Newt also failed to make the ballot in his home state. Paul is working the caucus states and may end up with more delegates than Newt.


27 posted on 01/31/2012 7:51:44 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I’m trying to avoid name calling. Is this how Newt supporters will turn Obama supporters in a general election?


28 posted on 01/31/2012 7:54:21 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
Better, but let me ask; are you a single-issue voter? If so, you can count on the party to disappoint again. Santorum has been a practicing, faithful Catholic much longer than Xavier-come-lately Newt and has pro-life credentials at least as good.

So let's move on to the next issue, Gay rights.

Oh, and BTW, I could care less about which one is a catholic or who has senority in their catholicness; that is really a complete nonsense characteristic with respect to being POTUS.

Do you, as a supposed conservative, support:

a.) The candidate, who as Governor, pushed for clerics, and others to perform Gay Marriages? Who, when the Supreme Court pushed the issue back to the House and Senate of MA, decided they weren't moving fast enough so he went ahead and pushed the issue himself?

b.) The candidate who has never been for Gay rights or Gay marriage.


And now for the lightning round for the really dull of understanding, and those still contending that there isn't much difference between Mitt and Newt.

WIth regards to DADT:

a.) Do you support the candidate who has pledged NOT to re-instate DADT?

b.) Or the candidate who has pledged to reinstate DADT?
29 posted on 01/31/2012 7:54:43 PM PST by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
I’m trying to avoid name calling. Is this how Newt supporters will turn Obama supporters in a general election?

Anybody, and I mean anybody who has been on FreeRepublic for any length of time this primary season and has the temerity to post the most stupid post of the evening that there isn't any differnce between Mitt and Newt deserves as much ridicule and mockery as possible.

You want to know why?

Because there is no excuse, from a conservative, thinking, informed position to post such nonsense.

You sir, are a troll.
30 posted on 01/31/2012 7:56:57 PM PST by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ez

Let’s mutually design a HIT ad against Santorum. Let’s start with Jim Wayne’s June posting below. I invite others to join in and add to the following criticisms of Santorum.

Rick Santorum must be opposed because he is a RINO who I think is setting himself up to be the running mate of Mitt Romney. At that point, we will have freepers saying we should unite behind them.

Santorum is not in the same category as Palin, Bachmann, Allen West or Herman Cain.

Santorum supported funding for Amtrak. Santorum was for abortion (in 1990) before he was against it. Santorum supported ethanol as automobile fuel. Santorum supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey. Santorum endorsed Mitt Romney and called him a conservative. Santorum called himself a “progressive conservative” and positioned himself as such in the initial days.

Santorum and Arlen Specter were partners in pork-procurement and figured out that between them they could share the right rhetoric to get voters to vote for them.

Don’t get fooled. He just knows to use the right rhetoric. DO NOT help MITT ROMNEY. Support for Santorum is support for Mitt Romney.


31 posted on 01/31/2012 7:58:30 PM PST by mitchell001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

That is Rush’s opinion and he is welcome to it. I rather think this is an “ABG” phenomenon.
The most conservative figures are not in the race. Look, I haven’t said that Newtbots are stupid, or delusional, or anything like that. However when I say I support Santorum as the last conservative in the race, it’s abortion, immigration, taxes, spending, and military strength. Romney talks tough on immigration but his actions always come down elsewhere. Newt is an amnesty guy and always was.


32 posted on 01/31/2012 7:59:37 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: klimeckg

I just heard Rick Santorum on CNN. Wolf Blitzer asked him about Newt. Santorum goes ballistic and said this:
“Newt Gingrich left SC with all the momentum and wasted every bit of it with negative personal attacks. He blew it himself”.

Is this man delusional or what? He didn’t mention his buddy Romney. He didn’t mention the 15 million dollars in negative ads run against Gingrich. Apparently self-consumed liar thinks Romney will win the nomination and make him his VP. That’s why he staying in the race, after getting destroyed in SC and Florida by Newt Gingrich. He should be ashamed of himself. He’s trying his best to kill the conservative wing of the GOP with his bullheaded arrogance.


33 posted on 01/31/2012 8:00:06 PM PST by NKP_Vet (creep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jane Austen

That’s because we noticed Rick is NOT the most conservative, by a long shot. He’s a big government pro union moderate who happens to be pro life. At best.


34 posted on 01/31/2012 8:00:14 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Check my date, newbie, before you call me a troll. I’ve been through this primary season, and my early choice was run out by Romney’s OR. Gingrich is someone we’ve seen take bothe sides of many issues. Will he defend private property rights against the Feds or make nice with his bench buddy Nancy Pelosi? We know what he says now, but will he flip again?


35 posted on 01/31/2012 8:04:10 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001
Thanks for the post about Rick Santorum’s RINO actions in his past. Since he endorsed Mitt Romney last time in 2008

Santorum endorsed Romney!, The anti-Christian cult leader, the most passionate and proactive abortionist and pro homosexual agenda candidate we have ever had in the GOP?

No wonder Mitt is Santorum people's second choice.

36 posted on 01/31/2012 8:04:12 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

Wow, it’s as hard to attack Santorum as it is for him to make an impression. While everything about Newt is larger than life, everything about Rick is small. Small ideas, small speeches, small chance to win.


37 posted on 01/31/2012 8:07:45 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mitchell001

Santorum was for abortion?


38 posted on 01/31/2012 8:08:14 PM PST by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Then mabye you ought to take off your blinders, do some reading, and put on your thinking cap.


39 posted on 01/31/2012 8:09:51 PM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Wow. That was some foresight! Well done.


40 posted on 01/31/2012 8:10:24 PM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
That is Rush’s opinion and he is welcome to it.

It seems to be true, if Santorum voters can't get Rick, then Romney is their man.

I didn't know until minutes ago that Santorum himself is a Romney man, that is sick, bizarre.

41 posted on 01/31/2012 8:11:56 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

I don’t see much between Romney and Obama.


42 posted on 01/31/2012 8:14:46 PM PST by freemarketsfreeminds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
Check my date, newbie, before you call me a troll. I’ve been through this primary season, and my early choice was run out by Romney’s OR. Gingrich is someone we’ve seen take bothe sides of many issues. Will he defend private property rights against the Feds or make nice with his bench buddy Nancy Pelosi? We know what he says now, but will he flip again?

Have I told you how boring people are that try to impress people with their seniority?

Try arguing from a position of strength of ideas, you'll impress and convince more people that way.

You still haven't provided any evidence on any issue or logical point why anyone should take you seriously when you make such a foolish post that there isn't any difference between Mitt or Newt.
43 posted on 01/31/2012 8:16:22 PM PST by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Exactly, and this nice nice guy act will get exposed soon, he is running negative Newt Ads but no negative Romney ads. He rather spend the little money he has to try to hurt newt.

You have a point, Mitt has probably signaled to Santorum the VP slot if he stays in. Can Romney secretly slip money to Santorum to keep him running? Santorum hurts Newt not Mitt.

44 posted on 01/31/2012 8:19:24 PM PST by klimeckg ("The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I didn’t make the original assertion that Santorum was a liar. I haven’t said anything nasty about your candidate. We know that Newt and Nancy think AGW is a vital issue. How will he come down? Us or Them?


45 posted on 01/31/2012 8:20:12 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: freemarketsfreeminds

I agree, except that some of the supporting cast changes.


46 posted on 01/31/2012 8:22:18 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Newt will fight Obama by telling people how they are different. How will Romney fight Obama. By highlighting their similarities? He won’t have the media to prop him up, and his attempt to carpet bomb will fail miserably. Obama has way more money to fight back with.


47 posted on 01/31/2012 8:25:02 PM PST by freemarketsfreeminds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne
Santorum supported funding for Amtrak. Santorum was for abortion (in 1990) before he was against it. Santorum supported ethanol as automobile fuel. Santorum supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey. Santorum endorsed Mitt Romney and called him a conservative. Santorum called himself a "progressive conservative" and positioned himself as such in the initial days.

What are your sources for the following statements?

"Santorum supported abortion in 1990" and "Santorum called him (Romney) a conservative".

48 posted on 01/31/2012 8:51:24 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

I’m trying to avoid name calling. Is this how Newt supporters will turn Obama supporters in a general election?
-————————————————————————\
...but you started the name calling by calling Newt a Mitt? You knew the reaction that would invoke and now play holier than thou. Is your name Rick?


49 posted on 01/31/2012 9:02:41 PM PST by bramps (Free Speech)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bramps

I did not call Newt a Mitt. I just don’t want either one.


50 posted on 01/31/2012 9:06:12 PM PST by steve8714 (Hitchens was wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson