Posted on 11/11/2011 5:08:27 PM PST by Engraved-on-His-hands
There are at least 8 candidates.
I actually think he's the worst choice possible, worse than Romney, if thats possible.
the leftist media will not allow someone who has been outspoken against homosex to get coverage.
How many wives has Rick had total?
Any ads with Pelosi?
Santorum fought against the gays when few did. Man on dog. A true socon.
Not a tea party candidate. But neither is Newt.
Santorum, though, could be the Huckabee of 2012. Newt definitely is the McCain of 2012.
I think Newt would’ve probably wanted to stay in the single digits a while longer.
Open season on the serial adulterer.
The people said Cain. Then Bachmann. Then Perry. Then Cain again.
The media likes the gays a lot more than Santorum does.
Santorum is not faking his socon creds. He admits he isn’t tea party. Is not limited constitutional government, leave it to the states. But I think I’d rather have Fed Gov forcing Conservative than forcing liberal.
Santorum is a real deal socon. And a good debater. Not likeable, but he might be the most capable of ripping an opponent to shreds in a debate.
He’s working hard in Iowa.
The problem is that we’re out of tea party candidates.
When the conservatives are considering Newt, it’s time to look at every single person.
It’s like “oh, is it the 2nd go round time now?”
Here’s how much time we put into Gingrich here when he announced.
Gingrich? Nope. Gingrich and Pelosi. Next.
Santorum? Nope. Toomey race. Next.
But if we’re looking at Gingrich again, be really should look at every single other candidate again that we didn’t take a good, close look at before.
What was wrong with Buddy Roemer? Why isn’t he in the debates? He was the Governor of Louisiana, and for all I know, he has a great record.
Did W win Pennsylvania ever? He won Nationally, but did win in Pennsylvania?
Did W win Pennsylvania ever? He won Nationally, but did he win in Pennsylvania?
“because many PA conservatives have not forgiven him for backing Specter (sitting R senator at the time) instead of Toomey. That could be easily fixed if Toomey would stand with him and give his full support to Rick.”
Toomey did endorse Santorum in Santorum’s most recent Senate race.
I was disappointed in Santorum myself for not endorsing Toomey, until I found out why:
“Specter won with 53% of the votes over his opponent with 42%. Toomey and Santorum are staunch Catholic Christians, vigorously pro-life and the Commonwealth would be well served by having both in the Senate. Unfortunately, the politics at the time of the 2004 were precarious enough that a Toomey campaign against Hoeffel would not be as certain as a Specter vs. Hoeffel match, or so Rick Santorum and others believed.”
excerpt http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/061018
Even knowing this, I can understand why some conservatives still disagree with Santorum’s decision, but they should at least understand his rationale.
We can find a few faults with every candidate, but look at the big picture:
In the House of Representatives, Santorum played a key role in exposing the House Banking Scandal. That scandal cost incumbent Republicans reelection, but Santorum was rock-solid on integrity. Santorum is, in short, just what we want: a conservative who puts principles above power.
excerpt http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/santorum_2012.html
“On abortion, he is one of many senators who vote pro-life. The difference is that he is personally responsible for making sure a lot of these votes occur in the first place: He was an architect of the effort to ban partial-birth abortion, a strategy that energized the pro-life movement and allowed it to go on the political offensive.”
http://www.heymiller.com/2010/08/the-fate-of-rick/
Just a couple of examples!
Santorum, Bachmann and Cain are the only ones that I could ever support with enthusiasm.
Also, I like that you noted his ACU ratings, but did you notice how his record tends to be a bit fluid during election years, when he seems to drift. His book, also was about as strong on economic conservatism as Huckabees ("It takes a family"). He's not a liberal, on social issues, he is absolute, but on economic issues, he tends to wander off, especially on spending.
Also, see the club for growth white paper.
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/whitepapers/?subsec=137&id=902
W won his own state. Santorum can’t. Your analogy fails, just like good old Rooster Rick.
Because he's a terrible candidate, who managed to lose his incumbent Senate seat by 20 points and speaks like a whiny little boy.
He'd be terrific President, but in this country you have to get there by winning an election, and that's not gonna happen.
Because Santorum is a bonefide loser
In the beginning my top three were Bachmann, Santorum then Cain. As I became acquainted with their views, first Santorum was crossed out, then Bachmann was crossed out, leaving the man with the plan who can, Herman Cain. And it will always be Herman Cain for this lady.
With the Communist media so strongly against Herman Cain’ with the leftist RNC so solidly against him, doesn’t anyone who calls themselves Conservative understand that Conservative Herman Cain is who they fear the most? So they change the minds of those Moderates, not Conservatives decide the bald faced lies being told about Herman Cain on Free Re[public are turning to egomaniac, establishment favorite, flip flopper loose cannon, Newt Gingrich? No wonder the country is going to hell in a hand basket!
Fortunately the people voting in the straw bolls are sticking with the best man running since Ronald Reagan, Herman Cain.
Santorum won PA in 2000. W lost PA in 2000.
PA is a much harder state for Rs to win than TX.
Santorum will be on Hannity’s radio today. Listen up!
Sorry you have me confused with someone that supports the Newt
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.