Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah Palin lavishes praise on Rick Santorum (SP for Santorum?, last chance for conservatives?)
Daily Caller ^ | Dec 2, 2012 | Alex Pappas

Posted on 12/02/2011 9:19:54 AM PST by heiss

Praise from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin could be just what Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum needs. And he got some of that Thursday night.

Palin lavished praise on Santorum during a televised interview, suggesting conservatives should give him a second look for being a consistent conservative.

The former Pennsylvania senator has campaigned hard in Iowa and New Hampshire, but has not gained much traction.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: elections; palin; santorum; sarah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: cripplecreek
He’s my acceptable alternative to Cain or Bachmann.

Exactly. However, it looks like the conservative base is going to get shoved to the back of the bus.

AGAIN.

21 posted on 12/02/2011 9:53:33 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Why, yes. I AM in a bad mood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

Santorum has HUGE electablility problems.. He not only lost by 18 points but lost to a person who literally no showed the campaign, and basically rode completely on his fathers name.

Santorum got routed, he didn’t just lose, he got routed and anyone who thinks that was just because of his support of Spectre is fooling themselves. Santorum was never as popular in PA as he is viewed in the rest of the country, he alienated a lot of folks conservative and otherwise with his actions over the years.

He’s a non starter in a national campaign, while he certainly has more experience and says the right things, he’s a non element and attempting to make him more is just dragging on the inevitable.


22 posted on 12/02/2011 9:55:32 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg

We’ll see. The renewed assault on Michele Bachmann tells me that she is more of a threat to the good ole boys than they want to let on.

Let the voting begin.


23 posted on 12/02/2011 9:57:30 AM PST by cripplecreek (Stand with courage or shut up and do as you're told.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Saying Perry is a RINO, no matter how many times, doesn’t change the fact that he is a small government (Washington DC) conservative.

A social conservative.

An economic conservative.

A pro military, pro defense conservative.

A drill here, drill now, conservative.

There’s a long list of that factual stuff that is foreign to RINOS.

And an EXECUTIVE.

No reason for ignoring him, the best of the choices we have been given.

Santorum over Perry?

No way.


24 posted on 12/02/2011 9:57:45 AM PST by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

“My hesitancy is based solely on electability.”

IMO it’s approximately 0.0%.


25 posted on 12/02/2011 9:59:09 AM PST by Magic Fingers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Personally, I think what we are seeing is a war of extermination against conservative candidates.

I’m really disappointed in Cain’s handling of his situation but you are quite right. Let the voting begin.


26 posted on 12/02/2011 10:05:09 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Why, yes. I AM in a bad mood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg

The conservative base shoved itself to the back of the bus by backing repeatedly candidates who weren’t remotely ready for prime time. Backing of a Santorum (or someone like him for example) early on by these folks, might have had some impact he has his issues, but at least can be considered seriously, but instead they glommed onto Bachmann who is a bitter crazy shrew.. then to Perry who is not remotely ready for prime time, and then bounced to a nobody named Cain.

I don’t think Santorum could have won, and probably wouldn’t even have gotten a VP nod, but I think he would have been able to bring the message further along and influenced the race more.

If the Tea Part bloc/Conservative voting block wants to have influence its got to do a better job in who it is backing and why. Anyone can show up and tell you what you want to hear, but that doesn’t mean for one minute they are worthy of your support, or that they are capable of winning an election.

Throwing your support behind someone who has never won a single election in their life, but is running for President is the single biggest way to show your not worth paying attention to. Do not blame the GOP for how conservatives wound up this election cycle, the conservative block as a whole needs to look in the mirror.

Overreached way to far, instead of finding a truly viable candidate, that we might have been able to support and perhaps even drive into a VP slot, the jump to whoever tells us what we want to hear, no matter the rest basically neutered themselves.

Cannot blame the MSM, cannot blame the GOP, time to accept that collectively the Tea Party Block screwed themselves this cycle IMHO.


27 posted on 12/02/2011 10:05:13 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

“Santorum has ZERO chance at a nomination, its time to stop the desperation and face reality.”

This is not true. In Iowa, anything can happen and conservative candiates tend to surprise. Last time Huckabee won.

Santorum can win Iowa (or strong second to Romney). After that, all single-digit candidates are out and the choice is between Santorum and Mitt. He is credible enough and won’t embarrass us in the debates or State Media interviews. I’m pretty sure surprise mistress or prostitute scandal won’t emerge for Santorum.

As for Newt vs Mitt. Mitt is unacceptable in FR and the exact same reasons apply to Newt. In many areas Newt is worse than Mitt (open push for amnesty, global warming, individual mandate in ObamaCare and openly bashing conservatives). These are not few opinions.

These are core conservative issues (amnesty, GW, individual mandate, Ryan’s plan).


28 posted on 12/02/2011 10:05:34 AM PST by heiss (heartless and inhumane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

“Santorum has ZERO chance at a nomination, its time to stop the desperation and face reality.”

This is not true. In Iowa, anything can happen and conservative candiates tend to surprise. Last time Huckabee won.

Santorum can win Iowa (or strong second to Romney). After that, all single-digit candidates are out and the choice is between Santorum and Mitt. He is credible enough and won’t embarrass us in the debates or State Media interviews. I’m pretty sure surprise mistress or prostitute scandal won’t emerge for Santorum.

As for Newt vs Mitt. Mitt is unacceptable in FR and the exact same reasons apply to Newt. In many areas Newt is worse than Mitt (open push for amnesty, global warming, individual mandate in ObamaCare and openly bashing conservatives). These are not few opinions.

These are core conservative issues (amnesty, GW, individual mandate, Ryan’s plan).


29 posted on 12/02/2011 10:05:43 AM PST by heiss (heartless and inhumane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

I don’t know how we were supposed to back candidates that wouldn’t declare. I’d have easily supported DeMint, Paul Ryan or Palin but it was their choice not to run, not ours.

You can’t blame the Tea Party for that.


30 posted on 12/02/2011 10:07:52 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Why, yes. I AM in a bad mood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
...Let the voting begin.

...I see your POV, but, for me it's still too early, unless the vote is to impeach and convict this administration. I'll wait to get rid of them within the system, because I will always value our liberty to do so first. Change is always the best option.

31 posted on 12/02/2011 10:21:16 AM PST by gargoyle (...Amendments 1 and 2, a well informed public and a well regulated militia...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: heiss

Respectfully, You are in denial. Santorum has ZERO chance of winning a national campaign.

Citing me Huckabee wone Iowa proves my point.. who wound up the nominee last time? It wasn’t Huckabee.

Santorum has no chance at the nomination, he lost PA by nearly 20 points, and I live in PA, he is far more liked by folks in the rest of the country than he is here and there is a reason for it.

He didn’t lose by 18 points to a nobody who literally ran a non existent campaign simply because he endorced Spectre. He lost because years of alienating folks all across the state and political spectrum finally caught up with him.

Now, I believe had the Tea Party block backed Santorum early on, and stayed there, they would have been able to influence the cycle far more than they have by bouncing from Jester to Clown as they have. Hell might have even been able to push for a VP spot, but they didn’t, and now its far too late. This block has shot itself in the foot.

I am not going to sit here and let you lecture me on what it means to be a conservative. Not knowing who your friends are does not make you a conservative, it makes you a zealot, and that doesn’t win you elections or influence policy.

There is pragmatic reality that must be faced, and that is that the tea party bloc has overplayed its hand, and basically neutered itself by the repeated backing of BAD candidates. Those of use who have warned and spoken up against these candidates have been flamed and chastised here on FR as the enemy, when in fact we are not the enemy, we just aren’t letting our emotions sweep us up to failure.

Santorum, has no chance of winning the nomination, and never did, however, and I have stated this elsewhere, had the Tea Party bloc bothered to evaluate their situation and the field of offerings, they could have backed and stuck with him early on and at the very least kept a solid conservative message alive deep into the primary, and might have had a long shot chance of a VP slot, though honestly I doubt it, but that MIGHT have been possible. At this stage of the game Santorum has no practicle chance.. what is he polling? 2%??

Do I agree with every Newt stance? Nope... Didn’t agree with ever Reagan stance either, don’t agree with every Santorum stance either, or Toomey’s or any politicians. However, to sit here and say the architect of the Contract With America, and the guy who planned and executed the campaign that took the house out of Democratic hands for the first time in what 40+ years isn’t a conservative? That’s laughable. He’s come down on the oposite side of things than I have at times, and no I don’t view Newt as a coservative Ideologue, and you know why? Simple, no ideologue is successful in politics. You cannot be successful in politics, except in authoritarian governments, by being an ideologue. And that’s true no matter which ideology you follow.

The end of the day, due to overplaying of hands by the Tea Party and a rather pathetic offering of candidates, the 2012 race is now a 2 horse show, Newt and Romney. You don’t have to like it, I dont’ have to like it, but that’s what it is.

Jumping to santorum now, is too little too late to effect any major shift in the race, and has no chance of nomination or VP.


32 posted on 12/02/2011 10:28:05 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Re: Brokered Convention

1. Delegates are party insiders and will be more likely to back an establishment candidate after they have cast their first pledged vote. I actually believe a brokered convention is to Romney’s favor.

2. Is it even mathematically possible to get out of the first round of voting as a non-candidate with no pledged delegates?

Forgive me as I am a little weak on the rules.


33 posted on 12/02/2011 10:36:41 AM PST by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: heiss

Thanks for that helpful hint Ms. Palin. Now, please go back to your igloo.


34 posted on 12/02/2011 10:40:50 AM PST by indianrightwinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg

I didn’t blame the Tea Party for who chose not to run, though perhaps they could have done more to recruit them. I blame them for backing anyone who said what they wanted to hear without bothering to step back and truly look at what they were doing. That behavior has basically left them out in the cold and its by their own doing, more than anything else.

They overplayed their hands backing absolutely 2nd and 3rd tier candidates... BACHMANN??? Are you kidding me??? Perry? probably worth looking at for a minute, but you look at before you leap, and that look clearly showed he wasn’t where he needed to be, and finally CAIN????? WTH??? A guy with a non existant political resume.. Really?

If you find yourself EVER making an argument that someone with no practical experience in the field where a job is offered, is somehow better qualified for a job in that field than those who have experience there... you need to step back and listen to what is coming out of your mouth.

Lets play what if.. what if the Tea Party picked say someone like a Santorum out of the gate? No chance of winning the nomination, IMHO, but with poll numbers in the 15-20% range during the primary and money, he could have made a larger impact on the race in terms of tenor and tone, of course that would only be if Santorum would recall this is a race against OBAMA, and not as he has tried to do as he has done in this race attacked the other R’s. Had the tea party backed him from the start, and he done that, I think the conservative message might have lived on in this campaign, and on the far outside may have been enough to get a VP nod.. Instead they just shot themselves in the foot and now in December, there message is effectively done, at least in terms of candidates that are going to get press.

The Tea Party Bloc has to engage in self analysis if they want to be effective at the national level. To think they would be able to ram a candidate through the primaries was foolish, and had they been successful, would have wound up with a national election loss. It would have been one thing if they were pushing a candidate like a Reagan, who actually had the resume and ability to back up the rhetoric, against the parties wishes, but that is not and never was the case this cycle.


35 posted on 12/02/2011 10:48:40 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

I see your point, but I don’t think any non-candidate for political office ever had more people pulling for her than Sarah Palin. That isn’t an indictment of the Tea Party.

However, particularly in the case of Romney and Gingrich, what they did while they had that experience disqualifies them from receiving my vote. We’ve seen their experience, and a lot of us don’t want any more of it.

The strength, and the weakness, of the Tea Party is its unrelenting individuality. We have seen that expressed on these boards constantly over the last few months and I’m sure we will again once the national party succumbs to its moderates and gives us Romney or Gingrich.

I still maintain, though, that the decisions made by our better potential candidates not to run should not reflect negatively on the people those candidates chose not to attempt to serve.


36 posted on 12/02/2011 11:07:58 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Why, yes. I AM in a bad mood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601
Last time I saw a brokered convention was the first election where I was old enough to vote. Ronald Reagan almost pulled it off and how history would have been changed had he and not Jimmy Carter had been elected in 1976!

As it was, the Ford people still had to throw the conservatives a few bones (dropping Nelson Rockefeller from the ticket being one) in order to have a chance at the general election.

Romney and Gingrich are both cut from the same GOP establishment cloth. It doesn't make a big difference to me which one gets the nod if we are down to these two.

In fact, Mitt might even have to pick a real conservative for the #2 spot whereas Newt thinks he can take us for granted and "reach out" to the establishment GOP instead.

37 posted on 12/02/2011 11:20:11 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Yeah, unless the president dies, the #2 spot is meaningless anyway. Yeah, Cheney held some weight because Bush cut him in on it, but do you really think Mitt would let a Veep have any power?


38 posted on 12/02/2011 11:26:40 AM PST by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David

Is this the same Santorum that said we should do everything we can to “make Pakistan our friend”?


39 posted on 12/02/2011 11:29:19 AM PST by TheBattman (They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
A while ago Palin said the person has to have executive experience.

Being a CEO doesn't count as "executive experience"?

40 posted on 12/02/2011 11:33:01 AM PST by TheBattman (They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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