1998 ACU Ratings: Gingrich 100%, Paul 88%, Santorum 84% [last year all 3 were in Congress]

American Conservative Union ^ | 12/2/2011 | staff

[Notwithstanding]

1998 was the last year that Gingrich, Paul and Santorum were all in Congress. Gingrich’s annual and lifetime ACU ratings were far better than both of the others:

100% - Gingrich: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (90% Lifetime Rating as of 1998) 88% - Paul: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (88% Lifetime Rating as of 1998) 84% - Santorum: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (83% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)

Source: http://www.conservative.org/ratings/ratingsarchive/1998/98houseratings.htm

[Wayne07]

You are right, but he did vote in 12 of the 25 votes scored.

[AdvisorB]

Bump

[Sudetenland]

No, she is not "behind Santorum." She merely said that she believes that he may be the next to rise in the polls. She was effusive in her praise of Newt as well, but she did not endorse him.

Sara will not endorse until there are only two in the race.

[traderrob6]

“don’t care about 1998. I want 2011.”

Yea right, and you’re the first person to post an artcile or comment on one from 15 years ago that will put Gingrich in a bad light.

PUHLEEEEEEAZE.

[montag813]

Sara will not endorse until there are only two in the race.

That may not happen until March! Bachmann is a whiz at budget campaigning, and still has millions in the tank.

[Fred]

ACU is sold to the highest bidder and a joke, Santorum lower then Newt the amnesty mandate tool, what a joke, that is impossible.

[OrangeHoof]

That’s a different Newt. It’s like judging Al Gore on his 1984 ACU.

[TruthWillWin]

ACU not ACLU.

[Sudetenland]

Indeed, or even later. For all the complaining by some in the politbureau (establishment) I think this is a great way to select a candidate--except for the internecine attacks.

Lots of debates allows poorly funded candidates to remain in the voters' eyes for very little money and gives us an opportunity to see the depth of understanding each candidate has on the issues. It may also provide the opportunity for candidates like Perry recover from his initial stumbling start.

I like being able to see the candidates repeatedly under varying stressful situations--it allows for a thorough vetting process.

Like Sarah, I still haven't made up my mind. I have favorites, but I am not emotionally invested in anyone yet.

[Future Useless Eater]

Interesting, and good find, Thanks...
I'll reformat to make it easier to read...

American Conservative Union

100% - Gingrich: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (90% Lifetime Rating as of 1998) 
 88% - Paul:     Annual 1998 ACU Rating (88% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
 84% - Santorum: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (83% Lifetime Rating as of 1998) 

( To the Gingrich-haters who troll and trash EVERY Gingrich thread, Please do not reply to me )

[Huck]

That’s right—and with good reason.

[Revolting cat!]

Gingrich 100%? I’d understand 50%, but this makes him a traitor to the cause!

[BuckeyeTexan]

You don’t know WTF you’re talking about. The ACU is a conservative rating organization. 100% is perfect. 50% is pathetic.

[heiss]

In 2011, Newt’s positions in the most important topics:
- supports Amnesty (”legalization of illegals”)
- supports Global Warming scam
- supports individual mandate in ObamaCare
- bashes conservatives (”radical rightwing social engineering”, supports Dede in NY23)

His conservative rating in key topics is zero. Even Romney is better in these. If somebody wants to have non-mormon version of more liberal Romney, Newt is your man.

[Jukeman]

Shut up and vote for the SOB then! You keep bitching and moaning about all us so called RINO’s. Who the hell do you want? I think you must be a skinhead or something like a member of the anarchist Texas Republic group. I’m fed up with your Rino crap. You wouldn’t know a Rino if it stuck his horn up your ass. “Better off with Obama”. Go for it you libertarian creep.

[Jukeman]

There’s your libertarian liberalism. Ron Paul is on the far side of loony land.

[Revolting cat!]

Humor deficiency?

[BuckeyeTexan]

Who? Me? Never. :)

[Revolting cat!]

Then learn to recognize jokes told without a laugh track before insulting people.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Your “joke” was not obvious, not even remotely.